nor all-sufficient Do not you think he may be worshipped through a picture which himself hath so expresly forbidden for that is in effect to deny him to be your Soveraign Lord. For if he be the Lord ascribe unto him that worship and honour which himself hath commanded not that which himself hath forbidden because you cannot ascribe unto the Lord the honour due unto his Name whiles you do not ascribe unto him the honour due unto his Nature that is the honour of being the Lord For this is to say unto him Lord Lord according to the letter of the first Commandement whiles by your breaches of the second you force him to say unto you I know you not depart from me ye workers of iniquity so far is it from Truth That Christians well instructed in the first cannot through ignotance offend against the second Commandement yet I will strive to make it true for truths sake by annexing to it this supposition if they exactly follow the instructions given them in the first Commandement for then clearly they will know God too well either to worship him by an image or to worship any image instead of him But now this your own assertion like a rebellious subject will take up arms against you for by the Rule of Logick which proceeds from the eversion of the Consequent to the eversion of the Antecedent it may be proved that notwithstanding all your great boasts of being so well instructed in the first Commandement you have not well received or not well followed those instructions because you have not rightly received and followed the prohibition of the second For if the first Commandement were in truth rightly understood and obeyed amongst you according to your own negative Thou shalt not have strange Gods before me and according to your own affirmative Thou shalt have me only for thy true God you would not be so zealous as you are to bestow religious worship upon your petty Deities for that is to have strange Gods not him only for your God nor would you be so ready to represent or worship the eternal Deitie through a picture for that is not to have him for the true God since undenyable is that of the Apostle God that made the world and all things therein seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth dwelleth not in Temples made with hands Acts 17. 24. And if not in Temples then sure not in Images made with hands yet take away this crude and carnal thought that the Creator is like the creature to be confined or comprehended in his dwelling which is against the very light of nature and much more against the light of grace and you will not easily be Idolators either in worshipping him by an Image or in worshipping an image instead of him So that from your not honoring God rightly according to the Prohibition of the second we have reason to fear you do not honour him rightly according to the instruction of the first Commandement For even Damascene himself though a great admirer of other Images yet allows not any to make the Image of God but saith lib. 4. de Orthod fide c. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who can make a representation of the invisible incorporeal God which can neither be described nor defined it is then the height of madness and of wickedness to make any form or picture of the Deity Therefore Christ as God is not to be represented much less worshipped by a picture and consequently your application of divine worship through his pictures unto him may easily be convinced of Idolatry 12. I next come to your third position which concerns the worshipping of Saints and Angels for they are to be Religiously worshipped before their pictures and if not they then not their pictures since therefore all moral duties that are performed without us are reduced by our blessed Saviour to these two Heads Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self Saint Mat. 22. I ask To which of these two you will reduce your Religious worshipping of Saints and Angels If to the first say there is more then one God and you can love more then one God with all your heart If to the second do not talk of a Religious worship for no man yet ever worshipped himself with a Religious worship and you are to love your neighbour but as your self not as your God For since God hath called All but himself your neighbour how can you call Any but himself your God whiles you worship him as your God by a Religious worship Can you think that Job did not intend that of every other creature whatsoever which he spake of the Sun Moon because the Heathen bestowed their Religious worship on them as not knowing any creature more glorious then them for they knew nothing of the Angels or glorified Saints If mine heart hath been secretly enticed or my mouth hath kissed my hand This also were an iniquity to be punished by the Judge Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iniquitas judicans vel judicialis digna quae à Judice puniatur an iniquity to be punished by the Judge of quick and dead since it is a Judged Case in his own Court since he himself hath judged it to be an iniquity For I should have denyed the God that is above Here is the Religious worship which calleth the creature the Creator for so saith Jarchi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If I have worshipped the Sun or Moon saying they are Gods And here is the iniquity that cannot escape Judgement for this calling the creature the Creator is to deny the God that is above so saith 〈◊〉 I should have denyed the 〈◊〉 â—…at is above The meaning is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The God that is above these two great lights The Hebrew words will yet bear another interpretation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For I should have lyed against the God above Hence Idolatry is called mendacium perniciosum a pernicious lye by your own Reginaldus Scandalous to men injurious to God directly against the honour due unto him which is not communicable to any but to himself Regin lib. 16. cap. 14. sec. 3. Idolatry is therefore called a Lye in Job a pernicious lye in Reginaldus because it communicates that honour to the creature which is due only to the Creator And according to this Principle The Religious worship of Saints and Angels must be called Idolatry For to worship them Religiously is to Communicate to them the honour of God it is to say they are Gods And to say they are Gods is to lye both to God and man for it is to deny the God that is above them and to deceive the men that are amongst us For it is vam here to talk of inferiour degrees of worship since Magis minus non variat speciâ—… if it be Religious worship properly so called the least degree of it is Religious
have made my heart clean I am pure from my sin He that hath made the best use thereof is most concerned in it and comprehended under it therefore he cannot say I have made my heart clean I am pure from my sins but he must lye to the Holy Ghost and be so far from cleansing his heart as immediatly to let in many unclean spirits the more to defile it For those two which God hath joyned together all the wit and power of man cannot put asunder even Satans filling the heart and lying to the Holy Ghost why hath Satan filled thy heart to lye to the Holy Ghost Acts 5. 3. And if Satan filleth the heart of those who make this lye then sure he also filleth the mouth of those who tell it And therefore the Church of God which is the pillar and ground of the Truth very much abhorreth this lye making this confession of her natural corruptions But we are all as an unclean thing Facti sumus ut Immundus omnes nos so the Hebrew and Chaldee in the singular number we are all but as one unclean man to shew the Uncleanness was from nature which was as equally derived to All as if all had been but one and making this confession of her personal corruptions which proceeded from the natural and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags Isa. 64. 6. Wherefore since Protestants and Papists both agree together in the former part of this confession as a Principle of Divinity 't is irrational in the Papists to disagree from Protestants in the latter part of it which is but a conclusion proceeding from this Principle For the natural corruption is the cause of the personal and therefore all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags because we are all as an unclean thing This being the full argumentation All who are unclean have an unclean righteousnesse but we all are unclean therefore we all have an unclean righteousnesse Quia opus justitiae immundatur inquinamento as saith Aquinas because our righteousnesse is defiled by our unrighteousnesse and by this we may fully understand that other text If we say that we have no sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us 1 Joh. 1. 8. For we are clearly guilty of a double lye one against our own souls we deceive our selves another against the Holy Ghost the Spirit of truth and the truth is not in us Both are such pernicious lyes as to bring upon us inevitable destruction for he that willingly deceives his own soul cares not for knowing the truth he that strives to deceive the Holy Ghost cannot come to know it For as he hath not the truth in him in that he deceiveth himself so he keepeth the Spirit of truth away from him that he may deceive himself for ever Nor can we possibly use any evasion upon this text as if some men might say they have no sin though others cannot for he must think himselfe better than the best of Saints the Disciple whom Jesus loved and questionlesse he had a very good reason of his love who will needs say he hath no sin though by saying so he is sure to prove himself worse than the worst of sinners for he maketh him a lyar who hath promised forgiveness of sins and he maketh his Word a lye which hath shewed our need or want of that forgiveness for in many things we offend all Jam. 3. 2. and he putteth himself out of their communion who alone obtain forgiveness even the communion of true penitents of whom it is said If we confesse our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins 1 Joh. 1. 9. he that denyes himself to be one of this number denyes himself to be one of the communion of Saints unless St. John and St. James were no Saints and consequently makes himself uncapable of the forgiveness of sins Thus doth the second Milevitane Council gloss the words of St. John that they were not spoken out of humility but out of necessity and that the greatest the necessity of Truth Satis apparet hoc non tantum humiliter sed etiam veraciter dici Poterat enim Apostolus dicere Si dixerimus quia non habemus peccatum nos ipsos extollimus humilitas in nobis non est sed quùm ait nos ipsos decipimus veritas in nobis non est satis ostendit eum qui se dixerit non habere peccatum non verum loqui sed falsum It is evident that this was spoken not only out of modesty but also out of truth for the Apostle might have said If we say that we have no sin we extol our selves and there is no humility in us But when he saith we deceive our selves and there is no truth in us he sufficiently sheweth that whosoever saith there is no sin in him doth not speak truly but falsly And thus also doth the same Council gloss the words of St. James saying The Apostle was holy and just when he said in many things we offend All for why did he add this particle All but to shew that he agreed with the Psalmist who had said Enter not into judgement with thy servant for in thy sight shall no man living be justified Psal. 142. 2. and with Solomon who had said There is no man that sinneth not 1 King 8. 46. And with Daniel who had said We have sinned and have committed iniquity Dan. 9. 5. and afterwards added ver 20. whiles I was confessing my sins and the sins of my people he would not say Our sins but My sins and the sins of my people because he did foresee by the Spirit of Prophecy that some in after ages would be ready to put him and such as he nay indeed much worse transgressours out of the catalogue or number of sinners Quia futuros istos qui tam malè intelligerent tanquam Propheta praevidit And at last upon these and the like proofes the same Council denounceth a terrible curse against those who should dare affirme that forgive us our trespasses was said by the Saints rather humbly than truly quis enim ferat orantem non hominibus sed ipsi Domino mentientem qui labiis sibi dicit dimitti velle corde dicit quae sibi dimittantur se debita non habere For say those Fathers who can endure that a man in his prayers should tell a lye not to man but to God saying with his mouth Forgive us our trespasses and saying in his heart he had no trespasses to be forgiven him Thus we have the authority of the Scripture and the authority of the Church both agreeing together in this doctrine That all men are sinners And though this was but a particular National Council in it self yet was it Universal and Oecumenical in its authority as consisting of Catholick Bishops amongst the rest Alipius and St. Augustine as appeares by the Synodical Epistle to Innocent the first and having been approved by the Catholick
A Christian Vindication OF TRUTH Against ERROUR Concerning these Seven Controversies 1. Of Sinners Prayers 2. Of Priests Marriage 3. Of Purgatory 4. Of the second Commandment and Images 5. Of praying to Saints and Angels 6. Of Justification by Faith 7. Of Christs New Testament or Covenant By Edw. Hide D. D. sometimes Fellow of T. C. in Cambridge and late Rector Resident of Brightwell in Berks. Holding forth the faithful word as he hath been taught that he may be able by sound Doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers Tit. 1. 9. Idcirco doctrinam Catholicam contradicentium obsidet impugnatio ut fides nostra non torpescat otio sed multis exercitationibus elimetur Aug. Serm. 98. de Tempore London Printed by R. White for Richard Davis Bookseller in Oxford 1659. The General Contents of each Chapter CAp. 1. Of Sinners prayers p. 1. 2. Of Priests Marriage p. 13. 3. Of Purgatory p. 69. 4. Of the Second Commandement and against Images p. 129. 5. Of Praying to Saints and Angels p. 245. 6. Of Justification p. 359. 7. Of Christs New Testament or Covenant p. 471. Courteous Reader The pages above-mentioned will shew theâ—… the full Contents of all particulars handled in each Chapter TO THE Christian Reader HE that writes Devotion is like to please all good Christians and is sure to please himself because he walks with God in whose presence is joy and at whose right hand are pleasures for evermore But he that writes Controversie is sure to displease many even all that are either Unchristian as coming short of Religion or Antichristian as going beyond or against it and cannot easily please himself because he walks among briers and thorns which may entangle but must annoy and offend his footing I did little think when I took some few steps in Golgotha to teach my self and prepare others how to dye That I should have met with thorns instead of dead mens skuls though I made a publick impression of those steps in my Christian Legacie for others the more plainly to see and the more easily to follow them But such is the contentiousness of this carping and quarreling age That it turneth even Devotion it self into controversie and no wonder then if it turn controversie into contention and contention into bloodshed Let the Apostle cry never so lowd Foolish and unlearned questions avoid knowing that they do gender strifes And the servant of Christ must not strive 2 Tim. 2. yet this captious world will afford more questions concerning strife then Godliness not considering that the Spirit of God calleth them foolish and unlearned questions though they be invented with never so much wit and maintained with never so great learning And such I think are most of these ensuing questions raised by so many exceptions lately brought against the doctrine and practice of the Church of England by one G. B. neerly devoted to the Church of Rome 1. Of Gods hearing the Prayers of Heathens for what is that to Christians 2. Of Purgatory for what is that to the Christian Faith 3. Of Priests marriage for what is that to the Christian Religion 4. Of worshiping Images for they are both directly against Religion. 5. Of Praying to Saints 6. Of Justification by works for that 's against Faith in Christ. 7. Of Quarrelling about the words of Testament and Covenant for that 's at least vain if not profane or sinful babling As t is meerly upon words so t is vain as t is quarrelling upon those words so it may easily be sinful For he that saith Hold fast the form of sound words 2 Tim. 1. 13. bids us stand upon Propositions which signifie true or false not upon single Terms which are unsignificant as to the Truth whether speculative or practick for there can be neither Faith nor Love in them yet I have endeavoured to make the Answers to these Questions though grounded on such unnecessary exceptions to contain some very necessary and sound Divinity for which purpose I have put them into large Chapters and have assigned to each Chapter large Contents being resolved to answer the Cause for the satisfaction of others rather then the Objection for the vindication ofmy self And I think I had a good occasion and a better reason so to do for though our Brethren most oppress us yet our Adversaries most revile us and therefore every true Son much more Servant of this distressed Church ought to believe and observe his Church now speaking to him in the language of St. Paul Be not thou therefore ashamed of the Testimony of the Lord nor of me his Prisoner but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the Gospel according to the Power of God 2 Tim. 1. 8. He that is ashamed of his Religion is ashamed of the Testimony of the Lord He that forsakes his Church when she is the Lords Prisoner did hypocritically follow her when she was the Lords free Servant and refusing to partake in the afflictions of the Gospel shews he embraced the Gospel according to the custom of men not according to the Power of God But the Word of God is not bound 2 Tim. 2. 9. These Truths which we profess according to Gods word will alwaies be professed to the worlds end though with less visibility yet not with less constancy and if Protestants shall go from them Papists shall return to them For God that can raise Children out of Stones will never be without witness among his own children and I look upon all Christians at large as his children though only upon good Christians as his dutiful children And if they should hold their peace the very stones would speak crying Hosanna to the Son of David our blessed Saviour ascribing unto him the Truth of our Religion and the honour of our Salvation And we desire no more may obtain no less Let our adversaries shew any one Tenent or Practice wherein we of this Church leave them to be more for the honour of Christ then that which we embrace and we will acknowledge our selves the worser Christians nor be any longer in that particular Protestant against them but detestant of our selves But till they can shew that we beseech them to shew themselves good Christians in not railing and raging against us for being so because we cannot think God hath given any Church Dominion over Religion or his Servant power above his Son yet men of their perswasion then most call to be answered when they least resolve to be satisfied disiring only to hinder Orthodox Ministers from confirming Protestants because they have power by prohibiting their own Proselites the use of their Books to hinder them from converting Papists yet for my part I should not have laid open the corrupt doctrines and practices of Popery had I not been constrained to vindicate Protestancy for I had rather spend my time and zeal about doctrines of Conscience the of Contestation or of Corruption and these for the most part are both
Gods but me the last Thou shalt not covet Primum est Non habebis Deos alienos coram me Ultimum Non concupisces whereas if his Church had then followed Saint Augustines division or account he must have said not ultimum but duo ultima Non concupises not the last but the two last are Thou shalt not covet For Saint Augustine takes Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours house for one and Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours wife for another Commandement But in the first words of the following Chapter he speaks yet more plainly whereby he that runs may read he that reads must understand That in the age wherein he lived neither was the second Commandement confounded with the first nor the second Table augmented in the number of its Commandements His words at large are these speaking of the Commandements in the very beginning of his 32. Chapter Quorum primum Non habebis Deos alienos coram me Non facies tibi sculptile sequens sed ultimum est Non concupisces Quatuor ex his dilectioni Dei sex dilectioni subserviunt proximi Non habebis Deos alienos coram me Non facies tibi sculptile neque omnem similitudinem Non assumes nomen Domini Dei tui in vanum Memento ut diem sabbatorum sanctifices Quatuor ista Dei dilectioni repugnantia prohibendo locum eidem dilectioni Dei sermo Dei parare intendit The first of the Commandements is this Thou shalt have no other Gods but me The next to that is Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image and the last of all is Thou shalt not covet Four of these set forth our love towards our God and six our love towards our neighbour Thou shalt have no other Gods Thou shalt not make an image Thou shalt not take the name of God in vain and Remember thou keep holy the Sabbath day by forbidding those four things which are repugnant to the love of God do intend to prepare amongst us a place for his love See here he allows four Commandements to treat of the love of God and the second to be one of those four So he admits not of Saint Augustines conjunction of the first and second into one and he allows six Commandements to treat of the love of our neighbour so he admits not of Saint Augustines division of the Tenth Commandement into two And he was of so great a repute for a true Catholick Divine that Tritenhemius saith of him in his life Vir in divinis Scripturis spiritu sancto per visionem illustrante doctissimus He was a man instructed in the knowledge of the holy Scriptures by immediate Visions and Revelations from the Holy Ghost Thus I have surveyed the chiefest Catholick Divines till full seven hundred years together after Saint Augustine not only of the Greek and Latine Church but also of Great Britane France Germany Africa and Hierusaâ—…em and not one of them follows Saint Augustines division of the Decalogue and though the master of the Sentences about the year 1145. brought the same in request and the Schoolmen after him yet Aquinas himself who is most zealous for it durst not say it was the division of the Decalogue generally received in the Church from Saint Augustines daies for it is his positive determination Quod praecepta Decalogi diversimodè à diversis distinguuntur 12 4 qu. 100. art 4. in c. The Commandements of the Decalogue have been severally distinguished by several men and he instanceth in Hesychius whom I named before Now Sir if you consider That the whole Catholick Church did speak by the mouthes of these fore-named Divines for so many Centuries after Saint Augustine I hope you will say This was an Assertion much sooner to be vented then to be verified for indeed never to be verified That All Catholick Divines after Saint Augustine did reckon the first and second but as one Commandement Having done my poor endeavour to prove de facto That all Catholick Divines after Saint Augustine have not reckoned the first and second Commandements but as one I now come to prove it de jure That they may not because indeed it is very Uncatholick so to do as being against essential Catholicism that is to say The substance of a Divine Truth taught by God himself and against Accidental Catholicism that is to say the Profession of A Divine Truth alwaies taught in the Church of God And if I prove both these I hope you will hereafter allow the Commandement an Interrogatory in your Confessions if not a distinct place in your Catechisms First I say it is against essential Catholicism that is against the substance of a divine truth taught by God himself For the Commandements are called by Gods holy Spirit Ten words Exod. 34. 28. Scripsit decem verba 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say the 70. He writ the ten words whence hath been derived the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which hath ever been the usual appellation in all Christian Churches to say The Decalogue or Ten words for the Ten Commandements And Deut. 4. 13. tis expresly said that God writ these Ten Commandements upon two Tables of stone As many words as he writ with his finger we must read with our eyes hear with our ears and obey with our hearts and as many words as he writ in each Table so many must we read hear and obey in it neither more nor less if we will have our Divinity come from God or in vain shall we talk of being Catholicks with his Church whiles we are Schismaticks from himself for the reason why we may not separate from his Church is because his Church doth not separate from him Considering then That God writ these Ten distinct words in Two distinct Tables it must needs be uncatholick either to make no distinct word of Gods second word in the first Table or to make two distinct words of Gods last word in the second Table For most Catholick is that saying of our blessed Saviour Mat. 19. 6. What God hath joyned together let not man put asunder From whence by the Rule of Conversion emergeth this other What God hath put asunder let not man joyn together The first Proposition will not allow us to divide the Tenth Commandement into two because God hath made it but one so we must have but six Commandements in the second Table The second Proposition will not allow us to make the first and second Commandements into one because God hath made them two and so we must have full four Commandements in the first Table For neither fewer words then four were written by Gods own hand in the first nor more then six in the second Table And the Church of God may not be said to have power may not be thought to have will to correct Gods own Hand-writing For the same God who hath given us Ten words in both Tables hath also given us four in the one and six in the other And doubtless
worship and the gâ—…eatest degree of it is no more Therefore we say That Religious worship in what degree soever is to be given only to God because he alone is the object of Religion For Religion though it command and govern such acts as pass from man to man or from man to God yet it doth not of it self produce or excite any act but only such as hath God for its immediate object And therefore all the elicite and proper acts of Religion such as flow from its own nature are reducible to some of the four Commandements in the first Table which concern God only as appears in that his name alone is used in every one of them And therefore to bestow any act of Religion upon any other then upon God alone is to set up both a God and a Religion neither revealed nor commanded in the first Table and consequently not of Goa's but of our own making Nay it is to fetch a God out of the second Table to bestow upon him the Duties enjoined in the first It is to borrow an Object from the second Table to exercise the Acts of the first For the whole Decalogue knows no other object but only God or neighbour and these are so distinct That what is neighbour cannot be God what is God cannot be neighbour And the Acts concerning these are as distinct as the Objects for all the Acts commanded or forbidden in the first Table concern our God All the Acts commanded or forbidden in the second Table concern our neighbour and t is equally absurd to apply to neighbour the Duties belonging to God as Glory or Worship and to apply to God the Duties belonging to neighbour as relief or maintenance This is the Divinity God himself hath taught for it is the plain undoubted sense of his Commandements and this is the Divinity Gods Church hath learned and professed for thus she understood his sense as saith Lactantius lib. 6. cap. 10. Primum Justitiae officium est conjungi cum Deo secundum cum homine sed illud primum Religio dicitur Hoc secundum misericordia vel humanitas nominatur The first office of Justice is to unite man to God The second to unite man to man or to his neighbour The first office is called Religion the second is called Humanity And therefore it is against the very order of Justice to confound these offices For as Humanity cannot extend to God so Religion cannot extend to neighbour Wherefore since all Communion is founded in Justice those who most confound the offices of Justice are the greatest enemies and opposers of true Christian Communion and consequently They who worship Saints and Angels are the greatest Schismaticks because they most confound the Offices of Justice doing to neighbour those offices which belong to God and not doing to God those offices which belong to him For he that renders to Caesar Gods due doth for that cause not render to God his own due And accordingly these two are disjoyned and divided as two distinct offices of Justice by Gods own eternal Wisdom and Truth and therefore may not be confounded without mans unsufferable folly and mistake for so saith our blessed Saviour Mat. 22. 21. Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesars there 's the Debt of Justice belonging to Humanity And unto God the things that are Gods there 's the Debt of Justice belonging to Religion Cesar must have his own but he may not have Gods Tribute The noblest creature that is either in Heaven or in Earth may not have the Creators due Since therefore Religion is the Creators due as Humanity is the creatures according to Lactantius Gods most glorious Servants Saints and Angels may not be sharers with their Master in his due that is to say in the offices of Religion though in never so inferiour a degree because they cannot be Gods though in never so inferiour a degree But they may only be sharers with their fellow-servants or creatures in the offices of Humanity whether double or treble or if you will centuple sharers it matters not according to their several degrees of glory and of excellency And this was so clear a Truth in our Saviours daies that it is said concerning the disciples of the Pharisees and the Herodians when they heard these words they marvelled and left him and went their way v. 22. And it is still so clear notwithstanding the many sophistical distinctions whereby some of late have clouded it that if any man now will needs reply against it he must be more refractory then those Pharisees or Herodians and fall under Saint Pauls reproof Nay but O man who art thou that replyest against God Rom. 9. 20. For God the Father in his Law God the Son in his Gospel and God the Holy Ghost the Pen man both of Law and Gospel hath so determined That the offices of Justice may not be confounded but those which belong to Religion must be reserved by themselves for God alone none of them all bestowed upon our neighbour he is capable only of those offices which belong to Humanity but of none of those which belong to Religion Therefore your words And the same I say proportionably though in an infinitely inferiour degree of our Religious worship of his glorious Servants Saints and Angels are not to be justified though you should say them to the worlds end For there is no proportion betwixt the creature and the Creator and consequently you may not say the same thing or talk of the same worship proportionably concerning them 13. The Honour of Humanity or of the second Table due from the fifth Commandement though in the highest degree of proportion being infinitely below the Creator and the honour of Religion or of the first Table due from the four first Commandements though in the lowest degree being infinitely above the creature For that honour is internally in the understanding an apprehension or belief of an infinite excellency in the will a subjection or submission to it there 's the duty of the first Commandement The same honour is externally in the gesture an adoration in the speech a profession in the deed a publick and solemn Homage made to the same infinite excellency there 's the duty of the three other Commandements in the first Table Wherefore you must place your degrees of proportion not in religious worship to make an inferiour degree of that but in civil worship to make a superiour degree of that for Gods glorious servants unless you will serve them instead of God to the dishonour of their Lord and to the despight of his Commandements I would not speak so positively were this Divinity of yesterday but you see Lactantius shews it was of old in the Catholick Church And the Angelical Doctor shews the same for notwithstanding the Practice of the Church was corrupted in his daies yet this Doctrine this Divinity was not corrupted For this we find was his determination 12º qu. 100. art 5.
Ecclesiae sententiâ resiliisse atque adversus ejus usum atque doctrinam scripsisse spicula intorsisse Bar. An. 794. nu 62. So little could the second Council of Nice prevail at that time with the Latine Church for admitting images into their Religion And though of late years that Council hath been accounted the seventh Oecumenical by a faction amongst the Latines yet the Greeks themselves did not antiently so account it your own Baronius being my witness An. 863. nu 6. In reliquis omnibus Ecclesiis Patriarchalibus exceptâ Constantinopolitanâ sex tantum Oecumenicae Synodi in publicis confessionibus professionibus nominari consuêrunt In all the other Patriarchal Churches that of Constantinople only excepted The Grecians did usually make mention of no more then six General Councils in all their Confessions and Professions So it is plain they accounted not the second of Nice as the seventh General Council and if not they why should we who know that though the Bishop of Rome consented to it yet all the other Bishops of the Latine Church generally opposed it And truly it deserved to be generally opposed not only for setting up a false worship this of images but also for setting it up by egregious falsities and yet more egregious falsifications First I will give you a short view of their falsities our blessed Saviour had said Mat. 4. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve They thus qualifie the Greek Text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 4. He doth put this Only to the word Serve not to the word Worship by false Logick distinguishing between two Synonomaes which signified one the same Religious worship unless we will blasphemously say That our Saviour did not fully confute the Devil who had used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his temptation saying All these things will I give thee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if thou wilt fall down and worship me or unless we will add to this blasphemy yet another much more execrable saying That so as we do reserve our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Divine worship for God we may allow our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Religious worship to the Devil be not startled at the inference for if any may have Religious worship but God alone the Devil will quickly have his share of it for he can transform himself into an Angel of light 2 Cor. 11. 14. and therefore if we will give Religious worship to Angels we may soon be so deluded as to give it unto Devils and whiles we pretend to worship God may in truth be brought to worship the Devil Therefore this was so very false a device though it were intended for a distinction That no Divine can be in love with it but he that is contented to venter Gods glory and mans salvation and much more his own soul upon a piece of Sophistry Againâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 4. Those that call pictures or images Idols let them be accursed A false authority assumed to countenance a false divice taking to themselves power of cursing those whom God had blessed even the Apostles and Prophets and many holy men who have promiscuously used these two words Images and Idols However no Christian Divine can justly be condemned for disowning those who could find in their hearts to deliver men over to the Devil meerly for a Grammatical notion and that a false one too in the case for which it was alledged For though there may be a Grammatical difference betwixt an Image and an Idol yet a Theological difference there is not since he that worships an Image doth without all peradventures make that Image an Idol to himself Thirdly whereas the Council of Constantinople had made men take an Oath against images These infatuated Zealots determine it is better for a man to break then to keep that Oath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 4. T is better you should be perjured then keep your Oath for throwing down of images strange besotted Divines to make so much of an image so little of an Oath yet more strange besotted Casuists to advise a man rather to break his Oath then to break an Image for an Oath is sacred by Gods institution but an image is sacred only by mans imagination The one doth not only reach the conscience but also bind it the other though it doth reach the eye yet cannot reach the conscience Fourthly They define that Angels and separated souls are corporeal which is another falsity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 5. They are not quite without bodies though they have but thin bodies for only God is wholly without a body They were so afraid of losing their pictures that they had rather lose the Truth and not allow Angels and blessed Spirits to be incorporeal then not allow them to be pictured But Binius though not over modest yet is ashamed of this gross assertion saying Angelos Animas esse corporeas falsum est sed pingi posse judicio Ecclesiae receptum est T is false That Angels and souls are corporeal yet the judgement of the Church is That they may be pictured He hath mended the matter well by taking a falsity from a Council to put it upon the Church for the Church cannot judge that may be pictured which is not corporeal since lineaments must first be in the substance represented before they can truly be in the representation Therefore the picturing of Angels and immaterial Spirits is more fitly assigned to the practice of some men in the Church then to the Judgement of the Church and yet these men intended not an essential but an historical representation of those Spirits not to describe them in their substances but in their actions or performances or appearances Fifthly and lastly not but that more might be alledged but that I have already alledged too much of such absurdities when as a Jew had objected in his Disputation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I am scandalized orgrievously offended at you Christians because you wâ—…rship Images Their answer is The Scriptures do not forbid us to worship Images but to worship 〈◊〉 as God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 5. As if they intended to be so false as to put a lye into the mouth of Truth it self making the same Commandement to speak contradictions whereof it is impossible both parts should be true For to limit an universal negative it to make it a particular affirmative and consequently so to deny or forbid in one thing as to affirm and command in another that is in truth to make it speak contradictions As for example Thou shalt do no murther limit you this universal negative by saying Murder not a Roman Catholick and it will follow that you may murder a Protestant whom you call an Heretick and so the same Precept shall forbid and allow murder that is shall speak contradictions So Thou shalt not steal
he never so glorious yet he is as far from God as my self for betwixt finite and infinite the distance is infinite whether the finite be glorious or inglorious for be he never so glorious yet he and his glory both are nothing in comparison of him to whom Cherubins and Seraphins continually do cry Heaven and earth are full of the majesty of thy Glory 7. Having vindicated mine own allegation against praying to Saints I come to oppose your Cardinals allegations for it which though they savour much more of learning authority yet not one jot less of impertinency And yet you and all yours swallow them as glib as once you swallowed the holy league and Covenant or as still you are desirous to swallow up all other Churches into your own pretended mother Church that is as that Behemoth swalloweth waters of whom it is said Behold he drinketh up a river and hasteth not he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth Job 4. 23. A large swallow you have to let down your own Camels whiles you strain at our gnats not considering the advice of the first Bishop of Hierusalem to his Clergy My Brethren have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ the Lord of glory with respect of persons Jam. 2. 1. If you had not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ with respect of persons more then of causes you would rather be exceptious against your own writers for most shamefully misapplying the holy Scriptures to set up your false worship then with ours for rightly applying them to pull it down since it is so much to the dishonour of Christ our Redeemer and to the danger of those Christian souls which he hath redeemed And yet your late writers seeing the unwritten word so unequal a match to grapple with the written word for the Protestants have opened their eyes though God alone can open their hearts and we pray him to open them do labour to prove all your false adorations and false invocations out of the holy Scriptures notwithstanding they are so plainly and so directly against the express letter of the Law of Moses and therefore cannot be according to the letter of the Prophets which are no other then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…aw But I will confine my self to your moâ—…â—…ed Dogmatist and desire you with me to consider the strange impertinency and if wilful the stranger imprety of his allegations out of the Text to maintain your invocation of Saints And amongst them all two only shall serve my turn 8. The first is that of Gen. 48. 16. The Angel which redeemed me from all evil bless the lads Hic apertè sanctus Jacob Aâ—…gelum invocavit saith Bellarm. Here holy Jacob did manifestly invocate an Angel If he did 't is manifest he took that Angel for the God of his Fathers Abraham and Isaac for the God which fed him all his life long and redeemed him from all evil for he invocateth none other to bless the lads but only that God so saith the Text God before whom my Fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk the God which â—…ed me all my life long to this day The Angel which redeemed me from all evil bless the â—…ads 'T is palpable all these particulars do concern but one and him Jacob desireth to bless the children If that one were an Angel he did not pray for Gods blessing upon them so the lads were little beholding to him If that one were God he did not pray to an Angel to blesâ—… them so 〈◊〉 â—…olding to your Carâ—… Nay indeed all that are concerned in this Text for the Angel though named yet is not concerned in it are litâ—…le beholding to him for all are losers by this interpretation 1º God loseth his honour of accepting feeding redeeming and blessing his servants 2º Abraham and Isaac lose their God For it was the Almighty God not an Angel that said to Abraham Walk before me and be thou perfect Gen. 17. 1. and God before whom my Fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk saith this Text. 3º The poor infants lose their blessing for t is clear an Angel could not bless them but only ministerially from God 4º Jacob loseth his Religion for he calleth upon a false God if upon an Angel instead of God All these cannot lose by this interpretation the Interpreter himself be no loser therefore though I will not say he lost his honesty by seeking to wrest a text yet I must say he hath lost his authority by seeking to oppose it For it is not an exposition but an opposition of the Text when words are taken Grammatically in their own sense that should be taken Theologically in Gods sense The Grammatical sense of a word is according to its own signification But the Theological sense of a word is according to Gods use of it or Gods application As Genesis 18. 2. The Lord appeared unto Abraham but v 2. Lo three men stood by him And again v. 16. The men rose up from thence yet v. 17. And the Lord said and 't is evident by all Abrahams prayer that it was the Lord appeared unto him for he calleth him the Judge of all the earth v. 25. and v. 33. 't is said The Lord went his way as soon as he had left communing with Abraham If you take this word men Grammatically as 't is in its own signification you must say Abraham prayed to a man But if you take it Theologically as 't is in Gods use or application 't is no less then the Lord appearing in the likeness of a Man and you must say That Abraham prayed only to the Lord So in this Text mis-interpreted by your great Doctor if you take the word Angel Grammatically as it signifies in it self 't is plain Iacob invocated an Angel but if you take it Theologically as God useth it 't is no less then the Lord in the likeness of an Angel and so 't is plain Iacob invocated none but God And truly the one Text might as well have been urged to prove that Abraham invocated a man as the other to prove that Iacob invocated an Angel Both good proofs Grammatically but neither a good proof Theologically For Grammarians look upon words as they signifie in themselves but Divines look upon words as they signifie in their use the reason is because the work of the one is to understand the Thing but the work of the other is to understand the Truth therefore as doubtful Propositions in the New Testament are to be expounded according to the Analogie of Faith in the Apostles Creed that we may have Truth in our Belief So doubtful Propositions in the Old Testament are to be expounded according to the analogie of righteousness in Moses his Decalogue that we may have Truth in our Obedience And as that Proposition This is my body must be taken Theologically that is in the sense of the speaker because taken Grammatically that is in the bare sense of the words it
Aquinas his exposition of them which was for praying to Saints He falls into this absurdity to say that at that time this Invocation was both in the custome and in the faith of the Church Tum in consuetudine tum in fide fuisse receptam which though Bellarmine be zealous to affirm concerning the Invocation of Angels yet he is not so hardy as to affirm concerning the Invocation of Saints A Tenent that creates their contradictions cannot invite our assent may not have our belief And the rather because Hieronymus Osorius a Bishop but not a Jesuit of their own Religion if at least the Religion of Jesuits may be called the same with the Religion of the Bishops in the Church of Rome in his Paraphrase upon Job gives us a quite contrary exposition of these words saying Denuntia quaeso alicui praestanti viro testimonium animadverte an sit aliquis qui tecum sentiat Ad quem enim ex Sanctis hominibus adibis qui tuae sententiae suffragari audeat Declare now to some excellent men your testimony and observe if there be any that hath the same thoughts with you For unto whom amongst all the Holy men can you go that will dare to be of your opinion This man was trained up in the Invocation of Saints as well as Bellarmine yet could not see how to ground it upon this Text For he expounds it not of Saints in Heaven but of Saints on Earth as Abenezra had expounded it before him Ex cujus ore sanctorum qui in terrâ sunt talia unquam audisti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Saints which are on earth out of whose mouth among all the Saints which are on the Earth did you ever hear such things But we may very well grant the words are rather to be understood of Holy Angels then of Holy men because he had spoken of the Angels a little before yet even so Bellarmines inference will not be made good that it was then the custome to call upon the Holy Angels for their Patronage tunc fuisse consuetudinem invocandi patrocinium Sanctorum Angelorum For the context will then require this sense as it is delivered by the most judicious and learned Mercerus Voca Angelorum aliquem eum inclama an vero eorum vel minimus tibi respondebit te suo sermone alloquio dignabitur Nullum sanè reperies Vides quantum à Deo distes quum ne Angeli quidem longè Deo inferiores te sint allocuturi si ad eos clames ob distantiam quae inter te est illos Call any one of the Angels and cry unto him and see if the meanest of them will answer thee or vouchsafe thee one word of discourse Thou will find none Thou seest then how far thou art distant from God when not so much as his Angels who are so far below him will answer thee if thou call to them because of the distance which is betwixt them and thee This is most probably the meaning of the words from the context for Eliphaz had a little before debased the excellencies of the Angels in regard of God and now comes to debase the excellencies of men in regard of the Angels all the scope and intent of his discourse tending to shew the emptiness and vanity of the Creature that so he might make Job humble himself before his Creator as hath been shewed a little before sc. Paragraph 3. 4 5 6. out of your own Pineda 11. But we must take to us the whole Armour of God that we may be able to withstand the assaults of men so furiously assaulting us and so watchfully besetting us To the Law and to the Testimony if others speak not according to that word 't is because there is no light no truth in them I ask then Doth this Invocation of Saints agree with the analogie of Faith in the Apostles Creed or with the analogie of righteousness in Moses his Decalogue I trow not For the one teacheth me to believe in one God the other not to call upon him in whom I have not believed and cannot believe And 't is clear that Invocation of Saints is against the whole current of devotions derived to us by the Spirit of God through the channel either of the Old or of the New Testament For there is scarce any prayer in either which our Saviour Christ who hath taught it us doth not pray with us for if he do not 't is in vain for us to pray since God heareth not our prayers but for his Intercession And therefore the Invocations that are used in the Psalms a peculiar Book of Prayers and Praises made by Gods own Holy Spirit for the use of his Church and constantly used by it in all ages are generally first spoken in the Person of Christ as appears in that he applied to himself very many of them as my God my God why hast thou for saken me Psal. 22. 1. and Into thy hands I commit my spirit Psal. 31. 6. and being first spoken in the Person of Christ are the more strongly recommended to all good Christians as composed by his Spirit sanctified by his lips and impowered and strengthned by his Intercession For Christus realis and Christus mysticus Christ personally and Christ mystically considered do constitute but one Communion of Saints He is the Head they are his Body and therefore they must pray in sin for in Schisme if they pray not to him as their Head for that is not to pray in Christs Communion as also in vain because in sin if they pray without their Head for that is not to pray in Christs Intercession Wherefore it being an undoubted truth that Christ was made obedient to the whole Law for man it necessarily follows that praying to Saints cannot be a duty of the Law but we must say That Christ the eternal Son of God prayd to Saints that is the Creator to the Creature And if it be not a duty of the Law how can it be command in the Prophets since they are but expounders not enlargers of the Law How in this Prophet Job whose book was penned in Hebrew by the Law-giver himself and only in Arabick by Job as saith your own Bellarmine de Script Eccl. cap. de Job because it is the judgement of the Catholick Church that Moses was the first Ecclesiastical Writer or the first Amanuensis and penneman of the Holy Ghost which by the way is another argument to prove that Bellarmine did not could not believe this Text of Holy Job was to be interpreted as a command Ad aliquem Sanctorū respice Look to one of the Saints but as a question or expostulation Ad quem sanctorum respicies To which of the Saints wilt thou look for without doubt so great a Scholar could not believe That Moses did bid us to do that in Job which he did forbid us to do in Exodus For the Commandement which saith Thou shall have no other Gods
a matter of right that is by his orderly power according to the Laws when the Law according to which a man is to act righteously is not in the power of the Agent then by acting according to his absolute power he acts disorderly and not righteously for being subject to a Law he is bound to act according to that Law But when the Law and the Righteousness of the Law is in the power of the Agent such an Agent may act orderly and righteously and yet act otherwise then according to the dictate of that Law because he is not subject to that Law and so his absolute power is not disorderly To apply this to our present case The Church is this free Agent in the exercise of Religion and having a Law given her to act by she may not act therein by an absolute power either besides or against that Law given her but by an orderly power according to it For being subject to the Law of Religion she is bound in the exercise of Religion to act according to that Law For there only the Agent may act orderly and righteously not according to the dictate of Law where the Law and the righteousness of the Law is in his own power So that either we must say That the Law and the righteousness of Religion is under the Power and Authority of the Church or we must confine the Church in the exercise of Religion to act according to the Law of God And therefore though your wit learning and numbers may invite you to that unsufferable insolency of seeking to domineer over other mens reasons yet pray let your own hearts and consciences deter you from that unpardonable impiety of seeking to domineer over Gods Commandements For what his Law hath made sin your practice cannot make righteousness what he hath made irreligion you cannot make Religion though you were as you say you are but shew you are not his Catholick Church For the Church is to depend upon God much more then the People are to depend upon the Church not only for the substance but also for the exercise of Religion Gods commands must be obyed for the substance of Religion according to the three first Commandements for the order and exercise of Religion according to the fourth Invocations Adorations Confessions Consecrations all must be for the honour of God for he only is named in the Commandements that require them that the Church may not make a Schism from God in the substance and in the exercise of Religion And then we must all with one heart and mouth unanimously and magnanimously joyn together in the defence and obedience of such Invocations Adorations Confessions and Consecrations That the people may not make a Schism from the Church in the outward Profession and Practice of Religion The Laws of the first Table are not only in the order of place or situation but also in the very order of nature and of Justice before the Laws of the second Table God must first have his right before the Church can lay claim to hers As in the Creed we are first taught to believe in God and after that to believe the holy Catholick Church so in the Decalogue it is first said Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve and after that Honour thy Father and thy Mother This Protestation was under Moses his hand before it was in the Apostles mouthes We ought to obey God rather then man Acts 5. 29. And this Protestation alone will justifie all Protestants to the worlds end that shall depart from your Church in those points of Religion wherein you have plainly and palpably departed from the Law of God For God first requires Verity iâ—… the Religion before he requires Unity in the Communion of his Church and after these and for these he requireth obedience to her Authority She is first holy by her Verity then Catholick by her Unity That Church that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sub 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our mother in the Lord by her Authority This we believe in believing the holy Catholick Church And according to the method of our faith must be the method of our obedience First obeying the Churches Verity then her Unity then her Authority For God founded the Religion before he founded the Communion as he founded the Communion before he founded the Authority of his Church at least according to the Priority of nature though not of time For he founded the Religion of his Church in the three first Commandements The Communion of his Church in the fourth and the Authority of his Church in the fifth Commandement So that Gods Church hath in truth a threefold foundation one in respect of her Religion another in respect of her Communion a third in respect of her Authority The first concerneth the Being the second the well-Being the third the splendid Being of the Church In regard of the first The Church is the pillar and ground of True worship in regard of the second she is the Pillar and ground of solemn or of publick worship in regard of the third she is the Pillar and ground of orderly or uniform worship First we have Truth in the service of God from her Religion Then solemnity from her Communion Then Uniformity from her Command These are the inestimable blessings God hath conveyed unto this wicked world by his Catholick Church and by every particular member thereof if we consider the goodness of God in offering these blessings rather then the wickedness of men in rejecting his offers or in abusing his goodness For by Gods holy appointment and institution his Church in every Nation is intrinsically Catholick from her Religion extrinsecally Catholick from her Communion and potentially Catholick from her Authority and 't is only by mens perversness and undutifulness That she loseth her Potential whiles she retaineth her intrinsecal and extrinsâ—…cal Catholicism For having her Religion according to the three first and having her Communion according to the fourth she ought also to have her Authority according to the fift Commandement But if she forsake her Religion or corrupt her Communion she cannot justly claim her authority if it be denied and doth unjustly use it if it be granted for she useth it against the honour and glory of Gods and for the distraction and the destruction of men whereas St. Paul saith expresly concerning his own and the Authority of all the other Apostles for he saith our authority which the Lord hath given us that it was only for edification not for destruction 2 Cor. 10. 8. and having said this for the Apostles themselves He hath much more said it for their successors Let it be granted which cannot reasonably be denied That every Christian Priest-hood or Ministry is the grand Apostle of that Nation wherein is an Apostolical Church I hope you will say the Apostle ought to be true to his God no less then the People ought to be true to
of my heart prove me and examine my thoughts look well if there be any way of wickedness in me and lead me this day and ever in the way ever lasting Ps. 139. 'T is an excellent observation of Abulenâ—…is Dicitur quod loquutus est Deus ne tantum beneficium vel tantus actus quantus est dare legem attribueretur Angelo ne crederent se Judaei obligatos Angelis Tost in Exod. 20. q. 1. It is said God spake all these words at the giving of the Law least if such a great blessing had been attributed to an Angel The Jews might think themselves obliged to the Angels The Jews might not think themselves obliged to the Angels for giving the Law and may Christians pray to them for assistance in keeping it If so how will you answer your own Baronius An. 60. n. 19. Quòd praecipuos Episcopos appellet Angelos planè significat instar hominum Angelos hominibus ministrare nec tantae esse excellentiae ut quae divina sunt iisdem tribuantur The Spirit of God in giving the Title of Angels to the chiefest Bishops doth plainly shew that as men so Angels do minister unto men and are not of so great excellency as that we should ascribe to them those things which belong to God All the world cannot say more against your daily prayer to your Guardian Angel He ministers to you no otherwise then your Bishop enlightning you Instrumentally by propounding directing applying heavenly thoughts to your understanding not efficiently by infusing or increasing them And by this reason you may no more invocate him for Illumination then you may your Bishop for he is not of so great excellency that you should ascribe to him those things which belong to God Till you can say of him that he hath opened the eyes of your body to receive the Light of nature how can you say to him Open the eyes of my Soul to rereive the light of Grace Till you can say of him he hath enlightned the darkness of the night how can you say to him Enlighten the darkness of mine understanding The Centurion had many servants under him and they all did come and go as he bade them to do any Acts of favourable assistance to the Jews should therefore the servants have the thanks and honour that was due unto their master I find that when Lazarus died he was carried by the Angels into Abrahams bosome yet I do not find that Lazarus said to his Guardian Angel who doubtless was one of them that carried him Into thy hands do I commend my spirit nor do I see how you can say so to yours unless you can also say unto him For thou hast redeemed me O Lord thou God of truth and if you cannot commend your Soul to your Guardian Angel when you die how can you commend your Soul to him whiles you live You may say with St. Stephen Lord Jesus receive my Spirit when it is to be carried to him by the Angels for they minister to this Lord But you cannot say Lord Jesus receive my Prayers when they are given or offered to his Angels for they are not fellow-sharers in his Lordship And this instance alone is enough to answer all your objections which you have gathered out of my ejaculations but if not you may take another The Psalmist saith The Angel of the Lord tarrieth round about them that fear him and delivereth them yet he saith not O Taste and see how gracious the Angel of the Lord is But O Tast and see how gracious the Lord is blessed is the man that trusteth in him Ps. 34. 7 8. My Guardian Angel is a ministring Spirit for my comfort but my God alone is an al-sufficient Spirit for my content None but he can give the Spiritual gust taste of a blessed immortality to my Soul who hath made it immortal and since my prayers are the chiefest means to procure this spiritual gust or Taste to my Soul how shall I pray to them who cannot give it I desire my Religion may be to me the beginning of my Salvation for so is Grace the inchoation of Glory and therefore cannot delight in such prayers as will not give my Soul the Antipast of eternity that is in such prayers as do not bid me say unto my self O Taste and see how gracious the Lord is because they do not ascend up so high as the Lord For prayer being a spiritual colloquy with him to whom we pray why should I pray to an Angel which probably may not be present to partake of this colloquy and indeed cannot partake of it if it be meerly spiritual that is only in the heart or if he could why should my heart leave conversing with God to converse with his Servant Is not this to undervalue that happiness which I can not deserve should not desert nay is it not to undervalue prayer to make it the depression of the Soul to the Creature which God hath appointed for the elevation of the Soul unto himself What though one Angel destroyed 185000. Assyrans may we therefore say unto him Remember not our iniquities nor the iniquities of our forefathers neither take thou vengeance of our sins And if we may not pray to Angels for the averting of Judgements then sure not for the obtaining of mercies since God useth them as his instruments for the one as well as for the other If we may as you infer humbly pray them to do those good offices for us which God hath appointed them we may also humbly pray God to give us leave to sin against Him in our Prayers for to break his Commandement is to sin against Him and he hath expresly commanded saying Call upon me in the day of trouble Psal. 50. 15. In that he hath said Call upon me he hath also in effect said Call not upon any of my Angels for that is not to call upon me Therefore dare I not pray to Angels for fear of bringing Judas his curse upon my prayers of whom it was said Let his prayer be turned into sin Ps. 109. v. 7. For if my prayer be turned into sin how will my sin be turned into Repentance or my repentance be turned into mercy and forgiveness If my prayer end in sin how will my sin not end in damnation your own Clement the 8. that corrected your Latine Translation which was of much longer standing in your Church then any of your corrupt devotions will rise up against you in Judgement if you will needs continue still in these corruptions For if he reformed your Bibles why should not you reform your Breviaries CHAP. VI. Of Justification 1. THe way of Truth in the Doctrine of Justification by Faith made dangerous by mens debates slippery by mens devices yet the truth it self never to be subverted or suppressed 2. The danger of not walking circumspectly in this way by taking either faction or phansie for faith 3. Gods Seers or Ministers above all are to
end But the Faith which doth not this as it proceedeth not from the grace of Christ but from the strength of our own conviction and tendeth not to the glory of Christ So it is rather the Faith of Devils than of good Christians and may well let a man go to hell for it may go thither along with him and therefore as it is not the foundation of righteousnesse so it cannot be the foundation of blessednesse Again the same Father tells us That though our blessed Saviour had at first in effect called the woman of Canaan a Dog it is not lawful to take the childrens bread and give it unto Dogs yet when he saw in her soul â—…he fruit of that reproof he changed his dialect and said not O Dog but O Woman great is thy Faith Non ait O canis sed O mulier magna est fides tua mutavit vocabulum quia mutatum vidit affectum That Faith which Christ approved in her had changed the affection and 't is not possible but the Affection should change the Action and therefore St. James feared not to call an actionless Faith or a Faith not working by love a Faith not of Christians but of Devils Fidem non Christianorum sed Daemonum For they are not Christians but Dogs and Devils who persist in ungodly affections and in unrighteous actions nay indeed they are Infidels so farre from having true Faith in Christ that they do not know what is true Faith They rightly affirme saith he that whosoever will not believe in Christ doth in some sort sin against the Holy Ghost and put himself under a necessity of damnation but they do not rightly understand what it is to believe in Christ for that is not to believe as Devils but as Christians not to have a dead Faith but a Faith living and working by love Illud sane non absurde intelligunt eum peccare in spiritum sanctum esse sine veniâ reum aeterni peccati qui usque in finem vitae noluerit credere in Christum sed si rectè intelligerent quid sit credere in Christum non enim hoc est habere Daemonum fidem quae rectè mortua perhibetur sed fidem quae per dilectionem operatur Aug. ibid. cap. 16. I have of purpose alledged many quotations out of St. Augustine indeed most of them which concerned this argument that all the world may see that his intent in confuting those mistaken brethren who thought to be saved by Faith without works was only to shew out of â—…t James and the other Catholick Epâ—…stles what Faith it is that justifieth sc. a Faith working by love but not to ascribe the glory of Justification either to works or love because they hold of mansrighteousness but only to Faith which holdeth of the righteousness of the Son of God I will now to St. Augustine further add St. Ambrose who in his Comment upon the Romans cap. 3. hath these words Justificati sunt gratis quia nihil operantes neque vicem reddentes solâ fide justificati sunt They are justified freely by his grace because working nothing sc. worth Gods acceptance and their own acquitment and making no recompence they are justified only by Faith through the gift of God And again upon those words cap. 4. Credenti autem in eum But to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly he saith thus Sic decretum dicit à Deo ut cessante lege solam fidem gratia Dei posceret ad salutem The Apostle tells us it was so decreed of God that the Law ceasing sc. as to that male diction Cursed is he that continueth not in all things to do them The grace of God should require only Faith to our salvation we find no mention of a Decree in the Text either in the Greek Original or in the Latine Translation yet St. Ambrose sets down the words thus Ei vere qui non operatur credenti autem in eum qui justificat impium reputatur fides ejus ad justitiam secundum Propositum Gratiae Dei To him that worketh not but believeth in him that justifieth the ungodly his Faith is accounted for righteousness according to the Purpose of the Grace of God not intending by the addition of these words according to the Purpose of the Grace of God that any should cavil against the true reading of the Truth as of late some Criticks have taught us to do but that all should understand the true meaning of it and no more question that in justification of the ungodly Faith is accounted for righteousness then they dare question the Purpose of the Grace of God This is palbably St. Ambrose his Doctrine and therefore he asks him Is it possible the Jews should think themselves justified by the works of the Law according to the justification of Abraham when they saw that Abraham himself was justified not by the works of the Law but only by Faith Quomodo ergo Judaei per opera legis justificari se putant justificatione Abrahae quum vident Abrahamum non ex operibus legis sed solâ fide justificatum He saith moreover That our Apostle proved this from the Psalmist pronouncing them blessed unto whom the Lord imputeth righteousness without works Beatos dicit quibus hoc sanxit Deus ut sine labore aliquâ observatione solâ fide justificentur apud Deum He calleth those blessed concerning whom the Lord hath determined that without their own labour and any observation of the Law by Faith alone they should be justified before Him which are so clear and high expressions for Justification by Faith alone that for any Divine now to say works are required to Justification as well as Faith is either to suppose the Apostles and Prophets not to have known Gods intent and meaning or to suppose St. Ambrose and St. Augustine not to have known the intent and meaning of the Apostles I must yet further add one more Testimony that in the mouth of two or three witnesses this so heavenly Word of Truth may be firmely established And that shall be the Testimony of St. Chrysostome who upon the two first Verses of the fourth Chapter to the Romans where the Apostle speaketh of Abrahams Justification giveth us this Exposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For as much as the Jews did turn this point of Divinity upside down because their Patriarch the friend of God was first circumcised sc. before he was accepted as a friend The Apostle is resolved to shew them that even Abraham himself was justified by Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For that a man should be justified by Faith who had no works were nothing strange But for one that flourished in deeds of righteousness not to be made just from them but from his Faith was very wounderful and doth exceedingly declare the power of Faith Therefore passing by all others he maketh mention only of him that is of Abraham Chrys. Aug. 11. in
that Redemption by Christ might upon any pretence be called imputative that is imaginary for so he is pleased to make the word signifie which is the whole scope of Gods most holy word and the only support and comfort of mens sinful souls By the first assertion he did overmuch exalt our own righteousnesse and took the ready course to bring us to presumption But by the second he did much more depresse the righteousnesse of Christ and so took the readie course to bring us to despair for if our redemption be imaginary our Salvation must be desperate And betwixt these two rocks of presumption and despair it is hard for any man to sail so warily as not to make shipwrack of his soul it being equally dangerous for him to rely upon his own and not to rely upon his Saviours righteousnesse Without doubt holy David though he had served God with all his might yet prayed to his dying day Enter not into Judgement with thy servant and hath accordingly bequeathed this Prayer as a legacy to all Gods servants ever since not excepting the most diligent and the most dutifull thus to pray for their Justification and then to pray most earnestly for it when they are drawing neerest Judgement That the Justification which they have now in title or sense of the Law they may also then have in the sentence of the Judge for that the one is not compleated without the other and upon what ground can any man pray to God not to enter into Judgement with him who knoweth himself still under the Accusation and Condemnation of the Law for the Judge must proceed according to the Law and how can he be exempted from the accusation and condemnation of the Law who hath broken it himself but by the satisfaction of his surety according to that of the Apostle Who is he that condemneth it is Christ that died Rom. 8. 34. No other satifaction but the death of Christ could consist with the Justice of God for that was indispenâ—…able and required it no other could consist with the Truth of God for that was infallible and had promised it no other could consist with the Office of Christ who took upon him the nature of man that he might expiate the sins of men no other could consist with our salvation who could not be saved unless our sins had been expâ—…ated This was a â—…urthen not to be taken from off our shoulders a yoke not to be taken from off our necks but only by the hand of the Messias in the Judgement of the Jews themselves for so the Chaldee Paraphrase interprets those words Isa. 10 27. The yoke shall be destroyed because of the Anoixting A facie Messiae vel propter Messiam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The yoke shall be destroyed because of the Messias or by the power of Christ Our own hands which brought it cannot remove it our own hands which made it cannot destroy it we may struggle till we break our necks nay yet more our hearts but we cannot break our yoke The Spiritual Assyrian that so easily brought us down can more easily keep us under none can break his Army but He that hath bruised his Head none can rescue us from his captivity but he that hath led captivity captive even the Captain of our salvation This is the Justification God promiseth to Israel and I hope you will not say he fails in promise by giving another or rather by giving none for what is merited or purchased by us is not given us saying O â—…srael trust in the Lord for with the Lord there is mercy and with him is 〈◊〉 redemption And he shall redeem Israel from all his sins Psal. 130. 7 8. Say not you he shall redeem Israel from some sins when God saith from All Say not you From sins before regeneration by the first but not from sins after it by the second Justification For as to such sins the plenteous redemption is not with the Lord but with Israel and so you will quite contradict the Text. 1. In its exhortation O Israel trust in the Lord For Israel may trust in the Lord to be redeemed from his sins only till his regeneration but in himself after it 2. In its assertion For with the Lord there is mercy and with him is plenteous redemption whereas t is rather to be said according to this supposition For with your selves there is merit and with him is plenteous renumeration or with your selves is plenteous redemption to redeem you from your greatest sins those committed against the greater light and with the greater unthankfulness for such are the sins after Regeneration But with the Lord is onely a â—…cantie redempâ—…ion to redeem you from sins before your Regeneration when you neither had light to know them nor power to resist them By which means you do in effect bid Israel Trust in himself all his life long and in God only some sew daies or perchance hours sc. no longer then till he is Baptzed or cleansed by the laver of Regeneration since very few sober Christians and no one National Church doth now defer the Baptism of Infants longer then their very first Infancy and most Divines do think That Infants are regenerated when they are baptized 3. You will contradict the text in its promise And he shall redeem Israel from all his sins for you in effect say That Israel shall redeem himself from the greatest part of his own sins Therefore pray let this Redemption continue till the last minute of your lives till it be perfected by Glorification that it may redeem Israel from All his sins And since it is a Redemption from all sin pray let it be called Justification unless you can teach us what else it is that redeemeth us from the guilt of sin I will conclude this point with that prayer wherewith our blessed Saviour concludes his life and hath taught us to conclude Ours Into thy hands Lord I commend my Spirit This is certainly the best the last good work you can do To commend your soul to God Will you do this in your own righteousnesse then say not For thou hast redeemed me but For I have served thee O God thou God of Truth Will you do this in your Saviours righteousnesse then be ashamed of that doctrine which doth undervalue this Redemption But do what you will and say what you can These three Truths are irresistible and should be undeniable 1. He only can absolve guiltinesse whose Justice makes us Guilty 2. He only can pronounce us Just whose will is the rule of Justice 3. He only can acquit in Judgement who only is the supreme Judge And therefore since to be absolved from guiltiness to be pronounced Just and to be acquitted in the Jugement are all three comprised in this one word Justificari To be justified we may not rely upon our selves but upon our God not upon our own works and righteousnesse but upon our Saviours merits and mercies for
must be done by Christians which Christ hath commanded and that Christ hath commanded all the moral duties that were before commanded by Moses for Be ye perfect even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect Mat. 5. allows not a lesse but rather requires a greater perfection under the Gospel than under the Law yet we dare not take our Personal doing that is our doing by our selves for the condition of the New Covenant as if our Salvation depended upon that but only our Virtual Doing that is our Doing by our blessed Saviour whose obedience is made ours by the power of Faith or our hearty desire of Doing and sorrow for not Doing which is accepted as Obedience by the power of Repentance Bona opera per peccata mortificata reviviscunt per poenitentiam is the general Tenent of the School good works that have been buried by sin are revived by Repentance As our sins have power to bury our good works so our Repentance hath power to raise them up again which clearly shews it is not our Righteousnesse but only our Repentance that is above our sins For our Righteousnesse may be overcome and conquered by our sins but our sins cannot be overcome and conquered by our Righteousness we must go to our blessed Redeemer for that conquest but only by our Repentance 17. Wherefore I will make bold to change your definition and say Christs New Testament is a new conditional Covenant with us by which we are bound to repent for not perfectly doing all those things our selves which God hath commanded us and to believe in him that hath perfectly done them all for us that we may obtain the promised inheritance in which condition if we fail sc. of believing but not of Doing we shall never attain thereto for to put Doing properly so taken and 't is not for a Divine to speak improperly as the Condition of life or Salvation is to set up the Covenant of Works not the Covenant of Grace and that is to puzzle not to Preach true Christianity We find Adam had but one poor Commandement upon the first Covenant viz. Not to eat of the fruit of one single Tree among so many and he kept it not though he was endued with strength to keep it he was to do but one thing whiles he had his perfect strength and he did it not And how can you say that a better Covenant binds us to do many things or else to forfeit our inheritance now we have lost our strength and are not able to do rightly and perfectly so much as one Therefore pray let the Condition of life in the second Covenant not be our Doing but our Believing not our entire Obedience but our entire Repentance And let him alone have the glory of perfect Obedience who came from Heaven to purchase it and the rather because he purchased it not for himself but for us allowing the benefit of it to his Servants though he reserve the glory of it only to himself we must do the best we can to keep off and to east out the great Dragon that old Serpent called the Devil and Satan but pray let it be only the seed of the Woman that shall break this Serpents Head and let not us think we are able to break it Nor have you made the condition of Salvation any whit lighter or easier by saying we are bound to do many things our selves then if you had said we are bounâ—… to do all things For if Doing be the condition of life it must reach to All Things that are to be done else not Doing will be the Condition as well as Doing And without doubt if we can do any one thing so exactly and perfectly as fully to satisfie the Obligation of the Law we may do many and consequently All and then what need we the seed of the Woman to break the Serpents Head since we can break it our selves for if we can take away his sting we may easily break his Head Now the sting of the Serpent is sin and the strength of sin is the Law Therefore if the Law be fully kept sin can have no strength and the Serpent can have no sting I do not think there is in all Christendom so religious a Votarie but will confesse that the old Serpent hath at some time or other by his sophistry beguiled him with his venome defiled him by his power overcome him and that therefore in himself he hath been captivated under Ignorance guiltinesse and infirmity even through his actual sins and should still have been detained under that captivity if God had not mercifully given him such a Redeemer who was pleased to be his Prophet to instruct his Ignorance his Priest to expiate his guiltiness and his King to strengthen his Infirmities If he confesse this he hath great reason to mistrust his own doing If he confesse it not He hath the greater reason to instruct himself For his ignorance keeping him from the knowledge of what he is to do his guiltiness keeping him from the desire and his weaknesse keeping him from the power of doing it he cannot hope to be saved by his Obedience but by his Faith not by his Doing but by his Believing Thus St. Paul preached the Covenant of Grace saying He was an Apostle of Jesus Christ according to the Faith of Gods Elect and the acknowledgement of the Truth which is after Godlinesse there 's the Obligation to righteousness in the Covenant of Grace But this righteousnesse is not the condition of life in that Covenant for it follows In hope of eternal life which God that cannot lye promised before the world began Tit. 1. 1 2. The eternal life is not annexed to mans performance but to Gods promise not to mans duty but to Gds mercy For this promise of eternal life was made before man was created and it was made to Christ the eternal Son of God on mans behalf That all who should believe in him according to the Faith of Gods Elect and the acknowledgement of the Truth which is after Godliness should through that Faith come to eternal life Upon this Promise did God seek us when we were lost restore us when we were dead reconcile us when we were his enemies and upon this same promise will he save us now we are his Servants For though all men are lyars and fail of their Godliness yet God that cannot lye will not fail of his promise Thus again saith the same St. Paul For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his life Rom. 5. 10. There was first an Atonement to be made for our reconciliation before there could be a Covenant made for our Salvation And as mans righteousness did not make the Atonement so neither doth mans righteousnesse fulfill the Covenant we are eternally obliged and should be wholy devoted to our blessed Saviour for both alike as That
they filled all their Comments with dire praesages against us that if any of them come to pass the ignorant multitude might impute the mischief to the Reformation as if that had been Prophetically blasted by the Spirit of God which was only injuriously reviled by the perverseness of men I will instance but in one and that was by Pererius the Jesuite in his Comment on Gen. 15. 16. If any man saith he do wonder why God suffers the power of the English to continue so long let him consider what is here said That the sins of the Amorites are not yet full Veniet etiam aliquando tandem Anglicae iniquitatis complementum veniet tempus Divinae Vindictae Quod tempus si quis dixerit non longè nunc abesse is à vero ut mea conjectura fert minimè aberraverit 〈◊〉 The time will come that the sins of the English will also be full and then God will certainly take vengeance on them and if any man think that time not to be far off at this instant in my opinion he is not mistaken This man out of his zeal to the Sea of Rome could not chuse but call us Amorites because he could not make us Papists and accordingly would needs threaten us with ruine and destruction from God whiles it was designed and complotted by men for this direful prediction of his was vented neer about the time that the Powder Plot should have been executed and that by such to whom himself was very near in Privacy if not in Confederacy However there is no more the Spirit of Truth in foretelling such dismal Tragedies then the Spirit of Piety in contriving or in acting them If there be you must say the Hugonotes in France were Prophets concerning the most barbarous murder of Henry the fourth for after the first blow given him they told him That for denying God with his mouth by professing Popery he was struck in the mouth and bad him take heed of denying God in his heart by embracing Popery for then he would be struck in the heart 'T is known what afterwards befell that Heroical Monarch though without the least of their contrivance who foretold it yet if you will account them Prophets for foretelling it you must say That for a Protestant to acknowledge the Pope is to deny God and that a reconciliation to the one is a Renuntiation of the other But I can alledge another Presage concerning our Churches destruction from one as contrary to your Pererius as both were contrary to the true Catholick Church and that was our Brightman upon the Revelation who threatned that God would spue us out of his mouth because we were as Laodiceans neither hot nor cold for though we had heat from the reformed doctrine yet we still had cold from the unreformed Discipline because forsooth that had been polluted and tainted by Popery This man thought we had not gone far enough from Rome as Lot from Sodom to be saved from destruction Pererius said we had gone too far So either for going or for not going we must expect to be like sheep appointed for the slaughter not only in the words but also in the wishes if not in the contrivances of both Factions who though they differ in the Premisses yet agree in this wicked Conclusion Nolumus hunc regnare we will not have this man to raign over us only the one Faction refuseth Christ in his word the other in his Church neither considering that 't is no credit for them to do what Pilate and Herod and the Heathen Souldiers did before them and no discredit for us to suffer what Christ and his Apostles have suffered before us I could also alledge the most Judicious yet more pious Hookers Presage That the age of our Church was like to be as the age of man which by trouble and sorrow might come to four score or a hundred years but that he mourned as a Dove to think that the wickedness of men would seek to destroy the goodness of God in giving us so well Tempered and so well Ordered a Church not croked as a Raven to shew his desire of our Churches destruction For clearly he thought our Religion as it was then established like temperamentum ad pondus of too pure a constitution to be of any lasting continuance But to leave uncertain predictions and to return to unerring Divinity If we be Amorites for maintaining Gods Truth I pray Sir tell me what is it that can make you Israelites Either let your Writers disprove our Religion or not disparage our Comâ—…nion For though our sins may make us Amorites yet Gods Truth cannot but keep us Israelites And whiles we keep that as we cannot think God doth make the Prophecies of your Spirit so we are sure he will hear the prayers of his Own and this among the rest Deliver Israel O God out of all his troubles especially out of all those troubles which they endure for being thy Israel Amen Amen O pray for the peace of Jerusalem They shall prosper that love thee Deo Trin-uni gloria in aeternum
and not be in the state of sin by marrying For then by your own allowance the Rule will hold and truly if the rule will not hold till then I believe the inference will hold ever after For if a mans being tempted to fornication will not yet sure his actual fornicating will put him under this indulgence of marrying because if he once fornicate he then may lawfully marry since the Apostle in saying It is better to marry then to fornicate hath allowed if not commande him to chose the better and to leave the worse And whereas you appeal to the precedent words If they cannot contain let them marry the same absurdity still follows your new gloss which is this That the Priviledge of marriage depends upon the bestiality of fornication for If they cannot contain is no more then if they burn and if they burn in your gloss is no less then if they fornicate whence it follows that according to your new gloss Saint Paul hath said If they fornicate let them marry And this is yet more palpable as the same Rule is set down in the second verse not by way of supposition but by way of Position in these words To avoid fornication let every man have his wife for if to avoid fornication do there signifie not to avoid the danger but only the guilt of fornication this concession To avoid fornication let every man have his wife will in effect be turned into this Prohibition Let no man have his wife till he hath actually fornicated and so the Laity must plunge themselves in vitiousness as well as the Clergy if they will have wives For Saint Pauls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every man comprizeth Clergy and Laity both alike neither of them more nor less then the other Wherefore since there is no man in Christendom but is either a Clergy-man or a Lay-man it will follow that no man in Christendom hath a Licence much less a Command to take a wife until he hath actually fornicated and so the ready way to avoid fornication by this remedy of marriage according to your gloss is to commit fornication To joyn all three together you in effect say That to burn is to fornicate and if they cannot contain is If they be actually guilty of Incontinency and to avoid fornication is to avoid the sin of fornication not the temptation to that sin And I say that this being supposed though it be not granted you will scarce be able to prove That any man hath the Apostles concession and much less his approbation to marry but only such a man as hath first actually fornicated which is a strange kind of Doctrine and may well make any sober man exclaim with the Canonist Nota mirabile quod plus habet hic luxuria quam castitas Gloss. in Decretal Greg. lib. 1. Tit. 21. cap. 6. See here a wonderfull case That Luxury hath a greater priviledge then chastity Therefore I conceive it fitter for a Divine to say That Saint Paul intended the remedy before the disease not after it and consequently did allow men to marry that they might avoid not only the guilt but also the danger of fornication for else he had not allowed marriage to avoid fornication till it was impossible to be avoided And consequently it is a greater sin in any Christian Church to allow one Priest to fornicate then to allow all her Priests to marry for by the one she thwarts Gods command by the other she follows his example by the one she approves and encourages a damnable sin by the other she approves and encourages a most glorious Vertue For allowing Priests to marry doth not make their marrying the more necessary but only their abstaining from marriage the more voluntary that is to say It doth only make Viâ—…ginity in Priests a Free will offering which cannot be acceptable unless it be free and the more it is free the more it is acceptable 13. You say further That Saint Paul himself had great temptations of the flesh but did neither marry nor fornicate to avoid them I answer If I had fully transcribed my Instance concerning Abraham as it is in Ignatius his Epistle to the Philadelphians I might have added not only Saint Peter but also Saint Paul to the number of married men and so perchance have prevented this part of your Objection But to let go conjectures Saint Paul himself tells us what were his Temptations Acts 20. 19. even temptations which befell him by the laying in wait of the Jews Temptations from other mens flesh not his own from other mens fleshly minds not from his own fleshly body And I wonder upon what probability of Truth you say Saint Paul was under the sinfull motions of the body when himself saith he could not tell whether he were in the body or out of the body at the time he had that revelation after which was given him a Thorn in the flesh lest he should be exalted above measure v. 3. 7. The Text saith Saint Paul had a Thorn in the flesh not Temptations of the flesh that is he had penall afflictions not sinfull motions These if they went up with him into Paradise yet surely came not with him down from thence For going to Paradise doth by your favour much more purge sin then going to Purgatory Besides datus est mihi stimulus was not so properly said of these motions as natus est in me stimulus carnis meae nor can you say That was given him at that time which you know was born in him so long before and was properly to be called a Relick not a Gift Or that God gave that concupiscence to his chiefest Apostle which by his Spirit he doth subdue in his meanest servants Nor is it probable Saint Paul did call that a Messenger of Satan which was inbred in him from his own natural corruption or ascribe that to the Devil which was rather to be ascribed to the flesh Summe all these inconveniencies together and I believe you will hereafter joyn with Saint Chrysostom Saint Pauls most faithfull interpreter in the judgement of your own Divines who gives us this interpretation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c By the Angel of Satan he meaneth Alexander the Coppersmith those about Hymaeneus and Philetas all that opposed the word and contended or contested against him those who did cast him into prison scourge and drive him away because those did the works of Satan Therefore even as he calleth the Jews the sons of the Devil for following his example so he calleth the Messenger of Satan every man that fell foully upon him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this saith he was the thorne in the flesh given to buffet me And truly the world is still very full of such Messengers of Satan for no Orthodox Divine now adaies can teach men either how to live or how to die according to his duty trust and conscience but legions of factious spirits will be pecking at
him by making either frivolous objections or fond cavils or false calumnies against his Doctrine which in truth is to be the Messengers of Satan And for ought we can see Saint Pauls truest Disciples are most like to have such Messengers to buffet them to the worlds end For this is one of those requests which according to Saint Chrysostom is most like to come under that Text For we know not what we should pray for as we ought Rom. 8. 26. When men who are persecuted and troubled for Religion pray for deliverance from their persecutions or for rest and relaxation from their labours and troubles But yet the Scholars saith he need not be so much ashamed or dismayed for even the great Master of Israel was himself in the same condition Saint Paul saying of himself as well as of others For we know not what we should pray for as we ought and that not out of modesty or humility as appears in that he uncessantly made request to see Rome which was not then granted him when he requested it and that he prayed earnestly and frequently for deliverance from his thorn in the flesh that is from his manifold dangers and afflictions which was never granted him at all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. in Rom. cap. 8. v. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 14. You have here a second place out of Saint Chrysostom to confute your new interpretation take yet a third for upon those words of Saint Paul to the Galathians which are next of kin with these to the Corinthians My temptation which was in the flesh ye despised not Gal. 4. 14. the same Saint Chrysostom thus glosseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I was tumbled and tossed I was beaten with rods I was under a thousand deaths whiles I preached to you and yet though I was in that contemptible condition you contemned me not Me thinks I hear my despised and distressed mother the Church of England at this time saying the same to all that still embrace her doctrine and continue in her Communion For this he meaneth when he saith My Temptation which was in the flesh ye despised not Whereas if Saint Paul had been under such Temptations of the flesh as you imagine these supercilious pretenders who sought to be justified by their own righteousness must needs have condemned him for more then an ordinary sinner They who boasted of their own circumcision in the flesh would certainly have despised him as uncircumcised who had such temptations in the flesh For what is it in the world that to this day makes any man more despicable nor could Saint Paul well have given such proud Justiciaries a greater advantage against him or his doctrine then such an open profession as this which you have made for him That he had great Temptations of the flesh But indeed the whole context speaks with Saint Chrysostom and against you That the Thorn in Saint Pauls flesh was not his great Temptations but his great Tribulations in the flesh For they are particularly mentioned in the ensuing discourse wherein is not one word concerning any impure motions Therefore saith he I take pleasure in infirmities in reproaches in necessities in persecutions in distresses for Christs sake And he particularly asserteth the Grace or strength he had obtained by prayer as given him to encounter with these Tribulations and I ask you seriously would not these words Most gladly therefore will I glory in my infirmities be very ill paraphrased after this manner Most gladly therefore will I glory in my concupiscence and I would fain know how it is possible for that which is naught in the Paraphrase to be good in the Exposition since a Paraphrase is no other but a verbal Exposition 14. Lastly you say This hath and will be still sufficient to the worlds end for millions of good men to undertake the office of Priesthood without needing either to marry or burn especially if they will do as he did not only assiduously pray but also Castigo corpus meum 1 Cor. 9. 27. Good Sir how do you know that the married Clergy with us do not so or that the unmatried Clergy with you do so Did not Saint Peter do this as well as Saint Paul and yet he was doubtless a married man But I answer I do find that men are bid abstain from marriage to fast and pray not that they are bid fast and pray to abstain from marriage nor have Priests any particular promise more then other men that they shall be enabled to live perpetual Virgins by fasting and praying that so they may fast and pray in faith of that promise nor have they any particular command more then other men to fast and pray to enable them to live perpetual Virgins that so they may fast and pray in obedience to that command And why should any man place Religion in that which neither is in faith as to Gods promise nor from obedience as to Gods command And whereas you speak of your millions of good men I heartily wish it may be more then speech but I have a fear a suspition nay a proof that hitherto it hath been no more For first your own Panormitane as I find him quoted by my late Reverend and Learned Diocesan Bishop Davenant makes me fear otherwise for he saith expreslly Credo pro bono salute esset animarum ut volentes possent contrahere I believe it would be for the good and salvation of souls if they that will might marry He means sure the Priests souls and therefore thought many of them deeply plunged in sin for want of marriage Secondly the Testimony of your own Agrippa makes me think otherwise for he saith plainly of your Priests Monks Clanculum confluunt ad lupanaria stuprant sacras virgines vitiant viduas And puts his Quod ego scio vidi to their clancular yet prodigious abominations and at last thus concludes Et quarum animas lucrari debent Deo Illarum corpora sacrificant Diabolo Agrip. de van scientiarum cap. 64. Thirdly the authority of your own Espencaeus makes me say otherwise for these are his words in his exposition upon Titus 1. Turpissimum est quod Clericos cum concubinis pellicibus meretricibus cohabitare liberosque procreare sinunt accepto ab eis atque adeo alicubi a continentibus certo quotannis cansu Habeat concubinam sive non habeat aureum solvat habeat si velit I should have been ashamed of quoting these three Testimonies had not your great boast constrained it but I am ashamed to English these quotations though by so doing I should go near to overthrow your boasting Indeed your own Cassander hath overthrown it for this is his ingenuous profession and confession in this kind That the want of able Ministers idoneorum Ministrorum inopia is one cause amongst others why the constitution which forbids the marriage of Priests in your Church should be recalled for that had kept many