born to rule over all other creatures and begins his life with punishments for no fault but that he was born In short The body is a region of diseases of sorrow and nastiness and weakness and temptation Here is cause enough of being humbled 83. Neither is it better in the soul of man where ignorance dwells and passion rules 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 After death came in there entred also a swarm of passions And the will obeys every thing but God Our judgment is often abused in matters of sense and one faculty guesses at truth by confuting another and the error of the eye is corrected by something of reason or a former experience Our fancy is often abus'd and yet creates things of it self by tying disparate things together that can cohere no more than Musick and a Cable than Meat and Syllogisms and yet this alone does many times make credibilities in the understandings Our Memories are so frail that they need instruments of recollection and laborious artifices to help them and in the use of these artifices sometimes we forget the meaning of those instruments and of those millions of sins which we have committed we scarce remember so many as to make us sorrowful or ashamed Our judgments are baffled with every Sophism and we change our opinion with a wind and are confident against truth but in love with error We use to reprove one error by another and lose truth while we contend too earnestly for it Infinite opinions there are in matters of Religion and most men are confident and most are deceiv'd in many things and all in some and those few that are not confident have only reason enough to suspect their own reason We do not know our own bodies not what is within us nor what ails us when we are sick nor whereof we are made nay we oftentimes cannot tell what we think or believe or love We desire and hate the same thing speak against and run after it We resolve and then consider we bind our selves and then find causes why we ought not to be bound and want not some pretences to make our selves believe we were not bound Prejudice and Interest are our two great motives of believing we weigh deeper what is extrinsical to a question than what is in its nature and oftner regard who speaks than what is said The diseases of our soul are infinite 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Dionysius of Athens Mankind of old fell from those good things which God gave him and now is fallen into a life of passion and a state of death In summ it follows the temper or distemper of the body and sailing by such a Compass and being carried in so rotten a vessel especially being empty or filled with lightness and ignorance and mistakes it must needs be exposed to the dangers and miseries of every storm which I choose to represent in the words of Cicero Ex humanae vitae erroribus aerumnis fit ut verum sit illud quod est apud Aristotelem sic nostros animos cum corporibus copulatos ut vivos cum mortuis esse conjunctos The soul joyned with the body is like the conjunction of the living and the dead the dead are not quickned by it but the living are afflicted and die But then if we consider what our spirit is we have reason to lie down flat upon our faces and confess Gods glory and our own shame When it is at the best it is but willing but can do nothing without the miracle of Grace Our spirit is hindred by the body and cannot rise up whither it properly tends with those great weights upon it It is foolish and improvident large in desires and narrow in abilities naturally curious in trifles and inquisitive after vanities but neither understands deeply nor affectionately relishes the things of God pleas'd with forms cousen'd with pretences satisfied with shadows incurious of substances and realities It is quick enough to find doubts and when the doubts are satisfied it raises scruples that is it is restless after it is put to sleep and will be troubled in despite of all arguments of peace It is incredibly negligent of matters of Religion and most solicitous and troubled in the things of the world We love our selves and despise others judging most unjust sentences and by peevish and cross measures Covetousness and Ambition Gain and Empire are the proportions by which we take account of things We hate to be govern'd by others even when we cannot dress our selves and to be forbidden to do or have a thing is the best art in the world to make us greedy of it The flesh and the spirit perpetually are at strife the spirit pretending that his ought to be the dominion and the flesh alleaging that this is her state and her day We hate our present condition and know not how to better our selves our changes being but like the tumblings and tossings in a Feaver from trouble to trouble that 's all the variety We are extreamly inconstant and always hate our own choice we despair sometimes of Gods mercies and are confident in our own follies as we order things we cannot avoid little sins and do not avoid great ones We love the present world though it be good for nothing and undervalue infinite treasures if they be not to be had till the day of recompences We are peevish if a servant does but break a glass and patient when we have thrown an ill cast for eternity throwing away the hopes of a glorious Crown for wine and dirty silver We know that our prayers if well done are great advantages to our state and yet we are hardly brought to them and love not to stay at them and wander while we are saying them and say them without minding and are glad when they are done or when we have a reasonable excuse to omit them A passion does quite overturn all our purposes and all our principles and there are certain times of weakness in which any temptation may prevail if it comes in that unlucky minute 84. This is a little representment of the state of man whereof a great part is a natural impotency and the other is brought in by our own folly Concerning the first when we discourse it is as if one describes the condition of a Mole or a Bat an Oyster or a Mushrome concerning whose imperfections no other cause is to be inquired of but the will of God who gives his gifts as he please and is unjust to no man by giving or not giving any certain proportion of good things And supposing this loss was brought first upon Adam and so descended upon us yet we have no cause to complain for we lost nothing that was ours Praeposterum est said Paulus the Lawyer antè nos locupletes dici quà m acquisterimus We cannot be said to lose what we never had and our fathers goods were not to descend upon us
the accidents of a body were not communicable to a Spirit but how easily might they have been deceived if it had pleased God to invest other substances with new and stranger accidents For though a Spirit hath not flesh and bones they may represent to the eyes and hands the accidents of flesh and bones and if it could in the matter of faith stand with the goodness and wisdom of God to suffer it what certainty could there be of any Article of our religion relating to Christs humanity or any proposition proved by miracles To this instance the man that must answer all I mean Bellarmine ventures something saying it was a good argument of our blessed Saviour Handle and see that I am no Spirit That which is handled and seen is no Spirit But it is no good argument to say This is not seen not handled therefore it is no body and therefore the body of Christ may be naturally in the Sacrament though it is not seen nor handled To this I reply 1. That suppose it were true what he said yet it would also follow by his own words This is seen bread and is handled so therefore it is bread Hoc enim affirmativè colligitur This is the affirmative consequent made by our blessed Lord and here confessed to be certain It being the same collection It is I for by feeling and seeing you shall believe it to be so and it is bread for by feeling and seeing and tasting and smelling it you shall perceive it to be so To which let this be added That in Scripture it is as plainly affirmed to be bread as it is called Christs body Now then because it cannot be both in the proper and natural sence but one of them must be figurative and tropical since both of the appellatives are equally affirm'd is it not notorious that in this case we ought to give judgment on that side which we are prompted to by common sense If Christ had said only This is my body and no Apostle had told us also that it is bread we had reason to suspect our senses to be deceived if it were possible they should be but when it is equally affirmed to be bread as to be our Lords body and but one of them can be naturally true and in the letter shall the testimony of all our senses be absolutely of no use in casting the ballance The two affirmatives are equal one must be expounded tropically which will you chuse Is there in the world any thing more certain and expedite than that what you see and feel and taste naturall and proper should be judged to be that which you see and feel and taste naturally and properly and therefore that the other be expounded tropically since you must expound one of the words tropically I think it is not hard to determine whether you ought to do it against your sense or with it But it is also remarkable that our blessed Lord did not only by feeling and seeing prove it to be a body but by proving it was his body he proved it was himself that is by these accidents representing my person ye are not led into an error of the person any more than of the kind of substance See my hands and my feet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it is even I my self this I noted lest a silly escape be made by pretending these accidents only proved Christ to be no Spirit but a body and so the accidents of bread declare a latent body meaning the body of Christ For as the accidents of a body declare the substance of a body so the particular accidents of this kind declare this kind of this person declare this person For so our blessed Saviour proved it to be himself in particular and if it were not so the deceit would pass from one thing to another and although it had not been a Spirit yet it might be John the Baptist risen from the dead or Moses or Elias and not Jesus their dear Lord. Besides if this had been all that Jesus had intended only to prove he was no spectrum but a body he had not done what was intended For put case it had been a Spirit and had assumed a body as Bellarmine in the very next Paragraph forgetting himself or else being entangled in the wildernesses of an inconsistent discourse affirms that in Scriptures the Israelites did sometimes see and then they were not deceived in touching or seeing a body for there was a body assumed and so it seemed to Abraham and Lot but then suppose Jesus Christ had done so and had been indeed a Spirit in an assumed body had not the Apostles been deceived by their feeling and seeing as well as the Israelites were in thinking those Angels to be men that came to them in humane shapes how had Christs arguments been pertinent and material how had he proved that he was no Spirit by shewing a body which might be the case of a Spirit but that it is not consistent with the wisdom and goodness of God to suffer any illusion in any matter of sense relating to an Article of Faith 5. Secondly It was the case of the Christian Church once not only to rely upon the evidence of sense for an introduction to the religion but also to need and use this argument in confirmation of an Article of the Creed For the Valentinians and the Marcionites thought Christs body to be fantastical and so denied the Article of the Incarnation and if arguments from sense were not enough to confute them viz. that the Apostles did see and feel a body flesh and blood and bones how could they convince these misbelievers for whatsoever answer can be brought against the reality of bread in the Eucharist all that may be answered in behalf of the Marcionites for if you urge to them all those places of Scripture which affirm Christ to have a body they answer it was in Scripture called a body because it seem'd to be so which is the answer Bellarmine gives to all those places of Scripture which call it bread after consecration And if you object that if it be not what it seems then the senses are deceived They will answer a Jesuit being by and prompting them the senses were not deceived because they only saw colour shape figure and the other accidents but the inward sense and understanding that is the man was deceived when he thought it to be the body of a man for under those accidents and appearances there was an Angel or a Divinity but no Man and now upon the grounds of Transubstantiation how can they be confuted I would fain know 6. But Tertullian disputing against them uses the argument of sense as the only instrument of concluding against them infallibly Non licet nobis in dubium sensus istos revocare c. It is not lawful to doubt of our senses lest the same doubt be made concerning Christ lest peradventure it should
not So that it may be only a private opinion of some Doctors and then I am to blame to charge Popery with it To this I answer that Bellarmine indeed says Non esse tam certum in Ecclesia an sint faciendae imagines Dei sive Trinitatis quam Christi Sanctorum It is not so certain viz. as to be an article of faith But yet besides that Bellarmine allows it and cites Cajetan Catharinus Payva Sanders and Thomas Waldensis for it this is a practice and doctrine brought in by an unproved custom of the Church Constat quod haec consuetudo depingendi Angelos Deum modo sub specie Columbae modo sub Figura Trinitatis sit ubique inter Catholicos recepta The picturing Angels and God sometimes under the shape of a Dove and sometimes under the figure of the Trinity is every where received among the Catholicks said a great Man amongst them And to what purpose they do this we are told by Cajetan speaking of Images of God the Father Son and Holy Ghost saying Haec non solum pinguntur ut ostendantur sicut Cherubim olim in Templo sed ut adorentur They are painted that they may be worshipped ut frequens usus Ecclesiae testatur This is witnessed by the frequent use of the Church So that this is received every where among the Catholicks and these Images are worshipped and of this there is an Ecclesiastical custom and I add In their Mass-book lately printed these pictures are not infrequently seen So that now it is necessary to shew that this besides the impiety of it is against the doctrine and practice of the Primitive Church and is an innovation in religion a propriety of the Roman doctrine and of infinite danger and unsufferable impiety To some of these purposes the Disswasive alledged Tertullian Eusebius and S. Hierom but A. L. says these Fathers have nothing to this purpose This is now to be tried These men were only nam'd in the Disswasive Their words are these which follow 1. For Tertullian A man would think it could not be necessary to prove that Tertullian thought it unlawful to picture God the Father when he thought the whole art of painting and making Images to be unlawful as I have already proved But however let us see He is very curious that nothing should be us'd by Christians or in the service of God which is us'd on or by or towards Idols and because they did paint and picture their Idols cast or carve them therefore nothing of that kind ought to be in rebus Dei as Tertullian's phrase is But the summ of his discourse is this The Heathens use to picture their false Gods that indeed befits them but therefore is unfit for God and therefore we are to flee not only from Idolatry but from Idols in which affair a word does change the case and that which before it was said to appertain to Idols was lawful by that very word was made Unlawful and therefore much more by a shape or figure and therefore flee from the shape of them for it is an Unworthy thing that the Image of the living God should be made the Image of an Idol or a dead thing For the Idols of the Heathens are silver and gold and have eyes without sight and noses without smell and hands without feeling So far Tertullian argues And what can more plainly give his sence and meaning in this Article If the very Image of an Idol be Unlawful much more is it unlawful to make an Image or Idol of the living God or represent him by the Image of a dead man But this argument is further and more plainly set down by Athanasius whose book against the Gentiles is spent in reproving the Images of God real or imaginary insomuch that he affirms that the Gentiles dishonour even their false Gods by making Images of them and that they might better have pass'd for Gods if they had not represented them by visible Images And therefore That the religion of making Images of their Gods is not piety but impious For to know God we need no outward thing the way of truth will direct us to him And if any man ask which is that way viz. to know God I shall say it is the soul of a man and that understanding which is planted in us for by that alone God can be seen and Vnderstood The same Father does discourse many excellent things to this purpose as that a man is the only Image of God Jesus Christ is the perfect Image of his Glory and he only represents his essence and man is made in the likeness of God and therefore he also in a less perfect manner represents God Besides these if any many desires to see God let him look in the book of the creature and all the world is the Image and lively representment of Gods power and his wisdom his goodness and his bounty But to represent God in a carved stone or a painted Table does depauperate our understanding of God and dishonours him below the Painters art for it represents him lovely only by that art and therefore less than him that painted it But that which Athanasius adds is very material and gives great reason of the Command why God should severely forbid any Image of himself Calamitati enim tyrannidi servienâ—es homines Vnicum illud est nulli Communicabile Dei nomen lignis lapidibusque imposâ—runt Some in sorrow for their dead children made their Images and fancied that presence some desiring to please their tyrannous Princes put up their statues and at distance by a phantastical presence flattered them with honours And in process of time these were made Gods and the incommunicable name was given to wood and stones Not that the Heathens thought that Image to be very God but that they were imaginarily present in them and so had their Name Hujusmodi igitur initiis idolorum inventio Scriptura â—este apud homines coepit Thus idolatry began saith the Scripture and thus it was promoted and the event was they made pitiful conceptions of God they confined his presence to a statue they worshipped him with the lowest way â—maginable they descended from all spirituality and the noble ways of Understanding and made wood and stone to be as it were a body to the Father of Spirits they gave the incommunicable name not only to dead men and Angels and Daemons but to the Images of them and though it is great folly to picture Angelical Spirits and dead Heroes whom they never saw yet by these steps when they had come to picture God himself this was the height of the Gentile impiety and is but too plain a representation of the impiety practised by too many in the Roman Church But as we proceed further the case will be yet clearer Concerning the testimony of Eusebius I wonder that any writer of Roman controversies should be ignorant and being
4 deprecations and 5 prayers and 6 intercessions and 7 giving of thanks will warrant and commend as so many parts of duty all the portions of the English Liturgy 34. If it were worth the pains it were very easie to enumerate the Authors and especially the occasions and time when the most minute passages such I mean as are known by distinct appellatives came into the Church that so it may appear our Liturgy is as ancient and primitive in every part as it is pious and unblameable and long before the Church got such a beam in one of her eyes which was endeavoured to be cast out at the Reformation But it will not be amiss to observe that very many of them were inserted as Antidotes and deleteries to the worst of Heresies as I have discours'd already and such was that clause through Jesus Christ our Lord who liveth and reigneth with thee in the unity of the holy Spirit ever one God and some other phrases parallel were put in in defiance of the Macedonians and all the species of the Antitrinitarians and used by S. Ambrose in Millain S. Austin in Africa and Idacius Clarus in Spain and in imitation of so pious precedents the Church of England hath inserted divers clauses into her Offices 35. There was a great instance in the administration of the blessed Sacrament For upon the change of certain clauses in the Liturgy upon the instance of Martin Bucer instead of the bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for you preserve your body and soul unto everlasting life was substituted this take and eat this in remembrance c. and it was done lest the people accustomed to the opinion of Transubstantiation and the appendant practices should retain the same doctrine upon intimation of the first clause But in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths reign when certain persons of the Zuinglian opinion would have abused the Church with Sacramentary doctrine and pretended the Church of England had declared for it in the second clause of 1552 the wisdom of the Church thought it expedient to joyn both the clauses the first lest the Church should be suspected to be of the Sacramentary opinion the latter lest she should be mistaken as a Patroness of Transubstantiation And both these with so much temper and sweetness that by her care she rather prevented all mistakes than by any positive declaration in her prayers engaged her self upon either side that she might pray to God without strife and contention with her brethren For the Church of England had never known how to follow the names of men but to call Christ only her Lord and Master 36. But from the inserting of these and the like clauses which hath been done in all ages according to several opportunities and necessities I shall observe this advantage which is in many but is also very signally in the English Liturgy we are thereby enabled and advantaged in the meditation of those mysteries de quibus festivatur in sacris as the Casuists love to speak which upon solemn days we are bound to meditate and make to be the matter and occasion of our address to God for the offices are so ordered that the most indifferent and careless cannot but be reminded of the mystery in every Anniversary which if they be summ'd up will make an excellent Creed and then let any man consider what a rare advantage it will be to the belief of such propositions when the very design of the Holy-day teaches the hard handed Artizan the name and meaning of an Article and yet the most forward and religious cannot be abused with any semblances of superstition The life and death of the Saints which is very precious in the eyes of God is so remembred by his humble and afflicted handmaid the Church of England that by giving him thanks and praise God may be honoured the Church instructed by the proposition of their example and we give testimony of the honour and love we owe and pay unto Religion by the pious veneration and esteem of those holy and beatified persons 37. Certain it is that there is no part of Religion as it is a distinct vertue and is to be exercised by interiour acts and forms of worship but is in the offices of the Church of England For if the Soul desires to be humbled she hath provided forms of Confession to God before his Church if she will rejoyce and give God thanks for particular blessings there are forms of thanksgiving described and added by the Kings authority upon the Conference at Hampton-Court which are all the publick solemn and foreseen occasions for which by Law and order provision could be made if she will commend to God the publick and private necessities of the Church and single persons the whole body of Collects and devotions supplies that abundantly if her devotion be high and pregnant and prepared to fervency and importunity of congress with God the Litanies are an admirable pattern of devotion full of circumstances proportionable for a quick and an earnest spirit when the revolution of the Anniversary calls on us to perform our duty of special meditation and thankfulness to God for the glorious benefits of Christs Incarnation Nativity Passion Resurrection and Ascension blessings which do as well deserve a day of thanksgiving as any other temporal advantage though it be the pleasure of a victory then we have the offices of Christmass the Annunciation Easter and Ascension if we delight to remember those holy persons whose bodies rest in the bed of peace and whose souls are deposited in the hands of Christ till the day of restitution of all things we may by the Collects and days of Anniversary festivity not only remember but also imitate them too in our lives if we will make that use of the proportions of Scripture allotted for the festival which the Church intends to which if we add the advantages of the whole Psalter which is an intire body of devotion by it self and hath in it forms to exercise all graces by way of internal act and spiritual intention there is not any ghostly advantage which the most religious can either need or fancy but the English Liturgy in its entire constitution will furnish us withal And certainly it was a very great wisdom and a very prudent and religious Constitution so to order that part of the Liturgy which the ancients called the Lectionarium that the Psalter should be read over twelve times in the year the Old Testament once and the New Testament thrice beside the Epistles and Gospels which renew with a more frequent repetition such choice places as represent the entire body of faith and good life There is a defalcation of some few Chapters from the entire body in the order but that also was part of the wisdom of the Church not to expose to publick ears and common judgments some of the secret rites of Moses's Law or the more mysterious prophecies of the New
our infirmities for we know not what we should pray for as we ought but the Spirit it self maketh intercession for us with groanings that cannot be uttered c. From whence the Conclusion that is inferred is in the words of S. Paul that we must pray with the Spirit therefore not with set forms therefore ex tempore Sect. 13. THE Collection is somewhat wild for there is great independency in the several parts and much more is in the Conclusion than was virtually in the premises But such as it is the Authors of it I suppose will own it And therefore we will examine the main design of it and then consider the particular means of its perswasion quoted in the Objection Sect. 14. IT is one of the Priviledges of the Gospel and the benefit of Christs ascension that the Holy Ghost is given unto the Church and is become to us the fountain of gifts and graces But these gifts and graces are improvements and helps of our natural faculties of our art and industry not extraordinary miraculous and immediate infusions of habits and gifts That without Gods spirit we cannot pray aright that our infirmities need his help that we know not what to ask of our selves is most true and if ever any Heretick was more confident of his own naturals or did evermore undervalue Gods grace than the Pelagian did yet he denies not this but what then therefore without study without art without premeditation without learning the Spirit gives the gift of prayer and is it his grace that without any natural or artificial help makes us pray ex tempore no such thing the Objection proves nothing of this Sect. 15. HERE therefore we will joyn issue whether the gifts and helps of the Spirit be immediate infusions of the faculties and powers and perfect abilities Or that he doth assist us only by his aids external and internal in the use of such means which God and nature hath given to man to ennoble his soul better his faculties and to improve his understanding ** That the aids of the Holy Ghost are only assistances to us in the use of natural and artificial means I will undertake to prove and from thence it will evidently follow that labour and hard study and premeditation will soonest purchase the gift of prayer and ascertain us of the assistance of the Spirit and therefore set Forms of Prayer studied and considered of are in a true and proper sence and without Enthusiasm the fruits of the Spirit Sect. 16. FIRST Gods Spirit did assist the Apostles by ways extraordinary and fit for the first institution of Christianity but doth assist us now by the expresses of those first assistances which he gave to them immediately Sect. 17. THUS the Holy Ghost brought to their Memory all things which Jesus spake and did and by that means we come to know all that the Spirit knew to be necessary for us the Holy Ghost being Author of our knowledge by being the fountain of the Revelation and we are therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taught by God because the Spirit of God revealed the Articles of our Religion that they might be known to all ages of the Church and this is testified by S. Paul He gave some Apostles and some Prophets c. for the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministry for the edifying of the Body of Christ till we all come in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man c. This was the effect of Christ's ascension when he gave gifts unto men that is when he sent the Spirit the verification of the promise of the Father The effect of this immission of the Holy Ghost was to fill all things and that for ever to build up the Church of God until the day of consummation so that the Holy Ghost abides with the Church for ever by transmitting those revelations which he taught the Apostles to all Christians in succession Now as the Holy Ghost taught the Apostles and by them still teaches us what to believe so it is certain he taught the Apostles how and what to pray and because it is certain that all the rules concerning our duty in prayer and all those graces which we are to pray for are transmitted to us by Derivation from the Apostles whom the Holy Ghost did teach even to that very purpose also that they should teach us it follows evidently that the gift of prayer is a gift of the Holy Ghost and yet to verifie this Proposition we need no other immediate inspiration or extraordinary assistance than that we derive from the Holy Ghost by the conveyance of the Apostolical Sermons and Writings Sect. 18. THE reason is the same in Faith and Prayer and if there were any difference in the acquisition or reception faith certainly needs a more immediate infusion as being of greatest necessity and yet a grace to which we least cooperate it being the first of graces and less of the will in it than any other But yet the Holy Ghost is the Author of our faith and we believe with the Spirit it is S. Pauls expression and yet our belief comes by hearing and reading the holy Scriptures and their interpretations Now reconcile these two together Faith comes by hearing and yet is the gift of the Spirit and it says that the gifts of the Spirit are not extasies and immediate infusions of habits but helps from God to enable us upon the use of the means of his own appointment to believe to speak to understand to prophesie and to pray Sect. 19. BUT whosoever shall look for any other gifts of the Spirit besides the parts of nature helped by industry and Gods blessing upon it and the revelations or the supplies of matter in holy Scripture will be very far to seek having neither reason promise nor experience of his side For why should the spirit of prayer be any other than as the gift and spirit of faith as S. Paul calls it acquired by humane means using divine aids that is by our endeavours in hearing reading catechizing desires to obey and all this blessed and promoted by God this produces faith Nay it is true of us what Christ told his Apostles sine me nihil potestis facere not nihil magnum aut difficile but omninò nihil as S. Austin observes Without me ye can do nothing and yet we were not capable of a Law or of reward or punishment if neither with him nor without him we were able to do any thing And therefore although in the midst of all our co-operation we may say to God in the words of the Prophet Domine omnia opera operatus es in nobis O Lord thou hast wrought all our works in us yet they are opera nostra still God works and we work First is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gods grace is brought to us he helps and gives us abilities and then
do in their Verses and sing it to a new tune with perfect and true musick and all this ex tempore For all this the Holy Ghost can do if he pleases But if it be said that the Corinthian Christians composed their Songs and Hymns according to art and rules of Musick by study and industry and that to this they were assisted by the Spirit and that this together with the devotion of their spirit was singing with the Spirit then say I so composing set forms of Liturgie by skill and prudence and humane industry may be as much praying with the Spirit as the other is singing with the Spirit plainly enough In all the sences of praying with the Spirit and in all its acceptations in Scripture to pray or sing with the Spirit neither of them of necessity implies ex tempore Sect. 47. THE sum or Collecta of the premises is this Praying with the Spirit is either First when the Spirit stirs up our desires to pray per motionem actualis auxilii or secondly when the Spirit teaches us what or how to pray telling us the matter and manner of our prayers Thirdly or lastly dictating the very words of our prayers There is no other way in the world to pray with the Spirit or in the Holy Ghost that is pertinent to this Question And of this last manner the Scripture determines nothing nor speaks any thing expresly of it and yet suppose it had we are certain the Holy Ghost hath supplied us with all these and yet in set forms of Prayer best of all I mean there where a difference can be For 1 as for the desires and actual motions or incitements to pray they are indifferent to one or the other to set forms or to ex tempore Sect. 48. SECONDLY But as to the matter or manner of prayer it is clearly contained in the expresses and set forms of Scriptures and there it is supplied to us by the Spirit for he is the great Dictatour of it Sect. 49. 3. NOW then for the very words No man can assure me that the words of his ex tempore prayer are the words of the holy Spirit it is neither reason nor modesty to expect such immediate assistances to so little purpose he having supplied us with abilities more than enough to express our desires aliundè otherwise than by immediate dictate But if we will take David's Psalter or the other Hymns of holy Scripture or any of the Prayers which are respersed over the Bible we are sure enough that they are the words of Gods Spirit mediately or immediately by way of infusion or extasie by vision or at least by ordinary assistance And now then what greater confidence can any man have for the excellency of his prayers and the probability of their being accepted than when he prayes his Psalter or the Lords Prayer or any other office which he finds consigned in Scripture When Gods Spirit stirs us up to an actual devotion and then we use the matter he hath described and taught and the very words which Christ and Christs Spirit and the Apostles and other persons full of the Holy Ghost did use If in the world there be any praying with the Spirit I mean in vocal prayer this is it Sect. 50. AND thus I have examined the intire and full scope of this first Question and rifled their Objection which was the only colour to hide the appearance of its natural deformity at the first sight The result is this Scribendum ergo quoties licebit Si id non dabitur cogitandum ab utroque exclusi debent tamen adniti ut neque deprehensus orator neque destitutus esse videatur In making our Orations and publick Advocations we must write what we mean to speak as often as we can when we cannot yet we must deliberate and study and when the suddenness of the accident prevents both these we must use all the powers of art and care that we have a present mind and call in all our first provisions that we be not destitute of matter and words apt for the imployment This was Quintilian's rule for the matter of prudence and in secular occasions but when the instance is in Religion and especially in our prayers it will concern us nearer to be curious and deliberate what we speak in the audience of the eternal God when our lives and our souls and the honour of God and the reputation of Religion are concern'd and whatsoever is greatest in it self or dearest to us Sect. 51. THE second Question hath in it something more of difficulty for the Men that own it will give leave that set forms may be used so you give question 2 leave to them to make them but if authority shall interpose and prescribe a Liturgie every word shall breed a quarrel and if the matter be innocent yet the very injunction is tyranny a restraining of the gifts of the Holy Ghost it leaves the spirit of a Man sterile and unprofitable it is not for edification of the Church and is as destitute of comfort as it is of profit For God hath not restrained his Spirit to those few that rule the Church in prelation above others but if he hath given to them the spirit of Government he hath given to others the spirit of Prayer and the spirit of Prophecy Now the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withall for to one is given by the Spirit the word of Wisdom to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit And these and many other gifts are given to several members that they may supply one another and all joyn to the edification of the body And therefore that must needs be an imprudent sanction that so determines the offices of the Church that she cannot be edified by that variety of gifts which the holy Spirit hath given to several men to that purpose just as if there should be a Canon that but one Sermon should be preached in all Churches for ever Besides it must needs be that the devotion of the Suppliants must be much retarded by the perpetuity and unalterable reiteration of the same form For since our affections will certainly vary and suffer great alteration of degrees and inclinations it is easier to frame words apt to comply with our affections than to conform our affections in all varieties to the same words When the forms are daily changed it is more probable that every man shall find something proportionable to his fancy which is the great instrument of Devotion than to suppose that any one form should be like Manna fitted to every taste and therefore in prayers as the affections must be natural sweet and proper so also should the words expressing the affections issue forth by way of natural emanation Sed extemporalis audaciae atque ipsius temeritatis vel praecipua jucunditas est Nam in ingenio sicut in agro quanquam alia diu serantur atque
elaborentur gratiora tamen quae suâ sponte nascuntur And a garment may as well be made to fit the Moon as that one form of Prayer should be made apt and proportionable to all men or to any man at all times Sect. 52. THIS Discourse relies wholly upon these two grounds A liberty to use variety of forms for prayer is more for the edification of the Church Secondly it is part of that liberty which the Church hath and part of the duty of the Church to preserve the liberty of the Spirit in various forms Sect. 53. BEFORE I descend to consideration of the particulars I must premise this that the gift or ability of prayer given to the Church is used either in publick or in private and that which is fit enough for one is inconvenient in the other and although a liberty in private may be for edification of good people when it is piously and discreetly used yet in the publick if it were indifferently permitted it would bring infinite inconvenience and become intolerable as a sad experience doth too much verifie Sect. 54. BUT now then this distinction evacuates all the former discourse and since it is permitted that every man in private use what forms he please the Spirit hath all that liberty that is necessary and so much as can be convenient the Church may be edified by every mans gift the affections of all men may be complied withall words may be fitted to their fancies their devotions quickned their weariness helped and supported and whatsoever benefit may be fancied by variety and liberty all that may be enjoyed and every reasonable desire or weaker fancy be fully satisfied Sect. 55. BUT since these advantages to devotion are accidental and do consult with weakness and infirmity and depend upon irregular variety for which no antecedent rule can make particular provision it is not to be expected the publick constitution and prescribed forms which are regular orderly and determin'd can make provision for particulars for chances and for infinite varieties And if this were any objection against publick forms it would also conclude against all humane Laws that they did not make provision for all particular accidents and circumstances that might possibly occurr All publick sanctions must be of a publick spirit and design and secure all those excellent things which have influence upon societies and communities of men and publick obligations Sect. 56. THUS if publick forms of Prayer be describ'd whose matter is pious and holy whose design is of universal extent and provisionary for all publick probable fear'd or foreseen events whose frame and composure is prudent and by authority competent and high and whose use and exercise is instrumental to peace and publick charity and all these hallowed by intention and care of doing glory to God and advantages to Religion express'd in observation of all such rules and precedents as are most likely to teach us best and guide us surest such as are Scriptures Apostolical Tradition Primitive practice and precedents of Saints and holy Persons the publick can do no more all the duty is performed and all the care is taken Sect. 57. NOW after all this there are personal necessities and private conveniencies or inconveniencies which if men are not so wise as themselves to provide for by casting off all prejudice and endeavouring to grow strong in Christianity men in Christ and not for ever to be Babes in Religion but frame themselves to a capacity of receiving the benefit of the publick without needing other provisions than what will fit the Church in her publick capacity the Spirit of God and the Church taught by him hath permitted us to comply with our own infirmities while they are innocent and to pray in private in any form of words which shall be most instrumental to our devotion in the present capacity Neque hoc ego ago ut ex tempore dicere malit sed ut possit Sect. 58. AND indeed sometimes an exuberant and an active affection and overflowing of Devotion may descend like anointing from above and our cup run over and is not to be contained within the margent of prescribed forms And though this be not of so great consideration as if it should happen to a man in publick that it is then fit for him or to be permitted to express it in forms unlimited and undetermin'd For there was a case in the dayes of the inundation of the Spirit when a man full of the Spirit was commanded to keep silence in the Church and to speak to himself and to God yet when this grace is given him in private he may compose his own Liturgy pectus enim est quod disertos facit vis mentis Ideoque imperitis quoque si modò sint aliquo affectu concitati verba non desunt Only when in private devotion we use forms of our own making or chusing we are concern'd to see that the matter be pious apt for edification and the present necessity and without contempt of publick prescriptions or irreverence to God and in all the rest we are at liberty only in the Lord that is according to the rule of faith and the analogy of Christian Religion For supposing that our devotion be fervent our intention pious and the petition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the will of God Whatsoever our expressions are God reads the petition in the Character of the spirit though the words be brevia concisa singultantium modo ejecta But then these accidental advantages and circumstances of profit which may be provided for in private as they cannot be taken care of in publick so neither is it necessary they should for those pleasures of sensible devotion are so far from being necessary to the acceptation of prayer that they are but compliances with our infirmities and suppose a great weakness in him that needs them say the Masters of spiritual life and in the strongest prayers and most effectual devotions are seldomest found such as was Moses prayer when he spake nothing and Hannah's and our blessed Saviour's when he called upon his Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with strong cries in that great desertion of spirit when he prayed in the Garden In these prayers the spirit was bound up with the strictness and violence of intention but could not ease it self with a flood of language and various expression A great devotion is like a great grief not so expressive as a moderate passion tears spend the grief and variety of language breaths out the devotion and therefore Christ went thrice and said the same words he could just speak his sence in a plain expression but the greatness of his agony was too big for the pleasure of a sweet and sensible expression of devotion Sect. 59. SO that let the devotion be never so great set forms of prayer will be expressive enough of any desire though importunate as extremity it self but when the spirit is
weak and the devotion imperfect and the affections dry though in respect of the precise duty on our part and the acceptation on Gods part no advantage is got by a liberty of an indifferent unlimited and chosen form and therefore in all cases the whole duty of prayer is secured by publick forms yet other circumstantial and accidental advantages may be obtained by it and therefore let such persons feast themselves in private with sweet-meats and less nourishing delicacies weak stomachs must be cared for yet they must be confessed to have stronger stomachs and better health that can feed upon the wholesome food prepared in the common Refectories Sect. 60. SO that publick forms it is true cannot be fitted to every mans fancy and affections especially in an Age wherein all publick constitutions are protested against but yet they may be fitted to all necessities and to every mans duty and for the pleasing the affections and fancies of men that may be sometimes convenient but it is never necessary and God that suffers driness of affections many times in his dearest servants and in their greatest troubles and most excellent Devotions hath by that sufferance of his given demonstration that it is not necessary such affections should be complyed withal for then he would never suffer those sterilities but himself by a cup of sensible Devotion would water and refresh those drinesses and if God himself does not it is not to be expected the Church should Sect. 61. AND this also is the case of Scripture for the many discourses of excellent Orators and Preachers have all those advantages of meeting with the various affections and dispositions of the hearers and may cause a tear when all Saint Paul's Epistles would not and yet certainly there is no comparison between them but one Chapter of Saint Paul is more excellent and of better use to the substantial part of Religion than all the Sermons of Saint Chrysostome and yet there are some circumstances of advantage which humane eloquence may have which are not observed to be in those other more excellent emanations of the holy Spirit And therefore if the Objection should be true and that conceived forms of Prayer in their great variety might do some accidental advantages to weaker persons and stronger fancies and more imperfect judgments yet this instance of Scripture is a demonstration that set and composed devotions may be better and this reason does not prove the contrary because the Sermons in Scripture are infinitely to be preferred before those discourses and orations which do more comply with the fancies of the people Nay we see by experience that the change of our prayers or our books or our company is so delightful to most persons that though the change be for the worse it more complies with their affections than the peremptory and unaltered retaining of the better but yet this is no good argument to prove that change to be for the better Sect. 62. BUT yet if such compliance with fancies and affections were necessary what are we the nearer if every Minister were permitted to pray his own forms How can his form comply with the great variety of affections which are amongst his Auditors any more than the publick forms described by Authority It may hit casually and by accident be commensurate to the present fancy of some of his Congregation with which at that time possibly the publick form would not This may be thus and it may be otherwise and at the same time in which some feel a gust and relish in his prayer others might feel a greater sweetness in recitation of the publick forms This thing is so by chance so irregular and uncertain that no wise man nor no Providence less than Divine can make any provisions for it Sect. 63. AND after all it is nothing but the fantastick and imaginative part that is pleased which for ought appears may be disturbed with curiosity peevishness pride spirit of novelty lightness and impertinency and that to satisfie such spirits and fantastick persons may be as dangerous and useless to them as it is troublesome in it self But then for the matter of edification that is considerable upon another stock for now adayes men are never edified unless they be pleased and if they mislike the Person or have taken up a quarrel against any form or institution presently they cry out They are not edified that is they are displeased and the ground of their displeasure is nothing from the thing it self but from themselves only they are wanton with their meat and long for variety and then they cry out that Manna will not nourish them but prefer the onions of Egypt before the food of Angels the way to cure this inconvenience is to alter the men not to change the institution for it is very certain that wholsome meat is of it self nutritive if the body be disposed to its reception and entertainment But it is not certain that what a sick man fancies out of the weakness of his spirit the distemper of his appetite and wildness of his fancy that it will become to him either good or good physick Now in the entertainments of Religion and spiritual repasts that is wholsome nutritive and apt to edifie which is pious in it self of advantage to the honour of God whatsoever is good Doctrine or good Prayers especially when it is prepared by a publick hand and designed for publick use by all the wisdom of those men who in all reason are to be supposed to have received from God all those assistances which are effects of the spirit of Government and therefore it is but weakness of spirit or strength of passion impotency in some sence or other certainly that first dislikes the publick provisions and then say they are not wholsome Sect. 64. FOR I demand concerning the publick Liturgies of a Church whose constitution is principally of the parts and choicest extracts of Scripture Lessons and the Psalms and some few Hymns and Symbols made by the most excellent persons in the Primitive Church and all this in nothing disagreeing from the rules of Liturgie given in Scripture but that the same things are desired and the same persons prayed for and to the same end and by the same great instrument of address and acceptation by Jesus Christ and which gives all the glory that is due to God and gives nothing of this to a Creature and hath in it many admirable documents whether there be any thing wanting in such a Lyturgie towards edification What is there in prayers that can edifie that is not in such a Lyturgie so constituted or what can there be more in the private forms of any Minister than is in such a publick composition Sect. 65. BY this time I suppose the Objection with all its parts is disbanded so far as it relates to edification profit and compliance with the auditors As for the matter of liberty and restraint of the spirit I shall consider that
Saint Polycarpe at Smyrna many years before Saint John writ his Revelation 6. Lastly That no jurisdiction was in the Ephesine Presbyters except a delegate and subordinate appears beyond all exception by Saint Paul's first Epistle to Timothy establishing in the person of Timothy power of coercitive jurisdiction over Presbyters and ordination in him alone without the conjunction of any in commission with him for ought appears either there or elsewhere * 4. The same also in the case of the Cretan Presbyters is clear For what power had they of Jurisdiction For that is it we now speak of If they had none before Saint Titus came we are well enough at Crete If they had why did Saint Paul take it from them to invest Titus with it Or if he did not to what purpose did he send Titus with all those powers before mentioned For either the Presbyters of Crete had jurisdiction in causes criminal equal to Titus after his coming or they had not If they had not then either they had no jurisdiction at all or whatsoever it was in subordination to him they were his inferiours and he their ordinary Judge and Governour 5. One thing more before this be left must be considered concerning the Church of Corinth for there was power of excommunication in the Presbytery when they had no Bishop for they had none of diverse years after the founding of the Church and yet Saint Paul reproves them for not ejecting the incestuous person out of the Church * This is it that I said before that the Apostles kept the jurisdiction in their hands where they had founded a Church and placed no Bishop for in this case of the Corinthian incest the Apostle did make himself the sole Judge For I verily as absent in body but present in spirit have judged already and then secondly Saint Paul gives the Church of Corinth commission and substitution to proceed in this cause in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ when ye are gathered together and my Spirit that is My power My authority for so he explains himself my Spirit with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ to deliver him over to Satan And 3. As all this power is delegate so it is but declarative in the Corinthians for Saint Paul had given sentence before and they of Corinth were to publish it 4. This was a Commission given to the whole Assembly and no more concerns the Presbyters than the people and so some have contended but so it is but will serve neither of their turns neither for an independent Presbytery nor a conjunctive popularity As for Saint Paul's reproving them for not inflicting censures on the peccant I have often heard it confidently averred but never could see ground for it The suspicion of it is ver 2. And ye are puffed up and have not rather mourned that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you Taken away But by whom That 's the Question Not by them to be sure For taken away from you implies that it is by the power of another not by their act for no man can take away any thing from himself He may put it away not take it the expression had been very imperfect if this had been his meaning * Well then In all these instances viz. of Jerusalem Antioch Ephesus Crete and Corinth and these are all I can find in Scripture of any consideration in the present Question all the jurisdiction was originally in the Apostles while there was no Bishop or in the Bishop when there was any And yet that the Presbyters were joyned in the ordering Church affairs I will not deny to wit by voluntary assuming them in partem sollicitudinis and by delegation of power Apostolical or Episcopal and by way of assistance in acts deliberative and consiliary though I find this no where specified but in the Church of Jerusalem where I proved that the Elders were men of more power than meer Presbyters men of Apostolical authority But here lies the issue and strain of the Question Presbyters had no jurisdiction in causes criminal and pertaining to the publick Regiment of the Church by vertue of their order or without particular substitution and delegation For there is not in all Scripture any Commission given by Christ to meer Presbyters no Divine institution of any power of Regiment in the Presbytery no constitution Apostolical that meer Presbyters should either alone or in conjunction with the Bishop govern the Church no example in all Scripture of any censure inflicted by any mere Presbyters either upon Clergy or Laity no specification of any power that they had so to do but to Churches where Colledges of Presbyters were resident Bishops were sent by Apostolical ordination not only with power of imposition of hands but of excommunication of taking cognisance even of causes and actions of Presbyters themselves as to Titus and Timothy the Angel of the Church of Ephesus and there is also example of delegation of power of censures from the Apostle to a Church where many Presbyters were fixt as in the case of the Corinthian Delinquent before specified which delegation was needless if coercitive jurisdiction by censures had been by divine right in a Presbyter or a whole Colledge of them Now then return we to the consideration of S. Hierom's saying The Church was governed saith he communi Presbyterorum consilio by the common Councel of Presbyters But 1. Quo jure was this That the Bishops are Superiour to those which were then called Presbyters by custom rather than Divine disposition Saint Hierome affirms but that Presbyters were joyned with the Apostles and Bishops at first by what right was that Was not that also by custom and condescension rather than by Divine disposition Saint Hierom does not say but it was For he speaks only of matter of fact not of right It might have been otherwise though de facto it was so in some places * 2. Communi Presbyterorum consilio is true in the Church of Jerusalem where the Elders were Apostolical men and had Episcopal authority and something superadded as Barnabas and Judas and Silas for they had the authority and power of Bishops and an unlimited Diocess besides though afterwards Silas was fixt upon the See of Corinth But yet even at Jerusalem they actually had a Bishop who was in that place superiour to them in Jurisdiction and therefore does clearly evince that the common Councel of Presbyters is no argument against the superiority of a Bishop over them * 3. Communi Presbyterorum consilio is also true because the Apostles call'd themselves Presbyters as Saint Paul and Saint John in their Epistles Now at the first many Prophets many Elders for the words are sometimes used in common were for a while resident in particular Churches and did govern in common As at Antioch were Barnabas and Simeon and Lucius and Manaen and Paul Communi horum Presbyterorum consilio the Church of
in the first three hundred years did theirs we can serve God in our houses and sometimes in Churches and our faith which was not built upon temporal foundations cannot be shaken by the convulsions of war and the changes of State But they who make our afflictions an objection against us unless they have a promise that they shall never be afflicted might do well to remember that if they ever fall into trouble they have nothing left to represent or make their condition tolerable for by pretending Religion is destroyed when it is persecuted they take away all that which can support their own Spirits and sweeten persecution However let our Church be where it pleases God it shall it is certain that Transubstantiation is an evil Doctrine false and dangerous and I know not any Church in Christendom which hath any Article more impossible or apt to render the Communion dangerous than this in the Church of Rome and since they command us to believe all or will accept none I hope the just reproof of this one will establish the minds of those who can be tempted to communicate with them in others I have now given an account of the reasons of my present engagement and though it may be enquired also why I presented it to You I fear I shall not give so perfect an account of it because those excellent reasons which invited me to this signification of my gratitude are such which although they ought to be made publick yet I know not whether your humility will permit it for you had rather oblige others than be noted by them Your Predecessor in the See of Rochester who was almost a Cardinal when he was almost dead did publickly in those evil times appear against the truth defended in this Book and yet he was more moderate and better tempered than the rest but because God hath put the truth into the hearts and mouths of his successors it is not improper that to you should be offered the opportunities of owning that which is the belief and honour of that See since the Religion was reformed But lest it be thought that this is an excuse rather than a reason of my address to you I must crave pardon of your humility and serve the end of glorification of God in it by acknowledging publickly that you have assisted my condition by the emanations of that grace which is the Crown of Martyrdom expending the remains of your lessened fortunes and increasing charity upon your Brethren who are dear to you not only by the band of the same Ministery but the fellowship of the same sufferings But indeed the cause in which these papers are ingaged is such that it ought to be owned by them that can best defend it and since the defence is not with secular arts and aids but by Spiritual the diminution of your outward circumstances cannot render you a person unfit to patronize this Book because where I fail your wisdom learning and experience can supply and therefore if you will pardon my drawing your name from the privacy of your retirement into a publick view you will singularly oblige and increase those favours by which you have already endeared the thankfulness and service of R. R. Your most affectionate and endeared Servant in the Lord Jesus JER TAYLOR A DISCOURSE OF THE REAL PRESENCE OF CHRIST In the Holy Sacrament SECT I. State of the Question 1. THE Tree of Knowledge became the Tree of Death to us and the Tree of Life is now become an Apple of Contention The holy Symbols of the Eucharist were intended to be a contesseration and an union of Christian societies to God and with one another and the evil taking it disunites us from God and the evil understanding it divides us from each other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And yet if men would but do reason there were in all Religion no article which might more easily excuse us from medling with questions about it than this of the holy Sacrament For as the man in Phaedrus that being asked what he carried hidden under his Cloak answered it was hidden under his Cloak meaning that he would not have hidden it but that he intended it should be secret so we may say in this mystery to them that curiously ask what or how it is Mysterium est it is a Sacrament and a Mystery by sensible instruments it consigns spiritual graces by the creatures it brings us to God by the body it ministers to the Spirit And that things of this nature are undiscernable secrets we may learn by the experience of those men who have in cases not unlike vainly laboured to tell us how the material fire of Hell should torment an immaterial soul and how baptismal water should cleanse the spirit and how a Sacrament should nourish a body and make it sure of the resurrection 2. It was happy with Christendom when she in this article retained the same simplicity which she always was bound to do in her manners and entercourse that is to believe the thing heartily and not to enquire curiously and there was peace in this Article for almost a thousand years together and yet that Transubstantiation was not determined I hope to make very evident In synaxi transubstantiationem serò definivit Ecclesia diù satis erat credere sive sub pane consecrato sive quocunque modo adesse verum corpus Christi so said the great Erasmus It was late before the Church defined Transubstantiation for a long time together it did suffice to believe that the true body of Christ was present whether under the consecrated bread or any other way so the thing was believed the manner was not stood upon And it is a famous saying of Durandus Verbum audimus motum sentimus modum nescimus praesentiam credimus We hear the Word we perceive the Motion we know not the Manner but we believe the presence and Ferus of whom Sixtus Senensis affirms that he was vir nobiliter doctus pius eruditus hath these words Cum certum sit ibi esse corpus Christi quid opus est disputare num panis substantia maneat vel non When it is certain that Christs body is there what need we dispute whether the substance of bread remain or no and therefore Cutbert Tonstal Bishop of Duresme would have every one left to his conjecture concerning the manner De modo quo id fieret satius erat curiosum quemque relinquere suae conjecturae sicut liberum fuit ante Concilium Lateranum Before the Lateran Council it was free for every one to opine as they please and it were better it were so now But S. Cyril would not allow so much liberty not that he would have the manner determined but not so much as thought upon Firmam fidem mysteriis adhibentes nunquam in tam sublimibus rebus illud Quomodo aut cogitemus aut proferamus For if we go about to think it
and the material part is opposed to it as less true or real The examples of this are not infrequent in Scripture The Tabernacle into which the high Priest entred was a type or a figure of Heaven Heaven it self is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the true Tabernacle and yet the other was the material part And when they are joyned together that is when a thing is expressed by a figure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 True is spoken of such things though they are spoken figuratively Christ the true light that lighteneth every man that cometh into the world He is also the true vine and verè cibus truly or really meat and Panis verus è coelo the true bread from Heaven and spiritual goods are called the true riches and in the same Analogy the spiritual presence of Christ is the most true real and effective the other can be but the image and shadow of it something in order to this for if it were in the Sacrament naturally or corporeally it could be but in order to this spiritual celestial and effective presence as appears beyond exception in this that the faithful and pious communicants receive the ultimate end of his presence that is spiritual blessings The wicked who by the affirmation of the Roman Doctors do receive Christs body and blood in the natural and corporal manner fall short of that for which this is given that is of the blessings and benefits 7. So that as S. Paul said He is not a Jew who is one outwardly neither is that circumcision which is outwardly in the flesh But he is a Jew which is one inwardly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that 's the real Jew and the true circumcision that which is of the heart and in the spirit and in this sence it is that Nathaniel is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 really and truly an Israelite so we may say of the blessed Sacrament Christ is more truly and really present in spiritual presence than in corporal in the Heavenly effect than in the natural being this if it were at all can be but the less perfect and therefore we are to the most real purposes and in the proper sence of Scripture the more real defenders of the real presence of Christ in the Sacrament for the spiritual sence is the most real and most true and most agreeable to the Analogy and style of Scripture and right reason and common manner of speaking For every degree of excellency is a degree of being of reality and truth and therefore spiritual things being more excellent than corporal and natural have the advantage both in truth and reality And this is fully the sence of the Christians who use the Aegyptian Liturgy Sanctifica nos Domine noster sicut sanctificasti has oblationes propositas sed fecisti illas non fictas that 's for real quicquid apparet est mysterium tuum spiritale that 's for spiritual To all which I add the testimony of Bellarmine concerning S. Austin Apud Augustinum saepissimè illud solum dici tale verè tale quod habet effectum suum conjunctum res enim ex fructu aestimatur itaque illos dicit verè comedere corpus Christi qui utiliter comedunt They only truly eat Christs body that eat it with effect for then a thing is really or truly such when it is not to no purpose when it hath his effect And in his eleventh Book against Faustus the Manichee Chap. 7. he shews that in Scripture the words are often so taken as to signifie not the substance but the quality and effect of a thing So when it is said Flesh and blood shall not inherit the Kingdom of God that is corruption shall not inherit and in the resurrection our bodies are said to be spiritual that is not in substance but in effect and operation and in the same manner he often speaks concerning the blessed Sacrament and Clemens Romanus affirms expresly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is to drink the blood of Jesus to partake of the Lords immortality 8. This may suffice for the word real which the English Papists much use but as appears with less reason than the Sons of the Church of England and when the real presence is denied the word real is taken for Natural and does not signifie transcendenter or in his just and most proper signification But the word substantialiter is also used by Protestants in this question which I suppose may be the same with that which is in the Article of Trent Sacramentaliter praesens Salvator substantiâ suâ nobis adest In substance but after a sacramental manner which words if they might be understood in the sence in which the Protestants use them that is really truly without fiction or the help of fancy but in rei veritate so as Philo calls spiritual things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most necessary useful and material substances it might become an instrument of an united confession And this is the manner of speaking which S. Bernard used in his Sermon of S. Martin where he affirms In Sacramento exhiberi nobis veram carnis substantiam sed spiritualiter non carnaliter In the Sacrament is given us the true substance of Christs body or flesh but not carnally but spiritually that is not to our mouths but to our hearts not to be chewed by teeth but to be eaten by faith But they mean it otherwise as I shall demonstrate by and by In the mean time it is remarkable that Bellarmine when he is stating this question seems to say the same thing for which he quotes the words of S. Bernard now mentioned for he says that Christs body is there truly substantially really but not corporally Nay you may say spiritually and now a man would think we had him sure but his nature is labile and slippery you are never the nearer for this for first he says it is not safe to use the word spiritually nor yet safe to say he is not there corporally lest it be understood not of the manner of his presence but to the exclusion of the nature For he intends not for all these fine words that Christs body is present spiritually as the word is used in Scripture and in all common notices of usual speaking but spiritually with him signifies after the manner of spirits which besides that it is a cousening the world in the manner of expression is also a direct folly and contradiction that a body should be substantially present that is with the nature of a body naturally and yet be not as a body but as a spirit with that manner of being with which a spirit is distinguished from a body In vain therefore it is that he denies the carnal manner and admits a spiritual and ever after requires that we believe a carnal presence even in the very manner But this caution and exactness in the use of the
word spiritual is therefore carefully to be observed lest the contention of both parties should seem trifling and to be for nothing We say that Christs body is in the Sacrament really but spiritually They say it is there really but spiritually For so Bellarmine is bold to say that the word may be allowed in this question Where now is the difference Here by spiritually they mean present after the manner of a Spirit by spiritually we mean present to our Spirits only that is so as Christ is not present to any other sense but that of Faith or spiritual susception but their way makes his body to be present no way but that which is impossibe and implies a contradiction a body not after the manner of a body a body like a spirit a body without a body and a sacrifice of body and blood without blood corpus incorporeum cruor incruentus They say that Christs body is truly present there as it was upon the Cross but not after the manner of all or any body but after that manner of being as an Angel is in a place That 's there spiritually But we by the real spiritual presence of Christ do understand Christ to be present as the Spirit of God is present in the hearts of the Faithful by blessing and grace and this is all which we mean besides the tropical and figurative presence 9. That which seems of hardest explication is the word corporaliter which I find that Melanchthon used saying corporaliter quoque communicatione carnis Christi Christum in nobis habitare which manner of speaking I have heard he avoided after he had conversed with Oecolampadius who was able then to teach him and most men in that question but the expression may become warrantable and consonant to our doctrine and means no more than really and without fiction or beyond a figure like that of S. Paul in Christ dwelleth the fulness of the Godhead bodily upon which S. Austin says In ipso inhabitat plenitudo Divinitatis corporaliter quia in Templo habitaverat umbraliter and in S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are opposed which are a shadow of things to come but the body is of Christ that is the substance the reality the correlative of the type and figure the thing signified and among the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies solidare to make firm real and consistent but among the Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or body signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every thing that is produced from nothing saith Phavorinus that is every thing that is real extra non ens that hath a proper being so that we receiving Christ in the Sacrament corporally or bodily understand that we do it really by the ministery of our bodies receiving him unto our souls And thus we affirm Christs body to be present in the Sacrament not only in type or figure but in blessing and real effect that is more than in the types of the Law the shadows were of the Law but the body is of Christ. And besides this the word corporally may be very well used when by it is only understood a corporal sign So S. Cyril of Jerusalem in his third Catechism says that the holy Ghost did descend corporally in the likeness of a Dove that is in a type or representment of a Doves body for so he and many of the Ancients did suppose and so he again uses the word Jesus Christ as a man did inspire the holy Spirit corporally into his Apostles where by corporally it is plain he means by a corporal or material sign or symbol viz. by breathing upon them and saying receive ye the holy Ghost In either of these sences if the word be taken it may indifferently be used in this question 10. I have been the more careful to explain the question and the use of these words according to our meaning in the question for these two reasons 1. Because until we are agreed upon the signification of the words they are equivocal and by being used on both sides to several purposes sometime are pretended as instruments of union but indeed effect it not but sometimes displease both parties while each supects the word in a wrong sence And this hath with very ill effect been observed in the conferences for composing the difference in this question particularly that of Poissy where it was propounded in these words Credimus in usu coenae Dominicae verè reipsâ substantialiter sen in substantiâ verum corpus sanguinem Christi spirituali ineffabili modo esse exhiberi sumi à fidelibus communicantibus Beza and Gallasius for the Reformed and Espencaeus and Monlucius for the Romanists undertook to propound it to their parties But both rejected it for though the words were not disliked yet they suspected each others sence But now that I have declared what is meant by us in these words they are made useful in the explicating the question 2. But because the words do perfectly declare our sence and are owned publickly in our doctrine and manner of speaking it will be in vain to object against us those sayings of the Fathers which use the same expressions for if by vertue of those words really substantially corporally verily and indeed and Christs body and blood the Fathers shall be supposed to speak for transubstantiation they may as well suppose it to be our doctrine too for we use the same words and therefore those authorities must signifie nothing against us unless these words can be proved in them to signifie more than our sence of them does import and by this truth many very many of their pretences are evacuated 11. One thing more I am to note in order to the same purposes that in the explication of this question it is much insisted upon that it be inquired whether when we say we believe Christs body to be really in the Sacrament we mean that body that flesh that was born of the Virgin Mary that was crucified dead and buried I answer I know none else that he had or hath there is but one body of Christ natural and glorified but he that says that body is glorified which was crucified says it is the same body but not after the same manner and so it is in the Sacrament we eat and drink the body and blood of Christ that was broken and powred forth for there is no other body no other blood of Christ but though it is the same which we eat and drink yet it is in another manner And therefore when any of the Protestant Divines or any of the Fathers deny that body which was born of the Virgin Mary that which was crucified to be eaten in the Sacrament as Bertram as S. Hierome as Clemens Alexandrinus expresly affirm the meaning is easie they intend that it is not eaten in a natural sence and then calling it corpus spirituale the word spiritual is not a substantial predication
meaning nothing to the giving of life So that here we have besides his authority an excellent Argument for us Christ said he that eateth my flesh hath life but the flesh that is the fleshly sence of it profits nothing to life but the Spirit that is the spiritual sence does therefore these words are to be understood in a spiritual sence 9. And because it is here opportune by occasion of this discourse let me observe this that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is infinitely useless and to no purpose For by the words of our Blessed Lord by the Doctrine of Saint Paul and the sence of the Church and the confession of all sides the natural eating of Christ's flesh if it were there or could so be eaten alone or of it self does no good does not give life but the spiritual eating of him is the instrument of life to us and this may be done without their Transubstantiated flesh it may be done in Baptisme by Faith and Charity by Hearing and understanding and therefore it may also in the blessed Eucharist although there also according to our Doctrine he be eaten only Sacramentally and Spiritually And hence it is that in the Mass-book anciently it is prayed after consecration Quaesumus Omnipotens Deus ut de perceptis muneribus gratias exhibentes beneficia potiora sumamus We beseech thee Almighty God that we giving thanks for these gifts received may receive greater gifts which besides that it concludes against the Natural Presence of Christ's body for what greater thing can we receive if we receive that it also declares that the grace and effect of the Sacramental communion is the thing designed beyond all corporal sumption and as it is more fully express'd in another Collect Vt terrenis affectibus expiati ad superni plenitudinem Sacramenti cujus libavimus sancta tendamus that being redeemed from all earthly affections we may tend to the fulness of the Heavenly Sacrament the Holy things of which we have now begun to taste And therefore to multiply so many miracles and contradictions and impossibilities to no purpose is an insuperable prejudice against any pretence less than a plain declaration from God Add to this that this bodily presence of Christ's body is either for corporal nourishment or for spiritual Not for Corporal for Natural food is more proper for it and to work a Miracle to do that for which so many Natural means are already appointed is to no purpose and therefore cannot be supposed to be done by God neither is it done for spiritual nourishment because to the spiritual nourishment vertues and graces the word and the efficacious signs faith and the inward actions and all the emanations of the Spirit are as proportion'd as meat and drink are to natural nourishment and therefore there can be no need of a Corporal Presence 2. Corporal manducation of Christ's body is apparently inconsistent with the nature and condition of a body 1. Because that which is after the manner of a spirit and not of a body cannot be eaten and drunk after the manner of a body but of a spirit as no man can eat a Cherubin with his mouth if he were made apt to nourish the soul but by the confession of the Roman Doctors Christ's body is present in the Eucharist after the manner of a spirit therefore without proportions to our body or bodily actions 2. That which neither can feel or be felt see or be seen move or be mov'd change or be changed neither do or suffer corporally cannot certainly be eaten corporally but so they affirm concerning the body of our blessed Lord it cannot do or suffer corporally in the Sacrament therefore it cannot be eaten corporally any more than a man can chew a spirit or eat a meditation or swallow a syllogism into his belly This would be so far from being credible that God should work so many Miracles in placing Christ's Natural body for spiritual nourishment that in case it were revealed to be placed there to that purpose it self must need one great Miracle more to verifie it and reduce it to act and it would still be as difficult to explain as it is to tell how the material fire of Hell should torment spirits and souls And Socrates in Plato's Banquent said well Wisdom is not a thing that can be communicated by local or corporal contiguity 3. That the Corporal presence does not nourish spiritually appears because some are nourished spiritually who do not receive the Sacrament at all and some that do receive yet fall short of being spiritually nourished and so do all unworthy Communicants This therefore is to no purpoose and therefore cannot be supposed to be done by the wise God of all the World especially with so great a pomp of Miracles 4. Cardinal Perron affirms that the Real Natural presence of Christ in the Sacrament is to greatest purpose because the residence of Christ's Natural body in our bodies does really and substantially joyn us unto God establishing a true and real Unity between God and Men. And Bellarmine speaks something like this de Euchar. l. 3. c. 9. But concerning this besides that every faithful soul is actually united to Christ without the actual residence of Christ's body in our bodies since every one that is regenerated and born a new of water and of the Spirit is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same plant with Christ as Saint Paul calls him Rom. 6.5 He hath put on Christ he is bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh Galat. 3.27 Ephes. 5.30 and all this by Faith by Baptism by regeneration of the Spirit besides this I say this corporal union of our bodies to the body of God incarnate which these great and witty Dreamers dream of would make man to be God For that which hath a real and substantial unity with God is consubstantial with the true God that is he is really substantially and truly God which to affirm were highest blasphemy 5. One device more there is to pretend an usefulness of the Doctrine of Christ's Natural presence viz. that by his contact and conjunction it becomes the cause and the seed of the Resurrection But besides that this is condemn'd by Vasquez as groundless and by Suarez as improbable and a novel temerity it is highly confuted by their own Doctrine For how can the contact or touch of Christ's body have that or any effect on ours when it can neither be touch'd nor seen nor understood but by faith which Bellarmine expresly affirms But to return from whence I am digressed Tertullian adds in the same place Quia sermo caro erat factus proinde in causam vitae appetendus devorandus auditu ruminandus intellectu fide digerendus Nam paulò antè carnem suam panem quoque coelestem pronunciârat urgens usquequaque per allegoriam necessariorum pabulorum memoriam Patrum qui panes carnes Egyptiorum praeverterant
is as it was crucified as it was our sacrifice And this is so wholly agreeable to the nature of the thing and the order of the words and the body of the circumstances that it is next to that which is evident in it self and needs no further light but the considering the words and the design of the Institution especially since it is consonant to the style of Scripture in the Sacrament of the Passeover and very many other instances it wholly explicates the nature of the mystery it reconciles our duty with the secret it is free of all inconvenience it prejudices no right nor hinders any real effect it hath or can have and it makes the mystery intelligible and prudent fit to be discoursed of and inserted into the rituals of a wise Religion 8. Seventhly He that receives unworthily receives no benefit to his body or to his soul by the holy Sacrament that is agreed on all sides therefore he that receives benefit to his body receives it by his worthy communicating therefore the benefit reaching to the body by the holy Eucharist comes to it by the soul therefore by the action of the soul not the action of the body therefore by faith not by the mouth whereas on the contrary if Christs body natural were eaten in the Sacrament the benefit would come to the body by his own action and to the soul by the body All that eat are not made Christs body and all that eat not are not disintitled to the resurrection the Spirit does the work without the Sacrament and in the Sacrament when 't is done The flesh profiteth nothing And this argument ought to prevail upon this account Because as is the nutriment so is the manducation If the nourishment be wholly spiritual then so is the eating But by the Roman doctrine the body of Christ does not naturally nourish therefore neither is it eaten naturally but it does nourish spiritually and therefore it is eaten only spiritually And this doctrine is also affirmed by Cajetan though how they will endure it I cannot understand Manducatur verum corpus Christi in Sacramento sed non corporalitèr sed spiritualitèr Spiritualis manducatio quae per animam fit ad Christi carnem in Sacramento existentem pertingit The true body of Christ is eaten in the Sacrament but not corporally but spiritually The spiritual manducation which is made by the soul reaches to the flesh of Christ in the Sacrament which is very good Protestant doctrine And if it be absurd to say Christs body doth nourish corporally why it should not be as absurd to say we eat it corporally is a secret which I have not yet been taught As is our eating so is the nourishing because that is in order to this therefore if you will suppose that natural eating of Christs body does nourish spiritually yet it must also nourish corporally let it do more if it may but it must do so much just as the waters in baptism although the waters are symbolical and instrumental to the purifying of the soul yet because the waters are material and corporeal they cleanse the body first and primarily so it must be in this Sacrament also if Christs body were eaten naturally it must nourish naturally and then pass further but that which is natural is first and then that which is spiritual 9. Eighthly For the likeness to the argument I insert this consideration by the doctrine of the ancient Church wicked men do not eat the body nor drink the blood of Christ. So Origen Si fieri potest ut qui malus adhuc perseveret edat verbum factum carnem cùm sit verbum panis vivus nequaquam scriptum fuisset Quisquis ederit panem hunc vivet in aeternum If it were possible for him that perseveres in wickedness to eat the word made flesh when it is the word and the living bread it had never been written Whosoever shall eat this bread shall live for ever So S. Hilary Panis qui descendit de coelo non nisi ab eo accipitur qui Dominum habet Christi membrum est The bread that came down from Heaven is not taken of any but of him who hath the Lord and is a member of Christ. Lambunt Petram saith S. Cyprian They lick the Rock that is eat not of the food and drink not of the blood that issued from thence when the Rock was smitten They receive corticem sacramenti furfur carnis saith S. Bernard the skin of the Sacrament and the bran of the flesh But Ven. Bede is plain without an allegory Omnis infidelis non vescitur carne Christi An unbelieving man is not fed with the flesh of Christ the reason of which could not be any thing but because Christ is only eaten by faith But I reserved S. Austin for the last So then these are no true receivers of Christs body in that they are none of his true members For to omit all other allegations they cannot be both the members of Christ and the members of an harlot and Christ himself saying He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him sheweth what it is to receive Christ not only sacramentally but truly for this is to dwell in Christ and Christ in him For thus he spoke as if he had said He that dwelleth not in me nor I in him cannot say he eateth my flesh or drinketh my blood In which words if the Roman Doctors will be judged by S. Austin for the sence of the Church in this Question and will allow him in this point to be a good Catholick 1. He dogmatically declares that the wicked man does not eat Christs body truly 2. He does eat it sacramentally 3. That to eat with effect is to eat Christs body truly to which if they please to add this That to eat it spiritually is to eat it with effect it follows by S. Austins doctrine that spiritually is really and that there is no true and real body of Christ eaten in the Sacrament but by the faithful receiver or if you please receive the conclusion in the words of S. Austin Tunc erit unicuique corpus sanguis Christi si quod in sacramento sumitur in ipsâ veritate spiritualiter manducetur spiritualiter bibatur then to each receiver it becomes the body and blood of Christ if that which is taken in the Sacrament be in the very truth it self spiritually eaten and spiritually drunk which words of S. Austin Bellarmine upon another occasion being to answer in stead of answering grants it and tells that this manner of speaking is very usual in S. Austin the truest answer in all his books but whether it be for him or against him he ought to have considered Neither can this be put off with saying that the wicked do not truly eat Christ that is not to any benefit or purpose but that this
THUS I have by very many arguments taken from the words and circumstances and annexes of the Institution or Consecration proved that the sence of this mystery is mysterious and spiritual that Christs body is eaten only sacramentally by the body but really and effectively only by faith which is the mouth of the soul that the flesh profiteth nothing but the words which Christ spake are spirit and life And let it be considered Whether besides a pertinacious resolution that they will understand these words as they found in the letter not as they are intended in the spirit there be any thing or indeed can be in the nature of the thing or circumstances of it or usefulness or in the different forms of words or the Analogy of the other discourses of Christ that can give colour to their literal sence against which so much reason and Scripture and arguments from Antiquity do contest This only I observe that they bring no pretence of other Scriptures to warrant this interpretation but such which I have or shall wrest out of their hands and which to all mens first apprehensions and at the very first sight do make against them and which without curious notion and devices cannot pretend on their side as appears first in the tenth Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians Verses 16 17. 2. Out of which I have already proved that Christs body is not taken in the natural sence but in the spiritual But when Bellarmine had out of the same words forced for himself three arguments proving nothing to save any man the labour of answering them he adds at the end of them these words Sed tota difficultas est as corporaliter realiter propriè sumatur sanguis caro an solùm significativè spiritualiter Quod autem corporaliter propriè probari posset omnibus argumentis quibus suprà probavimus propriè esse intelligenda verba illa institutionis Hoc est corpus meum That is after his arguments out of the first Epistle to the Corinthians were ended all the difficulty of the question still remained and that he was fain to prove by Hoc est corpus meum and the proper arguments of that but brings nothing from the words of S. Paul in this Chapter But to make up this also he does corrodere scrape together some things extrinsecal to the words of this authority as 1. That the literal sence is to be presumed unless the contrary be proved which is very true but I have evidently proved the contrary concerning the words of Institution and for the words in this Chapter if the literal sence be preferred then the bread remains after Consecration because it is called bread 2. So the Primitive Saints expounded it which how true it is I shall consider in his own place 3. The Apostle calling the Gentiles from their sacrificed flesh proposes to them a more excellent banquet but it were not more excellent if it were only a figure of Christs body so Bellarmine which is a fit cover for such a dish for 1. We do not say that in the Sacrament we only receive the sign and figure of Christs body but all the real effects and benefits of it 2. If we had yet it is not very much better than blasphemy to say that the Apostles had not prevailed upon that account For if the very figure and sacrament of Christs body be better than sacrifices offered to Devils the Apostle had prevailed though this sentence were true that in the Sacrament we receive only the figure And thus I have for all that is said against it made it apparent that there is nothing in that place for their corporal presence 3. There is one thing more which out of Scripture they urge for the corporal presence viz. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords body and he shall be guilty of the body and blood of Christ. Where they observe that they that eat unworthily do yet eat Christs body because how else could they be guilty of it and condemned for not discerning it 4. To this I answer many things 1. S. Paul does not say He that eateth and drinketh Christs body and blood unworthily c. but indefinitely He that eateth and drinketh c. yet it is probable he would have said so if it had been a proper form of speech because by so doing it would have layed a greater load upon them 2. Where S. Paul does not speak indefinitely he speaks most clearly against the Article in the Roman sence for he calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The cup of the Lord and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this bread and he that eats this bread unworthily is guilty of the body and blood of Christ and now these comminatory phrases are quitted from their pretence but yet they have their proper consideration Therefore 3. Not discerning the Lords body is not separating it from profane and common usages not treating it with addresses proper to the mystery To which phrase Justin gives light in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we do not receive it as common bread and common drink but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. but nourishment made Eucharistical or blessed by the word of Prayer and so it is the body and blood of the Lord. 4. It is the body of the Lord in the same sence here as in the words of institution which I have evinced to be exegetical sacramental and spiritual and by despising the sacrament of it we become guilty of the body and blood of Christ. Reus erit corporis sanguinis Christi qui tanti mysterii sacramentum despexerit saith S. Hierome And it is in this as Severianus said concerning the statutes of Theodosius broken in despight by the Antiochians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If you abuse the Kings Image the affront relates to your Prince 5. The unworthy receiver is guilty of the body and blood of Christ not naturally for that cannot now be and nothing is a greater probation of the spiritual sence of the words in this place than this which they would intice into their party For Christs body is glorified and not capable of natural injury but the evil communicant is guilty of the body and blood of Christ just as relapsing Christians are said by the same Apostles to crucifie the Lord of life again and put him to an open shame which I suppose they cannot do naturally or corporally One is as the other that is both are tropical or figurative 5. These are all that they pretend from Scripture and all these are nothing to their purpose but now besides what I have already said I shall bring arguments from other Scriptures which will not so easily be put off SECT IX Arguments from other Scriptures proving Christs Real Presence in the Sacrament to be only Spiritual not Natural 1. THE first is taken from those words of our
that gave the power should be lessened and be inferiour to him that received it which because they infer impossibilities like those which are consequent to Transubstantiation S. Paul makes no more of it but to say The contrary is manifest against the unlimited literal sence of the words Now for the eviction of this these two mediums are to be taken The one that this doctrine affirms that of the essence or existence of a thing which is contrary to the essence or existence of it and yet that the same thing remains that is that the essence remains without the essence that is without it self The other that this doctrine makes a thing to be and not to be at the same time I shall use them both but promiscuously because they are reducible to one 11. The doctrine of Transubstantiation is against the nature and essence of a body Bellarmine seems afraid of this for immediately before he goes about to prevaricate about the being of a body in many places at once he says that if the essence of things were evidently and particularly known then we might know what does and what does not imply a contradiction but id non satis constat there is no certainty of that by that pretended uncertainty making way as he hopes to escape from all the pressure of contradictions that lye upon the prodigious philosophy of this Article But we shall make a shift so far to understand the essence of a body as to evince this doctrine to be full of contradictions 12. First For Christs body his Natural body is changed into a Spiritual body and it is not now a Natural body but a Spiritual and therefore cannot be now in the Sacrament after a natural manner because it is so no where and therefore not there It is sown a natural body it is raised a Spiritual body And therefore though this Spirituality be not a change of one substance into another yet it is so a change of the same substance that it hath lost all those accidents which were not perfective nor constitutive but imperfect and separable from the body and therefore in no sence of nature can it be manducated And here is the first contradiction The body of Christ is the Sacrament The same body is in Heaven In Heaven it cannot be broken naturally In the Sacrament they say it is broken naturally and properly therefore the same body is and is not it can and it cannot be broken To this they answer that this is broken under the Species of bread Not in it self Well! is it broken or is it not broken let it be broken under what it will if it be broken the thing is granted For if being broken under the Species it be meant that the Species be broken alone and not the body of Christ then they take away in one hand when they reach forth with the other This being a better argument The Species only are broken the Species are not Christs body therefore Christs body is not broken better I say than this The body of Christ is under the Species the Species alone are broken therefore the body of Christ is broken For how can the breaking of Species or accidents infer the breaking of Christs body unless the accidents be Christs body or inseparable from it or rather How can the breaking of the accidents infer the breaking of Christs body when it cannot be broken To this I desire a clear and intelligible answer Add to this how can Species that is accidents be broken but when a substance is broken for an accident properly such as smell colour taste hath of it self no solid and consistent nor indeed any fluid parts nothing whereby it can be broken and have a part divided from a part but as the substance in which the accident is subjected becomes divided so do the inherent accidents but no otherwise and if this cannot be admitted men cannot know what one another say or mean they can have no notices of things or regular propositions 13. Secondly But I demand When we speak of a body what we mean by it For in all discourses and entercourses of mankind by words we must agree concerning each others meaning when we speak of a body of a substance of an accident what does mankind agree to mean by these words All the Philosophers and all the wise men in the world when they divide a substance from an accident mean by a substance that which can subsist in it self without a subject of inherence But an accident is that whose very essence is to be in another When they speak of a body and separate it from a Spirit they mean that a Spirit is that which hath no material divisible parts physically that which hath nothing of that which makes a body that is extension limitation by lines and superficies and material measures The very first notion and conception of things teaches all men that what is circumscribed and measured by his proper place is there and no where else For if it could be there and be in another place it were two and not one A finite Spirit can be but in one place but it is there without circumscription that is it hath no parts measured by the parts of a place but is there after another manner than a body that is it is in every part of his definition or spiritual location So it is said a soul is in the whole body not that a part of it is in the hand and a part of it in the eye but it is whole in the whole and whole in every part and it is true that it is so if it be wholly immaterial because that which is spiritual and immaterial cannot have material parts But when we speak of a body all the world means that which hath a finite quantity and is determin'd to one place This was the philosophy of all the world taught in all the Schools of the Christians and Heathens even of all mankind till the doctrine of Transubstantiation was to be nursed and maintained and even after it was born it could not be forgotten by them who were bound to keep it And I appeal to any man of the Roman perswasion if they can shew me any ancient Philosopher Greek or Roman or Christian of any Nation who did not believe it to be essential to the being of a body to be in one place and Amphitruo in the old Comedy had reason to be angry with Sofia upon this point Tun ' id dicere audes quod nemo unquam homo antehac vidit nec potest fieri tempore uno Homo idem duobus locis ut simul sit And therefore to make the body of Christ to be in a thousand places at once and yet to be but one body To be in Heaven and to be upon so many Altars to be on the Altar in so many round Wafers is to make a body to be a spirit and to make a finite to be infinite
for nothing can be so but an infinite Spirit 14. Neither will it be sufficient to fly here to Gods omnipotency for God can indeed make a body to be a Spirit but can it consist with the Divine Being to make an infinite substance Can there possibly be two Categorematical that is positive substantial infinites or can it be that a finite should remaining finite yet not be finite but indefinite and in innumerable places at once God can new create the body and change it into a Spirit But can a body remaining a body be at the same time a Spirit or can it be a body and yet not be in a place is it not determined so that remaining in a place it cannot be out of it If these things could be otherwise then the same thing at the same time could be a Body and a Spirit limited and unlimited wholly in a place and wholly out of it finite and infinite a body and yet no body one and yet many the same and not the same that is it should not be it self Now although God can change any thing from being the thing it is to become another thing yet is it not a contradiction to say it should be the same it is and yet not the same These are the essential immediate consequents of supposing a body remaining a body whose essence it is to be finite and determined in one place can yet so remaining be in a thousand places Thirdly The Socinians teach that our bodies at the Resurrection shall be as they say Christs body now is changed substantially For corruptible and incorruptible mortal and immortal natural and spiritual are substantial differences and now our bodies being natural corruptible and mortal differ substantially from bodies spiritual immortal and incorruptible as they shall be hereafter and as the body of our Lord now is Now I am sure the Church of Rome allows not of this doctrine in these neither have they reason for it But do not they admit that in hypothesi which they deny in thesi For is it not a perfect change of substance that a body from finite is changed to be at least potentially infinite from being determined in one place to be indefinite and indeterminable To lose all his essential proprieties must needs infer a substantial change and that it is of the essence of a body to be in one place at least an essential propriety they will not I suppose be so impudent as to deny since they flye to the Divine omnipotency and a perpetual miracle to make it be otherwise which is a plain demonstration that naturally it is so this therefore they are to answer if they can 15. But let us see what Christian Philosophy teaches us in this particular S. Austin is a good probable Doctor and may be trusted for a proposition in Natural Philosophy These are his conclusions in this Article Corpora quae non possunt esse nisi in loco Bodies cannot be but in their place Angustias omnipotentiae corpora patiuntur nec ubique possunt esse nec semper Divinitas autem ubique praestò est The Divinity is present every where but not bodies they are not omnipotent meaning it is a propriety of God to be in many places an effect of his omnipotence But more plainly yet Spatia locorum tolle corporibus nusquam erunt quia nusquam erunt nec erunt If you take from bodies the spaces of place they will be no where and if they be no where they will not be at all and to apply this to the present question he affirms Christus homo secundùm corpus in loco est de loco migrat cum ad alium locum venerit in eo loco unde venit non est Christ as man according to the body is in a place and goes from a place and when he comes to another place is not in the place from whence he came For besides that so to do is of the verity of Christs body that it should have the same affections with ours according as it is insisted upon in divers places of the Scripture particularly S. Luke 24.39 it is also in the same place and in the story apparent that the case was not alter'd after the resurrection but Christ moved finitely by dimensions and change of places So Theodoret Dominicum corpus incorruptibile resurrexit impatibile immortale divinâ gloriâ glorificatum est à coelestibus adoratur potestatibus corpus tamen est priorem habens circumscriptionem Christs body even after the resurrection is circumscribed as it was before And therefore as it is impious to deny God to be invisible so it is profane not to believe and profess the son of God in his assum'd humility to be visible corporeal and local after the resurrection It is the saying of S. Austin 16. And I would fain know how it will be answered that they attribute to the body of Christ which is his own creature the incommunicable attribute of ubiquity either actually or potentially For let them say is it not an attribute of God to be unlimited and to be undefined by places S. Austin says it and it is affirm'd by natural reason and all the world attributes this to God as a propriety of his own If it be not his own then all the world hath been always deceived till this new generation arose If it be let them fear the horrid consequent of giving that to a creature which is the glory of the Creator And if they think to escape by saying that they do not attribute to it actual ubiquity but potential that is that though he be not yet he may be every where let it be considered if the argument of the Fathers was good by which they proved the Divinity of the holy Ghost This is every where therefore this is God is it not also as good to say This may be every where therefore this may be God And then it will be altogether as bad as any thing can be imagined for it makes the incommunicable attribute of God to be communicable to a creature and not only so but it is worse for it makes that an actual creature may be a potential God that is that there can be a God which is not eternally a God that is not a pure act a God that is not yet but that shall have a beginning in time 17. Fourthly There was not in all School Divinity nor in the old Philosophy nor in nature any more than three natural proper ways of being in a place circumscriptivè definitivè repletivé The body of Christ is not in the Sacrament circumscriptively because there he could be but in one Altar in one Wafer It is not there definitively for the same reason because to be definitely in a place is to be in it so as to be there and no where else And both these are affirmed by their
own Turrecremata It remains that it must be repletivè in many places which we use to attribute to God only and it is that manner of being in a place by which God is distinguished from his creatures But now a fourth word must be invented and that is Sacramentalitèr Christs body is Sacramentally in more places than one which is very true that is the Sacrament of Christs body is and so is his body figuratively tropically representatively in being and really in effect and blessing But this is not a natural real being in a place but a relation to a person the other three are all the manners of location which the soul of Man could yet ever apprehend 18. Fifthly It is essential to a body to have partem extra partem one part without the other answering to the parts of his place for so the eyes stand separate from the hands and the ears from the feet and the head from the belly But in Transubstantiation the whole body is in a point in a minimum naturale in the least imaginable crumb of consecrated bread how then shall nose and eyes and head and hands be distinct unless the mutiny of the members be reconciled and all parties pleased because the feet shall be the eyes and the leg shall be the head and possess each others dimension and proper cells of dwelling Quod ego non credo said an ancient Gloss. I will not insist upon the unworthy questions which this carnal doctrine introduces viz. Whether Christs whole body be so there that the prepuce is not wanting Suarez supposing that as probable others denying it but disputing it fiercely Neither will I make scrutiny concerning eating Christs bones guts hair and nails nor suppose the Roman Priests to be such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to have such saws in their mouths these are appendages of their perswasion but to be abominated by all Christian and modest persons who use to eat not the bodies but the flesh of beasts and not to devour but to worship the body of Christ in the exaltation and more in the union with his Divinity But that which I now insist upon is that in a body there cannot be indistinction of parts but each must possess his own portion of place and if it does not a body cannot be a body nor distinguished from a Spirit 19. Sixthly When a body broken into half one half is separate from another and remains divided But in the doctrine of Transubstantiation the wafer which they say is Christs whole body if it be broken is broken into two whole ones not into the halfs of one and so there shall be two bodies if each half make one and yet those two bodies are but one and not two Adde to this if each wafer be Christ's body whole and the fraction of it makes that every part is whole Christ then every communicant can consecrate as well as the Priest for at his breaking the host in his mouth why the body should not also become whole to each part in the mouth as well as to each part in the hand is one of the unintelligible secrets of this mystery 20. Aquinas says that The body of Christ is not in the Sacrament in the manner of a body but of a substance and so is whole in the whole Well suppose that for a while yet 1. Those substances which are whole in the whole are by his own doctrine neither divisible nor multiplicable and how then can Christs body be supposed to be multiplicable for there are no other words to express my meaning though no words can speak sence according to their doctrine words not signifying here as every where else and among them as they did always in all mankind how can it I say be multiplied by the breaking of the wafer or bread upon the account of the likeness of it to a substance that cannot be broken or if it could yet were not multipliable But 2. If Christs body be there according to the manner of a substance not of a body I demand according to the nature of what substance whether of a material or an immaterial If according to the nature of a material substance then it is commensurate by the dimensions of quantity which he is now endeavouring to avoid If according to the nature of an immaterial substance then it is not a body but a Spirit or else the body may have the being of a Spirit whilest it remains a body that is be a body and not a body at the same time But 3. To say that a body is there not according to the nature of a body but of a substance is not sence for besides that by this answer it is a body without the nature of a body it says that it is also there determin'd by a manner and yet that manner is so far from determining it that it makes it yet more undetermin'd and general than it was For Substance is the highest Genus in that Category and corpus or body is under it and made more special by a superadded difference To say therefore that a body is there after the manner of a substance is to say that by being specificated limited and determin'd it becomes not a Species but a Genus that is more unlimited by limitations more generical by his specification more universal by being made more particular For impossible is it for wise men to make sence of this business 3. But besides all this to be in a place after the manner of a substance is not to be in a place at all for substantia hath in it no relation to a place till it be specificated to a Body or a Spirit For substantia dicit solùm formalitatem substandi accidentibus subsistendi per se but the capacity of or relation to a place is by the specification of it by some substantial difference 4. Lastly to explicate the being in a place in the manner of a substance by being whole in the whole and whole in every part is to say that every substance is so which is notoriously false for corporal substances are not so whether spiritual be is a question not proper for this place 21. Aquinas hath yet another device to make all whole saying that one body cannot be in diverse places localitèr but Sacramentalitèr not locally but Sacramentally But first I wish the words were sence and that I could tell the meaning of being in a place locally and not locally unless a thing can be in a place and not in a place that is so to be in that it is also out But so long as it is a distinction it is no matter it will amuse and make way to escape if it will do nothing else But if by being Sacramentally in many places is meant figuratively as before I explicated it then I grant Aquinas's affirmative Christs body is in many places Sacramentally that is it is represented upon all the holy Tables or
all that he says he saw then was that he saw a great light and heard a voice 3. That in case Christ did appear corporally to Saul on earth it follows not his body was in two places at once I have the warrant of him that is willing enough otherwise that this argument should prevail Quia non est improbabile Christum privatim ad breve tempus descendisse de coelo post ascensionem It is not unlikely that Christ might privately and for a short time descend from Heaven after his ascension For when it is said in Scripture that the Heavens must receive him till the day of restitution of all things it is to be meant ordinarily and as his place of residence but that hinders not an extraordinary commigration as a man may be said to dwell continually in London and yet sometimes to go into the country to take the air For the other instances of S. Peter and S. Anthony and the rest if I were sure they were true I would say the same answer would also serve their turn but as they are it is not material whether it does or no. 26. Another way of answering is taken from the examples of God and the reasonable soul. Concerning the soul I have these things to say 1. Whether the soul be whole in every part of the body and whole in the whole is presumed by most men but substantially proved by none but denied by a great many and those of the first rank of learned men 2. If it were it follows not that it is in two places or more because not the hand nor the foot is the adequate place of the soul but the whole body and therefore the usual expression of Philosophy saying The soul is whole in every part is not true positively but negatively that is the soul being immaterial cannot be cantoniz'd into parts by the division of the body but positively it is not true For the understanding is not in the foot nor the will in the hand and something of the soul is not organical or depending upon the body viz. The pure acts of volition some little glimpses of intuition reflexion and the like 3. If it were yet to alledge this is impertinent to their purpose unless whatsoever is true concerning a spirit can also be affirmed of a body 4. When the body is divided into parts the soul is not multiplied into fantastick or real numbers as it is pretended in Transubstantiation and therefore although the soul were whole in every part it could do no service in this question unless it were so whole in each part as to be whole when each part is divided for so it is said to be in the Eucharist which because we say is impossible we require an instance in something where it is so but because it is not so in the soul this instance is not home to any of their purposes But Bellarmine says God can make it to be so that the soul shall remain in the member that is discontinued and cut off I answer that God ever did do so nor he nor any man else can pretend unless he please to believe S. Winifreds and S. Denys's walking with their heads in their hands after their decollation but since we never knew that God did so and whether it implies a contradiction or no that it should be so God hath no where declared it is sufficient to the present purpose that it is as much a question and of it self no more evident than that a body can be conserved in many places and therefore being as uncertain as the principal question cannot give faith to it or do any service But this is to amuse unwary persons by seeming to say something which indeed is nothing to the purpose 27. But that the Omnipresence of God should be brought to prove it possible that a body may be in many places truly though I am heartily desirous to do it if I could justly yet I cannot find any colour to excuse it from great impiety But this I shall add that it is so impossible that any body should be in two places and so impossible to justifie this from the immensity of God that God himself is not in proper manner of speaking in two places he is not capable of being in any place at all as we understand being in a place he is greater than all places and fills all things and locality and place and beings and relations are all from him and therefore they cannot comprehend him But then although this immensity of God is beyond the capacity of place and he can no more be in a place than all the world can be in the bottom of a well yet if God could be limited and determined it were a contradiction to say that he could be in two places just as it is a contradiction to say there are two Gods So that this comparison of Bellarmines as it is odious up to the neighbourhood and similitude of a great impiety so it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is against that Philosophy whereby we understand any of the perfective notices of God But these men would fain prevail by all means they care not how 28. But why may we not believe as well the doctrine of Transubstantiation in defiance of all the seeming impossibilities as well as we believe the doctrine of the Trinity in defiance of greater To this I answer many things 1. Because the mystery of the Trinity is revealed plainly in Scripture but the doctrine of Transubstantiation is against it as I suppose my self to have plainly proved So that if there were a plain revelation of Transubstantiation then this argument were good and if it were possible for ten thousand times more arguments to be brought against it yet we are to believe the revelation in despite of them all but when so much of revelation is against it and nothing for it it is but vain to say we may believe this as well as the doctrine of the Trinity for so we may as well argue for the heresie of the Manichees why may we not as well believe the doctrine of the Manichees in despite of all the arguments brought against it when there are so many seeming impossibilities brought against the holy Trinity I suppose the answer that I have given would be thought reasonable to every such pretence 2. As the doctrine of the holy Trinity is set down in Scripture and in the Apostles Creed and was taught by the Fathers of the first three hundred years I know no difficulties it hath what it hath met withal since proceeds from the too curious handling of that which we cannot understand 3. The Scool-men have so pried into this secret and have so confounded themselves and the Articles that they have made it to be unintelligible inexplicable indefensible in all their minuits and particularities and it is too sadly apparent in the arguments of the Antitrinitarians whose sophisms
extrinsecal to a quantitative body and it relies upon the definition Aristotle gives of it in the fourth book of his Physicks that place is the superficies of the ambient body which is as absurd in nature as any thing can be imagined for then a stone in the bottom of a river did change his place though it lie still in every instant because new water still washes it and by this rule it is necessary against Aristotles great grounds that some quantitative bodies should not be in a place or else that quantitative bodies were Categorematically infinite For either there is no end but body incloses body for ever or else the ultimate or outmost body is not inclosed by any thing and so cannot be in a place To which add this that if Epicurus his opinion were true and that there were some spaces empty which at least by a Divine power can become true and he can take the air out from the inclosure of four walls In this case if you will suppose a man sitting in the midst of that room either that man were in no place at all which were infinitely absurd or else which indeed is true circumscription or superficies were not the essence of a place Place therefore is nothing but the Space to which quantitative bodies have essential relation and finition that where they consist and by which they are not infinite and this is the definition of place which S. Austin gives in his fourth book Exposit. of Genes ad literam chapt 8. 30. God can do what he please and he can reverse the laws of his whole creation because he can change or annihilate every creature or alter the manners and essences but the question now is what laws God hath already established and whether or no essentials can be changed the things remaining the same that is whether they can be the same when they are not the same He that says God can give to a body all the essential properties of a Spirit says true and confesses Gods omnipotency but he says also that God can change a body from being a body to become a Spirit but if he says that remaining a body it can receive the essentials of a Spirit he does not confess Gods omnipotency but makes this Article difficult to be believed by making it not to work wisely and possibly God can do all things but are they undone when they are done that is are the things chang'd in their essentials and yet remain the same then how are they chang'd and then what hath God done to them 31. But as to the particular question To suppose a body not coextended to a place is to suppose a man alive not coexistent to time to be in no place and to be in no time being alike possible and this intrinsecal extension of parts is as inseparable from the extrinsecal as an intrinsecal duration is from time Place and Time being nothing but the essential manners of material complete substances these cannot be supposed such as they are without time and place because quantitative bodies in their very formality suppose that For place without body in it is but a notion in Logick but when it is a reality it is a Vbi and time is Quando and a body supposed abstractly from place is not real but intentional and in notion only and is in the Category of substance but not of quantity But it is a strange thing that we are put to prove the very principles of nature and first rudiments of art which are so plain that they can be understood naturally but by all devices of the world cannot be made dubitable 32. But against all the evidence of essential and natural reason some overtures of Scripture must be pretended For that two bodies can be in one place appears because Christ came from his mothers womb it being closed into the assembly of the Apostles the doors being shut out of the grave the stone not being rolled away and ascended into Heaven through the solid orbs of all the firmament Concerning the first and the last the Scripture speaks nothing neither can any man tell whether the orbs of Heaven be solid or fluid or which way Christ went in But of the Heavens opening the Scripture sometimes makes mention And the Prophet David spake in the Spirit saying Lift up your heads O ye gates and be ye lift up ye everlasting doors and the King of glory shall come in The stone of the Sepulchre was removed by an Angel so saith S. Matthew But why should it be supposed the Angel rolled it away after Christ was risen or if he did why Christ did not remove it himself who loosed all the bands of death by which he was held and there leave it when he was risen or if he had passed through and wrought a miracle why it should not be told us or why it should not remain as a testimony to the Souldiers and Jews and convince them the more when they should see the body gone and yet their seals unbroken or if it were not how we should come to fancy it was so I understand not neither is there ground for it There is only remaining that we account concerning Jesus his entring into the assembly of the Apostles the doors being shut To this I answer that this infers not a penetration of bodies or that two bodies can be in one place 1. Because there are so many ways of effecting it without that impossibility 2. The door might be made to yield to his Creator as easily as water which is fluid be made firm under his feet for consistence or lability are not essential to wood and water For water can naturally be made consistent as when 't is turned to ice and wood that can naturally be petrified can upon the efficiency of an equal agent be made thin or labile or inconsistent 3. This was done on the same day in which the Sea yielded to the children of Israel that is the seventh day after the Passeover and we may allow it to be a miracle though it be no more than that of the waters that is as these were made consistent for a time Suppositúmque rotis solidum mare So the doors apt to yield to a solid body possint namque omnia reddi Mollia quae fiant aer aqua terra vapores Quo pacto fiant quâ vi cunque gerantur 4. How easie was it for Christ to pass his body through the pores of it and the natural apertures if he were pleased to unite them and thrust the matter into a greater consolidation 5. Wood being reduced to ashes possesses but a little room that is the crass impenetrable parts are but few the other apt for cession which could easily be disposed by God as he pleased 6. The words in the Text are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the past tense the gates or doors having been shut but that they were shut in the instant of his
entry it says not they might if Christ had so pleased have been insensibly opened and shut in like manner again and if the words be observed it will appear that S. John mentioned the shutting the doors in relation to the Apostles fear not to Christs entring he intended not so far as appears to declare a miracle 7. But if he had there are ways enough for him to have entred strangely though he had not entred impossibly Vain therefore is the fancy of those men who think a weak conjecture able to contest against a perfect natural impossibility For when a thing can be done without a penetration of dimensions and yet by a power great enough to beget admiration though without contesting against the unalterable laws of nature to dream it must be this way is to challenge confidently but to be careless of our warrant I conclude that it hath never yet been known that two bodies ever were at once in one place 33. I find but one objection more pretended and that is that place is not essential to bodies because the utmost Heaven is a body and yet is not in a place because it hath nothing without it that can circumscribe it To this I have already answered in the confutation of Aristotle's definition of a place But besides I answer that what the utmost Heaven is our Philosophy can tell or guess at But it is certain that beyond any thing that Philosophy ever dreamed of there are bodies For Christ is ascended far above all Heavens and therefore to say it is not in a place or that there is not a place where Christs body is is a ridiculous absurdity But if there be places for bodies above the highest Heavens then the highest Heaven also is in a place or may be for ought any thing pretended against it In my Fathers house are many mansions said Christ many places of abode and it is highly probable that that pavement where the bodies of Saints shall tread to eternal ages is circumscribed though by something we understand not Many things more might be said to this But I am sorry that the series of a discourse must be interrupted with such trifling considerations 34. The summe is this as substances cannot subsist without the manner of substances no more can accidents without the manner of accidents quantities after the manner of quantities qualities as qualities for to separate that from either by which we distinguish them from each other is to separate that from them by which we understand them to be themselves And four may as well cease to be four and be reduced to unity as a line cease to be a line and a body a body and a place a place and a quantum or extensum to be extended in his own kind of quantity or extension and if a man had talked otherwise till this new device arose all sects of Philosophers of the world would have thought him mad and I may here use the words of Cotta in Cicero l. 1. De naturâ Deorum Corpus quid sit sanguis quid sit intelligo quasi corpus quasi sanguis quid sit nullo prorsus modo intelligo But concerning the nature of bodies and quantities these may suffice in general For if I should descend to particulars and insist upon them I could cloy the reader with variety of one dish 35. Tenthly By this doctrine of Transubstantiation the same thing is bigger and less than it self for it is bigger in one host than in another for the wafer is Christs body and yet one wafer is bigger than another therefore Christs body is bigger than it self The same thing is above it self and below it self within it self and without it self It stands wholly upon his own right side and wholly at the same time upon his own left side it is as very a body as that which is most divisible and yet it is as indivisible as a Spirit and it is not a Spirit but a body and yet a body is no way separated from a Spirit but by being divisible It is a perfect body in which the feet are further from the head than the head from the breast and yet there is no space between head and feet at all So that the parts are further off and nearer without any distance at all being further and not further distant and yet in every point By this also here is magnitude without extension of parts for if it be essential to magnitude to have partem extra partem that is parts distinguished and severally sited then where one part is there another is not and therefore the whole body of Christ is not in every part of the consecrated wafer and yet if it be not then it must be broken into parts when the wafer is broken and then it must fill his place by parts But then it will not be possible that a bigger body with the conditions of a body should be contained in a thing less than it self that a man may throw the house out at the windows and if it be possible that a magnitude should be in a point and yet Christs body be a magnitude and yet in a point then the same thing is in a point and not in a point extended and not extended great and not divisible a quantity without dimension something and nothing * By this doctrine the same thing lies still and yet moves it stays in a place and goes away from it it removes from it self and yet abides close by it self and in it self and out of it self It is removed and yet cannot be moved broken and cannot be divided * passes from East to West through a middle place and yet stirs not * It is brought from Heaven to Earth and yet is no where in the way nor ever stirs out of Heaven * It ceases to be where it was and yet doe◠not stir from thence nor yet cease to be at all * It is removed at the motion of the accidents and yet does not fall when the host falls it changes his place but falls not and yet the changing of place was by falling It supposes a body of Christ which was made of bread that is Not born of the Virgin Mary * it says that Christs body is there without power of moving or seeing or hearing or understanding he can neither remember nor foresee save himself from robbers or vermin corruption or rottenness * it makes that which was raised in power to be again sown in weakness it gives to it the attribute of an idol to have eyes and see not ears and hear not a nose and not to smell feet and yet cannot walk * It makes a thing contained bigger than the continent and all Christs body to go into a part of his body his whole head into his own mouth if he did eat the Eucharist as it is probable he did and certain that he might have done These are the certain consequents of this most
unreasonable doctrine in relation to motion and quantity I need not instance in those collateral absurdities which are appendent to some of the foregoing particulars as how it should be credible that Christ in his sumption of the last Supper should eat his own flesh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Simplicius Nothing can receive it self nothing can really participate of it self and properly figuratively and Sacramentally this may be done but not in a natural and physical sence for as S. Cyril of Alexandria argues Si verè idem est quod participat quod participatur quid opus est participatione What need he partake of himself what need he receive a part of that which he is already whole and if the partaker and the thing partaken be naturally the same then the Sacrament did as much eat Christ as Christ did eat the Sacrament * It would also follow from hence that the soul of Christ should enter into his body though it were there before it entred and yet it would now be there twice at the same time for it is but one soul and yet enters after it is there it never having gone forth * Nay further yet upon supposition that Christ did eat the Sacrament as it is most likely he did and we are sure he might have done then the soul of Christ which certainly went along with his body which surely was then alive should be in his body in two contrary and incompatible manners by one of which he does operate freely and exercise all the actions of life by the other he exercises none by one he is visible by the other invisible by one moveable by the other immovable by one after the manner of a body by the other after the manner of a Spirit The one of these being evident in it self the other by their own affirmation But these are by the by there are whole Categories of fond and impossible consequents from this doctrine 36. Eleventhly But if I should also consider the change of consecration i. e. the conversion of bread into Christs body and their rare stratagems and devices in ridiculous affirmatives and negatives as to that particular it would afford a new heap of matter 37. For this conversion is not generation it is not corruption it is not creation because Christs body already is and cannot be produced again it is not after the manner of natural conversions it differs from the supernatural there is no change of one form into another the same first matter does not remain under * several forms first of bread then of Christs body It is turned into the substance of Christs body and yet nothing of the bread becomes any thing of the body of Christ. It is turned into Christ and yet it is turned into nothing the substance is not annihilated for then it were not turned into Christs body and yet it is annihilated or turned to nothing for it does not become Christs body it is determined upon Christs body and yet does not become it though it be changed into it for if bread could become Christs body then bread could receive a greater honour than any of the servants of Christ for it could be glorified with the biggest glorification it would be exalted far above all Angels bread should reign for ever and be King of all the world which are honours not communicable to meer man and by no change can be wrought upon him and if they may upon bread then bread is exalted higher than the sons of men and yet so it is if it be naturally and substantially changed into the body of Christ. I cannot insist upon any thing of this the absurdity being so vast the labour would be as great as needless Only I shall transcribe part of a disputation by which Tertullian proves the resurrection of our bodies by such words which do certainly confute the Roman fancies of Transubstantiation Cap. 55. de resurrectione carnis Discernenda est autem demutatio ab omni argumento perditionis c. Change must be distinguished from perdition But they are not distinguished if the flesh be so changed that it perishes As that which is lost is not changed so that which is changed is not lost or perished For it suffered change not perdition for to perish is wholly not to be that which it was but to be changed is only to be otherwise Moreover while it is otherwise it can be the same thing or it self for it hath his being which did not perish Now how it is possible that these words should be reconciled with Transubstantiation in which they affirm the bread to be changed and yet totally to have perished that is that nothing of it remains neither matter nor form it concerns them to take care for my part I am satisfied that it is impossible and I chuse to follow the Philosophy of Tertullian by which he fairly confirms the Article of the resurrection rather than the impossible speculations of these men which render all notices of men to be meer deceptions and all Articles of Faith in many things uncertain and nothing to be certain but that which is impossible This consideration so moved Durand and their Doctor Fundatissimus Egidius Romanus that they thought to change the word Transubstantiation and instead of it that they were obliged to use the word of Transformation simply affirming that other to be unintelligible But I proceed By this doctrine Christs body is there where it was not before and yet not by change of place for it descends not nor by production for it was produced before not by natural mutation for Christ himself is wholly immutable and though the bread be mutable it can never become Christ. * That which is now and was always begins to be and yet it cannot begin which was so long before And by this Doctrine is affirmed that which even themselves * judge to be simply and absolutely impossible For if after a thing hath his being and during the first being it shall have every day many new beginnings without multiplying the beings then the same thing is under two times at the same time it is but a day old and yet was six days ago and six ages and sixteen * The body of Christ obtains to be what it was not before and yet it is wholly the same without becoming what it was not * It obtains to be under the form of bread and that which it is now and was not before is neither perfective of his being nor destructive nor alterative nor augmentative nor diminutive nor conservative It is as it were a production as it were a creation as a conservation as an adduction that is it is as it were just nothing for it is not a creation not a generation not an adduction not a conservation It is not a conversion productive for no new individual is produced It is not a conversion conservative That 's a child of Bellarmines but it is perfect non-sence
and by Gregory de Valentiâ The words are these Panis iste quem Dominus discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed naturâ mutatus omnipotentiâ verbi factus est caro sicut in personâ Christi c. The bread which the Lord gave to his disciples is changed not in shape but in nature being made flesh by the omnipotency of the word and as in the person of Christ the humanity was seen and the divinity lay hid so in the visible Sacrament the divine essence after an ineffable manner pours it self forth that devotion about the Sacraments might be religion and that a more sincere entrance may be opened to the truth whereof the body and the blood are Sacraments even unto the participation of the Spirit not unto the consubstantiality of Christ. This testimony as Bellarmine says admits of no answer But by his favour it admits of many 1. Bellarmine cites but half of those words and leaves out that which gives him answer 2. The words affirm that that body and blood are but a Sacrament of a reality and truth but if it were really and naturally Christs body then it were it self veritas corpus and not only a Sacrament 3. The truth of which these are Sacramental is the participation of the Spirit that is a Spiritual communication 4. This does not arrive ad Consubstantialitatem Christi to a participation or communion of the substance of Christ which it must needs do if bread were so changed in nature as that it were substantially the body of Christ. 5. These Sermons of S. Cyprians title and name are under the name also of Arnoldus Abbot of Bonavilla in the time of S. Bernard as appears in a M S. in the Library of All-Souls Colledge of which I had the honour sometimes to be a Fellow However it is confessed on all sides that this Tractate is not S. Cyprians and who is the Father of it if Arnoldus be not cannot be known neither his age nor reputation His style sounds like the eloquence of the Monastery being direct Friers Latin as appears by his honorificare amaricare injuriare demembrare sequestrare attitulare spiritalitas t◠supplico and some false latin besides and therefore he ought to pass for nothing which I confess I am sorry for as to this question because to my sence he gives us great advantage in it But I am content to lose what our cause needs not I am certain they can get nothing by him For if the authority were not incompetent the words were impertinent to their purpose but very much against them only let me add out of the same Sermon these words Panis iste communis in carnem sanguinem mutatus procurat vitam incrementum corporibus ideóque ex consueto effectu fidei nostra adjuta infirmitas sensibili argumento edocta visibilibus Sacramentis inesse vitae aeternae effectum non tam corporali quà m spirituali transitione nos cum Christo uniri That common bread being changed into flesh and blood procures life and increment to our bodies therefore our infirmity being helped with the usual effect of faith is taught by a sensible argument that the effect of eternal life is in visible Sacraments and that we are united to Christ not so much by a corporal as by a Spiritual change If both these discourses be put together let the authority of the writer be what it will the greater the better 23. In the dialogues against the Marcionites collected out of Maximus in the time of Commodus or Severus or thereabouts Origen is brought in speaking thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If as the Marcionites say Christ had neither flesh nor blood of what flesh or of what blood did he giving bread and the chalice as images command his disciples that by these a remembrance of him should be made 24. To the same purpose are the words of Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He gave to his disciples the Symbols of Divine oeconomie commanding the image or type of his own body to be made and again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They received a command according to the constitution of the new Testament to make a memory of this sacrifice upon the table by the symbols of his body and healthful blood 25. S. Ephrem the Syrian Patriarch of Antioch is dogmatical and decretory in this question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The body of Christ received by the faithful departs not from his sensible substance and is undivided from a spiritual grace He adds the similitude and parity of baptism to this mystery for even baptism being wholly made Spiritual and being that which is the same and proper of the sensible substance I mean of water saves and that which is born doth not perish I will not descant upon these or any other words of the Fathers I alledge for if of their own natural intent they do not teach our doctrine I am content they should pass for nothing 26. S. Epiphanius affirming man to be like God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in some image or similitude not according to Nature illustrates it by the similitude of the blessed Sacrament We see that our Saviour took into his hands as the Evangelist hath it that he arose from supper and took those things and when he had given thanks he said This is mine and this we see it is not equal it is not like not to the image in the flesh not to the invisible Deity not to the proportion of members for this is a round form 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and cannot perceive any thing or is insensible according to power or faculty and he would by grace say This is mine and this and every man believes the word that is spoken for he that believeth not him to be true is fallen from grace and salvation Now the force of Epiphanius his argument consisting in this that we are like to God after his image but yet not according to nature as the Sacramental bread is like the body of Christ it is plain that the Sacramental species are the body of Christ and his blood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the image or representment not according to Nature but according to Grace 25. Macarius his words are plain enough 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Church is offered bread and wine the antitype of his flesh and of his blood and they that partake of the bread that appears do spiritually eat the flesh of Christ. 26. S. Gregory Nazianzen speaking of the Pascha saith Jam potestatis participes erimus c. Now we shall be partakers of the Paschal supper but still in figure though more clear than in the old law For the legal passeover I will not be afraid to speak it was a more obscure figure of a figure S. Ambrose is of the same perswasion Fac nobis hanc oblationem ascriptam rationabilem acceptabilem quod est
Christ is the blood of Christ so the Sacrament of faith is Now suppose a stranger to the tricks of the Roman Doctors a wise and a discerning man should read these words in S. Austin and weigh them diligently and compare them with all the adjacent words and circumstances of the place I would desire reasonably to be answered on which side he would conclude S. Austin to be if in any other place he speaks words contrary that is his fault or forgetfulness but if the contrary had been the doctrine of the Church he could never have so forgotten his Religion and Communion as so openly to have declared a contrary sence to the same Article Non hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturi estis c. You are not to eat this body which you see so he brings in Christ speaking to his disciples or to drink that blood which my crucifiers shall pour forth I have commended to you a Sacrament which being spiritually understood shall quicken you and Christ brought them to a banquet in which he commended to his disciples the figure of his body and blood * For he did not doubt to say This is my body when he gave the sign of his body * Quod ab omnibus sacrificium appellatur c. That which by all men is called a sacrifice is the sign of the true sacrifice in which the flesh of Christ after his assumption is celebrated by the Sacrament of remembrances But concerning S. Austins doctrine I shall refer him that desires to be further satisfied to no other record than their own Canon Law Which not only from S. Austin but from divers others produces testimonies so many so pertinent so full for our doctrine and against the dream of Transubstantiation that it is to me a wonder why it is not clapped into the Indices expurgatorii for it speaks very many truths beyond the cure of their Glosses which they have changed and altered several times But that this matter concerning S. Austin may be yet clearer his own third book de doctrinâ Christianâ is so plain for us in this question that when Frudegardus in the time of Charles the Bald had upon occasion of the dispute which then began to be hot and interested in this question read this book of S. Austin he was changed to the opinion of a Spiritual and mysterious presence and upon occasion of that his being perswaded by S. Austin Paschasius Ratberdus wrote to him as of a question then doubted of by many persons as is to be seen in his Epistle to Frudegardus I end this of S. Austin with those words of his which he intends by way of rule for expounding these and the like words of Scripture taken out of this book of Christian doctrine Locutio praeceptiva c. A preceptive speech forbidding a crime or commanding something good or profitable is not figurative but if it seems to command a crime or forbid a good then it is figurative Vnless ye eat the flesh of the son of man c. seems to command a wickedness it is therefore a figure commanding us to communicate with the passion of our Lord and sweetly and profitably to lay it up in our memory that his flesh was crucified and wounded for us I shall not need to urge that this holy Sacrament is called Eucharistia carnis sanguinis The Eucharist of the body and blood by Irenaeus Corpus symbolicum typicum by Origen In typo sanguis by S. Jerome similitudo figura typus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 images enigmaes representations expressions exemplars of the Passion by divers others that which I shall note here is this that in the Council of Constantinople it was publickly professed that the Sacrament is not the body of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not by nature but by representment for so it is expounded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the holy image of it and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Eucharistical bread is the true image of the natural flesh and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A figure or image delivered by God of his flesh and a true image of the incarnate dispensation of Christ. These things are found in the third Tome of the Sixth Action of the second Nicene Council where a pert Deacon ignorant and confident had boldly said that none of the Apostles or Fathers had ever called the Sacrament the image of Christs body that they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 antitypes before consecration he grants but after consecration they are called and are and are believed to be the body and blood of Christ properly which I suppose he might have learned of Damascene who in opposition to the Iconoclasts would not endure the word Type or Image to be used concerning the holy Sacrament for they would admit no other image but that he in defiance of them who had excommunicated him for a worshipper of Images and a half Sarazin would admit any Image but that but denied that to be an Image or Type of Christ de fide l. 4. c. 14. For Christ said not This is the Type of my body but it is it But however this new question began to branle the words of Type and Antitype and the manner of speaking began to be changed yet the Article as yet was not changed For the Fathers used the words of Type and Antitype and Image c. to exclude the natural sence of the Sacramental body and Damascene and Anastasius Sinaita and some others of that Age began to refuse those words lest the Sacrament be thought to be nothing of reality nothing but an Image And that this really was the sence of Damascene appears by his words recited in the Acts of the second Council of Nice affirming that the Divine bread is made Christs body by assumption and inhabitation of the Spirit of Christ in the same manner as water is made the laver of regeneration But however they were pleased to speak in the Nicene assembly yet in the Roman Edition of the Councils the Publishers and Collectors were wiser and put on this marginal note 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The holy gifts are oftentimes called types and figures even after consecration particularly by Gregory Nazianzen and S. Cyril of Hierusalem I remember only one thing objected to this testimony of so many Bishops that they were Iconoclasts or breakers of images and therefore not to be trusted in any other Article So Bellarmine as I remember But this is just as if I should say that I ought to refuse the Lateran Council because they were worshippers of Images or defenders of Purgatory Surely if I should I had much more reason to refuse their sentence than there is that the Greeks should be rejected upon so slight a pretence nay for doing that which for ought appears was in all their circumstances their duty in a high
of their Goods Ridiculous What then Saint Austin himself tells us by so much as they lov'd their goods more or less by so much sooner or later they shall be sav'd And what he said of this kind of sin viz. too much worldliness with the same Reason he might suppose of others this he thought possible but of this he was not sure and therefore it was not then an Article of Faith and though now the Church of Rome hath made it so yet it appears that it was not so from the beginning but is part of their new fashion'd faith And E. W. striving so impossibly and so weakly to avoid the pressure of this Argument should do well to consider whether he have not more strained his Conscience than the words of Saint Austin But this matter must not pass thus Saint Austin repeats this whole passage verbatim in his Answer to the 8. Quest. of Dulcitius Quest. 1. and still answers in this and other appendant Questions of the same nature viz. Whether Prayers for the dead be available c. Quest. 2. And whether upon the instant of Christ's appearing he will pass to judgment Quest 3. In these things which we have describ'd our and the infirmity of others may be so exercis'd and instructed nevertheless that they pass not for Canonical Authority And in the Answer to the first Question he speaks in the style of a doubtful person Whether men suffer such things in this life only or also such certain judgments follow even after this life this Understanding of this sentence is not as I suppose abhorrent from truth The same words he also repeats in his Book de fide operibus Chap. 16. There is yet another place of S. Austin in which it is plain he still is a doubting person in the Question of Purgatory His sence is this After the death of the body until the resurrection if in the interval the spirits of the dead are said to suffer that kind of fire which they feel not who had not such manners and loves in their life-time that their wood hay and stubble ought to be consum'd but others feel who brought such buildings along with them whether there only or whether here and there or whether therefore here that it might not be there that they feel a fire of a transitory tribulation burning their secular buildings though escaping from damnation I reprove it not for peradventure it is true So Saint Austin's peradventure yea is alwayes peradventure nay and will the Bigots of the Roman Church be content with such a confession of faith as this of Saint Austin in the present Article I believe not But now after all this I will not deny but Saint Austin was much inclin'd to believe Purgatory fire and therefore I shall not trouble my self to answer the citations to that purpose which Bellarmine and from him these Transcribers bring out of this Father though most of them are drawn out of Apocryphal spurious and suspected pieces as his Homilies de S. S. c. yet that which I urge is this that Saint Austin did not esteem this to be a Doctrine of the Church no Article of Faith but a disputable Opinion and yet though he did incline to the wrong part of the Opinion yet it is very certain that he sometimes speaks expresly against this Doctrine and other times speaks things absolutely inconsistent with the Opinion of Purgatory which is more than an Argument of his confessed doubting for it is a declaration that he understood nothing certain in this affair but that the contrary to his Opinion was the more probable And this appears in these few following words Saint Austin hath these words Some suffer temporary punishments in this life only others after death others both now and then Bellarmine and from him Diaphanta urges this as a great proof of Saint Austin's Doctrine But he destroyes it in the words immediately following and makes it useless to the hypothesis of the Roman Church This shall be before they suffer the last and severest judgment meaning as Saint Austin frequently does such sayings of the General conflagration at the end of the world But whether he does so or no yet he adds But all of them come not into the everlasting punishments which after the Judgment shall be to them who after death suffer the temporary By which Doctrine of Saint Austin viz. that those who are in his Purgatory shall many of them be damn'd and the temporary punishments after death do but usher in the Eternal after judgment he destroyes the salt of the Roman fire who imagines that all that go to Purgatory shall be sav'd Therefore this testimony of Saint Austin as it is nothing for the avail of the Roman Purgatory so by the appendage it is much against it which Coquaeus Torrensis and especially Cardinal Perron observing have most violently corrupted these words by falsely translating them So Perron Tous ceux qui souffrent des peines temporelles apres lâ— mort ne viennent pas aux peines Eternelles qui auront tien apres le judgement which reddition is expresly against the sence of Saint Austin's words 2. But another hypothesis there is in Saint Austin to which without dubitation he does peremptorily adhere which I before intimated viz. that although he admit of Purgatory pains after this life yet none but such as shall be at the day of Judgment Whoever therefore desires to avoid the eternal pains let him be not only baptiz'd but also justified in Christ and truly pass from the Devil unto Christ. But let him not think that there shall be any Purgatory pains but before that last and dreadful Judgment meaning not only that there shall be none to cleanse them after the day of Judgment but that then at the approach of that day the General fire shall try and purge And so himself declares his own sence All they that have not Christ in the foundation are argued or reproved when in the day of Judgment but they that have Christ in the foundation are chang'd that is purg'd who build upon this foundation wood hay stubble So that in the day of Judgment the trial and escape shall be for then shall the trial and the condemnation be But yet more clear are his words in other places So at the setting of the Sun that is at the end viz. of the world the day of judgment is signified by that fire dividing the carnal which are to be sav'd by fire and those who are to be damned in the fire nothing is plainer than that Saint Austin understood that those who are to be sav'd so as by fire are to be sav'd by passing through the fire at the day of judgment that was his Opinion of Purgatory And again out of these things which are spoken it seems more evidently to appear that there shall be certain purgatory pains of some persons in that judgment For what thing else
in two parts of the body which is one and whole and so is but in one place and consequently is but one soul. But if the feet were parted from the body by other bodies intermedial then indeed if there were but one soul in feet and head the Gentleman had spoken to the purpose But here these wafers are two intire wafers separate the one from the other bodies intermedial put between and that which is here is not there and yet of each of them it is affirm'd that it is Christs body that is of two wafers and of two thousand wafers it is at the same time affirm'd of every one that it is Christs body Now if these wafers are substantially not the same not one but many and yet every one of these many is substantially and properly Christs body then these bodies are many for they are many of whom it is said every one distinctly and separately and in it self is Christs body 2. For his comparing the presence of Christ in the wafer with the presence of God in Heaven it is spoken without common wit or sence for does any man say that God is in two places and yet be the same one God Can God be in two places that cannot be in one Can he be determin'd and number'd by places that sills all places by his presence or is Christs body in the Sacrament as God is in the world that is repletivè filling all things alike spaces void and spaces full and there where there is no place where the measures are neither time nor place but only the power and will of God This answer besides that it is weak and dangerous is also to no purpose unless the Church of Rome will pass over to the Lutherans and maintain the Ubiquity of Christs body Yea but S. Austin says of Christ Ferebatur in manibus suis c. he bore himself in his own hands and what then Then though every wafer be Christs body yet the multiplication of wafers does not multiply bodies for then there would be two bodies of Christ when he carried his own body in his hands To this I answer that concerning S. Austins mind we are already satisfied but that which he says here is true as he spake and intended it for by his own rule the similitudes and figures of things are oftentimes called by the name of those things whereof they are similitudes Christ bore his own body in his own hands when he bore the Sacrament of his body for of that also it is true that it is truly his body in a Sacramental spiritual and real manner that is to all intents and purposes of the holy Spirit of God According to the words of S. Austin cited by P. Lombard We call that the body of Christ which being taken from the fruits of the Earth and consecrated by mystick prayer we receive in memory of the Lords Passion which when by the hands of men it is brought on to that visible shape it is not sanctified to become so worthy a Sacrament but by the spirit of God working invisibly If this be good Catholick doctrine and if this confession of this article be right the Church of England is right but then when the Church of Rome will not let us alone in this truth and modesty of confession but impose what is unknown in Antiquity and Scripture and against common sence and the reason of all the world she must needs be greatly in the wrong But as to this question I was here only to justifie the Disswasive I suppose these Gentleman may be fully satisfied in the whole inquiry if they please to read a book I have written on this subject intirely of which hitherto they are pleas'd to take no great notice SECT IV. Of the Half-Communion WHEN the French Embassador in the Council of Trent A. D. 1561. made instance for restitution of the Chalice to the Laity among other oppositions the Cardinal S. Angelo answered that he would never give a cup full of such deadly poison to the people of France instead of a medicine and that it was better to let them die than to cure them with such remedies The Embassador being greatly offended replied that it was not fit to give the name of poison to the blood of Christ and to call the holy Apostles poisoners and the Fathers of the Primitive Church and of that which followed for many hundred years who with much spiritual profit have ministred the cup of that blood to all the people this was a great and a publick yet but a single person that gave so great offence One of the greatest scandals that ever were given to Christendom was given by the Council of Constance which having acknowledged that Christ administred this venerable Sacrament under both kinds of bread and wine and that in the Primitive Church this Sacrament was receiv'd of the faithful under both kinds yet the Council not only condemns them as hereticks and to be punished accordingly who say it is unlawful to observe the custom and law of giving it in one kind only but under pain of excommunication forbids all Priests to communicate the people under both kinds This last thing is so shameful and so impious that A. L. directly denies that there is any such thing which if it be not an argument of the self-conviction of the man and a resolution to abide in his error and to deceive the people even against his knowledge let all the world judge for the words of the Councils decree as they are set down by Carranza at the end of the decree are these Item praecipimus sub pâ—â—na excommunicationis quod nullus presbyter communicet populum sub utraque specie panis vini I need say no more in this affair To affirm it necessary to do in the Sacraments what Christ did is called heresie and to do so is punished with excommunication But we who follow Christ hope we shall communicate with him and then we are well enough especially since the very institution of the Sacrament in both kinds is a sufficient Commandment to minister and receive it in both kinds For if the Church of Rome upon their supposition only that Christ did barely institute confession do therefore urge it as necessary it will be a strange partiality that the confessed institution by Christ of the two Sacramental species shall not conclude them as necessary as the other upon an Unprov'd supposition And if the institution of the Sacrament in both kinds be not equal to a command then there is no command to receive the bread or indeed to receive the Sacrament at all but it is a mere act of supererogation that the Priests do it at all and an act of favour and grace that they give even the bread it self to the Laity But besides this it is not to be endur'd that the Church of Rome only binds her subjects to observe the decree of abstaining from the cup
they affect weak minds that they seem to live and feel especially when the veneration of a multitude is added to it by which so great a worship is bestowed upon them Here is the danger and how much is contributed to it in the Church of Rome by clothing their Images in rich apparel and by pretending to make them nod their head to twinkle the eyes and even to speak the world is too much satisfied Some such things as these and the superstitious talkings and actings of their Priests made great impressions upon my Neighbours in Ireland and they had such a deep and religious veneration for the Image of our Lady of Kilbrony that a worthy Gentleman who is now with God and knew the deep superstition of the poor Irish did not distrain upon his Tenants for his rents but carried away the Image of the female Saint of Kilbrony and instantly the Priest took care that the Tenants should redeem the Lady by a punctual and speedy paying of their rents for they thought themselves Unblessed as long as the Image was away and therefore they speedily fetch'd away their Ark from the house of Obededom and were afraid that their Saint could not help them when her Image was away Now if S. Paul would have Christians to abstain from meats sacrificed to idols to avoid the giving offence to weak brethren much more ought the Church to avoid tempting all the weak people of her Communion to idolatry by countenancing and justifying and imposing such acts which all their heads can never learn to distinguish from Idolatry I end this with a memorial out of the Councils of Sens and Mentz who command moneri populum ne imagines adorent The Preachers were commanded to admonish the people that they should not adore Images And for the Novelty of the practice here in the British Churches it is evident in Ecclesiastical story that it was introduc'd by a Synod of London about the year 714. under Bonifacius the Legat and Bertualdus Achbishop of Dover and that without disputation or inquiry into the lawfulness or unlawfulness of it but wholly upon the account of a vision pretended to be seen by Eguinus Bishop of Worcester the Virgin Mary appearing to him and commanding that her Image should be set in Churches and worshipped That Austin the Monk brought with him the banner of the Cross and the Image of Christ Beda tells and from him Baronius and Binius affirms that before this vision of Egwin the Cross and Image of Christ were in use but that they were at all worshipped or ador'd Beda saith not and there is no record no monument of it before this Hypochondrical dream of Egwin and it further appears to be so because Albinus or Alcuinus an English-man Master of Charles the Great when the King had sent to Offa the book of G. P. for the worship of Images wrote an Epistle against it Ex authoritate Divina scripturarum mirabiliter affirmatum and brought it to the King of France in the name of our Bishops and Kings saith Hovedon SECT VII Of Picturing God the Father and the Holy Trinity AGAINST all the authorities almost which are or might be brought to prove the Unlawfulness of Picturing God the Father or the Holy Trinity the Roman Doctors generally give this one answer That the Fathers intended by their sayings to condemn the picturing of the Divine Essence but condemn not the picturing of those symbolical shapes or forms in which God the Father or the Holy Ghost or the Blessed Trinity are supposed to have appeared To this I reply 1. That no man ever intended to paint the essence of any thing in the world A man cannot well understand an Essence and hath no Idea of it in his mind much less can a Painters Pencil do it And therefore it is a vain and impertinent discourse to prove that they do ill who attempt to paint the Divine Essence This is a subterfuge which none but men out of hope to defend their opinion otherwise can make use of 2. To picture God the Father in such symbolical forms in which he appear'd is to picture him in no form at all for generally both the Schools of the Jews and Christians consent in this that God the Father never appear'd in his person for as S. Paul affirms he is the invisible God whom no eye hath seen or can see He always appeared by Angels or by fire or by storm and tempest by a cloud or by a still voice he spake by his Prophets and at last by his Son but still the adorable majesty was reserved in the secrets of his glory 3. The Church of Rome paints the Holy Trinity in forms and symbolical shapes in which she never pretends the Blessed Trinity did appear as in a face with three Noses and four Eyes one body with three heads and as an old man with a great beard and a Popes Crown upon his head and holding the two ends of the transverse rafter of the Cross with Christ leaning on his breast and the Holy Spirit hovering over his head And therefore they worship the Images of God the Father and the Holy Trinity figures which as is said of Remphan and the Heathen Gods and Goddesses themselves have made which therefore must needs be Idols by their own definition of Idolum simulachrum rei non existentis for never was there seen any such of the Holy Trinity in Unity as they most impiously represent And if when any thing is spoken of God in Scripture allegorically they may of it make an Image to God they would make many more Monsters than yet they have found out For as Durandus well observes If any one shall say that because the Holy Ghost appeared in the shape of a Dove and the Father in the old Testament under the Corporal forms that therefore they may be represented by Images we must say to this that those corporal forms were not assumed by the Father and the Holy Spirit and therefore a representation of them by Images is not a representation of the Divine person but a representation of that form or shape alone Therefore there is no reverence due to it as there is none due to those forms by themselves Neither were these forms to represent the Divine persons but to represent those effectâ— which those Divine persons did effect And therefore there is one thing more to be said to them â—hat do so They have chang'd the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude of a mortal man Now how will the Reader imagine that the Disswasive is confuted and his testimonies from Antiquity answered Why most clearly E. W. saith that one principle of S. John Damascen doth it it solves all that the Doctor hath or can alledge in this matter Well! what is this principle The words are these and S. Austin points at the same Quisnam est qui invisibilis corpore vacantis ac
so should confidently say Eusebius had nothing to this purpose viz. to condemn the picturing of God when his words are so famous that they are recorded in the seventh Synod and the words were occasioned by a solemn message sent to Eusebius by the sister of Constantius and wife of Licinius lately turned from being Pagan to be Christian desiring Eusebius to send her the picture of our Lord Jesus to which he answers Quia vero de quadam imagine quasi Christi scripsisti hanc volens tibi à nobis mitti quam dicis qualem hanc quam perhibes Christi imaginem Vtrâ—â— veram incommutabilem natura characteres suos portantem An istam quam propter nos suscepit servi formae schemate circumamictus Sed de forma quidem Dei nec ipse arbitror te quaerere semel ab ipso edoctam quoniam neque patrem quis novit nisi filius neque ipsum filium novit quis aliquando digne nisi solus pater qui eum genuit And a little after Quis ergo hujusmodi dignitatis gloriae vibrantes praefulgentes splendores exarare potuisset mortuis inanimatis Coloribus scripturis Vmbraticis And then speaking of the glory of Christ in Mount Thabor he proceeds Ergo si tunc incarnata ejus forma tantam virtutem sortita est ab inhabitante in se Divinitate mutata quid oportet dicere cum mortalitate exutus corruptione ablutus speciem servilis formae in gloriam Domini Dei commutavit Where besides that Eusebius thinks it unlawful to make a picture of Christ and therefore consequently much more to make a picture of God he also tells Constantia he supposes she did not offer at any desire of that Well for these three of the Fathers we are well enough but for the rest the objector says that they speak only against representing God as in his own essence shape or form To this I answer that God hath no shape or form and therefore these Fathers could not speak against making Images of a thing that was not and as for the Images of his essence no Christian no Heathen ever pretended to it and no man or beast can be pictured so no Painter can paint an Essence And therefore although this distinction was lately made in the Roman Schools yet the Fathers knew nothing of it and the Roman Doctors can make nothing of it for the reasons now told But the Gentleman saith that some of their Church allow only and practise the picturing those forms wherein God hath appeared It is very well they do no more but I pray in what forms did God the Father ever appear or the Holy and Mysterious Trinity Or suppose they had does it follow they may be painted We saw but now out of Eusebius that it was not esteemed lawful to picture Christ though he did appear in a humane body And although it is supposed that the Holy Ghost did appear in the shape of a Dove yet it is forbidden by the sixth General Council to paint Christ like a Lamb or the Holy Spirit like a Dove Add to this where did ever the Holy and Blessed Trinity appear like three faces joyned in one or like an old man with Christ crucified leaning on his breast and a Dove hovering over them and yet however the objector is pleas'd to mince the matter yet the doing this is ubique inter Catholicos recepta and that not only to be seen but to be ador'd as I prov'd a little above by testimonies of their own The next charge is concerning S. Hierom that he says no such thing which matter will soon be at an end if we see the Commentary he makes on these words of Isaiah Cui ergo similem fecisti Deum To whom do you liken God Or what Image will ye make for him who is a Spirit and is in all things and runs every where and holds the earth in his fist And he laughs at the folly of the Nations that an Artist or a Brasier or a Goldsmith or a Silversmith makes a God viz. by making the Image of God But the objector adds that it would be long to set down the words of the other Fathers quoted by the Doctor and truly so the Doctor thought so too at first but because the objector says they do not make against what some of his Church own and practise I thought it might be worth the Readers pains to see them The words of S. Austin in this question are very plain and decretory For a Christian to place such an Image to God viz. with right and left-hand sitting with bended knees that is in the shape of a man is wickedness but much more wicked is it to place it in our hearts But of this I have given account in the preceding Section Theodoret Damascen and Nicephorus do so expresly condemn the picturing God that it is acknowledg'd by my adversaries only they fly for succour to the old mumpsimus they condemn the picturing the essence of God but not his forms and appearances a distinction which those good old writers never thought of but directly they condemned all Images of God and the Holy Trinity And the Bishops in the seventh Synod though they were worshippers of Images yet they thinking that Angels were Corporeal believ'd they might be painted but denied it of God expresly And indeed it were a strange thing that God in the old Testament should so severely forbid any Image to be made of him upon this reason because he is invisible and he presses it passionately by calling it to their memory that they heard a voice but saw no shape and yet that both he had formerly and did afterwards shew himself in shapes and forms which might be painted and so the very reason of the Commandment be wholly void To which add this consideration that although the Angels did frequently appear and consequently had forms possible to be represented in Imagery yet none of the Ancients did suppose it lawful to paint Angels but they that thought them to be corporeal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Philo. To which purpose is that of Seneca Effugit oculos cogitatione visendus est And Antiphanes said of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God is not seen with eyes he is like to no man therefore no man can by an Image know him By which it appears plainly to be the General opinion of the Ancients that whatever was incorporeal was not to be painted no though it had appeared in symbolical forms as confessedly the Angels did And of this the second Synod of Nice it self is a sufficient witness the Fathers of which did all approve the Epistle of John Bishop of Thessalonica in which he largely discourses against the picturing of any thing that is incorporeal He that pleases to see more of this affair may find much more and to very great purpose in a little book de imaginibus
a perfect grace * We must be ready to part with all for a good conscience and to die for Christ that 's perfect obedience and the most perfect love * We must conform to the Divine Will in doing and suffering that 's perfect patience we must live in all holy conversation and godliness that 's a perfect state * We must ever be going forward and growing in godliness that so we may be perfect men in Christ. * And we must persevere unto the end that 's perfection and the crown of all the rest If any thing less than this were intended it cannot be told how the Gospel should be a holy institution or that God should require of us to live a holy life but if any thing more than this were intended it is impossible but all mankind should perish 52. To the same sence are we to understand those other severe Precepts of Scripture of being pure unblameable without spot or wrinkle without fault that is that we be honest and sincere free from hypocrisie just in our purposes and actions without partiality and unhandsome mixtures S. Paul makes them to expound each other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sincere that is without fault pure and clear in Conscience 53. Like to this is that of Toto corde loving and serving God with all our heart and with all our strength That this is possible is folly to deny For he that saith he cannot do a thing with all his strength that is that he cannot do what he can do knows not what he says and yet to do this is the highest measure and sublimity of Christian perfection and of keeping the Commandments But it signifies two things 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without hypocrisie sincerely and heartily opposite to that of Corde corde in the Psalmist Corde corde loquuti sunt they spake with a double heart but the men of Zebulon went out to battel absque corde corde they were not of a double heart so S. Hierome renders it but heartily or with a whole heart they did their business 2. It signifies diligence and labour earnestness and caution Totus in hoc sum so the Latines use to speak I am earnest and hearty in this affair I am wholly taken up with it 54. Thus is the whole design of the Gospel rarely abbreviated in these two words of Perfection and Repentance God hath sent Jesus to bless you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whilest or so that every one of you turn from your iniquities He blesses us and we must do our duty He pardons us and we obey him He turns us and we are turned And when S. Peter had represented the terrors of the day of Judgment he infers What manner of persons ought we to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in holy living and holy worshippings This he calls a giving diligence to be found 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without spot and unblameable that 's Christian perfection and yet this very thing is no other than what he calls a little before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a coming to repentance Living in holy conversation and piety in the faith of Christ is the extent and burthen of repentance and it is the limit and declaration of the spotless and unblameable This is no more and that is no less 55. Upon this account the Commandments are not only possible but easie necessary to be observed and will be exacted at our hands as they are imposed That is 1. That we abstain from all deliberate acts of sin 2. That we never contract any vicious habit 3. That if we have we quite rescind and cut them off and make amends for what is past 4. That our love to God be intire hearty obedient and undivided 5. That we do our best to understand Gods will and obey it allowing to our selves deliberately or by observation not the smallest action that we believe to be a sin Now that God requires no more and that we can do thus much and that good men from their conversion do thus much though in differing degrees is evident upon plain experience and the foregoing considerations I conclude with the words of the Arausican Council Omnes baptizati Christo auxiliante cooperante possunt debent quae ad salutem pertinent si fidelitèr laborare voluerint adimplere All baptized Christians may by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ if they will faithfully labour perform and fulfil all things that belong to their salvation 56. The summ of all is this The state of regeneration is perfection all the way even when it is imperfect in its degrees The whole state of a Christians life is a state of perfection Sincerity is the formality or the Soul of it A hearty constant endeavour is the Body or material part of it And the Mercies of God accepting it in Christ and assisting and promoting it by his Spirit of Grace is the third part of its constitution it is the Spirit This perfection is the perfection of Men not of Angels oand it is as in the perfection of Glory where all are perfect yet all are not equal Every regenerate man hath that perfection without which he cannot be accepted but some have this perfection more some less It is the perfection of state but the perfection of degrees is not yet Here men are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 made perfect according to the measure of their Fathers as Porphyrie express'd it that is by the measures of mortality or as it pleases God to enable and accept them SECT IV. The former Doctrine reduc'd to Practice 1. THE Law is either taken for the Law of Moses or the Law of Works The Law of Works is that Empire and Dominion which God exercised over man using his utmost right and obliging man to the rigorous observation of all that Law he should impose upon him And in this sence it was a law of death not of life for no man could keep it and they that did not might not live This was impos'd on Adam only 2. But when God brought Israel out of Egypt he began to make a Covenant with them with some compliance to their infirmities For because little things could not be avoided Sacrifices were appointed for their expiation which was a mercy as the other was a misery a repentance as the sin But for great sins there was no Sacrifice appointed no repentance ministred And therefore still we were in the ministration of death for this mercy was not sufficient as yet it was not possible for a man to be justified by the Law It threatned sinners with death it inflicted death it did not promise eternal life it ministred no grace but fear and temporal hope It was written in Tables of stone not in their hearts that is the material parts of the Law of Moses were not consonant to natural and essential reason but arbitrary impositions they were not perfective of a man but
in the remaining portion of our days actions meet for repentance so the Baptist called them This is in Scripture by way of propriety called Repentance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so the Baptist used it distinguishing Repentance from its fruits that is from such significations exercises and prosecutions of this change as are apt to represent and to effect it more and more such as are confession weeping self-afflictions alms and the like So S. Paul using the same words before King Agrippa But by way of Synecdoche not only the fruits and consequent expressions but the beginning sorrow also is signified by the same word and all are under the same Commandment though with different degrees of necessity and expression of which I shall afterwards give account Here I only account concerning the essential and constituent parts and definition of Repentance 10. All the whole duty of Repentance and every of its parts is sometimes called Conversion Thus godly sorrow is a conversion or change and upon that account S. James calls upon sinners Be afflicted and mourn and weep let your laughter be turned into mourning and your joy into weeping This is the first change of our affections which is attended with a change of our judgment when we do no longer admire the false beauties of sin but judge righteously concerning it And of this the Prophet Jeremy gives testimony Surely after that I was turned I repented And by this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Hebrews express the duty which the LXX indifferently render by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is best rendred Conversion And then follows the conversion of the whole man body and soul mind and spirit all are set in opposition against sin and apply themselves to the service of God and conformity to Jesus SECT II. Of Repentance in general or Conversion 1. REpentance and Faith in Scriptures signifie sometimes more generally and in the federal sence are used for all that state of grace and favour which the holy Jesus revealed and brought into the world They both signifie the Gospel For the whole Gospel is nothing else but that glad tidings which Christ brought to all mankind that the Covenant of Works or exact measures should not now be exacted but men should be saved by second thoughts that is by Repentance and amendment of life through faith in the Lord Jesus That is if we become his Disciples for that is the condition of the Covenant we shall find mercy our sins shall be blotted out and we shall be saved if we obey heartily and diligently though not exactly This becoming his Disciples is called Faith that is coming to him believing him hoping in him obeying him and consequent to this is that we are admitted to Repentance that is to the pardon of our sins For him hath God exalted on his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to give repentance and remission of sins This is the summ Total of the Gospel That we have leave to repent supposes that God will pardon what is past But then that we have leave to repent supposes us also highly bound to it It is in meer pity to our imfirmities our needs and our miseries that we have leave to do it and this is given to mankind by faith in Jesus Christ that is by becoming his Disciples for he hath power to pardon sins and to take them away and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness viz. which we have committed This is that which all the world did need and long'd for it was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hidden mystery from all ages but revealed in Christ whose blood as S. Clement expresses it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 brought to all the world the grace of Repentance 2. This is the Gospel For the Gospel is nothing else but Faith and Repentance The Gospel is called Faith by S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before that faith came we were under the law shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed that is to the Gospel or the glad tidings of Repentance which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hearing of faith For Faith being here opposed to the Law that is the Covenant of Mercy to the Covenant of Works must mean the Covenant of Repentance And therefore although if we consider them as proper and particular graces and habits they have differing natures and definitions yet in the general and federal sence of which I now speak Faith and Repentance are only distinguished by relations and respects not by substance and reality Repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ that is Repentance for having sinned against God a Repentance I say through faith in Jesus Christ that is a Repentance procured and preach'd and enjoyn'd by Christ being the summ of his Discipline And that it may appear Faith and Repentance to be the same thing and differing only in name and manner of expression S. Paul confounds the distinction which he formerly made and that which he called Repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Jesus in his Sermons in Asia in his Epistle to the Hebrews he calls Repentance from dead works and faith in God And the words are used for each other promiscuously in S. Luke for that which the rich man in Hell called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Abraham called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If one comes from the dead they will repent No said Abraham If they will not hear Moses and the Prophets then if one come from the dead they will not believe or be perswaded And S. Peter giving an account of the delaying of the coming of the Lord for the punishment of the obdurate Jews and enemies of Christ says it is because God of his infinite goodness expects even them also to be converted to the faith or becoming Christians as the whole design of the place infers and this he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a coming to Repentance that is to the faith of Christ. And therefore the Gospel is nothing else but an universal publication of Repentance and pardon of sins in the Name of Christ that is procured for all them who are his Disciples and to this we are baptized that is adopted into the Religion into that Discipleship under which God requires holiness but not perfect measures sincerity without hypocrisie but not impeccability or perfect innocence 3. And as the Gospel is called Faith and Faith is Repentance that is it is the same Covenant of Grace and Mercy with this only difference that it is called Faith as it relates to Christ who procured this mercy for us Repentance as it signifies the mercy it self so procured So Baptism by the same analogy is called the Baptism unto Repentance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Baptism of Repentance so it is called in the Jerusalem Creed that is the admission to the grace of the Gospel which the Fathers of C.P.
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But when Christ had been preached all the obfirmation and obstinacy of mind by which they shut their eyes against that light all that was choice and interest or passion and was to be rescinded by Repentance But Conversion was the word indifferently used concerning the change both of Jews and Gentiles because they both abounded in iniquity and did need this change called by S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a redemption from all iniquity by S. Peter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a conversion from wickedness 10. In analogy and proportion to these Repentances and Conversions of Jews and Gentiles the Repentances of Christians may be called Conversion We have an instance of the word so used in the case of S. Peter When thou art converted strengthen thy brethren that is when thou art returned from thy folly and sin of denying the Lord do thou confirm thy brethren that they may not fall as thou hast done This is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a conversion from vanity and impiety or injustice when a person of any evil life returns to his duty and his undertaking in Baptism from the unregenerate to the regenerate estate that is from habitual sin to habitual grace But the Repentances of good men for their sins of infirmity or the seldom interruptions of a good life by single falls is not properly Conversion But as the distance from God is from whence we are to retire so is the degree of our Conversion The term from whence is various but the term whither we go is the same All must come to God through Jesus Christ in the measures and strictness of the Evangelical holiness which is that state of Repentance I have been now describing which is A perfect abrenunciation of all iniquity and a sincere obedience in the faith of Jesus Christ which is the result of all the foregoing considerations and usages of words and is further manifested in the following appellatives and descriptions by which Repentance is signified and recommended to us in Scripture 11. I. It is called Reconciliation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We pray you in Christs stead to be reconciled to God that is to be friends with him no longer to stand in terms of distance for every habitual sinner every one that provokes him to anger by his iniquity is his enemy not that every sinner hates God by a direct hate but as obedience is love so disobedience is enmity or hatred by interpretation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enemies in their mind by wicked works So S. Paul expresses it and therefore the reconciling of these is to represent them holy and unblameable and unreprovable in his sight Pardon of sins is the least part of this reconciliation Our sins and our sinfulness too must be taken away that is our old guilt and the remanent affections must be taken off before we are friends of God And therefore we find this reconciliation press'd on our parts we are reconciled to God not God to us For although the term be relative and so signifies both parts as conjunction and friendship and society and union do yet it pleased the Spirit of God by this expression to signifie our duty expresly and to leave the other to be supposed because if our parts be done whatsoever is on Gods part can never fail And 2. Although this reconciliation begins on Gods part and he first invites us to peace and gave his Son a Sacrifice yet Gods love is very revocable till we are reconciled by obedience and conformity 12. II. It is called Renewing and that either with the connotation of the subject renewed or the cause renewing The renewing of the Holy Ghost and the renewing of the mind or the spirit of the mind The word is exactly the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a change of mind from worse to better as it is distinguished from the fruits and effects of it So be renewed in your mind that is throw away all your foolish principles and non-sence propositions by which you use to be tempted and perswaded to sin and inform your mind with wise notices and sentences of God That ye put off concerning the old conversation the old man which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts and that ye put on the new man which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness which is an excellent description of Repentance In which it is observable that S. Paul uses two words more to express the greatness and nature of this change and conversion It is 13. III. A new Creature The new Man Created in Righteousness for the state of Repentance is so great an alteration that in some sence it is greater than the Creation because the things created had in them no opposition to the power of God but a pure capacity obediential but a sinner hath dispositions opposite to the Spirit of Grace and he must unlearn much before he can learn any thing He must die before he can be born Nam quodcunque suis mutatum finibus exit Continuò hoc mors est illius quod fuit anté Lucret. Our sins the body of sin the spirit of uncleanness the old man must be abolished mortified crucified buried our sins must be laid away we must hate the garments spotted with the flesh and our garments must be whitened in the blood of the Lamb our hearts must be purged from an evil conscience purified as God is pure that is as S. Paul expresses it from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit denying or renouncing all ungodliness and worldly lusts 14. And then as the antithesis or consequent of this is when we have laid away our sin and renounced ungodliness We must live godly righteously and soberly in this present world we must not live either to the world or to our selves but to Christ Hic dies aliam vitam adfert alios mores postulat Our manner of life must be wholly differing from our former vanities so that the life which we now live in the flesh we must live by the faith of the Son of God that is according to his Laws and most holy Discipline 15. This is pressed earnestly upon us by those many Precepts of obedience to God to Christ to the holy Gospel to the Truth to the Doctrine of Faith * of doing good doing righteousness doing the truth * serving in the newness of the Spirit * giving our members up as servants of righteousness unto holiness * being holy in all conversations * following after peace with all men and holiness being followers of good works providing things hones◠in the sight of God and men abhorring evil and cleaving to that which is good * perfecting holiness in the fear of God to be perfect in every good work * being filled with the fruits of righteousness walking worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing being
suppose a man to be gone a great way from God before he can presumptuously or wilfully commit any of them such as are idolatry wilful murder adultery witchcraft perjury sacriledge and the like such which by reason of their evil effect are called peccata clamantia ad Dominum crying sins as oppressing widows entring into the fields of the fatherless killing a man by false accusation grinding the face of the poor some sort of unnatual lusts or such which by reason of their scandal and severe prohibitions of them and their proper baseness and unholiness are peccata vastantia conscientiam they lay a mans conscience waste such are all these that I have now reckoned Now concerning every one of these there is amongst wise and good men no question but every act of them is exclusive of a man from all his hopes of Heaven unless he repent timely and effectually For every act of these is such as a man cannot be surprised in the commission of it he can have no ignorance no necessity no infirmity to lessen or excuse his fault which because it is very mischievous in the event expresly and severely and by name forbidden is also against holiness and against charity against God and against the Commandment so apparently that there is nothing to lessen them into the neighbourhood of an excuse if he that commits them have a clear use of reason Some acts of other sins are such which as they are innocent of doing mischief to our neighbour so they are forbidden only in general but concerning the particular there is not any express certainty as in drunkenness which though every Christian knows to be forbidden yet concerning every particular act it is not always so certain that it is drunkenness because the acts partake of more and less which is not true in murder in adultery apostasie witchcraft and the like Besides which in some of the forbidden instances there are some degrees of surprise even when there are some degrees of presumption and deliberation which in others there cannot be Upon which considerations it is apparent that the single acts of these greater sins are equal to a habit in others and are for the present destructive of the state of Gods favour a man that does them is in the state of damnation till he hath repented that is no good man can do one of these acts and be a good man still he is a wicked person and an enemy of God if he does 24. II. This is apparent in those acts which can be done but once as in parricide or murdering our Father or Mother and in the wilful murder of our self There can be no habit of these sins all their malignity is spent in one act and the event is best declared by one of them the man dies in his sin in that sin which excludes him from Heaven Every act of these sins is like the stinging of Bees animámque in vulnere ponunt He cannot strike again he can sin that sin over no more and therefore it is a single act that damns in that case Now though it is by accident that these sins can be but once acted yet it is not by accident that these single acts destroy the soul but by their malice and evil effect their mischief or uncharitableness it follows therefore that it is so in all the single acts of these great crimes for since they that cannot be habitual yet are highly damnable the evil sentence is upon every act of these greater crimes 25. III. Concerning the single acts of other sins which are not so highly criminal yet have a name in the Catalogues of condemn'd sins the sentence in Scripture is the same the penalty extreme the fine is the whole interest S. Paul in his Epistle to the Corinthians seem only to condemn the habit Thieves drunkards covetous railers c. shall not inherit the kindom of Heaven Now one act does not make them properly such a habit not an act denominates But lest this be expounded to be a permission to commit single acts S. Paul in his Epistle to the Galatians affixes the same penalty to the actions as to the habits 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they that do such things that is the actions of those sins are damnable and exclusive from Heaven as verily as the habits And however in moral accounts or in Aristotle's Ethicks a man is not called by the name of a single action yet in all laws both of God and man he is He that steals once is a thief in the Courts of God and the King and one act of adultery makes a man an adulterer so that by this measure they that are such and they that do such things means the same and the effect of both is exclusion from the Kingdom of Heaven 26. IV. Single actions in Scripture are called works of darkness deeds of the body works of the flesh and though they do not reign yet if they enter they disturb the rest and possession of the spirit of grace and therefore are in their several measures against the holiness of the Gospel of Christ. All sins are single in their acting and a sinful habit differs from a sinful act but as many differ from one or as a year from an hour a vicious habit is but one sin continued or repeated for as a sin grows from little to great so it passes from act to habit a sin is greater because it is complicated externally or internally no other way in the world it is made up of more kinds or more degrees of choice and when two or three crimes are mixt in one action then the sin is loud and clamorous and if these still grow more numerous and not interrupted and disjoyned by a speedy repentance then it becomes a habit As the continuation of an instant or its perpetual flux makes time and proper succession so does the re-acting or the continuing in any one or more sins make a habitual sinner So that in this Question the answer for one will serve for the other where-ever the habit is forbidden there also the act is criminal and against God damnable by the laws of God and actually damning without repentance Between sins great and little actual and habitual there is no difference of nature or formality but only of degrees 27. V. And therefore the words that represent the state of sin are used indifferently both for acts and habits 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to do single acts and by aggravation only can signifie an habitual sinner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that commits sin is of the Devil so S. John by which although he means especially him that commits sin frequently or habitually for where there is greater reason there is the stronger affirmative yet that he must also mean it of single sins is evident not only by the nature of the thing some single acts in some instances being as mischievous and malicious as a habit in others but
supernatural contentions and designs of grace it calls back nature from its remedy and purifications of Baptism and makes such new aptnesses that the punishment remains even after the beginning of the sins pardon and that which is a natural punishment of the sinful actions is or may be morally a sin as the lust which is producâ—d by gluttony And when a man hath entertain'd a holy sorrow for his sins and made holy vows of obedience and a new life he must be forc'd to contend for every act of duty and he is daily tempted and the temptation is strong and his progression is slow he marches upon sharp-pointed stones where he was not us'd to go and where he hath no pleasure He is forc'd to do his duty as he takes Physick where reason and the grace of God make him consent against his inclination and to be willing against his will He is brought to that state of sorrow that either he shall perish for ever or he must do more for heaven than is needful to be done by a good man whose body is chast and his spirit serene whose will is obedient and his understanding well inform'd whose temptations are ineffective and his strengths great who loves God and is reconciled to duty who delights in Religion and is at rest when he is doing God service But an habitual sinner even when he begins to return and in some measure loves God hath yet too great fondnesses for his enemy his repentances are imperfect his hatred and his love mixt nothing is pure nothing is whole nothing is easie So that the bands of holiness are like a yoke shaken upon the neck they fret the labouring Ox and make his work turn to a disease and as Isaac he marches up the hill with the wood upon his shoulders and yet for ought he knows himself may become the Sacrifice S. Austin complains that it was his own case He was so accustomed to the apertures and free emissions of his lust so pleas'd with the entertainments so frequent in the imployment so satisfied in his mind so hardned in his spirit so ready in his choice so peremptory in his soul determinations that when he began to consider that death stood at the end of that life he was amaz'd to see himself as he thought without remedy and was not to be recover'd but by a long time and a mighty grace the perpetual the daily the nightly prayers and violent importunities of his Mother the admirable precepts and wise deportments of S. Ambrose the efficacy of truth the horrible fears of damnation hourly beating upon his spirit with the wings of horrour and affrightment and after all with a mighty uneasiness and a discomposed spirit he was by the good hand of God dragg'd from his fatal ruine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus one folly added to another hath great labour and vexation unquietness and difficulty for its reward But as when our Blessed Saviour dispossess'd the little Demoniack in the Gospel when the Devil went forth he roar'd and foam'd he rent him with horrid Spasmes and Convulsions and left him half dead So is every man that recovers from a vicious habit he suffers violence like a bird shut up in a cage or a sick person not to be restored but by Causticks and Scarifications and all the torments of Art from the dangers of his Nature 15. IV. A vicious habit makes a great sin to be swallowed up as easily as a little one An dubitat solitus totum conâ—â—are Tonantem Radet inaurati femur Herculis faciem ipsam Neptuni qui bracteolam de Castore ducet He that is us'd to it makes nothing of Sacriledge who before started at the defrauding his Neighbour of an uncertain right but when he hath digested the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by step and step he ventures so far till he dares to steal the Thunderbolts from Jupiter when sin is grown up to its height and station by all its firmest measures a great sin is not felt and let the sin be what it will many of the instances pass so easily that they are not observed as the hands and feet sometimes obey the fancy without the notice of the superiour faculties and as we say some parts of our prayers which we are us'd to though we attend not and as Musicians strike many single strokes upon which they do not at all consider which indeed is the perfection of a habit So we see many men swear when they know not that they do so they lie and know they lie and yet believe themselves They are drunk often and at last believe it innocent and themselves the wiser and the action necessary and the excess not intemperance Peccata quamvis magna horrenda cùm in consuetudinem venerint aut parva aut nulla esse creduntur usque adeò ut non solùm non occultanda verùm etiam jam praedicanda ac diffamanda videantur said S. Austin At first we are asham'd of sin but custome makes us bold and confident apt to proclaim not to conceal our shame For though at first it seemed great yet every day of use makes it less and at last all is well it is a very nothing 16. This is a sad state of sin but directly the case of a vicious habit and of use in the illustration of this Question For if we look upon the actions and little or great instances of folly and consider that they consider not every such Oath will pass for an indeliberate folly and an issue of infirmity But then if we remember that it is voluntary in its principle that this easiness of sinning comes from an intolerable cause from a custome of prophaneness and impiety that it was nourish'd by a base and a careless spirit it grew up with a cursed inadvertency and a caitiff disposition that it could not be at all but that the man is infinitely distant from God it is to be reckoned like the pangs of death which although they are not always felt yet they are violent and extreme they are fatal in themselves and full of horror to the standers by 17. But from hence besides that it serves perfectly to reprove the folly of habitual swearing it also proves the main Question viz. that in a vicious habit there is a venome and a malice beyond the guilt and besides the sinfulness of the single actions that produce and nourish it the quality it self is criminal For unless it can be supposed that to swear frequently can at last bring its excuse with it and that such a custome is only to be estimated according to the present notice and deliberation by which it is attended to and that to swear often can be but a little thing but to swear seldom shall be horrid and inexcusable it must be certain that the very habit it self is a state of sin and enmity against God besides the
habit can equally in the merits of Christ be the disposition to a pardon as an act can for an act and is certainly much better than any one act can be because it includes many single acts of the same nature and it is all them and their permanent effect and change wrought by them besides So that it is certainly the better and the surer way But now the Question is not whether it be the better way but whether it be necessary and will not the lesser way suffice To this therefore I answer that since no man can be acceptable to God as long as sin reigns in his mortal body and since either sin must reign or the Spirit of Christ must reign for a man cannot be a Neuter in this war it is necessary that sins kingdom be destroyed and broken and that Christ rule in our hearts that is it is necessary that the first and the old habits be taken off and new ones introduc'd For although the moral revocation of a single act may be a sufficient disposition to its pardon because the act was transient and unless there be a habit or something of it nothing remains yet the moral revocation of a sinful habit cannot be sufficient because there is impressed upon the soul a viciousness and contrariety to God which must be taken off or there can be no reconciliation For let it be but considered that a vicious habit is a remanent aversation from God an evil heart the evil treasure of the heart a carnal mindedness an union and principle of sins and then let it be answered whether a man who is in this state can be a friend of God or reconcil'd to him in his Son who lives in a state so contrary to his holy Spirit of Grace The guilt cannot be taken off without destroying its nature since the nature it self is a viciousness and corruption 39. VI. Either it is necessary to extirpate and break the habit or else a man may be pardon'd while he is in love with sin For every vicious habit being radicated in the will and being a strong love inclination and adhesion to sin unless the natural being of this habit be taken off the enmity against God remains For it being a quality permanent and inherent and its nature being an aptness and easiness a desire to sin and longing after it to retract this by a moral retractation and not by a natural also is but hypocrisie for no man can say truly I hate the sin I have committed so long as the love to sin is inherent in his will and then if God should pardon such a person it would be to justifie a sinner remaining such which God equally hates as to condemn the innocent He will by no means acquit the guilty It was part of his Name which he caused to be proclaimed in the Camp of Israel And if this could be otherwise a man might be in the state of sin and the state of grace at the same time which hitherto all Theology hath believ'd to be impossible 40. VII This whole Question is clear'd by a large discourse of S. Paul For having under the person of an unregenerate man complain'd of the habitual state of prevailing sin of one who is a slave to sin sold under sin captive under a law of sin that is under vile inclinations and high pronenesses and necessities of sinning so that when he is convinc'd that he ought not to do it yet he cannot help it though he fain would have it help'd yet he cannot obey his own will but his accursed superinduc'd necessities and his sin within him was the ruler that and not his own better choice was the principle of his actions which is the perfect character of an habitual sinner he inquires after a remedy for all this which remedy he calls a being delivered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the body of this death The remedy is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace of God through Jesus Christ for by Christ alone we can be delivered But what is to be done the extermination of this dominion and Empire of concupiscence the breaking of the kingdom of sin That being the evil he complains of and of which he seeks remedy that is to be remov'd But that we may well understand to what sence and in what degree this is to be done in the next periods he describes the contrary state of deliverance by the parts and characters of an habit or state of holiness which he calls a walking after the Spirit opposed to a walking after the flesh It was a law in his members a law of sin and death Now he is to be made free by a contrary law the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus That is as sin before gave him law so now must the Spirit of God whereas before he minded the things of the flesh now he minds the things of the spirit that is the carnal-mindedness is gone and a spiritual-mindedness is the principle and ruler of his actions This is the deliverance from habitual sins even no other than by habitual graces wrought in us by the spirit of life by the grace of our Lord Jesus And this whole affair is rarely well summ'd up by the same Apostle As ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness If ye were servants before so ye must be now it is but justice and reason that at least as much be done for God as for the Devil It is not enough morally to revoke what is past by a wishing it had not been done but you must oppose a state to a state a habit to a habit And the Author of the Book of Baruch presses it further yet As it was your mind to go astray from God so being returned seek him ten times more It ought not to be less it must be as S. Chrysostom expresses it A custom against a custom a habit opposed to a habit that the evil may be driven out by the good as one nail is by another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Procopius In those things where you have sinned to profit and to increase and improve to their contraries that is the more comely way to pardon 41. VIII Either a habit of vertue is a necessary disposition to the pardon of a habit of vice or else the doctrine of mortification of the lusts of the flesh of all the lusts of all the members of the old man is nothing but a counsel and a caution of prudence but it contains no essential and indispensable duty For mortification is a long contention and a course of difficulty it is to be done by many arts and much caution and a long patience and a diligent observation by watchfulness and labour the work of every day and the employment of all the prudence and all the advices of good men and the
whole grace of God It is like the curing of a Hectick feaver which one potion will not do Origen does excellently describe it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When a word is strengthened and nourished by care and assiduity and confirmed by opinions and wise sentences or near to confirmation it masters all oppositions and breaks in pieces the concupiscence This is the manner of mortification there must be resolutions and discourses assiduity and diligence auxiliaries from reason and wise sentences and advices of the prudent and all these must operate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto a confirmation or near it and by these the concupiscence can be master'd But this must be a work of time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Menander To dissolve a long custom in a short time is a work indeed but very hard if not impossible to be done by any man A man did not suddenly come to the state of evil from whence he is to arise Nemo repentè fuit turpissimus But as a man coming into a pestilential air does not suck in death at every motion of his lungs but by little and little the spirits are poysoned and at last enter into their portion of death so it is in a vicious custom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The evil is not felt instantly it begins from little things and is the production of time and frequent actions And therefore much less can it be supposed that we can overcome our filthy habits and master our fortified corruptions by a sudden dash of piety and the ex tempore gleams of repentance Concerning this S. Basil discourses excellently Sicut enim morbi corporis inveterati c. For as the old diseases of the body are not healed without a long and painful attendance so must old sins be cured by a long patience a daily prayer and the sharpest contention of the spirit That which is dyed with many dippings is in grain and can very hardly be washed out Sic anima sanie peccatorum suppurata in habitu constituta malitiae vix ac multo negotio elui potest So is the soul when it is corrupted with the poyson of sin and hath contracted a malicious habit it can scarce but not without much labour be made clean 42. Now since we say our nature is inclined to sin and we feel it to be so in many instances and yet that it needs time and progression to get a habit of that whither we too naturally tend we have reason to apprehend that we need time and fierce contentions and the long suffering of violences to take the kingdom of Heaven by force by a state of contradiction and hostility against the tempting enemy It is much harder to get a habit against our nature and a prepossessing habit than to confirm nature and to actuate our inclinations 43. And this does not only relate to habits in their Natural capacity but in their Moral and consequently their Relative capacity as appertaining to God in the matter of his valuation of them Because in habits as it is in acts although metaphysically we can distinguish the action from the irregularity yet because they are subjected in the same person and the irregularity is inherent in the action in the whole composition the action is sinful so it is in habits For the sin adheres to the natural facility and follows it in all its capacities And as the natural facility of doing viciously is cured by time and a successive continued diligence so is the sinfulness because that facility is vicious and sinful And as heat is distinguished from fire but you cannot lessen the heat but by decreasing the natural being of fire so does the sin of a vicious habit pass away as the habit naturally lessens that is the Moral capacity changes as does the Natural this being the subject of that and it could not have been this habit if it had not in it this sinfulness * 44. Now if the parts of this argument be put together their intention is this A habit of sin is not gotten but by time and progression and yet it cannot be lost so soon as it was gotten but it is a long time before its natural being is overcome by its contrary But the sinfulness of it does pass away with the natural being and no otherwise therefore the sinfulness of it cannot be removed suddenly And therefore if mortification be a duty and we be commanded to do it we are commanded to do a long work and a difficult a thing that is more than the moral retractation of it by a single act of sorrow or contrition a duty that contains in it so much work as is proportion'd to the necessity even to the breaking the habit of sin and setting up the habit of vertue over it Now then all the question will be whether Mortification be a Precept or a Counsel Concerning which I only appeal to the words of S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mortifie therefore your earthly members and If ye through the Spirit do mortifie the deeds of the body ye shall live Mortification is the condition of life it is expresly commanded by the Apostle that we make the deeds of the body to be dead that is the evil habits and concupiscence of the body for that which S. Paul here calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or deeds in the same precept written to the Galatians he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lusts and concupiscences And of what great necessity and effect this mortification and crucifying of our sinful customs is we may understand best by those other words of the same Apostle He that is dead is justified from sins not till then not till his habit was dead not as soon as he morally retracts it by an act of displeasure and contrition but when the sin is dead when the habit is crucified when the concupiscence does not reign but is overcome in all its former prevalencies then he is pardon'd and not before 45. IX Unless it be necessary to oppose a habit against a habit a state of vertue against a state of vice that is if a vicious habit may be pardon'd upon one act of contrition then it may so happen that a man shall not be obliged to do good but only to abstain from evil to cease from sin but not to proceed and grow in grace which is against the perpetual design and analogy of the Gospel and the nature of Evangelical righteousness which differs from the righteousness of the law as doing good from not doing evil The law forbad murder but the Gospel superadds charity The law forbad uncleanness but the Gospel superadds purity and mortification The law forbad us to do wrong but the Gospel commands us to do offices of kindness Injustice was prohibited by the law but revenge also of real injuries is forbidden by the Gospel and we are commanded to do good to them that injure us and
not known to the man and there are degrees of hope concerning the final event of our souls For suppose it cannot be told to the habitual sinner that his habits of sin are overcome and that the Spirit rules in all the regions of his soul yet is he sure that his vicious habits do prevail is he sure that sin does reign in his mortal body If he be then let him not be angry with this doctrine for it is as bad with him as any doctrine can affirm But if he be not sure that sin reigns then can he not hope that the Spirit does rule and if so then also he may hope that his sins are pardon'd and that he shall be sav'd And if he look for greater certainty than that of a holy and a humble hope he must stay till he have a revelation it cannot be had from the certainty of any proposition in Scripture applicable to his case and person 73. IV. If a habit be long before it be master'd if a part of it may consist with its contrary if a habit may lurk secretly and undiscernibly all these things are aggravations of the danger of an habitual sinner and are very true and great engagements of his watchfulness and fear his caution and observance But then not these nor any thing else can evacuate the former truths nor yet ought to make the returning sinner to despair Only this If he fears that there may be a secret habit unmortified let him go about his remedy 2. If he still fears let him put himself to the trial 3. If either that does not satisfie him or he wants opportunity let him endeavour to encrease his supreme habit the habit of Charity or that universal grace of the love of God which will secure his spirit against all secret undiscernible vicious affections 74. V. This only is certain No man needs to despair that is alive and hath begun to leave his sins and to whom God hath given time and power and holy desires If all these be spent and nothing remain besides the desires that is another consideration and must receive its sentence by the measures of the former doctrine But for the present a man ought not to conclude against his hopes because he finds propensities and inclinations to the former courses remaining in him even after his conversion For so it will be always more or less and this is not only the remains of a vicious habit but even of natural inclination in some instances 75. VI. Then the habit hath lost its killing quality and the man is freed from his state of ungraciousness when the habit of vertue prevails when he obeys frequently willingly chearfully But if he sins frequently and obeys his temptations readily if he delights in sin and chuses that that is if his sins be more than sins of infirmity as they are described under their proper title then the habit remains and the man is in the state of death But when sentence is given for God when vertue is the greater ingredient when all sin is hated and labour'd and pray'd against the remaining evils and struglings of the Serpent are signs of the Spirits victory but also engagements of a persevering care and watchfulness lest they return and prevail anew He that is converted and is in his contentions for Heaven is in a good state of being let him go forward He that is justified let him be justified still but whether just now if he dies he shall be sav'd or not we cannot answer or give accounts of every period of his new life In what minute or degree of Repentance his sins are perfectly pardon'd no man can tell and it is unreasonable to reprove a doctrine that infers a man to be uncertain where God hath given no certain notices or measures If a man will be certain he must die as soon as he is worthily baptiz'd or live according to his promises then made If he breaks them he is certain of nothing but that he may be sav'd if he returns speedily and effectively does his duty But concerning the particulars there can no rules be given sufficient to answer every mans case before-hand If he be uncertain how Gods judgment will be of him let him be the more afraid and the more humble and the more cautious and the more penitent For in this case all our security is not to be deriv'd from signs but from duty Duty is the best signification and Gods infinite boundless mercy is the best ground of our Confidence SECT VI. The former Doctrine reduc'd to Practice IT now remains that we account concerning the effect of this Doctrine and first concerning them that are well and vigorous 2. Them that are old 3. Them that are dying All which are to have several usages and receptions proper entertainments and exercises of Repentance The manner of Repentance and usage of Habitual sinners who convert in their timely and vigorous years 1. I. Let every man that thinks of his return be infinitely careful to avoid every new sin for it is like a blow to a broken leg or a burthen to a crushed arm Every little thing disorders the new health and unfinish'd recovery So that every new sin to such a person is a double damage it pulls him back from all his hopes and makes his labours vain and he is as far to seek and as much to begin again as ever and more For so may you see one climbing of a Rock with a great contention and labour and danger if when he hath got from the foot to the shoulder he then lets his hold go he falls lower than where he first set his foot and sinks deeper by the weight of his own fall So is the new converted man who is labouring to overcome the rocks and mountains of his habitual sins every sin throws him down further and bruises his very bones in the fall To this purpose therefore is the wise advice of the son of Sirach Hast thou sinn'd do so no more but ask pardon for thy former fault Add not sin to sin for in one a man shall not be unpunished Ergo ne pietas sit victa cupidine ventris Parcite vaticinor cognatas caede nefandâ Exturbare animas ne sanguine sanguis alatur Let not blood touch blood nor sin touch sin for we destroy our souls with impious hands when a crime follows a habit like funeral processions in the pomps and solennities of death 2. II. At the beginning of his recovery let the penitent be arm'd by special cautions against the labours and difficulties of the restitution and consider that if sin be so pleasant it is the habit that hath made it so it is become easie and natural by the custom And therefore so may vertue And complain not that Nature helps and corroborates the habits of sin For besides that Nature doth this mischief but in some instances not in all the Grace of God will as much assist the customs
covetousness was I wroth and smote him I hid me and was wroth and he went on frowardly in the way of his heart I have seen his ways and will heal him I will lead him also and restore comfort to him and to his mourners I create the fruit of the lips peace peace to him that is afar off and to him that is near saith the Lord and I will heal him But the wicked are like the troubled sea when it cannot rest whose waters cast up mire and dirt There is no peace saith my God to the Wicked It is good for a man that he bear the yoke in his youth It is good that a man should both hope and quietly wait for the salvation of the Lord. Who is a God like unto thee that pardoneth iniquity and passeth by the transgression of the Remnant of his heritage he retaineth not his anger for ever because he delighteth in mercy He will turn again he will have compassion upon us he will subdue our iniquities and thou wilt cast all our sins into the depth of the sea Remember now thy Creator in the daies of thy youth while the evil daies come not nor the years draw nigh when thou shalt say I have no pleasure in them A PSALM O Lord though our iniquities testifie against us have mercy upon us for thy Names sake for our backslidings are many we have sinned against thee O the hope of Israel the Saviour thereof in time of trouble why shouldst thou be a stranger to us and as a wayfaring-man that turneth aside to tarry for a night Why shouldst thou be as a man astonied as a mighty man that cannot save yet thou O Lord art in the midst of us and we are called by thy name leave us not We acknowledge O Lord our wickedness and the iniquity of our fathers for we have sinned against thee Do not abhor us for thy Names sake do not disgrace the Throne of thy Glory remember break not the Covenant with us I will no more sit in the assembly of mockers nor rejoyce I will sit alone because of thy hand for thou hast filled me with indignation Why is my pain perpetual and my wound incurable which refused to be healed â—ilt thou be altogether unto me as waters that fail O Lord I know that the way of man is not in himself it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps O Lord correct me but with judgment not in thine anger lest thou bring me to nothing O Lord the hope of Israel all that forsake thee shall be ashamed because they have forsaken the Lord the fountain of living waters Heal me O Lord and I shall be healed save me and I shall be saved for thou art my praise Be not a terror unto me thou art my hope in the day of evil Behold O Lord for I am in distress my bowels are troubled mine heart is turned within me for I have grievously rebelled For these thingâ— I weep mine eye mine eye runneth down with water because the Comforter that should relieve my soul is far from me Hear me O Lord and that soon for my spirit waxeth faint hide not thy face from me lest I be like unto them that go down into the pit O let me hear thy loving kindness betimes for in thee is my trust shew thou me the way that I should walk in for I lift up my soul unto thee Teach me the thing that pleaseth thee for thou art my God let thy loving Spirit lead me forth into the land of righteousness Quicken me O Lord for thy Names sake and for thy righteousness sake bring my soul out of trouble The Lord upholdeth all such as fall and lifteth up those that be down I have gone astray like a sheep that is lost O seek thy servant for I do not forget thy Commandments O do well unto thy servant that I may live and keep thy word O spare me a little that I may recover my strength before I go hence and be no more seen Glory be to the Father c. As it was in the beginning c. A Prayer for a Sinner returning after a long impiety I. O Eternal Judge of Men and Angels Father of Mercy and the great lover of Souls I humbly acknowledge that the state of my soul is sad and deplorable and by my fault by my own grievous fault I am in an evil condition and if thou shouldst now enter into judgment with me I have nothing to put in bar against the horrible sentence nothing of my own nothing that can ease thy anger or abate the fury of one stroke of thy severe infliction I do O God judge and condemn my self and justifie thee for thou art righteous and whatsoever thou doest is good and true But O my God when the guilty condemns himself nothing is left for the offended party but to return to graciousness and pardon I O Lord have done thy severe and angry work I have sentenc'd a vile man to a sad suffering and if I so perish as I have deserved thou art just and righteous and thou oughtest for ever to to be glorified II. BVt O my God though I know that I have deserved evils that I know not and hope I shall never feel yet thou art gracious and holy and lovest more to behold thy glory reflected from the floods and springs of mercy than to see it refracted from the troubled waters of thy angry and severe displeasure And because thou lovest it so highly to shew mercy and because my eternal interest is served in it I also ought to desire what thou lovest and to beg of thee humbly and passionately that I may not perish and to hope with a modest confidence that thou hast mercy in store for him to whom thou hast given grace to ask for it for it is one degree of pardon to be admitted to the station of penitent beggers it is another degree of pardon that thou hast given me grace to hope and I know that in the fountains of thy own graciousness thou hast infinite arguments and inducements to move thee to pity me and to pardon III. O My God pity me for thy Names sake even for thy own goodness sake and because I am miserable and need it And because I have nothing of my own to be a ground of confidence give thy servant leave to place my hopes on thee through Jesus Christ thou hast commanded me to come to the Throne of Grace with boldness that I may find mercy in time of need and thou hast promised to give thy holy Spirit to them that ask him O dear God give me pardon and give me thy Spirit and I am full and safe and cloathed and healed and all that I desire to be and all that I ought to be IV. I Have spent much time in vanity and in undoing my self grant me thy grace
Spirit and a man in that state cannot be sav'd because he wants a vital part he wants the spirit which is a part of the constitution of a Christian in that capacity who consists of Body and Soul and Spirit and therefore Anima without Spiritus the Soul without the Spirit is not sufficient * For as the Soul is a sufficient principle of all the actions of life in order to our natural end and perfection but it can bear us no further so there must be another principle in order to a supernatural end and that is the Spirit called by S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the new creation by S. Peter a divine nature and by this we become renewed in the inner man the infusion of this new nature into us is called Regeneration and it is the great principle of godliness called Grace or the Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The seed of God and by it we are begotten by God and brought forth by the Church to the hopes and beginnings of a new life and a supernatural end And although I cannot say that this is a third substance distinct from Soul and Body yet it is a distinct principle put into us by God without which we cannot work and by which we can and therefore if it be not a substance yet it is more than a Metaphor it is a real being permanent and inherent but yet such as can be lessen'd and extinguish'd But Carnality or the state of being in the flesh is not only privatively oppos'd but contrarily also to the spiritual state or the state of Grace But as the first is not a sin deriv'd from Adam so neither is the second The first is only an imperfection or want of supernatural aids The other is indeed a direct state of sin and hated by God but superinduc'd by choice and not descending naturally * Now to the spiritual state nothing is in Scripture oppos'd but these two and neither of these when it is sinful can be pretended upon the stock or argument of any Scriptures to descend from Adam therefore all the state of opposition to Grace is owing to our selves and not to him Adam indeed did leave us all in an Animal estate but this state is not a state of enmity or direct opposition to God but a state insufficient and imperfect No man can perish for being an Animal man that is for not having any supernatural revelations but for not consenting to them when he hath that is for being Carnal as well as Animal and that he is Carnal is wholly his own choice In the state of animality he cannot go to Heaven but neither will that alone bear him to Hell and therefore God does not let a man alone in that state for either God suggests to him what is spiritual or if he does not it is because himself hath superinduc'd something that is Carnal 54. Having now explicated those Scriptures which have made some difficulty in this Question to what Topick soever we shall return all things are plain and clear in this Article Noxa caput sequitur The soul that sinneth it shall die Neque virtutes neque vitia parentum liberis imputantur saith S. Hierome Neither the vices nor the vertues of the parents are imputed to the children And therefore when Dion Chrysostomus had reprov'd Solon's laws which in some cases condemn the innocent posterity he adds this in honour of Gods law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That it does not like the law of the Athenians punish the children and kindred of the Criminal but every man is the cause of his own misfortune But concerning this it will not be amiss in order to many good purposes to observe the whole Oeconomy and dispensation of the Divine Justice in this affair SECT III. How God punishes the Fathers sin upon the Children 55. I. GOD may and does very often bless children to reward their fathers piety as is notorious in the famous descent of Abrahams family But the same is not the reason of favours and punishments For such is the nature of benefits that he in whose power they are may without injustice give them why and when and to whom he please 56. II. God never imputes the fathers sin to the son or relative formally making him guilty or being angry with the innocent eternally It were blasphemy to affirm so fierce and violent a cruelty of the most merciful Saviour and Father of mankind and it was yet never imagined or affirm'd by any that I know of that God did yet ever damn an innocent son though the father were the vilest person and committed the greatest evils of the world actually personally chusingly and maliciously and why it should by so many and so confidently be affirm'd in a lesser instance in so unequal a case and at so long a distance I cannot suspect any reason Plutarch in his book against Herodotus affirms that it is not likely they would meaning that it was unjust to revenge an injury which the Samians did to the Corinthians three hundred years before But to revenge it for ever upon all generations and with an eternal anger upon some persons even the most innocent cannot without trembling be spoken or imagined of God who is the great lover of Souls Whatsoever the matter be in temporal inflictions of which in the next propositions I shall give account yet if the Question be concerning eternal damnation it was never said never threatned by God to pass from father to the son When God punishes one relative for the sin of another he does it as fines are taken in our law salvo contenemento the principal stake being safe it may be justice to seise upon all the smaller portions at least it is not against justice for God in such cases to use the power and dominion of a Lord. But this cannot be reasonable to be used in the matter of eternal interest because if God should as a Lord use his power over Innocents and condemn them to Hell he should be Author to them of more evil than ever he conveyed good to them which but to imagine would be a horrible impiety And therefore when our blessed Saviour took upon him the wrath of God due to all mankind yet Gods anger even in that case extended no further than a temporal death Because for the eternal nothing can make recompence and it can never turn to good 57. III. When God inflicts a temporal evil upon the son for his fathers sin he does it as a Judge to the father but as a Lord only of the son He hath absolute power over the lives of all his creatures and can take it away from any man without injustice when he please though neither he nor his Parents have sinned and he may use the same right and power when either of them alone hath sinn'd But in striking the son he does not do to him as a Judge that is he is not angry with him but with the
ended upon their accounts but this Gordian knot I have now untied as Alexander did by destroying it and cutting it all in pieces But to return to the Question 79. S. Austin was indeed a fierce Patron of this device and one of the chief inventers and finishers of it and his sence of it is declared in his Boook De peccatorum medicinâ where he endeavours largely to prove that all our life time we are bound to mourn for the inconveniences and evil consequents deriv'd from Original sin I dare say every man is sufficiently displeased that he is liable to sickness weariness displeasure melancholy sorrow folly imperfection and death dying with groans and horrid spasmes and convulsions In what sence these are the effects of Adams sin and though of themselves natural yet also upon his account made penal I have already declar'd and need no more to dispute my purpose being only to establish such truths as are in order to practice and a holy life to the duties of repentance and amendment But our share of Adams sin either being in us no sin at all or else not to be avoided or amended it cannot be the matter of repentance Neminem autem rectè ita loqui poenitere sese quòd natus sit aut poenitere quòd mortalis sit aut quòd ex offenso fortè vulneratóque corpore dolorem sentiat said A. Gellius A man is not properly said to repent that he was born or that he shall die or that he feels pain when his leg is hurt he gives this reason Quando istiusmodi rerum nec consilium sit nostrum nec arbitrium As these are besides our choice so they cannot fall into our deliberation and therefore as they cannot be chosen so neither refused and therefore not repented of for that supposes both that they were chosen once and now refused * As Adam was not bound to repent of the sins of all his posterity so neither are we tied to repent of his sins Neither did I ever see in any ancient Office or forms of prayer publick or private any prayer of humiliation prescrib'd for Original sin They might deprecate the evil consequents but never confess themselves guilty of the formal sin 80. Add to this Original sin is remitted in Baptism by the consent of those Schools of learning who teach this article and therefore is not reserved for any other repentance and that which came without our own consent is also to be taken off without it That which came by the imputation of a sin may also be taken off by the imputation of righteousness that is as it came without sin so it must also go away without trouble But yet because the Question may not render the practice insecure I add these Rules by way of advice and caution SECT VII Advices relating to the matter of Original Sin 81. I. IT is very requisite that we should understand the state of our own infirmity the weakness of the flesh the temptations and diversions of the spirit that by understanding our present state we may prevent the evils of carelesness and security * Our evils are the imperfections and sorrows inherent in or appendant to our bodies our souls our spirits 82. * In our bodies we find weakness and imperfection sometimes crookedness sometimes monstrosity filthiness and weariness infinite numbers of diseases and an uncertain cure great pain and restless night hunger and thirst daily necessities ridiculous gestures madness from passions distempers and disorders great labour to provide meat and drink and oftentimes a loathing when we have them if we use them they breed sicknesses if we use them not we die and there is such a certain healthlesness in many things to all and in all things to some men and at some times that to supply a need is to bring a danger and if we eat like beasts only of one thing our souls are quickly weary if we eat variety we are sick and intemperate and our bodies are inlets to sin and a stage of temptation If we cherish them they undo us if we do not cherish them they die we suffer illusion in our dreams and absurd fancies when we are waking our life is soon done and yet very tedious it is too long and too short darkness and light are both troublesome and those things which are pleasant are often unwholsome Sweet smells make the head ach and those smells which are medicinal in some diseases are intolerable to the sense The pleasures of our body are bigger in expectation than in the possession and yet while they are expected they torment us with the delay and when they are enjoyed they are as if they were not they abuse us with their vanity and vex us with their volatile and fugitive nature Our pains are very frequent alone and very often mingled with pleasures to spoil them and he that feels one sharp pain feels not all the pleasures of the world if they were in his power to have them We live a precarious life begging help of every thing and needing the repairs of every day and being beholding to beasts and birds to plants and trees to dirt and stones to the very excrements of beasts and that which dogs and horses throw forth Our motion is slow and dull heavy and uneasie we cannot move but we are quickly tired and for every days labour we need a whole night to recruit our lost strengths we live like a lamp unless new materials be perpetually poured in we live no longer than a fly and our motion is not otherwise than a clock we must be pull'd up once or twice in twenty four hours and unless we be in the shadow of death for six or eight hours every night we shall be scarce in the shadows of life the other sixteen Heat and cold are both our enemies and yet the one always dwells within and the other dwells round about us The chances and contingencies that trouble us are no more to be numbred than the minutes of eternity The Devil often hurts us and men hurt each other oftner and we are perpetually doing mischief to our selves The stars do in their courses fight against some men and all the elements against every man the heavens send evil influences the very beasts are dangerous and the air we suck in does corrupt our lungs many are deformed and blind and ill coloured and yet upon the most beauteous face is plac'd one of the worst sinks of the body and we are forc'd to pass that through our mouths oftentimes which our eye and our stomach hates Pliny did wittily and elegantly represent this state of evil things Itaque foelicitèr homo natus jacet manibus pedibúsque devinctis flens animal caeteris imperaturum à suppliciis vitam auspicatur unam tantum ob culpam quia natum est A man is born happily but at first he lies bound band and foot by impotency and cannot stir the creature weeps that is
from the severities of Religion let me live by the measures of thy law not by the evil example and disguises of the world Renew a right spirit within me and cast me not away from thy presence lest I should retire to the works of darkness and enter into those horrible regions where the light of thy countenance never shineth II. I AM ashamed O Lord I am ashamed that I have dishonoured so excellent a Creation Thou didst make us upright and create us in innocence And when thou didst see us unable to stand in thy sight and that we could never endure to be judged by the Covenant of works thou didst renew thy mercies to us in the new Covenant of Jesus Christ and now we have no excuse nothing to plead for our selves much less against thee but thou art holy and pure and just and merciful Make me to be like thee holy as thou art holy merciful as our Heavenly Father is merciful obedient as our holy Saviour Jesus meek and charitable temperate and chaste humble and patient according to that holy example that my sins may be pardoned by his death and my spirit renewed by his Spirit that passing from sin to grace from ignorance to the knowledge and love of God and of his Son Jesus Christ I may pass from death to life from sorrow to joy from Earth to Heaven from the present state of misery and imperfection to the glorious inheritance prepar'd for the Saints and Sons of light the children of the new birth the brethren of our Lord and Brother our Judge and our Advocate our Blessed Saviour and Redeemer JESVS Amen A Prayer to be said by a Matron in behalf of her Husband and Family that a blessing may descend upon their posterity I. O Eternal God our most merciful Lord and gracious Father thou art my guide the light of mine eyes the joy of my heart the author of my hope and the object of my love and worshippings thou relievest all my needs and determin'st all my doubts and art an eternal fountain of blessing open and running over to all thirsty and weary souls that come and cry to thee for mercy and refreshment Have mercy upon thy servant and relieve my fears and sorrows and the great necessities of my family for thou alone O Lord canst do it II. FIT and adorn every one of us with a holy and a religious spirit and give a double portion to thy servant my dear Husband Give him a wise heart a prudent severe and indulgent care over the children which thou hast given us His heart is in thy hand and the events of all things are in thy disposition Make it a great part of his care to promote the spiritual and eternal interest of his children and not to neglect their temporal relations and necessities but to provide states of life for them in which with fair advantages they may live chearfully serve thee diligently promote the interest of the Christian family in all their capacities that they may be always blessed and always innocent devout and pious and may be graciously accepted by thee to pardon and grace and glory through Jesus Christ. Amen III. BLESS O Lord my Sons with excellent understandings love of holy and noble things sweet dispositions innocent deportment diligent souls chaste healthful and temperate bodies holy and religious spirits that they may live to thy glory and be useful in their capacities to the servants of God and all their neighbours and the Relatives of their conversation Bless my Daughters with a humble and a modest carriage and excellent meekness a great love of holy things a severe chastity a constant holy and passionate Religion O my God never suffer them to fall into folly and the sad effects of a wanton loose and indiscreet spirit possess their fancies with holy affections be thou the covering of their eyes and the great object of their hopes and all their desires Blessed Lord thou disposest all things sweetly by thy providence thou guidest them excellently by thy wisdom thou unitest all circumstances and changes wonderfully by thy power and by thy power makest all things work for the good of thy servants Be pleased so to dispose my Daughters that if thou shouldest call them to the state of a married life they may not dishonour their Family nor grieve their Parents nor displease thee but that thou wilt so dispose of their persons and the accidents and circumstances of that state that it may be a state of holiness to the Lord and blessing to thy servants And until thy wisdom shall know it fit to bring things so to pass let them live with all purity spending their time religiously and usefully O most blessed Lord enable their dear father with proportionable abilities and opportunities of doing his duty and charities towards them and them with great obedience and duty toward him and all of us with a love toward thee above all things in the world that our portion may be in love and in thy blessings through Jesus Christ our dearest Lord and most gracious Redeemer IV. O MY God pardon thy servant pity my infirmities hear the passionate desires of thy humble servant in thee alone is my trust my heart and all my wishes are towards thee Thou hast commanded me to pray to thee in all needs thou hast made gracious promises to hear and accept me and I will never leave importuning thy glorious Majesty humbly passionately confidently till thou hast heard and accepted the prayer of thy servant Amen dearest Lord for thy mercy sake hear thy servant Amen TO The Right Reverend Father in God JOHN WARNER D.D. and late Lord Bishop of Rochester MY LORD I NOW see cause to wish that I had given to your Lordship the trouble of reading my papers of Original Sin before their publication for though I have said all that which I found material in the Question yet I perceive that it had been fitting I had spoken some things less material so to prevent the apprehensions that some have of this doctrine that it is of a sence differing from the usual expressions of the Church of England However my Lord since your Lordship is pleased to be careful not only of truth and Gods glory but desirous also that even all of us should speak the same thing and understand each other without Jealousies or severer censures I have now obeyed your Counsel and done all my part towards the asserting the truth and securing charity and unity Professing with all truth and ingenuity that I would rather die than either willingly give occasion or countenance to a Schism in the Church of England and I would suffer much evil before I would displease my dear Brethren in the service of Jesus and in the ministeries of the Church But as I have not given just cause of offence to any so I pray that they may not be offended unjustly lest the fault lie on them whose persons I so much love
the image of the Earthly we shall also bear the image of the Heavenly Now this I say That flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of Heaven neither doth corruption inherit incorruption This Discourse of the Apostle hath in it all these propositions which clearly state this whole Article There are two great heads of Mankind the two Adams the first and the second The first was framed with an earthly body the second had viz. after his resurrection when he had died unto sin once a spiritual body The first was Earthly the second is Heavenly From the first we derive an Earthly life from the second we obtain a Heavenly all that are born of the first are such as he was naturally but the effects of the Spirit came only upon them who are born of the second Adam From him who is earthly we could have no more than he was or had the spiritual life and consequently the Heavenly could not be derived from the first Adam but from Christ only All that are born of the first by that birth inherit nothing but temporal life and corruption but in the new birth only we derive a title to Heaven For flesh and blood that is whatsoever is born of Adam cannot inherit the Kingdom of God And they are injurious to Christ who think that from Adam we might have inherited immortality Christ was the Giver and Preacher of it he brought life and immortality to light through the Gospel It is a singular benefit given by God to mankind through Jesus Christ. 3. Upon the affirmation of these premises it follows That if Adam had stood yet from him we could not have by our natural generation obtained a title to our spiritual life nor by all the strengths of Adam have gone to Heaven Adam was not our representative to any of these purposes but in order to the perfection of a temporal life Christ only is and was from eternal ages designed to be the head of the Church and the fountain of spiritual life And this is it which is affirmed by some very eminent persons in the Church of God particularly by Junius and Tilenus that Christus est fundamentum totius praedestinationis all that are or ever were predestinated were predestinated in Christ Even Adam himself was predestinated in him and therefore from him if he had stood though we should have inherited a temporal happy life yet the Scripture speaks nothing of any other event Heaven was not promised to Adam himself therefore from him we could not have derived a title thither And therefore that inquity of the School-men Whether if Adam had not sinned Christ should have been incarnate was not an impertinent Question though they prosecuted it to weak purposes and with trifling arguments Scotus and his Scholars were for the affirmative and though I will not be decretory in it because the Scripture hath said nothing of it nor the Church delivered it yet to me it seems plainly the discourse of the Apostle now alledged That if Adam had not sinned yet that by Christ alone we should have obtained everlasting life Whether this had been dispensed by his Incarnation or some other way of oeconomy is not signified 4. But then if from Adam we should not have derived our title to Heaven though he had stood then neither by his Fall can we be said to have lost Heaven Heaven and Hell were to be administred by another method But then if it be enquired what evil we thence received I answer That the principal effect was the loss of that excellent condition in which God placed him and would have placed his posterity unless sin had entred He should have lived a long and lasting life till it had been time to remove him and very happy Instead of this he was thrown from those means which God had designed to this purpose that is Paradise and the trees of life he was turned into a place of labour and uneasiness of briars and thorns ill air and violent chances nova febrium terris incubuit cohors the woman was condemned to hard labour and travel and that which troubled her most obedience to her Husband his body was made frail and weak and sickly that is it was leâ—t such as it was made and left without remedies which were to have made it otherwise For that Adam was made mortal in his nature is infinitely certain and proved by his very eating and drinking his sleep and recreation by ingestion and egestion by breathing and generating his like which immortal substances never do and by the very tree of life which had not been needful if he should have had no need of it to repair his decaying strength and health 5. The effect of this consideration is this that all the product of Adam's sin was by despoiling him and consequently us of all the superadditions and graces brought upon his nature Even that which was threatned to him and in the narrative of that sad story expressed to be his punishment was no lessening of his nature but despoiling him of his supernaturals And therefore Manuel Pelaeologus calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the common driness of our nature and he adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by our Fathers sin we fell from our Fathers graces Now according to the words of the Apostle As is the earthly such are they that are earthly that is all his posterity must be so as his nature was left in this there could be no injustice For if God might at first and all the way have made man with a necessity as well as a possibility of dying though men had not sinned then so also may he do if he did sin and so it was but this was effected by disrobing him of all the superadded excellencies with which God adorned and supported his natural life But this also I add that if even death it self came upon us without the alteration or diminution of our nature then so might sin because death was in re naturali but sin is not and therefore need not suppose that Adam's nature was spoiled to introduce that 6. As the sin of Adam brought hurt to the body directly so indirectly it brought hurt to the soul. For the evils upon the body as they are only felt by the soul so they grieve and tempt and provoke the soul to anger to sorrow to envy they make weariness in religious things cause desires for ease for pleasure and as these are by the body always desired so sometimes being forbidden by God they become sins and are always apt to it because the body being a natural agent tempts to all it can feel and have pleasure in And this is also observed and affirmed by S. Chrysostom and he often speaks it as if he were pleased in this explication of the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Together with death entred a whole troop of affections or passions For when the body became mortal then of necessity it did admit desires
concerning doing good or bad For it is not only true that the unregenerate oftentimes feel the fight and never see the triumph but it is also true that sometimes the regenerate do not feel this contention They did once with great violence and trouble but when they have gotten a clear victory they have also great measures of peace But this is but seldom to few persons and in them but in rare instances in carnal sins and temptations for in spiritual they will never have an intire rest till they come into their Country It is Angelical perfection to have no flesh at all but it is the perfection of a Christian to have the flesh obedient to the spirit always and in all things But if this contention be not a sign of regeneration but is common to good and bad that which can only distinguish them is victory and perseverance and those sins which are committed at the end of such contentions are not sins of a pitiable and excusable infirmity but the issues of death and direct emanations from an unregenerate estate Therefore 44. VII Lastly The regenerate not only hath received the Spirit of God but is wholly led by him he attends his motions he obeys his counsels he delights in his Commandments and accepts his testimony and consents to his truth and rejoyces in his comforts and is nourish'd by his hopes up to a perfect man in Christ Jesus This is the only condition of being the sons of God and being sav'd For as many as are led by the Spirit of God they are the sons of God None else And therefore if ye live after the flesh ye shall die but if through the Spirit ye do mortifie the deeds of the body ye shall live This is your characteristick note Our obedience to the Spirit our walking by his light and by his conduct This is the Spirit that witnesseth to our spirit that we are the sons of God That is if the Spirit be obeyed if it reigns in us if we live in it if we walk after it if it dwells in us then we are sure that we are the sons of God There is no other testimony to be expected but the doing of our duty All things else unless an extraregular light spring from Heaven and tells us of it are but fancies and deceptions or uncertainties at the best SECT VII What are properly and truly sins of Infirmity and how far they can consist with the Regenerate Estate 45. WE usually reckon our selves too soon to be in Gods favour While the War lasts it is hard telling who shall be the Prince When one part hath fought prosperously there is hopes of his side and yet if the adversary hath reserves of a vigorous force or can raise new and not only pretends his title but makes great inrodes into the Country and forrages and does mischief and fights often and prevails sometimes the inheritance is still doubtful as the success But if the Usurper be beaten and driven out and his forces quite broken and the lawful Prince is proclaim'd and rules and gives laws though the other rails in prison or should by a sudden fury kill a single person or plot an ineffective treason no man then doubt concerning the present possession 46. But men usually think their case is good so long as they are fighting so long as they are not quite conquered and every step towards grace they call â—t pardon and salvation presently As soon as ever a man begins heartily to mortifie his â—â—n his hopes begin and if he proceeds they are certain But if in this sight he bâ— overcome he is not to ask Whether that ill day and that deadly blow can consist with the state of life He that fights and conquers not but sins frequently and â—o yield or be killed is the end of the long contentions this man is not yet alive But when he prevails regularly and daily over his sin then he is in a state of regeneration but let him take heed for every voluntary or chosen sin is a mortal wound 47. But because no man in this world hath so conquer'd but he may be smitten and is sometimes struck at and most good men have cause to complain of their calamity that in their understandings there are doubtings and strange mistakes which because after a great confidence they are sometimes discovered there is cause to suspect there are some there still which are not discovered that there are in the will evil inclinations to forbidden instances that in the appetite there are carnal desires that in their natural actions there are sometimes too sensual applications that in their good actions there are mighty imperfections it will be of use that we separate the certain from the uncertain security from danger the apology from the accusation and the excuse from the crime by describing what are and what are not sins of Infirmity 48. For most men are pleased to call their debaucheries sins of infirmity if they be done against their reason and the actual murmur of their consciences and against their trifling resolutions and ineffective purposes to the contrary Now although all sins are the effects of infirmity Natural or Moral yet because I am to cure a popular mistake I am also to understand the word as men do commonly and by sins of Infirmity to mean 49. Such sins which in the whole and upon the matter are unavoidable and therefore excusable Such which can consist with the state of grace that is such which have so much irregularity in them as to be sins and yet so much excuse and pity as that by the Covenant and Mercies of the Gospel they shall not be exacted in the worst of punishments or punished with eternal pains because they cannot with the greatest moral diligence wholly be avoided Concerning these so described we are to take accounts by the following measures 50. I. Natural imperfections and evil inclinations when they are not consented to or delighted in either are no sins at all or if they be they are but sins of infirmity That in some things our nature is cross to the Divine Commandment is not always imputable to us because our natures were before the Commandment and God hath therefore commanded us to do violence to our nature that by such preternatural contentions we should offer to God a service that costs us something But that in some things we are inclin'd otherwise than we are suffered to act is so far from offending God that it is that opportunity of serving him by which we can most endear him To be inclined to that whither nature bends is of it self indifferent but to love to entertain to act our inclinations when the Commandment is put between that is the sin and therefore if we resist them and master them that is our obedience For it is equally certain no man can be esteemed spiritual for his good wishes and desires of holiness but for his actual and
to signifie in an apt and a disposed nature what kind of apprehensions and trouble there is within For weeping upon the presence of secular troubles is more ready and easie because it is an effect symbolical and of the same nature with its proper cause But when there is a spiritual cause although its proper effect may be greater and more effective of better purposes yet unless by the intermixture of some material and natural cause it be more apportion'd to a material and natural product it is not to be charged with it or expected from it Sin is a spiritual evil and tears is the sign of a natural or physical sorrow Smart and sickness and labour are natural or physical evils and hatred and nolition is a spiritual or intellectual effect Now as every labour and every smart is not to be hated or rejected but sometimes chosen by the understanding when it is mingled with a good that pleases the understanding and is eligible upon the accounts of reason So neither can every sin which is the intellectual evil be productive of tears or sensitive sorrow unless it be mingled with something which the sense and affections that is which the lower man hates and which will properly afflict him such as are fear or pain or danger or disgrace or loss The sensitive sorrow therefore which is usually seen in new penitents is upon the account of those horrible apprehensions which are declared in holy Scriptures to be the consequent of sins but if we shall so preach Repentance as to warrant a freedom and a perfect escape instantly from all significations of the wrath of God and all dangers for the future upon the past and present account I know not upon what reckoning he that truly leaves his sin can be commanded to be sorrowful and if he were commanded how he can possibly obey 18. But when repentance hath had its growth and progression and is increased into a habit of piety sorrow and sensitive trouble may come in upon another account for great and permanent changes of the mind make great impressions upon the lower man When we love an object intensely our very body receives comfort in the presence of it and there are friendly Spirits which have a natural kindness and cognation to each other and refresh one another passing from eye to eye from friend to friend and the Prophet David felt it in the matter of Religion My flesh and my heart rejoyce in the living Lord. For if a grief of mind is a consumption of the flesh and a chearful spirit is a conservatory of health it is certain that every great impression that is made upon the mind and dwells there hath its effect upon the body and the lower affections And therefore all those excellent penitents who consider the baseness of sin * their own danger though now past in some degrees * the offence of God * the secret counsels of his Mercy * his various manners of dispensing them * the fearful judgments which God unexpectedly sends upon some men * the dangers of our own confidence * the weakness of our Repentance * the remains of our sin * the aptnesses and combustible nature of our Concupiscence * the presence of temptation and the perils of relapsing * the evil state of things which our former sins leave us in * our difficulty in obeying and our longings to return to Egypt * and the fearful anger of God which will with greater fierceness descend if we chance to fall back Those penitents I say who consider these things frequently and prudently will find their whole man so wrought upon that every faculty shall have an enmity against sin and therefore even the affections of the lower man must in their way contribute to its mortification and that is by a real and effective sorrow 19. But in this whole affair the whole matter of question will be in the manner of operation or signification of the dislike For the duty is done if the sin be accounted an enemy that is whether the dislike be only in the intellectual and rational appetite or also in the sensitive For although men use so to speak and distinguish superior from inferior appetites yet it will be hard in nature to find any real distinct faculties in which those passions are subjected and from which they have emanation The intellectual desire and the sensual desire are both founded in the same faculty they are not distinguished by their subjects but by their objects only they are but several motions of the will to or from several objects When a man desires that which is most reasonable and perfective or consonant to the understanding that we call an intellectual or rational appetite but if he desires a thing that will do him hurt in his soul or to his best interest and yet he desires it because it pleases him this is fit to be called a sensitive appetite because the object is sensitive and it is chosen for a sensual reason But it is rather appetitio than appetitus that is an act rather than a principle of action The case is plainer if we take two objects of several interests both of which are proportion'd to the understanding S. Anthony in the desart and S. Bernard in the Pulpit were tempted by the spirit of pride they resisted and overcame it because pride was unreasonable and foolish as to themselves and displeasing to God If they had listned to the whispers of that spirit it had been upon the accounts of pleasure because pride is that deliciousness of spirit which entertains a vain man making him to delight in his own images and reflexions and therefore is a work of the flesh but yet plainly founded in the understanding And therefore here it is plain that when the flesh and the spirit fight it is not a fight between two faculties of the soul but a contest in the soul concerning the election of two objects It is no otherwise in this than in every deliberation when arguments from several interests contest each other Every passion of the man is nothing else but a proper manner of being affected with an object and consequently a tendency to or an aversion from it that is a willing or a nilling of it which willing and nilling when they produce several permanent impressions upon the mind and body receive the names of divers passions The object it self first striking the fancy or lower apprehensions by its proper energy makes the first passion or tendency to the will that is the inclination or first concupiscence but when the will upon that impression is set on work and chuses the sensual object that makes the abiding passion the quality As if the object be displeasing and yet not present it effects fear or hatred if good and not present it is called desire but all these diversifications are meerly natural effects as to be warm is before the fire and cannot be in our choice directly and immediately That
sins are pardon'd by those ways and instruments which God hath constituted in the Church and there are no other external rites appointed by Christ but the Sacraments it follows that as they are worthily communicated or justly denied so the pardon is or is not ministred And therefore when the Church did bind any sinner by the bands of Discipline she did remove him from the mysteries and sometimes enjoyn'd external or internal acts of repentance to testifie and to exercise the grace and so to dispose them to pardon and when the penitents had given such testimonies which the Church demanded then they were absolved that is they were admitted to the mysteries For in the Primitive records of the Church there was no form of absolution judicial nothing but giving them the holy Communion admitting them to the peace of the Church to the society and priviledges of the faithful For this was giving them pardon by vertue of those words of Christ Whose sins ye remit they are remitted that is if ye who are the Stewards of my family shall admit any one to the Kingdom of Christ on Earth they shall be admitted to the participation of Christs Kingdom in Heaven and what ye bind here shall be bound there that is if they be unworthy to partake of Christ here they shall be accounted unworthy to partake of Christ hereafter if they separate from Christs members they also shall be separate from the head and this is the full sence of the power given by Christ to his Church concerning sins and sinners called by S. Paul The word of reconciliation For as for the other later and superinduc'd Ministery of pardon in judicial forms of absolution that is wholly upon other accounts of good use indeed to all them that desire it by reason of their present perswasions and scruples fears and jealousies concerning the event of things For sometimes it happens what one said of old Mens nostra difficillimè sedatur Deus faciliús God is sooner at peace with us than we are at peace with our own minds and because our repentances are always imperfect and he who repents the most excellently and hates his sin with the greatest detestation may possibly by his sence of the foulness of his sin undervalue his repentance and suspect his sorrow and because every thing is too little to deserve pardon he may think it is too little to obtain it and the man may be melancholy and melancholy is fearful and fear is scrupulous and scruples are not to be satisfied at home and not very easily abroad in the midst of these and many other disadvantages it will be necessary that he whose office it is to separate the vile from the precious and to judge of leprosie should be made able to judge of the state of this mans repentance and upon notice of particulars to speak comfort to him or some thing for institution For then if the Minister of holy things shall think fit to pronounce absolution that is to declare that he believes him to be a true penitent and in the state of grace it must needs add much comfort to him and hope of pardon not only upon the confidence of his wisdom and spiritual learning but even from the prayers of the holy man and the solemnity of his ministration To pronounce absolution in this case is to warrant him so far as his case is warrantable That is to speak comfort to him that is in need to give sentence in a case which is laid before him in which the party interested either hath no skill or no confidence or no comfort Now in this case to dispute whether the Priest power be Judicial or Optative or Declarative is so wholly to no purpose that this sentence is no part of any power at all but it is his office to do it and is an effect of wisdom not of power it is like the answering of a question which indeed ought to be askt of him as every man prudently is to inquire in every matter of concernment from him who is skill'd and experienced and profest in the faculty But the Priests proper power of absolving that is of pardoning which is in no case communicable to any man who is not consecrated to the Ministery is a giving the penitent the means of eternal pardon the admitting him to the Sacraments of the Church and the peace and communion of the faithful because that is the only way really to obtain pardon of God there being in ordinary no way to Heaven but by serving God in the way which he hath commanded us by his Son that is in the way of the Church which is his body whereof he is Prince and Head The Priest is the Minister of holy things he does that by his Ministery which God effects by real dispensation and as he gives the Spirit not by authority and proper efflux but by assisting and dispensing those rites and promoting those graces which are certain dispositions to the receiving of him just so he gives pardon not as a King does it nor yet as a Messenger that is not by way of authority and real donation nor yet only by declaration but as a Physician gives health that is he gives the remedy which God appoints and if he does so and if God blesses the medicines the person recovers and God gives the health 52. For it is certain that the holy man who ministers in repentance hath no other proper power of giving pardon than what is now described Because he cannot pardon them who are not truly penitent and if the sinner be God will pardon him whether the Priest does or no and what can be the effect of these things but this that the Priest does only minister to the pardon as he ministers to repentance He tells us upon what conditions God does pardon and judges best when the conditions are performed and sets forward those conditions by his proper ministery and ministers to us the instruments of grace but first takes accounts of our souls and helps us who are otherwise too partial to judge severe and righteous judgment concerning our eternal interest and he judges for us and does exhort or reprove admonish or correct comfort or humble loose or bind So the Minister of God is the Minister of reconciliation that is he is the Minister of the Gospel for that is the Word of Reconciliation which S. Paul affirms to be intrusted to him in every office by which the holy man ministers to the Gospel in every of them he is the Minister of pardon 53. But concerning that which we call Absolution that is a pronouncing the person to be absolved it is certain that the forms of the present use were not used for many ages of the Church In the Greek Church they were never used and for the Latin Church in Thomas Aquinas his time they were so new that he put it into one of his Quaestiones disputatae whether form were more fit the Optative
faciem ejus in confessione let us prevent his anger by sentencing our selves or if we do not let us follow the sad accents of the angry voice of God and imitate his justice by condemning that which God condemns and suffering willingly what he imposes and turning his judgments into voluntary executions by applying the suffering to our sins and praying it may be sanctified For since God smites us that we may repent if we repent then we serve the end of the Divine judgment and when we perceive God smites our sin if we submit to it and are pleased that our sin is smitten we are enemies to it after the example of God and that is a good act of repentance 114. IV. For the quality or kind of penances this is the best measure Those are the best which serve most ends not those which most vex us but such which will most please God If they be only actions punitive and vindictive they do indeed punish the man and help so far as they can to destroy the sin but of these alone S. Paul said well Bodily exercise profiteth but little but of the latter sort he added but Godliness is profitable to all things having the promise of the life that now is and of that which is to come and this indeed is our exactest measure Fastings alone lyings upon the ground disciplines and direct chastisements of the body which have nothing in them but toleration and revenge are of some use they vex the body and crucifie the sinner but the sin lives for all them but if we add prayer or any action symbolical as meditation reading solitariness silence there is much more done towards the extinction of the sin But he that adds Alms or something that not only is an act contrary to a former state of sin but such which is apt to deprecate the fault to obey God and to do good to men he hath chosen the better part which will not easily be taken from him Fasting prayer and alms together are the best penances or acts of exterior repentance in the world If they be single fasting is of the least force and alms done in obedience and the love of God is the best 115. V. For the quantity of penances the old rule is the best that I know but that it is too general and indefinite It is S. Cyprian's Quà m magna deliquimus tam granditèr defleamus If our sins were great so must our sorrow or penances be As one is so must be the other For sorrow and penances I reckon as the same thing in this question save only that in some instances of corporal inflictions the sin is opposed in its proper matter as intemperance is by fasting effeminacy by suffering hardships whereas sorrow opposes it only in general and in some other instances of penances there is a duty distinctly and directly serv'd as in prayer and alms But although this rule be indefinite and unlimited we find it made more minute by Hugo de S. Victore Si in correctione minor est afflictio quà m in◠culpâ fuit delectatio non est dignus poenitentiae tuae fructus Our sorrow either in the direct passion or in its voluntary expressions distinctly or conjunctly must at least equal the pleasure we took in the committing of a sin And this rule is indeed very good if we use it with these cautions First that this be understood principally in our repentances for single sins for in these only the rule can be properly and without scruple applied where the measures can be best observed For in habitual and long courses of sin there is no other measures but to do very much and very long and until we die and never think our selves safe but while we are doing our repentances Secondly that this measure be not thought equal commutation for the sin but be only used as an act of deprecation and repentance of the hatred of sin and opposition to it For he that sets a value upon his punitive actions of repentance and rests in them will be hasty in finishing the repentance and leaving it off even while the sin is alive For in these cases it is to be regarded that penances or the punitive actions of repentance are not for the extinction of the punishment immediately but for the guilt That is there is no remains of punishment after the whole guilt is taken off but the guilt it self goes away by parts and these external actions of repentance have the same effect in their proportion which is wrought by the internal Therefore as no man can say that he hath sufficiently repented of his sins by an inward sorrow and hatred so neither can he be secure that he hath made compensation by the suffering penances for if one sin deserves an eternal Hell it is well if upon the account of any actions and any sufferings we be at last accepted and acquitted 116. VI. In the performing the punitive parts of external repentance it is prudent that we rather extend them than intend them that is let us rather do many single acts of several instances than dwell upon one with such intension of spirit as may be apt to produce any violent effects upon the body or the spirit In all these cases prudence and proportion to the end is our best measures For these outward significations of repentance are not in any kind or instance necessary to the constitution of repentance but apt and excellent expressions and significations exercises and ministeries of repentance Prayer and Alms are of themselves distinct duties and therefore come not in their whole nature to this reckoning but the precise acts of corporal punishment are here intended And that these were not necessary parts of repentance the Primitive Church believed and declared by absolving dying persons though they did not survive the beginnings of their publick repentance But that she enjoyn'd them to suffer such severities in case they did recover she declar'd that these were useful and proper exercises and ministeries of the Grace it self And although inward repentance did expiate all sins even in the Mosaical Covenant yet they had also a time and manner of its solemnity their day of expiation and so must we have many But if any man will refuse this way of repentance I shall only say to him the words of S. Paul to them who rejected the Ecclesiastical customs and usages We have no such Custom neither the Churches of God But let him be sure that he perform his internal repentance with the more exactness as he had need look to his own strengths that refuses the assistance of auxiliaries But it is not good to be too nice and inquisitive when the whole Article is matter of practice For what doth God demand of us but inward sincerity of a returning penitent obedient heart and that this be exercised and ministred unto by fit and convenient offices to that purpose This is all and from this we are to make
where he hath intended them but so say that therefore he will doe it by an external act and ministery and that confin'd to a particular viz. this Rite and no other is no good Argument unless God could not doe it without such means or that he had said he would not And why cannot God as well doe his mercies to Infants now immediately as he did before the institution either of Circumcision or Baptism 18. However there is no danger that Infants should perish for want of this external Ministery much less for prevaricating Christ's precept of Nisi quis renatus fuerit c. For first the Water and the Spirit in this place signifie the same thing and by Water is meant the effect of the Spirit cleansing and purifying the Soul as appears in its parallel place of Christ baptizing with the Spirit and with Fire For although this was literally fulfilled in Pentecost yet morally there is more in it for it is the sign of the effect of the Holy Ghost and his productions upon the soul and it was an excellency of our Blessed Saviour's office that he baptizes all that come to him with the Holy Ghost and with Fire for so S. John preferring Christ's mission and office before his own tells the Jews not Christ's Disciples that Christ shall baptize them with Fire and the Holy Spirit that is all that come to him as John the Baptist did with water for so lies the Antithesis And you may as well conclude that Infants must also pass through the fire as through the water And that we may not think this a trick to elude the pressure of this place Peter says the same thing for when he had said that Baptism saves us he adds by way of explication not the washing of the flesh but the confidence of a good Conscience towards God plainly saying that it is not water or the purifying of the body but the cleansing of the Spirit that does that which is supposed to be the effect of Baptism And if our Saviour's exclusive negative be expounded by analogie to this of Peter as certainly the other parallel instance must and this may then it will be so far from proving the necessity of Infants Baptism that it can conclude for no man that he is obliged to the Rite and the Doctrine of the Baptism is onely to derive from the very words of Institution and not to be forced from words which were spoken before it was ordained But to let pass this advantage and to suppose it meant of external Baptism yet this no more infers a necessity of Infants Baptism then the other words of Christ infer a necessity to give them the holy Communion Nisi comederitis carnem Filii hominis biberitis sanguinem non introibitis in regnum coelorum and yet we do not think these words sufficient Argument to communicate them If men therefore will doe us justice either let them give both Sacraments to Infants as some Ages of the Church did or neither For the wit of man is not able to shew a disparity in the Sanction or in the energie of its expression And Simeon Thessalonicensis derides inertem Latinorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as we express it the lazie trifling of the Latines who dream of a difference 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O the unreasonableness and absurdity For why do you baptize them Meaning that because they are equally ignorant in Baptism as in the Eucharist that which hinders them in one is the same impediment in both And therefore they were honest that understood the obligation to be parallel and performed it accordingly and yet because we say they were deceived in one distance and yet the obligation all the world cannot reasonably say but is the same they are as honest and as reasonable that doe neither And since the ancient Church did with an equal opinion of necessity give them the Communion and yet men now adays do not why shall men be burthened with a prejudice and a name of obloquy for not giving the Infants one Sacrament more then they are disliked for not affording them the other If Anabaptist shall be a name of disgrace why shall not some other name be invented for them that deny to communicate Infants which shall be equally disgracefull or else both the Opinions signified by such names be accounted no disparagement but receive their estimate according to their truth 19. Of which truth since we are now taking account from pretences of Scripture it is considerable that the discourse of S. Peter which is pretended for the intitling Infants to the Promise of the Holy Ghost and by consequence to Baptism which is supposed to be its Instrument and conveiance is wholly a fancy and hath in it nothing of certainty or demonstration and not much probability For besides that the thing it self is unreasonable and the Holy Ghost works by the heightning and improving our natural faculties and therefore it is a Promise that so concerns them as they are reasonable creatures and may have a title to it in proportion to their nature but no possession or reception of it till their faculties come into act besides this I say the words mentioned in S. Peter's Sermon which are the onely record of the Promise are interpreted upon a weak mistake The promise belongs to you and to your children therefore Infants are actually receptive of it in that capacity That is the Argument But the reason of it is not yet discovered nor ever will for to you and your children is to you and your posterity to you and your children when they are of the same capacity in which you are effectually receptive of the promise and therefore Tertullian calls Infants designatos sanctitatis ac per hoc etiam salutis the candidates of holiness and salvation those that are designed to it But he that when-ever the word children is used in Scripture shall by children understand Infants must needs believe that in all Israel there were no men but all were Infants and if that had been true it had been the greater wonder they should overcome the Anakims and beat the King of Moab and march so far and discourse so well for they were all called the children of Israel 20. And for the Allegation of S. Paul that Infants are holy if their Parents be faithfull it signifies nothing but that they are holy by designation just as Jeremy and John Baptist were sanctified in their Mothers womb that is they were appointed and designed for holy Ministeries but had not received the Promise of the Father the gift of the Holy Ghost for all that sanctification and just so the children of Christian parents are sanctified that is designed to the service of Jesus Christ and the future participation of the Promises 21. And as the Promise appertains not for ought appears to Infants in that capacity and consistence but onely by the title of their being reasonable creatures and when they come to that
Disciples But he told it to the Jews and yet it does not follow that they should all be baptized with the Holy Ghost and with fire but it is meant onely that that glorious effect should be to them a sign of Christ's eminency above him they should see from him a Baptism greater then that of John And that it must be meant of that miraculous descent of the Holy Spirit in Pentecost and not of any secret gift or private immission appears because the Baptist offered it as a sign and testimony of the prelation and greatness of Christ above him which could not be proved to them by any secret operation which cometh not by observation but by a great and miraculous mission such as was that in Pentecost So that hence to argue that we may as well conclude that Infants must also pass through the fire as through the water is a false conclusion inferred from no premisses because this being onely a Prophecy and inferring no duty could neither concern men or children to any of the purposes of their Argument For Christ never said Vnless ye be baptized with fire and the Spirit ye shall not enter into the Kingdome of heaven but of water and the Spirit he did say it therefore though they must pass through the water yet no smell of fire must pass upon them But there are yet two things by which they offer to escape The one is that in these words Baptism by water is not meant at all but Baptism by the Spirit onely because S. Peter having said that Baptism saves us he addes by way of explication not the washing of the flesh but the answer of a good conscience towards God plainly saying that it is not water but the Spirit To this I reply that when water is taken exclusively to the Spirit it is very true that it is not water that cleanses the Soul and the cleansing of the body cannot save us but who-ever urges the necessity of Baptism urges it but as a necessary Sacrament or Instrument to convey or consign the Spirit and this they might with a little observation have learned there being nothing more usual in discourse then to deny the effect to the instrument when it is compared with the principle and yet not intend to deny to it an instrumental efficiency It is not the pen that writes well but the hand and S. Paul said It is not I but the grace of God and yet it was gratia Dei mecum that is the principal and the less principal together So S. Peter It is not water but the Spirit or which may come to one and the same not the washing the filth of the flesh but purifying the conscience that saves us and yet neither one nor the other are absolutely excluded but the effect which is denied to the instrument is attributed to the principal cause But however this does no more concern Infants then men of age for they are not saved by the washing the body but by the answer of a good conscience by the Spirit of holiness and sanctification that is water alone does not doe it unless the Spirit move upon the water But that water also is in the ministery and is not to be excluded from its portion of the work appears by the words of the Apostle The like figure whereunto even Baptism saves us c. that is Baptism even as it is a figure saves us in some sense of other by way of ministery and instrumental efficiency by conjunction and consolidation with the other but the ceremony the figure the Rite and external ministery must be in or else his words will in no sense be true and could be made true by no interpretation because the Spirit may be the thing figured but can never be a figure The other little 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is that these words were spoken before Baptism was ordained and therefore could not concern Baptism much less prove the necessity of baptizing Infants I answer that so are the sayings of the Prophets long before the coming of Christ and yet concerned his coming most certainly Secondly They were not spoken before the institution of Baptism for the Disciples of Christ did baptize more then the Baptist ever in his life-time they were indeed spoken before the commission was of baptizing all nations or taking the Gentiles into the Church but not before Christ made Disciples and his Apostles baptized them among the Jews And it was so known a thing that great Prophets and the Fathers of an Institution did baptize Disciples that our Blessed Saviour upbraided Nicodemus for his ignorance of that particular and his not understanding words spoken in the proportion and imitation of custome so known among them But then that this Argument which presses so much may be attempted in all the parts of it like Souldiers fighting against Curiassiers that try all the joynts of their armour so doe these to this For they object in the same number that the exclusive negative of Nisi quis does not include Infants but onely persons capable for say they this no more infers a necessity of Infants Baptism then the parallel words of Christ Nisi comâ—deritis unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his bloud ye have no life in you infer a necessity to give them the holy Communion c. With this Argument men use to make a great noise in many Questions but in this it will signifie but little First Indeed to one of the Roman Communion it will cause some disorder in this Question both because they think it unlawfull to give the holy Communion to Infants and yet that these words are meant of the holy Communion and if we thought so too I do not doubt but we should communicate them with the same opinion of necessity as did the Primitive Church But to the thing itself I grant that the expression is equal and infers an equal necessity in their respective cases and therefore it is as necessary to eat the flesh of the Son of man and to drink his bloud as to be baptized but then it is to be added that eating and drinking are metaphors and allusions us'd onely upon occasion of Manna which was then spoken of and which occasioned the whole discourse but the thing itself is nothing but that Christ should be received for the life of our Souls as bread and drink is for the life of our bodies Now because there are many ways of receiving Christ there are so many ways of obeying this precept but that some way or other it be obeyed is as necessary as that we be baptized Here onely it is declared to be necessary that Christ be received that we derive our life and our spiritual and eternall being from him now this can concern Infants and does infer an ordinary necessity of their Baptism for in Baptism they are united to Christ and Christ to them in Baptism they receive the beginnings of a new life
have a title to the Promises then the thing is done and this title of theirs can be signified by these words and then either this is a good argument or the thing is confessed without it For he that hath a title to the Promises of the Gospel hath a title to this Promise here mentioned the promise of the Holy Spirit for by him we are sealed to the day of redemption And indeed that this mystery may be rightly understood we are to observe that the Spirit of God is the great ministery of the Gospel and whatsoever blessing Evangelicall we can receive it is the emanation of the Spirit of God Grace and Pardon Wisedome and Hope offices and titles and relations powers priviledges and dignities all are the good things of the Spirit whatsoever we can profit withall or whatsoever we can be profited by is a gift of God the Father of spirits and is transmitted to us by the Holy Spirit of God For it is but a trifle and a dream to think that no person receives the Spirit of God but he that can doe actions and operations spiritual S. Paul distinguishes the effects of the Spirit into three classes there are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 besides these operations there are gifts and ministeries and they that receive not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the operations or powers to doe actions spiritual may yet receive gifts or at least the blessings of ministery they can be ministred to by others who from the Spirit have received the power of ministration And I instance in these things in which it is certain we can receive the Holy Spirit without any predisposition of our own First We can receive gifts even the wicked have them and they who shall be rejected at the day of Judgement shall yet argue for themselves that they have wrought miracles in the name of the Lord Jesus and yet the gift of miracles is a gift of the Holy Spirit and if the wicked can receive them who are of dispositions contrary to all the emanations of the Holy Spirit then much more may children◠who although they cannot prepare themselves any more then the wicked do yet neither can they doe against them to hinder or obstruct them But of this we have an instance in a young child Daniel whose spirit God raised up to acquit the innocent and to save her soul from unrighteous Judges and when the boys in the street sang Hosanna to the Son of David our Blessed Lord said that if they had held their peace the stones of the street would have cried out Hosanna And therefore that God should from the mouths of babes and sucklings ordain his own praise is one of the Magnalia Dei but no strange thing to be believed by us who are so apparently taught it in Holy Scripture Secondly Benediction or blessing is an emanation of God's Holy Spirit and in the form of blessing which is recorded in the Epistles of S. Paul one great part of it is the communication of the Holy Spirit and it is very probable that those three are but Synonyma The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ is to give us his Holy Spirit and the love of God is to give us his Holy Spirit for the Spirit is the love of the Father and our Blessed Saviour argues it as the testimony of God's love to us If ye who are evil know how to give good things to your children how much more shall your heavenly Father give his Spirit to them that ask him Now since the great summe and compendium of Evangelicall blessings is the Holy Spirit and this which is expressed by three Synonyma's in the second Epistle to the Corinthians is in the first reduced to one it is all but the Grace of the Lord Jesus it will follow that since our Blessed Saviour gave his solemn blessing to children his blessing relating to the Kingdom of Heaven for of such is the Kingdom he will not deny his Spirit to them when he blessed them he gave them something of his Spirit some emanation of that which blesses us all and without which no man can be truly blessed Thirdly Titles to inheritance can be given to Infants without any predisposing act of their own Since therefore Infants dying so can as we all hope receive the inheritance of Saints some mansion in Heaven in that Kingdom which belongs to them and such as they are and that the gift of the Holy Spirit is the consignation to that inheritance nothing can hinder them from receiving the Spirit that is nothing can hinder them to receive a title to the inheritance of the Saints which is the free gift of God and the effect and blessing from the Spirit of God Now how this should prove to Infants to be a title to Baptism is easie enough to be understood For by one Spirit we are all baptized into one body that is the Spirit of God moves upon the waters of Baptism and in that Sacrament adopts us into the mysticall body of Christ and gives us title to a coinheritance with him Ad 21. So that this perfectly confutes what is said in the beginning of Number 21. that Baptism is not the means of conveying the Holy Ghost For it is the Spirit that baptizes it is the Spirit that adopts us to an inheritance of the Promises it is the Spirit that incorporates us into the mysticall body of Christ and upon their own grounds it ought to be confessed for since they affirm the water to be nothing without the Spirit it is certain that the water ought not to be without the Spirit and therefore that this is the soul and life of the Sacrament and therefore usually in conjunction with that ministery unless we hinder it and it cannot be denied but that the Holy Ghost was given ordinarily to new converts at their Baptism And whereas it is said in a parenthesis that this was not as the effect is to the cause or to the proper instrument but as a consequent is to an antecedent in a chain of causes accidentally and by positive institution depending upon each other it is a groundless assertion for when the men were called upon to be baptized and were told they should receive the Holy Ghost and we find that when they were baptized they did receive the Holy Ghost what can be more reasonable then to conclude Baptism to be the ministery of the Spirit And to say that this was not consequent properly and usually but accidentally onely it followed sometimes but was not so much as instrumentally effected by it is as if one should boldly deny all effect to Physick for though men are called upon to take Physick and told they should recover and when they do take Physick they do recover yet men may unreasonably say this recovery does follow the taking of Physick not as an effect to the cause or to the
proper instrument but as a consequent is to an antecedent in a chain of causes accidentally and by positive institution depending upon each other Who can help it if men will say that it happened that they recovered after the taking Physick but then was the time in which they should have been well however The best confutation of them is to deny Physick to them when they need and try what nature will doe for them without the help of art The case is all one in this Question this onely excepted that in this case it is more unreasonable then in the matter of Physick because the Spirit is expresly signified to be the baptizer in the forecited place of Saint Paul From hence we argue that since the Spirit is ministred in Baptism and that Infants are capable of the Spirit the Spirit of adoption the Spirit of incorporation into the body of Christ the Spirit sealing them to the day of redemption the Spirit intitling them to the Promises of the Gospel the Spirit consigning to them God's part of the Covenant of Grace they are also capable of Baptism For whoever is capable of the Grace of the Sacrament is capable of the sign or Sacrament itself To this last clause the Anab. answers two things First that the Spirit of God was conveyed sometimes without Baptism I grant it but what then Therefore Baptism is not the sign or ministery of the Holy Ghost It follows not For the Spirit is the great wealth and treasure of Christians and is conveyed in every ministery of Divine appointment in Baptism in Confirmation in Absolution in Orders in Prayer in Benediction in assembling together Secondly The other thing they answer is this that it is not true that they who are capable of the same grace are capable of the same sign for females were capable of the righteousness of Faith but not of the seal of Circumcision I reply that the Proposition is true not in natural capacities but in spiritual and religious regards that is they who in Religion are declared capable of the grace are by the same Religion capable of the Sacrament or sign of that grace But naturally they may be uncapable by accident as in the Objection is mentioned But then this is so far from invalidating the Argument that it confirms it in the present instance Exceptio firmat regulam in non exceptis For even the Jewish females although they could not be circumcised yet they were baptized even in those days as I have proved already and although their natural indisposition denied them to be circumcised yet neither nature nor Religion forbad them to be baptized and therefore since the Sacrament is such a ministery of which all are naturally capable and none are forbidden by the Religion the Argument is firm and unshaken and concludes with as much evidence and certainty as the thing requires Ad 10. The last Argument from Reason is That it is reasonable to suppose that God in the period of Grace in the days of the Gospel would not give us a more contracted comfort and deal with us by a narrower hand then with the Jewish babes whom he sealed with a Sacrament as well as enriched with a grace and therefore openly consigned them to comfort and favour Ad 22. To this they answer that we are to trust the word without a sign and since we contend that the Promise belongs to us and to our children why do we not believe this but require a sign I reply that if this concludes any thing it concludes against the Baptism of men and women for they hear and reade and can believe the Promise and it can have all its effects and produce all its intentions upon men but yet they also require the sign they must be baptized And the reason why they require it is because Christ hath ordained it And therefore although we can trust the Promise without a sign and that if we did not this manner of sign would not make us believe it for it is not a miracle that is a sign proving but it is a Sacrament that is a sign signifying and although we do trust the Promise even in the behalf of Infants when they cannot be baptized yet by the same reason as we trust the Promise so we also use the Rite both in obedience to Christ and we use the Rite or the Sacrament because we believe the Promise and if we did not believe that the Promise did belong to our children we would not baptize them Therefore this is such an impertinent quarrel of the Anabaptists that it hath no strength at all but what it borrows from a cloud of words and the advantages of its representment As God did openly consign his grace to the Jewish babes by a Sacrament so he does to ours and we have reason to give God thanks not onely for the comfort of it for that 's the least part of it but for the ministery and conveyance of the real blessing in this Holy mystery Ad 23 24 25. That which remains of Objections and answers is wholly upon the matter of examples and precedents from the Apostles and first descending Ages of the Church but to this I have already largely spoken in a Discourse of this Question and if the Anabaptists would be concluded by the practice of the Universal Church in this Question it would quickly be at an end For although sometimes the Baptism of children was deferred till the age of reason and choice yet it was onely when there was no danger of the death of the children and although there might be some advantages gotten by such delation yet it could not be endured that they should be sent out of the world without it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said S. Gregory Nazianzen It is better they should be sanctified even when they understand it not then that they should go away from hence without the seal of perfection and sanctification Secondly But that Baptism was amongst the Ancients sometimes deferred was not always upon a good reason but sometimes upon the same account as men now adays defer repentance or put off Confession and Absolution and the Communion till the last day of their life that their Baptism might take away all the sins of their life Thirdly It is no strange thing that there are examples of late Baptism because Heathenism and Christianity were so mingled in towns and cities and private houses that it was but reasonable sometimes to stay till men did chuse their Religion from which it was so likely they might afterwards be tempted Fourthly The Baptism of Infants was always most notorious and used in the Churches of Africa as is confessed by all that know the Ecclesiastical Story Fifthly Among the Jews it was one and all if the Major domo believed he believed for himself all his family and they all followed him to Baptism even before they were instructed and therefore it is that we find mention of
first-fruits among many Brethren The consequent is this which I express in the words of S. Austin affirming Christi in Baptismo columbam unctionem nostram praefigurâsse The Dove in Christ's Baptism did represent and prefigure our Unction from above that is the descent of the Holy Ghost upon us in the rite of Confirmation Christ was baptized and so must we But after Baptism he had a new ministration for the reception of the Holy Ghost and because this was done for our sakes we also must follow that example And this being done immediately before his entrance into the Wilderness to be tempted of the Devil it plainly describes to us the Order of this ministery and the Blessing design'd to us After we are baptiz'd we need to be strengthned and confirm'd propter pugnam spiritualem we are to fight against the Flesh the World and the Devil and therefore must receive the ministration of the Holy Spirit of God which is the design and proper work of Confirmation For they are the words of the Excellent Author of the imperfect work upon S. Matthew imputed to S. Chrysostom The Baptism of Water profits us because it washes away the sins we have formerly committed if we repent of them But it does not sanctifie the Soul nor precedes the Concupiscences of the Heart and our evil thoughts nor drives them back nor represses our carnal desires But he therefore who is only so baptized that he does not also receive the Holy Spirit is baptized in his Body and his sins are pardon'd but in his Mind he is yet but a Catechumen for so it is written He that hath not the Spirit of Christ is none of his and therefore afterward out of his flesh will germinate worse sins because he hath not receiv'd the Holy Spirit conserving him in his Baptismal Grace but the house of his Body is empty wherefore that wicked spirit finding it swept with the Doctrines of Faith as with besoms enters in and in a sevenfold manner dwells there Which words besides that they well explicate this mystery do also declare the necessity of Confirmation or receiving the Holy Ghost after Baptism in imitation of the Divine precedent of our Blessed Saviour 2. After the Example of Christ my next Argument is from his Words spoken to Nicodemus in explication of the prime mysteries Evangelical Vnless a man be born of Water and of the Holy Spirit he shall not enter into the Kingdom of God These words are the great Argument which the Church uses for the indispensable necessity of Baptism and having in them so great effort and not being rightly understood they have suffered many Convulsions shall I call them or Interpretations Some serve their own Hypothesis by saying that Water is the Symbol and the Spirit is the Baptismal Grace Others that it is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one is only meant though here be two Signatures But others conclude that Water is only necessary but the Spirit is super-added as being afterwards to supervene and move upon these Waters And others yet affirm that by Water is only meant a Spiritual Ablution or the effect produced by the Spirit and still they have intangled the words so that they have been made useless to the Christian Church and the meaning too many things makes nothing to be understood But Truth is easie intelligible and clear and without objection and is plainly this Unless a man be Baptized into Christ and Confirmed by the Spirit of Christ he cannot enter into the Kingdom of Christ that is he is not perfectly adopted into the Christian Religion or fitted for the Christian Warfare And if this plain and natural sence be admitted the place is not only easie and intelligible but consonant to the whole Design of Christ and Analogy of the New Testament For first Our blessed Saviour was Catechizing of Nicodemus and teaching him the first Rudiments of the Gospel and like a wise Master-builder first lays the foundation The Doctrine of Baptism and laying on of Hands which afterwards S. Paul put into the Christian Catechism as I shall shew in the sequel Now these also are the first Principles of the Christian Religion taught by Christ himself and things which at least to the Doctors might have been so well known that our Blessed Saviour upbraids the not knowing them as a shame to Nicodemus S. Chrysostom and Theophylact Euthymius and Rupertus affirm that this Generation by Water and the Holy Spirit might have been understood by the Old Testament in which Nicodemus was so well skilled Certain it is the Doctrine of Baptisms was well enough known to the Jews and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the illumination and irradiations of the Spirit of God was not new to them who believed the Visions and Dreams the Daughter of a Voice and the influences from Heaven upon the Sons of the Prophets and therefore although Christ intended to teach him more than what he had distinct notice of yet the things themselves had foundation in the Law and the Prophets but although they were high Mysteries and scarce discerned by them who either were ignorant or incurious of such things yet to the Christians they were the very Rudiments of their Religion and are best expounded by observation of what S. Paul placed in the very foundation But 2. Baptism is the first Mystery that is certain but that this of being born of the Spirit is also the next is plain in the very order of the words and that it does mean a Mystery distinct from Baptism will be easily assented to by them who consider that although Christ Baptized and made many Disciples by the Ministery of his Apostles yet they who were so baptized into Christ's Religion did not receive this Baptism of the Spirit till after Christ's Ascension 3. The Baptism of Water was not peculiar to John the Baptist for it was also of Christ and ministred by his command it was common to both and therefore the Baptism of Water is the less principal here Something distinct from it is here intended Now if we add to these words That S. John tells of another Baptism which was Christ's peculiar He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with Fire That these words were literally verified upon the Apostles in Pentecost and afterwards upon all the Baptized in Spiritual effect who besides the Baptism of Water distinctly had the Baptism of the Spirit in Confirmation it will follow that of necessity this must be the meaning and the verification of these words of our Blessed Saviour to Nicodemus which must mean a double Baptism Transibimus per aquam ignem antequam veniemus in refrigerium We must pass through Water and Fire before we enter into Rest that is We must first be Baptized with Water and then with the Holy Ghost who first descended in Fire that is the only way to enter into Christ's Kingdom is by these two Doors of the Tabernacle which God hath pitched
but because the Apostle speaking of the Foundation in which Baptism is and is reckoned one of the principal parts in the Foundation there needed no Absolution but Baptismal for they and we believing one Baptism for the Remission of Sins this is all the Absolution that can be at first and in the Foundation The other was secunda post naufragium tabula it came in after when men had made a shipwrack of their good conscience and were as S. Peter says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 forgetful of the former cleansing and purification and washing of their old sins Secondly It cannot be meant of Ordination and this is also evident 1. Because the Apostle says he would thence-forth leave to speak of the Foundation and go on to perfection that is to higher Mysteries Now in Rituals of which he speaks there is none higher than Ordination 2. The Apostle saying he would speak no more of Imposition of Hands goes presently to discourse of the mysteriousness of the Evangelical Priesthood and the honour of that vocation by which it is evident he spake nothing of Ordination in the Catechism or Narrative of Fundamentals 3. This also appears from the context not only because Laying on of hands is immediately set after Baptism but also because in the very next words of his Discourse he does enumerate and apportion to Baptism and Confirmation their proper and proportioned effects to Baptism illumination according to the perpetual style of the Church of God calling Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an enlightning and to Confirmation he reckons tasting the Heavenly gift and being made partakers of the Holy Ghost by the thing signified declaring the Sign and by the mystery the Rite Upon these words S. Chrysostom discoursing says That all these are Fundamental Articles that i◠that we ought to Repent from dead works to be Baptized into the Faith of Christ and be made worthy of the gift of the Spirit who is given by Imposition of Hands and we are to be taught the mysteries of the Resurrection and Eternal Judgment This Catechism says he is perfect so that if any man have Faith in God and being baptized is also confirmed and so tastes the Heavenly gift and partakes of the Holy Ghost and by hope of the Resurrection tastes of the good things of the World to come if he falls away from this state and turns Apostate from this whole Dispensation digging down and turning up these Foundations he shall never be built again he can never be Baptized again and never be Confirmed any more God will not begin again and go over with him again he cannot be made a Christian twice If he remains upon these Foundations though he sins he may be renewed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Repentance and by a Resuscitation of the Spirit if he have not wholly quenched him but if he renounces the whole Covenant disown and cancel these Foundations he is desperate he can never be renewed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Title and Oeconomy of Repentance This is the full explication of this excellent place and any other ways it cannot reasonably be explicated but therefore into this place any notice of Ordination cannot come no Sence no Mystery can be made of it or drawn from it but by the interposition of Confirmation the whole context is clear rational and intelligible This then is that Imposition of hands of which the Apostle speaks Vnus hic locus abunde testatur c. saith Calvin This one place doth abundantly witness that the original of this Rite or Ceremony was from the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith S. Chrysostom for by this Rite of Imposition of hands they receiv'd the Holy Ghost Fo◠though the Spirit of God was given extra-regularly and at all times as God was pleas'd to do great things yet this Imposition of hands was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this was the Ministery of the Spirit For so we receive Christ when we hear and obey his word we eat Christ by Faith and we live by his Spirit and yet the Blessed Eucharist is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ministery of the Body and Blood of Christ. Now as the Lord's Supper is appointed ritually to convey Christ's Body and Bloud to us so is Confirmation ordain'd ritually to give unto us the Spirit of God And though by accident and by the overflowings of the Spirit it may come to pass that a man does receive perfective graces alone and without Ministeries external yet such a man without a miracle is not a perfect Christian ex statuum vitae dispositione but in the ordinary ways and appointment of God and until he receive this Imposition of hands and be Confirmed is to be accounted an imperfect Christian. But of this afterwards I shall observe one thing more out of this testimony of S. Paul He calls it the Doctrine of Baptisms and Laying on of hands by which it does not only appear to be a lasting ministery because no part of the Christian Doctrine could change or be abolished but hence also it appears to be of Divine institution For if it were not S. Paul had beed guilty of that which our Blessed Saviour reproves in the Scribes and Pharisees and should have taught for Doctrines the Commandments of Men. Which because it cannot be suppos'd it must follow that this Doctrine of Confirmation or Imposition of hands is Apostolical and Divine The Argument is clear and not easie to be reprov'd SECT II. The Rite of Confirmation is a perpetual and never-ceasing Ministery YEA but what is this to us It belong'd to the days of wonder and extraordinary The Holy Ghost breath'd upon the Apostles and Apostolical men but then he breath'd his last recedente gratiâ recessit disciplina when the Grace departed we had no further use of the Ceremony In answer to this I shall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by divers particulars evince plainly that this Ministery of Confirmation was not temporary and relative only to the Acts of the Apostles but was to descend to the Church for ever This indeed is done already in the preceding Section in which it is clearly manifested that Christ himself made the Baptism of the Spirit to be necessary to the Church He declar'd the fruits of this Baptism and did particularly relate it to the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Church at and after that glorious Pentecost He sanctified it and commended it by his Example just as in order to Baptism he sanctified the Floud Jordan and all other waters to the mystical washing away of sin viz. by his great Example and fulfilling this righteousness also This Doctrine the Apostles first found in their own persons and Experience and practised to all their Converts after Baptism by a solemn and external Rite and all this passed into an Evangelical Doctrine the whole mystery being signified by the external Rite in the words of the Apostle as before it was by Christ expressing
they minister shadows instead of substances SECT V. The whole Procedure or Ritual of Confirmation is by Prayer and Imposition of Hands THE Heart and the Eye are lift up to God to bring Blessings from him and so is the Hand too but this also falls upon the People and rests there to apply the descending Blessing to the proper and prepared suscipient God governed the People of Israel by the hand of Moses and Aaron calidae fecêre silentia turbae Majestate manûs And both under Moses and under Christ when-ever the President of Religion did bless the People he lifted up his Hand over the Congregation and when he blessed a single Person he laid his Hand upon him This was the Rite used by Jacob and the Patriarchs by Kings and Prophets by all the eminently Religious in the Synagogue and by Christ himself when he blessed the Children which were brought to him and by the Apostles when they blessed and confirmed the baptized Converts and whom else can the Church follow The Apostles did so to the Christians of Samaria to them of Ephesus and S. Paul describes this whole mystery by the Ritual part of it calling it the Foundation of the Imposition of hands It is the solemnity of Blessing and the solemnity and application of Paternal prayer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Clement of Alexandria Upon whom shall he lay his hands whom shall he bless Quidenim aliud est Impositio manuum nisi Oratio super hominem said S. Austin The Bishop's laying his hands on the People what is it but the solemnity of Prayer for them that is a prayer made by those Sacred persons who by Christ are appointed to pray for them and to bless in his Name and so indeed are all the Ministeries of the Church Baptism Consecration of the B. Eucharist Absolution Ordination Visitation of the Sick they are all in genere Orationis they are nothing but solemn and appointed Prayer by an intrusted and a gracious Person specificated by a proper order to the end of the blessing then designed And therefore when S. James commanded that the sick Persons should send for the Elders of the Church he adds and let them pray over them that is lay their hands on the sick and pray for them that is praying over them It is adumbratio dextrae as Tertullian calls it the right hand of him that ministers over-shadows the person for whom the solemn Prayer is to be made This is the Office of the Rulers of the Church for they in the Divine Eutaxy are made your Superiors they are indeed your servants for Jesus sake but they are over you in the Lord and therefore are from the Lord appointed to bless the People for without contradiction saith the Apostle the less is blessed of the greater that is God hath appointed the Superiors in Religion to be the great Ministers of Prayer he hath made them the gracious Persons them he will hear those he hath commanded to convey your needs to God and God's blessings to you and to ask a blessing is to desire them to pray for you them I say whom God most respecteth for their piety and zeal that way or else regardeth for that their place and calling bindeth them above others to do this duty such as are Natural and Spiritual Fathers It is easie for prophane persons to deride these things as they do all Religion which is not conveyed to them by sense or natural demonstrations but the Oeconomy of the Spirit and the things of God are spiritually discerned The Spirit bloweth where it listeth and no man knows whence it comes and whither it goes and the Operations are discerned by Faith and received by Love and by Obedience Date mihi Christianum intelligit quod dico None but true Christians understand and feel these things But of this we are sure that in all the times of Mose's Law while the Synagogue was standing and in all the days of Christianity so long as men loved Religion and walked in the Spirit and minded the affairs of their Souls to have the Prayers and the Blessing of the Fathers of the Synagogue and the Fathers of the Church was esteemed no small part of their Religion and so they went to Heaven But that which I intend to say is this That Prayer and Imposition of Hands was the whole procedure in the Christian Rites and because this Ministery was most signally performed by this Ceremony and was also by S. Paul called and noted by the name of the Ceremony Imposition of hands this name was retained in the Christian Church and this manner of ministring Confirmation was all that was in the commandment or institution But because in Confirmation we receive the Unction from above that is then we are most signally made Kings and Priests unto God to offer up spiritual sacrifices and to enable us to seek the Kingdom of God and the Righteousness of it and that the giving of the Holy Spirit is in Scripture called the Vnction from above the Church of God in early Ages made use of this Allegory and passed it into an External Ceremony and Representation of the Mystery to signifie the Inward Grace Post inscripta oleo frontis signacula per quae Vnguentum Regale datum est Chrisma perenne We are consigned on the Fore-head with Oil and a Royal Unction and an Eternal Chrism is given to us so Prudentius gives testimony of the ministery of Confirmation in his time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said S. Cyril Preserve this Unction pure and spotless for it teaches you all things as you have heard the blessed S. John speaking and philosophizing many things of this holy Chrism Upon this account the H. Fathers used to bless and consecrate Oil and Balsam that by an External Signature they might signifie the Inward Unction effected in Confirmation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Chrism is not simple or common when it is blessed but the gift of Christ and the presence of his H. Spirit as it were effecting the Divinity it self the body is indeed anointed with visible Ointment but is also sanctified by the holy and quickning Spirit so S. Cyril I find in him and in some late Synods other pretty significations and allusions made by this Ceremony of Chrisms Nos autem pro igne visibili qui die Pentecostes super Apostolos apparuit oleum sanctum materiam nempe ignis ex Apostolorum traditione ad confirmandum adhibemus This using of Oil was instead of the Baptism with Fire which Christ baptized his Apostles with in Pentecost and Oil being the most proper matter of Fire is therefore used in Confirmation That this was the ancient Ceremony is without doubt and that the Church had power to do so hath no question and I add it was not unreasonable for if ever the Scripture expresses the mysteriousness of a Grace conferred by an Exterior ministery as this is by
the reception of the Holy Ghost they waxed valiant in the Faith and in all their spiritual combats 2. In Confirmation we receive the Holy Ghost as the earnest of our inheritance as the seal of our Salvation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Gregory Nazianzen we therefore call it a Seal or Signature as being a guard and custody to us and a sign of the Lord's dominion over us The Confirmed person is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a sheep that is mark'd which Thieves do not so easily steal and carry away To the same purpose are those words of Theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Remember that holy mystagogâ—e in which they who were initiated after the renouncing that Tyrant the Devil and all his works and the confession of the true King Jesus Christ have received the Chrism of spiritual Vnction like a Royal signature by that Vnction as in a shadow perceiving the invisible grace of the most Holy Spirit That is Confirmation we are sealed for the service of God and unto the day of Redemption then it is that the seal of God is had by us The Lord knoweth who are his Quomodo verò dices Dei sum si notas â—on produxeris said S. Basil How can any may say I am God's sheep unless he produce the marks Signati estis Spiritu promissionis per Sanctâ—ssimum Divinum Spiritum Domini grex effecti sumus said Theophylact. When we are thus seal'd by the most Holy and Divine Spirit of promise then we are truly of the Lord's Flock and mark'd with his seal that is When we are rightly Confirm'd then he descâ—nds into our Souls and though he does not operate it may be presently but as the Reasonable Soul works in its due time and by the order of Nature by opportunities and new fermentations and actualities so does the Spirit of God when he is brought into use when he is prayed for with love assiduity when he is caressed tenderly when he is us'd lovingly when we obey his motions readily when we delight in his words greatly then we find it true that the Soul had a new life put into her a principle of perpetual actions but the tree planted by the waters side does not presently bear fruit but in its due season By this Spirit we are then seal'd that whereas God hath laid up an inheritance for us in the Kingdom of Heaven and in the faith of that we must live and labour to confirm this Faith God hath given us this Pledge the Spirit of God is a witness to us and tells us by his holy comforts by the peace of God and the quietness and refrâ—shments of a good Conscience that God is our Father that we are his Sons and Daughters and shall be co-heirs with Jesus in his eternal Kingdom In Baptism we are made the Sons of God but we receive the witness and testimony of it in Confirmation This is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Holy Ghost the Comforter this is he whom Christ promis'd and did send in Pentecost and was afterwards ministred and conveyed by Prayer and Imposition of hands and by this Spirit he makes the Confessors bold and the Martyrs valiant and the Tempted strong and the Virgins to persevere and Widows to sing his praises and his glories And this is that excellency which the Church of God called the Lord's seal and teaches to be imprinted in Confirmation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a perfect Phylactery or Guard even the Lord's seal so Eusebius calls it I will not be so curious as to enter into a discourse of the Philosophy of this But I shall say that they who are curious in the secrets of Nature and observe external signatures in Stones Plants Fruits and Shells of which Naturalists make many observations and observe strange effects and the more internal signatures in Minerals and Living bodies of which Chymists discourse strange secrets may easily if they please consider that it is infinitely credible that in higher essences even in Spirits there may be signatures proportionable wrought more immediately and to greater purposes by a Divine hand I only point at this and so pass it over as it may be not fit for every mans consideration And now if any man shall say we see no such things as you talk of and find the Confirm'd people the same after as before no better and no wiser not richer in Gifts not more adorned with Graces nothing more zealous for Christ's Kingdom not more comforted with Hope or established by Faith or built up with Charity they neither speak better nor live better What then Does it therefore follow that the Holy Ghost is not given in Confirmation Nothing less For is not Christ given us in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper Do not we receive his Body and his Blood Are we not made all one with Christ and he with us And yet it is too true that when we arise from that holy Feast thousands there are that find no change But there are in this two things to be considered One is that the changes which are wrought upon our souls are not after the manner of Nature visible and sensible and with observation The Kingdom of God cometh not with Observation for it is within you and is only discerned spiritually and produces its effects by the method of Heaven and is first apprehended by Faith and is endear'd by Charity and at last is understood by holy and kind Experiences And in this there is no more objection against Confirmation than against Baptism or the Lord's Supper or any other Ministery Evangelical The other thing is this If we do not find the effects of the Spirit in Confirmation it is our faults For he is receiv'd by Moral instruments and is intended only as a Help to our endeavours to our labours and our prayers to our contentions and our mortifications to our Faith and to our Hope to our Patience and to our Charity Non adjuvari dicitur qui nihil facit He that does nothing cannot be said to be help'd Unless we in these instances do our part of the work it will be no wonder if we lose his part of the co-operation and supervening blessing He that comes under the Bishops hands to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost will come with holy desires and a longing Soul with an open hand and a prepared heart he will purifie the House of the Spirit for the entertainment of so Divine a guest he will receive him with humility and follow him with obedience and delight him with purities and he that does thus let him make the objection if he can and tell me Does he say that Jesus is the Lord He cannot say this but by the Holy Ghost Does he love his Brother If he does then the Spirit of God abides in him Is Jesus Christ formed in him Does he live by the laws of the Spirit Does he obey his commands Does he attend his motions Hath he no
sin 673 n. 47. M. Malefactors BEing condemned by the customs of Spain they are allowed respite till their Confessor supposeth them competently prepared 678 n 56. Man The weakness and frailty of humane nature 734 n. 82. in his body soul and spirit 735 n. 83. and 486. Mark Chap. 12.34 explained 780 n. 26. Chap. 12.32 explained 809. Justin Martyr His testimony against Transubstantiation 258 § 12. and 522 523. His testimony against Purgatory 513 514. Mass. A Cardinal in his last Will took order to have fifty thousand Masses said for his soul 320. Indulgences make not the multitude of Masses less necessary 320 c. 2. § 4. Pope John VIII gave leave to the Moravians to have Mass in the Sclavonian tongue 534. Saint Matthew Chap. 26.11 Me ye have not always explained 222 § 9. Chap. 28.20 I am with you always to the end of the world explained ibid. Chap. 18.17 Dic Ecclesiae explained 389. Chap. 15.9 teaching for doctrines the commandments of men 471 472 477. Chap. 5.19 one of the least of these Commandments 615 616 n. 18. Chap. 5.19 explained ibid n. 18. Chap. 5. v. 22. explained 622 n. 34. Chap. 12.32 explained 810. Chap. 15.48 explained 582 n. 40 43. Chap. 5.22 shall be guilty of judgement 621 n. 34. Mercy God's Mercy and Justice reconciled about his exacting the Law 580. Merit Pope Adrian taught that one out of the state of Grace may merit for another in the state of Grace 320 321. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The difference between them 596 n. 1. Millenaries Their opinion how much it spread and prevailed in the ancient Church 976 n. 3. Miracles The miraculous Apparitions that are brought to prove Transubstantiation proved to be false by their own doctrine 229 § 10. Of those now-adays wrought by the Romanists 452. The Dominicans and Franciscans brought Miracles on both sides in proof both for and against the immaculate Conception 1019. Of false Miracles and Legends 1020. Miracles not a sufficient argument to prove a doctrine ibid. Canus his opinion of the Legenda Lombardica ibid. The Pope in the Lateran Council made a decree against false Miracles 1020. Montanus His Heresie mistaken by Epiphanius 955 n. 18. Moral The difference between the Moral Regenerate and Prophane man in committing sin 782 n. 33. and 820 n. 1. Mortal Sin Between the least mortal sin and greatest venial sin no man can distinguish 610 n. 2. Mortification It is a precept not a counsel 672 n. 44. The method of mortifying vicious habits 691 n. 10 11. The benefits of it 690. n. 6. Mysterie The real presence of Christ in the Eucharist like other mysteries is not to be searched into as to the manner of it too curiously 182 § 1. N. Nature OF the use of that word in the controversie of Transubstantiation 251 § 12. By the strength of it alone men cannot get to heaven 885. The state of nature 770 n. 1 2. c. 8. § 1. What the phrase by nature means 723 n. 48. By it alone we cannot be saved 737 n. 86. The use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 767 n. 35. Necessity Of that distinction Necessitas praecepti and medii 8. b. There is in us no natural necessity of sinning 754 n. 15. Nicolaitans The authour of that Heresie vindicated from false imputations 953 n. 17. Novatians Their doctrine opposed 802 n. 8. A great objection of theirs proposed 806 n. 24. and answered 807 n. 26. O. Obedience ARguments to prove that perfect obedience to God's Law is impossible 576 577 n. 15. ad 19. Obstinacy Two kinds of it the one sinful the other not so 951 n. 10. Opinion A man is not to be charged with the odious consequents of his opinion 1024. Sometimes on both sides of the Opinion it is pretended that the Proposition promotes the honour of God ibid. How hard it is not to be deceived in weighing some Opinions of Religion 1026. Ordination Pope Pelagius not lawfully ordained Bishop according to the Canon 98 § 31. A Presbyter did once assist at the ordaining a Bishop ibid. Ordo and gradus were at first used promiscuously 98 § 31. How strangely some of the Church of Rome do define Orders 99 § 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had Episcopal Ordinaâ—ion but not Jurisdiction 102 § 32. Presbyters could not ordain 102 § 32. The Council of Sardis would not own them as Presbyters who were ordained by none but Presbyters 103 § 32. Novatus was ordained by a Bishop without the assistance of other Clergy 104 § 32. A Bishop may ordain without the concurrence of a Presbyter in the Ceremony 105 § 32. Concerning Ordination in the Reformed Churches without Bishops 105 § 32. Saint Cyprian did ordain and perform acts of jurisdiction without his Presbyters 145 146 § 44. A Pope accused in the Lateran Council for not being in Orders 325 c. 2. § 7. The Romanists give distinct Ordination to their Exorcists 336. Origen His authority against Transubstantiation 258 § 12. Original sin In what sense it is damnable 570. How that doctrine is contrary to the Pelagian 571. Some Romanists in this doctrine have receded as much from the definitions of their Church as this Authour from the English and without offence 571. Original sin is manifest in the many effects of it 869. The true doctrine of Original sin 869 870 896. The errours in that Article 871. There are sixteen several and famous opinions in the Article of Original sin 877. Against that Proposition Original sin makes us liable to damnation yet none are damned for it 878 n. 5. 879 n. 6 7. The ill consequence of the mistakes in this doctrine 883 884. If Infants are not under the guilt of original sin why are they baptized That objection answered 884. The difficulties that Saint Augustine and others found in explicating the traduction of original sin 896. The Authour's doctrine about Original sin It is proved that it contradicts not the Ninth Article of the Church of England 898 899. Concupiscence is not it 911. Whether we derive from Adam original and natural ignorance 713 n. 22. Adam's sin made us not heirs of damnation ibid. nor makes us necessarily vicious 717 n. 37. Adam's sin did not corrupt our nature by a natural efficiency 717 n. 39. nor because we were in the loins of Adam 717 n. 40. nor because of the will and decree of God 717 n. 41. Objections out of Scripture against this doctrine answered 720 n. 46. Vid. Sin The Authour affirmeth not that there is no such thing as original sin 747 748 n. 1. He is not singular in his doctrine 762 n. 24 26. The want of original righteousness is no sin 752 n. 10. In what sense the ancient Fathers taught the doctrine of Original sin 761 n. 22. With what variety the doctrine of Original sin was anciently taught 761 n. 23. How much they are divided amongst themselves who say that Original sin is in us formally a sin 762 n. 25. Original sin
damneth not 756 n. 16. The sum of the doctrine of Original sin 757 n. 5. Clemens Alexandrinus in the opinion of Vossius understood not Original sin 759 n. 20. P. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 WHat it signifieth 617 n. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What it and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie 809 n. 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The signification of it 617 n. 21. Pardons Of Pardons 316 318 c. 2. § 3 4. What is the use of so many hundred thousand years of pardon 317. The many follies about Pardons and the difficulties 319. Wherein the pardon of sin doth consist 484 485. At the day of Judgement a different pardon is given from what we obtain in this world 501. Several degrees of pardon of sin 839 n. 54. As our repentance is so is our pardon 839. Mistakes about Pardon and Salvation 789 n. 45. Some sins called unpardonable in a limited sense 806 n. 22. What is our state of pardon in this life 814 n. 57. and 816. In what manner and to what purpose the Church pardoneth Penitents by the hand of a Priest 838 839 n. 54. The usefulness of pardon by a Priest 841 n. 59. Parishes When the first division of them was 139 § 43. Episcopal Dioceses in the Primitive notion of them had no subordination nor distinction of Parishes 140 § 43. Which was first a particular Congregation or a Diocese 141 § 43. Passions What they are 870. How the Will and Passions do differ and where they are seated ibid. They do not rule the will 871. Their violence excuseth not under the title of sins of infirmity 792 n. 56. Make it the great business of thy life to subdue thy Passions 795 n. 67. A state of passion is a state of spiritual death 793 n. 58. A Passion in the soul is nothing but a peculiar way of being affected with an object 825 n. 19. The Passions are not immediately subject to commandment 826 n. 19. From what cause each Passion flows ibid. Passeover The Eucharist does imitate the words used at the Passeover as the institution is a Copy of that 201 § 5. The Lamb is said to be the Passeover of which deliverance it was onely the commemorative sign 211 § 6. Peace Truth and Peace compared in their value 883. All truth is not to be preferred before it 882 962. Pelagian How the doctrine of Original sin as here explicated is contrary to the Pelagian 571. Saint Augustine's zeal against the Pelagians made him mistake Rom. 7.15 19. pag. 775 n. 18. Of that Heresie 761 n. 23 24. How it is mistaken 761 762 n. 23. Pelagius's Heresie not condemned by any General Council 961 n. 31. Penances Of corporal austerities 858 n. 111. A rule for the measure of them 860 n. 114 115. Which are best and rather to be chosen 860 n. 114. Fasting Prayer and Alms are the best penances 860 n. 115. They are not to be accounted simply necessary or a direct service of God 860 n. 116. People Against popular Elections in the Church 131 § 40. How it came to pass that in the Acts of the Apostles the people seem to exercise the power of electing the Seven Deacons 131 § 40. The people's approbation in the choice of the superiour Clergy was sometimes taken how and upon what reason 132 § 40. The people had de facto no vote in the first Oecumenical Council 137 § 41. Perfection How Christian perfection and supererogation differ 590 591 n. 16. Perfection of degrees and of state 582 n. 41. ad 48. How perfection is consistent with repentance 582 n. 47. § 3. per tot Wherein perfection of state consisteth 583 n. 47. Perfection in genere actûs 584. what it is 584. The perfection of a Christian is not the supreme degree of action or intention 585 n. 47. It cannot be less then an entire Piety perfect in its parts 585 n. 48. The perfection of a Christian requires increase 589 n. 13. and 583 n. 44. Philippians Chap. 1. v. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Text discussed 87 § 23. Chap. 2. 12 13. Work out your salvation with fear explained 676 n. 55. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What these words in Saint Paul's style do import 767 n. 38. and 781. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The use of that word 723 and 767 n. 35. Picture Divers Hereticks did worship the Picture of our Lord and were reproved for it 545. A reply to that answer of the Romanists That the writings of the Fathers do forbid nothing else but picturing the Divine Essence 550 554. Against the distinction of picturing the Essence and the Shape 550 554. Pope John caused those to be burned for Hereticks that made Pictures of the Trinity 555. Pilgrimages They are reproved by the ancient Fathers 293 496. Place Picus Mirandula maintained at Rome that one body by the power of God could not be in two places at one time 222 § 9. How a spirit is in place 236 § 11. How a body is in place ibid. One body cannot at the same time be in two places 236 § 11. and 241. A glorified body is subject to the conditions of locality as others are according to Saint Augustine's opinion 237 § 11. Ubiquity is an incommunicable attribute of God's 237 § 11. and 241. The device of potential and actual Ubiquity helps not 237 § 11. Three natural ways of being in a place 237 § 11 Of being in a place Sacramentaliter 239 § 11. Bellarmine holds that one body may be in two places at once which Aquinas denieth 239 § 11. That one body cannot be at once in two distant places 236 and 241 § 11. That consequence If two bodies may be in one place then one body may be in two places denied 243 § 11. Against Aristotle's definition of place 244 § 11. When our Lord entred into an assembly of the Apostles the doors being shut it does not infer that there were two bodies in one place 245 § 11. Two bodies cannot be in one place 245 § 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The true notion of it 636 n. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How it differs from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 724 n. 53. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The meaning of it 636 n. 5. Pope A Text of Saint Cyprian's contrary to their Supremacy over the Bishops that succeed other Apostles 155 § 48. The authority of a Pope against publick Prayers in an unknown tongue 304. The Apostles were from Christ invested with an equal authority 308. By the Law of Christ one Bishop is not superiour to another and they all derive their power equally from Christ 309. When Bellarmine was to answer the authority of Fathers brought against the Pope's universal Episcopacy he allows not the Fathers to have a vote against the Pope 310 c. 1. § 10. Saint Cyprian affirms that Pope Stephen had not a superiority of power over Bishops that were of forrein Dioceses 310. Saint Gregory Bishop of Rome reproved the Patriarch of Constantinople for
be the best way of proving the immortality of the Soul 357. Aristotle believed the Soul of man to be divine and not of the body 718 n. 41. There is no difference between the inferiour and superiour faculties of the Soul 728 n. 68. and 825 n. 19. The frailty of man's Soul 734 n. 83. Spirit Whether the ordinary gifts of the Spirit be immediate infusions of faculties and abilities or an improvement of our natural powers and means 4 n. 15. ad 34. How the Holy Spirit did inspire the Apostles and Writers of the New Testament as to the very words 8 n. 32. What in the sense of Scripture is praying with the Spirit 9 n. 37. and 47. What a Spirit is as to nature 236 § 11. How a Spirit is in place 236 § 11. The Holy Spirit perfects our Redemption 1. b. The Spirit of God 1. b. The frailty of the spirit of man 735 n. 83. The rule of the Spirit in us 782. To have received the Spirit is not an inseparable propriety of the regenerate 786. What the Spirit of God doth in us 787. The regenerate man hath not onely received the Spirit of God but is wholly led by him 788. Sublapsarians Their Doctrine in five Propositions 872. It is not much better then the Supralapsarian 873. Against this way 886 n. 8. Substance What a Substance is 236 § 11. Aquinas says that the Body of Christ is in the Elements not after the manner of a Body but a Substance this Notion considered 238 § 11. Succession Of the succession of Bishops 402 403. Supererogation How it and Christian perfection differ 590 591 n. 16 17. What it is 786. Superlative This is usually exprest by a synonymal word by an Hebraism 909. Supralapsarians Their Doctrine 871. T. Tears A Man by them must not judge of his Repentance nor by any other one way of expression 850 n. 86. Temptation Every temptation to sin if overcome increases not the reward 661 n. 7. No man is tempted of God 737 n. 86. The violence of a temptation doth not in the whole excuse sin 743. Testament In a humane or Divine Testament figurative words may be admitted 210 § 6. A certain Athenian's aenigmatical Testament 210 § 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What they were 835 n. 44. Theodoret. His words about Transubstantiation considered 264 265 § 12. Theology The power of Reason in matters of Theology 230 231 § 11. It findeth a medium between Vertue and Vice 673. Thief on the Cross. Why his Repentance was accepted 681 n. 65. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What that word means 637 n 10. 1. Epistle to Timothy Chap. 4. v. 8. explained 860 n. 114. Chap. 5. v. 22. explained 808 n. 31. Chap. 5.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explained 152 § 48. and 166 § 51. Chap. 3.15 16. the pillar and ground of truth explained 386 387. Chap. 1.5 6. explained 949 n. 8. 2. Epistle to Timothy Chap. 2. v. 4. explained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 162 § 49. Epistle to Titus Chap. 5.15 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explained 780 n. 30. Tradition Christ and his Apostles made use of Scripture for arguments not Tradition 353. An answer to that Objection Tradition is the best argument to prove the Scripture to be the word of God therefore it is a better Principle then that 354. Oral Tradition was useful to convey matter of fact onely not Doctrines 354 355 358. Oral Tradition a very uncertain means to convey down a Doctrine 356. The Romanists have no Tradition to assure them the Epistle to the Hebrews is Canonical 361. The doctrine of the Scriptures sufficiency proved by Tradition 410. Some of the Fathers by Tradition mean Scripture 410 411 412. What Tradition is and what the word meaneth 420 § 3. When and in what case Tradition is an useful Topick 421. It is necessary in the Church because the Scripture could not be conveyed to us without it 424. The Questions that arose in the Council of Nice were not determined by Tradition but Scripture 425. The Tradition urged by the Ancients was not oral 425. The Romanists by their doctrine of Tradition gave great advantage to the Socinians 425. The doctrine of the Trinity relieth not upon Tradition but Scripture 425. That the doctrine of Infant-baptism relieth not upon Tradition onely but Scripture too 425 426. The validity of Baptism by Hereticks is not to be proved by Tradition without Scripture 426 427. The Procession of the Holy Ghost may be proved by Scripture without Tradition 427 428. The observation of the Lord's Day relieth not upon Tradition 428. Instances wherein oral Tradition has failed in conveyance 431. Saint Augustine's Rule to try Apostolical Traditions 432. Some Traditions said to be Apostolical have proceeded from the testimony of one man alone and he none of them 432. Of the means of proving a Tradition to be Apostolical 433. Of Vincentius Lirinensis his Rule to discern Apostolical Tradition 434. In the Question about the immaculate Conception Tradition is equally pretended on both sides 435. Traditions now held that are contrary to the Primitive Traditions 453 454. There is no Ecclesiastical Tradition for Auricular Confession 490. Of what use Tradition is in expounding Scripture 976. It is no sufficient medium to end Controversies 976 sect 5. per tot It was pretended by the Arians and divers other hereticks as well as the Orthodox 977 n. 3. The report of Tradition was uncertain even in the Ages Apostolical 978 n. 4. Tradition could not be made use of to determine the Controversie about Easter between the Churches of the East and West because both sides pretended it 979 n. 7. What Tradition it was the Fathers used to appeal to 979 n. 8. Transubstantiation The arts by which the Romanists have managed this Article Ep. Ded. to Real Pres. 174. It is acknowledged by the Romanists that this doctrine cannot be proved out of Scripture 187 § 2. and 298. How many figurative terms there are in the words of Institution 211 212 § 6. If this doctrine be true then the truth of Christian Religion which relieth upon the evidence of Sense is questionable 223 224 § 10. The Papists Answer to that Argument with our Reply 224 § 10. Bellarmine's Answer and a Reply upon it 226 § 10. If the testimony of our Senses in fit circumstances be not to be relied on the Catholicks could not have confuted the Valentinians and Marcionites 227 § 10. Irenaeus mentions an Impostour that essayed to counterfeit Transubstantiation long before the Roman Church decreed it 228 § 10. The miraculous Apparitions that are brought to prove Transubstantiation are proved to be false by their own doctrine 229 § 10. Picus Mirandula offered to maintain in Rome this Thesis Paneitas potest suppositare corpus Domini 230 § 11. How many ways the words of Christ Hoc est corpus meum may be verified without Transubstantiation 230 231 § 11. The folly of that assertion Credo quia impossibile est when applied to