God in Spirit and truth which the Gospel requireth is so plentifully preached in all those writings which wee call Apocrypha Whereas in our Saviors and his Apostles time and much more afterwards they promised themselves the kingdome of heaven upon the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees That is upon the outward and carnal observation of Moses Law and preciseness in all those little niceties which their Masters had fensed it with For it is no mervail that they who under persecution promised themselves a part in the resurrection of the righteous cleaving to God and his Law should finde themselves tyed to that obedience in spirit and truth which God who is a Spirit sees and allows But lesse mervail it is that having attained the carnal promises of the Law in the possession of the Land of Promise they should fall away from the like zeal and yet promise themselves the world to come upon that form of godliness which they observed being destitute of the force and power of it As an argument that this consideration is well grounded and true I will here adde the authority and practice of the primitive Church prescribing these books to be read by the Catechumeni or those that professed to believe the truth of Christianity and offered themselves to be instructed in the mater of it in order to Baptism and being made Christians For seeing these might be as well Jews as Gentiles this signifies that the doctrine of them was held by the Church a fit instruction towards Christianity even for those that were already acquainted with the doctrine of the Prophets S. Athanasius then in Synopsi testifieth that these books were read to the Catechumeni To the same purpose it is read in the Constitutions of the Apostles though the place is not at hand at present And that which the last Canon of the Apostles prescribes that besides the Canonical Scriptures the book of Ecclesiasticus be read by the youth seems to tend to the same purpose To the same purpose Dionysius de div Nom. cap. IV. calls the Book of Wisedom an Introduction to the divine Oracles But let no man think to inferr that the Apostles took these Books for Scripture inspired by God because I grant that they borrowed from them in their writings Origen hath met with this objection Prol. in Cant. where hee observeth That the Apostles have borrowed some things out of Apocryphal Scriptures as S. Jude out of the books of Enoch and the departure of Moses and yet addes that wee are not to give way to the reading of them because wee must not transgresse the bounds which our Fathers have fixed Where you see hee distinguisheth those books which the Church did not allow to be read under the name of Apocrypha from those which it did allow to be read and are therefore more properly called Ecclesiastical Scriptures which name hath particularly stuck by way of excellence upon the Wisedom of the son of Sirach though I contend not about names when wee call them Apocrypha because I see that S. Jerome hath sometimes done it And if S. Paul have alleged Aratus Menander and Epimenides heathen Poets hee did not thereby intend to allow the authors but the mater which hee allegeth If these things be so I shall not desire to abridg any mans liberty from arguing against the mater of these Books to prove them not inspired by God because not agreeing with those which wee know and agree to have been inspired by God But I shall warn them that take upon them thus to argue first to look about them that they bring not the unquestionable parts of Scripture into an undue suspicion for agreeing in something for which they have conceived a prejudice that these Books are not to be received The design of Judith and her proceeding in the execution of it is charged not to agree with Christianity neither is it my purpose here to maintain that it doth But I am more than afraid that those who object this do not know how to distinguish it from the fact of Jaell the wife of Heber the Kenite in the book of Judges which the Spirit of God in Deborah the Prophetesse so highly extolleth The like is to be said of the like passages questioned in the book of Tobit and the Maccabees and namely the fact of Razias killing himself least hee should fall into the hands of persecutors which seemeth to be related with much approbation 2 Mac. XIV 41-46 For to distinguish this fact from Samsons it will not serve the turn to say that Samson did it by inspiration of Gods Spirit supposing afore that it was contrary to Gods declared Law to do it The difficulty being greater in saying that the declared Law of God is violated by the motion of Gods Spirit when as the Spirit of God is not granted to any man but upon supposition of acknowledging Gods declared Law For howsoever Saul or Caiaphas or Balaam may be moved by the Spirit of God to speak such things as by the Scriptures inspired by God wee learn that they did speak Yet that God should imploy upon his own Commission as the Judges of whom it is said that the Spirit of God came upon them were manifestly imployed by God whom hee favored not is a thing which cannot agree with the presumption which all Christians have of the salvation of the Fathers As for the passage of Eccles XLVI 23. which seems to say that it was the soul of Samuel the Prophet and not an evil Spirit assuming his habit that foretold the death of Saul I do not understand why all this may not be said according to appearance not according to truth For it will still make for the honor of Samuel that the King whatsoever opinion hee had of this means of fore-knowledg should desire to see Samuel as him whom in his life time hee found so unquestionable But if it be said that this cannot satisfie the leter of the Scripture yet can it not be said that as Saul a wicked man did believe that hee might see Samuel so a good man at that time might not have the same Being then no part of the truth which true piety obliged all men to acknowledg In the book of Tobit there are several things besides questionable But they that imagine conjuring in the liver of a fish to drive away an unclean Spirit do not consider those exorcisms whereby it is evident both by the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles besides divers of the most ancient Fathers of the Church that the Jews both in our Lords times and after did cast out unclean Spirits For what force could they have but from the appointment of God from whom at first they were delivered for a testimony of his residence among his people Which makes me stick to condemn that relation of the Jews in the Talmud extant also in Suidas that there were admirable remedies delivered by Solomon which hee caused to be writ upon
â—omething for the placing of every man every momâ—nâ— â—◠〈◊〉 estate which thereby hee fore-seeth And the possibility oâ— fore-seeing what will follow being something because no conâ—râ—â—iction destroyes the consistence of the terms inâ—errs by the infiâ—â—â—â— perfection of God the actual fore-sight of what will come to pâ—â—â— though not in it self which is nothing yet in God who is all things And all this involving no predetermination of mans will by God the discourse cannot be superfluous which resolveth the foresight of future contingencies into the decree which supposeth the knowledg of things conditionally future not which inferreth the fore knowledg of things absolutely future For by this means nothing that is found in the Scripture will contradict the substance of Faith which predetermination destroyeth though disclaiming all possibility of making evidence to common sense how it may come to pass And though Gods decree to permit sin can be no sufficient ground of his fore sight that what hee hindreth not shall come to pass as I have argued pag. 209. yet if wee consider withall that there is no question of Gods permitting any man to sin but onely him that is prevented with temptation to sin it may not untruly be said that God fore-sees sin in his own deccee of permitting it including the state of him that is tempted in that case wherein God decrees to permit sin In which case God fore-seeth it properly in his decree of placing the man in that estate not of suffering himto sin which the opinion that I contradict in that place absolutely refuseth And upon these terms when it is resolved Chap. XXVI that predestination to the first Grace is absolute you must not understand predestination to the act of conversioâ— but to the helps which effect it For whatsoever be the motives upon which a man actually resolves it in whatsoever circumstance hee meets them nothing but his own freedom determines his conversion though without those helps hee had not or could not have determined it And therefore if it be said that it is a barr to the prayers and indeavors of those that are moved to be Christians to tell them that their resolution depends upon something which is not in their Power To wit that congruity wherein the efficacy of Grace consisteth The answer is That absolutely whatsoever is requisite to the conversion of him who is called to be a Christian is in his Power Though upon supposition of Gods fore-knowledg that may be said to be requisite without which God fore-sees hee will not be converted when absolutely if hee would hee might have been converted and when supposing hee had been otherwise moved hee would have been converted In which case it is absolutely enough to the charging of any man with his duty that absolutely hee wanted nothing requisite to inable him for a right choice Though upon supposition of Gods fore-knowledg the doing of his duty requires whatsoever God fore-sees that it will not be done without it I have no more to say but that the Contents of the Chapters are premised instead of a Table for which they may well serve in books of this nature And that in regard to the difficulty of the Copy and the ordinary faileurs of the Press the Reader is desired to correct the faults that are marked before hee begin and to serve himself in the rest THE CONTENTS OF THE First Book CHAP. I. ALL agree that Reason is to decide controversies of Faith The objection thaâ— Faith is taught by Gods Spirit answered What Reason decideth questions of Faith The resolution of Faith ends not in the light of Reason but in that which Reason evidenceth to come from Gods messengers Page 1 CHAP. II. The question between the Scripture and the Church which of them is Judge in matters of Faith Whether opinion the Tradition of the Church stands better with Those that hold the Scripture to be clear in all things necessary to salvation have no reason to exclude the Tradition of the Church What opinions they are that deny the Church to be a Society or Corporation by Gods Law 3 CHAP. III. That neither the sentence of the Church nor the dictate of Gods Spirit can be the reason why the Scripâ—ures are to be received No man can know that hee hath Gods Spirit without knowing that he is a true Christian Which supposeth the truth of the Scriptures The motives of Faith are the reason why the Scriptures are to be believed And the consent of Gods people the reason that evidences those motives to be infallibly true How the Scriptures are believed for themselves How a circlâ— is made in rendring a reason of the Faith The Scriptures are Gods Law to all to whom they are published by Gods act of publishing them But Civil Law by the act of Soveraign Powers in acting Christianity upon their Subjects 7 CHAP. IV. Neither the Dictate of Gods Spirit nor the aâ—thority of the Church is the reason of believing any thing in Christianity Whether the Church be before the Scripture or the Scripture before the Church The Scriptures contain not the Infallibility of the Church Nor the consent of all Christians 18 CHAP. V. All things necessary to salvation are not clear in the Scriptures to all understandings Not in the old Testament Not in the Gospel Not in the Writings of the Apostles It is necessary to salvation to believe more then this that our Lord is the Christ Time causeth obscurity in the Scriptures aswell as in other Records That it is no where said in the Scriptures that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scriptures Neither is there any consent of all Christians to evidence the same 25 CHAP. VI. All interpretation of Scripture is to be consined within the Tradition of the Church This supposeth that the Church is a Communion instituted by God What means there is to make evidence of Gods Charter upon which the corporation of the Church subsisteth The name of the Church in the Scriptures often signifieth the Whole or Catholick Church CHAP. VII That the Apostles delivered to the Church a Summary of Christianity which all that should be baptized were to profess Evidence out of the Scriptures Evidence out of the Scriptures for Tradition regulating the Communion of the Church and the Order of it Evidence for the Rule of Faith out of the records of the Church For the Canons of the Church and the pedegree of them from the order established in the Church by the Apostles That the profession of Christianity and that by being baptized is necessary to the salvation of a Christian CHAP. VIII That the power of Governing the whole Church was in the Apostles and Disciples of Christ and those whom they tooke to assist them in the part of it The power of their Successors must needs be derived from those Why that succession which appears in one Church necessarily holdeth all Churches The holding of Councils evidenceth the Unity of the Church
I said there can be no sect as communicating in nothing visible as Christians But I need not have recourse to such an obscure Sect as this For the same is necessarily the opinion of all the sect that makes every Congregation Independent and Sovereign in Church maters For if particular Congregations be not obliged to joyn in communion to the constitution of one Church wee may perhaps understand the collection of all Congregations to be signified at once by the name of the Church but wee cannot imagine that the Church so understood can be obliged by any sentence that can passe in it And if this opinion be true it must be acknowledged as of late years it hath been disputed amongst us that there is no crime of Schisme in violating the unity of the Church but when a breach is made in a Congregation obliged to communicate one with another in Church maters For where there is no bond of unity what crime can there be in dissolving it This is then the ground of all Independent Congregations that there is no such thing as the Church understanding by the name of the Church a Society or Corporation founded upon a Charter of Gods which signification the addition of Catholick and Apostolick in our Creed hath hitherto been thought to determine But there is a second opinion in the Leviathan who allowes all points of Ecclesiastical Power in Excommunicating Ordaining and the rest to the Soveraign Powers that are Christian Though before the Empire was Christian hee granteth that the Churches that is to say the several Bodies of Christians that were dwelling in several Cities had and exercised some parts of the same right by virtue of the Scriptures As you may see pag. 274-279 287-292 Making that right which the Scriptures give them for the time to eschete to the Civil Power when it is Christian and dissolving the said Churches into the State or Common-wealth which once Christian is from thenceforth the Church And this I suppose upon this ground though hee doth not expresly allege it to that purpose Because the Scripture hath not the force of a Law obliging any man in justice to receive it till Soveraign Powers make it such to their subjects but onely contains good advice which hee that will may imbrace for his souls health and hee that will not at his peril may refuse Thus hee teacheth pag. 205. 281-287 If therefore the act of Soveraign Power give the Scripture the force of Law then hath it a just claim to all rights and Powers founded upon the Scripture as derived from it and therefore vested originally in it Hence followeth that desperate inference concerning the right of Civil Power in mater of Religion not for a Christian but for an Apostate to publish that if the Soveraign command a Christian to renounce Christ and the faith of Christ hee is bound to do it with his mouth but to believe with his heart And therefore much more to obey whatsoever hee commandeth in Religion besides whether to believe or to do The Reason Because in things not necessary to salvation the obedience due by Gods and mans Law to the Soveraign must take place Now there is nothing necessary to salvation saith hee but to believe that our Lord Jesus is the Christ All that the Scripture commandeth besides this is but the Law of Nature which when the Civil Law of every Land hath limited whosoever observes that Law cannot fail of fulfilling the Law of Nature These things you have pag. 321-330 The late learned Selden in his first book de Synedriis Judaeorum maintaining Erastus his opinion that there is no power of Excommunicating in the Church by Gods Law grants that which could not be denied that the Church did exercise such a Power before Constantine but not by any charter of Gods but by free consent of Christians among themselves pag. 243 244. Which if hee will follow the grain of his own reason hee is consequently to extend to the power of Ordaining and to all other rights which the Church as a Corporation founded by God can claim by Gods Law And upon this ground hee may dissolve the Church into the Common-wealth and make the power of it an eschere to the Civil Power that is Christian with lesse violence than the Leviathan doth Because whatsoever Corporations or Fraternities are bodied by sufferance of the State dissolve of themselves at the will of it and resolve the powers which they have created into the disposition of it And that this was his intent whoso considereth what hee hath written of the indowment of the Church in his History of Tithes of Ordinations in the second book de Synedriis of the right of the Civil Power in limiting causes of divorce in his Vxor Ebraica hath reason to judge as well as I who have heard him say that all pretense of Ecclesiastical Power is an imposture I say not that hee or the rest of Erastus his followers make themselves by the same consequence liable to those horrible consequences which the Leviathan admits But I say that they are to bethink themselves what right they will assign the Civil Power in determining controversies in Religion that may arise And what assurance they can give their subjects that their salvation is well provided for standing to their decrees Besides I was to mention these opinions here that those who take the sentence of the Church to be the first ground of Faith into which it is lastly resolved may see that they are to prove the Church to be a Corporation by divine Right before they can challenge any such power for it For that which is once denied it will be ridiculous to take for granted without proving it And whatsoever may be the right of the Church in deciding controversies of Faith it cannot be proved without evidence for this charter of the Church as you shall see by and by more at large CHAP. III. That neither the sentence of the Church nor the dictate of Gods Spirit can be the reason why the Scriptures are to be received No man can know that hee hath Gods Spirit without knowing that hee is a true Christian Which supposeth the truth of the Scripture The motives of Faith are the reason why the Scriptures are to be believed And the consent of Gods people the reason that evidences those motives to be infallibly true How the Scriptures are believed for themselves How a Circle is made in rendering a reason of the Faith The Scriptures are Gods Law to all to whom they are published by Gods act of publishing them But Civil Law by the act of Soveraign Powers in acting Christianity upon their Subjects IT would not be easie to finde an entrance into such a perplexed Question had not the dispute of it started another concerning the reason why wee believe the Scriptures whether upon the credit of the Church or for themselves or whether nothing but the Spirit of God speaking to each mans heart
inward witness of Gods Spirit dictating to his Spirit that they are the word of God it will be utterly impertinent to our purpose For seeking as wee do the means to resolve one another it will be impertinent to allege that which though a man is inwardly satisfied with yet outwardly to another cannot appear And certainly if there be no reason to satisfie another man of the truth of the whole that is of Christianity or of the Scriptures It cannot be expected that there should be satisfaction why this or that should belong to the truth of Christianity or the intent and meaning of the Scriptures For of necessity whatsoever evidence can be made for this or that truth contained in the Scriptures must depend upon the reason for which Christianity is received as Gods truth In fine the reason why controversies in Religion may and are to be ended by dispute of reason is this as hath been premised because that the Holy Ghost which effectually moveth us to believe supposeth sufficient reason moving in the nature of an object proposed to believe Therefore neither the truth of Christianity nor the Scripture is admitted upon the dictate of Gods Spirit but supposing the reasons which convict us that they are to be admitted And correspondently the gift of the Holy Ghost that inableth to continue in the profession and exercise of Christianity supposeth the belief of that Christianity which a man from his heart professes And by consequence the reason why hee is to believe which will not fail to inferre the truth of the Scriptures But if it be said That any person or persons as Rulers of the Church have the promise of inspiration or revelation from God for a ground upon which others are to believe It hath been showed that all such grace supposeth the profession of Christianity and the truth of the Scriptures and therefore the grounds of the same If any man should say as I perceive some have a minde to say that the gift of Infallibility in the Church supposes no such inspiration or revelation but onely the qualities of such persons as have power to conclude the Church and that they do visibly proceed to determine It will be evident that they can no more challenge this right not supposing Christianity and the foundation of the Church than the High Priest of the Jewes could proceed to give answer by Uâ—im and Tummim not supposing that God had given the Law and appointed the Priest so to do The resolution of this Question may make it appear that Christians falling out among themselves maintain themselves upon such grounds as would leave no room for the truth of that Christianity which both suppose Had wee to do with the enemies of it it would easily appear wee must allege such reasons for the truth of Gods Word as might convince the enemies of it and not suppose the truth of it when the question is how it may appear to be true It were therefore fit to consider whether a man can reasonably be a Christian and yet question the truth of the Scriptures or rather not fit to consider that which there can be no doubt in The whole content of the Scripture is either the motives or the mater of Christianity They that professe Christianity suppose the motives of it true which they admit to be sufficient Supposing them true they cannot question the Scriptures that record them Supposing those Scriptures they cannot question those motives for true Whether sufficient is resolved by admitting Christianity Alwaies the same reason that moves a man to be a Christian resolves him to believe the Scripture neither would hee allege any other had hee to do with the enemies of Christianity What those motives are concernes not us proceeding upon supposition of common Christianity to determine differences within it Yet that I may be the better understood my meaning is That the miracles done by those from whom wee have the Scriptures is the onely motive to shew that they came from God and therefore that wee are obliged to receive what they preached and by consequence the Scriptures that containe it Not intending hereby to quit the advantage which the Law hath of Heathenism and the Gospel of the Law in regard of the reasonablenesse and holinesse of the mater of each above other respectively justified by the light of nature But because the businesse is at present onely to shew the evidence wee have that God did send whatsoever reason may be given why hee would send which without other evidence had remained unknown though never so probable or reasonable Not intending hereby to balk that witnesse which the Scriptures of the Old Testament yield to the truth of the New But because that witnesse depends upon the miracles done by Moses and the Prophets to evidence their Commission from God And so the credit which the New Testament hath from the Old is resolved into those miracles which evidenced the sending of Moses and the Prophets and consists in the miracle of fore-telling those things by the one which by the other are fullfilled I know the Jewes expresly deny the credit of the Law to depend upon any miracles done by Moses and the Prophets but onely upon the appearance of God at giving the Law to all that people and speaking to them mouth to mouth The like whereof not having been done nor to be done in giving Christianity belonging to all nations who could not meet at once to receive it they think themselves grounded thereupon that the Law is not nor could be reversed by it Thus are they content that God sending Moses on his ambussage with the miracles which hee gave him for his letters of credit shall be thought not to have convicted Pharao That the Law provided no legal tryal God no evidence to the conscience of his servants distinguishing true and false Prophets which cannot be imagined but by their sayings and doings predictions and other miracles Well may the delivering of the Law have circumstances which no other miraculous action recorded in the Scriptures can compare with Shall that obscure the glory of Christs resurrection fore-told by him expresse to witnesse the truth of his message Shall it make an Ocean of miracles done by him and his Apostles to stand for nothing Shall it disable God himself to do any thing competent to make faith of a message the nature whereof bore not those circumstances which hee had used afore Now if the reason why wee believe the Scriptures to come from God as they pretend be the motives of Christianity strange it is that a man should be troubled how to answer the difficulty that may be made how wee know the truth of those motives speaking onely to Christians which have admitted them to be true But I am sure neither the witnesse of the Church nor the dictate of the Spirit can be alleged to Infidels but by them that would have themselves and this Gospel laught at both at once Seeing
therefore that Christians do believe for the same reasons for the which Infidels ought to believe I shall yield that it is onely the credit of Gods ancient people and of Christs Church that maâ—â—â— evidence that those miracles were truly done which I affirm to be the onely motive to believe being done at such distance of time and place from us But let not those that would learn mistake what is meant by the name of the Church For if you suppose the Church to be a Society of men whereof some by Gods appointment have power to oblige the whole then will the credit of the Scripture be resolved into the authority of the Church if the truth of those miracles on which alone the credit thereof is said to depend be grounded upon such a witnesse of the Church But my meaning is to suppose no more by the name of the Church in this place but the whole number of believers from Christ to the worlds end And so to say that there is no other reason why wee believe that such men as Moses and the Prophets as our Lord and his Apostles did such works as the Scriptures report to evidence that they came from God but the consent of all Christians that have imbraced the Gospel upon that motive Neither shall the Gospel hereby depend more upon the witnesse of man which may fail than it depends upon the witnesse of him who upon seeing what was done by our Lord and his Apostles should be moved to imbrace the Faith For though they had not taken effect with him but for the report of his eyes yet did not the force of them depend upon it Hee that considers shall finde that the consent of all believers in the whole motive of Faith more than supplies the use of our eyes in showing us sufficient reason to believe There is a distance of place as well as of time And God forbid wee should say those that never saw our Lord and his Apostles do the works for which wee believe had not sufficient reason to believe Their ears supplyed to them the use of their eyes inasmuch as experience and common sense shows that those things wherein the world agrees are no lesse certain and evident though morally than those which wee see with our eies Hee that should not traffick into the East or West-Indies or travail to Rome or Constantinople before hee had seen them must resolve not to see them The reason is because the world can have no common interest to deceive or to be deceived Much lesse could the Law of Moses least of all the Gospel of Christ have found credit the one imposing such an endlesse morosity of precepts to observe the other the Crosse of Christ had it not been originally manifest that such things were done to evidence that and this By which it appears that this reason supposes no authority in the Church founded upon the Gospel as a Society communicating in it because it supposes the same in the people of the Jewes as in the Church The authority of the Church standing upon the Gospel that which was over the Jewes on the Law whereof the one was to be removed when the other took place The reason because it referreth nothing to the Church but that intelligency which the community of mankinde furnish one another with for assurance in those things whereof all cannot be eye-witnesses by the consent of all which common reason makes to be as good evidence as our own senses And now it will not be difficult to say how the Scriptures are to be believed for themselves For inasmuch as the motives of believing are things recorded in Scripture it will be necessary to grant that the Scriptures are to be believed for themselves which are to be believed for those things which the Scriptures report But if wee be further demanded for what reason those motives which if true are sufficient to oblige all men to believe are taken to be true Hee that saies because they are recorded in the Scriptures grants that there is no reason to believe the Scriptures granting that there is no reason to believe the motives of faith but the report of those Scriptures the belief whereof supposes the truth of those motives But if wee impute the belief of that truth to the common sense of all who upon the supposition of them have submitted to Christianity and hold it wee have the whole truth of the Scripture evidenced upon such a ground as shall serve to inforce a resolution of whatsoever is questionable in Christianity upon it Whereas they who make the authority of the Church or the dictate of the Holy Ghost the reason of believing must either stand still when they are demanded the reason or give it by supposing Christianity and the Scriptures the truth whereof they pretend to prove by it which is the Circle that I spoke of afore admitting neither principle nor conclusion of discourse To confirm that which hath been said let me demand how the Writings of Homer or Virgil of Aristotle or Plato of Tully or Demosthenes of Hippocrates or Galen come to be admitted without any question for their Writings after some two thousand years more or lesse Is it not because ever since they were penned there have been those that have studied them for paterns of good Language and Oratory for the lest authors in Philosophy and Physick Because by them and through their hands they have been transmitted from age to age Is not their credit by this means so unquestionable that a man would be laught at that should ask other reason for it And yet what is this in comparison of that which is to be said for the Scriptures That all nations having starred aside to worship many Gods one people of the Jewes took upon them the worship of the onely true God according to the Lawes recorded in the books of Moses and that of so ancient time That being planted in the land of Canaan God stirred them up Prophets from age to age to keep them close to the service of their God That howsoever they kept them they alwaies professed to be under those Lawes as Gods That our Lord Jesus and his Apostles by commission from him in due time preached both Jewes and Gentiles to be rebels against God And that neither the Law of nature nor of Moses was able to free them from sin Tendering in Gods name the terms upon which all may be reconciled to God and evidencing their Commission by the works which they did in Gods name That all parts of the civil world being by that means convicted of the truth hereof undertook to professe Christianity notwithstanding the persecutions to which it was lyable and do continue in it till this time Is not this infallible evidence that wee have the very Writings of Moses and of the Prophets and Apostles and that they who left them us were sent by God seeing them admitted for Lawes to mens lives and conversations which
words of S. Augustine contra Epistolam fundamenti cap. V. which alwaies have a place in this dispute though I can as yet admit S. Augustine no otherwise than as a particular Christian and his saying as a presumption that hee hath said no more than any Christian would have said in the common cause of all Christians against the Manichees Ego Evangelio non crederem saith hee nisi me Ecclesiae Catholicae moveret authoritas I would not believe or have believed the Gospel had not the authority of the Catholick Church moved mee For some men have imployed a great deal of learning to show that moveret stands for movisset as in many other places both of S. Augustine and of other Africane Writers And without doubt they have showed it past contradiction and I would make no doubt to show the like in S. Hierome Sidonius and other Writers of the decaying ages of the Latine tongue as well as in the Africane Writers if it were any thing to the purpose For is not the Question manifestly what it is that obligeth that man to believe who as yet believeth not Is it not the same reason that obliges him to become and to be a Christian Therefore whether moveret or movisset all is one The Question is whether the authority of the Church as a Corporation that is of those persons who are able to oblige the Church would have moved S. Austine to believe the Gospel because they held it to be true Or the credit of the Church as of so many men of common sense attesting the truth of those reasons which the Gospel tenders why wee ought to believe What is it then that obliged S. Austine to the Church The consent of people and nations that authority which miracles had begun which hope had nourished charity increased succession of time settled from S. Peter to the present the name and title of Catholick so visible that no Heretick durst show a man the way to his Church demanding the way to the Catholick So hee expresseth it cap. 111. And what is this in English but the conversion of the Gentiles foretold by the Prophets attested by God and visibly settled in the Unity of the Church Whereupon hee may boldly affirm as hee doth afterwards that if there were any word in the Gospel manifestly witnessing Manes to be the Apostle of Christ hee would not believe the Gospel any more For if the reason for which hee had once believed the Church that the Gospel is true because hee saw it verified in the being of the Church should be supposed false there could remain no reason to oblige us to take the Gospel for true All that remaines for the Church in the nature and quality of a Corporation by this account will be this That it is more discretion for him that is in doubt of the truth of Christianity to take the reason of it from the Church that is from those whom the Church trusteth to give it than from particular Christians who can by no means be presumed to understand it so well as they may do For otherwise supposing a particular Christian sets forth the same reasons which the Church does how can any man not be bound to follow him that is bound to follow the Church So that the reasons which both allege being contained in the Scriptures the Church is no more in comparison of the Scriptures than the Samaritane in comparison of our Lord himself when her fellow-citizens tell her John IV. 12. Wee believe no more for thy saying For wee our selves have heard and know that this is of a truth the Saviour of the World the Christ For the reasons for which our Lord himself tells us that wee are to believe are contained in the Scriptures But by the premises it will be most manifest that the same Circle in discourse is committed by them who resolve the reason why they believe into the dictate of the Spirit as into the decree of the Church For the question is not now of the effective cause whether or no in that nature a man is able to imbrace the true Faith without the assistance of Gods Spirit or not Which ought here to remain questionable because it is to be tried upon the grounds upon which here wee are seeking And therefore that Faith which is grounded upon revelation from God and competent evidence of the same is to be counted divine supernatural Faith without granting whatsoever wee may suppose any supernatural operation of Gods Spirit to work it in the nature of an effective cause which must remain questionable supposing the reason why wee believe the Scriptures But in the nature of an object presenting unto the understanding the reason why we are to believe it is manifest by the premises that no man can know that hee hath Gods Spirit that knoweth not the truth of the Scriptures If therefore hee allege that hee knowes the Scriptures to be true because Gods Spirit saith so to his Spirit hee allegeth for a reason that which hee could not know but supposing that for granted which hee pretendeth to prove To wit That the dictate of his own Spirit is from Gods Spirit Indeed when the motives of Faith proceed from Gods Spirit in Moses and the Prophets in our Lord and his Apostles witnessing by the works which they do their Commission as well as their message who can deny that this is the light of Gods Spirit Again when wee govern our doings by that which wee believe and not by that which wee see who will deny that this is the light of Faith and of Gods Spirit But both these considerations take place though wee suppose the mater of Faith to remain obscure in it self though to us evidently credible for the reasons God showes us to believe that hee saith it If any man seek in the mater of Faith any evidence to assure the conscience in the nature of an object or reason why wee are to believe that is not derived from the motives of Faith outwardly attesting Gods act of revealing it hee falls into the same inconvenience with those who believe their Christianity because the Church commends it and again the Church because Christianity commends it As for that monstrous imagination that the Scripture is not Law to oblige any man in justice to believe it before the Secular Powers give it force over their subjects Supposing for the present that which I said before that it is all one question whether Christianity or whether the Scriptures oblige us as Law or not Let mee demand whether our Lord Christ and his Apostles have showed us sufficient reasons to convince us that wee are bound to believe and become Christians If not why are wee Christians If so can wee be obliged and no Law to oblige us supposing for the present though not granting because it is not true that by refusing Christianity sufficiently proposed a man comes not under sin but onely comes not from under it but
remains under that sin which by refusing the Gospel hee refuses to escape The man whom God showes competent reasons to convict him of the truth of Christianity does hee not thereby oblige to believe If so then is Christianity by those reasons and by out Lord and his Apostles advancing them published for Gods Law to all them to whom those reasons become known Suppose that not onely the Apostles but God himself do no more than perswade men to believe can any Secular Power do more For what can it do more in making a Law than declare the will of the Soveraign under a punishment expressed And doth not God declare when hee sends those that are furnished with means to convict the world of the truth of Christianity that it is his will that they become Christians And is it not competent punishment to inact a Law that by disobeying men become incapable of escaping their own sin and the punishment of it If Christianity be no Law because a man hath his choice whether hee will believe or not hath not a thief his choice whether hee will be hanged or not steal or is not the mischief that comes by refusing the Faith as great as that As for the point of justice is not gtatitude justice doth not God oblige them in point of justice whom hee obligeth in point of gratitude doth hee not oblige them in point of gratitude whom by his Gospel hee showes the way to come from under sin to everlasting happinesse Again is it not justice that mankinde should be subjects and not rebels to God doth not the Gospel preach that mankinde are become rebels to God and that they ought to return and become his Subjects If wee can owe a debt of justice to God or to our selves the greatest is that which the Gospel bindeth upon us But suppose not onely that which this Dogmatist granteth that hee who is bound to renounce Christ with his mouth when his Soveraign commandeth is bound to believe him with his heart at the same time let mee demand by what Law hee is bound to it if the Scriptures be not Law Or how a man can be bound to believe in heart that our Lord Jesus is the Christ and not be bound to receive either the mater or the motives to believe that which Christ teacheth which is all that the Scriptures containe Wherefore wee are by no means to admit that which this Author presumes upon as evident truth That it is one thing to demand why a man believes the Scriptures another thing to demand how a man knowes them to be the Word of God and a third by what authority they become Law Because saith hee one man believes for this reason another for that But to know the Scripture to be the Word of God is a thing that no man can do but onely hee to whom this or that Scripture was revealed For it is true that one man believes for this reason another for that if they believe not for that reason for which they ought to believe But there is but one reason for which God requires us to believe namely his will declared by the motives of Faith which hee by his messengers or deputies hath presented us with And hee that is moved to believe for any reason besides that is but called a believer for hee is not such in Gods esteem And hee that by these reasons stands convict that those messengers came from God though hee cannot know by the report of his senses nor by any evidence of the mater which they contain that the Scriptures are the Word of God yet may hee reasonably be said to know that they are so because hee knowes those reasons by which hee stands convict that they are no otherwise And I have now further showed that the publishing of Christianity that is the tendering of the Scriptures with this evidence that they contain the word and will of God bindes them for a Law upon the consciences of all that receive them so obliging them not onely to believe all that they contain to be true but to undertake and do whatsoever they require Wherefore it is true that the Scriptures or Christianity becomes the civil Law of a State because the Soveraign Power thereof inacteth it But wee are further to demand whether Secular Power is able to do this because it is Soveraign or because it is Christian For if because it is Sovetaign it will follow of necessity that those who are not subject to Christian Powers are not obliged to believe the truth of the Scriptures nor to be Christians if there be no other Law to require it at their hands but the will of their Soveraign Because the onely reason which this opinion saith obliges them to believe that is the act of Soveraigne Power is wanting If because it is Christian the question will have recourse what it was that obliged the Soveraign Power to become Christian For the act of Soverâ—igne Power hath no effect upon it self but upon those that are under it And yet the same reason why the Soveraign Power is bound to believe will convince all that are under it that they also ought to believe because concerning them as men or at least as those men whom the motives of Faith are published to not as of this or that Common-wealth But in this businesse I am most ashamed for Euclid's sake that a man so studied in Geometry should build such a vast pretense in Christianity upon such an imaginary ground Forsooth Abraham and the Patriarchs after him and then Moses had the Soveraign Power of their Families and of Gods people the Patriarchs by their birth and estate Moses by the contract of the Israelites accepting of God for their Civil Soveraign and Moses for his Lieutenant The same Patriarchs and Moses were absolute in maters of Religion because Gods people inferiors were to be ruled in it by no other Laws then those which God published to them by the hands of those Superiors Hee that will go about to draw the conclusion from these principles whether granted or onely supposed shall easily see that it followes not For half an eye will serve to distinguish two qualities in the Patriarchs and in Moses the one of Soveraignes the other of Prophets or Depuries and Commissaries or Interpreters of the will of God to his people And this distinction being made I will not be beholden to any man to say which of the two it was that could oblige their inferiors to obey as Gods Lawes those things which persons so authorized should declare in his name For if those whom God by sufficient evidence had witnessed to be his Prophets and messengers should falsify his trust the blame of that which should be done upon such deceit must needs redound upon God And therefore this author pag. 231 287. agreeth with that which I argued even now that revelations and inspirations of Gods Spirit are not granted under the Gospel but to those
it may be said in some regard that the Church was before the Scriptures when as in order of reason it is evident that the truth of Christianity is supposed to the being of it inasmuch as no man can be or be known to be of the Church but as hee is or is known to be a Christian And truly those that dispute the authority of the Church to be the the reason to believe the sentence of it in mater of Faith to be true are to consider what they will say to that opinion which utterly denies any such authority any such thing as a Church Understanding the Church to be a Society founded by Gods appointment giving publick authority to some persons so or so qualified by that appointment in behalf of the whole For this all must deny that admit Erastus his opinion of Excommunication to be true if they will admit the consequence of their own doctrine Which opinion I have therefore premised in staring this Question that it may appear to require such an answer as may not suppose the being of the Church in that nature but may be a means to demonstrate it But as it is not my intent to begg so great a thing in question by proceeding upon supposition of any authority in the Church before I can prove it to be a Corporation founded with such authority as the foundation of it requireth So is it as farre from my meaning to deny that authority which I do not suppose For hee that denieth the authority of the Church to be the reason why any thing is to be taken for truth or for the meaning of the Scripture may take the due and true authority of the Church to be a part of that truth which is more ancient than the authority of the Church Inasmuch as it must be believed that God hath founded a Society of them which professe Christianity by the name of the Church giving such authority to some members of it in behalf of the whole as hee pleased before it can be believed that this or that is within the authority of the Church For that there is a Church and a publick authority in it and for it and what things they are that fall under that authority if it be true is part of that truth which our Lord and his Apostles whose authority is more ancient than the Church have declared Indeed if it were true that the first truth which all Christians are to believe and for the reason of it to believe every thing else is the saying of persons so and so qualified in the Church then were it evident that the belief of that which is questioned in religion could not be resolved into any other principle But if it be manifest by the motives of Christianity that the authority of the Apostles is antecedent to it that all Scripture and the meaning of Scripture which signifies nothing beside it own meaning and Tradition of the Apostles if any such Tradition over and above Scripture may appear is true not supposing it as appeares by the premises then is the authority of the Church no ground of Faith and so not Infallible There are indeed sundry Objections made both out of Scripture and the Fathers to weaken and to shake such an evident truth which are not here to be related till wee have resolved as well what is the reason of believing in Controversies of Faith as what is not In the mean time if wee demand by what means any person that can pretend to give sentence in Controversies of Faith knowes his own sentence to be infallible or upon what ground hee gives sentence Hee that answers by Scripture or authority of Writers that professe to have learned from the Scriptures or reasons depending on the authority of our Lord and his Apostles acknowledges the authority of the Church not to be the reason of believing For what need wee all this if it were If hee say by the same means for which these are receivable that is by revelation from God It will be presently demanded to make evidence of such revelation the same evidence as wee have for the truth of the Scriptures Which because it cannot be done therefore is this plea laid aside even by them who neverthelesse professe to imbrace the Communion of the Church of Rome because they believe the Church to be Infallible But if it be destructive to all use of reason to deny the conclusion admitting the premises then let him never hope to prevaile in any dispute that holds the conclusion denying the premises For to hold the sentence of the Church Infallible when the means that depend upon the authority of our Lord and his Apostles proves whatsoever is to be believed without supposing any such thing when revelation independent upon their authority there is acknowledged to be none averreth Infallibility in the sentence of the Church denying the onely principle that can inferre it And therefore those that speak things so inconsequent so inconsistent I shall not grant that they speake those things which themselves think and believe but rather that like men upon the rack they speak things which themselves may and in some sort do know not to be true For whosoever holds an opinion which hee sees an argument against that hee cannot resolve is really and truly upon the rack and of necessity seeks to escape by contradicting what himself confesseth otherwise Which every man of necessity doth who acknowledging the reason of believing Christianity to lye in the authority of our Lord and his Apostles challengeth neverthelesse that Infallability which is the reason of believing to all sentences of the Church the mater of which sentence if it be true the reason of it must depend immediately upon the same authority upon which the authority of the Church which sentenceth dependeth But the consequence of this assertion deserves further consideration because all that followes depends upon it Suppose that the Scriptures prove themselves to be the Word of God by the reasons of believing contained in them witnessed by the common sense of all Christians For this admits no dispute If the same consent can evidence any thing belonging to the mater of Faith that will appear to oblige the Faith of all Christians upon the same reason as the Scriptures do whether contained in the Scriptures or not For who will undertake that God could not have preserved Christianity without either Scriptures or new revelations And therefore hee chose the way of writing not as of absolute necessity but as of incomparable advantage If therefore God might have obliged man to believe any thing not delivered by writing whether hee hath or not will remain questionable supposing the Scriptures to be the Word of God upon the ground aforesaid Besides there are many things so manifest in the Scriptures that they can indure no dispute supposing the Scriptures to be the Word of God Many things are every day cleared more and more by applying the knowledg
of the Languages and of Historical truth to the text of the Scripture And many things more may be cleared by applying the light of reason void of partiality and prejudice to draw the truth so cleared into consequence No part of all this can be said to be held upon any decree of the Church Because no part of the evidence supposes the Church in the nature and quality of a Corporation the constitution whereof inableth some persons to oblige the whole Because there are maters in question concerning our common Christianity and the sense of the Scriptures upon which the great mischief of diviâ—â—on is fallen out in the Church it is thought a plausible plea to say that the decree of the present Church supposing the foundation of the Church in that nature and the power given to every part in behalf of the whole of which no evidence can be made not supposing all that for truth which I have said obligeth all Christians to believe as much as the Scriptures supposing them to be the Word of God can do Which they that affirm do not consider that it must first be evident to all that are to be obliged Both that the Church is so founded and whoâ—e Act it is and how that Act must be done which must oblige it Seeing then that the Scriptures are admitted on all sides to be the Word of God let us see whether it be as evident as the Scriptures that the act of the Pope or of a General Council or both oblige the Church to believe the truth of that which they decree as much as the Scriptures I know there are texts of Scripture alleged First concerning the Apostles and Disciples Mat. X. 14 15 40. Luke IX 5. X. 10 11 16. where those that refuse them are in worse estate than Sodom and Gomorrha And Hee that heareth you heareth mee Hee that neglecteth you neglecteth mee Mat. XXVIII 19 20. Go make all Nations Disciples teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you and behold I am with you to the worlds end 1 Thess II. 13. Yee received the Gospel of us not as the word of man but as it is indeed the word of God Then concerning S. Peter as predecessor of all Popes Mat. XVI 18 19. Vpon this rock will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it And I will give thee the keyes of the Kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou bindest on earth shall be bound in heaven whatsoever thou loosest on earth shall be loosed in heaven Luke XXII 32. I have prayed for thee that thy Faith fail not and thou once converted strengthen thy brethren John XXI 15 16 17. Simon son of Jonas lovest thou mee Feed my lambs feed my sheep Again concerning the Church and Councils Mat. XVIII 17-20 If hee heare them not tell the Church If hee hear not the Church let him be to thee as a Heathen or a Publican Verily I say unto you whatsoever yee binde on earth shall be bound in heaven whatsoever yee loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven Again I say unto you If two of you agree on earth upon any thing to ask it it shall be done them from my Father in heaven For where two or three are assembled in my name there am I in the midst of them John XVI 13. The Spirit of truth shall lead you into all truth Acts XV. 28. It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us 1 Tim. III. 15. That thou mayest know now it behoveth to converse in the house of God which is the Churchof God the pillar and establishment of the truth You have further the exhortations of the Apostles 1 Thess V. 12 13. Now I beseech you brethren to know them which labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you And esteem them more than abundantly in love for their works sake Heb. XIII 7 17. Bee obedient and give way to your Rulers for they watch for your souls as those that must give account That they may do it joyfully and not groaning Which is not for your profit And afore Rememeer your Rulers which have spoken to you the Word of God And considering the issue of their conversation imitate their Faith Those that spoke unto them the Word of God are the Apostles or their companions and deputies whom hee commandeth them to obey no otherwise than those who presently watched over them after their death In the Old Testament likewise Deut. XVII 5-12 Hee that obeyeth not the determination of the Court that was to sit before the Ark is adjudged to death Therefore Hag. II. 12. Thus saith the Lord the God of Hosts Ask the Priests concerning the Law Mal. II. 7. The Priests lips shall preserve knowledge and the Law shall they require at his mouth For hee is the messenger of the Lord of Hosts The answers of the Priests resolved into the decrees of the said Court therefore they are unquestionable And this Power established by the Law our Lord acknowledging the Law allowes Mat. XXIII 2. The Scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses chair whatsoever therefore they command you that do But according to their works do not This is that which is alleged out of the Scriptures for that Infallibility which is challenged for the Church If I have left any thing behinde it will prove as ineffectual as the rest In all which there are so many considerations appear why the sense of them should be limited on this side or extended beyond the body of the Church that it is evident they cannot serve for evidence to ground the Infallibility of it For is it not evident that the neglect of the Apostles in questioning their doctrine redounds upon our Lord who by sending them stamps on them the marks of his Fathers authority which hee is trusted with Not so the Church For who can say that God gives any testimony to the lie which it telleth seeing Christianity is supposed the Infallibility thereof remaining questionable Is it not evident that God is with his Chu ch not as a Corporation but as the collection of many good Christians Supposing that those who have power to teach the Church by the constitution thereof teach lies and yet all are not carried away with their doctrine but believe Gods truth so farre as the necessity of their salvation requires If there were any contradiction in this supposition how could it be maintained in the Church of Rome that so it shall be when Antichrist comes as many do maintain Besides is it as evident as Christianity or the Scriptures that this promise is not conditional and to have effect supposing both the teaching and the following of that which our Lord lud taught and nothing else Surely if those that refuse the Gospel be in a worse state than those of Sodom and Gomorrha it followeth not yet that all that refuse to hear the Church without the Gospel are so For the truth of the Gospel
Church For it is manifest that hitherto the authorities of Church Writers cannot be considered any otherwise than as the opinions of particular persons which no wayes import the consent of the whole Church For whereas hitherto there is nothing to oblige the Faith of any Christian but that which is plaine by the Scriptures and the consent of the Church It no wayes appears as yet how the authorities of Church Writers can evidence the consent of Church I will not therefore be curious here to heap up the sayings of the Fathers commending the sufficience and clearness of the Scriptures One or two I will take notice of because they are all I can remember in which the limitation thereof to things which our salvation requires us to believe is expressed S. Augustine de doctr Christianâ— II. 9. In eis quae aperte in Scripturis posita sunt inveâ—iuntâ—r illa omnia qnae continent fideâ— moresq vivendi In those things which are plainty set down in the Scriptures is found whatsoever that Faith or maners by which wee live doth containe S. Chrysostome in II. ad Thessal Hom. III. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things are plain and plain and straight in the Scriptures all things that are necessary are mâ—nifest Whereunto wee may addâ— the words of Constantine to the Council of Nâ—â—â—a in Theodoreâ— Eâ—clef Hist l. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles and the Oracles of the ancient Prophets plainly teach us what wee are to think of God But I will also take notice that the same S. Augustine de doctr Christ III. 2. saith that the Rule of Faith which hee had set forth in the first book is had from the plainer places of the Scripture and the authority of the Church And the same S. Chrysostome in the same Homily sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Those things which the Apostles writ and those which they delivered by word of mouth are equally credible Therefore let us think the Tradition of the Church deserves credit It is a Tradition seek no more And Vincentius in the beginning of his Commâ—nitorium or Remembrance confessing the Canon of the Scriptures to be every way perfect and sufficient requires neverthelesse the Tradition of the Church for the steddy understanding of it And therefore I have just ground to say that all that is necessary to salvation is not clear in the Scriptures to all that can reade in the opinion of S. Chrysostome and S. Augustine But to all that reade supposing the Rule of Faith received from the Church to bound and limit the sense and exposition of the Scriptures And therefore may more justly suppose the same limitation whâ—n they speak of the perfection and sufficience and clearnesse of the Scripture at large without confining their speech to that which the necessity of salvation requires us to believe And this is already a sufficient barr to any man that shall pretend the consent of the Church which concurreth to evidence the truth of the Scripture for the perspicuity thereof in things necessary to be believed to all whom they may concerne For so long as Tradition may be requisite besides Scripture that cannot appear When it shall appear whether requisite or not then will it appear how farr the sufficience and perspicuity of the Scripture reacheth And this I come now to inquire CHAP. VI. All interpretation of Scripture is to be confined within the Tradition of the Church This supposeth that the Church is a Communion instituted by God What means there is to make evidence of Gods Charter upon which the Corporation of the Church subsisteth The name of the Church in the Scriptures often signifieth the Whole or Cathelick Church THis presumption then which is able to prejudice the truth by disparaging the means God hath given to discover it And that by possessing men that things pretended to be necessary to salvation would have been clear of themselves to all men in the Scriptures if they were true But nothing conducing to clear the doubtfull meaning of any Scripture that is never so true This presumption I say being removed and the authority of the Church as the reason of believing taken away it remaines that wee affirm whatsoever the whole Church from the beginning hath received and practised for the Rule of Faith and maners all that to be evidently true by the same reason for which wee believe the very Scriptures And therefore that the meaning of them is necessarily to be confined within those bounds so that nothing must be admitted for the truth of them which contradicteth the same Wee saw before that the Scripture consisteth of motives to Faith and mater of Faith That in the motives of Faith supposing them sufficient when admitted for true a difficulty may be made upon what evidence they are admitted for true That the conviction of this truth consisteth in the profession and conversation of all those who from the beginning receiving Christianity have transmitted it to their successors for a Law and Rule to their beliefs and conversations Wherefore there can remain no further question concerning the truth of that which stands recommended to us by those same means that evidence the truth of those 〈◊〉 for which wee receive Christianity Had there been no 〈◊〉 Christianity to have been read in the profession and practice of all that call themselves Christians it would not have been possible to convince the enemies of Christianity that wee are obliged to believe the Scriptures If the professing and practising things so contrary to the interest of flesh and bloud be an â—vidence that they are delivered and received from them who first showed reasons to believe It must first remain evident that there are certain things that were so professed and practised from the beginning before it can be evident that the motives upon which they are said to be received were indeed tendred to the world for that purpose This is that common stock of Christianity which in the first place after receiving the Scriptures is to be admitted for the next principle toward the settling of truth controverted concerning the meaning of them as flowing immediately from the reason for which they are received and immediately flowing into the evidence that can be made of any thing questionable in the same It is that sound ingredient of nature which by due application must either cure all distempers in the Church or leave them incurable and everlasting And truly if it were as easie to make evidence what those things are which have been received professed and practised from the beginning by the whole Church as it is necessary to admit all such for truth I suppose there would remain no great difficulty in admitting this principle But in regard it is so easie to show what contradiction hath been made within the pale of the Church to that which elsewhere otherwhiles hath been received I cannot tell whether men despaire to finde any thing generally received
is there just cause to think that thereby advantage is given to the Jewes against Christianity by granting that such passages out of which the New Testament drawes the birth and sufferings of our Lord are reasonably to be understood of his predecessors in Gods ancient people For it is plaine that it despite of the Jewes the works done by our Lord and his Prophesies concerning his Dying and Rising again and the destruction of the Jewes and the preaching of the Gospel to all Nations seconded by his Apostles and that which they did to winn credit that they were the witnesses of the same are the evidence upon which the Gospel obliges The Scriptures of the Old Testament which were no evidence to the Gentiles as much and more concerned in the Gospel than the Jewes were evidence and so to be not of themselves for what need Christ then have done those works But upon supposition that God intended not to rest in giving the Law but to make it the thred to introduce the Gospel by Which supposition as it is powerfully inforced by the nature of the Law and the difference between the inward and the outward obedience of God as it hath been hitherto declared and maintained So is it also first introduced by those works which our Lord declareth to be done for evidence thereof then made good by the perpetual correspondence between the Old and New Testament which any considerable exception interrupts And there reasons so much the more effectual because this difference of literal and mystical sense was then and is at this day acknowledged by the Jewes themselves against whom our Lord and his Apostles imploy it in a considerable number of Scriptures which they themselves interpret of the Messias though they are not able to make good the consequence of the same sense throughout because they acknowledge not the reason of it which concludes the Lord Jesus to be the Messias whom they expect If these things be true neither Origen nor any man else is to be indured when they argue that a mystical sense of the Scripture is to be inquired and allowed even where this ground takes no place For vindicating the honor of God and that it may appeare worthy of his wisedom to declare that which wee admit to be the utmost intent of the Scriptures For if it be for the honor of God to have brought Christianity into the world for the salvation of mankinde and to have declared himself by the Scriptures for that purpose then whatsoever tends to declare this must be concluded worthy of God and his wisedom whatsoever referres not to it cannot be presumed agreeable to his wisdom how much soever it flatter mans eare or fantasie with quaintnesse of conceit or language Now as I maintain this difference between the literal and mystical sense of the Old Testament to be necessary for the maintenance of Christianity as well as for understanding the Scriptures So are there some particular questions arising upon occasion of it which I can well be content to leave to further dispute As for example There is an opinion published which saith That the abomination of desolation which our Lord saith was spoken of by Daniel the Prophet concerning the destruction of Jerusalem Dan. IX 24 Mat. XXIV 15. Mar. XIII 14. was fulfilled in the havock made by Antiochus Epiphanes Which is also plainly called the abominatio of desolation by the same Prophet Daâ— XI 31. XII 10. Whether this opinion can be made good according to historical truth or not this is not the place to dispute Whether or no the difference between the literal and mystical sense of the Scriptures will indure that the same Prophesie be fulfilled twice in the literal sense concerning the temporal state of the Jewes once under Antiochus Epiphanes and once under Titus that is it which I am here content to referre to further debate One thing I affirme that notwithstanding this difference it is no inconvenience to say that some Prophesies are fulfilled but once Namely that of Jacob Gen. XLIX 8-12 that of Daniel IX 24. that of Malacbi III. 1. IV. 5 6. Because the coming of Christ boundeth the times of the literal and mystical sense And therefore there is reason why it should be marked out by Prophesies of the Old Testament referring to nothing else Againe I am content to leave to dispute whether the many Prophesies of the Old Testament which are either manifestly alleged or covertly intimated by the Revelation of S. John must therefore be said to be twice fulfilled once in the sense of their first Authors under the Law and again under the Gospel in S. Johns sense to the Church Or that this second complement of them was not intended by the Spirit of God in the Old Prophets but that it pleased God to signifie to S. John things to befall the Church by Prophetical Visions like those which hee had read in the ancient Prophets whereby God signified to them things to befall his ancient people For of a truth it is the outward rather than the spiritual state of the Church which is signified to S. John under these images A third particular must be the first Chapter of Genesis For in that which followes of Paradise and what fell out to our first Parents there I will make no question that hoth senses are to be admitted the Church having condemned Origen for taking away the historical sense of that portion of Scripture But whether the creation of this sensible world is to be taken for a figure of the renewing of mankinde into a spiritual world by the Gospel of Christ according to that ground of the difference between the literal and mystical sense of the Scripture which hitherto I maintaine This I conceive I may without prejudice leave to further debate But leaving these things to dispute I must insist that those things which the Evangelists affirm to have been fulfilled by such things as our Lord said or did or onely befell him in the flesh have a further meaning according to which they are mystically accomplished in the spiritual estate of his Christian people The chiefe ground hereof I confesse is that of S. Matthew VIII 17. where having related divers of our Lords miracles hee addeth that they were done That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Prophet Esay LIII 4. Hee took our infirmities and â—are away our sicknesses Together with the words of our Lord Luke V. 17-21 where hee telleth them of Nazareth This day are the words of the Prophet Esay LXI 1. The Spirit of the Lord is upon mee because hee hath anointed mee to preach the Gospel to the poor fulfilled in your hearing And his answer to John Baptist grounded upon the same passage Mat. XI 4 5 6. Go and tell John what yee have heard and seen The blinde receive sight the lame walk the lâ—pers are cleansed the deaf heare the dead are raised and the poor have the Gospel preached them For
Christ shed for reâ—â—ission of sins the life of the Kingdom of heaven See the unbaptized deprived also of the bread and cup of life is divided from the Kingdom of Heaven where Christ the well of life remains So it appears that the African Church had this custome but held it not necessary to salvation as Baptism But by Gennadius de dogmatibus Ecclesiasticis Cap. LII It appears to have been a custome of the Church when Hereticks were reconciled to the Church by confirmation to give their little ones the Eucharist presently upon it And Ordo Romanus de Baptismo prescribes it after the solemn Baptism before Easter which the French Capitulary I. 161. and Alcuinus also de divinis officiis provideth for And in the Eastern Church Dionysius in the end of the booke de Hierarchiâ Ecclesiasticâ In the mean time it is to be considered that there being no order that all should be baptized Infants nor at what age Whereupon St. Gregory Nazianzene Orat. XLII in Sanctum Bapt. advises at three or four years of age it cannot be said to have been a generall custome of the Church Nor that it could be originall from the Apostles because the solemn times of Baptisme at Easter and Whitsontide cannot be thought to have been settled till Christianity was grown very vulgar For as for those that were baptized upon particular occasions or in danger of death it cannot be thought that the Eucharist was celebrated for their purpose nor doth any example appear that it was ever brought them from the Church On the contrary when the times of Baptisme came to be disused because it was found to be for the best that all should be baptized Infants upon this occasion the receiving of the Eucharist came to be deferred as much longer then was fitting in my opinion then it was given too soon in S. Cyprians time according to the example related by him in his Book de Lapsis where the Child whom the Pagans had given bread dipped in the wine that had been consecrated to their Idols because too young to eat of the flesh of their sacrifices receives the Eucharist in the Church CHAP. XXIV Two sorts of means to resolve whatsoever is resolvable concerning the Scripture Upon what terms the Church may or is to determine controversies of Faith And what obligation that determination produceth Traditions of the Apostles oblige the present Church as the reasons of them continue or not Instances in our Lords Passeover and Eucharist Penance under the Apostles and afterwards S. Pauls vail eating blood and things offered to Idols The power of the Church in limiting these Traditions I May now proceed I conceive to resolve generally upon what principles any thing questionable in Christianity is determinable and as franckly as briefly do affirm that there are but two sorts of means to resolve us in any thing of that nature Tradition and Argument Authority and Reason History and Logick For whatsoever any Artist or Divine hath said of the great use of the languages in discovering the true meaning of the Original Scriptures by the ancient Translations as well as the Originalls which I allow as much as they demand they must give me leave to observe that seeing all languages are certain Lawes of speaking which have the force of signifying by being delivered to posterity upon agreement of their Predeoessors all that helpe is duly ascribed to Tradition which we have from the Languages Indeed this is no Tradition of the Church no more then all History and Historicall truth concerning the times the places the persons mentioned in the Scripture concerning the Lawes the Customes the Fashions and orders practised by persons mentioned in the Scriptures in all particulars whereof the Scripture speaks which whether it be delivered by Christians or not Christians as far as the common reason of men alloweth or warranteth it for Historical truth is to be admitted into consequence in inquiring the meaning of the Scriptures and without it all pretense of Languages is pedantick and contemptible as that which gives the true reason to the Language of the Scripture whatsoever it import in vulgar use This helpe being applied to the Text of the Scripture it will be of consequence to confider the process of the discourse pursuing that which may appear to be intended not by any mans fancy but by those marks which cleared by the helps premised may appear to signifie it Which is the work of reason supposing the truth of the Scriptures And whereas other passages of Scripture either are clearer of themselves or being made clearer by using the same helps may seem to argue the meaning of that which is questioned whereas other parts of Christianity resolved afore may serve as principles to inferre by consequence of reason the truth of that which remains in doubt not to be impured therefore to reason but to the truth from which reason argues as believed and not seen this also is no lesss the work of reason supposing the truth of the Scriptures But whereas there be two sorts of things questionable in Christianity and all that is questionable meerly in point of truth hath relation to and dependance upon the rule of faith as consequent to it or consistent with it if we will have it true or otherwise if false I acknowledge in the first place that nothing of this nature can be questionable further then as some Scripture the meaning whereof is not evident createth the doubt And therefore that the determination of the meaning of that Scripture is the determination of the truth questionable For seeing the truth of Gods nature and counsails which Christianity revealeth are things which no Christian can pretend to have known otherwise then by revelation from God and that we have evidence that whatsoever we have by Scripture is revealed but by the Tradition of the Church no further then all the Church agreeth in it all that wherein it agreeeth being supposed to be in the Scripture and much more then that It followeth that nothing can be affirmed as consequent to or consistent with that which the tradition of the Church containeth but by the Scripture and from the Scripture So that I willingly admit whatsoever is alleadged from divers sayings of the Fathers that whatsoever is not proved out of the Scriptures is as easily rejected as it is affirmed limiting the meaning of it as I have said But whatsoever there is Scripture produced to prove seeing we have prescribed that nothing can be admitted for the true meaning of any Scripture that is against the Catholick Tradition of the Church it behoveth that evidence be made that what is pretended to be true hath been taught in the Church so expresly as may inferre the allowance of it and therefore is not against the rule of Faith But this being cleared so manifest as it is that the Church hath not the priviledge of infallibility in any express act which is not justifiable from the universall
originall practice of the Church whither in prescribing what is to be believed what is to be professed or what is to be done So manifest must it remain that nothing can be resolved by plurality of votes of Ecclesiasticall Writers as to the point of truth For then were the priviledge of infallibility in the votes of those Writers which themselves disclaim from the substance of what they write And it is to say that what had no such priviledge when it was written if it have more Authors survive that hold it shall be and must be held infallible Which consequences being ridiculous it followeth that for the tryal of truth within the bounds aforesaid recourse must be had to the means premised And the effect of those means every dayes experience witnesseth For the obligation which all men think they have firmly to hold that which by these means they have all concluded from the Scriptures is the consequence of these principles in expounding the same Which obligation though sometimes imaginary in regard that between contradictory reasons the consequence may be equally firm on both sides yet that it cannot be otherwise he that believes the truth of Christianity must needs imagine For true principles truly used necessarily produce nothing but true consequences Which if it be so why should any question be made that the Church may and sometimes ought to proceed in determining the truth of things questionable upon occasion of the Scriptures concerning the rule of Christian faith or which is all one that the exercise of this power by the Church produceth in those that are of the Church an obligation of submitting to the same Indeed here be two obligations which sometimes may contradict one another and therefore whatsoever the matter of them be the effects of them cannot be contraries The use of the means to determine the meaning of the Scriptures produceth an obligation of holding that which followeth from it which obligation no man can have or ought to imagine he hath before the due use of such meanes whither his estate in the Church oblige him to use them or not But the visible determination of the Church obliges all that are of the Church not to scandalize the unity thereof by professing contrary to the same And to both these obligations the same man may be subject as the matter may be to wit as one that hath resolved the question upon true principles not to believe the contrary and as one of the Church that believes the Church faileth in that for which he is bound not to break the unity thereof not to professe against what the Church determineth For I am bold to say again that there is no society no communion in the world whether Civill Ecclesiasticall Military or whatsoever it be that can subsist unlesse we grant that the Act of superiour Power obligeth sometimes when it is ill used In the mean time I say not that this holds alwaies and in matters of whatsoever concernment nor do take upon me generally to resolve this no more then what is the mater of the rule of Faith which he that believes may be saved he that positively believes it not all cannot It shall be enough for me if I may give an opinion whether that which we complain of be of value to disoblige us to our superiours or not As concerning what is questioned amongst us whither it be of the rule of Faith or not But this I shall say that to justifie the use of this power towards God requireth not onely a perswasion of the truth competent to the weight of the point in question in those that determine for the Church but also a probable judgement that the determination which they shall make will be the meanes to reduce contrary opinions to that sense which they see so great Authority profess and injoyn For without doubt there can be no such means to dissolve the unity of the Church as a precipitate and immature determination of something that is become questionable For effectually to proceed to exercise Ecclesiasticall Communion upon terms contrary to that which hath been received afore is actually to dissolve the unity of the Church The ingagement to make good that which men shall have once done being the most powerful Witcheraft and Ligature in the world to blind them from seeing that which all men see besides themselves or at least from confessing to see that which they cannot but see But if we speak of things which concern the communion of the Church in those offices which God is to be served with by Christians or that tend to maintain the same besides the meaning and truth of the Scriptures there remains a further question what is or ought to be law to the Church and oblige them that are of the Church seeing that whatsoever is in the Scripture obligeth not the Church for Law though obliged to beleeve it for truth the resolution whereof will require evidence of the reason for which every thing was done by the Apostles for as it holds or not so the constitution grounded upon it is to hold either alwaies or onely as it holds And this reason must be evidenced by the Authority of the Church admitting that reason into force whither by express act or by silent practice When the Israelites are commanded to eat the Passeover in haste with their loins girt and their staves in their hands there is appearance enough that the intent of it was onely concerning that Passeover which first they celebrated in Egypt not for an order alwaies to continue because then the case required haste and because then the Angell passed over their houses upon the door-posts whereof the blood was commandded to be sprinkled that by that marke he might passe over them to smite the Egyptians For though Philo would have the Passeover to be celebrated at home and not at Jerusalem though perhaps onely by those of the dispersions those that dwelt in the Land of promise being all tied to resort to Jerusalem yet all that acknowledge the Talmud think it not lawfull to celebrate it but at Jerusalem contenting themselves with the Supper and abatng the Lambe as one of those sacrifices which the Law forbiddeth every where but before the Ark. But had not the practice of the Nation and the Authority of the Elders trusted by the Law to determine such matters appeared in the businesse our Lord who according to his own doctrine was subject to their constitutions had not had a rule for his proceeding So in the infancy of Christianity it is no marvail if the Christians at Jerusalem entertained daily communion even at board also among themselves and that they gave their estates to the maintenance of it not by any law of communion of goods but as the common necessity required For what could make more towards the advancement of Christianity And when at Corinth and in other Churches the communion was in use though not so frequent nor giving up their
large vvord to make good But if vve look upon the intent of those that spake it and the mater vvhich they had in hand it will appear very unreasonable to extend it to any thing else Now I suppose upon the premises that the Prophets Esay and Ieremy in the first and literal and obvious sense intend to soretell the return of the people of Israel from Captivity and the great change that should be seen in their faithfulnesse to God though figuring thereby that knowledge of God and that fidelity of Christians which the preaching of the Gospel should produce And truly I do challenge all them that are best acquainted with the state of that people from the beginning to show me any greater change in it then that which we see came to passe upon their return from the Captivity To wit that they who formerly before the Captivity had been every day falling away from their own the true God to the worship of imaginary Deities should from thenceforth continue constant to him when tempted with the greatest torments in the world to renounce him for the worship of Idols as we see by the relations of the Maccabees And is it strange then that I should say that this is the change which these Prophesies intend to declare Especially when I say not that this is all they intend because I know that the Apostles have declared them to be intended of the times of the Gospel But that this is that which they intend in the first instance which by the premises must be a figure and step to that which the Gospel intends to declare And yet in regard of the manifold Idolatries which prevailed before the Captivity it shall be most truly and significantly understood that the people of God who after the Captivity never departed from the true God shall not then teach one another to know the true God because that Law the summe of the old Law should be written in their hearts and entrails so that they should have no need to teach one another to know the true God If this be true referring this Prophene to the Gospel of which the Apostle expounds it in the mystical sense Heb. VIII 8 it will be much more evident how those that are baptized upon the profession of the Christian faith who are the new Israel according to the Spirit shall have no need to teach one another to know the true God who both know God and the way to God which is the Law of God which they bear in their hearts if their Christianity be not counterfeit So that when God promiseth to establish this new Covenant he promiseth neither more nor lesse then the conversion of the world to the Christian faith Accordingly S. John truly tells the Christians to whom he writes that they knew all things and had no need that any man should teach them because the unction that was in them taught them the truth because he doth not mean that they knew the secrets of Geometry or the mysteries of nature or whatsoever is or is done in the utmost parts of the world or any thing else impertinent to his present discourse But because they had in them a principle sufficient to condemn those errors which he writes against there to wit those that deny both the Father and the Son by denying Jesus to be the Christ which saith the Apostle is the spirit of Antichrist For surely he that hath unfainedly professed the Christian Faith upon being catechized in it hath in him a principle sufficient to preserve him from such gross infections which the Holy Ghost wherewith he is anointed upon being baptized into this profession out of a good conscience sealeth up in his heart so that such corruptions can have no access to infect it And therefore the Apostle might well call upon them to try such Spirits whither of God or not seeing that the comparing of their pretenses with that which they had once received must needs be sufficient to condemn that which is opposite to it by the judgement of any man that unfainedly adhereth to it So that S. Paul when he bids the Thessalonians try all things but hold that which is good demands no unreasonable thing at their hands if we understand those things which he would have tried to be such as are triâ—ble by the rule of faith common to all Christians Indeed the same Apostle when he writeth to the Corinthians that the spiritual man is judged by no man but himselfe judgeth all things seems to speak more generally not onely of the rule of Faith but of the secret counsel and good pleasure of God in dispensing the revelation thereof one way to the ancient Prophets another way to the Apostles both by the Spirit of God and Christ Which secret counsel those spiritual men that he speaketh of were able to interpret in the Scriptures of the Old Testament by comparing spiritual things with spiritual things That is the revelations granted under the Law with those which the Gospel had brought forth Which though the Apostles could do yet the grace of understanding the Scriptures of the Old Testament by the Holy Ghost was no more common to all Christians at that time then now that the understanding of the Scriptures is to be purchased by humane indeavours it can be common to all Christians to be Divines By all which it appeareth not that the Scriptures con in all things necessary to salvation clearly to all that want it but that Christianity affordeth sufficient means of instruction in all things necessary to the salvaâ—ion of all that learn it And those who to find this instruction turn simple plain meaning Christians to that translation of the Bible which they like to find resolution in the pretenses of the sects which can arise cannot be said either to teach them Christianity or sufficient means to learn it For he who hath not only acknowledged the substance of Christianity but grounded the hope of his salvation upon it will rather deny his own senses then admit any thing contrary to it to be the true meaning of the Scripture whatsoever be the sound of the words of it But he that onely knoweth the Scriptures to be Gods truth and believeth he hath the spirit of God to conduct him in seeking the sense of it not supposing the beliefe of Christianity to be a condition requisite to the having of Gods spirit may easily be seduced by his inbred pride to devise and set up new positions sounding like the Scriptures which the Church acknowledgeth no more then that meaning of the Old Testament which our Lord and his Apostles first declared was acknowledged by the Scribes and Pharisees And thinking he doth it by the same right as they had must needs take himselfe and his followers for our Lord and his Apostles but the Church for the Scribes and Pharisees As for that extravagant conceit of Cartwright I will once more stand amazed at it A man of so much
will divide the Church unlesse an end be put But I say that the Authority of the Church can be no reason obliging or warranting to believe that for truth which cannot be reasonably deduced from the motives of our common faith onely it shall be a reason obliging and warranting to keep the peace of the Church by not scandalizing such determinations thereof as are not destructive to the common faith Much more where the faith is not concerned onely the question is of determining the circumstances of those actions wherein the Communion of the Church is exercised which neither our Lord nor his Apostles have determined shall the disobeying of such determinations be the violating of that unity which all Christians professe that God hath ordained in his Church And now we have an easie account to give how the Prophets Haggai and Malachi send the Israelites to the Priest for resolution in those things which the practice of that people determined to belong to their office to resolve Because it cannot be doubted that their resolutions depended upon upon the acts of that authority which concluded that people by the Law aforesaid of Deut. XVII 8 -12 Which if not infallible and yet authorized by God to warrant the proceedings of his people it will be no marvail if those that act in dependance on them be authorized to warrant the people though further from being infallible To come now to those things that are alleadged to be said of the Apostles and of the Church having already limited the power of the Church not to extend to the faith of Christianity which it presupposeth it will be easie to distinguish it from the power of the Apostles Which though it presuppose the truth of Christianity preached by our Lord as that which they are imployed to introduce and establishâ— yet in order of nature and reason is before the very being of the Church as serving to evidence any truth of the Gospel to them that believe being convicted that they came from God to move them to believe For how can they stand obliged to believe the truth of our common Christianity to be that which God sent our Lord Christ to preach but by standing convict that the Apostles were sent by him to move them to accept of it and thereupon inabled with means to evidence this Commission and trust whereupon the world may safely repose themselves upon the credit of them whose act God owns by the witnesse he yields them for his own The true reason and ground upon which no act of theirs whither by word or writing is refusable by the Church Upon which the truth of things determined by their writings is no more determinable by the Church because the meaning of their words which is the truth sought for is in the words from the time they are said And is it then an unreasonable demand that their Charter He that heareth you heareth me extending to all that falls under their office should not be thought to descend upon the Church indefinitely but according to such limitations as the constitution thereof determineth That is to say not to the effect of creating faith but of preserving peace and unity in the Communion of the Church Not prejudicing neverthelesse that force of evidencing the truth of Christianity and the meaning of the Apostles writings which I have showed to be in the testimony of the Church not by any authority it hath from God but from that conviction which the testimony of such a body of men inferreth I shall not therefore deny that he who heareth or refuseth their successors heareth and refuseth God if that which they would be heard in be within the bounds of that power which God hath assigned them but is not the same that he assigned the Apostles But I shall utterly deny that it is by virtue of these words which were spoken by our Lord at such time as he had not declared whither they should have successors or not For there is very great appearance that they themselves after this expected to see the worlds end and the coming of Christ When the Apostles Mat. XXVI 3. inquire of our Lord When shall these things come to passe And what shall be the sign of thy coming and of the worlds end Though our Lord by this answer distinguisheth the time of the destruction of Jerusalem from the end of the world yet by the question there is no appearance that the Apostles did so distinguish before his answer And when his answer contains That this generation shall not be over till all these things come to passe and that not only after he had declared the destruction of Jerusalem but his coming and the end of the world Mat. XXIV 14 -23-29-34 it appeareth that those things which he declares shall forerun the worlds end were to begin before that generation were out when to end being not thought sit then to be said If this interpretation of Grotius which makes good the leter best suffer contradiction yet is it evident by S. Pauls Epistles 1 Cor. XV. 51 52. 2 Cor. V. 11-44 2 Thes IV. 15. 17. that he was not certificed but that the coming of Christ to judgement should be during his time In which S. Iohn by the Apocalypse was more fully informed If these things be true the obedience due to the Apostles successors cannot stand by virtue of this command given when it was not declared whither they were to have successors or not But by those Scriptures whereby it may appear so farre as in due place it shall appear whither or no and upon what terms the Apostles left their Authority with successors which when it appears then by consequence of reason it will be inferred from these words that who hears or refuses them hears or refuses God by whom the Apostles were inabled to leave such part of their power with successors Neither will it be strange that I allow not any Councill in which never so much of the authority of the present Church is united to say in the same sense and to the same effect as the Synode of the Apostles at Jerusalem It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Though I allow the overt act of their assembling to be a legall presumption that their acts are the acts of the Holy Ghost so farre as they appear not to transgresse those bounds upon which the assistance of the Holy Ghost is promised the Church For as for the Apostles I have showed before that they had the Holy Ghost given them not onely to preserve them in the truth of the common profession of Christians but to reveal unto them the true sense of the old Scriptures according to the Gospell which they preached though that grace was common to many more besides the Apostles not to all Christians upon which depended the resolution of the point then in debate Besides I do not intend to depart from that observation which I have made in another place that we find
the sense of it For if the same Faith which first was preached was afterwards committed to writing by the Apostles and how should those Christians which had not the use of leters be saved otherwise then was it the authority of the Apostles acknowledged by them that found themselves tyed to be Christians which made the Faith to oblige whether delivered by writing or without it The consent of all Churches in the same Rule of Faith serving for evidence of the Apostles act in delivering the same to the Churches Nor can any further reason be demanded why that knowledg which the Gnosticks prerended to have received by secret wayes should be refuted than the want of this And therefore it is in vain to allege that as they scorned the Scripture so they alleged Tradition for this secret knowledge The Tradition which they alleged being secret and such as could not be made to appear But no lesse contradictory to the Tradition of the Church than to the Scriptures both infallibly witnessed by the consent of all Churches And hereupon I leave the sayings of S. Austine setting aside the authority of the Council of Nicaea and affirming that former General Councils may be corrected by later without answer As also the sayings of them who affirm the Faith which our Lord hath taught to be the rock upon which the Church is built For if no building can lay that foundation upon which it standeth then cannot the Church make mater of Faith being founded upon it And that authority which may be set aside or corrected can be no infallible ground of Faith It is true it is pleaded that though in the Church of Rome there be some that do believe that the Church is able to make new Articles of Faith that is to make such determinations in maters of Faith as shall oblige all men to believe them as much as they are obliged to believe all that which comes from our Lord by his Apostles Others that do believe onely that the Church is able to evidence what the Apostles delivered to the Church and that this evidence is the ground whereon particular persons are to rest that whatsoever is so evidenced was indeed so delivered by the Apostles yet both these agree in one and the same reason of believing both of them alleging the Tradition of the Apostles to the Church for the ground of their Faith But this is more than any man of reason can believe unlesse wee allow him that affirms contradictories to ground himself upon one part of the contradiction which the other part of it destroyes For seeing that there must be but one reason one ground upon which we believe all that we believe and that it is manifest that those Articles of Faith which the determination of the Church creates being not such by any thing which that determination supposes are believed to be such meerly in consideration of the authority of the Church that determines them By consequence the Scripture and whatsoever is held to be of Faith upon any ground which the authority of the Church createth is no mater of Faith but by the authority of the Church determining that it be held for such On the other side hee that allowes Tradition to be the reason why hee believes the Christian Faith necessarily allowes all that hee allowes to be mater of Faith not onely to be true but to be mater of Faith before ever the Church determine it So that allowing him to say that hee holds his Faith by Tradition hee must allow mee that hee contradicts himself whensoever hee takes upon him to maintain that the Church creates new Articles of Faith which were not so the instant before the determination of the Church CHAP. XXXII Answer to an Objection that choice of Religion becomes difficult upon these terms This resolution is for the Interest of the Reformation Those that make the Church Infallible cannot those that make the Scripture clear and sufficient may own Tradition for evidence to determine the meaning of the Scriptures and Controversies of Faith The Interest of the Church of England The pretense of Rushworthes Dialogues that wee have no unquestionable Scripture and that the Tradition of the Church never changes AS little shall I need to be troubled at any reason that may be framed against this resolution having answered the prejudice that seems to sway most men to apprehend that God must have been wanting to his Church if all things necessary to salvation be not clearly laid down in the Scriptures For it is very manifest that the very same presumption possesses the mindes of the adverse party that God must needs have provided a visible Judge infallible in deciding all Controversies of Faith Whether the Church or any person or persons authorized in behalf of the Church for the present all is one I shall therefore onely demand that it be considered first that God was no way tied either to send our Lord Christ or to give his Gospel which because it comes of Gods free grace is therefore called the Word of his Grace and the Covenant of Grace Then that hee hath not found himself obliged to provide effectual means to bring all mankinde to the knowledge of it resting content to have provided such as if men be not wanting to their own salvation and the salvation of the rest of mankinde may be sufficient to bring all men to the knowledg of it And when it is come to knowledg all discreet Christians notwithstanding must acknowledg that the motives thereof fully propounded though abundantly sufficient to reasonable persons yet do not constrain those that are convicted by them to proceed according to them as necessary reasons constrain all understandings that see them to judg by them For how should it be a trial of mens dispositions if there were no way to avoid the necessity of those motives that inforce it Now if any knowledg can be had of truth in maters of faith that become disputable it must all of necessity depend upon the sufficiency of those motives which convict men to imbrace the Christian Faith And if there be any such skill as that of a Divine among Christians of necessity all of it proceeds upon supposition of the said motives which not pretending to show the reason of things which they convict men to believe convict them notwithstanding to believe that they are revealed by God For what conviction can there be that this or that is true unlesse it may appear to fall under those motives as the means which God hath imployed so to recommend it Therefore can it not be reasonable to require a greater evidence to the truth of things disputable among Christians than God hath allowed Christianity it self which being supposed on all hands it remains questionable whether this or that be part of it Therefore can it not be presumed that God hath made the Scriptures clear in all points necessary to salvation to all understandings concerned or that hee hath
destructive to their particular salvation within that compasse neither will their fall be imputable to the Church but to themselves if they do But neither shall this difficulty be so great an inconvenience in our common Christianity nor so insuperable as it seems to those that are loth to be too much troubled about the world to come For I never found that God pretendeth to give or that it is reason hee should give those means for attaining that truth by which wee must be saved which it should not lye within the malice of man to render difficult for them to compasse whom they concern I finde it abundantly enough for his unspeakable goodness and exactly agreeable with those means whereby hee convicteth the world of the truth of Christianity that hee give those whom it concerns such means to discern the truth of things in debate as being duly applyed are of themselves sufficient to create a resolution as certain as the weight of the mater in debate shall require And such I maintain the Scripture to be containing the sense of it within those bounds which the Rule of Faith and the Lawes given the Church by our Lord and his Apostles do limit For what is more obvious than to discern what the whole Body of the Church hath agreed in what not what is manifestly consequent to the same what not what is agreeable to the ground and end of those Lawes which the Church first received from our Lord and his Apostles what not Let prejudice cast what mists of difficulties it can before the light which God hath given his Church to discover the truth hee that stands out of their way shall discern much more art used to obscure than to discern it Neither is there any reason why it is so hard to make it discernable to all that are concerned but the unreasonable prejudices either of the force of humane authority in mater of Faith and the extent of Tradition beyond the Rule of Faith or that the consent of the whole Church may as well come from Antichrist as from the Apostles If the records of the Church were handled without these prejudices lesse learning than this age shows in other maters might serve to evidence the consent of â— Church in more controversies than wee have to those that would be content to rest in the Scripture expounded according to the same But if the Church that is those that uave right in behalf of the Church being perswaded of a sacrilegious privilege of Infallibility shall take upon them to determine truths in debate to limit Lawes to the Church without respect to this Rule which if they respect they manifestly renounce the privilege of their Infallibility I mervail not that God suffers his people to be tried with such difficulties whose sins I doubt deserve this tryal But then I say further that it is not the providence of God that is the means which hee hath provided to resolve men in debates of Christianity but it is the malice of man that makes that means uneffectual which God hath made sufficient I must now answer an envious objection that this resolution is not according to the positions of those that professe the Reformation with us To which I will speak as freely as to the rest having profess'd my self utterly assoiled of all faction and respect of mens persons to way against the means of finding the truth and for that reason devested even the Fathers of the Church of all authority which their merits from Christianity have purchased to hear what their testimonies argue in point of Historical truth I say then first that may saying no way prejudices the intent and interest of the Reformation whatsoever insufficience it may charge the expressions of Reformers with I know the worst that can be alleged in this point is that Luther in appealing from the Pope and Council called by him to a Council that should judg meerly by the Scriptures first framed this Controversie between the Scriptures and the Church which since hath been alwaies in debate so that hee which will not be tried by the Scriptures alone plainly seems to quit the party and give up the game Who has this imagination though never to apparent let mee desire him to go a little higher to the first commencing of the plea about Indulgences For there can be nothing more manifest than this That when those that undertook that cause against Luther found that the present practice of the Church could not be derived from any thing recorded in the Scripture they were forced to betake themselves to the authority of the Church not that which consisteth in testifying the faith once delivered but in creating that which never was of force untill the exercice of it Here let all the world judg for I am confident the case is so plain that all the world may judg in it whether Luther had any Interest to demand that the Scripture alone should be heard in opposition to the Tradition received from the beginning by the Church tending as I have said to nothing but to limit the meaning of the Scripture Or that his Interest required him to protest that the truth for which hee stood was not to be liable to the Sentence of the present Church And therefore when afterwards hee appealed to a Council which should pronounce by the Scriptures alone if this tend to exclude those means which are subordinate to the attaining of the meaning of the Scriptures I do utterly deny that it can be understood so to be meant by any man that would not defeat his own enterprize And therefore that it must be understood to exclude onely the authority of the present Church so farre as it proceeds not upon supposition of those grounds whereupon the Church is to pronounce For what hinders the sentence of the Church to be infallible not of it self alone but as it proceeds upon those means which duely applied produce a sentence that is infallible And truly were not his plea so to be understood all his Followers Melancthan Chemnitius and others who have written Volumes to show how their profession agrees with that of the Catholick Church should have taken pains to commit a very great inconsequence For as I have argued that those who maintain the Infallibility of the present Church do contradict themselves whensoever they have recourse either to the Scripture or to any Records of the Church to evidence the sense of the Scripture in that which otherwise they professe the authority of the Church alone infallibly to determine So those that will have the Scripture alone to determine all Controversies of Faith and yet take the pains to bring evidence of the meaning thereof from that which hath been received in the Church may very well be said to take pains to contradict themselves Some of our Scottish Presbyterians have observed that the Church of England was reformed by those that had more esteem of Melancthon than of Calvin and
consideration of his merits and sufferings which they neither acknowledge to have been tendred by our Lord nor accepted by the Father to any such effect or purpose But nothing hinders him therefore to acknowledge it the Grace of God that is a meere grant of his free goodnesse whatsoever condition he require thereby to qualifie him that imbraces it for the promises which it tenders provided it be such as he that it is tendred to can accomplish For that Faith which alone justifieth according to S. Paul he maketh to consist in believing the Truth of Christianity and sincerely indeavouring to bring forth the fruits thereof out of a grounded confidence of obtaining the said promises And that in consideration hereof those that thus believe are counted righteous before God that is treated as if they had been originally righteous and not sinners before they came to believe As for the Sacrament of Baptism making no more of a Church then of an arbitrary Society of so many as agree to serve God together in the same Faith it is no marvel if he make it a meer Ceremony the use whereof was during the time of the Disciples of our Lord and the conversion of Jews and Gentiles to Christianity by their preaching to signifie the purifying of them by that Faith to which they professed thereby to be converted which intent ceasing in those who being born of Christian Parents were never tainted with the filthinesse either of Jewes or Gentiles by consequence that ceremony though it may freely be used by Christians in the nature of a thing indifferent yet ought not to carry that opinion as if any mans salvation depended upon it And having related this opinion I must relate another opposite to this in another extream which is the opinion of those that hold that Faith which alone justifieth to consist in believing that a man is predestinated by God to life from everlasting as being of the number of them whom Christ was sent to redeem exclusively to the rest of Mankind And that therefore the whole consideration for which this Faith justifieth is the obedience of Christ imputed unto them which are of thâ—s number upon no other account then the eternall purpose of God to give him for them alone whereby his sufferings are theirs in Law as much as if they had been performed by themselves the condition of Faith serving only to limit a qualification without which this purpose availeth them not being limited to take place from the time that this purpose of God is revealed unto them the revelation whereof they suppose to be that Faith which alone justifieth Who they are that maintain this opinion I will not here dispute which I intend to show cause why it is to be thought so ill of that I could with that no man that is called a Christian would own it And perhaps many of those who either expresly or in effect do hold it do withall hold other points which indeed and in effect are contradictions to it Neither can I say that our Presbyterians are parties in it but this I say that this is the opinion in opposiâ—ion to which Socinus brought in the Opinion hitherto described voiding the Grace and satisfaction of Christ by declining to the other extream as any man may see that with a little care shall peruse the fourth part of his Book De Christo Servatorâ— Cap. III. IX X. And therefore I conceive I may justly infer that to maintain this extremity which he not consulting the Catholick Church and the Faith thereof thought necessary to the voyding of that other extream which he found inconsistent with the principles of Christianity he proceeded so far as to deny any Godhead any being of Christ before his birth of the Virgin taking away by consequence that reason and ground both of satisfaction for sin and of merit of Grace which the Church ascribeth to his obedience and sufferings and placeth the Godhead of Christ which he acknowledgeth so far as to tender him the worship that is proper to God at least in some circumstances in that height of eminence to which God hath exalted him for undertaking and performing the Commission of reconciling Man to God though bound to it as a meer man and Gods Creature before he undertooke it And thus you see how that part of Socinus his Heresie in denying the Faith of the Holy Trinity indirectly commeth in to the question of the Covenant of Grace Seeing it is manifest to the sence of all men that had he not questioned the Godhead of Christ there had been no pretence of bringing the Faith of the Trinity into any dispute But of what consequence this opinion concerning Justifying Faith and the nature of it is to the substance of Christianity it will be time to consider when I have shewed why it is not true In the mean I shall note here another opinion differing in somewhat but agreeing in much with this which I take to be the opinion of our Antinomians but shall not be much troubled if any man shall dispute that I mistake it For seeing them so full with a blasphemous conceit of Gods Spirit that they would think it a disparagement to it to be tied to any dispute of reason though upon supposition of the Christian Faith to distinguish between principles and conclusions to infer a certaine position from certain grounds even of Scripture I cannot think it any great imputation to misunderstand them whose perfection it is not to understand themselves For when I name Antinomians I intend to comprise in the opinion which I refute all our Anabaptists all our Familists all our Enthusiasts and Quakers all Sectaries whatsoever that do believe themselves possessed of the Spirit not presupposing not only the beliefe of that Faith which is necessary to the salvation of all Christians but also whatsoever else it shall appear that the condition of the Covenant of Grace importeth The having of Gods Spirit as it inferreth a right to everlasting life so supposing whatsoever the Covenant of Grace importeth But by the noise which they make with the free Grace of God and the Covenant of Grace I conceive the main of their position lies in one step beyond that extream which I described even now in opposition to Socinus That we are justified by the obedience of Christ performed for them for whom God appointed it and therefore imputed to them from everlasting by vertue of that appointment made from everlasting but revealed to them by that faith whereby they know themselves to be elected to life from everlasting not depending upon the revelation thereof but the revelation upon the being of it And upon this ground it is that they say that God sees not nor can see sin in his Elect that all their sins are pardoned before they are done and that there is no mortall sin but repentance implying the want of saving faith with which no sin can stand nor any thing be but sin without
is to determine controversies of Faith And what obligation that determination produceth Traditions of the Apostles oblige the present Church as the reasons of them continue or not Instances in our Lords Passeover and Eucharist Penance under the Apostles and afterwards S. Pauls vail eaâ—ing blood and things offered to Idols The power of the Church in limiting these Traditions 178 CHAP. XXV The power of the Church in limiting even the Traditions of the Apostles Not every abuse of this power a sâ—fficient warrant for particular Churches to reforme themselves Heresie consists in denying something necessary to salvation to be believed Schism in departing from the unity of the Church whether upon that or any other cause Implicite Faith no virtue but the effect of it may be the work of Christian charity p. 163 CHAP. XXVI What is to add to Gods Law What to adde to the Apocalypse S. Pauls Anathema The Beraeans S. Johns Gospel sufficient to make one believe and the Scriptures the man of God perfect How the Law giveth light and Christians are taught by God How Idolatry is said not to be commanded by God 168 CHAP. XXVII Why it was death to transgress the determinations of the Jewes Consistory and what power this argueth in the Church A difference between the authority of the Apostles and that of the Church The being of the Church to the worlds end with power of the Keyes makes it not infallible Obedience to Superiours and the Pillar of truth inferre it not 175 CHAP. XXXI The Fathers acknowledge the sufficiencie 〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—rnesse of the Scriptures as the Traditions of the Church They are to be reconciled by limiting the termes which they use The limitations of those sayings which make all Christian truth to be contained in the Scriptures Of those which make the authority of the Church the ground of Faith 181 CHAP. XXXII Answer to an Objection that choice of Religion becomes difficult upon these terms This resolution is for the Interest of the Reformation Those that make the Church Infallible cannot those that make the Scriptures â—â—ear â—nd sufficient may own Tradition for evidence to determine the meaning of the Scriptures and controversies of Faith The Interest of the Church of England The pretense of Rushworthes Dialogues that we have no unquestionable Scripture and that tâ—e Tradition of the Church never changes 192 CHAP. XXXI That the Scriptures which wee have are unquestionable That mistakes in Copying are not considerable to the sense and effect of them The meaning of the Hebrew and Greek even of the Prophets determinable to the deciding of Controversies How Religion delivered by Tradition becomes subject to be corrupted 198 CHAP. XXXIV The dispute concerning the Canon of Scripture and the translations thereof in two Questions There can be no Tradition for those books that were written since Prophesie ceased Wherein the excellence of them above other books lies The chiâ—fe objections against them are questionâ—ble In those parcels of the New Testament that have been questioned the case is not the same The sense of the Church 207 CHAP. XXXIII Onely the Originall Copy can be Authentick But the truth thereof may as well be found in the translations of the Old Testament as in the Jewes Copies The Jewes have not falsified them of malice The points come neither from Moses nor Esdras but from the Talmud Iewes 218 CHAP. XXXIV Of the ancientest Translations of the Bible into Greek first With the Authors and authority of the same Then into the Chaldee Syriack and Latine Exceptions against the Greek and the Samaritane Pentateuch They are helps never thelesse to assure the true reading of the Scriptures though with other Copies whether Jewish or Christian Though the Vulgar Latine were better than the present Greek yet must both depend upon the Original Greek of the New Testament No danger to Christianity by the differences remaining in the Bible 224 The CONTENTS of the second Book CHAP. I. TWo parts of that which remains How the dispute concerning the Holy Trinity with Socinus belongs to the first The Question of justification by Faith alone The Opinion of Socinus concerning the whole Covenant of Grace The opinion of those who make justifying Faith the knowledge of a mans Predestination opposite to it in the other extream The difference between it and that of the Antinomians That there are mean Opinions p. 1 CHAP. II. Evidence what is the condition of the Covenant of Grace The contract of Baptism The promise of the Holy Ghost annexed to Christs not to Johns Baptism Those are made Christs Disciples as Christians that take up his Cross in Baptism The effects of Baptism according to the Apostles 5 CHAP. III. The exhortations of the Apostles that are drawn from the patterns of the Old Testament suppose the same How the Sacraments of the Old and New Testament are the same how not the same How the new Testament and the New Covenant are both one The free-will of man acteth the same part in dealing about the New-Covenant as about the Old The Gospel a Law 12 CHAP. IV. The consent of the whole Church evidenced by the custome of catechising By the opinion thereof concerning the salvation of those that delayed their Baptism By the rites and Ceremonies of Baptism Why no Penance for sins before but after Baptism The doctrine of the Church of England evident in this case 17 CHAP. V. The Preaching of our Lord and his Apostles evidenceth that some act of Mans free choice is the condition which it requireth The correspondence between the Old and New Testament inferreth the same So do the errors of Socinians and Antinomians concerning the necessity of Baptism Objections deferred 23 CHAP. VI. Justifying faith sometimes consists in believing the truth Sometimes in trust in God grounded upon the truth Sometimes in Christianity that is in imbracing and professing it And that in the Fathers as well as in the Scriptures Of the informed and formed Faith of the Schools 30 CHAP. VII The last signification of Faith is properly justifying Faith The first by a Metonymy of the cause The second of the effect Those that are not justified do truly believe The trust of a Christian presupposeth him to be justified All the promises of the Gospel become due at once by the Covenant of Grace That to believe that we are Elect or justified is not justifying faith 37 CHAP. VIII The objection from S. Paul We are not justifyed by the Law nor by Works but by Grace and by Faith Not meant of the Gospel and the works that suppose it The question that S. Paul speakes to is of the Law of Moses and the workes of it He sets those workes in the same rank with the works of the Gentiles by the light of nature The civil and outward works of the Law may be done by Gentiles How the Law is a Pedagogue to Christ 43 CHAP. IX Of the Faith and Justification of Abraham and the Patriarkes according to the Apostles
The nature and intent of it renders it subordinate to the Clergy How farre the single life of the Clergy hath been a Law to the Church Inexecution of the Canons for it Nullity of the proceedings of the Church of Rome in it The interest of the People in the acts â—f the Church And in the use of the Scriptures 368 CHAP. XXXII How great the Power of the Church and the offect of it is The right of judging the causes of Christians ceaseth when it is protected by the State An Objection If Ecclesiastical Power were from God Secular Power could not limit the use of it Ground for the Interest of the State in Church matters The inconsequence of the argument The concurrence of both Interests to the Law of the Church The Inâ—erest of the state in the indowment of the Church Concurrence of both in matrimonial causes and Ordinations Temporall penalties upon Excommunication from the State No Soveraigne subject to the greater Excommunication but to the lesse The Rights of the Jewes State and of Christian Powers in Religion partly the same partly not The infinite Power of the Pope not founded upon Episcopacy but upon acts of the Secular Powers of Christendom 381 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF Christian Truth The First BOOK CHAP. I. All agree that Reason is to decide controversies of Faith The objection that Faith is taught by Gods Spirit answered What Reason decideth questions of Faith The resolution of Faith ends not in the light of Reason but in that which Reason evidenceth to come from Gods messengers THe first thing that we are to question in the beginning is Whether there be any means to resolve by the use of reason those controverâ—â—es which cause division in the Church Which is all one as if we undertook to enquire whether there be any such skill or knowledg as that for which men call themselvs Divines For if there be it must be the same in England as at Rome And if it have no principles as no principles it can have unlesse it can be resolved what those principles are then is it a bare name signifying nothing But if there be certain principles which all parties are obliged to admit that discourse which admits no other will certainly produce that resolution in which all shall be obliged to agree And truely this hope there is left that all parties do necessarily suppose that there is means to resolve by reason all differences of Faith Inasmuch as all undertake to perswade all by reason to be of the judgment of each one and would be thought to have reason on their side when so they do and that reason is not done them when they are not believed There are indeed many passages of Scripture which say that Faith is only taught by the Spirit of God Mat. XVI 17. Blessed art thou Peter son of Ionas for flesh and blood revealed not this to thee but my Father which is in the heavens II. 25. I thank thee O Father Lord of heaven and earth that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent and revealed them unto babes 1 Cor. I. 26 27 28. For Brethren you see your calling that not many wise according to the flesh not many mighty not many noble But the foolish things of the world hath God chosen to shame the wise The weak things of the world hath God chosen to shame the strong The ignoble and despicable things of the world hath God chosen and the things that are not to confound the things that are John VI. 45. It is written in the Prophets And they shall be all taught of God Heb. VIII 10. Jer. XXXI 33. This is the Covenant that I will make with the house of Israel in those dayes saith the Lord I will put my Laws in their mindes and write them in their hearts These and the like Scriptures then asâ—ribing the reason why wee believe to the work of Gods Spirit seem to leave no room for any other reason why wee should believe But this difficulty is easie for him to resolve that diâ—â—inguishes between the reason that moveth in the nature of an object and that motion which the active cause produceth For the motion of an object supposes that consideration which discovers the reason why wee are to believe But the motion of the Holy Ghost in the nature of an active cause proceeds without any notice that wee take of it According to the saying of our Lord to Nicodemus John 111. 8. The winde bloweth where it listeth and a man hears the noise of it but cannot tell whence it cometh nor whither it goeth So is every one that is born of the spirit For wee must know that there may be sufficient reason to evict the truth of Christianity and yet prove ineffectual to induce the most part either inwardly to believe or outwardly to professe it The reason consists in two things For neither is the mater of Faith evident to the light of reason which wee bring into the world with us And the Crosse of Christ which this profession drawes after it necessarily calls in question that estate which every man is setled upon in the world So that no marvel if the reasons of believing fail of that effect which for their part they are sufficient to produce Interest diverting the consideration or intercepting the consequence of such troublesom truth and the motives that inforce it The same is the reason why the Christian world is now to barren of the fruits of Christianity For the profession of it which is all the Laws of the world can injoyn is the common privilege by which men hold their estates Which it is no marvel those men should make use of that have neither resolved to imbrace Christ with his Crosse nor considered the reason they have to do it who if they should stick to that which they professe and when the protection of the Law failes or act according to it when it would be disadvantage to them in the world so to do should do a thing inconsequent to their own principles which carried them no further than that profession which the Law whereby they hold their estates protecteth The true reason of all Apostasy in all trials As for the truth of Christianity Can they that believe a God above refuse to believe his messengers because that which they report stands not in the light of any reason to evidence it Mater of Faith is evidently credible but cannot be evidently true Christianity supposes sufficient reason to believe but not standing upon evidence in the thing but upon credit of report the temptation of the Crosse may easily defeat the effect of it if the Grace of Christ and the operation of the Holy Ghost interpose not Upon this account the knowledg of Gods truth revealed by Christ may be the work of his Grace according to the Scriptures for that so it is I am not obliged neither have I any reason here to suppose being to come in
question hereafter for the Principles which here wee seek to decide but supposing sufficient reason propounded to make it evidently credible And hee that alleges Gods Spirit for what hee cannot show sufficient reason to believe otherwise may thank himself if hee perish by believing that which hee cannot oblige another man to believe Here wee must make a difference between those men whom God imployes to deal with other men in his name and those which come to God by their means For of the first it is enough to demand how it appears that they come from God To demand by what means hee makes his will known to them supposing they come from him is more than needs at least in this place For if it be granted mee that the Apostles and Prophets were the messengers of God suppose I cannot tell how Prophesies are made evident to the souls of them to whom the Spirit of God reveals them No body will question Whether or no hee ought to believe these whom hee acknowledges Gods messengers And therefore it will be no prejudice to my purpose to set aside all curious dispute how and by what means God reveales his messages to those whom by such revelations hee makes Prophets But those that derive their knowledg from the report of such as are believed to come from God must as well give account how they know that which they believe to come from such report as why such report is to be believed For if wee believe that God furnished those whom hee imployed with sufficient means to make it appear that they came on his message wee can dispute no further why their report is to be believed If wee believe it not there will be no cause why those who pretend themselves to be Gods messengers should not be neglected as fools or rejected as impostors Nay there will be no cause why wee should be Christians upon the report of those that show us not sufficient reason to receive them for Gods messengers But this being admitted and believed unlesse evidence can be made what was delivered by them that came on Gods message it is in vain to impose any thing on the Faith of them that are ready to receive whatsoever comes upon that score The resolution then of all controversies in Religion which the Church is divided about consists in making evidence what hath been delivered by them whom all Christians believe that God sent to man on his message And therefore there will remain no great difficulty about the force and use of reason in matters of Faith if wee consider that it is one thing to resolve them by such principles as the light of reason evidenceth another to do it by the use of reason evidencing what Gods messengers have delivered to us For all dispute in point of Faith tends only to evidence what wee have received from the authors of our Faith Till that evidence come doubt remaineth when it is come it vanisheth Without the use of reason this evidence is not made though not by that which the light of nature discovereth yet by those helps which reason imployeth to make it appear what wee have received from those from whom wee received our Christianity Which without those helps did not appear But if competition fall out between that which is thus evidenced to come from God on the one side and on the other side the light of reason seeming evidently to contradict the truth of it First wee are certain that this competition or contradiction is only in appearance because both reason and revelation is from God who cannot oblige us to make contradictory resolutions Then there is no help without the use of reason to unmask this appearance I will not here go about to controule that which may be alleged on either side in any particular point by any general prejudice chusing rather to referre the debate to that particular question in which cause of competition may appear then to presume upon any thing which the truth of Christianity the only supposition which hitherto I premise appeareth not so contain Only this I will prescribe It is not the exception of a Christian to say That which the light of reason evidenceth not to be possible is not true though commended to us by the same reasons which move us to be Christians For the nature of God the counsails of God the works of God being such things as mans understanding hath no skill of till it be enlightened by God from above That sense of Gods oracles which the motives of Faith do inforce is no lesse undisputable then it is undisputable whether that which God saith be true or not who inacts his revelations by those motives CHAP. II. The question between the Scripture and the Church which of them is Judge in matters of Faith Whether opinion the Tradition of the Church stands better with Those that hold the Scripture to be clear in all things necessary to salvation have no reason to exclude the Tradition of the Church What opinions they are that deny the Church to be a Society or Corporation by Gods Law THe cure of all diseases comes from the sound ingredients of nature when they get the upper hand and restore nature by expelling that which was against it Neither can the divisions and distempers of the Church be cured but by the common truth which the parties acknowledg when the right understanding of it clears the mistakes which mans weaknesse tainteth it with There is a sufficient stock of sound Principles left all the parties which I mean when all of them acknowledg the Scriptures that is so much of them as all agree to contain the word of God But supposing the truth of them to come from God First it remaines in difference how the meaning of them may be determined when doubt is made of it And then because nothing but the true meaning of the Scripture can be counted Scripture if there be a way to determine that Whether any thing over and above it is to be received for the word of God with it Concerning which point it is well enough known what opinions there are on foot When Luther first disputed against the Indulgences of Leo X Pope those that appeared in defense of them the Master of the Popes Palace and Eckius finding themselves scanted of mater to allege out of the Scriptures betook themselvs to the common place of the Church and the Power of it the force whereof stood upon this consequence That whatsoever the Church shall decree is to be received for unquestionable Afterwards certain Articles extracted out of Luthers Writings being condemned by a Bull of the Pope Luther interposes his appeal to a Council that should decree according to the Scripture alone This is the rise of the great Controversie still on foot between the Church and the Scripture between Scripture and the Tradition of the Church of what force each of them is in deciding controversies of Faith They that hold
is sufficient to evidence that it is the word of God which they contain This if wee can resolve in our way perhaps wee may discover ground to stand upon when wee come to the main Hee that sayes the Scriptures are to be believed for themselves exposes them to the scorn of unbelievers by tying himself to use no other reason for them least for that reason they should finde that credit which the seeking of it showes they had not of themselves Hee that sayes they are to be believed for the authority of the Church is bound to give account how wee shall know both that there is a Church which some persons may oblige And who is the Church that is who be the men whose act obliges the Church And that without alleging Scripture because hitherto wee have no reason to receive it And being but men how their Act obliges the Church which cannot be showed without showing that God hath founded a Corporation of his Church and given power to some men or some qualities or ranks of men in it to oblige the whole Which how it will be showed without means to determine the sense of the Scriptures the parties agreeing in nothing but the truth of Christianity and of the Scriptures is impossible to be said This position then induces that stop to all proceeding by reason which Logicians call a Circle When a man disputes in a round as a mill-horse grindes arguing this power to be in the Church by the Scriptures without which hee can say nothing to it and arguing the truth of the Scriptures back again by alleging the authority of the Church Which destroyes that supposition upon which all dispute of reason proceeds that nothing can be proved but by that which is better known than that which it proveth But are those that allege the spirit for the evidence upon which they receive the Scripture lesse subject to this inconvenience For is it not manifest that men may and do delude themselves with an imagination that Gods Spirit tells them that which their own Spirit without Gods Spirit conceives How then shall it discerned what comes from Gods Spirit what does not without supposing the Scriptures by which the mater thereof is discernable And is not this the same Circle to prove the truth of the Scriptures by the dictate of Gods Spirit and that by alleging the Scriptures To make the ground of this inconvenience still more evident I will here insist upon this presumption That the gift of the Holy Ghost presupposeth Christianity that is the belief and profession of the Christian Faith And therefore that no man can know that hee hath the Holy Ghost but hee must first know the truth of Christianity and of the Scriptures Not that it is my meaning either to suppose or prove in this place that whoso hath the Spirit of God doth or may know that hee hath it For that is one of those controversies which wee are seeking principles to resolve But that no man can know that hee hath the Spirit of God unlesse first hee know himself to be a true Christian That is to say that supposing for the present but not granting that a man can know that hee hath Gods Spirit and that it is Gods Spirit which moves him to believe this or that hee must first know what is true Christianity and by consequence the means to discern between true and false And this I propose for an assumption necessary to the evidencing of that which followes but not questioned by any party in the Church because it is a principle in Christianity that the Grace of the Holy Ghost is a promise peculiar to those that undertake it Who were they on whom the Holy Ghost was first bestowed Was it not the Apostles and the rest of Disciples assembled to serve God with the Offices of the Church that is to say already Christians When Philip had converted the Samaritanes came S. Peter and S. John to give them the Holy Ghost by laying on their hands till they were baptized Concerning the Disciples at Ephesus Acts XIX 1-6 there is some dispute whether they received the Holy Ghost by the imposition of S. Pauls hands by virtue of the Baptism of John which they had received before they met with S. Paul or whether they were baptized over and above with the baptisme of Christ and thereupon received the Holy Ghost by the laying on of S. Pauls hands But of this they that will have them to have been baptized only with S. Johns baptisme make no dispute that they were fully made Christians by it Can any thing be clearer than S. Pauls words Gal. II. 2-5 That by the hearing of Faith that is obeying it they had received the Holy Ghost which by the works of the Law they could not receive And 2 Cor. XI 4. If hee that cometh preach another Jesus whom wee preached not or yee receive another Spirit which yee received not or another Gospel which yee admitted not Another Jesus another Gospel inferreth another Spirit So Gal. III. 14. That the blessing of Abraham may come upon the Gentiles through Christ Jesus that yee may receive the promise of the Holy Ghost by Faith The promise of the Holy Ghost then supposeth the condition of Faith And Gal. IV. 6. Because yee are sons therefore God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts crying Abba Father Heb. VI. 6. It is impossible for those that were once inlightened and tasted the heavenly gift and became partakers of the Holy Ghost Upon inlightening that is baptisme followes the participation of the H. Ghost And seeing the resurrection of the flesh unto glory is ascribed by S. Paul to the Spirit of God that dwelt in it while it lived upon earth Rom. VIII 10 11. as the resurrection of our Lord Christ is ascribed to the Spirit of holinesse that dwelt in him without measure Rom. I. 4. John III. 34. of necessity the Holy Ghost dwelleth in all them that shall rise to glory But Baptisme assureth resurrection to glory Therefore it assureth the Holy Ghost by which they rise Nor can it be understood how wee are the Temple of God because the Spirit of God dwelleth in us 1 Cor. III. 16. but because the promise of the Holy Ghost dependeth upon that which distinguisheth Christians from other people In fine when our Saviour promiseth John XIV 23. If any man love mee hee will keep my word and my Father will love him and wee will come to him and abide with him Seeing the Father and the Son do dwell in those that love God by the grace of the Holy Ghost the gift of the Holy Ghost of necessity supposeth the love of God in them that have it And yet his discourse is more effectual Rom. VIII 1-9 That there is now no condemnation for those that are in Christ Jesus that walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit For as hee inferreth that if any man have not the
spirit of Christ hee is none of Christs So hee had premised Rom. V. 1-5 Being justified by Faith wee have peace towards God through our Lord Jesus Christ together with the joy of hope by the love of God poured out in our hearts through the Spirit of God which is in us The Kingdome of God consisting in righteousnesse and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost Rom. XIV 17. If it be here objected that the Grace of the Holy Ghost is necessary to bring a man to Christianity and therefore cannot suppose it Supposing this for the present but not granting it because it is in controversie and must be resolved by the grounds which wee seek It will be easie to distinguish between the grace of the Holy Ghost and the gift of the Holy Ghost For hee that is converted to believe the truth of Christianity may acknowledge it to be of Grace but must not presume of the gift of the Holy Ghost that it is bestowed on him for his own till his conversion be complete by undertaking the profession of Christianity If it be further alleged that Cornelius and his company received the Holy Ghost before they were baptized The answer is ready from that maxime of Law That every exception against a Rule establishes the Rule in cases not excepted Cornelius no Jew but converted from Idols to worship the true God under the promises which the Jewes expected with his company of the same Faith being in the state of Gods grace upon that account receives the Holy Ghost before Baptisme because God knew him ready to undertake the profession of Christianity so soon as it could appear to be commanded by God And this for the satisfaction of S. Peter and the Jewes in that secret which hereby begâ—n to be declared that the Gentiles as well as the Jewes belonged to the Church It is true the graces of the Holy Ghost are of two kindes For some of them are given for the benefit and salvation of those in whom they are Some for the benefit and edification of the Church And it is true that both kindes are meant and expressed by these Scriptures But it is no lesse true that neither of them is to be had but supposing the truth of Christianity and of the Scriptures For the first kinde is granted to none but those that imbrace Christianity with a sincere intention of living according to that which they professe Being indeed the help that God by his Gospel promises and allowes them to go thorough with that high and difficult profession which they undertake Wee see the Apostles forsake their Lord and make a doubt of his resurrection before the coming of the Holy Ghost Whom having received they are ready to professe Christ in the midst of utmost dangers And S. John as hee giveth the reason why the righteous sin not because their â—eed abideth in them that is the word of the Gospel by which they were ingendred anew to be Christians 1 John III. 9. So hee giveth the reason why they were not to be seduced by the Heresies of that time because the unction which they had received from the Holy One taught them to know all things 1 John II. 20 27. Thus the Unction of the Spirit supposes the seed of the Word and the seed of the Word inferres the Unction of the Spirit And as when the Word of God came to the Prophets they were withall possessed by Gods Spirit moving them to deliver it to the people So when the word of Faith is established in the heart of a Christian as David saith the Spirit of God possesseth him with an inclination both to professe it and to live according to it As for the second kinde it is true they are granted to those that are not heires of Gods promises as it appeares by the instances of Saul surprised with the Spirit of Prophesie when hee intended the death of David 1 Sam. XIX 23 24. Of those that have prophesied and cast out Devils and done miracles in our Lords name to whom hee shall say I know you not Mat. VII 22 23. Of Caiaphas who prophesied of our Lords death when hee was compassing of it John XI 49 -52. And of Balaam in the last place as all know But as the former kinde supposeth true Christianity in him that hath it so doth this correspondently suppose the profession of it as under the old Law the profession of the true God The tryal of a Prophet under the Law was not the doing of a miracle alone If hee seduced from God in stead of taking him for Gods messenger they were to put him to death Deut. XIII 1-5 So the tryal was the doing of a miracle under the profession of the true God Under the Gospel No man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus anathema nor can any man call Jesus Lord but by the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. XII 3. Supposing that a man speaketh such things as must come either from Gods Spirit or from evil Spirits the tryal is whether hee professe Christ or not And 1 John IV. 2 3. Every Spirit that confesseth Jesus come in the flesh to be Christ is of God And every Spirit that confesseth not Jesus Christ that is come in the flesh is not of God Every Spirit that is every inspiration which a man of himself cannot have God will not have his people so tempted that under the profession of the true Religion the Devils instruments should have power to work miracles to seduce them from it Upon these terms prophesied Saul under the Law and upon the same terms prophesied those under the Gospel whom our Lord will not own having done miracles in his name As for Caiaphas it doth not appear that hee spoke those words whereby S. John saith hee prophened of our Lords death by revelation or inspiration from God For the reason is given why hee prophened because hee was High Priest that year Now when the High Priests declared Gods orders to his ancient people there is no appearance that they were inspired by revelation with that which they declared But that putting on the Pontifical robes Gods will appeared by the brest-plate of Urim and Tummim though now wee know not how Accordingly to were Caiaphas his words ordered this gift being ceased many ages afore as to containe a Prophesie of our Lords death by Gods intent but without his But Balaams case is farre otherwise Arnobius advers Gent. I. tells us that Magicians in their operations met with contrary Gods whom hee calls Antitheos that would not suffer them to proceed Balaam met with the true God and knew him to be so and all his Inchantments controlable by him and yet sacrifices to false Gods that by their help hee might curse Gods people In this case Balaam though commanded as a subject is not as a friend inspired by God when God forces him to speak what hee would not If any man then resolve the credit of the Scripture into the
who professe the true Christ Nor under the Law were granted but to those who professed the true God And for this cause they are called by S. Paul 1 Cor. XII 7. the manifestation of the Spirit because they manifest the presence of God in his Church As 1 Cor. XIV 22-25 hee saith that unbelievers seeing the secrets of their hearts revealed by those graces were moved to fall on their faces and worship God declaring that God is in his Church of a truth Those therefore who are thus witnessed by God upon his witnesse are to be received whatsoever they deliver in Gods name concerning either the Law of Moses or the Gospel of Christ For how can any man imagine that upon every new revelation declared by a Prophet upon every new letter written or act done by an Apostle a new evidence should be requisite to attest a new Commission from God Especially the presumption that God will not suffer his people to be abused by trusting him being necessary and not onely reasonable Since therefore our Lord and his Apostles carry this quality no lesse than did Moses and the Prophets it followes of necessity that their writings and what else they may have ordained are no lesse the Law of God no lesse obliging than the Law of Moses by virtue of their Commission which makes their acts in Gods name to be Gods acts Though civil Law they are not till civil Powers binde them upon their Subjects CHAP. IV. Neither the Dictate of Gods Spirit nor the authority of the Church is the reason of believing any thing in Christianity Whether the Church be before the Scripture or the Scripture before the Church The Scriptures contain not the Infallibility of the Church Nor the consent of all Christians IT is now time to proceed to the resolution of some part of those disputes and opinions which wee showed the world divided into upon occasion of the question how Controversies of Faith are to be tryed and ended That is to say so much of them as must be determined by him that will proceed in this dispute For supposing the premises to be true I shall not make any difficulty to conclude That neither the dictate of the Spirit of God to the Spirits of particular Christians that is the presumption of it nor the authority of the Church that is the presumption of the like dictate to any persons that may be thought to have power of obliging the Church is a competent reason to decide the meaning of the Scripture or any Controversie about mater of Faith obliging any man therefore to believe it And by consequence that the authority of the Church that is of persons authorized to give sentence in behalf of the Body of the Church here understood is not Infallible which if it were it must be without question admitted for a competent reason of believing all such sentences to be Infallibly true The truth of this Conclusion is demonstrated by the premises if any thing in a mater of this nature can be counted demonstrative If whatsoever the Spirit of God can be presumed to dictate to the Spirit of any Christian presupposeth the truth of Christianity as that which must try it whether onely a presumption or truth then can no mans word that professes Christianity be the reason why another man should believe For whosoever it is that gives the sentence by professing Christianity pretendeth to have a reason for what hee professeth which reason and not his judgment if it be good obligeth all Christians as well as him to believe For being once resolved that wee are obliged to believe whatsoever comes from those persons whom wee are convinced to believe that God imployed to declare his will to us Whatsoever is said to come from them must for the same reason be received and therefore by the same meanes said to come from them as it is said that they came from God On the other side whatsoever cannot by the same means be said to come from them can never by any means be said to come from God who hath given us no other means to know what hee would have us believe but those whom hee hath imployed on his message Wherefore seeing the authority of the Church supposeth the truth of Christianity of necessity it supposeth the reason for which whatsoever can be pretended to belong to Christianity is receivable Because supposing for the present though not granting that the Church is a Body which some persons by Gods appointment have authority to oblige it is manifest that no man can be vested with this authority but hee must bear the profession of a Christian and by consequence suppose the reasons upon which whatsoever belongs to the profession of a Christian is receivable For that which cannot be derived as for the evidence of it from those means by which wee stand convicted that Christianity stands upon true motives cannot be receivable as any part of it And therefore however the generality of this reason may obscure the evidence of it to them that take not the pains to consider it as it deserves yet the truth of it supposes no more than all use of reason supposes that all knowledg that is to be had proceeds upon something presupposed to be known In which case it would be very childish to consider that the Church is more ancient in time than the Scriptures at least than some part of them as the Writings of the Apostles for example in some sort then all Scriptures if wee understand the people of God and the Church to be the same thing For to passe by sor the present the Fathers before the Law as the people of Israel were Gods people by the Covenant of the Law before they received the Law written in the five Books of Moses So was the authority of Moses imployed by God to mediate that Covenant both good and sufficient before they by accepting the Law became Gods people And upon this authority alone and not upon any authority founded upon their being Gods people free and possessed of the Land of Promise to be ruled by themselves and their own Governors dependeth the credit of Moses and the Prophets Writings In like manner the being of the Church whether a Society and Corporation or not supposing the profession of Christianity and that the receiving of the Gospel which is the Covenant of Grace and that the authority of our Lord and his Apostles as sent by God to establish it Manifest it is that the credit of their Writings depends on nothing else but is supposed to the being of the Church whatsoever it is Which if it be so no lesse manifest it must be that nothing is receivable for truth in Christianity that cannot be evidenced to proceed from that authority that is more antient than the being of the Church as a truth declared by some act of that authority And therefore it would be childish to allege priority of time for the Church if perhaps
made of a General Council whether constituted according to right or not whether proceeding without force and fraud or not Is it as evident to all Christians as their Christianity or the Scriptures that it is not If it be said that all Catholicks agree that the Pope with a General Council or a General Council confirmed by the Pope cannot erre First what shall oblige them to agree For if they agree not their Infallibility is not evident to all Christians nor if their agreement appear casual can it be taken for a ground of Faith that is undefeifible Then to set aside all the East which contesting the Power of the Pope cannot concurre to this Infallibility about the Councils of Constance and Basle when the dispute between the Pope and Council was at the hottest there lived divers Doctors of repute that have maintained this Infallibility to be the gift and privilege not of the present but of the Catholick Church By name Ockam Alliacensis Panormitane Antoninus Cusanus Clemangis and Mirandula Whose words you may see in Doctor Baron of Aberdene his dispute de Objecto Fidei Tract V. Cap. XIX XX. Further I demand if there be in the Church a gift of Infallibility indâ—pendent upon the Scripture that is obliging to believe the decrees thereof which our common Christianity evidenceth not can it appear without the like reasons for which wee believe the Scripture Where is the evidence that Gods Spirit inspires them with their decrees Nay when wee see Popes and Councils imploy the same means to finde the truth of things in question which other men do would they have us believe that they shall not fail by Gods providence when they use no means but that may fail nor have themselves any reason in them to evidence that they do not fail For if they had they might make it appear But of all things the strâ—ngest is that they should undertake to perâ—wade the world this when as the Church it self never determined it Of all things that ever the Church of any time took in hand to decree it will never appear that ever it was decreed that the decrees of the present Church are to be admitted for Gods truth And therefore there is not so much appearance of any opinion the Church of Rome has that it is true as there is of humane policy in breeding men up in such prejudicate conceits which education makes them as zealous of as of their Faith though meer contradiction to the grounds of it That being intangled in their own understandings to hold things so inconsistent they may be the fitter instruments to intangle others in that obedience to the Church which they hold necessary though upon false reasons For as Antony disputes in Tully de Oratore that no man is so fit to induce others into passion as hee that appears really possessed with the same so is no man so fit to imbroile the true reason and order of believing in another mans understanding as hee that is himself first confounded in it There is indeed a plauâ—â—ble inconvenience alleged if it be not admitted to wit that differences cannot be ended otherwise But to object an inconvenience is not to answer an argument say Logicians Nor is it say I to demonstrate a truth It is requisite the Church should be one Suppose wee this for the present for it is not proved as yet but it is not therefore necessary that the unity thereof should depend upon the deâ—ision of all Controversies that arise what true what false It is a great deal easier to command men not to decide their own opinions than to believe their adversaries For to decide is nothing else but to command all men to judge one part to be true when it appeareth that a great part have already judged it to be false But not to offend him that hath declared a contrary judgment is a thing to be attained of him that cannot see reason to judge the same Charity may have place in all things in question among Christians though Faith be confined to the proper mater of it though wee cannot yet determine what that proper mater is and upon what termes it standeth It remains therefore that all presumption concerning the truth of the Churches decrees presupposeth the corporation of the Church the foundation thereof nor can any way be evidenced by supposing onely the truth of the Scriptures and the consent of Christians as Christians which conveyes the evidence thereof unto us So that the belief of the Scriptures and of all things so clear in the Scriptures that they are not questioned in the Church depending upon the evidence of Gods revelations to his messengers But the belief of the Churches decrees inasmuch as not evidenced by the Scriptures upon the presumption of the right use of the Power vested in them that decree by the foundation of the Church if that foundation may appear they do not allow us the common reason of all men that require us to yield the same credit to both CHAP. V. All things necessary to salvation are not clear in the Scriptures to all understandings Not in the Old Testament Not in the Gospel Not in the Writings of the Apostles It is necessary to salvation to believe more than this that our Lord is the Christ Time causeth obscurity in the Scriptures aswell as in other Records That it is no where said in the Scriptures that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scriptures Neither is there any consent of all Christians to evidence the same IN the next place to proceed by steps I must negatively conclude on the other side that all things necessary to the salvation of all are not of themselves clear in the Scriptures to all understandings Whereby I say not that all such things are not contained in the Scriptures as if some thing necessary to the salvation of all were to be received by Tradition alone Nor that being in the Scriptures they are not clear and discernable to the understandings of those that are furnished with means requisite to discern the meaning of the Scriptures But that which I stand upon is that it is not nor ought to be a presumption that this or that is not necessary to salvation because it is not clear in the Scriptures Which if it were admitted whosoever were able to make such an argument against any Article of Faith as all understandings interessed in salvation could not dissolve such as it is plain may be made against the truth of Christianity should have gained this that though it may be true yet it cannot be an Article of Faith To my purpose indeed it were enough in this place to prove that this is not the first truth in Christianity to wit that all things necessary to salvation are clear by the Scriptures For having obtained that there is no Rule to conclude those doctrines which may be questioned not to be Articles of Faith so that it cannot thereupon be
disputed by degrees that they are not true There would be nothing in my way to hinder the resolution of a positive Rule to distinguish between true and false in all things concerning the Christian Faith Notwithstanding because by that which already wee have said and that which appears to all men in the Scriptures there is sufficient means to conclude so much as I have proposed and that the proof of it will be an advantage to that which shall follow I shall undertake it supposing no more than I have said I do remember the Argument made against Tradition by Marinaro the Carmelite at the Council of Trent Which as it was thought so considerable there that order was taken that hee should appeare no more in the Council so seemed to mee when I reade it not easie to answer Now upon further consideration I make it my ground to prove the conclusion which I have advanced Hee argued That it was not possible to give a reason why God should provide that some of those truths which are necessary to salvation should be recorded in Scripture others equally obliging not For if you interpose the terme clearly and argue That there is no reason why God should deliver some things clearly by writing others not the argument will be the same To mee it seems manifest that hee who once holds that all things necessary to the salvation of all are clearly contained in the Scriptures adding onely clearly to his terms to all understandings ties himself by giving the reason why they ought to be clear because necessary to maintain that all truths are delivered by Scripture in the same degree of clearnesse to all understandings as they are in degree of necessity to the salvation of all souls For that every cause every reason should inferre the consequence produce the effect answerable in degree to that degree which the reason or cause is supposed to hold is a thing that all reason inforces every understanding justifies But that all things are not clear by the Scriptures in the same degree as they are necessary to salvation is clear to all in point of fâ—ct Inasmuch as there are infinite truths which Christians diffâ—r not about in the Scriptures because they think not their salvation concerned in the mater of them those which are thought to concern it remaining in dispute because not so clear Neither is it for a Christian to prescribe a reason why it ought to be otherwise because that were to prescribe unto Almighty God a rule not depending upon his will declared otherwise This is the issue upon which I demonstrate my intent Neither Gods act in general of declâ—ring his will in writing not his particular acts of declaring his will in such several maters as the several writings of the Prophets and Apostles which make the Body of the Scriptures contain do any way import the declaring of an intent in God thereby to manifest all things necessary to the salvation of all clearly to all understandings therefore that any thing is necessary to salvation is no presumption that it is clearly declared in Scripture to all understandings Inasmuch as it is manifest that no man can give Law to God what hee ought to declare but all men may presume that and that onely to be declared which by dealing with mâ—n under such or such a profession hee hath of his free goodnesse tied himself to declare For it being in the free choice of God whether to declare any will concerning mans salvation or none and that choice being made it remaining yet in his choice whether hee would declare his will by writing or not as it was in his power for so many years before Moses to save men without Scripture it cannot be said that either before declaring an intent to save men hee was bound to declare all that was necessary unto it by writing or by declaring it And this I hold enough to demonstrate to all understandings that the declaring of an intent to deliver us by writing things concerning our salvation imports not in God an intent to declare thereby all things necessary to the salvation of all clearly to all understandings Which will yet be cleâ—rer by proving the other part of my proposition that by the intent of writing the several Books whereof the Scripture consists clearly declared God hath not clearly declared the intent so often said The proof of this by the particulars I hold the sufficientest satisfaction that can be tendred here where the pretense is to proceed onely upon that which all Christians receive The particulars consist in the writings of the Prophets the sayings and doings of our Lord recorded in the four Gospels and the writings of the Apostles For the Gospels pretending to contain the doings and sayings of our Lord but to be written by his disciples It followes by the nature of the busâ—nesse that they must contain some thing as from the person of the Writer and of his sense over and above what they pretend to record Which properly will belong to the writings of the Apostles though contained in the Gospels And thus farre to avoid cavil I have thought fit here to distinguish Now that all mater of salvation is not clearly contained in the writings of the Prophets that is in the Old Testament written by Moses and his Scholars the Prophets I prescribe upon that which all Christians suppose as the ground upon which Christianity is justified against Judaisme That the Old Testament delivereth but the figure and shadow of the New For unlesse a man will have the figure and shadow to be all one with the body and substance hee must confesse that the substance of Christianity which is shadowed in the Old Testament is not clearly declared by the same unless he will have to be shadowed and unshadowed that is clear to be all one Let mee demand if Christianity be clearly declared by the Law to be that profession which God would have all to be saved by that should be saved from the time of prescribing it what need the miracles of our Lord and his Apostles what need the Resurrection and so his Sufferings as to the account of evidencing the truth of his Doctrine For the Law being once received upon necessary reasons it is impossible to say why any new reasons should be requiâ—ite to inforce the truth or the obligation of the Gospel if it were clearly declared by it Again it is manifest that our Lord being risen again and giving the Holy Ghost unto his Disciples by breathing on them John XX. 22. gave them also a spiritual grace of understanding the Scriptures as you finde Luke XXIV 32 45. Where first the Disciples that went to Emmaus confesse with admiration Did not our hearts burn within us when hee talked with us on the way and opened us the Scriptures declaring unto them how hee was foretold in the Old Testament as you have it afore Then having perswaded them all that it was even hee
salvation of all and that which becomes necessary to the salvation of some by reason of their particular states and conditions cannot be said The writings of the Apostles are their Epistles with their Acts and S. Johns Revelations if these may not be referred to the rank of their Epistles The chief of their Epistles that to the Romanes that to the Galatians that to the Ebrewes with the greatest part of the rest are either occasioned by the reservation which they used in declaring to those that were become Christians of Jewes their discharge from the Law as justified by Christ or by the secret indeavors of Hereticks pretending Commission from the Apostles on one side on the other practising compliance with the Jewes to seduce those that inclined to the Law to the damnable inventions of Simon Magus and his Successors But none of them pretendeth more than preventing or avoiding those particular disorders which appeared in the respective Churches For what the Apostles did in setling Christianity at Jerusalem or propagating it by S. Paul especially so farre as the book of the Acts relates what S. John saw touching the state of Christianity to come I suppose is something else than the summe of all that is necessary to the salvation of all Christians And though in discretion every man may presume that upon occasion of the expresse purposes of these writings there is nothing necessary to the salvation of all that is not touched in some place of them yet it is one thing to be touched upon the by another thing to be delivered upon expresse purpose For those things that are but touched upon occasion referring to the knowledge which they presuppose cannot must not containe the clear understanding of those things which they onely touch Unlesse wee will have the Writer so impertinent as upon every occasion to turne aside and instruct him that hee writes to in such things as hee supposes him to know afore So the reason why the summe or substance of Christianity is not clear in the Old Testament and Gospels is because it was not then clearly preached Why not in the writings of the Apostles is because it was clearly delivered afore the clear delivering of it being seen in the catechizing of them that came to the profession of the Gospel and the communion of the Church Beside this reason particular to the Apostles writings there is another that is seen not onely in the Law and Prophers as well as in them but in all ancient records of learning arising from the distance of time between us and the writing of them and the change which such a succession produceth in the stare of things necessarily inferting obscurity answerable to that difference in the condition of those things which they expresse There is no record of Learning so flight that any man who knowes what belongs to Learning can presume of a cleare understanding of it till by comparing it with other writings nearest to it in nature and time hee get satisfaction in it For such a change of language followes the changes that come to passe in Times and Places and Lawes and Fashions and the condition of persons consequent to the same that till they be understood by reading seeing and hearing not being available in languages out of use the meaning of Writers is not to be had from their words How much more in writings of such consideration as the Scriptures are to the Church of such antiquity as the Law and Prophets and the primitive Church of the Apostles of such difference from the present state of things as between the Law either flourishing under the Princes of Gods people or tolerated by their Soveraignes between the Gospel springing up in the midst of the Empire professing Heathenisme but protecting Judaisme and the Gospel professed and protected by Christian powers and people So little record remaining otherwise either of things done under the Law or under the Apostles so farre from priding themselves in writing books How much more I say must we be in the dark for the clear meaning of that whereof every tittle is conâ—â—derable That the Apostles writings were no way obscure to those they were directed to is to mee unquestionable For though it is reasonable that they should as wee see they do in some passages rise above the pitch of the common capacity even of them they were writ to least they should become subject to neglect So that for the most part they should not be understood of the most part would be a manifest inconvenience But it is no inconvenience that by distance of time they should become liable to the same difficulty of being understood which all other ancient writings necessarily become subject to And that reason appeareth no lesse in those things which concern the necessary salvation of all than in maters of lesse consequence It will therefore be hard to reconcile to any capacity of reason that which is advanced for the first truth towards the deciding of all Controversies of Faith that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scriptures to all understandings Those Scriptures which onely can be pretended to deliver the truth of Christianity clearly neither professing to deliver the whole summe and substance of it and being directed to those who are supposed already instructed in all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians Therefore this unreasonable presumption is not to create any difficulty to that reason of deciding Controversies of Faith which wee proceed to settle upon the premises I cannot tell whether or no it was requisite to say so much against a presumption meerly voluntary and which common experience contradicts For if all agreeing in the truth of Christianity and the Scriptures there remain dispute about things which some count necessary to salvation others not It is enough that the truth of Christianity inferreth means sufficient to clear the truth of what remaines on dispute But first it is manifest that what remaines in dispute is not of it self manifest to all that acknowledge the Scriptures but may become manifest to them that use such means as the truth of Christianity inforceth Neverthelesse since they that are in love with their own presumptions though never so dangerous to the supreme Majesty take whatsoever crosses them for a derogation to the Scriptures let thus much be said to show that by giving the Scriptures no man may presume that God intended to declare in them whatsoever is necessary to the salvation of all clearly to all understandings But if this must have been supposed as a principle or ground whereupon wee are to resolve all Controversies of Faith it would have been requisite to have showed us that this truth is of all other so much more clearly laid down in the Scriptures as that which concurres to the clearing of all ought it self to be the most clear Now if wee consider that this privilege of containing all that is necessary to the salvation of all belongs
not to any part but to the whole Body of the Scriptures it would first have been said what Scripture speaking of the whole Body of the Scripture hath established this property or â—rivilege of it For my part upon the best consideration that I can take I am at a stand to finde any text of Scripture any letter or syllable of the whole Bible that sayes any thing at all good or bad of the whole Bible So farre is it from delivering this property or privilege of it So farre further from delivering it as the first truth in termes so clear and unquestionable as to make it a presumption to the deciding of all that is or may become questionable concerning the Scripture The words of S. Paul 2 Tim. III. 16 17. All Scripture inspired by God is also profitable for doctrine for reproof for correction for instruction in righteousness That the man of God may be perfect Being fitted for every good work Cannot be said of the whole Body of Canonical Scripture being written before it was That is when evidently many parts of the New Testament were not written probably all and evidently concernes every part of Gods Word not the whole Body of the Scriptures Therefore with Origen I conceive they are meant of the Scriptures of the Old Testament To this effect That that instruction which is necessary to salvation being had by the Gospel which the Church teacheth those whom it maketh Christians the right understanding of the Old Testament according to the mystery of the Gospel is that which rendereth him whom God imployeth in the propagation of his Gospel and the edification of his Church able to convince those that withstand to edifie those that admit it Which if it be farre short of that which I deny the rest of those pitifull lame consequences which are usually made from the Scriptures to prove the same purpose will easily appeare to come short of it though I take not in hand to determine at present the full meaning of them but onely to show that they import not that all things necessary for the salvation of all Christians are clear to all Christians in the Scriptures The fashion is to allege Deut. IV. 2. XII 32. Yee shall take heed to do all the Word that I command you Yee shall adde nothing to it nor take any thing from it And You shall adde nothing to the Word that I command you nor take any thing from it That you may keep the commandement of the Lord your God which I command you And that it is threatned for a conclusion to the whole Scripture Apoc. XXI 18 19 If any man adde to the words of the Prophesie contained in this Book God shall lay upon him the plagues written in this Book God shall take away his share out of the book of Life and the holy City and the things that are written in this Book For is not all that is requisite sufficiently clear if nothing may be added or taken from the Scriptures Therefore is S. Paul also alleged pronouncing anathema if himself or an Angel from heaven or any man should take upon him to preach any other Gospel than that which they had already received Gal. I. 8 9. And that therefore are the Beraeans commended Acts XVII 11. that they did not admit even those things which S. Paul so great an Apostle preached to them without examining them by the Scriptures whether so as hee said or not To the same purpose John XX. 30 31. Many other miracles did Jesus which are not written in this book But these are written that yee may believe that Jesus is the Christ and that believing yee may have life through his Name Adde hereunto the Psalmists commendations of the Law XIX 7-31 as giving wisedom to the simple as inlightning the eyes and instructing the servants of God which how should it do if it be not first to be understood For the precept is a candle and the Law light saith Solomon Prov. VII 22. And Psalm CXIX 113. Thy word is a candle to my feet and a light to my paths Further the Scriptures tell us how they come to be obscure what makes them clear They shall be all taught by God saith the Prophet Isa LIV. 13. speaking of the times of the Gospel and the children of the Church And Jeremy XXXI 33 34. promiseth that God will put his New Covenant in the hearts of his children and write it in their entrailes so that they shall have no need to teach one another the knowledge of God because they should be all taught by God to know God And is not this that for which our Lord gives thanks to the Father Mat. XI 25. because having concealed the mystery of the Gospel from the wise and understanding hee had revealed it to babes and sucklings Which the Apostle expoundeth 1 John II. 20 21 27. You have an Vnctien from God and know all things I have not written to you because yee know not the truth but because yee know it and that no lye is of the truth And But as for you the Vnction which yee have received of him remaineth in you and yee need not that any man teach you But as that Vnction teacheth you of all things and is true and not false and as it hath taught you so shall you abide in it Whereupon afterwards IV. 1. Believe not every Spirit but try the Spirits whether of God or not To wit as those who were possessed of that by which they were to be tryed Therefore S. Paul 1 Thess V. 23. Try all things Hold that which is good To wit by that means which hee intimateth 1 Cor. II. 15. The spiritual man is judged by none but himself judgeth all things In fine I must not forget Cartwrights argument from the words of the Prophet Jeremy VII 31. XXXI 35. where hee reproveth the Jewes Idolatries by this argument that it never came into Gods minde to command them any such thing For if the grievousnesse even of their Idolatries consist in this that they were done without warrant of Gods word how can it be questionable that hee hath provided us instruction sufficient to clear us in all that wee are to do by the Scriptures But these Scriptures are as easily wiped away as they are alleged if wee go no further than to show that they inforce no such principle as is pretended for the ending of all Controversies that all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians are clear to all Christians in the Scriptures For what a pitifull inconsequence is it to argue that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scriptures because Moses forbideth to adde to or take from his Law For if the Gospel be not clearly contained in the Old Testament containing the Law and the Prophets and therefore much lesse in the Law alone then is it not lawfull to adde to or take from that Scripture in which all things necessary to salvation
from the beginning and therefore lay aside this principle not as false but as uselesse and not to be put in practice Wherein that men mistake not themselves they must take notice That it will not concerne my position That all original Catholick Tradition is to be supposed for unquestionable truth in deciding what is questionable concerning the truth of the Scripture that concerning most maters there is no Catholick Tradition or consent of the Church For I do professe that were not the Church or had it not been one Society one visible Body Communion or Corporation of men from the beginning the communion whereof alwaies confined the profession and conversation of Christians to some certain visible Rule I should think it impossible to make evidence of any common truth received of all Christians But if it can be made to appear that the Church was from the beginning such a Society then may such Rules as reasonably appear to be original and Catholick as it can appear reasonable to any man that hee ought to be a Christian Here I must note that concerning the State of the Church whether it be such a Society as I have said distinct from all Civil Societies of Christian Kingdomes and Common-wealths there may be two questions made The one of Fact whether indeed the Church hath been such a Society since the first being of it and the conversion of believers to Christianity The other of Right whether by the appointment of God or by humane consent of such who being converted to Christianity agreed to live in communion by whatsoever Rule it may appear they have admitted But these two are so near one another that if the question of Fact can be voided and it appear that such was the Church from the beginning it will be a presumption in a maner peremtory of the Churches Title by divine right Though there is difference made between them as appeâ—rs by the opinion related afore that the power of Excommunication was settled in the Church afore Constantine by humane consent not by Gods appointment Which by consequence of like reason extends to all other points wherein the power of the Church consists For my present purpose it were enough to make it appear that the Church was de Facto such a Society from the beginning But the proving of the point of Right will be only making the same inference which hath been alwaies concluded out of that evidence which resolveth the point of Fact And the conclusion thus inferred will be both necessary and effectual to clâ—are the positive right of the Church in deciding Controversies of Faith which will be the best satisfaction why negatively it cannot extend to create the ground upon which wee are to believe I will therefore wrap them up both together in the processe of my discourse In which I finde that difficulty which S. Augustine observeth in proving any of those things which are most manifest to common reason and sense For it shall be hard to bring arguments that are much clearer than that which they intend to prove That the Church had been from the beginning one outwardly by visible Communion as well as one inwardly by invisible Faith and love could not be questioned so long as it prevailed Neither was it foreseen at dissolving the Unity of the Western Church for the Reformation that it would ever come to this dispute whether there had been alwaies and ought to be one Catholick and Apostolick Church For each party hoped well to be so themselves as being perswaded that their adversaries ought to unite themselves unto them upon acknowledgment that the truth was on their side And truly I acknowledge that there is no clear mention of a precrpt of God commanding all Christians to hold the unity of the Catholick Church by outward communion with it For the intent of God to call the Gentiles to Christianity seemeth to be the utmost of that which is clearly declared by the Scriptures That his intent was to unite all Christians in one visible communion of the Church there is evidence by consequence to be had from the Scriptures But what the form should be before the materials were prepared it were as strange to think that the stones and timber particular Christians ought to know as that the Surveyors the Apostles and their fellowes should not know That therefore the Church was from the beginning and ought to be one visible Communion must be showed by the ingredients and principles or elements of all visible Societies Which in the Society of the Church will appear proportionable to the nature and pretense of it Supposing from common sense and experience that all Civil Societies or Common-wealthes unto which the name of Societies or Communities principally because most visibly belongeth are constituted and founded upon certain Rights of Soveraigne Power which some call in Latine Jura Majestatis being indeed the particulars wherein the Right and Power of Soveraignty consisteth For when it is once resolved in what hands that Power is to remaine then is the State and Form of Government constituted and thereby distinguished from other formes of Common-wealth according to the qualitie of those persons in whom this Power is established That being ruled by certain Lawes acknowledging certain Governors being subject to the Power of the Sword by which those Governors execute those Lawes are the effects of Soveraigne Power being the principal of the said ingredients or particulars the certain and necessary marks of a distinct Common-wealth is that which I suppose from common experience There are Societies which subsist by the Law of Nature and Nations As that which Aristotle observes among those that are imbarked in the same bottome for the same voyage That which the Jewes Law supposes among the Caravans of the East consisting of subjects and members of several Common-wealthes There are Communities and Corporations which subsist by the Act of Soveraigne Power in each Common-wealth allowing that Power over the Members to the whole ihat is such persons as are allowed to act for the whole as they think fit If the whole Church from the beginning have acknowledged certain Lawes by which they were governed in those things wherein the Communion of the Church consisteth certain Governors to whom they ought to give respect according to those Lawes a Power of putting out of the Church answerable to the Power of putting to death by the sword into which the coâ—ctive Power of Common-wealths is resolved then is the Church and alwaies was such a Society wherein the same Rule of Faith might be and was alwaies from the beginning preserved by Tradition and Custome which is my present businesse to show And if the Church alwaies was so de Facto then is it so alwaies de Jure If it did alwaies hold unity in the Faith and communion in the service of God by the meanes of certain Lawes certaine Rulers certaine Power of granting or refusing this Communion Then was there a precept of
thing which was deposited in trust with thee through the Holy Ghost that dwelleth in us II. 2. And those things which thou hast heard of mee under many witnesses deposite with trusty persons who may alsobe able to teach others Would you have any thing plainer than this to show that the Summe of Christianity was delivered for a Rule by the Apostles by which their Successors were to examine all Doctrines Therefore 1 Tim. II. 20. O Timothy keep that which is committed to thy trust avoiding profane novelties of termes and oppositions of knowledge falsly so called which some professing have failed of the Faith By the Rule of Faith which he had deposited in his trust he will have him exclude the pretenses of the Gnosticks which every man might see were inconsistent with it Whereupon S. John calls it the Unction 1 John II. 20-24 27. by which they knew all things To wit that belong to the common Faith of Christians And therefore the inconsistence of it with the pretenses of the Antichristian They continuing in that which they had heard from the beginning when they turned Christians And you saith the Apostle have an unction from the Holy One and know all things I write not to you because you know not the truth but because you know it and that no lye is of the Truth Therefore let that which you have heard from the beginning abide in you If that which you have heard from the beginning abide in you then shall you also abide in the Sonne and in the Father It is plaine enough why this truth which they have heard from the beginning of their Christianity is called the Unction because the anointing of the Holy Ghost the gift whereof as I have showed you presupposeth Christianity is granted upon consideration of being baptized into the profession of Christianity Wherefore it followeth in S. John As for you the Vnction which you have received of him abideth in you And yee need not that any man teach you But as the same Vnction teacheth you of all things and is true and no lye and as it hath taught you abide in it The Unction teacheth all things that a Christian is to avoid because it teacheth to avoid all that agreeth not with the truth which the same Unction had taught him afore When according to that which hath been said being moved by the Holy Ghost to become a Christian hee was taught that truth upon profession whereof hee received the gift of the Holy Ghost for an habitual indowment And the same is the Apostles meaning when hee saith again 1 John III. 9. Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sinne for his seed abideth in him The seed of which a Christian is born is the Word of the Gospel which begetteth children to God when it prevaileth with sinners to become Christians This Word obliging Christians upon their salvation not to sinne abideth not in him that sinneth neither sinneth hee in whom it abideth So whether you call it Vnction or Seed In regard it is the Rule of our conversation as well as of our belief as hee that abideth in the truth must needs reject Heresies contrary to it so in whom the seed which hee is born of abideth hee cannot sinne And in his second Epistle 6 7 9. with S. Paul hee calls it the commandement which they had received from the same beginning to preserve them from the impostures of that time inticing to transgresse it In fine that this Tradition is the Law whereupon our Christianity standeth you may see by the Apostle 1 Pet. III. 20. when hee saith that Baptisme saveth us not the putting away the filth of the flesh but the examination of a good conscience to God That is to say the answer that is made out of a good conscience to the interrogatories that were even then propounded to them that were baptized by which answer they tied themselves to professe the Faith and to live according to it Which S. Paul therefore calls that good profession which Timothy had made before many witnesses 1 Tim. VI. 12 13 14. to wit when hee was baptized and therefore conjures him by the good profession which our Lord made before Pilate of his Kingdome for which hee suffered death to preserve it unspotted Which if it be so then must no Christian imagine that the receiving of this Tradition or Rule of Faith upon which men were admitted to Baptisme and made Christians consisted onely in professing to believe that which is necessary for the salvation of all Christians to be believed but also in undertaking to live as Christianity requireth Therefore S. Paul sometimes in his writings referres himself to the precepts not onely which hee had delivered them but also which they had received of him charging his flock not onely with their duty but also with their engagement 1 Thess IV. 1 2 11. 2 Thess III. 6. But besides the Rule of Faith there is another sort of Traditions concerning the outward order in the Church by which Unity is preserved in the communion of those Offices which God is to be served with by Christians which Christians come to be subject to by receiving their Baptisme from the Church and consequently undertaking to serve God with the Church For it is manifest that this communion cannot be maintained without certain Rules limiting the maner and circumstances of Gods service for time and place and the persons both which are admitted to communion with the Church and which are inabled to minister the Offices of the same Baptisme is the door to all Gods Ordinances that Christians are obliged to serve God with The praising of God the reading and hearing of the Scriptures and the expounding of them the common prayers of Christian Assemblies are all Offices which no Christian doubts that God is to be served with under the Gospel though there be no expresse precept of the New Testament what Offices the publick service of God is to consist of because before the Gospel they were alwaies in use among Gods people The Sacrament of the Eucharist being instituted by Christ to be frequented by the Church at their Assemblies for the service of God must be reckoned among the positive Laws of God to his Church obliging only because commanded Hee that supposeth the Church a Corporation founded by God to maintaine the communion of those that believe in these Offices must consequently maintain a Power of settling good order in the exercise of them as for all other circumstances so especially for the qualities of persons concurring to the celebrating of them Hee that shows by the Scripture that this order was provided for by the Apostles in the Churches of their founding shows that they intended the Church for a Body indowed with Power of limiting the like Rules for the future And this is to be showed by many passages of S. Pauls Epistles 1 Cor. XI 2 3-16 20-34 having commended them for observing his Traditions as hee had delivered
the visibility of the Church and the assurance that every particular Christian might have during this intelligence and correspondence that holding communion with his own Pastor hee held the true Faith together with the Unity of the Catholick Church Neither putting trust in man which God curseth nor in his own understanding for the sense of the Scriptures but trusting his own common sense as well for the means of conveying to him the mater as the motives of Christianity For why is it enough for Irenaeus and Tertullian for S. Augustine and Optatus to allege the Church of Rome and the succession from the Apostles for evidence that the Faith of those Hereticks was contrived by themselves that the Donatists were out of communion with the Church Because supposing that the Apostles and Disciples of our Lord all communicated in the same Faith which they taught the Churches of their own founding other Churches founded and the Pastors of them constituted by the authority of those Churches must needs be founded and settled upon condition of maintaining and professing the same Faith So that if any Christian or Pastor should attempt the unsettling of any part thereof the people to stand bound rather to follow the original consent of the whole from whence they received their Christianity than any man that should forfeit his ingagement to the whole in the judgment of the whole This being the true ground for the authority of Councils might and did take effect without assembling of Councils S. Cyprian directs his leters to Steven Bishop of Rome to write to the Churches of Gaule to ordain a new Bishop in stead of Marcianus in the Church of Arles because hee had joyned with the Novatians To the Spanish Bishops owning the Deposing of Basilides and Martialis and the Ordaining of those whom they had put in their places notwithstanding that upon false suggestions they had gained Steven Bishop of Rome to maintain them Epist LXV LXVI Could any man in his right senses have attempted this had it not been received among Christians which hee alleges that the people of particular Churches are bound not to acknowledge those for their Pastors whom the communion of the Church disowneth whether assembled in Council or not The acts of Councils themselves such are the creation of a Bishop of Arles in stead of Marcianus of Spanish Bishops in stead of Basilides and Martialis depending upon the authority of the Churches of Rome and Carthage that concurred not to them in presence If this be imputed to any mistake of Gods appointment in the ancient Church it will be easie for mee to allege Tertullians reason to as good purpose against our Independent Congregations as hee used it against the Hereticks of his time For if the chief Power of the Church be vested in those that assemble to serve God at once without any obligation to the resolution of other Congregations then is the trust that a Christian can repose in the Church resolved into that confidence which hee hath of those seven with whom hee joyneth to make a Congregation that the ruling part of them cannot faile Or rathâ—r into that which hee hath of himself and of the Spirit of God guiding his choice to those that shall not faile They presuming themselves to have the Spirit of God without declaring what Christianity they professe for the condition upon which they obtain it need no provision of a Catholick Church to preserve that Faith which the Gift of the Holy Ghost supposeth God who requireth the profession of a true Faith in them upon whom hee bestoweth his Spirit hath provided the communion of his Church for a means to assure us of that which it preserveth That it is presumption in them to oversee this no imposture in the Church to challenge it Tertullians reason determines The Hereticks pleaded that the Churches had departed from the Faith which the Apostles had left them To this after other allegations hee sets his rest up on this one that error is infinite truth one and the same That no common sense will allow that to be a mistake in which all Christians agree They all agreed in the same Faith against those Hereticks because they all agreed in acknowledging the Catholick Church provided by God to preserve and propagate it against our Independent Congregations Thus Tertullian de Praescript XXVIII There have been some Disputers of Controversies that have claimed the benefit of Tertullians exception against the Hereticks of his time in behalf of the Church of Rome Hee pleadeth not that the Catholicks ought not but that they are not bound to admit them to dispute upon the Scriptures being able to condemne them without the Scriptures And they plead that the Reformation not standing to those Pastors whom they acknowledge to possesse the place of those that derived their authority by succession from the Apostles may be condemned without Scripture as not holding the truth who hold not that which is taught by the said Pastors Which is to demand of those of the Reformation for an end of all debates first to acknowledge those Pastors and that which they teach then to take that for the true meaning of the Scripture which that which they reach alloweth or requireth But this supposes the sentence of the Church to be an infallible ground for the truth of that which it determineth And therefore to be accepted with the same Faith as our common Christianity or the Scriptures Which I showed you already to be false It shall therefore suffice mee to say that those men consider not the difference between the plea of the Reformation and that of those Hereticks For they acknowledging our Lord Christ and his Apostles no otherwise than the Alcoran and Mahomet doth where they served their turn made no scruple to say when it was for their purpose that they knew not the depth of Gods minde which themselves by some secret way having attained to know were therefore called Gnosticks That they imparted not the utmost of their knowledge to all alike when that served their turne That therefore the Scriptures were unperfect and revealed not that secret whereby they promised their salvation but by incklings These things you shall finde in Tertullian de Praescript XXII and Irenaeus III. 1. as well as that plea which I mentioned afore that the Churches were fallen from that which they had received of the Apostles Whereas those of the Reformation allege against the Church of Rome that those Hereticks pretended Tradition as they do Without cause indeed For what is Tradition pretended to be delivered in secret to them and by them who tender no evidence for it to that which the visibility of Christianity and the grounds upon which it is settled justifieth But so as to make it appear that they no way disown the Apostles or their writings nor can expect salvation by any other meanes And therefore are manifestly to be tryed by the Scriptures acknowledged on both sides provided the trial
But hee that complaineth of that will be bound to advance some other meaning of those texts which may be free from contradiction both to the Rule of Faith and to Historical truth which common sense justifieth And yet admit no mention of publick Penance in the Church no intent to speak of it in all the Scriptures there alleged Which perhaps will be too hard to do Further I labor not I will suppose no man so wilfull as to dispute the right of excluding from the Communion of the Church granting a power of limiting the conditions upon which it is to be restored to them who forfeited it And this is visible It was but a mater of LXX years after the decease of S. John according to Eusebius his Chronicle that Montamis appeared to demand that Adulterers might not be readmitted to the communion of the Church upon Penance That those that had married the second time might not communicate That the rule of Fasting might be stricter than was in use That it might not be lawfull to fly from persecution for the Faith It is manifest that these were his pretenses by Tertullian that maintaines them being seduced with the opinion of inspirations and revelations granted him and his partizans to that purpose These pretenses were afterwards in part revived at Rome by Novatianus to get himself the Bishoprick there by excluding from Penance and reconciliation those that had fallen away in the persecution of Decius It appeareth also that those men alleged for themselves the very passages of the Apostles which I allege to my intent Neither can it appear that ever any son of the Church did contradict them by saying that the Apostles meant nothing of Penance as they imagined And now let all men judge whether the Church have reason to hold this evidence of Penance and by consequence of its own being a Church Was Epiphanius and all that writ against the Novatians troubled to no purpose at the VI of the Ebrews when those Schismaticks alleging it for themselves might have been silenced by denying that it concerned Penance Why did not the Church allege that the sin unto death 1 John V. 17. is no such thing as Apostasy from Christianity when the Novatians alleged it to prove that Apostates were not to be reconciled to the Church How came it to passe that there was so much doubt made in the Church of Rome of admitting the Epistle to the Ebrews for Canonical Scripture witnesse S. Jerome Epist ad Dardanum as thinking that it did absolutely contradict the re-admitting of Apostates which had been practised in that Church before Montanus Tertullian of all men was troubled without cause that the incestuous person whom hee supposes to be excommunicated at Corinth by S. Pauls Order 1 Cor. V. should be re-admitted by his Indulgence 1 Cor. VII De Pudicitiâ cap. XIII XIV XV. because hee saw this was a peremptory exception against Montanus that a crime equal to Adultery should by S. Paul be admitted to Penance How easie a thing it had been for him to say that there is nothing of Penance nothing of Excommunication which Penance presupposes and therefore inferres in delivering to Satan the incestuous person in commanding them not so much as to eat with those that are called brethren that is Christians but are indeed such as the incestuous But hee being some fourteen hundred years nearer the beginning of Christianity than wee and being satisfied by his five senses of those things which new Heresies and Schismes oblige us to argue by consequences found that his Patriarch Montanus could not answer so And therefore thinking that the Church could not answer their arguments forces an answer to this by saying it was not the same man that is excommunicated by the Apostles Order 1 Cor. V. and restored by his Indulgence 2 Cor. VII Because hee saw the reconciling of a sinner to the Church by Penance as lively described and signified by S. Pauls Indulgence there as by any record of the Church at such time as it was most in use And can there remain any doubt of this Excommunication because the Church cannot now deliver to Satan for destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus Surely all the writings of the Apostles do bear witnesse that the miraculous graces of the Holy Ghost which they had then but all Christians see the Church hath not now served not onely to witnesse the truth of Christianity but the authority of the Apostles in behalf of it This authority having taken effect by those Ordinances which the Church hath received at their hands It is no longer requisite that God should bear witnesse to his own Ordinances by such miraculous effects seeing hee doth no longer bear witnesse to the truth of Christianity by the like Hee that believes that whosoever is not in the Church is in the power of Satan needs no reason why hee is delivered to Satan that is put out of the Church Hee that believes it not is not to be perswaded that there is a power of Excommunication granted the Church But that the Christian saith which the Church preacheth is true for that without peradventure preached the Church At least till some body show us that this reason is insufficient hee must not demand that wee give an Article of our Creed and all the help to salvation which the communion of the Catholick Church pretendeth for such an objection as this Chuse now whether you will say as I say That under the Apostles difficulty was made of re-admitting some sorts of sins but never any peremptory order against it and so that Montanus and Novatianus were Schismaticks for seperating from the Church when the whole Church was agreed that there was a necessity of it or look about for a more reasonable sense to assoile the great difficulties of these passages Provided that you offer not violence to common sense and historical truth by imagining that so near the Apostles time there could be so much question about Penance they having neither meant nor ordained any thing about it To this argument all the most ancient records of the Church wheresoever mention is made of reconciling by Penance all the Penitential Canons of later ages will bear witnesse For who can undertake to answer or rather to obscure the evidence made in the place aforenamed that some sins were refused Penance and reconcilement in the first ages of the Church When wee have a whole book of Tertullian contending with Montannus to impose a Law upon it of re-admitting no Adulterers When wee know a whole sect of Novatians that left the Church that they might re-admit no Apostates As for the Penitential Canons of later ages it is manifest to any man that shall peruse and compare them with that which hath been said of the primitive times that they are nothing else but the abatement of that rigor of Discipline which during the primitive heat and zele of
himself because hee expresses not so much of his meaning For my part as I found it necessary so I finde it sufficient to have quoted these opinions and reasons advanced against the right of the Church because I finde they oblige mee to digg sor a foundation upon which as the true ground of that right which the Church claimeth I may be inabled to dissolve whatsoever reasons wit and learning impregnated by passion or interest can invent to contradict the same Here then I must have recourse to a position which some men will count hazardous others prejudicial to Christianity according as their prejudices or engagements may work But will appear in truth to them that shall take the pains to look through the consequences of it in the resolution of Controversies which divide the Church to concern the interest of Christianity and the peace of the Church more thâ—n any point whatsoever that is not of the Foundation of Faith In as much as there is no question that is started or can be started as the case is now with the Church so as to call in question the peace and unity thereof but the interpretation of the old Testâ—ment or some part of it in relation and correspondence to the New Testament will be ingaged in it Concerning which the position that I intend to advance is this That by the Law of Moses and the Covenant between God and the people of Israel upon it nothing at all was expresly contracted concerning everlasting life and the happinesse of the world to come Not that I intend to say That there was not at that time sufficient ground for a man to be competently perswaded of his right to it or sufficient means to come to the knowledge of that ground for hee that should say this could not give account how the Fathers should attain salvation under the Law which I finde all that maintain the truth of Christianity against the Jews so obliged to do that without it they must give up the game But that the thing contracted for between God and the people of Israel by the mediation of Moses was the Land of Promise That is to say that they should be a free people and injoy their own Lawes in the possession of it upon condition of imbracing and observing such Lawes as God should give As for the kingdome of heaven which the Gospel of Christ preacheth the hope of it was so mystically intimated that there was sufficient cause to imbrace it even then but not propounded as the condition upon which God offered to contract with them as hee doth with Christians And this though I cannot say that the Church hath at anytime expressed to be a part of the Rule of Faith yet that the Church hath alwaies implicitely admitted it for a part of the reason of Faith which wee call Divinity I must and do maintain Before I come to prove this I will here propound one objection because it seems to contain the force of all that is to be said against it For when our Lord sayes Mat. XIX 19. If thou wilt enter into life keep the commandements When hee resolves the great commandements of the Law to be the love of God above all things and of our neighbor as of our selves Mat. XXII 36. In fine wheresoever hee derives the duties of Christianity from the Law of Moses hee seems to suppose and so do his Apostles that the same life everlasting which hee promiseth by the Gospel was proposed by the Law as the reward for observing it And indeed what can the Gospel was propound for a more suitable way or meanes to salvation than the love of God and man in that order which the Law of God appointeth It is not for nothing that S. Augustine observeth The first commandement of the Decalogue to acknowledge God and the last not to covet that which is another mans to contain in them the utmost office of a Christian And all Divines have distributed the precepts of Moses Law into Moral as well as Judicial and Ceremonial The Moral precepts containing in them no lesse than the duties of Christianity when they are done with such an intent as God who by giving Moses Law declareth himself to see the most inward of the heart requireth Here in the first place supposing that God entring into Covenant with that people intended to establish their Civil Government by the Law of Moses I will proceed to argue that all Civil Lawes that are not contrary to the Law of Nature and the actions by them injoyned or prohibited may be done or not done for two several reasons For if there be reason enough for the Nations that know not God nor ground their Lawes upon any presumption of his will or expectation of good or evil from him to unite themselves in Civil Society then is their reason enough for them to observe the Lawes upon which the benefit of Civil Society is to be had though they suppose not themselvs obliged by God to them nor to oblige God by keeping them And if it be evident that all Civil Lawes not contrary to the Lawes of God and Nature do come from God as Civil Society doth it will be as evident that the keeping of them in that regard and for that consideration is obedience to God The Jewes Civil Law hath this privilege above the Civil Lawes of other Nations to be gronnded upon those acts whereby God revealing himself for their freedom by Moses tendereth them the Land promised to their Fathers upon the Covenant they then had with God upon condition of undertaking the Lawes which hee should give them for the future And no reason can deny that this was sufficient to convince them that God required of them not onely the work which the Law specified but that it be done in consideration of his will and in reference to his honor and service Though on the other side it is not necessary to grant that so much is expressed by the Civil Law of that Nation expresly tending to their Civil freedome and happinesse in the possession of the Land of Promise It cannot be doubted that the immortality of the soul and the reward of good and bad after death was received among that people from and before the time of receiving the Law Otherwise how should the Patriarchs obtain it which the maintainance of Christianity requireth that they did obtain It is also evident by the Scriptures that the same conversation which Christ and his Apostles preached was extant in the lives and actions of the Fathers before the Law Abraham Isaac Jacob Joseph Job Moses and the rest as the Fathers of the Church are wont to argue against the Jewes that Christianity is more ancient than Judaisme It is also manifest that the same conversation was extant and to be seen under the Law in the lives of the Prophets and their Disciples by the words of our Lord to the Scribes and Pharisees Mat. XXIII 29-36 when hee
which under the Gospel is expresly required yet when it is said of the precepts of the Law which who so shall do shall live by them Levit. XVIII 5. Ezek. XX. 11 21. it is not to be granted that everlasting life is necessarily signified but onely a prosperous estate which vivere in the Ebrew as well as in the Greek and Latine elegantly signifies And yet there is good reason why these are counted by our Lord the chief precepts of the Law though as for the immediate intent thereof they reach no further than the over act which other Lawes determine as well as they Because more apt to signifie the general extent of that inward and spiritual obedience which being preached and taught by the Fathers was first to be translated out of their doctrine into the Law of Moses that the Prophets who being authorized by the Law Deut. XVIII 18. were raised by God to prepare the way for our Lord Christ and his Gospel might have as it were a Text in the Law upon which they might ground their Sermons of spiritual obedience which the Gospel of Christ whose coming they preached should expresly require And this is that secret of Gods Law and of his Covenant which the Prophet David declares to be revealed to those that keep Covenant with God and prayes that his eyes may be opened to see it in the Law the study whereof inlightens a man to discover it Psal XXV 13 15 XIX 9 10. CXIX 18. if wee adde hereunto the secret of Christ his coming which this obedience or at the least the tender of a Covenant which should condition for it presupposeth As for the division of the Precepts of the Law into Ceremonial Moral and Judicial it will very fitly fall in with the truth which I insist upon in case those that advance or maintaine that division be content to receive this truth For it will be very proper to say that the Ceremonial and Judicial Precepts are those that depend upon the expresse and immediate intent of the Law as it containeth the condition on their part upon which God on his part covenants to give them the civil happinesse of the Land of Promise But the Moral precepts such as might be counted Civil Lawes being observed civilly out of respect to that happinesse and might be counted spiritual Lawes as the offices of them might be done out of obedience to God in respect to his service Which sense the light of Nature stirred up by that measure of revelation which God was pleased to grant the Fathers before and the Prophets under the Law having prevailed to bring into force before the Law was translated out of unwritten custome into the Law of Moses to give the Prophets a ground of their doctrine of the love of God above all and a mans neighbor as himself so to make way for that spiritual obedience which under the Gospel was expresly to be required But if they refuse to admit this division so as to comply with the sense I pretend then will it be easie for mee to refuse the division as not contained in the Scripture but the conceit of Divines that neither do understand the true difference between the Law and the Gospel not can be content to be showed it For neither doth any Scripture of the Old or New Testament expresse this division to come from the first and immediate and expresse intent of the Law nor is there any Tradition in the Church of it which are the two onely means that hitherto remain in question whether mater of Faith can be grounded upon both of them or onely upon the one And to have recourse to any opinion of the Jewes since the separation of them from the Church of God in a point concerning that difference must needs be an affront to Christianity CHAP. XIII That the Law tendreth no other promise but that of the Land of Canaan How the Resurrection is signified by the Prophets Expresse texts of the Apostles Their arguments and the arguments of our Lord do suppose the mystical sense of the Scriptures That this sense is to be made good throughout the Scripture wheresoever the ground of it takes place Christianity well grounded supposing this What parts of Scripture may be questionable whether they have a mystical sense or not The sayings and doings of our Lord have it As also those passages of the Old Testament which are fulfilled by the same The sense of the Fathers HAving showed by removing this block that there is no appearance of inconvenience in admitting this truth I am now to show what appearance of necessary consequences from the Scriptures there is to inforce it Beginning then with the first proposition of the Covenant of the Law in Marah Exod. XVI 27 28. wee reade that at Marah God appointed them a Statute and a Judgment The Jews say that there hee gave them the precepts of the Sabbath and Honoring parents Whether so or not something God propounds them to do For to show what hee bids them expect doing it hee inferres And there hee tried him and said If thou wilt hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God and do that which is right in his eyes and wilt receive his precepts and do all his Statutes I will bring upon thee none of the griefs that I brought upon Aegypt For I am the Lord thy God that heal thee It will be hard to say how the Law could be established upon any other condition than first it was propounded on and here is nothing but an earthly promise Come wee to the giving and receiving of the Law Exod. XIX 5 6. And now if you will hear my voice and keep my Covenant yee shall be to mee whose all the earth is a Jewell above all Nations of the earth a kingdome of Priests an holy people All Nations being at this time polluted by offering sacrifices to devils and enemies to God the Israelites redeemed by God out of Aegypt to be free under his government and to offer sacrifices to him alone might well be a kingdome of Priests a holy people Gods Jewel above all Nations of the earth without any Covenant for the happiness of the world to come After the giving of the Decalogue and other Precepts by the mediation of Moses Exod. XXIII 25 And you shall serve the Lord your God and hee shall blesse thy bread and waters And I will take sickness from amid thee There shall no woman miscarry or be barren in thy Land I will make full the number of thy dayes I will send my terror before thee and the rest that followes there to assure them how and by what means hee will bring them into the Land of Promise Hitherto in treating in contracting this Covenant no mention of the world to come What shall wee finde at renewing it Deut. XXIX 1. These are the words that is the termes of the Contract which Moses struck with the Israelites in the plain of Moab besides that
observable than in the Psalmes XVI 11. Thou shalt make known to mee the way of life Fulnesse of joyes is before thee and pleasures at thy right hand for ever more Is not this true in the sense of Ezekiah Esa XXXVII 10 21 First hee saith I shall see the Lord no more in the land of the living But upon the tender of the Prophet hee askes What is the signe that I shall go up into the house of the Lord Where the presence or right hand of God and the pleasure of it is the joy that his people have to worship him before the Ark of his presence Psal XVII 15. As for mee I will behold thy presence in righteousnesse when I awake I shall be satisfied with thy likenesse The same thing hee meanes and hee awakes when hee comes out of trouble to serve God Though I am to grant that I cannot think of any text in all the book of Psalms wherein the world to come is more literally exâ—ressed thâ—n in these words Psalm CXXVI 5 6. They that sow in tears shall reap in joy Hee that now goeth on his way weeping shall doub lesse come again in joy and bring in his sheaves Whether at the returne from Captivity or in heaven let the beginning of the Psalme speak When the Lord turned again the Captivity of his people thâ—n were wee like men that dreame But there would be no end if I should go about to produce all those passages of the Psalmes wherein the same is to be observed Let us come now to the New Testament and produce first the sayings of the Apostles wherein my position is expresly affirmed especially in the Apostle to the Hebrewes VII 19. For the Law persited nothing but the bringing in of à better hope by which wee draw nigh unto God What is this better hope but that of the world to come so much better than the Land of Promise and what bringeth it in but the Gospel of Christ by whom alone sinners have accesse to God X. 19 Againe VIII 6. But now hee hath obtained a more excellent ministery by how much hee is the Mediator of a better Covenant which is inacted upon better promises IX 15. And therefore is â—ee the Mediator of a New Covenant that dâ—ath interceding for the redemption of those sins that were under the first Covenant those that are called may receive the promise of eternal life This more excellent Ministery is the Priesthood of Chriâ—t after the order of Melchisedeck To make way for which the whole Epistle ciâ—putâ—s that the Levitical Priesthood is removed as the interest of Christianity against the Law of Moses and the qâ—â—â—â—ion on foot required Now Melchisedek was â— Priest not by the law of a carnal precept but by the power of indissoluble life saith hee again Ebr. VII 19. What thiâ— carnal precept is you have IX 9-14 When hee saith that at present to wit under the Law gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot persit him that serveth as to the conscience consisting onely in meats and drinks and several washings and carnal justifications imposed till the time of Reforma 〈…〉 When Christ coming as a High Priest of good things to come and having fo 〈…〉 sage into heaven cleanses the conscience from dead works to serve the living â—â—d So that according to the Apostle the Sacrifices of the Law effecting onâ—ly a carnal right to the Congregation of Gods people the Sacrifice of Christ a right to heaven this right is tendred by the Gospel the other by the Law And thus S. Paul 2 Tim. I. 9 10. calleth the Gospel the Grace that was given us in Christ Jesus before the ages of the world but is manifested now by the appearance of our Lord Christ Jesus who hath destroyed death but declared life and incorruption by the Gospel For though the life to come was known and declared by the Prophets under the Law yet had they no expresse commission to ingage God for it till Christ rendred it as that which the Gospel covenants for on Gods part But I must not forget the occasion of that memorable passage quoted from Ebr. IX 9. from the discourse that went afore whereby the Apostle declares the whole course and constitution of the service of the Temple to be nothing else but a Parable of the present time to wit of Christianity As also the legal Tabernacle was nothing else but a Copy of the Heavenly by the pattern whereof hee observes that Moses was commanded to build it VIII 5 6. calling it therefore the Worldly Sanctuary IX 1. because it was a Copy as it were of this whole world in the several parts of it as Philo and Josephus have discoursed at large The most Holy place into which the High Priest entred once a year by the Apostles interpretation answereth to the highest heavens whereunto our Lord Christ is ascended whom therefore hee calleth the minister of the true Tabernacle which God and not man pitched VIII 7 And therefore the outward Sanctuary into which the Priests went once a day was intended to signifie the Starry heavens and the Court of the Tabernacle the World here below as Philo and Josephus declare justifying the reason why the Apostle calls it a Worldly Tabernacle This interpretation of the Ceremonial Law made by the Apostle in this place by that which it expresly affirmes concerning the twofold sense of that part of the Old Testament induces a consequence to the twofold sense of all the rest Inferring that if the mystical and allegorical sense of the Old Testament determine in the promises of the world to come then the literal and historical sense of the same determines in the promises of this life the allegory that is to say the reason of interpreting the Old Testament to that purpose consisting in nothing else but the correspondence between them I am not ignorant that some Divines have done their best to create one Controversie more to divide the Church by maintaining that there is but one sense of the Scriptures which the leter intends The things figured under the Old Testament and the figures of them there set down making but one and the same sense as a man and his picture are called the same man because without the things signified the signes are nothing at least in the nature of signes For my part I finde it a thing as easie as for every fool to tye knots which a wise man cannot loose to ingage in disputes in which men cannot yield to the truth while that ingagement continues But I finde no pretense why that sense of the Scriptures which they make one consisting of the figure and the thing figured should not be counted two one immediately the other principally intended Because the Gospel was a secret under the Law as S. Paul so many times layes down So that hee which knew the Law many times understood not the utmost intent of it under the Gospel Seeing then that this way of
to a Christian but due from all that will be what they professe So the indowing of the Church to those purposes for which the communion thereof standeth though called Alms even by the Laws of this Land had never prevailed over all Christendom had not the obligation thereof been a part of our common Christianity But now as concerning the Power of determining Controversies of Faith I do here insist upon this argument That because no Secular Power is inabled by God to determine Controversies of Faith therefore God hath provided a Society of the Church for preservation of unity among Christians by such determinations as may reasonably satisfie the consciences of those for whom they are made Though not in order to any penalty of this world pretending by outward force to constrain obedience but onely in order to the Communion of the Church that is to the holding or loosing of it as a man conforms to the determination or not All outward force and constraint being acknowledged to proceed from the power of the Sword which the Soveraign beareth This difficulty onely the Leviathan answers they who denying the Power of Excommunication dissolve the Communion of the Church and the Society thereof into the Community of a Christian Common-wealth contenting themselves to name godly Magistrates which term I use not because incompetible to the Soveraign or Christian Powers as if their godlinesse or Christianity did intitle them to this Power though it might have concerned them to show how the Profession of Christianity comes to oblige Christian Subjects to the determinations of Christian or godly Powers if they would not be thought to begg the question which they tye themselves to answer For I also say that all Christians stand bound to the decrees of godly Powers because I suppose and the presumption of piety implies them to suppose that it is a part of godliness to profess one holy Catholick and Apostolick Church the unity whereof once professed obliges a private Christian to be of it a publick person to maintain it Which if the Soveraign do then must hee maintain those persons who by the Society of the Church have right to act in behalf of the Church both in doing their duty and in giving force to their Acts. For I acknowledge as I have already done two points of that right which Secular Power hath in the acting of Church maters The first is that which the trust of Secular Power importeth in all maters As they hold it not by their Christianity and therefore not by the Church so that they suffer it not to be invaded upon pretense of Christianity and the Power of the Church For as experience hath showed that there may be such pretenses So the reasons whereupon I ground the Society and right of Soveraign Power show that Christianity abridgeth not the Soveraign Power in any thing that may concerne the publick peace The second arises from Christianity Which as it giveth all Christians an interest both in all Christian truth and in the Communion of the Church as the common birth-right of Christians So it giveth publick Powers a publick interest in the maintenance of the same That is of all truth which the Church by the acts of the Church done by the Power of the Church for the preservation of Christianity stands possest of and of all Lawes whereby the Communion of the Church in the service of God according to Christianity is duely maintained But this interest presupposeth therefore a Society of the Church by the acts whereof Christian truth and the unity of the Church is to be maintained And importeth in the Soveraign a Right to constrain even those that act in behalf of the Church not to transgresse their own profession that is either the due power of determining things questionable which the Society of the Church inferreth or the acts which have been duely done by the same Therefore not supposing this Society that is such an Act of the Church as it may be evident that the Soveraign may or ought to maintain because it may be evident that the Church transgresses not those grounds which it professes and supposing Controversies among Christians about Christianity I say the Secular Power can have no right to determine them that is to oblige those that are under their Power to stand to the determination which they shall makeâ— unlesse wee do grant that by their Christianity they may be obliged to believe one thing and by their Allegiance to professe another For seeing there be Soveraignes that professe Christianity whereof some are of the Eastern others of the Western Church and of these some of the Communion of the Church of Rome others that are departed from it some Calvinists others Lutherans and Socinus his Sect no man knowes how soon some Soveraign may follow besides new Religions that appear how shall the common profession of Piety or Christianity oblige several Nations to obey those Lawes whereby several Soveraignties may establish contrary things in Christianity but by obliging them to professe contrary to what they believe For what contradictions soever are held among Christians neverthelesse they are sensible that no mans private spirit that is any evidence of Christian truth in the minde of one man can oblige another man to follow it because it imports no evidence to make that which hee thinks hee sees appear to others What becomes then of the Christianity of Christian Subjects obliging them to stand to the Determination of their Soveraignes in all things questionable If the Soveraign Power have right to limit all that is questionable this right will create an obligation of professing and doing the contrary of that which Christianity will oblige a man to believe and to think fit to be done Unlesse all the Subjects of each Soveraign have the strange hap to believe as their Soveraigns in all things questionable Besides if the Soveraign Power have right to determine them it will be impossible to show a reason why this Power in him that is no Christian should not have the same right Seeing it is plain that the common profession of Christianity being in Soveraigns that command contrary things does it not and the Soveraign Power which remains is the same in those that are not Christians as in those that are And therefore I conceive that the Leviathan hath done like a Philosopher in this to object unto himself the greatest of those difficulties that his opinion is liable to and hath but pursued his own principles when hee inquires what a Christian should do when a Soveraign that is no Christian commands him to renounce Christianity For when hee argueth that every Soveraign by being a Soveraign is the chief Teacher of his people whom it is manifest that Soveraigns Teach not but by their Laws or commands but that Christianity onely inableth to use this Power right Hee must know that there is no Power that will not oblige when it is used amisse though not to all purposes
the Church provided for the service of God upon supposition of this common Christianity evidently destroyeth what it pretendeth to maintain I leave the case at present for their plea who cannot obtain the consent of the whole if they reform themselves But you see what reason I have to deny that this Reformation consisteth in voiding the obligation of the acts and decrees of the Church For the same reason the authority of Pastors is as visibly derived from the act of the Apostles in primitive Churches as their own authority is visible in the Scriptures And unlesse all Christendom could be cousened or forced at once to admit such an imposture they can be no Churches further than the name in which it is derived from the Law of nature and reason and the liberty left private Christians to dispose of themselves in Ecclesiastical communion where they please For of that liberty neither the Scriptures nor all Christianity since the time of them will yield one example I marvel therefore that S. Pauls commission to Timothy 1 Tim. V. 17. should seem to import no more then a reproof and that at the discretion of him that is reproved whether hee will admit it or return him as good as hee brings For if S. Pauls commission to Timothy extend no further what could hee have done more himself had hee been present And the Apostle injoyning obedience to those who first brought the Gospel and to those who presently ruled those Churches in the same terms Hebr. XIII 7 17. must needs be thought to give the successors their predecessors authority saving the difference observed afore So certain is it which I have advanced in another place that this opinion is not tenable without denying the authority of the Apostles in the quality of Governours of the Church For as to the exception that may be made concerning the use of this Power I have already demurred to the doubt that may rest in difference between the succession of Faith and the succession of persons In fine not to insist here what the respective interests of publick and private persons in the Church are and ought to be because it is a point that cannot here be voided It shall be enough to say that of necessity the authority of publick persons in and for the whole must be such as may make and maintain the Church a Society of reasonable people not a Common-wealth of the Cyclopes in which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no body is ruled by any body in any thing according to Euripides As for the Synagogues that may be presumed rather then evidenced to have subsisted in the ten Tribes during the Schisme Let him make appear what hee can hee shall never have joy of it towards his intent so long as the difference between the Law and the Gospel stands which I have â—ettled that the Church and the State were both one and the same Body under the Law as standing both by the same title of it But several under the Gospel the one standing upon the common ground of all Civil Government the other upon the common Faith of Christianity which ought to make all Christian States one and the same whole Church For in the two Tribes who were at their freedom to resort to the Temple for that service of God which was confined to the Temple which all could neither alwayes do nor were bound to do there is no record of any settled order for assembling themselves to serve God either in the Law obliging of right or actually practised according to Historical truth How much lesse in the ten Tribes being fallen from the Law by the Schism And if there wanted not those who had not bowed the knee to Baal nor Prophets and schools of Prophets under whom they might assemble themselves yet was this far from a Society formed by a certain Rule and Order for communicating in Gods service as I have shewed the Church is And therefore hee who upon that account thinks himself free from the Rule of Gods service under which wee now have in the Church of England must first either nullifie the Gospel as owning no such thing as one visible Church or prove the Church in which hee received his Christianity to be apostate Now I confesse our Doctor here makes use of an assumption which I intend not to deny being an evident truth That every man hath the Soveraign Power of judging in mater of Religion what himself is to beleeve or to do For how should any man be accountable to God for his choice upon other termes But hee will intangle himself most pitifully if hee imagine That God hath turned all men loose to the Bible to make what they can of it and professe the Religion that they may fansie to themselves out of it Even those who make men beleeve the Infallibility of the Church must in despite of themselves appeal to the judgement of whomsoever they perswade to pronounce that so it is And for the rest how much soever he referre himself to him that hath intangled him in that snare it proceeds wholly upon this supposition to which hee hath once made his understanding a slave But if all the world should do as men do now in England make every fansy taken up out of the Bible a Law to their Faith not questioning whether ever professed owned or injoined by the Church or not it would soon become questionable whether there be indeed any such thing as Christianity or not these that professe it agreeing in nothing wherein they would have it consist And for my part the the mater is past question supposing what hath been said That God provided from the beginning of Christianity that all Churches should be linked together by a Law of visible Communion in the service of God and so to make one Church For by this means to become a Member of any Church was to become a Member of the whole Church by the right of visible Communion with all Churches into which all Members of any Church were baptized And this it is which made the Church visible For when a man had no further to enquire but what Christians they were who in every City communicated with all Christians besides the choice was ready made without further trial avoiding the rest for Hereticks or Schismaticks And this choice being made there was no fear of offense by reading the Scriptures the sense whereof this choice confined to the Faith and Rules received through the whole Church So that speaking of Gods Institution every man is Soveraign to judge for himself in mater of Religion supposing the Communion of the Church and the sense of the Scripture to be confined within that which it alloweth But hee who thereupon takes upon him to judge of Religion out of the Scripture not knowing what bounds the Communion of the Church hath given the sense of it shall never impute it to Gods Ordinance if hee perish by chusing amisse Now if it be objected
is evident that hee allowes them that which the Apostles had forbidden because it is evident that this is one of those differences which Jews by the Law were bound to make If therefore there be this difference in the Scriptures it is manifest that the leter of them doth not determine what obliges So again the same Apostle 1 Cor. XI 1-16 disputeth at large that men ought not but women ought to cover their heads at praying or prophesying in the Church For the intent whereof though it hath been the subject of whole books in this age I conceive I need go no further than Tertullians book de Velandis Virginibus who living so much nearer the Apostles knew better the custoÌ„ms of their Churches than all the Criticks of this time Hee disputes the case in question then whether Virgins had a privilege not to vail their faces at Divine Service by arguing that they cannot be excepted from S. Pauls words and alleging the example of the Church of Corinth where at that very time the Virgins vailed their faces at Divine Service as other women did Which whether it tye the Church or not at this time it will scarce be granted by those who now practice it not And in another place 1 Tim. V. 3-6 hee showeth that there was then an Order of Widowes whose maintenance hee ordereth to come from the stock of the Church as likewise how they are to be qualified and how imployed Of which Order there is no where any step remaining in the Church at â—resent though nothing be more imperative than the Order concerning it So the precept of the Apostle serves not to oblige the Church at present though by Scripture And if I may use the argument ad hominem upon the supposition of those that I dispute with who intend not to take any thing for true which I prove not as debating the principles of Christian truth it is manifest that the Apostle James V. 14. appointeth that the sick be anointed with oil together with prayers as well for the recovery of their health as for the forgivenesse of their sins Which it is manifest that it cannot appear not to oblige the Church at this time by virtue of that Scripture which injoyneth it And therefore to say nothing at present whether it do indeed oblige the now Church or not those that believe it doth not oblige cannot be able to give a reason why it obligeth not by the Scripture alone And this is the argument whereby I prove that the interpretation of Scripture as concerning mater of Law to the Church or the means to be used in determining what obligeth what not cannot transgresse the tradition and practice of the Church Because that which is propounded in the Scriptures as meer mater of fact may oblige and that which is propounded as mater of precept creating right may not oblige the Scripture not determining whether it intend that obligation to be universal or not For having showed afore that the Church is a Society instituted by God to which these Rules are given as Laws to govern it in the exercise of those Offices wherein the Communion therâ—of consisteth all reasonable men must grant that as the intent and meaning of all Laws is to be gathered from the primitive and original practice of that Society for which they were made so is the reason of all Orders delivered to the Church by the Apostles and by consequence their intent how farr they were to oblige to be measured by the first and most ancient practice of the Church which first had them to use Whereunto let us adde these considerations That the Orders delivered the Church by the Apostles were of necessity in force before mention can be made of them in their writings That the writing of them is neither the reason why they oblige nor a thing thereunto requisite but meerly supervenient to the force of them And that there is sufficient evidence that those motives to believe which the Scripture recordeth but cannot evidence are neverthelesse true and that the truth of those motives cannot be evident but by the Society of the Church which the said Laws do maintain For upon these conâ—â—derations it will appear necessarily consequent that as there be Apostolical Traditions which the Scripture evidently witnesseth so evidence may be made of them without Scripture The Rule of S. Austine how to discern what Traditions do indeed come from the Apostles is well enough known to be this To wit that which is observed over all the Church though it cannot be discerned when where or by whom it came first in force that is in his times by the authority of what Synod it was settled that must be deemed and taken to come from the authority of the Apostles themselves I will not use the terms of Synod or Synods because I conceive the Church was from the beginning by virtue of the perpetual intelligence and correspondence settled and used between the parts of it a standing Synod even when there was no Assembly of persons authorized to consent in behalf of their respective Churches Such things as became requisite to be determined in any Church being thereby so communicated to the rest as the order taken in one either to be accepted by them or redressed Neither will I say that the Rule is so effectual as it is true For I cannot warrant how general the practice of every thing that may come in question can appear to have been over the whole Church nor whether it may appear to have begun from some act of the Church to be designed by some place or persons or not which in S. Austines time I doubt not might be made to appear and being made to appear would maintain the Rule to be true Nor have I need of any such Rule as may serve to discern whatsoever may become questionable whether it come from the Apostles themselves or not It shall suffice mee here to presume thus much that no man can prescribe against any Rule of the Church that it comes not from the Apostles because it is not recorded in the holy Scriptures And therefore that nothing hindereth competent evidence to be made of the authority of the Apostles in some Orders of the Church of which there is no mention in the Scriptures Correspondently to that which was settled afore concerning the Rule of Faith that no man can prescribe against any thing questionable that it is no part of it because it is not evident in Scripture or because such arguments may be made against it out of the Scriptures which every one whose salvation it concerns is not able evidently to assoile And all this being determined I intend neverthelesse that it still shall remain questionable how farr these Orders of the Apostles oblige the Church Because I intend not to prescribe from all this that those Orders which shall appear to have been brought in by the Apostles may not become uselesse to the Church CHAP.
XXII The Authority of the Fathers is not grounded upon any presumption of their Learning or Holinesse How farr they challenge the credit of Historical truth The pre-eminenee of the Primitive The presumption that is grounded upon their ranks and qualities in the Church Of Arnobius Lactantius Tertullian Origen Clemens and the approbation of posterity THese things being said wee have got ground for a resolution in the dispute concerning the authority of the Fathers in maters questionable concerning Christianity and the interpretation of the Scriptures For truly did the credit of those things which they affirm consist in the reputation of their holinesse or learning whether or no the premises be true the consequence would be lame Hee that could make a question of the godlinesse and of the Christianity of those persons to whom wee owe the maintenance and propagation of Christianity under God by preserving Christs flock from the contagion of Heresies by intertaining the unity of the Church and by laying down their lives for the truth must by consequence question though not that Christianity which hee hath sansied yet that which was delivered by the Apostles Which notwithstanding if the Holy Ghost that was in them to save them by saving the common Christianity hath not given the Church evidence that hee was given them to preserve them from error in understanding the Scriptures wee wrong them and the Holy Ghost in them if wee take the truth of their doctrine upon their credit For though the having of the Holy Ghost presupposeth the profession of Christianity as I have showed yet that importeth no evidence to warrant the truth of all that they might say in defense or interpretation of it And though their learning in that which is proper to Christians that is their skill in the Scriptures be such as these ages that boast so much of learning can never equal because they made it in a maner their whole businesse of study And though some of them as Clemens Tertullian Origen and S. Hiâ—rome that looked about them for further helps to the defense and interpretation of Christianity may well challenge the curiosity of these times for great knowledg Yet because mans wit is alwaies fruitfull in that which it is imployed about and may still be well imployed in clearing the true intent of Christianity and the Scriptures so long as there are contrary opinions and sects which cannot all be true I will not create any prejudice to the learning of this time upon that score which it is evident may and doth imploy more helps of learning than they ever did imploy towards the understanding of the Scriptures Two privileges there are belonging to the Fathers of the Church which no man that writes in these dayes can pretend to how godly how learned soever hee may be The first is that of their age and time creating an infallible trust in point of historical truth concerning the state of Christianity during those ages in which they lived or which they might know This is that which neither Pagans nor Jews nor Mahumetanes can refuse them any more than Christians can refuse to believe them in maters of fact which they relate not as things done in private which themselves with a few more may pretend to have had means to know but which were visible to the world at such time as they writ and wherein had they been otherwise they might have been reproved as imposing upon the world not the belief of that which doth not appear to be true but of that which doth appear to be untrue Neither do I demand that upon this score their credit be admitted any further than that which I have premised will inforce For if I have well concluded that the Church is a Society instituted by our Lord Christ and his Apostles in trust for the maintenance and propagation of Christianity contained in the holy Scriptures which hee deposited with it then is the sense of that time which is nearest the age of the Apostles a legal presumption of the truth of that which it was trusted with And as all Writers that relate things subject to the sense of all men as well as their own have the credit of historical truth and Church writers in maters of fact concerning the Church of their respective ages the state thereof being alwaies visible So those that write under the first ages of the Church though competent authors for the truth of nothing in Christianity for then why should not Christianity be believed upon their credit yet must be admitted as unquestionable witnesses of that Christianity which came hot and tender from the forge of our Lord and his Apostles Nor do I complain that any man refuses them upon this score But when I see how many pretending to search the Scriptures and the truth of things questioned in Christianity never make use of any information they might have from them to argue thereupon the true sense of the Scriptures who if they were to expound any Author of humane learning would count him a mad man that should neglect the records of those Authors that lived nearest the same time and perhaps do themselves imploy the writings of Jewes and Pagans in expounding the very Scriptures I cannot chuse but take it as a mark of prejudice against some truth that men care not to be informed of the primitive Christianity least consequences might be framed against some prejudices of their own which supposing onely the credit of historical truth might prove undeniable And here I must needs mervail at the Cardinal of Perrons demand that the trial of what is to be thought Catholick or universally received in the whole Church of God should proceed chiefly or at least necessarily upon the testimonies of those Writers which lived about the fourth century of years from Christ as that which flourished most for number and learning of Writers For seeing the authority of Church Writers is not grounded upon presumption of their learning And that the credit of historical truth cannot be denied even the single witnesse of those that writ when they were more scarce and lesse knowing at least in Secular studies But what is primitive what accessory is not to be discovered but by the state of those times which were before additions could be made hee that demands to be tryed by the times of three hundred years distance from the original wherein what change may have fallen out not presumption but historical truth must determine I say hee that demands this tryal demands not to be tryed Not that I would deny the Writers of that age and such as follow the credit which their time in the consideration now on foot allowes But that the resolution of what is original and primitive must not come from the testimony thereof but from the comparison of it with the testimony of those ages that went afore The second consideration in which the writings of the Fathers are valuable cometh from that which is now
spirit to show that he is no Schismatick not acknowledging much lesse holding the unity of the Church out of which no man can be accounted otherwise But I marvail most wherein he would have the crime of Schisme acknowledged by S. Paul in that one Text which he would be tried by to consist It is the Law of Nature that inables Christians to â—oyn in a independent Congregation as our other Doctor of Oxford hath told us If a Covenant or League passe between so many Soveraigns in this point consider how difficult it is to charge a Soveraign with breach of League such contracts consisting of many Articles one whereof violated voids the contract At least to the contrary there is no Rule Now the Covenant of a Congregation must suppose all Christianity the violation whereof in any point by any member supported by the rest frees a man of his contract How then shall S. Pauls words take place 1 Cor. XI 19. There must be Heresies that the approved may become manifest among you For if one leave six the Congregation consisting of seven how shall it appear that the six are in the right But in my supposition these petty animosities at Corinth may have been fomented by secret Hereticks as in time I shall show that they were And their indeavour might be to make a party for their Heresie out of other Churches as well as out of that of Corinth and being formed to unite them by the like bond as they saw the Church tied with by the Apostles In this case division is ruinous to Christianity not when the question is whether seven shall meet together or three and four For by this means it may become difficult for particular Christians upon true principles to give sentence for themselves in the matter of differances but easie to miss the truth and to joyn with the enemies of it thinking they serve God in communicating with them by charging themselves with judging of the sense of the Scriptures either in those Laws of the Church which concern not the salvation of particular Christians or in the common faith without those bounds which God hath provided by the Church And upon these terms those that are approved may and do become manifest by the rising of Heresies in the Church That which I shall inferre is this That though there be no such virtue as implicite faith because it is no part of faith no office of that virtue to believe that any thing is true because the Church believes it with that firm adherance to it as we are resolved to stand to that by believing which we hope to be saved yet it is part of the virtue and part of the office of a faithfull man that is a Christian to conform himselfe to the beliefe of all that which the Church lawfully determineth to be believed that is to say not to professe the contrary of it and upon that profession to do any thing towards dissolving the unity of the Church so long as the determination thereof causeth not that corruption of those things which the society of the Church presupposeth as may seem to make the unity thereof uselesse whereof this is not the place to debate when it comes to pass It is sufficient for the present that whatsoever the Church hath power to determine according to the premises that the Church that is all particular Christians are obliged not to believe by the office of faith which is onely exercised in them who can make deductions of conclusions from the principles of faith who necessarily holding the conclusions in consideration meerly of the premises do necessarily believe the conclusions by that virtue of faith which holds the principles but to hold and to conform to and not to scandalize by the office of that charity which is most eminently exercised about that which concerns the common good of all Christians in generall which uothing in the world can so much concern next the common faith as the unity and communion of the Church Thus have I bounded the power of the Church and so showed the reason upon which the right use of it is to proceed I showed afore the ground of that exception which the interest of secular Power in Church matters createth to the due use of it When I shall have showed in the third book what the Law of God hath determined in matters concerding the communion of the Church and by consequence what it leaveth to the Church to determine it will be time to take in hand the same consideration again For the ground of this exception will show how farre it extendeth whereby it will appear that Christian Powers do acknowledge the Church and the power of it to stand by Gods Law even when they limit the exercise of it by virtue of that interest which the law of God alloweth them in Church matters CHAP. XXVI What it is to adde to Gods Law What to adde the Apocalypse S. Pauls Anathema The Beraeans S. Johns Gospel sufficient to make one believe and the Scriptures The man of God perfit How the Law giveth light and Christians are taught by God How Idolatry is said not to be commanded by God IN the beginning of this Book I proposed the chief Texts of Scripture which are usually drawn into consequence to prove either the infallibility of the Church or the sufficience and clearness of the Scriptures Of which I may truly say that they are and have been for these hundred and forty yeares the Theme of a dispute between the Scriptures and the Church for the right of giving Law to the consciences of Christians what communion to chuse that of the Reformation or that of the Church of Rome But with so little success that a discreet man may truly say that the parties do now stand at a bay as it is visible that they do meerly because they are not able to force one another by the arms which they are furnished with the Arguments of either side serving to maintain them against the adversary meerly because the arguments of the other side are insufficient not because either hath either the whole truth or nothing of the truth for it I showed you there that they come short of making good that which they are imployed to prove on this side as well as on that As for my present business which is here to show how the sense of them concurs to the truth which I have established I shall but desire any man of common sense to make an argument from the Text of Moses alledged in the first place and say The people of Israel are forbidden by the Law of Moses to adde any thing to the said Law and to take any thing from it Therefore the Scriptures contain clearly set down to all understandings concerned all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians then to tell me whither he will undertake to make good this consequence of not For if the Law of Moses cannot pretend to contain
knowledge as to think himselfe fit to recall the Lawes of his Country and give new Laws to the Church of God in it is not ashamed to admit that the reason why the Idolatries of Israelites were so odious to God was because he had not commanded them by the Scriptures As if God had never forbade them to worship Idols by the Scriptures For otherwise he could not have inferred by the words of the Prophet that a Christian ought to do nothing without a Text of Scripture to warrant it much lesse to admit any Law of the Church without such evidence Which had it been granted him with power to give the Church such Laws he could not have proceeded without demanding this exception that those which Cartwright should make without any such warrant might be counted godly and religious but these which the Church superstitious CHAP. XXVII Why it was death to transgress the determinations of the Jews Consistory and what power this argueth in the Church A difference between the authority of the Apostles and that of the Church The being of the Church to the worlds end with power of the Keyes makes it not infallible Obedience to Superiors and the Pillar of truth inferre it not IT will not be more difficult to show how the true sense of all those Scriptures which are alleadged towards the infallibility of the Church concurs to make good the terms upon which I have resolved the dispute in hand For having showed that the Law of Moses was given the Jews for the condition of holding the land of promise they ruling as well their civil communion as the service they tendred to God according to it I will demand but one thing more from the general experience of all civill people which is this That no form of Laws can be propounded to any community of men whatsoever so as to serve it without further determining and limiting of such things as time and the occurrences of time shall discover to be undetermined by that Law and therefore questionable So that Moses Law though given by God who foresaw whatsoever could become questionable concerning the mater of his Law yet because given for the civil Law of the people must needs be given liable to want such limitations as the occurrences of time should make requisite Neither can the truth hereof be better evidenced then by showing the course which God by the Law hath taken for the ending of all such disputes arising upon the Law I do therefore not onely grant but insist upon this that the power established by the law of Deut. XVII 8 -12 extendeth to all maner of debates arising upon occasion of any recept of Moses Law and to the determining of them by limiting those things which the leter of the Law had not expressed I do likewise grant that death is allotted for a penalty to whosoever should not conform to any such determination and the practice of the Law according to it And I do find so much reason for it that I do not understand how possibly that people should subsist and by consequence the Law which made them that people in practice of it without such a provision as this An opinion of the intent and meaning of God in the practice of any precept being sufficient to divide that people into parties not to be reconciled but by the voice of God either upon the occasion or by the Law warranting the sentence of those whom he authorizeth to declare what he requireth of his people Setting aside for the present to dispute whether it be the Priests alone or the Priests with the chiefe of the People in whom this Power is vested by the Law as for the present I dispute not who the persons are in whom the power of Church maters rests in behalf of the Church it is plainly by this Law a capitall crime to teach and do contrary to what the publick Power of that People should determine concerning the intent and practice of any Precept of that Law And therefore accordingly I grant insist that in the new Israel of God according to the Spirit which is the Church of Christ there is and ought to be a Power of putting out of the fellowship of the same any man that shall not stand to the resolution which legally is able to conclude it For without such a Power it cannot be imagined how the unity thereof should subsist seeing that there can be no community in which debates shall not arise about those things wherein they communicate I grant further and insist that he who is justly put out of the Church though meerly for violating the unity thereof by disobeying that just order which unites it is thereby condemned to the death of the world to come As he that teaches and does contrary to the sentence of that power that concludes the Synagogue is put out of this Notwithstanding as many other crimes besides this are capitall by the law of Moses so there be many other causes both of faith and of life by which a man forfeits his interest both in the world to come and in the communion of the Church But if any man argue that because a man forfeits the Communion of the Church by disobeying the determination thereof therefore all the determinations thereof are infallibly true and obliging by virtue of Gods Law I shall deny the consequence by virtue of that very Law of Deut. XVII 8 -12 upon which this Argument is grounded For whereas it makes disobedience a capital crime there are other Laws that suppose a breach of the Law even in following the determinations of that power which it establisheth At least if we admit the practice of those Jews that follow the Talmud in those precepts of Levit. VI. 13 -21 Numb XV. 21 -26 which indeed cannot reasonably be otherwise understood How should the Congregation offer sacrifices to expiate that ignorance wherein all were involved but as those that had power to make wrong determinations should expiate that ignorance which the Congregation by following had incursed Neither saith our Lord any lesse in the Gospel though in a mater of greater consequence when having condemned them that transgressed Gods commandment for the Tradition of their Predecessors Mat. XV. 5-10 Mar. VII 8-12 neverthelesse he commands them to observe and do all such things as the Scribes and Pharisees sitting in Moses Chair should command Mat. XXIII 2. to wit because the authority of Moses his Chair presupposed the Law of God but extended not to nullifie any part of it In like maner the authority of the Church presupposing the truth of Christianity the profession whereof makes Christians the Body whereof is the Church It is not possible that it should reach so farre as to warrant any man to believe that which those grounds upon which the truth of Christianity stands cannot evidence to be true I say not that the Church cannot determine what shall be taught and received in such disputes as
the second of the LXX whose privildges are not to be communicated to any authority to be preserved in the Church afterwards But the importance of these exhortations is not such as can inferre any imagination of infallibility in those whom they are exhorted to follow For they that know the bounds of that Power which the Apostles had trusted with the Governours of particular Churches presupposing the Christianity and Laws of Ecclesiastical communion which themselves had delivered may safely be exhorted to acknowledge them to esteem them above measure in love to obey them and to give way to them remembring those from whom they had first received Christianity from whom they had received these instructions as well as their then Rulers because they had long before received and yielded obedience to those things which we except from the obedience of present Rulers as presupposed to any power they can challenge As for the words of S. Paul 1 Tim. III. 15. I confess they containe a very just and full attribute of the Church and a Title serving to justifie all the right I challenge for it For if the Church be the House of the living God then is it by Gods founding and appointment a Body consisting of all members of the true Church wherein God dwells as of old in the Temple at Jerusalem as he dwells in every Christian as he dwelt in the Tabernacle and Campe of the Israelites And if it be the Pillar that sustains the truth then must it have wherewith to maintain it beside the truth it selfe which is the Scriptures And what what can that be but the testimony of it selfe as a body and fellowship of men onely which securing it selfe that is succession by the evidence made to the Predecessors of the same body maintains the truth once committed to the trust of it not onely by writing but also by practice But what is this to the gift of Infallibility for suppose the Church by the foundation of it inabled to maintain both the truth and the sufficience of the motives of faith against Infidels and also the rule of faith against Hereticks by the evidence which it maketh that they are received What is this to the creating of faith by decreeing that which before it was decreed was not the object of faith but upon such decree obligeth all faithful to believe Surely the Church cannot be the Pillar that sustains any faith but that which is laid upon it as received from the beginning not that which it layeth upon the foundation of faith Here I will desire the Reader to peruse these words of S. Basil Epist LXII speaking of the Bishop of Neo caesarea deceased 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is a man gone that of all men of his time most evidently excelled in all and every of those good things that belong to men The stay of his Country the ornament of the Church the Pillar that sustained the truth For if a particular Prelate may duly be qualified as well the Pillar that supporteth the truth as the prop of his Country Well may the Church be thought capable of the same stile though it create no matter of faith by decreeing but onely preserve that which it hath received by defending and maintaining it CHAP. XXXI The Fathers acknowledge the Sufficience and clearness of the Scriptures as the Traditions of the Church They are to be reconciled by limiting the terms which they use The limitation of those sayings which make all Christian truth to be contained in the Scriptures Of those which make the authority of the Church the ground of Faith IT is now time having showed the meaning of those Scriptures which are alleged for both extremes which I avoid to do the like for some of those sayings of the Fathers which are pleaded to the same purpose This abridgment cannot consider all Therefore I will not multiply those which speak to one and the same purpose Nor marshal them according to the mater which they speak to Finding them speak to any branch of those extremes which I decline I will put them down as they come S. Augustine again de Doctr. Christianâ II. 6. for one place you had afore Magnifice salubriter Spiritus Sanctus ità Scripturas modificavit ut locis apertioribus fami occurreret obscurioribus fastidia detergeret Nihil enim ferè de illis obscuritatibus eruitur quod non planissimè dictum alibi reperiatur Gallantly as well as wholesomly hath the Holy Ghost so tempered the Scriptures as to satisfie hunger by those places that are plain by those that are obscure to wipe of queasiness For there is scarce any thing digged out of those dark places that is not found most manifestly said elsewhere Epist III. Tanta est Christianarum profunditas literarum ut in eis quotidie proficerem si eas solas ab ineunte pueritiâ usque ad decrepitam senectutem maximo otio summo studio meliore ingenio conarer addiscere Non quòd ad ea quae necessaria sunt saluti tant â in eis perveniatur difficultate Sed cùm ibi quisque fidem tenuerit sine quâ rectè pieque non vivitur tam multa tamque multis mysteriorum umbraculis opaca intelligenda proficientibus restant So great is the depth of the Writings of Christianity that I should profit in them continually if I should indeavor to learn them onely at very great leasure with most earnest study having a better wit from the beginning of my nonage till decrepit old age Not as if it were so hard to attain to that which is necessary in them But when a man hath attained the Faith without which there is no good and godly living there remain so many things to be understood and so darkly shadowed with manifold mysteries Clemens Protreptico 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hear yee then that are farre off hear yee that are near hand The word is not hid from any It is a common light it shineth upon all men There are no Cimmerians in the Word As some said then that there were in the world that had no Sun Irenaeus II. 46. Vniversae Scripturae Propheticae Apostolicae in aperto sine ambiguitate similiter ab omnibus audiri possunt All the Scriptures both of the Prophets and Apostles are open and without ambiguity and may be heard or understood alike of all III. 15. Doctrina Apostolorum manifesta firma nihil subtrahens neque alia quidem in abscondito alia verò in manifesto docent um The doctrine of the Apostles is clear and firm and conceals nothing As not teaching one thing in secret and another openly Origen contra Celsum VII 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The vnlgar after their entrance made may easily study to apprehend even the deeper notions that are hid in the Scriptures For it is manifest to any man that reads them that they may have much deeper sense than that which straight appears in them Which becomes
as they pretended to do thence calling themselves Gnosticks may be convinced by that evidence which the consent of all Churches in the same Faith tenders common sense for the Tradition of the Apostles Which saith hee wee must have stuck to had they left us nought in writing as those Christians then did which had not the use of leters Epiphanius Haer. LXI 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All Gods words do not need allegory but are to be understood as they are But they need consideration to know the force of each mater Tradition also is to be used For all is not to be had from Gods Sriptures For the Holy Apostles delivered some things in writing others by Tradition as the Apostle saith So Haer. LV. LXXV S. Jerome advers Lucif Multa quae per Traditionem in Ecclesiis observantur auctoritatem sibi scriptae Legis usurpà runt Orthod Non quidem abnuo hanc esse Ecclesiasticam consuetudinem Sed quale est ut Leges Ecclesiae ad haeresim transferas Many things that are observed in the Churches by Tradition have usurped to themselves the authority of written Law The Orthodox party answers I deny not the custome of the Church to be such But what a business is it that you transform the Lawes of the Church into Heresie S. Austine Epist CXVIII Illa autem quae non scripta sed tradita custodimus quae quidem toto terrarum orbe servantur dantur intelligi vel ab ipsis Apostolis vel plenariis Conciliis quorum est in Ecclesiâ saluberrima auctoritas commendata atque statuta retineri But those things which wee observe though not written but delivered being observed all over the world wee are given to understand that they are held as recommended and setled either by the Apostles themselves or by General Councils the authority whereof is very wholesom in the Church To the same purpose de Bapt. contra Donat. II 7. IV. 6 24. V. 23. de Vnitate Ecclesiae XIX contra Cresconiam I. 31 32 33. The supposed Dionysius the Areopagite Eccles Hierarchiae cap. I. mentioneth that instruction which the Apostles delivered without writing as a witnesse of the Church though not as a Scholar of the Apostles And Eusebius de demonstr Evang. I. 8. acknowledgeth written Lawes of the Apostles Concilium Gangrense in fine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And wee desire in summe that all things delivered by the Scriptures of God and the Traditions of the Apostles be observed in the Church And Greg. Nazianzene Orat. I. advers Jul. referrs those Ordinances which I quoted out of him afore to the Apostles as Authors of them Some sayings of the Fathers are also alleged to show that they held the Scriptures obscure Origen in Levit. Hom. V. allegorizeth the Law of burning some part of the peace-offerings to signifie that some things in the Scriptures are reserved to Gods knowledg least wee understand them otherwise than truth requires The same saith Irenaeus II. 47. even in the world to come that man may alwayes learn but God alwayes teach the maters of God S. Chrysostome in Joan. Hom. XL. observes that our Lord bids Search the Scriptures By digging as for mines or treasure So if they may be understood with searching yet it followeth not that every one is able to take that course in searching them that is requisite And Opus imperfectum in Mat. Hom. XLIV Ergò non sunt Scriptnrae clausae Sed obscurae quidem ut cum labore inveniantur non autem clausae ut nullo modo inveniantur Therefore the Scriptures are not shut Dark indeed they are so that they are found with pains But not shut so as by no means to be found Adding that as it is for the praise of them that finde them that they sought so for the condemnation of them that seek not that they understand them not S. Jerome ad Algasiam Quaest VIII Omnis Epistola ad Romanos miris obscuritatibus involuta est The whole Epistle to the Romanes is involved with marvellous darkness Epist ad Paulinum Hoc autem velamen non solùm in facie Moysi sed in Evangelistis Apostolis positum est This vail is not onely in Moses face but upon the Evangelists and Apostles And Nisi aperta fuerint universa quae scripta sunt ab eo qui habet clavem David qui aperit nemo claudit qui claudit nemo aperit nullo alio reserante pandentur Unless all things that are written be opened by him who hath the Key of David who opens and no man shuts who shuts and no man opens no man else will unlock and lay them forth Before him Origen in Exodum Hom. XII is afraid that the Evangelists and Apostles as well as the Prophets will prove not onely vailed but sealed to us as the Prophet saith unlesse wee both study and pray that the Lamb of the Tribe of Juda may open us the Seals of it Here I will advise the parties to consider how they can advantage themselves by those sayings of the Fathers which contain not the terms of that position which they do nothing unlesse they inforce Allege they what they can allege out of the Fathers to show that they acknowledg the Scriptures both sufficient and perspicuous I shall not be troubled at it but shall willingly concurr to acknowledg the same I acknowledg the Scriptures to be an Instrument of God though a Moral Instrument And I shall have a care not to acknowledg that God ever provided or used au Instrument that would not serve his turn Instrumentum Vetus Novum is a term in every mans mouth to signifie the Old and New Testament But there are Natural Instruments and there are Moral Instruments I say not that there is no third kind of Instruments for it may be there are Artificial Instruments of a several nature from both but my present purâ—ose obliges mee not to consider that difference When the substance or frame of the Instrument inables it to serve him that imployes it well may it be called a Natural Instrument as the parts of mans body or other creatures which execute the operations of the soul When neither the substance nor frame of the thing which that substance produces concurrs to the work to the which it is Instrumental but it is done meerly by the consent of mans will the reason is the same of Gods will if it be an Instrument between man and God then is it great reason why it should be called a Moral Instrument because the force of it lyes in the maners of those who use it to testifie those acts which they do not mean to transgresse Such as all civil records are in regard of the effect of those contracts or deeds which they come to witnesse The Old and New Testament are the records of two several Treaties or Contracts if you please that have passed between God and Man And therefore authentick because the writings of those who contracted those Treaties But does
every Instrument of a contract contain every thing that is in force by the said contract Surely it is a thing so difficult to contain in writing every thing that a contract intends that many times if witnesses were not alive other whiles if general Lawes did not determine the intent of words in fine if there were nothing to help the tenor of such Instruments things contracted would hardly sort to effect Consider now what is alleged on the other side how resolutely how generally the Tradition both of the Rule of Faith and of Lawes to the Church is acknowledged even by those witnesses whose sayings are alleged to argue the sufficience perfection and evidence of the Scriptures Is it civil is it reasonable to say that the Writers of the Christian Church make it their businesse to contradict themselves which no Scholar will admit either Infidels Pagans Jewes Mahumetans or Hereticks to do Is it not easie to save them from contradicting themselves by saying that Tradition of Faith containeth nothing that is not in the Scriptures but limits the meaning of that which they contain Tradition of Lawes may contain that which is not in the Scriptures for the species of fact but is derived from the Scripture for the authority from whence it proceeds Or is it possible by any other means reasonably to save them from contradicting themselves These generals premised freely may wee make our approaches to the particulars and by considering the circumstance of the places where they lye make our selves consident to finde some limitation restraining the generality of their words to make them agree as well with my position as with themselves For example Epiphanius Haer. LXXVI Irenaeus II. 46. III. 15. Athanasius Dispcum Ario say all is clear in the Scriptures Meaning that the sense of the Church is clearly the sense of the Scriptures in the points questioned But not to them who exclude that Tradition which themselves include and presuppose Observe again that the perspicuity of the Scriptures is not limited to things necessary to salvation in all that hath been alleged but once in S. Austine Epist III. and observe withall that the knowledg of things necessary proceeds upon supposition of the Rule of Faith acknowledged and received from the Church in the Catechizing of those that were baptized Not determined by every ones sense of the Scriptures It is therefore easily granted that the Scriptures were made for all sorts of people that they might profit by them Alwaies provided that they bring with them the Faith of the Catholick Church for the Rule within the bounds whereof they may profit by reading them otherwise they may and they may not And therefore those sayings which were alleged to prove them obscure convincing that they are not clear to all understandings because they require study and search and digging do necessarily leave him that comes without his Rule not onely in doubt of finding the truth but in danger of taking error for it Upon the like supposition S. Austine affirms de Vtilitate credendi VI. that any man may finde enough in the Old Testament that seeks as he ought For to seek humbly and devoutely is the same thing for him that is no Christian For the Manichees to whom S. Austine recommends the Old Testament in this place were Christians no further than the name as it is for him that is a Christian to seek like a Christian that is having before his eyes the Faith of the Church And this is that which S. Austine means that hee who is no Christian so seeking may finde enough to make him a Christian That is as much as hee is to expect from the Old Testament And this supposition is exprest by Origen contra Celsum VII when hee sayes that the unlearned may study the Scriptures with profit after their entrance made For this entrance is the Rule of Faith which they were taught when they were baptized And the Catechism of that time containing as well the motives as the mater of Faith appears to the unlearned the way into the deep that is the mystical sense of the Scripture Upon the same terms may wee proceed to grant all that is alleged to show that which is not contained in the Scriptures not to be receivable in point of Christian truth For having showed that the Rule of Faith is wholly contained in the Scriptures And nothing contained in the records of Church Writers to be unquestionable but the Rule and Tradition of Faith Whatsoever further intelligence and information can be pretended either tending to establish the same or by consequence of reason to flow from it if it cannot be pretended to come from Tradition because there is no Tradition of the Church concerning that wherein the Church agrees not either it must come from the Scripture or by the like revelation as the Scriptures which no Church Writer pretends to have For as for that which by consequence of reason is derived from those things which the Scripture expresseth Seeing the words of the Scripture is not the word of God but the sense and meaning of them it were a thing very impertinent to question whether or no that be contained in the Scripture which the true sense of the Scripture by due consequence of argument imports But if the question be of Lawes delivered the Church by the Apostles having showed that there may sufficient evidence be made of such though not recorded in the Scriptures there can no presumption be made being not found in the Scriptures that therefore a Law was not first brought into the Church by the Apostles And yet it remains grounded upon the Scriptures in point of righâ— because the authority by which it was brought into the Church is either established or attested by the Scriptures Mater of fact being competently evidenced by other historical truth besides And upon these terms wee may proceed to acknowledg the goodness of an argument drawn negatively from the Scriptures that is to say inferring this is not in the Scriptures therefore not true Doth my position then oblige mee to deny Irenaeus affirming III. that the Apostles writ the same that they preached Or S. Austine in Psalmum XXI de Vnitate Ecclesiae cap. V. and Optatus V. tying the Donatists to be tried by the Scriptures Both parties pretending to be children of God are to be tryed by their Fathers Will that is by the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament But if there shall fall out any difference about the intent of their Fathers Will the meaning of the Old and New Testament shall I think that is said in vain which is alleged on the other side out of the same S. Austine contra Cresconium I. 33. that if a man would not erre in that point hee is to advise with the Church which the Scripture evidenceth For the question being about the rebaptizing of Hereticks that is about a Law of the Church if you will have S. Austine agree with S. Austine
it must be upon the terms of my position the practice of the Church giving bounds to the sense of the Scripture I can therefore safely agree with the Constitutions of the Apostles with S. Cyprian and Leo and whosoever else teaches that it is not safe for the people to assure their consciences upon the credit of their Pastors But it is because I suppose the Unity of the Church provided by God for a ground upon which the people may reasonably presume when they are to adhere to their Pastors when not To wit when they are owned not when they are disowned by the Unity of the Church For though this provision becomes uneffectual when this Unity is dissolved yet ought not that to be an argument that the goodnesse of God never made that provision which the malice of man may defeat But that whosoever concurrs to maintain the division concurrs to defeat that provision which God hath made As safely do I agree with all them who agree that whatsoever is taught in Christianity is to be proved by the Scriptures For if it belong to the Rule of Faith it is intended by the Scriptures though that intent is evidenced by the Tradition of the Church If to the Lawes of the Church the authority of it comes from the Scriptures though the evidence of it may depend upon common sense which the practice of the Church may convince If over and above both it is not receivable if not contained in the Scriptures And in this regard whosoever maintains the whole Scripture to be the Rule of Faith is throughly justified by all those testimonies that have been alleged to that purpose For though it be not necessary to the salvation of all Christians to understand the meaning of all the Scriptures yet what Scripture soever a man attains to understand is as much a Rule to his Faith as that which a man cannot be saved if hee understand not the sense of it whether in and by the Scripture or without it And though a man may be obliged to believe that which is not in the Scripture to have been instituted by the Apostles yet is he not obliged to observe it but upon that reason which the Scripture delivereth And upon these terms is the whole Scripture a Rule of Faith from which as nothing is to be taken away so is nothing to be added to it as the saying of S. Chrysostome in Phil. II. Hom. XII requireth And the saying of S. Basil in Esa II. and Ascet Reg. I. condemning all that is done without Scripture takes place upon no other terms than these Not as Cartwright and our Puritanes after him imagine that a man is to have a text of Scripture specifying every thing which hee doth for his warrant For as it is in it self ridiculous to imagine that all cases which fall out can be ruled by expresse text of Scripture our Christianity being concerned infinite wayes of which it is evident that the Scripture had no occasion to speak So if the words of the Scripture be lodged in a heart where the work of them dwelleth not a thing which wee see too possible to come to passe it is the ready way to make the Word of God a color for all unrighteousnesse not onely to others but to the very heart of him who hath that cloke for it It is therefore enough that the reason of every thing which a Christian doth is to be derived from that doctrine which the Scripture declaeth And where a man proceedeth to do that for which hee hath not such a reason so grounded as reasonable men use to go by then cometh that to passe which S. Basil chargeth Ascet Reg. LXXX That What is not of faith is sin It is true according to that sense which hitherto I have used after many Church Writers the Rule of Faith extendeth not to all the Scriptures but onely to that which it is necessary to salvation to believe and to know Which every man knowes that all the Scripture is not For though it be necessary to salvation to believe that all the Scripture is true yet is it not necessary to salvation to know all that the Scripture containeth And the reason why I use it in this sense is to distinguish those things contained in the Scriptures which Tradition extendeth to from those to which it extendeth not For upon these terms is the sense of them limitable to the common Faith But I quarel not therefore the opinion of them that maintaine the whole Scriptures to be the Rule of Faith acknowledging that whatsoever it containeth is necessarily to be believed by all that come to understand it And whatsoever it containeth not though the Scripture alone obligeth not to believe the truth of it is not necessarily to be observed for any other reason but that which the Scripture declareth As for S. Basil making it apostasy to bring that which is not written into the Faith It is a thing well known that the Arians were charged by the Church for bringing in words that were not in the Scriptures saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was a time when Christ was not And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That hee was made of nothing On the other side after the Council of Nicaea the Arians charged the Church for bringing in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same substance Where then lay the difference between the Inndelity of the Arians and the Faith of the Church Theodoret showes it Hist Eccles I. 8. out of Athanasius de Actis Concil Niceni 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith hee They were condemned by written words piously understood But how appears this piety For I suppose the Arians would not have granted it Hee addeth that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had been used by the Fathers which had it been inconsistent with the sense of the Church could not have been indured in a mater concerning the Rule of Faith whereas their terms were contrary to that which is found in the Scriptures Now S. Basil acknowledgeth that hee had elsewhere dealing with Hereticks used terms not found in the Scriptures to exclude their sense contrary to the Scriptures as you shall finde by the Authors alleged that the Council of Nicaea had done but to those who desired information with a single heart hee resolves to rest content with the Scriptures The terms whereof his meaning is that the Hereticks did not rest content with because they had a minde to depart from the Faith Upon the same terms Tertullian pronounces the Wo that belongs to them which adde to Gods Word upon Hermogenes because his error concerned the Article of our Creed that God made heaven and earth And S. Austine presumes the reason why there is no clear Scripture for the original of the soul to be because hee presumes that it concerns not the substance of Faith Besides these Observations some of those passages which are alleged may concern Christianity rather than the Scriptures
provided a visible Judg infallible in determining Controversies of Faith either because originally his goodnesse requires it or because wee cannot suppose that men can be obliged to imbrace the Gospel upon other terms It is sufficient that having given the Scriptures hee hath over and above provided the Communion of the Church to preserve the Rule of Faith and the Laws of the Church in the sensible knowledg and common practice of all Christians that the means of salvation might be sufficient and yet men remain subject to trial whether they would render them uneffectual or not to themselvs and the rest of mankinde I confess indeed it would be much for the ease of the parties and would shorten their work very much if it might be admitted for a presumption that all things necessary are clear in the Scriptures or that the Church is an infallible Judg in Controversies of Faith For then the superficial sound of the words of Scripture repeated by rote in the Pulpit or out of the Pulpit would serve to knock the greatest question on the head without any advise what difficulties remain behind undecided upon no lesse appearances in Scripture On the other side a decree of the Council of Trent would serve to put the Scripture to silence without any proffer to satisfie the conscience that is moved with the authority thereof equally obliging with our common Christianity with the sense of the Church on the same side to boot Thus much is visible that they whose businesse it is in England to reconcile souls to the Church of Rome finde their work ready done when they have gained this point and men all their lives afore grounded upon contrary reasons in the particulars which are the subject of the breach change their profession without any coutrary resolution in those particulars that is their former grounds remaining in force Surely nothing were more desirable than a ready and short way to the truth in things so concerning But to pretend it upon a ground which if any thing can be demonstrative in this kinde is demonstratively proved that it cannot be true To wit the authority of the Church decreeing without means to derive that which it decreeth from the motives that should evidence it to be revealed by God This I say to pretend is no better than an Imposture And if this be true I remain secure of that which every man will object against the resolution which I advance that whereas the meaning of the Scripture alone is a thing too difficult for the most part of men to compasse I require further that it be assured by the records of the Church which are endlesse and which no mans industry can attain to know So that the meer despair of finding resolution by the means propounded will justifie to God him that followes probabilities as being all one in that case whether there be no truth or whether it cannot appear to those whom it concerns This Objection I say I do not finde so heavy upon mee that I have any cause to mince but rather to aggravate the difficulty of it having showed that the means provided by God to make evidence of the Faith to the consciences of particular Chaistians is not any gift of infallibility vested in any person or persons on behalf of the whole Church but the Unity of the whole Church grounded upon the profession of the same Faith as the condition of it For in all reason what Unity bindes that Division destroyes And whatsoever Unity contributes to the assurance of a Christian that hee is in the way to salvation so long as hee continues in the Unity of the Church that the Division of the Church necessarily derogates from the same assurance in him that cannot continue in that Unity which is once dissolved and yet believing the Scriptures and our common Christianity to be infallibly true cannot believe the parties to be infallible as they are And what hath hee that desireth the Unity of the Church to do but to aggravate that difficulty of attaining salvation which the division thereof produceth I do therefore grant and challenge as for mine own Interest that it is very difficult for unlearned Christians to discern the truth in those Controversies about which a settled division is once formed as now in the Western Church At least upon so true and so clear grounds as may assure them that they make their choice upon no other interest than that of Gods truth But I do not therefore yield to that which this difficulty it seems hath wrung from Vincentius Lerinensis with whom agreeth the Opus imperfectum in Mat. as you have them quoted afore That there is no means but Scripture to convince inveterate Heresies The reason whereof the later of those authors renders Because those Heresies have their Churches their Pastors and the succession of them and their Communion as well as Catholick Christians For hee supposeth Pastors lawfully constituted to have fallen away to those Heresies And truly the case of this difficulty was put when the Arian Faction had possessed so great a part of the Church that S. Gregory Nazianzene in the place afore quoted acknowledges that the true Church could not be judged by numbers With whom S. Hilary libro de Synodis agreeth But if the same Nazianzene scorn them that value the Church by numbers Liberius in the place afore quoted out of Theodoret revies it upon him in saying that the cause of the Faith could not suffer though hee were alone For not onely the Scriptures continue alwaies the same but though the present Church fail it follows not that the Tradition of the Whole Church must fail with it So long as the original sense of the Whole Church may be evident by the agreement thereof with the Scripture wee may discern what is Catholick without the sentence of the present Church And that which is not so to be discerned for Catholick wee may presume that our salvation requires us not to believe it And therefore Vincentius and his fellow are so to be understood that it is difficult indeed to make evidence to private Christians of Tradition contrary to that which they see received by Heresies And therefore that for the convicting of them in the truth recourie is to be had to the Scriptures But Vincentius who as I showed you acknowledges evidence for Tradition from written records of the Church need not have said that there is no means to convince inveterate Heresies but the Scriptures Be this difficulty then the evidence how much it concerns the salvation of all Christians that the Unity of the Church be restored That the choice of private Christians in maters concerning their salvation be not put upon the sentencing of those disputes the reasons whereof they are not able to manage For being restored upon agreement in those things which it is sufficient for all Christians to believe it will neither be easie for private Christians to frame to themselves opinions
therefore affected a compliance with the ancient Church And truly it is fit it should be thought that they complied with him because hee complied with the Catholick Church for by that reason they shall comply with the Church if in any thing hee comply not with it But it is a great deal too little for him to say that will say the truth for the Church of England For it hath an Injunction which ought still to have the force of a Law that no interpretation of the Scripture be alleged contrary to the consent of the Fathers Which had it been observed the innovations which I dispute against could have had no pretense If this be not enough hee that shall take pains to peruse what Dr. Field hath writ hereupon in his work of the Church shall find that which I say to be no novelty either in the Church of England of in the best learned Doctors beyond the Seas And sure the Reformation was not betrayed when the B. of Sarum challenged all the Church of Rome at S. Pauls Crosse to make good the points in difference by the first DC years of the Church Always it is easie for me to demonstrate that this resolution That the Scripture holding the meaning of it by the Tradition of the Church is the onely means to decide controversies of Faith is neerer to the common terms that the Scripture is the onely Rule of Faith than to that Infallibility which is pretended for the Church of Rome Having demonstrated that to depend upon the Infallibility of the present and the Tradition of the Catholick Church are things inconsistent whereas this cannot be inconsistent with that Scripture which is no lesse delivered from age to age than Tradition is though the one by writing the other by word of mouth and serving chiefly to determine the true meaning of it when it comes in debate And if prejudice and passion carry not men headlong to the ruine of that Christianity which they professâ— it cannot seem an envious thing to comply with the most learned of the Church of Rome who acknowledge not yet any other Infallibility in the Church then I claime rather than with the Socinians the whole Interest of whose Heresie consists in being tryed by Scripture alone without bringing the consent of the Church into consequence and that supposing all mater of Faith must be clear in the Scripture to all them that consult with nothing but Scripture But I cannot leave this point till I have considered a singular conceit advanced in Rushworthes Dialogues for maintaining the Infallibility of the Church upon a new account The pretense of that Book is to establish a certain ground of the choice of Religion by the judgement of common sense To which purpose I pretend not to speak in this place thinking it sufficient if this whole work may inable them who are moved with it duely to make that choice for themselves and to show those that depend on them how to do the like But in as much as no man will deny the choice of Religion to be the choice of truth before falshood in those particulars whereof the difference of Religion consists It is manifest that the means of discerning between true and false in mater of Faith which I pretend cannot stand with that which hee advanceth It consists in two points That the Scripture is not and that Tradition is the certain means of deciding this truth Which if no more were said will not amount to a contradiction against that which I resolve For hee that sayes the Scripture is not the onely means excluding that Tradition which determines the meaning of it doth neither deny that Tradition is nor say that the Scripture is the certain means of deciding this kind of truth But the issue of his reasons will easily show upon what termes the contradiction stands Hee citeth then common sense to witnesse that wee cannot rest certain that wee have those Scriptures which came wee agree by inspiration of God by reason of the manifold changes which common sense makes appearance must come to passe in transcribing upon such a supposition as this That so many Columns as one Book contâ—ins so many Copies at least are made every hundreth years and in every Copy so many faults at least as words in one Column Upon which account 15 or 16 times as many faults having been made in all copies as there are words it will be so much oddes that wee have no true Scripture in any place Abating onely for those faults that may have fallen out to be the same in several copies And if Sixtus V Pope causing 100 copies of the Vulgar Latine to be compared found two thousand faults supposing two thousand copies extant which may be supposed a hundred thousand in any Language what will remain unquestionable It is further alleged that the Scripture is written in Languages now ceased which some call Learned Languages because men learn them to know such Books as are written in them the meaning whereof not being subject to sense dependeth upon such a guessing kind of skill as is subject to mistake as experience showes in commenting of all Authors But especially the Hebrew and that Greek in which wee have the Scriptures That having originally no vowels to determine the reading of it wanting Conjunctions and Preposiaions to determine the signification of him that speaks all the Language extant being contained in the Bible alone the Jews Language differing so much as it does from it the Language of the Prophets consisting of such dark Tropes and Figures that no skill seems to determine what they mean This so copious and by that means so various in the expressions of it though wanting that variety of Conjugations by which the Hebrew and other Eastern Languages vary the sense that to determine the meaning of it is more than any ordinary skill can compasse Adde hereunto the manifold equivocations incident to whatsoever is expressed by writing more incident to the Scripture as pretending to give us the sense of our Lords words for example not the very syllables Adde the uncertainties which the multiplicity of Translations must needs produce and all this must needs amount to this reckoning That God never meant the Bible for the means to decide controversies of Faith the meaning whereof requires many principles which God alone can procure because so indefinite Which the nature of the Book argueth no lesse as I observed being written in no method of a Law or a Rule nor having those decisions that are to oblige distinguished from mater of a farre diverse and almost impertinent nature Upon these premises it is inferred as evident to common sense that the Scripture produces no distinct resolution of controversies though as infinitely usefull for instruction in virtue so tending to show the truth in maters of Faith in grosse and being read rather to know what is in it than to judge by it by the summary agreement of it with that which
is held and practised convincing where the truth is and on which side especially if wee content our selves with what is probable from it expecting from Tradition what is definite and certain For supposing so great a Congregation as the Church to take this for the ground of their Faith that nothing is to be believed for revealed truth but what they have received from hand to hand from the Apostles it must be granted First that they had the same perswasion from the beginning Because having never declared to their successors what are the particulars they are to receive either they had from the beginning this principle to distinguish mater of faith from that which is not or could never introduce it without grosse imposture And besides that holding this perswasion they could never admit any thing as received from their Fore-fathers which was not so indeed Because whole Nations can never agree so to deceive in a mater subject to sense as to say that they received this or that from their Fore-fathers when they did not the reason being the same in all ages since Christ as in our own For the Christian Faith being so repeated so inculcated by the preaching of the Apostles how long soever wee suppose the remembrance of their doctrine to have remained certain in the Church so long wee may inferre that age which had this certain remembrance must convey it as certain in a sensible distance of time and by the means of such distances that it must needs come no lesse certain to us Neither can any breach have been made upon the Faith without contesting the common principle of Tradition in the first place and secondly the consequence and correspondence which the Articles of Christianity have one with another by means whereof hee that questioneth one must needs by consequence prejudice others And Religion being a bond by observing which people are perswaded they shall attain happinesse the same motives to enter into this bond in general the same grounds of embracing Christianity in particular remaining how should wee imagine any part of it should be either lost or changed which necessarily must concurre to the effect of the whole For being dispersed as from the beginning it hath been over so many Nations whose authority can be a sufficient reason to perswade them all that which hee sayes to have been received from the Apostles not that which they were possessed of afore Who is able to move them with hopes and fears answerable to those which wrought them to imbrace it either to silence or to change it And yet so long as it can appear that the contrary was received so long time must the change require to prevaile and so much more to leave the truth forgot and yet subject to be evidenced by any Records that may remain So that there is no appearance that the principles producing such a change should so long time prevail as those motives that first evidenced the truth And further upon all this appearance in point of fact it is argued à priori and as it were in point of Right That God having provided so many possibilities to make the preservation of Christianity so easie the effect must needs have followed lest the means should have been provided in vain if no effect should insue All possibility being to no purpose when no effect followes and no effect but this answering the means that render it so possible CHAP. XXXI That the Scriptures which wee have are unquestionable That mistakes in Copying are not considerable to the sense and effect of them The meaning of the Hebrew and Greek even of the Prophets determinable to the deciding of Controversies How Religion delivered by Tradition becomes subject to be corrupted THis is the summe of this new account which to my understanding maintains the Infallibility of the present Church upon as high terms as those that resolve the reason of their Faith into it and yet not upon any gift of Infallibility intailed upon any visible act of any persons however qualified on behalf of the Church but upon a pretense of evidence made to common sense that those who acknowledge Tradition cannot receive any thing not onely which they believe to be but which is indeed inconsistent with it Wherein I shall protest in the first place that I have nothing to do with the terms of great error or Christianity so as to say here that either Christianity which hee calleth Christs Law or any part of it either hath been or may be renounced by them that pretend to admit nothing as revealed truth but what they believe was received from the Apostles and that so great an error as this may have crept into the Church For the present purpose being general to try how any thing in debate may be tryed whether agreeable to the Faith or not I should count it a great impertinence and the ruine of all that I design to infer upon sufficient principles which I pretend those which I reject not to be to be ingaged to show how great any error may be before I have a ground to inferre whether it be an error or not But if I may proceed to settle such a ground I shall make no doubt to convince all that remain convict of the truth thereof how great the error is which it convicteth It shall therefore suffice mee for the present to state the opposition which I make to this pretense upon these termes That the common sense of all Christians determineth those who pretend to admit nothing as of Faith but what they receive from our Lord and his Apostles to be subject neverthelesse under that pretense to receive things really inconsistent with it and which may be discerned so to be by the means which wee have to decide such questions The Scriptures interpreted by the Original and Catholick Tradition of the Church The evidence of this position necessarily consists in that which is to be said for Scripture and Tradition joyntly as the onely sufficient means to evidence Christian truths that is to say that having showed the arguments made against Scripture alone and for Tradition alone to be ineffectual and void That which remains for the truth will be this that the Scripture with Tradition to determine the meaning of it do both together make a sufficient means to determine the truth of any thing questioned concerning Christianity I say then in behalf of the Scripture which this plea so undervalueth as not to acknowledge any such thing but in favour to them whom they dispute with that it is a mervail to see how the greater difference with common enemies is forgot upon lesse quarrels among our selves For if there be any such men as Atheists that deny the beginning of the world and the marks of Gods providence expressed in the government of it as I would there were none I demand how they could be more gratified than by making it beleeved that we are no more tied to beleeve Moses writings
that we have to come from God than we please For if it be fifteen or sixteen to one that the words which we have are not from God what respect can oblige us to do more And would Pagans and Idolaters think themselves lesse bound to us if we could perswade them that whatsoever is pretended in Scripture of a Covenant made by God with Abraham and his posterity to acknowledge and worship him alone for the true God may be denied so farre as by saying that no man can say we have any Record of it As for the Jews what a favour were it to them to quit them all that can be alleged against them out of Moses and the Prophets by saying That we cannot be assured that it is their writing For if it be said that whatsoever the Church hath interest to use against Atheists Pagans and Jews will be admitted upon Tradition having renounced Scripture can it be imagined that having granted that the whole narration upon which Christianity steppeth in may have been counterfeited in writing any man can undertake to show the truth of the same unquestionable by word of mouth Surely it may well astonish a man void of prejudice to see it so carefully alleged how many ambiguities and equivocations necessarily fall out in expressing mens mindes by writing never considering that the same may fall out in whatsoever is delivered by word of mouth so much more uncureably as a man writes upon more deliberation than hee speaks and posterity can affirm with more confidence that which is delivered by writing to have been said than that which is onely so reported For let common sense judg by what is usually done by men for the preserving of evidence concerning their estates whether it be more effectual to have it in writing or onely by word of mouth For whatsoever can be pretended to come by Tradition from the Apostles must first have been delivered in the Ebrew language at least that language which they spake and was so near the Ebrew of the Old Testament that in the New Testament it is called by that name Thence being turned into Greek or Latine it must have come afterwards into the now vulgar languages of Christendom Neither can any man imagine how the profession of Christians should be conveyed by Tradition and not by word of mouth Where though they that heard the Apostles certainly understood their meaning which there can be no question of when the intent is familiarly to teach it yet the terms wherein it was delivered not remaining upon record as much difference may creep in as there may be difference in several mens apprehensions saving that which the communion of the Church determineth And will any common sense allow that the meaning thereof shall be more certain than the words are more certain than the meaning of written words which are certain though obscure and yet not without competent means to bring the intent of them to light But I must not preferr any thing of this nature before any thing wee have in the Scriptures so long as both sides acknowledg it I demand then whether the precept of the Law which injoyned the Israelites to teach it their children concerned the written Law or not The Prophet David Psalm LXXVIII 1-8 shewes the practice of it and so do other passages of the Old Testament and surely there can be no doubt made that Moses himself did deliver and inculcate the sense of the precepts to his hearers But will any common sense allow that hee forgot his text when hee expounded the meaning of it Our Lord commands the Jews to search the Scriptures hee remits Dives in the Parable to Moses and the Prophets S. Paul presses that all things that are written are written for our learning that wee through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope That all Scripture inspired from God is profitable and a great deal more to the same effect and shall wee open the mouth of Atheism with an answer that this concerns not us who no way stand convict that wee have the words of Moses and the Prophets of our Lord and his Apostles Let this therefore passe for a desperate attempt of making a breach for Atheism Heathenism Judaism to enter in provided that the Reformation should have nothing to say against the Church of Rome But let it be demanded whether any of those that writ for the Church against Heresies were masters of the common sense of men or not And let it be demanded when they alleged the Scriptures against them whether they thought the meaning of them determinable or not It is true Tertullian prescribed against Hereticks that the Church was not tied to dispute with them out of the Scriptures and certainly had just reason so to do Because though they admitted the Apostles to have Gods Spirit yet they admitted not that Spirit to have declared to them the bottom of the truth as to themselves and therefore made use of the Scriptures as the Alcoran doth so farre onely as they agreed with the Traditions of their own Masters whom they supposed to have the falnesse of the truth Whereas it is manifest that Christianity admits no dispute from the Scriptures but from them that acknowledg no gifts of Gods Spirit that suppose not Christianity and the Scriptures Therefore those that disputed against the Heresies that grew up afterwards and acknowledged no revelation but that which had brought on Christianity what did they dispute upon For evidently they neither had nor used that prescription which Tertullian insisted upon against his Hereticks But as Tertullian might though not bound to so much use the Scriptures against such Hereticks as well as against Jews and Infidels did they who succeeded onely use it against succeeding Heresies that own no further revelation than that which Scripture came with not as necessity but to show the advantage they had for this they must do if nothing but probability is to be had from the Scriptures but the peremptory truth is without Scripture evident in the determination of the present Church which was first visible in ejecting Hereticks Certainly such a breach upon common sense cannot be admitted as for them that have evidence for the truth to compromise it to a dispute of probabilities Here therefore I do appeal to the common sense of all men that see how all the disputes that have been made from the beginning for the Faith against Heresies do consist of Scriptures drawn into consequence against them though in behalf of that which they professed to hold from the Apostles whether all this pains was taken to show what was probable or what was true upon the evidence of the true sense of Scripture falling within the compasse of that which they held from the Apostles The ground then of that account which pretends that wee have no Scripture is very frivolous For if common sense be valued by the experience of those that handle written Copies not by
the imagination of them that do not the faults which it is probable all Copies carry from their makers cannot endanger the truth of the Scripture but in that one case which hee alloweth to abate his account that is when the same fault falls out in several Copies which is a rare chance For where diverse Copies agree in the same fault it behoveth that there should be some occasion of committing the mistake capable to induce several men into the same the consent of whose Copies may in time create a doubt what is true But to imagine that a fault committed at large by a Copyer which it is so great odds that none else shall fall into The truth being one errors infinite should indanger the true reading of any writing is not to appeal to common sense but to renounce it For neither in that one case where it is confest there may be danger are wee left without cure the consequence of the sense either alone or with the help of some Copy alwaies outwaying the credit of Copies liable to so many mistakes Hee that sees not what benefit all records of learning have received even from negligent Copies industriously handled to the preservation of all records may pretend ignorance in this point But for the Scriptures as common sense bears that there is more occasion of making faults than in other writings because more multiplying of Copiesl so common sense showing that there is so much more means of correcting them the danger of changing the text is vanished Which if all this were not common sense that sees the present text of Scripture make a sense so reasonable so agreeable will as much scorn as a reasonable man will scorn to admit that this beautifull order of the world comes from the casual interfering of atomes For is it not the same case when it is said that so constant sense arises from the contingence of errors And therefore I mervail that the varieties of readings recorded in Sixtus V his Bible should be alleged to this purpose Which though they are the records of errors yet they are the arguments of truth The true reading by the credit of them over-balancing all mistakes And truly hee that shall not up a just account of the hinderance which the variety of reading in the Scripture gives the resolution of truth shall finde three or four texts questionable for their reading by the enemies of the Trinity In other things though diverse readings questionable yet none of consequence to any point in debate And those I speak of so questionable that that either they make no consEquence there being evidence sufficient without them or there remains evidence enough to waigh the true reading down Now the ceasing of the Languages in which the Scripture was written is indeed a difficulty to the attaining of the sense of them as it is a difficulty to the attaining of the Language But either wee suppose the skill of the Language attained when it is not or being attained wee must suppose that which wee have upon record in it as well understood to wit as to the Language as men understand one another in their mother tongue And therefore the Ebrew and Greek have hard fortune to lye under contrary charges As to say that the Ebrew is obscure because it is scarce and the Greek is obscure because copious and the Scripture being written in the one and in the other is therefore obscure Certainly those that spoke Ebrew and those that spoke Greek had means to understand one anothers meaning or else those Languages were uselesse to the end of all Language And shall wee imagine that they determine not the meaning of the speaker in writing but when they are spoken well and good No. To them that know not the Language there is no sufficient mark to determine the meaning of what is said in it It is no mervail On Gods name let them learn a little further and they may discern the marks whereby the force of signifying is stamped upon the Languages And truly the scarcenesse of that Language lies rather in the sloth of learners who save a great deal of pains by perswading themselves that they know that Language when they have learned what is to be found in the Scriptures than in want of words to expresse all conceits It is an easie thing to imagine that the writings of later Jewes are not good Ebrew and indeed it may appear that after the Captivity the Vulgar did not speak it But by the Traditions whereby they determine the exercise of Moses Law which the Jews of Palestine resident at Tiberias agreed to put in writing about the Emperor Antoninus his time it appears plain enough that the Language was preserved alive among the Learned and extends farr further than that which is found onely in the Scripture though with some little difference Which that excellent Master of humane learning Joseph d'Escale seems to mee very properly to distinguish by the names of the Ebrew and Jewish Languages Because this difference may well seem to have begun from the times of Esdras when the Tribe of Judah with the apperrenances of it with the recovery of their ancient inheritance took upon them the study of their Law And I appeal to the common sense of all that have found by reading with what ease and property that Language serves to express all the conceits of their Philosophers and Divines how beggarly how unable to determine the meaning of mans minde wee are to account it As for the Greek be it never so defective in those expressions which the variety of Conjugations in Eastern Languages do produce hee that knows both the one and the other shall finde the force of those expressions signified by other means in the Greek and other Languages Be it never so copious otherwise hee that will husband his paines to the learning of the Scriptures shall finde means enough to attain the meaning of them without undertaking to overcome all that is written in that Language As for the figurative speech that is used especially by the Prophets and other writings of a Poetical stile as the Psalms Job the Canticle and the like if you reckon them not among the Prophets as it is not to be denyed that the stile of them is obscure by that means so when wee see the meaning of them determined by the writings of the Apostles wee must either grant that means to be sufficient for that effect or that the Apostles have alleged them upon no just ground to no just purpose Now that our Lords and the Apostles words are set down in such expressions as the Evangelists and S. Luke thought meetest I suppose hee that hath a due respect for them will not think to be any argument that hee who hath the meaning of the Pen-man hath not the meaning of him that spoke And if all these be difficulties to the attaining of the true meaning of the Scriptures sure the multiplicity of
translations those especially which are the most ancient by those who understand them is duely esteemed a help to that end and not a hinderance For as the turning of them into so many Languages prevents all errors of Copiers and assures the true reading so the comparing of the translations with the original showing how it was understood anciently by those who were better and nearer acquainted with the mater of them than wee are who must have it from them makes up a commentary of the meaning of the same and how farr it extends I do therefore here appeal to the common sense of all them that have been at charge or at pains to procure and compasse the Edition of all translations of the Bible especially the ancient in particular the Spanish Anwerpe and Paris which it is hoped is now improved to the same purpose here at London and do challenge all men to say first whether the designe be commendable or not then whether it can be commendable if it contribute not to preserve the true reading to determine the true meaning of the Scriptures As for that which I conceive I have sufficiently insisted upon in behalf of the truth that the writings of the Apostles presuppose a Rule of Faith received by those to whom they addresse together with certain Rules limiting their communion in the service of God upon supposition of that Rule I am here to claim the effect of it that the sense of the Scripture is to be limited to that which common sense may discover by the records of the Church to have been the sense and intent of the same But that this should argue an intent in God not to have given the Scriptures to determine debates that might arise among Christians concerning the common faith and that upon onely the visible profession of the Church all arguments to the contrary from the Scriptures all clamors of conscience are to be silenced without reconciling them to the primitive Faith and practice of the Church to which it is evident that if the Church be not wanting to their duty they are reconcileable this is that which I must and do proclaim to be utterly brutish and unreasonable And therefore to proceed to the next point I grant and insist that nothing but that which is received from our Lord Christ his Apostles can by any means seem receivable to any Christian But whereas it may be received either by writing alone or by word of mouth alone or by both I say that the receiving of Christianity by word of mouth alone cannot be pretended the power of the Church to create articles of Faith which was never heard of till the quarel with Luther was on foot being excluded but supposing it evident to common sense that the act of the present Church is the act of the Catholick Church from the Apostles Which so farr as I know was never heard of till Rushworths Dialog ues came forth The Christianity that was from the beginning received by word of mouth consists in the profession of believing a certain Rule of Faith and undertaking a certaine Rule of life as the Law and condition whereby all Christians hope to attain everlasting life Besides all Christians being upon this profession admitted to communicate with the Church in the service of God acicording to such Rules as determine the circumstances thereof first brought in by the Apostles These Rules may also be said to be received by word of mouth because the practice of them holds by custome from age to age though the expresse knowledg and profession of them is not the means to save particular Christians further than it is the means to maintain the service of God in the unity of his Church which is the means of it Here are then two heads of things received by word of mouth which hee that will speak expresly in this point must distinguish And according to this distinction I say that onely the Rule of Faith which is the Law of attaining everlasting life and the communion of the Church is delivered by word of mouth though when I say so I understand that the true intent and meaning thereof and what it importeth to common sense cannot be excluded Besides which there is of necessity infinite mater of discourse concerning things consequent or impertinent or repugnant to the same some whereof obtaining credit in some times and some parts of Christendom comes by tradition of word of mouth neverthelesse to other ages and places which therefore do truly bear the name of Tradition Though not as delivered from the beginning by the Apostles further then as by them the means is delivered whereby it may appear which of them is consequent which of them repugnant which of them impertinent to that which they have delivered indeed As concerning the Laws of the Church so certain and so manifest as it is that there were Rules delivered by the Apostles to have the force of Law in directing the communion of Christians in the publick service of God to the Unity of the Church So certain and manifest is it First that the same Laws are not capable to regulate the communion of the Church in all estates of it which the change of times should produce And yet secondly that whatsoever should be changed or taken away or added to the same ought to tend to the same intent which it is visible those of the Apostles did purpose Let any understanding that is capable but consider the difference that needs must arise by the Secular Power undertaking the protection of Christianity between the Church afore and the Church afterwards If hee say the same Laws will serve to maintain the communion of the Church in both estates supposing the society thereof to be the same upon the premises I shall then confesse that it is to no purpose to appeal to any discourse of reason in this whole dispute I say further that among those who professe that nothing ought to be received for revealed truth but that which was first delivered by our Lord and his Apostles nothing ought to have the force of Law but that which tendeth to the same purpose with that which they inacted Nothing hindreth things to be received into belief and practice that are really not onely impertinent to but inconsistent with that which indeed they have delivered to us The appeal is to common sense therefore let discourse and experience satisfie common sense Religion indeed is a bond by the condition whereof wee perswade our selves of peace with God of attaining the good and avoyding the ill which belongs to those that are so or otherwise And thus farre it is certain that Religion is a thing bred in mans nature which it is impossible for him to shake off or renounce But is it impossible for him to become perswaded hereof upon undue terms Whence then comes all false Religion whether of Jews or Pagans For we shall not need here to consider Mahumetanes whose Religion supposeth
that hee hath any end but himself nor that hee doth any thing to any other end than to exercise and declare his own perfections If hee do sundry things which of their nature have necessarily such an end as they attain not it is to be said that Gods end never fails in so much as by failing of the end to which they were made they become the subject of some other part of that providence wherein his perfections are exercised and declared Seeing then that all Controversies concerning the Faith have visibly their original from some passages of Scripture which being presupposed true before the foundation of the Church ought to be acknowledged but cannot be constituted by it And seeing that no man that out of the conscience of a Christian hath imbraced all that is written can deny that which hee may have cause to believe to be the sense of the least part of the Scripture without ground to take away that belief It remains that the way to abate Controversies is to rest content with the means that God hath left us to determine the sense of the Scripture not undertaking to tye men further to it than the applying of those means will inferre And truly to imagine that the authority of the Church or the dictate of Gods Spirit should satisfie doubts of that nature without showing the means by which other records of learning are understood and so resolving those doubts which the Scriptures necessarily raise in all them that believe them to be true and the word of God is more than huge cart-loads of Commentaries upon the Scriptures have have been able to do Which being written upon supposition of certain determinations pretended by the Church or certain positions which tending to reform abuses in the Church were taken for testified by Gods Spirit have produced no effect but an utter despair of coming to resolution or at least acknowledgment of resolution in the sense of the Scriptures Whereas let men capable of understanding and managing the means heretofore mentioned think themselves free as indeed they ought to be of all prejudices which the partialities on foot in the Church may have prepossessed them with and come to determine the meaning thereof by the means so prescribed and within those bounds which the consent of the Church acknowledges They shall no sooner discern how the primitive Christianity which we have from the Apostles becomes propagated to us but they shall no less clearly discern the same in their writings And if God have so great a blessing for Christendom as the grace to look upon what hath been written with this freedom there hath been so much of the meaning of the Scripture already discovered by those that have laid aside such prejudices and so much of it is in the way to be discovered every day if the means be pursued as is well to be hoped will and may make partizans think upon the reason they have to maintain partialities in the Church If God have not this blessing in store for Christendom it remains that without or against all satisfaction of conscience concerning the truth of contrary pretenses men give themselves up to follow and professe that which the protection of secular Power shall show them means to live and thrive by In which condition whether there be more of Atheism or of Christianity I leave to him who alone sees all mens hearts to judge CHAP. XXXIV The Dispute concerning the Canon of Scripture and the translations thereof in two Questions There can be no Tradition for those books that were written since Prophesie ceased Wherein the excellence of them above other books lies The chief objections against them are questionable In those parcels of the New Testament that have been questioned the case is not the same The sense of the Church HAving thus resolved the main point in doubt it cannot be denied notwithstanding that there are some parts or appertenances of the Question that remain as yet undecided For as long as it is onely said that the Scripture interpreted by the consent of the Church is a sufficient mean to determine any thing controverted in mater of Christian truth there is nothing said till it appear what these Scriptures are and in what records they are contained And truly it is plain that there remains a controversie concerning the credit of some part of those writings which have been indifferently copied and printed for the Old Testament commonly marked in our English Bibles by the title of Apocrypha And no lesse concerning the credit of the Copies wherein they are recorded For though it is certain and evident that the Old Testament hath been derived from the Ebrew the New from the Greek in which at first they were delivered to the Church Yet seeing it appeareth not of it self impossible such changes may have succeeded in the Copies that the Copies which the Jews now use of the Old Testament are further from that which was first delivered than the Vulgar Latine as also the Copies of the Greek Testament now extant It is a very plain case that this doubt remaining it is not yet resolved what are the principles what the means to determine the truth in maters questionable concerning Christianity I must further distinguish two questions that may be made in both these points before I go further For it is evidently one thing to demand whether those writings which I said remain questionable are to be counted part of the Old Testament or not Another whether they are to be read by Christians either for particular information or for publick edification at the assemblies of the Church And likewise as concerning the other point it is one thing to demand what Copy is to be held for authentick another thing to dispute how every Copy is to be used and frequented in the Church To wit whether translations in mother languages are to be had and into what credit they are to be received For it is manifest that the one sense of both questions demands what the body of the Church either may do or ought to do in proposing or prohibiting the said writings or Copies to be used by the members thereof for their edification in Christian piety But the other what credit they have in themselves upon such grounds as are in nature and reason more ancient than the authority of the Church and which the being and constitution thereof presupposeth And as manifest as it is that these are two questions so manifest must it needs remain that the one of them to wit that which concerns the authority of the Church and the effect of it does not belong to this place nor come to be decided but upon supposition of all the means God hath given his Church to be resolved of any truth that becomes questionable As for the other part of both questions though it hath been and may be among them that will not understand the difference between principles and conclusions because it is for
their turn that differences in religion should be everlasting the subject of great Volumes written for and again Ye to them that are content to set aside that which cannot here be decided I am confident there remains so little to be said that the resolution of them will appear to be meer consectaries and inferences from that truth which hitherto hath been premised For supposing that which common sense is able to inform that the writings which wee call Apocrypha are more ancient than the Church of Christ And that whether they were written by inspiration from God as wee believe the Law and the Prophâ—â—s to have been the Church never had any expresse revelation beside the credit upon which it received them from the Synagogue it remains that whether they were received by the Synagogue as inspired by God is all that can remain questionable Seeing it is not within the compasse of common sense to imagine that being not inspired by God at the beginning when they were penned they can become inspired by God by virtue of any act of the Church inducing them to be received for such Here then is to be seen the use of that distinction which was made between the Church as a Society of men visible to common sense and the same Church as a Society of men founded by God and visible onely to the faith of Christians For the belief of this later presupposes the truth of Christianity the motives whereof without more ado must evidence the truth of the Scriptures And so this question must be decided by such means as are more evident than the being of the Church in this later sense to wit by the being thereof in the former sense And this is that which I said that the testimony of the Synagogue in maters of this nature is every whit of as much force as the testimony of the Church Both of them proceeding upon the same evidence which the visible consent of such a company of men advanceth to common sense In fine if it may appear that the writings in question were from the beginning admitted by the Synagogue in the nature of writings inspired by God there will remain no cause why they should not be received into the same credit with other writings whereof the Old and New Testament consisteth If it may appear to the contrary it will be utterly in vain to allege any act of the Church to inforce that which is as evidently beyond the Power of the Church as it is evident that there is such a thing as the Church Neither can there be any question whether these writings were ever received by the Synagogue in this nature seeing it is evident that they do not receive any Prophets after Malachi I will not undertake that they do not believe that any body after that time was inspired by God to foretell things to come For that is not all that belongs to those whose writings are to be received as inspired by God It must appear further that they are sent by God to his people with commission to declare his will to them There must be evidence that they are moved to speak by the Holy Ghost and by consequence the people of God to whom they are moved to speak obliged to receive them How else should the gifts of Gods Spirit and the commission upon which they that have it are sent challenge of duty the acknowledgment of Gods people I reade in Josephus of divers things foretold with truth after this time nor I do I finde my self obliged to maintain that the motions were not from God But in as much as they were not furnished with such means as God appoints to manifest unto his people whom hee sends on his message they are not to receive them as sent from God whatsoever his secret purpose may be in sending such motions but shall alwaies remain obliged to govern themselves according to his will otherwise declared Now there is nothing more manifest than the declaration of Josephus intending to acquaint the Gentiles with the Faith and Laws of the Jews That untill the time of Artaxerxes that succeeded Xerxes being in his opinion the time whereof I speak the Prophets had written the relation of their own times But after that time things were written indeed but not with the like credit because there was no succession of Prophets Cont. Ap. I. And what can be more agreeable to the conclusion of the Prophet Malachi IV. 4 where having warned them to give heed to the Law of Moses the Statutes and Ordinances which God by him had given Israel Behold saith hee I send you Elias the Prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord come and hee shall turn the hearts of the Fathers to the children and of the children to the Fathers least I come and smite the Land with a curse Which the Gospell tell us was fulfilled in sending John the Baptist to make way for the Christ the Chief and end of all the Prophets Luke I. 17. Mat. XI 14. XVII 12. according to the saying of the ancient Jews that the Christ is to be annointed that is solemnly invested in his Office by Elias And for this reason when Judas Maccabeus purged the Temple and the question was what should be done with the stones of the Altar that had been polluted it is said 1 Mac. IV. 46. And they laid up the stones in a fit place in the Mount of the Temple untill a Prophet should come and give answer concerning them And speaking of the persecution after the death of Judas it is said 1 Mac. IX 27. And there fell out so great tribulation in Israel as had not been from the day that no Prophet had been seen in Israel And this time it is whereof it is either said or prophesied Psal LXXIV 10. Wee see not our tokens there is no Prophet any more neither any that understandeth any thing Now it is manifest that in the Scriptures as well as in the Jews writings the name of Prophet is not understood onely of foretelling things to come but of uttering things unknown to humane understanding And so the Law and the Prophets contains all the Scriptures of the Old Testament If therefore there were no Prophesie from those times to the coming of our Lord and John the Baptist it followeth that there is no Scripture inspired by God left us by those times according to the words of Eusebius in his Chronicle at the XXXII year of this Artaxerxes Hucusque Hebraeorum divinae Scripturae annales temporum continent Hither to the divine Scriptures of the Hebrews contain the annals of the times And the Synagogue in S. Jerome in Es cap. XLIX lib. XIII Post Aggaeum Zachariam Malachiam nullos alios Prophetas usque ad Joannem Baptistam videram From Haggai Zachary and Malachy to John the Baptist I had seen no other Prophets And so S. Austine de Civ Dei XVII 24. Toto ille tempore ex quo
Valerianus de Flavigny Professor of the Ebrew in the University of Paris written in opposition to an opinion vented in the Preface to the great Bible lately published there in disparagement of the Ebrew Copy of the Old Testament Where hee shall see that opinion refuted with that eagernesse and the contrary attested by the opinions of so many Divines of so great note in the Church of Rome since that Council that no man that sees them can deny that notwithstanding the decree it is free for every man to maintain the original Copies to be authentick And truly hee that should affirm the credit of the Scripture to stand upon the decree of the present Church or upon the testimony of the Spirit must by consequence have recourse to the same visible decree or to the same invisible dictate whensoever it shall be necessary to accept or refuse the reading of any text of Scripture with that faith which if it be false the whole truth of Christianity will be forfeit What Rushworth and his possession would do to evidence what reading of the Scripture is indeed authentick when as it doth not appear what is the reading which the Church is truly in possession of let him advise For in that case hee must expresly avow the consequence of his position that the Scripture is not considerable in resolving Controversies of Faith Because the Church is not in possession of the certain reading of any Scripture For if hee say hee hath made short work in that question having discharged the Scripture of being necessary to the Church and therefore acquitted himself of any necessity to show how wee may come by true Scripture and in stead thereof and all other means of deciding Controversies in the Church established the tradition presently in possession First it will be easier for mee to verifie the short Rule of Faith by the Scriptures interpreted according to that which by records may appear to have been from the beginning of force in the Church than it will be for him to show what is the Tradition which the Church is in possession of at present And that this being showed I shall not need to fear any great danger that hee may object from the variety of reading which may be found in several Copies the necessity of salvation being secured And then in the next place to say That the Scripture is not necessary though not for the salvation of every Christian yet for the salvation of the Body of Christians which is the Church Though that faction which separation ingenders will suffer no opinion to be plausible but those which are in extreams Yet I hope the malice of Satan hath not yet debauched the ears of Christians to indure And thus as afore it was settled that the whole Scripture is received for the word of God upon the credit of Tradition so of every part and parcel of it wherein the credit of several Copies consisteth it is consequently to be said that nothing can oblige the faith of a Christian to receive it unquestionably for the word of God the Tradition whereof is not unquestionable But thus mâ—ch being settled That what was originally delivered in Greek and Ebrew is to be received for the authentick Word of God What was originally delivered in Greek and Ebrew may still remain questionable That is to say this being agreed it may still remain questionable what Copies they are that do contain that which was originally delivered in Greek and Ebrew How probable it is I need not yet say but any man of common sense must say that it is possible through the changes that time is able to produce that the translations shall prove better than the originals and that the Scriptures shall be truer read among those that have received than among those that delivered them And this is indeed the true state of the question which is now come to be disputed upon due terms as it seems To wit whether the Ebrew Copies which now wee have from the Jews and the Greek Copies of the New Testament now extant contain that Scripture which all Christians are bound to receive upon their Christianity not onely in opposition to the Vulgar Latine which the Council of Trent injoyneth and to the authority of the present Church thinking that it is concluded in that decree but in opposition to that Tradition which other ancient Copies either original or translated may and do contain and evidence In which point I shall in the first place professe as concerning the Old Testament that I finde it no inconvenience but a great deal of reason to grant that at what time those books were made up into a Body and consigned unto the Synagogue the reading which wee have received from them was not delivered as unquestionable so that it should be any prejudice to the Law of God to suspect it but as the most probable and by admitting whereof no prejudiee to the said Law could follow And the safety of this position both Jews and Christians will witnesse with mee For if the Jews rruly acknowledg and insist that their Judaism is sufficiently grounded and witnessed by the leter of the Old Testament which wee have the Christians that their Christianity is as sufficiently to be evidenced by the Copies wee have as Christianity was intended to be delivered by the Scriptures of the Old Testament Is it possible that it should be a mater of jealousie for mee to admit that in that Body of the Old Testament which the Christians have received from the Jews there may be found some passages the reading whereof was not received as unquestionable when the Body of the Old Testament was consigned to the Synagogue from whence the Church receiveth it I say not when this time was nor would I have that which I affirm here to stand upon a circumstance so disputable I do believe the Jews when they tell us of the men of the Great Synagogue after the return from the Captivity from whom and by whom the Scriptures they believe were settled and delivered to their posterity I do also believe that this Assembly might and did indure whilest the Grace of Prophets had vogue and was in force among Gods people For if I believe them when they tell mee that there was such a company of men I cannot disbelieve them that the Prophets Haggai Zachary and Malachi the Scribe Esdras the same with Malachi as they tell us for any thing I know for why should I not believe Malachi being appellative and signifying my messenger to be Esdras his surname given him from that which is prophesied Mal. III. 1 Mordecai Nehemias Josue the son of Josedok and many others of that time were of it But shall I believe that their Prophetical grace was imployed to decide the true reading of the Scripture shall I believe that a new revelation was given to notifie how every leter and syllable was to be read when neither the consequence of the mater required it
of their people that wee have the vulgar Latine and that ancient and worthy Christian translation into the Syriack is there any body will undertake to say Either that having these helps wee cannot assure our selves of the Scripture which God delivered to the Church so farr as the necessity of the Church requireth to be assured of it Or that nothing but the Copy which now wee have from the Jews is to be regarded God having provided us so many helps over and above For suppose the Samaritane Copy of the Law to have been fâ—lâ—ified by Desitheus must it not needs have been falsified upon some certain design And will one certain design require or will it indure that all should be falsified whether it concerned that design or not So suppose those Jews of Alexandria who turned the Old Testament into Greek gave themselves liberty to make the Book of Job the Proverbs more of the Old Testament if more can be alleged not what the original contained but what themselves fansied would be handsom shall wee therefore say the whole work is not a translation but a Romance which wee see stick so close to the original in the most of the Scripture Surely the very great antiquity of both Copies and the experience which all that study the Scriptures with an intent to clear the meaning of them have of the great advantage which the comparing of the Greek advances more and more every day to that design will no way indure that it should be counted no translation of the Old Testament Or that though a man pretend not to build upon the credit of either of those Copies alone in opposition to the Ebrew which wee now use Yet the agreement of them with other Copies together with the reason and consequence or pertinence of sense inforced by the text of the Scripture may give him just ground to assure himself and the Church of the true reading of the Scripture yea though the present Ebrew should not agree with others For I shall not need here to say what or how great faults may be found in our Ebrew Copies who had rather be assured that there were none at all to be found greater or lesse But that wee who neither relye upon the dictate of the Spirit to them that are able to conclude the Church nor much lesse to particular Churches for assuring the true reading of Scripture are not bound to resolve our faith in it into the present Tradition of the Synagogue having over and above so considerable helps to the verifying of the same For magnifying first the providence of God in that the Jews having Christians in utter hatred should neverthelesse neither be willing for their interest nor able for their malice to falsifie those things in their own books which bear witnesse against themselves Seeing God hath given the Church that most ancient Greek Translation which is commonly ascribed to LXX Interpreters sent from Jerusalem but more justly to the Jews of Alexandria besides that Copy of the Law which the Samaritanes still use Since wee have considerable remains of those Greek Translations made by Aquila Symmachus and Theodotion the Bodies whereof to the great losse of the Church have perished with the worthy labors of Origen in joyning them in columes to the Ebrew Since wee have those ancient translations into the Chaldee which the Jews make so much esteem of Since wee have the Syriack and Vulgar Latine made by Christians to say nothing of the Arabick whether made by Jews or Christians or of any other though ancient translations which have not had the like use and credit in the Church So far am I from giving way to that unreasonable demand so destructive to the being of Christianity that wee cannot assure our selves that wee have any Scripture That in all that I have to say or shall have said concerning the dispute on foot in England about Religion I shall neither undertake to assure men that will be content with reason that I allege nothing for Scripture which I cannot justifie so to be or else undertake to resolve that which shall come in debate without the help of that which I cannot assure to be such Not intending in that which follows to allege any more evidence hereof in the particulars than I have done in the premises But building my self upon the resolution premised and intending that there shall be nothing to be objected from the true means of questioning and settling the true reading of the Scriptures that may breed any considerable scruple concerning the truth of those Scriptures which I shall imploy to my purpose As for the part of the difficulty which remains concerning the true reading of the New Testament it is in vain to maintain the decree of the Council of Trent by pretending that the Greek Copy out of which the Vulgar Latine was translated vvas more intire and of better credit than the Greek Copies novv extant Understanding that decree to make that Copy authentick in point of faith by virtue of any gift of Infallibility intailed upon the decrees of the present Church For if it be onely made authentick because the use and credit of it is not allowed to be questioned in the Church it is another question as I have said already vvhich I pretend not to touch in this place For supposing the Copy from which the Vulgar Latine was translated to have been better than any Greek Copy now extant the credit of the Vulgar Latine is not to be ascribed to the decree of the Council that decrees this any more than the fundamental Laws of this Kingdom of England were the fundamental Laws thereof by virtue of any Act of Parliament by which they were not constituted but declared and acknowledged to be such And if the credit of the Vulgar Latine be derived from the Greek Copy out of which it was translated then is it no further authentick than as it expresseth the authentick reading which then was found in the Greek out of which it was translated And so the whole credit of the Scripture is resolved into the credit of the Originals whereof wee stand possest in the translations of them that remain in whatsoever Language So that the question comes to be the very same that remained before concerning the authentick Copy of the Old Testament and the resolution clear that the Original Greek is the authentick the reading thereof being first assured neither by the dictate of Gods Spirit to any persons inabled to oblige the Church by their decrees nor to any never so good Christian much lesse by the Tradition of any particular Copy which the Church stands possest of but by that Tradition which is justified and assured by all Copies wherein the leter of the Scripture is recorded to the Church For though I do for disputation sake suppose yet do I not grant for a truth that the Copy out of which the Vulgar Latine was translated is to be held of better credit than that
it and the like blasphemies innumerable I know there are other Opinions of Justification by faith alone among those that professe it according to the senses which they may have of the nature of justifying faith and those perhaps of greater vogue than this which I have named Neither is it my intent to involve those that maintain Justification by faith alone in the blame which I charge the opinions hitherto described with The reason why I mention these opinions here is because they are in the extreams and therefore the mention of them seemed to propose the state of that question which I pretend to resolve For my way shall be in the first place to answer the question proposed concerning that disposition which the Covenant of Grace requireth the mind of him to be formally affected with that will be qualified for the promises which God therby tendreth Making this account that the treating of it will give us an overture into the consideration both of the effective cause that produceth it in those that have it and also of the meritorius cause that moveth God both originally to grant the said effective cause and consequently to accept the effect thereof for a competent qualification of them that have it for the promises which God by his Gospel tendreth those that receive it CHAP. II. Evidence what is the Condition of the Covenant of Grace The contract of Baptism The promise of the Holy Ghost annexed to Christs not to Johns Baptism Those are made Christs Disciples as Christians that take up his Crosse in Baptism The effects of Baptism according to the Apostles TO proceed to as brief and as clear a resolution of that point as I can propose I say That a sincere and resolute profession to undertake Christianity and to live according to it believing as our Lord Christ hath revealed and living as he hath taught consigned to God in the hands of his Church by the Sacrament of Baptism is that condition which the Covenant of Grace requireth to qualifie us for the promises which it tendreth This resolution is directly against the Antinomians and those that believe that a Christian is justified by the obedience of Christ imputed from everlasting to them whom he came to save Which indeed nullifieth the Covenant of Grace and converteth it to a meer promise on Gods part requiring no condition on mans part to be performed by him to qualifie hâ—m for it But this resolution opposing that conceit so roundly as positively to expresse the condition which I intend to maintain It will serve both against the conceit of Socinus that justifying faith is nothing but a firm beliefe that those who believed the Gospel purposing to live as God requireth are accepted by him as righteous Baptisme into the profession of Christianity not included But also of those that will have it to consist in the knowledge of our being predestinate to life from everlasting revealed by Gods word and sealed by his Spirit The proofs of it I will divide into three heads For consisting of so many branches as you see it cannot be expected that those Scriptures which shall serve to evidence it should every where expresse all the parts of it It is enough if the severall parts of it out of which the whole results be demonstrable by severall ranks of Scriptures The first of those Scriptures that concern the profession which God by our Lord Christ requireth and he by his Apostles and the Church after them to the worlds end of them that will be qualified for the Promises which the Gospel tondreth which I put in the first place expresly because they seem to contain the most visible and express arguments that the principles and practice of Christianity can yield to inforce this truth The second shall be taken from the nature of faith and the attributes ascribed to it by the Scriptures in justifying saving regenerating or adopting us for sons giving us the spirit of Gods sons remitting our sins and the rest that we expect at Gods hands by vertue of his Covenant of Grace The last shall be from those passages of the Apostles chiefly and consequently of other Scriptures that they expound wherein it is denied that we are saved or justified by Works or by the Law but affirmed that we are saved and justified by Grace and by faith The due sence and intent whereof is the thread to guide us through the intricacies of this whole dispure Though when this is done I shall not wish any man to resolve himself in this or in any other point of the whole book till he hath gone through the whole and considered what resolution this generall infers to all other branches or dependances of it And therefore shall think he does nothing that goes about to disprove any part of it without shewing the resolution which his opinion infers to those other points or dependances that the Reader may have the choice before him which he thinks most consequent in reason to the principles of Christianity received on all sides I will begin with the words of the Apostle 1 Pet. III. 20 21. where this seems to be couched in terminis He saith that the long suffering of God waited in the dayes of Noe while the Arke was making in which a few that is eight souls were saved the antitype whereof Baptism now saveth us not the laying down of the filth of the flesh but the having of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ The water of Baptism saveth us through the temtations of the World as they were saved through the deluge And what can be done more then to save us let no man think to defeat this by striving about words that to save and to justifie is not the same If Bapâ—ism import the condition of the Covenant of Grace which saveth us our justification will necessarily be wrapt up in the same packet though to justifie and to save be severall conceits And is it not strange that any man should be perswaded that there is nothing said or meant of the Baptism of water in all this passage but of the Baptism of the Spirit as that which moves a good conscience to professe Christianity For how can Baptism by the Holy Ghost and fire be the antitype of the waters of the deluge as the Baptism of water is and as that Baptism which the Apostle speaks of is The correspondence between the types of the Old and the antitypes of the New Testament by vertue of the premises consists in the correspondence between the temporall deliverance of that time and the spirituall deliverance of this both in order to the everlasting deliverance of the World to come Now it is certain that the visible Ceremony of Baptism signifies the temptations of this World out of which we escape by the means of that Sacrament as he that is baptized rises out of the water again According to that of the Psalm LXIX 1 15. Save me O God
Church I say there was reason for these orders supposing that Scholars were to be admitted Christians upon this presumption Otherwise none And hence it commeth that the assembly of the Church being first by a Synecdoche called in Latine Missa from the dismissing of it which it ends with as in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Latine Collecta for the assembling of it the word Missa Latine as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek is now come to signifie the Sacrament of the Eucharist which came after the dismissing of Learners but went afore the dismissing of believers being the principall office for which the Assemblies of the Church were held But I will remit those that would understand the weight of this argument to that which they may read in Clemens his Poedagogus where they shall find the conversation which the Church required of those who professed to be Scholars of Christianity and to stand for baptism described in all the parts of it Perhaps somewhat in the way of Plato his Common-wealth or Xenophons education of Cyrus expressing many times what should be rather than what was But still what the Church on the behalfe of God required at their hands till being come to the end of the book he who had approved himselfe by his conversation likely to make a good Christian is in the end of it inducted by the Chatechist into the Church to demand that baptism which by this time he hath learned what it charges him with And if this be not argument enough what the Church in Gods behalfe demands of them that would be Christians it will be in vain to apply reason to argue any thing that is questionable For it is visible that the time of any mans continuing Catechumenus or a Probationer in Christianity was required upon no other ground nor to any other purpose but that the Church might be reasonably or legally that is according to custome assured that the party pretending to baptism was really resolved to stand to that which Christianity should require at his hands This the conversation of severall years for triall the frequenting of Gods service in the Church the hatred which he needs must undergo from the enemies of the Church Jewes and Gentiles must needs signifie supposing Christians to be reasonable people But that exception which I alledged out of the Constitutions most clearly That if any mans zeal to Christianity should be found so fervent that there was no reason to suspect his sincerity then the regular time of continuing in the state and rank of Catechumenus or a Scholar of Christianity might be abridged by the Church For this is the same confideration which takes place in many penitentiall Canons of the Church afterwards That if any man should demonstrate that zeal and eagerness in detesting the offences through which he had failed which might ground a confidence of his sincerity for the future the regular time of his Penance might be abridged The ground whereof is to be seen in the example of S. Paul abating the rigor of his censure upon the incestuous person at Corinth though not only in consideration of the persons own zeal but of the Churches submission to acknowledge themselves parties to his crime for bearing him out against the censure due to it before And this indulgence consisting in the releasing or abating of regular penance is without all quession according to the will and word of God Consider further another custome of the Church during this primitive estate Many men that were convicted in their judgements of the truth of Christianity finding dâ—fficulty in undergoing the Crosse of Christ and persecution for Christianity at least willing to avoid it though they went so far as to professe themselves Probationers in Christianity yet went not so far as to pretend to Baptism least by being admitted to it they should make themselves liable to persecution as Christians These men if any thing fell out to make themselves liable to persecution as Christians These men if any thing fell out to make them think their lives to be in danger would nevertheless desire to be baptized in their beds of sickness Neither did the Church make any question of granting it presuming that those who by the hand of God had been driven to demand it would prove true to that which by such an exigent they had been driven to seek Nevertheless these are those Clinicâ— whom we read of in the ancient Records of the Church of whose salvation though there were that presumption in regard whereof they were admitted to baptism yet not without some scruple Upon what account Not because they were not so well drenched with water being baptized in their beds as others But because their resolution to abide by the Christianity which they professed at their baptisme was counted more questionable than theirs who had frankly without reservation abandoned themselves to it Tertullian in his Book De Bapt. cap. XIX argues that none should make hast to Baptism that are not provided of that resolution which the performance of that which they undertake by it requires And upon this account he advises to delay the baptism of Infants to mans estate nay of single persons because of the temptations to which they are subject till they resolve to serve God either in the state of virginity and widowhood or of wedlock What the consequence hereof is in the matter of baptizing Infants his reason must determine And that sufficiently appears to be upon the profession which Baptism undertaketh For that which he apprehendeth is that not having well understood and digested what it is they undertake they should fail in making it good And truly let any man tell me why there should be so much doubt made of the salvation of those that died before baptism in the ancient Church notwithstanding that they had professed not only to believe the truth of Christianity but also that they intended to undertake the profession of it and were indeed of the rank of Catechumeni Scholars or Probationers in it For it is manifest that aster persecution was ceased there were many and many who professing Christianity forbore neverthelesse to be baptized sometimes many years sometimes till death as we see by the great Constantine who having professed so long before the beliefe of Christianity was not baptized neverthelesse till a while before his death sometimes therefore were prevented by death and died unbaptized of whose salvation there was some difficulty made in conceiving full assurance as it appears by the arguments wherewith S. Ambrose comforts himselfe in the case of the Emperour Valentiniane and his brother Satyrus Not that there could remain any doubt in the salvation of those who having resolved to undertake and profess Christianity by being baptized should be intercepted and cut off by inevitable casualties of mortality not procured by those delayes which the want of zeal in that resolution had brought to pass For it is clear that those who suffered
death in the profession of Christianity left no doubt in the mind of any Christian whether they should be saved or not suffering for Christ before they were baptized But because those who might have had means and opportunity to be baptized at such times and upon such occasions as the rules and customes of the Church furnished by neglecting the same ministred some ground to presume that they had not in them that resolution to undergo the Crosse of Christ in and for the performance of that which baptisin undertakes in consideration whereof he grants those promises which his Gospel proclaimeth And having said this I conceive I need say no more to show the necessity of Baptism according to the doctrine and practise of the whole Church which I proved afore by the Scriptures For if those who professed to believe Christianity and had resolved to enter into that estate and life which it required came under a doubtfull repute as to their salvation among Christians where they were intercepted by death before they were Christened by baptism well may the unavoydable casualties of mortality dispense in the necessity of an act the means whereof may depend upon something else beside his will that wants it But it appears therefore a necessary ingredient in the condition which qualifies for the promises of the Gospel when the desire of having it if it were possible appears absolutely undispensable And this shall save me the labour of producing the testimonies of Church Writers to evidence the sense thereof in all ages For the sense of the Church cannot be so effectually evidenced by the sayings of particular persons of what authority soever in their own Churches as it is evident by the customs really in force which it appeareth that particular persons held themselves obliged to follow And therefore to the opinions presently on foot Of the Socinians That baptisme was necessary under the Apostles to profess that purity of life which Christianity promiseth when men were converted from Jews or Gentiles to Christians but indifferent for those that wear that profession by being born and brought up under Christian parents And of some Enthusiasts among us who think it a meer mistake to baptize with water into Christianity the Baptism of John being the Baptism of water but the Baptism of the Holy Ghost the Baptism of Christ of which Opinions you shall hear more by and by I say to these opinions it shall serve my turn to say That the necessity of the Baptism of Water stands evidenced by the same means that convince the World of the truth of Christianity To wit by the Scriptures hitherto alledged and by the consent of all Christians For it will be impossible to alledge not only any Writer that hath been allowed and credited by the Church but any man that hath pass'd for a Christian in the Church that ever undertook to perswade himselfe or any man else to presume that he should be saved neglecting Baptism For what reason and upon what ground I leave to those that shall neglect S. Peters distinction hitherto pleaded to alledge As for the next point which is the manner of baptizing from the circumstances and ceremonies of it I shall but relate here what I alledged out of S. Peter in the beginning of the solemn questions propounded of course to those that demanded Baptism whether they did believe the truth of Christianity whether they would undertake to profess it and to fight against the flesh the World and the Divel for the observing of it whether he desired to be baptized upon these terms Neither shall I need to alledge the testimonies of Church-Writers for the use of the same ceremony which at this day is in force in the Church of England And though there be those that are liberall enough in censuring it as impertinent now that all are baptized Infants and though this be not the place to consider such exceptions yet I will here take notice how the contract thus executed concerns â—he salvation of Christians that so it may be judged how it concerns the Office of Baptism that what so concerns the salvation of Christians be expressed in it To the same purpose I will here alledge the putting on of white robes after Baptisin Whereupon the Sunday after Easter-day is still called Dominica in Albis The Lords day in Whites which first they had put on at Easter when they were baptized which custome seemeth to have been in use in the Church when S. Paul said Rom. XIII 14. Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ and make no provision for the flesh to fulfill it in the lusts thereof And Gal. III. 27. As many as are baptized into Christ have put on Christ And Joh. IV. 22. 24. To put off the old man and put on the new man which after God is created in righteousnesse and true holinesse And Col. 3. 10. Having put off the old man with his actions and put on the new man that is renewed unto knowledge according to the image of him that made him For all these expressions seem to be allusions to that which they saw done and practised before their eyes But those that yield not so much cannot refuse to grant that the custome was taken up by the Church to signifie the profession of that which the Apostle injoyneth all Christians in those that were baptized The same thing signified by signing those that were baptized with the sign of the Crosse Which S. Augustine expounds very well by the custome of the Roman Empire to set a mark on the bodies of those that were listed Souldiers and upon slaves by which they might be known and brought back if they should run away or depart from their colours For though the sign of the Crosse made upon him that is baptized remain not visible upon him yet being done publickly and solemnly and as S. Paul saith of Timothy under many witnesses he is notwithstanding to be challenged by it of what he undertooke And he that observes this mark to be called by the ancient Church sigillum the signe or seal must think of S. Pauls words 2 Cor. I. 21 22. But he that establisheth us with you into Christ and anointeth us is God who hath also signed us and put the earnest of his Spirit into our hearts And Ephes I. 13. In whom also having believed ye were signed with the Holy Spirit of Promise And IV. 30. Grieve not the Holy Spirit of God by whom ye are signed to the day of Redemption I say he must think of these words of S. Paul as I said of those concerning the white robes of them them that were baptized That they are either allusions to that which men saw done by the appointment of the Apostles or occasions of taking up these ceremonies by the primitive Church I might here argue from the custom of Vndertakers which now are called Godfathers and Godmothers to the same purpose For if it were requisite that the Church should be secured
be baptized who cannot make or are tied to any such promise To these I say no more but this that it is one thing to answer arguments and to give grounds of a contrary truth another thing to object difficulties which even the truth is not clear of especially that which comes by revelation from without as Christianity doth Because to the verifying of revealed truth it is not necessary that all things should be alike clearly revealed that are necessary to the clearing of objections The obligation of sticking to that which is revealed taking place no lesse though something belonging to the clearing of it be not so clearly expressed And generally that which is evident is never the lesse evident because there is something else evident the evidence whereof I cannot reconcile with it But this I say not as though I meant to dismiss these difficulties without that which I conceive ought to satisfie But because I have learned of Aristotle that it is the fashion of the unlearned to demand at once both the grounds of the truth and the clearing of difficulties A thing which might be done here but so that another place would require it to be done againe and not without balking the order which I intend My designe will bring me in due time to speak with the Pelagians first and afterwards with the Anabaptists To those points I will remit the answer to these objections Onely for the present to the former of these doubts I would say this That all that hath been said hitherto concerns onely that disposition which he that will come to salvation by Christianity must be firmly qualified with as the condition which the Covenant of Grace requireth All which being supposed it may and doth still remaine questionable how and by what meanes in the nature of an effective cause a man becomes qualified with the disposition so required To wit whether by the meer force of free will or by the help of Gods Grace And that being resolved upon what consideration in the nature of a meritorious cause those helps of Gods grace are furnished To wit whether by the free Grace of God or in consideration of the merits and satisfaction of Christ provided by Gods free Grace as the reason for which and the measure by which the helps of his Grace are dispensed To the latter of them I would onely say here That I conceive I have here maintained that reason for the necessity of Baptisme to the salvation of all Christians upon which the necessity of the Baptisme of Infants is to be tied Which is to say in plain English That I have by the premises re-established that ground for the necessity of Baptisme in generall the unsetling whereof was the onely occasion to make the necessity of Baptizing Infants become questionable CHAP. VI. Justifying Faith sometimes consists in believing the truth Sometimes in trust in God grounded upon the truth Somtimes in Christianity that is in imbracing and professing it And that in the Fathers as well as in the Scriptures Of the informed and formed Faith of the Schools NOW for those Scriptures wherein the nature of justifying faith is described by those effects which the promises of the Gospel tender I must here observe that which all observe that faith is many times made by the Scriptures to consist in believing the truth of Christs Message which he came to preach Otherwhiles neverthelesse in a grounded trust and confidence in the goodnesse of God declared through Christ For what is more manifest then that of S. Paul Rom. X. 9. If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe with thy heart that God raised him from the deád thou shalt be saved Where first that which the heart believeth is the rising of Christ from the dead signifying by one Article the rest of the Faith then that which the mouth professeth is nothing but the same truth Therefore neither the inward nor the outward act of faith reacheth any further then the acknowledgment of the said truth So the Apostle 1 John V. 15. 10. Every one that believeth that Jesus is the Messi as is begotten of God Who is he that overcomes the World but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God He that believeth in the Son of God hath the witnesse in himself He that believeth not God hath made him a liar because he believeth not the witnesse which God beareth of his Son Where it is plain that no difference is made between believing God and believing in the Son of God and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is no more then to believe Gods witnesse Mat. IX 28. Jesus faith to the blind Believe you that I am able to do this They say unto him yea Lord. Then touched he their eyes saying according to your faith be it unto you That faith which consisted in believing that he was able to do it So of John the Baptist our Lord Mat. XXI 32. John came to you in the way of righteousnesse and ye believed him not but the publicans and harlots believed him Which you seeing repeated not afterwards that ye might believe him And sure they obtained the grace of Christ that believed John the Baptish Our Lord to the father of the Lunatick Mat. IX 23. 24. If thou caust believe all things are possible to him that believeth And straight the father of the childe crying out said Lord I believe help my unbeliefe If thou canst believe that I am able to do this as afore Mat. XI 23. 24. He that shall say to this mountaine be thou removed and cast into the sea and doubt not in his heart but believe that what he sayeth cometh to passe is shall come to passe to him as he sayeth Therefore I say unto you all things that ye ask by prayer believe that ye shall receive and they shall come to passe to you John V. 24. He that heareth me and believeth him that sent me hath eternal life and cometh not into condemnation but is passed from death to life XX. 31. These things are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and that believeing ye may have life through his Name Acts VIII 37. Philip said to the Eunuch If thou believest with all thy heart thou mayest be baptized He answered and said I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God Upon which faith he is baptized Rom. IV. 3. Abraham believed God saying to him Thy seed shall be as the stars of heaven Gen. XV. 5. and it was impâ—â—â—ed to him for righteousnesse On the other side it is no rare thing to finde faith described by trust and confidence in God and the effects of saving faith ascribed to it as in the description of the Apostle Heb. XI 2. Now faith is the substance of thing hoped for the evidence of things not seen That which he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is that which the Hebrew expresseth by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
under the discipline of the Prophets their masters that Amos VII 22. alledges it as a strange thing that God had made him a Prophet of an heardsman and that therefore he could not but do his message And is Saul among the Prophets became a riddle rather then a Proverb not to be resolved but by another question And who is the father of them that is that God the Father of all Prophets could give his Graces where he pleased without meanes 1 Sam. X. 11. 12. And therefore at the election of S. Matthias to the office of an Apostle to which this grace belonged the disciples pray Acts I. 24. Thou Lord that knowest the hearts of all shew whether of these thou hast chosen shewing the Christianity of the heart to be the foundation of that choice And when S. Paul exhorteth to think soberly of themselves according to that measure of Faith which God had divided to every one it is manifest that this measure of faith extends to all graces the thought whereof may carry a man beyond the bounds of sobriety That is a'l wherein Christianity consisteth So that the measure or proportion of Faith is the measure and proportion of Christianity which being given by God though seconded with graces which all had not he forbids them to be puffed up with Againe when the same Apostle hopeth that the faith of the Corinthians being increased should be magnified abundantly through them by his preaching the Gospel to the parts beyond them according to his own rule 2. Cor. X 15 16. What is that increase of faith but the setling of them in their Christianity which when it were done he hoped by their meanes to find accesse to preach to their neighbours I do confidently chalenge to this signification that text of S. Paul Gal. V. 6. In Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision but faith that is acted by love Because I know that no man that understands Greek can deny that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in this place passive and because it cannot be understood without violence how faith should be acted by love but when that profession which we make at our Baptisme is performed for no other motive but that of God and his love What is then that work of the Thessalonians faith which S. Paul commendeth 1 Thes I. 3. which he prayeth God powerfully to fulfill 2 Thes II. 11. but the doing of that which they undertook to do when they were made Christians And what is the ministry of the Philipians faith Philip. II. 17. but the service which S. Paul did God in labouring to make them good Christians And what is the faith in which he would have the Corinthians to stand 1 Cor. XVI 13 Wherein He and Barnabas exhort the Churches to continue Acts. XIV 22 The bare profession of Christianity or the liabituated resolution of living according to it By which reason whensoever the profession of Christianity is signified by the name of Faith in the writings of the Apostles in which sense it stands as frequently there as in any other this habituated resolution is presupposed because upon presumption thereof men are made Christians to the Church as well as to God For that no man is really and naturally a Christian to God untill he be so legally to the Church unlesse it be when the effectuall purpose of being so is prevented by that necessity which reasonably cannot be prevented And hereupon it is that though men believe the truth of Christianity before they are made Christians by being baptized yet even in the Scriptures themselves believers and Christians are many times all one 1 Tim. V. 8. 16. If any man provide not for his owne and especially those of his houshold he hath denyed the faith and is worse then an infidell If any believer he or she have widows let them support them and let not the Church be charged VI. 2. Those servants that have believing masters let them not despise them because they are brethren but serve them the ratheâ— because they are faithfull and beloved Titus I. 6. If any man be blameless the husband of one wife having children that believe not blamed for riotousnesse or disobedience Apoc. XVII 14. They that are with the Lamb are such as are called and choice and believers And hereupon when the Apostle faith John III. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 His meaning of necessity is this Beloved thou shalt do like a Christian what thou shalt do for the brethren and strangers Because no private trust but the common tye of Christianity obligeth to do good to Christian travelers of whom he speakes there And therefore Acts II. 38 44. S. Peter having said to those that were pricked in heart upon conviction of the resurrection of our Lord Repent ye and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ unto remission of sins And this being done it followeth But all the believers were together and had all things common Here I must not forget the stile and language of the most ancient Fathers of the Church who deriving from and referring all their studies to the Scriptures must needs speak in the same stile with them in matters of Christianity I do not intend therefore to say that they do not use the word Faith to signifie the belief of those things which the Gospel declareth to be true and that trust and confidence in God through Christ which the truth thereof naturally tendeth to produce Having shewed that both these conceptions are frequently signified by the terme of faith in the writings of the Apostles their masters But I say further that it is oftentimes used by them in this third sense which I spake of last to signifie Christianity that is the profession thereof presumed by the Church not to be counterseit This is very visible in Tertullian in whose language Faith and Baptisme are many times the same thing de exhortatione castitatis Cap. I. Nec secundas post sidem nuptias permittitur nosse And is not permitted to know any second marriage after Baptisme De Pudicitia Cap. XVI Quae amisso viro Fidem ingressa She who entered into the faith having lost her husband Is that became a Christian Ibid. Cap. XVIII Ante fidem post fidem Signifies before and after Baptisme Therefore in his Scorpiace Cap. VIII Talia a primordio prâ—cepta exemplâ— debitricem Martyrii Fidem ostendunt Such precepts such examples from the beginning shew that Faith is indebted in Martyrdome For it is Baptisme that obliges a Christian to Martyrdome rather then renounce the Faith So S. Cyprian following his master Epist ad Antonianum Si fidei calor praevalet If the heat of faith prevail And Deâ—opere Eleemosyna Credentium fides novo adhuc fidei calore fervebat The faith of believers was servent with the heat of faith being yet new For so Tertullian had said of Morcion in the place alledged in the first book Cont. Marc. IV. 4. In
forgive our brethren their offences against us Mat. VI. 14. 15. Our Lord rendring a reason why he had taught his disciples to pray Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespasse against us For if it forgive men their sinnes your heavenly Father will forgive you also But if you forgive not men their Transgressions neither will your Father forgive your Transgressions And the Apostle James II. 13. to the same purpose Judgement shall be without mercy to him that sheweth not mercy And the foote of our Saviours Parable Mat. XVIII 35. So also shall your bravenly Father do to you if from your hearts yee forgive not every one his Brother their transgressions So Mar. XI 25. 26. And Luc. VI. 37. 38. Judge not and yee shall not be judged condemn not and ye shall not be condemned pardon and ye shall be pardoned give and there shall be given to you good measure crouded and shaken and runing over shall be given into your bosome for the measure that ye mete with shall be measured to you againe And againe Luk. XI 41. But give Almes according to your power and all things shall be cleane to you So Solomen Prov. XVI 6. By mercy and truth shall inquity be expiated And Daniell to Nebuchodonosor Dan. III. 5. Redeeme thy sins by righteousnesse or Almes deeds and thy iniquity by shewing compassion upon the afflicted For the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can signifie nothing but Redeem in the Caldee though there is a figure of speech in the Prophets Language intending redeem thy self from thy sinnes as I shall have occasion to say in another place and therefore t is in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And from hence come those sayings Tobit IV. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And againe Tob. XII 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Almes delivereth from death and suffereth not to enter into darknesse And Almes delivereth from death and purgeth away all sinne And Ecclus. III. 33. Water quencheth flaming fire and with almes shall he make prepitiation for sinnes And XXIX 15. Shut up almes in thy store houses and they will deliver thee from all afflictions And the words of the Apostle are plainest in this sense I Pet. IV. 8. Charity shall cover a many sinnes The Prophet also to the same purpose Isa I. 17. For they that make that filth which alone justifieth not to include or presuppose that condition to which Baptisme tieth Christians must needs crucifie themselves and set the Scriptures upon the rack to finde another meaning for them then the words bear By which that which God hath made due without and before any condition may turely be said to be given in consideration of it Which reason and the common sense of all men abhors But supposing that faith which onely justifieth to include the profession of undertaking Christianity as the condition upon which the promises of the Gospel are to be expected So certaine as it is that this will not be due if the condition be not fulfilled so necessary and so proper it will be to say That whatsoever that condition includeth is the consideration upon which the promise cometh though not by virtue of the thing done but by virtue of Gods tender and the Covenant of Grace and the promise which it containeth and the free goodnesse of God which first moved him to tender that promise And therefore you shall find those that suppose it not alwayes tormenting themselves to force upon the Scriptures such a meaning as the words of them doe not beare And in the last place concerning the consent of the Church though the Fathers are free in acknowledging with S. Paul justification by faith alone yet notwithstanding they are on the other side so copious in attributing the promises of the Gospel to the good workes of Christians that it may truly be said there is never a one of them from whom sufficient authority is not to be had for evidence thereof Which will amount to a tradition of the whole Church in this point In particular S. Augustine to whom appeal is wont to be made in all parts of that dispute which relateth to the Heresie of Pelagius hath so clearly and so copiously delivered the answer which I maintaine to those texts of S. Paul where he denieth that Christians are justified by the workes of the Law that those that challenge him in other points of this dispute concerning the Covenant of Grace doe not pretend to be of his mind in this Though the ground of this answer consisting in the twofold sense of the Law deserved as I conceive to be further cleared even after S. Augustine and the rest of ancient Church-writers I would therefore have the reader here to understand that I account all the rest of this second book to be nothing else but the resolution of those difficulties the answer to those objections and demandes which arise upon the determination here advanced The chief of them is that which followes in the next place How the promises of the Gospel can be said to be the effects of Gods free grace requiring our Christianity as the condition upon which they become due and not otherwise But there are also others concerning the possibility of fulfulling Gods Law by the new obedience of Christians concerning the goodnesse and perfection of it concerning the force and effect of good workes either in making satisfaction for sinne or in meriting life everlasting Which I shall allow that consideration in due time which the model of this abridgement will bear As for the sense of the Fathers evidencing the Tradition of the Church I am yet to learn that there ever was any exception alledged to infringe the consent of the Church in the necessity of good workes to the obtaining of salvation for Christians But onely the case of those who being taken away by death upon professing Christianity have not time to bring forth the fruits of it And how good workes can be the necessary meanes to procure the salvation of Christians but by virtue of that Law or condition for obtaining salvation which the Gospel now expresly enacteth and alwaies did covertly effectuate no sense of man comprehendeth For that the ancient Church agreeth in allowing the force of satisfaction for sinne to workes of Penance of Merit for the world to come to workes done in the state of Grace none of the Reformation which either disowneth or excuseth it for so doing according to the respect they have for it can make questionable And therefore though this be not the place to justifie the ancient Church in these particulars yet this is evident that those who maintaine more then my position requires do agree in that which it containes I shall therefore content my selfe for the present with producing some speciall passages of the Fathers expressing in my opinion the markes of my position and the reasons whereupon it proceeds As limiting the position between faith and workes in the matter of justifying
with the merits of their lives They study to presse down immoderate words with the wait of good works And by and by Quia hoc quod tegitur inferius ponitur aliud aliquid superducitur ut quod est subterpositum tegatur tegere peccata ducimur quae quasi subterponentes abdicamus Quibus nimirum quasi tegmen superdicimus dum bonorum operum nos indumento vestimus Peccata itaque tegimus si bona facta malis actibus superponamus Because that which is covered is laid beneath and something drawn over it to cover that which lies beneath we are said to cover those sinnes which we give over as laying them beneath Over which we draw a kind of covering when we invest our selves with the covering of good workes Therefore we cover sinnes if we lay good deeds over evil workes CHAP. X. What Pelagius questioneth concerning the Grace of Christ what Socinus further of the state of Christ before his birth The opposition between the first and second Adam in S. Paul evidenceth originall sinne Coucupiscence in the unregenerate and the inability of the Law to subdue it evict the same The second birth by the holy Ghost evidenceth that the first birth propagateth sinne NOW though all agree that we are justified not by the Law nor by Workes but by the Gospel and by Grace because it is the meer Grace of God that moved him to send our Lord Christ by him to convince the World that the Gospell is true and ought to be imbraced yet that the Grace of Christ that is those helpes of grace which God gives in consideration of his merits and sufferings are requisite to inable those to whome this conviction is tendred to imbrace it and to persevere in it neither Pelagius of old nor Socinus at present will yeild Nor that Abraham should have any thing to bragge of if he should pretend to be justified by those workes which the free will of him whose understanding is convict that the Gospel is true is without other help able to produce Or that in consideration of any such help the Gospel is to be counted Grace which if the helps it requireth should be purchased by obeying it were not to be counted of free Grace The words of Pelagius are well enough known remaining upon record in S. Austine De Gratia Christi 1. 7. Adjuvat enim nos per doctrinam revelationem suam dum cordis nostri oculos aperit dum nobis ne praesentibus occupemur futura demonstrat dum Diâ—boli pandit insidias dum nos multiformi ineffabili dono gratiae coelest is illuminat For he helps us by revealing his doctrine while he opens the eyes of our heart while he shewes us things to come least we be busied about things present while he layes open the ambushes of the Devil while he inlightens us with the manifold gift of heavenly grace And againe Cap. X. Operatur in nobis Deus velle quod bonum est velle quod sanctum est dum nos terrenis cupiditatibus diligentes mutorum amantium more tantum praesentia diligentes futurae gloriae magnitudine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praemiorum pollicitatione succendit dum revelatione sapientiae in desiderium Dei stupentem suscitat voluntatem dum nobis suadet omne quod bonum est God works in us the willing of that which is good and holy while he inflames us being addicted to earthly lusts and loving onely things present like mute creatures with the promise of great reward of glory to come while by revealing of wisdome he raises the dull will to the desire of God while he perswadeth us to all that is good Where besides the Grace of God in making us reasonable creatures he acknowledgeth also the grace of the Law meaning thereby the doctrine and motives of Christianity whereby saith he the mind is inlightned to understand the difference between things transitory and everlasting and the will is inclined and perswaded to preferre true good before that which is counterfeite Which being said by a Christian though I see no expresse mention that he makes of the Gospel of Christ necessarily infers that notwithstanding he supposed the same with Socinus To wit that the conviction which the motives of faith tender to all men that are made acquainted with it as it is necessarily the production of Gods meer Grace so is it enough to inable a reasonable man being so convict how much the world to come is to be preferred before this to imbrace and to persevere in that course by which a man stands convict that he may attaine it And though Socinus hath more expresly maintained that upon the imbracing of Christianity the holy Ghost is given to inable Christians to preferre that which their profession importeth Yet as I find the truth thereof so manifestly layd down in the Scriptures of the New Testament that I cannot see how he should pretend to be a Christian that should deny it So can I not remember that Pelagius ever went about to deny it On the contrary there is appearance enough that Pelagius acknowledgeth the grace of the holy Ghost whether in bringing a man to be or to persevere unto the end a Christian His own words are yet extant upon 1 Cor. 11. 10. To us who by believing have deserved to receive the Spirit of God which shewes us his will Nobis qui fide meruimus Sp. Dei accipere qui voluntatem suam nobis ostendit Hath God revealed it And by and by Sensum Domini qui est in viris Spiritualibus sine Spiritu Dei nemo cognovit No man knowes the meaning of God which is in spirituall men without Gods Spirit And upon Rom. IV. 17. Quare multa peccata donavit abundantia donationis Sp. Sancti Quia multa sunt dona Ipsa enim justitia donatur in baptismo non ex merito datur Why hath the abundant gift of the holy Ghost pardoned us many sinnes Because Gods gifts are many For righteousness it self is given in Baptisme not rewarded as of merit For why might not Pelagius as well as Socinus make it the purchase of mans free will upon the tender of Christianity which is Gods Grace For the appearance is sufficient and evident that Socinus was so disgusted with the opinion That justifying faith consists in believing that a man is predestinate to everlasting life in consideration of the obedience of Christ imputed to his account because given for him and the elect in opposition to the rest of mankind that supposing the tender of the Gospel the accepting of it he placeth in the meer act of free will upon which the gift of the holy Ghost necessary to the performance of that which Christianity professeth depends as due debt by Gods promise Who having prevented mankinde with that promise hath suspended that which follows upon this compliance It is further to be considered that Socinus also acknowledgeth the Grace of the holy Ghost preventing the undertaking
and sending other false Apostles as I said afore in thebeginning to Antiochia and other places saying that unless ye be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses ye cannot be saved there came no small trouble as I said afore and these are they that in Paul are called false Apostles deceitfull workers transforming themselves into Apostles of Christ. For here Epiphanius distinguishing two kinds of false Apostles one that pretended to be sent by our Lord Christ another by his Apostles applyes unto them the words of S. Paul 2 Cor. XI 23. by virtue of that of the Synodicall Letter of the Apostles Acts XV. 24. to whom we gave no such charge and sayes that whatsoever they pretended they were neither sent by our Lord Christ nor yet by his Apostles commission from Christ Herewith agrees all that which the Apostle writes against eating things sacrificed to Idols in the VIII and X. Chapters of this first Epistle For there is no question to be made that the Sect of Cerinthus was one of the Gnosticks because it is expressed in Epiphanius that they also taught the unknown God whom they pretended to make known And therefore when S. Paul saith in the beginning of that eighth chapter As concerning things offered to Idols we know that we all have knowledge knowledge indeed puffeth up but charity edifieth It is manifest that he civily reproveth that pretense of knowledge which some weak Christians were then in danger to be carried away with to believe That those who knew the true God whom their masters pretended to teach and the Idols of the Gentiles to be nothing might without scruple of conscience communicate in the worship of those whom they scorned and thought to be nothing Intending in the X. Chapter to protest that they could not communicate in the same without renouncing their Christianity And if any man say that Cerinthus according to Epiphanius saith That our Lord Christ is not to rise againe till the last day and therefore that the opinion of those that deny the resurrection which S. Paul disputes against 1 Cor. XV. can neither be imputed to Cerinthus nor the Câ—rintâ—ians It is answered that Epiphanius himself declares that the Cerinthians were not all of a minde Some of them denying the resurrection of Christ and by consequence of Christians against whom the maine of that Chapter argues Others affirming that Christ was not to rise again till all should rise againe at the worlds end And truly I see not why S. Paul should argue that it is necessary that we should believe the resurrection of Christ saying If Christ be not risen againe then is our preaching vaine and we are found false witnesses then is your faith vain and yâ— are yet in your sinnes 1 Cor. XV. 14-17 Unlesse among those whom he argues against the resurrection of Christ had been questioned which is Epiphanius his argument And I would faine hear who can give a better account of that everlasting difficulty in S. Pauls words that follow 1 Cor. XV. 29. For what shall those that are baptized for the dead do if the dead rise not againe why are they baptized for the dead then Epiphanius gives according to this supposition and that upon the credit of Historical truth not of any conjecture of his owne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 .. For in this countrey I mean Asia and Galatia this Sect flourished much Among whom a point of Tradition is come to us how some of them dying before Baptisme others are baptized for them in their name that rising at the resurrection they may be liable to no sentence of punishment as not having received Baptisme and become obnoxious to the power of him that made the world Where by the way you see the Cerinthians were Gnosticks because by baptisme they pretended to free men from the bad principle which made the world This being the doctrine of the Gnosticks Now if it be true as Epiphanius understood that the Cerinthians in Asia and Galatia baptized others for those that were dead without baptisme shall we think it strange that those false Apostles who transformed themselves into Apostles of Christ as Satan into an Angel of light should teach the Corinthians to do the same And what need S. Paul stand to condemne this condemning all their impostures by the dispute of both Epistles Neither is it more difficult to discerne those whom S. Paul disputes against in the second Chapter of his Epistle to the Colossians to be of the same stamp if we observe two points of his reproofe The one the worship of Angels the other abstinence from certaine meats and from women which S. Paul couches in these words Colos II. 21. Touch not taste not come not nigh those things which all tend to perish in the using This you may perceive by the warning he gives Timothy of the like men who afterwards should depart from the faith giving â—eed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of devils who should forbid marriage and injoyne abstinence from meats which God hath made to be received of those that know him with thanksgiving 1. Tim. IV. 1 2 3. I know there is a plausible opinion abroad that these doctrines of devils as I translate it are the Traditions which have crept into the Church for the worshiping of the souls of holy men departed which some Christians have brought into the ranke of those secondary gods which the Gentiles call daemones or daemonia But this opinion cannot be true First because it is plaine that the second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 serves to interpret the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now it is manifest that by seducing spirits S. Paul can mean nothing but those inspirations true or pretended which the devil and his ministers corrupted Christianity with And therefore when he declares himself further by adding and doctrines of devils He meanes doctrines taught by devils Secondly because the word daemones or daemonia is never used in a good sense among Christians as it is among Pagans For those that knew not the difference between good spirits and bad but in effect as S Paul saith 1 Cor. X. 20 21. worshiped devils it is not to be expected that they should expresse a meaning to scorne or detest those whom they worshipped And whatsoever opinions those Philosophers which followed Plato and Pithagoras had of the vulgar Idolatries of their countryes seeing there is so much appearance as I have shewed in another place that they were Magicians it is no marvaile that they make not the difference between good and evil spirits which Christianity alone fully declareth The Jewes themselves not having sufficiently discovered it in and by the Scriptures of the Old Testament But as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Idol signifying of it self indifferently any image or representation to Christians and Jewes who understand the Gentiles to worship false gods signifies the image of those Gods in an ill sense So to those that understand the devils to put themselves
was actually deprived of the habituall knowledge of those truths which were setled in his minde concerning God or of those images in the minde or conceptions of the mind wherein that knowledge did consist as all knowledge doth It is enough and more then enough that the poison wherewith his inclinations and appetites stood now so perverted suffered not that truth which enlightened his mind to have effect in his actions according to that which Christians being by the grace of God restored to the like light do find in themselves by sad experience And when in processe of time his posterity notwithstanding the instruction which they received of him for above nine hundred years together and notwithstanding the preaching of the godly Fathers which S. Jude in his Epistle exemplifieth of Encch and S. Peter of Noe 2 Pet. II. 5. fell away not onely to oppression and wickednesse but to the worship of false Gods Then it appeared how naturall this blindnesse is to the posterity of Adam having departed from God concupiscence prevailing to make such strange and horrible ignorance take place in the mindes of them who had such certain and evident information from their predecessors of God that made them and all the world for their benefit of his severe judgement upon the fall of Adam and mercy promised and judgement preached against them that should refuse it To the difficulty then which causeth this whole dispute I will answer otherwise then they which have not been able to take it away have done That all sinne being a transgression of Gods Law if there be severall Lawes by which God deales with mankind there must be also severall rules and severall measures by which that which is sinne according to the Originall Law may not be sinne according to the latter Law which necessarily derogateth from that which went afore The originall rule of righteousnesse which the light which man was created in obliged him to must needs detect and convince all habituall inclination of concupiscence and much more the very first motions of the same to be sinne against God And seeing the very same motions are seen in that conflict between the flesh and the Spirit which the most regenerate find in themselves though by the grace of Gods Spirit in them they prevaile not so that there is no difference for nature and kind but onely for efficacy and strength between the concupiscence which remaines in the regenerate and that which rules in the unregenerate there can no controversie remaine among Christians that there is an original Law of God which this defect of original righteousnesse violateth And seeing Christianity obligeth to mortifie concupiscence and to prevent rather then to suppresse the first motions of it of necessity the rule of our conversation is grounded upon that uprightnesse in which or to which Adam was created But not therefore the rule of Gods proceeding with us whose salvation his mercy designeth supposing concupiscence And if there be a latter Law of God derogatory to that originall Law according to which he dealeth with those that are under it by imbracing the Covenant of Grace it cannot be said that the transgression of Gods Originall Law is any sinne against it being tendered to those whom God knows that so long as they live in the world they cannot be void of concupiscence So that by virtue of that Law according to which God by his Gospel declares that he will deâ—l with those that imbrace Christianity well may it be said that originall sinne is utterly defaced by Baptisme Though in relation to that originall rule of righteousnesse which mans uprightness obligeth him to it is most truly said that concupiscence is originall sinne And though supposing this answer it seems to me evidently unnecessary if not evidently contradictory to it self and to the justice goodnesse and holinesse of God to have recourse to a state of meer nature as if man might have been created in it supposing him designed by God to a state of supernaturall happinesse Yet it is as evident to me that it is no error of the foundation of faith but onely in the knowledge of the Scriptures and the skill of divines For supposing the belief of originall sinne on the one side on the other side remission of sinne by the profession of Christianity which Baptisme executeth and solemnizeth he that failes in giving account how these things may stand together and be both true at once cannot be thought to faile of that faith which he maintaines not with good successe There may be as great a failâ—ur on the other side in not believing the efficacy of Christianity in the remission of sinne Neither can the decree of the Council of Trent couched in the proper and formall terms of S. Augustine that concupiscence in the regenerate is not truly and properly sinne but so called because proceeding from sinne and tending to sinne be condemned as absolutely false so long as there is a new Law of God which is the Covenant of Grace against which it is no sinne being tendred and made after it and supposing it Nor could the mouth of Pelagius have been stopped when the efficacy of Baptisme in the remission of sinne was received among all Christians according to the Primitive and originall truth of Christianity were there not some true and just ground upon which it may be said that the opposition of concupiscence after Baptisme to the Law of God remaineth no more And yet that is no lesse true which the same Augustine in divers other places affirmeth either expresly or by good consequence that concupiscence which remaines after Baptisme is originall sinne To wit according to the originall Law of God tendred to the originall institution of mans nature If therefore that be true which Doctor Field saith that all the errors of the Church of Rome concerning the Covenant of Grace have their originall from this error concerning the state of pure nature as perhaps they may better be said to proceed from not distinguishing the severall consequences of Gods severall Lawes it will neverthelesse be very fit to be considered whether those errors which are grounded upon a mistake in divinity do amount to any deniall of the Foundation of Faith For supposing for the present though not granting the supposition of meer nature that is that God might have made man though instituted to supernaturall happinesse with concupiscence to be possible it may be neverthelesse and is without doubt utterly uselesse for a reason why the righteousnesse of a Christian is accepted by God as the fulfilling of his Law towards the reward of everlasting happinesse notwithstanding concupiscence For which it would be very impertinent to alledge that God might have made man with concupiscence and therefore accepts the obedience of those that are under it Because it is manifest that the perfection to which Christianity calleth is that to which Adam was instituted in Paradise It is therefore by consequence no lesse impertinent
produceth the other freedome from bondage either to sin or righteousnesse Not that this state of proficience requires actual indifference which supposeth so great an inclination biasse as that of inbred concupiscence Not determining the will to any action or object but the acts thereof to those taints which the want of a due end right reason and therefore of just measure in a mans desire necessarily inferreth But because in passing from the bondage of sin to the love of righteousnesse it is necessary that a man go through an instance of indifference wherein his resolution shall balance betweene the love of true good and that which is counterfeit It is therefore to be acknowledged that in the state of innocence there had needed no other helpe then the knowledge of Gods will to inable men to performe whatsoever he should require Of the spheare of nature supposing Adam instituted and called onely to the uprightnesse and happinesse of this life or supernaturall supposing him instituted and called to the world to come For where no immoderate inclination of the sensuall appetite created any difficulty what should hinder the prosecution of a reason so unquestionable as the will of God is But is not therefore the knowledge of Gods will revealed by the gospell under reasons convincing man of his obligation to doe it upon the account of his utter misery or perfect happinesse the grace of Christ Knowing by the scriptures alleged before that the means of it are purchased by his crosse that where the reason is so convinced there cannot want motives sufficient to incline the will to make choice Not that I think those reasons not being necessary but onely sufficient would take place were they not managed by Gods spirit Whether for the dificulty of supernatural actions or for the contrary biasse of inbred concupiscence But because in the nature of a sufficient helpe they do actually inable a man to make choice though in regard of the difficulties which contrary inclinations create is is most certaine they would prove addle and void of effect were they not conducted by the grace of God which is called effectuall for the event of it Not that the nature of those helps which prevaile is any other then the nature of those which overcome not which I may well affirme if Jansenius though to the prejudice of his opinion can not deny it but because they are by the worke of providence presented in severall circumstances to severall dispositions and inclinations whether of Gods mere will and pleasure as he is Lord of all things or upon reason of reward or punishment in maters wherein he hath declared himself by the Covenant of Grace So that the same reasons and motives which in some prove void and frustrate coming to effect and reaching and attaining to the very doing of the work which they inable a man to doe it cannot â—e said according to this position of mine that God by the grace of Christ onely inableth to do what he requireth the will of man making the difference between him that doth it and him that doth it not but the very act as well as the ability of doing is duely ascribed to the worke of Gods Grace according to the articles agreed by the Church against Pelagius And this not onely under the Gospell but even under the Law For though I showed you in the first book that the law expressely tenders onely the promise of temporall happinesse in holding the land of Canaan for the reward of the outward and carnall observations thereof Yet I showed you also that in the meane time there was an other traffick in driving under hand between God and his people for the happinesse of the world to come upon their obedience to his Law for such reasons and to such an end and with such measures as he requireth Therefore The Law is spirituall according to S. Paul Rom VII 14. and a grace according to S. Iohn I. 16 17. When he saith Of his fulnesse wee have all received and grace for grace For the Law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ The grace of the Gospell instead of the grace of the Law And S. Paul againe speaketh of the things which are granted us by the Gospell not in wâ—rds taught by mans wisdome but by the Holy Ghost comparing spirituall things with spirituall things 1. Cor. II. 13. Signifying that he taught the Gospell out of the Law comparing the spirituall things of the Gospell as signified by the Law to the same spirituall things as revealed by Christ And againe when he saith Rom. I. 17. The righteousnesse of God is revealed in the Gospell from faith to faith His meaning is proceeding to the faith of Christ from that which was under the Law True iâ— is indeed and I acknowledge that this spirituall sense of the Law was not to be discovered in the Law nor was discovered under it without the revelation of Gods spirit that placed it there to his friends the Prophets and by them to their disciples and followers But the office of those Prophets being to call the people to the spirituall service of God obedience to his Law out of love which was the intent for which his spirit strove with them as with those before the floud Gen. VI. 2. Whereupon Noe is called the preacher of righteousnesse 2. Peter II. 5. it followes of necessity that there was meanes for them to learne to practice true righteousnesse seeing they are charged for resisting the spirit of God calling them to it S Steven in the seventh of the Acts insisteth not in convincing the Jewes of the truth of Christianity supposing it done by that which had passed but inferrs by all that long speech clearely this That as the Israelite refused Moses for a judge between him and the Israelite whom he wronged as the people were rebellious to him in the wildernesse and turned back in their hearts to Egypt so were they to the prophet whom Moses had foretold concluding therefore Ye stifnecked and uncircumcised in hearts and eares ye doe alwaies resisty the Holy Ghost as your fathers so you also Which of the prophets did not your fathers persecute Killing those that foretold of the coming of that righteous one of whom you are now become the traytors and murtherers And our Lord when he telleth them that by honouring the memories of the Prophets and persecuting the Prophets and wise and Scribes Apostles whom he was sending them they owned themselves heires of them that killed the Prophets Mat. XXIII 29 37. showeth that the case was the same with the Prophets of old as with himselfe and his Apostles And whatsoever we read in the old Testament of the grace of God to that people in granting them his spirit or of their ungraciousnesse in resisting the same serves to prove the same purpose It is truly said indeed in rendring the reason why our Lord Christ came not till towards
bound by natural equity to accept that for full satisfaction which makes up his whole intresse when civile Law obliâ—es him not Makes the tender of Christ no lesse the substitute to our payment of that debt which Gods Law requireth for how is it lesse fit to be tendred when it is not due to be accepted then when it is no lesse able to fulfill Gods desire seeing nothing can be imagined more acceptable to him then the voluntary obedience of his own sonne consisting in those sufferings wherein the greatest virtue that mans nature is capable of was seen and tending to the redemption of mankind which his love to his creature inclined him so much â—o desire as his wisdome found to comport with his native goodnesse and the exercise of his justice I shall not here as in other points stand to clear the Faith of the Catholike Church When Pelagius is alleged for one that held not the satisfaction of Christ it is plain enough that it can have no footing in or allowance from the authority of the Church which hath disclaimed Pâ—lagius Onely we may take notice how well the evidence which the witnesse and practice of the Church renders to the rule of Faith is understood by them who in stead of alledging some allowance of the Church by some person of noted credit openly professing it and nevertheless esteemed to be of the Church name us one that was cast out of the Church for holding it whether expresly or by consequence As for Lactantius who alleging the suffering of Christ for our example addes further neverthelesse pro crimine nostro for our crime Instit IV. 23 24 26. Though I might safely have said as afore that a word of his upon the by may well have past without censure because his credit was not such in the Church as to create appearance of offense Yet I shall not need to have recourse to this answer his own words having given so much advantage for a fair interpretation of his meaning in the sense of the Church As for Pâ—trus Abailardus that is thought to have said something to the same purpose I shall not need to insist what his opinion was For as I allow that he lived in such an age when something that is true might be entertained with the censure of the Church So when it is said to be in a point wherein he is pâ—rtizane with Pelagius the Church that condemned him must needs in condemning him for iâ— be partizane with the Church that condemned Pelagius I will onely allege here a doctrine which I take to be generally received by the ancient Fathers of the Church That the devil by bringing Christ to death that had not sinned forfeited that power of death which the Apostle speakes of Heb. II. 14. to wit that which he had over man that had sinned in bringing him to death And I allege it because the Socinians seem to take it for granted that the Church is now ashamed to maintaine this which I confesse I am not For if the devil be Prince of this World as our Saviour calls him John XIV 30. because he is imployed by God as his Goaler or the executioner of those judgements to which he abandons those that forsake him by giving them up to his temptations shall we not understand the justice of God to be seen towards him in limiting this imployment as under the grace of Christ we believe it is limited in consideration of his attempting upon Christ beyond his commission because without right he being without sinne And therefore the justice of God having appointed him this imployment and this justice satisfied by the obedience of Christ it is but due consequence that this imployment in which the principality of this World consisteth should become forfeit and voâ—de so farre as the Grace of Christ determineth it By virtue of which reason our Lord Christ rising from death because not having sinned he could not be â—â—ld by death drawes after him all that upon the sound of his Gospel imbrace the profession of Christianity CHAP. XXX God might have reconciled man to himself without the coming of Christ The promises of the Gospel depend as well upon his active as passive obedience Christ need not suffer â—ell paâ—nes that we might not The opinion that maketh justifying Faith to be trust in God not true Yet not prejudiciall to the Faith The decree of the Council of Trent and the doctrine of the Schoole how it is not prejudiciall to the Faith As also that of Socinus I Will not leave this point till I have inferred from that which hath been said the resolution of two or three points in question necessarily following upon it And first that though as I have said it is impossible for the wit of man to propose any course for the reconciling of men to God by which the glory of God in the exercise of his divine perfections should have been more seen then is that which it pleased God to take Yet was it not impossible for his divine wisdome to have taken other courses to effect the same his glory remaining inâ—â—re according as S. Augustine hath long since resolved Though to the great displeasure of all them who distinguish not the imagination of immediate satisfaction by the death of Christ for the sinnes of them that shall be saved from that dispensation in the Originall Law of God which the Gospel declareth to all that imbrace the terms of it To the effect whereof I have showed that God provided and accepted it For if God did not provide noâ— accept de facto the death of Christ for immediate satisfaction to his vindicative justice in behalf of their sinnes that shall be saved Then was he not tied in point of right to seek that satisfaction for the same either from Christ or from us And truly this opinion that God was tied to execute his vindicative justice either upon Christ or us seems to represent God to the fansies of Christians as taking content in the evils and torments which Christ suffered that being the onely recompense that vindicative justice seeks without consideration of that perfect obedience and zeale to Gods glory in the saving of his creature together with his justice and holinesse in regard whereof God indeed accepteth the same Now though it be necessary for the maintenance of Christianity to say that the course which God takeâ—h for the reconciling of man to himself according to it preserveth his glory intire as being agreeable to his divine perfections For to say that man cannot propose a course more for his glory then that which it advanceth is rather honourable for Christianity then necessary for the maintenance of the truth of it yet to say that Gods wisdome in designing this course according to the exigence of all his perfections is so exhausted and equalled by the work of it as it were that his own wisdome could have designed no other course to attaine tâ—e same end preserving
suspended and interrupted as in him that cannot have confidence in God as reconciled to God in regard of these sinnes the seed of it notwithstanding remaining by virtue of that act of Faith whereby being reconciled as these are that are for ever reconciled to him he remains certaine of helpes of grace that shall be effectuall to work in him true repentance and of reconcilement upon supposition of it Whereupon it must be said the contrary that those whom God receiveth into grace without any purpose of granting them the grace of perseverance cannot be said to be justified without some terme of abatement signifying the justification granted them to be as to the sense of the Church or to an opinion unduely conceived by themselves but not as to God So that their faith also must be understood to be a confidence unduely grounded the failing whereof is not the disanulling of that which once was good but the discovering of that which once seemed good and was not This opinion so limited as I have said I should not think destructive to Christianity for the reason delivered afore concerning that opinion of justiing faith upon which it followes But as I then concluded that though not destructive to the Faith yet that opinion from whence it followeth is not true according to the true sense of the Scriptures wherein the skill of a Divine consisteth So must I here conclude that this opinion of perseverance which proceedeth upon that supposition of justifying faith which though not destructive to the Faith yet is not true is also not true though not destructive to the Faith The other which proceeds upon that supposition of justifying faith and predestination which is destructive to the faith remaining both untrue and destructive to the faith I grant that though the gift of the holy Ghost which is as I have said the habituall assistance of it being granted in consideration of a mans undertaking Christianity becomes void upon not performing that which a man undertakes yet God of his free goodnesse not as obliged by any promise of the Gospel may continue the assistance thereof but upon the same terms as he first grants the help of it to bring men out of the state of sinne into the state of grace I grant that the resolution of believing the faith of Christ and of living according to the same in the profession of Christianity having been once made upon reasons convincing a man that he is bound so to do cannot be changed at his pleasure in an instant though it fall out that he be overtaken with some sinne that laies wast the conscience But the promises of the Gospel being made in consideration of undertaking the profession of Christianity and therefore incompetible to those that live not according to it I say that they all become void to him that falls into such a sinne For the Covenant of Grace passing upon supposition of originall concupiscence remaining in the regenerate and insnaring them all with the occasions of sinne It cannot be imagined that all sinne makes it void But on the other side some sinnes being of so grosse a nature that a man cannot be surprized by them but that the being so conquered must imply a resolution to preferre this world before the world to come must needs forfeit those promises which depend upon the Covenant of Grace a rebellion against which they containe and declare So that unlesse the free grace of God by the operation of his Spirit bring a man back to repentance the whole resolution of being a Christian shall in time be blotted out though the profession because it imports the benefit of this world in Christian states remain counterfeit This is then the reason of my resolution necessarily following upon the premises that the sincere profession of Christianity is the condition of the Covenant of Grace seeing it is not imaginable that any man should hold any priviledge at Gods hands by professing that which he performeth not The profession as it serveth to aggravate the sinne which it committed under it as done in despite of all the grace of God and the conviction which it tendereth to reduce us to Christianity and the profession made in submission to the same condemning a man by his own sentence So containing the condition upon which all the promises become due upon the violation whereof on the contrary they must of necessity become void And this is the reason that leaves no place for any composition of this difference by saying that a man remains absolutely justified when the particular sinne which is not yet repented of is not pardoned For seeing the wages of it is death so farre as the Covenant of Grace dispenses not and seeing the Covenant of Grace cannot protect him that transgresseth the termes of it of necessity he falls into the same estate which he was under setting the Covenant of Grace aside as if to him our Lord Christ had neither been borne nor crucified nor risen againe Those that suffer the truth of this condition to be obscured by defective interpretations of that faith which alone justifieth and the scripturs concerning the same it is no mervaile if they can imagine a reconciliation betweene the state of sinne and the state of grace in the same man at the same time which makes the positive will of God declared by the Gospell to dispense with the necessary and naturall hate he beares to all sinners for their sinne But when it is once discoverd that by the termes of the Gospell God who declares himselfe ready to be reconciled to all sinners is declared unreconcileable to any so long as he continueth in sinne then must it necessarily appeare that the positive will of God declared by the Gospell concurring with the naturall detestation of sinne which is essentiall to the purity of his nature whosoever is under the guilt of sinne remains liable to his wrath And proceeding upon this ground as I doe I shall not thinke my selfe obliged to take notice of those thinges which have lately beene disputed in great volumes upon this point to and againe For presuming that the parties have not the ground upon which I proceed in debate As of necessity he who seemes to come short of proving his intent without it may with it be able to make the conviction effectuall which he tenders So he that seemes to have made the worse cause seeme the better without considering it must provide new evidence to make the condition of the Covenant of Grace seeme otherwise then I have showed it to be before he can thinke to have done his worke Notwithstanding because there are many texts of Scripture which evidently fortify the summe of Christianity setled upon the termes of the Covenant of Grace by demonstrating the failleure of the promise upon failleure of the condition to which the Gospell makes it due I take it to be part of my businesse to point at the cheife of them without being much troubled to
bring all that might be alleged Because I may make this generall inference from the premises that all precepts all exhortations all promises all threats made to induce man to perseverance in that estate to which the promises of the Gospell are any way signified to be due are necessary arguments to show that those to whome they are made may faile of the perseverance to which they induce And this by virtue of the generall reason premised that they are all evidences of that free will of men which the grace of God destroyeth not but cureth And therefore as when they are used to induce men to imbrace Christianity they containe an evidence that he may doe otherwise So also when they are used to induce man to persevere in that profession which he hath once undertaken they must necessarily by the same reason containe an evidence that it is possible for any man not to persevere who is induced by them to persevere in the course of a Christian For if it be said that without the grace of God they cannot with it they cannot but be effectual Either it is supposed the grace of God here named shal become effectuall to induce them to persevere to the end supposing that God foresees that they shall soâ—persevere or something else including the fore-sight of the perseverance it selfe or not If so it is no mervaile that the said exhortations cannot but prove effectuall because God foresees they shall be effectuall and that which shall not be can never be foreseene But if not supposing this any man undertake to say that the exhortation of the Gospell with the helpe of Gods inward grace must necessarily prove effectuall he will necessarily fall into all the inconvenience which I have charged them with who maintaine that the will of man is immediately determined by the will and operation of God to doe whatsoever it doeth Which is no lesse then the destruction aswell of all civility as of Christianity But let us see what the Apostle writes Heb. VI. 4-7 For it is not possible to renew unto repentance those that being once inlightned and having tasted the heavenly gift and been partakers of the Holy Ghost and relished the good word of God and the powrs of the world to come fall a way and crucify to themselves and traduce the Sonne of God For the earth that drinkes the raine that oft comes upon it and beares herbes fit for them by whome it is tilled receives a blessing from God But that which beares thornes and thistles is reprobate and neare a curse the end whereof is to be burned Could more have been said to expresse the state of grace For if any man can undertake to have the Spirit of God without premising Christianity I say confidently there is no cause why any man should be a Christian Therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here as Ebr. X. 32. signifieth neither more nor lesse then Christened 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the ancient Church signifies Baptisme because of the darknesse of Hethenisme or Judaisme which it dispelleth What is then the heavenly Gift which Christian tast be it remission of sinnes or be it the Gift of the Holy Ghost that followes expressing the same thing in severall parallel termes my businesse is done if the Gift of the Holy Ghost be not granted but upon that condition which makes all other promises of the Gospell due Wherefore I am content that relishing the good word of God shall signify no more then that conditon to wit That sense of Christianity which resolveth a man to undertake it But to relish the powers of the world to come no man can be understood but he that upon supposition of the said condition becomes sensible of that peace and joy of the Holy Ghost which under Christianity onely Christianity can give And therefore though I dispute not here how he means that it is impossible to renew those that fall from Christianity to repentance yet I challenge that impossibility of renewing to contain both a former right in and a possession of that estate to which they are renewed by repentance and also the present losse of it by falling from the condition which gâ—ves it So that the comparison which followes of fruitful and barren land upon tillage as it expresses a promise of following helpes of grace to them that use those which went a fore aright contained in the promise of giving the Holy Ghost to inable them who sincerely professe Christianity to performe that which they undertake So it convinceth the fruitlesse to be liable to the curse of fire which it is said to be neare because it is called reprobate The same is the effect of the like exhortation Ebrews X. 26 -29. For if we sinne voluntarily after receiving the acknowledgement of the truth there remaines no more any sacrifice for sinne but a certaine terrible expectation of vengeance and glowing of firâ— that is to consume opposers If one set at naught the Law of Moses without mercy he dies upon two or three witnesses Of how much worse punishment think you shall he be thought worthy that treads the Sonne of God under foot and esteems the blood of the Covenant by which he is sanctified unâ—leane and doth despite to the Spirit of Grace I say this is to the same effect if it be once granted that this sinne may be committed by a true Christian which no man can deny For can a Christian be thought to doe that despite to the Spirit of Grace which the Scribes and Pharises are said in the Gospell Matt XII 28. 32. Marke III. 29. Luke XII 10. to doe in sinning that sinne against the Holy Ghost which our Lord there pronounces irremissible Is it not manifest that their sinne consisted in attributing the miracles by which our Lord sought to convert them to the uncleane spirit being in Judgment convinced that by the Holy Ghost alone they were done And is it not as manifest that a Christian having received the Spirit of Grace promised to those that are baptized out of a sincere resolution of Christianity abuses the spirit which is so given him and which he hath and which had allready wrought that worke of conviction which the scribes and Pharises sufferd not to take effect in their harts Especially when the Apostle expressely premiseth the washing of them called here sanctifying by the blood of the Covenant which is the cleansing of that vessell by remission of sinnes into which the new wine of the Holy Ghost is to be put Wherefore I will not say that the faith of these men is true faith if you meane that onely to be true faith which lasts to the end which is many times in common language that which truth signifieth But if you meane that to be true faith which effecteth remission of sinnes and qualifieth for the world to come he must set the scripture upon the rack that will make it confesse any other sense Now consider what the Apostle
difficulty is the same For is not This of which our Lord speaks the same that hee took If you say not so because hee gave thanks before hee said This is my Body This is my Bloud at least it must be that which hee broke after hee had given thanks and that of necessity is the same bread which hee took as the same wine For to imagine that This demonstrates bread and wine which when hee sayes is my Body and Bloud are then abolished to make room for the Body and Bloud is that which his affirmation is will by no means allow requiring that which it affirmeth to be verified for that time which it demonstrateth or presenteth to the understanding So that This must be the Body and Bloud of Christ at such time as it is This that is that Bread and that Wine which Gods word demonstrateth In fine whatsoever it is which This may be said to demonstrate besides Bread and Wine it will be unpossible to make appear that the Disciples understood that which the Scriptures whereby wee must learn what they understood expresse not But this is not all When S. Matthew sayes I will drink no more of this production of the Vine which S. Luke sayes that our Lord said before the consecration of the Sacrament either wee must say that hee repeated the same words which is nothing unlikely seeing the tender of the cup at which they were said is repeated by our Lord as it is agreed upon that the Jewes at the Supper of the Passeover did customarily repeat the same And this answer takes away all imputation of confusion from the text of S. Matthew But if any man stand upon it that these words were said onely before the consecration though they are repeated by S. Matthew after it at the delivering of the cup and therefore that it is not called wine which is in the cup after the consecration If hee consider how pertinently hee makes S. Matthew bring in this saying upon the delivery of the cup not supposing that to be wine which was in it hee will finde himself never a whit easied by that escape For how grosse were it for him to put these sayings together This is my bloud of the New Testament which is shed for many to the remission of sins And I say unto you I will drink no more of this production of the Vine had hee not taken that which was in the cup for wine The same holds in the words of S. Mark having followed S. Matthew in this So when S. Paul makes our Lord say Take eat this is my Body which is broken for you is it not manifest that breaking is properly said of bread of a body of flesh not without some impropriety to be understood by that which is common to bread and to a body of flesh And would S. Paul have used a term which necessarily referrs him that hears it to bread were it not bread which our Lord brake after the consecration of the Sacrament in resemblance wherewith this body is said to be broken because it was wounded But when the same S. Paul speaking of that which they take which they eat which they drink which certainly they do after the consecration when it is the Sacrament saith So oft as yee eat this bread and drink this cup yee declare the Lords death till hee come Therefore whoso eateth this bread and drinketh this cup unworthily is guilty of the body and bloud of Christ Is there then any reason left why wee should not believe bread to be bread and wine to be wine when the word of God sayes it but that whatsoever the word of God say wee are resolved of our prejudice And when hee saith again Let a man examine himself and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup speaketh hee of eating and drinking any thing else but that which all Christians receive in the Sacrament of the Eucharist If any thing can possibly be more manifest than this it is that which hee addeth arguing that all Christians are one Body â—s the bread is one to wit which they eat because they all partake of onâ— bread And therefore when hee saith further The cup of blessing which weâ— blesse is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ The bread which wee break is it not the communion of the body of Christ I will not insist upon this that it is called bread after the blessing though S. Matthew observeth that our Lord calleth it so after giving of thanks because the cup may be called the cup of blessing which wee blesse before the blessing be past and done But I say confidently that to make our Lord say that the bread is the communion of the Body and the cup that is the wine that is in the cup which is blessed for what else can be understood to be in the cup with correspondence to bread is the communion of the bloud of Christ is to make him say that which hee did not mean unlesse hee did mean that that is bread and wine whereby Christians communicate in the body and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist But shall this evidence of the nature and substance of Bread and Wine remaining in the Sacrament of the Eucharist even when it is a Sacrament that is when it is received either deface or efface the evidence which the same Scriptures yield us of the truth of Christs body and blood brought forth and made to be in the Sacrament of the Eucharist by making it to be that Sacrament Surely wee must not suffer such a conceit to prossesse us unlesse wee will offer the same violence to the manifest and expresse words of the Scripture For of necessity when our Lord saith This is my body this is my blood either wee must make is to stand for signifieth and This is my body this is my bloud to be more than this is a sign of my body and bloud Or else the word is will inforce the elements to be called the body and bloud of Christ at that time and for that time when they are not yet received That is to say whether hee that receives them who think it for their advantage to maintain that This is my body and my bloud signifies no more but this is a sign of my body and bloud to advise how they can ground the true real participation of the body and bloud of Christ in by the Sacrament of the Eucharist upon the Scripture allowing no more than the signification of the body bloud of Christ by that Sacrament to be declared in those words of the Scripture that describe the institution of it For that a man receives the body and bloud of Christ spiritually through faith in receiving the Sacrament of the Eucharist is no more than hee does in not receiving the Sacrament of the Eucharist if by the act of a living faith wee do eat the flesh of Christ and drink his
sorts of Oblations commanded by the Law and practised by Gods ancient people For First-fruits Tithes and accursed things that is things dedicated to God under a curse upon them that should convert them to any other use Leviâ— XXVIII were not dedicated to be spent upon the Altar in Sacrifices but to the maintenance of the Temple or of them that attended upon the service of it But seeing wee have now showed that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice it followeth that those Oblations which are dedâ—cated to God to be spent in the celâ—bration of the Eucharist in reference whereunto I have already showed that all Oblations of Christians are consecrated to God because dedicated to maintain the Communion of his Church whereof the Eucharist is that Office which is peculiar to Christianity are not barely consecrated to God but to the service of God by Sacrifice For those things which under the Law were consecrated to God to be sacrificed upon the Altar were not then first offered to God when they were killed and the parts of them burnt upon the Altar But from the time that they were declared Gods goods for that purpose as by the Law it self may appear in the precept of the second Tithe which for two years belonging to the poor the third year was to be spent in sacrificing at Jerusalem and so by Law and by no mans act consecrate to the Altar Deut. XIV 22-29 In as much then as I have showed that the Eucharist is a Sacriâ—iâ—e in so much and for that very reason that which Christians offer to God for the celebration of the Eucharist is no otherwise a Sacrifice than those things which were appropriated to the Altar under the Law were Sacrifices from the time that they were dedicated to that purpose Saving alwaies the difference between Sacrifices figurative of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse such as Christianity supposeth all the Sacrifices of the Old Law to be and the commemoration and representation of the same past which I have showed that the Eucharist pretendeth And truly having showed that this representative and commemorative Sacrifice is of the nature and kinde of Peace-Offerings in as much as it is celebrated on purpose to communicate with the Altar in feasting upon it And knowing that every beast that was sacrificed for a Peace-Offering was attended with a Meat-Offering of floure and a Drink-Offering of wine which are the kindes in which the Eucharist is appointed to be celebrated I must needs say that those species set apart for the celebration of the Eucharist are as properly to be called Sacrifices of that nature which the Eucharist is of to wit commemorative and representative as the same are to be counted figurative under the Law from the time that they were deputed to that use This is then the first act of Oblation by the Church that is by any Christian that consecrates his goods not at large to the service of God but peculiarly to the service of God by Sacrifice in regard whereof the Elemenâ—s of the Eucharist before they be consecrated are truly counted Oblations or Sacrifices After the Consecration is past having showed you that S. Paul hath appointed that at the celebration of the Eucharist prayers supplications and intercessions be made for all estates of the world and of the Church And that the Jews have no right to the Eucharist according to the Epistle to the Hebrews because though Eucharistical yet it is of that kinde the bloud whereof is offered to God within the Vail with prayers for all estates of the world as Philo and Josephus inform us Seeing the same Apostle hath so plainly expounded us the accomplishment of that figure in the offering of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse to the Father in the highest heavens to obtain the benefits of his passion for us And that the Eucharist is nothing else but the representation here upon earth of that which is done there These things I say considered necessarily it follows that whoso believes the prayers of the Church made in our Lords name do render God propitious to them for whom they are made and obtain for them the benefits of Christs death which hee that believes not is no Christian cannot question that those which are made by S. Pauls appointment at the celebration of the Eucharist offering up unto God the merits and sufferings of Christ there represented must be peculiarly and especially effectual to the same purposes And that the Eucharist may very properly be accounted a Sacrifice propitiatory and impetratory both in this regard because the offering of it up unto God with and by the said prayers doth render God propitious and obtain at his hands the benefits of Christs death which it representeth there can be no cause to refuse being no more than the simplicity of plain Christianity inforceth But whether the Eucharist as in regard of this Oblation so in regard of the Consecration may be called a propitiatory Sacrifice this I perceive is yet a question even among those of the Church of Rome For it is acknowledged that there is yet among them a party even since the Decree of the Council of Trent who acknowledging the nature of a Sacrifice propitiatory in the Eucharist in regard of the offering of it already consecrated according to the order of the Latine Masse to God for the necessities of the Church utterly deny any nature of such a Sacrifice in it by virtue of the Consecration otherwise True it is these men are looked upon as bordering upon Hereticks in regard they acknowledg no other nature of a Sacrifice but that which those who acknowledg no Transubstantiation may grant without prejudice to their positions And if my aim were onely to hold a mean opinion between â—wo extreams and not freely to declare what may be affirmed with truth it might seem very convenient to take up that position for which I may allege a party at present extant in the Communion of the Church of Rome But having resolved to set all regard of faction behinde the consideration of truth manifested by the Scriptures I stick not to yield and to maintain that the consecration of the Eucharist in order to the participation of it is indeed a Sacrifice whereby God is rendred propitious to and the benefits of Christs death obtained for them that worthily receive it But this perhaps neither in the sense nor to the interest of them who make it their businesse to maintain the present abuses of the Church of Rome by disguising the true intentions and expressions of the Catholick Church That I may be understood without prejudice in this point I will lay down the difference of opinion that remains in the Church of Rome â—â—nce the Council of Trent as I finde it reported by Jacobus Bayus de Eucharistiâ III. 15-18 Hee complains of an opinion that the nature of a Sacrifice is not seen in conâ—ecrating the Elements to become the body and bloud of
with virgines and once maried people And shall thy sacrifice freely ascend And among other affections of a good minde wilt thou desire chastity for thee and thy wife I dispute not here how lawfull it is to pray for the dead which Tertullian touches again de Monogamiâ X. de Animâ LVIII This Tertullian supposes that if a Christian have two wives hee must offer that the Eucharist may be celebrated and that at the celebrating of it the Priest may pray for those whom hee mentions as the occasion of celebrating it The birth-dayes of Martyrs that is the Anniversaries of their sufferings was another occasion of celebrating the Eucharist as in Tertullian so in S. Cyprian Epist XXXIV Sacrificium pro eis semper ut meminiâ—â—is offerimus quoties Martyrum passiones dies annuâ commemoratione celebâ—an us Wee alwaies offer sacrifice for them as you remember when wee celebrate the yearly commemoration of the Martyrs suffering dayes Therefore where the â—ame S. Cyprian forbids offering the names of those that had fallen away in persecution and offering for them Epist IX XI hee forbids the receiving of their offerings and by consequence praying for them at the Eucharist Epiphanius Haer. XXX speaking of the Patriarch of the Jewes baptized in private 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The said Patriarâ—â—â—aâ—inâ—â—â— his hand a very considerable summ of gold streâ—ched out his hand and gave it to â—â—e Bishop saying Offer for mee S. Cyril of Jerusalem Catech. Mystag V. Eâ—roe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Then that spiritual sacrifice that unbloudy service being done consecrâ—tâ—â— over that propitiatory sacrifice wee beseech God for the common peace of the Churches for the State of the world for the Kings their armies and allies for the sick c. adding that praying for the departed wee offer to God Christ cruciâ—â—ed â—or our sins to render him propitious to them and to us Of which effect in due place the intent hereby appears For here as hee calls it a Sacrifice upon the Consecration so hee plainly sets down wherein the propitiation which it effecteth consists according to the Catholick Church For to say truth to the purpose in hand I can produce nothing like that which I have said already in my Book of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church to which I remit you for the rest pag. 370-382 that in all the Liturgies there is a place where mention is to be made of all States of the Church for whom the Oblations out of which the Eucharist is consecrated are offered And likewise a place where the Eucharist being consecrated prayer is made in behalf of all States in the Church that is to say the Sacrifice of Christ his Crosse there present is offered up to move God to grant them all that is desired by the regular and continual prayers of the Church And among them there is a special place for those that offer at present If any man be moved to imagine that any part hereof is prejudicial to that Reformation which the Church of England professeth for I professe from the beginning not to be sâ—rupulous of offending those that offend it I remit him to that learned Appendix of Dr Field to his third book of the Church the purpose whereof in answer to the question where the Reformed Church was before Luther is to show that in this point as in others there handled the sense of the whole Church of Christ even to the time of Luther and to the Council of Trent was no other than that which the Church of England embraceth and cherisheth Thereby to show that the Reformation thereof never pretended to found a new Church but to preserve that which was by taking away those corruptions which time and the enemies of Christianity had sown in the Lawes and customs of it Which hee doth so evidently perform in this point that I must needs challenge any man that hath a minde to blast any thing here said with the staâ—e calumny of Popery to consider first Whether hee can prove those things which the Authors past exception there quoted declare to be the sense of the Catholick Church at that time to contain any thing prejudicial to the Gospel of Christ and that purity thereof which the Reformation pretendeth And because I know hee cannot do it I rest secure of all blasphemies or slanders that can be forged upon this occasion Openly professing that those who will not acknowledg that condition of the Gospel and the promises thereof which I have demonstrated to be essential to Christianity it is for their interest to defame the sense of the Catholick Church with the slanderous aspersions of Popery that so they might seduce miserable creatures to believe that there is a faith which inâ—itles them to the promises of the Gospel not supposing them converted to the Christianity which it rendereth For seeing that propitiation which the Sacrifice of the Eucharist pretendeth is grounded upon this condition of the Covenant of Grace as I have showed it is no mervail if they who pretend to reconcile the promises of the Gospel to the lusts of the flesh by which this world is injoyed indeavor to slander the purity of Christianity with those aspersions which they have seduced wretched people to count odious In fine it is not that consideration of a Sacrifice in the Sacrament of the Eucharist which the sense and practice of the Catholick Church inforceth but the violent interpretations of it which are made on both sides to both extremities that can give the leass pretense for division in the Church For while on the one side the sacrificing of Christ a new is so construed as if to doubt of the virtue of it in behalf of all that assist in it whether they communicate in it or not whether their devotions concurr to it or not were to doubt of the virtue of Christs Crosse it is no mervail if this create so great offense that the receiving of the Eucharist nay the assisting of it with the devotions of Christian people comes to be a mater of indifference On the other side while the renewing of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse by that representation thereof which the Eucharist tendreth for the redressing of the Covenant of Grace between God and those which receive is construed as prejudicial to that one Sacrifice whereby our Lord for ever hath perfected those whom hee sanctifieth no mervail if the very celebrating of it come to be a mater of indifference the effect whereof by believing that a man is predestinate or justified is had before and without it The mater of the Sacrifice then being so great a subject for the diviâ—ion upon so litle cause it is time for good Christians to awake and look about them and see that the lesse cause there is the greater good will the parties have to continue at distance In the mean time it is the common interest of Christianity even the means of their salvation by the
to one wife indissolubly as mariage hath alwaies been indissoluble among Christians could have taken effect among all Christians had it not been received from the beginning for a part of that Christianity which our Lord Christ and his Disciples delivered to the Church nor preserved so inviolable as it hath been but by the society of the Church He that will give a reason how this Law could have taken place otherwise must either alledge the Law of Moses or the Law of the Romane Empire There being no other Law extant when Christianity took place For the law of Moses it is evident that at such time as Christianity came into the world it was counted lawfull according to it to have more wives then one and to put away away a mans wife by a Bill of divorce I demand then how this should come to be prohibited by virtue of that Law which was hitherto thought to allow it It will be said by the true interpretaion of the Law which having been obscured by the false glosses of the Scribes and Pharisees our Lord by his Gospel Mat. V. 31. 32. XIX 3-9 Mark X. 11. 12. Luk. XVII 18. clears and injoyns upon Christians for the future But I showed before in the second Book that when our Lord saith so oft in his Sermon on the Mount You have heard it was said to those of old his meaning is that Moses said so to their Fathers when he gave them the Law not that the Scribes and Pharisees said so to their Predecessors when they corrupt it Besides there are two things evident in the Scripture beyond contradiction The first that divers Lawes of Moses either make it lawfull or suppose it lawful to have more wives then one Deut. XXI 15-17 the Law supposes a man to have two wives the one beloved the other not and provides accordingly Ex. XXI 6-11 the Law gives him leave that hath bought the daughter of a Jew to mary her to his Sonne who if he have another is â—bound to pay her the mariage debt of a wife so that if he do not she is to go free Deut. XXI 1-14 the Law inables him that hath taken a captive in the War whom he likes to marry her not conditioning if he have no other wife Call these two later wives or call them Concubines so long as the Law of God allows them evident it is that it allows that which Christians by their Christianity think themselves bound to forbear Adde hereunto that the King is bound not to take too many wives Deut. XVII 16. 17. that David is not reproved as transgressing this Law though Solomon is But on the contrary that God imputes it as a favour to him that he gave him many wives 2 Saâ— XII 8. which he could not do had he not allowed it I say adde the practice as the life of the Law to the leter as the carcase of it and I may justly conclude that Polygamy is not prohibited by the Law of Moses Besides the Law provides that an Ebrue slave who may go free at the seventh year if his Master have given him a slave of his own to wife and he have children by her must part wedlock with his wife and leave her and children to his Master for his goods Exodus XXI 3. 4. nullifying the contract of Mariage by the choice of him who proffers his freedom before his wife and children in bondage a thing utterly inconsistent with the insolubility of Mariage by Moses Law Secondly our Lord in the Gospel saith not onely It was said to them of â—ld He that puts away his wife let him give her a Bill of Divorce But I say unto you as Mat. V. 31. 32. But further when they ask him Mat. XIX 7. Why did Moses then command to give a Bill of divorce and seâ—d her away He answereth Moses for your hard-heartednesse suffered you to put away your wives But from the beginning it was not so Now I say unto you that he that puts away his wife for fornicatioâ— and maries another commits adultery and he that maries her that is put away commits adultery And all this having laid his ground afore He that made them from the beginning made them male and female and said therefore shall a mâ—n leave father and mother and cleave to his wife and they two shall be one flesh So they are no longer two but one flesh Therefore what God hath joyned let no man part Whereby it is evident that he derives not the prohibition of putting away a wife to take another from any interpretation of Moses Law to the provision whereof he opposeth the provision which hereby he introduceth But from the commission which he pretendeth by virtue whereof he restoreth the primitive institution of Paradise which the Law of Moses had either dispensed with or did suppose it to have been formerly dispensed with For he saith not onely You have heard that it was said to them of old which may be thought to be understood of the Scribes and Pharisees But also Moses said and I say opposing his own saying to that of Moses so farre as prohibiting that which he had allowed imports without licensing that which was prohibited by the Law And upon this ground that by mariage man and wife become one flesh he proceeds to prohibite the divorces which Moses Law alloweth so that the reason why mariage is indissoluble is because man and wife are one flesh by the Gospel of Christ according to the first institutions in Paradise This indeed is the difficulty which I here suppose already declared how this first institution lost or may appear to have lost the force of a Law till revived by our Lord Christ though I conceive the evidence of this truth cannot be obstructed by not declaring the reason of it here S. Paul having so fully laid down the effect and intent of his masters Law 1 Cor. VII 1-6 Now of that you writ to me about it is good for a man not to touch a woman Neverthelesse because of fornications sake let every man have his wife and every woman her husband let the man render his wife the benevolence that is due likewise the wife to the Husband The woman hath no power of her Body but the man Likewise the man is not master of his own Body but the wife Defraud not one another unlesse upon agreement for a time that ye may attend to fasting and prayer and come together againâ— least Satan tempt you for your incontinence For here it is manifest that because man and wife are one flesh they have an interess in one anothers bodies not to be disposed of upon any other to the prejudice of it And upon this supposition the mariage of the first Adam in this earthly Paradise being the figure of the mariage between the second Adam and his Church becomes the rule and measure of the Mariages of Christians in the Church as the same Apostle declares at large Ephes V.
chargeable with adultery when the wife maries again being not put away for adultery why is he chargeable with it that put her away for adultery If because he maries again not putting his wife away for adultery putting her away for adultery why is he chargeable with it The difficulty will be Then is the knot of wedlock tied to the one party and loose to the other which seems a knot more indissoluble then that of wedlock but is indeed none at all if we distinguish between the metaphor of a knot tied and the obligation signified by it For though the act of consent to the contract of wedlock is the act of two parties whereof a third that is God is depositary to discharge the innocent and to charge the guilty yet the bond or obligation which is contracted by it is answerable severally by each party in the judgement of God And is there the same reason that God should call him to account for adultery who thinks himselfe free of that contract which he stood to till his party transgressed it as her that gave him cause to think himselfe free by transgressing it The difficulty then rests in the meaning of S. Paul when he châ—rgeth the wife not to depart from her Husband If she do to abidâ— unmaried or to be reconciled to her Husband And the Husband not to put away his wife 1 Cor. VII 12. And that having before charged maried people not to part even for devotion but for a time for fear of temptation by concupiscense For can it then be imagined that he allows them to part upon any occasion but that of adultery Therefore those that are parted for adultery he forbids to marry again And these are the Texts that have moved S. Jerome Epist XLVII to be of this mind But S. Austine further expounding the Sermon in the mount upon this supposition as he himselfe professes in the beginning of his books de adultrinis conjugiis written expresse to maintain it and desiring to show how our Lords Law injoyns the same with his Apostles imagines that our Lord might mean spirituall fornication or adultery according to which the Psalme saies Thou hast destroyed all that commit fornication against thee when he gave it Which sense compriseth all sinne that carieth with it a construction of departing from our Covenant with God both in truth and according to S. Austine de Sermone domini in monte I. 16. Whereupon the Mileritane Canon XVII speaks thus Placuit ut secundum Evangelicam Apostolicam disciplinam ueque dimissus ab uxore neque dimissa à marito alteri conjungantur sed ita maneant auâ— sibi reconcilientur Quod si contempserint ad poenitentiam redigantur In qua causà legem Iâ—perialem petendam promulgari It seemed good that according to the discipline of the Gospel and the Apostles neither he that is dimissed by his wife nor she that is dimissed by her husband be wedded to another but remain so or be reconciled to one another which if they neglect that they be put to Penance and that request be made for an Imperial Law to be published in the case Where alleging the Gospel and S. Paul both it is plain the Canon proceeds upon the opinion of S. Austine For he was at this Council and in all probability had the penning of the Canons That which moved them to be of this opinion I confesse moves me to be against it I cannot be perswaded that S. Paul in this place and our Lord in the Gospel speak both to one and the same purpose All subjects of the Romane Empire when S. Paul writ had power to leave their wives or their husbands at pleasure without giving the Law account But supposing them Christians were they not to give God account were they not to give the Church account Certainly if they maried again they must give the Church account because our Lord hath said He that leaveth his wife but for adultery and marieth again committeth adultery For of adultery account is to be given the Church And truly who parts with a wife it is great odds does it out of a desire to mary another which all the Church agrees he cannot do unlesse she be an adulteresse part of it sayes further though she be he cannot do it But if he mary not another but part with his wife he must give God account whether he be bound to give the Church account or not And this account S. Paul instructs how to give He will not have Christians to part bed and bord much less to repudiate to part families to send one another a way with that which they brought but if they will needs try how good it is living unmarried he would have them know that they could not mary elsewhere because of our Lords Law which in case of fornication he silently excepteth For to me it seemeth manifest that our Lord in case of fornication provideth for the reparation of the party wronged whose bed and issue is concerned restraining the divorce which the law allowed onely to the transgression of mariage inâ—cted by the institution of Paradise when two continue not one flesh But S. Paul for the conscience of particular Christians upon what terms they may or ought to forbear â—ohabitation to wit so as they mary not again Which is exhortation enough to set aside animosities and return to bed and bord again S. Austine and Venerable Bede upon the Gospel following him confesse that according to their interpretation our Lord permits to part not for the fornication which the other party hath done but for that which himselfe may do To wit which by the company of an ill disposed yoke-fellow he may be moved to do So divorce according to this opinion is grounded upon the precept of the Gospel If thine eye offend thee pluck it out and is that which the Church of Rome at this day maintaineth by the XXVI Session of the Council of Trent Can. VIII and that as I think according to S. Paul onely that he leaves it to the Conscience of particular Christians without interessing the Church the interest whereof I conceive cannot be excluded though S. Paul here provide not for it as Cardinall Bellarmine de Matrimoniâ— I. 14. disputeth But in case of adultery it never was nor ever could seem questionable so as S. Paul to decide it whither a man might so put away his wife or no all Civill Law that then was counting him accessory to the stain of his bed and issue that did not And thereupon the ancient Canons of the Church imposing penalties upon any of the Clergy who being allowed to dwell with their wives should indure an adulteresse And therefore I conclude that S. Paul though he allow not either husband or wife to part with wife or husband as to cohabitation without renouncing the bond of wedlock no not for the state of continence as S. Austine very well argues if not for continence then for no
Congregations I do indeed acknowledge that there is difficulty in expounding those texts of the Apostles which speak to this purpose so as to agree them with the Originall and universal practice of the Church And therefore it is no marvail if learned men that have handled this point among us where without affectation I may say that it hath been most curiously and ingenuously disputed have gone several wayes upon severall grounds in assigning the reason why the degree of Deacons is mentioned next to the degree of Bishops in so many texts of the Apostles having the order of Priests between both as the original and perpetual custome of the Church required For it is well enough known that there is an opinion published and maintained by many learned observations in the primitive antiquity of the Church that during the time when those texts of the Apostles were written there were but two Orders of Bishops and Deacons established in the Church though Bishops also are called Presbyters the name not being yet appropriated to the midle order while it was not introduced as afterwards it came to be And this opinion allegeth Epiphanius very fitly confuting Aerius the Heretick or Schismatick objecting the same that at the beginning the multitude of believers in less places being so small that one Governour together with some Ministers to attend upon him in executing his Orders might well serve them it is no marvail if there be no mention of any more Orders in so many texts of the Apostles And it may be said that as there were Churches founded and governed by a certain order from the beginning that we read of them in the Apostles so no Bishop Priest or Deacon was appropriated to any particular Church till after that time by degrees they came to be selled to certain Churches by Ecclesiastical Law and Custome So that during the time of the Apostles themselves and their companions whom they associated to themselves for their assistance were in common the Governours of Churches then founded according as they fell out to be present in these Churches to whom they had the most relation by planting and watering the faith planted in them either by virtue of the agreement taken by the Apostles within themselves or by the appointment of some of them if we speak of their companions and assistances But afterwards when the faith came to be setled then as those which had been Governours of Churches in common before became chief Governours of particular Churches to whom by lawful consent they became appropriated so were they provided of Priests and Deacons to assist and attend them in the execution of their office towards the body of Christians then mulplyed in severall Churches I do confess to have declared an opinion something differing from both of these sayings about the reason here demanded As not being perswaded either that the Order of Presbyters was not yet introduced into the Church during the Apostles time or that chief Governours were not appropriated and setled in some Churches during the same though I have no need to undertake that in all they were believing and maintaining that the Apostles themselves in the Churches of their own planting and watering were acknowledged chief Governours in ordering notwithstanding their extraordinary both Power not confined to any one Church and graces and abilities porportionable In which regard and under which limitation visible to the common sense of all men of their own and the next ages I do maintain Bishops to be their successors Whereupon it follows that I allow the name of Bishops in the Apostles writings to comprehend Priests also because of the mater of their function common to both though with a chief Power in the Bishop in Priests so limited as to do nothing that is to say nothing of consequence to his Power over the whole Church without his consent and allowance But this variety of opinion in expounding these Scriptures draweth after it no further consequence to prejudice the primitive Law of Goverment in the Church then this That there are more waies then one to answer the seeming probabilities pretending to make the evidence of Catholick Tradition unreconcileable with the truth of the Scriptures in the agreement whereof the demonstration of this truth consisteth I conceive therefore I might very well referre my self to the Readers free judgement to compare the reasons which I have produced with those that since have been used Notwithstanding I shall not think much briefly according to the model of this design to express the sense I have of the most native meaning of the most texts alleged in this businesse that I may have opportunity to point out again the peremptory exceptions which â—re visible in them either to the imagination of mungrill Prâ—sbyteries compounded of Clergy and People during the time of the Apostles or of the chief Power of any such Presbyteries in their resepective Churches CHAP. XVII The Power given the XII under the Title of Apostles and the LXX Disciples That the VII were Deacons Of the first Presbyters at Jerusalem and the Interest of the People Presbyters appropriated to Churches under the Apostles S. Pauls Deacons no Presbyters No ground for Lay Flders FIrst then as the name of Apostle in the Originall meaning is very general to signifie any commissary Proxy delegate or Ambassador so the use of it in the Apostles writings is larger then to be confined to the twelve For when S. Paul saith That our Lord appeared to the twelve afterwards to all the Apostles 1 Cor. XV. 5. 7. He must needs understand other Apostles besides the twelve perhaps the same that he meant where he reckoned Andronicus and Junias remarkable among the Apostles Rom. XVI 7. And that in another â—ense then Paul and Barnabas are called Apostles Act. XIV 4. 14. For the name of Apostle intimating whose Apostle he is that is called an Apostle we have no reason to count Paul and Barnabas any mans Apostles but our Lord Christs though they were first sent with the blessing of such Doctors and Prophets as the Church of Antiochia then had Acts XIII 1. 2 3. whose authority cannot in any reason be thought to extend so farre as to constitute an Apostle parâ—llel to the Twelve which S. Paul so oft so expresly challenges For since we see their commission is immediately from the Holy Ghost that is from God we are not to value their right by the solemnity which it is visibly conferred upon them with Unlesse you will say that by virtue of that Imposition of Hands they were messengers and Commissaries of that Church and that they then appeared to be no more then so though afterwards God set on them marks of the same authority with the Twelve Truly those whom S. Paul calls false Apostles transferring themselves into the Apostles of Christ 1 Cor. XI 13. must neâ—ds be understood to have pretended commission from our Lord Christ himself For hereupon they stood upon it that they had
time the place the maner and form the ceremonies and solemnities whereby the celebration of Church offices is either already determined by Gods Law or remains determinable by the Law of the Church And this I cannot do better then beginning with the times of divine service and considering what Laws of God what Laws of the Church all Christians ought to be tied to in that point whence it may appear what may be the subject of Reformation in it Where I find it requisite in the first place to debate by what right the first day of the week called Sunday is set apart for the service of God under Christianity There is an opinion too well known amongst us that the first day of the week is kept by Christians in virtue of the fourth Commandment which obliged the Jews to keep the seventh day of the week Which opinion if it be true they have some ground for confining the service of God to it But it cannot be maintained without two assumptions The first That the seventh day in the fourth Commandment signifies not the seventh day of the week on which God rested from creating any more but one of the seven dayes The second That the resurrection of Christ upon the first day of the week is a reason that necessarily determines all Christians to do that which they are bound to do on one day of the seven upon the first and none else Neither of which is true though the later have farre the more appearance of truth in it For it is manifest that the will of God may be having obliged the Jewes to keep one day in seven to oblige Christians to keep one day in six or lesse unesse it be otherwise determined by some commandment of Gods Now it appeareth that the first day of the week was kept in the times of the Apostles our Saviour having peared unto them after his Resurrection upon that day Joh. XIX 26. Act. XX. â— 1 Cor. XVI 2. Apoc. I. 10. But of any precept to make this a Law to all Christians nothing appears in the Scriptures of the New Testament Again it may be said That the Gospel requireth more plentiful fruits of obedience then the Law And therefore if the Law required one day of seven for the service of God that the Gospel requires more Nor will it concern me here to prove that this opinion is true It is more then enough that I can say that before this novelty came into England it cannot appear that ever any Christian thought otherwise For I argue no more in this place but that the rising of our Lord upon the first day of the week doth not necessarily determine the Church to keep one day of the seven as the command of God doth For had God commanded one day of seven to be kept under the Gospel as under the Law there had been no room for further consideration But so long as there is onely a reason on the one side That the Resurrection to Christians is as the Creation to Jews And a reason on the other side That it becomes Christians in this as in all to do more then Jews I cannot deny that there is a sufficient reason for him that hath power of determining that which God hath not determined to appoint the first day of the week but I utterly deny that there is any Law of God before the act of this power to determine it And the reason is plain For in maters of this nature there may be sufficient reason for several determinations because it is not the substance but the circumstance of that which is by nature necessarily good and Gods service Again supposing that Christians are bound to keep one day of seven for Gods service may I not ask why the passion of Christ should not determine them to keep the sixth as well as the Resurrection the first day of the week Especially in the sense of them who think they have reason to feast on good Friday and to celebrate their Fasts on the Lords day For if the resurrection of Christ be no reason to make the day thereof Festivall nor his Passion why we should rather fast on the day of it certainly where both cannot be kept the one concerns us as much as the other do and therefore there is as much reason to keep this as that This to the later of the two assumptions But in the former there is no colour of truth Nor do I see how any thing can be more strange then this That so many men professing learning and zeal to the Scriptures alone should read in the Commandment that God resâ—ed the seventh day from making the world and therefore commanded the seventh day to be kept holy And understand by all this onely that God would have one day of seven not that day of the seven on which himself rested Unlesse it be still more strange that men of common sense should believe that the Jews were not tyed by Gods Law to keep the day on which God rested but onely one of seven so that the keeping of the seventh was not by Gods Law but by mans For if it be once granted that God commanded them to keep not onely one day of seven but in particular the seventh how can any common sense understand that Christians by the same command should be tied to keep the first day of the week If prejudice and faction went not under the colour of zeal to the Scriptures it would appear to be zeal towards our selves and ours that offers such violence to our own sense in seeking to impose this sense upon the Scriptures In plain terms there can be nothing more manifest to Christians in the Law of Moses then it is manifest that the precept of the Sabbath is a ceremonial Precept figuring the rest of Christians from the bondage of sin by doing for the future God works here in the Church militant and from the bondage of pain when that rest is become perfect in the triumphant Church of the World to come And all this by the work of this precept that is by resting from bodily labour in the Land of promise in remembrance of the bondage of Aegypt which the Israelites had escaped For in Deutronomy V. 15. this is the reason alleged why they where to rest Ezek. XX. 12. Ex. XXXI 31. I gave them my Sabbaths to be a sign between me and them that they might know that it is I the Lord their God that sanctifieth them And therefore the Apostle Heb. IV. 4. 5 9 10. showeth the seventh day to signifie the rest of the Land of pâ—oâ—iâ—e For saith he in one place it is said God rested on the seventh day from all his work And here Psalm XCV 11. if they shall enter into my rest For he that is entred into his rest hath ceased from his own works as God from his Therefore there remaineth another rest to the people of God as the Apostle argueth by the same reason as
to limite the extent of the leter so as not to destroy duties of greater consequence And it seems they pitched upon a reasonable ground for a reasonable measure when they made a Sabbath dayes journey so much as the distance of the utmost camp from the Tabernacle in the wildernesse But he that was not within that distance of a Synagogue by going to a Synagogue must violate the Law that saith Thou shalt not stirre out of thy place on the Sabbath It was therefore holinesse to sit still otherwise the service of God must not have been omitted for it Therefore the service of God by those offices which Christians serve him with is no otherwise intimated rather then provided for by the Law then as the Gospel is witnessed rather then inacted by it And it is truly said that God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it in that he appointed his rest in the world to come for those who had rested from their own works here But consequently in that he appointed the rest of the seventh day in the Land of promise to be a figure of it For I take not upon me to say That God hallowed not the seventh day till he gave the Law understanding that which is said at the creation that he blessed and sanctified it by a Prolepsis because he did it when he gave the Law because I need not The designing of the thing signified by it which is more properly the rest of God then not working reflecting the attribute of holinesse upon the day which he designed for the sign of it For in that God rested the seventh day from making all his works he signified that he appointed rest for them that do his work here in the world to come In that delivering his people out of Egypt he appointed them to rest from bodily labour upon the seventh day he signified that he appointed them whom he had given the rest of the promised Land a shadow of resting from their own works to do his the substance whereof is the conversation of Christians in the Church which the Land of promise â—igureth as well here as in the world to come The former appointment is that which the blessing and hallowing of the seventh day at the creation the second that which the hallowing of the same at giving the Law signifieth Nor do I make it my business that the Fathers before the Law did ever keep or not keep the seventh day for Gods service because I neither see evidence for this nor for that For though the remembrance of the seven days of the week is so ancient and so general among all Nations as you may see by that very learned Work de Jure naturae Gentium secundum Ebraeos that you may well conclude it to be a mark and impress of the creation in seven days yet will this argue no observation of it under the Patriarches Because the appropriating of them to the seven Planets though conâ—rived by the Devill to divert that truth to superstition which is the ground of Religion according to the Scripture disables us to argue the creation it selfe from it to those that know it not otherwise much more any rule of Gods service grounded upon it But he that should say that the Sabbath was kept under the law of Nature as it was to be kept under the law of Moses must first answer Tertullian cont Jud. cap. IV. and Justine from whom he hath it and all Fathers that have used it after them and understood the interess of Christianity better then we do Quis legit Abrahamum Sabbatizantem For why should he think to perswade us to such a ridiculous imagination if he have no Scripture for it And therefore though I agree not with Philo that the Jews had forgot which was the seventh day till God recalled the remembrance of it by sending down Manna and therefore said Remember to keep holy the Sabbath yet I do not allow this to be said because they had forgot it by their Apostasy in Egypt where it is plain they forgot their God as I shewed you afore But because they forgot Gods first command at the giving of Manna therefore it is reason they should be charged to remember it for the future As little do I esteem of that meere voluntary presumption that being part of the Decalogue the precept of the Sabbath must needs be part of Gods perpetual Law whither naturall and morall or positive For is it not the Decalogue that saith That thy dayes may belong in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee Or doth the Land of promise in the leter belong to any but Israelites Again the tenth Commandment forbiddeth to covet another mans wise adultery being forbidden afore And therefore to covet another mans wife in the tenth Commandement is to compasse another mans wife which might be done where the Law alloweth divorces as Moses his Law doth If therefore the first and last Commandment of the second Table are by the terms of them appropriated to Gods ancient people is it strange that the precept of the Sabbath should not be thought perpetual to oblige all mankind but Ceremonial to oblige onely the same That there should be a Ceremoniall precept in the first Table of the Decalogue Nay seeing to all mankind it can import no more then a circumstance of time for the publick service of God what reason can be imagined why a precept of that consequence should make one in the first Table of the Decalogue whereas importing to that people the creation of all things by the true God and their deliverance out of Aegypt and by consequence the obligation of his whole Law it is worthily reckoned by the Jews Doctors among the very principall precepts of it As for Christians the literal sense of it is no lesse unlawful for them to observe then it is for them to be circumcised or to undertake the Law of Moses to the which the Sabbath next to circumcision obligeth And by consequence the spirituall sense of it importeth no lesse then the whole duty of a Christian which all ceremonies do figure that is to say resting from our works of sinne and consequently busying our selves about the works of Gods service And therefore I do marvel that those who so obstinately promote this Doctrine are not sensible of the scandall they give to them who have visibly been seduced to keep the Saturday by grounding themselves upon it And may by the same reason be seduced to be circumcised and turn Jewes If yet it be a thing to do and that divers English in these unstable times not distinguishing between that which did and that which doth oblige when they find both in the Scriptures have not hereby been moved to make that change For when they are told that by the leter of the fourth Commandment they are obliged to keep the first day of the week And by common sense discovering a great part of the premises discern that
Easter was then in use And if it can be said that the keeping of Easter for seven dayes from whence in stead of the Heathen names the Christians called the dayes of the week feriam primam secundam septimam and the use to pray standing from Easter to Whitsuntide were not original nor universal customs of the Church but accessory and local yet can it never be said that there was any time or any part of the Church that did not fast before Easter that Fast which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek and quadragefimam in Latine Though I cannot say for forty days as the name seems to import 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying a summ of fifty days in the language of all Jews or Christians that write in Greek For I have not on any hand any satisfaction in the words of Irenaeus the true reading whereof there maintained seemeth to import that in some places they fasted but forty hours before the Feast of the Resurrection Tertullian de Jejuniis cap. XIII objecteth to the Catholicks that they Fasted the Easter Fast citra dies quibus ablatus est sponsus On this side the dayes on which the Bridegroom was taken away More dayes than our Lord was in the grave But that is farr from forty That which is alleged for the forty dayes Fast out of Ignatius is not found in the true Copy Thus farr the solemnity of Easter and the Fast before it appear original But not forty days This will scarce allow that to be true which the learned Selden in his book de Anno Jud. c. XXI produceth of his Eutychius which saith that the Christians after the Ascension of our Lord though they kept Easter when our Lord suffred and rose again yet kept the Fast of forty days immediately after the Epiphany as our Lord after his Baptism which they supposed fell on the day of his birth and that when Demetrius was Bishop of Alexandria by many leters and messages that passed between him and Victor of Rome and the then Patriarchs of Jerusalem and Antiochia it was agreed that the order which hath since prevailed should take place Much less will the said passages of Irenaeus and Tertullian allow that which the book of the Popes lives compiled by Anastasius but out of the records of that Church reports of Telesphorus that hee ordered the Lent Fast for VII weeks afore Easter rather signifying that hee ordered something about it which later authors report according to that which was later in debate For that there was dispute in the time of Pius about keeping Easter that is ending the Fast on the Lords day or according to the Jews may appear by the revelation which Hermes his Pastor pretendeth to that purpose Which Anastasius allegeth to that purpose Therefore though I can allow Eutychius no credit of historical truth when hee agreeth not with authors which have that credit yet in a case where intelligence is wanting I must needs think his relation considerable It is well enough known what Socrates hath discoursed for his opinion that the Lent Fast came in by meer custom not by any Order of the Apostles what hee hath alleged of the visible practice of the Church in his time to that purpose Eccles â—ist V. 21. Sozomenus VII 19. more particularly that the Montanists fasted two weeks some three continual weeks others as much or more weeks as came to three weeks which perhaps may save Socrates his credit reporting that at Rome three weeks if it be true which Peitus hath observed that Leo and S. Austine say that they fasted not the the Tuesdayes and Thursdayes of Lent in their time others in five six or seven More he might have said For the Christians of Syria Aethiopia and the Coptites begin their Ninive a week before Septuagesima That is their forty days fast because Jonas prophesied Yet forty dayes and Ninive shall be destroyed The variety seemes to argue that it came by degrees to this certain number of dayes by the example of the Clergy the freedom of the people and the authority of the Church Which though I shall be glad to be informed further in whether so or otherwise yet having setled from the beginning that the chief difference between the Apostles Orders and those of the Whole Church is the mater of them determinable by common sense and the state of times to conduce or not to conduce to the end of Gods service for which it stands To mee it makes not much difference whether instituted by the Apostles or received by the whole Church the power of the Church manifestly extending to it And the solemnizing thereof being of such inestimable use though not for the instructing of them that stood to be Christians as in the primitive times yet alwayes for the profession and practice of Penance and for the reconciling of sinners to the Communion of the Eucharist at Easter And therefore if I do not apply unto the Forty days Fast as to the Fast before Easter I do apply the rule of S. Austine that those things which the whole Church observeth having no remembrance of the beginning of them must be ascribed to the Tradition of the Apostles yet I do apply unto them that other saying of S. Austine which importeth That to dispute against those things which the whole Church observeth is the height of madnesse Nor is there any thing in that Law unsurable to Christianity but that which the coming of the world into the Church necessarily inforceth That all are constrained to keep it and so good Christians notwithstanding the exception of the sick and impotent may suffer for the refractory and prophane among whom they live Who when it came first in use no doubt were left to themselves and to that which the good example of the Clergy moved them in conscieâ—ce to undergo The Church of England I see for the prejudices which that time was possest with could not undertake to restore the ancient custome of publick Penance at the beginning of Lent But when the Church professeth withall how much it were for the souls health of all that Penance were restored when it prescribeth a Commination against sinners to charge upon particular Consciences to exercise that themselves which for preserving of Unity it undertaketh not to impose upon all when it ordereth those Prayers for the service of that season which cannot be said with a good conscience but by those who in some measure apply themselvs to these exercises well may we grant that the tares of false doctrine springing up with the Reformation have made these wholsome orders of litle effect but it must never be granted that the Church of England maketh either the Lent Fast or other times of fasting superstitiosu As for the difference of meats true it is that S. Paul hath marked those that sorbid mariage that injoyn abistnence from meats which God hath made to be received with thanksgiving by those that believe and
in the judgement of many that think themselves the most refined Christians that they allow it not that common sense in managing the businesse of Christianity which they must needs allow Jews Pagans Mahometans in faithfully serving their own faithlesse suppositions and which all experience shows us that it serves all mankind to what purpose soever it is imployed and that notwithstanding so great a triall of it as the governing of so great a Body as the Church is in unity so farre and so long as this Unity hath prevailed it is therefore necessary to give a reason why the Church so used them Which supposing the premises it will be as easie as it is necessary for me to give and that more sufficient if I mistake not then can possibly be given not supposing the same For if the secret of the resurrection the general judgement and the World to come if the mystery of the Holy Triniâ—y consisting in the Word or Wisdome and Spirit of God if the inward and spiritual service of God in truth of heart be more clearly opened in them by the work of Providence dispensing the effect of Canonicall Scripture by the occurrences of time then in the Law and the Prophets themselves which I have showed both that so it is and why so it is from the ground of the difference between the Old and the New Testament then I suppose there is sufficient reason why those who admit the Old Testament to be made for common edification in the Church should not put any question concerning those Scriptures Those new lights among us who do not allow the Psalter to be pertinently and reasonably imployed for the publick service of God upon all occasions as the Church hath alwaies imployed it may assure us that they understand not why the Scriptures of the Old Testament are read in the Church because they understand not the correspondence between the Old and the New Testament in the understanding whereof the edification of the Church by the Scriptures of the Old Testament consisteth There may be offence taken at divers things in these Scriptures I deny not But there may be offence taken in like maner at divers things in the Canonicall Scriptures of the Old Testament The humility of Christians requires them edifying themselves in that which they understand in the Scriptures according to our common Christianity in the rest which they understand not to refer themselves to their Superiours The Church understood well enough this difference and this correspondence to be discovered by these writings as the time required when it appointed Learners to read them And though I stand not upon terms yet I conceive they are more properly called Ecclesiastical because the Church hath imployed them to be read in the Church then Apocryphal according to the use of that word in the Church to signifie such writings as the Church suspecteth and therefore alloweth not to be read whither in publick or in private Whereupon I conceive also that the term of Canonical Scripture hath and ought to have two senses one when we speak of the Jews Canon in the Old Testament another when we speak of the Canon of the Church For seeing the Tradition of the Synagogue is perfect evidence what Scriptures of the old Testament are to be received as inspired by God the word Canon in that case may well signifie the Rule of our Faith or maners But because the Church cannot pretend to create that evidence originally but onely to transmit what she receiveth from the Synagogue Pretending neverthelesse to give a Rule what shall be read for the edification of the Church the word Canon therefore in that case will signifie onely the list or Catalogue of Scriptures which the Church appoints to be read in the Church which seems to reconcile the diverse accounts extant in severall Records of the Church CHAP. XXIII The consideration of the Eucharist prescribed by Tradition for the mater of it Lords Prayer prescribed in all services The mater of Prayers for all estates prescribed The form of Baptism necessary to be prescribed The same reason holdeth in the forms of other Offices IN the next place I do maintain that the Order of celebrating the Eucharist and the Prayer which it was was from the beginning solemnized with were from the beginning prescribed the Church by unwritten custome that is by Tradition from the Apoâ—â—les containing though not so many words that it was not lawful to use more or lesse for these were always occasions for celebrating the Eucharist emergent which must be intimated in fewer or more words in the celebrating of it yet the mater and substance of the Consecration of it together with the mater and substance of the necessities of the Church for which it was offered that is to say for which the Church was and is to pray at the celebration of it as hoping to obtain them by the sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross which it representeth as received from the beginning was every were known to be the same This I inferr from that which I have said in the Book afore quoted of those Texts of S. Paul where those Prayers of the Church which the Eucharist is consecrated with are called Eucharistia or Thanksgiving if not rather the thanksgiving because it was a certain form of Thanksgiving well known to all Christians by that name from whence the Sacrament â—o consecrated was also so called from the time that our Lord hâ—ing blessed or given thanks to the Father over the Elements had said This is my body this is my blood and order is given that at the celebration thereof Prayers be made for the necessities of the Church and of all people 1 Cor. XIV 25. 26. 1 Tiâ—â— II. 1-8 Together with those passages of primitive antiquity from whence it appeareth there that the form of consecrating the Eucharist used and known generally in the Church is called Eucharistia and that the custome of interceding for all the necessities of the Church and for the reducing of unbelievers to the same is and hath been taken up and ever frequented by the Church in obedience to and prosecution of the said precept of the Apostles This observation might perhaps be thought too obscure evidence â—o bring to light a point of this consequence were it not justified by all that I produced afore to show that the Eucharist is consecrated by the Prayers of the Church which celebrateth it upon the faith of our Lords institution and promise For the mater of these Prayers tending to a certain purpose that the Elements may become the Body and Blood of Christ and convay his Spirit to those who receive them with living faith the Consecration which is the effect of them requires that the form of them be prescript and certain though not in number of words yet in sense in tent and substance And this by the evidence there produced may appear to have been maintained from the beginning by Tradition in
vulgarly understood and that for the communion as well as for the sacrifice it must further be provided that this Communion be complete in both kinds in which the Sacrament is celebrated not barring the people of the Cup as it is the custome in the Church of Rome to do And truly there is not so much marvell at any thing in difference as there is why it hath been thought fit to make this the cause of so great a breach For the precept running in those terms which take hold of them who are obliged by it that is of the whole Church consisting of Clergy and people both alike because I have showed that do this in remembrance of me concerns the whole Church by the prayers whereof it is consecrated How will it be possible to make any humane understanding capable to comprehend that when our Lord saith take eat drinke do this the people shall stand charged onely with part of it Indeed had there been any limitation of the Law-givers intent expressed either by way of precept as this lies or by the practice of the Church originally under the Apostles and generally throughout Christendom there might have been pretense for dispute And it must not be denied that there have been those that have attempted to show that the Apostles so used it even in the Scriptures But by such means as if they meant not indeed to prove it for a truth but to show how willingly they would gratifie those who would be glad to see it proved whether true or false And do therefore sort to no other effect then to make it appear that their desire to prove it out of the Scripture was farr greater then the Scripture gave them cause to cherish For were breaking of bread put a thousand times in the Scripture for celebrating the Eucharist as sometimes it is put Act. II. 42. 45. XX. 7. at least for those Suppers at which the Eucharist was celebrated what would this avail unlesse we could be perswaded that as oft as breaking of bread is put for eating there we are to understand that there was no drink Or unlesse we could understand by one and the same term of breaking bread that all Priests had drink as well as bread but the Lay people none Therefore whatsoever advantage it may be in regard it is certain that the greatest part of the world will never be wise to make a noise with any plea though never so unprobable rather then be thought to have nothing to say men of judgement and conscience must needs take it for a confession that there is no ground for it in the Scriptures to see things alleged so farr from all appearance of truth As for the practice of the Catholick Church I may very well remit all that desire to inform and not to scandalize themselves to those things which Cassander hath which much learning collected as sufficient to make it appear if any thing that men are unwilling to see can be made to appear that as to this day there is no such custom in the Eastern Church so in the Western Church it is not many ages since it can be called a custom And that by so visible degrees introduced as may be an undeniable instance to make evidence that corruption may creep into the Laws and customs of the Church though by those degrees which are not alwayes visible Indeed it is alleged that there are some natures found in the world that can by no means indure the taste of wine which therefore some men call abstemious without casting it back again â—nd induring as great pangs as men are seen to indure that are forced or couâ—ened to eat things which they hate So that to force such natures to receive the Sacrament in both kinds were to destroy the reverence due to it both in them who receive it and in them that shall see it used with no more reverence It is alleged again That Christianity goes further than wine That is That some Christian Nations dwell in Countries so untemperately cold that wine will not keep in their Countries but changes as soon as it comes Now as no reason appeareth why the Sacrament should not be celebrated for the use of those people who cannot receive it in both kinds Neither can any reason appear why other people receiving it in one kinde should not receive the same benefit by it which they do Last of all it is alleged that in the primitive Church it was many times received by the people in one kinde upon several occasions For in regard that Christians could not alwayes be prâ—sent at the celebrating therâ—oâ— when there was not such means as have since been provided especially those who were maried to unbelievers it was a custom to send them the Communion who were known to joyn with the devotion of the Church though hindred to joyn therewith in bodily presence as wee learn by Justiâ—e Martyrs second Apology And because in the quality of wine a litle quantity is not to be preserved as preserve it they did besides other reasons to take it Fasting therefore it was sent onely in the other kinde as wee finde by Tertullian writing to his wife Again if a man that was under Penance fell in danger of departing this life before hee was reconciled to the Church by receiving the Communion again which by this one instance wee may see how much the primitive Christians abominated to do As the Law of the Church was that they should not be refused the Communion in that case So the custom was for the same reason to send it them onely in one kinde as appeareth by an eminent example related from Dionysius of Alexandria by Eusebius Hist Eccles VI. 44. But these instances if they be looked into will appear to be of the same consequence as if it should be alleged to a Jew that if two Jews should turn back to back and go one of them East the other West till they came to meet again howsoever this may be possible to be done seeing when they meet again if the one count Saturday the other must needs count Sunday as appears evidently by the reason of the Sphere and the dayly motion of the Sun round the earth therefore they cannot both keep the Sabbath upon the day which the Law appoints therefore it is in the power of the Synagogue to appoint that no Sabbath be kept Or because during the forty years travail of the Israelites through the Wilderness to the Land of Promise their children were not circumcised by reason that they knew not when they should be summoned to remove by the moving of the cloud that was over the Tabernacle which they were alwayes to be ready to do Therefore it was in the power of the Synagogue to dispense with the circumcision of male children under the Law of Moses Positive precepts they are all that of circumcision and that of the Sabbath as well as this of the Eucharist Neither can it
it could be the same crime in them to worship the true God under an image as in the Gentiles to worship the elements of the world dead men imaginations in effect the Devile under the like image They made a calfe in Horeb and worshiped the molten image Thus they turned their glory into the similitude of a Calfe that eateth hay saith David Psalme CVI. 19. 20 of this act of the Isralites They changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man and to birds and four footed beasts and creeping things saith S. Paul Rom. I. 23. of the Gentiles who as I have showed did truly intend to worship those creatures for Gods And therefore must conclude that whatsoever Aaron might pretend to represent to the Israelits by this Calfe that they intended to worship for God And when the Israelites joined themselves to Baal Peor and ate the offerings of the dead Psal CVI. 23 Num. XXV 3-8 and Moses commandeth to hang up the Princes and the Judges to slay every one his man that were joyned to Baal Peor Phineas out of his zeale to God executeth his command not out of a private inspiration whereof nothing could appeare as hath fondly and perniciously been imagined and killeth a Prince among the Israelites But when Moses comming downe from the mount saw the calfe made he caused the Levites to revenge the fault by slaying three thousand of those that were guilty of it Ex. XXXII 25-30 And is it possible for any man to believe that the same punishment is assigned by God to the offering of sacrifices to a dead man as to the offering of it to the living God under or before an image Not that I intend to say this of Aaron or what his intention might be in complying with them and avoiding their mutiny without ever imbracing in his heart that idolatry to which he pretended to conâ—urre with them nor will I much contend with him that shall say he chose that figure which might represent something concurring to that worship of God which himselfe had commanded but the act of them that mutinousely constrained him to make them a God to goe before them I can by no meanes distinguish from the idolatries of Egypt which it was but late that they had forsaken As for Jeroboam it is most truly alleged that nothing obliged him to demand of the Isralites to worship any false God or to require of them more then Aaron had done upon their motion concurring himselfe to their Idolatry But then I must say also that by setting up his calves and constraining the people to resort to them for that worship which the Law obliged them to tender to God he certainely knewe that he must needs occasion the greatest part of the people to worship an other God besides the true God howsoever some of them might do that which Aaron had done in concurring with the rest of their people And perhaps the truth is that Jeroboam for this reason made choice of the same image wherein Aaron had offended afore But otherwise the appearance of the Idolatry of the gentiles in the act of Jeroboam that is in the service tendred his calves is evident in the scripture Otherwise how should the prophet Ahiah charge him that he had set up other Gods and molten images and groves 2. Kings XIV 9 15 16. as by Jeroboams owne fin And Baasha that walked in the way of Jeroboam 2. Kings XV. 24. as did also Omri after him 1 Kings XVI 26. are said to have provoked the Lord God of Israell to anger with their vanities 1. Kings XVI 13. 26. And Abia reproches Jeroboam 1 Chron. XIII 9. and his party that they had made them Pristes after the manner of the nations and other lands so that whosoever cometh to fill his hand with a bullock and seven Rames may be a Priest of no Gods For what are vanities or no gods but imaginary deities as Saint Paul saith that he preached to the Gentiles to turn from those vanities unto the living God Acts XIV 15. And the Prophet Jonas in his prayer II. 8. they that observe lying vanities forsake their own mercy And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in David Psal XXXII 7. Lying vanities is the same that S. Pauls ly when he saith the Gentiles changed the truth of God into a ly in worshipping the creature besides the creator God blessed for evermore Rom. I. 25. So also Deut. XXXII 22. 2 Kings XVII 15. Jeremy II. 5. VIII 19. X. 15. XIV 22. And why should the Prophet Osee object VIII 6. The workman made it therefore it is not God but the calf of Samaria shall be broken in pieces Had not the calfe been taken for God And againe Os XIII 2. They say of them let the men that sacrifice kisse the calves For that this kissing was a signe of worshipping that which was taken to be God you have from Job XXXI 26 27. If I beheld the Sunne when it shined or the Moone walking in her height and my heart hath been seduced and my mouth hath kissed my hand The Sunne and the Moone being at a distance because they whose hearts were seduced to think them gods could not kisse them they kissed their hands to them in signe that they honoured them for gods Therefore they that kissed the calves whom they might come nigh did it in signe that they honoured them for gods As the answer of God to Elias saith I have reserved my self seven thousand men all the knees that have not bowed unto Baal all the mouthes that have not kissed him 1 Kings XIX 18. And therefore it seemeth very probable that these calves are also called Baalim by the said Prophet when he saith Osee XIII 1 2. When Ephraim offended in Baal he died And now they sin more and more and have made them molten images of their silver and Idols according to their own understanding all of it the work of craftsmen They say of them let the men that sacrifice kisse the calves The author of Tobit is for his antiquity more to be credited in the understanding of the Scriptures then all the conjectures we can make at this distance of time And he saith that the ten tribes went up to offer sacrifice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tobit I. 5. to the heifer Baal Whereupon it is thought that S. Paul also when he quoteth the answer of God to Elias 1 Kings XIX 18. I have reserved my self seven thousand men that have not bowed the knee to Baal in the feminine gender 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. XI 4. referreth to the feminine substantive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if these calves were of the nature of Baalim it cannot be denied that they signified imaginary godheads such as the Baalim were Wherefore when it is objected in the first place that Aaron proclaimed a feast to the Lord by the name of the true God and that both he and Jeroboam said This is the
for poor soules that they receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist They who depart from the Church that they may minister the Sacraments on such grounds and to such effects as the Church allowes not incurre the nullities and sacriledges which departing from the Church inferreth But if beside the Faith of the Church the authority of the Church be supposed to the effect of the Sacraments how shall the Sacraments be Sacraments though ministred upon profession of the true Faith where no authority of the Church can be pretended for the ministring of them Or where it can onely be pretended but is indeed usurped and void Posterity will never forget that there are in a Land inhabited by Christians called England Country Parishes in which the Sacraments have not been ministred for so many years as the order of the Church of England hath been superseded by the late warre If the Word and Sacraments be the marks of the Church what pretense for a Church where there is indeed a pretense of the Word though no presumption that it is Gods but of Sacraments not so much as a pretense What hath the rest of England deserved of the Congregations or of the Presbyteries that they should be left destitute of the meanes of salvation because they cannot see reason to be of Congregations or Presbyteries Lay men preach and Lay men go to Church to hear them preach because they cannot preach themselves at home to their families The horror of profaning the Sacraments of the Church by Sacriledge is yet alive to make them tremble still at usurping to celebrate the Sacrament of the Eucharist But will those Lay men that preach answer for the Lay mens soules to whom they preach that they have sufficient means of salvation by hearing them preach being of no Church that might answer that it is Gods Word which they preach ministring no Sacraments for a mark of the Church Is it possible a Christian should hold himself able to preach who holds not himself able to baptize Or is it the appetite of devouring consecrated goods that insnares men to preach who when it comes to baptizing had rather let innocent soules perish then own the authority of the Church which inables every Christian to baptize in case of necessity because they know they usurp the office of preaching without authority from the Church It is I that have said that a Lay man may be authorized to preach by the Church And I believe still I said true in it But shall I therefore answer for him that preacheth without authority from the Church Should he preach by authority from the Church there were presumption for his hearers that it is the Word of God which the Church authorizeth When he preacheth without authority from the Church shall he not answer for the soules whom he warrants salvation by his preaching without Church or Word or Sacraments But these are not the Godly Those that know themselves such are thereby authorized to retire themselves into Congregations that they may injoy the purity of the Ordinances It is then mens Godlinesse that inables them to forsake the Church and betake themselves into Congregations And indeed I know an Oxford Doctor who to prove himselfe no Schismaticke for it hath alledged that he can be no Schismatick because he knowes himself to be Godly and to have Gods Spirit I deny not that he hath alledged other reasons why he is no Schismaticke the ground whereof I considered afore But what Quaker could not have alledged the Spirit of God as well as he And did not he who pretends himself Christ alledge reasons for it as well as pretend the Spirit A nice mistake it is to imagine that a Christian is to accept the Scriptures for the Word of God because the Spirit of God assures him that so they are For of a truth untill the Spirit of God move him to be a Christian he accepteth them not for such When it doth he is moved so to accept them by the Spirit of God as by the effective cause But for reasons which though contained in the Scriptures yet were they not visibly true before a man can accept the Scriptures for the Word of God he could never so accept them by Gods Spirit Unlesse we can imagine the virtue of Gods Spirit not to depend upon the preaching of his Gospel which I suppose onely Enthusiasts do imagine Nor doth the Spirit of God distinguish to any Christian the Apochrypha from Canonicall Scripture but by such meanes as may make the difference visible No more doth it assure him that he is a good Christian but upon the knowledge of such resolutions and actions wherein Christianity consisteth If it be requisite to make a man no Schismatick that it be not his own fault that he is not of the Catholicke Church If he perswade himselfe upon unsufficient reasons that there is no such thing by Gods Law as the visible body of a Catholick Church Just it is with God to leave such a one to thinke it Gods Spirit that assures him a godly man being a Schismatick It is not therefore supposition of invisible godlinesse that can priviledge men to withdraw themselves from the Church into Congregations supposing such a thing as a Catholicke Church The purity being invisible but the barre to it separation from Gods Church visible the Ordinances for which they separate will remaine their own Ordinances not Gods The Presbyterians sometimes pleade their Ordination in the Church of England for the authority by which they ordaine others against the Church of England to doe that which they received authority from the Church of England to doe provided that according to the order of it A thing so ridiculously senselesse that common reason refuseth it Can any State any society doe an act bâ— virtue whereof there shall be right and authority to destroy it Can the Ordination of the Church of England proceeding upon supposition of a solemne promise before God and his Church to execute the ministery a man receiveth according to the Order of it inable him to doe that which he was never ordained to doe Shall he by failing of his promise by the act of that power which supposed his promise receive authority to destroy it Then let a man obtaine the kingdome of heaven by transgressing that Christianity by the undertaking whereof he obtained right to it They are therefore meere Congregations voluntarily constituted by the will of those all whose acts even in the sphere of their ministery once received are become voide by theire failing of that promise in consideration whereof they were promoted to it Voide I say not of the crime of Sacrilege towards God which the usurpation of Core constituteth but of the effect of Grace towardes his people For the like voluntary combining of them into Presbyteries and Synodes createth but the same equivocation of wordes when they are called Churches to signify that which is visible by their usurpation in point of fact
who create the parties by heading the division have to look about them least they become guilty of the greatest part of soules which in reason must needs perish by the extremities in which it consisteth And the representing of the grounds thereof unto the parties though it may seem an office unnecessary for a private Christian to undertake yet seemeth to me so free from all imputation of offense in discharging of our common Christianity and the obligation of it that I am no lesse willing to undergoe any offense which it may bring upon me then I am to want the advantages which allowing the present Reformation might give me In the mean time I remaine obliged not to repent me of the resolution of my nonage to remaine in the communion of the Church of England There I find an authority visibly derived from the act of the Apostles by meanes of their successors Nor ought it to be of force to question the validity thereof that the Church of Rome and the communion thereof acknowledgeth not the Ordinations and other Acts which are done by virtue of it as done without the consent of the whole Church which it is true did visibly concurre to the authorizing of all acts done by the Clergy as constituted by virtue of those Lawes which all did acknowledge and under the profession of executing the offices of their severall orders according to the same For the issue of that dispute will be triable by the cause of limiting the exercise of them to those termes which the Reformation thereof containeth which if they prove such as the common Christianity expressed in the Scriptures expounded by the original practice of the whole Church renders necessary to be maintained notwithstanding the rest of the Church agree not in them the blame of separation that hath insued thereupon will not be chargeable upon them that retire themselves to them for the salvation of Christian soules but on them who refuse all reasonable compliance in concurring to that which may seem any way tollerable But towards that triall that which hath been said must suffice The substance of that Christianity which all must be saved by when all disputes and decrees and contradictions are at an end is more properly maintained in that simplicity which all that are concerned are capable of by the terms of that Baptisme which it ministreth requiring the profession of them from all that are confirmed at years of discretion then all the disputes on both sides then all decrees on the one side all confessions of faith on the other side have been able to deliver it And I conceive I have some ground to say so great a word having been able by limiting the term of justifying faith in the writings of the Apostles according to the same to resolve upon what termes both sides are to agree if they will not set up the rest of their division upon something which the truth of Christianity justifieth not on either side For by admitting Christianity that is the sincere profession thereof to be the Faith which onely justifyeth in the writings of the Apostles whatsoever is in difference as concerning the Covenant of Grace is resolved without prejudicing either the necessity of Grace to the undertaking the performing the accepting of it for the reward or the necessity of good works in consideration for the same The substance of Chrianity about which there is any difference being thus secured there remaines no question concerning Baptisme and the Eucharist to the effect for which they are instituted being ministred upon this ground and the profession of it with the form which the Catholick Church requireth to the consecration of the Eucharist Nor doth the Church of England either make Sacraments of the rest of the seven or abolish the Offices because the Church of Rome makes them Sacraments Nor wanteth it an order for the daily morning and evening service of God for the celebration of Festivalls and times of Fasting for the observation of ceremonies fit to create that devotion and reverence which they signify to vulgar understandings in the service of God But praying to Saints and worshipping of Images or of the Eucharist Prayers for the delivery of the dead out of Purgatory the Communion in one kind Masses without Communions being additions to or detractions from that simplicity of Gods service which the originall order of the Church delivereth visible to common reason comparing the present order of the Church of Rome with the Scriptures and primitive records of the Church there is no cause to think that the Catholick Church is disowned by laying them aside It is true it was an extraordinary act of Secular Power in Church maters to inforce the change without any consent from the greater part of the Church But if the matter of the change be the restoring of Lawes which our common Christianity as well as the Primitive orders of the Church of both which Christian Powers are borne Protectors make requisite the secular power acteth within the sphere of it and the division is not imputable to them that make the change but to them that refuse their concurrence to it Well had it been had that most pious and necessary desire thereof to restore publick Penance been seconded by the zeal and compliance of all estates and not stifled by the tares of Puritanisme growing up with the Reformation of it For as there can be no just pretense of Reformation when the effect of it is not the frequentation of Gods publick service in that forme which it restoreth but the suppressing of it in that form which it rejecteth So the communion of the Eucharist being the chiefe office in which it consisteth the abolishing of private Masses is an unsusticient pretense for Reformation where that provision for the frequenting of the communion is not made which the restoring of the order in force before private Masses came in requireth Nor can any meane be imagined to maintaine continuall communion with that purity of conscience which the holinesse of Christianity requireth but the restoring of Penance In fine if any thing may have been defective or amisse in that order which the Church of England establisheth it is but justice to compare it in grosse with both extreames which it avoideth and considering that it is not in any private man to make the body of the Church such as thâ—y could wish to serve God with to rest content in that he is not obliged to become a party to those things which he approves not conforming himself to the order in force in hope of that grace which communion with the Church in the offices of Gods service promiseth For consider againe what meanes of salvation all Christians have by communion with the Church of Rome All are bound to be at Masse on every Festivall day but to say onely so many Paters and so many Aves as belong to the hour Not to assist with their devotions that which they understand not much lesse