Children of God Ch. 3.26 27. or by way of distinction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sons of God under great external priviledges of Christian freedom and also inwardly Sons and Heirs of life if they live as becometh the profession of Christianity whilst they who were under the Law were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Children under age being in bondage under the Elements of the World Gal. 4.1 3. And since all those who by Baptism do enter upon Christianity are entituled Sons of God which Sonship proceedeth not from their natural Generation but from their entrance into the Covenant of God persons baptized may according to the same sense be hence called regenerate and born again and such expressions also are sufficiently allowed and defended from the Scripture speaking of being born again of Water and of the Spirit Joh. 3.5 and calling Baptism the washing of regeneration Tit. 3.5 9. 4. Concerning baptized persons being called Heirs of Everlasting Salvation we may observe that those Members of the Church visible who shall be cast into outer darkness are yet called Children of the Kingdom Mat. 8.12 And they may well be called Heirs to whom the promise referring to the inheritance is confirmed and who are by Baptism received under the Seal of the Covenant of Grace which alone giveth right of inheriting Gal. 4.30 On this account the Gentile Church and every Member embracing the Christian Faith are called Fellow-Heirs and Members of the same body Eph. 3.6 they also being now by the Gospel grace received to be the Children of the Covenant And S. Peter exhorteth Husbands and Wives embracing Christianity to mind their duties as being Heirs together of the grace of life 1 Pet. 3.7 And when S. Paul exhorteth the Thessalonians to walk worthy of him who hath called them unto his Kingdom and Glory it is manifest that he speaketh to them all and even to them who were most negligent of the Christian life to whom such titles of dignity do belong from their Christian profession and being under the Gospel Grace though the inward priviledges exhibited under those Titles are only the portion of those who do perform the Conditions of the Gospel Covenant And upon the same account that baptized persons may be called the Sons of God they may be also thence concluded Heirs of Salvation 10. 5. On the same manner may Christians by Baptism be acknowledged to be regenerated by the Holy Ghost because the entrance into the body of Christ by Baptism is a priviledge obtained by the Grace of God or by the Holy Spirit For in Baptism the Minister acteth in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost and therefore as Calvin asserteth Baptism is to be received as from the hand of God Baptismus accipiendus est quasi ex manu Dei Wherefore in like manner as Baptism which is performed in the name of the Holy Ghost hath been shewed to regenerate persons may be properly said to be therein regenerated by the Holy Spirit to which agreeth that Phrase of being born of Water and of the Spirit Joh. 3.5 And as all gifts and diversities of operations in the Christian Church are derived from the Holy Spirit 1 Cor. 12.4 11. So particularly this gift or priviledge of being baptized and received into Membership with the body of Christ is acknowledged by the Apostle to flow from the holy Spirit unto whom all benefits of Divine Grace and favour are ascribed For the Apostle saith concerning every visible member of the Church of Corinth as is manifest from the design of that Chapter 1 Cor. 12.13 By one Spirit we are all baptized into one body to which place Zanchy referring saith Vi Spiritus Sancti baptizamur c. De Trib. Eloh Par. 1. l. 7. c. 5. Sect. 6. By the power of the Holy Ghost we are baptized of the Father into one body of Christ and thereby regenerated as well by the Spirit as by the Father and the Son And again Haec regeneratio seu insitio in Christum fit à patre sed per Spiritum Sanctum And this is agreeable to our Book of Articles Artic. 27. expressing that in Baptism the promise of forgiveness of sins and of adoption to be the Sons of God by the Holy Ghost are visibly signed and sealed 11. Besides these expressions the Scriptures speak of persons baptized being buried with Christ Col. 2.12 and being dead unto sin and buried with Christ by Baptism unto death and being planted together in the likeness of his death Rom. 6.2 4 5. And as Zanchy at large observed Tom. 7. de Persever c. 2. p. 118. 137 138. Notanda est Scripturarum consuetudo c. The usual way of the Scriptures is to be observed they call as many as give up their names to Christ and are baptized into his name persons justified sanctified and the Sons of God And in another place he saith All who are baptized are sealed unto Christ Tom 8. de Relig. Christ Fides De. Baptismo Sect. 1. as being now incorporated into him by the Holy Ghost that they may not be under their own power but under his by whom they are said to be taken into the fellowship of his Covenant and to be made one body with him and all Saints and to be partakers of all spiritual and heavenly good And in his next Paragraph he saith All who are baptized tales esse fieri Sacramentaliter vere dicuntur Sect. 2. are sacramentally and truly said to be such and to be made such 12. But it may be said that according to this sense these expressions of being regenerated born again members of Christ c. have but a low signification not suitable to the excellency and dignity of those names Ans 1. These expressions even as they are used at the Baptism of the adult do enclude a considerable hope and evidence of true spiritual Communion and Membership with Christ and of inward regeneration and a right to Eternal Life which are benefits certainly attained in Baptism by persons duly qualified for the receiving them 2. They declare the very high priviledge of the Christian calling the entrance into which is the way to the Communion with Christ and to the highest enjoyment of the priviledges of the Children and Heirs of God which those persons do enjoy who do neglect the Christian life And the Scriptures usually mention those who are under the tenders of Salvation by terms of great priviledge and dignity not to make them secure in the disregarding true piety but partly to amplify and exalt the Gospel grace and goodness of God whereby so great benefits are set before us partly to manifest our great engagements to exemplary Piety and Obedience from so great encouragements partly to testifie that if we perish by willful neglect of God and disobedience to the Gospel this will be to fall into dreadful misery out of that state which encluded excellent means and great opportunities of obtaining Eternal
be considered V. Ambr. de Abr. Patr. l. 1. c. 6. Drus in gen 18.3 V. Gen. 18.2 16. 22. that it is the usual practice even of the Holy Scriptures to call Angels by the name of such as they represent or resemble The two Angels that came to Sodom in the appearance of men are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men Gen. 19.12 The Angel that appeared to Manoah's Wife being asked if he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the man who appeared to the Woman declared that he was Jud. 13.11 the Angel in the Sepulchre who gave tidings of the resurrection of Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a young man Mar. 16.5 and the two Angels who appeared at the Ascension of our Lord are called by S. Luke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men in white apparel Act. 1.10 Now it is not agreeable to religious piety to condemn such ways of expression as evil and sinful which are allowed in the holy word of God nor is it unseemly for an holy Angel to owne that manner of expression which the holy Spirit himself useth And besides this Estius in loc diffic Scrip. in Tob. that which is hinted by Estius may well be admitted that the name of Azarias the Son of Ananias might be taken by the Angel upon himself to express by the signification of these names what was the business he came to effect Azarias signifying the help of God and Ananias the grace and favour of God that by the Angel the help of God was vouchsafed which is the effect of the Favour of God Obj. 5. The last Objection from Tobit and the most considerable is Tob. 12.15 Where the Angel is reported to say I am Raphael one of the seven holy Angels which present the Prayers of the Saints and go in and out before the glory of the holy one For the clearing of this place touching the Phrase of the seven holy Angels which yet is neither in Munsters Hebrew Copy of Tobit nor in the Syriack it may be taken for an definite number as the like Phrase is used Mat. 12.45 Mede Disc on Zech. 4.10 And Mr. Mede's Notion is known who asserteth it as an evident truth in his judgment and for which he giveth considerable proof that there are only seven principal Angels or Arch-Angels to which these words refer But whether these words be understood definitely for seven only or indefinitely for an uncertain number we have the like expression in the Canonical Scripture Zec. 4. 10. Rev. 5.6 7. What is here said concerning Angels presenting the Prayers of the Saints this being a point of truth or matter of belief may not be received accordin gto the judgment both of the ancient Church and our present Church upon the authority of an Apocryphal Book further than it is grounded upon the evidence of the Canonical Scripture and in such a ense only as is agreeable to the Doctrine of those holy Scriptures Indeed if these words be acknowledged to be the words of an holy Angel as they are related in this Book according to some versions then must they be as certainly true as if they had been spoken by a Prophet or Apostle But admitting that an holy Angel did converse with Tobit yet might his words be either misapprehended or in this passage misrepresented And that they are so may be hence with some probility conjectured because in this place Tob. 12.15 there is no mention of Angels presenting the Prayers of the Saints either in the Hebrew Copy of Munster or Fagius or in the Syriack Version or in the Latin which S. Hierome translated out of the Chaldee but it is only expressed in the Greek which our Translation followeth and this very place was above 1400. Years ago thrice cited by Cyprian Cypâ—â— de Orat. Domin de Mortalitate Adv. Jud. l. 1. n. 20. without this clause on this manner Ego sum Raphael unus ex septem Angelis Sanctis qui adsistimus conversamur ante claritatem Dei Indeed in the twelfth Verse both according to the Greek the Hebrew and the Latin the Angel spake of his bringing the remembrance of their Prayers before the holy one but even there the Syriack mentioneth no such thing 8. But because these words are in our version and taken in a restrained sense have been ordinarily admitted as a truth by divers ancient Christian Writers I shall give a double account in what sense these words may be taken agreeably to the Canonical Scriptures and the anciently received Doctrine in the Christian Church who owned not the Angels as Mediators nor did allow that Prayers should be put up to Angels 1. They judged that the holy Angels who are frequently present with us do join in our Religious worship and Prayers to God and as all who join in Prayers do present those Prayers to God so particularly do the holy Angels who enjoy a nearer Communion with God then we have yet attained Cont. Cels l. 5. p. 273 238. Lib. 8. p. 401. So Origen who expresly declareth against praying to Angels or to any who do themselves supplicate addeth afterward that the Christians particular Angel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presenteth the Prayers joining in them P. 420. and in another place of the same Book V. D. Hammond Annot in 1. Cor. 11.10 saith that many myriads of Angels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do join in Prayer with them who pray to God And as holiness disposeth an Angel to be ever ready to join in glorifying God so love maketh them ready to desire our good Luk. 15.10 since there is joy in the presence of the Angels of God over one sinner that repenteth And S. John in his Vision of the Churches worship declareth the holy Angels about the Throne to join in their Amen thereto Rev. 7.10 11 12. 9. 12. That the holy Angels being Gods Messengers as their name imports are both Ministers of conveying much good to us from God which divine Providence could bbestow without their Ministry and of representing our state and desires to God as his Servants and our friends which are fully and immediately manifest to God who is Omniscient And this may be performed partly as they are testifiers and witnesses of our actions Ad fr. in Erem Serâ—â— 68. with desire of our good and such S. Aug. judgeth them certainly to be and S. Paul giveth Timothy a charge before the elect Angels 1. Tim. 5.21 and speaketh of their presence in the Church 1. Cor. 11.10 and if Satan be the accuser of the brethren before God Rev. 12.10 the holy Angels may well be thought truly to represent what is good and partly as they are ministring Spirits attending on God and desiring our good they declare our Prayers not as Mediators but as Ministers non quia Deum doceant as S. Aug. expresseth sed quia voluntatem ejus super his consulunt desiring to know what commands God will give them to
lawful and expedient to be unlawful upon such evidence which they apprehend to be full and sufficient and thereupon cannot yield to practise these things it must be considered that it is but the common attendant of mans being fallible that he should out of respect to a greater good bear some outward inconvenience as the result even of his most innocent errours Thus in secular matters he who meerly mistaketh the right way of legal proceedings about his own cause may suffer some damage thereby and though his case may herein deserve pity yet it is better he should sustain this consequent of his own mistake than that no rules and orders of Law should be observed And the same may be said of matters Ecclesiastical 25. 2. If the Rules above-mentioned be observed they will direct how men may generally practise things lawfully enjoined according to right principles of Conscience But if they be not observed men must either resolve to follow their own imaginations in things they understand not which is a manifest way of errour and walking in the dark or else they must in these things practise according to the directions of those who speak most plausibly and takingly to their affections and are also strict in their lives but this both over-looketh the duty of obedience and the due relation to guides and teachers and is a very probable way to misguide men both in this and in other Cases By following this rule or rather by being taken in this snare many anciently embraced the monstrous positions of manicheism perswaded thereto by Faustus who had eloquium seductorium as S. Aug. ealleth it the enticing eloquence of seducing Aug. Conf. l. 6. c. 3 6 13. and whose words were observed by the same Father to have a more pleasing and delightful sweetness than the eloquence of S. Ambrose which was more learned and substantial Baron ad An. 377. n. 7. and those who embraced that impious Heresie were always talking of God and Christ and the holy Spirit the Comforter And to be guided in opinions or doctrines by such respect to persons can be no safe way of conduct because God hath not directed Christians thereto for as to expression Luther accounted Julian the Pelagian to be a better speaker and Orator than S. Augustine Luther Judicium de Erasmo Tom. 2. and as to practice Nazianzene declared even of the Macedonians who denyed the Divinity of the Holy Spirit Naz. Orat. 44. that they were persons whose lives were to be admired though their Doctrines were not to be allowed And therefore that more ancient rule of Tertullian is of necessary use Non ex personis probamus fidem sed ex fide personas that we are not to examine and esteem the Faith by the persons but the persons by their Faith Therefore the best way to be rightly established is by having a Conscientious regard in the first place to the evidence of manifest truth clearly discerned and in the next place to spiritual guides and teachers it being one end why God appointed Church Officers Eph. 4.11 14. that we be henceforth no more Children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of Doctrine SECT IV. Of Ecclesiastical Rites which have been abused in any corrupt way of worship 1. It is acknowledged that some gesture garment and action though not the same individually but of the like kind or physical nature established in the Church of England hath been ill used in the Church of Rome and this hath been much of old and by some of late objected against these appointments Now we do assert that the worship of God who is a jealous God is to be preserved pure and not mixed with any sinful defilement whatsoever whether of Idolatry or superstition and that things otherwise indifferent which either in the design of them who use them or in their own present tendency do directly promote or propagate such corruptions do in that Case become things unlawful Hence that which was in it self indifferent and was used in the Pagan Idolatry might upon good grounds be disclaimed as unlawful to Christians by Tertullian and other ancient Writers where the present use among Christians might appear to countenance and confirm those Idolatrous practices But that the use of things in themselves lawful and expedient and known to be ordered to a lawful end and purpose should be condemned as sinful because these things or the like are or have been otherwhere sinfully abused is a position by no means to be admitted Concerning which in general besides what shall be added concerning our particular Rites Ch. 4. I shall content my self with these three Observations 2. Obs 1. This position is not consistent with the principles of Christian practice It is a ground of hope in the Gospel Regeneration that those bodies and Souls which were once abused to the service of false Gods and Devils as according to Gr. Nazianzen was once the Case of S. Cyprian Naz. Orat. 18. and according to S. Paul of the Corinthians Thessalonians and others 1 Cor. 12.2 1 Thes 1.9 and to the service of sin as were the members of the Roman Church Rom. 6.17 18 19. may yet find acceptance with God in serving him Surely none can think that S. Pauls tongue was not to be allowed to preach the Gospel because it had been abused to blaspheme nor is it amiss observed by Durandus Dur. Rational l. 1. c. 1. Sect. 33. that among other Scriptures there is a principal use made in the Church of God of what was written by David who was guilty of Adultery S. Matthew who was a Publican and S. Paul who was a persecutor and blasphemer and among the Fathers of S. Augustine who was a Manichee And surely it is much more incredible that through the ill use of some the whole Species of actions gestures and things should become unlawful and unclean Can any possibly imagine that if other men have or do lift up their Eyes to Heaven to adore the Sun or Moon or bow down their knees to give religious worship to an Idol or to Saints and Angels this must render our lifting up our eyes to Heaven in the worshipping of God or bowing our knees in Prayer to him to be sinful Or may not one man lawfully make use of the light of the Sun to read the holy Scriptures because another maketh use of it to commit Villanies or did Judas his Kiss make the kiss of Charity sinful 3. As Sozomen reporteth Sozom. Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 single Mersion in Baptism was used by Eunomius who disowned the Trinity and the threefold Mersion which was the more general ancient Custom was abused in Spain as Walafridus Strabo relateth to express thereby a denyal of one Essence in the three Persons of the Trinity upon which occasion the Council of Toledo enjoined single Mersion in Spain Conc. Tol. 4. c. 5. still declaring according to S.
account also apparently hindred because these discords do oft divert many Ministers from the more directly profitable parts of their employment and make it necessary for them to spend much time in satisfying these scruples and answering objections with thoughtfullness of the ill consequents of these dissentions while they have other work enough to do in the worship of God the edifying his Church and the opposing other designs of those Enemies who seek to undermine it This is like the discovery of a fire breaking forth or inward mutinies appearing at that time when there is much necessary work to be done at home and many conflicts to be prepared for both at home and abroad which must needs put some considerable obstructions to those proceedings SECT III. Of the dangerous loss of the Churches Peace and Unity by this controversie and of the sin of Schism 1. That upon matters referring to this controversie the Peace and Concord of our Church doth much depend and that it is and hath been thereby evidently and extreamly hindred is so apparently visible that it needeth no proof and hath been on all hands generally confessed and complained of Now though it be every Christians duty to reject that Peace which is inconsistent with Piety yet there can be no discharge given to these great duties of Peace and Vnity where they may be practised consistently with godliness and truth To be truly Religious is to enjoy a healthful state of a sound mind where there is no lethargick stupidness but an inward and vigorous life which is not attended with distempered heats and inflammations but with a calm and sedate composure of a sober spirit for the fruits of righteousness are sown in peace Jam. 3.18 2. This duty is so considerable that the Holy Ghost seemeth scarce in any thing else so pathetically to command and urge our practical obedience as about the Churches Peace and Christian Vnity If there be any consolation in Christ Phil. 2.1 2. saith the Apostle if any comfort of love if any fellowship of the Spirit if any bowels and mercies fulfil ye my joy that ye be like minded being of one accord and of one mind Yea so generally is this duty pressed that there is scarce any Book of the holy Scripture chiefly of the new Testament but doth particularly enjoin or recommend it 3. If we value the favour and presence of God even that is no where so much to be found as where Christian Peace and Unity are most pursued Wherefore St. Paul commandeth 2 Cor. 13.11 Be of one mind live in peace and the God of love and peace shall be with you And the same Apostle declareth that the Church becometh an Holy Temple Eph. 2.21 22. and an habitation of God by being a building joined and united in Christ and fitly framed together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and some have not amiss observed that in the framing of that Greek word there is contained a treble band of Unity The Jewish Doctors observed that the Shecinah or Divine presence did dwell with the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the meek and quiet spirits but flyeth from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 them who were wrathful and angry Nazianz. Orat. 12. Nazianzen maketh it a considerable Character of one who is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 near of God and to what is Divine that he is a man who embraceth peace and hateth discord Ign. Ep. ad Eph. p. 20. 25. Edit Voll and Ignatius expresseth the great profitableness of being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in unspoted Vnity that thereby they may always have Communion with God and prevail against the power of the Devil 4. If the true exercise of the Christian life and duty be considered St. Paul declareth the divisions and discords of the Church of Corinth to be an evidence that they were carnal 1 Cor. 3.3 and to be the cause why their assembling to the Lords Supper was not advantageous but hurtful to them Ch. 11.17 18. and that the benefits of true Christian growth and encrease are to be expected in Christian Vnity Cyp. de Vnit Eccl. Eph. 4.16 Ch. 2.21 Col. 2.19 And in those words of our departing Saviour Hil. in Ps 119. Joh. 14.27 Peace I leave with you my peace I give unto you the ancient Fathers have conceived the great blessing of peace given by Christ to his Church and the duty of peace required in it to be chiefly contained Basil Mor. Reg. 50. Amb. de Joseph c. 13. To this sense St. Cyprian Hilary Basil Ambrose Chrysostome and Theophylact expound that place some of them including also the tranquillity of the Christian mind and the perfect peace of the life to come And from that Text St. Augustine concludeth Serm. 59. de Verb. Dom. that he cannot come to Gods inheritance who doth not observe Christs Testament and he can have no concord with Christ who will be at discord with a Christian 5. That the want of peace becometh the decay of piety may be also sufficiently confirmed by particular instances Ep. ad Cor. p. 3. Clemens observed concerning the Corinthian Church that while they enjoyed peace they had an unsatiable desire to do good and received a plentiful effusion of the holy Spirit they were religious in their supplications to God and harmless towards one another but upon their discord righteousness and peace was banished far from them they all who embraced divisions forsook the fear of God P. 5. and became dark sighted in the Faith and walked after evil affections And Nazianzen took notice that Religion had one flourished in the Church and calculating the season when its decay began Naz. Orat. 21. he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. that from the time this contradicting spirit as a terrible Disease infected the Church thence forward its beauty and glory did decline And there is another Country not unknown to us where like effects may be observed and after peace was lost injustice and unrighteousness like a mighty torrent did at once bear down all before it heretical blasphemies were frequently belched forth against all the fundamental Articles of the Christian Faith and all manner of vile affections were professedly served under the ranting and other names of pretendedly Religious Sects 6. Upon this account Christian peace was deservedly esteemed and honoured in the Primitive Church to which purpose the judgment and practice of that excellent spirited man Gr. Nazianzen is above other worthy our observation He disswadeth from that peace which is evil and sinful Orat. 12. but by no means alloweth any discharge to this great duty in other cases and declareth that his little Church where he was Bishop before he went to Constantinople continuing in Unity and concord when discord and much overspread the Christian World was reputed to be as the Ark of Noah which alone escaped the universal deluge and where Religion was intirely preserved Ruff. Prol. in Naz. Orat
every occasion but because in great Assemblies attentio auditorum per usitatas formulas non parum juvatur the attentiveness of the hearers is not a little helped forward by usual forms Consid Contr. Ang. c. 7. q. 2. The Walachrian Classis of Zealand do in like manner declare publick forms to be lawful and profitable for the helping and directing the attention of the auditors and the preserving Uniformity and that in good forms of Prayer Christians may pray with a humble sense of their wants with holy affection desire zeal faith and a Religious acting of the heart to God suitable to their own cases nobis expertis certissimum est is a thing say they most certain to us who have experienced it 12. But the surest way of tryal whereby forms of Prayer may be manifested to bring no disadvantage to the Church of themselves is from considering several arguments to that purpose as 1. because as I have shewed God himself prescribed a constant form of Prayer for the Jewish Offrings and a form of Priestly blessing and our Saviour directed the Lords Prayer as a form and presented a form of words for the administring Baptism but it must be at the least a great misapprehension and sin to think that the holy God and our blessed Saviour should command and enjoin what is of its own nature a hindrance to godliness Piety and true Religion and a disadvantage to the Church De Orat. Dom. S. Cyprian said well what Prayer can be more spiritual than that which was given to us by Christ by whom the holy Spirit himself was sent 2. Because it is generally acknowledged that the singing Psalms of Prayer or praise may be advantageously performed in a set form of words and the holy Scriptures are not the less edifying nor the less applicable to our selves because they are contained in a set form of words both in reading the Scriptures and in Prayer our hearts ought to be religiously moved towards God though in somewhat a different manner 3. Because all the ages of the Christian Church from the first Centuries have used them as an advantage to Religion and it is not at all probable that such excellently devout and judicious men as the fourth and fifth Centuries abounded with should be so stupid and dull spirited as not any of them to discern between the helps and hindrances of religious devotion in matters of most ordinary practice Wherefore though many mens minds may be most pleased and delighted with variety of expression there is no prejudice to piety from a set form further than this is caused by prejudice against such a form or by want of a Religious temper to join in it Here I shall note what Mr. Baxter observeth though he yield not so much use of forms as I plead for He saith Disp of Liturgy Prop. 10. the constant disuse of forms is apt to breed a giddiness in Religion and it may make men Hypocrites who shall delude themselves with conceits that they delight in God when it is but in these novelties and varieties of expression that they are delighted and therefore he adviseth forms to fix Christians and make them sound And the arguments in the foregoing Section do evidence the benefits of their constant use SECT III. Of the manner of composing the Prayers in our Liturgie chiefly of Responsals and short Prayers 1. Coming now to a particular consideration of that form of Prayer enjoined in this Church I shall wave such things where the force and matter of the objections is cut of by the alterations authoritatively made in the new establishment of our Liturgy and beginning with the Prayers themselves in the daily service there are two things especially to be treated of concerning their general frame and contexture The first is that the people are required to bear a part in this service not only in that they are by voice to join in the Confession and Doxology but that several Petitions are required to be expressed by the united voice of all the Assembly This is condemned by the Non-Conformists Except of Presbyter p. 4. who say that the Minister is appointed for the people in all publick services appertaining to God and that the people hereby seem to invade that sacred office the Scriptures making the Minister the mouth of the people to God in Prayer and intimating the peoples part to be only to say Amen 2. But since our Saviour condemneth the teaching or receiving for doctrines the commandments of men we may not embrace that as a Scripture doctrine where the Scripture delivereth no such thing Indeed under the law there was a special command of God that whatever legal Sacrifices were offered to him some few extraordinary cases only excepted that service was to be performed by the hand of the Priest but there is no constitution under the Gospel that spiritual Sacrifices of Prayer thanksgiving or the expression of a contrite broken heart may be offered up to God in no other way than by the mouth of a Minister though it be in a publick Assembly And what they assert is sufficiently to other mens understandings contradicted by themselves who allow the people liberty by their voices to join in singing those Psalms which contain both Prayers praises and Confessions 3. The truth is all such Prayers as have particular reference to the Consecration and Administration of the Sacraments and to the Ministerial absolution and benediction ought to be performed by the Minister alone though it be in a private place and upon a particular occasion because these things enclude the power of the Keys But as for others the rules of order and edification will direct that Prayers and Confessions which are considerably long should be expressed by one that the rest may the better understand and join in them and the authority of the Ecclesiastical office and its order and degree in the Church will require this to be performed by some in the Ministry For this we have the examples of the Scripture times to which agreeth the practice of the following ages De Eccles Dogm c. 30. and the author under S. Aug. name saith that those who are of authority in the Church tota fere Ecclesia secum congemiscente postulant precantur do put up their requests and Prayers almost all the Church joining with their sighs and groans Yet this practice doth no way disallow the peoples vocal joining in short Ejaculations or in other generally known Petitions since this may be of good use to unite their affections more firmly to quicken their minds into a greater fervency and to fix their spirits in a more diligent attending to the service they are about and more particularly to express their joining therein whereby they may both incite others and use their tongues as instruments of Gods glory 4. Indeed S. Paul speaketh of him who occupieth the room of the unlearned saying Amen at their blessing or giving of thanks
also from sin and their whole man from destruction And in this sense if this Petition should be supposed to enclude which in the proper sense of the words it doth not even Traitors and Robbers can we be blamed to pray even for them that God would preserve them from further sin and so keep them that they may have time and grace for repentance and that thereby they may be preserved from eternal destruction according to Mat. 5.44 12. That Petition that God would have mercy upon all men is condemned by some but is certainly commanded by S. Paul requiring us to make Prayers for all men for nothing can be prayed for which doth not enclude Gods mercy But such light objections which are easily made against the best words that the wisdom and piety of man can devise I think not worthy the further naming but shall now proceed to some other matters of greater moment SECT V. Considerations concerning the publick reading Apocryphal Chapters 1. The reading the Apocryphal Chapters in our Church hath been severely censured as if it was a forsaking the holy Scriptures which are the waters of life to drink of other unwholsom streams but that this matter may be rightly understood without prejudice or mistake it will be requistie to take notice of these following considerations 2. Cons 1. The excellent authority of the Canonical Books of Holy Scripture as they are distinguished from the Apocryphal is fully and clearly acknowledged by this Church in her Articles Art 6. where it declareth concerning the Apocryphal Books that the Church as S. Hierome saith doth read them for example of life and instruction of manners but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine which Article plainly disclaimeth them from being accounted Canonical Books of the Holy Scripture That the Jews do not owne these Books as any part of the Old Testament is manifest from their Bibles which contain them not and the particular evidences from the Jewish Rabbins against every one of those seven Books of the Apocrypha which are forged to be Canonical by the Council of Trent are some of them exhibited by Hollinger Thes Phil. l. 2. c. 2. Sect. 1. And that neither the ancient Church of the Jews before the destruction of Jerusalem nor Christ and his Apostles nor the several Ages of the Christian Church till some late Romish Councils did acknowledge or make use of these Books as Canonical is solidly and learnedly evidenced by the Bishop of Durham Schol. Hist of Can. of Scripture throughout with reference to the sixth Article of this Church Wherefore though it would be injurious to the holy Scriptures that any other Books which are not of divine inspiration should be accounted of equal authority with them yet it is far from being a dishonour either to them or to they holy Spirit who indited them if either these Apocryphal or any other good Books be esteemed useful and profitable and acknowledged to contain things that are true and good 3. Cons 2. It was can usual practice in the ancient Christian Church that some of these Apocryphal Books and other good writings besides the holy Scriptures were publickly read as instructive Lessons in their Assemblies but with such variation as the prudence of every Church thought meet In the second Century both the Fpistle of Clemens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the then ancient Custom In Eus Hist l. 4. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and some other Ecclesiastical Epistles were publickly read even on the Lords days for their instruction as Dionysius of Corinth testifieth And in Euscbius his time as well as before it Ibid. l. 3. c. 15. was the Epistle of Clemens publickly read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the greatest number of Churches Aug. de Civ Dei l. 22. c. 8. Hom. de Sanct. de S. Steph. Ser. 7. In the African Church in S. Augustins time the Histories of the passions of Martyrs v. Hom. 26. inter 50. and accounts of miraculous works by the efficacy of Christian Prayer were read in their Churches which Custom though it was very pious in the beginning was at last intolerably abused to the bringing in legend stories And more particularly the publick reading several Apocryphal Books as Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Tobit Judith and the Maccabees was ordered in one of the Carthaginian Councils in S. Augustins time 3. Carth. c. 47. Cont. Carth. c. 27. and that Canon was taken into their Code and besides what S. Hierom oft speaketh of these Books being read in the Church but distinguished from their Canon Ruffinus his contemporary who was first his friend and then his adversary having given first an acount of the Canonical Books proceedeth to these Books which he saith are not Canonical but Ecclesiastical Ruff. in Symb. as Ecclesiasticus Wisdom Tobit Judith c. and declareth the judgment of the ancient Fathers before his time concerning them quae omnia legi quidem in Ecclesiis voluerunt sed non proferri ad auctoritatem ex his fidei confirmandam that they would have them all to be read in the Churches but not to be produced as of authority to confirm any matters of Faith And that in after Ages these Books were read in the Church Isid de Eccl off l. 1. c. 11 12. Rab. de Inst Cler. l. 2. c. 53. is evident from Isidonss Hispalensis and in the very same words from Rabanus Maurus and might be shewed from very many others if that was needful 4. Cons 3. These Books called the Apocrypha have been greatly esteemed both in the ancient Church and by the chief Protestant Writers as very useful though not divine writings Divers of the ancients have cited them under the title of the holy Scripture using that Phrase in so great a latitude as to signifie only holy writings though not divinely inspired The Council of Carthage above-named doth there call them Canenical Books as doth also S. Augustin who was in that Council De Doct. Christ lib. 2. c. 8. using the word Canonical in a large sense for it is manifest from that and divers places of S. Aug. that they were not esteemed of equal authority with those Books properly called Canonical And therefore Cajetan for the interpretation of the right sense of there words Caj Com. in Esth in fin hath well declared concerning these Books Non sunt Canonici i. e. regulares ad firmandum ea quae sunt fidei possunt tamen dici Canonici hoc est regulares ad aedificationem fidelium or they are not Canonical as containing a rule to direct our faith an belief though they may sometimes be called Canonical as containing rules to better our lives In the Greek Church where they were not at least so much publickly read as in the Latin they were accounted useful for instruction as appeareth besides the Citations of the Greek Fathers from that very Epistle of Athanasius Fragm Epist 39. in
Minister for our good according to our Petitions Ep. 120. c. 22. Ep. 121. c. 9. This sense is oft expressed by S. Augustin and in the Book under his name De diligendo Deo and seemeth well to agree with the expressions of others of the ancient Fathers and with the notion of the ancient Jews as it is mentioned by Philo Phil. de Plant. Nae de Gigantibus and thus much seemeth to be encluded in these words of the New-Testament Heb. 1.14 Are they not all ministring spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall be Heirs of Salvation And Mat. 18.10 Take heed that you despise not one of these little ones for I say unto you that their Angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in Heaven And this notion expresseth an honourable ministration of the holy Angels De Cu. Dei l. 9.6 15. which hath respect to the Church of God but doth not allow them as S. Aug. would not to be accounted Mediators nor to receive Religious worship from us but to be honoured by us Charitate non servitute De Ver. Râ—elig c. 55. by an high degree of respectful love but not by Religious service and subjection 10. As to that passage of Ecclus. 46.22 Which mentioneth Samuel prophecying after his death it is sufficient here to observe that that that part of that Chapter is by our Kalendar directed to be omitted And from all this it may appear that nothing is in our service appointed to be read out of the Apocrypha which being rightly understood is any way hurtful or of ill influence upon practice Yet it is to be further noted that he who shall acknowledge that there is much good contained and no evil or sin advised in any of the Apocryphal Books is still far from admitting them to be equal to the Canonical Scriptures For though there may be divers Books free from actual error yet it is the Prerogative of the holy Scriptures alone to be immediately indited by that holy Spirit who can never err and to be tendered of God and received of his Church as the perpetual and infallible rule to manifest the will of God and the Doctrines of Faith SECT VII Considerations about that Translation of the Psalms used in the Liturgy 1. The next thing to be treated of is the ue of the Psalms according to the version in the Common-Prayer-Book concerning which Consid 1. The use of this Translation doth not require us to judge it the best English Translation For as formerly the sentences out of the Psalms before Morning Prayer and at the Communion were expressed according to another ancient and distinct translation so both the Epistles and Gospels and the sentences out of the Psalms at the beginning of Morning and Evening Prayer are now altered according to our last allowed English Translation which alteration seemeth to prefer that Translation as the best 2. Cons 2. The Translation of the Psalms used in our Liturgy is from the Hebrew to which it generally agreeth sometimes using the liberty of a paraphrastical stile And the Hebrew being the Original is doubtless more pure than any Translation which differeth fromit And though the Septuagint in the Book of Psalms which of all other hath been of most frequent publick use in the Christian Church doth vary less from the Hebrew than in any other Poetical Book of holy Scripture yet a Catalogue may be given of at least an hundred and fifty places wherein the Septuagint differeth from the Hebrew not in any Christian Doctrine but in the manner of expressing the sense of those Texts in all which the version in the Liturgy accordeth with the Hebrew and dissenteth from the Septuagint Indeed in some phrases and clauses our version followeth the Septuagint where the matter is unblameable and three entire verses which are not in the Hebrew Chaldee or Syriack are in the fourteenth Psalm added in this English Version according to the ordinary Copies of the 70 Grot. in Ps 14. and of many but as Grotius intimateth not all of the Aethiopick Vulgar Latin and Arabick and which are not in the Greek Manuscript from Alexandria but these Verses being the same with what is cited by the Apostle out of the Old Testament Rom. 3.12 13 18. cannot be disallowed as to the matter of them and the Psalms in the Liturgy being chiefly used as Hymns of praise or our words of blessing God agreeably to the practice of the Jewish and ancient Christian Church may well admit in that use of such a variation from the Hebrew Text. 3. If we observe the practice of the ancient Christian Churches we shall find that the Greek Church publickly used the Psalms according to the Septuagint and the Latin Arabian and Aethiopick Churches V P. Pithaeum de Latin Biblior Interpret had their Psalms of publick use translated from the Septuagint or with a little tincture from Lucian the Martyr wherein they also followed some evident corruptions of the Greek Copies as the Arabick in admitting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ps 17.14 the Aethiopick in reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ps 39.5 Ps 92.10 and the Vulgar in translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Syriack Version was translated out of the Hebrew but hath suffered some alterations by being revised according to the Septuagint from whence among other things it received its frequent use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but this Version hath many imperfections as chiefly its leaving out sometimes a whole verse as in Ps 34.9 and sometimes some part thereof as Ps 58.9 The result of this consideration is this that the Psalms publickly used in the Church of England are more fully agreeing to the Original Hebrew than any of those known Versions were which were used in the ancient Christian Churches and he who thinketh that he may not lawfully join or Minister in the Church of England because of our use of this version of the Psalms might have discerned greater cause in this very particular to have kept him at a greater distance from all the famous ancient Christian Churches in the World 4. Cons 3. The particular places most blamed in this Version of the Psalms do afford no sufficient cause when our superiours enjoin the use of this Translation to withhold our hearty consent thereto I shall instance in three places which are chiefly urged 1. One is Ps 106.30 where this Translation readeth it then stood up Phinees and prayed and so the Plague ceased But the Version in our Bibles rendreth it Then stood up PHinehas and executed judgment The word in the Hebrew is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Verbs of which Root being most used in the form Hithpahel do generally signifie to pray and in this form of Pihel they are rarely used and do sometimes signifie judging or the judge interposing between men and men to end their strife But
the institutions of Christ which is the first consideration I propound 4. Cons 2. The necessity of being duly qualified for the right receiving the Lords Supper doth not leave men at all excusable in their ordinary forbearing for the danger of performing any Religious duty carelesly is expressed in the holy Scriptures to quicken men unto the greater piety in their attendance upon those services but not to give them any liberty of neglecting them That slothful and wicked servant who hid his talent in a Napkin had at last no comfort by his pretended excuse for his neglect that he looked upon his Lord as an hard man whom he could not please Mat. 25.24 30. but was cast into outer darkness It was no way lawful for the Aaronical Priests to forbear to offer the Sacrifices which God had commanded because he had declared that he would be sanctified in them that come nigh him and had destroyed Nadab and Abihu for their undue approach Though God upbraided the Jews that they did steal and murder and commit adultery c. and come and stand before him in his House which was called by his name yet it was still the duty of every male among them religiously to present themselves there before the Lord three times in the year Deut. 16.16 and they were all enjoined to keep the Passover which encluded a yielding themselves to the Lord. 2. Chr. 30.8 and a preparing their heart to seek God v. 19. And when S. Paul had said 1 Cor 11.27 28 29. that whosoever shall eat his bread and drink this Cup of the Lord unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord this giveth no allowance to any to neglect this Ordinance but the next verse directeth but let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that Cup and the following words For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords body are laid down as an argument to shew that men ought to examine themselves and so to eat and drink 5. He that heareth or readeth the word of God or knoweth his will or professeth the name of Christ without obedience yielded thereunto doth encrease his sin and condemnation and yet hearing reading knowledge and profession of Christianity are necessary duties but that which it here only available and is every mans indispensable duty is to join the life of Christianity with its knowledge and profession So it is a duty to receive this Sacrament and to be careful not to receive it unworthily or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unsuitably to its nature and institution Wherefore this Ordinance encluding under the Elements of Bread and Wine an Heavenly Communion of the body and blood of Christ whose death is here represented as he offered up himself to God for us and established the New Testament with the assurance of all the blessings and promises thereof the worthy receiving this Sacrament will require that Communion with Christ be both heartily desired and piously embraced that the death and mediation of Christ be acknowledged as the only way of atonement and remission of sins that the Christian Religion established in the New Testament or Covenant be owned as the only true Religion and all others rejected that the promises of eternal life pardon and grace be valued and sought after as the chief objects of desire and hope and that the Christian practice which the New Testament requireth be undertaken and resolved upon with a circumspect care of repentance and amendment of what is amiss and with a peculiar respect to peace and love by reason of this Sacrament of Unity it being noted by S. Augustine De Consecr dist 2. c. Qui manducant that he who receiveth the Sacrament of Vnity and doth not hold the bond of peace doth not receive the Sacrament for his good but as a testimony against himself which was also the Doctrine of S. Paul 1 Cor. 11.17 18. And though there be too many who do not practise according to the necessary rules of Christianity it is absolutely and indispensably necessary for them that their lives be changed and amended that they may not only be fit to receive this holy Sacrament but that they may be fit to partake of the blessing of God and to avoid the dreadful miseries of everlasting torments and to live answerable to their Baptismal Covenant that they may be advantaged by their profession of Christianity And let any man consider whether it be not as unreasonable a Plea in the sight of God for any man to avoid the holy Communion because he is not willing to live according to the Christian rules when both these things are his duty as it would be in the sight of a Prince for a Subject to refuse to take the Oath of Allegiance upon pretence that he is enclined to undertake practices of Rebellion 6. Cons 3. The Doctrine of our Church and its Rules for Communion do not allow that any persons should come to the holy Sacrament otherwise than in a suitable and Religious manner but it jointly urgeth as the holy Scriptures do also the duty of coming and the necessity of coming preparedly Amongst our Writers Bishop Cranmer declared that we ought not unreverently and unadvisedly to approach to the Lords Table but we ought to come to that Board of the Lord with all reverence Def. of Cath. Doctr. of the Sacr. l. 3. c. 14. faith love and charity fear and dread Both Bishop Whitgift and Mr. Hocker in their defence of the Order for the Communion against T. C. allow that there may be cause of present forbearance from this Sacrament because of unfitness but this ought to be amended B. Whitg Tr. 9. c. 6. Tr. 15. c. 2. and that it is not desirable that men persisting in wickedness should be constrained to come to the Lords Supper Eccles Pol. l 5. c. 68. But it is needless to add other testimonies when the Communion Book it self in the first exhortation saith If any of you be a blasphemer of God an hinderer or slanderer of his word an adulterer or be in malice or envy or in any other grievous crime repent you of your sins or else come not to that holy Table lest after the taking of that holy Sacrament the Devil enter into you as he entred into Judas and fill you full of all iniquities and bring you to destruction both of Body and Soul Wherefore it is acknowledged in our Church that the receiving the Holy Communion is not a right Christian action where it is not performed with a Christian spirit and disposition and partly upon this account and partly for the disciplinary discountenancing of wickedness both the twenty sixth Canon and the Rubrick before the Communion do require that no notorious evil liver or malicious man before their amendment be suffered to come to the Lords Table and consistently herewith must that
them but this as some other ways of reserving them as found to be of ill use Hesych in Lev. 8. Hesychius speaketh of a custom of burning them which custom I suppose took its original from those Commands of God whereby he enjoyned the remainder of the Jewish Passcover and of the Sacrifices of thanksgiving and some others to be burnt with fire Exod. 12.10 Lev. 7.15 16 17. The Council of Mascon directed them to be given in the Church Conc. Matisc 2. c. 6. to such Christians as kept their Fasts there on the fourth and sixth days of the week which were the old stationary days The direction in our Rubrick is ordered with as much prudence as any of these if it be not to be preserred before them all for as there is no reason to doubt but that they may be eaten so can there be no reason produced why the Communicants may not as well eat them as any other persons 3. The eating these Elements in the Church by the Communicants out of a reverent respect to the Sacrament for which they were consecrated is allowable and no way blameable Both our Articles and our Rubrick after the Communion Service do acknowledge that the sacramental Bread and Wine even in the Sacrament do remain in their proper substances which with other expressions in our Liturgy sufficiently exclude the Romish corruptions Yet since we believe this Sacrament to be an excellent Gospel Ordinance I suppose that out of respect thereunto devout Christians do generally acknowledge that even the Vessels particularly appointed for the Bread and Wine at the Communion and the Communion Table should not be used at mens ordinary meals and certainly a due respect to Gods Ordinance for which they are set apart will not allow this which was also condemned by the ancient Canons and it appears very reasonable that those Elements which were consecrated for the Sacrament may be used with at least as much reverence as the Communion Cup or Patine De Consc l. 4. c. 31. Sect. 3. And when Amesius truly asserteth that it necessarily followeth from the Religious honour of God that those things which have any respect unto Gods Worship ought to receive from us a privative honour even when they are not used to a holy use as heh instanceth in Bread and Wine left at the Communion which is to be honoured privatively that is care ought to be taken that it be not used contemptibly and sacred Phrases as sacramental words c. not to be used in sport even hence it will follow that they may be used with a relative honour that is so used as to express a reverence to those holy Ordinances to which they bear relation SECT III. Of the saving Regeneration of Infants in Baptism and the grounds upon which it may be asserted 1. THE next Office in the Book of Common Prayer is that of Baptism where that which requireth principal consideration is that every baptized Infant is declared Regenerate and thanks is returned to God after Baptism that he hath regenerated this Infant by his holy Spirit and the beginning of the Catechism declareth that the Child in Baptism was made a Member of Christ a Child of God and an Inheritor of the Kingdom of Heaven These expressions have been somewhat differently understood some applying them to a saving Regeneration of every baptized Infant others to a federal Regeneration or a Regeneration Sacramento tenus And I suppose it evident that if it can be certainly proved that every baptized Infant is savingly regenerated or if on the other side all the expressions in the Liturgy can be fairly and probably interpreted of a federal Regeneration which is generally acknowledged there can be then no doubt but all these expressions may be fitly and allowably used shall treat of both these senses because they both plead an allowance in our Church and indeed the latter doth not necessarily destroy but may well consist with the former 2. Beginning with the former I shall first shew what evidence there is that the acknowledging a saving regeneration of every Infant baptized hath been the Doctrine publickly received in this Church ever since the Reformation This is the more probable sense of that Rubrick before the Catechism in the former Book of Common Prayer and that at the end of Baptism in the present Book both which declare that Children baptized are undoubtedly saved that is as the first Book of Edw. VI. and our present Book do express it if they dye in their infancy and before they commit actual sin And our Book of Homilies declareth Hem. of Salvation of Mankind by Christ Part. 1. that Infants being baptized and dying in their infancy are by his Christs Sacrifice washed from their sins brought to Gods favour and made his children and inheritors of his Kingdom of Heaven To these I shall and what Bishop Cranmer who was a great Instrument in our Reformation and Bishop Juell a principal Defender thereof write concerning Baptism complying with the sense here expressed Bishop Cranmer saith Of the Lords Supper lib. 1. c. 12. For this cause Christ ordained Baptism in water that as surely as we see feel and touch water with our bodies so assuredly ought we to believe when we be baptized that Christ is verily present with us and that by him we be new born again spiritually and washed from our sins and graffed in the stock of Christs own body so that as the Devil hath no power against Christ so hath he none against us so long as we remain graffed in that stock Def. of Apol. Part. 2. c. 11. Sect. 3. c. Bishop Juell declareth the Doctrine of the Church of England thus We confess and have evermore taught that in the Sacrament of Baptism by the death and blood of Christ is given remission of all manner of sin and that not in half or in part or by way of imagination or by sancy but whole full and perfect of all together so that now was S. Paul saith There is no condemnation to them that be in Christ Jesus 3. But it must be here noted that by the saving regeneration of baptized Infants it is not intended that their understandings or wills are guided to an high esteem and love of God and the Christian life which the Infant state is not capable of but this regeneration is mainly relative so that being regenerated by Baptism they are no longer the Children of wrath and under the curse due to original sin but are brought into a new state to be members of the body of Christ and thereby partakers of the favour of God And though some small seeds of gracious disposition may be in Infants who are capable thereof in the same manner as they are of corruption yet that regeneration or renovation of an Infant in Baptism whereby he is received into a state of remission and Salvation is very different from the regeneration of an adult person whereby his
soul and life is moulded according to the form of the Christian Doctrine and brought into a conformity to the Image of God Aug. de Trin. l. 14. c. 17. and so S. Augustine distinguisheth them Renovatio saith he quae fit ad imaginem Dei non momento uno fit sicut momento uno fit illa in baptismo renovatio remissione omnium peccatorum And even this benefit of Infant Baptism is vouchsafed by the Holy Ghost for by one Spirit we are all baptized into one body 1 Cor. 12.13 And it must needs be the work of God and of his Grace to accept an Infant born under Original sin into his favour or as S. Augustine expresseth it Aug. Retract l. 1. c. 13. By the grace of God the guilt of all sins that are past is pardoned in them who are baptized into Christ which is done by the Spirit of Regeneration and in the Adult their will is cured by the Spirit of Faith and Charity 4. Now that all baptized Infants are savingly regenerated is asserted upon such Arguments as these 1. Because Baptism doth evidence every person rightly baptized according to Gods will to be received by the will of God to be under the terms of the Covenant of Grace but he who is rightly received to be under the Covenant of Grace is in the favour of God if the conditions of that Covenant on his part be performed nor doth any thing exclude him from that favour besides the sinning against or the breach of those conditions But Original sin of which alone Infants are guilty was supposed to be the state under which man lay when the Covenant of Grace was tendered to him and so is no breach of the conditions of that Covenant but may be pardoned by the benefits thereof And no condition can be assigned to be performed on mans part by or concerning an Infant born in the Church more than is encluded in its being baptized which I shall further clear when I shall treat of the condition of believing which is generally propounded even as the being circumcised was of old the performing the condition of Gods Covenant by the seed of Abraham Gen. 17.7 10 11 12 14. faith and obedience being also necessary in persons adult But that Baptism doth admit the person baptized aright to be under the terms of the Covenant of Grace is manifest because they are baptized into Christs body 1 Cor. 12.13 They are baptized into Christ and have put on Christ Gal. 3.27 And are baptized into the death of Christ Rom. 6.3 and even Circumcision it self was a seal of the Righteousness of Faith Rom. 4.11 5. 2. The Gospel Doctrine and the holy Sacraments do convey saving benefits to them who received them aright and are partakers of them with due qualifications That Infants born in the Church are fitly qualified to receive Baptism is not only manifest from the general practice of the Church from the Apostles times in baptizing Infants but also from the favour of God expressed towards them in the Covenant of Grace and in that Circumcision was administred to Infants which was a Seal of the Covenant of Grace And as the Gospel Doctrine bringeth Salvation to him who rightly receiveth it and the Lords Supper tendereth Christ and remission of sins to the worthy partakers thereof so even Baptism conveyeth saving benefits to them who receive it with due qualification hence S. Paul calleth in the washing of regeneration by which God saved us Tit. 3.5 S. Peter commanded them who were pricked in their hearts to repent and be baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus for the remission of sins Act. 2.37 38. and Ananias directed Paul to be baptized and wash away his sins Act 22.16 Which places both shew that Baptism doth convey remission of sins to them who are qualified aright to receive it and also that they who were under a due preparation to receive remission of sins by Baptism were not partakers thereof without Baptism And indeed no adult person is ordinarily capable of remission but by joyning inward faith and repentance with outward Baptism as is expressed Mar. 16.16 Act. 2.38 Baptism being the instituted Ordinance wherein they must declare repentance in coming to Christ and profess faith in accepting the Gospel and receive gracious Union with Christ Wherefore since Baptism doth bring the due receiver thereof into a saving estate infants must also be acknowledged due receivers of Baptism and rightly admitted thereto 6. 3. Christ hath appointed his word and Sacraments as the ordinary means of Salvation to the Members of his Church Eph. 5.26 That he might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word But infants dying in infancy are capable of no other Ordinance of Christ but Baptism and therefore that is to them the only means of Salvation And it seemeth injurious to the grace of God to imagine that he appointeth any only means which is ineffectual to the end though it be complyed with as much as is possible it should be by them who make use thereof but the infant state can admit no more but that they should be passive recipients both of this Ordinance â—â—d of Divine Grace and therefore thereby 〈…〉 obtain Salvation Now that Baptism is designed to be a means of Salvation besides the Scriptures above-mentioned is expressed by S. Peter 1. Pet 3.21 who saith that Baptism now saveth us And whereas that Apostle presently addeth that it is not the putting away the filth of the flesh but that answer of a good Conscience towards God he doth not thereby look off from the Sacrament of Baptism to something else as a means of Salvation but he thereby declareth that this Christian Sacrament is not as the Jewish Purifications only a putting away the filth of the flesh but it is a professed engaging of man to God or to the Covenant of Grace 7. 4. If baptized Infants born in the Church be not in their Baptism in a state of Salvation it will be hard to shew what benefit any Infant dying in his Infancy can enjoy thereby Now to assert that they have no benefit by Baptism would be to render that Ordinance to them useless and of no effect which the Scriptures do declare to be of a saving nature and to enclude a being buried with Christ Col. 2.12 Now if it be said that by Baptism they become members of Christ what advantage can this be to them if this Membership doth not enclude the favour of God and a state of Salvation If it be said that it may be hoped that God will save the baptized infant this indeed may be hoped with confidence if Baptism bring them into a state of salvation but if Baptism supposing always the Grace of God tendred therein do not enstate them in salvation them must they be saved only by Gods extraordinary grace not by the ordinary grace of his promise to them who embrace aright the means of salvation or by the grace
calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be sanctified without any sense or apprehension thereof Wherefore S. Aug. did truly assert De peccat Mer. Remis l. 3. c. 5. that of old the whole Church did firmly hold parvulos fideles originalis peccati remissionem per Christi baptismum consecutos esse that little Children of the Church of Christ do obtain remission of original sin by the Baptism of Christ 3. Among the publick Writings of the Protestants the first Augustan Confession asserteth Conf. Aug. 1530. Art 9. that Children being offered to God in Baptism are received into the favour of God and condemneth the Anabaptists who say that Children may be saved i. e. ordinarily without Baptism to which the larger Confession 1540. addeth that concerning Children baptized in the Church of God Christ said Mat. 18. It is not the will of your Father which is in Heaven that one of these little ones should perish Conf. Saxon de Baptism The Saxon Confession fully expresseth the saving regeneration of baptized Infants and that these words I baptize thee c. are as much as to say By this mersion I testifie thee to be washed from thy sins and to be now received by the true God who is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ who hath redeemed thee by his Son Jesus Christ and sanctifieth thee by the Holy Ghost and it declareth that at that time Infants are truly received of God and sanctified and to the same purpose is the Confession of Frederick the third the Prince Palatine Conf. Helv. c. 20. And the general expressions of the efficacious saving vertue of Baptism Conf. Gal. c. 35. in the Helvetick French and Scotish Confessions Conf. Scot. Sect. 21. are such that the state of Infants cannot be excluded therefrom And the Geneva Catechism declareth that By baptism we are Cloathed with Christ and receive his Spirit unless by rejecting the promises which are there tendered to us we render them unfruitful to our selves 4. To give an account of the particular judgments of Protestant Writers would be a needless difficult and endless undertaking Divers of them manifestly assert the saving regeneration of all baptized Infants others do embrace another notion of baptismal regeneration which I shall afterward mention and some from the use of different ways of expression and from what they speak with just earnestness against the errors of the Church of Rome are sometimes misunderstood Cath. Orthod Tr. 3. qu. 3. Sect. 1. Rivet averreth that there is no true Protestant who doth not approve that of Aquinas 12ae q. 81. Art 3. That Original sin is done away in Baptism as to the guilt thereof and he there saith that it is most false that Calvin and Beza ever said that some baptized Infants are damned Ibid. Sect. 9. dying in their infancy before they commit any actual sin unrepented of Absters Cal. Calum 7. and the same thing is with much passionate earnestness asserted by Beza himself writing against Tilemannus Heshushius Whit. ad Rat. 8 m Camp And Dr. Whitaker against Campian undertaking herein to declare the Protestant Doctrine saith In baptism we receive remission of sins we are entred into Christs Family we have the Holy Ghost given us we are raised to certain hope of eternal life what hath your Baptism saith he to Campian that ours hath not hath it grace hath it the merits of Christ hath it salvation all these hath ours And against Duraeus in defense of his answer to Campian he saith To the adult Faith is necessary Cont. Duraeum l. 8. that Baptism may be a saving Sacrament but to little ones because they are the Children of believing Parents and are encluded in the Covenant it is the Sacrament of Salvation though they by reason of their age cannot believe where by the Children of believing Parents his foregoing words declare him to mean Children born within the Church in distinction from Turks Jews and Ethnicks These words do express an actual regeneration of baptized Infants by the grace of God and the application of the merits of Christ for remission and Salvation but they are very hardly reconcileable with divers passages in the posthumous Writings of that learned man especially his Praelections de Sacram. Qu. 4. c. 2 3. SECT V. The Objections against the saving regeneration of Infants in Baptism considered 1. Against all baptized Infants being savingly regenerated by their Baptism it may be first objected That the Scriptures declare the general necessity of Faith in order to Salvation and therefore Infants unless they believe cannot be saved by being baptized In answer to this it being a matter of obscurity I shall relate different ways of solution Aug. de pec Mer. rem l. 3. c. 2. 1. Many account Faith the condition for adult persons Aug. Ep. 23. but not for Infants but this is discarded by others both ancient and modern Kemait Exam. Part. 2. de Baptism partly because by the general practice of the Church at Infant-Baptism of which S. Aug. taketh notice it was declared in the Infants name as it is in our Liturgy Credo or I believe and partly because the condition of Faith seemeth so generally expressed in the Gospel that they judge that Infants cannot be thence excluded though the Faith for the infant state cannot be the same with what is required from the adult 2. Divers others as Augustine Bede Hugo de Victore Amalanus and Walafridus Strabo think baptized Infants to be saved by the Faith of the Church into which they are baptized or by the Faith of them who offer them unto Baptism or as many Protestants and also the Catechismus Romanus express it credunt parentum fide by the faith of their Parents as the Syrophaenician Womans Daughter was healed by her Mothers Faith Mat. 15.28 and the sick of the Palsie was Cured by the Faith of them who brought him to Christ Mat. 9.2 But this doth not satisfie Kemnitius and some others partly because it is every ones one Faith which is the Gospel condition for his Salvation though anothers Faith may be instrumental for the procuring of divers blessings and partly because this answer giveth no good account of the Ecclesiastical usage of owning or professing the Creed in the Infants name at the time of his Baptism 3. Others assert that there is some Faith wrought in Infants Inst lib. 4. c. 16. Cath. Orth. Tr. 3. qu. 1. Sect. 12. which Calvin and Rivet say is not the act but the seed of Faith by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and Kemnitius asserteth this operation of the Holy Ghost in Infants to be that they call Faith though they know not what kind of operation it is 2. 4. To these I shall add what I conceive most probable That since Infants are not capable of the Faith of adult persons which cometh by hearing and consisteth in the knowledge and assent of the mind
Ecclesiastical Authority because they were so wonderfully inspired and guided by the holy Spirit yet if it can be shewed that the Apostles themselves appointed external Rites attendant on the service of God which were of an alterable and mutable nature this will manifest that the use of such things is well consistent with the Gospel worship and thence it will follow that the Christian Church hath liberty as well as the Jewish Church had to determine such observations since God hath give no special command to abridge that liberty Here I shall consider 2. 1 The holy kiss or kiss of Charity It was a common friendly salutation for men to kiss each other both among the Jews and in other Eastern Countries as hath been observed from Xenophon and Herodotus and was also used in the Western parts of the Empire in the time of Tiberius But both S. Paul Rom. 16.16 and and S. Peter 1. Pet. 5.18 required the practice of this holy kiss as a peculiar Christian Rite and observation but when and how it was used we must discover from the relation of the ancient Christian Writers That it was used at their publick Assemblies at the time of their solemn Prayers Grot. in Rom. 16. c. 16. is proved by Grotius from the testimonies of Justin Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus and Tertullian who calleth it signaculum orationis the seal of Prayer and speaking of it as it was their ordinary expressive attestation of Unity Peace Tertul. de Orat. c. 14. and Love he saith Quae oratio cum divortio Sancti sâ—uli integra What Prayer can be perfect which is separated from the holy kiss Cassand Liturg. c. 39. And Cassander hath evidenced from S. Austin Innocent and divers other particular Authors and ancient Offices that it was especially used at the time of the holy Communion sometimes before but for the most part after the Consecration of the elements and before their distribution by which Ceremony Christians expressed their consent to those administrations and their love to each other and of this kiss at the Lords Supper Calvin supposeth S. Paul to speak Calv. in 1 Cor. 16. â—0 when he commandeth the Corinthians to greet one another with an holy kiss Indeed several modern Ritualists being willingly so short sighted as to discern no further than the dusky and false light of the Romish Decretals doth discover do ascribe the use of the kiss 〈◊〉 the Communion to a later original some from Leo the second others from Innocent the first but this appeareth to be a fond and vain imagination because this Custom was not only mentioned by S. Chrysostome but evidently referred to by the Laodicean Council Conc. Laod. Can. 19. Just Mart. Ap. 2. and is also expressed by Jestin Martyr in his Apology written within less than an hundred years after the Apostolical Epistles of S. Paul and S. Peter Yet that this was an external mutable Rite is so far agreed upon and acknowledged as that it is generally disused because through the vanity of mens minds it was discovered at length to promote impurity and obscenity rather than holiness and Christian love And the Romish Custom introduced instead hereof of kissing the tabellam pacis or the Table of Saints Pictures is quite another thing from the Apostolical Rite and cannot be excused from superstition from the relation it beareth to their Doctrine of the Adoration of Saints And if we enquire how this ancient use of the holy kiss was most ordinarily practised it is manifest from the testimony of the Author of the Constitutions Const Apost l. 8. c. 11. concerning the more early times of Christianity and from Amalarius describing its use about 800. Years ago Amalar. de Deccl Offic. l. 3. c. 32. that it was not promiscuously used by men and women towards each other but separately and distinctly by men towards one another and by women among themselves alone 3. 2. Their Agapae or Feasts of Charity which were appointed in part for the relief of the poor Zonar in Conc. Trul. 74. Gang. 11. Chrys in 1 Cor. but especially to express continue and increase Christian love and fellowship which is also one great design of the Lords Supper were in and after the Apostles times used either immediately before as some affirm concerning some Churches or immediately after it as others assert and which was the more general practice and even in the places of publick Assemblies That they were celebrated at the same time and place with the Lords Supper hath been usually observed and collected from 1. Cor. 11.20 23. and from Act. 2.42 46. and from thence appeareth to have been used as an Ecclesiastical Rite The use of these Feasts of Charity was mentioned with approbation by S. Jude v. 12. and according to some Greek Copies by S. Peter 2 Pet. 2.13 and amongst the ancient Writers by Ignatius Ep. ad Smyr Tertullian Apol. c. 39. Clemens Alexand. Paedag l. 2. c. 1. Orig. Cont. Celsum l. 1. Conc. Gangr c. 11. and by S. Chrysostom Augustine and divers others some placing them as the Passover was eaten before the Lords Supper others comparing them to the Jewish Feasts eaten after the Passover But when these Feasts of Charity became greatly abused the Canons both of Provincial and general Councils Conc. Laodic c. 28.3 Carth. 30. Trul. 74. excluded them from the publick places of Church Assemblies and as Baronius observeth they were abolished in Italy by S. Ambroses Authority as they were also not long afterwards in Africa by S. Augustine and the other Bishops of the Carthaginian Province Baron an 377. n. 14 Aug. Ep. 64. and they became generally disused though some appearances thereof may possibly be discerned in later times in the Communion upon Maundy Thursday in divers Churches and in the practice of the Greek Church upon the day of the Resurrection or Easter Day Cassand Liturg. c. 4. when as Cassander relateth after the holy Communion allatis in Ecclesiam epulis communiter convivantur they have a common Banquet brought into the Church of which they all partake 4. But against that part of this observation that the Agapae were anciently joined with the holy Communion it may be objected Albasp Obj. lib. 1. Obj. 18. that Albaspinus doth on purpose undertake to prove that in Tertullians time the Agapae and the Eucharist were not observed together but that the former was celebrated at night from Tertul Apol. c. 39. and the latter in the Morning from Tertul. lib. 2. ad Vxor c. 5. and de Coron Mil. c. 3. But in answer to this we may consider that in that very observation Albaspinus himself admitteth with a Non inficias iverim that the Agapae were in the time of the Apostles celebrated with the Eucharist and concerning the time of Tertullian he neither undertaketh to prove that there were no Agapae in the Morning nor no Communion in the Evening for those very words of Tertullian de
them but even to urge them to approve and allow what is really sinful and is rightly so esteemed by them 20. But the main objection to be here considered is that S. Paul Rom. 14.1 c. commandeth to receive them who are weak in the Faith but not to doubtful disputations Commiss Papers p. 70. and alloweth no judging or despising one another for eating or not eating meats and for observing or not observing days and hence it is urged that no such things indifferent ought to be imposed but to be made the matter of mutual forbearance Now it must be granted that Christian Charity requireth a hearty and tender respect to be had to every truly conscientious person so far as it may consist with the more general interest of the Church of God yet it is manifest that the Apostle is not in this Chapter treating about and therefore not against the rules of order in the service of God But in order to a right understanding of this place I shall note three things 21. First that these directions given by the Apostle in the beginning of this Chapter so far as they give allowance to the different practices therein mentioned have a peculiar respect to those times only of the first dawning of Christianity when most of the Jews who believed in Christ did as yet zealously retain the Mosaical Rites abstaining from certain meats as judging them unlawful and unclean Rom. 14.2 14. and observing Jewish days and times out of a peculiar esteem for them v. 5. and yet this for a time was in this Chapter allowed and indulged by the Apostle But afterwards the Rules and Canons of the Church severely condemned all Christians whether of Jews or Gentiles August Ep. 19. Conc. Gangr c. 2. Conc. Laod. c. 29. who observed the Mosaical Law and the Rites and distinction of meats contained therein out of Conscience thereunto yea S. Paul himself vehemently condemned the Galatians who were Gentiles for observing such distinctions of days out of Conscience to the Law Gal. 4.10 11. and passeth the like censure upon the Colossians who distinguished meats upon the same account Col. 2.20 21 22. Wherefore we must further observe that in the Apostles times and according to the Rules they delivered to the Church The Gentile Christians were in these things with others prohibited the observation of the Law of Moses and its Ceremonies though many of them as the Galatians and Colossians were prone to judge this to be their necessary duty Act. 21.25 Gal. 5.2 The Jews among the Gentiles who did not yet understand that the Law of Moses was abrogated were allowed to observe its Rites and to practise according to the Jewish Customs Act. 21.21 24. Gal. 2.12 13. Act. 16.3 But the Jews who lived in Judea and S. Paul himself when he was there were obliged or enjoined to observe the Mosaical Rites though they were satisfied that the binding power of the Law was abrogated Act. 21.24 Gal. 2.12 Now in these different practices allowed determined and ordered by the directions and rules given by the Apostles as temporary provisions for the several sorts or different Churches of Christians the Apostle requireth the Romans to receive and not to judge one another 22. 2. When the Apostle commandeth them to receive them who are weak in the Faith he thereby intendeth that they ought to be owned judged as Christians notwithstanding these different Observations v. 1. And when he commandeth that he that eateth should not despise him that eateth not and that he that eateth not should not judge him that cateth v. 3. he forbiddeth the weaker Jews to condemn the other Jews or Gentiles as if they were not possessed with the fear of God because they observed not the Law of Moses and prohibiteth those others from despising or disowning these weaker Jews as not having embraced Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 3. signifying here so to despise as withal to reject and disclaim as Mar. 9.12 Act. 4.11 1 Cor. 1.28 because they observed the Rites of Judaism And to this sense are manifestly designed the Apostles Arguments whereby he enforceth these Precepts V. 3. For God hath received him v. 4. to his own Master he standeth or falleth for God is able to make him stand v. 6. he acteth with Conscience to God and v. 10. Why dost thou judge thy Brother or why dost thou set at naught thy Brother We shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ So that the main design of this part of this Chapter is this To condemn them who press their own practices or judgments in things unnecessary as being the essential and necessary points of Religion and Christianity and thereupon do undertake to censure all those who differ from them in such lesser things as having no true Religion or inward relation to or Communion with Jesus Christ though they live never so conscientiously and act according to the best apprehensions they can attain Aug. Exp. prop. 78. ad Rom. To this purpose S. Austen expounded these words Non ferre audeamus sententiam de alieno corde quod non videmus Beza in Loc. and Beza saith upon them Rudes non debent ut extra salutis spem positi damnari And this which is the true intent and scope of the Apostle in that place doth in no wise impugn the use of Ecclesiastical Authority in appointing what is orderly and expedient about things indifferent but he will by no means allow that lesser things should be esteemed the main matters of Religion and Christianity to which purpose he layeth down that excellent Rule in v. 17. The Kingdom of God is not meat and drink but righteousness peace and joy in the Holy Ghost 23. 3. The considering the Apostolical practice in making Decrees at the Council of Jerusalem in S. Pauls setting orderly bounds to the use of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit in the Church of Corinth or limiting the exercise thereof to avoid confusion and his not allowing S. Peter Barnabas and other Jews to practise without controul what agreed with their present apprehensions under those circumstances but was the way to disadvantage the peace and welfare of the Church and his giving commands for order and decency with things of like nature do evidence that it is a great misunderstanding of the Apostles Doctrine in this place to conceive that he condemneth the establishing useful rules for the order and edification of the Church though they do not always comply with every particular persons apprehension 24. But if it be further objected that if those things may be commanded or enjoined which some persons though through mistake judge unlawful either they must practise against their own judgments which would be sinful or their being conscientious will be their disadvantage which is not desireable To which I answer 1. That if in some particular things certain persons through meer mistake accompanied with humility and designs of peace should judge things
are in office inferiour to the guests but in the institution of this Ordinance he who was Lord and greatest was among them as one who served and all after administrations of that Ordinance must be performed by the special Officers of Christs Church because the consecration of the Elements encludeth the power of the Keys and a solemn benediction Nor may this Communion be lawfully taken seperately of every single Family or by any single person as other Suppers may be and whereas men having the head covered is an ordinary posture at other Tables to assert that men men ought to have their Hats on at the Holy Communion Gangr Part. 2. error 112. was justly condemned as an errour vented by some wild Spirits in our former times of licentiousness and yet this cannot be avoided by those who will assert that the postures of the Lords Supper ought to be correspondent to those at ordinary Tables Wherefore this objection though earnestly insisted upon is built upon an unsound Foundation But when S. Paul reproved the abuses at Corinth about their Agapae which attended the Lords Supper 1 Cor. 11.22 saying Have ye not Houses to eat and to drink in it was well from thence observed by Zanchy Zanch. Tom. 4. in 2. Praecept c. 16. that not only internal but even external reverence ought to be expressed at the holy Sacrament otherwise than at our common Tables out of respect to Christ who instituted it 2. It is acknowledged that the great priviledge of Communion with Christ as Members and joint Heirs which yet is not a Communion of equality to him but still encludeth deriving from him and subjection to him as our head and Lord is encluded in the right partaking of this Ordinance and is sufficiently signifyed by the Ordinance it self in whatsoever sit and becoming gesture it be administred And in all Christian services in which we have access to God by the mediation of his Son Christians enjoy some considerable degree of Communion with God as his Children which is an high priviledge but still they are his Servants and Creatures and must humble themselves before him and kneeling is still a fit and proper gesture for Prayer and therefore so it may be at the Communion 4. Obj. 2. But it is more generally by many amongst us objected that kneeling at this Sacrament is contrary to the example and practice of Christ and his Apostles who sate at the institution of the Lords Supper Ans 1. There is no certainty concerning the gesture used by Christ and his Apostles at the Lords Supper There are some good Writers both ancient and Modern who speak either variously or doubtfully concerning his gesture at the Passover but I think it sufficiently evident especially from S. Luke 22. v. 14 15. and John 21.20 that he did eat the Passover with his Disciples in a discumbing gesture which gesture because it is wholly out of use with us is expressed in our English Translation by sitting because it was a Table gesture Now they who urge this Objection take for granted because the Lords Supper was instituted before the Paschal Solemnities were fully ended that our Saviour continued all that time in the same gesture against the certainty yea or probability of which I alledge three things 1. That it was the ordinary Custom of the Jews V. Hor. Hebr. in Mat. 26.20 to change their gesture during the continuance of the Paschal Feast At the beginning of their Feast they did discumb and so continued till they had eaten the Cake of Unleavened Bread and drunk the two former Cups of Wine as both the Talmud and Buxtorf do relate Buxt Synag Judaic c. 13. but at the time of the two latter Cups of Wine and at the eating their bitter Herbs the same gesture was not required nor used as the Talmud in Berachoth and Pesachin doth express and here Buxtorf saith reclinati non comedunt 2. That the Jews who in their solemn Feasts did eat discumbing yet in their giving thanks before those Feasts Phil. de Vit. Contemp they were as Philo relateth in a standing gesture with their eyes and hands lifted up towards Heaven and therefore it is no way probable that Christ and his Apostles should continue in their Table gesture which this objection must suppose at the blessing the holy Supper which is an higher Ordinance than the Passover was because this would be very unsuitable to so great a solemnity 3. That there anpeareth no footsteps of any Custom of the Primitive Church of receiving the Lords Supper either sitting or discumbing of which the following Section will give some further account 5. Ans 2. There is no obligation of duty upon the Christian Church to keep to that gesture in the Lords Supper which was used by Christ and his Apostles though it could be evidently discovered because 1. Christ hath given no command concerning the gesture and S. Paul when he telleth his Corinthians what he had received from the Lord and delivered unto them concerning this holy Sacrament maketh no mention at all therein of any gesture 1 Cor. 11.23 24 25. Bishop Jewel therefore well asserteth that Christ said not Reply to Hard. Art 2. Do this after Supper or sitting or being so many together neither did the Apostles ever so understand him 2. Christ and his Apostles observed that Passover gesture which was usually received among the Jews though it was different from the gesture at its first institution of which I have discoursed somewhat in a former Chapter 3. Other circumstances of like nature attendant upon the institutution of the Lords Supper Ch. 1. Sect. 2. n. 3. are generally acknowledged to be of no necessary obligation unto Christians in after times Bishop Saunderson noteth that whereas those four last predicaments ubi De Oblig Consc Prael 3. Sect. 16 c. quando situs habitus where when the gesture and the habit are of a like nature it is almost generally acknowledged that we are not obliged to make use of a like place for the celebrating the Lords Supper an upper room nor the same time at night at the end of Supper nor of the same habit a seemless Coat woven throughout but only the gesture is urged as necessary for which there can be no more reason than for the other yea though there be more uncertainty concerning the gesture than concerning any of the other three 6. Ans 3. There is no reason at all to conclude that Christ and his Apostles sate at this institution Now though I know no evidence against our Saviour his using a gesture of Prayer and Worship at the time of celebrating the Lords Supper which is the more probable because such was the general practice of the ancient Primitive Church I shall for the present suppose that he used the same gesture at the Lords Supper and at the Passover yet then I must observe 1. That this discumbing gesture was vastly different from
Cens c. 11. And Bucer in his Censura declareth it to be an ancient and simplex ritus apure or innocent Rite and that he judgeth the use thereof to be neither indecent nor unprofitable 17. I know there are some who think their own apprehensions so much above all others that they are no otherwise moved by testimonies which are produced against them than to express their censures Altar Damasc c. 10. p. 830. and sometimes their contempt o◠the most worthy Writers and on this manner doth Didoclavius deal with the testimony of Bucer which I now produced saith he it is frigida diluta censura nec satis expendisse videtur it was his dull and weak judgment about this matter and he did not seem to have considered what he wrote But let not such think that their authority is of any value to be put in the balance against the Primitive Church and so many reformed Churches and Writers and therefore as there being no just cause from the consideration of this rite it self and the use thereof to condemn it the censure of such persons is unjust and uncharitable and the dislike of others who are more modest in their opposition is also groundless SECT III. Of laying on hands in Confirmation THis Imposition of hands is the more opposed Didocl Altar Damasc c. 5. p. 359. Except of Presbyt p. 29. because of those Declarative words in the Prayer used at Confirmation Vpon whom after the example of the holy Apostles we have now laid our hands to certifie them by this sign of thy favour and gracious goodness to them The Non Conformists here will neither allow that the Apostles practice should be accounted any example for laying on hands in Confirmation nor that this sign may be used to certifie Gods grace and favour which seemeth say they to speak it a Sacrament 2. Wherefore we are first to consider what Warrant this imposition of hands in Confirmation may claim from the practice of the Apostles We read Act. 8.15 17 18. that after Philip had baptized at Samaria by the Apostles prayer accompanied with imposition of hands they received the Holy Ghost and the same is related concerning the Disciples at Ephesus Act. 19.6 Here we have an Apostolical practice evident that they imposed hands and prayed and thereupon the Holy Ghost was received It is indeed acknowledged that in those instances there was a visible and miraculous testimony of the presence of the Holy Spirit by speaking with Tongues c. but the chief blessing of Gods Spirit consisteth in the inward Graces of the Spirit which were not peculiar to that time and that the obtaining the strengthning grace of the Spirit was in an especial manner designed by the Apostles imposition of hands is declared by Irenaeus Iren. adv Haeres l. 4. c. 75. Aug. Tract 6. in Ep. 1. Johan and it was justly esteemed by S. Austin that the Holy Ghost is here received where no miraculous gifts are bestowed but the gracious dispositions of love peace and unity are entertained And prayer especially the most solemn Prayer of the Bishop or chief Officer of the Church joyned with imposition of hands which was a testimony of peculiar benediction used by dying Jacob and others under the Old Testament and by Christ and his Apostles under the New is a means to obtain this blessing to such who are disposed and qualified for the receiving thereof but that those who indulge and give way to their corruptions and passions as the Corinthians did by their divisions could not receive the increase of the grace and strength of the Holy Spirit by the Apostolical imposition of hands is also asserted in the place above-mentioned by Irenaeus And if any persons will contend that the imposition of hands now received in the Church cannot be a practice according to the example of the Apostles because in those times the Holy Ghost was oft miraculously received which cannot now be expected he may as well assert that the imposition of hands for Ordination is not continued in the Church from the example of the Apostles because then the Holy Ghost was sometimes extraordinarily given thereby or that our praying and preaching is not a doing that for which we have the Apostles for an example because we cannot by them expect such wonderful gifts as sometimes were conferred under the Apostles doctrine and by their prayer 3. And by the searching into Antiquity we may discern the general use of this Imposition of hands in the Church as from the Apostles When the Apostle Heb. 6.2 speaketh of the Foundation of the Doctrine of Baptisms and of laying on of hands the ordinary exposition of the Greek and Latine Fathers refer those words unto Confirmation and in the same sense are they understood by Calvin Beza Illyricus and many other Protestants Eusebius ralateth a story Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherein Confirmation was used under the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 while S. John was yet alive and Cornelius noted it as a defect in Novatus the Schismatick that he never obtained Confirmation from the Bishop for receiving the Holy Ghost which he calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eus Hist l. 6. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as his words are related in Eusebius Tertullian in his short account of the Rites of the Church Tertul. de Resur Cam. c. 8. De Baptism c. 8. after he had mentioned Baptism expresseth Confirmation in these words Caro manus impositione adumbratur ut anima Spiritu illuminetur and in his Book De Baptisma saith that after Baptism is used imposition of hands calling for and inviting the holy Spirit by that benediction Cypr. Ep. 73. S. Cyprians testimony is yet more full who saith that for those whom Philip baptized that which lacked was performed by Peter and John by whose prayer and imposition of hands the Holy Ghost was invocated and poured forth upon them which also saith he is now practised among us that those who are baptized in the Church are presented to the chief Officers of the Church that by our prayer and imposition of hands they may obtain the Holy Ghost and may by Confirmation attain to the highest Order of Christians or signaculo dominico consummentur S. Ambrose speaketh of Confirmation Amb. de Sacr. l. 3. c. 2. Hieron adv Lucif Aug. Cont. l. 3. c. 16. l. 5. c. 23. in Psal 130. that the holy Spirit is thereby obtained by prayer S. Hierom approveth it for Apostolical and S. Austin in divers places defendeth the practice hereof with relation to the Apostolical imposition of hands and for the receiving the Holy Ghost even when the miraculous gifts of the Spirit were no more communicated and this imposition of hands was enjoyned by the ancient Council of Elvira Conc. Elib c. 38. unto them who being baptized in case of necessity did afterwards recover their health And therefore this practice of the