our infirmities for we know not what we should pray for as we ought but the Spirit it self maketh intercession for us with groanings that cannot be uttered c. From whence the Conclusion that is inferred is in the words of S. Paul that we must pray with the Spirit therefore not with set forms therefore ex tempore Sect. 13. THE Collection is somewhat wild for there is great independency in the several parts and much more is in the Conclusion than was virtually in the premises But such as it is the Authors of it I suppose will own it And therefore we will examine the main design of it and then consider the particular means of its perswasion quoted in the Objection Sect. 14. IT is one of the Priviledges of the Gospel and the benefit of Christs ascension that the Holy Ghost is given unto the Church and is become to us the fountain of gifts and graces But these gifts and graces are improvements and helps of our natural faculties of our art and industry not extraordinary miraculous and immediate infusions of habits and gifts That without Gods spirit we cannot pray aright that our infirmities need his help that we know not what to ask of our selves is most true and if ever any Heretick was more confident of his own naturals or did evermore undervalue Gods grace than the Pelagian did yet he denies not this but what then therefore without study without art without premeditation without learning the Spirit gives the gift of prayer and is it his grace that without any natural or artificial help makes us pray ex tempore no such thing the Objection proves nothing of this Sect. 15. HERE therefore we will joyn issue whether the gifts and helps of the Spirit be immediate infusions of the faculties and powers and perfect abilities Or that he doth assist us only by his aids external and internal in the use of such means which God and nature hath given to man to ennoble his soul better his faculties and to improve his understanding ** That the aids of the Holy Ghost are only assistances to us in the use of natural and artificial means I will undertake to prove and from thence it will evidently follow that labour and hard study and premeditation will soonest purchase the gift of prayer and ascertain us of the assistance of the Spirit and therefore set Forms of Prayer studied and considered of are in a true and proper sence and without Enthusiasm the fruits of the Spirit Sect. 16. FIRST Gods Spirit did assist the Apostles by ways extraordinary and fit for the first institution of Christianity but doth assist us now by the expresses of those first assistances which he gave to them immediately Sect. 17. THUS the Holy Ghost brought to their Memory all things which Jesus spake and did and by that means we come to know all that the Spirit knew to be necessary for us the Holy Ghost being Author of our knowledge by being the fountain of the Revelation and we are therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taught by God because the Spirit of God revealed the Articles of our Religion that they might be known to all ages of the Church and this is testified by S. Paul He gave some Apostles and some Prophets c. for the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministry for the edifying of the Body of Christ till we all come in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man c. This was the effect of Christ's ascension when he gave gifts unto men that is when he sent the Spirit the verification of the promise of the Father The effect of this immission of the Holy Ghost was to fill all things and that for ever to build up the Church of God until the day of consummation so that the Holy Ghost abides with the Church for ever by transmitting those revelations which he taught the Apostles to all Christians in succession Now as the Holy Ghost taught the Apostles and by them still teaches us what to believe so it is certain he taught the Apostles how and what to pray and because it is certain that all the rules concerning our duty in prayer and all those graces which we are to pray for are transmitted to us by Derivation from the Apostles whom the Holy Ghost did teach even to that very purpose also that they should teach us it follows evidently that the gift of prayer is a gift of the Holy Ghost and yet to verifie this Proposition we need no other immediate inspiration or extraordinary assistance than that we derive from the Holy Ghost by the conveyance of the Apostolical Sermons and Writings Sect. 18. THE reason is the same in Faith and Prayer and if there were any difference in the acquisition or reception faith certainly needs a more immediate infusion as being of greatest necessity and yet a grace to which we least cooperate it being the first of graces and less of the will in it than any other But yet the Holy Ghost is the Author of our faith and we believe with the Spirit it is S. Pauls expression and yet our belief comes by hearing and reading the holy Scriptures and their interpretations Now reconcile these two together Faith comes by hearing and yet is the gift of the Spirit and it says that the gifts of the Spirit are not extasies and immediate infusions of habits but helps from God to enable us upon the use of the means of his own appointment to believe to speak to understand to prophesie and to pray Sect. 19. BUT whosoever shall look for any other gifts of the Spirit besides the parts of nature helped by industry and Gods blessing upon it and the revelations or the supplies of matter in holy Scripture will be very far to seek having neither reason promise nor experience of his side For why should the spirit of prayer be any other than as the gift and spirit of faith as S. Paul calls it acquired by humane means using divine aids that is by our endeavours in hearing reading catechizing desires to obey and all this blessed and promoted by God this produces faith Nay it is true of us what Christ told his Apostles sine me nihil potestis facere not nihil magnum aut difficile but omninò nihil as S. Austin observes Without me ye can do nothing and yet we were not capable of a Law or of reward or punishment if neither with him nor without him we were able to do any thing And therefore although in the midst of all our co-operation we may say to God in the words of the Prophet Domine omnia opera operatus es in nobis O Lord thou hast wrought all our works in us yet they are opera nostra still God works and we work First is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gods grace is brought to us he helps and gives us abilities and then
expects our duty And if the spirit of prayer be of greater consequence than all the works God hath wrought in us besides and hath the promise of a special prerogative let the first be proved and the second be shown in any good Record and then I will confess the difference Sect. 20. THE Parallel of this Argument I the rather urge because I find praying in the Holy Ghost joyned with graces which are as much Gods gifts and productions of the spirit as any thing in the world and yet which the Apostle presses upon us as duties and things put into our power to be improved by our industry and those are faith in which I before instanced and charity But ye beloved building up your selves on your most holy faith praying in the Holy Ghost keep your selves in the love of God All of the same consideration Faith and Prayer and Charity all gifts of the Spirit and yet build up your selves in faith and keep your selves in love and therefore by a parity of reason improve your selves in the spirit of Prayer that is God by his Spirit having supplied us with matter let our industry and co-operations per modum naturae improve these gifts and build upon this foundation Sect. 21. THUS the Spirit of God is called the Spirit of adoption the Spirit of counsel the Spirit of grace the Spirit of meekness the Spirit of wisdom And without doubt he is the fountain of all these to us all and that for ever and yet it cannot reasonably be supposed but that we must stir up the graces of God in us co-operate with his assistances study in order to counsel labour and consider in order to wisdom give all diligence to make our calling and election sure in order to our adoption in which we are sealed by the Spirit Now these instances are of gifts as well as graces and since the days of wonder and need of miracles is expired there is no more reason to expect inspiration of gifts than of graces without our endeavours It concerns the Church rather to have these secured than those and yet the Spirit of God puts it upon the condition of our co-operation for according to the Proverb of the old Moralists Deus habet sinum facilem non perforâ—tum Gods bosom is apt and easie to the emission of graces and assistances but it is not loose and ungirt something must be done on our part we must improve the talents and swell the bank for if either we lay them up in a napkin or spend them suppress the Spirit or extinguish it we shall dearly account for it Sect. 22. IN the mean time if we may lose the gifts by our own fault we may purchase them by our diligence if we may lessen them by our incuriousness we may increase them by study if we may quench the spirit then also we may re-enkindle it all which are evident probation that the Holy Ghost gives us assistances to improve our natural powers and to promote our acquisite and his aids are not inspirations of the habit or infusions of a perfect gift but a subliming of what God gave us in the stock of nature and art to make it in a sufficient order to an end supernatural and divine Sect. 23. THE same doctrine we are taught by S. Pauls exhortation to Timothy Neglect not the gift that is in thee which was given thee by prophecie with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery And again stir up the gift of God which is in thee by the laying on of my hâ—nds If there be any gifts of the Holy Ghost and spiritual influences dispensed without our co-operation and by inspiration of the intire power it is in ordination and the persons so ordained are most likely to receive the gift of prayer if any such thing be for the edification of the Church they being the men appointed to intercede and to stand between God and the people and yet this gift of God even in those times when they were dispensed with miracle and assistances extraordinary were given as all things now are given by the means also of our endeavour and was capable of improvement by industry and of defailance by neglect and therefore much rather is it so now in the days of ordinary ministration and common assistances Sect. 24. AND indeed this argument beside the efficacy of its perswasion must needs conclude against the Men to whom these adversaria are addressed because themselves call upon their Disciples to exercise the gift of prayer and offer it to consideration that such exercising it is the way to better it and if natural endowments and artificial endeavours are the way to purchase new degrees of it it were not amiss they did consider a little before they begin and did improve their first and smallest capacities before they ventured any thing in publick by way of address to Almighty God For the first beginnings are certainly as improvable as the next degrees and it is certain they have more need of it as being more imperfect and rude Therefore when ever Gods Spirit hath given us any capacities or assistances any documents motions desires or any aids whatsoever they are therefore given us with a purpose we should by our industry skill and labour improve them because without such co-operation the intention is made void and the work imperfect Sect. 25. AND this is exactly the doctrine I plainly gather from the objected words of S. Paul The Spirit helpeth our infirmities 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is in the Greek collaborantem adjuvat It is an ingeminate expression of our labours And that supposes us to have faculties capable of improvement and an obligation to labour and that the effect of having the gift of prayer depends upon the mutual course that is upon God blessing our powers and our endeavours And if this way the Spirit performs his promise sufficiently and does all that we need and all that he ties himself to he that will multiply his hopes farther than what is sufficient or what is promised may possibly deceive himself but never deceive God and make him multiply and continue miracles to justifie his fancy Sect. 26. BETTER it is to follow the Scriptures for our guide as in all things else so in this particular Ephes. 6.17 18. Take the sword of the Spirit which is the Word of God Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit The word of God is the sword of the spirit praying in the Spirit is one way of using it indeed the only way that he here specifies Praying in the Spirit then being the using of this Sword and this Sword being the word of God it follows evidently that praying in the spirit is praying in or according to the word of God that is in the directions rules and expresses of the Word of God that is of the holy Scriptures For we have many infirmities and we need the spirit to
his children That ye should walk worthy of God who hath called you unto his Kingdom and glory * For this cause also thank we God without ceasing because when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us ye received it not as the word of men but as it is in truth the word of God which effectually worketh also in you that believe How much more shall the blood of Christ who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God And having an High Priest over the house of God Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water * Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering for he is faithful that promised * And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works * Not forsaking the assembling of our selves together as the manner of some is but exhorting one another and so much the more as ye see the day approaching For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins * but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation which shall devour the adversaries * He that despised Moses's law died without mercy under two or three witnesses * Of how much sorer punishment suppose ye shall he be thought worthy who hath trodden under foot the Son of God and hath counted the blood of the Covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing and hath done despite unto the Spirit of Grace For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God and if it first begin at us what shall the end be of them that obey not the Gospel of God And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself even as he is pure And whatsoever we ask we receive of him because we keep his Commandments and do those things which are pleasing in his sight And he that overcometh and keepeth my works unto the end to him will I give power over the Nations A Penitential Psalm collected out of the Psalms and Prophets HAVE mercy upon me O God according to thy loving kindness according to the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions For our transgressions are multiplied before thee and our sins testifie against us our transgressions are with us and as for our iniquities we know them In transgressing and lying against the Lord and departing away from our God speaking oppression and revolt conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falshood Our feet have run to evil our thoughts are thoughts of iniquity The way of peace we have not known we have made us crooked paths whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace Therefore do we wait for light but behold obscurity for brightness but we walk in darkness Look down from Heaven and behold from the habitation of thy Holiness and of thy Glory where is thy zeal and thy strength the sounding of thy bowels and of thy mercies towards me are they restrained We are indeed as an unclean thing and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags and we all do fade as a leaf and our iniquities like the wind have taken us away But now O Lord thou art our Father we are the clay and thou our potter and we all are the work of thy hand Be not wroth very sore O Lord neither remember iniquity for ever behold see we beseech thee we are thy people Thou O Lord art our Redeemer thy Name is from everlasting O Lord Father and Governour of my whole life leave me not to the sinful counsels of my own heart and let me not any more fall by them Set scourges over my thoughts and the discipline of wisdom over my heart lest my ignorances encrease and my sins abound to my destruction O Lord Father and God of my life give me not a proud look but turn away from thy servant always a haughty mind Turn away from me vain hopes and concupiscence and thou shalt hold him up that is always desirous to serve thee Let not the greediness of the belly nor the lust of the flesh take hold of me and give not thy servant over to an impudent mind There is a word that is clothed about with death God grant it be not found in the portion of thy servant For all such things shall be far from the godly and they shall not wallow in their sins Though my sins be as scarlet yet make them white as snow though they be red like crimson let them be as wooll For I am ashamed of the sins I have desired and am confounded for the pleasures that I have chosen Lord make me to know mine end and the measure of my days what it is that I may know how frail I am and that I may apply my heart unto wisdom Withhold not thou thy tender mercies from me O Lord let thy loving kindness and thy truth continually preserve me For innumerable evils have compassed me about mine iniquities have taken hold upon me so that I am not able to look up for they are more than the hairs of my head therefore my heart faileth me But thou O Lord though mine iniquities testifie against me save me for thy Name sake for our backslidings are many we have sinned grievously against thee But the Lord God will help me therefore shall I not be confounded therefore have I set my face like a flint and I know that I shall not be ashamed He is near that justifieth me who will contend with me The Lord God will help me who is he that shall condemn me I will trust in the Lord and stay upon my God O let me have this of thine hand that I may not lie down in sorrow S. Paul's Prayers for a holy life I. I BOW my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ of whom the whole family in Heaven and Earth is named that he would grant unto me according to the riches of his glory to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man that Christ may dwell in my heart by faith that being rooted and grounded in love I may be able to comprehend with all Saints what is the breadth and length and depth and height and to know the love of Christ which passeth knowledge and may be filled with all the fulness of God through the same our most blessed Saviour Jesus Amen The Doxologie Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think according to the power that worketh in us Vnto him be glory in the Church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages world without end Amen II. O MOST gracious God grant to thy servant to be filled with the knowledge of thy Will in all
help as doubting coldness weariness disrelish of heavenly things indifferency and these are enough to interpret the place quoted in the Objection without tying him to make words for us to no great religious purposes when God hath done that for us in other manner than what we dream of ** Sect. 27. SO that in effect praying in the Holy Ghost or with the spirit is nothing but prayer for such things and in such manner which God by his Spirit hath taught us in holy Scripture Holy Prayers spiritual songs so the Apostle calls one part of prayer viz. Eucharistical or thanksgiving that is Prayers or Songs which are spiritual in materiâ And if they be called spiritual for the Efficient cause too the Holy Ghost being the Author of them it comes all to one for therefore he is the cause and giver of them because he hath in his word revealed what things we are to pray for and there also hath taught us the manner Sect. 28. AND this I plainly prove from the words of S. Paul before quoted The Spirit helpeth our infirmities for we know not what we should pray for as we ought In this we are infirm that we know not our own needs nor our own advantages when the Holy Ghost hath taught us what to ask and to ask that as we ought then he hath healed our infirmities and our ignorances in the matter and the manner then we know what to pray for as we ought then we have the grace of Prayer and the Spirit of supplication And therefore in the instance before mentioned concerning spiritual songs when the Apostle had twice enjoyn'd the use of them in order to Prayer and Preaching to instruction and to Eucharist and those to be done by the aid of Christ and Christ's spirit What in one place he calls being filled with the Spirit In the other he calls the dwelling of the word of Christ in us richly plainly intimating to us that when we are mighty in the scriptures full of the word of Christ then we are filled with the Spirit because the Spirit is the great Dictator of them to us and the Remembrancer and when by such helps of Scripture we sing Hymns to Gods honour and our mutual comfort then we sing and give thanks in the spirit And this is evident if you consult the places and compare them Sect. 29. AND that this is for this reason called a gift and grace or issue of the Spirit is so evident and notorious that the speaking of an ordinary revealed truth is called in Scripture a speaking by the Spirit 1 Cor. 12.8 No man can say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost For though the world could not acknowledge Jesus for the Lord without a revelation yet now that we are taught this truth by Scripture and by the preaching of the Apostles to which they were enabled by the Holy Ghost we need no revelation or Enthusiasm to confess this truth which we are taught in our Creeds and Catechisms and this light sprang first from the immission of a ray from God's Spirit we must for ever acknowledge him the fountain of our light Though we cool our thirst at the mouth of the river yet we owe for our draughts to the springs and fountains from whence the waters first came though derived to us by the succession of a long current If the Holy Ghost supplies us with materials and fundamentals for our building it is then enough to denominate the whole edifice to be of him although the labour and the workmanship be ours upon another stock And this is it which the Apostle speaks 1 Cor. 2.13 Which things also we speak not in the words which mans wisdom teacheth but which the Holy Ghost teacheth comparing spiritual things with spiritual The Holy Ghost teaches yet it is upon our co-operation our study and endeavour while we compare spiritual things with spiritual the Holy Ghost is said to teach us because these spirituals were of his suggestion and revelation Sect. 30. FOR it is a rule of the School and there is much reason in it Habitus infusi infunduntur per modum acquisitorum whatsoever is infused into us is in the same manner infused as other things are acquired that is step by step by humane means and co-operation and grace does not give us new faculties and create another nature but meliorates and improves our own And therefore what the Greeks called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 habits the Christians used to call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gifts because we derive assistances from above to heighten the habits and facilitate the actions in order to a more noble and supernatural end And what S. Paul said in the Resurrection is also true in this Question That is not first which is spiritual but that which natural and then that which is spiritual The graces and gifts of the Spirit are postnate and are additions to art and nature God directs our counsels opens our understandings regulates our will orders our affections supplies us with objects and arguments and opportunities and revelations in scriptis and then most when we most imploy our own endeavours God loving to bless all the means and instruments of his service whether they be natural or acquisite Sect. 31. SO that now I demand Whether since the expiration of the age of miracles Gods spirit does not most assist us when we most endeavour and most use the means He that says No discourages all men from reading the Scriptures from industry from meditation from conference from humane arts and sciences and from whatsoever else God and good Laws provoke us to by proposition of rewards But if Yea as most certainly God will best crown the best endeavours then the spirit of prayer is greatest in him who supposing the like capacities and opportunities studies hardest reads most practises most religiously deliberates most prudently and then by how much want of means is worse than the use of means by so much ex tempore prayers are worse than deliberate and studied Excellent therefore is the Counsel of Saint Peter 1 Epist. Chap. 4. ver 11. If any man speak let him speak as the Oracles of God not lightly then and inconsiderately If any man minister let him do it as of the ability which God giveth great reason then to put to all his abilities and faculties to it and whether of the two does most likely do that he that takes pains and considers and discusses and so approves and practises a form or he that never considers what he says till he says it needs not much deliberation to pass a sentence Only methinks it is most unreasonable that we should be bound to prepare our selves with due requisites to hear what they shall speak in publick and that they should not prepare what to speak as if to speak were of easier or of less consideration than to hear what is spoken or if
they do prepare what to speak to the people it were also very fit they prepar'd their prayers and considered before-hand of the fitness of the offertory they present to God Sect. 32. LASTLY Did not the Pen-men of the Scripture write the Epistles and Gospels respectively all by the Spirit Most certainly holy Men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost saith Saint Peter And certainly they were moved by a more immediate motion and a motion nearer to an Enthusiasm than now adays in the gift and spirit of Prayer And yet in the midst of those great assistances and motions they did use study art industry and humane abilities This is more than probable in the different stiles of the several Books some being of admirable art others lower and plain The words were their own at least sometimes not the Holy Ghosts And if Origen Saint Hierome and especially the Greek Fathers Scholiasts and Grammarians were not deceived by false Copies but that they truly did observe sometimes to be impropriety of an expression in the language sometimes not true Greek who will think those errors or imperfections in Grammar were in respect of the words I say precisely immediate inspirations and dictates of the Holy Ghost and not rather their own productions of industry and humanity But clearly some of their words were the words of Aratus some of Epimenides some of Menander some of S. Paul This speak I not the Lord. Some were the words of Moses even all that part of the Levitical Law which concerned divorces and concerning which our blessed Saviour affirms that Moses permitted it because of the hardness of their hearts but from the beginning it was not so and divers others of the same nature collected and observed to this purpose by Origen S. Basil S. Ambrose and particularly that promise which S. Paul made of calling upon the Corinthians as he passed into Macedonia which certainly in all reason is to be presumed to have been spoken humanitùs and not by immediate inspiration and infusion because Saint Paul was so hindred that he could not be as good as his word and yet the Holy Ghost could have foreseen it and might better have excused it if Saint Paul had laid it upon his score but he did not and it is reasonable enough to believe there was no cause he should and yet because the Holy Ghost renewed their memory improved their understanding supplied to some their want of humane learning and so assisted them that they should not commit an error in fact or opinion neither in the narrative nor dogmatical parts therefore they writ by the Spirit Since that we cannot pretend upon any grounds of probability to an inspiration so immediate as theirs and yet their assistances which they had from the Spirit did not exclude humane arts and industry but that the ablest Scholar did write the best much rather is this true in the gifts and assistances we receive and particularly in the gift of prayer it is not an ex tempore and an inspired faculty but the faculties of nature and the abilities of art and industry are improv'd and ennobled by the supervening assistances of the Spirit And if these who pray ex tempore say that the assistance they receive from the Spirit is the inspiration of words and powers without the operations of art and natural abilities humane industry then besides that it is more than the Pen-men of Scripture sometime had because they needed no extraordinary assistances to what they could of themselves do upon the stock of other abilities besides this I say it must follow that such Prayers so inspired if they were committed to writing would prove as good Canonical Scripture as any is in Saint Paul's Epistles the impudence of which pretension is sufficient to prove the extreme vanity of the challenge Sect. 33. THE summe is this Whatsoever this gift is or this spirit of prayer it is to be acquired by humane industry by learning of the Scriptures by reading by conference and by whatsoever else faculties are improved and habits enlarged Gods Spirit hath done his work sufficiently this way and he loves not either in nature or grace which are his two great sanctions to multiply miracles when there is no need Sect. 34. AND now let us take a man that pretends he hath the gift of Prayer and loves to pray ex tempore I suppose his thoughts go a little before his tongue I demand then Whether cannot this man when it is once come into his head hold his tongue and write down what he hath conceived If his first conceptions were of God and God's Spirit then they are so still even when they are written Or is the Spirit departed from him upon the sight of a Pen and Inkhorn It did use to be otherwise among the old and new Prophets whether they were Prophets of prediction or of ordinary ministery But if his conception may be written and being written is still a production of the Spirit then it follows that set forms of prayer deliberate and described may as well be a praying with the Spirit as sudden forms and ex tempore out-lets Sect. 35. NOW the case being thus put I would fain know what the difference is between deliberate and ex tempore Prayers save only that in these there is less consideration and prudence for that the other are at least as much as these the productions of the Spirit is evident in the very case put in this Argument and whether to consider and to weigh them be any disadvantage to our devotions I leave it to all wise men to determine So that in effect since after the pretended assistance of the Spirit in our prayers we may write them down consider them try the spirits and ponder the matter the reason and the religion of the address let the world judge whether this sudden utterance and ex tempore forms be any thing else but a direct resolution not to consider beforehand what we speak Sic itaque habe ut istam vim dicendi rapidam aptiorem esse circulanti judices quà m agenti rem magnam seriam docentique They are the words of Seneca and express what naturally flows from the premises The pretence of the Spirit and the gift of prayer is not sufficient to justifie the dishonour they do to Religion in serving it in the lowest and most indeliberate manner nor quit such men from unreasonableness and folly who will dare to speak to God in the presence of the people and in their behalf without deliberation or learning or study Nothing is a greater disreputation to the prudence of a Discourse than to say it was a thing made up in haste that is without due considering Sect. 36. BUT here I consider and I wish they whom it concerns most would do so too that to pretend the Spirit in so unreasonable a manner to so ill purposes and without reason or promise or
probability for doing it is a very great crime and of dangerous consequence It was the greatest aggravation of the sin of Ananias and Sapphira 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they did falsly pretend and belye the Holy Spirit which crime besides that it dishonours the Holy Ghost to make him the President of imperfect and illiterate rites the Author of confusion and indeliberate Discourses and the Parent of such productions which a wise person would blush to own it also intitles him to all those Doctrines which either Chance or Design shall expose to the people in such prayers to which they entitle the holy Spirit as the Author and immediate Dictator So that if they please he must not only own their follies but their impieties too and how great disreputation this is to the Spirit of Wisdom of Counsel and of Holiness I wish they may rather understand by Discourse than by Experiment Sect. 37. BUT let us look a little further into the mystery and see what is meant in Scripture by praying with the spirit In what sence the holy Ghost is called the Spirit of Prayer I have already shewn viz. by the same reason as he is the Spirit of faith of prudence of knowledge of understanding and the like because he gives us assistances for the acquiring of these graces and furnishes us with revelations by way of object and instruction But praying with the Spirit hath besides this other sences also in Scripture I find in one place that we then pray with the Spirit when the Holy Ghost does actually excite us to desires and earnest tendencies to the obtaining our holy purpose when he prepares our hearts to pray when he enkindles our desires gives us zeal and devotion charity and fervour spiritual violence and holy importunity This sence is also in the latter part of the objected words of S. Paul Rom. 8. The Spirit it self maketh Intercession for us with groanings And indeed this is truly a praying with the Spirit but this will do our Reverend Brethren of the Assembly little advantage as to the present Question For this Spirit is not a Spirit of utterance not at all clamorous in the ears of the people but cries aloud in the ears of God with groans unutterable so it follows and only He that searcheth the heart he understandeth the meaning of the Spirit This is the Spirit of the Son which God hath sent into our hearts not into our tongues whereby we cry Abba Father Gal. 4.6 And this is the great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for mental prayer which is properly and truly praying by the Spirit Sect. 38. ANOTHER praying with the Spirit I find in that place of St. Paul from whence this expression is taken and commonly used I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the understanding also It is generally supposed that Saint Paul relates here to a special and extraordinary gift of Prayer which was indulg'd to the Primitive Bishops and Priests the Apostles and Rulers of Churches and to some other Persons extraordinarily of being able to compose Prayers pious in the matter prudent in the composure devout in the forms expressive in the language and in short useful to the Church and very apt for devotion and serving to her Religion and necessities I believe that such a gift there was and this indulged as other issues of the Spirit to some persons upon special necessities by singular dispensation as the Spirit knew to be most expedient for the present need and the future instruction This I believe not because I find sufficient testimony that it was so or any evidence from the words now alledged but because it was reasonable it should be so and agreeable to the other proceedings of the Holy Ghost For although we account it an easie matter to make prayers and we have great reason to give thanks to the Holy Ghost for it who hath descended so plentifully upon the Church hath made plentiful revelation of all the publick and private necessities of the world hath taught us how to pray given rules for the manner of address taught us how to distinguish spiritual from carnal things hath represented the vanity of worldly desires the unsatisfyingness of earthly possessions the blessing of being denied our impertinent secular and indiscreet requests and hath done all this at the beginning of Christianity and hath actually stirred up the Apostles and Apostolical men to make so many excellent Forms of Prayer which their Successors did in part retain and in part imitate till the conjunct wisdom of the Church saw her Offices compleat regular and sufficient So that now every man is able to make something of Forms of Prayer for which ability they should do well to pay their Eucharist to the Holy Ghost and not abuse the gift to vanity or schism yet at the first beginning of Christianity till the holy Spirit did fill all things they found no such plenty of Forms of Prayer and it was accounted a matter of so great consideration to make a Form of Prayer that it was thought a fit work for a Prophet or the Founder of an Institution And therefore the Disciples of John asked of him to teach them how to pray and the Disciples of Christ did so too For the Law of Moses had no Rules to instruct the Synagogue how to pray and but that Moses and David and Asaph and some few of the Prophets more left forms of Prayer which the Spirit of God inspired them withall upon great necessities and great mercy to that people they had not known how to have composed an Office for the daily service of the Temple without danger of asking things needless vain or impious such as were the prayers in the Roman Closets that he was a good man that would not own them Et nihil arcano qui roget ore Deos. Pulchra Laverna Da mihi fallere da justum sanctúmque videri Noctem peccatis fraudibus objice nubem But when the Holy Ghost came down in a full breath and a mighty wind he filled the breasts and tongues of men and furnished the first Christians not only with abilities enough to frame excellent devotions for their present Offices but also to become precedents for Liturgie to all Ages of the Church the first being imitated by the second and the second by the third till the Church be setled in peace and the Records transmitted with greater care and preserved with less hazard the Church chose such Forms whose Copies we retain at this day Sect. 39. NOW since it was certain that all ages of the Church would look upon the first Fathers in Christ and Founders of Churches as precedents or Tutors and Guides in all the parts of their Religion and that prayer with its several parts and instances is a great portion of the Religion the Sacraments themselves being instruments of grace and effectual in genere orationis it is very reasonable to think that the Apostolical
men had not only the first fruits but the elder Brothers share a double portion of the Spirit because they were not only to serve their own needs to which a single and an ordinary portion would have been then as now abundantly sufficient but also to serve the necessity of the succession and to instruct the Church for ever after Sect. 40. BUT then that this assistance was an ability to pray ex tempore I find it no where affirmed by sufficient authentick Testimony and if they could have done it it is very likely they would have been wary and restrained in the publick use of it I doubt not but there might then be some sudden necessities of the Church for which the Church being in her infancy had not as yet provided any publick forms concerning which cases I may say as Quintilian of an Oratour in the great and sudden needs of the Commonwealth Quarum si qua non dico cuicunque innocentium civium sed amicorum ac propinquorum alicui evenerit stabÃtne mutus salutarem parentibus vocem statim si non succurratur perituris moras secessum silentium quaeret dum illa verba fabricentur memoriae insidant vox ac latus praeparetur I do not think that they were oratores imparati ad casus but that an ability of praying on a sudden was indulged to them by a special aid of the Spirit to contest against sudden dangers and the violence of new accidents to which also possibly a new inspiration was but for a very little while necessary even till they understood the mysteries of Christianity and the revelations of the Spirit by proportion and analogy to which they were sufficiently instructed to make their sudden prayers when sudden occasions did require Sect. 41. THIS I speak by way of concession and probability For no man can prove thus much as I am willing relying upon the reasonableness of the Conjecture to suppose but that praying with the Spirit in this place is praying without study art or deliberation is not so much as intimated Sect. 42. FOR first It is here implyed that they did prepare some of those devotions to which they were helped by the Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when you come together each of you peradventure hath a Psalm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not every one makes but when you meet every one hath viz. already which supposes they had it prepared against the meeting For the Spirit could help as well at home in their meditation as in the publick upon a sudden and though it is certain the Holy Spirit loves to bless the publick meetings the communion of Saints with special benedictions yet I suppose my Adversaries are not willing to acknowledge any thing that should do much reputation to the Church and the publick authoriz'd conventions at least not to confine the Spirit to such holy and blessed meetings They will I suppose rather grant the words do probably intimate they came prepared with a Hymn and therefore there is nothing in the nature of the thing but that so also might their other forms of Prayer the assistance of the Spirit which is the thing in Question hinders not but that they also might have made them by premeditation Sect. 43. SECONDLY In this place praying with the Spirit signifies no other extraordinary assistance but that the Spirit help'd them to speak their prayer in an unknown Tongue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If I pray in a tongue my spirit prayeth but my understanding is without fruit what then I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the understanding also Plainly here praying in the spirit which is opposed to praying in understanding is praying in an unknown tongue where by the way observe that praying with the spirit even in the sence of Scripture is not always most to edification of the people Not alwayes with understanding And when these two are separated St. Paul prefers five words with understanding before ten thousand in the spirit For this praying with the spirit was indeed then a gift extraordinary and miraculous like as prophesying with the spirit and expired with it But while it did last it was the lowest of gifts inter dona linguarum it was but a gift of the tongue and not to the benefit of the Church directly or immediately Sect. 44. THIS also observe in passing by If Saint Paul did so undervalue the praying with the Spirit that he preferred edifying the Church a thousand degrees beyond it I suppose he would have been of the same mind if the Question had been between praying with the Spirit and obeying our Superiours as he was when it was between praying with the Spirit and edification of the Church because if I be not mistaken it is matter of great concernment towards the edification of the Church to obey our Superiours not to innovate in publick forms of worship especially with the scandal and offence of very wise and learned men and to the disgrace of the dead Martyrs who sealed our Liturgie with their blood Sect. 45. BUT to return In this place praying with the Spirit beside the assistance given by the Holy Ghost to speak in a strange tongue is no more than my spirit praying that is it implies my co-operation with the assistance of the Spirit of God insomuch that the whole action may truly be denominated mine and is called of the Spirit only by reason of that collateral assistance For so Saint Paul joyns them as terms identical and expressive one of anothers meaning as you may please to read ver 14. and 15. 1 Cor. 14. I will pray with the spirit and my spirit truly prayeth It is the act of our inner man praying holy and spiritual prayers But then indeed at that time there was something extraordinary adjoyned for it was in an unknown Tongue the practice of which Saint Paul there dislikes This also will be to none of their purposes For whether it were ex tempore or by premeditation is not here expressed or if it had yet that assistance extraordinary in prayer if there was any beside the gift of Tongues which is not here or any where else expressed is no more transmitted to us than the speaking Tongues in the Spirit or prophesying ex tempore and by the Spirit Sect. 46. BUT I would add also one experiment which Saint Paul also there adds by way of instance If praying with the Spirit in this place be praying ex tempore then so is singing too For they are expressed in the same place in the same manner to the same end and I know no reason why there should be differing sences put upon them to serve purposes And now let us have some Church Musick too though the Organs be pull'd down and let any the best Psalmist of them all compose a Hymn in Metrical form as Antipater Sidonius in Quintilian and Licinius Archias in Cicero could
do in their Verses and sing it to a new tune with perfect and true musick and all this ex tempore For all this the Holy Ghost can do if he pleases But if it be said that the Corinthian Christians composed their Songs and Hymns according to art and rules of Musick by study and industry and that to this they were assisted by the Spirit and that this together with the devotion of their spirit was singing with the Spirit then say I so composing set forms of Liturgie by skill and prudence and humane industry may be as much praying with the Spirit as the other is singing with the Spirit plainly enough In all the sences of praying with the Spirit and in all its acceptations in Scripture to pray or sing with the Spirit neither of them of necessity implies ex tempore Sect. 47. THE sum or Collecta of the premises is this Praying with the Spirit is either First when the Spirit stirs up our desires to pray per motionem actualis auxilii or secondly when the Spirit teaches us what or how to pray telling us the matter and manner of our prayers Thirdly or lastly dictating the very words of our prayers There is no other way in the world to pray with the Spirit or in the Holy Ghost that is pertinent to this Question And of this last manner the Scripture determines nothing nor speaks any thing expresly of it and yet suppose it had we are certain the Holy Ghost hath supplied us with all these and yet in set forms of Prayer best of all I mean there where a difference can be For 1 as for the desires and actual motions or incitements to pray they are indifferent to one or the other to set forms or to ex tempore Sect. 48. SECONDLY But as to the matter or manner of prayer it is clearly contained in the expresses and set forms of Scriptures and there it is supplied to us by the Spirit for he is the great Dictatour of it Sect. 49. 3. NOW then for the very words No man can assure me that the words of his ex tempore prayer are the words of the holy Spirit it is neither reason nor modesty to expect such immediate assistances to so little purpose he having supplied us with abilities more than enough to express our desires aliundè otherwise than by immediate dictate But if we will take David's Psalter or the other Hymns of holy Scripture or any of the Prayers which are respersed over the Bible we are sure enough that they are the words of Gods Spirit mediately or immediately by way of infusion or extasie by vision or at least by ordinary assistance And now then what greater confidence can any man have for the excellency of his prayers and the probability of their being accepted than when he prayes his Psalter or the Lords Prayer or any other office which he finds consigned in Scripture When Gods Spirit stirs us up to an actual devotion and then we use the matter he hath described and taught and the very words which Christ and Christs Spirit and the Apostles and other persons full of the Holy Ghost did use If in the world there be any praying with the Spirit I mean in vocal prayer this is it Sect. 50. AND thus I have examined the intire and full scope of this first Question and rifled their Objection which was the only colour to hide the appearance of its natural deformity at the first sight The result is this Scribendum ergo quoties licebit Si id non dabitur cogitandum ab utroque exclusi debent tamen adniti ut neque deprehensus orator neque destitutus esse videatur In making our Orations and publick Advocations we must write what we mean to speak as often as we can when we cannot yet we must deliberate and study and when the suddenness of the accident prevents both these we must use all the powers of art and care that we have a present mind and call in all our first provisions that we be not destitute of matter and words apt for the imployment This was Quintilian's rule for the matter of prudence and in secular occasions but when the instance is in Religion and especially in our prayers it will concern us nearer to be curious and deliberate what we speak in the audience of the eternal God when our lives and our souls and the honour of God and the reputation of Religion are concern'd and whatsoever is greatest in it self or dearest to us Sect. 51. THE second Question hath in it something more of difficulty for the Men that own it will give leave that set forms may be used so you give question 2 leave to them to make them but if authority shall interpose and prescribe a Liturgie every word shall breed a quarrel and if the matter be innocent yet the very injunction is tyranny a restraining of the gifts of the Holy Ghost it leaves the spirit of a Man sterile and unprofitable it is not for edification of the Church and is as destitute of comfort as it is of profit For God hath not restrained his Spirit to those few that rule the Church in prelation above others but if he hath given to them the spirit of Government he hath given to others the spirit of Prayer and the spirit of Prophecy Now the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withall for to one is given by the Spirit the word of Wisdom to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit And these and many other gifts are given to several members that they may supply one another and all joyn to the edification of the body And therefore that must needs be an imprudent sanction that so determines the offices of the Church that she cannot be edified by that variety of gifts which the holy Spirit hath given to several men to that purpose just as if there should be a Canon that but one Sermon should be preached in all Churches for ever Besides it must needs be that the devotion of the Suppliants must be much retarded by the perpetuity and unalterable reiteration of the same form For since our affections will certainly vary and suffer great alteration of degrees and inclinations it is easier to frame words apt to comply with our affections than to conform our affections in all varieties to the same words When the forms are daily changed it is more probable that every man shall find something proportionable to his fancy which is the great instrument of Devotion than to suppose that any one form should be like Manna fitted to every taste and therefore in prayers as the affections must be natural sweet and proper so also should the words expressing the affections issue forth by way of natural emanation Sed extemporalis audaciae atque ipsius temeritatis vel praecipua jucunditas est Nam in ingenio sicut in agro quanquam alia diu serantur atque
set form of Prayer Now it is considerable that no man ever had the fulness of the Spirit but only the Holy Jesus and therefore it is also certain that no man had the Spirit of prayer like to him and then if we pray this prayer devoutly and with pious and actual intention do we not pray in the Spirit of Christ as much as if we prayed any other form of words pretended to be taught us by the Spirit We are sure that Christ and Christs Spirit taught us this Prayer they only gather by conjectures and opinions that in their ex tempore or conceived forms the Spirit of Christ teacheth them So much then as Certainties are better than uncertainties and God's Word better than Man's so much is this set Form besides the infinite advantages in the matter better than their ex tempore and conceived Forms in the form it self And if ever any Prayer was or could be a part of that Doctrine of Faith by which we received the Spirit it must needs be this Prayer which was the only form our blessed Master taught the Christian Church immediately was a part of his great and glorious Sermon in the Mount in which all the needs of the world are sealed up as in a treasure house and intimated by several petitions as diseases are by their proper and proportioned remedies and which Christ published as the first emanation of his Spirit the first perfume of that heavenly anointing which descended on his sacred Head when he went down into the waters of Baptism Sect. 79. THIS we are certain of that there is nothing wanting nothing superfluous and impertinent nothing carnal or imperfect in this Prayer but as it supplies all needs so it serves all persons is fitted for all estates it meets with all accidents and no necessity can surprize any man but if God hears him praying that Prayer he is provided for in that necessity and yet if any single person paraphrases it it is not certain but the whole sence of a petition may be altered by the intervention of one improper word and there can be no security given against this but qualified and limited and just in such a proportion as we can be assured of the wisdom and honesty of the person and the actual assistance of the holy Spirit Sect. 80. NOW then I demand whether the Prayer of Manasses be so good a Prayer as the Lords Prayer or is the Prayer of Judith or of Tobias or of Judas Macchabeus or of the Son of Sirach is any of these so good Certainly no man will say they are and the reason is because we are not sure they are inspired by the Holy Spirit of God prudent and pious and conformable to Religion they may be but not penn'd by so excellent a spirit as this Prayer And what assurance can be given that any Ministers prayer is better than the prayers of the Son of Sirach who was a very wise and a very good man as all the world acknowledges I know not any one of them that has so large a testimony or is of so great reputation But suppose they can make as good prayers yet surely they are Apocryphal at least and for the same reason that the Apocryphal prayers are not so excellent as the Lords prayer by the same reason must the best they can be imagin'd to compose fall short of this excellent pattern by how much they partake of a smaller portion of the Spirit as a drop of water is less than all the waters under or above the Firmament Sect. 81. SECONDLY I would also willingly know whether if any man uses the form which Christ taught supposing he did not tie us to the very prescript words can there be any hurt in it Is it imaginable that any Commandment should be broken or any affront done to the honour of God or any act of imprudence or irreligion in it or any negligence of any insinuation of the Divine pleasure I cannot yet think of any thing to frame for answer so much as by way of an Antinomy or Objection But then supposing Christ did tie us to use this Prayer pro loco tempore according to the nature and obligation of all affirmative precepts as it is certain he did in the preceptive words recorded by St. Luke When ye pray say Our Father then it is to be considered that a Divine Commandment is broken by its rejection and therefore if there were any doubt remaining whether it be a Command or no yet since on one side there is danger of a negligence and a contempt and that on the other side the observation and conformity cannot be criminal or imprudent it will follow that the retaining of this Prayer in practice and suffering it to do all its intentions and particularly becoming the great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or authority for set Forms of prayer is the safest most prudent most Christian understanding of those words of Christ propounding the Lords Prayer to the Christian Church And because it is impossible that all particulars should be expressed in any form of prayer because particulars are not only casual and accidental but also infinite Christ according to that wisdom he had without measure fram'd a Prayer which by a general comprehension should include all particulars eminently and virtually so that there should be no defect in it and yet so short that the most imperfect memories might retain and use it Sect. 82. AND it is not amiss to observe that our blessed Saviour first taught this Prayer to be as a remedy and a reproof of the vain repetition of the Pharisees and besides that it was so à priori we also in the event see the excellent spirit and wisdom in the Constitution for those persons who have laid aside the Lords Prayer have been noted by common observation to be very long in their forms and troublesome and vain enough in their repetitions they have laid aside the medicine and the old wound bleeds afresh the Pharisees did so of old Sect. 83. AND after all this it is strange imployment that any man should be put to justifie the wisdom and prudence of any of Christs institutions as if any of his servants who are wise upon his Stock instructed by his Wisdom made knowing by his Revelations and whose all that is good is but a weak ray of the glorious light of the Sun of Righteousness should dare to think that the Derivative should be before the Primitive the Current above the Fountain and that we should derive all our excellency from him and yet have some beyond him that is some which he never had or which he was not pleased to manifest or that we should have a spirit of Prayer able to make productions beyond his Prayer who received the Spirit without measure But this is not the first time man hath disputed against God Sect. 84. AND now let us consider with sobriety not only of this excellent Prayer but of
expolit dicendi necessitas secundos impetus auget placendi cupido Adeò praemium omnia spectant ut eloquentia quoque quanquam plurimum habeat in se voluptatis maximè tamen praesenti fructu laudis opinionisque ducatur It may so happen that the opinion of the people as it is apt to actuate the faculty so also may encourage the practice and spoil the devotion But these things are accidental to the nature of the thing and therefore though they are too certainly consequent to the person yet I will not be too severe but preserve my self on the surer side of a charitable construction which truly I desire to keep not only to their persons whom I much reverence but also to their actions But yet I durst not do the same thing even for these last reasons though I had no other Sect. 115. IN the next place we must consider the next great objection that is with much clamor pretended viz. that in set Forms of Prayer we restrain and confine the blessed Spirit and in conceived Forms when every man is left to his liberty then the Spirit is free unlimited and unconstrained Sect. 116. I ANSWER Either their conceived forms I use their own words though indeed the expression is very inartificial are premeditate and described or they are ex tempore If they be premeditate and described then the Spirit is as much limited in their conceived forms as in the Churches conceived Forms For as to this particular it is all one who describes and limits the Form whether the Church or a single man does it still the Spirit is in constraint and limit So that in this case they are not angry at set Forms of Prayer but that they do not make them And if it be replyed that if a single person composes a set Form he may alter it if he please and so his Spirit is at liberty I answer so may the Church if She see cause for it and unless there be cause the single person will not alter it unless he do things unreasonable and without cause So that it will be an unequal challenge and a peevish quarrel to allow of set Forms of Prayer made by private Persons and not of set Forms made by the publick spirit of the Church It is evident that the Spirit is limited in both alike Sect. 117. BUT if by conceived Forms in this Objection they mean ex tempore Prayers for so they would be thought most generally to practise it and that in the use of these the liberty of the spirit is best preserved To this I answer that the being ex tempore or premediate will be wholly impertinent to this Question of limiting the spirit For there may be great liberty in set forms even when there is much variety and there may be great restraint in ex tempore Prayers even then when it shall be called unlawful to use set forms That the spirit is restrained or that it is free in either is accidental to them both for it may be either free or not free in both as it may happen Sect. 118. BUT the restraint is this that every one is not left to his liberty to pray how he list with premeditation or without it makes not much matter but that he is prescribed unto by the spirit of another But if it be a fault thus to restrain the Spirit I would fain know is not the Spirit restrained when the whole Congregation shall be confined to the form of this one mans composing Or shall it be unlawful or at least a disgrace and disparagement to use any set Forms especially of the Churches composition More plainly thus Sect. 119. SECONDLY Doth not the Minister confine and restrain the spirit of the Lords People when they are tied to his Form It would sound of more liberty to their spirits that every one might make a prayer of his own and all pray together and not be forced or confined to the Ministers single dictate and private spirit It is true it would breed confusions and therefore they might pray silently till the Sermon began and not for the avoiding one inconvenience run into a greater and to avoid the disorder of a popular noise restrain the blessed Spirit for even in this case as well as in the other where the Spirit of God is there must be liberty Sect. 120. THIRDLY If the spirit must be at liberty who shall assure us this liberty must be in Forms of Prayer And if so whether also it must be in publick Prayer and will it not suffice that it be in private and if in publick Prayers is not the liberty of the spirit sufficiently preserved that the publick Spirit is free That is the Church hath power upon occasion to alter and increase her Litanies By what argument shall any man make it so much as probable that the Holy Ghost is injured if every private Ministers private spirit shall be guided and therefore by necessary consequence limited by the authority of the Churches publick Spirit Sect. 121. FOURTHLY Does not the Directory that thing which is here called restraining of the Spirit Does it not appoint every thing but the words And after this is it not a goodly Palladium that is contended for and a princely liberty they leave unto the Spirit to be free only in the supplying the place of a Vocabulary and a Copia verborum For as for the matter it is all there described and appointed and to those determined sences the Spirit must assist or not at all only for the words he shall take his choice Now I desire it may be considered sadly and seriously Is it not as much injury to the Spirit to restrain his matter as to appoint his words Which is the more considerable of the two Sence or Language Matter or Words I mean when they are taken singly and separately For so they may very well be for as if men prescribe the matter only the Spirit may cover it with several words and expressions so if the Spirit prescribe the words I may still abound in variety of sence and preserve the liberty of my meaning we see that true in the various interpretations of the same words of Scripture So that in the greater of the two the Spirit is restrained when his matter is appointed and to make him amends for not trusting him with the matter without our directions and limitations we trust him to say what he pleases so it be to our sence to our purposes A goodly compensation surely Sect. 122. FIFTHLY Did not Christ restrain the spirit of his Apostles when he taught them to pray the Lords Prayer whether his precept to his Disciples concerning it was Pray this or Pray thus Pray these words or Pray after this manner Or though it had been less than either and been only a Directory for the matter still it is a thing which our brethren in all other cases of the same nature are resolved perpetually to call a
restraint Certainly then this pretended restraint is no such formidable thing These men themselves do it by directing all of the matter and much of the manner and Christ himself did it by prescribing both the matter and the words too Sect. 123. SIXTHLY These restraints as they are called or determinations of the Spirit are made by the Spirit himself For I demand when any Assembly of Divines appoint the matter of prayers to all particular Ministers as this hath done is that appointment by the Spirit or no If no then for ought appears this directory not being made by Gods Spirit may be an enemy to it But if this appointment be by the Spirit then the determination and limitation of the Spirit is by the spirit himself and such indeed is every pious and prudent constitution of the Church in matters spiritual Such as was that of St. Paul to the Corinthians when he prescribed orders for publick Prophesying and Interpretation and speaking with Tongues The Spirit of some he so restrained that he bound them to hold their peace he permitted but two or three to speak at one meeting the rest were to keep silence though possibly six or seven might at that time have the spirit Sect. 124. SEVENTHLY Is it not a restraint of the spirit to sing a Psalm in Metre by appointment Clearly as much as appointing Forms of prayer or Eucharist And yet that we see done daily and no scruple made Is not this to be partial in judgment and inconsiderate of what we do Sect. 125. EIGHTHLY And now after all this strife what harm is there in restraining the spirit in the present sence What prohibition What law What reason or revelation is against it What inconvenience in the nature of the thing For can any man be so weak as to imagine a despite is done to the spirit of grace when the gifts given to his Church are used regularly and by order As if prudence were no gift of Gods spirit as if helps in Government and the ordering spiritual matters were none of those graces which Christ when he ascended up on high gave unto men But this whole matter is wholly a stranger to reason and never seen in Scripture Sect. 126. FOR Divinity never knew any other vitious restraining the spirit but either suppressing those holy incitements to vertue and good life which God's Spirit ministers to us externally or internally or else a forbidding by publick authority the Ministers of the Word and Sacraments to speak such truths as God hath commanded and so taking away the liberty of prophesying The first is directly vitious in materia speciali The second is tyrannical and Antichristian And to it persecution of true Religion is to be reduced But as for this pretended limiting or restraining the Spirit viz. by appointing a regular Form of prayer it is so very a Chimaera that it hath no footing or foundation upon any ground where a wise man may build his confidence Sect. 127. NINTHLY But lastly how if the Spirit must be restrained and that by precept Apostolical That calls us to a new account But if it be not true what means Saint Paul by saying The spirits of the Prophets must be subject to the Prophets What greater restraint than subjection If subjected then they must be ruled if ruled then limited prescribed unto and as much under restraint as the spirits of the superiour Prophets shall judge convenient I suppose by this time this Objection will trouble us no more But perhaps another will Sect. 128. FOR Why are not the Ministers to be left as well to their liberty in making their Prayers as their Sermons I answer the Church may if she will but whether she doth well or no let her consider This I am sure there is not the same reason and I fear the experience the world hath already had of it will make demonstration enough of the inconvenience But however the differences are many Sect. 129. FIRST Our Prayers offered up by the Minister are in behalf and in the name of the People and therefore great reason they should know beforehand what is to be presented that if they like not the message they may refuse to communicate especially since people are so divided in their opinions in their hopes and in their faiths it being a duty to refuse communion with those prayers which they think to have in them the matter of sin or doubting Which reason on the other part ceases For the Minister being to speak from God to the people if he speaks what he ought not God can right himself however is not a partner of the sin as in the other case the people possibly may be Sect. 130. SECONDLY It is more fit a liberty be left in Preaching than Praying because the address of our discourses and exhortations are to be made according to the understanding and capacity of the audience their prejudices are to be removed all advantages to be taken and they are to be surprized that way they lie most open But being crafty I caught you saith St. Paul to the Corinthians And discourses and arguments ad hominem upon their particular principles and practises may more move them than the most polite and accurate that do not comply and wind about their fancies and affections St. Paul from the absurd practise of being baptized for the dead made an excellent Argument to convince the Corinthians of the Resurrection But this reason also ceases in our prayers For God understandeth what we say sure enough he hath no prejudices to be removed no infirmities to be wrought upon and a fine figure of Rhetorick a pleasant cadence and a curious expression move not him at all No other twinings and compliances stir him but charity and humility and zeal and importunity which all are things internal and spiritual It was observed by Pliny Deos non tam accuratis adorantium precibus quà m innocentiâ sanctitate laetari gratiorémque existimari qui delubris eorum puram castámque mentem quà m qui meditatum carmen intulerit And therefore of necessity there is to be great variety of discourses to the people and permissions accordingly but not so to God with whom a Deus miserere prevails as soon as the great Office of forty hours not long since invented in the Church of Rome or any other prayers spun out to a length beyond the extension of the office of a Pharisee Sect. 131. THIRDLY I fear it cannot stand with our reverence to God to permit to every spirit a liberty of publick address to him in behalf of the people Indeed he that is not fit to pray is not always fit to preach but it is more safe to be bold with the people than with God if the persons be not so fit In that there may be indiscretion but there may be impiety and irreligion in this The people may better excuse and pardon an indiscretion or a rudeness if any such should happen than
all the benefits which before were the consequents of Conformity and Unity will be lost and if they be not valuable I leave it to all them to consider who know the inconveniences of Publick disunion and the Publick disunion that is certainly consequent to them who do not communicate in any common forms of Worship and to think that the Directory will bring Conformity is as if one should say that all who are under the same Hemisphere are joyned in communi patriâ and will love like Country-men For under the Directory there will be as different religions and as different desires and as differing forms as there are several varieties of Men and manners under the one half of Heaven who yet breath under the same half of the Globe Sect. 139. BUT ask again what benefit can the publick receive by this form or this no form For I know not whether to call it Shall the matter of Prayers be better in all Churches shall God be better served shall the Word of God and the best Patterns of Prayers be always exactly followed It is well if it be But there is no security given us by the Directory for the particulars and special instances of the matter are left at every Mans dispose for all that and we must depend upon the honesty of every particular for it and if any man proves an Heretick or a Knave then he may introduce what impiety he please into the publick forms of Gods Worship and there is no law made to prevent it and it must be cured afterward if it can but before-hand it is not prevented at all by the Directory which trusts every man Sect. 140. BUT I observe that all the benefit which is pretended is that it will make an able Ministry Maximus verò studiorum fructus est praemium quoddam amplissimum longi laboris ex tempore dicendi facultas said an excellent person And it is very true to be able to speak excellent things without long considering is an effect of a long industry and greatest learning but certainly the greatest enemy in the world to its production Much learning and long use of speaking may enable a man to speak upon sudden occasions but speaking without consideration will never make much learning Nec quisquam tantum fidit ingenio ut sibi speret incipienti statim posse contingere sed sicut in cogitatione praecipimus ita facilitatem quoque extemporalâ—m à parvis initiis paulatim perducemus ad summam And to offer that as a means of getting learning which cannot be done at all as it ought but after learning is already gotten in a very great degree is highest mistaking I confess I am very much from believing the allegation and so will every man be that considers what kind of men they are that have been most zealous for that way of conceived Prayer I am sure that very few of the learnedst very many ignorants most those who have made least abode in the Schools of the Prophets And that I may disgrace no mans person we see Trades-men of the most illiberal arts and women pretend to it and do it with as many words and that 's the main thing with as much confidence and speciousness of spirit as the best amongst them Sed nec tumultuarii nec fortuiti sermonis contextum mirabor unquam quem jurgantibus etiam mulierculis superfluere video said Quintilian And it is but a small portion of learning that will serve a man to make conceived Forms of Prayer which they may have easily upon the stock of other men or upon their own fancy or upon any thing in which no learning is required He that knows not this knows nothing of the craft that may be in the Preachers trade But what Is God better served I would fain see any authority or any reason or any probability for that I am sure ignorant men offer him none of the best sacrifices ex tempore and learned men will be sure to deliberate and know God is then better served when he is served by a publick than when by a private Spirit I cannot imagine what accruements will hence come to the Publick it may be some advantages may be to the private interests of men For there are a sort of men whom our Blessed Saviour noted Who do devour Widows houses and for a pretence make long Prayers They make Prayers and they make them long by this means they receive double advantages for they get reputation to their ability and to their piety And although the Common-Prayer-Book in the Preface to the Directory be charged with unnecessary length yet we see that most of these men they that are most eminent or would be thought so make their Prayers longer and will not lose the benefits which their credit gets and they by their credit for making their Prayers Sect. 141. ADDE this that there is no promise in Scripture that he who prays ex tempore shall be heard the better or that he shall be assisted at all to such purposes and therefore to innovate in so high a matter without a warrant to command us or a promise to warrant us is no better than vanity in the thing and presumption in the person He therefore that considers that this way of Prayer is without all manner of precedent in the Primitive Church against the example of all famous Churches in all Christendom in the whole descent of XV Ages without all command or warrant of Scripture that it is unreasonable in the nature of the thing against prudence and the best wisdom of humanity because it is without Deliberation that it is innovation in a high degree without that authority which is truly and by inherent and Ancient right to command and prescribe to us in external Forms of Worship that it is much to the disgrace of the first Reformers of our Religion that it gives encouragement to the Church of Rome to quarrel with some reason and more pretence against our Reformation as being by the Directory confessed to have been done in much blindness and therefore might erre in the excess as well as in the defect throwing out too much as casting off too little which is the more likely because they wanted no zeal to carry them far enough He that considers the universal deformity of publick Worship and the no means of Union no Symbol of publick Communion being publickly consigned that all Heresies may with the same authority be brought into our Prayers and offered to God in the behalf of the people with the same authority that any truth may all the particular matter of our Prayers being left to the choice of all men of all perswasions and then observes that actually there are in many places Heresie and Blasphemy and Impertinency and illiterate Rudenesses put into the Devotion of the most solemn Days and the most publick Meetings and then lastly that there are divers parts of Liturgie for which no
provision at all is made in the Directorie and the very administration of the Sacraments left so loosely that if there be any thing essential in the Forms of Sacraments the Sacrament may become ineffectual for want of due Words and due Administration I say he that considers all these things and many more he may consider will find that particular men are not fit to be intrusted to offer in Publick with their private Spirit to God for the people in such Solemnities in matters of so great concernment where the Honour of God the benefit of the People the interest of Kingdoms the being of a Church the unity of Minds the conformity of Practice the truth of Perswasion and the salvation of Souls are so much concerned as they are in the publick Prayers of a whole National Church An unlearned man is not to be trusted and a Wise man dare not trust himself he that is ignorant cannot he that is knowing will not THE END OF THE SACRED ORDER AND OFFICES OF EPISCOPACY BY Divine Institution Apostolical Tradition and Catholick Practice TOGETHER WITH Their Titles of Honour Secular Imployment Manner of Election Delegation of their Power and other Appendant Questions Asserted against the Aërians and Acephali New and Old By JER TAYLOR D. D. and Chaplain in Ordinary to King CHARLES the First Published by His MAJESTIES Command ROM 13.1 There is no Power but of God The Powers that be are ordained of God CONCIL CHALCED 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 LONDON Printed for R. Royston Bookseller to the King 's most Excellent MAJESTY M DC LXXIII TO THE Truly Worthy and Most Accomplisht Sir CHRISTOPHER HATTON Knight of the Honourable Order of the BATH SIR I AM ingag'd in the defence of a Great Truth and I would willingly find a shroud to cover my self from danger and calumny and although the cause both is and ought to be defended by Kings yet my person must not go thither to Sanctuary unless it be to pay my devotion and I have now no other left for my defence I am robb'd of that which once did bless me and indeed still does but in another manner and I hope will do more but those distillations of celestial dews are conveyed in Channels not pervious to an eye of sense and now adays we seldom look with other be the object never so beauteous or alluring You may then think Sir I am forc'd upon You may that beg my pardon and excuse but I should do an injury to Your Nobleness if I should only make You a refuge for my need pardon this truth you are also of the fairest choice not only for Your love of Learning for although that be eminent in You yet it is not your eminence but for your duty to H. Church for Your loyalty to his sacred Majesty These did prompt me with the greatest confidence to hope for Your fair incouragement and assistance in my pleadings for Episcopacy in which cause Religion and Majesty the King and the Church are interested as parties of mutual concernment There was an odde observation made long ago and registred in the Law to make it authentick Laici sunt infensi Clericis Now the Clergie pray but fight not and therefore if not specially protected by the King contra Ecclesiam Malignantium they are made obnoxious to all the contumelies and injuries which an envious multitude will inflict upon them It was observ'd enough in King Edgars time Quamvis decreta Pontificum verba Sacerdotum inconvulsis ligaminibus velut fundamenta montiurn fixa sunt tamen plerumque tempestatibus turbinibus saecularium rerum Religio S. Matris Ecclesiae maculis reproborum dissipatur ac rumpitur Idcirco Decrevimus Nos c. There was a sad example of it in K. John's time For when he threw the Clergie from his Protection it is incredible what injuries what affronts what robberies yea what murders were committed upon the Bishops and Priests of H. Church whom neither the Sacredness of their persons nor the Laws of God nor the terrors of Conscience nor fears of Hell nor Church-censures nor the laws of Hospitality could protect from Scorn from blows from slaughter Now there being so near a tye as the necessity of their own preservation in the midst of so apparent danger it will tye the Bishops hearts and hands to the King faster than all the tyes of Lay-Allegiance all the Political tyes I mean all that are not precisely religious and obligations in the Court of Conscience 2. But the interest of the Bishops is conjunct with the prosperity of the King besides the interest of their own security by the obligation of secular advantages For they who have their livelihood from the King and are in expectance of their fortune from him are more likely to pay a tribute of exacter duty than others whose fortunes are not in such immediate dependency on his Majesty Aeneas Sylvius once gave a merry reason why Clerks advanced the Pope above a Council viz. because the Pope gave spiritual promotions but the Councils gave none It is but the common expectation of gratitude that a Patron Paramount shall be more assisted by his Beneficiaries in cases of necessity than by those who receive nothing from him but the common influences of Government 3. But the Bishops duty to the King derives it self from a higher fountain For it is one of the main excellencies in Christianity that it advances the State and well-being of Monarchies and bodies Politick Now then the Fathers of Religion are the Reverend Bishops whose peculiar office it is to promote the interests of Christianity are by the nature and essential requisites of their office bound to promote the Honour and Dignity of Kings whom Christianity would have so much honour'd as to establish the just subordination of people to their Prince upon better principles than ever no less than their precise duty to God and the hopes of a blissful immortality Here then is utile honestum and necessarium to tye Bishops in duty to Kings and a threefold Cord is not easily broken In pursuance of these obligations Episcopacy pays three returns of tribute to Monarchy 1. The first is the Duty of their people For they being by God himself set over souls judges of the most secret recesses of our Consciences and the venerable Priests under them have more power to keep men in their dutious subordination to the Prince than there is in any secular power by how much more forcible the impressions of the Conscience are than all the external violence in the world And this power they have fairly put into act for there was never any Protestant Bishop yet in Rebellion unless he turned recreant to his Order and it is the honour of the Church of England that all her Children and obedient people are full of indignation against Rebels be they of any interest or party whatsoever For here and for it we thank God and good Princes Episcopacy hath been preserved
concurrence of Jurisdiction this must be considered distinctly 1. Then In the first founding of Churches the Apostles did appoint Presbyters and inferiour Ministers with a power of baptizing preaching consecrating and reconciling in privato foro but did not in every Church at the first founding it constitute a Bishop This is evident in Crete in Ephesus in Corinth at Rome at Antioch 2. Where no Bishops were constituted there the Apostles kept the jurisdiction in their own hands There comes upon me saith S. Paul daily the care or supravision of all the Churches Not all absolutely for not all of the Circumcision but all of his charge with which he was once charged and of which he had not exonerated himself by constituting Bishops there for of these there is the same reason And again If any man obey not our word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie him to me by an Epistle so he charges the Thessalonians and therefore of this Church S. Paul as yet clearly kept the power in his own hands So that the Church was ever in all the parts of it governed by Episcopal or Apostolical authority 3. For ought appears in Scripture the Apostles never gave any external or coercitive jurisdiction in publick and criminal causes nor yet power to ordain Rites or Ceremonies or to inflict censures to a Colledge of meer Presbyters * The contrary may be greedily swallowed and I know not with how great confidence and prescribing prejudice but there is not in all Scripture any commission from Christ any ordinance or warrant from the Apostles to any Presbyter or Colledge of Presbyters without a Bishop or express delegation of Apostolical authority tanquam vicario suo as to his substitute in absence of the Bishop or Apostle to inflict any censures or take cognizance of persons and causes criminal Presbyters might be surrogati in locum Episcopi absentis but never had any ordinary jurisdiction given them by vertue of their ordination or any commission from Christ or his Apostles This we may best consider by induction of particulars 1. There was a Presbytery at Jerusalem but they had a Bishop always and the Colledge of the Apostles sometimes therefore whatsoever act they did it was in conjunction with and subordination to the Bishop and Apostles Now it cannot be denied both that the Apostles were superiour to all the Presbyters in Jerusalem and also had power alone to govern the Church I say they had power to govern alone for they had the government of the Church alone before they ordain'd the first Presbyters that is before there were any of capacity to joyn with them they must do it themselves and then also they must retain the same power for they could not lose it by giving Orders Now if they had a power of sole jurisdiction then the Presbyters being in some publick acts in conjunction with the Apostles cannot challenge a right of governing as affixed to their Order they only assisting in subordination and by dependency This only by the way In Jerusalem the Presbyters were something more than ordinary and were not meer Presbyters in the present and limited sence of the word For Barnabas and Judas and Silas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Luke calls them were of that Presbytery 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They were Rulers and Prophets Chief men amongst the Brethren and yet called Elders or Presbyters though of Apostolical power and authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Oecumenius For truth is that divers of them were ordained Apostles with an Vnlimited jurisdiction not fixed upon any See that they also might together with the twelve exire in totum mundum * So that in this Presbytery either they were more than meer Presbyters as Barnabas and Judas and Silas men of Apostolical power and they might well be in conjunction with the twelve and with the Bishop they were of equal power not by vertue of their Presbyterate but by their Apostolate or if they were but meer Presbyters yet because it is certain and proved and confessed that the Apostles had power to govern the Church alone this their taking meer Presbyteros in partem regiminis was a voluntary act and from this example was derived to other Churches and then it is most true that Presbyteros in communi Ecclesiam regere was rather consuetudine Ecclesiae dominicae dispositionis veritate to use S. Hierom's own expression for this is more evident than that Bishops do eminere caeteris by custom rather than Divine institution For if the Apostles might rule the Church alone then that the Presbyters were taken into the Number was a voluntary act of the Apostles and although fitting to be retained where the same reasons do remain and circumstances concur yet not necessary because not affixed to their Order not Dominicae dispositionis veritate and not laudable when those reasons cease and there is an emergency of contrary causes 2. The next Presbytery we read of is at Antioch but there we find no acts either of concurrent or single jurisdiction but of ordination indeed we do and that performed by such men as S. Paul was and Barnabas for they were two of the Prophets reckoned in the Church of Antioch but I do not remember them to be called Presbyters in that place to be sure they were not meer Presbyters as we now Understand the word as I proved formerly 3. But in the Church of Ephesus there was a Colledge of Presbyters and they were by the Spirit of God called Bishops and were appointed by him to be Pastors of the Church of God This must do it or nothing In quo spiritus S. posuit vos Episcopos In whom the holy Ghost hath made you Bishops There must lye the exigence of the argument and if we can find who is meant by vos we shall I hope gain the truth * S. Paul sent for the Presbyters or Elders to come from Ephesus to Miletus and to them he spoke ** It 's true but that 's not all the vos For there were present at that Sermon Sopater and Aristarchus and Secundus and Gaius and Timothy and Tychicus and Trophimus And although he sent to Ephesus as to the Metropolis and there many Elders were either accidentally or by ordinary residence yet those were not all Elders of that Church but of all Asia in the Scripture sence the lesser Asia For so in the Preface of his Sermon S. Paul intimates Ye know that from the first day I came into Asia after what manner I have been with you at all seasons His whole conversation in Asia was not confined to Ephesus and yet those Elders who were present were witnesses of it all and therefore were of dispersed habitation and so it is more clearly inferred from verse 25. And now behold I know that ye all among whom I have gone preaching the Kingdom of God c. It was a travel to preach to all that were present and therefore
Acta in the Scripture therefore by Gods Holy Spirit and the end he also specifies viz. for the honour of that sacred order non propter legis necessitatem not that there is any necessity of law that Confirmation should be administred by the Bishop Not that a Priest may do it but that as S. Hierome himself there argues the Holy Ghost being already given in baptism if it happens that Bishops may not be had for he puts the case concerning persons in bondage and places remote and destitute of Bishops then in that case there is not the absolute necessity of a Law that Confirmation should be had at all A man does not perish if he have it not for that this thing was reserved to a Bishops peculiar ministration was indeed an honour to the function but it was not for the necessity of a Law tying people in all cases actually to acquire it So that this non necessarium is not to be referred to the Bishops ministration as if it were not necessary for him to do it when it is to be done nor that a Priest may do it if a Bishop may not be had but this non-necessity is to be referred to Confirmation it self so that if a Bishop cannot be had Confirmation though with much loss yet with no danger may be omitted This is the summe of S. Hieroms discourse this reconciles him to himself this makes him speak conformably to his first assertions and consequently to his arguments and to be sure no exposition can make these words to intend that this reservation of the power of Confirmation to Bishops is not done by the spirit of God and then let the sence of the words be what they will they can do no hurt to the cause and as easily may we escape from those words of his to Rusticus Bishop of Narbona Sed quia scriptum est Presbyteri duplici honore honorentur praedicare eos decet utile est benedicere congruum confirmare c. It is quoted by Gratian dist 95. can ecce ego But the gloss upon the place expounds him thus i. e. in fide the Presbyters may preach they may confirm their Auditors not by consignation of Chrism but by confirmation of faith and for this quotes a parallel place for the use of the word Confirmare by authority of S. Gregory who sent Zachary his legate into Germany from the See of Rome Vt Orthodoxos Episcopos Presbyteros vel quoscunque reperir◠potuisset in verbo exhortationis perfectos ampliùs confirmaret Certainly S. Gregory did not intend that his legate Zachary should confirm Bishops and Priests in any other sence but this of S. Hierom's in the present to wit in faith and doctrine not in rite and mystery and neither could S. Hierome himself intend that Presbyters should do it at all but in this sence of S. Gregory for else he becomes an Antistrephon and his own opposite * Yea but there is a worse matter than this S. Ambrose tells of the Egyptian Priests that they in the absence of the Bishop do confirm Denique apud Egyptum Presbyteri consignant si praesens non sit Episcopus But 1. The passage is suspicious for it interrupts a discourse of S. Ambrose's concerning the Primitive Order of election to the Bishoprick and is no way pertinent to the discourse but is incircled with a story of a far different consequence which is not easily thought to have been done by any considering and intelligent Author 2. But suppose the clause be not surreptitious but natural to the discourse and born with it yet it is matter of fact not of right for S. Ambrose neither approves nor disproves it and so it must go for a singular act against the Catholick practice and Laws of Christendom 3. If the whole clause be not surreptitious yet the word Consignant is for S. Austin who hath the same discourse the same thing viz. of the dignity of Presbyters tells this story of the Act and honour of Presbyters in Alexandria and all Egppt almost in the other words of his Master S. Ambrose but he tells it thus Nam in Alexandriâ per totum Egyptum si desit Episcopus Consecrat Presbyter So that it should not be consignat but consecrat for no story tells of any confirmations done in Egypt by Presbyters but of consecrating the Eucharist in cases of Episcopal absence or commission I shall give account in the Question of jurisdiction that that was indeed permitted in Egypt some other places but Confirmation never that we can find elsewhere and this is too improbable to bear weight against evidence and practice Apostolical and four Councils and sixteen ancient Catholick Fathers testifying that it was a practice and a Law of Christendom that Bishops only should confirm and not Priests so that if there be no other scruple this Question is quickly at an end ** But S. Gregory is also pretended in objection for he gave dispensation to the Priests of Sardinia ut baptizatos Vnguant to aneal baptized people Now anointing the forehead of the baptized person was one of the solemnities of Confirmation so that this indulgence does arise to a power of Confirming for Vnctio and Chrismatio in the first Arausican Council and since that time Sacramentum Chrismatis hath been the usual word for Confirmation But this will not much trouble the business Because it is evident that he means it not of Confirmation but of the Chrisme in those times by the rites of the Church us'd in baptism For in his ninth Epistle he forbids Priests to anoint baptized people now here is precept against precept therefore it must be understood of several anointings and so S. Gregory expounds himself in this ninth Epistle Presbyteri baptizatos infantes signare bis infronte Chrismate non praesumant Presbyters may not anoint baptized people twice once they might now that this permission of anointing was that which was a ceremony of baptism not an act of confirmation we shall see by comparing it with other Canons In the collection of the Oriental Canons by Martinus Bracarensis It is decreed thus Presbyter praesente Episcopo non Signet infantes nisi forte ab Episcopo fuerit illi praeceptum A Priest must not sign infants without leave of the Bishop if he be present Must not sign them that is with Chrisme in their foreheads and that in baptism for the circumstant Canons do expresly explicate and determine it for they are concerning the rites of baptism and this in the midst of them And by the way this may answer S. Ambrose his Presbyteri consignant absente Episcopo in case it be so to be read for here we see a consignation permitted to the Presbyters in the Eastern Churches to be used in baptism in the absence of the Bishop and this an act of indulgence and favour and therefore extraordinary and of use to S. Ambrose his purpose of advancing the Presbyters
or understand it we lose our labour Quomodo enim id fiat ne in mente intelligere nec linguâ dicere possumus sed silentio firmâ fide id suscipimus We can perceive the thing by faith but cannot express it in words nor understand it with our mind said S. Bernard Oportet igitur it is at last after the steps of the former progress come to be a duty nos in sumptionibus Divinorum mysteriorum indubitatam retinere fidem non quaerere quo pacto The summe is this The manner was defined but very lately there is no need at all to dispute it no advantages by it and therefore it were better it were left at liberty to every man to think as he please for so it was in the Church for above a thousand years together and yet it were better men would not at all trouble themselves concerning it for it 's a thing impossible to be understood and therefore it is not fit to be inquired after This was their sence and I suppose we do in no sence prevaricate their so pious and prudent counsel by saying the presence of Christ is reall and spirituall because this account does still leave the Article in his deepest mystery not only because spiritual formalities and perfections are undiscernable and incommensurable by natural proportions and the measures of our usual notices of things but also because the word spiritual is so general a term and operations so various and many by which the Spirit of God brings his purposes to pass and does his work upon the soul that we are in this specifick term very far from limiting the Article to a minute and special manner Our word of spiritual presence is particular in nothing but that it excludes the corporal and natural manner we say it is not this but it is to be understood figuratively that is not naturally but to the purposes and in the manner of the Spirit and spiritual things which how they operate or are effected we know no more than we know how a Cherubin sings or thinks or by what private conveyances a lost notion returns suddenly into our memory and stands placed in the eye of reason Christ is present spiritually that is by effect and blessing which in true speaking is rather the consequent of his presence than the formality For though we are taught and feel that yet this we profess we cannot understand and therefore curiously inquire not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Justin Martyr it is a manifest argument of infidelity to inquire concerning the things of God How or after what manner And in this it was that many of the Fathers of the Church laid their hands upon their mouths and revered the Mystery but like the remains of the sacrifice they burnt it that is as themselves expound the allegory it was to be adored by Faith and not to be discussed with reason knowing that as Solomon said Scrutator Majestatis opprimetur à gloriâ He that pries too far into the Majesty shall be confounded with the Glory 3. So far it was very well and if error or interest had not unravelled the secret and looked too far into the Sanctuary where they could see nothing but a cloud of fire Majesty and Secrecy indiscriminately mixt together we had kneeled before the same Altars and adored the same mystery and communicated in the same rites to this day For in the thing it self there is no difference amongst wise and sober persons nor ever was till the manner became an Article and declared or supposed to be of the substance of the thing But now the state of the question is this 4. The doctrine of the Church of England and generally of the Protestants in this Article is That after the Minister of the holy mysteries hath ritely prayed and blessed or consecrated the bread and the wine the symbols become changed into the body and blood of Christ after a Sacramental that is in a spiritual real manner so that all that worthily communicate do by faith recive Christ really effectually to all the purposes of his passion The wicked receive not Christ but the bare symbols only but yet to their hurt because the offer of Christ is rejected and they pollute the blood of the Covenant by using it as an unholy thing The result of which doctrine is this It is bread and it is Christs body It is bread in substance Christ in the Sacrament and Christ is as really given to all that are truly disposed as the symbols are each as they can Christ as Christ can be given the bread and wine as they can and to the same real purposes to which they are designed and Christ does as really nourish and sanctifie the soul as the elements do the body It is here as in the other Sacrament for as there natural water becomes the laver of regeneration so here bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ but there and here too the first substance is changed by grace but remains the same in nature 5. That this is the doctrine of the Church of England is apparent in the Church Catechism affirming the inward part or thing signified by the consecrated bread and wine to be The body and blood of Christ which are verily and indeed taken and received of the faithful in the Lords Supper and the benefit of it to be the strengthening and refreshing of our souls by the body and blood of Christ as our bodies are by the bread and wine and the same is repeated severally in the exhortation and in the prayer of the address before the consecration in the Canon of our Communion verily and indeed is reipsâ that 's really enough that 's our sence of the Real Presence and Calvin affirms as much saying In the Supper Christ Jesus viz. his body and blood is truly given under the signs of bread and wine And Gregory de Valentiâ gives this account of the doctrine of the Protestants that although Christ be corporally in Heaven yet is he received of the faithful communicants in this Sacrament truly both spiritually by the mouth of the mind through a most near conjunction of Christ with the soul of the receiver by faith and also sacramentally with the bodily mouth c. And which is the greatest testimony of all we who best know our own minds declare it to be so 6. Now that the spiritual is also a real presence and that they are hugely consistent is easily credible to them that believe that the gifts of the holy Ghost are real graces and a Spirit is a proper substance and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are amongst the Hellenists 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intelligible things or things discerned by the mind of a man are more truly and really such and of a more excellent substance and reality than things only sensible And therefore when things spiritual are signified by materials the thing under the figure is called true
and the material part is opposed to it as less true or real The examples of this are not infrequent in Scripture The Tabernacle into which the high Priest entred was a type or a figure of Heaven Heaven it self is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the true Tabernacle and yet the other was the material part And when they are joyned together that is when a thing is expressed by a figure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 True is spoken of such things though they are spoken figuratively Christ the true light that lighteneth every man that cometh into the world He is also the true vine and verè cibus truly or really meat and Panis verus è coelo the true bread from Heaven and spiritual goods are called the true riches and in the same Analogy the spiritual presence of Christ is the most true real and effective the other can be but the image and shadow of it something in order to this for if it were in the Sacrament naturally or corporeally it could be but in order to this spiritual celestial and effective presence as appears beyond exception in this that the faithful and pious communicants receive the ultimate end of his presence that is spiritual blessings The wicked who by the affirmation of the Roman Doctors do receive Christs body and blood in the natural and corporal manner fall short of that for which this is given that is of the blessings and benefits 7. So that as S. Paul said He is not a Jew who is one outwardly neither is that circumcision which is outwardly in the flesh But he is a Jew which is one inwardly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that 's the real Jew and the true circumcision that which is of the heart and in the spirit and in this sence it is that Nathaniel is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 really and truly an Israelite so we may say of the blessed Sacrament Christ is more truly and really present in spiritual presence than in corporal in the Heavenly effect than in the natural being this if it were at all can be but the less perfect and therefore we are to the most real purposes and in the proper sence of Scripture the more real defenders of the real presence of Christ in the Sacrament for the spiritual sence is the most real and most true and most agreeable to the Analogy and style of Scripture and right reason and common manner of speaking For every degree of excellency is a degree of being of reality and truth and therefore spiritual things being more excellent than corporal and natural have the advantage both in truth and reality And this is fully the sence of the Christians who use the Aegyptian Liturgy Sanctifica nos Domine noster sicut sanctificasti has oblationes propositas sed fecisti illas non fictas that 's for real quicquid apparet est mysterium tuum spiritale that 's for spiritual To all which I add the testimony of Bellarmine concerning S. Austin Apud Augustinum saepissimè illud solum dici tale verè tale quod habet effectum suum conjunctum res enim ex fructu aestimatur itaque illos dicit verè comedere corpus Christi qui utiliter comedunt They only truly eat Christs body that eat it with effect for then a thing is really or truly such when it is not to no purpose when it hath his effect And in his eleventh Book against Faustus the Manichee Chap. 7. he shews that in Scripture the words are often so taken as to signifie not the substance but the quality and effect of a thing So when it is said Flesh and blood shall not inherit the Kingdom of God that is corruption shall not inherit and in the resurrection our bodies are said to be spiritual that is not in substance but in effect and operation and in the same manner he often speaks concerning the blessed Sacrament and Clemens Romanus affirms expresly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is to drink the blood of Jesus to partake of the Lords immortality 8. This may suffice for the word real which the English Papists much use but as appears with less reason than the Sons of the Church of England and when the real presence is denied the word real is taken for Natural and does not signifie transcendenter or in his just and most proper signification But the word substantialiter is also used by Protestants in this question which I suppose may be the same with that which is in the Article of Trent Sacramentaliter praesens Salvator substantiâ suâ nobis adest In substance but after a sacramental manner which words if they might be understood in the sence in which the Protestants use them that is really truly without fiction or the help of fancy but in rei veritate so as Philo calls spiritual things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most necessary useful and material substances it might become an instrument of an united confession And this is the manner of speaking which S. Bernard used in his Sermon of S. Martin where he affirms In Sacramento exhiberi nobis veram carnis substantiam sed spiritualiter non carnaliter In the Sacrament is given us the true substance of Christs body or flesh but not carnally but spiritually that is not to our mouths but to our hearts not to be chewed by teeth but to be eaten by faith But they mean it otherwise as I shall demonstrate by and by In the mean time it is remarkable that Bellarmine when he is stating this question seems to say the same thing for which he quotes the words of S. Bernard now mentioned for he says that Christs body is there truly substantially really but not corporally Nay you may say spiritually and now a man would think we had him sure but his nature is labile and slippery you are never the nearer for this for first he says it is not safe to use the word spiritually nor yet safe to say he is not there corporally lest it be understood not of the manner of his presence but to the exclusion of the nature For he intends not for all these fine words that Christs body is present spiritually as the word is used in Scripture and in all common notices of usual speaking but spiritually with him signifies after the manner of spirits which besides that it is a cousening the world in the manner of expression is also a direct folly and contradiction that a body should be substantially present that is with the nature of a body naturally and yet be not as a body but as a spirit with that manner of being with which a spirit is distinguished from a body In vain therefore it is that he denies the carnal manner and admits a spiritual and ever after requires that we believe a carnal presence even in the very manner But this caution and exactness in the use of the
word spiritual is therefore carefully to be observed lest the contention of both parties should seem trifling and to be for nothing We say that Christs body is in the Sacrament really but spiritually They say it is there really but spiritually For so Bellarmine is bold to say that the word may be allowed in this question Where now is the difference Here by spiritually they mean present after the manner of a Spirit by spiritually we mean present to our Spirits only that is so as Christ is not present to any other sense but that of Faith or spiritual susception but their way makes his body to be present no way but that which is impossibe and implies a contradiction a body not after the manner of a body a body like a spirit a body without a body and a sacrifice of body and blood without blood corpus incorporeum cruor incruentus They say that Christs body is truly present there as it was upon the Cross but not after the manner of all or any body but after that manner of being as an Angel is in a place That 's there spiritually But we by the real spiritual presence of Christ do understand Christ to be present as the Spirit of God is present in the hearts of the Faithful by blessing and grace and this is all which we mean besides the tropical and figurative presence 9. That which seems of hardest explication is the word corporaliter which I find that Melanchthon used saying corporaliter quoque communicatione carnis Christi Christum in nobis habitare which manner of speaking I have heard he avoided after he had conversed with Oecolampadius who was able then to teach him and most men in that question but the expression may become warrantable and consonant to our doctrine and means no more than really and without fiction or beyond a figure like that of S. Paul in Christ dwelleth the fulness of the Godhead bodily upon which S. Austin says In ipso inhabitat plenitudo Divinitatis corporaliter quia in Templo habitaverat umbraliter and in S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are opposed which are a shadow of things to come but the body is of Christ that is the substance the reality the correlative of the type and figure the thing signified and among the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies solidare to make firm real and consistent but among the Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or body signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every thing that is produced from nothing saith Phavorinus that is every thing that is real extra non ens that hath a proper being so that we receiving Christ in the Sacrament corporally or bodily understand that we do it really by the ministery of our bodies receiving him unto our souls And thus we affirm Christs body to be present in the Sacrament not only in type or figure but in blessing and real effect that is more than in the types of the Law the shadows were of the Law but the body is of Christ. And besides this the word corporally may be very well used when by it is only understood a corporal sign So S. Cyril of Jerusalem in his third Catechism says that the holy Ghost did descend corporally in the likeness of a Dove that is in a type or representment of a Doves body for so he and many of the Ancients did suppose and so he again uses the word Jesus Christ as a man did inspire the holy Spirit corporally into his Apostles where by corporally it is plain he means by a corporal or material sign or symbol viz. by breathing upon them and saying receive ye the holy Ghost In either of these sences if the word be taken it may indifferently be used in this question 10. I have been the more careful to explain the question and the use of these words according to our meaning in the question for these two reasons 1. Because until we are agreed upon the signification of the words they are equivocal and by being used on both sides to several purposes sometime are pretended as instruments of union but indeed effect it not but sometimes displease both parties while each supects the word in a wrong sence And this hath with very ill effect been observed in the conferences for composing the difference in this question particularly that of Poissy where it was propounded in these words Credimus in usu coenae Dominicae verè reipsâ substantialiter sen in substantiâ verum corpus sanguinem Christi spirituali ineffabili modo esse exhiberi sumi à fidelibus communicantibus Beza and Gallasius for the Reformed and Espencaeus and Monlucius for the Romanists undertook to propound it to their parties But both rejected it for though the words were not disliked yet they suspected each others sence But now that I have declared what is meant by us in these words they are made useful in the explicating the question 2. But because the words do perfectly declare our sence and are owned publickly in our doctrine and manner of speaking it will be in vain to object against us those sayings of the Fathers which use the same expressions for if by vertue of those words really substantially corporally verily and indeed and Christs body and blood the Fathers shall be supposed to speak for transubstantiation they may as well suppose it to be our doctrine too for we use the same words and therefore those authorities must signifie nothing against us unless these words can be proved in them to signifie more than our sence of them does import and by this truth many very many of their pretences are evacuated 11. One thing more I am to note in order to the same purposes that in the explication of this question it is much insisted upon that it be inquired whether when we say we believe Christs body to be really in the Sacrament we mean that body that flesh that was born of the Virgin Mary that was crucified dead and buried I answer I know none else that he had or hath there is but one body of Christ natural and glorified but he that says that body is glorified which was crucified says it is the same body but not after the same manner and so it is in the Sacrament we eat and drink the body and blood of Christ that was broken and powred forth for there is no other body no other blood of Christ but though it is the same which we eat and drink yet it is in another manner And therefore when any of the Protestant Divines or any of the Fathers deny that body which was born of the Virgin Mary that which was crucified to be eaten in the Sacrament as Bertram as S. Hierome as Clemens Alexandrinus expresly affirm the meaning is easie they intend that it is not eaten in a natural sence and then calling it corpus spirituale the word spiritual is not a substantial predication
is in order to the act and therefore is nothing of it self and is only the imperfection of or passage to the act if therefore the act were not necessary neither were the disposition but if the act be necessary then the desire which is but the disposition to the act is not sufficient As if it be necessary to go from Oxford to London then it is necessary that you go to Henly or Vxbridge but if it be necessary to be at London it is not sufficient to go to Vxbridge but if it be not necessary to be at London neither is it necessary to go so far But this distinction as it is commonly used is made to serve ends and is grown to that inconvenience that repentance it self is said to be sufficient if it be only in desire for so they must that affirm repentance in the Article of death after a wicked life to be sufficient when it is certain there can be nothing actual but infective desires and all the real and most material events of it cannot be performed but desired only But whosoever can be excused from the actual susception of a Sacrament can also in an equal necessity be excused from the desire and no man can be tied to an absolute irrespective desire of that which cannot be had and if it can the desire alone will not serve the turn And indeed a desire of a thing when we know it cannot be had is a temptation either to impatience or a scruple and why or how can a man be obliged to desire that to be done which in all his circumstances is not necessary it should be done A preparation of mind to obey in those circumstances in which it is possible that is in which he is obliged is the duty of every man but this is not an explicite desire of the actual susception which in his case is not obligatory because it is impossible And lastly such a desire of a thing is wholly needless because in the present case the thing it self is not necessary therefore neither is the desire neither did God ever require it but in order to the act But however if we find by discourse that for all these decretory words the desire can suffice I demand by what instrument is that accepted whether by faith or no I suppose it will not be denied But if it be not denied then a spiritual manducation can perform the duty of those words for susception of the Sacrament in desire is at the most but a spiritual manducation And S. Austin affirms that Baptism can perform the duty of those words if Beda quotes him right for in his Sermon to Infants and in his third book de peccatorum meritis remissione he affirms that in Baptism Infants receive the Body of Christ So that these words may as well be understood of Baptism as of the Eucharist and of Faith better than either 5. The men of Capernaum understood Christ to speak these words of his natural flesh and blood and were scandalized at it and Christ reproved their folly by telling them his words were to be understood in a spiritual sence So that if men would believe him that knew best the sence of his own words there need be no scruple of the sence I do not understand these words in a fleshly sence but in a spiritual saith Christ The flesh profiteth nothing the words that I have spoken they are spirit and they are life Now besides that the natural sence of the words hath in it too much of the sence of the offended Disciples the reproof and consultation of it is equally against the Romanists as against the Capernaites For we contend it is spiritual so Christ affirmed it they that deny the Spiritual sence and affirm the Natural are to remember that Christ reproved all sences of these words that were not spiritual And by the way let me observe that the expression of some chief men among the Romanists are so rude and crass that it will be impossible to excuse them from the understanding the words in the sence of the men of Capernaum for as they understood Christ to mean his true flesh natural and proper so do they as they thought Christ intended they should tear him with their teeth and suck his blood for which they were offended so do these men not only think so but say so and are not offended So said Alanus Apertissimè loquimur corpus Christi verè à nobis contrectari manducari circumgestari dentibus teri sensibiliter sacrificari non minùs quà m ante consecrationem panis And they frequently quote those Metaphors of S. Chrysostom which he preaches in the height of his Rhetorick as testimonies of his opinion in the doctrinal part and Berengarius was forced by Pope Nicholas to recant in those very words affirming that Christâ—s body sensualiter non solùm Sacramento sed in veritate manibus Sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri that Christ's flesh was sensually not only in the Sacrament but in truth of the thing to be handled by the Priests hands to be broken and grinded by the teeth of the faithful Insomuch that the gloss on the Canon de Consecratione dist 2. cap. Ego Berengarius affirms it to be a worse heresie than that of Berengarius unless it be so soberly understood to which also Cassander assents and indeed I thought that the Romanists had been glad to separate their own opinion from the carnal conceit of the men of Capernaum and the offended Disciples supposing it to be a great Objection against their Doctrine that it was the same with the men of Capernaum and is only finer dressed But I find that Bellarmine owns it even in them in their rude circumstances for he affirms that Christ corrected them not for supposing so but reproved them for not believing it to be so And indeed himself sayes as much Corpus Christi verè ac propriè manducari etiam corpore in Eucharistiâ the body of Christ is truly and properly manducated or chewed with the body in the Eucharist and to take off the foulness of the expression by avoiding a worse he is pleased to speak nonsence Nam ad rationem manducationis non est mera attritio sed satis est sumptio transmissio ab ore ad stomachum per instrumena humana A thing may be manducated or chewed though it be not attrite or broken If he had said it might be swallowed and not chewed he had said true but to say it may be chewed without chewing or breaking is a Riddle fit to spring from the miraculous doctrine of Transubstantiation and indeed it is a pretty device that we take the flesh and swallow down flesh and yet manducate or chew no flesh and yet we swallow down only what we manducate Accipite manducate were the words in the institution And indeed according to this device there were no difference between eating and drinking and
meaning nothing to the giving of life So that here we have besides his authority an excellent Argument for us Christ said he that eateth my flesh hath life but the flesh that is the fleshly sence of it profits nothing to life but the Spirit that is the spiritual sence does therefore these words are to be understood in a spiritual sence 9. And because it is here opportune by occasion of this discourse let me observe this that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is infinitely useless and to no purpose For by the words of our Blessed Lord by the Doctrine of Saint Paul and the sence of the Church and the confession of all sides the natural eating of Christ's flesh if it were there or could so be eaten alone or of it self does no good does not give life but the spiritual eating of him is the instrument of life to us and this may be done without their Transubstantiated flesh it may be done in Baptisme by Faith and Charity by Hearing and understanding and therefore it may also in the blessed Eucharist although there also according to our Doctrine he be eaten only Sacramentally and Spiritually And hence it is that in the Mass-book anciently it is prayed after consecration Quaesumus Omnipotens Deus ut de perceptis muneribus gratias exhibentes beneficia potiora sumamus We beseech thee Almighty God that we giving thanks for these gifts received may receive greater gifts which besides that it concludes against the Natural Presence of Christ's body for what greater thing can we receive if we receive that it also declares that the grace and effect of the Sacramental communion is the thing designed beyond all corporal sumption and as it is more fully express'd in another Collect Vt terrenis affectibus expiati ad superni plenitudinem Sacramenti cujus libavimus sancta tendamus that being redeemed from all earthly affections we may tend to the fulness of the Heavenly Sacrament the Holy things of which we have now begun to taste And therefore to multiply so many miracles and contradictions and impossibilities to no purpose is an insuperable prejudice against any pretence less than a plain declaration from God Add to this that this bodily presence of Christ's body is either for corporal nourishment or for spiritual Not for Corporal for Natural food is more proper for it and to work a Miracle to do that for which so many Natural means are already appointed is to no purpose and therefore cannot be supposed to be done by God neither is it done for spiritual nourishment because to the spiritual nourishment vertues and graces the word and the efficacious signs faith and the inward actions and all the emanations of the Spirit are as proportion'd as meat and drink are to natural nourishment and therefore there can be no need of a Corporal Presence 2. Corporal manducation of Christ's body is apparently inconsistent with the nature and condition of a body 1. Because that which is after the manner of a spirit and not of a body cannot be eaten and drunk after the manner of a body but of a spirit as no man can eat a Cherubin with his mouth if he were made apt to nourish the soul but by the confession of the Roman Doctors Christ's body is present in the Eucharist after the manner of a spirit therefore without proportions to our body or bodily actions 2. That which neither can feel or be felt see or be seen move or be mov'd change or be changed neither do or suffer corporally cannot certainly be eaten corporally but so they affirm concerning the body of our blessed Lord it cannot do or suffer corporally in the Sacrament therefore it cannot be eaten corporally any more than a man can chew a spirit or eat a meditation or swallow a syllogism into his belly This would be so far from being credible that God should work so many Miracles in placing Christ's Natural body for spiritual nourishment that in case it were revealed to be placed there to that purpose it self must need one great Miracle more to verifie it and reduce it to act and it would still be as difficult to explain as it is to tell how the material fire of Hell should torment spirits and souls And Socrates in Plato's Banquent said well Wisdom is not a thing that can be communicated by local or corporal contiguity 3. That the Corporal presence does not nourish spiritually appears because some are nourished spiritually who do not receive the Sacrament at all and some that do receive yet fall short of being spiritually nourished and so do all unworthy Communicants This therefore is to no purpoose and therefore cannot be supposed to be done by the wise God of all the World especially with so great a pomp of Miracles 4. Cardinal Perron affirms that the Real Natural presence of Christ in the Sacrament is to greatest purpose because the residence of Christ's Natural body in our bodies does really and substantially joyn us unto God establishing a true and real Unity between God and Men. And Bellarmine speaks something like this de Euchar. l. 3. c. 9. But concerning this besides that every faithful soul is actually united to Christ without the actual residence of Christ's body in our bodies since every one that is regenerated and born a new of water and of the Spirit is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same plant with Christ as Saint Paul calls him Rom. 6.5 He hath put on Christ he is bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh Galat. 3.27 Ephes. 5.30 and all this by Faith by Baptism by regeneration of the Spirit besides this I say this corporal union of our bodies to the body of God incarnate which these great and witty Dreamers dream of would make man to be God For that which hath a real and substantial unity with God is consubstantial with the true God that is he is really substantially and truly God which to affirm were highest blasphemy 5. One device more there is to pretend an usefulness of the Doctrine of Christ's Natural presence viz. that by his contact and conjunction it becomes the cause and the seed of the Resurrection But besides that this is condemn'd by Vasquez as groundless and by Suarez as improbable and a novel temerity it is highly confuted by their own Doctrine For how can the contact or touch of Christ's body have that or any effect on ours when it can neither be touch'd nor seen nor understood but by faith which Bellarmine expresly affirms But to return from whence I am digressed Tertullian adds in the same place Quia sermo caro erat factus proinde in causam vitae appetendus devorandus auditu ruminandus intellectu fide digerendus Nam paulò antè carnem suam panem quoque coelestem pronunciârat urgens usquequaque per allegoriam necessariorum pabulorum memoriam Patrum qui panes carnes Egyptiorum praeverterant
second or third remove if here Christ begins to change the particulars of his discourse it can primarily relate to nothing but his death upon the Cross at which time he gave his flesh for the life of the world and so giving it it became meat the receiving this gift was a receiving of life for it was given for the life of the world The manner of receiving it is by faith and hearing the word of God submitting our understanding the digesting this meat is imitating the life of Christ conforming to his doctrine and example and as the Sacraments are instruments or acts of this manducation so they come under this discourse and no otherwise 18. But to return This very allegory of the word of God to be called meat and particularly Manna which in this Chapter Christ particularly alludes to is not unusual in the old Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Philo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Moses said unto them This is the word which the Lord hath given us to eat This is the word which the Lord hath ordained you see what is the food of the soul even the eternal Word of God c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Word of God the most honourable and eldest of things is called Mana and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The soul is nourished by the Word qui pastus pulcherrimus est animorum 19. And therefore now I will resume those testimonies of Clemens Alexandrinus of Eusebius S. Basil S. Hierome and S. Bernard which I wav'd before all agreeing upon this exposition that the word of God Christs doctrine is the flesh he speaks of and the receiving it and practising it are the eating his flesh for this sence is the literal and proper and S. Hierom is express to affirm that the other exposition is mystical and that this is the more true and proper and therefore the saying of Bellarmine that they only give the mystical sence is one of his confident sayings without reason or pretence of proof and whereas he adds that they do not deny that these words are also understood literally of the Sacrament I answer it is sufficient that they agree in this sence and the other Fathers do so expound it with an exclusion to the natural sence of eating Christ in the Sacrament particularly this appears in the testimonies of Origen and Saint Ambrose above quoted to which I add the words of Eusebius in the third book of his Theologia Ecclesiastica expounding the 63. verse of the sixth of Saint John he brings in Christ speaking thus Think not that I speak of this flesh which I bear and do not imagine that I appoint you to drink this sensible and corporal blood But know ye that the words which I have spoken are spirit and life Nothing can be fuller to exclude their interpretation and to affirm ours though to do so be not usual unless they were to expound Scripture in opposition to an adversary and to require such hard conditions in the sayings of men that when they speak against Titius they shall be concluded not to speak against Cajus if they do not clap their contrary negative to their positive affirmative though Titius and Cajus be against one another in the cause is a device to escape rather than to intend truth and reality in the discourses of men I conclude It is notorious and evident what Erasmus notes upon this place Hunc locum veteres interpretantur de doctrinâ coelesti sic enim dicit panem suum ut frequenter dixit sermonem suum The Ancient Fathers expound this place of the heavenly doctrine so he calls the bread his own as he said often the word to be his And if the concurrent testimonies of Origen Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus S. Basil Athanasius Eusebius S. Hierom S. Ambrose S. Austin Theophylact and S. Bernard are a good security for the sence of a place of Scripture we have read their evidence and may proceed to sentence 20. But it was impossible but these words falling upon the allegory of bread and drink and signifying the receiving Christ crucified and communicating with his passion in all the wayes of Faith and Sacrament should also meet with as allegorical expounders and for the likeness of expression be referr'd to sacramental manducation And yet I said this cannot at all infer Transubstantiation though sacramental manducation were only and principally intended For if it had been spoken of the Sacrament the words had been verified in the spiritual sumption of it for as Christ is eaten by faith out of the Sacrament so is he also in the Sacrament as he is real and spiritual meat to the worthy Hearer so is he to the worthy Communicant as Christ's flesh is life to all that obey him so to all that obediently remember him so Christ's flesh is meat indeed however it be taken if it be taken spiritually but not however it be taken if it be taken carnally He is nutritive in all the wayes of spiritual manducation but not in all the wayes of natural eating by their own confession nor in any by ours And therefore it is a vain confidence to run away with the conclusion if they should gain one of the premises But the truth is this It is neither properly spoken of the Sacrament neither if it were would it prove any thing of Transubstantiation 21. I will not be alone in my assertion though the reasonableness and evidence would bear me out Saint Austin saith the same Spiritualiter intelligite quod loquutus sum vobis Non hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturi estis Sacramentum aliquod commendavi vobis spiritualiter intellectum vivificabit nos That which I have spoken is to be understood spiritually ye are not to eat that body which ye see I have commended a Sacrament to you which being understood spiritually will give you life where besides that he gives testimony to the main question on our behalf he also makes sacramentally and spiritually to be all one And again Vt quia jam similitudinem mortis ejus in baptismo accipimus similitudinem quoque sanguinis carnis sumamus ita ut veritas non desit in sacramento ridiculum nullum fiat in Paganis quod cruorem occisi hominis bibamus That as we receive the similitude of his Death in Baptism so we may also receive the likeness of his Flesh and Blood so that neither truth be wanting in the Sacrament nor the Pagans ridiculously affirm that we should drink the blood of the crucified Man Nothing could be spoken more plain in this Question We receive Christ's body in the Eucharist as we are baptized into his death that is by figure and likeness In the Sacrament there is a verity or truth of Christ's body and yet no drinking of blood or eating of flesh so as the Heathen may calumniate us by saying we do that which the men of Capernaum thought Christ taught
Symbol the name of his body and S. Cyprian speaks expresly to this purpose as you may see above Sect. 5. n. 9. 9. Sixthly The strange inconveniences and impossibilities the scandals and errours the fancy of the Capernaites and the temptations to faith arising from the literal sence of these words have been in other cases thought sufficient by all men to expound words of Scripture by tropes and allegories The heresie of the Authropomorphites and the Euchitae and the doctrine of the Chiliasts and Origen gelding himself proceeded from the literal sence of some texts of Scripture against which there is not the hundred part of so much presumption as I shall in the sequel make to appear to lie against this And yet no man puts out his right eye literally or cuts off his right hand to prevent a scandal Certain it is there hath been much greater inconvenience by following the letter of these words of institution than of any other in Scripture by so much as the danger of Idolatry and actual tyranny and uncharitable damning others and schism are worse than any temporal inconvenience or an error in a matter of speculation 10. Seventhly I argue out of S. Austins grounds thus As the Fathers did eat Christs body so do we under a diverse Sacrament and different symbols but in all the same reality whatsoever we eat the same they did eat for the difference is this only they received Christ by faith in him that was to come and we by faith in him that is come already but they had the same real benefit Christ as really as we for they had salvation as well as we But the fathers could not eat Christs flesh in a natural manner for it was not yet assumed and though it were as good an argument against our eating of it naturally that it is gone from us into heaven yet that which I now insist upon is that it was cibus spiritualis which they eat under the Sacrament of Manna therefore we under the Sacrament of bread and wine eating the same meat eat only Christ in a spiritual sence that is our spiritual meat And this is also true in the other Sacraments of the Rock and the Cloud Our Fathers eat of the same spiritual meat and drank of the same spiritual drink that is Christ so he afterwards expounds it Now if they did eat and drink Christ that is were by him in sacrament and to all reality of effect nourished up to life eternal why cannot the same spiritual meat do the same thing for us we receiving it also in sacrament and mystery 2. To which I add that all they that do communicate spiritually do receive all the blessing of the Sacrament which could not be unless the mystery were only sacramental mysterious and spiritual Maldonate speaking of something of this from the authority of S. Austin is of opinion that if S. Austin were now alive in very spite to the Calvinists he would have expounded that of Manna otherwise than he did It seems he lived in a good time when malice and the spirit of contradiction was not so much in fashion in the interpretations of the Scripture 11. Now let it be considered whether all that I have said be not abundantly sufficient to out-weigh their confidence of the literal sence of these sacramental words They find the words spoken they say they are literally to be understood they bring nothing considerable for it there is no Scripture that so expounds it there is no reason in the circumstances of the words but there is all the reason of the world against it as I have and shall shew and such for the meanest of which very many other places of Scripture are drawn from the literal sence and rest in a tropical and spiritual Now in all such cases when we find an inconvenience press the literal expression of a text instantly we find another that is figurative and why it is not so done in this the interest and secular advantages which are consequent to this opinion of the Church of Rome may give sufficient account In the mean time we have reason not to admit of the literal sence of these words not only by the analogy of other sacramental expressions in both Testaments I mean that of Circumcision and the Passeover in the Old and Baptism as Christ discoursed it to Nicodemus in the New Testament but also 2. Because the literal sence of the like words in this very Article introduced the Heresie of the Capernaites and 3. Because the subject and the predicate in the words of institution are diverse and disparate and cannot possibly be spoken of each other properly 4. The words in the natural and proper sence seem to command an unnatural thing the eating of flesh 5. They rush upon infinite impossibilities they contradict sence and reason the principles and discourses of all mankind and of all Philosophy 6. Our blessed Saviour tells us that the flesh profiteth nothing and as themselves pretend even in this mystery that his words were spirit and life 7. The literal sence cannot be explicated by themselves nor by any body for them 8. It is against the Analogy of other Scriptures 9. It is to no purpose 10. Upon the literal sence of the words the Church could not confute the Marcionites Eutychians Nestorians the Aquarii 11. It is against antiquity 12. The whole form of words in every of the members is confessed to be figurative by the opposite party 13. It is not pretended to be verifiable without an infinite company of miracles all which being more than needs and none of them visible but contestations against art and the notices of two or three sciences cannot be supposed to be done by God who does nothing superfluously 14. It seems to contradict an Article of faith viz. of Christs sitting in Heaven in a determinate place and being contained there till his second coming Upon these considerations and upon the account of all the particular arguments which I have and shall bring against it it is not unreasonable neither can it seem so that we decline the letter and adhere to the spirit in the sence of these words But I have divers things more to say in this particular from the consideration of other words of the institution and the whole nature of the thing SECT VII Considerations of the Manner and Circumstances and Annexes of the Institution 1. THE blessed Sacrament is the same thing now as it was in the institution of it But Christ did not really give his natural body in the natural sence when he eat his last Supper therefore neither does he now The first proposition is beyond all dispute certain evident and confessed Hoc facite convinces it This do what Christ did his Disciples are to do I assume Christ did not give his natural body properly in the last Supper therefore neither does he now the assumption I prove by divers arguments 2. First If then he gave
does not mean they receive him not at all Just as we say when a man eats but a little he does not eat for as good never a jot as never the better This I say is not a sufficient escape 1. Because S. Austin opposes sacramental receiving to the true and real and says that the wicked only receive it sacramentally but not the thing whose Sacrament it is so that this is not a proposition of degrees but there is a plain opposition of one to the other 2. It is true S. Austin does not say that the wicked do not receive Christ at all for he says they receive him sacramentally but he says they do not at all receive him truly and the wicked man cannot say he does and he proves this by unanswerable arguments out of Scripture 3. This excuse will not with any pretence be fitted with the sayings of the other Fathers nor to all the words of S. Austin in this quotation and much less in others which I have and shall remark particularly this that he calls that which the wicked eat nothing but signum corporis sanguinis His words are these Ac per hoc qui non manet in Christo in quo non manet Christus procul dubio non manducat spiritualiter carnem non bibit sanguinem licèt carnaliter visibiliter premat dentibus signum corporis sanguinis he does not eat the body and drink the blood spiritually although carnally and visibly he presses with his teeth the sign of the body and blood Plainly all the wicked do but eat the sign of Christs body all that is to be done beyond is to eat it spiritually There is no other eating but these two and from S. Austin it was that the Schools received that famous distinction of Panis Dominus and Panis Domini Judas received the bread of the Lord against the Lord But the other Apostles received the bread which was the Lord that is his body But I have already spoken of the matter of this argument in the third Paragraph num 7. which the Reader may please to add to this to make it fuller 10. Ninthly Lastly In the words of Institution and Consecration as they call them the words which relate to the consecrated wine are so different in the Evangelists and S. Paul respectively as appears by comparing them together that 1. It does not appear which words were literally spoken by our blessed Saviour for all of them could not be so spoken as they are set down 2. That they all regarded the sence and meaning of the mystery not the letters and the syllables 3. It is not possible to be certain that Christ intended the words of any one of them to be consecratory or effective of what they signifie for every one of the relators differ in the words though all agree in the things as the Reader may observe in the beginning of the fourth Paragraph where the four forms are set by each other to be compared 4. The Church of Rome in the consecration of the Chalice uses a form of words which Christ spake not at all nor are related by S. Matthew or S. Mark or S. Luke or S. Paul but she puts in some things and changes others her form is this Hic est enim calix sanguinis mei novi aeterni Testamenti mysterium fidei qui pro vobis pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum For this is the chalice of my blood of the New and eternal Testament the mystery of faith which shall be shed for you and for many for the remission of sins what is added is plain what is altered would be very material if the words were consecratory for they are not so likely to be operative and effective as the words of Christ recited by S. Matthew and S. Mark this is my blood and if this had not been the ancient form used in the Church of Rome long before the doctrine of Transubstantiation was thought of it is not to be imagined that they would have refused the plainer words of Scripture to have made the Article more secret the form less operative the authority less warrantable the words less simple and natural But the corollary which is natural and proper from the particulars of this argument is that the mystery was so wholly spiritual that it was no matter by what words it were expressed so the spirit of it were retained and yet if it had been an historical natural proper sence that had been intended it ought also in all reason to have been declared or much more effected by a natural and proper and constant affirmative But that there is nothing spoken properly is therefore evident because there are so many predications and all mean the same mystery Hic est sanguis meus N. Testamenti and Hic calix est N. Testamentum in meo sanguine and Hic est calix sanguinis mei in the Roman Missal all this declares it is mysterium fidei and so to be taken in all sences and those words are left in their Canon as if on purpose either to prevent the literal and natural understanding of the other words or for the reducing the communicants to the only apprehensions of faith It is mysterium fidei not sanguis naturalis a mystery of faith not natural blood For supposing that both the forms used by S. Matthew and S. Luke respectively could be proper and without a figure and S. Matthews Hic est sanguis Testamenti did signifie This is the divine promise for so Bellarmine dreams that Testament there signifies and that in S. Lukes words This cup is the Testament it signifies the instrument of the Testament for so a Will or a Testament is taken either for the thing willed or the Parchment in which it is written yet how are these or either of these affirmative of the wine being transubstantiated into blood It says nothing of that and so if this sence of those words does avoid a trope it brings in a distinct proposition if it be spoken properly it is more distant from giving authority to their new doctrine and if the same word have several sences then in the sacramental proposition as it is described by the several Evangelists there are several predicates and therefore it is impossible that all should be proper And yet besides this although he thinks he may freely say any thing if he covers it with a distinction yet the very members of this distinction conclude against his conclusion for if Testament in one place be taken for the instrument of his Testament it is a tropical loquution just as I say my bible meaning my book is the word of God that is contains the word of God it is a Metonymie of the thing containing for that which it contains But this was more than I needed and therefore I am content it should pass for nothing SECT VIII Of the Arguments of the Romanists from Scripture 1.
THUS I have by very many arguments taken from the words and circumstances and annexes of the Institution or Consecration proved that the sence of this mystery is mysterious and spiritual that Christs body is eaten only sacramentally by the body but really and effectively only by faith which is the mouth of the soul that the flesh profiteth nothing but the words which Christ spake are spirit and life And let it be considered Whether besides a pertinacious resolution that they will understand these words as they found in the letter not as they are intended in the spirit there be any thing or indeed can be in the nature of the thing or circumstances of it or usefulness or in the different forms of words or the Analogy of the other discourses of Christ that can give colour to their literal sence against which so much reason and Scripture and arguments from Antiquity do contest This only I observe that they bring no pretence of other Scriptures to warrant this interpretation but such which I have or shall wrest out of their hands and which to all mens first apprehensions and at the very first sight do make against them and which without curious notion and devices cannot pretend on their side as appears first in the tenth Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians Verses 16 17. 2. Out of which I have already proved that Christs body is not taken in the natural sence but in the spiritual But when Bellarmine had out of the same words forced for himself three arguments proving nothing to save any man the labour of answering them he adds at the end of them these words Sed tota difficultas est as corporaliter realiter propriè sumatur sanguis caro an solùm significativè spiritualiter Quod autem corporaliter propriè probari posset omnibus argumentis quibus suprà probavimus propriè esse intelligenda verba illa institutionis Hoc est corpus meum That is after his arguments out of the first Epistle to the Corinthians were ended all the difficulty of the question still remained and that he was fain to prove by Hoc est corpus meum and the proper arguments of that but brings nothing from the words of S. Paul in this Chapter But to make up this also he does corrodere scrape together some things extrinsecal to the words of this authority as 1. That the literal sence is to be presumed unless the contrary be proved which is very true but I have evidently proved the contrary concerning the words of Institution and for the words in this Chapter if the literal sence be preferred then the bread remains after Consecration because it is called bread 2. So the Primitive Saints expounded it which how true it is I shall consider in his own place 3. The Apostle calling the Gentiles from their sacrificed flesh proposes to them a more excellent banquet but it were not more excellent if it were only a figure of Christs body so Bellarmine which is a fit cover for such a dish for 1. We do not say that in the Sacrament we only receive the sign and figure of Christs body but all the real effects and benefits of it 2. If we had yet it is not very much better than blasphemy to say that the Apostles had not prevailed upon that account For if the very figure and sacrament of Christs body be better than sacrifices offered to Devils the Apostle had prevailed though this sentence were true that in the Sacrament we receive only the figure And thus I have for all that is said against it made it apparent that there is nothing in that place for their corporal presence 3. There is one thing more which out of Scripture they urge for the corporal presence viz. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords body and he shall be guilty of the body and blood of Christ. Where they observe that they that eat unworthily do yet eat Christs body because how else could they be guilty of it and condemned for not discerning it 4. To this I answer many things 1. S. Paul does not say He that eateth and drinketh Christs body and blood unworthily c. but indefinitely He that eateth and drinketh c. yet it is probable he would have said so if it had been a proper form of speech because by so doing it would have layed a greater load upon them 2. Where S. Paul does not speak indefinitely he speaks most clearly against the Article in the Roman sence for he calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The cup of the Lord and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this bread and he that eats this bread unworthily is guilty of the body and blood of Christ and now these comminatory phrases are quitted from their pretence but yet they have their proper consideration Therefore 3. Not discerning the Lords body is not separating it from profane and common usages not treating it with addresses proper to the mystery To which phrase Justin gives light in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we do not receive it as common bread and common drink but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. but nourishment made Eucharistical or blessed by the word of Prayer and so it is the body and blood of the Lord. 4. It is the body of the Lord in the same sence here as in the words of institution which I have evinced to be exegetical sacramental and spiritual and by despising the sacrament of it we become guilty of the body and blood of Christ. Reus erit corporis sanguinis Christi qui tanti mysterii sacramentum despexerit saith S. Hierome And it is in this as Severianus said concerning the statutes of Theodosius broken in despight by the Antiochians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If you abuse the Kings Image the affront relates to your Prince 5. The unworthy receiver is guilty of the body and blood of Christ not naturally for that cannot now be and nothing is a greater probation of the spiritual sence of the words in this place than this which they would intice into their party For Christs body is glorified and not capable of natural injury but the evil communicant is guilty of the body and blood of Christ just as relapsing Christians are said by the same Apostles to crucifie the Lord of life again and put him to an open shame which I suppose they cannot do naturally or corporally One is as the other that is both are tropical or figurative 5. These are all that they pretend from Scripture and all these are nothing to their purpose but now besides what I have already said I shall bring arguments from other Scriptures which will not so easily be put off SECT IX Arguments from other Scriptures proving Christs Real Presence in the Sacrament to be only Spiritual not Natural 1. THE first is taken from those words of our
be in more places than one if in two it may be in 2000 and then it may be every where for it is not limited and therefore is illimited and potentially infinite Against this so seemingly impossible at the very first sight and relying upon a similitude and analogy that is not far from blasphemy viz. that as God is in Heaven and yet on Earth eodem modo after the same manner is Christs body which words it cannot be easie to excuse against this I say although for the reasons alledged it be unnecessary to be disproved yet I have these things to oppose 1. The words of Scripture that affirm Christ to be in Heaven affirm also that he is gone from hence Now if Christs body not only could but must be every day in innumerable places on earth it would have been said that Christ is in Heaven but not that he is not here or that he is gone from hence 2. Surrexit non est hîc was the Angels discourse to the inquiring woman at the Sepulchre he is risen he is not here but if they had been taught the new doctrine of the Roman Schools they would have denied the consequent he is risen and gone from hence but he may be here too And this indeed might have put the Angels to a distinction but the womens ignorance rendred them secure However S. Austin is dogmatical in this Article saying Christum ubique totum esse tanquam Deum in eodem tanquam inhabitante Deum in loco aliquo coeli propter veri corporis modum Christ as God is every where but in respect of his body he is determin'd to a particular residence in Heaven viz. at the right hand of God that is in the best seat and in the greatest eminency And in the thirtieth Treatise of S. John It behoveth that the body of our Lord since it is raised again should be in one place alone but the truth is spread over all But concerning these words of S. Austin they have taken a course in all their Editions to corrupt the place And in stead of oportet have clapp'd in potest instead of must be have foisted in may be against the faith of the ancient Canonists and Scholasticks particularly Lombard Gratian Ivo Carnotensis Algerus Thomas Bonaventure Richardus Durand Biel Scotus Cassander and divers others To this purpose is that of S. Cyril Alex. He could not converse with his Disciples in the flesh being ascended to his Father So Cassian Jesus Christ speaking on Earth cannot be in Heaven but by the infinity of his Godhead and Fulgentius argues it strongly If the body of Christ be a true body it must be contained in a particular place but this place is just so corrupted in their Editions as is that of S. Austin potest being substituted instead of oportet but this doctrine viz. that to be in several places is impossible to a body and proper to God was affirmed by the Universality of Paris in a Synod under William their Bishop 1340 and Johannes Picus Mirandula maintained in Rome it self that it could not be by the power of God that one body should at once be in divers places 3. Thirdly The Scripture speaks of his going thither from hence by elevation and ascension and of his coming from thence at his appearing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the words have an Antithesis the Heavens till then shall retain him but then he shall come from thence which were needless if he might be here and stay there too 4. When Christ said Me ye have not always and at another time Loe I am with you always to the end of the World It is necessary that we distinguish the parts of a seeming contradiction Christ is with us by his Spirit but Christ is not with us in body but if his body be here too then there is no way of Substantial Real Presence in which those words can be true me ye have not always The Rhemists in their note upon this place say that when Christ said Me ye have not always he means ye have not me in the manner of a poor man needing relief that is Not me so as you have the poor But this is a trifle because our Blessed Saviour did not receive that ministery of Mary Magdalen as a poor man for it was a present for a Prince not a relief to necessity but a Regalo fit for so great a person and therefore if he were here at all after his departure he was capable of as noble an usage and an address fit to represent a Majesty or at least to express a love It was also done for his burying so Christ accepted it and that signified and plainly related to a change of his state and abode But besides this if this could be the interpretation of those words then they did not at all signifie Christs leaving this world but only his changing his circumstance of fortune his outward dress and appendages of person which were a strange commentary upon Me ye have not always that is I shall be with you still but in a better condition but S. Austin hath given sentence concerning the sence of these words of Christ Loquebatur de praesentiâ corporis c. He spake of the presence of his body ye shall have me according to my providence according to Majesty and invisible grace but according to the flesh which the word assumed according to that which was born of the Virgin Mary ye shall not have me therefore because he conversed with his disciples forty days he is ascended up into Heaven and is not here If he be here in person what need he to have sent his Vicar his holy Spirit in substitution especially since by this doctrine he is more now with his Church than he was in the days of his conversion in Palestine for then he was but in one assembly at once now he is in thousands every day If it be said because although he be here yet we see him not This is not sufficient for what matter is it whether we see him or no if we know him to be here if we feel him if we eat him if we worship him in presence natural and proper There wants nothing but some accidents of colour and shape A friend in the dark behind a curtain or to a blind man is as certainly present as if he were in the light in open conversation or beheld with the eyes And then also the office of the holy Spirit would only be to supply the sight of his person which might possibly be true if he had no greater offices and we no greater needs and if he himself also were visible and glorious to our eyes for if the effect of his substitution is spiritual secret and invisible our eyes are still without comfort and if the Spirits secret effect does supply it and makes it not necessary that we should see him then so
and flesh hath been pull'd out of the mouths of the communicants and Plegilus the Priest saw an Angel shewing Christ to him in form of a child upon the Altar whom first he took in his arms and kissed but did eat him up presently in his other shape in the shape of a Wafer Speciosa certè pax Nebulonis ut qui oris praebuerat basium dentium inferret exitium said Berengarius It was but a Judas kiss to kiss with the lip and bite with the teeth But if such stuffe as this may go for argument we may be cloyed with them in those unanswerable Authors Simeon Metaphrastes for the Greeks and Jacobus de Voragine for the Latin who make it a trade to lye for God and for the interest of the Catholick cause But however I shall tell a piece of a true story In the time of Soter Pope of Rome there was an Impostor called Mark 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that was his appellative and he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pretending to make the Chalice of wine and water Eucharistical saying long prayers over it made it look red or purple that it might be thought that grace which is above all things does drop the blood into the Chalice by invocation Such as these have been often done by humane artifice or by operation of the Devil said Alexander of Ales. If such things as these were done regularly it were pretence enough to say it is flesh and blood that is in the Eucharist but when nothing of this is done by God but Hereticks and Knaves Juglers and Impostors hoping to change the Sacrament into a charm by abusing the spiritual sence into a gross and carnal against the authority of Scripture and the Church reason or religion have made pretences of those things and still the Holy Sacrament in all the times of ministration hath the form and all the perceptibilities of bread and wine as we may believe those Impostors did more rely upon the pretences of sense than of other arguments and distrusting them did flye to these as the greater probation so we rely upon that way of probation which they would have counterfeited but which indeed Christ in his institution hath still left in the nature of the symbols viz. that it is that which it seems to be and that the other superinduc'd predicate of the body of Christ is to be understood only in that sence which may still consist with that substance whose proper and natural accidents remain and are perceived by the mouth and hands and eyes of all men To which this may be added that by the doctrine of the late Roman Schools all those pretences of real appearances of Christs body or blood must be necessarily concluded to be Impostures or aery phantasmes and illusions because themselves teach that Christs body is so in the Sacrament that Christs own eyes cannot see his own body in the Sacrament and in that manner by which it is there it cannot be made visible no not by the absolute power of God Nay it can be neither seen nor touched nor tasted nor felt nor imagined It is the doctrine of Suarez in 3. Tho. disp 53. Sect. 3. and disp 52. Sect. 1. and of Vasquez in 3. t. 3. disp 191. n. 22. which besides that it reproves the whole Article by making it incredible and impossible it doth also infinitely convince all these apparitions if ever there were any of deceit and fond illusion I had no more to say in this particular but that the Roman Doctors pretend certain words out of S. Cyrils fourth mystagogique Catechism against the doctrine of this Paragraph Pro certissimo habeas c. Be sure of this that this bread which is seen of us is not bread although the taste perceives it to be bread but the body of Christ For under the species of bread the body is given to thee under the species of wine the blood is given to thee Here if we will trust S. Cyrils words at least in Bellarmine's and Brerely's sence and understand of them before you will believe your own eyes you may For S. Cyril bids you not believe your sense For taste and sight tells you it is bread but it is not But here is no harm done 2. For himself plainly explains his meaning in his next Catechism Think not that you taste bread and wine saith he No what then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but the antitypes of the body and blood and in this very place he calls bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a type 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and therefore it is very ill rendred by the Roman Priests by Species which signifies accidental forms for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies no such thing but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is not S. Cyrils word 3. He says it is not bread though the taste feel it so that is it is not meer bread which is an usual expression among the Fathers Non est panis communis says Irenaeus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says Justin Martyr just as S. Chrysostome says of Baptismal water it is not common water and as S. Cyril himself says of the sacramental bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is not meer bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but the Lords body For if it were not that in some sence or other it were still meer bread but that it is not But this manner of speaking is not unusual in the holy Scriptures that restrained and modificated negatives be propounded in simple and absolute forms I have given them statutes which are not good Ezek. 20.25 I will have mercy and not sacrifice Hos. 6.6 They have not rejected thee but me 1 Sam. 8.7 It is not you that speak but the Spirit of my Father I came not to send peace but a sword S. Mat. 10.20 34. He that believeth on me believeth not on me but on him that sent me And If I bear witness of my self my witness is not true S. John 5.31 which is expresly confronted by S. John 8.14 Though I bear record of my self yet my record is true which shews manifestly that the simple and absolute negative in the former place must in his signification be restrained So S. Paul speaks usually Henceforth I know no man according to the flesh 2 Cor. 5.16 We have no strife against flesh and blood Ephes. 6.12 And in the ancient Doctors nothing more ordinary than to express limited sences by unlimited words which is so known that I should lose my time and abuse the Readers patience if I should heap up instances So Irenaeus He that hath received the Spirit is no more flesh and blood but Spirit And Epiphanius affirms the same of the flesh of a temperate man It is not flesh but is changed into Spirit so we say of a drunken man and a furious person He is not a man but a beast And they speak thus particularly in the matter of the holy Sacrament as appears in the instances above
expounding the Sacrament Nothing needs to be plainer By the way let me observe this that the words cited by Tertullian out of Jeremy are expounded and recited too but by allusion For there are no such words in the Hebrew Text which is thus to be rendred Corrumpanus veneno cibum ejus and so cannot be referred to the Sacrament unless you will suppose that he fore-signified the poysoning the Emperour by a consecrated wafer But as to the figure this is often said by him for in the first book against Marcion he hath these words again nec reprobavit panem quo ipsum corpus suum repraesentat etiam in Sacramentis propriis egens mendicitatibus creatoris He refused not bread by which he represents his own body wanting or using in the Sacraments the meanest things of the Creator For it is not to be imagined that Tertullian should attempt to perswade Marcion that the bread was really and properly Christs body but that he really delivered his body on the Cross that both in the old Testament and here himself gave a figure of it in bread and wine for that was it which the Marcionites denied saying on the cross no real humanity did suffer and he confutes them by saying these are figures and therefore denote a truth 8. However these men are resolved that this new answer shall please them and serve their turn yet some of their fellows great Clerks as themselves did shrink under the pressure of it as not being able to be pleased with so laboured and improbable an answer For Harding against Juel hath these words speaking of this place which interpretation is not according to the true sence of Christs words although his meaning swerve not from the truth And B. Rhenanus the author of the admonition to the Reader De quibusdam Tertulliani dogmat◠seems to confess this to be Tertullians error Error putantium corpus Christi in Eucharistiâ tantùm esse sub figurâ jam olim condemnatus The error of them that think the body of Christ is in the Eucharist only in a figure is now long since condemned But Garetius Bellarmine Justinian Coton Fevardentius Valentia and Vasquez in the recitation of this passage of Tertullian very fairly leave out the words that pinch them and which clears the article and bring the former words for themselves without the interpretation of id est figura corporis mei I may therefore without scruple reckon Tertullian on our side against whose plain words no real exception can lye himself expounding his own meaning in the pursuance of the figurative sence of this mystery 20. Concerning Origen I have already given an account in the ninth Paragraph and other places casually and made it appear that he is a direct opposite to the doctrine of Transubstantiation And the same also of Justin Martyr Paragraph the fifth number 9. Where also I have enumerated divers others who speak upon parts of this question on which the whole depends whither I refer the Reader Only concerning Justin Martyr I shall recite these words of his against Tryphon Figura fuit panis Eucharistiae quem in recordationem passionis facere praecepit The bread of the Eucharist was a figure which Christ the Lord commanded to do in remembrance of his passion 21. Clemens Alexandrinus saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The blood of Christ is twofold the one is carnal by which we are redeemed from death the other spiritual viz. by which we are anointed And this is to drink the blood of Jesus to be partakers of the incorruption of our Lord. But the power of the word is the Spirit as blood is of the flesh Therefore in a moderated proposition and convenience wine is mingled with water as the Spirit with a man And he receives in the Feast viz. Eucharistical tempered wine unto faith But the Spirit leadeth to incorruption but the mixture of both viz. of drink and the word is called the Eucharist which is praised and is a good gift or grace of which they who are partakers by faith are sanctified in body and soul. Here plainly he calls that which is in the Eucharist Spiritual blood and without repeating the whole discourse is easie and clear And that you may be certain of S. Clement his meaning he disputes in the same chapter against the Encratites who thought it not lawful to drink wine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For be ye sure he also did drink wine for he also was a man and he blessed wine when he said Take drink 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is my blood the blood of the vine for that word that was shed for many for the remission of sins it signifies allegorically a holy stream of gladness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that the thing which had been blessed was wine he shewed again saying to his disciples I will not drink of the fruit of this vine till I drink it new with you in my fathers kingdom Now S. Clement proving by Christs sumption of the Eucharist that he did drink wine must mean the Sacramental Symbol to be truly wine and Christs blood allegorically that holy stream of gladness or else he had not concluded by that argument against the Encratites Upon which account these words are much to be valued because by our doctrine in this article he only could confute the Encratites as by the same doctrine explicated as we explicate it Tertullian confuted the Marcionites and Theodoret and Gelasius confuted the Nestorians and Eutychians if the doctrine of Transubstantiation had been true these four heresies had by them as to their particular arguments relating to this matter been unconfuted 22. S. Cyprian in his Tractate de unctione which Canisius Harding Bellarmine and Lindan cite hath these words Dedit itaque Dominus noster c. Therefore our Lord in his table in which he did partake his last banquet with his disciples with his own hands gave bread and wine but on the cross he gave to the souldiers his body to be wounded that in the Apostles the sincere truth and the true sincerity being more secretly imprinted he might expound to the Gentiles how wine and bread should be his flesh and blood and by what reasons causes might agree with effects and diverse names and kinds viz. bread and wine might be reduced to one essence and the signifying and the signified might be reckoned by the same words and in his third Epistle he hath these words Vinum quo Christi sanguis ostenditur wine by which Christs blood is showen or declared Here I might cry out as Bellarmine upon a much slighter ground Quid clariùs dici potuit But I forbear being content to enjoy the real benefits of these words without a triumph But I will use it thus far that it shall outweigh the words cited out of the tract de coenâ Domini by Bellarmine by the Rhemists by the Roman Catechism by Perron
Christ is the blood of Christ so the Sacrament of faith is Now suppose a stranger to the tricks of the Roman Doctors a wise and a discerning man should read these words in S. Austin and weigh them diligently and compare them with all the adjacent words and circumstances of the place I would desire reasonably to be answered on which side he would conclude S. Austin to be if in any other place he speaks words contrary that is his fault or forgetfulness but if the contrary had been the doctrine of the Church he could never have so forgotten his Religion and Communion as so openly to have declared a contrary sence to the same Article Non hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturi estis c. You are not to eat this body which you see so he brings in Christ speaking to his disciples or to drink that blood which my crucifiers shall pour forth I have commended to you a Sacrament which being spiritually understood shall quicken you and Christ brought them to a banquet in which he commended to his disciples the figure of his body and blood * For he did not doubt to say This is my body when he gave the sign of his body * Quod ab omnibus sacrificium appellatur c. That which by all men is called a sacrifice is the sign of the true sacrifice in which the flesh of Christ after his assumption is celebrated by the Sacrament of remembrances But concerning S. Austins doctrine I shall refer him that desires to be further satisfied to no other record than their own Canon Law Which not only from S. Austin but from divers others produces testimonies so many so pertinent so full for our doctrine and against the dream of Transubstantiation that it is to me a wonder why it is not clapped into the Indices expurgatorii for it speaks very many truths beyond the cure of their Glosses which they have changed and altered several times But that this matter concerning S. Austin may be yet clearer his own third book de doctrinâ Christianâ is so plain for us in this question that when Frudegardus in the time of Charles the Bald had upon occasion of the dispute which then began to be hot and interested in this question read this book of S. Austin he was changed to the opinion of a Spiritual and mysterious presence and upon occasion of that his being perswaded by S. Austin Paschasius Ratberdus wrote to him as of a question then doubted of by many persons as is to be seen in his Epistle to Frudegardus I end this of S. Austin with those words of his which he intends by way of rule for expounding these and the like words of Scripture taken out of this book of Christian doctrine Locutio praeceptiva c. A preceptive speech forbidding a crime or commanding something good or profitable is not figurative but if it seems to command a crime or forbid a good then it is figurative Vnless ye eat the flesh of the son of man c. seems to command a wickedness it is therefore a figure commanding us to communicate with the passion of our Lord and sweetly and profitably to lay it up in our memory that his flesh was crucified and wounded for us I shall not need to urge that this holy Sacrament is called Eucharistia carnis sanguinis The Eucharist of the body and blood by Irenaeus Corpus symbolicum typicum by Origen In typo sanguis by S. Jerome similitudo figura typus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 images enigmaes representations expressions exemplars of the Passion by divers others that which I shall note here is this that in the Council of Constantinople it was publickly professed that the Sacrament is not the body of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not by nature but by representment for so it is expounded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the holy image of it and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Eucharistical bread is the true image of the natural flesh and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A figure or image delivered by God of his flesh and a true image of the incarnate dispensation of Christ. These things are found in the third Tome of the Sixth Action of the second Nicene Council where a pert Deacon ignorant and confident had boldly said that none of the Apostles or Fathers had ever called the Sacrament the image of Christs body that they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 antitypes before consecration he grants but after consecration they are called and are and are believed to be the body and blood of Christ properly which I suppose he might have learned of Damascene who in opposition to the Iconoclasts would not endure the word Type or Image to be used concerning the holy Sacrament for they would admit no other image but that he in defiance of them who had excommunicated him for a worshipper of Images and a half Sarazin would admit any Image but that but denied that to be an Image or Type of Christ de fide l. 4. c. 14. For Christ said not This is the Type of my body but it is it But however this new question began to branle the words of Type and Antitype and the manner of speaking began to be changed yet the Article as yet was not changed For the Fathers used the words of Type and Antitype and Image c. to exclude the natural sence of the Sacramental body and Damascene and Anastasius Sinaita and some others of that Age began to refuse those words lest the Sacrament be thought to be nothing of reality nothing but an Image And that this really was the sence of Damascene appears by his words recited in the Acts of the second Council of Nice affirming that the Divine bread is made Christs body by assumption and inhabitation of the Spirit of Christ in the same manner as water is made the laver of regeneration But however they were pleased to speak in the Nicene assembly yet in the Roman Edition of the Councils the Publishers and Collectors were wiser and put on this marginal note 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The holy gifts are oftentimes called types and figures even after consecration particularly by Gregory Nazianzen and S. Cyril of Hierusalem I remember only one thing objected to this testimony of so many Bishops that they were Iconoclasts or breakers of images and therefore not to be trusted in any other Article So Bellarmine as I remember But this is just as if I should say that I ought to refuse the Lateran Council because they were worshippers of Images or defenders of Purgatory Surely if I should I had much more reason to refuse their sentence than there is that the Greeks should be rejected upon so slight a pretence nay for doing that which for ought appears was in all their circumstances their duty in a high
were press'd in the Council of Florence by Pope Eugenius and by their necessity how unwillingly they consented how ambiguously they answered how they protested against having that half-consent put into the Instrument of Union how they were yet constrain'd to it by their Chiefs being obnoxious to the Pope how a while after they dissolv'd that Union and to this day refuse to own this Doctrine are things so notoriously known that they need no further declaration We add this only to make the conviction more manifest We have thought fit to annex some few but very clear testimonies of Antiquity expresly destroying the new Doctrine of Purgatory Saint Cyprian saith Quando istinc excessum fuerit nullus jam locus poenitentiae est nullus satisfactionis effectus When we are gone from hence there is no place left for repentance and no effect of satisfaction Saint Dionysius call the extremity of death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The end of all our Agonies and affirms That the Holy men of God rest in joy and in never-failing hopes and are come to the end of their holy combates Saint Justin Martyr affirms That when the soul is departed from the body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presently there is a separation made of the just and unjust The unjust are by Angels born into places which they have deserv'd but the souls of the just into Paradise where they have the conversation of Angels and Archangels Saint Ambrose saith That Death is a Haven of rest and makes not our condition worse but according as it finds every man so it reserves him to the judgment that is to come The same is affirmed by Saint Hilary c Saint Macarius and divers others they speak but of two states after death of the just and the unjust These are plac'd in horrible Regions reserv'd to the judgment of the great day the other have their souls carried by Quires of Angels into places of Rest. Saint Gregory Nazianzen expresly affirms That after this life there is no purgation For after Christ's ascension into Heaven the souls of all Saints are with Christ saith Gennadius and going from the body they go to Christ expecting the resurrection of their body with it to pass into the perfection of perpetual bliss and this he delivers as the Doctrine of the Catholick Church In what place soever a man is taken at his death of light or darkness of wickedness or vertue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same order and in the same degree either in light with the just and with Christ the great King or in darkness with the unjust and with the Prince of Darkness said Olympiodorus And lastly we recite the words of Saint Leo one of the Popes of Rome speaking of the Penitents who had not perform'd all their penances But if any one of them for whom we pray unto the Lord being interrupted by any obstacles falls from the gift of the present Indulgence viz. of Ecclesiastical Absolution and before he arrive at the appointed remedies that is before he hath perform'd his penances or satisfactions ends his temporal life that which remaining in the body he hath not receiv'd when he is devested of his body he cannot obtain He knew not of the new devices of paying in Purgatory what they paid not here and of being cleansed there who were not clean here And how these words or any of the precedent are reconcileable with the Doctrines of Purgatory hath not yet entred into our imagination To conclude this particular We complain greatly that this Doctrine which in all the parts of it is uncertain and in the late additions to it in Rome is certainly false is yet with all the faults of it passed into an Article of Faith by the Council of Trent But besides what hath been said it will be more than sufficient to oppose against it these clearest words of Scripture Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth even so saith the Spirit that they may rest from their labours If all the dead that die in Christ be at rest and are in no more affliction or labours then the Doctrine of the horrible pains of Purgatory is as false as it is uncomfortable To these words we add the saying of Christ and we rely upon it He that heareth my word and believeth on him that sent me hath eternal life and cometh not into judgment but passeth from death unto life If so then not into the judgment of Purgatory If the servant of Christ passeth from death to life then not from death to the terminable pains of a part of Hell They that have eternal life suffer no intermedial punishment judgment or condemnation after death for death and life are the whole progression according to the Doctrine of Christ and Him we chuse to follow SECT V. THE Doctrine of Transubstantiation is so far from being Primitive and Apostolick that we know the very time it began to be own'd publickly for an Opinion and the very Council in which it was said to be passed into a publick Doctrine and by what arts it was promoted and by what persons it was introduc'd For all the world knows that by their own parties by Scotus Ocham Biel Fisher Bishop of Rochester and divers others whom Bellarmine calls most learned and most acute men it was declared that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is not expressed in the Canon of the Bible that in the Scriptures there is no place so express as without the Churches Declaration to compel us to admit of Transubstantiation and therefore at least it is to be suspected of novelty But further we know it was but a disputable Question in the ninth and tenth Ages after Christ that it was not pretended to be an Article of Faith till the Lateran Council in the time of Pope Innocent the Third one thousand two hundred years and more after Christ that since that pretended determination divers of the chiefest Teachers of their own side have been no more satisfied of the ground of it than they were before but still have publickly affirm'd that the Article is not express'd in Scripture particularly Johannes de Bassolis Cardinal Cajetan and Melchior Canus besides those above reckon'd And therefore if it was not express'd in Scripture it will be too clear that they made their Articles of their own heads for they could not declare it to be there if it was not and if it was there but obscurely then it ought to be taught accordingly and at most it could be but a probable Doctrine and not certain as an Article of Faith But that we may put it past argument and probability it is certain that as the Doctrine was not taught in Scripture expresly so it was not at all taught as a Catholick Doctrine or an Article of the Faith by the Primitive Ages of the Church Now for this we need no proof
peculiar grace and vertue was signified by the symbol of wine and it was evident that the chalice was an excellent representment and memorial of the effusion of Christs blood for us and the joyning both the symbols signifies the intire refection and nourishment of our souls bread and drink being the natural provisions and they design and signifie our redemption more perfectly the body being given for our bodies and the blood for the cleansing our souls the life of every animal being in the blood and finally this in the integrity signifies and represents Christ to have taken body and soul for our redemption For these reasons the Church of God always in all her publick communions gave the chalice to the people for above a thousand years This was all I would have remarked in this so evident a matter but that I observed in a short spiteful passage of E. W. Pag. 44. a notorious untruth spoken with ill intent concerning the Holy Communion as understood by Protestants The words are these seeing the fruit of Protestant Communion is only to stir up faith in the receiver I can find no reason why their bit of bread only may not as well work that effect as to taste of their wine with it To these words 1. I say that although stirring up faith is one of the Divine benefits and blessings of the Holy Communion yet it is falsely said that the fruit of the Protestant Communion is only to stir up faith For in the Catechism of the Church of England it is affirmed that the body and blood of Christ are verily and indeed taken and received of the faithful in the Lords Supper and that our souls are strengthened and refreshed by the body and blood of Christ as our bodies are by the bread and wine and that of stirring up our faith is not at all mention'd So ignorant so deceitful or deceiv'd is E. W in the doctrine of the Church of England But then as for his foolish sarcasm calling the hallowed Element a bit of bread which he does in scorn he might have considered that if we had a mind to find fault whenever his Church gives us cause that the Papists wafer is scarce so much as a bit of bread it is more like Marchpane than common bread and besides that as Salmeron acknowledges anciently Olim ex pane uno sua cuique particula frangi consueverat that which we in our Church do was the custom of the Church out of a great loaf to give particles to every communicant by which the Communication of Christs body to all the members is better represented and that Durandus affirming the same thing says that the Grecians continue it to this day besides this I say the Author of the Roman order says Cassander took it very ill that the loaves of bread offered in certain Churches for the use of the sacrifice should be brought from the form of true bread to so slight and slender a form which he calls Minutias nummulariarum oblatarum scraps of little penies or pieces of money and not worthy to be called bread being such which no Nation ever used at their meals for bread But this is one of the innovations which they have introduc'd into the religious Rites of Christianity and it is little noted they having so many greater changes to answer for But it seems this Section was too hot for them they loved not much to meddle with it and therefore I shall add no more fuel to their displeasure but desire the Reader who would fully understand what is fit to be said in this Question to read it in a book of mine which I called Ductor dubitantium or the Cases of Conscience only I must needs observe that it is an unspeakable comfort to all Protestants when so manifestly they have Christ on their side in this Question against the Church of Rome To which I only add that for above 700. years after Christ it was esteemed sacriledge in the Church of Rome to abstain from the Cup and that in the ordo Romanus the Communion is always describ'd with the Cup how it is since and how it comes to be so is too plain But it seems the Church hath power to dispence in this affair because S. Paul said that the Ministers of Christ are dispensers of the mysteries of God as was learnedly urg'd in the Council of Trent in the doctrine about this question SECT V. Of the Scriptures and Service in an unknown Tongue THE Question being still upon the novelty of the Roman doctrines and Practices I am to make it good that the present article and practice of Rome is contrary to the doctrine and practice of the Primitive Church To this purpose I alledged S. Basil in his Sermon or book de variis scripturae locis But say my adversaries there is no such book Well! was there such a man as S. Basil If so we are well enough and let these Gentlemen be pleas'd to look into his works printed at Paris 1547. by Carola Guillard and in the 130. page he shall see this Book Sermon or Homily in aliquot scripturae locis at the beginning of which he hath an exhortation in the words placed in the Margent there we shall find the lost Sheep The beginning of it is an exhortation to the people congregated to get profit and edification by the Scriptures read at morning prayer the Monitions in the Psalms the precepts of the Proverbs Search ye the beauty of the history and the examples and add to these the precepts of the Apostles But in all things joyn the words of the Gospel as the Crown and perfection that receiving profit from them all ye may at length turn to that to which every one is sweetly affected and for the doing of which he hath received the grace of the Holy Spirit Now this difficulty being over all that remains for my own justification is that I make it appear that S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose S. Austin Aquinas and Lyra do respectively exhort to the study of the Scriptures exhorting even the Laity to do so and testifie the custom of the Ancient Church in praying in a known tongue and commending this as most useful and condemning the contrary as being useless and without edification I shall in order set down the doctrine they deliver in their own words and then the impertinent cavils of the adversaries will of themselves come to nothing S. Chrysostom commenting upon S. Pauls words concerning preaching and praying for edification and so as to be understood coming to those words of S. Paul If I pray with my tongue my spirit prayeth but my mind is without fruit you see saith he how a little extolling prayer he shews that he who is such a one viz. as the Apostle there describes is not only unprofitable to others but also to himself since his mind is without fruit Now if a man praying what he understands not does
pass the common Reader to say Tertullian did not say for what he is alledged for more will believe him than examine him But the words of Tertullian shall manifest the strange confidence of this person The Quotations out of Tertullian are only noted in the Margent but the words were not cited but now they must to justifie me and themselves 1. That reference to Tertullians book of Idolatry the objector takes no notice of as knowing it would reproach him too plainly see the words the artificers of statues and images and all kind of representations the Devil brought into the world and when he had given the Etymology of an idol saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is formula he adds Igitur omnis forma vel formula idolum se dici exposcit Inde omnis Idoli artifex ejusdem Vnius est criminis And a little before Exinde jam caput facta est Idololatriae ars omnis quae Idolum quoquo modo edit And in the beginning of the fourth chapter Idolum tam fieri quam coli Deus prohibet Quanto praecedit ut fiat quod coli possit tanto prius est ne fiat si coli non licet And again toto mundo ejusmodi artibus interdixit servis Dei And a little after he brings in some or other objecting Sed ait quidam adversus similitudinis interdictae propositionem cur ergo Moses in eremo simulachrum serpentis ex aere secit To this at last he answers Si eundum Deum observas habes legem ejus ne feceris similitudinem si praeceptum factae postea similitudinis respicis tu imitare Moysen Ne facias adversus legem simulachrum aliquod nisi tibi Deus jusserit Now here is no subterfuge for any one For Tertullian first says the Devil brought into the world all the artists and makers of statues images and all sorts of similitudes 2. He makes all these to be the same with Idols And 3. that God as well forbad the making of these and the worship of them and that the maker is guilty of the same crime and lastly I add his definition of Idolatry Idololatria est omnis circa omne idolum famulatus servitus Every image is an idol and every service and obeysance about any or every idol is idolatry I hope all this put together will convince the Gentleman that denied it that Tertullian hath said some such thing as the Dissuasive quoted him for Now for the other place quoted the words are these proinde similitudinem vetans fieri omnium quae in coelo in terra in aquis ostendit causas idololatriae scilicet substantiam exhibentes God forbidding all similitude to be made of things in Heaven and Earth and in the Waters shews the causes that restrain idolatry the causes of idolatry be more fully described in the fore-cited place Quando enim sine idolo idololatria fiat for he supposes the making of the images to be the cause of their worshipping and he calls this making statues and images Daemoniis corpora facere But there is yet another place in his books against Marcion where Tertullian affirming that S. Peter knew Moses and Elias on Mount Tabor by a spiritual extasie says it upon this reason Nec enim imagines eorum aut statuas populus habuisset aut similitudines lege prohibente The same also is to be seen in his book De spectaculis c. 23. Jam vero ipsum opus personarum quaero an Deo placeat qui omnem similitudinem vetat fieri quanto magis imaginis suae By this time I hope the Gentleman thinks himself in some shame for denying that Tertullian said the making of Images to be Unlawful Now let us see for the other two Authors quoted by the Dissuasive The objector in the Letter says they only spake of making the Images of Jupiter and the other heathen Gods but E. W. says he cannot find those quotations out of Clemens of Alexandria because the books quoted are too big and he could not espy them The author of the Letter never examined them but took them for granted but E. W. did search a little but not exactly However he ought not to have look'd in the sixth book of the Stromata for the words there quoted but in the protrepticon as I shall shew by and by That other quotation in the Stromata is the sixth book and is only referred to as to the question in general against images for so S. Clement calls it spiritual adultery to make idols or images Now to this E. W. says although he did not find what he look'd for yet he knows before-hand that the word in the Latin translation is simulachrum that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Idol It is indeed well guessed of E. W· for the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and if he had seen the place he now tells us what answer we might have expected But I am before-hand with him in this particular and out of Tertullian have prov'd idolum to be the same with formula deriv'd from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and consequently means the same with an Image And he hath a good warrant from the greatest Master of the Latin tongue Imagines quae idola nominant quorum incursione non solum videamus sed etiam cogitemus c. said Cicero and the same notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in a great Master of the Greek S. Chrysostom who speaking of the statues and images with which they adorned their houses calls them Idols 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But it matters not so much what Greek or Latin word is us'd in any translation for in the Hebrew in which the spirit of God spake when he forbad the worship of images he us'd two words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pesel and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Themunah and the latter of these signifies always an image or similitude and that most properly and is always so translated and the former of these is translated indifferently by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 image carved image and idol for they are all one And therefore proportionably Justin Martyr reciting this law of God says that God forbad every image and similitude 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are the words But suppose that idolum and imago were not the same yet because the Commandment forbids not only idolum but imago not only Pesel but Themunah they do not observe the Commandment who make to themselves viz. for worship either one or the other But to return to S. Clement of whom our present inquiry is And to deal most clearly in this affair as in all things else that out of the Stromata of S. Clement that I rather remark is not this of the sixth book but out of the fifth S. Clement of Alexandria saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pythagoras commanded that
so should confidently say Eusebius had nothing to this purpose viz. to condemn the picturing of God when his words are so famous that they are recorded in the seventh Synod and the words were occasioned by a solemn message sent to Eusebius by the sister of Constantius and wife of Licinius lately turned from being Pagan to be Christian desiring Eusebius to send her the picture of our Lord Jesus to which he answers Quia vero de quadam imagine quasi Christi scripsisti hanc volens tibi à nobis mitti quam dicis qualem hanc quam perhibes Christi imaginem Vtrâ—â— veram incommutabilem natura characteres suos portantem An istam quam propter nos suscepit servi formae schemate circumamictus Sed de forma quidem Dei nec ipse arbitror te quaerere semel ab ipso edoctam quoniam neque patrem quis novit nisi filius neque ipsum filium novit quis aliquando digne nisi solus pater qui eum genuit And a little after Quis ergo hujusmodi dignitatis gloriae vibrantes praefulgentes splendores exarare potuisset mortuis inanimatis Coloribus scripturis Vmbraticis And then speaking of the glory of Christ in Mount Thabor he proceeds Ergo si tunc incarnata ejus forma tantam virtutem sortita est ab inhabitante in se Divinitate mutata quid oportet dicere cum mortalitate exutus corruptione ablutus speciem servilis formae in gloriam Domini Dei commutavit Where besides that Eusebius thinks it unlawful to make a picture of Christ and therefore consequently much more to make a picture of God he also tells Constantia he supposes she did not offer at any desire of that Well for these three of the Fathers we are well enough but for the rest the objector says that they speak only against representing God as in his own essence shape or form To this I answer that God hath no shape or form and therefore these Fathers could not speak against making Images of a thing that was not and as for the Images of his essence no Christian no Heathen ever pretended to it and no man or beast can be pictured so no Painter can paint an Essence And therefore although this distinction was lately made in the Roman Schools yet the Fathers knew nothing of it and the Roman Doctors can make nothing of it for the reasons now told But the Gentleman saith that some of their Church allow only and practise the picturing those forms wherein God hath appeared It is very well they do no more but I pray in what forms did God the Father ever appear or the Holy and Mysterious Trinity Or suppose they had does it follow they may be painted We saw but now out of Eusebius that it was not esteemed lawful to picture Christ though he did appear in a humane body And although it is supposed that the Holy Ghost did appear in the shape of a Dove yet it is forbidden by the sixth General Council to paint Christ like a Lamb or the Holy Spirit like a Dove Add to this where did ever the Holy and Blessed Trinity appear like three faces joyned in one or like an old man with Christ crucified leaning on his breast and a Dove hovering over them and yet however the objector is pleas'd to mince the matter yet the doing this is ubique inter Catholicos recepta and that not only to be seen but to be ador'd as I prov'd a little above by testimonies of their own The next charge is concerning S. Hierom that he says no such thing which matter will soon be at an end if we see the Commentary he makes on these words of Isaiah Cui ergo similem fecisti Deum To whom do you liken God Or what Image will ye make for him who is a Spirit and is in all things and runs every where and holds the earth in his fist And he laughs at the folly of the Nations that an Artist or a Brasier or a Goldsmith or a Silversmith makes a God viz. by making the Image of God But the objector adds that it would be long to set down the words of the other Fathers quoted by the Doctor and truly so the Doctor thought so too at first but because the objector says they do not make against what some of his Church own and practise I thought it might be worth the Readers pains to see them The words of S. Austin in this question are very plain and decretory For a Christian to place such an Image to God viz. with right and left-hand sitting with bended knees that is in the shape of a man is wickedness but much more wicked is it to place it in our hearts But of this I have given account in the preceding Section Theodoret Damascen and Nicephorus do so expresly condemn the picturing God that it is acknowledg'd by my adversaries only they fly for succour to the old mumpsimus they condemn the picturing the essence of God but not his forms and appearances a distinction which those good old writers never thought of but directly they condemned all Images of God and the Holy Trinity And the Bishops in the seventh Synod though they were worshippers of Images yet they thinking that Angels were Corporeal believ'd they might be painted but denied it of God expresly And indeed it were a strange thing that God in the old Testament should so severely forbid any Image to be made of him upon this reason because he is invisible and he presses it passionately by calling it to their memory that they heard a voice but saw no shape and yet that both he had formerly and did afterwards shew himself in shapes and forms which might be painted and so the very reason of the Commandment be wholly void To which add this consideration that although the Angels did frequently appear and consequently had forms possible to be represented in Imagery yet none of the Ancients did suppose it lawful to paint Angels but they that thought them to be corporeal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Philo. To which purpose is that of Seneca Effugit oculos cogitatione visendus est And Antiphanes said of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God is not seen with eyes he is like to no man therefore no man can by an Image know him By which it appears plainly to be the General opinion of the Ancients that whatever was incorporeal was not to be painted no though it had appeared in symbolical forms as confessedly the Angels did And of this the second Synod of Nice it self is a sufficient witness the Fathers of which did all approve the Epistle of John Bishop of Thessalonica in which he largely discourses against the picturing of any thing that is incorporeal He that pleases to see more of this affair may find much more and to very great purpose in a little book de imaginibus
the burthen was great but the shoulder is weak and crushed and therefore was not able to bear it and therefore much less can it stand under a bigger load if the holy Precepts of the Gospel should prove so and we be assisted by no firmer supporters 16. For the nature and constitution of man is such that he cannot perpetually attend to any state of things Voluntas per momenta variatur quia solus Deus immutabilis variety and change inconstancy and repentance are in his very nature * If he be negligent he is soon tempted If he be watchful he is soon wearied * If he be not instructed he is exposed to every abuse * If he be yet he is ignorant of more than he knows may be consened by very many things and in what he knows or seems to know he is sometimes confident sometimes capricious curious and impertinent proud and contemptuous * The Commandments are instanc'd in things against our natural inclinations and are restraints upon our appetite and although a man may do it in single instances yet to act a part of perpetual violence and preternatural contentions is too hard and severe an expectation and the often unavoidable failings of men will shew how impossible it is It is as S. Hieromes expression is as if a man should hale a boat against the stream if ever he slacken his hand the vessel falls back and if ever we give way to our appetite in any of the forbidden instances we descend naturally and easily * Some vices are proportionable to a mans temper and there he falls pleasantly and with desire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Aristotle That which is natural is sweet but that which is violent is troublesome to others he is indifferent but to them he is turn'd by every byass * If a man be morose he is apt to offend with fullenness and angry pretensions but if he be compliant and gentle he is easily cousened with fair entreaties * If he be alone he is sad and phantastick and woe to him that is alone If he be in company it will be very hard for him to go with them to the utmost limits of permission and not to step beyond it * No mans leisure is great enough to attend the inquiry after all the actions and particulars for which he is to be judged and he does many things which he considers not whether they be sins or no and when he does consider he often judges wrong * For some things there are no certain measures and there are very many constituent or intervening things and circumstances of things by which it is made impossible to give a certain judgement of the whole * Oftentimes a man is surpris'd and cannot deliberate for want of time sometimes he is amaz'd and wants order and distinction to his thoughts and cannot deliberate for want of powers * Sometimes the case is such that if a man determines it against his temporal interest he determines falsly and yet he thinks he does it safest and if he judges in compliance with his temporal regards he cannot be confident but that he was mov'd not by the prevailing reason but by prevailing passion * If the dispute be concerning degrees there is no certain measures to weigh them by and yet sometimes a degree does diversifie the kind and vertue and vice are but differing degrees of the same instance and the ways of sinning upon the stock of ignorance are as many as there are ignorances and degrees and parts and vicious causes and instances of it 17. Concerning our infirmities they are so many that we can no more account concerning the ways of error coming upon that stock than it can be reckoned in how many places a lame man may stumble that goes a long journey in difficult and uneven ways We have beginning infant strengths which are therefore imperfect because they can grow Crescere posse imperfectae rei signum est and when they are most confirm'd and full grown they are imperfect still When we can reckon all the things of chance then we have summ'd up the dangers and aptnesses of man to sin upon that one principle but so as they can they are summ'd up in the words of Epiphanius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The condition of our nature the inconstancy of our spirits the infirmity of our flesh the distraction of our senses are an argument to make us with confidence expect pardon and mercy from the loving kindness of the Lord according to the preaching of Truth the Gospel of Christ. 18. But besides all this the numbers of sin are not easily to be told the lines of account are various and changeable our opinions uncertain and we are affrighted from one into another and all changes from sin are not into vertue but more commonly into sin Obsessa mens hominis undique diaboli infestatione vallata vix occurrit singulis vix resistit si avaritia prostrata est exurgit libido And if we do not commit things forbidden yet the sins of omission are innumerable and undiscernable * Businesses intervene and visits are made and civilities to be rendred and friendly compliances to be entertain'd and necessities to be served and some things thought so which are not so and so the time goes away and the duty is left undone prayers are hindred and prayers are omitted and concerning every part of time which was once in our power no man living can give a fair account 19. This moral demonstration of the impossibility of perfect and exact obedience and innocence would grow too high if I should tell how easily our duties are sowr'd even when we think we walk wisely Severity is quickly turn'd into ungentleness love of children to indulgence joy to gayety melancholy to peevishness love of our wives to fondness liberties of marriage to licentiousness devotion to superstition austerity to pride feasting to intemperance Vrbanity to foolish jesting a free speech into impertinence and idle talking 20. There were no bottom of this consideration if we consider how all mankind sins with the tongue He that offends not in his tongue he is a perfect man indeed But experience and the following considerations do manifest that no man is so perfect For 21. Every passion of the Soul is a Spring and a shower a parent and a nurse to sin Our passions either mistake their objects or grow intemperate either they put too much upon a trifle or too little upon the biggest interest They are material and sensual best pleas'd and best acquainted with their own objects and we are to do some things which it is hard to be told how they can be in our own power We are commanded to be angry to love to hope to desire certain things towards which we cannot be so affected ever when we please A man cannot love or hate upon the stock and interest of a Commandment and yet these are parts of our duty To mourn and
have received our pardon for what we have not kept 33. II. As the law of Moses was not of it self impossible absolutely and naturally so neither are the Commandments of the Gospel For if we consider the particulars of Moses law they were such a burthen which the Jews themselves were loth to part withal because it was in the Moral part of it but a law of abstinence from evil to which fear and temporal promises was as they understood it a sufficient endearment But that burthen which neither they nor their fathers were able to bear was the sting of the law that it allowed no repentance for great crimes but the transgressor should die without mercy under two or three witnesses Now then since in the Gospel there is no such thing but there is an allowance of repentance this must needs be an easie yoke This only is to be added That the righteousness of the law was in abstinence from evil the righteousness of the Gospel is in that and in the doing all the affirmative Commandments of Christ. Now this being a new obligation brought also with it new abilities I mean the glorious promises of the Gospel which whosoever believes heartily will find himself able to do or suffer any thing for the enjoying of them and this is that which is taught us by S. Paul For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh God sending his own Son made it possible by the Spirit of Grace and by our spiritual conversation 34. III. There is a Natural possibility and a Moral there are abilities in every man to do any thing that is there commanded and he that can do well to day may do so to morrow in the nature of things this is true and since every sin is a breach of a law which a man might and ought to have kept it is naturally certain that when ever any man did break the Commandment he might have done otherwise In man therefore speaking naturally and of the Physical possibilities of things there is by those assistances which are given in the Gospel ability to keep the Commandments Evangelical But in the Moral sence that is when we consider what Man is and what are his strengths and how many his enemies and how soon he falls and that he forgets when he should remember and his faculties are asleep when they should be awake and he is hindred by intervening accidents and weakned and determin'd by superinduc'd qualities habits and necessities the keeping of the Commandments is morally impossible Now that this may also be taken off there is an abatement and an allowance made for this also Our infirmities are pitied our ignorances excused our unavoidable errors not imputed These in the law were imputable and it was lawful for the avenger of blood to kill a Man-slayer who sinn'd against his will if he could overtake him before he got to Sanctuary These I say in the law were imputable but they were not imputed Gods mercy took them off privately upon the accounts of his Mercy and a general Repentance But in the Gospel they are neither imputed nor imputable They were paid for before-hand and put upon the accounts of the Cross God winked at the times of your ignorance and The Lord had pity on me because I did it in ignorance said S. Paul and so Christ prayed Father forgive them for they know not what they do But ye did it ignorantly as did also your Rulers so S. Peter and upon that account he called them to accept of mercy And it is certain in reason that if God forgives those sins of malice of which we repent infinitely rather will he not impute what we cannot probably or possibly avoid For to do otherwise were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is a severity above the measures of humane sufferance and capacity to be punished for infirmities when they do not sin wilfully and therefore God who remembers and pities our infirmities will never put these into his account especially the holy Jesus having already paid our symbol Upon the account of these particulars it is certain God does not exact of us an impossible commandment that is not in the impossible measure for that is the meaning of those words of S. Basil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is impious to say the Commandments of the Spirit i. e. of the Gospel are impossible viz. in that sence in which they are exacted 35. But now to the second inquiry Since in justice God exacts not an impossible law how does it consist with his wisdom to impose what in justice he does not exact I answer 1. That it was necessary the Law in its latitude and natural extension should be given for if in the sanction any limits and lessenings had been described it had been a permission given to us to despise him in a certain degree and could in no sence have been proportionable to his infinity God commands us to love him with all our hearts and all our strengths that is always and with all that we can if less than this had been imposed and we commanded to love God but to a less and a certain proportion besides that it would not have been possible for us to understand when we did what was commanded it would have been either a direct lessening our opinion of God by tempting us to suppose no more love was due to him than such a limited measure or else a teaching us not to give him what was his due either of which must necessarily tend to Gods dishonour 36. II. The commanding us to do all that we can and that always though less be exacted does invite our greatest endeavours it entertains the faculties and labours of the best and yet despises not the meanest for they can endeavour too and they can do their best and it serves the end of many graces besides and the honour of some of the Divine Attributes 37. III. By this means still we are contending and pressing forwards and no man can say he does now comprehend or that his work is done till he die and therefore for ever he must grow in grace which could not be without the proposing of a Commandment the performance of which would for ever sufficiently imploy him for by this means the Commandments do every day grow more possible than at first A lustful person thinks it impossible to mortifie his lust but when he hath long contended and got the mastery it grows easie and at last in the progressions of a long piety sin is more impossible than duty is He that is born of God sinneth not neither indeed can he so S. John and Through Christ that strengthens me I can do all things saith S. Paul It is long before a man comes to it but the impossibility by degrees turns into a possibility and that into an easiness and at last into a necessity It is a trouble for some to commit a sin By
in the remaining portion of our days actions meet for repentance so the Baptist called them This is in Scripture by way of propriety called Repentance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so the Baptist used it distinguishing Repentance from its fruits that is from such significations exercises and prosecutions of this change as are apt to represent and to effect it more and more such as are confession weeping self-afflictions alms and the like So S. Paul using the same words before King Agrippa But by way of Synecdoche not only the fruits and consequent expressions but the beginning sorrow also is signified by the same word and all are under the same Commandment though with different degrees of necessity and expression of which I shall afterwards give account Here I only account concerning the essential and constituent parts and definition of Repentance 10. All the whole duty of Repentance and every of its parts is sometimes called Conversion Thus godly sorrow is a conversion or change and upon that account S. James calls upon sinners Be afflicted and mourn and weep let your laughter be turned into mourning and your joy into weeping This is the first change of our affections which is attended with a change of our judgment when we do no longer admire the false beauties of sin but judge righteously concerning it And of this the Prophet Jeremy gives testimony Surely after that I was turned I repented And by this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Hebrews express the duty which the LXX indifferently render by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is best rendred Conversion And then follows the conversion of the whole man body and soul mind and spirit all are set in opposition against sin and apply themselves to the service of God and conformity to Jesus SECT II. Of Repentance in general or Conversion 1. REpentance and Faith in Scriptures signifie sometimes more generally and in the federal sence are used for all that state of grace and favour which the holy Jesus revealed and brought into the world They both signifie the Gospel For the whole Gospel is nothing else but that glad tidings which Christ brought to all mankind that the Covenant of Works or exact measures should not now be exacted but men should be saved by second thoughts that is by Repentance and amendment of life through faith in the Lord Jesus That is if we become his Disciples for that is the condition of the Covenant we shall find mercy our sins shall be blotted out and we shall be saved if we obey heartily and diligently though not exactly This becoming his Disciples is called Faith that is coming to him believing him hoping in him obeying him and consequent to this is that we are admitted to Repentance that is to the pardon of our sins For him hath God exalted on his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to give repentance and remission of sins This is the summ Total of the Gospel That we have leave to repent supposes that God will pardon what is past But then that we have leave to repent supposes us also highly bound to it It is in meer pity to our imfirmities our needs and our miseries that we have leave to do it and this is given to mankind by faith in Jesus Christ that is by becoming his Disciples for he hath power to pardon sins and to take them away and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness viz. which we have committed This is that which all the world did need and long'd for it was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hidden mystery from all ages but revealed in Christ whose blood as S. Clement expresses it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 brought to all the world the grace of Repentance 2. This is the Gospel For the Gospel is nothing else but Faith and Repentance The Gospel is called Faith by S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before that faith came we were under the law shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed that is to the Gospel or the glad tidings of Repentance which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hearing of faith For Faith being here opposed to the Law that is the Covenant of Mercy to the Covenant of Works must mean the Covenant of Repentance And therefore although if we consider them as proper and particular graces and habits they have differing natures and definitions yet in the general and federal sence of which I now speak Faith and Repentance are only distinguished by relations and respects not by substance and reality Repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ that is Repentance for having sinned against God a Repentance I say through faith in Jesus Christ that is a Repentance procured and preach'd and enjoyn'd by Christ being the summ of his Discipline And that it may appear Faith and Repentance to be the same thing and differing only in name and manner of expression S. Paul confounds the distinction which he formerly made and that which he called Repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Jesus in his Sermons in Asia in his Epistle to the Hebrews he calls Repentance from dead works and faith in God And the words are used for each other promiscuously in S. Luke for that which the rich man in Hell called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Abraham called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If one comes from the dead they will repent No said Abraham If they will not hear Moses and the Prophets then if one come from the dead they will not believe or be perswaded And S. Peter giving an account of the delaying of the coming of the Lord for the punishment of the obdurate Jews and enemies of Christ says it is because God of his infinite goodness expects even them also to be converted to the faith or becoming Christians as the whole design of the place infers and this he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a coming to Repentance that is to the faith of Christ. And therefore the Gospel is nothing else but an universal publication of Repentance and pardon of sins in the Name of Christ that is procured for all them who are his Disciples and to this we are baptized that is adopted into the Religion into that Discipleship under which God requires holiness but not perfect measures sincerity without hypocrisie but not impeccability or perfect innocence 3. And as the Gospel is called Faith and Faith is Repentance that is it is the same Covenant of Grace and Mercy with this only difference that it is called Faith as it relates to Christ who procured this mercy for us Repentance as it signifies the mercy it self so procured So Baptism by the same analogy is called the Baptism unto Repentance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Baptism of Repentance so it is called in the Jerusalem Creed that is the admission to the grace of the Gospel which the Fathers of C.P.
God is created in righteousness and true holiness Let no man deceive you with vain words for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience Be not ye therefore partakers with them * For ye were sometimes darkness but now are ye light in the Lord walk as children of light * For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth * Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord * And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness but rather reprove them * See then that ye walk circumspectly not as fools but as wise * Redeeming the time because the days are evil * Wherefore be ye not unwise but understanding what the will of the Lord is If ye then be risen with Christ seek those things which are above where Christ fitteth on the right hand of God Set your affection on things above not on things on the earth * For ye are dead and your life is hidden with Christ in God * Mortifie therefore your members which are upon the earth fornication uncleanness inordinate affection evil concupiscence and covetousness which is idolatry * But now you also pâ—t off all these anger wrath malice blasphemy filthy communication out of your mouth * Lie not one to another seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds * And have put on the new man which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men Teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts we should live soberly righteously and godly in this present world * Looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ * Who gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity and purifie unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good works Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses let us lay aside every weight and the sin which doth so easily beset us and let us run with patience the race that is set before us Looking unto Jesus the Author and Finisher of our faith who for the joy that was set before him endured the Cross despising the shame and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God * Follow peace with all men and holiness without which no man shall see the Lord * Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you and thereby many be defiled Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth that we should be a kind of first fruits of his creatures Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness and receive with meekness the ingraffed word which is able to save your souls * But be ye doers of the word and not hearers only deceiving your own selves Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises that by these you might be partakers of the divine nature having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust And besides this giving all diligence add to your faith vertue and to vertue knowledge * And to knowledge temperance and to temperance patience and to patience godliness * And to godliness brotherly kindness and to brotherly kindness charity * For if these things be in you and abound they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. * But he that lacketh these things is blind and cannot see far off and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind be sober and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ. As obedient children not fashioning your selves according to the former lusts in your ignorance * But as he which hath called you is holy so be ye holy in all manner of conversation * Because it is written Be ye holy for I am holy Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree that we being dead to sins should live unto righteousness by whose stripes ye were healed The indispensable necessity of a good life represented in the following Scriptures WHosoever breaketh one of these least Commandments and shall teach men so he shall be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven but whosoever shall do and teach them the same shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven And why call ye me Lord Lord and do not the things which I say Ye are my friends if ye do whatsoever I command you I beseech you therefore brethren by the mercies of God that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice holy acceptable unto God which is your reasonable service And be not conformed to this world but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind that ye may prove what is that good that acceptable and perfect will of God Who will render to every man according to his deeds To them who by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory and honour and immortality eternal life * But unto them that are contentious and do not obey the truth but obey unrighteousness indignation and wrath * Tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man that doth evil of the Jew first and also of the Gentile * But glory honour and peace to every man that worketh good to the Jew first and also to the Gentile Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing but the keeping of the Commandments of God Therefore my beloved brethren be ye stedfast unmoveable always abounding in the work of the Lord forasmuch as you know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision but a new creature For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision but faith which worketh by love For we are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them And this I pray that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgment That ye may approve things that are excellent that ye may be sincere and without offence till the day of Christ * Being filled with the fruits of righteousness which are by Jesus Christ unto the glory and praise of God Furthermore then we beseech you brethren and exhort you by the Lord Jesus that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God so ye would abound more and more * For ye know what Commandments we gave by the Lord Jesus * For this is the will of God even your sanctification As you know how we exhorted and comforted and charged every one of you as a Father doth
first part of Conversion or Repentance is a quitting of all sinful habits and abstaining from all criminal actions whatsoever Virtus est vitium fugere sapientia prima Stultitiâ caruisse For unless the Spirit of God rule in our hearts we are none of Christs but he rules not where the works of the flesh are frequently or maliciously or voluntarily entertained All the works of the flesh and whatsoever leads to them all that is contrary to the Spirit and does either grieve or extinguish him must be rescinded and utterly taken away Concerning which it is necessary that I set down the Catalogues which by Christ and his Apostles are left us as lights and watch-towers to point out the rocks and quicksands where our danger is and this I shall the rather do not only because they comprehend many evils which are not observed or feared some which are commended and many that are excused but also because although they are all mark'd with the same black character of death yet there is some difference in the execution of the sentence and in the degrees of their condemnation and of the consequent Repentance Evil thoughts or discoursings 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Evil reasonings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says Hesychius that is prating importune pratling and looseness of tongue such as is usual with bold boys and young men prating much and to no purpose But our Bibles read it Evil thoughts or surmisings for in Scripture it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so Suidas observes concerning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to think long and carefully to dwell in meditation upon a thing to which when our blessed Saviour adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 evil he notes and reproves such kind of morose thinkings and fancying of evil things and it is not unlikely that he means thoughts of uncleanness or lustful fancies For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Suidas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says Hesychius it signifies such words as are prologues to wantonness so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Aristophanes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that here are forbidden all wanton words and all morose delighting in venereous thoughts all rollings and tossing such things in our mind For even these defile the soul. Verborum obscoenitas si turpitudini rerum adhibeatur ludus ne libero quidem homine dignus est said Cicero Obscene words are a mockery not worthy of an ingenuous person This is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that foolish talking and jesting which S. Paul joyns to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that filthiness of communication which men make a jest of but is indeed the basest in the world the sign of a vile dishonest mind and it particularly noted the talk of Mimicks and Parasites Buffoons and Players whose trade was to make sport 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and they did use to do it with nastiness and filthy talkings as is to be seen in Aristophanes and is rarely described and severely reproved in S. Chrysostom in his sixth Homily upon S. Matthew For per verba dediscitur rerum pudor which S. Paul also affirms in the words of Menander 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Evil words corrupt good manners and evil thoughts being the fountain of evil words lie under the same prohibition Under this head is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a talkative rash person ready to speak slow to hear against S. James his rule Inventers of Evil things 3. Contrivers of all such artifices as minister to vice Curious inventions for cruelty for gluttony for lust witty methods of drinking wanton pictures and the like which for the likeness of the matter I have subjoyn'd next to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the evil thinkings or surmises reproved by our blessed Saviour as these are expresly by S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 COVETOVSNESS or 4. Inordinate unreasonable desires For the word does not only signifie the designing and contrivances of unjust ways of purchasing which is not often separated from covetous desires but the very studium habendi the thirst or greediness secret and impatient desires of having abundance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hurt of immoderate lusting or desire and is sometimes applied to the matter of uncleanness but in this Catalogue I wholly separate it from this because this is comprised under other words Neither will it be hard to discern and to reprove this sin of desires in them that are guilty of it though they will not think or confess what is and what is not abundance For there is not easily to be found a greater testimony of covetousness than the error concerning the measure of our possessions He that is not easie to call that abundance which by good and severe men is thought so desires more than he should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when any thing is over and above the needs of our life that is too much and to desire that is covetousness saith S. Luke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Take heed and keep your selves from covetousness for our life consisteth not in abundance intimating that to desire more than our life needs is to desire abundance and that is covetousness and that is the root of all evil that is all sins and all mischiefs can come from hence Divitis hoc vitium est auri nec bella fuere Faginus adstabat cum scyphus ante dapes There were no wars in those days when men did drink in a treen cup. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 WICKEDNESS 5. This is the same that the Latines call Malitia a scurvy base disposition aptness to do shrewd turns to delight in mischiefs and tragedies a loving to trouble our neighbour and to do him ill offices crosseness perverseness and peevishness of action in our entercourse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Suidas Facessere negotium alicui to do a man an evil office or to put him to trouble And to this is reducible that which S. Paul calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Malignity a baseness of nature by which we take things by the wrong handle and expounding things always in the worst sence Vitiositas is the Latin word for it and it seems to be worse than the former by being a more general principle of mischief Malitia certi cujusdam vitii est vitiositas omnium said Cicero This is in a mans nature an universal depravation of his spirit that is in manners and is sooner cured than this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 CRAFTINESS 6. That is a wiliness and aptness to deceive a studying by some underhand trick to over-reach our brother like that of Corax his Scholar he cousen'd his Master with a trick of his own art 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A crafty Crow laid a crafty egge By which is not signified that natural or acquired sagacity by which men can contrive wittily or be too hard for their brother if they should
object like that of the wife of Ajax in Sophocles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 She did him most strange zealous services as if her affection had no measure It signifies also violent desires of equalling or excelling another for honours sake ambition and envy mixt together it is a violent pursuit after a thing that deserves it not A consequent of these is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Seditions or Schisms and Heresies 15. That is Divisions in the Church upon diversity of Opinions or upon Pride Faction and Interest as in chusing Bishops in Prelations and Governments Ecclesiastical from factious Rulers or factious Subjects which are properly Schisms but use commonly to belch forth into Heresie according to that saying Plerunque schisma in haeresin eructat AN EVIL EYE 16. That is a repining at the good of others Envy a not rejoycing in the prosperity of our Neighbours a grieving because he grieves not Aut illi nescio quid incommodi accidit aut nescio cui aliquid boni when good happens to another it is as bad as if evil happened to himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is one of the worst of Crimes for a man to hate him that is prosperous hate him whom God loves or blesses It bears part of its punishment along with it the sin hath in it no pleasure but very much torment Nam sese excruciat qui beatis invidet A part of this is Vnthankfulness those who do not return kindnesses to others from whom they have received any neither are apt to acknowledge them which is properly an envying to our friend the noblest of all graces that of Charity or it is Pride or Covetousness for from any of these roots this equivocal issue can proceed LOVERS OF PLEASVRES 17. Such who study and spend their time and money to please their senses rarum memorabile magni Gutturis exemplum conducendúsque Magister Rare Epicures and Gluttons such which were famous in the Roman Luxury and fit to be Presidents of a Greek Symposiack not for their skill in Philosophy but their witty Arts of drinking Ingeniosa gula est Siculo scarus aequore mersus Ad mensam vivus perducitur Sensual men Such who are dull and unaffected with the things of God and transported with the lusts of the lower belly persons that are greedy of baser pleasures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said the Scholiast upon Aristotle The wicked man allows to himself too large a portion of sweet things Licorishness is the common word to express this vice in the matter of eating and drinking BVSIE-BODIES 18. That is such who invade the offices or impertinently obtrude their advice and help when there is no need and when it is not lik'd nor out of charity but of curiosity or of a trifling spirit and this produces talking of others and makes their conversation a scene of Censure and Satyr against others never speaking of their own duty but often to the reproach of their Neighbours something that may lessen or disparage him The Fearful and the Vnbelievers 19. That is they that fear man more than God that will do any thing but suffer nothing that fall away in persecution such who dare not trust the Promises but fear want and fear death and trust not God with chearfulness and joy and confidence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They that take pleasure in those that do these things 20. That is they who in any sence incourage or promote or love the sin of another are guilty themselves not of the others sin but of their own He that commands a man to swear is not guilty of that swearing but of that commanding him It is a sin to do so but that sin to which the man is encouraged or tempted or assisted is his own sin and for it he is to repent every man for his own For it is in artificially said by the Masters of Moral Theology that by many ways we are guilty of the sins of others by many ways indeed we can procure them to sin and every such action of ours is a sin against charity and the matter of that Commandment in which the temptation was instanc'd But their sin is not ours their sin does not properly load us neither does our being author of it excuse them It was the case of Adam and Eve and the Serpent who yet did every one bear their own burden Aristotle Zeno and Chrysippus were notorious in this kind Non est enim immunis à scelere qui ut fieret imperavit nec est alienus à crimine cujus consensu licèt à se non admissum crimen tamen publicè legitur said S. Cyprian He that commands and he that consents and he that delights and he that commends and he that maintains and he that counsels and he that tempts or conceals or is silent in anothers danger when his speaking will prevent it is guilty before God Corrumpere corrumpi saeculum vocatur This evil is of a great extent but receives its degrees according to the influence or causality it hath in the sins of others 21. These I have noted and explicated because they are not so notorious as others which have a publick name and filthy character and easie definition Such as adulteries fornication drunkenness idolatry hating of God and good men perjury malicious lies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as S. Paul adds and such like these and those and all that are like these exclude us from the Kingdom of Heaven They are the works of the flesh but these which are last reckoned are such which all the world condemns and they are easily discerned as smoak or a cloud upon the face of the Sun but the other are sometimes esteemed innocent often excused commonly neglected always undervalued But concerning all these the sentence is sad and decretory They that are such shall not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven But they shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone Now if we list to observe it many of these are such which occur so frequently in our daily conversation are so little noted and so confidently practised that to try men concerning their hopes of Heaven by such measures would seem strange and hard but it is our faults that it is so these are the measures of the Sanctuary and not to be prejudg'd by later and looser customs SECT II. Whether every single act of these Sins puts a man out of Gods favour 22. IN this Question by a single act I mean a deliberate act a wilful observ'd known act for concerning acts by surprize by incogitancy by imperfection I shall give a special account in a Chapter on purpose To this therefore I answer by several propositions 23. I. There are some acts of sin so vile and mischievous that they cannot be acted but by a great malice or depravation of the will and do
whole grace of God It is like the curing of a Hectick feaver which one potion will not do Origen does excellently describe it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When a word is strengthened and nourished by care and assiduity and confirmed by opinions and wise sentences or near to confirmation it masters all oppositions and breaks in pieces the concupiscence This is the manner of mortification there must be resolutions and discourses assiduity and diligence auxiliaries from reason and wise sentences and advices of the prudent and all these must operate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto a confirmation or near it and by these the concupiscence can be master'd But this must be a work of time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Menander To dissolve a long custom in a short time is a work indeed but very hard if not impossible to be done by any man A man did not suddenly come to the state of evil from whence he is to arise Nemo repentè fuit turpissimus But as a man coming into a pestilential air does not suck in death at every motion of his lungs but by little and little the spirits are poysoned and at last enter into their portion of death so it is in a vicious custom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The evil is not felt instantly it begins from little things and is the production of time and frequent actions And therefore much less can it be supposed that we can overcome our filthy habits and master our fortified corruptions by a sudden dash of piety and the ex tempore gleams of repentance Concerning this S. Basil discourses excellently Sicut enim morbi corporis inveterati c. For as the old diseases of the body are not healed without a long and painful attendance so must old sins be cured by a long patience a daily prayer and the sharpest contention of the spirit That which is dyed with many dippings is in grain and can very hardly be washed out Sic anima sanie peccatorum suppurata in habitu constituta malitiae vix ac multo negotio elui potest So is the soul when it is corrupted with the poyson of sin and hath contracted a malicious habit it can scarce but not without much labour be made clean 42. Now since we say our nature is inclined to sin and we feel it to be so in many instances and yet that it needs time and progression to get a habit of that whither we too naturally tend we have reason to apprehend that we need time and fierce contentions and the long suffering of violences to take the kingdom of Heaven by force by a state of contradiction and hostility against the tempting enemy It is much harder to get a habit against our nature and a prepossessing habit than to confirm nature and to actuate our inclinations 43. And this does not only relate to habits in their Natural capacity but in their Moral and consequently their Relative capacity as appertaining to God in the matter of his valuation of them Because in habits as it is in acts although metaphysically we can distinguish the action from the irregularity yet because they are subjected in the same person and the irregularity is inherent in the action in the whole composition the action is sinful so it is in habits For the sin adheres to the natural facility and follows it in all its capacities And as the natural facility of doing viciously is cured by time and a successive continued diligence so is the sinfulness because that facility is vicious and sinful And as heat is distinguished from fire but you cannot lessen the heat but by decreasing the natural being of fire so does the sin of a vicious habit pass away as the habit naturally lessens that is the Moral capacity changes as does the Natural this being the subject of that and it could not have been this habit if it had not in it this sinfulness * 44. Now if the parts of this argument be put together their intention is this A habit of sin is not gotten but by time and progression and yet it cannot be lost so soon as it was gotten but it is a long time before its natural being is overcome by its contrary But the sinfulness of it does pass away with the natural being and no otherwise therefore the sinfulness of it cannot be removed suddenly And therefore if mortification be a duty and we be commanded to do it we are commanded to do a long work and a difficult a thing that is more than the moral retractation of it by a single act of sorrow or contrition a duty that contains in it so much work as is proportion'd to the necessity even to the breaking the habit of sin and setting up the habit of vertue over it Now then all the question will be whether Mortification be a Precept or a Counsel Concerning which I only appeal to the words of S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mortifie therefore your earthly members and If ye through the Spirit do mortifie the deeds of the body ye shall live Mortification is the condition of life it is expresly commanded by the Apostle that we make the deeds of the body to be dead that is the evil habits and concupiscence of the body for that which S. Paul here calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or deeds in the same precept written to the Galatians he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lusts and concupiscences And of what great necessity and effect this mortification and crucifying of our sinful customs is we may understand best by those other words of the same Apostle He that is dead is justified from sins not till then not till his habit was dead not as soon as he morally retracts it by an act of displeasure and contrition but when the sin is dead when the habit is crucified when the concupiscence does not reign but is overcome in all its former prevalencies then he is pardon'd and not before 45. IX Unless it be necessary to oppose a habit against a habit a state of vertue against a state of vice that is if a vicious habit may be pardon'd upon one act of contrition then it may so happen that a man shall not be obliged to do good but only to abstain from evil to cease from sin but not to proceed and grow in grace which is against the perpetual design and analogy of the Gospel and the nature of Evangelical righteousness which differs from the righteousness of the law as doing good from not doing evil The law forbad murder but the Gospel superadds charity The law forbad uncleanness but the Gospel superadds purity and mortification The law forbad us to do wrong but the Gospel commands us to do offices of kindness Injustice was prohibited by the law but revenge also of real injuries is forbidden by the Gospel and we are commanded to do good to them that injure us and
Chrysostom In that moment says he he wipes away all the sins of his life And S. Austin upon that of David before quoted My confession came not so far as my mouth and God heard the voice of my heart 58. To this I answer first concerning the words of David Then concerning the examples 1. Concerning contrition that it is a good beginning of repentance is certain and in its measure acceptable to God and effective of all its proper purposes But contrition can have but the reward of contrition but not of other graces which are not parts but effects of it God will not despise the broken and contrite heart no for he will receive it graciously and bind up the wounds of it and lead it on in the paths of righteousness and by the waters of comfort 59. II. But a man is not of a contrite heart as soon as he hath exercised one act of contrition He that goes to break a rock does something towards it by every blow but every blow does not break it A mans heart is not so easily broken I mean broken from the love of sin and its adherence to it Every act of temperance does not make a man temperate and so I fear will it be judg'd concerning contrition 60. III. But suppose the heart be broken and that the man is contrite there is more to be done than so God indeed does not despise this but he requires more God did not despise Ahabs repentance but it did not do all his work for him He does not despise patience nor meekness nor resignation nor hope nor confession nor any thing that himself commands But he that commands all will not be content with one alone every grace shall have its reward but it shall not be crown'd alone Faith alone shall not justifie and repentance alone taken in its specifical distinctive sence shall not suffice but faith and repentance and charity and patience and the whole circle and rosary of graces and duties must adorn our heads 61. IV. Those graces and duties which are commanded us and to which God hath promised glorious rewards must not be single or transient acts but continual and permanent graces He that drinks of the water which I shall give him shall never thirst again He that eats of this bread shall live for ever He that believes in me rivers of living waters shall flow from his belly He that confesseth his sins and forsaketh them shall have mercy Repent and believe and wash away your sins Now these words of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are of extended and produced signification as Divines observe and signifie a state of duty such as includes patience and perseverance Such also are these He that doth the will of my Father abideth for ever If we confess our sins he is just and faithful to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all iniquity and they that do such things shall possess the kingdom of Heaven And I will deliver him because he hath put his trust in me And If ye love him he also will love us And Forgive and ye shall be forgiven These and many more do not intend that any one grace alone is sufficient much less any one act of one grace proceeding from the Spirit of God can be sufficient to wipe off our leprosies But these signifie states of duty and integrity not transient actions or separate graces And besides the infinite reasonableness of the thing this truth is consign'd to us plainly in Scripture God will render to every man according to his deeds To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality eternal life And if men had pleased they might as well have fallen upon this proposition that an act of humility would have procur'd our pardon as well as that an act of contrition will do it because of the words of David The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a contrite heart and will save such as be of an humble spirit Salvation is as much promised to humility alone as to contrition alone that is to neither separately but in the conjunction with other parts of duty 62. V. Contrition is either taken in its proper specifick signification and so it is but a part of repentance and then who can say that it shall be sufficient to a full and final pardon Repentance alone is not sufficient There must be faith and hope and charity therefore much less shall a part be sufficient when the whole is not But if contrition be taken in a sence comprehending more than it self then I demand how much shall it involve That it does include in it an act of the Divine love and a purpose to confess and a resolution to amend is affirmed So far is well But why thus far and no farther Why shall not contrition when it is taken for a sufficient disposition to pardon and salvation signifie as much as repentance does and repentance signifie the whole duty of a converted sinner Unless it does repentance it self that is as it is one single grace cannot suffice as I proved but now And therefore how shall contrition alone much less an act of contrition alone do it For my part I should be very glad it were so if God so pleased for I have as much need of mercy as any man and have as little reason to be confident of the perfection of my repentance as any returning sinner in the world But I would not willingly deceive my self nor others and therefore I must take the surest course and follow his measures who hath describ'd the lines and limits of his own mercy * But it is remarkable that the manner of the Scripture is to include the consequents in the antecedents He that is of God heareth Gods word That is not only hears but keeps it For not the hearer but the doer is blessed So S. John in the Revelation Blessed are they that are called to the marriage of the Lamb. They which are called are blessed that is They which being called come and come worthily having on the wedding garment For without this the meaning of the Spirit is not full For many are called but few are chosen And thus also it is in the present instance God will not despise the contrite heart that is the heart which being bruised with sorrow returns to duty and lives in holiness for in order to holiness contrition was accepted But one thing I shall remark before I leave this In the definition of Contrition all the Schools of Theologie in the world that I know of put the love of God Contrition is not only sorrow but a love of God too Now this doctrine if they themselves would give men leave rightly to understand it is not only an excellent doctrine but will also do the whole business of this great Question Without Contrition our sins cannot be pardon'd It is not Contrition unless the love
The penitent need not be fond of them for they are dangers which prove death if they be not triumphed over and if they be yet the man hath escap'd a danger and may both prove and act his repentance without it But therefore he that is not so tried and put to it must do all that which he is put to and execute his fierce anger against the sin and by proper instances of mortification endeavour the destruction of it and although every man hath not so glorious a trial and indication of his Repentance as in the former instance yet he that denies himself in any instance of his sin and so in all that he can or is tempted in does the same thing all the same duty and with less danger and with less gloriousness * But if it happen that his sin urge him not at all as formerly or the occasion is gone and the matter is subtracted he is to follow the measures of old men described in the next Section 9. IX Let the penitent be infinitely careful that he does not mortifie one vicious habit by a contrary vice but by a contrary vertue For to what purpose is it that you are cur'd of prodigality and then die by covetousness Quid te exempta juvat spinis de millibus una It is not this or that alone that is contrary to God Every vicious habit is equally his enemy and he that exterminates one vice and entertains another hath destroyed the vice but not the viciousness he hath quitted the instance but not the irregularity he hath serv'd the interest of his fortune or his pleasure his fame or his quiet his passion or his humour but not his vertue and relations to God By changing his vice for another he is convinced of his first danger but enters not into safety He is only weary of his feaver and changes it into the ease of a dead palsie and it is in them as in all sharp sicknesses that is always worst that is actually upon him and the man dies by his imaginary cure but real sickness 10. X. When the mortification of a vicious habit is attempted and is found difficult and pertinacious not flexible or malleable by the strokes of contrition and its proper remedies it is a safe way if the penitent will take some course to disable the sin and make it impossible to return in the former instance provided it be done by a lawful instrument Origen took an ill course to do it but resolved he would mortifie his lust and made himself an Eunuch But a solemn vow were an excellent instrument to restrain the violences of a frequent temptation if the person were to be trusted with it that is if he were a constant person not giddy nor easie to revolt but of a pertinacious nature or of so tender conscience that he durst not for the world break his vow But this remedy is dangerous where the temptations return strongly But there are some others which are safer Cut off the occasion wholly Defie the Concubine publickly and disgrace her make it impossible for her to consent to thee if thou shouldest ask her If thy Lord or Master tempts thee to drunkenness quit his service or openly deny him Make thy face unpleasant and tear off the charms from thy beauty that thou mayest not be courted any more This is a fierceness and â—eal of repentance but very fit to be used when milder courses will not cure thee Scelerum si benè poenitet Eradenda cupidinis pravi sunt elementa Et tenerae nimis mentes asperioribus Formandae studiis If thou repentest truly pluck up sin by the roots take away its principle strangle its nurse and destroy every thing that can foment it 11. XI It was not well with thee when thou didst first enter into the suburbs of Hell by single actions of sin but they were transient and passed off sooner than the habit But when this did supervene a mans acts of malice were enlarged and made continual to each other that is joyn'd by a common term of affection and delight in sin and perfect subjection to its accursed empire But now in thy return consider proportionably concerning thy actions of repentance and piety whether they be transient or permanent Good men often say their prayers and chuse good forms and offices the best they can and they use them with an earnest and an actual devotion but he that hath prayed long and well yet when he rises it may be he cannot tell all the particulars which he begg'd of God I doubt not but those prayers which contain matter in them agreeable to his usual and constant desires and are actually attended to in the time of their use are recorded in Heaven and there will abide to procure the blessing and towards the accounts of Eternity But then it is to be observ'd that those transient acts of devotion or other volatile and fugitive instances of Repentance are not the proper and proportion'd remedy to the evil of vicious habits There must be something more permanent Therefore let the penitent make no sudden resolutions but first consider them well and imprint them upon his spirit and renew them often and call them to mind constantly and at certain periods let him use much meditation upon the matter of his repentance and remedy and let his prayers be the same passionate material alike expressed and made the business of much of our time For our spirit by use must be made holy and by assiduity of reading of praying of meditating and acts of self-denial be accustomed to the yoke of Jesus for let the habit be firm as a rock united and hard as a stone it will be broken and made soft by a continual dropping The proper Repentance and usage of sinners who return not till their old age 12. I. Let all such penitents be reminded that their sins will not so easily be pardoned as the sins of younger persons whose passions are greater and their reason less and their observations loose and their experience trifling But now God hath long expected the effects of wise and sober counsels The old man in the Comedy did so to his son Dum tempus ad eam rem tulit sivi animum ut expleret suum Nunc hic dies aliam vitam adfert alios mores postulat De hinc postulo sive aequum est te oro Dave ut redeat jam in viam And God does so to us And therefore follies of old age are upbraidings of a man and confusions to his spirit Lateranus ad illos Thermarum calices inscriptáque lintea vadit Maturus bello Armeniae To have a grave wise man wrangle for nutshels and a Judge scramble for apples is an undecency bigger than the sin and dishonours him by the disproportion Quaedam cum primâ resecentur crimina barbâ Lateranus should have gone to the Armenian wars or been charging a Parthian horsman when he went to the baths and hir'd
and there is none begotten who hath not committed sin He says their meaning cannot extend to Christ for he was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 born to sin but he is natura ad peccandum natus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by nature born to sin who by the choice of his own will is author to himself to do what he list whether it be good or evil The following words are eaten out by time but upon this ground whatever he said of Infants must needs have been to better purposes than is usually spoken of in this Article 2. Heirs of wrath signifies persons liable to punishment heirs of death It is an usual expression among the Hebrews So sons of death in the holy Scriptures are those that deserve death or are condemned to die Thus Judas Iscariot is called The son of perdition and so is that saying of David to Nathan The man that hath done this shall surely die In the Hebrew it is He is the son of death And so were those Ephesians children or sons of wrath before their conversion that is they had deserv'd death 3. By nature is here most likely to be meant that which Galen calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an acquisite nature that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 customs and evil habits And so Suidas expounds the word in this very place not only upon the account of Grammar and the use of the word in the best Authors but also upon an excellent reason His words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When the Apostle says we were by nature children of wrath he means not that which is the usual signification of nature for then it were not their fault but the fault of him that made them such but it means an abiding and vile habit a wicked and a lasting custom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Aristotle Custom is like Nature For often and always are not far asunder Nature is always Custom is almost always To the same sence are those words of Porphyry 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The ancients who lived likest to God and were by nature the best living the best life were a golden generation 4. By nature means not by birth and natural extraction or any original derivation from Adam in this place for of this these Ephesians were no more guilty than every one else and no more before their conversion than after but by nature signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so the Greek Scholiast renders it really beyond opinion plenè omnino intirely or wholly so the Syriack and so S. Hierome affirms that the Ancients did expound it and it is agreeable to the usage of the same phrase Gal. 4.8 Ye did service to them which by nature are no Gods that is which really are none And as these Ephesians were before their conversion so were the Israelites in the days of their rebellion a wicked stubborn people insomuch that they are by the Prophet called children of transgression a seed of falsehood But these and the like places have no force at all but what they borrow from the ignorance of that sence and acceptation of the word in those languages which ought to be the measure of them 51. But it is hard upon such mean accounts to reckon all children to be born enemies of God that is bastards and not sons heirs of Hell and damnation full of sin and vile corruption when the holy Scriptures propound children as imitable for their pretty innocence and sweetness and declare them rather heirs of Heaven than Hell In malice be children and unless we become like to children we shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven and their Angels behold the face of their Father which is in Heaven Heaven is theirs God is their Father Angels are appropriated to them they are free from malice and imitable by men These are better words than are usually given them and signifie that they are beloved of God not hated design'd for Heaven and born to it though brought thither by Christ and by the Spirit of Christ not born for Hell that was prepared for the Devil and his Angels not for innocent babes This does not call them naturally wicked but rather naturally innocent and is a better account than is commonly given them by imputation of Adams sin 52. But not concerning children but of himself S. Paul complains that his nature and his principles of action and choice are corrupted There is a law in my members bringing me into captivity to the law of sin and many other words to the same purpose all which indeed have been strangely mistaken to very ill purposes so that the whole Chapter so as is commonly expounded is nothing but a temptation to evil life and a patron of impiety Concerning which I have in the next Chapter given account and freed it from the common abuse But if this were to be understood in the sence which I there reprove yet it is to be observed in order to the present Question that S. Paul does not say This law in our members comes by nature or is derived from Adam A man may bring a law upon himself by vicious custom and that may be as prevalent as Nature and more because more men have by Philosophy and illuminated Reason cured the disposition of their nature than have cured their vicious habits * Add to this that S. Paul puts this uneasiness and this carnal law in his members wholly upon the account of being under the law and of his not being under Christ not upon the account of Adams prevarication as is plain in the analogy of the whole Chapter 53. As easie also it is to understand these words of S. Paul without prejudice to this Question The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God neither indeed can he know them meaning as is supposed that there is in our natures an ignorance and averseness from spiritual things that is a contrariety to God But it is observable that the word which the Apostle uses is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is not properly rendred Natural but Animal and it certainly means a man that is guided only by natural Reason without the revelations of the Gospel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Suidas An animal man that is a Philosopher or a rational man such as were the Greek and Roman Philosophers upon the stock and account of the learning of all their Schools could never discern the excellencies of the Gospel mysteries as of God incarnate Christ dying Resurrection of the body and the like For this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Animal and another word used often by the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Carnal are opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Spiritual and are states of evil or of imperfection in which while a man remains he cannot do the work of God For animality which is a relying upon natural principles without revelation is a state privatively oppos'd to the
and whose eternal interest I do so much desire may be secured and advanced Now my Lord I had thought I had been secured in the Article not only for the truth of the Doctrine but for the advantages and comforts it brings I was confident they would not because there was no cause any men should be angry at it For it is strange to me that any man should desire to believe God to be more severe and less gentle That men should be greedy to find out inevitable ways of being damned that they should be unwilling to have the vail drawn away from the face of Gods goodness and that they should desire to see an angry countenance and be displeased at the glad tidings of the Gospel of peace It is strange to me that men should desire to believe that their pretty Babes which are strangled at the gates of the womb or die before Baptism should for ought they know die eternally and be damned and that themselves should consent to it and to them that invent Reasons to make it seem just They might have had not only pretences but reasons to be troubled if I had represented God to be so great a hater of Mankind as to damn millions of millions for that which they could not help or if I had taught that their infants might by chance have gone to Hell and as soon as ever they came for life descend to an eternal death If I had told them evil things of God and hard measures and evil portions to their children they might have complained but to complain because I say God is just to all and merciful and just to infants to fret and be peevish because I tell them that nothing but good things are to be expected from our good God is a thing that may well be wondred at My Lord I take a great comfort in this that my doctrine stands on that side where Gods justice and goodness and mercy stand apparently and they that speak otherwise in this Article are forced by convulsions and violences to draw their doctrine to comply with Gods justice and the reputation of his most glorious Attributes And after great and laborious devices they must needs do it pitifully and jejunely but I will prejudice no mans opinion I only will defend my own because in so doing I have the honour to be an advocate for God who will defend and accept me in the simplicity and innocency of my purposes and the profession of his truth Now my Lord I find that some believe this doctrine ought not now to have been published Others think it not true The first are the wise and few the others are the many who have been taught otherwise and either have not leisure or abilities to make right judgments in the question Concerning the first I have given what accounts I could to that excellent man the Lord Bishop of Sarum who out of his great piety and prudence and his great kindness to me was pleased to call for accounts of me Concerning the other your Lordship in great humility and in great tenderness to those who are not perswaded of the truth of this doctrine hath called upon me to give all those just measures of satisfaction which I could be obliged to by the interest of any Christian vertue In obedience to this pious care and prudent counsel of your Lordship I have published these ensuing Papers hoping that God will bless them to the purposes whither they are designed however I have done all that I could and all that I am commanded and all that I was counselled to And as I submit all to Gods blessing and the events of his providence and Oeconomy so my doctrine I humbly submit to my holy Mother the Church of England and rejoyce in any circumstances by which I can testifie my duty to her and my obedience to your Lordship CHAP. VII A further EXPLICATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF Original Sin SECT I. Of the Fall of Adam and the Effects of it upon Him and Vs. IT was well said of S. Augustine in this thing though he said many others in it less certain Nihil est peccato Originali ad praedicandum noâ—ius nihil ad intelligendum secretius The article we all confess but the manner of explicating it is not an apple of knowledge but of contention Having therefore turned to all the ways of Reason and Scripture I at last apply my self to examine how it was affirmed by the first and best Antiquity For the Doctrine of Original sin as I have explicated it is taxed of Singularity and Novelty and though these words are very freely bestowed upon any thing we have not learned or consented to and that we take false measures of these Appellatives reckoning that new that is but renewed and that singular that is not taught vulgarly or in our own Societies Yet I shall easily quit the proposition from these charges and though I do confess and complain of it that the usual affirmations of Original sin are a popular error yet I will make it appear that it is no Catholick doctrine that it prevailed by prejudice and accidental authorities but after such prevailing it was accused and reproved by the Greatest and most Judicious persons of Christendom And first that judgment may the better be given of the Allegations I shall bring from authority I shall explicate and state the Question that there may be no impertinent allegations of Antiquity for both sides nor clamours against the persons interested in either perswasion nor any offence taken by error and misprision It is not therefore intended nor affirmed that there is no such thing as Original sin for it is certain and affirmed by all Antiquity upon many grounds of Scripture That Adam sinned and his sin was Personally his but Derivatively ours that is it did great hurt to us to our bodies directly to our souls indirectly and accidentally 2. For Adam was made a living soul the great representative of Mankind and the beginner of a temporal happy life and to that purpose he was put in a place of temporal happiness where he was to have lived as long as he obeyed God so far as he knew nothing else being promised to him or implied but when he sinned he was thrown from thence and spoiled of all those advantages by which he was enabled to live and be happy This we find in the story the reasonableness of the parts of which teaches us all this doctrine To which if we add the words of S. Paul the case is clear The first Adam was made a living soul The last Adam was made a quickning Spirit Howbeit that is not first which is spiritual but that which is natural and afterwards that which is spiritual The first man is of the earth earthly the second man is the Lord from Heaven As is the earthly such are they that are earthly and as is the Heavenly such are they also that are Heavenly and as we have born
I explicate it is wholly against the Pelagians for they wholly deny Original sin affirming that Adam did us no hurt by his sin except only by his example These Men are also followed by the Anabaptists who say that death is so natural that it is not by Adam's fall so much as made actual The Albigenses were of the same opinion The Socinians affirm that Adam's sin was the occasion of bringing eternal death into the World but that it no way relates to us not so much as by imputation But I having shewed in what sence Adam's sin is imputed to us am so far either from agreeing with any of these or from being singular that I have the acknowledgment of an adversary even of Bellarmine himself that it is the doctrine of the Church and he laboriously endeavours to prove that Original sin is meerly ours by imputation Add to this that he also affirms that when Zuinglius says that Original sin is not properly a sin but metonymically that is the effect of one sin and the cause of many that in so saying he agrees with the Catholicks Now these being the main affirmatives of my discourse it is plain that I am not alone but more are with me than against me Now though he is pleased afterwards to contradict himself and say it is veri nominis peccatum yet because I understood not how to reconcile the opposite parts of a contradiction or tell how the same thing should be really a sin and yet be so but by a figure onely how it should be properly a sin and yet onely metonymically and how it should be the effect of sin and yet that sin whereof it is an effect I confess here I stick to my reason and my proposition and leave Bellarmine and his Catholicks to themselves 25. And indeed they that say Original sin is any thing really any thing besides Adam's sin imputed to us to certain purposes that is effecting in us certain evils which dispose to worse they are according to the nature of error infinitely divided and agree in nothing but in this that none of them can prove what they say Anselme Bonaventure Gabriel and others say that Original sin is nothing but a want of Original righteousness Others say that they say something of truth but not enough for a privation can never be a positive sin and if it be not positive it cannot be inherent and therefore that it is necessary that they add indignitatem habendi a certain unworthiness to have it being in every man that is the sin But then if it be asked what makes them unworthy if it be not the want of Original righteousness and that then they are not two things but one seemingly and none really they are not yet agreed upon an answer Aquinas and his Scholars say Original sin is a certain spot upon the soul. Melancthon considering that concupiscence or the faculty of desiring or the tendency to an object could not be a sin fancied Original sin to be an actual depraved desire Illyrious says it is the substantial image of the Devil Scotus and Durandus say it is nothing but a meer guilt that is an obligation passed upon us to suffer the evil effects of it which indeed is most moderate of all the opinions of the School and differs not at all or scarce discernibly from that of Albertus Pighius and Catharinus who say that Original sin is nothing but the disobedience of Adam imputed to us But the Lutherans affirm it to be the depravation of humane nature without relation to the sin of Adam but a vileness that is in us The Church of Rome of late sayes that besides the want of Original righteousness with an habitual aversion from God it is a guiltiness and a spot but it is nothing of Concupiscence that being the effect of it only But the Protestants of Mr. Calvin's perswasion affirm that concupiscence is the main of it and is a sin before and after Baptism but amongst all this infinite uncertainty the Church of England speaks moderate words apt to be construed to the purposes of all peaceable men that desire her communion 26. Thus every one talks of Original sin and agree that there is such a thing but what it is they agree not and therefore in such infinite Variety he were of a strange imperious spirit that would confine others to his particular fancy For my own part now that I have shown what the Doctrine of the purest Ages was what uncertainty there is of late in the Question what great consent there is in some of the main parts of what I affirm and that in the contrary particulars Men cannot agree I shall not be ashamed to profess what company I now keep in my opinion of the Article no worse Men than Zuinglius Stapulensis the great Erasmus and the incomparable Hugo Grotius who also says there are multi in Gallia qui eandem sententiam magnis same argumentis tuentur many in France which with great argument defend the same sentence that is who explicate the article intirely as I do and as S. Chrysostome and Theodoret did of old in compliance with those H. Fathers that went before them with whom although I do not desire to erre yet I suppose their great names are guard sufficient against prejudices and trifling noises and an amulet against the Names of Arminian Socinian Pelagian and I cannot tell what Monsters of appellatives But these are but Boyes tricks and arguments of Women I expect from all that are wiser to examine whether this Opinion does not or whether the contrary does better explicate the truth with greater reason and to better purposes of Piety let it be examined which best glorifies God and does honour to his justice and the reputation of his Goodness which does with more advantage serve the interest of holy living and which is more apt to patronize carelesness and sin These are the measures of wise and good men the other are the measures of Faires and Markets where fancy and noise do govern SECT VI. An Exposition of the Ninth Article of the Church of England concerning Original sin according to Scripture and Reason 27. AFter all this it is pretended and talked of that my Doctrine of Original sin is against the Ninth Article of the Church of England and that my attempt to reconcile them was ineffective Now although this be nothing to the truth or falshood of my Doctrine yet it is much concerning the reputation of it Concerning which I cannot be so much displeased that any man should so undervalue my reason as I am highly content that they do so very much value her Authority But then to acquit my self and my Doctrine from being contrary to the Article all that I can do is to expound the Article and make it appear that not only the words of it are capable of a fair construction but also that it is reasonable they should be expounded so
succession were all circumcised and no arguments no authority could hinder them And for their fear it only produc'd caution and sneaking from the face of men and both together set them on work to corrupt the spirit of the law by expositions too much according to the letter so that by this means their natural desires their lustings and concupiscence were not cured 7. For as Lactantius brought in the Heathen complaining so does S. Paul bring in the Jew That which I do I allow not for what I would that I do not but what I hate that I do I say this is the state of a man under the law a man who is not regenerate and made free by the Spirit of Christ that is a man who abides in the infirmities of nature of which the law of nature warn'd him first and the superinduc'd law of God warn'd him more but there was not in these Covenants or Laws sufficient either to endear or to secure obedience they did not minister strength enough to conquer sin to overthrow its power to destroy the kingdom and reign of sin this was reserv'd for the great day of triumph it was the glory of the Gospel the power of Christ the strength of the Spirit which alone was able to do it and by this with its appendages that is the pardon of sin and a victory over it a conquest by the prevailing and rule of the Spirit by this alone the Gospel is the most excellent above all the covenants and states and institutions of the world 8. But then the Christian must not complain thus if he be advanced into the secrets of the Kingdom if he be a Christian in any thing beyond the name he cannot say that sin gives him laws that it reigns in his mortal body that he is led captive by Satan at his will that he sins against his will frequently and habitually and cannot help it But so it is men do thus complain and which is worse they make this to be their excuse and their incouragement If they have sinn'd foully they say It is true but it is not I but sin that dwelleth in me For that which I do I allow not for what I would that do I not and what I hate that do I. And if they be tempted to a sin they cannot be disswaded from it or incouraged to a noble and pertinacious resistance because they have this in excuse ready To will is present with me but how to perform that which is good I find not For the good which I would I do not but the evil which I would not that I do That is it is my infirmity give me leave to do it I am the child of God for all my sin for I do it with an unwilling willingness I shall do this always and shall never be quit of this tyranny of sin It was thus with S. Paul himself and I ought not to hope to be otherwise than he and a person more free from sin We find in the life of Andronicus written by Nicetas Choniates the same pretence made in excuse for sin they could not help it and we find it so in our daily experience and the thing it self warranted by many Interpreters of Scripture who suppose that S. Paul in the seventh Chapter to the Romans from the fourteenth verse to the end describes his own state of infirmity and disability or which is all one the state of a regenerate man that it is no other but an ineffective striving and strugling against sin a contention in which he is most commonly worsted and that this striving is all that he can shew of holiness to be a testimony of his regeneration SECT II. 9. HOW necessary it is to free the words of S. Paul from so dangerous a sence we may easily believe if we consider that to suppose a man who is regenerate by the Spirit of Christ to be still a slave under sin and within its power and that he fain would but cannot help it is very injurious to the power of Christ and the mightiness of the spirit of grace when all its effect is only said to be that it strives but can do nothing that is sin abounds more than grace and the man that is redeemed by Christ is still unredeem'd and a captive under sin and Satan this is not only an incouragement of evil life but a reproach and scorn cast upon the holy Spirit It is verbum dictum contrae Spiritum sanctum a word spoken against the holy Ghost And as S. Austin calls it it is tuba hostis non nostra unde ille incitetur non unde vincatur the Devils trumpet to encourage him in his war against poor mankind but by this means he shall never be overcome And therefore he gives us caution of it for speaking of these words The good which I would that do I not but the evil that I would not that I do advises thus Lectio Divina quae de Apostoli Pauli epistolâ recitata est quotiescunque legitur timendum est ne malè intellecta det hominibus quaerentibus occasionem When ever these words of S. Paul are read we must fear lest the misunderstanding of them should minister an occasion of sin to them that seek it For men are prone to sin and scarce restrain themselves When therefore they hear the Apostle saying I do not the good which I would but I do the evil which I hate they do evil and as it were displeasing themselves because they do it think themselves like the Apostle In pursuance of this caution I shall examine the expositions which are pretended 10. I. These words I do not the good which I would but I do the evil which I hate are not the words or character of a regenerate person in respect of actual good or bad A regenerate man cannot say that he does frequently or habitually commit the sin that he hates and is against his conscience 1. Because no man can serve two Masters if he be a servant of sin he is not a servant of the Spirit No man can serve Christ and Belial If therefore he be brought into captivity to the law of sin he is the servant of sin and such was he whom S. Paul describes in this Chapter Therefore this person is not a servant of Christ He that is a servant of righteousness is freed from sin and he who is a servant of sin is not a servant of but freed from righteousness A regenerate person therefore is a servant of the Spirit and so cannot at the same time be a servant or a slave and a captive under sin 11. II. When the complaint is made I do the evil which I hate the meaning is I do it seldom or I do it commonly and frequently If it means I do it seldom then a man cannot use these words so well as the contrary he can say The good which I would I do regularly
and ordinarily and the evil which I hate I do avoid sometimes indeed I am surpris'd and when I do neglect to use the aids and strengths of the spirit of grace I fall but this is because I will not and not because I cannot help it and in this case the man is not a servant or captive of sin but a servant of Christ though weak and imperfect But if it means I do it commonly or constantly or frequently which is certainly the complaint here made then to be a regenerate person is to be a vile person sold under sin and not Gods servant For if any man shall suppose these words to mean only thus I do not do so much good as I would and do sometimes fall into evil though I would fain be intirely innocent indeed this man teaches no false doctrine as to the state or duty of the regenerate which in this life will for ever be imperfect but he speaks not according to the sence and design of the Apostle here For his purpose is to describe that state of evil in which we are by nature and from which we could not be recovered by the law and from which we can only be redeemed by the grace of Jesus Christ and this is a state of death of being killed by sin of being captivated and sold under sin after the manner of slaves as will further appear in the sequel 12. III. Every regenerate man and servant of Christ hath the Spirit of Christ. But where the Spirit of God is there is liberty therefore no slavery therefore sin reigns not there Both the propositions are the words of the Apostle The conclusion therefore infers that the man whom S. Paul describes in this Chapter is not the regenerate man for he hath not liberty but is in captivity to the law of sin from which every one that is Christs every one that hath the Spirit of Christ is freed 13. IV. And this is that which S. Paul calls being under the law that is a being carnal and in the state of the flesh not but that the law it self is spiritual but that we being carnal of our selves are not cured by the law but by reason of the infirmity of the flesh made much worse curbed but not sweetly won admonished but assisted by no spirit but the spirit of bondage and fear This state is opposed to the spiritual state The giving of the law is called the ministery of death the Gospel is called the ministery of the Spirit and that is the ministration of life and therefore if we be led by the Spirit we are not under the law but if we be under the law we are dead and sin is revived and sin by the law brings forth fruit unto death From hence the argument of the Apostle is clear The man whom he here describes is such a one who is under the law but such a man is dead by reason of sin and therefore hath not in him the Spirit of God for that is the ministration of life A regenerate person is alive unto God he lives the life of righteousness but he that is under the law is killed by sin and such is the man that is here described as appears verse 9. and I shall in the sequel further prove therefore this man is not the regenerate 14. V. To which for the likeness of the argument I add this That the man who can say I do that which I hate is a man in whom sin is not mortified and therefore he lives after the flesh but then he is not regenerate for if ye live after the flesh ye shall die saith S. Paul but if ye through the Spirit do mortifie the deeds of the body ye shall live These arguments are taken from consideration of the rule and dominion of sin in the man whom S. Paul describes who therefore cannot be a regenerate person To the same effect and conclusion are other expressions in the same Chapter 15. VI. The man whom S. Paul here describes who complains That he does not the good which he would but the evil that he would not is such a one in whom sin does inhabit It is no more I but sin that dwelleth in me But in the regenerate sin does not inhabit My Father and I will come unto him and make our abode with him So Christ promised to his servants to them who should be regenerate and the Spirit of God dwelleth in them the Spirit of him that raised Jesus from the dead and therefore the Regenerate are called the habitation of God through the Spirit Now if God the Father if Christ if the Spirit of Christ dwells in a man there sin does not dwell The strong man that is armed keeps possession but if a stronger than he comes he dispossesses him If the Spirit of God does not drive the Devil forth himself will leave the place They cannot both dwell together Sin may be in the regenerate and grieve Gods Spirit but it shall not abide or dwell there for that extinguishes him One or the other must depart And this also is noted by S. Paul in this very place sin dwelleth in me and no good thing dwelleth in me If one does the other does not but yet as in the unregenerate there might be some good such as are good desires knowledge of good and evil single actions of vertue beginnings and dispositions to grace acknowledging of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ some lightnings and flashes of the holy Ghost a knowing of the way of righteousness but sanctifying saving good does not dwell that is does not abide with them and rule so in the regenerate there is sin but because it does not dwell there they are under the Empire of the Spirit and in Christs Kingdom or as S. Paul expresses it Christ liveth in them and that cannot be unless sin be crucified and dead in them The summ of which is thus in S. Paul's words Reckon your selves indeed to be dead unto sin but alive unto God through Jesus Christ. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof For sin shall not have dominion over you because we are not under the law but under grace 16. VII Lastly the man whom S. Paul describes is carnal but the regenerate is never called carnal in the Scripture but is spiritual oppos'd to carnal A man not only in pure naturals but even plac'd under the law is called carnal that is until he be redeemed by the Spirit of Christ he cannot be called spiritual but is yet in the flesh Now that the regenerate cannot be the carnal man is plain in the words of S. Paul The carnal mind is enmity against God and they that are in the flesh cannot please God To which he adds But ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you
But the Spirit of God does dwell in all the servants of God in all the regenerate For if any man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his Now as these are in Scripture distinguished in their appellatives and in their character so also in their operations They that are carnal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the flesh do mind or relish the things of the flesh They that are after the Spirit do mind the things of the Spirit And they that are Christs have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts Now they that have crucified the flesh cannot in any sence of Scripture or Religion be called Carnal That there is something of carnality in the regenerate is too true because our regeneration and spirituality in this life is imperfect But when carnal and spiritual are oppos'd in Scripture and the Question is Whether of these two is to be attributed to the servants and sons of God to the Regenerate It is certain by the analogy of the thing and the perpetual manner of speaking in Scripture that by this word Carnal the Spirit of God never means the sons of God or the spiritual that is the Regenerate The sons of God are led by the Spirit of God therefore not by the flesh which they have crucified Whatsoever is essential to regeneration to new birth to the being the sons of God all that is in the regenerate for they cannot be that thing of which they want an essential part as a thing cannot be a body unless it be divisible nor a living creature if it have not life Therefore regeneration is perfect in respect of its essentials or necessary parts of constitution But in the degrees there is imperfection and therefore the abatement is made by the intermixture of carnality For it is in our new and spiritual birth as in our natural The child is a man in all essential parts but he is as a beast in some of his operations he hath all the faculties of a man but not the strengths of a man but grows to it by the progression and encrease of every day So is the spiritual man regenerate in his mind his will his affections and therefore when carnal and spiritual are oppos'd in their whole nature and definitions the spiritual man is not the carnal though he still retain some of the weaknesses of the flesh against which he contends every day To this purpose are those words of S. Leo. Quamvis spe salvi facti sumus corruptionem adhuc carnémque mortalem gestamus rectè tamen dicimur in carne non esse si carnales nobis non dominentur affectus meritò ejus deponimus â—uncupationem cujus non sequimur voluntatem We are not to be called Carnal though we bear about us flesh and its infirmities yet if carnal affections do not rule over us well are we to quit the name when we do not obey the thing Now if any man shall contend that a man may be called Carnal if the flesh strives against the Spirit though sin does not rule I shall not draw the Saw of Contention with him but only say that it is not usually so in Scripture and in this place of which we now dispute the sence and use it is not so for by Carnal S. Paul means such a person upon whom sin reigns I am carnal sold under sin therefore this person is not the spiritual not the regenerate or the son of God S. Paul uses the word Carnal in a comparative locution for babes and infants or unskilful persons in the Religion but then this carnality he proves to be in them wholly by their inordinate walking by their strifes and contentions by their being Schismaticks and therefore he reproves them which he had no reason to do if himself also had been carnal in that sence which he reproves 17. The Conclusion from all these premises is I suppose sufficiently demonstrated that S. Paul does not in the seventh Chapter to the Romans describe the state of himself really or of a regenerate person neither is this state of doing sin frequently though against our will a state of unavoidable infirmity but a state of death and unregeneration SECT III. 18. SAint Austin did for ever reject that interpretation and indeed so did the whole Primitive Church but yet he having once expounded this Chapter of the unregenerate or a man under the law not redeemed by the Spirit of Christ from his vain conversation he retracted this Exposition and constru'd those words in question thus Non ergo quod vult agit Apostolus quia vult non concupiscere tamen concupiscit ideo non quod vult agit The Apostle does not do what he would because he would fain not desire but yet because he desires he does what he would not Did that desire lead him captive to fornication God forbid He did strive but was not mastered but because he would not have had that concupiscence left against which he should contend therefore he said What I would not that I do meaning I would not lust but I do lust The same also I find in Epiphanius Nam quod dictum est Quod operor non cognosco facio quod odio habeo non de eo quod operati sumus ac perfecimus malum accipiendum est sed de eo quod solum cogitavimus Now this interpretation hath in it no impiety as the other hath for these Doctors allow nothing to be unavoidable or a sin of infirmity and consistent with the state of grace and regeneration but the mere ineffective unprocured desirings or lustings after evil things to which no consent is given and in which no delight is taken extraneae cogitationes quas cogitavimus aliquando non volentes non scientes ex quâ causâ as Epiphanius expresses this Article But S. Austin may be thought to have had some design in chusing this sence as supposing it would serve for an argument against the Pelagians and their sence of Free will For by representing the inevitability of sin he destroyed their doctrine of the sufficiency of our natural powers in order to Heaven and therefore by granting that S. Paul complains thus of his own infirmity he believed himself to have concluded firmly for the absolute necessity of Gods grace to help us But by limiting this inevitability of sinning to the matter of desires or concupiscence he gave no allowance or pretence to any man to speak any evil words or to delight or consent to any evil thoughts or to commit any sinful actions upon the pretence of their being sins of an unavoidable infirmity So that though he was desirous to serve the ends of his present question yet he was careful that he did not disserve the interests of Religion and a holy life But besides that the holy Scriptures abound in nothing more than in affirming our needs and the
the tenure of death Here then are three Combatants the Flesh the Conscience the Spirit The flesh endeavours to subject the man to the law of sin the other two endeavour to subject him to the law of God The flesh and the conscience or mind contend but this contention is no sign of being regenerate because the Flesh prevails most commonly against the Mind where there is nothing else to help it the man is still a captive to the law of sin But the Mind being worsted God sends in the auxiliaries of the Spirit and when that enters and possesses that overcomes the flesh it rules and gives laws But as in the unregenerate the Mind did strive though it was over-power'd yet still it contended but ineffectively for the most part so now when the Spirit rules the flesh strives but it prevails but seldom it is over-powered by the Spirit Now this contention is a sign of regeneration when the flesh lusteth against the Spirit not when the flesh lusteth against the mind or conscience For the difference is very great and highly to be remark'd And it is represented in two places of S. Pauls Epistles The one is that which I have already explicated in this Chapter I consent to the law of God according to the inner man But I see another law in my members fighting against the law of my mind and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin that is in my members where there is a redundancy in the words but the Apostle plainly signifies that the law of sin which is in his members prevails that is sin rules the man in despite of all the contention and reluctancy of his conscience or the law of his mind So that this strife of flesh and conscience is no sign of the regenerate because the mind of a man is in subordination to the flesh of the man sometimes willingly and perfectly sometimes unwillingly and imperfectly 32. I deny not but the mind is sometimes called Spirit and by consequence improperly it may be said that even in these men their spirit lusteth against the flesh That is the more rational faculties contend against the brute parts reason against passion law against sin Thus the word Spirit is taken for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the inner man the whole mind together with its affections Mat. 26.4 and Acts 19.21 But in this Question the word Spirit is distinguished from Mind and is taken for the mind renewed by the Spirit of God and as these words are distinguished so must their several contentions be remark'd For when the mind or conscience and the flesh fight the flesh prevails but when the Spirit and the flesh fight the Spirit prevails And by that we shall best know who are the litigants that like the two sons of Rebecca strive within us If the flesh prevails then there was in us nothing but law of the mind nothing but the conscience of an unregenerate person I mean if the flesh prevails frequently or habitually But if the Spirit of God did rule us if that principle had possession of us then the flesh is crucified it is mortified it is killed and prevails not at all but when we will not use the force and arms of the Spirit but it does not prevail habitually not frequently or regularly or by observation This is clearly taught by those excellent words of S. Paul which as many other periods of his Epistles have had the ill luck to be very much misunderstood This I say then walk in the Spirit and ye shall not fulfil the lusts of the flesh For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit and the Spirit against the flesh so that ye cannot that ye do not or may not do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the things that ye would But if ye be led by the Spirit ye are not under the law The word in the Greek may either signifie duty or event Walk in the Spirit and fulfil not or ye shall not fulfil the lusts of the flesh If we understand it in the Imperative sence then it is exegetical of the former words He that walks in the Spirit hoc ipso does not fulfil the lusts of the flesh To do one is not to do the other whoever fulfils the lusts of the flesh and is rul'd by that law he is not ruled by the grace of Christ he is not regenerate by the Spirit But the other sence is the best reddition of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if he had said Walk in the Spirit and then the event will i◠that the flesh shall not prevail over you or give you laws you shall not then fulfil the lusts thereof And this is best agreeable to the purpose of the Apostle For having exhorted the Galatians that they should not make their Christian liberty a pretence to the flesh as the best remedy against their enemy the flesh he prescribes this walking in the Spirit which is a certain deletery and prevalency over the flesh And the reason follows for the flesh lusteth against the Spirit and the Spirit against the flesh so that ye cannot do the things that ye would that is though ye be inclined to and desirous of satisfying your carnal desires yet being under the Empire and conduct of the Spirit ye cannot do those desires the Spirit over-rules you and you must you will contradict your carnal appetites For else this could not be as the Apostle designs it a reason of his exhortation For if he had meant that in this contention of flesh and Spirit we could not do the good things that we would then the reason had contradicted the proposition For suppose it thus Walk in the Spirit and fulfil not the lusts of the flesh For the flesh and the Spirit lust against each other so that ye cannot do the good ye would This I say is not sence for the latter part contradicts the former For this thing that the flesh hinders us from doing the things of the Spirit is so far from being a reason why we should walk in the Spirit that it perfectly discourages that design and it is to little purpose to walk in the Spirit if this will not secure us against the domineering and tyranny of the flesh But the contrary is most clear and consequent If ye walk in the Spirit ye shall not fulfil the lusts of the flesh for though the flesh lusteth against the Spirit and would fain prevail yet it cannot for the Spirit also lusteth against the flesh and is stronger so that ye may not or that ye do not or that ye cannot for any of these readings as it may properly render the words of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so are not against the design of the Apostle do what ye otherwise would fain do and therefore if ye will walk in the Spirit ye are secured against the flesh 33. The result is this 1. An impious profane person sins without any contention that is with a
by ignorance or inadvertency The unregenerate sins unwillingly too but it is by reason of the dominion and rule that sin bears over him but still this difference distinguishes them in the event of things that when it comes to the question whether sin shall be done or no the one wills and the other wills not though it may happen that the consent or dissent respectively may be with the same unwillingness by reason of the contention and strife from the adverse though weaker party The unregenerate man may be unwilling to obey sin but he obeys it for all that and the unwillingness is a sign of the greater slavery but there can be no sign of his regeneration but by not obeying the sin in the day of its own power and temptation A servant is still a servant whether he obeys with or against his will His servants we are to whom we obey saith S. Paul all therefore that is to be considered in the Question of regeneration is whether the man obeys or not obeys for whether he be willing or unwilling is not here considerable Let no man therefore flatter himself that he is a regenerate person because though he is a servant to sin and acts at the command of his lust and cannot resist in the evil day or stand the shock of a temptation yet he finds an unwillingness within him and a strife against sin Hugo de S. Victore or else S. Austin in the Book de continentiâ gave beginning or countenance to this error Hanc pugnam non experiuntur in semetipsis nisi bellatores virtutum debellatorésque vitiorum This fight none find in themselves but they that fight on vertues side and destroy vice Which words though something crudely set down and so not true yet are explicable by the following period Non expugnat concupiscentiae malum nisi continentiae bonum only holy and continent persons do overcome their concupiscence and in that sence it is true Only the regenerate feel this fight which ends in victory But he whose contention ends in sin and after a brave on-set yields basely frequently I mean or habitually every such person is a servant of sin and therefore not a servant of the spirit but free from that is not rul'd by the law of righteousness And this is so certain that this unwillingness to sin which ends in obeying it is so far from being a note of a regenerate person that it is evidently true that no man can come from the servitude or slavery of sin but the first step of his going from it is the sense and hatred of his fetters and then his desire of being freed but therefore he is not free because he complains of his bands and finds them heavy and intolerable and therefore seeks for remedy For if an unregenerate person did always sin willingly that is without this reluctancy and strife within and the regenerate did sin as infallibly but yet sore against his will then the regenerate person were the verier slave of the two for he that obeys willingly is less a slave than he that obeys in spight of his heart Libertatis servaveris umbram Si quicquid jubeare velis He that delights in his fetters hath at least the shadow and some of the pleasure of liberty but he hath nothing of it who is kept fast and groans because his feet are hurt in the stocks and the iron entreth into his soul. It was the sad state and complaint of the Romans when by the iniquity of war and the evil success of their armies they were forc'd to entertain their bondage tot rebus iniquis Paeruimus victi venia est haec sola pudoris Degenerìsque metus nil jam potuisse negari It was a conquest that gave them laws and their ineffective strugling and daily murmurs were but ill arguments of their liberty which were so great demonstrations of their servitude 37. III. An unregenerate man may not only will and desire to do Natural or Moral good things but even Spiritual and Evangelical that is not only that good which he is taught by natural reason or by civil sanctions or by use and experience of things but even that also which is only taught us by the Spirit of grace For if he can desire the first much more may he desire the latter when he once comes to know it because there is in spiritual good things much more amability they are more perfective of our mind and a greater advancer of our hopes and a security to our greatest interest Neither can this be prejudic'd by those words of S. Paul The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit for they are foolishness unto him neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned For the natural man S. Paul speaks of is one unconverted to Christianity the Gentile Philosophers who relied upon such principles of nature as they understood but studied not the Prophets knew not of the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles nor of those excellent verifications of the things of the Spirit and therefore these men could not arrive at spiritual notices because they did not go that way which was the only competent and proper instrument of finding them Scio incapacem te Sacramenti impie Non posse caecis mentibus mysterium Haurire nostrum They that are impious and they that go upon distinct principles neither obeying the proposition nor loving the Commandment they indeed viz. remaining in that indisposition cannot receive that is entertain him And this is also the sence of the words of our blessed Saviour The world cannot receive him that is the unbelievers such who will not be perswaded by arguments Evangelical But a man may be a spiritual man in his notices and yet be carnal in his affections and still under the bondage of sin Such are they of whom S. Peter affirms it is better they had never known the way of righteousness than having known it to fall away Such are they of whom S. Paul says They detain the truth in unrighteousness Now concerning this man it is that I affirm that upon the same account as any vicious man can commend vertue this man also may commend holiness and desire to be a holy man and wishes it with all his heart there being the same proportion between his mind and the things of the Spirit as between a Jew and the Moral Law or a Gentile and Moral vertue that is he may desire it with passion and great wishings But here is the difference A regenerate man does what the unregenerate man does but desire 38. IV. An unregenerate man may leave many sins which he is commanded to forsake For it is not ordinarily possible that so perfect a conviction as such men may have of the excellency of religion should be in all instances and periods totally ineffective Something they will give to reputation something to fancy something to fame something to peace something
habitual obedience so no man is to be esteemed carnal or criminal for his natural inclinations to what is forbidden But that good men complain of their strange propensities to sin it is a declaration of their fears of their natural weakness of the needs of grace and the aids of Gods Spirit But because these desires even when they are much restrained do yet sometimes insensibly go too far therefore it is that such are sins of infirmity because they are almost unavoidable This remain is like the image of the Ape which Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria left after the breaking of the other Idols a testimony of their folly but as that was left for no other purpose but to reprove them so is this to humble us that we may not rely upon flesh and blood but make God to be our confidence 51. II. Sins of infirmity are rather observed in the imperfection of our duty than in the commission of any criminal action For in this it was that our blessed Saviour instanc'd these words The spirit truly is willing but the flesh is weak The body is weary the eyes heavy the fancy restless diversions many businesses perpetually intervene and all the powers of discourse and observation cannot hinder our mind from wandring in our prayers Odi artus fragilémque hunc corporis usum Desertorem animi But this being in the whole unavoidable is therefore in many of its parts and instances very excusable if we do not indulge to it if we pray and strive against it that is so long as it is a natural infirmity For although we cannot avoid wandring thoughts yet we can avoid delighting in them or a careless and negligent increasing them For if they once seise upon the will they are sins of choice and malice and not of infirmity So that the great scene of sins of infirmity is in omission of degrees and portions of that excellency of duty which is required of us We are imperfect and we do imperfectly and if we strive towards perfection God will pity our imperfection There is no other help for us but blessed be God that is sufficient for our need and proportionable to our present state 52. III. But in actions and matters of commission the case is different For though a man may forget himself against his will or sleep or fall yet without his will he cannot throw himself down or rise again Every action is more or less voluntary but every omission is not A thing may be let alone upon a dead stock or a negative principle or an unavoidable defect but an action cannot be done without some command or action of the will therefore although sins of defect are in many cases pitied and not exacted yet sinful actions have not so easie a sentence but they also have some abatements Therefore 53. IV. Imperfect actions such which are incomplete in their whole capacity are sins of infirmity and ready and prepar'd for pity of this sort are rash or ignorant actions done by surprise by inconsideration and inadvertency by a sudden and great fear in which the reason is in very many degrees made useless and the action cannot be considered duly In these there is some little mixture of choice so much as to make the action imputable if God should deal severely with us but yet so little that it shall not be imputed under the mercies of the Gospel although the man that does them cannot pretend he is innocent yet he can pretend that he does stand fair in the eye of mercy A good man may sometimes be unwary or he may speak or be put to it to resolve or do before he can well consider If he does a thing rashly when he can consider and deliberate he is not excused but if he does it indiscreetly when he must do it suddenly it is his infirmity and he shall be relieved at the Chancery of the throne of Grace For it is remarkable that Gods justice is in some cases 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exact full and severe in other cases it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 full of equity gentleness and wisdom making abatement for infirmities performing promises interpreting things to the most equal and favourable purposes So Justice is taken in S. John If we confess our sins he is righteous or just to forgive our sins that is Gods justice is such as to be content with what we can do and not to exact all that is possible to be imposed He is as just in forgiving the penitent as in punishing the refractory as just in abating reasonably as in weighing scrupulously such a justice it is which in the same case David calls Mercy For thou Lord art merciful for thou rewardest every man according to his works And if this were not so no man could be saved Mortalis enim conditio non patitur esse hominem ab omni maculâ purum said Lactantius For in many things we offend all and our present state of imperfection will not suffer it to be otherwise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Philo. For as a runner of races at his first setting forth rids his way briskly and in a breath measures out many spaces but by and by his spirit is saint and his body is breathless and he stumbles at every thing that lies in his way so is the course of a Christian fierce in the beginnings of repentance and active in his purposes but in his progress remiss and hindred and starts at every accident and stumbles at every scandal and stone of offence and is sometimes listless and without observation at other times and a bird out of a bush that was not look'd for makes him to start aside and decline from the path and method of his journey But then if he that stumbles mends his pace and runs more warily and goes on vigorously his error or misfortune shall not be imputed for here Gods justice is equity it is the justice of the Chancery we are not judged by the Covenant of works that is of exact measures but by the Covenant of faith and remission or repentance But if he that falls lies down despairingly or wilfully or if he rises goes back or goes aside not only his declination from his way but every error or fall every stumbling and startling in that way shall be accounted for For here Gods justice is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exact and severe it is the justice of the Law because he refused the method and conditions of the Gospel 54. V. Every sinful action that can pretend to pardon by being a sin of infirmity must be in a small matter The imperfect way of operating alone is not sufficient for excuse and pardon unless the matter also be little and contemptible because if the matter be great it cannot ordinarily be but it must be considered and chosen He that in a sudden anger strikes his friend to the heart whom he had lov'd as passionately as now he smote him
gone that they would not return and God did not and at last would not pardon them For this appellative is not properly subjected nor attributed to the sin it self but it is according as the man is The sin may be and is at some time unpardonable yet not in all its measures and parts of progression as appears in the case of Pharaoh who all the way from the first miracle to the tenth sinn'd against the Holy Ghost but at last he was so bad that God would not pardon him Some men are come to the greatness of the sin or to that state and grandeur of impiety that their estate is desperate that is though the nature of their sins is such as God is extremely angry with them and would destroy them utterly were he not restrain'd by an infinite mercy yet it shall not be thus for ever for in some state of circumstances and degrees God is finally angry with the man and will never return to him 49. Until things be come to this height whatsoever the sin be it is pardonable For if there were any one sin distinguishable in its whole nature and instance from others which in every of its periods were unpardonable it is most certain it would have been described in Scripture with clear characters and cautions that a man might know when he is in and when he is out Speaking a word against the Holy Spirit is by our blessed Saviour called this great sin but it is certain that every word spoken against him is not unpardonable Simon Magus spoke a foul word against him but S. Peter did not say it was unpardonable but when he bid him pray he consequently bid him hope but because he would not warrant him that is durst not absolve him he sufficiently declared that this sin is of an indefinite nature and by growth would arrive at the unpardonable state the state and fulness of it is unpardonable that is God will to some men and in some times and stages of their evil life be so angry that he will give them over and leave them in their reprobate mind But no man knows when that time is God only knows and the event must declare it 50. But for the thing it self that it is pardonable is very certain because it may be pardoned in baptism The Novatians denied not to baptism a power of pardoning any sin and in this sence it is without doubt true what Zosimus by way of reproach objected to Christian Religion it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a deletery and purgative for every sin whatsoever And since the unconverted Pharisees were guilty of this sin and it was a sin forbidden and punished capitally in the law of Moses either to these Christ could not have been preached and for them Christ did not die or else it is certain that the sin against the holy Spirit of God is pardonable 51. Now whereas our Blessed Lord affirmed of this sin it shall not be pardoned in this world nor in the world to come we may best understand the meaning of it by the parallel words of old Heli to his sons If a man sin against another the Judge shall judge him placari ei potest Deus so the Vulgar Latin reads it God may be appeased that is it shall be forgiven him that is a word spoken against the Son of man which relates to Christ only upon the account of his humane nature that may be forgiven him it shall that is upon easier terms as upon a temporal judgment called in this place a being judged by the Judge But if a man sin against the Lord who shall intreat for him that is if he sin with a high hand presumptuously against the Lord against his power and his Spirit who shall intreat for him it shall never be pardoned never so as the other never upon a temporal judgment that cannot expiate this great sin as it could take off a sin against a man or the Son of man for though it be punished here it shall be punished hereafter But 52. II. It shall not be pardoned in this world nor in the world to come that is neither to the Jews nor to the Gentiles For Saeculum hoc this World in Scripture is the period of the Jews Synagogue and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the world to come is taken for the Gospel or the age of the Messias frequently among the Jews and it is not unlikely Christ might mean it in that sence which was used amongst them by whom he would be understood But because the word was also as commonly used in that sence in which it is understood at this day viz. for the world after this life I shall therefore propound another exposition which seems to me more probable Though remission of sins is more plentiful in the Gospel than under the Law yet because the sin is bigger under the Gospel there is not here any ordinary way of pardoning it no Ministery established to warrant or absolve such sinners but it must be referred to God himself and yet that 's not all For if a man perseveres in this sin he shall neither be forgiven here nor hereafter that is neither can he be absolved in this world by the ministery of the Church nor in the world to come by the sentence of Christ and this I take to be the full meaning of this so difficult place 53. For in this world properly so speaking there is no forgiveness of sins but what is by the ministery of the Church For then a sin is forgiven when it is pardon'd in the day of sentence or execution that is when those evils are removed which are usually inflicted or which are proper to that day Now then for the final punishment that is not till the day of judgment and if God then gives us a mercy in that day then is the day of our pardon from him In the mean time if he be gracious to us here he either forbears to smite us or smites us to bring us to repentance and all the way continues to us the use of the Word and Sacraments that is if he does in any sence pardon us here if he does not give us over to a reprobate mind he continues us under the means of salvation which is the ministery of the Church for that 's the way of pardon in this World as the blessed sentence of the right hand is the way of pardon in the World to come So that when our great Lord and Master threatens to this sin it shall not be pardon'd in this World nor in the World to come he means that neither shall the Ministers of the Church pronounce his pardon or comfort his sorrows or restore him after his fall or warrant his condition or pray for him publickly or give him the peace and communion of the Church neither will God pardon him in the day of Judgment 54. But all this fearful denunciation of the Divine judgment is only upon
does but declare it so it effects it not 71. VIII And after all it is certain that the words of absolution effect no more than they signifie If therefore they do pardon the sin yet they do not naturally change the disposition or the real habit of the sinner And if the words can effect more they may be changed to signifie what they do effect for to signifie is less than to effect Can therefore the Church use this form of absolution I do by the power committed unto me change thy Attrition into Contrition The answer to this is not yet made for their pretence is so new and so wholly unexamined that they have not yet considered any thing of it It will therefore suffice for our institution in this useful material and practical question that no such words were instituted by Christ nor any thing like them no such were used by the Primitive Church no such power pretended And as this new doctrine of the Roman Church contains in it huge estrangements and distances from the spirit of Christianity is another kind of thing than the doctrine and practice of the Apostolical and succeeding ages of the Church did publish or exercise so it is a perfect destruction to the necessity of holy life it is a device only to advance the Priests office and to depress the necessity of holy dispositions it is a trick to make the graces of Gods holy Spirit to be bought and sold and that a man may at a price become holy in an instant just as if a Teacher of Musick should undertake to convey skill to his Scholar and fell the art and transmit it in an hour it is a device to make dispositions by art and in effect requires little or nothing of duty to God so they pay regard to the Priest But I shall need to oppose no more against it but those excellent words and pious meditation of Salvian Non levi agendum est contritione ut debita illa redimantur quibus mors aeterna debetur nec transitoriâ opus est satisfactione pro malis illis propter quae paratus est ignis aeternus It is not a light contrition by which those debts can be redeem'd to which eternal death is due neither can a transitory satisfaction serve for those evils for which God hath prepared the vengeance of eternal fire SECT VI. Of Penances or Satisfactions 72. IN the Primitive Church the word Satisfaction was the whole word for all the parts and exercises of repentance according to those words of Lactantius Poenitentiam proposuit ut si peccata nostra confessi Deo satisfecerimus veniam consequamur He propounded repentance that if we confessing our sins to God make amends or satisfaction we may obtain pardon Where it is evident that Satisfaction does not signifie in the modern sence of the word a full payment to the Divine Justice but by the exercises of repentance a deprecation of our fault and a begging pardon Satisfaction and pardon are not consistent if satisfaction signifie rigorously When the whole debt is paid there is nothing to be forgiven The Bishops and Priests in the Primitive Church would never give pardon till their satisfactions were performed To confess their sins to be sorrowful for them to express their sorrow to punish the guilty person to do actions contrary to their former sins this was their amends or Satisfaction and this ought to be ours So we find the word used in best Classick Authors So Plautus brings in Alcmena angry with Amphitruo Quin ego illum aut deseram Aut satisfaciat mihi atque adjuret insuper Nolle esse dicta quae in me insontem protulit i. e. I will leave him unless he give me satisfaction and swear that he wishes that to be unsaid which he spake against my innocence for that was the form of giving satisfaction to wish it undone or unspoken and to add an oath that they believe the person did not deserve that wrong as we find it in Terence Adelph Ego vestra haec novi nollem factum jusjurandum dabitur esse te indignum injuriâ hâc Concerning which who please to see more testimonies of the true sence and use of the word Satisfactions may please to look upon Lambinus in Plauti Amphitr and Laevinus Torrentius upon Suetonius in Julio Exomologesis or Confession was the word which as I noted formerly was of most frequent use in the Church Si de exomologesi retractas gehennam in corde considera quam tibi exomologesis extinguet He that retracts his sins by confessing and condemning them extinguishes the flames of Hell So Tertullian The same with that of S. Cyprian Deo patri misericordi precibus operibus suis satisfacere possunt They may satisfie God our Father and merciful by prayers and good works that is they may by these deprecate their fault and obtain mercy and pardon for their sins Peccatum suum satisfactione humili simplici confitentes So Cyprian confessing their sins with humble and simple satisfaction plainly intimating that Confession or Exomologesis was the same with that which they called Satisfaction And both of them were nothing but the publick exercise of repentance according to the present usages of their Churches as appears evidently in those words of Gennadius Poenitentiae satisfactionem esse causas peccatorum exscindere nec eorum suggestionibus aditum indulgere To cut off the causes of sins and no more to entertain their whispers and temptations is the satisfaction of repentance and like this is that of Lactantius Potest reduci liberari si eum poeniteat actorum ad meliora conversus satisfaciat Deo The sinner may be brought back and freed if he repents of what is done and satisfies or makes amends to God by being turned to better courses And the whole process of this is well described by Tertullian Exomologesis est quâ delictum Domino nostrum confitemur non quidem ut ignaro sed quatenus satisfactio confessione disponitur confessione poenitentia nascitur penitentiâ Deus mitigatur we must confess our sins to God not as if he did not know them already but because our satisfaction is dispos'd and order'd by confession by confession our repentance hath birth and production and by repentance God is appeased 73. Things being thus we need not immerge our selves in the trifling controversies of our later Schools about the just value of every work and how much every penance weighs and whether God is so satisfied with our penal works that in justice he must take off so much as we put on and is tied also to take our accounts Certain it is if God should weigh our sins with the same value as we weigh our own good works all our actions and sufferings would be found infinitely too light in the balance Therefore it were better that we should do what we can and humbly beg of God to weigh them both with vast allowances of
despite of that fear die constantly and patiently that fear as it increases their suffering may also accidentally increase their glory provided that the fear be not criminal it its cause nor effective of any unworthy comportment So is the shame in confession a great mortification of the man and highly punitive of the sin and such that unless it hinders the duty is not to be directly reproved but it must be taken care of that it be a shame only for the sin which by how much greater it is by so much the more earnestly the man ought to fly to all the means of remedy and instruments of expiation and then the greater the shame is which the sinneâ— suffers the more excellent is the repentance which suffers so much for the extinction of his sin But at no hand let the shame affright the duty but let it be remembred that this confession is but the memory of the shame which began when the sin was acted and abode but as a handmaid of the guilt and goes away with it Confession of sins opens them to man but draws a veil before them that God will the less behold them And it is a material consideration that if a man be impatient of the shame here when it is revealed but to one man who is also by all the ties of Religion and by common Honesty oblig'd to conceal them or if he account it intolerable that a sin publick in the scandal and the infamy should be made publick by solemnity to punish and to extinguish it the man will be no gainer by refusing to confess when he shall remember that sins unconfessed are most commonly unpardon'd and unpardon'd sins will be made publick before all Angels and all the wise and good men of the world when their shame shall have nothing to make it tolerable 105. XIX When a penitent confesses his sin the holy man that ministers to his Repentance and hears his Confession must not without great cause lessen the shame of the repenting man he must directly encourage the duty but not add confidence to the sinner For whatsoever directly lessens the shame lessens also the hatred of sin and his future caution and the reward of his repentance and takes off that which was an excellent defensative against the sin But with the shame the Minister of Religion is to do as he is to do with the mans sorrow so long as it is a good instrument of repentance so long it is to be permitted and assisted but when it becomes irregular or dispos'd to evil events it is to be taken off And so must the shame of the penitent man when there is danger lest the man be swallowed up by too much sorrow and shame or when it is perceiv'd that the shame alone is a hinderance to the duty In these cases if the penitent man can be perswaded directly and by choice for ends of piety and religion to suffer the shame then let his spirit be supported by other means but if he cannot let there be such a confidence wrought in him which is deriv'd from the circumstances of the person or the universal calamity and iniquity of man or the example of great sinners like himself that have willingly undergone the yoke of the Lord or from consideration of the Divine mercies or from the easiness and advantages of the duty but let nothing be offer'd to lessen the hatred or the greatness of the sin lest a temptation to sin hereafter be sowed in the furrows of the present Repentance 106. XX. He that confesseth his sins to the Minister of Religion must be sure to express all the great lines of his folly and calamity that is all that by which he may make a competent judgment of the state of his soul. Now if the man be of a good life and yet in his tendency to perfection is willing to pass under the method and discipline of greater sinners there is no advice to be given to him but that he do not curiously tell those lesser irregularities which vex his peace rather than discompose his conscience but what is most remarkable in his infirmities or the whole state and the greatest marks and instances and returns of them he ought to signifie for else he can serve no prudent end in his confession 107. But secondly if the man have committed a great sin it is a high prudence and an excellent instance of his repentance that he confess it declaring the kind of it if it be of that nature that the spiritual man may conceal it But if upon any other account he be bound to reveal every notice of the fact let him transact that affair wholly between God and his own soul. And this of declaring a single action as it is of great use in the repentance of every man so it puts on some degrees of necessity if the man be of a sad amazed and an afflicted conscience For there are some unfortunate persons who have committed some secret facts of shame and horror at the remembrance of which they are amazed of the pardon of which they have no sign for the expiation of which they use no instrument and they walk up and down like distracted persons to whom reason is useless and company is unpleasant and their sorrow is not holy but very great and they know not what to do because they will not ask I have observed some such and the only remedy that was fit to be prescribed to such persons was to reveal their sin to a spiritual man and by him to be put into such a state of remedy and comfort as is proper for their condition It is certain that many persons have perished for want of counsel and comfort which were ready for them if they would have confessed their sin for he that concealeth his sin non dirigetur saith Solomon he shall not be counselled or directed 108. And it is a very great fault amongst a very great part of Christians that in their inquiries of Religion even the best of them ordinarily ask but these two questions Is it lawful Is it necessary If they find it lawful they will do it without scruple or restraint and then they suffer imperfection or receive the reward of folly For it may be lawful and yet not fit to be done It may be it is not expedient And he that will do all that he can do lawfully would if he durst do something that is not lawful And as great an error is on the other hand in the other question He that too strictly inquires of an action whether it be necessary or no would do well to ask also whether it be good whether it be of advantage to the interest of his soul For if a Christian man or woman that is a redeemed blessed obliged person a great beneficiary endeared to God beyond all the comprehensions of a mans imagination one that is less than the least of all Gods mercies and yet hath received many
because they could not put to death Sejanus's daughters as being Virgins defloured them after sentence that by that barbarity they might be capable of the utmost Cruelty it makes God to be all that for which any other thing or person is or can be hated for it makes him neither to be good nor just nor reasonable but a mighty enemy to the biggest part of mankind it makes him to hate what himself hath made and to punish that in another which in himself he decreed should not be avoided it charges the wisdom of God with solly as having no means to glorifie his justice but by doing unjustly by bringing in that which himself hates that he might do what himself loves doing as Tiberius did to Brutus and Nero the Sons of Germanicus Variâ fraude induxit ut concitarentur ad convitia concitati perderentur provoking them to rail that he might punish their reproachings This opinion reproaches the words of the Spirit of Scripture it charges God with Hypocrisie and want of Mercy making him a Father of Cruelties not of Mercy and is a perfect overthrow of all Religion and all Laws and all Government it destroys the very being and nature of all Election thrusting a man down to the lowest form of Beasts and Birdâ— to whom a Spontaneity of doing certain actions is given by God but it is in them so natural that it is unavoidable Now concerning this hoâ—rid opinion I for my part shall say nothing but this That he that says there was no such man as Alexander would tell a horrible lie and be injurious to all story and to the memory and same of that great Prince but he that should say It is true there was such a man as Alexander but he was a Tyrant and a Blood-sucker cruel and injurious false and dissembling an enemy of mankind and for all the reasons of the world to be hated and reproached would certainly dishonour Alexander more and be his greatest enemy So I think in this That the Atheists who deny there is a God do not so impiously against God as they that charge him with foul appellatives or maintain such sentences which if they were true God could not be true But these men Madam have nothing to do in the Question of Original Sin save only that they say that God did decree that Adam should fall and all the sins that he sinned and all the world after him are no effects of choice but of predestination that is they were the actions of God rather than man But because these men even to their brethren seem to speak evil things of God therefore the more wary and temperate of the Calvinists bring down the order of reprobation lower affirming that God looked upon all mankind in Adam as fallen into his displeasure hated by God truly guilty of his sin liable to Eternal damnation and they being all equally condemned he was pleased to separate some the smaller number far and irresistibly bring them to Heaven but the far greater number he passed over leaving them to be damned for the sin of Adam and so they think they salve Gods Justice and this was the design and device of the Synod of Dort Now to bring this to pass they teach concerning Original Sin 1. That by this sin our first Parents fell from their Original righteousness and communion with God and so became dead in sin and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body 2. That whatsoever death was due to our first Parents for this sin they being the root of all mankind and the guilt of this sin being imputed the same is conveyed to all their posterity by ordinary generation 3. That by this Original corruption we are utterly indisposed disabled and made opposite to all good and wholly inclined to all evil and that from hence proceed all actual transgressions 4. This corruption of nature remains in the regenerate and although it be through Christ pardoned and mortified yet both it self and all the motions thereof are truly and properly sin 5. Original sin being a transgression of the righteous Law of God and contrary thereunto doth in its own nature bring guilt upon the sinner whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God and curse of the Law and so made subject to death with all miseries spiritual temporal and eternal These are the sayings of the late Assembly at Westminster Against this heap of errors and dangerous propositions I have made my former discoursings and statings of the Question of Original sin These are the Doctrines of the Presbyterian whose face is towards us but it is over-against us in this and many other questions of great concernment Nemo tam propè proculque nobis He is nearest to us and furthest from us but because I have as great a love to their persons as I have a dislike to some of their Doctrines I shall endeavour to serve truth and them by reproving those propositions which make truth and them to stand at distance Now I shall first speak to the thing in general and its designs then I shall make some observations upon the particulars 1. This device of our Presbyterians and of the Synod of Dort is but an artifice to save their proposition harmless and to stop the out-cries of Scripture and reason and of all the World against them But this way of stating the Article of reprobation is as horrid in the effect as the other For 1. Is it by a natural consequent that we are guilty of Adams sin or is it by the decree of God Naturally it cannot be for then the sins of all our forefathers who are to their posterity the same that Adam was to his must be ours and not only Adams first sin but his others are ours upon the same account But if it be by the Decree of God by his choice and constitution that it should be so as Mr. Calvin and Dr. Twisse that I may name no more for that side do expresly teach it follows that God is the Author of our Sin So that I may use Mr. Calvins words How is it that so many Nations with their Children should be involved in the fall without remedy but because God would have it so And if that be the matter then to God as to the cause must that sin and that damnation be accounted And let it then be considered whether this be not as bad as the worst For the Supralapsarians say God did decree that the greatest part of mankind should perish only because he would The Sublapsarians say that God made it by his decree necessary that all we who were born of Adam should be born guilty of Original Sin and he it was who decreed to damn whom he pleased for that sin in which he decreed they should be born and both these he did for no other consideration but because he would Is it not therefore evident that he absolutely decreed Damnation to these Persons
most eminent writers of the Primitive Christ I need not trouble my self with citations of many of them since Calvin lib. 3. Instit. c. 3. Sect. 10. confesses that S. Austin hath collected their testimonies and is of their opinion that Concupiscence is not a sin but an infirmity only But I will here set down the words of S. Chrysostome Homil. 13. in Epist. Rom. because they are very clear Ipsae passiones in se peccatum non sunt Effraenata verò ipsarum immoderantia peccatum operata est Concupiscentia quidem peccatum non est quando verò egressa modum foras eruperit tunc demum adulterium fit non à concupiscentia sed à nimio illicito illius luxu By the way I cannot but wonder why men are pleased where-ever they find the word Concupiscence in the New Testament presently to dream of Original Sin and make that to be the summ total of it whereas Concupiscence if it were the product of Adam's fall is but one small part of it Et ut exempli gratia unam illarum tractem said S. Chrysostome in the forecited place Concupiscence is but one of the passions and in the utmost extension of the word it can be taken but for one half of the passion for not only all the passions of the Concupiscible faculty can be a principle of sin but the Irascible does more hurt in the world that is more sensual this is more devillish The reason why I note this is because upon this account it will seem that concupiscence is no more to be called a sin than anger is and as S. Paul said Be angry but sin not so he might have said Desire or lust but sin not For there are some lustings and desires without sin as well as some Anger 's and that which is indifferent to vertue and vice cannot of it self be a vice To which I add that if Concupiscence taken for all desires be a sin then so are all the passions of the Irascible faculty Why one more than the other is not to be told but that Anger in the first motions is not a sin appears because it is not always sinful in the second a man may be actually angry and yet really innocent and so he may be lustful and full of desire and yet he may be not only that which is good or he may overcome his desires to that which is bad I have now considered what your Lordship received from others and gave me in Charge your self concerning Concupiscence Your next Charge is concerning Antiquity intimating that although the first antiquity is not clearly against me yet the second is For thus your Lordship is pleased to write their objection I confess I find not the Fathers so fully and plainly speaking of Original Sin till Pelagius had pudled the stream but after this you may find S. Jerome c. That the Fathers of the first Four Hundred years did speak plainly and fully of it is so evident as nothing more and I appeal to their testimonies as they are set down in the Papers annexed in their proper place and therefore that must needs be one of the little arts by which some men use to escape from the pressure of that authority by which because they would have other men concluded sometimes upon strict inquiry they find themselves entangled Original Sin as it is at this day commonly explicated was not the Doctrine of the Primitive Church but when Pelagius had pudled the stream S. Austin was so angry that he stampt and disturb'd it more And truly my Lord I do not think that the Gentlemen that urg'd against me S. Austin's opinion do well consider that I profess my self to follow those Fathers who were before him and whom S. Austin did forsake as I do him in the question They may as well press me with his authority in the Article of the damnation of Infants dying unbaptized or of absolute predestination In which Article S. Austin's words are equally urged by the Jansenists and Molinists by the Remonstrants and Contra-remonstrants and they can serve both and therefore cannot determine me But then my Lord let it be remembred that they are as much against S. Chrysostome as I am against S. Austin with this only difference that S. Chrysostome speaks constantly in the argument which S. Austin did not and particularly in that part of it which concerns Concupiscence For in the inquiry whether it be a sin or no he speaks so variously that though Calvin complains of him that he calls it only an infirmity yet he also brings testimonies from him to prove it to be a sin and let any man try if he can tie these words together De peccator mer. remission l. 1. c. 3. Concupiscentia carnis peccatum est quia inest illi inobedientia contra dominatum mentis Which are the words your Lordship quotes Concupiscence is a sin because it is a disobedience to the Empire of the spirit But yet in another place lib. 1. de civit Dei cap. 25. Illa Concupiscentialis inobedientia quanto magis absque culpa est in corpore non consentientis si absque culpa est in corpore dormientis It is a sin and it is no sin it is criminal but is without fault it is culpable because it is a disobedience and yet this disobedience without actual consent is not culpable If I do believe S. Austin I must disbelieve him and which part soever I take I shall be reproved by the same authority But when the Fathers are divided from each other or themselves it is indifferent to follow either but when any of them are divided from Reason and Scripture then it is not indifferent for us to follow them and neglect these and yet if these who object S. Austin's authority to my Doctrine will be content to subject to all that he says I am content they shall follow him in this too provided that they will give me my liberty because I will not not be tied to him that speaks contrary things to himself and contrary to them that went before him and though he was a rare person yet he was as fallible as any of my brethren at this day He was followed by many ignorant ages and all the world knows by what accidental advantages he acquired a great reputation but he who made no scruple of deserting all his predecessors must give us leave upon the strength of his own reasons to quit his authority All that I shall observe is this that the Doctrine of Original Sin as it is explicated by S. Austin had two parents one was the Doctrine of the Encratites and some other Hereticks who forbad Marriage and supposing it to be evil thought they were warranted to say it was the bed of sin and children the spawn of vipers and sinners And S. Austin himself and especially S. Hierome whom your Lordship cites speaks some things of marriage which if they were true then marriage were highly
punishments and they may come upon more accounts by Gods Dominion by natural consequence by infection by destitution and dereliction for the glory of God by right of authority for the institution or exercise of the sufferers or for their more immediate good But that directly and properly one should be punish'd for the sins of others was indeed practised by some Common-wealths Vtilitatis specie saepissimè in repub peccari said Cicero they do it sometimes for terror and because their ways of preventing evil is very imperfect and when Pedianus secundus the Pretor was kill'd by a slave all the family of them was kill'd in punishment this was secundum veterem morem said Tacit. Annal. 14. for in the slaughter of Marcellus the slaves fled for fear of such usage it was thus I say among the Romans but habuit aliquid iniqui and God forbid we should say such things of the fountain of Justice and mercy But I have done and will move no more stones but hereafter carry them as long as I can rather than make a noise by throwing them down I shall only add this one thing I was troubled with an objection lately for it being propounded to me why it is to be believed that the sin of Adam could spoil the nature of man and yet the nature of Devils could not be spoiled by their sin which was worse I could not well tell what to say and therefore I held my peace THE END ΘΕΟΛΟΓΙΑ ΕΚΛΕΚΤΙΚΗ Or A DISCOURSE OF The Liberty of Prophesying With its just Limits and Temper SHEWING The Vnreasonableness of prescribing to other mens Faith and the Iniquity of persecuting differing Opinions By JEREM. TAYLOR D. D. The Third Edition Corrected and Enlarged DANIEL S. IOHN 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 14.31 LONDON Printed for R. Royston Bookseller to his most Sacred MAJESTY To the Right Honourable Christopher Lord Hatton Baron HATTON of Kirby Comptroller of His Majestie 's Houshold and one of His Majestie 's most Honourable Privie Council MY LORD IN this great Storm which hath dasht the Vessel of the Church all in pieces I have been cast upon the Coast of Wales and in a little Boat thought to have enjoyed that rest and quietness which in England in a greater I could not hope for Here I cast Anchor and thinking to ride safely the Storm followed me with so impetuous violence that it broke a Cable and I lost my Anchor And here again I was exposed to the mercy of the Sea and the gentleness of an Element that could neither distinguish things nor persons And but that he who stilleth the raging of the Sea and the noise of his Waves and the madness of his people had provided a Plank for me I had been lost to all the opportunities of content or study But I know not whether I have been more preserved by the courtesies of my friends or the gentleness and mercies of a noble Enemy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And now since I have come ashore I have been gathering a few sticks to warm me a few books to entertain my thoughts and divert them from the perpetuall Meditation of my private Troubles and the publick Dyscrasy but those which I could obtain were so few and so impertinent and unusefull to any great purposes that I began to be sad upon a new stock and full of apprehension that I should live unprofitably and die obscurely and be forgotten and my bones thrown into some common charnell-house without any name or note to distinguish me from those who onely served their Generation by filling the number of Citizens and who could pretend to no thanks or reward from the Publick beyond jus trium liberorum While I was troubled with these thoughts and busie to find an opportunity of doing some good in my small proportion still the cares of the publick did so intervene that it was as impossible to separate my design from relating to the present as to exempt myself from the participation of the common calamity still half my thoughts was in despite of all my diversions and arts of avocation fixt upon and mingled with the present concernments so that besides them I could not go Now because the great Question is concerning Religion and in that also my Scene lies I resolved here to fix my considerations especially when I observed the ways of promoting the several Opinions which now are busie to be such as besides that they were most troublesome to me and such as I could by no means be friends withall they were also such as to my understanding did the most apparently disserve their ends whose design in advancing their own Opinions was pretended for Religion For as contrary as cruelty is to mercy as tyranny to charity so is war and bloudshed to the meekness and gentleness of Christian Religion And however that there are some exterminating spirits who think God to delight in humane sacrifices as if that Oracle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had come from the Father of Spirits yet if they were capable of cool and tame Homilies or would hear men of other opinions give a quiet account without invincible resolutions never to alter their perswasions I am very much perswaded it would not be very hard to dispute such men into mercies and compliances and Tolerations mutuall such I say who are zealous for Jesus Christ then whose Doctrine never was any thing more mercifull and humane whose lessons were softer then Nard or the juice of the Candian Olive Vpon the first apprehension I design'd a Discourse to this purpose with as much greediness as if I had thought it possible with my Arguments to have perswaded the rough and hard-handed Souldiers to have disbanded presently For I had often thought of the Prophecy that in the Gospell our Swords should be turned into plow-shares and our Spears into pruning-hooks I knew that no tittle spoken by God's Spirit could return unperform'd and ineffectual and I was certain that such was the excellency of Christ's Doctrine that if men could obey it Christians should never war one against another In the mean time I considered not that it was praedictio consilii non eventûs till I saw what men were now doing and ever had done since the heats and primitive fervours did cool and the love of interests swell'd higher then the love of Christianity but then on the other side I began to fear that whatever I could say would be as ineffectual as it could be reasonable For if those excellent words which our Blessed Master spake could not charm the tumult of our spirits I had little reason to hope that one of the meanest and most ignorant of his servants could advance the end of that which he calls his great and his old and his new Commandment so well as the excellency of his own Spirit and discourses could And yet since he who knew every event of things and the success and efficacy of every Doctrine and that very much of it
men are much mistaken some in their opinions concerning the truth of them as believing them to be all true some concerning their purpose as thinking them sufficient not only to condemn all those opinions there called heretical but to be a precedent to all Ages of the Church to be free and forward in calling Heretick But he that considers the Catalogues themselves as they are collected by Epiphanius Philastrius and S. Austin shall find that many are reckoned for Hereticks for opinions in matters disputable and undetermined and of no consequence and in these Catalogues of Hereticks there are men numbred for Hereticks which by every side respectively are acquitted so that there is no company of men in the world that admit these Catalogues as good Records or sufficient sentences of condemnation For the Churches of the Reformation I am certain they acquit Aerius for denying prayer for the dead and the Eustathians for denying invocation of Saints And I am partly of opinion that the Church of Rome is not willing to call the Collyridians Hereticks for offering a Cake to the Virgin Mary unless she also will run the hazard of the same sentence for offering Candles to her And that they will be glad with S. Austin l. 6. de haeres c. 86. to excuse the Tertullianists for picturing God in a visible corporal representment And yet these Sects are put in the black Book by Epiphanius and S. Austin and Isidore respectively I remember also that the Osseni are called Hereticks because they refused to worship towards the East and yet in that dissent I find not the malignity of a Heresie nor any thing against an Article of Faith or good manners and it being only in circumstance it were hard if they were otherwise pious men and true believers to send them to Hell for such a trifle The Parermeneutae refused to follow other mens dictates like sheep but would expound Scripture according to the best evidence themselves could find and yet were called Hereticks whether they expounded true or no. The Pauliciani for being offended at crosses the Proclians for saying in a regenerate man all his sins were not quite dead but only curbed and asswaged were called Hereticks and so condemned for ought I know for affirming that which all pious men feel in themselves to be too true And he that will consider how numerous the catalogues are and to what a volume they are come in their last collections to no less than five hundred and twenty for so many heresies and Hereticks are reckoned by Prateolus may think that if a re-trenchment were justly made of truths and all impertinencies and all opinions either still disputable or less considerable the number would much decrease and therefore that the Catalogues are much amiss and the name Heretick is made a Terriculamentum to affright people from their belief or to discountenance the persons of men and disrepute them that their Schooles may be empty and their Disciples few 20. So that I shall not need to instance how that some men were called Hereticks by Philastrius for rejecting the translation of the Lxx. and following the Bible of Aquila wherein the great faults mentioned by Philastrius are that he translates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not Christum but unctum Dei and instead of Emanuel writes Deus nobiscum But this most concerns them of the Primitive Church with whom the translation of Aquila was in great reputation is enim veluti plus à quibusdam ..... intellexisse laudatur It was supposed he was a great Clerk and understood more than ordinary it may be he did But whether yea or no yet since the other Translators by the confession of Philastrius quaedam praetermisisse necessitate urgente cogerentur if some wise men or unwise did follow a Translatour who understood the Original well for so Aquila had learnt amongst the Jews It was hard to call men Hereticks for following his Translation especially since the other Bibles which were thought to have in them contradictories and it was confessed had omitted some things were excused by necessity and the others necessity of following Aquila when they had no better was not at all considered nor a less crime than heresy laid upon their score Such another was the heresy of the Quartodecimani for the Easterlings were all proclaimed Hereticks for keeping Easter after the manner of the East and as Socrates and Nicephorus report the Bishop of Rome was very forward to Excommunicate all the Bishops of the lesser Asia for observing the Feast according to the Tradition of their Ancestors though they did it modestly quietly and without faction and although they pretended and were as well able to prove their Tradition from S. John of so observing it as the Western Church could prove their Tradition derivative from S. Peter and S. Paul If such things as these make up the Catalogues of Hereticks as we see they did their accounts differ from the Precedents they ought to have followed that is the censures Apostolical and therefore are unsafe precedents for us and unless they took the liberty of using the word heresy in a lower sence than the world now doth since the Councils have been forward in pronouncing Anathema and took it only for a distinct sence and a differing perswasion in matters of opinion and minute Articles we cannot excuse the persons of the men but if they intended the crime of heresy against those opinions as they laid them down in their Catalogues that crime I say which is a work of the flesh which excludes from the Kingdom of Heaven all that I shall say against them is that the causeless curse shall return empty and no man is damned the sooner because his enemy cryes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and they that were the Judges and Accusers might erre as well as the persons accused and might need as charitable construction of their opinions and practices as the other And of this we are sure they had no warrant from any rule of Scripture or practice Apostolical for driving so furiously and hastily in such decretory sentences But I am willing rather to believe their sence of the word Heresie was more gentle than with us it is and for that they might have warrant from Scripture 21. But by the way I observe that although these Catalogues are a great instance to shew that they whose Age and spirits were far distant from the Apostles had also other judgments concerning Faith and heresy than the Apostles had and the Ages Apostolical yet these Catalogues although they are reports of heresies in the second and third Ages are not to be put upon the account of those Ages not to be reckoned as an instance of their judgment which although it was in some degrees more culpable than that of their Predecessors yet in respect of the following Ages it was innocent and modest But these Catalogues I speak of were set down according to the sence of the then present
mystery of the glorious Unity in Trinity we alledge that saying of Saint John there are three which bear witness in heaven the Father the Word and the Spirit and these three are one the Antitrinitarians think they have answered the Argument by saying the Syrian Translation and divers Greek Copies have not that verse in them and therefore being of doubtful Authority cannot conclude with certainty in a Question of Faith And there is an instance on the Catholick part For when the Arrians urge the saying of our Saviour No man knows that day and hour viz. of Judgment no not the Son but the Father only to prove that the Son knows not all things and therefore cannot be God in the proper sence St. Ambrose thinks he hath answered the Argument by saying those words no not the Son was thrust into the Text by the fraud of the Arrians So that here we have one objection which must first be cleared and made infallible before we can be ascertain'd in any such Question as to call them Hereticks that dissent 5. Secondly I consider that there are very many sences and designs of expounding Scripture and when the Grammatical sence is found out we are many times never the nearer it is not that which was intended for there is in very many Scriptures a double sence a literal and a Spiritual for the Scripture is a Book written within and without Apoc. 5. And both these sences are sub-divided For the literal sence is either natural or figurative And the Spiritual is sometimes allegorical sometimes anagogical nay sometimes there are divers literal sences in the same sentence as Saint Austin excellently proves in divers places and it appears in divers quotations in the New Testament where the Apostles and Divine Writers bring the same Testimony to divers purposes and particularly St. Paul's making that saying of the Psalm Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee to be an Argument of Christs Resurrection and a designation or ordination to his Pontificate is an instance very famous in his first and fifth Chapters to the Hebrews But now there being such variety of sences in Scripture and but few places so marked out as not to be capable of divers sences if mâ—n will write Commentaries as Herod made Orations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what infallible 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will be left whereby to judge of the certain dogmatical resolute sence of such places which have been the matter of Question For put case a Question were commenced concerning the degrees of glory in heaven as there is in the Schools a noted one To shew an inequality of reward Christs Parable is brought of the reward of ten Cities and of five according to the divers improvement of the Talents this sence is mystical and yet very probable and understood by men for ought I know to this very sence And the result of the Argument is made good by Saint Paul as one star differeth from another in glory so shall it be in the resurrection of the dead Now suppose another should take the same liberty of Expounding another Parable to a mystical sence and Interpretation as all Parables must be expounded then the Parable of the Labourers in the Vineyard and though differing in labour yet having an equal reward to any mans understanding may seem very strongly to prove the contrary and as if it were of purpose and that it were primum intentum of the Parable the Lord of the Vineyard determined the point resolutely upon the mutiny and repining of them that had born the burthen and heat of the day I will give unto this last even as to thee which to my sence seems to determine the Question of degrees They that work but little and they that work long shall not be distinguished in the reward though accidentally they were in the work And if this opinion could but answer St. Pauls words it stands as fair and perhaps fairer than the other Now if we look well upon the words of Saint Paul we shall find he speaks nothing at all of diversity of degrees of glory in beatified bodies but the differences of glory in bodies heavenly and earthly There are says he bodies earthly and there are heavenly bodies And one is the glory of the earthly another the glory of the heavenly one glory of the Sun another of the Moon c. So shall it be in the Resurrection For it is sown in corruption it is raised in incorruption Plainly thus our bodies in the Resurrection shall differ as much from our bodies here in the state of corruption as one Star does from another And now suppose a Sect should be commenced upon this Question upon lighter and vainer many have been either side must resolve to answer the others Argument whether they can or no and to deny to each other a liberty of Expounding the Parable to such a sence and yet themselves must use it or want an Argument But men use to be unjust in their own cases And were it not better to leave each other to their liberty and seek to preserve their own charity For when the words are capable of a mystical or a divers sence I know not why mens fancies or understandings should be more bound to be like one another than their faces And either in all such places of Scripture a liberty must be indulged to every honest and peaceable wise man or else all Argument from such places must be wholly declined Now although I instanced in a Question which by good fortune never came to open defiance yet there have been Sects framed upon lighter grounds more inconsiderable Questions which have been disputed on either side with Arguments less material and less pertinent Saint Austin laught at the Donatists for bringing that saying of the Spouse in the Canticles to prove their Schism Indica mihi ubi pascas ubi cubes in meridie For from thence they concluded the residence of the Church was only in the South part of the World only in Africa It was but a weak way of Argument yet the Fathers were free enough to use such mediums to prove mysteries of great concernment but yet again when they speak either against an Adversary or with consideration they deny that such mystical sences can sufficiently confirm a Question of Faith But I shall instance in the great Question of Rebaptization of Hereticks which many Saints and Martyrs and Confessours and divers Councils and almost all Asia and Africa did once believe and practise Their grounds for the invalidity of the baptism by a Heretick were such mystical words as these Oleum peccatoris non impinguet caput meum Ps. 140. And Qui baptizatur à mortuo quid proficit lavatio ejus Ecclus. 34. And Ab aquâ alienâ abstinete Prov. 5. And Deus peccatores non exaudit Joh. 9. And he that is not with me is against me Luke 11. I am not sure the other part had Arguments so
good For the great one of una fides unum baptisma did not conclude it to their understandings who were of the other opinion and men famous in their generations for it was no Argument that they who had been baptized by Johns Baptism should not be baptized in the name of Jesus because unus Deus unum baptisma and as it is still one Faith which a man confesseth several times and one Sacrament of the Eucharist though a man often communicates so it might be one baptism though often ministred And the unity of baptism might not be derived from the unity of the ministration but from the unity of the Religion into which they are baptized though baptized a thousand times yet because it was still in the name of the holy Trinity still into the death of Christ it might be unum baptisme Whether Saint Cyprian Firmilian and their Collegues had this discourse or no I know not I am sure they might have had much better to have evacuated the force of that Argument although I believe they had the wrong cause in hand But this is it that I say that when a Question is so undetermined in Scripture that the Arguments rely only upon such mystical places whence the best fancies can draw the greatest variety and such which perhaps were never intended by the holy Ghost it were good the Rivers did not swell higer than the Fountain and the confidence higher than the Argument and evidence for in this case there could not any thing be so certainly proved as that the disagreeing party should deserve to be condemned by a sentence of Excommunication for disbelieving it and yet they were which I wonder at so much the more because they who as it was since judg'd had the right cause had not any sufficient Argument from Scripture not so much as such mystical Arguments but did fly to the Tradition of the Church in which also I shall afterward shew they had nothing that was absolutely certain 3. I consider that there are divers places of Scripture containing in them mysteries and Questions of great concernment and yet the fabrick and constitution is such that there is no certain mark to determine whether the sence of them should be literal or figurative I speak not here concerning extrinsecal means of determination as traditive interpretations Councils Fathers Popes and the like I shall consider them afterward in their several places But here the subject matter being concerning Scripture in its own capacity I say there is nothing in the nature of the thing to determine the sence and meaning but it must be gotten out as it can and that therefore it is unreasonable that what of it self is ambiguous should be understood in its own prime sence and intention under the pain of either a sin or an Anathema I instance in that famous place from whence hath sprung that Question of Transubstantiation Hoc est corpus meum The words are plain and clear apt to be understood in the literal sence and yet this sence is so hard as it does violence to reason and therefore it is the Question whether or no it be not a figurative speech But here what shall we have to determine it What mean soever we take and to what sence you will expound it you shall be put to give an account why you expound other places of Scripture in the same case to quite contrary sences For if you expound it literally then besides that it seems to intrench upon the words of our blessed Saviour The words that I speak they are Spirit and they are life that is to be spiritually understood and it is a miserable thing to see what wretched shifts are used to reconcile the literal sence to these words and yet to distinguish it from the Capernaitical phancy but besides this why are not those other sayings of Christ expounded literally I am a Vine I am the Door I am a Rock Why do we fly to a figure in those parallel words This is the Covenant which I make between me and you and yet that Covenant was but the sign of the Covenant and why do we fly to a figure in a precept as well as in mystery and a proposition If thy right hand offend thee cut it off and yet we have figures enough to save a limb If it be said because reason tells us these are not to be expounded according to the letter This will be no plea for them who retain the literal exposition of the other instance against all reason against all Philosophy against all sense and against two or three sciences But if you expound these words figuratively besides that you are to contest against a world of prejudices you give your self the liberty which if others will use when either they have a reason or a necessity so to do they may perhaps turn all into Allegory and so may evacuate any precept and elude any Argument Well so it is that very wise men have expounded things Allegorically when they should have expounded them literally So did the famous Origen who as St. Hierom reports of him turned Paradise into an Allegory that he took away quite the truth of the Story and not only Adam was turned out of the Garden but the Garden it self out of Paradise Others expound things literally when they should understand them in Allegory so did the Ancient Papias understand Apocal. 20. Christs Millenary raign upon earth and so depressed the hopes of Christianity and their desires to the longing and expectation of temporal pleasures and satisfactions and he was followed by Justin Martyr Irenaeus Tertullian Lactantius and indeed the whole Church generally till S. Austin and S. Hierom's time who first of any whose works are extant did reprove the errour If such great spirits be deceived in finding out what kind of sences be to be given to Scriptures it may well be endured that we who sit at their feet may also tread in the steps of them whose feet could not always tread aright 7. Fourthly I consider that there are some places of Scripture that have the selfe same expressions the same preceptive words the same reason and account in all appearance and yet either must be expounded to quite different sences or else we must renounce the Communion and the charities of a great part of Christendom And yet there is absolutely nothing in the thing or in its circumstances or in its adjuncts that can determine it to different purposes I instance in those great exclusive negatives for the necessity of both Sacraments Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aquâ c. Nisi manducaveritis carnem filii hominis c. a non introibit in regnum coelorum for both these Now then the first is urged for the absolute indispensable necessity of baptism even in Infants insomuch that Infants go to part of Hell if inculpably both on their own and their Parents part they miss of baptism for that is the
would bring in after Ages to the Authority of a competent judge or witness say the same thing for they plainly confess that the first Ages spake little or nothing to the present Question or at least nothing to their sence of them for therefore they call in aid from the following Ages and make them suppletory and auxiliary to their designs and therefore there are no Traditions to our purposes And they who would willingly have it otherwise yet have taken no course it should be otherwise for they when they had opportunity in the Councils of the last Ages to determine what they had a mind to yet they never named the number nor expressed the particular Traditions which they would fain have the world believe to be Apostolical But they have kept the bridle in their own hands and made a reserve of their own power that if need be they may make new pretensions or not be put to it to justifie the old by the engagement of a conciliary declaration 11. Lastly We are acquitted by the testimony of the Primitive Fathers from any other necessity of believing than of such Articles as are recorded in Scripture And this is done by them whose Authority is pretended the greatest Argument for Tradition as appears largely in Irenaeus who disputes professedly for the sufficiency of Scripture against certain Hereticks who affirm some necessary truths not to be written It was an excellent saying of S. Basil and will never be wip'd out with all the eloquence of Perron in his Serm. de fide Manifestus est fidei lapsus liquidum superbiae viâ—ium vel respuere aliquid eorum quae Scriptura habet vel inducere quicquam quod scriptum non est And it is but a poor device to say that every particular Tradition is consigned in Scripture by those places which give Authority to Tradition and so the introducing of Tradition is not a super-inducing any thing over or besides Scripture because Tradition is like a Messenger and the Scripture is like his Letters of Credence and therefore Authorizes whatsoever Tradition speaketh For supposing Scripture does consign the Authority of Tradition which it might do before all the whole Instrument of Scripture it self was consigned and then afterwards there might be no need of Tradition yet supposing it it will follow that all those Traditions which are truly prime and Apostolical are to be entertained according to the intention of the Deliverers which indeed is so reasonable of it self that we need not Scripture to perswade us to it it self is authentick as Scripture is if it derives from the same fountain and a word is never the more the Word of God for being written nor the less for not being written but it will not follow that whatsoever is pretended to be Tradition is so neither is the credit of the particular instances consigned in Scripture dolosus versatur in generalibus but that this craft is too palpable And if a general and indefinite consignation of Tradition be sufficient to warrant every particular that pretends to be Tradition then S. Basil had spoken to no purpose by saying it is Pride and Apostasie from the Faith to bring in what is not written For if either any man brings in what is written or what he says is delivered then the first being express Scripture and the second being consigned in Scripture no man can be charged with superinducing what is not written he hath his answer ready And then these are zealous words absolutely to no purpose but if such general consignation does not warrant every thing that pretends to Tradition but only such as are truly proved to be Apostolical then Scripture is useless as to this particular for such Tradition gives testimony to Scripture and therefore is of it self first and more credible for it is credible of it self and therefore unless Saint Basil thought that all the will of God in matters of Faith and Doctrine were written I see not what end nor what sence he could have in these words For no man in the World except Enthusiasts and mad-men ever obtruded a Doctrine upon the Church but he pretended Scripture for it or Tradition and therefore no man could be pressed by these words no man confuted no man instructed no not Enthusiasts or Montanists For suppose either of them should say that since in Scripture the holy Ghost is promised to abide with the Church for ever to teach whatever they pretend the Spirit in any Age hath taught them is not to super-induce any thing beyond what is written because the truth of the Spirit his veracity and his perpetual teaching being promised and attested in Scripture Scripture hath just so consigned all such Revelations as Perron saith it hath all such Traditions But I will trouble my self no more with Arguments from any humane Authorities but he that is surprized with the belief of such Authorities and will but consider the very many testimonies of Antiquity to this purpose as of Constantine St. Hierom St. Austin St. Athanasius St. Hilary St. Epiphanius and divers others all speaking words to the same sence with that saying of St. Paul Nemo sentiat super quod scriptum est will see that there is reason that since no man is materially a Heretick but he that errs in a point of Faith and all Faith is sufficiently recorded in Scripture the judgment of Faith and Heresie is to be derived from thence and no man is to be condemned for dissenting in an Article for whose probation Tradition only is pretended only according to the degree of its evidence let every one determine himself but of this evidence we must not judge for others for unless it be in things of Faith and absolute certainties evidence is a word of relation and so supposes two terms the object and the faculty and it is an imperfect speech to say a thing is evident in it self unless we speak of first principles or clearest revelations for that may be evident to one that is not so to another by reason of the pregnancy of some apprehensions and the immaturity of others This discourse hath its intention in Traditions Doctrinal and Ritual that is such Traditions which propose Articles new in materiâ but now if Scripture be the repository of all Divine Truths sufficient for us Tradition must be considered as its instrument to convey its great mysteriousness to our understandings it is said there are traditive Interpretations as well as traditive propositions but these have not much distinct consideration in them both because their uncertainty is as great as the other upon the former considerations as also because in very deed there are no such things as traditive Interpretations universal For as for particulars they signifie no more but that they are not sufficient determinations of Questions Theological therefore because they are particular contingent and of infinite variety and they are no more Argument than the
for all that law of killing such false Prophets were permitted with impunity in the Synagogue as appears beyond exception in the great divisions and disputes between the Pharisees and the Sadducees I deny not but certain and known Idolatry or any other sort of practicall impiety with its principiant Doctrine may be punished corporally because it is no other but matter of fact but no matter of mere Opinion no errours that of themselves are not sins are to be persecuted or punished by death or corporal inflictions This is now to be proved 3. Secondly All the former Discourse is sufficient argument how easie it is for us in such matters to be deceived So long as Christian Religion was a simple profession of the Articles of Belief and a hearty prosecution of the rules of good life the fewness of the Articles and the clearness of the Rule was cause of the seldome prevarication But when Divinity is swelled up to so great a body when the several Questions which the peevishness and wantonness of sixteen Ages have commenced are concentred into one and from all these Questions something is drawn into the body of Theologie till it hath ascended up to the greatnesse of a mountain and the summe of Divinity collected by Aquinas makes a volume as great as was that of Livy mocked at in the Epigram Quem mea vix totum bibliotheca capit it is impossible for any industry to consider so many particulars in the infinite numbers of Questions as are necessary to be considered before we can with certainty determine any And after all the considerations which we can have in a whole Age we are not sure not to be deceived The obscurity of some Questions the nicity of some Articles the intricacy of some Revelations the variety of humane understandings the windings of Logick the tricks of adversaries the subtilty of Sophisters the ingagement of educations personal affections the portentous number of writers the infinity of Authorities the vastness of some arguments as consisting in enumeration of many particulars the uncertainty of others the several degrees of probability the difficulties of Scripture the invalidity of probation of Tradition the opposition of all exteriour arguments to each other and their open contestation the publick violence done to Authors and records the private arts and supplantings the falsifyings the indefatigable industry of some men to abuse all understandings and all perswasions into their own Opinions these and thousands more even all the difficulty of things and all the weaknesses of man and all the arts of the Devil have made it impossible for any man in so great variety of matter not to be deceived No man pretends to it but the Pope and no man is more deceived then he is in that very particular 4. Thirdly From hence proceeds a danger which is consequent to this proceeding for if we who are so apt to be deceived and so insecure in our resolution of Questions disputable should persecute a disagreeing person we are not sure we do not fight against God For if his Proposition be true and persecuted then because all Truth derives from God this proceeding is against God and therefore this is not to be done upon Gamaliel's ground lest peradventure we be found to fight against God of which because we can have no security at least in this case we have all the guilt of a doubtfull or an uncertain Conscience For if there be no security in the thing as I have largely proved the Conscience in such cases is as uncertain as the Question is and if it be not doubtfull where it is uncertain it is because the man is not wise but as confident as ignorant the first without reason and the second without excuse And it is very disproportionable for a man to persecute another certainly for a Proposition that if he were wise he would know is not certain at least the other person may innocently be uncertain of it If he be killed he is certainly killed but if he be called Heretick it is not so certain that he is an Heretick It were good therefore that proceedings were according to evidence and the rivers not swell over the banks nor a certain definitive sentence of Death passed upon such perswasions which cannot certainly be defined And this argument is of so much the more force because we see that the greatest persecutions that ever have been were against Truth even against Christianity itself and it was a prediction of our Blessed Saviour that persecution should be the lot of true believers And if we compute the experience of suffering Christendom and the prediction that Truth should suffer with those few instances of suffering Hereticks it is odds but persecution is on the wrong side and that it is errour and Heresie that is cruel and tyrannical especially since the Truth of Jesus Christ and of his Religion are so meek so charitable and so merciful And we may in this case exactly use the words of S. Paul But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the spirit even so it is now and so it ever will be till Christ's second coming 5. Fourthly Whoever persecutes a disagreeing person arms all the world against himself and all pious people of his own perswasion when the scales of Authority return to his adversary and attest his contradictory and then what can he urge for mercy for himself or his party that sheweth none to others If he says that he is to be spared because he believes true but the other was justly persecuted because he was in errour he is ridiculous For he is as confidently believed to be an Heretick as he believes his adversary such and whetheâ— he be or no being the thing in question of this he is not to be his own judge but he that hath Authority on his side will be sure to judge against him So that what either side can indifferently make use of it is good that neither would because neither side can with reason sufficiently doe it in prejudice of the other If a man will say that every man must take his adventure and if it happens Authority to be with him he will persecute his adversaries and if it turns against him he will bear it as well as he can and hope for a reward of Martyrdom and innocent suffering besides that this is so equal to be said of all sides and besides that this is a way to make an eternall disunion of hearts and charities and that it will make Christendom nothing but a shambles and a perpetuall butchery and as fast as mens wits grow wanton or confident or proud or abused so often there will be new executions and massacres besides all this it is most unreasonable and unjust as being contrariant to those Laws of Justice and Charity whereby we are bound with greater zeal to spare and preserve an innocent then to condemn a guilty person and there
Baptism said Peter and if therefore the circumstances of one should be drawn to the other we should make Baptism a prodigie ratherthen a Rite The Paschall Lamb was a Type of the Eucharist which succeeds the other as Baptism does to Circumcision but because there was in the manducation of the Paschall Lamb no prescription of Sacramental drink shall we thence conclude that the Eucharist is to be ministred but in one kinde And even in the very instance of this Argument supposing a correspondence of analogie between Circumcision and Baptism yet there is no correspondence of identity For although it were granted that both of them did consign the Covenant of Faith yet there is nothing in the circumstance of childrens being Circumcised that so concerns that Mystery but that it might very well be given to children and yet Baptism onely to men of reason Because Circumcision left a character in the flesh which being imprinted upon Infants did its work to them when they came to age and such a character was necessary because there was no word added to the sign but Baptism imprints nothing that remains on the body and if it leaves a character at all it is upon the Soul to which also the word is added which is as much a part of the Sacrament as the sign itself is For both which reasons it is requisite that the persons baptized should be capable of Reason that they may be capable both of the word of the Sacrament and the impress made upon the spirit Since therefore the reason of this parity does wholly fail there is nothing left to infer a necessity of complying in this circumstance of age any more then in the other annexes of the Type And the case is clear in the Bishop's Question to Cyprian for why shall not Infants be baptized just upon the eighth days as well as circumcised If the correspondence of the Rites be an Argument to infer one circumstance which is impertinent and accidental to the mysteriousness of the Rite why shall it not infer all And then also Females must not be baptized because they were not circumcised But it were more proper if we would understand it right to prosecute the Analogie from the Type to the Anti-type by way of letter and spirit and signification and as Circumcision figures Baptism so also the adjuncts of the Circumcision shall signifie something spiritual in the adherencies of Baptism And therefore as Infants were Circumcised so spiritual Infants shall be Baptized which is spiritual Circumcision for therefore babes had the ministry of the Type to signifie that we must when we give our names to Christ become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 children in malice for unless you become like one of these little ones you cannot enter into the Kingdom of heaven said our Blessed Saviour and then the Type is made compleat And this seems to have been the sense of the Primitive Church for in the Age next to the Apostles they gave to all baptized persons milk and honey to represent to them their duty that though in age and understanding they were men yet they were babes in Christ and children in malice But to infer the sense of the Paedo-baptists is so weak a manner of arguing that Austin whose device it was and men use to be in love with their own fancies at the most pretended it but as probable and a mere conjecture 14. And as ill success will they have with the other Arguments as with this For from the action of Christ's blessing Infants to infer they are to be baptized proves nothing so much as that there is great want of better Arguments The Conclusion would be with more probability derived thus Christ blessed children and so dismissed them but baptized them not therefore Infants are not to be baptized But let this be as weak as its enemy yet that Christ did not baptize them is an Argument sufficient that Christ hath other ways of bringing them to heaven then by Baptism he passed his act of grace upon them by benediction and imposition of hands 15. And therefore although neither Infants nor any man in puris naturalibus can attain to a supernatural end without the addition of some instrument or means of God's appointing ordinarily and regularly yet where God hath not appointed a Rule nor an Order as in the case of Infants we contend he hath not the Argument is invalid And as we are sure that God hath not commanded Infants to be baptized so we are sure God will doe them no injustice nor damn them for what they cannot help 16. And therefore let them be pressed with all the inconveniences that are consequent to Original sin yet either it will not be laid to the charge of Infants so as to be sufficient to condemn them or if it could yet the mercy and absolute goodness of God will secure them if he takes them away before they can glorifie him with a free obedience Quid ergò festinat innocens aetas ad remissionem peccatorum was the question of Tertullian lib. de Bapt. He knew no such danger from their Original guilt as to drive them to a Laver of which in that Age of innocence they had no need as he conceived And therefore there is no necessity of flying to the help of others for tongue and heart and Faith and predispositions to Baptism for what need all this stir As Infants without their own consent without any act of their own and without any exteriour solennity contracted the guilt of Adam's sin and so are liable to all the punishment which can with justice descend upon his posterity who are personally innocent so Infants shall be restored without any solennity or act of their own or of any other men for them by the second Adam by the redemption of Jesus Christ by his righteousness and mercies applied either immediately or how or when he shall be pleased to appoint And so Austin's Argument will come to nothing without any need of Godfathers or the Faith of any body else And it is too narrow a conception of God Almighty because he hath tied us to the observation of the Ceremonies of his own institution that therefore he hath tied himself to it Many thousand ways there are by which God can bring any reasonable soul to himself But nothing is more unreasonable then because he hath tied all men of years and discretion to this way therefore we of our own heads shall carry Infants to him that way without his direction The conceit is poor and low and the action consequent to it is too bold and venturous Mysterium meum mihi filiis domûs meae Let him doe what he please to Infants we must not 17. Onely this is certain that God hath as great care of Infants as of others and because they have no capacity of doing such acts as may be in order to acquiring Salvation God will by his own immediate mercy bring them thither
Disciples But he told it to the Jews and yet it does not follow that they should all be baptized with the Holy Ghost and with fire but it is meant onely that that glorious effect should be to them a sign of Christ's eminency above him they should see from him a Baptism greater then that of John And that it must be meant of that miraculous descent of the Holy Spirit in Pentecost and not of any secret gift or private immission appears because the Baptist offered it as a sign and testimony of the prelation and greatness of Christ above him which could not be proved to them by any secret operation which cometh not by observation but by a great and miraculous mission such as was that in Pentecost So that hence to argue that we may as well conclude that Infants must also pass through the fire as through the water is a false conclusion inferred from no premisses because this being onely a Prophecy and inferring no duty could neither concern men or children to any of the purposes of their Argument For Christ never said Vnless ye be baptized with fire and the Spirit ye shall not enter into the Kingdome of heaven but of water and the Spirit he did say it therefore though they must pass through the water yet no smell of fire must pass upon them But there are yet two things by which they offer to escape The one is that in these words Baptism by water is not meant at all but Baptism by the Spirit onely because S. Peter having said that Baptism saves us he addes by way of explication not the washing of the flesh but the answer of a good conscience towards God plainly saying that it is not water but the Spirit To this I reply that when water is taken exclusively to the Spirit it is very true that it is not water that cleanses the Soul and the cleansing of the body cannot save us but who-ever urges the necessity of Baptism urges it but as a necessary Sacrament or Instrument to convey or consign the Spirit and this they might with a little observation have learned there being nothing more usual in discourse then to deny the effect to the instrument when it is compared with the principle and yet not intend to deny to it an instrumental efficiency It is not the pen that writes well but the hand and S. Paul said It is not I but the grace of God and yet it was gratia Dei mecum that is the principal and the less principal together So S. Peter It is not water but the Spirit or which may come to one and the same not the washing the filth of the flesh but purifying the conscience that saves us and yet neither one nor the other are absolutely excluded but the effect which is denied to the instrument is attributed to the principal cause But however this does no more concern Infants then men of age for they are not saved by the washing the body but by the answer of a good conscience by the Spirit of holiness and sanctification that is water alone does not doe it unless the Spirit move upon the water But that water also is in the ministery and is not to be excluded from its portion of the work appears by the words of the Apostle The like figure whereunto even Baptism saves us c. that is Baptism even as it is a figure saves us in some sense of other by way of ministery and instrumental efficiency by conjunction and consolidation with the other but the ceremony the figure the Rite and external ministery must be in or else his words will in no sense be true and could be made true by no interpretation because the Spirit may be the thing figured but can never be a figure The other little 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is that these words were spoken before Baptism was ordained and therefore could not concern Baptism much less prove the necessity of baptizing Infants I answer that so are the sayings of the Prophets long before the coming of Christ and yet concerned his coming most certainly Secondly They were not spoken before the institution of Baptism for the Disciples of Christ did baptize more then the Baptist ever in his life-time they were indeed spoken before the commission was of baptizing all nations or taking the Gentiles into the Church but not before Christ made Disciples and his Apostles baptized them among the Jews And it was so known a thing that great Prophets and the Fathers of an Institution did baptize Disciples that our Blessed Saviour upbraided Nicodemus for his ignorance of that particular and his not understanding words spoken in the proportion and imitation of custome so known among them But then that this Argument which presses so much may be attempted in all the parts of it like Souldiers fighting against Curiassiers that try all the joynts of their armour so doe these to this For they object in the same number that the exclusive negative of Nisi quis does not include Infants but onely persons capable for say they this no more infers a necessity of Infants Baptism then the parallel words of Christ Nisi comâ—deritis unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his bloud ye have no life in you infer a necessity to give them the holy Communion c. With this Argument men use to make a great noise in many Questions but in this it will signifie but little First Indeed to one of the Roman Communion it will cause some disorder in this Question both because they think it unlawfull to give the holy Communion to Infants and yet that these words are meant of the holy Communion and if we thought so too I do not doubt but we should communicate them with the same opinion of necessity as did the Primitive Church But to the thing itself I grant that the expression is equal and infers an equal necessity in their respective cases and therefore it is as necessary to eat the flesh of the Son of man and to drink his bloud as to be baptized but then it is to be added that eating and drinking are metaphors and allusions us'd onely upon occasion of Manna which was then spoken of and which occasioned the whole discourse but the thing itself is nothing but that Christ should be received for the life of our Souls as bread and drink is for the life of our bodies Now because there are many ways of receiving Christ there are so many ways of obeying this precept but that some way or other it be obeyed is as necessary as that we be baptized Here onely it is declared to be necessary that Christ be received that we derive our life and our spiritual and eternall being from him now this can concern Infants and does infer an ordinary necessity of their Baptism for in Baptism they are united to Christ and Christ to them in Baptism they receive the beginnings of a new life
have a title to the Promises then the thing is done and this title of theirs can be signified by these words and then either this is a good argument or the thing is confessed without it For he that hath a title to the Promises of the Gospel hath a title to this Promise here mentioned the promise of the Holy Spirit for by him we are sealed to the day of redemption And indeed that this mystery may be rightly understood we are to observe that the Spirit of God is the great ministery of the Gospel and whatsoever blessing Evangelicall we can receive it is the emanation of the Spirit of God Grace and Pardon Wisedome and Hope offices and titles and relations powers priviledges and dignities all are the good things of the Spirit whatsoever we can profit withall or whatsoever we can be profited by is a gift of God the Father of spirits and is transmitted to us by the Holy Spirit of God For it is but a trifle and a dream to think that no person receives the Spirit of God but he that can doe actions and operations spiritual S. Paul distinguishes the effects of the Spirit into three classes there are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 besides these operations there are gifts and ministeries and they that receive not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the operations or powers to doe actions spiritual may yet receive gifts or at least the blessings of ministery they can be ministred to by others who from the Spirit have received the power of ministration And I instance in these things in which it is certain we can receive the Holy Spirit without any predisposition of our own First We can receive gifts even the wicked have them and they who shall be rejected at the day of Judgement shall yet argue for themselves that they have wrought miracles in the name of the Lord Jesus and yet the gift of miracles is a gift of the Holy Spirit and if the wicked can receive them who are of dispositions contrary to all the emanations of the Holy Spirit then much more may children◠who although they cannot prepare themselves any more then the wicked do yet neither can they doe against them to hinder or obstruct them But of this we have an instance in a young child Daniel whose spirit God raised up to acquit the innocent and to save her soul from unrighteous Judges and when the boys in the street sang Hosanna to the Son of David our Blessed Lord said that if they had held their peace the stones of the street would have cried out Hosanna And therefore that God should from the mouths of babes and sucklings ordain his own praise is one of the Magnalia Dei but no strange thing to be believed by us who are so apparently taught it in Holy Scripture Secondly Benediction or blessing is an emanation of God's Holy Spirit and in the form of blessing which is recorded in the Epistles of S. Paul one great part of it is the communication of the Holy Spirit and it is very probable that those three are but Synonyma The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ is to give us his Holy Spirit and the love of God is to give us his Holy Spirit for the Spirit is the love of the Father and our Blessed Saviour argues it as the testimony of God's love to us If ye who are evil know how to give good things to your children how much more shall your heavenly Father give his Spirit to them that ask him Now since the great summe and compendium of Evangelicall blessings is the Holy Spirit and this which is expressed by three Synonyma's in the second Epistle to the Corinthians is in the first reduced to one it is all but the Grace of the Lord Jesus it will follow that since our Blessed Saviour gave his solemn blessing to children his blessing relating to the Kingdom of Heaven for of such is the Kingdom he will not deny his Spirit to them when he blessed them he gave them something of his Spirit some emanation of that which blesses us all and without which no man can be truly blessed Thirdly Titles to inheritance can be given to Infants without any predisposing act of their own Since therefore Infants dying so can as we all hope receive the inheritance of Saints some mansion in Heaven in that Kingdom which belongs to them and such as they are and that the gift of the Holy Spirit is the consignation to that inheritance nothing can hinder them from receiving the Spirit that is nothing can hinder them to receive a title to the inheritance of the Saints which is the free gift of God and the effect and blessing from the Spirit of God Now how this should prove to Infants to be a title to Baptism is easie enough to be understood For by one Spirit we are all baptized into one body that is the Spirit of God moves upon the waters of Baptism and in that Sacrament adopts us into the mysticall body of Christ and gives us title to a coinheritance with him Ad 21. So that this perfectly confutes what is said in the beginning of Number 21. that Baptism is not the means of conveying the Holy Ghost For it is the Spirit that baptizes it is the Spirit that adopts us to an inheritance of the Promises it is the Spirit that incorporates us into the mysticall body of Christ and upon their own grounds it ought to be confessed for since they affirm the water to be nothing without the Spirit it is certain that the water ought not to be without the Spirit and therefore that this is the soul and life of the Sacrament and therefore usually in conjunction with that ministery unless we hinder it and it cannot be denied but that the Holy Ghost was given ordinarily to new converts at their Baptism And whereas it is said in a parenthesis that this was not as the effect is to the cause or to the proper instrument but as a consequent is to an antecedent in a chain of causes accidentally and by positive institution depending upon each other it is a groundless assertion for when the men were called upon to be baptized and were told they should receive the Holy Ghost and we find that when they were baptized they did receive the Holy Ghost what can be more reasonable then to conclude Baptism to be the ministery of the Spirit And to say that this was not consequent properly and usually but accidentally onely it followed sometimes but was not so much as instrumentally effected by it is as if one should boldly deny all effect to Physick for though men are called upon to take Physick and told they should recover and when they do take Physick they do recover yet men may unreasonably say this recovery does follow the taking of Physick not as an effect to the cause or to the
the Lord taketh them up and so it is in this particular what is wanting to them by the neglect of others God will supply by his own graces and immediate dispensation But if Baptism be made necessary to all then it ought to be procured for those who cannot procure it for themselves just as meat and drink and physick and education And it is in this as it is in blessing little babes cannot ask it but their needs require it and therefore as by their friends they were brought to Christ to have it so they must without their asking minister it to them who yet are bound to seek it as soon as they can The precept bindes them both in their several periods Ad 31. But their next great strength consists in this Dilemma If Baptism does no good there needs no contention about it if it does then either by the opus operatum of the Sacrament or by the dispositions of the suscipient If the former that 's worse then Popery if the latter then Infants cannot receive it because they cannot dispose themselves to its reception I answer that it works its effect neither by the Ceremony alone nor yet by that and the dispositions together but by the grace of God working as he please seconding his own Ordinance and yet Infants are rightly disposed for the receiving the blessings and effects of Baptism For the understanding of which we are to observe that God's graces are so free that they are given to us upon the accounts of his own goodness onely and for the reception of them we are tied to no other predispositions but that we do not hinder them For what worthiness can there be in any man to receive the first grace before grace there can be nothing good in us and therefore before the first grace there is nothing that can deserve it because before the first grace there is no grace and consequently no worthiness But the dispositions which are required in men of reason is nothing but to remove the hinderances of God's grace to take off the contrarieties to the good Spirit of God Now because in Infants there is nothing that can resist God's Spirit nothing that can hinder him nothing that can grieve him they have that simplicity and nakedness that passivity and negative disposition or non-hinderances to which all that men can doe in disposing themselves are but approaches and similitudes and therefore Infants can receive all that they need all that can doe them benefit And although there are some effects of the Holy Spirit which require natural capacities to be their foundation yet those are the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or powers of working but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the inheritance and the title to the Promises require nothing on our part but that we can receive them that we put no hinderance to them for that is the direct meaning of our Blessed Saviour He that doth not receive the kingdome of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein that is without that nakedness and freedome from obstruction and impediment none shall enter Upon the account of this Truth all that long harangue that pursues this Dilemma in other words to the same purposes will quickly come to nothing For Baptism is not a mere Ceremony but assisted by the grace of the Lord Jesus the communication of the Holy Spirit and yet it requires a duty on our part when we are capable of duty and need it but is enabled to produce its effect without any positive disposition even by the negative of children by their not putting a bar to the Holy Spirit of God that God may be glorified and may be all in all Two particulars more are considerable in their Argument The first is a Syllogism made up out of the words of S. Paul All that are baptized into Christ have put on Christ. The Minor proposition is with a little straining some other words of S. Paul thus But they that put on Christ or the new man must be formed in righteousness and holiness of truth for so the Apostle Put ye on the new man which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness But Infants cannot put on Christ to any such purposes and therefore cannot be baptized into Christ. I answer that to put on Christ is to become like unto him and we put him on in all ways by which we resemble him The little babes of Bethlehem were like unto Christ when it was given to them to die for him who died for them and us We are like unto him when we have put on his robe of righteousness when we are invested with the wedding garment when we submit to his will and to his doctrine when we are adopted to his inheritance when we are innocent and when we are washed and when we are buried with him in Baptism The expression is a metaphor and cannot be confined to one particular signification but if it could yet the Apostle does not say that all who in any sense put on the new man are actually holy and righteous neither does he say that by the new man is meant Christ for that also is another metaphor and it means a new manner of living When Christ is opposed to Adam Christ is called the new man but when the new man is opposed to the old coversation then by the new man Christ is not meant and so it is in this place it signifies to become a new man and it is an exhortation to those who had lived wickedly now to live holily and according to the intentions of Christianity But to take two metaphors from two several books and to concentre them into one signification and to make them up into one Syllogism is fallacia quatuor terminorum they prove nothing but the craft of the men or the weakness of the cause For the words to the Ephesians were spoken to them who already had been baptized who had before that in some sense put on Christ but yet he calls upon them to put on the new man therefore this is something else and it means that they should verifie what they had undertaken in Baptism which also can concern children but is seasonable to urge it to them as S. Paul does to the Ephesians after their Baptism But yet after all let the argument press as far as it is intended yet Infants even in the sense of the Apostle do put on the new man which after God is created in righteousness for so are they they are a new creation they are born again they are efformed after the image of Christ by the designation and adoption of the Holy Spirit but as they cannot doe acts of reason and yet are created in a reasonable nature so they are anew created in righteousness even before they can doe acts spiritual that is they are designati sanctitatis as Tertullian's expression is they are in the second birth as in the first instructed
it self I can only say what Secundus did to the wise Lupercus Quoties ad fastidium legentium deliciásque respicio intelligo nobis commendationem ex ipsa mediocritate libri petendam I can commend it because it is little and so not very troublesome And if it could have been written according to the worthiness of the Thing treated in it it would deserve so great a Patronage but because it is not it will therefore greatly need it but it can hope for it on no other account but because it is laid at the feet of a Princely Person who is Great and Good and one who not only is bound by Duty but by Choice hath obliged Himself to do advantages to any worthy Instrument of Religion But I have detain'd Your Grace so long in my Address that Your Pardon will be all the Favour which ought to be hop'd for by Your Grace's most Humble and Obliged Servant Jer. Dunensis A DISCOURSE OF CONFIRMATION THE INTRODVCTION NEXT to the Incarnation of the Son of God and the whole Oeconomy of our Redemption wrought by him in an admirable order and Conjugation of glorious Mercies the greatest thing that ever God did to the World is the giving to us the Holy Ghost and possibly this is the Consummation and Perfection of the other For in the work of Redemption Christ indeed made a new World we are wholly a new Creation and we must be so and therefore when S. John began the Narrative of the Gospel he began in a manner and style very like to Moses in his History of the first Creation In the beginning was the Word c. All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made But as in the Creation the Matter was first there were indeed Heavens and Earth and Waters but all this was rude and without form till the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters So it is in the new Creation We are a new Mass redeem'd with the bloud of Christ rescued from an evil portion and made Candidates of Heaven and Immortality but we are but an Embryo in the regeneration until the Spirit of God enlivens us and moves again upon the waters and then every subsequent motion and operation is from the Spirit of God We cannot say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost By him we live in him we walk by his aids we pray by his emotions we desire we breath and sigh and groan by him he helps us in all our infirmities and he gives us all our strengths he reveals mysteries to us and teaches us all our duties he stirs us up to holy desires and he actuates those desires he makes us to will and to do of his good pleasure For the Spirit of God is that in our Spiritual life that a Man's Soul is in his Natural without it we are but a dead and liveless trunk But then as a Man's Soul in proportion to the several Operations of Life obtains several appellatives it is Vegetative and Nutritive Sensitive and Intellective according as it operates So is the Spirit of God He is the Spirit of Regeneration in Baptism of Renovation in Repentance the Spirit of Love and the Spirit of holy Fear the Searcher of the hearts and the Spirit of Discerning the Spirit of Wisdom and the Spirit of Prayer In one mystery he illuminates and in another he feeds us he begins in one and finishes and perfects in another It is the same Spirit working divers Operations For he is all this now reckoned and he is every thing else that is the Principle of Good unto us he is the Beginning and the Progression the Consummation and Perfection of us all and yet every work of his is perfect in its kind and in order to his own designation and from the beginning to the end is Perfection all the way Justifying and Sanctifying Grace is the proper entitative Product in all but it hath divers appellatives and connotations in the several rites and yet even then also because of the identity of the Principle the similitude and general consonancy in the Effect the same appellative is given and the same effect imputed to more than one and yet none of them can be omitted when the great Master of the Family hath blessed it and given it institution Thus S. Dionys calls Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the perfection of the Divine birth and yet the baptized person must receive other mysteries which are more signally perfective 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Confirmation is yet more perfective and is properly the perfection of Baptism By Baptism we are Heirs and are adopted to the inheritance of Sons admitted to the Covenant of Repentance and engag'd to live a good Life yet this is but the solemnity of the Covenant which must pass into after-acts by other influences of the same Divine principle Until we receive the spirit of Obsignation or Confirmation we are but babes in Christ in the meanest sence Infants that can do nothing that cannot speak that cannot resist any violence expos'd to every rudeness and perishing by every Temptation But therefore as God at first appointed us a ministery of a new birth so also hath he given to his Church the consequent Ministery of a new strength The Spirit mov'd a little upon the waters of Baptism and gave us the Principles of Life but in Confirmation he makes us able to move our selves In the first he is the Spirit of Life but in this he is the Spirit of Strength and Motion Baptisma est nativitas Vnguentum verò est nobis actionis instar motûs said Cabasilas In Baptism we are intitled to the inheritance but because we are in our Infancy and minority the Father gives unto his Sons a Tutor a Guardian and a Teacher in Confirmation said Rupertus that as we are baptized into the Death and Resurrection of Christ so in Confirmation we may be renewed in the Inner man and strengthned in all our Holy vows and purposes by the Holy Ghost ministred according to God's Ordinance The Holy Rite of Confirmation is a Divine Ordinance and it produces Divine Effects and is ministred by Divine Persons that is by those whom God hath sanctified and separated to this ministration At first all that were baptiz'd were also confirm'd and ever since all good people that have understood it have been very zealous for it and time was in England even since the first beginnings of the Reformation when Confirmation had been less carefully ministred for about six years when the people had their first opportunities of it restor'd they ran to it in so great numbers that Churches and Church-yards would not hold them insomuch that I have read that the Bishop of Chester was forc'd to impose hands on the people in the Fields and was so oppressed with multitudes that he had almost been trode to death by the people and had died with the throng
First-fruits and in these things was the Fountain of the Sacraments and Spiritual Grace and the great Exemplar of the Oeconomy of the Church For Christ was nullius poenitentiae debitor Baptism of Repentance was not necessary to him who never sinn'd but so it became him to fulfil all righteousness and to be a pattern to us all But we have need of these things though he had not and in the same way in which Salvation was wrought by him for himself and for us all in the same way he intended we should walk He was Baptized because his Father appointed it so we must be baptized because Christ hath appointed it and we have need of it too He was Consecrated to be the great Prophet and the great Priest because no man takes on him this honour but he that was called of God as was Aaron and all they who are to minister in his Prophetical office under him must be consecrated and solemnly set apart for that ministration and after his glorious example He was Anointed with a Spiritual Unction from above after his Baptism for after Jesus was baptized he ascended up from the waters and then the Holy Ghost descended upon him It is true he receiv'd the Fulness of the Spirit but we receive him by measure but of his fulness we all receive grace for grace that is all that he receiv'd in order to his great work all that in kind one for another Grace for Grace we are to receive according to our measures and our necessities And as all these he receiv'd by external ministrations so must we God the Father appointed his way and he by his Example first hath appointed the same to us that we also may follow him in the regeneration and work out our Salvation by the same Graces in the like solemnities For if he needed them for himself then we need them much more If he did not need them for himself he needed them for us and for our Example that we might follow his steps who by receiving these exterior solemnities and inward Graces became the Author and finisher of our Salvation and the great Example of his Church I shall not need to make use of the fancy of the Murcosians and Colabarsians who turning all Mysteries into Numbers reckoned the numeral letters of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and made them coincident to the α and ω· but they intended to say that Christ receiving the Holy Dove after his Baptism became all in all to us the beginning and the perfection of our Salvation here he was confirm'd and receiv'd the ω to his α the Consummation to his Initiation the completion of his Baptism and of his Headship in the Gospel But that which I shall rather add is what S. Cyril from hence argues When he truly was baptized in the River of Jordan he ascended out of the waters and the Holy Ghost substantially descended upon him like resting upon like And to you also in like manner after ye have ascended from the waters of Baptism the Vnction is given which bears the image or similitude of him by whom Christ was anointed that as Christ after Baptism and the coming of the Holy Spirit upon him went forth to battel in the Wilderness and overcame the adversary so ye also after Holy Baptism and the mystical Vnction or Confirmation being vested with the Armour of the Holy Spirit are enabled to stand against the opposite Powers Here then is the first great ground of our solemn receiving the Holy Spirit or the Unction from above after Baptism which we understand and represent by the word Confirmation denoting the principal effect of this Unction Spiritual Strength Christ who is the Head of the Church entred this way upon his duty and work and he who was the first of all the Church the Head and great Example is the measure of all the rest for we can go to Heaven no way but in that way in which he went before us There are some who from this Story would infer the descent of the Holy Ghost after Christ's Baptism not to signifie that Confirmation was to be a distinct Rite from Baptism but a part of it yet such a part as gives fulness and Consummation to it S. Hierom Chrysostom Euthymius and Theophylact go not so far but would have us by this to understand that the Holy Ghost is given to them that are baptized But Reason and the Context are both against it 1. Because the Holy Ghost was not given by John's Baptism that was reserv'd to be one of Christ's glories who also when by his Disciples he baptiz'd many did not give them the Holy Ghost and when he commanded his Apostles to baptize all Nations did not at that time so much as promise the Holy Ghost he was promis'd distinctly and given by another Ministration 2. The descent of the Holy Spirit was a distinct ministery from the Baptism it was not only after Jesus ascended from the waters of Baptism but there was something intervening and by a new office or ministration For there was Prayer joyn'd in the ministery So S. Luke observes while Jesus was praying the Heavens were open'd and the Holy Spirit descended for so Jesus was pleas'd to consign the whole Office and Ritual of Confirmation Prayer for invocating the Holy Spirit and giving him by personal application which as the Father did immediately so the Bishops do by Imposition of hands 3. S. Austin observes that the apparition of the Holy Spirit like a Dove was the visible or ritual part and the voice of God was the word to make it to be Sacramental accedit verbum ad elementum â—it Sacramentum for so the ministration was not only perform'd on Christ but consignâ—d to the Church by similitude and exemplar institution I shall only add that the force of this Argument is established to us by more of the Fathers S. Hilary upon this place hath these words The Fathers voice was heard that from those things which were consummated in Christ we might know that after the Baptism of water the Holy Spirit from the gates of Heaven flies unto us and that we are to be anointed with the Vnction of a celestial glory and be made the Sons of God by the adoption of the voice of God the Truth by the very effects of things prefigur'd unto us the similitude of a Sacrament So S. Chrysostom In the beginnings always appears the sensible visions of Spiritual things for their sakes who cannot receive the understanding of an incorporeal nature that if afterwards they be not so done that is after the same visible manner they may be believ'd by those things which were already done But more plain is that of Theophylact The Lord had not need of the descent of the Holy Spirit but he did all things for our sakes and himself is become the First-fruits of all things which we afterwards were to receive that he might become the
first-fruits among many Brethren The consequent is this which I express in the words of S. Austin affirming Christi in Baptismo columbam unctionem nostram praefigurâsse The Dove in Christ's Baptism did represent and prefigure our Unction from above that is the descent of the Holy Ghost upon us in the rite of Confirmation Christ was baptized and so must we But after Baptism he had a new ministration for the reception of the Holy Ghost and because this was done for our sakes we also must follow that example And this being done immediately before his entrance into the Wilderness to be tempted of the Devil it plainly describes to us the Order of this ministery and the Blessing design'd to us After we are baptiz'd we need to be strengthned and confirm'd propter pugnam spiritualem we are to fight against the Flesh the World and the Devil and therefore must receive the ministration of the Holy Spirit of God which is the design and proper work of Confirmation For they are the words of the Excellent Author of the imperfect work upon S. Matthew imputed to S. Chrysostom The Baptism of Water profits us because it washes away the sins we have formerly committed if we repent of them But it does not sanctifie the Soul nor precedes the Concupiscences of the Heart and our evil thoughts nor drives them back nor represses our carnal desires But he therefore who is only so baptized that he does not also receive the Holy Spirit is baptized in his Body and his sins are pardon'd but in his Mind he is yet but a Catechumen for so it is written He that hath not the Spirit of Christ is none of his and therefore afterward out of his flesh will germinate worse sins because he hath not receiv'd the Holy Spirit conserving him in his Baptismal Grace but the house of his Body is empty wherefore that wicked spirit finding it swept with the Doctrines of Faith as with besoms enters in and in a sevenfold manner dwells there Which words besides that they well explicate this mystery do also declare the necessity of Confirmation or receiving the Holy Ghost after Baptism in imitation of the Divine precedent of our Blessed Saviour 2. After the Example of Christ my next Argument is from his Words spoken to Nicodemus in explication of the prime mysteries Evangelical Vnless a man be born of Water and of the Holy Spirit he shall not enter into the Kingdom of God These words are the great Argument which the Church uses for the indispensable necessity of Baptism and having in them so great effort and not being rightly understood they have suffered many Convulsions shall I call them or Interpretations Some serve their own Hypothesis by saying that Water is the Symbol and the Spirit is the Baptismal Grace Others that it is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one is only meant though here be two Signatures But others conclude that Water is only necessary but the Spirit is super-added as being afterwards to supervene and move upon these Waters And others yet affirm that by Water is only meant a Spiritual Ablution or the effect produced by the Spirit and still they have intangled the words so that they have been made useless to the Christian Church and the meaning too many things makes nothing to be understood But Truth is easie intelligible and clear and without objection and is plainly this Unless a man be Baptized into Christ and Confirmed by the Spirit of Christ he cannot enter into the Kingdom of Christ that is he is not perfectly adopted into the Christian Religion or fitted for the Christian Warfare And if this plain and natural sence be admitted the place is not only easie and intelligible but consonant to the whole Design of Christ and Analogy of the New Testament For first Our blessed Saviour was Catechizing of Nicodemus and teaching him the first Rudiments of the Gospel and like a wise Master-builder first lays the foundation The Doctrine of Baptism and laying on of Hands which afterwards S. Paul put into the Christian Catechism as I shall shew in the sequel Now these also are the first Principles of the Christian Religion taught by Christ himself and things which at least to the Doctors might have been so well known that our Blessed Saviour upbraids the not knowing them as a shame to Nicodemus S. Chrysostom and Theophylact Euthymius and Rupertus affirm that this Generation by Water and the Holy Spirit might have been understood by the Old Testament in which Nicodemus was so well skilled Certain it is the Doctrine of Baptisms was well enough known to the Jews and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the illumination and irradiations of the Spirit of God was not new to them who believed the Visions and Dreams the Daughter of a Voice and the influences from Heaven upon the Sons of the Prophets and therefore although Christ intended to teach him more than what he had distinct notice of yet the things themselves had foundation in the Law and the Prophets but although they were high Mysteries and scarce discerned by them who either were ignorant or incurious of such things yet to the Christians they were the very Rudiments of their Religion and are best expounded by observation of what S. Paul placed in the very foundation But 2. Baptism is the first Mystery that is certain but that this of being born of the Spirit is also the next is plain in the very order of the words and that it does mean a Mystery distinct from Baptism will be easily assented to by them who consider that although Christ Baptized and made many Disciples by the Ministery of his Apostles yet they who were so baptized into Christ's Religion did not receive this Baptism of the Spirit till after Christ's Ascension 3. The Baptism of Water was not peculiar to John the Baptist for it was also of Christ and ministred by his command it was common to both and therefore the Baptism of Water is the less principal here Something distinct from it is here intended Now if we add to these words That S. John tells of another Baptism which was Christ's peculiar He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with Fire That these words were literally verified upon the Apostles in Pentecost and afterwards upon all the Baptized in Spiritual effect who besides the Baptism of Water distinctly had the Baptism of the Spirit in Confirmation it will follow that of necessity this must be the meaning and the verification of these words of our Blessed Saviour to Nicodemus which must mean a double Baptism Transibimus per aquam ignem antequam veniemus in refrigerium We must pass through Water and Fire before we enter into Rest that is We must first be Baptized with Water and then with the Holy Ghost who first descended in Fire that is the only way to enter into Christ's Kingdom is by these two Doors of the Tabernacle which God hath pitched
and not Man first by Baptism and then by Confirmation first by Water and then by the Spirit The Primitive Church had this Notion so fully amongst them that the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions attributed to S. Clement who was S. Paul's Scholar affirms That a man is made a perfect Christian meaning Ritually and Sacramentally and by all exterior solemnity by the Water of Baptism and Confirmation of the Bishop and from these words of Christ now alledged derives the use and institution of the Rite of Confirmation The same sence of these words is given to us by S. Cyprian who intending to prove the insufficiency of one without the other says Tunc enim plenè Sanctificari esse Dei filii possunt si Sacramento utroque nascantur cùm scriptum sit Nisi quis natus fuerit ex aqua Spiritu non potest intrare in regnum Dei Then they may be fully Sanctified and become the Sons of God if they be born with both the Sacraments or Rites for it is written Vnless a man be born of Water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God The same also is the Commentary of Eusebius Emissenus and S. Austin tells That although some understand these words only of Baptism and others of the Spirit only viz. in Confirmation yet others and certainly much better understand utrumque Sacramentum both the Mysteries of Confirmation as well as Baptism Amalarius Fortunatus brings this very Text to reprove them that neglect the Episcopal Imposition of Hands Concerning them who by negligence lose the Bishop's presence and receive not the Imposition of his Hands it is to be considered lest in justice they be condemned in which they exercise Justice negligently because they ought to make haste to the Imposition of Hands because Christ said Vnless a man be born again of Water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God And as he said this so also he said Vnless your Righteousness exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees ye shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven To this I foresee two Objections may be made First That Christ did not institute Confirmation in this place because Confirmation being for the gift of the Holy Ghost who was to come upon none of the Apostles till Jesus was glorified these words seem too early for the consigning an Effect that was to be so long after and a Rite that could not be practised till many intermedial events should happen So said the Evangelist The Holy Ghost was come upon none of them because Jesus was not yet glorified intimating that this great Effect was to be in after-time and it is not likely that the Ceremony should be ordained before the Effect it self was ordered and provided for that the Solemnity should be appointed before provisions were made for the Mystery and that the outward which was wholly for the inward should be instituted before the inward and principal had its abode amongst us To this I answer First That it is no unusual thing for Christ gave the Sacrament of his Body before his Body was given the Memorial of his Death was instituted before his Death 2. Confirmation might here as well be instituted as Baptism and by the same reason that the Church from these words concludes the necessity of one she may also infer the designation of the other for the effect of Baptism was at that time no more produced than that of Confirmation Christ had not yet purchased to himself a Church he had not wrought remission of sins to all that believe on him the Death of Christ was not yet passed into which Death the Christian Church was to be Baptized 3. These words are so an institution of Confirmation as the sixth Chapter of S. John is of the blessed Eucharist It was designativa not ordinativa it was in design not in present command here it was preached but not reducible to practice till its proper season 4. It was like the words of Christ to S. Peter When thou art converted confirm thy Brethren Here the command was given but that Confirmation of his Brethren was to be performed in a time relative to a succeeding accident 5. It is certain that long before the event and Grace was given Christ did speak of the Spirit of Confirmation that Spirit which was to descend in Pentecost which all they were to receive who should believe on him which whosoever did receive out of his Belly should flow Rivers of Living Waters as is to be read in that place of S. John now quoted 6. This predesignation of the Holy Spirit of Confirmation was presently followed by some little antepast and donariola or little givings of the Spirit for our Blessed Saviour gave the Holy Ghost three several times First 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 obscurely and by intimation and secret vertue then when he sent them to heal the sick and anoint them with Oil in the Name of the Lord. Secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more expresly and signally after the Resurrection when he took his leave of them and said Receive ye the Holy Ghost And this was to give them a power of ministring Remission of sins and therefore related to Baptism and the ministeries of Repentance But Thirdly he gave it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more perfectly and this was the Spirit of Confirmation for he was not at all until now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says the Text The Holy Ghost was not yet So almost all the Greek Copies Printed and Manuscript and so S. Chrysostom Athanasius Cyril Ammonius in the Catena of the Greeks Leontius Theophylact Euthymius and all the Greek Fathers read it so S. Hierom and S. Austin among the Latines and some Latin Translations read it Our Translations read it The Holy Ghost was not yet given was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in them as some few Greek Copies read it but the meaning is alike Confirmation was not yet actual the Holy Spirit viz. of Confirmation was not yet come upon the Church but it follows not but he was long before promised designed and appointed spoken of and declared * The first of these Collations had the Ceremony of Chrism or Anointing joyned with it which the Church in process of time transferred into her use and ministery yet it is the last only that Christ passed into an Ordinance for ever it is this only which is the Sacramental consummation of our Regeneration in Christ for in this the Holy Spirit is not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 present by his power but present 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as S. Gregory Nazianzen expresses it to dwell with us to converse with us and to abide for ever 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so S. Paul describes this Spirit of Confirmation the Spirit which he hath poured forth upon us richly or plentifully that is in great measures and to the full consummation of the
but because the Apostle speaking of the Foundation in which Baptism is and is reckoned one of the principal parts in the Foundation there needed no Absolution but Baptismal for they and we believing one Baptism for the Remission of Sins this is all the Absolution that can be at first and in the Foundation The other was secunda post naufragium tabula it came in after when men had made a shipwrack of their good conscience and were as S. Peter says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 forgetful of the former cleansing and purification and washing of their old sins Secondly It cannot be meant of Ordination and this is also evident 1. Because the Apostle says he would thence-forth leave to speak of the Foundation and go on to perfection that is to higher Mysteries Now in Rituals of which he speaks there is none higher than Ordination 2. The Apostle saying he would speak no more of Imposition of Hands goes presently to discourse of the mysteriousness of the Evangelical Priesthood and the honour of that vocation by which it is evident he spake nothing of Ordination in the Catechism or Narrative of Fundamentals 3. This also appears from the context not only because Laying on of hands is immediately set after Baptism but also because in the very next words of his Discourse he does enumerate and apportion to Baptism and Confirmation their proper and proportioned effects to Baptism illumination according to the perpetual style of the Church of God calling Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an enlightning and to Confirmation he reckons tasting the Heavenly gift and being made partakers of the Holy Ghost by the thing signified declaring the Sign and by the mystery the Rite Upon these words S. Chrysostom discoursing says That all these are Fundamental Articles that i◠that we ought to Repent from dead works to be Baptized into the Faith of Christ and be made worthy of the gift of the Spirit who is given by Imposition of Hands and we are to be taught the mysteries of the Resurrection and Eternal Judgment This Catechism says he is perfect so that if any man have Faith in God and being baptized is also confirmed and so tastes the Heavenly gift and partakes of the Holy Ghost and by hope of the Resurrection tastes of the good things of the World to come if he falls away from this state and turns Apostate from this whole Dispensation digging down and turning up these Foundations he shall never be built again he can never be Baptized again and never be Confirmed any more God will not begin again and go over with him again he cannot be made a Christian twice If he remains upon these Foundations though he sins he may be renewed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Repentance and by a Resuscitation of the Spirit if he have not wholly quenched him but if he renounces the whole Covenant disown and cancel these Foundations he is desperate he can never be renewed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Title and Oeconomy of Repentance This is the full explication of this excellent place and any other ways it cannot reasonably be explicated but therefore into this place any notice of Ordination cannot come no Sence no Mystery can be made of it or drawn from it but by the interposition of Confirmation the whole context is clear rational and intelligible This then is that Imposition of hands of which the Apostle speaks Vnus hic locus abunde testatur c. saith Calvin This one place doth abundantly witness that the original of this Rite or Ceremony was from the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith S. Chrysostom for by this Rite of Imposition of hands they receiv'd the Holy Ghost Fo◠though the Spirit of God was given extra-regularly and at all times as God was pleas'd to do great things yet this Imposition of hands was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this was the Ministery of the Spirit For so we receive Christ when we hear and obey his word we eat Christ by Faith and we live by his Spirit and yet the Blessed Eucharist is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ministery of the Body and Blood of Christ. Now as the Lord's Supper is appointed ritually to convey Christ's Body and Bloud to us so is Confirmation ordain'd ritually to give unto us the Spirit of God And though by accident and by the overflowings of the Spirit it may come to pass that a man does receive perfective graces alone and without Ministeries external yet such a man without a miracle is not a perfect Christian ex statuum vitae dispositione but in the ordinary ways and appointment of God and until he receive this Imposition of hands and be Confirmed is to be accounted an imperfect Christian. But of this afterwards I shall observe one thing more out of this testimony of S. Paul He calls it the Doctrine of Baptisms and Laying on of hands by which it does not only appear to be a lasting ministery because no part of the Christian Doctrine could change or be abolished but hence also it appears to be of Divine institution For if it were not S. Paul had beed guilty of that which our Blessed Saviour reproves in the Scribes and Pharisees and should have taught for Doctrines the Commandments of Men. Which because it cannot be suppos'd it must follow that this Doctrine of Confirmation or Imposition of hands is Apostolical and Divine The Argument is clear and not easie to be reprov'd SECT II. The Rite of Confirmation is a perpetual and never-ceasing Ministery YEA but what is this to us It belong'd to the days of wonder and extraordinary The Holy Ghost breath'd upon the Apostles and Apostolical men but then he breath'd his last recedente gratiâ recessit disciplina when the Grace departed we had no further use of the Ceremony In answer to this I shall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by divers particulars evince plainly that this Ministery of Confirmation was not temporary and relative only to the Acts of the Apostles but was to descend to the Church for ever This indeed is done already in the preceding Section in which it is clearly manifested that Christ himself made the Baptism of the Spirit to be necessary to the Church He declar'd the fruits of this Baptism and did particularly relate it to the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Church at and after that glorious Pentecost He sanctified it and commended it by his Example just as in order to Baptism he sanctified the Floud Jordan and all other waters to the mystical washing away of sin viz. by his great Example and fulfilling this righteousness also This Doctrine the Apostles first found in their own persons and Experience and practised to all their Converts after Baptism by a solemn and external Rite and all this passed into an Evangelical Doctrine the whole mystery being signified by the external Rite in the words of the Apostle as before it was by Christ expressing
only the internal so that there needs no more strength to this Argument But that there may be wanting no moments to this truth which the Holy Scripture affords I shall add more weight to it And 1. The Perpetuity of this Holy Rite appears because this great Gift of the Holy Ghost was promised to abide with the Church for ever And when the Jews heard the Apostles speak with Tongues at the first and miraculous descent of the Spirit in Pentecost to take off the strangeness of the wonder and the envy of the power S. Peter at that very time tells them plainly Repent and be Baptized every one of you and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not the meanest person amongst you all but shall receive this great thing which ye observe us to have received and not only you but your Children too not your Children of this Generation only sed Natinatorum qui nascentur ab illis but your Children for ever For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are afar off even to as many as the Lord our God shall call Now then let it be considered 1. This gift is by Promise by a promise not made to the Apostles alone but to all to all for ever 2. Consider here at the very first as there is a verbum a word of promise so there is sacramentum too I use the word as I have already premonished in a large fence only and according to the style of the Primitive Church It is a Rite partly Moral partly Ceremonial the first is Prayer and the other is Laying on of the hands and to an effect that is but transient and extraordinary and of a little abode it is not easie to be supposed that such a Solemnity should be appointed I say such a Solemnity that is it is not imaginable that a solemn Rite annexed to a perpetual Promise should be transient and temporary for by the nature of Relatives they must be of equal abode The Promise is of a thing for ever the Ceremony or Rite was annexed to the Promise and therefore this also must be for ever 3. This is attested by S. Paul who reduces this Argument to this Mystery saying In whom after that ye believed signati estis Spiritu Sancto promissionis ye were sealed by that Holy Spirit of promise He spake it to the Ephesians who well understood his meaning by remembring what was done to themselves by the Apostles but a while before who after they had Baptized them did lay their hands upon them and so they were sealed and so they received the Holy Spirit of promise for here the very matter of Fact is the clearest Commentary on S. Paul's words The Spirit which was promised to all Christians they then received when they were consigned or had the Ritual seal of Confirmation by Imposition of hands One thing I shall remark here and that is that this and some other words of Scripture relating to the Sacraments or other Rituals of Religion do principally mean the Internal Grace and our consignation is by a secret power and the work is within but it does not therefore follow that the External Rite is not also intended for the Rite is so wholly for the Mystery and the Outward for the Inward and yet by the Outward God so usually and regularly gives the Inward that as no man is to rely upon the External Ministery as if the opus operatum would do the whole Duty so no man is to neglect the External because the Internal is the more principal The mistake in his particular hath caused great contempt of the Sacraments and Rituals of the Church and is the ground of the Socinian Errors in these Questions But 4. What hinders any man from a quick consent at the first representation of these plain reasonings and authorities Is it because there were extraordinary effects accompanying this Ministration and because now there are not that we will suppose the whole Oeconomy must cease If this be it and indeed this is all that can be supposed in opposition to it it is infinitely vain 1. Because these extraordinary effects did continue even after the death of all the Apostles S. Irenaeus says they did continue even to his time even the greatest instance of Miraculous power Et in fraternitate saepissime propter aliquid necessarium eâ quae est in quoquo loco Vniversâ Ecclesiâ postulante per jejunium supplicationem multam reversus est spiritus c. When God saw it necessary and the Church prayed and fasted much they did miraculous things even of reducing the spirit to a dead man 2. In the days of the Apostles the Holy Spirit did produce miraculous effects but neither always nor at all in all men Are all workers of Miracles do all speak with Tongues do all interpret can all heal No the Spirit bloweth where he listeth and as he listeth he gives Gifts to all but to some after this manner and to some after that 3. These Gifts were not necessary at all times any more than to all persons but the Promise did belong to all and was made to all and was performed to all In the days of the Apostles there was an Effusion of the Spirit of God it ran over it was for themselves and others it wet the very ground they trode upon and made it fruitful but it was not to all in like manner but there was also then and since then a Diffusion of the Spirit tanquam in pleno S. Stephen was full of the Holy Ghost he was full of faith and power The Holy Ghost was given to him to fulfil his Faith principally the working Miracles was but collateral and incident But there is also an Infusion of the Holy Ghost and that is to all and that is for ever The manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withall saith the Apostle And therefore if the Grace be given to all there is no reason that the Ritual ministration of that Grace should cease upon pretence that the Spirit is not given extraordinarily 4. These extraordinary Gifts were indeed at first necessary In the beginnings always appear the sensible visions of spiritual things for their sakes who cannot receive the understanding of an incorporeal Nature that if afterward they be not so done they may be believed by those things which were already done said S. Chrysostom in the place before quoted that is these visible appearances were given at first by reason of the imperfection of the state of the Church but the greater Gifts were to abide for ever and therefore it is observable that S. Paul says that the gift of Tongues is one of the least and most useless things a mere Sign and not so much as a Sign to Believers but to Infidels and Unbelievers and before this he greatly prefers the gift of
Prophesying or Preaching which yet all Christians know does abide with the Church for ever 5. To every ordinary and perpetual Ministery at first there were extraordinary effects and miraculous consignations We find great parts of Nations converted at one Sermon Three thousand Converts came in at once Preaching of S. Peter and five thousand at another Sermon and persons were miraculously cured by the Prayer of the Bishop in his visitation of a sick Christian and Devils cast out in the conversion of a sinner and Blindness cur'd at the Baptism of S. Paul and Aeneas was healed of a Palsie at the same time he was cur'd of his Infidelity and Eutychus was restor'd to life at the Preaching of S. Paul And yet that now we see no such Extraordinaries it follows not that the Visitation of the sick and Preaching Sermons and Absolving Penitents are not ordinary and perpetual ministrations and therefore to fansy that invocation of the Holy Spirit and Imposition of hands is to cease when the extraordinary and temporary contingencies of it are gone is too trifling a fancy to be put in balance against so Sacred an Institution relying upon so many Scriptures 6. With this Objection some vain persons would have troubled the Church in S. Austin's time but he considered it with much indignation writing against the Donatists His words are these At the first times the Holy Spirit fell upon the Believers and they spake with Tongues which they had not learned according as the Spirit gave them utterance They were Signs fitted for the season for so the Holy Ghost ought to have signified in all Tongues because the Gospel of God was to run through all the Nations and Languages of the World so it was signified and so it pass'd through But is it therefore expected that they upon whom there is Imposition of hands that they might receive the Holy Ghost that they should speak with Tongues Or when we lay hands on Infants does every one of you attend to hear them speak with Tongues And when he sees that they do not speak with Tongues is any of you of so perverse a heart as to say They have not received the Holy Ghost for if they had received him they would speak with Tongues as it was done at first But if by these Miracles there is not now given any testimony of the presence of the Holy Spirit how doth any one know that he hath received the Holy Ghost Interroget cor suum Si diligit fratrem manet Spiritus Dei in illo It is true the Gift of Tongues doth not remain but all the greater Gifts of the Holy Spirit remain with the Church for ever Sanctification and Power Fortitude and Hope Faith and Love Let every man search his Heart and see if he belongs to God whether the love of God be not spread in his heart by the Spirit of God Let him see if he be not patient in Troubles comforted in his Afflictions bold to confess the Faith of Christ crucified zealous of Good works These are the miracles of Grace and the mighty powers of the Spirit according to that saying of Christ These signs shall follow them that believe In my Name shall they cast out Devils they shall speak with new Tongues they shall tread on Serpents they shall drink poison and it shall not hurt them and they shall lay their hands on the sick and they shall recover That which we call the Miraculous part is the less power but to cast out the Devil of Lust to throw down the Pride of Lucifer to tread on the great Dragon and to triumph over our Spiritual enemies to cure a diseased Soul to be unharmed by the poison of Temptation of evil Examples and evil Company these are the true signs that shall follow them that truly and rightly believe on the Name of the Lord Jesus this is to live in the Spirit and to walk in the Spirit this is more than to receive the Spirit to a power of Miracles and supernatural products in a natural matter For this is from a supernatural principle to receive supernatural aids to a supernatural end in the Diviner spirit of a man and this being more miraculous than the other it ought not to be pretended that the discontinuance of extraordinary Miracles should cause the discontinuance of an ordinary Ministration and this is that which I was to prove 7. To which it is not amiss to add this Observation that Simon Magus offered to buy this power of the Apostles that he also by laying on of hands might thus minister the Spirit Now he began this sin in the Christian Church and it is too frequent at this day but if all this power be gone then nothing of that sin can remain if the subject matter be removed then the appendant crime cannot abide and there can be no Simony so much as by participation and whatever is or can be done in this kind is no more of this Crime than Drunkenness is of Adultery it relates to it or may be introductive of it or be something like it But certainly since the Church is not so happy as to be intirely free from the Crime of Simony it will be hard to say that the power the buying of which was the principle of this sin and therefore the Rule of all the rest should be removed and the house stand without a foundation the relative without the correspondent the accessary without the principal and the accident without the subject This is impossible and therefore it remains that still there abides in the Church this power that by Imposition of the Hands of fit persons the Holy Ghost is ministred But this will be further cleared in the next Section SECT III. The Holy Rite of Imposition of Hands for the giving the Holy Spirit or Confirmation was actually continued and practised by all the succeeding Ages of the purest and Primitive Church NExt to the plain words of Scripture the traditive Interpretation and Practice of the Church of God is the best Argument in the World for Rituals and Mystical ministrations for the Tradition is universal and all the way acknowledged to be derived from Scripture And although in Rituals the Tradition it self if it be universal and primitive as this is were alone sufficient and is so esteemed in the Baptism of Infants in the Priests consecrating the Holy Eucharist in publick Liturgies in Absolution of Penitents the Lord's Day Communicating of Women and the like yet this Rite of Confirmation being all that and evidently derived from the practice Apostolical and so often recorded in the New Testament both in the Ritual and Mysterious part both in the Ceremony and Spiritual effect is a point of as great Certainty as it is of Usefulness and holy designation Theophilus Antiochenus lived not long after the death of S. John and he derives the name of Christian which was first given to the Disciples in his City from this Chrism or
the hands of the Bishop he was not Confirmed Quo non impetrato quomodo Spiritum Sanctum obtinuisse putandus est Which having not obtain'd how can he be suppos'd to have receiv'd the Holy Spirit The same also something more fully related by Nicephorus but wholly to the same purpose Melchiades in his Epistle to the Bishops of Spain argues excellently about the necessity and usefulness of the Holy Rite of Confirmation What does the mystery of Confirmation profit me after the mystery of Baptism Certainly we did not receive all in our Baptism if after that Lavatory we want something of another kind Let your charity attend As the Military order requires that when the General enters a Souldier into his list he does not only mark him but furnishes him with Arms for the Battel so in him that is Baptiz'd this Blessing is his Ammunition You have given Christ a Souldier give him also Weapons And what will it profit him if a Father gives a great Estate to his Son if he does not take care to provide a Tutor for him Therefore the Holy Spirit is the Guardian of our Regeneration in Christ he is the Comforter and he is the Defender I have already alledged the plain Testimonies of Optatus and S. Cyril in the first Section I add to them the words of S. Gregory Nazianzen speaking of Confirmation or the Christian signature Hoc viventi tibi maximum est tutamentum Ovis enim quae sigillo insignita est non facilè patet insidiis quae verò signata non est facilè à furibus capitur This Signature is your greatest guard while you live For a Sheep when it is mark'd with the Master's sign is not so soon stollen by Thieves but easily if she be not The same manner of speaking is also us'd by S. Basil who was himself together with Eubulus confirm'd by Bishop Maximinus Quomodo curam geret tanquam ad se pertinentis Angelus quomodo eripiat ex hostibus si non agnoverit signaculum How shall the Angel know what sheep belong unto his charge how shall he snatch them from the Enemy if he does not see their mark and signature Theodoret also and Theophylact speak the like words and so far as I can perceive these and the like sayings are most made use of by the School-men to be their warranty for an indeleble Character imprinted in Confirmation I do not interest my self in the question but only recite the Doctrine of these Fathers in behalf of the Practice and Usefulness of Confirmation I shall not need to transcribe hither those clear testimonies which are cited from the Epistles of S. Clement Vrban the First Fabianus and Cornelius the summ of them is in those plainest words of Vrban the First Omnes fideles per manûs impositionem Episcoporum Spiritum Sanctum post Baptismum accipere debent All faithful people ought to receive the Holy Spirit by Imposition of the Bishops hands after Baptism Much more to the same purpose is to be read collected by Gratian de Consecrat dist 4. Presbyt de Consecrat dist 5. Omnes fideles ibid. Spiritus Sanctus S. Hierom brings in a Luciferian asking Why he that is Baptiz'd in the Church does not receive the Holy Ghost but by Imposition of the Bishop's hands The answer is Hanc observâ—tionem ex Scripturae authoritate ad Sacerdotii honorem descendere This observation for the honour of the Priesthood did descend from the authority of the Scriptures adding withall it was for the prevention of Schisms and that the Safety of the Church did depend upon it Exigis ubi scriptum est If you ask where it is written it is answered in Actibus Apostolorum It is written in the Acts of the Apostles But if there were no authority of Scripture for it totius orbis in hanc partem consensus instar praecepti obtineret the Consent of the whole Christian World in this Article ought to prevail as a Commandment But here is a twofold Chord Scripture and Universal Tradition or rather Scripture expounded by an Universal traditive interpretation The same observation is made from Scripture by S. Chrysostom The words are very like those now recited from S. Hierom's Dialogue and therefore need not be repeated S. Ambrose calls Confirmation Spiritale signaculum quod post fontem superest ut perfectio fiat A spiritual Seal remaining after Baptism that Perfection be had Oecumenius calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Perfection Lavacro peccata purgantur Chrismate Spiritus Sanctus superfunditur utraque verò ista manu ore Antistitis impetramus said Pacianus Bishop of Barcinona In Baptism our sins are cleans'd in Confirmation the Holy Spirit is pour'd upon us and both these we obtain by the hands and mouth of the Bishop And again vestrae plebi unde Spiritus quam non consignat unctus Sacerdos The same with that of Cornelius in the case of Novatus before cited I shall add no more lest I overset the Article and make it suspicious by too laborious a defence only after these numerous testimonies of the Fathers I think it may be useful to represent that this Holy Rite of Confirmation hath been decreed by many Councils The Council of Eliberis celebrated in the time of P. Sylvester the First decreed that whosoever is Baptiz'd in his sickness if he recover ad Episcopum eum perducat ut per manûs impositionem perfici possit Let him be brought to the Bishop that he may be perfected by the Imposition of hands To the same purpose is the 77. Can. Episcopus eos per benedictionem perficere debebit The Bishop must perfect those whom the Minister Baptiz'd by his Benediction The Council of Laodicea decreed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All that are Baptized must be anointed with the celestial Unction and so be partakers of the Kingdom of Christ. All that are so that is are Confirm'd for this celestial Unction is done by holy Prayers and the invocation of the Holy Spirit so Zonaras upon this Canon All such who have this Unction shall reign with Christ unless by their wickedness they preclude their own possessions This Canon was put into the Code of the Catholick Church and makes the 152. Canon The Council of Orleans affirms expresly that he who is Baptiz'd cannot be a Christian meaning according to the usual style of the Church a full and perfect Christan nisi confirmatione Episcopali suerit Chrismatus unless he have the Unction of Episcopal Confirmation But when the Church had long disputed concerning the re-baptizing of Hereticks and made Canons for and against it according as the Heresies were and all agreed that if the first Baptism had been once good it could never be repeated yet they thought it fit that such persons should be Confirm'd by the Bishop all supposing Confirmation to be the perfection and consummation of the less-perfect Baptism Thus the
the reception of the Holy Ghost they waxed valiant in the Faith and in all their spiritual combats 2. In Confirmation we receive the Holy Ghost as the earnest of our inheritance as the seal of our Salvation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Gregory Nazianzen we therefore call it a Seal or Signature as being a guard and custody to us and a sign of the Lord's dominion over us The Confirmed person is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a sheep that is mark'd which Thieves do not so easily steal and carry away To the same purpose are those words of Theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Remember that holy mystagogâ—e in which they who were initiated after the renouncing that Tyrant the Devil and all his works and the confession of the true King Jesus Christ have received the Chrism of spiritual Vnction like a Royal signature by that Vnction as in a shadow perceiving the invisible grace of the most Holy Spirit That is Confirmation we are sealed for the service of God and unto the day of Redemption then it is that the seal of God is had by us The Lord knoweth who are his Quomodo verò dices Dei sum si notas â—on produxeris said S. Basil How can any may say I am God's sheep unless he produce the marks Signati estis Spiritu promissionis per Sanctâ—ssimum Divinum Spiritum Domini grex effecti sumus said Theophylact. When we are thus seal'd by the most Holy and Divine Spirit of promise then we are truly of the Lord's Flock and mark'd with his seal that is When we are rightly Confirm'd then he descâ—nds into our Souls and though he does not operate it may be presently but as the Reasonable Soul works in its due time and by the order of Nature by opportunities and new fermentations and actualities so does the Spirit of God when he is brought into use when he is prayed for with love assiduity when he is caressed tenderly when he is us'd lovingly when we obey his motions readily when we delight in his words greatly then we find it true that the Soul had a new life put into her a principle of perpetual actions but the tree planted by the waters side does not presently bear fruit but in its due season By this Spirit we are then seal'd that whereas God hath laid up an inheritance for us in the Kingdom of Heaven and in the faith of that we must live and labour to confirm this Faith God hath given us this Pledge the Spirit of God is a witness to us and tells us by his holy comforts by the peace of God and the quietness and refrâ—shments of a good Conscience that God is our Father that we are his Sons and Daughters and shall be co-heirs with Jesus in his eternal Kingdom In Baptism we are made the Sons of God but we receive the witness and testimony of it in Confirmation This is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Holy Ghost the Comforter this is he whom Christ promis'd and did send in Pentecost and was afterwards ministred and conveyed by Prayer and Imposition of hands and by this Spirit he makes the Confessors bold and the Martyrs valiant and the Tempted strong and the Virgins to persevere and Widows to sing his praises and his glories And this is that excellency which the Church of God called the Lord's seal and teaches to be imprinted in Confirmation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a perfect Phylactery or Guard even the Lord's seal so Eusebius calls it I will not be so curious as to enter into a discourse of the Philosophy of this But I shall say that they who are curious in the secrets of Nature and observe external signatures in Stones Plants Fruits and Shells of which Naturalists make many observations and observe strange effects and the more internal signatures in Minerals and Living bodies of which Chymists discourse strange secrets may easily if they please consider that it is infinitely credible that in higher essences even in Spirits there may be signatures proportionable wrought more immediately and to greater purposes by a Divine hand I only point at this and so pass it over as it may be not fit for every mans consideration And now if any man shall say we see no such things as you talk of and find the Confirm'd people the same after as before no better and no wiser not richer in Gifts not more adorned with Graces nothing more zealous for Christ's Kingdom not more comforted with Hope or established by Faith or built up with Charity they neither speak better nor live better What then Does it therefore follow that the Holy Ghost is not given in Confirmation Nothing less For is not Christ given us in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper Do not we receive his Body and his Blood Are we not made all one with Christ and he with us And yet it is too true that when we arise from that holy Feast thousands there are that find no change But there are in this two things to be considered One is that the changes which are wrought upon our souls are not after the manner of Nature visible and sensible and with observation The Kingdom of God cometh not with Observation for it is within you and is only discerned spiritually and produces its effects by the method of Heaven and is first apprehended by Faith and is endear'd by Charity and at last is understood by holy and kind Experiences And in this there is no more objection against Confirmation than against Baptism or the Lord's Supper or any other Ministery Evangelical The other thing is this If we do not find the effects of the Spirit in Confirmation it is our faults For he is receiv'd by Moral instruments and is intended only as a Help to our endeavours to our labours and our prayers to our contentions and our mortifications to our Faith and to our Hope to our Patience and to our Charity Non adjuvari dicitur qui nihil facit He that does nothing cannot be said to be help'd Unless we in these instances do our part of the work it will be no wonder if we lose his part of the co-operation and supervening blessing He that comes under the Bishops hands to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost will come with holy desires and a longing Soul with an open hand and a prepared heart he will purifie the House of the Spirit for the entertainment of so Divine a guest he will receive him with humility and follow him with obedience and delight him with purities and he that does thus let him make the objection if he can and tell me Does he say that Jesus is the Lord He cannot say this but by the Holy Ghost Does he love his Brother If he does then the Spirit of God abides in him Is Jesus Christ formed in him Does he live by the laws of the Spirit Does he obey his commands Does he attend his motions Hath he no
lawful or not but which were better To Confirm Infants or to stay to their Childhood or to their riper years Aquinas Bonaventure and some others say it is best that they be Confirmed in their Infancy quia dolus non est nec obicem ponunt they are then without craft and cannot hinder the descent of the Holy Ghost upon them And indeed it is most agreeable with the Primitive practice that if they were Baptized in Infancy they should then also be Confirmed according to that of the famous Epistle of Melchiades to the Bishops of Spain Ità conjuncta sunt haec duo Sacramenta ut ab invicem nisi morte praeveniente non possint separari unum altero ritè persici non potest Where although he expresly affirms the Rites to be two yet unless it be in cases of necessity they are not to be severed and one without the other is not perfect which in the sence formerly mentioned is true and so to be understood That to him who is Baptized and is not Confirmed something very considerable is wanting and therefore they ought to be joyned though not immediately yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to reasonable occasions and accidental causes But in this there must needs be a liberty in the Church not only for the former reasons but also because the Apostles themselves were not Confirmed till after they had received the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper Others therefore say That to Confirm them of Riper years is with more edification The confession of Faith is more voluntary the election is wiser the submission to Christ's discipline is more acceptable and they have more need and can make better use of their strengths than derived by the Holy Spirit of God upon them and to this purpose it is commanded in the Canon Law that they who are confirmed should be perfectae aetatis of full age upon which the Gloss says Perfectam vocat fortè duodecim annorum Twelve years old was a full age because at those years they might then be admitted to the lower services in the Church But the reason intimated and implied by the Canon is because of the Preparation to it They must come Fasting and they must make publick Confession of their Faith And indeed that they should do so is matter of great edification as also are the advantages of choice and other preparatory abilities and dispositions above-mentioned They are matter of edification I say when they are done but then the delaying of them so long before they be done and the wanting the aids of the Holy Ghost conveyed in that Ministery are very prejudicial and are not matter of edification But therefore there is a third way which the Church of England and Ireland follows and that is that after Infancy but yet before they understand too much of Sin and when they can competently understand the Fundamentals of Religion then it is good to bring them to be Confirmed that the Spirit of God may prevent their youthful sins and Christ by his Word and by his Spirit may enter and take possession at the same time And thus it was in the Church of England long since provided and commanded by the Laws of King Edgar cap. 15. Vt nullus ab Episcopo confirmari diu nimiùm detrectârit That none should too long put off his being Confirmed by the Bishop that is as is best expounded by the perpetual practice almost ever since as soon as ever by Catechism and competent instruction they were prepared it should not be deferred If it have been omitted as of late years it hath been too much as we do in Baptism so in this also it may be taken at any age even after they have received the Lord's Supper as I observed before in the Practice and Example of the Apostles themselves which in this is an abundant warrant But still the sooner the better I mean after that Reason begins to dawn but ever it must be taken care of that the Parents and God-fathers the Ministers and Masters see that the Children be catechised and well instructed in the Fundamentals of their Religion For this is the necessary preparation to the most advantageous reception of this Holy Ministery In Ecclesâ—is potissimùm Latinis non nisi adultiore aetate pueros admitti videmus vel hanc certè ob causam ut Parentibus Susceptoribus Ecclesiarum Praesectis occasio detur pueros de Fide quam in Baptismo professi sunt diligentiùs instituendi admonendi said the excellent Cassander In the Latin Churches they admit children of some ripeness of age that they may be more diligently taught and instructed in the Faith And to this sence agree S. Austin Walafridus Strabo Ruardus Lovaniensis and Mr. Calvin For this was ever the practice of the Primitive Church to be infinitely careful of Catechizing those who came and desired to be admitted to this holy Rite they used Exorcisms or Catechisms to prepare them to Baptism and Confirmation I said Exorcisms or Catechisms for they were the same thing if the notion be new yet I the more willingly declare it not only to free the Primitive Church from the suspicion of Superstition in using Charms or Exorcisms according to the modern sence of the word or casting of the Devil out of innocent Children but also to remonstrate the perpetual practice of Catechizing Children in the eldest and best times of the Church Thus the Greek Scholiast upon Harmenopulus renders the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Primitive Exorcist was the Catechist And Balsamon upon the 26. Canon of the Council of Laodicea says that to Exorcize is nothing but to Catechize the unbelievers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some undertook to Exorcize that is says he to Catechize the unbelievers And S. Cyril in his Preface to his Catechisms speaking to the Illuminati Festinent says he pedes tui ad Catecheses audiendas Exorcismos studiosè suscipe c. Let your feet run hastily to hear the Catechisms studiously receive the Exorcisms although thou beest already inspired and exorcized that is although you have been already instructed in the Mysteries yet still proceed For without Exorcisms or Catechisms the Soul cannot go forward since they are Divine and gathered out of the Scriptures And the reason why these were called Exorcisms he adds Because when the Exorcists or Catechists by the Spirit of God produce fear in your hearts and do inkindle the Spirit as in a furnace the Devil flies away and Salvation and hope of Life Eternal does succeed according to that of the Evangelist concerning Christ They were astonished at his Doctrine for his word was with power and that of S. Luke concerning Paul and Barnabas The Deputy when he saw what was done was astonished at the Doctrine of the Lord. It is the Lord's Doctrine that hath the power to cast out Devils and work Miracles Catechisms are the best Exorcisms
received 1004. Alexander III. in a Council condemned Pet. Lombard of Heresy from which sentence without repentance or leaving his opinion after 36 years he was absolved by Innocent III. 1005. Infallible The Romanists hold the Scripture for no infallible rule 381. No man affirms but J.S. that the Fathers are infallible 373 374 375. Whether the representative Church be infallible 389. General Councils not infallible 392. Bellarmine confesseth that for 1500 years the Pope's judgement was not held infallible 453. Infants What punishment Adam's sin can bring upon Infants that die 714 n. 29. It was the general opinion of the Fathers before Saint Augustine that Infants unbaptized were not condemned to the pains of Hell 755 756 n. 16 17. The reason on which the Baptism of Infants is grounded 718 n. 42. Infirmity What is the state of Infirmity 771 n. 3. It excuses no man ibid. That state which some men call a state of Infirmity is a state of sin and death 777 n. 26. What are sins of infirmity 789 n. 47. Sins of infirmity consist more in the imperfection of obedience then in the commission of any evil 790 n. 51. A sin of infirmity cannot be but in a small matter 791 n. 54. What are not sins of infirmity 792 n. 55. Violence of passion excuseth none under the title of sins of infirmity 792 n. 56. Sins of infirmity not accounted in the same manner to young men as to others 793 n. 59. The greatness of the temptation doth not make sin excusable upon the account of sins of infirmity 793 n. 60. The smallest instance if observed ceases to be a sin of infirmity 794 n. 61. A man's will hath no infirmity 794 n. 62. Nothing is a sin of infirmity but what is in some sense involuntary 794 n. 63. Sins of inculpable ignorance are sins of infirmity 794 n. 64. There is no pardonable state of infirmity 797 n. 98. Job Chap. 31. v. 18. explained 721. Gospel of Saint John Chap. 3. v. 5. Vnless a man be born of water and of the holy Spirit explained 5 6 b. Chap. 6. v. 53. Vnless ye eat the flesh of the Son of God and drink his bloud 8 b. Chap. 8. 47. He that is of God heareth God's word 679 n. 62. Chap. 9.34 Thou wast altogether born in sin and dost thou teach us 721 n. 49. Chap. 14.17 The world cannot receive him explained 785 n. 37. Chap. 20.23 Whosoever's sins ye remit explained 816 n. 66. 1. Epistle of Saint John Chap. 5. v. 17. There is a sin not unto death explained 643 n. 31. and 809 810. Chap. 3.9 He that is born of God sinneth not nor can he explained 810. Chap. 1.9 If we confess our sins God is faithful to forgive our sins explained 830 n. 34. Chap. 5.7 The Father the Word and the Spirit and these three are one explained 967 n. 4. Irenaeus He mentions an impostor that essayed to counterfeit Transubstantiation long before the Roman Church decreed it 228 § 10. Isaiah Chap. 53. v. 10. explained 712 n. 15. Judgment That of man and God proceed in several methods and relie upon different grounds 614 615 n. 15. Jurisdiction Mere Presbyters had not in the Church any Jurisdiction in causes criminal otherwise then by delegation 82 § 21. What persons are under that of Bishops 123 § 36. Justice God's Justice and Mercy reconciled about his exacting the Law 580. Justification Of our Justification by imputation of Christ's righteousness 901 902. Guilt cannot properly and really be traduced from one person to another 902 915. Of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 903. K. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 WHat it signifieth 636 n. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of that word and its use 638 n. 12. Keys Wherein that kind of power consisteth 841 n. 58. Kings The Episcopal power encroacheth not upon the Regal 120 § 36. The seal of Confession the Romanists will not suffer to be broken to save the life of a Prince or the whole State 343 c. 3. § 2. An excommunicate King the Romans teach may be deposed or killed 344 c. 3. § 3. The Pope takes upon him to depose Kings that are not heretical 345. The Roman Religion no friend to Kings 345. Their opinions so injurious to Kings are not the doctrines of private men onely 345. Father Arnald Confessor to Lewis XIII of France did cause that King in private confession to take such an oath as did in a manner depose him 489. L. Laiety NO Ecclesiastical presidency ever given to the Laiety 114 § 36. The Oeconomus of the Church might not be a Lay-man 164 § 50. The Laiety sometime admitted to vote in Councils 394 395. Lay-Elders never had authority in the Church 165 § 51. Latin Photius was the first authour of the Schism between the Greek and Latin Church 109 § 33. Law The Papists corrupted the Imperial Law of Justinian in the matter of Prayers in an unknown Language 304 c. 1. § 7. The difference between the Law and Gospel 574. Of the possibility of keeping the Law 576. Arguments to prove that perfect obedience to God's Law is impossible 576 577 n. 15. ad 19. In what sense it is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 574. It s severity made the Gospel better received ibid. Difference between it and the Gospel 673 n. 46. and 574 575. and 580 581. Of the difference between Saint Augustine and Saint Hierome concerning the possibility of keeping the Law of God 579 n. 30 31. In what measures God exacteth it 580 581. His mercy and justice reconciled about that thing 580 581. To keep the Law naturally possible but morally impossible 580 n. 34. No man can keep the Law of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but he may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 585 n. 50. The Law of works imposed on Adam onely 587 n. 1. The state of men under the Law 778. A threefold Law in man flesh or members the mind or conscience the spirit 781 n. 29. The contention between the Law of the flesh and conscience is no sign of Regeneration but the contention between the Law of the flesh and spirit is 782 n. 31. The Law of Moses and of the Gospel were not impossible of themselves but in respect of our circumstances 580 n 33. All that which was insupportable in Moses's Law was nothing but the want of Repentance ibid. Laws indirectly occasion sin 771 n. 6. Lawful Every thing that is lawful or the utmost of what is lawful not always 〈◊〉 to be done 856 857. Life The necessity of good life 799 n. 25. The natural evils of man's life 734 n. 82. Loose What in the promise of Christ is signified by binding and loosing 836 n. 45 46 47. Saint Luke Chap. 22.25 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explained 153 § 48. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that Text what it meaneth ibid. 154. Chap. 15.7 explained 801 n. 5. Chap. 11.41 explained 848. Chap. 13.14 explained 786 40. Lukewarmness How it comes to be a
be the best way of proving the immortality of the Soul 357. Aristotle believed the Soul of man to be divine and not of the body 718 n. 41. There is no difference between the inferiour and superiour faculties of the Soul 728 n. 68. and 825 n. 19. The frailty of man's Soul 734 n. 83. Spirit Whether the ordinary gifts of the Spirit be immediate infusions of faculties and abilities or an improvement of our natural powers and means 4 n. 15. ad 34. How the Holy Spirit did inspire the Apostles and Writers of the New Testament as to the very words 8 n. 32. What in the sense of Scripture is praying with the Spirit 9 n. 37. and 47. What a Spirit is as to nature 236 § 11. How a Spirit is in place 236 § 11. The Holy Spirit perfects our Redemption 1. b. The Spirit of God 1. b. The frailty of the spirit of man 735 n. 83. The rule of the Spirit in us 782. To have received the Spirit is not an inseparable propriety of the regenerate 786. What the Spirit of God doth in us 787. The regenerate man hath not onely received the Spirit of God but is wholly led by him 788. Sublapsarians Their Doctrine in five Propositions 872. It is not much better then the Supralapsarian 873. Against this way 886 n. 8. Substance What a Substance is 236 § 11. Aquinas says that the Body of Christ is in the Elements not after the manner of a Body but a Substance this Notion considered 238 § 11. Succession Of the succession of Bishops 402 403. Supererogation How it and Christian perfection differ 590 591 n. 16 17. What it is 786. Superlative This is usually exprest by a synonymal word by an Hebraism 909. Supralapsarians Their Doctrine 871. T. Tears A Man by them must not judge of his Repentance nor by any other one way of expression 850 n. 86. Temptation Every temptation to sin if overcome increases not the reward 661 n. 7. No man is tempted of God 737 n. 86. The violence of a temptation doth not in the whole excuse sin 743. Testament In a humane or Divine Testament figurative words may be admitted 210 § 6. A certain Athenian's aenigmatical Testament 210 § 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What they were 835 n. 44. Theodoret. His words about Transubstantiation considered 264 265 § 12. Theology The power of Reason in matters of Theology 230 231 § 11. It findeth a medium between Vertue and Vice 673. Thief on the Cross. Why his Repentance was accepted 681 n. 65. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What that word means 637 n 10. 1. Epistle to Timothy Chap. 4. v. 8. explained 860 n. 114. Chap. 5. v. 22. explained 808 n. 31. Chap. 5.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explained 152 § 48. and 166 § 51. Chap. 3.15 16. the pillar and ground of truth explained 386 387. Chap. 1.5 6. explained 949 n. 8. 2. Epistle to Timothy Chap. 2. v. 4. explained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 162 § 49. Epistle to Titus Chap. 5.15 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explained 780 n. 30. Tradition Christ and his Apostles made use of Scripture for arguments not Tradition 353. An answer to that Objection Tradition is the best argument to prove the Scripture to be the word of God therefore it is a better Principle then that 354. Oral Tradition was useful to convey matter of fact onely not Doctrines 354 355 358. Oral Tradition a very uncertain means to convey down a Doctrine 356. The Romanists have no Tradition to assure them the Epistle to the Hebrews is Canonical 361. The doctrine of the Scriptures sufficiency proved by Tradition 410. Some of the Fathers by Tradition mean Scripture 410 411 412. What Tradition is and what the word meaneth 420 § 3. When and in what case Tradition is an useful Topick 421. It is necessary in the Church because the Scripture could not be conveyed to us without it 424. The Questions that arose in the Council of Nice were not determined by Tradition but Scripture 425. The Tradition urged by the Ancients was not oral 425. The Romanists by their doctrine of Tradition gave great advantage to the Socinians 425. The doctrine of the Trinity relieth not upon Tradition but Scripture 425. That the doctrine of Infant-baptism relieth not upon Tradition onely but Scripture too 425 426. The validity of Baptism by Hereticks is not to be proved by Tradition without Scripture 426 427. The Procession of the Holy Ghost may be proved by Scripture without Tradition 427 428. The observation of the Lord's Day relieth not upon Tradition 428. Instances wherein oral Tradition has failed in conveyance 431. Saint Augustine's Rule to try Apostolical Traditions 432. Some Traditions said to be Apostolical have proceeded from the testimony of one man alone and he none of them 432. Of the means of proving a Tradition to be Apostolical 433. Of Vincentius Lirinensis his Rule to discern Apostolical Tradition 434. In the Question about the immaculate Conception Tradition is equally pretended on both sides 435. Traditions now held that are contrary to the Primitive Traditions 453 454. There is no Ecclesiastical Tradition for Auricular Confession 490. Of what use Tradition is in expounding Scripture 976. It is no sufficient medium to end Controversies 976 sect 5. per tot It was pretended by the Arians and divers other hereticks as well as the Orthodox 977 n. 3. The report of Tradition was uncertain even in the Ages Apostolical 978 n. 4. Tradition could not be made use of to determine the Controversie about Easter between the Churches of the East and West because both sides pretended it 979 n. 7. What Tradition it was the Fathers used to appeal to 979 n. 8. Transubstantiation The arts by which the Romanists have managed this Article Ep. Ded. to Real Pres. 174. It is acknowledged by the Romanists that this doctrine cannot be proved out of Scripture 187 § 2. and 298. How many figurative terms there are in the words of Institution 211 212 § 6. If this doctrine be true then the truth of Christian Religion which relieth upon the evidence of Sense is questionable 223 224 § 10. The Papists Answer to that Argument with our Reply 224 § 10. Bellarmine's Answer and a Reply upon it 226 § 10. If the testimony of our Senses in fit circumstances be not to be relied on the Catholicks could not have confuted the Valentinians and Marcionites 227 § 10. Irenaeus mentions an Impostour that essayed to counterfeit Transubstantiation long before the Roman Church decreed it 228 § 10. The miraculous Apparitions that are brought to prove Transubstantiation are proved to be false by their own doctrine 229 § 10. Picus Mirandula offered to maintain in Rome this Thesis Paneitas potest suppositare corpus Domini 230 § 11. How many ways the words of Christ Hoc est corpus meum may be verified without Transubstantiation 230 231 § 11. The folly of that assertion Credo quia impossibile est when applied to
sent away without cause and because the negative is in this case later then the affirmative it must enter as the affirmatives doe when they happen to be later then the negative Adde to this that for the introduction of a negative against the possession of a prevailing affirmative it is not enough to invalidate the arguments of the affirmative by making it appear they are not demonstrative for although that might have been sufficient to hinder its first entry yet it is not enough to throw it out because it hath gotten strength and reasonableness by long custome and dwelling upon the minds of men and hath some forces beyond what it derives from the first causes of its introduction And therefore whoever will perswade men to quit their long perswasions and their consonant practices must not tell them that such perswasions are not certain and that they cannot prove such practices to be necessary but that the Doctrine is false against some other revealed Truth which they admit and the practice evil not onely useless but dangerous or criminal So that the Anabaptists cannot acquit themselves and promote their cause by going about to invalidate our Arguments unless they do not onely weaken our affirmative by taking away not one or two but all the confidences of its strength but also make their own negative to include a duty or its enemy to be guilty of a crime And therefore if it were granted that we cannot prove the Baptism of infants to be necessary and that they could speak probably against all the Arguments of the right Believers yet it were intolerable that they should be attended to unless they pretend and make their pretence good that they teach piety and duty and necessity for nothing less then these can make recompence for so violent so great an inroad and rape upon the perswasions of men Whether the Anabaptists do so or no will be considered in the sequel Thirdly These Arguments which are in this Section urged in behalf of the Anabaptists their persons I mean finally not their cause at all but in order to their persons can doe the less hurt because they rely upon our grounds not upon theirs that is they are intended to perswade us to a charitable comport towards the men but not at all to perswade their Doctrine For it is remarkable that none of them have made use of this way of arguing since the publication of these Adversaria and of some things they can never make use As in that exposition of the words of S. Peter Be baptized and ye shall receive the holy Ghost which is expounded to be meant not in Baptism but in Confirmation which is a Rite the Anabaptists allow not and therefore they cannot make use of any such Exposition which supposes a Divine institution of that which they at no hand admit And so it is in divers other particulars as any wary person that is cautious he be not deluded by any weak and plausible pretence of theirs may easily observe But after all the Arguments for the Baptism of children are firm and valid and though shaken by the adverse plea yet as trees that stand in the face of storms take the surer root so will the right Reasons of the right Believers if they be represented with their proper advantages Ad 3. 13. The first Argument is the Circumcising of children which we say does rightly infer the Baptizing them The Anabaptist says no because admit that Circumcision were the type of Baptism yet it follows not that the circumstances of one must infer the same circumstances in the other which he proves by many instances and so far he sayes true And therefore if there were no more in the Argument then can be inferred from the type to the antitype both the supposition the superstructure would be infirm because it is uncertain whether Circumcision be a type of Baptism and if it were granted it cannot infer equal circumstances But then this Argument goes farther and to other and more material purposes even to the overthrow of their chief pretension For Circumcision was a seal of the righteousness of faith And if Infants who have no Faith yet can by a Ceremony be admitted into the Covenant of Faith as S. Paul conâ—ends that all the circumcised were and it is certain of Infants that they were reckoned amongst the Lord's people as soon as they were circumcised then it follows that the great pretence of the Anabaptists that for want of Faith Infants are incapable of the Sacrament comes to nothing For if Infants were admitted into the Covenant of Faith by a Ceremony before they could enter by choice and reason by Faith and Obedience then so they may now their great and onely pretence notwithstanding Now whereas the Anabaptist says that in the admission of the Jewish Infants to Circumcision and of Christian Infants to Baptism there is this difference that Circumcision imprints a character on the flesh but Baptism does not Circumcision had no word added but Baptism hath and therefore Infants were capable of the former but not of the latter for they might be cut with the Circumcising-stone but they cannot be instructed with the word of Baptism in that there was a character left by which they might be instructed when they come to age but in Baptism there is no character and the word they understand not therefore that was to purpose but this is not I answer that this is something to the circumstance of the Sacraments but nothing to the substance of the Argument For if the Covenant of Faith can belong to Infants then it is certain they can have the benefit of Faith before they have the grace that is God will doe them benefit before they can do him service and that is no new thing in Religion that God should love us first But then that God is not as much before-hand with Christian as with Jewish Infants is a thing which can never be believed by them who understand that in the Gospel God opened all his treasures of mercies and unsealed the fountain itself whereas before he poured forth only rivulets of mercy and comfort That Circumcision is a seal of the righteousness of faith Saint Paul affirms that so also is Baptism if it be any thing at all the Anabaptists must needs confess because they refuse to give Baptism to them who have not Faith and make it useless to them as being a Seal without a Deed. But then the Argument is good upon its first grounds But then for the title Reparties but now mentioned that Circumcision imprints a character but Baptism does not that Baptism hath a word but Circumcision had none they are just nothing to the purpose For as that character imprinted on the Infants flesh would have been nothing of instruction to them unless there had been a word added that is unless they had been told the meaning of it when they came to be men so neither will the word
added to Baptism be of use either to men or children unless there be a character upon their spirits imprinted when or before they come to the use of reason by the Holy Spirit of God but therefore as the Anabaptists would have our Infants stay from the Sacrament till they can understand the word so also might the imprinting of a character on the flesh of the Jewish Infants have been deferred till the word should be added that is till they could understand the word or declaration of the meaning of that character without which they could not understand its meaning The case is equal In the Jewish Infants the character was before the word in the Christian Infants the word is before the character but neither that nor this alone could doe all the work of the Sacrament but yet it could doe some and when they could be conjoyned the office was compleated But therefore as the Infants under Moses might have that which to them was an insignificant character so may the Infants under Christ have water and a word whose meaning these shall understand as soon as those could understand the meaning of the character So that these pretended differences signifie nothing and if they did yet they are not certainly true but rather certainly false for although the Scriptures mention not any form of words used in the Mosaick Sacraments yet the Jews books record them And then for the other that there is no character imprinted in Baptism it is impossible they should reasonably affirm because it being spiritual is also undiscernible and cometh not by observation And although there is no permanent or inherent quality imprinted by the Spirit in Baptism that we know of and therefore will not affirm but neither can they know it is not and therefore they ought not to deny much less to establish any proposition upon it yet it is certain that although no quality be imprinted before they come to the use of Reason yet a Relation is contracted and then the children have title to the Promises and are reckoned in Christi censu in Christ's account they are members of his body and though they can as yet doe no duty yet God can doe them a favour although they cannot yet perform a condition yet God can make a promise and though the Anabaptists will be so bold as to restrain Infants yet they cannot restrain God and therefore the Sacrament is not to be denied to them For although they can doe nothing yet they can receive something they can by this Sacrament as really be admitted into the Covenant of Faith even before they have the Grace of Faith as the Infants of the Jews could and if they be admitted to this Covenant they are Children of faithfull Abraham and heirs of the promise All the other particulars of their answer to the Argument taken from Circumcision are wholly impertinent for they are intended to prove that Circumcision being a type of Baptism cannot prove that the same circumstances are to be observed all which I grant For Circumcision was no type of Baptism but was a Sacrament of initiation to the Mosaick Covenant and so is Baptism of initiation to the Evangelical Circumcision was a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith and so is Baptism but they are both but Rites and Sacraments and therefore cannot have the relation of type and antitype they are both but external ministeries fitted to the several periods of the Law and the Gospel with this onely difference that Circumcision gave place to was supplied and succeeded to by Baptism And as those persons who could not be circumcised I mean the females yet were baptized as is notorious in the Jews books and story and by that Rite were admitted to the same Promises and Covenant as if they had been circumcised so much more when males and females are onely baptized Baptism must be admitted and allowed to consign all that Covenant of Faith which Circumcision did and therefore to be dispensed to all them who can partake of that Covenat as Infants did then and therefore certainly may now So that in short we do not infer that Infants are to receive this Sacrament because they received that but because the benefit and secret purpose of both is the same in some main regards and if they were capable of the blessing then so they are now and if want of Faith hindered not the Jewish babes from entring into the Covenant of Faith then neither shall it hinder the Christian babes and if they can and do receive the benefit for which the ceremony was appointed as a sign and conduit why they should not be admitted to the ceremony is so very a trifle that it deserves not to become the entertainment of a fancy in the sober time of the day but must go into the portion of dreams and illusions of the night Ad 4. And as ill success will they have with the other Answers For although we intend the next Argument but as a reasonable inducement of the baptizing Infants by way of proportion to the other treatments they received from Christ yet this probability notwithstanding all that is said against it may be a demonstration For if Infants can be brought to Christ by the charitable minsteries of others when they cannot come themselves if Christ did give them his blessing and great expressions of his love to them when they could not by any act of their own dispose themselves to it if the Disciples who then knew nothing of this secret were reproved for hindring them to be brought and upon the occasion of this a precept established for ever that children should be suffered to come to him and though they were brought by others yet it was all one as if they had come themselves and was so called so expounded and if the reason why they should be suffered to come is such a thing as must at least suppose them capable of the greatest blessing there is no peradventure but this will amount to as much as the grace of Baptism will come to For if we regard the outward Ministery that Christ did take them in his arms and lay his hands upon them is as much as if the Apostles should take them in their arms and lay water upon them if we regard the effect of it that Christ blessed them is as much as if his Ministers prayed over them if we regard the capacity of Infants it is such that the Kingdome of Heaven belongs to them that is they also can be admitted to the Covenant of the Gospel for that is the least signification of the Kingdome of Heaven or they shall be partakers of Heaven which is the greatest signification and includes all the intermedial ways thither according to the capacity of the suscipients if we regard the acceptance of the action and entertainment of the person it is as great as Christ any-where expresses if we regard the Precept it cannot be supposed to expire in the persons of