it may be said in some regard that the Church was before the Scriptures when as in order of reason it is evident that the truth of Christianity is supposed to the being of it inasmuch as no man can be or be known to be of the Church but as hee is or is known to be a Christian And truly those that dispute the authority of the Church to be the the reason to believe the sentence of it in mater of Faith to be true are to consider what they will say to that opinion which utterly denies any such authority any such thing as a Church Understanding the Church to be a Society founded by Gods appointment giving publick authority to some persons so or so qualified by that appointment in behalf of the whole For this all must deny that admit Erastus his opinion of Excommunication to be true if they will admit the consequence of their own doctrine Which opinion I have therefore premised in staring this Question that it may appear to require such an answer as may not suppose the being of the Church in that nature but may be a means to demonstrate it But as it is not my intent to begg so great a thing in question by proceeding upon supposition of any authority in the Church before I can prove it to be a Corporation founded with such authority as the foundation of it requireth So is it as farre from my meaning to deny that authority which I do not suppose For hee that denieth the authority of the Church to be the reason why any thing is to be taken for truth or for the meaning of the Scripture may take the due and true authority of the Church to be a part of that truth which is more ancient than the authority of the Church Inasmuch as it must be believed that God hath founded a Society of them which professe Christianity by the name of the Church giving such authority to some members of it in behalf of the whole as hee pleased before it can be believed that this or that is within the authority of the Church For that there is a Church and a publick authority in it and for it and what things they are that fall under that authority if it be true is part of that truth which our Lord and his Apostles whose authority is more ancient than the Church have declared Indeed if it were true that the first truth which all Christians are to believe and for the reason of it to believe every thing else is the saying of persons so and so qualified in the Church then were it evident that the belief of that which is questioned in religion could not be resolved into any other principle But if it be manifest by the motives of Christianity that the authority of the Apostles is antecedent to it that all Scripture and the meaning of Scripture which signifies nothing beside it own meaning and Tradition of the Apostles if any such Tradition over and above Scripture may appear is true not supposing it as appeares by the premises then is the authority of the Church no ground of Faith and so not Infallible There are indeed sundry Objections made both out of Scripture and the Fathers to weaken and to shake such an evident truth which are not here to be related till wee have resolved as well what is the reason of believing in Controversies of Faith as what is not In the mean time if wee demand by what means any person that can pretend to give sentence in Controversies of Faith knowes his own sentence to be infallible or upon what ground hee gives sentence Hee that answers by Scripture or authority of Writers that professe to have learned from the Scriptures or reasons depending on the authority of our Lord and his Apostles acknowledges the authority of the Church not to be the reason of believing For what need wee all this if it were If hee say by the same means for which these are receivable that is by revelation from God It will be presently demanded to make evidence of such revelation the same evidence as wee have for the truth of the Scriptures Which because it cannot be done therefore is this plea laid aside even by them who neverthelesse professe to imbrace the Communion of the Church of Rome because they believe the Church to be Infallible But if it be destructive to all use of reason to deny the conclusion admitting the premises then let him never hope to prevaile in any dispute that holds the conclusion denying the premises For to hold the sentence of the Church Infallible when the means that depend upon the authority of our Lord and his Apostles proves whatsoever is to be believed without supposing any such thing when revelation independent upon their authority there is acknowledged to be none averreth Infallibility in the sentence of the Church denying the onely principle that can inferre it And therefore those that speak things so inconsequent so inconsistent I shall not grant that they speake those things which themselves think and believe but rather that like men upon the rack they speak things which themselves may and in some sort do know not to be true For whosoever holds an opinion which hee sees an argument against that hee cannot resolve is really and truly upon the rack and of necessity seeks to escape by contradicting what himself confesseth otherwise Which every man of necessity doth who acknowledging the reason of believing Christianity to lye in the authority of our Lord and his Apostles challengeth neverthelesse that Infallability which is the reason of believing to all sentences of the Church the mater of which sentence if it be true the reason of it must depend immediately upon the same authority upon which the authority of the Church which sentenceth dependeth But the consequence of this assertion deserves further consideration because all that followes depends upon it Suppose that the Scriptures prove themselves to be the Word of God by the reasons of believing contained in them witnessed by the common sense of all Christians For this admits no dispute If the same consent can evidence any thing belonging to the mater of Faith that will appear to oblige the Faith of all Christians upon the same reason as the Scriptures do whether contained in the Scriptures or not For who will undertake that God could not have preserved Christianity without either Scriptures or new revelations And therefore hee chose the way of writing not as of absolute necessity but as of incomparable advantage If therefore God might have obliged man to believe any thing not delivered by writing whether hee hath or not will remain questionable supposing the Scriptures to be the Word of God upon the ground aforesaid Besides there are many things so manifest in the Scriptures that they can indure no dispute supposing the Scriptures to be the Word of God Many things are every day cleared more and more by applying the knowledg
of the Apostles through all the world offereth to him that feedeth us the First-fruits of his owne gifts in the New Testament So the precept of Oblations goes along with the precept of celebrating the Eucharist as provided for the maintenance of it Againe IV. 34. Et propter hoc illi quidem decimas suorum habebant consecratas qui autem perceperunt libertatem omnia quae sunt ipsorum ad dominicos decernunt usus hilariter liberè dantes ea non quae sunt minora utpote majorum spem habentes Viduâ illâ pauperculâ hîc totum victum suum mittente in Gazophylacium Dei And therefore that there might be a difference between the Oblations of slaves and of those that are free they the Jewes had the Tithes of their goods consecrated by the Law But those who have received freedome do themselves order all their goods to the Lords use as those at Jerusalem did cheerfully and freely Not giving lesse as having greater hopes But that poore Widow throwing into the Treasury of God her whole living Againe Quoniam igitur cum simplicitate Ecclesia offert justè munus ejus purum sacrificium deputatum est Quemadmodum Paulus Philippensibus ait Repletus sum acceptis ab Epaphrodito quae à vobis missa sunt odorem suavitatis hostiam acceptabilem placent em Deo Oportet enim nos oblationem facere in omnibus gratos inveniri fabricatori Deo in sententiâ purâ fide sine hypocrisi in spe firmâ in diâ—ectione ferventi primitias earum quae sunt eis creaturarum offerentes Therefore because the Church offereth with simplicity justly is her Oblations counted a pure Sacrifice As Paul saith to the Philippians I am full having received of Epaphroditus the things which you sent a sweet smell an acceptable sacrifice pleasing to God For it behooveth us making oblations to be found in all things thankfull to God that framed us Offering with pure mindes and faith unfained with firm hope and servent love the First-fruits of those creatures which wee have You see hee qualifieth that which they sent S. Paul no otherwise than the Oblations out of which the Eucharist is consecrated But chargeth the duty peremptorily upon all Christians which evidently presupposeth that it was in force through the whole Church for hee declareth that they did do that which hee moveth them cheerfully and freely to do Making the freedome of Christians the reason why the Gospel declareth not what is Gods as the Law did and so tying them to more Tertullian in the place afore-quoted de praescript Cap. XXX saith that Marcion the Heretick when hee was admitted into the Church out of which hee was excluded afterwards brought in with him ducenta Sestertia And adversus Marc. IV. 4. Adeò antiquius est quod est secundùm nos â—t ipse illi Marcion aliquando crediderit Quum pecuniam in primo calore fidei Catholicae Ecclesiae contulit projectam mox cum ipso posteaquam à nostrâ veritate descivit So is that Gospel of S. Luke which wee use the more ancient that Marcion himself sometimes believed it When in the first heat of the Catholick faith hee contributed also money to the Church which was straight cast out with him when hee fell off to his own Heresie from our truth How could the money that Marcion had brought into the Church with be cast out with him afterwards but because hee offered it to the treasury of the Church and because being there it was with himself disowned by the Church Which never would admit any offering from any body that was not admitted to communion with the Church For how many ancient Canons of the Church are there in which it is forbidden to receive the Oblations of such and such to signifie that they are not admitted to communion with the Church The Testimonies of Tertullian Origen and S. Cyprian I leave them that please to peruse in the History of Tithes Chap. IV. contenting my self by these few to demonstrate upon what ground and with what intent and conscience Christians from the beginning tendred their Oblations at the celebrating of the Eucharist But it will as easily appear that the Church was owner of goods and possessions which Christians did contribute to the maintenance thereof even when it was subject to be persecuted untill persecution was proclaimed For then it cannot be doubted that the Church goods were seized into the Emperors coffers And what evidence more any man can demand for the Corporation of the Church which Idolaters acknowledged as long as they tolerated Christianity I understand not But there can be nothing so eminent as the charge laid to S. Athanasius in the Council of Tyrus and ever after wheresoever his case was questioned that going to visit after the Council of Nicaea and to put the acts of it in execution in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was a Shire of Aegypt next to Alexandria alwaies part of the Diocesse and coming with a guard to the Cell of one Ischyras pretending to be a Priest among the Meletians whom the Council had commanded to be subject to Athanasius and the rest of the Catholick Bishops upon such terms as I have remembred elsewhere and his Cell a Church it fell out that there was a glasse broken which they pretended to be a Chalice For it can no wayes be imagined that this case should trouble the whole Church as it did so long as it remained questionable whether Athanasius was regularly removed or not had not all the Church presupposed that Churches and Altars and Chalices consecrated to God are the Churches goods and that the irreverence which might be showed them might charge upon one of Athanasius his rank a presumption of so much irreverence to Christianity as should render him unworthy of it Therefore Athanasius in his Apology never allegeth any thing to the contrary but many things to evidence that there was neither Church nor Altar nor Chalice there The order of the Emperor Aurelian given for the execution of the sentence of the Christian Synod at Antiochia against Paulus Samosatenus is expresse and peremptory to the purpose How can the Soveraigne acknowledg the House of the Church which is in our Language the Bishops Palace at Antiochia but hee must be understood to acknowledge that which the Christians had disposed of to the Church to be done by virtue of their Law which hee for that time conniving at Christianity alloweth to be the Churches The good Emperor Constantine the Great in restoring to the Church the goods and possessions which had been ravished from it in the persecution under Diocletian and should then be found in being as you may see by Eusebius de Vitâ Constantini II. 36-40 Eccles Hist X. 5. intendeth not hereby to erect the Church into a Corporation by a secular capacity of possessing lands or goods without interruption of Law but professing to restore that which was the Churches
therefore affected a compliance with the ancient Church And truly it is fit it should be thought that they complied with him because hee complied with the Catholick Church for by that reason they shall comply with the Church if in any thing hee comply not with it But it is a great deal too little for him to say that will say the truth for the Church of England For it hath an Injunction which ought still to have the force of a Law that no interpretation of the Scripture be alleged contrary to the consent of the Fathers Which had it been observed the innovations which I dispute against could have had no pretense If this be not enough hee that shall take pains to peruse what Dr. Field hath writ hereupon in his work of the Church shall find that which I say to be no novelty either in the Church of England of in the best learned Doctors beyond the Seas And sure the Reformation was not betrayed when the B. of Sarum challenged all the Church of Rome at S. Pauls Crosse to make good the points in difference by the first DC years of the Church Always it is easie for me to demonstrate that this resolution That the Scripture holding the meaning of it by the Tradition of the Church is the onely means to decide controversies of Faith is neerer to the common terms that the Scripture is the onely Rule of Faith than to that Infallibility which is pretended for the Church of Rome Having demonstrated that to depend upon the Infallibility of the present and the Tradition of the Catholick Church are things inconsistent whereas this cannot be inconsistent with that Scripture which is no lesse delivered from age to age than Tradition is though the one by writing the other by word of mouth and serving chiefly to determine the true meaning of it when it comes in debate And if prejudice and passion carry not men headlong to the ruine of that Christianity which they professâ— it cannot seem an envious thing to comply with the most learned of the Church of Rome who acknowledge not yet any other Infallibility in the Church then I claime rather than with the Socinians the whole Interest of whose Heresie consists in being tryed by Scripture alone without bringing the consent of the Church into consequence and that supposing all mater of Faith must be clear in the Scripture to all them that consult with nothing but Scripture But I cannot leave this point till I have considered a singular conceit advanced in Rushworthes Dialogues for maintaining the Infallibility of the Church upon a new account The pretense of that Book is to establish a certain ground of the choice of Religion by the judgement of common sense To which purpose I pretend not to speak in this place thinking it sufficient if this whole work may inable them who are moved with it duely to make that choice for themselves and to show those that depend on them how to do the like But in as much as no man will deny the choice of Religion to be the choice of truth before falshood in those particulars whereof the difference of Religion consists It is manifest that the means of discerning between true and false in mater of Faith which I pretend cannot stand with that which hee advanceth It consists in two points That the Scripture is not and that Tradition is the certain means of deciding this truth Which if no more were said will not amount to a contradiction against that which I resolve For hee that sayes the Scripture is not the onely means excluding that Tradition which determines the meaning of it doth neither deny that Tradition is nor say that the Scripture is the certain means of deciding this kind of truth But the issue of his reasons will easily show upon what termes the contradiction stands Hee citeth then common sense to witnesse that wee cannot rest certain that wee have those Scriptures which came wee agree by inspiration of God by reason of the manifold changes which common sense makes appearance must come to passe in transcribing upon such a supposition as this That so many Columns as one Book contâ—ins so many Copies at least are made every hundreth years and in every Copy so many faults at least as words in one Column Upon which account 15 or 16 times as many faults having been made in all copies as there are words it will be so much oddes that wee have no true Scripture in any place Abating onely for those faults that may have fallen out to be the same in several copies And if Sixtus V Pope causing 100 copies of the Vulgar Latine to be compared found two thousand faults supposing two thousand copies extant which may be supposed a hundred thousand in any Language what will remain unquestionable It is further alleged that the Scripture is written in Languages now ceased which some call Learned Languages because men learn them to know such Books as are written in them the meaning whereof not being subject to sense dependeth upon such a guessing kind of skill as is subject to mistake as experience showes in commenting of all Authors But especially the Hebrew and that Greek in which wee have the Scriptures That having originally no vowels to determine the reading of it wanting Conjunctions and Preposiaions to determine the signification of him that speaks all the Language extant being contained in the Bible alone the Jews Language differing so much as it does from it the Language of the Prophets consisting of such dark Tropes and Figures that no skill seems to determine what they mean This so copious and by that means so various in the expressions of it though wanting that variety of Conjugations by which the Hebrew and other Eastern Languages vary the sense that to determine the meaning of it is more than any ordinary skill can compasse Adde hereunto the manifold equivocations incident to whatsoever is expressed by writing more incident to the Scripture as pretending to give us the sense of our Lords words for example not the very syllables Adde the uncertainties which the multiplicity of Translations must needs produce and all this must needs amount to this reckoning That God never meant the Bible for the means to decide controversies of Faith the meaning whereof requires many principles which God alone can procure because so indefinite Which the nature of the Book argueth no lesse as I observed being written in no method of a Law or a Rule nor having those decisions that are to oblige distinguished from mater of a farre diverse and almost impertinent nature Upon these premises it is inferred as evident to common sense that the Scripture produces no distinct resolution of controversies though as infinitely usefull for instruction in virtue so tending to show the truth in maters of Faith in grosse and being read rather to know what is in it than to judge by it by the summary agreement of it with that which
is to determine controversies of Faith And what obligation that determination produceth Traditions of the Apostles oblige the present Church as the reasons of them continue or not Instances in our Lords Passeover and Eucharist Penance under the Apostles and afterwards S. Pauls vail eaâ—ing blood and things offered to Idols The power of the Church in limiting these Traditions 178 CHAP. XXV The power of the Church in limiting even the Traditions of the Apostles Not every abuse of this power a sâ—fficient warrant for particular Churches to reforme themselves Heresie consists in denying something necessary to salvation to be believed Schism in departing from the unity of the Church whether upon that or any other cause Implicite Faith no virtue but the effect of it may be the work of Christian charity p. 163 CHAP. XXVI What is to add to Gods Law What to adde to the Apocalypse S. Pauls Anathema The Beraeans S. Johns Gospel sufficient to make one believe and the Scriptures the man of God perfect How the Law giveth light and Christians are taught by God How Idolatry is said not to be commanded by God 168 CHAP. XXVII Why it was death to transgress the determinations of the Jewes Consistory and what power this argueth in the Church A difference between the authority of the Apostles and that of the Church The being of the Church to the worlds end with power of the Keyes makes it not infallible Obedience to Superiours and the Pillar of truth inferre it not 175 CHAP. XXXI The Fathers acknowledge the sufficiencie 〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—rnesse of the Scriptures as the Traditions of the Church They are to be reconciled by limiting the termes which they use The limitations of those sayings which make all Christian truth to be contained in the Scriptures Of those which make the authority of the Church the ground of Faith 181 CHAP. XXXII Answer to an Objection that choice of Religion becomes difficult upon these terms This resolution is for the Interest of the Reformation Those that make the Church Infallible cannot those that make the Scriptures â—â—ear â—nd sufficient may own Tradition for evidence to determine the meaning of the Scriptures and controversies of Faith The Interest of the Church of England The pretense of Rushworthes Dialogues that we have no unquestionable Scripture and that tâ—e Tradition of the Church never changes 192 CHAP. XXXI That the Scriptures which wee have are unquestionable That mistakes in Copying are not considerable to the sense and effect of them The meaning of the Hebrew and Greek even of the Prophets determinable to the deciding of Controversies How Religion delivered by Tradition becomes subject to be corrupted 198 CHAP. XXXIV The dispute concerning the Canon of Scripture and the translations thereof in two Questions There can be no Tradition for those books that were written since Prophesie ceased Wherein the excellence of them above other books lies The chiâ—fe objections against them are questionâ—ble In those parcels of the New Testament that have been questioned the case is not the same The sense of the Church 207 CHAP. XXXIII Onely the Originall Copy can be Authentick But the truth thereof may as well be found in the translations of the Old Testament as in the Jewes Copies The Jewes have not falsified them of malice The points come neither from Moses nor Esdras but from the Talmud Iewes 218 CHAP. XXXIV Of the ancientest Translations of the Bible into Greek first With the Authors and authority of the same Then into the Chaldee Syriack and Latine Exceptions against the Greek and the Samaritane Pentateuch They are helps never thelesse to assure the true reading of the Scriptures though with other Copies whether Jewish or Christian Though the Vulgar Latine were better than the present Greek yet must both depend upon the Original Greek of the New Testament No danger to Christianity by the differences remaining in the Bible 224 The CONTENTS of the second Book CHAP. I. TWo parts of that which remains How the dispute concerning the Holy Trinity with Socinus belongs to the first The Question of justification by Faith alone The Opinion of Socinus concerning the whole Covenant of Grace The opinion of those who make justifying Faith the knowledge of a mans Predestination opposite to it in the other extream The difference between it and that of the Antinomians That there are mean Opinions p. 1 CHAP. II. Evidence what is the condition of the Covenant of Grace The contract of Baptism The promise of the Holy Ghost annexed to Christs not to Johns Baptism Those are made Christs Disciples as Christians that take up his Cross in Baptism The effects of Baptism according to the Apostles 5 CHAP. III. The exhortations of the Apostles that are drawn from the patterns of the Old Testament suppose the same How the Sacraments of the Old and New Testament are the same how not the same How the new Testament and the New Covenant are both one The free-will of man acteth the same part in dealing about the New-Covenant as about the Old The Gospel a Law 12 CHAP. IV. The consent of the whole Church evidenced by the custome of catechising By the opinion thereof concerning the salvation of those that delayed their Baptism By the rites and Ceremonies of Baptism Why no Penance for sins before but after Baptism The doctrine of the Church of England evident in this case 17 CHAP. V. The Preaching of our Lord and his Apostles evidenceth that some act of Mans free choice is the condition which it requireth The correspondence between the Old and New Testament inferreth the same So do the errors of Socinians and Antinomians concerning the necessity of Baptism Objections deferred 23 CHAP. VI. Justifying faith sometimes consists in believing the truth Sometimes in trust in God grounded upon the truth Sometimes in Christianity that is in imbracing and professing it And that in the Fathers as well as in the Scriptures Of the informed and formed Faith of the Schools 30 CHAP. VII The last signification of Faith is properly justifying Faith The first by a Metonymy of the cause The second of the effect Those that are not justified do truly believe The trust of a Christian presupposeth him to be justified All the promises of the Gospel become due at once by the Covenant of Grace That to believe that we are Elect or justified is not justifying faith 37 CHAP. VIII The objection from S. Paul We are not justifyed by the Law nor by Works but by Grace and by Faith Not meant of the Gospel and the works that suppose it The question that S. Paul speakes to is of the Law of Moses and the workes of it He sets those workes in the same rank with the works of the Gentiles by the light of nature The civil and outward works of the Law may be done by Gentiles How the Law is a Pedagogue to Christ 43 CHAP. IX Of the Faith and Justification of Abraham and the Patriarkes according to the Apostles
the Church to be the onely infallible Judge of all Controversies of Faith necessarily suppose that the Church is by Gods appointment that is Jure divino a Corporation Society or Body of men visible though not Civil because standing upon Gods will revealed in order to the happinesse of the world to come In which Society because in no Society all that are Interessed can act for themselvs it behooveth that there be a publick Authority vested in some persons or Bodies the Act whereof may oblige the whole And thus it may and must be understood that the Church is maintained to be Judge in Controversies of Faith by the definitive sentence of those that have authority to oblige the Body Whether Pope or Council wee dispute not here or what else may be imagined For that as all other Controversies in Religion is to be decided by the resolution of the point now in hand what is the means to determine by reason all such differences Which if it could not be decided without supposing whose authority is to tye the Church there could be no end of differences in the Church whatsoever there will be Here is then an opinion famous enough that the Church is indowed with a gift of Infallability by virtue whereof whatsoever sentence is passed by them that are authorized on behalf of the Church becomes matter of Faith and obliges all men to receive it by the same reason for which they receive the Christian Faith Now they who in opposition to this opinion do maintain the Scriptures to be the onely Judge in Controversies of Faith do involve in this opposition an equivocation manifest enough For it is manifest that their intent is to render a reason by this position why they submit not to that sentence which condemneth their positions in the name of the Church To wit because it is contrary to the Scriptures And further why they with-draw themselves from the communion of that Church which condemneth them and joyn in communion grounded upon the profession of the positions condemned maintaining themselves thereupon to be the true Church of God and those that condemne them the corrupt and counterfeit Whereby it appeareth that in effect they do maintain that there is no Judge provided by God to be visible in his Church with the gift of Infallible But that they are themselves and ought to be Judges to condemne all sentences given against the Scripture by any authority established in the Church By which means the Scripture becomes no more the Judge but the Rule or the Law by which men are to judge Whether they are to stand to such sentences as are given in the name of the Church or not Now if the Scripture be the Law or the Rule by which Controversies of Faith are to be judged there will be no pretense to exclude any means that may serve as evidence to clear the meaning of it And therefore there will be no cause why the Tradition of the Church should not be joyned with the Scripture in deciding Controversies of Faith Not disputing hitherto whether or no it contain any thing that the Scripture containeth not to clear and to determine the sense of the Scripture Whereas they that maintain the sentence of the present Church to be the reason of believing can no way resolve their belief into the Tradition of the Catholick Church Because that supposes only the act of our Lord and his Apostles delivering to the Church that which it holdeth Which who so supposeth can allege no other reason why hee believeth And therefore the sentence of the present Church cannot be the reason why any man should believe that which there was reason from the beginning to believe without it They who to exclude the Tradition of the Church state this position upon these terms That all things necessary to salvation are clearly contained in the Scriptures pretending to limit the generality of the question put it upon an issue not to be tryed till wee have resolved what means there is to determine the meaning of the Scripture For to be necessary to salvation is to be true and something more So that nothing can appear necessary to salvation till it can appear to be true Nor appear to be true untill it can be resolved what means there is to distinguish between true and false Besides how unlimited this limitation is may appear by this Because whatsoever is clear is said to be clear in relation to some sight And there is so much difference between the sight of several Christians that nothing can be said to be clear to all because it is clear to some And that which is not clear to all whose salvation is concerned in it what availes it those to whom it is not clear Now I suppose those that advance these termes will not grant that nothing is necessary to salvation that may be questioned by an argument out of the Scripture which all Christians cannot answer Knowing that such things as themselvs hold necessary to salvation may be assalted by such reasons out of the Scripture as they do not think all Christians fit to resolve Besides they do not pretend that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scripture of themselvs but by consequence of reason which may make them clear Now hee that would draw true consequences from the Scripture had need be well informed of the mater of that Scripture which hee drawes into consequence And to that information how can it appear that any thing is more necessary than the Tradition of the Church Therefore though I say not yet whether it be true or false that all things necessary to salvation are clearly contained in the Scriptures yet at the present I say that this is not the prime truth which must give a reason of all that followes upon it but demands a reason to be given for it by those principles upon which the resolution of all maters of Faith depends All this while wee agree upon the supposition that the Church is a Society of men subsisting by Gods revealed will distinct from all other Societies Because as I said those that have departed from the Church of Rome have hitherto pretended their own communion to be the true Church For if it be said that they do not or scarce ever did agree in communion one with another so that they can pretend to constitute all one Church That is not because they do not think that they ought all to constitute one Church but because they agree not upon the conditions Each part thinking that the other doth not believe as those whom they may communicate with ought to believe But this is now manifestly contradicted by two opinions among us though the one can be no â—ect the other as yet appears not to be one The first is that of them that think themselves above Ordinances the Communion of the Church onely obliging proficients and every perfect Christian being to himself a Church Of these
who professe the true Christ Nor under the Law were granted but to those who professed the true God And for this cause they are called by S. Paul 1 Cor. XII 7. the manifestation of the Spirit because they manifest the presence of God in his Church As 1 Cor. XIV 22-25 hee saith that unbelievers seeing the secrets of their hearts revealed by those graces were moved to fall on their faces and worship God declaring that God is in his Church of a truth Those therefore who are thus witnessed by God upon his witnesse are to be received whatsoever they deliver in Gods name concerning either the Law of Moses or the Gospel of Christ For how can any man imagine that upon every new revelation declared by a Prophet upon every new letter written or act done by an Apostle a new evidence should be requisite to attest a new Commission from God Especially the presumption that God will not suffer his people to be abused by trusting him being necessary and not onely reasonable Since therefore our Lord and his Apostles carry this quality no lesse than did Moses and the Prophets it followes of necessity that their writings and what else they may have ordained are no lesse the Law of God no lesse obliging than the Law of Moses by virtue of their Commission which makes their acts in Gods name to be Gods acts Though civil Law they are not till civil Powers binde them upon their Subjects CHAP. IV. Neither the Dictate of Gods Spirit nor the authority of the Church is the reason of believing any thing in Christianity Whether the Church be before the Scripture or the Scripture before the Church The Scriptures contain not the Infallibility of the Church Nor the consent of all Christians IT is now time to proceed to the resolution of some part of those disputes and opinions which wee showed the world divided into upon occasion of the question how Controversies of Faith are to be tryed and ended That is to say so much of them as must be determined by him that will proceed in this dispute For supposing the premises to be true I shall not make any difficulty to conclude That neither the dictate of the Spirit of God to the Spirits of particular Christians that is the presumption of it nor the authority of the Church that is the presumption of the like dictate to any persons that may be thought to have power of obliging the Church is a competent reason to decide the meaning of the Scripture or any Controversie about mater of Faith obliging any man therefore to believe it And by consequence that the authority of the Church that is of persons authorized to give sentence in behalf of the Body of the Church here understood is not Infallible which if it were it must be without question admitted for a competent reason of believing all such sentences to be Infallibly true The truth of this Conclusion is demonstrated by the premises if any thing in a mater of this nature can be counted demonstrative If whatsoever the Spirit of God can be presumed to dictate to the Spirit of any Christian presupposeth the truth of Christianity as that which must try it whether onely a presumption or truth then can no mans word that professes Christianity be the reason why another man should believe For whosoever it is that gives the sentence by professing Christianity pretendeth to have a reason for what hee professeth which reason and not his judgment if it be good obligeth all Christians as well as him to believe For being once resolved that wee are obliged to believe whatsoever comes from those persons whom wee are convinced to believe that God imployed to declare his will to us Whatsoever is said to come from them must for the same reason be received and therefore by the same meanes said to come from them as it is said that they came from God On the other side whatsoever cannot by the same means be said to come from them can never by any means be said to come from God who hath given us no other means to know what hee would have us believe but those whom hee hath imployed on his message Wherefore seeing the authority of the Church supposeth the truth of Christianity of necessity it supposeth the reason for which whatsoever can be pretended to belong to Christianity is receivable Because supposing for the present though not granting that the Church is a Body which some persons by Gods appointment have authority to oblige it is manifest that no man can be vested with this authority but hee must bear the profession of a Christian and by consequence suppose the reasons upon which whatsoever belongs to the profession of a Christian is receivable For that which cannot be derived as for the evidence of it from those means by which wee stand convicted that Christianity stands upon true motives cannot be receivable as any part of it And therefore however the generality of this reason may obscure the evidence of it to them that take not the pains to consider it as it deserves yet the truth of it supposes no more than all use of reason supposes that all knowledg that is to be had proceeds upon something presupposed to be known In which case it would be very childish to consider that the Church is more ancient in time than the Scriptures at least than some part of them as the Writings of the Apostles for example in some sort then all Scriptures if wee understand the people of God and the Church to be the same thing For to passe by sor the present the Fathers before the Law as the people of Israel were Gods people by the Covenant of the Law before they received the Law written in the five Books of Moses So was the authority of Moses imployed by God to mediate that Covenant both good and sufficient before they by accepting the Law became Gods people And upon this authority alone and not upon any authority founded upon their being Gods people free and possessed of the Land of Promise to be ruled by themselves and their own Governors dependeth the credit of Moses and the Prophets Writings In like manner the being of the Church whether a Society and Corporation or not supposing the profession of Christianity and that the receiving of the Gospel which is the Covenant of Grace and that the authority of our Lord and his Apostles as sent by God to establish it Manifest it is that the credit of their Writings depends on nothing else but is supposed to the being of the Church whatsoever it is Which if it be so no lesse manifest it must be that nothing is receivable for truth in Christianity that cannot be evidenced to proceed from that authority that is more antient than the being of the Church as a truth declared by some act of that authority And therefore it would be childish to allege priority of time for the Church if perhaps
made of a General Council whether constituted according to right or not whether proceeding without force and fraud or not Is it as evident to all Christians as their Christianity or the Scriptures that it is not If it be said that all Catholicks agree that the Pope with a General Council or a General Council confirmed by the Pope cannot erre First what shall oblige them to agree For if they agree not their Infallibility is not evident to all Christians nor if their agreement appear casual can it be taken for a ground of Faith that is undefeifible Then to set aside all the East which contesting the Power of the Pope cannot concurre to this Infallibility about the Councils of Constance and Basle when the dispute between the Pope and Council was at the hottest there lived divers Doctors of repute that have maintained this Infallibility to be the gift and privilege not of the present but of the Catholick Church By name Ockam Alliacensis Panormitane Antoninus Cusanus Clemangis and Mirandula Whose words you may see in Doctor Baron of Aberdene his dispute de Objecto Fidei Tract V. Cap. XIX XX. Further I demand if there be in the Church a gift of Infallibility indâ—pendent upon the Scripture that is obliging to believe the decrees thereof which our common Christianity evidenceth not can it appear without the like reasons for which wee believe the Scripture Where is the evidence that Gods Spirit inspires them with their decrees Nay when wee see Popes and Councils imploy the same means to finde the truth of things in question which other men do would they have us believe that they shall not fail by Gods providence when they use no means but that may fail nor have themselves any reason in them to evidence that they do not fail For if they had they might make it appear But of all things the strâ—ngest is that they should undertake to perâ—wade the world this when as the Church it self never determined it Of all things that ever the Church of any time took in hand to decree it will never appear that ever it was decreed that the decrees of the present Church are to be admitted for Gods truth And therefore there is not so much appearance of any opinion the Church of Rome has that it is true as there is of humane policy in breeding men up in such prejudicate conceits which education makes them as zealous of as of their Faith though meer contradiction to the grounds of it That being intangled in their own understandings to hold things so inconsistent they may be the fitter instruments to intangle others in that obedience to the Church which they hold necessary though upon false reasons For as Antony disputes in Tully de Oratore that no man is so fit to induce others into passion as hee that appears really possessed with the same so is no man so fit to imbroile the true reason and order of believing in another mans understanding as hee that is himself first confounded in it There is indeed a plauâ—â—ble inconvenience alleged if it be not admitted to wit that differences cannot be ended otherwise But to object an inconvenience is not to answer an argument say Logicians Nor is it say I to demonstrate a truth It is requisite the Church should be one Suppose wee this for the present for it is not proved as yet but it is not therefore necessary that the unity thereof should depend upon the deâ—ision of all Controversies that arise what true what false It is a great deal easier to command men not to decide their own opinions than to believe their adversaries For to decide is nothing else but to command all men to judge one part to be true when it appeareth that a great part have already judged it to be false But not to offend him that hath declared a contrary judgment is a thing to be attained of him that cannot see reason to judge the same Charity may have place in all things in question among Christians though Faith be confined to the proper mater of it though wee cannot yet determine what that proper mater is and upon what termes it standeth It remains therefore that all presumption concerning the truth of the Churches decrees presupposeth the corporation of the Church the foundation thereof nor can any way be evidenced by supposing onely the truth of the Scriptures and the consent of Christians as Christians which conveyes the evidence thereof unto us So that the belief of the Scriptures and of all things so clear in the Scriptures that they are not questioned in the Church depending upon the evidence of Gods revelations to his messengers But the belief of the Churches decrees inasmuch as not evidenced by the Scriptures upon the presumption of the right use of the Power vested in them that decree by the foundation of the Church if that foundation may appear they do not allow us the common reason of all men that require us to yield the same credit to both CHAP. V. All things necessary to salvation are not clear in the Scriptures to all understandings Not in the Old Testament Not in the Gospel Not in the Writings of the Apostles It is necessary to salvation to believe more than this that our Lord is the Christ Time causeth obscurity in the Scriptures aswell as in other Records That it is no where said in the Scriptures that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scriptures Neither is there any consent of all Christians to evidence the same IN the next place to proceed by steps I must negatively conclude on the other side that all things necessary to the salvation of all are not of themselves clear in the Scriptures to all understandings Whereby I say not that all such things are not contained in the Scriptures as if some thing necessary to the salvation of all were to be received by Tradition alone Nor that being in the Scriptures they are not clear and discernable to the understandings of those that are furnished with means requisite to discern the meaning of the Scriptures But that which I stand upon is that it is not nor ought to be a presumption that this or that is not necessary to salvation because it is not clear in the Scriptures Which if it were admitted whosoever were able to make such an argument against any Article of Faith as all understandings interessed in salvation could not dissolve such as it is plain may be made against the truth of Christianity should have gained this that though it may be true yet it cannot be an Article of Faith To my purpose indeed it were enough in this place to prove that this is not the first truth in Christianity to wit that all things necessary to salvation are clear by the Scriptures For having obtained that there is no Rule to conclude those doctrines which may be questioned not to be Articles of Faith so that it cannot thereupon be
salvation of all and that which becomes necessary to the salvation of some by reason of their particular states and conditions cannot be said The writings of the Apostles are their Epistles with their Acts and S. Johns Revelations if these may not be referred to the rank of their Epistles The chief of their Epistles that to the Romanes that to the Galatians that to the Ebrewes with the greatest part of the rest are either occasioned by the reservation which they used in declaring to those that were become Christians of Jewes their discharge from the Law as justified by Christ or by the secret indeavors of Hereticks pretending Commission from the Apostles on one side on the other practising compliance with the Jewes to seduce those that inclined to the Law to the damnable inventions of Simon Magus and his Successors But none of them pretendeth more than preventing or avoiding those particular disorders which appeared in the respective Churches For what the Apostles did in setling Christianity at Jerusalem or propagating it by S. Paul especially so farre as the book of the Acts relates what S. John saw touching the state of Christianity to come I suppose is something else than the summe of all that is necessary to the salvation of all Christians And though in discretion every man may presume that upon occasion of the expresse purposes of these writings there is nothing necessary to the salvation of all that is not touched in some place of them yet it is one thing to be touched upon the by another thing to be delivered upon expresse purpose For those things that are but touched upon occasion referring to the knowledge which they presuppose cannot must not containe the clear understanding of those things which they onely touch Unlesse wee will have the Writer so impertinent as upon every occasion to turne aside and instruct him that hee writes to in such things as hee supposes him to know afore So the reason why the summe or substance of Christianity is not clear in the Old Testament and Gospels is because it was not then clearly preached Why not in the writings of the Apostles is because it was clearly delivered afore the clear delivering of it being seen in the catechizing of them that came to the profession of the Gospel and the communion of the Church Beside this reason particular to the Apostles writings there is another that is seen not onely in the Law and Prophers as well as in them but in all ancient records of learning arising from the distance of time between us and the writing of them and the change which such a succession produceth in the stare of things necessarily inferting obscurity answerable to that difference in the condition of those things which they expresse There is no record of Learning so flight that any man who knowes what belongs to Learning can presume of a cleare understanding of it till by comparing it with other writings nearest to it in nature and time hee get satisfaction in it For such a change of language followes the changes that come to passe in Times and Places and Lawes and Fashions and the condition of persons consequent to the same that till they be understood by reading seeing and hearing not being available in languages out of use the meaning of Writers is not to be had from their words How much more in writings of such consideration as the Scriptures are to the Church of such antiquity as the Law and Prophets and the primitive Church of the Apostles of such difference from the present state of things as between the Law either flourishing under the Princes of Gods people or tolerated by their Soveraignes between the Gospel springing up in the midst of the Empire professing Heathenisme but protecting Judaisme and the Gospel professed and protected by Christian powers and people So little record remaining otherwise either of things done under the Law or under the Apostles so farre from priding themselves in writing books How much more I say must we be in the dark for the clear meaning of that whereof every tittle is conâ—â—derable That the Apostles writings were no way obscure to those they were directed to is to mee unquestionable For though it is reasonable that they should as wee see they do in some passages rise above the pitch of the common capacity even of them they were writ to least they should become subject to neglect So that for the most part they should not be understood of the most part would be a manifest inconvenience But it is no inconvenience that by distance of time they should become liable to the same difficulty of being understood which all other ancient writings necessarily become subject to And that reason appeareth no lesse in those things which concern the necessary salvation of all than in maters of lesse consequence It will therefore be hard to reconcile to any capacity of reason that which is advanced for the first truth towards the deciding of all Controversies of Faith that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scriptures to all understandings Those Scriptures which onely can be pretended to deliver the truth of Christianity clearly neither professing to deliver the whole summe and substance of it and being directed to those who are supposed already instructed in all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians Therefore this unreasonable presumption is not to create any difficulty to that reason of deciding Controversies of Faith which wee proceed to settle upon the premises I cannot tell whether or no it was requisite to say so much against a presumption meerly voluntary and which common experience contradicts For if all agreeing in the truth of Christianity and the Scriptures there remain dispute about things which some count necessary to salvation others not It is enough that the truth of Christianity inferreth means sufficient to clear the truth of what remaines on dispute But first it is manifest that what remaines in dispute is not of it self manifest to all that acknowledge the Scriptures but may become manifest to them that use such means as the truth of Christianity inforceth Neverthelesse since they that are in love with their own presumptions though never so dangerous to the supreme Majesty take whatsoever crosses them for a derogation to the Scriptures let thus much be said to show that by giving the Scriptures no man may presume that God intended to declare in them whatsoever is necessary to the salvation of all clearly to all understandings But if this must have been supposed as a principle or ground whereupon wee are to resolve all Controversies of Faith it would have been requisite to have showed us that this truth is of all other so much more clearly laid down in the Scriptures as that which concurres to the clearing of all ought it self to be the most clear Now if wee consider that this privilege of containing all that is necessary to the salvation of all belongs
mentioning the Devil and his Angels nor of that not mentioning the creation of Angels The knowledge then requisite to save a Christian containeth the Apostasy of the evil Angels whether it be in the Creed or not because neither the Creed as it is nor Baptisme in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost can be understood to have any sense without supposing it And therefore Irenaeus I. 2. could not deliver this Rule without mentioning the Devil and his Angels though I intend not thereupon to argue that it was contained in the words of the Creed at that time By S. Cyrils Catechises you shall understand that those who pretended to Baptisme at Easter were to be instructed in the sense and grounds of their Creed during the Lent And S. Augustine in his book de Catechizandis rudibus where hee acquaints his friend that had writ to him about something of that office with the form that hee was wont to use instructs him to begin with the beginning of Genesis and setting forth what course God had taken with mankinde before and under the Law to bring down his discourse to the coming of Christ and from thence to his second coming to Judgment Which is to the very same purpose onely taking opportunity to mixe the motives of Faith which the Old Testament containeth with the mater of Faith which the New Testament requireth Whatsoever then is said of the Rule of Faith in the writings of the Fathers is to be understood of the Creed Whereof though it be not maintained that the words which Pretenders were required to render by heart were the same yet the substance of it the reasons and grounds which make every point necessary to be believed were alwaies the same in all Churches and remaine unchangeable I would not have any hereupon to think that the mater of this Rule is not in my conceit contained in the Scriptures For I finde S. Cyril Catech. V. protesting that it containes nothing but that which concerned our salvation the most selected out of the Scriptures And therefore in other places he tenders his Scholars evidence out of the Scriptures and wishes them not to believe that whereof there is no such evidence And to the same effect Eucherius in Symb. Hom. I. Paschasius de Sp. S. in Praef. and after them Thomas Aquinas secunda II. Quest I. Art IX all agree that the form of the Creed was made up out of the Scriptures Giving such reasons as no reasonable Christian can refuse Not onely because all they whose salvation is concerned have not leisure to study the Scriptures but because they that have cannot easily or safely discern wherein the substance of Faith upon the profession whereof our salvation depends consisteth Supposing that they were able to discern between true and false in the meaning of the Scriptures To which I will adde onely that which Tâ—rtullian and others of the Fathers observe of the ancient Hereticks that their fashion was to take occasion upon one or two texts to overthrow and deny the main substance and scope of the whole Scriptures Which whether it be seen in the Sects of our time or not I will not say here because I will not take any thing for granted which I have not yet principles to prove but supposing it onely a thing possible I will think I give a sufficient reason why God should provide Tradition as well as Scripture to bound the sense of it As S. Cyril also cautioneth in the place aforenamed where hee so liberally acknowledgeth the Creed to be taken out of the Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For saith hee the Faith was not framed as it pleased men but the most substantial maters collected out of the Scripture do make up one doctrine of the Faith For I beseech you what had they whosoever they were that first framed the Creed but Tradition whereby to distinguish that which is substantial from that which is not Heare Origen in the Preface to his books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cùm multi sum qui sentire se putent quae Christi sunt nonnulii eorum diversa à prioribus sentiant servetur verò Ecclesiastica praedicatio per successionis ordinem ab Apostolis tradita usque ad praesens in Ecclesiis permanens Illa sola credenda est veritas quae in nullo ab Ecclesiasticâ discordat traditione Illud tamen scire opor tet quoniam sancti Apostoli fidem Christi praedicantes de quibusdam quidem quaecunque necessaria crediderunt omnibus credentibus etiam his qui erga inquisitionem divinae scientiae pigriores videbantur manifestissimê tradiderunt Rationem scilicet assertionis relinquentes eis inquirendam qui Spiritûs dona excellentia praecipuè sermonis sapientiae scientiae per ipsum Spiritum Sanctum percipere merebantur De aliis verò dixerunt quidem quia sint quomodo autem aut unde sint siluerunt profectò ut studiosiores quoque l. quique ex posteris suis amatores sapientiae scientiae exercitium habere possent in quo ingenii sui fructum ostendere valerent Hi videlicet qui dignos se capaces sapientiae praepararent Species verò eorum quae per praedicationem Apostolicam manifestè traduntur hae sunt There being many that think their sense to be Christian and yet the sense of some differs from their predecessors But that which the Church preaches as delivered by order of succession from the Apostles being preserved and remaining the same in the Churches That onely is to be believed for truth which nothing differs from the Tradition of the Church This notwithstanding wee must know That the holy Apostles preaching the Faith of Christ delivered some things as many as they held necessary most manifestly to all believers even those whom they found the duller in the search of divine knowledge Leaving the reason why they affirmed them to the search of those that goe to receive the eminent gifts of the Holy Ghost especially of utterance wisedom and knowledge by the Holy Ghost Of other things they said that they are but how or whereupon they are they said not Forsooth that the more studious of their Successors loving wisedom and knowledge might have some exercise wherein to show the fruit of their wit To wit those that should prepare themselves to be worthy and capable of wisedom Now the particulars of that which is manifestly delivered by the preaching of the Apostles are these Which hee proceedeth to set down But Vincentius Lerinensis hath writ a Discourse on purpose to show that this Rule of Faith being delivered by succession to the principal as S. Paul requires Timothy to do and by them to those that were baptized was the ground upon which all Heresies attempting upon the Faith were condemned So that so many Heresies as historical truth will evidence to have been excluded the Church from the Apostles time for mater of belief so many convictions of this Rule Which
because all agreed that they transgressed therefore they were excluded the Church But Vincentius besides this advanceth another mark to discern what belongs to the Rule that is what the ground and scope of our Creed requires For it might be said that perhaps something may come in question whether consistent with the Rule of Faith or not in which there hath passed no decree of the primitive Church because never questioned by that time Wherein therefore wee shall be to seek notwithstanding the decrees past by the Church upon ancient Heresies Which to meet with Vincentius saith further that whatsoever hath been unanimously taught in the Church by writing that is alwaies by all every where to that no contradiction is ever to be admitted in the Church Here the stile changes For whereas Irenaeus Tertullian and others of former time appeal onely to that which was visible in the practice of all Churches By the time of the Council at Ephesus the dare of Vincentius his book so much had been written upon all points of Faith and upon the Scriptures that hee presumeth evidence may be made of it all what may stand with that which the whole Church had taught what may not I know this proposition satisfieth not now because I know Vincentius proceedeth upon supposition that the Church was and ought to be alwaies one Body in which that which agreeth with the Faith might be taught that which agreeth not might not Which is the question now in dispute For upon other termes it had been madnesse in him to allege and maintain the Council of Ephesus condemning Nestorius as infringing the Rule of Faith upon this presumption because ten received Doctors of the Church had formerly delivered the contrary of his doctrine It is well enough known that there are many questions in which though there may be ten Fathers alleged on one side yet there may be more alleged on the other side And it were a piteous case if Vincentius or I could tell you no wiser a way for the ending of Controversies in Religion than by counting noses The presumption lies in this That the witnesles that depose being of such credit in the Church as the quality which they beare in it presupposeth it cannot reasonably be imagined that they could teach that for truth which is inconsistent with Christianity but they must be contradicted in it and their quality and degree in the Church questioned upon it And that the Church having been alwaies one and the same Body from Christ whosoever should undertake to teach that for the Christian Faith which from the beginning had been counted false hee would have been questioned for contradicting that profession which qualified him for that rank which hee held in the Church It is the case of Nestorius who venting his Heresie in the Church gave the people occasion to check at it and the Council of Ephesus to condemn it Now Vincentius his discourse presupposeth that the doctrine of those ten whom hee allegeth had not been contradicted A thing which must needs be presupposed by him that supposed the Great Council of Nicaea had decreed no more than that which had alwaies been taught in the Church For it is plain that without questioning the Faith setled at Nicaea there is no room for the opinion of Nestorius But otherwise should ten of that quality which hee allegeth be so considerably contradicted that it must be presumed their doctrine was suffered to passe not as not taken notice of but as not contradicting the common profession of Christians it will appear a presumption that neither part is of the substance of Faith but both allowed to be taught in the Church And if it appear further that the fewer in number and the lesse in rank and quality in the Church hold that which dependeth more necessarily upon the Rule of Faith which containeth the substance of the Scriptures it will be no way prejudicial to the Unity and authority of the Church as a Corporation founded by God that a private man as I am should conclude it for truth against the greater authority in maters depending upon the foundation of the Church If it be said that this evidence supposeth the necessity of Baptisme to the making of a Christian Which not onely the Leviathaâ— is farr from granting who professeth himself bound to renounce Christ at the command of his Soveraign But the Socinians also and some of our Sectaries hold indifferent to salvation whether baptized or not I answer That the question here is not what belongs or belongs not to the Rule of Faith and Christian conversation necessary to the salvation of all Christians but whether there be any such Rule or not That the original and universal custome of Carechizing all Christians evidenceth such a Rule by the consent of all Christians as you have seen it evidenced by the frequent mention thereof in Scriptures That therefore it stands recommended to us by the same means and upon the same grounds for which wee receive the holy Scriptures And that though when the World was come into the Church and many more were baptized infants then afore it cannot be said that this order of Catechizing was so substantially performed as afore Yet the mater and theme of it remaining in the Tradition of the Creed and the sense of it in the writings of the Fathers and the decrees of the Church against Hereticks it remains still visible what belongs to it what not as I shall make appear in that which is questioned within the subject of this book Onely this is the place where I am to allege against the Leviathan why the profession of Christianity is necessary to the salvation of all Christians Whereupon it will follow without further proof that it is necessary to salvation to believe more than that Jesus is the Christ To wit whatsoever this Rule of Christianity containeth the profession whereof is requisite to Christianity Heare our Lord Mat. X. 32 33. Luke XII 8 9. Whosoever shall renounce mee before men him will I renounce before my Father which is in heaven And whosoever shall acknowledge mee before men him will I acknowledge before my Father which is in heaven And S. Paul Rom. X. 9 10. If thou confesse with thy mouth that Jesus is the Lard and believe with thy heaâ—t that God raised him from the dead that shalt be saved For with the heart a man believes to righteousnesse and with the mouth hee professeth to salvation And a Tim. II. 12. If wee deny him hee will deny us Our Lords Commission to his Apostles is Mat. XXVIII 19. Go make disciples all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Who are then Christs Disciples That wee may know what the Apostles are to make them whom they make Christs Disciples Yâ—e are my Disciples saith our Lord if yee do whatsoever I command you And John XV. 8. Herein is my Father glorified that yee heart 〈◊〉 fruit
the visibility of the Church and the assurance that every particular Christian might have during this intelligence and correspondence that holding communion with his own Pastor hee held the true Faith together with the Unity of the Catholick Church Neither putting trust in man which God curseth nor in his own understanding for the sense of the Scriptures but trusting his own common sense as well for the means of conveying to him the mater as the motives of Christianity For why is it enough for Irenaeus and Tertullian for S. Augustine and Optatus to allege the Church of Rome and the succession from the Apostles for evidence that the Faith of those Hereticks was contrived by themselves that the Donatists were out of communion with the Church Because supposing that the Apostles and Disciples of our Lord all communicated in the same Faith which they taught the Churches of their own founding other Churches founded and the Pastors of them constituted by the authority of those Churches must needs be founded and settled upon condition of maintaining and professing the same Faith So that if any Christian or Pastor should attempt the unsettling of any part thereof the people to stand bound rather to follow the original consent of the whole from whence they received their Christianity than any man that should forfeit his ingagement to the whole in the judgment of the whole This being the true ground for the authority of Councils might and did take effect without assembling of Councils S. Cyprian directs his leters to Steven Bishop of Rome to write to the Churches of Gaule to ordain a new Bishop in stead of Marcianus in the Church of Arles because hee had joyned with the Novatians To the Spanish Bishops owning the Deposing of Basilides and Martialis and the Ordaining of those whom they had put in their places notwithstanding that upon false suggestions they had gained Steven Bishop of Rome to maintain them Epist LXV LXVI Could any man in his right senses have attempted this had it not been received among Christians which hee alleges that the people of particular Churches are bound not to acknowledge those for their Pastors whom the communion of the Church disowneth whether assembled in Council or not The acts of Councils themselves such are the creation of a Bishop of Arles in stead of Marcianus of Spanish Bishops in stead of Basilides and Martialis depending upon the authority of the Churches of Rome and Carthage that concurred not to them in presence If this be imputed to any mistake of Gods appointment in the ancient Church it will be easie for mee to allege Tertullians reason to as good purpose against our Independent Congregations as hee used it against the Hereticks of his time For if the chief Power of the Church be vested in those that assemble to serve God at once without any obligation to the resolution of other Congregations then is the trust that a Christian can repose in the Church resolved into that confidence which hee hath of those seven with whom hee joyneth to make a Congregation that the ruling part of them cannot faile Or rathâ—r into that which hee hath of himself and of the Spirit of God guiding his choice to those that shall not faile They presuming themselves to have the Spirit of God without declaring what Christianity they professe for the condition upon which they obtain it need no provision of a Catholick Church to preserve that Faith which the Gift of the Holy Ghost supposeth God who requireth the profession of a true Faith in them upon whom hee bestoweth his Spirit hath provided the communion of his Church for a means to assure us of that which it preserveth That it is presumption in them to oversee this no imposture in the Church to challenge it Tertullians reason determines The Hereticks pleaded that the Churches had departed from the Faith which the Apostles had left them To this after other allegations hee sets his rest up on this one that error is infinite truth one and the same That no common sense will allow that to be a mistake in which all Christians agree They all agreed in the same Faith against those Hereticks because they all agreed in acknowledging the Catholick Church provided by God to preserve and propagate it against our Independent Congregations Thus Tertullian de Praescript XXVIII There have been some Disputers of Controversies that have claimed the benefit of Tertullians exception against the Hereticks of his time in behalf of the Church of Rome Hee pleadeth not that the Catholicks ought not but that they are not bound to admit them to dispute upon the Scriptures being able to condemne them without the Scriptures And they plead that the Reformation not standing to those Pastors whom they acknowledge to possesse the place of those that derived their authority by succession from the Apostles may be condemned without Scripture as not holding the truth who hold not that which is taught by the said Pastors Which is to demand of those of the Reformation for an end of all debates first to acknowledge those Pastors and that which they teach then to take that for the true meaning of the Scripture which that which they reach alloweth or requireth But this supposes the sentence of the Church to be an infallible ground for the truth of that which it determineth And therefore to be accepted with the same Faith as our common Christianity or the Scriptures Which I showed you already to be false It shall therefore suffice mee to say that those men consider not the difference between the plea of the Reformation and that of those Hereticks For they acknowledging our Lord Christ and his Apostles no otherwise than the Alcoran and Mahomet doth where they served their turn made no scruple to say when it was for their purpose that they knew not the depth of Gods minde which themselves by some secret way having attained to know were therefore called Gnosticks That they imparted not the utmost of their knowledge to all alike when that served their turne That therefore the Scriptures were unperfect and revealed not that secret whereby they promised their salvation but by incklings These things you shall finde in Tertullian de Praescript XXII and Irenaeus III. 1. as well as that plea which I mentioned afore that the Churches were fallen from that which they had received of the Apostles Whereas those of the Reformation allege against the Church of Rome that those Hereticks pretended Tradition as they do Without cause indeed For what is Tradition pretended to be delivered in secret to them and by them who tender no evidence for it to that which the visibility of Christianity and the grounds upon which it is settled justifieth But so as to make it appear that they no way disown the Apostles or their writings nor can expect salvation by any other meanes And therefore are manifestly to be tryed by the Scriptures acknowledged on both sides provided the trial
unity of the Church which professed it Thus then writeth Irenaeus This preaching and this faith the Church having received as I said afore though dispersed all over the world carefully keepeth as if it inhabited one house And believeth these things alike as if it had one soule and one heart And harmoniously preacheth and teacheth and delivereth them as if it had but one mouth For there be divers languages in the world but the Tradition signifies the same Nor do the Churches seated in the Germanies believe or deliver otherwise nor those in the Spaines nor among the Gaules nor in the East nor in Aegypt nor in Africk nor those that are seated in the middle parts of the world But as the Creature of God the Sun is one and the same in all the world so shineth the preaching of the truth every where inlightning all men that will come to the knowledge of the truth And neither will any of those that Rule in the Churches though powerfull in speaking say things diverse from these for the Disciple is not above his Master nor hee that is weak in speech abate of that which is delivered For to the same Faith neither hee that is able to say much of it addeth nor hee that is able to say little abateth of it Hee that acknowledges this to be Gods doing must of necessity acknowledge the means of it the concurrence of all Churches to the maintainance of unity in the same Faith by disowning those that pretended to break it not left to mans will but injoyned by Gods And Irenaeus his instance in the Church of Rome serves to good purpose to make out this evidence For all Churches that is as Irenaeus sayes Christians of all Churches having necessarily recourse to Rome for all occasions because it was the seat of the Empire might there inform themselves and their Churches of the perverse doctrines that might be on foot and of the consent of the Churches in refusing the same In the next place I will not forget the relation of Epiphanius concerning Marcion in the beginning of his Heresie because it is next in time and of great consequence Hee being put out of the Church by his Father Bishop of Sinope in Pontus and making sure to be admitted by the Church of Rome received this answer That they could not do it without his Fathers consent because the Faith is one and the Unity the same Compare herewith the proceeding of Synesius against Andronicus Ep. LVIII LXXIX though so much distant in time which in the first book de Synedriis Judaeorum pag. 304. is said to be of a high strain Hee saith that if any Church neglecting his Church of Ptolomais as a poor Church being the Church of a small City shall receive to communion those whom it had excommunicated hee shall be thereby guilty of dividing the Church which Christ will have to be one And tell mee how this proceeding differs from that which in Marcions case Epiphanius sayes was done at Rome so near the Apostles Certainly if one Church should receive into communion those whom another Church excommunicates there could remaine no unity in the whole Church because no distinction from those that are not of the Church When therefore it appears that the Church held it for a Rule from the beginning not to do so shall not this be evidence that the reason is that which was alleged to Marcion at Rome which Synesius alleges To wit the Unity of the Church For the same reason Montanus having as it seems by pretended revelations and inspirations such as at that time there can be no question but the Church was graced with brought the Churches of Phrygia to his intent but being rejected by the Churches of Asia went or sent to Rome to induce that Church to undertake and prescribe the same Rules to all that adheered unto it For why otherwise should hee labor for the consent of that Church before others but in hope that having induced it to receive his Rules the authority thereof might induce other Churches to do the like because they found it necessary for them to hold correspondence with the Church of Rome Now I beseech you were all Christians utterly out of their five senses to contend about the communion of the Church if there were no such thing in point of fact Were they all from the beginning possest with a frenzy that they were bound to maintain it by voiding all questions that might impeach it if there were no such obligation in point of right Is it not plain that the issue of such questions was this whether the Unity of the Church or the advantage of such Rules to the common cause of Christianity wayed most How is Tertullian otherwise counted a Montanist that is as I suppose a Schismatick Wee may believe Tertullian in a mater which all Christians at Rome then might know when hee tells us that Zephyrinus then Bishop of Rome was about to admit unto his communion the Churches of Asia and Phrygia that had acknowledged Montarus and his Prophets and Prophesies Contr. Prax. cap. I. Though Pope Soter afore Zephyrinus had writ against Montanus as well as Apollonius Bishop of Ephesus if wee believe Sirmondus his Praedestinatus Haer. XXVI When hee sayes that afterwards the contrary was resolved upon informations brought from Asia by Praxeas an Heretick That which appears that the Montanists were disclaimed wee must admit That which appears not upon what information it was done wee need not dispute Tertullian hereupon drawes after him a company which called themselves a Church at Carthage and subsisted there after Tertullian till they were reduced by S. Augustine as wee learn by Sirmondus his Praedestinatus Haer. XCVII and S. Augustine de Haeresibus This makes Tertullian a Schismatick That rather than rest content with those Rules which the rest of the Church satisfied themselves with hee departed from the Unity of it Otherwise those blasphemies for which the followers of Montanus are counted Hereticks preferring their own revelations above and against those of the Apostles hee is not chargable with Proceed wee now to the businesse of keeping Easter and the debate about it between Victor Bishop of Rome and the Churches of Asia These resolutely adheering to the custome which in all appearance they had received from their founder S. John to keep the Passion when the Jewes kept it that is upon the fifteenth day of the Moon that was the next equinoctial and the Resurrection the third after that The Church of Rome and almost all Churches beside keeping thc Passion on the Friday the Resurrection on the Ladies day following The one aiming at winning the Jewes when it was first set on foot the other to protest against them as incorrigible It is well enough known how Victor intending to withdraw his Communion from the Churches of Asia was reduced to tolerate them by the perswasions of Irenaeus then Bishop of Lions Certainly had not the Communion of the
himself because hee expresses not so much of his meaning For my part as I found it necessary so I finde it sufficient to have quoted these opinions and reasons advanced against the right of the Church because I finde they oblige mee to digg sor a foundation upon which as the true ground of that right which the Church claimeth I may be inabled to dissolve whatsoever reasons wit and learning impregnated by passion or interest can invent to contradict the same Here then I must have recourse to a position which some men will count hazardous others prejudicial to Christianity according as their prejudices or engagements may work But will appear in truth to them that shall take the pains to look through the consequences of it in the resolution of Controversies which divide the Church to concern the interest of Christianity and the peace of the Church more thâ—n any point whatsoever that is not of the Foundation of Faith In as much as there is no question that is started or can be started as the case is now with the Church so as to call in question the peace and unity thereof but the interpretation of the old Testâ—ment or some part of it in relation and correspondence to the New Testament will be ingaged in it Concerning which the position that I intend to advance is this That by the Law of Moses and the Covenant between God and the people of Israel upon it nothing at all was expresly contracted concerning everlasting life and the happinesse of the world to come Not that I intend to say That there was not at that time sufficient ground for a man to be competently perswaded of his right to it or sufficient means to come to the knowledge of that ground for hee that should say this could not give account how the Fathers should attain salvation under the Law which I finde all that maintain the truth of Christianity against the Jews so obliged to do that without it they must give up the game But that the thing contracted for between God and the people of Israel by the mediation of Moses was the Land of Promise That is to say that they should be a free people and injoy their own Lawes in the possession of it upon condition of imbracing and observing such Lawes as God should give As for the kingdome of heaven which the Gospel of Christ preacheth the hope of it was so mystically intimated that there was sufficient cause to imbrace it even then but not propounded as the condition upon which God offered to contract with them as hee doth with Christians And this though I cannot say that the Church hath at anytime expressed to be a part of the Rule of Faith yet that the Church hath alwaies implicitely admitted it for a part of the reason of Faith which wee call Divinity I must and do maintain Before I come to prove this I will here propound one objection because it seems to contain the force of all that is to be said against it For when our Lord sayes Mat. XIX 19. If thou wilt enter into life keep the commandements When hee resolves the great commandements of the Law to be the love of God above all things and of our neighbor as of our selves Mat. XXII 36. In fine wheresoever hee derives the duties of Christianity from the Law of Moses hee seems to suppose and so do his Apostles that the same life everlasting which hee promiseth by the Gospel was proposed by the Law as the reward for observing it And indeed what can the Gospel was propound for a more suitable way or meanes to salvation than the love of God and man in that order which the Law of God appointeth It is not for nothing that S. Augustine observeth The first commandement of the Decalogue to acknowledge God and the last not to covet that which is another mans to contain in them the utmost office of a Christian And all Divines have distributed the precepts of Moses Law into Moral as well as Judicial and Ceremonial The Moral precepts containing in them no lesse than the duties of Christianity when they are done with such an intent as God who by giving Moses Law declareth himself to see the most inward of the heart requireth Here in the first place supposing that God entring into Covenant with that people intended to establish their Civil Government by the Law of Moses I will proceed to argue that all Civil Lawes that are not contrary to the Law of Nature and the actions by them injoyned or prohibited may be done or not done for two several reasons For if there be reason enough for the Nations that know not God nor ground their Lawes upon any presumption of his will or expectation of good or evil from him to unite themselves in Civil Society then is their reason enough for them to observe the Lawes upon which the benefit of Civil Society is to be had though they suppose not themselvs obliged by God to them nor to oblige God by keeping them And if it be evident that all Civil Lawes not contrary to the Lawes of God and Nature do come from God as Civil Society doth it will be as evident that the keeping of them in that regard and for that consideration is obedience to God The Jewes Civil Law hath this privilege above the Civil Lawes of other Nations to be gronnded upon those acts whereby God revealing himself for their freedom by Moses tendereth them the Land promised to their Fathers upon the Covenant they then had with God upon condition of undertaking the Lawes which hee should give them for the future And no reason can deny that this was sufficient to convince them that God required of them not onely the work which the Law specified but that it be done in consideration of his will and in reference to his honor and service Though on the other side it is not necessary to grant that so much is expressed by the Civil Law of that Nation expresly tending to their Civil freedome and happinesse in the possession of the Land of Promise It cannot be doubted that the immortality of the soul and the reward of good and bad after death was received among that people from and before the time of receiving the Law Otherwise how should the Patriarchs obtain it which the maintainance of Christianity requireth that they did obtain It is also evident by the Scriptures that the same conversation which Christ and his Apostles preached was extant in the lives and actions of the Fathers before the Law Abraham Isaac Jacob Joseph Job Moses and the rest as the Fathers of the Church are wont to argue against the Jewes that Christianity is more ancient than Judaisme It is also manifest that the same conversation was extant and to be seen under the Law in the lives of the Prophets and their Disciples by the words of our Lord to the Scribes and Pharisees Mat. XXIII 29-36 when hee
is there just cause to think that thereby advantage is given to the Jewes against Christianity by granting that such passages out of which the New Testament drawes the birth and sufferings of our Lord are reasonably to be understood of his predecessors in Gods ancient people For it is plaine that it despite of the Jewes the works done by our Lord and his Prophesies concerning his Dying and Rising again and the destruction of the Jewes and the preaching of the Gospel to all Nations seconded by his Apostles and that which they did to winn credit that they were the witnesses of the same are the evidence upon which the Gospel obliges The Scriptures of the Old Testament which were no evidence to the Gentiles as much and more concerned in the Gospel than the Jewes were evidence and so to be not of themselves for what need Christ then have done those works But upon supposition that God intended not to rest in giving the Law but to make it the thred to introduce the Gospel by Which supposition as it is powerfully inforced by the nature of the Law and the difference between the inward and the outward obedience of God as it hath been hitherto declared and maintained So is it also first introduced by those works which our Lord declareth to be done for evidence thereof then made good by the perpetual correspondence between the Old and New Testament which any considerable exception interrupts And there reasons so much the more effectual because this difference of literal and mystical sense was then and is at this day acknowledged by the Jewes themselves against whom our Lord and his Apostles imploy it in a considerable number of Scriptures which they themselves interpret of the Messias though they are not able to make good the consequence of the same sense throughout because they acknowledge not the reason of it which concludes the Lord Jesus to be the Messias whom they expect If these things be true neither Origen nor any man else is to be indured when they argue that a mystical sense of the Scripture is to be inquired and allowed even where this ground takes no place For vindicating the honor of God and that it may appeare worthy of his wisedom to declare that which wee admit to be the utmost intent of the Scriptures For if it be for the honor of God to have brought Christianity into the world for the salvation of mankinde and to have declared himself by the Scriptures for that purpose then whatsoever tends to declare this must be concluded worthy of God and his wisedom whatsoever referres not to it cannot be presumed agreeable to his wisdom how much soever it flatter mans eare or fantasie with quaintnesse of conceit or language Now as I maintain this difference between the literal and mystical sense of the Old Testament to be necessary for the maintenance of Christianity as well as for understanding the Scriptures So are there some particular questions arising upon occasion of it which I can well be content to leave to further dispute As for example There is an opinion published which saith That the abomination of desolation which our Lord saith was spoken of by Daniel the Prophet concerning the destruction of Jerusalem Dan. IX 24 Mat. XXIV 15. Mar. XIII 14. was fulfilled in the havock made by Antiochus Epiphanes Which is also plainly called the abominatio of desolation by the same Prophet Daâ— XI 31. XII 10. Whether this opinion can be made good according to historical truth or not this is not the place to dispute Whether or no the difference between the literal and mystical sense of the Scriptures will indure that the same Prophesie be fulfilled twice in the literal sense concerning the temporal state of the Jewes once under Antiochus Epiphanes and once under Titus that is it which I am here content to referre to further debate One thing I affirme that notwithstanding this difference it is no inconvenience to say that some Prophesies are fulfilled but once Namely that of Jacob Gen. XLIX 8-12 that of Daniel IX 24. that of Malacbi III. 1. IV. 5 6. Because the coming of Christ boundeth the times of the literal and mystical sense And therefore there is reason why it should be marked out by Prophesies of the Old Testament referring to nothing else Againe I am content to leave to dispute whether the many Prophesies of the Old Testament which are either manifestly alleged or covertly intimated by the Revelation of S. John must therefore be said to be twice fulfilled once in the sense of their first Authors under the Law and again under the Gospel in S. Johns sense to the Church Or that this second complement of them was not intended by the Spirit of God in the Old Prophets but that it pleased God to signifie to S. John things to befall the Church by Prophetical Visions like those which hee had read in the ancient Prophets whereby God signified to them things to befall his ancient people For of a truth it is the outward rather than the spiritual state of the Church which is signified to S. John under these images A third particular must be the first Chapter of Genesis For in that which followes of Paradise and what fell out to our first Parents there I will make no question that hoth senses are to be admitted the Church having condemned Origen for taking away the historical sense of that portion of Scripture But whether the creation of this sensible world is to be taken for a figure of the renewing of mankinde into a spiritual world by the Gospel of Christ according to that ground of the difference between the literal and mystical sense of the Scripture which hitherto I maintaine This I conceive I may without prejudice leave to further debate But leaving these things to dispute I must insist that those things which the Evangelists affirm to have been fulfilled by such things as our Lord said or did or onely befell him in the flesh have a further meaning according to which they are mystically accomplished in the spiritual estate of his Christian people The chiefe ground hereof I confesse is that of S. Matthew VIII 17. where having related divers of our Lords miracles hee addeth that they were done That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Prophet Esay LIII 4. Hee took our infirmities and â—are away our sicknesses Together with the words of our Lord Luke V. 17-21 where hee telleth them of Nazareth This day are the words of the Prophet Esay LXI 1. The Spirit of the Lord is upon mee because hee hath anointed mee to preach the Gospel to the poor fulfilled in your hearing And his answer to John Baptist grounded upon the same passage Mat. XI 4 5 6. Go and tell John what yee have heard and seen The blinde receive sight the lame walk the lâ—pers are cleansed the deaf heare the dead are raised and the poor have the Gospel preached them For
truth as to show further how well it agreeth with the sense of the Catholick Church by which I had begun to show that wee are to examine all maters of Faith Indeed I must caution this first that I do not pretend as if this point were any part of the Rule of Faith which is the substance of Christianity to be believed but of all points concerning the knowledge of the Scriptures which is the skill of Christian Divines I hold it of most consequence And that therefore though I am not obliged to affirm that it is expresly taught by all the primitive Doctors of the Church as all maintaining the mystical â—ense it may be maintained that by consequence they do all unanimously deliver it Origen in praef de Principiis so accounts it so will it be necessary to show how well it standeth with the sense of them that it may appear that there is no consent of the whole Church against it It shall be therefore sufficient to name S. Jerome S. Chrysostome and S. Augustine the first affirming that hee reades nothing of the kingdom of heaven in all the Old Testament Epist CXXIX Mihi in Evangelio promittuntur regna coelorum quae vetus Instrumentum omnino non nominat To mee the kingdom of heaven is promised by the Gospel which the Old Testament nameth not at all The second in his Homilies de Lazaro and divers others places raising his exhortations drawn from examples of the Saints in the Old Testament upon this ground that if they did so and so when the Resurrection was not preached it behooveth us under the Gospel to do much more The last besides other places whereof some you may finde quoted in my book of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church in the book de Gestis Palestinis relating it for one of the Articles which Pelagius renounced at that Synod not onely that the Saints under the Law obtained salvation by it but even that the salvation of the world to come was preached under the Law The Article charged upon Pelagius you shall finde there to be this cap. V. Regnum coelorum etiam in veteri Testamento promissum That the kingdome of heaven was promised also in the Old Testament To which Pelagius answering That this may be proved by the Scriptures was judged by the Council not to depart from the Faith of the Church Which notwithstanding when S. Austine considers That the Old Testament in vulgar Language signifies the books of the Old Testament in which the kingdome of heaven is promised as the Gospel is fore-told But in the Scriptures the Old Covenant in which it is not promised Hee sayes as much as I have done Therefore hee saith further In illo verò Testamento quod Vetus dicitur datâ—m est in monte Sinâ non invenitur apertissime promitti nisi terrena foelicitas But in that which is called the Old Testament and was given in mount Sina none but earthly felicity is found to be very openly promised Whereupon hee proceedeth to observe that the Land of Canaan is called the Land of Promise in which the promises of the Old Testament figuring the spiritual promises belonging to the New are tendred by the Law And reason hee had to insist upon this because of another Article charged upon Pelagius of kin to this that men were saved under the Law as under the Gospel As you may see there cap. XI Which might well be understood to mean without the Grace of Christ But having cleared the ground of the difference between the literal and allegorical sense of the Scriptures of the Old Testament I hold it utterly unnecessary if not altogether impertinent to tender further proof of this position from the Fathers then the constant agreement of them in maintaining that difference Being when it is rightly understood the necessary and immediate consequence of it Indeed it cannot be maintained that they did understand expresly the true ground of this difference which had they done they would not have been found to use it impertinently and unseasonably as all lovers of Truth must avow that many times they do Notwithstanding in as much as they agree in maintaining and using of it from which use the ground of it which is this position is to be inferred it shall be enough that all of them agree in delivering that by consequence which the principal of them at least in expounding the Scriptures do expresly asfirme For nothing obliges mee to maintaine that this is a poiâ—t necessary to the salvation of all Christians to be believed And by consequence that it hath been every where taught and no where contradicted It is sufficient that I can and do hold it more generally necessary to the right understanding of the Scriptures than any other point of skill in the Scriptures Now if any man object that this is the doctrine of the Socinians I answer first That they also hold that nothing is necessary to salvation to be believed but that which is clear to all men in the Scriptures And that this position hath a necessary influence into their whole Heresie which is grounded upon the unreasonable presumption of it On the contrary the difference between the Law and the Gospel is a principle from which I hope to draw good consequences in maintainance of the Faith of the Church against the Socinians who if they did alwaies see the consequence of their owne positions would not deny the Tradition of the Church as I observed afore If they do not I am not to waive the doctrine of the Fathers because the Socinians acknowledge it But lastly I demand whether Socinus provide for the salvation of the Fathers or not If so why is his opinion blamed If not why is mine opinion that do taken for his CHAP. XIV The Leviathans opinâ—on that Christ came to restore that kingdome of God which the Jewes cast off when they rejected Samuel It overthroweth the foundation of Christianity The true Government of Gods ancient people The name of the Church in the New Testament cannot signifie the Synagogue Nor any Christian State THis position being settled in the next place I will proceed upon it to argue the vanity of that conceit of the Leviathan pag. 263. that the intent of Christs coming was to regaine unto God by a New Covenant that Kingdome which being his by the Old Covenant had been ravished from him by the rebellion of the Israelites in the election of Saul For supposing most truly that God became their King by the Covenant of the Law and that under him Moses had the Soveraigne Power to all purposes pag. 250 251 252. hee inferreth further that after Moses it was by God vested in the High Priests Aarons Successors though hee for his time was subject to Moses And this pag. 217. from that text of Exodus XIX 6. where God promiseth them that upon undertaking his Covenant they should be a Sacerdotal Kingdome which in
manisest that by the leter of the Law Deut. XIV 23. XVIII 4. Num. XVIII 12. of all fruits of the earth onelyCome and Oile and Wine are Tithable Of living creatures the Tith goes not to the Levites who payed the Priesthood the Tenth of their Tithes but to the Altar that is they are to be sacrificed to God So that by this means the Priests and Levites themselves paid this Tith as well as other Israelites and that no more to the interest and advantage of the Priesthood than the Paschal Lambs which they also sacrificed for Tithe cattel went to the owners as the Paschal Lambs did the Law having provided onely that they should be holy to the Lord Levis XXVII 32. that is sacrificed to God their bloud sprinkled upon the Altar and their flesh eaten in Jerusalem Which Law providing also that this Tith he onely of the Herd or of the flock that is of Bullock Sheep or Goat that passeth under the rod they that will derive the Churches claime of Tithes from the Levitical Law must by consequence tye themselves to these Terms Which would be not to abridge the claime but to destroy it For though many kindes besides these were Tithable among the Jewes by virtue of the Constitutions of the Synagogue yet that would not advantage the Church which forsaking the Synagogue for refusing Christianity cannot avail it self of the authority of it And truly hee that would insist that the Law is in force for the payment of Tithes to the Church will never be able to give a reason why it should not be in force for observing the Sabbath that is the Saturday for being circumcised and keeping all the Festivals and Sacrifices and Purifications of the Ceremonial Law and much more the Civil Law of that people as much contrary to the Civil Law of Christian people as to Christianity seeing that whatsoever is contained in that Law which is made void by Christianity must be understood to be void till it appear to be contained and imported in that Act which introduceth and establisheth Christianity in stead of the Law Indeed I must not say that the Levitical Law is the onely evidence that is alleged for the right of Tithes in the Church For every man knowes that Abrahams paying Tithes to Metchiseck the Priest of the most high God Gen. XIV 20. and Jacobs paying Tithes or vowing to pay them Gen. XXVIII 22. are alleged as indeed they ought to be alleged to show that paying of Tithes was in force under the Law of Nature that is in the time of the Patriarchs before the Ceremonial Law In which regard God faith that Tithes are his Levis XXVII 30 to wit by a Law introduced afore And the consequence hereof seems to be more effectual to the Church than that which is drawn from the Levitical Law in that consideration which the Fathers of the Church do presse with advantage enough against the Jewes that the Patriarchs were the fore-runners of Christians and that Christianity is more ancient than Judaisme in regard that the same service of God in spirit and truth by the inward obedience of the heart was in being in the lives of the Patriarchs as the Gospel requires before the scrupulous and precise and supperssitious observation of bloudy sacrifices and smoke of fat and incense and troublesom purifications of the outward man and the rest of Moses positive Law was required For if the Law of Nature and the conversation of the Patriarchs under it is indeed the pattern of Christianity and of the life of Christians under the Gospel expressed by deed before wee finde it indented for by Covenant Then certainly that which ought to be out-done by the Church is not abrogated by Christianity But this argument being made and allowed to be of force hee that therefore should say that the Church claimeth this right by virtue of that Law whereby it was in force under the Patriarchs would be presently lyable to peremptory instances of the difference of clean and unclean creatures Gen. Vll. 2. Of raising up feed to a brother deceased Gen. XXXVIII II. Of the Polygamy of the Patriarchs and others which though then in force under the Gospel hold not Wherefore it is not to be said that the Law of that time is the act whereby the Church claimes but a ground whereupon the act whereby the Church claimes was done In like maner hee that should affirm this right due to the Church by virtue of the Levitical Law would meet with these exceptions peremptory as I suppose that have been advanced But when it hath been said and made good that the Levitical Law supposing the Gospel ordained by God to succeed it yields a sufficient ground to argue that a provision answerable thereunto was to be established in the Church as the correspondence between the Law and the Gospel between the Synagogue and the Church requireth I say this being premised there remaines nothing in question but how the establishing of it may be derived from the act of them that had the settling of the Church in their hands Considering then that provision is made by the Law onely for the maintenance of Gods Ceremonial service confined to Jerusalem for a powerfull evidence that the intent of that Covenant expressed no more than the Land of Promise that the promise of bringing the Gentiles to Christianity and the real destruction of the Law with the Place of this service inferrs the service of God in all places in spirit and truth to succeed it under the Gospel and by it that no order for all Nations that should be converted to resort to this service can be maintained without a Society or Corporation of the Church visibly telling them whither to resort for that purpose Upon these premiâ—es it will be of necessary consequence that the like provision for the maintenance of that service of God which the Church professeth be made to that which had been made for the service of God at Jerusalem during the time of the Synagogue Now the maintenance of Gods service in the Church with the maintenance of the Church subsisting for no other end than that service consists in the maintenance of those persons that are to attend on Gods service Of which persons there are two sorts The first is of those that attend either upon the Government of the Church or else upon the minisâ—ring of those Offices which God is served with by his Church unto the Assemblies of his people The second sort is of those that to preserve this temporal life being obliged to attend upon the imployment of it cannot spare themselves and their time to attend on Gods service It was therefore necessary that Christian people should contribute the first-fruits of their goods in Tithes and oblations to the Church by which those that attended upon the publick government of it as well as upon ministring the Offices of Christianity should both maintain themselves and be trusted to maintain the
man mistake mee pretends not any general Rule for the interpretation of Scripture even in those things which concern the Rule of Faith but inferrs a prescription against any thing that can be alleged out of Scripture that if it may appear to be contrary to that which the whole Church hath received and held from the beginning it cannot be the true meaning of that Scripture which is alleged to prove it For the meaning even of those Scriptures which concern the Rule of Faith must be had by the same same means by which I shall come by and by to show that the meaning of all Scriptures whatsoever they concern is to be had and established But the being and constitution of the Society of the Catholick Church from the beginning is of force to prescribe this limitation to the Fansies of all men that take upon them to interpret the Scriptures that they neither admit nor impose upon any man any thing for the true sense of Scripture whereby the substance of Christianity which the Rule of Faith importeth may become questionable So that an evidence of such opposition ought to out-shine and supresse any appearance or supposed evidence of truth in any such sense The Rule of Faith Not to go about to determine in this place what it containes because it is the Master-piece of all the Divines of Christendome to say what is fundamental in Christianity and what is not but to give a grosse description of what men mean when they inquire for it consists partly in things to be believed partly in things to be done Hee that holds so much of Christian truth as may reasonably certifie him of all that is requisite to qualifie a Christian man for remission of sins and life everlasting which are the promises of the Gospel may well be said to hold the whole Rule of Faith in things to be believed Hee that holds so much of Christian truth as may reasonably certifie him of all that is requisie to preserve all Christians with consciences void of sin may be said to hold it in things to be done For the common Rule of Faith importeth not what is necessity for any Christian but for all Christians And that any thing contrary to the salvation of all Christians should be held and professed by all Christians is a grosse contradiction to common sense Whereupon it is no lesse evidently true that the Catholick Church of all ages and places is utterly infallible In as much as it is a grosse contradiction to suppose a number of men to attain salvation who all do hold some thing destructive to the salvation of any one So much difference there is between the whole Church which is the Catholick Church of all times and places and the present Catholick Church respectively to those ages in which the Communion of the whole was not interrupted by any breach but effectuated by actual correspondence For the act of the Catholick Church in this sense which I call the present Church if it be lawfull obligeth all that are of it But it self stands obliged to the Faith of the whole Church as that which the being privilege of a Church resupposeth to beâ— rofessed by it And of this I cannot conceive how any question should remain The difficulty that remains is how it may appear that all this is not a fine nothing how it may reasonably seem to signifie something towards the limitation which I prescribe to the interpretation of those Scriptures which may be alleged in mater concerning the Rule of Faith And the answer is that seeing it hath appeared that the Apostles of our Lord Christ established from the beginning one Catholick Church consisting of all Churches by the will of God and his appointment and that in consideration of that which was made to appear afore that all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians though evidently extant and discernable in the Scriptures are not neverthelesse evidently discernable by all them whose salvation they concern that therefore the unity and Communion of the Catholick Church was provided by God as the depository of his truth the acknowledgment whereof should be necessary to obtain life everlasting So that the effect of this trust deposited by God in the Church to be at least thus much That whatsoever was advanced in any part thereof as belonging to the Rule of Faith being condemned where first it was advanced and in consequence of that condemnation by all other parts of the Church to that effect as to render those that held it uncapable of the Communion of all the whole Church That this I say might be accounted a reasonable mark to discern such doctrine to be destructive to the Rule of Faith And thus were all Heresies marked for such by the Church and upon this ground those marks were receivable not onely before Constantine but so long as it may be visible that nothing hindred this correspondence wherein the actual unity of the Church consisted to operate and have effect For if this be the reason and ground which made these marks reasonable as grounded upon it then hee that supposes this reason either actually interrupted or impeached cannot presume upon the like effect And therefore the justifying of these marks requires the evidencing of this correspondence of the Church and no more And truly I could not but admire to finde it alleged by Crellius the Socinian in his answer to Grotius concerning the satisfaction of Christ where hee argues that no Ecclesiastical Writer ever profest that opinion I say I admired to finde him answer that Pelagius the Heretick maintained the same For sure it is not much more pertinent than if hee should allege that the Jewes professe our Lord Jesus not to be the Messias or that the Gentiles do not worship one true God In as much as though they be further from the faith of true Christians than Pelagius yet an Heretick is no lesse excluded from the Communion of the Church than a Jew or a Gentile And the whole reason for which the testiemonies of Ecclesiastical Writers is receivable to evidence maters concerning the Rule of Faith to which they can give no credit but are by acknowledging the same receivable for Christians is the Communion of the Church which make it evident that what such men professe in the Church is not against the Faith of the Church And this in the second place may be a reasonable presumption or evidence of that which belongeth to the Rule of Faith when a thing is so ordinarily and vulgarly taught by Church Writers that there can be no reasonable presumption made by the doctrine of any of them that the contrary was ever allowed by the Church So then I do not tye my self to this that if any thing be found in the writings of any of those whom wee call commonly Fathers it is therefore not contrary to Christianity or to the Rule of Faith that is either expresly or by consequence For
is evident that hee allowes them that which the Apostles had forbidden because it is evident that this is one of those differences which Jews by the Law were bound to make If therefore there be this difference in the Scriptures it is manifest that the leter of them doth not determine what obliges So again the same Apostle 1 Cor. XI 1-16 disputeth at large that men ought not but women ought to cover their heads at praying or prophesying in the Church For the intent whereof though it hath been the subject of whole books in this age I conceive I need go no further than Tertullians book de Velandis Virginibus who living so much nearer the Apostles knew better the custoÌ„ms of their Churches than all the Criticks of this time Hee disputes the case in question then whether Virgins had a privilege not to vail their faces at Divine Service by arguing that they cannot be excepted from S. Pauls words and alleging the example of the Church of Corinth where at that very time the Virgins vailed their faces at Divine Service as other women did Which whether it tye the Church or not at this time it will scarce be granted by those who now practice it not And in another place 1 Tim. V. 3-6 hee showeth that there was then an Order of Widowes whose maintenance hee ordereth to come from the stock of the Church as likewise how they are to be qualified and how imployed Of which Order there is no where any step remaining in the Church at â—resent though nothing be more imperative than the Order concerning it So the precept of the Apostle serves not to oblige the Church at present though by Scripture And if I may use the argument ad hominem upon the supposition of those that I dispute with who intend not to take any thing for true which I prove not as debating the principles of Christian truth it is manifest that the Apostle James V. 14. appointeth that the sick be anointed with oil together with prayers as well for the recovery of their health as for the forgivenesse of their sins Which it is manifest that it cannot appear not to oblige the Church at this time by virtue of that Scripture which injoyneth it And therefore to say nothing at present whether it do indeed oblige the now Church or not those that believe it doth not oblige cannot be able to give a reason why it obligeth not by the Scripture alone And this is the argument whereby I prove that the interpretation of Scripture as concerning mater of Law to the Church or the means to be used in determining what obligeth what not cannot transgresse the tradition and practice of the Church Because that which is propounded in the Scriptures as meer mater of fact may oblige and that which is propounded as mater of precept creating right may not oblige the Scripture not determining whether it intend that obligation to be universal or not For having showed afore that the Church is a Society instituted by God to which these Rules are given as Laws to govern it in the exercise of those Offices wherein the Communion therâ—of consisteth all reasonable men must grant that as the intent and meaning of all Laws is to be gathered from the primitive and original practice of that Society for which they were made so is the reason of all Orders delivered to the Church by the Apostles and by consequence their intent how farr they were to oblige to be measured by the first and most ancient practice of the Church which first had them to use Whereunto let us adde these considerations That the Orders delivered the Church by the Apostles were of necessity in force before mention can be made of them in their writings That the writing of them is neither the reason why they oblige nor a thing thereunto requisite but meerly supervenient to the force of them And that there is sufficient evidence that those motives to believe which the Scripture recordeth but cannot evidence are neverthelesse true and that the truth of those motives cannot be evident but by the Society of the Church which the said Laws do maintain For upon these conâ—â—derations it will appear necessarily consequent that as there be Apostolical Traditions which the Scripture evidently witnesseth so evidence may be made of them without Scripture The Rule of S. Austine how to discern what Traditions do indeed come from the Apostles is well enough known to be this To wit that which is observed over all the Church though it cannot be discerned when where or by whom it came first in force that is in his times by the authority of what Synod it was settled that must be deemed and taken to come from the authority of the Apostles themselves I will not use the terms of Synod or Synods because I conceive the Church was from the beginning by virtue of the perpetual intelligence and correspondence settled and used between the parts of it a standing Synod even when there was no Assembly of persons authorized to consent in behalf of their respective Churches Such things as became requisite to be determined in any Church being thereby so communicated to the rest as the order taken in one either to be accepted by them or redressed Neither will I say that the Rule is so effectual as it is true For I cannot warrant how general the practice of every thing that may come in question can appear to have been over the whole Church nor whether it may appear to have begun from some act of the Church to be designed by some place or persons or not which in S. Austines time I doubt not might be made to appear and being made to appear would maintain the Rule to be true Nor have I need of any such Rule as may serve to discern whatsoever may become questionable whether it come from the Apostles themselves or not It shall suffice mee here to presume thus much that no man can prescribe against any Rule of the Church that it comes not from the Apostles because it is not recorded in the holy Scriptures And therefore that nothing hindereth competent evidence to be made of the authority of the Apostles in some Orders of the Church of which there is no mention in the Scriptures Correspondently to that which was settled afore concerning the Rule of Faith that no man can prescribe against any thing questionable that it is no part of it because it is not evident in Scripture or because such arguments may be made against it out of the Scriptures which every one whose salvation it concerns is not able evidently to assoile And all this being determined I intend neverthelesse that it still shall remain questionable how farr these Orders of the Apostles oblige the Church Because I intend not to prescribe from all this that those Orders which shall appear to have been brought in by the Apostles may not become uselesse to the Church CHAP.
originall practice of the Church whither in prescribing what is to be believed what is to be professed or what is to be done So manifest must it remain that nothing can be resolved by plurality of votes of Ecclesiasticall Writers as to the point of truth For then were the priviledge of infallibility in the votes of those Writers which themselves disclaim from the substance of what they write And it is to say that what had no such priviledge when it was written if it have more Authors survive that hold it shall be and must be held infallible Which consequences being ridiculous it followeth that for the tryal of truth within the bounds aforesaid recourse must be had to the means premised And the effect of those means every dayes experience witnesseth For the obligation which all men think they have firmly to hold that which by these means they have all concluded from the Scriptures is the consequence of these principles in expounding the same Which obligation though sometimes imaginary in regard that between contradictory reasons the consequence may be equally firm on both sides yet that it cannot be otherwise he that believes the truth of Christianity must needs imagine For true principles truly used necessarily produce nothing but true consequences Which if it be so why should any question be made that the Church may and sometimes ought to proceed in determining the truth of things questionable upon occasion of the Scriptures concerning the rule of Christian faith or which is all one that the exercise of this power by the Church produceth in those that are of the Church an obligation of submitting to the same Indeed here be two obligations which sometimes may contradict one another and therefore whatsoever the matter of them be the effects of them cannot be contraries The use of the means to determine the meaning of the Scriptures produceth an obligation of holding that which followeth from it which obligation no man can have or ought to imagine he hath before the due use of such meanes whither his estate in the Church oblige him to use them or not But the visible determination of the Church obliges all that are of the Church not to scandalize the unity thereof by professing contrary to the same And to both these obligations the same man may be subject as the matter may be to wit as one that hath resolved the question upon true principles not to believe the contrary and as one of the Church that believes the Church faileth in that for which he is bound not to break the unity thereof not to professe against what the Church determineth For I am bold to say again that there is no society no communion in the world whether Civill Ecclesiasticall Military or whatsoever it be that can subsist unlesse we grant that the Act of superiour Power obligeth sometimes when it is ill used In the mean time I say not that this holds alwaies and in matters of whatsoever concernment nor do take upon me generally to resolve this no more then what is the mater of the rule of Faith which he that believes may be saved he that positively believes it not all cannot It shall be enough for me if I may give an opinion whether that which we complain of be of value to disoblige us to our superiours or not As concerning what is questioned amongst us whither it be of the rule of Faith or not But this I shall say that to justifie the use of this power towards God requireth not onely a perswasion of the truth competent to the weight of the point in question in those that determine for the Church but also a probable judgement that the determination which they shall make will be the meanes to reduce contrary opinions to that sense which they see so great Authority profess and injoyn For without doubt there can be no such means to dissolve the unity of the Church as a precipitate and immature determination of something that is become questionable For effectually to proceed to exercise Ecclesiasticall Communion upon terms contrary to that which hath been received afore is actually to dissolve the unity of the Church The ingagement to make good that which men shall have once done being the most powerful Witcheraft and Ligature in the world to blind them from seeing that which all men see besides themselves or at least from confessing to see that which they cannot but see But if we speak of things which concern the communion of the Church in those offices which God is to be served with by Christians or that tend to maintain the same besides the meaning and truth of the Scriptures there remains a further question what is or ought to be law to the Church and oblige them that are of the Church seeing that whatsoever is in the Scripture obligeth not the Church for Law though obliged to beleeve it for truth the resolution whereof will require evidence of the reason for which every thing was done by the Apostles for as it holds or not so the constitution grounded upon it is to hold either alwaies or onely as it holds And this reason must be evidenced by the Authority of the Church admitting that reason into force whither by express act or by silent practice When the Israelites are commanded to eat the Passeover in haste with their loins girt and their staves in their hands there is appearance enough that the intent of it was onely concerning that Passeover which first they celebrated in Egypt not for an order alwaies to continue because then the case required haste and because then the Angell passed over their houses upon the door-posts whereof the blood was commandded to be sprinkled that by that marke he might passe over them to smite the Egyptians For though Philo would have the Passeover to be celebrated at home and not at Jerusalem though perhaps onely by those of the dispersions those that dwelt in the Land of promise being all tied to resort to Jerusalem yet all that acknowledge the Talmud think it not lawfull to celebrate it but at Jerusalem contenting themselves with the Supper and abatng the Lambe as one of those sacrifices which the Law forbiddeth every where but before the Ark. But had not the practice of the Nation and the Authority of the Elders trusted by the Law to determine such matters appeared in the businesse our Lord who according to his own doctrine was subject to their constitutions had not had a rule for his proceeding So in the infancy of Christianity it is no marvail if the Christians at Jerusalem entertained daily communion even at board also among themselves and that they gave their estates to the maintenance of it not by any law of communion of goods but as the common necessity required For what could make more towards the advancement of Christianity And when at Corinth and in other Churches the communion was in use though not so frequent nor giving up their
spirit to show that he is no Schismatick not acknowledging much lesse holding the unity of the Church out of which no man can be accounted otherwise But I marvail most wherein he would have the crime of Schisme acknowledged by S. Paul in that one Text which he would be tried by to consist It is the Law of Nature that inables Christians to â—oyn in a independent Congregation as our other Doctor of Oxford hath told us If a Covenant or League passe between so many Soveraigns in this point consider how difficult it is to charge a Soveraign with breach of League such contracts consisting of many Articles one whereof violated voids the contract At least to the contrary there is no Rule Now the Covenant of a Congregation must suppose all Christianity the violation whereof in any point by any member supported by the rest frees a man of his contract How then shall S. Pauls words take place 1 Cor. XI 19. There must be Heresies that the approved may become manifest among you For if one leave six the Congregation consisting of seven how shall it appear that the six are in the right But in my supposition these petty animosities at Corinth may have been fomented by secret Hereticks as in time I shall show that they were And their indeavour might be to make a party for their Heresie out of other Churches as well as out of that of Corinth and being formed to unite them by the like bond as they saw the Church tied with by the Apostles In this case division is ruinous to Christianity not when the question is whether seven shall meet together or three and four For by this means it may become difficult for particular Christians upon true principles to give sentence for themselves in the matter of differances but easie to miss the truth and to joyn with the enemies of it thinking they serve God in communicating with them by charging themselves with judging of the sense of the Scriptures either in those Laws of the Church which concern not the salvation of particular Christians or in the common faith without those bounds which God hath provided by the Church And upon these terms those that are approved may and do become manifest by the rising of Heresies in the Church That which I shall inferre is this That though there be no such virtue as implicite faith because it is no part of faith no office of that virtue to believe that any thing is true because the Church believes it with that firm adherance to it as we are resolved to stand to that by believing which we hope to be saved yet it is part of the virtue and part of the office of a faithfull man that is a Christian to conform himselfe to the beliefe of all that which the Church lawfully determineth to be believed that is to say not to professe the contrary of it and upon that profession to do any thing towards dissolving the unity of the Church so long as the determination thereof causeth not that corruption of those things which the society of the Church presupposeth as may seem to make the unity thereof uselesse whereof this is not the place to debate when it comes to pass It is sufficient for the present that whatsoever the Church hath power to determine according to the premises that the Church that is all particular Christians are obliged not to believe by the office of faith which is onely exercised in them who can make deductions of conclusions from the principles of faith who necessarily holding the conclusions in consideration meerly of the premises do necessarily believe the conclusions by that virtue of faith which holds the principles but to hold and to conform to and not to scandalize by the office of that charity which is most eminently exercised about that which concerns the common good of all Christians in generall which uothing in the world can so much concern next the common faith as the unity and communion of the Church Thus have I bounded the power of the Church and so showed the reason upon which the right use of it is to proceed I showed afore the ground of that exception which the interest of secular Power in Church matters createth to the due use of it When I shall have showed in the third book what the Law of God hath determined in matters concerding the communion of the Church and by consequence what it leaveth to the Church to determine it will be time to take in hand the same consideration again For the ground of this exception will show how farre it extendeth whereby it will appear that Christian Powers do acknowledge the Church and the power of it to stand by Gods Law even when they limit the exercise of it by virtue of that interest which the law of God alloweth them in Church matters CHAP. XXVI What it is to adde to Gods Law What to adde the Apocalypse S. Pauls Anathema The Beraeans S. Johns Gospel sufficient to make one believe and the Scriptures The man of God perfit How the Law giveth light and Christians are taught by God How Idolatry is said not to be commanded by God IN the beginning of this Book I proposed the chief Texts of Scripture which are usually drawn into consequence to prove either the infallibility of the Church or the sufficience and clearness of the Scriptures Of which I may truly say that they are and have been for these hundred and forty yeares the Theme of a dispute between the Scriptures and the Church for the right of giving Law to the consciences of Christians what communion to chuse that of the Reformation or that of the Church of Rome But with so little success that a discreet man may truly say that the parties do now stand at a bay as it is visible that they do meerly because they are not able to force one another by the arms which they are furnished with the Arguments of either side serving to maintain them against the adversary meerly because the arguments of the other side are insufficient not because either hath either the whole truth or nothing of the truth for it I showed you there that they come short of making good that which they are imployed to prove on this side as well as on that As for my present business which is here to show how the sense of them concurs to the truth which I have established I shall but desire any man of common sense to make an argument from the Text of Moses alledged in the first place and say The people of Israel are forbidden by the Law of Moses to adde any thing to the said Law and to take any thing from it Therefore the Scriptures contain clearly set down to all understandings concerned all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians then to tell me whither he will undertake to make good this consequence of not For if the Law of Moses cannot pretend to contain
will divide the Church unlesse an end be put But I say that the Authority of the Church can be no reason obliging or warranting to believe that for truth which cannot be reasonably deduced from the motives of our common faith onely it shall be a reason obliging and warranting to keep the peace of the Church by not scandalizing such determinations thereof as are not destructive to the common faith Much more where the faith is not concerned onely the question is of determining the circumstances of those actions wherein the Communion of the Church is exercised which neither our Lord nor his Apostles have determined shall the disobeying of such determinations be the violating of that unity which all Christians professe that God hath ordained in his Church And now we have an easie account to give how the Prophets Haggai and Malachi send the Israelites to the Priest for resolution in those things which the practice of that people determined to belong to their office to resolve Because it cannot be doubted that their resolutions depended upon upon the acts of that authority which concluded that people by the Law aforesaid of Deut. XVII 8 -12 Which if not infallible and yet authorized by God to warrant the proceedings of his people it will be no marvail if those that act in dependance on them be authorized to warrant the people though further from being infallible To come now to those things that are alleadged to be said of the Apostles and of the Church having already limited the power of the Church not to extend to the faith of Christianity which it presupposeth it will be easie to distinguish it from the power of the Apostles Which though it presuppose the truth of Christianity preached by our Lord as that which they are imployed to introduce and establishâ— yet in order of nature and reason is before the very being of the Church as serving to evidence any truth of the Gospel to them that believe being convicted that they came from God to move them to believe For how can they stand obliged to believe the truth of our common Christianity to be that which God sent our Lord Christ to preach but by standing convict that the Apostles were sent by him to move them to accept of it and thereupon inabled with means to evidence this Commission and trust whereupon the world may safely repose themselves upon the credit of them whose act God owns by the witnesse he yields them for his own The true reason and ground upon which no act of theirs whither by word or writing is refusable by the Church Upon which the truth of things determined by their writings is no more determinable by the Church because the meaning of their words which is the truth sought for is in the words from the time they are said And is it then an unreasonable demand that their Charter He that heareth you heareth me extending to all that falls under their office should not be thought to descend upon the Church indefinitely but according to such limitations as the constitution thereof determineth That is to say not to the effect of creating faith but of preserving peace and unity in the Communion of the Church Not prejudicing neverthelesse that force of evidencing the truth of Christianity and the meaning of the Apostles writings which I have showed to be in the testimony of the Church not by any authority it hath from God but from that conviction which the testimony of such a body of men inferreth I shall not therefore deny that he who heareth or refuseth their successors heareth and refuseth God if that which they would be heard in be within the bounds of that power which God hath assigned them but is not the same that he assigned the Apostles But I shall utterly deny that it is by virtue of these words which were spoken by our Lord at such time as he had not declared whither they should have successors or not For there is very great appearance that they themselves after this expected to see the worlds end and the coming of Christ When the Apostles Mat. XXVI 3. inquire of our Lord When shall these things come to passe And what shall be the sign of thy coming and of the worlds end Though our Lord by this answer distinguisheth the time of the destruction of Jerusalem from the end of the world yet by the question there is no appearance that the Apostles did so distinguish before his answer And when his answer contains That this generation shall not be over till all these things come to passe and that not only after he had declared the destruction of Jerusalem but his coming and the end of the world Mat. XXIV 14 -23-29-34 it appeareth that those things which he declares shall forerun the worlds end were to begin before that generation were out when to end being not thought sit then to be said If this interpretation of Grotius which makes good the leter best suffer contradiction yet is it evident by S. Pauls Epistles 1 Cor. XV. 51 52. 2 Cor. V. 11-44 2 Thes IV. 15. 17. that he was not certificed but that the coming of Christ to judgement should be during his time In which S. Iohn by the Apocalypse was more fully informed If these things be true the obedience due to the Apostles successors cannot stand by virtue of this command given when it was not declared whither they were to have successors or not But by those Scriptures whereby it may appear so farre as in due place it shall appear whither or no and upon what terms the Apostles left their Authority with successors which when it appears then by consequence of reason it will be inferred from these words that who hears or refuses them hears or refuses God by whom the Apostles were inabled to leave such part of their power with successors Neither will it be strange that I allow not any Councill in which never so much of the authority of the present Church is united to say in the same sense and to the same effect as the Synode of the Apostles at Jerusalem It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Though I allow the overt act of their assembling to be a legall presumption that their acts are the acts of the Holy Ghost so farre as they appear not to transgresse those bounds upon which the assistance of the Holy Ghost is promised the Church For as for the Apostles I have showed before that they had the Holy Ghost given them not onely to preserve them in the truth of the common profession of Christians but to reveal unto them the true sense of the old Scriptures according to the Gospell which they preached though that grace was common to many more besides the Apostles not to all Christians upon which depended the resolution of the point then in debate Besides I do not intend to depart from that observation which I have made in another place that we find
the second of the LXX whose privildges are not to be communicated to any authority to be preserved in the Church afterwards But the importance of these exhortations is not such as can inferre any imagination of infallibility in those whom they are exhorted to follow For they that know the bounds of that Power which the Apostles had trusted with the Governours of particular Churches presupposing the Christianity and Laws of Ecclesiastical communion which themselves had delivered may safely be exhorted to acknowledge them to esteem them above measure in love to obey them and to give way to them remembring those from whom they had first received Christianity from whom they had received these instructions as well as their then Rulers because they had long before received and yielded obedience to those things which we except from the obedience of present Rulers as presupposed to any power they can challenge As for the words of S. Paul 1 Tim. III. 15. I confess they containe a very just and full attribute of the Church and a Title serving to justifie all the right I challenge for it For if the Church be the House of the living God then is it by Gods founding and appointment a Body consisting of all members of the true Church wherein God dwells as of old in the Temple at Jerusalem as he dwells in every Christian as he dwelt in the Tabernacle and Campe of the Israelites And if it be the Pillar that sustains the truth then must it have wherewith to maintain it beside the truth it selfe which is the Scriptures And what what can that be but the testimony of it selfe as a body and fellowship of men onely which securing it selfe that is succession by the evidence made to the Predecessors of the same body maintains the truth once committed to the trust of it not onely by writing but also by practice But what is this to the gift of Infallibility for suppose the Church by the foundation of it inabled to maintain both the truth and the sufficience of the motives of faith against Infidels and also the rule of faith against Hereticks by the evidence which it maketh that they are received What is this to the creating of faith by decreeing that which before it was decreed was not the object of faith but upon such decree obligeth all faithful to believe Surely the Church cannot be the Pillar that sustains any faith but that which is laid upon it as received from the beginning not that which it layeth upon the foundation of faith Here I will desire the Reader to peruse these words of S. Basil Epist LXII speaking of the Bishop of Neo caesarea deceased 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is a man gone that of all men of his time most evidently excelled in all and every of those good things that belong to men The stay of his Country the ornament of the Church the Pillar that sustained the truth For if a particular Prelate may duly be qualified as well the Pillar that supporteth the truth as the prop of his Country Well may the Church be thought capable of the same stile though it create no matter of faith by decreeing but onely preserve that which it hath received by defending and maintaining it CHAP. XXXI The Fathers acknowledge the Sufficience and clearness of the Scriptures as the Traditions of the Church They are to be reconciled by limiting the terms which they use The limitation of those sayings which make all Christian truth to be contained in the Scriptures Of those which make the authority of the Church the ground of Faith IT is now time having showed the meaning of those Scriptures which are alleged for both extremes which I avoid to do the like for some of those sayings of the Fathers which are pleaded to the same purpose This abridgment cannot consider all Therefore I will not multiply those which speak to one and the same purpose Nor marshal them according to the mater which they speak to Finding them speak to any branch of those extremes which I decline I will put them down as they come S. Augustine again de Doctr. Christianâ II. 6. for one place you had afore Magnifice salubriter Spiritus Sanctus ità Scripturas modificavit ut locis apertioribus fami occurreret obscurioribus fastidia detergeret Nihil enim ferè de illis obscuritatibus eruitur quod non planissimè dictum alibi reperiatur Gallantly as well as wholesomly hath the Holy Ghost so tempered the Scriptures as to satisfie hunger by those places that are plain by those that are obscure to wipe of queasiness For there is scarce any thing digged out of those dark places that is not found most manifestly said elsewhere Epist III. Tanta est Christianarum profunditas literarum ut in eis quotidie proficerem si eas solas ab ineunte pueritiâ usque ad decrepitam senectutem maximo otio summo studio meliore ingenio conarer addiscere Non quòd ad ea quae necessaria sunt saluti tant â in eis perveniatur difficultate Sed cùm ibi quisque fidem tenuerit sine quâ rectè pieque non vivitur tam multa tamque multis mysteriorum umbraculis opaca intelligenda proficientibus restant So great is the depth of the Writings of Christianity that I should profit in them continually if I should indeavor to learn them onely at very great leasure with most earnest study having a better wit from the beginning of my nonage till decrepit old age Not as if it were so hard to attain to that which is necessary in them But when a man hath attained the Faith without which there is no good and godly living there remain so many things to be understood and so darkly shadowed with manifold mysteries Clemens Protreptico 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hear yee then that are farre off hear yee that are near hand The word is not hid from any It is a common light it shineth upon all men There are no Cimmerians in the Word As some said then that there were in the world that had no Sun Irenaeus II. 46. Vniversae Scripturae Propheticae Apostolicae in aperto sine ambiguitate similiter ab omnibus audiri possunt All the Scriptures both of the Prophets and Apostles are open and without ambiguity and may be heard or understood alike of all III. 15. Doctrina Apostolorum manifesta firma nihil subtrahens neque alia quidem in abscondito alia verò in manifesto docent um The doctrine of the Apostles is clear and firm and conceals nothing As not teaching one thing in secret and another openly Origen contra Celsum VII 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The vnlgar after their entrance made may easily study to apprehend even the deeper notions that are hid in the Scriptures For it is manifest to any man that reads them that they may have much deeper sense than that which straight appears in them Which becomes
every Instrument of a contract contain every thing that is in force by the said contract Surely it is a thing so difficult to contain in writing every thing that a contract intends that many times if witnesses were not alive other whiles if general Lawes did not determine the intent of words in fine if there were nothing to help the tenor of such Instruments things contracted would hardly sort to effect Consider now what is alleged on the other side how resolutely how generally the Tradition both of the Rule of Faith and of Lawes to the Church is acknowledged even by those witnesses whose sayings are alleged to argue the sufficience perfection and evidence of the Scriptures Is it civil is it reasonable to say that the Writers of the Christian Church make it their businesse to contradict themselves which no Scholar will admit either Infidels Pagans Jewes Mahumetans or Hereticks to do Is it not easie to save them from contradicting themselves by saying that Tradition of Faith containeth nothing that is not in the Scriptures but limits the meaning of that which they contain Tradition of Lawes may contain that which is not in the Scriptures for the species of fact but is derived from the Scripture for the authority from whence it proceeds Or is it possible by any other means reasonably to save them from contradicting themselves These generals premised freely may wee make our approaches to the particulars and by considering the circumstance of the places where they lye make our selves consident to finde some limitation restraining the generality of their words to make them agree as well with my position as with themselves For example Epiphanius Haer. LXXVI Irenaeus II. 46. III. 15. Athanasius Dispcum Ario say all is clear in the Scriptures Meaning that the sense of the Church is clearly the sense of the Scriptures in the points questioned But not to them who exclude that Tradition which themselves include and presuppose Observe again that the perspicuity of the Scriptures is not limited to things necessary to salvation in all that hath been alleged but once in S. Austine Epist III. and observe withall that the knowledg of things necessary proceeds upon supposition of the Rule of Faith acknowledged and received from the Church in the Catechizing of those that were baptized Not determined by every ones sense of the Scriptures It is therefore easily granted that the Scriptures were made for all sorts of people that they might profit by them Alwaies provided that they bring with them the Faith of the Catholick Church for the Rule within the bounds whereof they may profit by reading them otherwise they may and they may not And therefore those sayings which were alleged to prove them obscure convincing that they are not clear to all understandings because they require study and search and digging do necessarily leave him that comes without his Rule not onely in doubt of finding the truth but in danger of taking error for it Upon the like supposition S. Austine affirms de Vtilitate credendi VI. that any man may finde enough in the Old Testament that seeks as he ought For to seek humbly and devoutely is the same thing for him that is no Christian For the Manichees to whom S. Austine recommends the Old Testament in this place were Christians no further than the name as it is for him that is a Christian to seek like a Christian that is having before his eyes the Faith of the Church And this is that which S. Austine means that hee who is no Christian so seeking may finde enough to make him a Christian That is as much as hee is to expect from the Old Testament And this supposition is exprest by Origen contra Celsum VII when hee sayes that the unlearned may study the Scriptures with profit after their entrance made For this entrance is the Rule of Faith which they were taught when they were baptized And the Catechism of that time containing as well the motives as the mater of Faith appears to the unlearned the way into the deep that is the mystical sense of the Scripture Upon the same terms may wee proceed to grant all that is alleged to show that which is not contained in the Scriptures not to be receivable in point of Christian truth For having showed that the Rule of Faith is wholly contained in the Scriptures And nothing contained in the records of Church Writers to be unquestionable but the Rule and Tradition of Faith Whatsoever further intelligence and information can be pretended either tending to establish the same or by consequence of reason to flow from it if it cannot be pretended to come from Tradition because there is no Tradition of the Church concerning that wherein the Church agrees not either it must come from the Scripture or by the like revelation as the Scriptures which no Church Writer pretends to have For as for that which by consequence of reason is derived from those things which the Scripture expresseth Seeing the words of the Scripture is not the word of God but the sense and meaning of them it were a thing very impertinent to question whether or no that be contained in the Scripture which the true sense of the Scripture by due consequence of argument imports But if the question be of Lawes delivered the Church by the Apostles having showed that there may sufficient evidence be made of such though not recorded in the Scriptures there can no presumption be made being not found in the Scriptures that therefore a Law was not first brought into the Church by the Apostles And yet it remains grounded upon the Scriptures in point of righâ— because the authority by which it was brought into the Church is either established or attested by the Scriptures Mater of fact being competently evidenced by other historical truth besides And upon these terms wee may proceed to acknowledg the goodness of an argument drawn negatively from the Scriptures that is to say inferring this is not in the Scriptures therefore not true Doth my position then oblige mee to deny Irenaeus affirming III. that the Apostles writ the same that they preached Or S. Austine in Psalmum XXI de Vnitate Ecclesiae cap. V. and Optatus V. tying the Donatists to be tried by the Scriptures Both parties pretending to be children of God are to be tryed by their Fathers Will that is by the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament But if there shall fall out any difference about the intent of their Fathers Will the meaning of the Old and New Testament shall I think that is said in vain which is alleged on the other side out of the same S. Austine contra Cresconium I. 33. that if a man would not erre in that point hee is to advise with the Church which the Scripture evidenceth For the question being about the rebaptizing of Hereticks that is about a Law of the Church if you will have S. Austine agree with S. Austine
it must be upon the terms of my position the practice of the Church giving bounds to the sense of the Scripture I can therefore safely agree with the Constitutions of the Apostles with S. Cyprian and Leo and whosoever else teaches that it is not safe for the people to assure their consciences upon the credit of their Pastors But it is because I suppose the Unity of the Church provided by God for a ground upon which the people may reasonably presume when they are to adhere to their Pastors when not To wit when they are owned not when they are disowned by the Unity of the Church For though this provision becomes uneffectual when this Unity is dissolved yet ought not that to be an argument that the goodnesse of God never made that provision which the malice of man may defeat But that whosoever concurrs to maintain the division concurrs to defeat that provision which God hath made As safely do I agree with all them who agree that whatsoever is taught in Christianity is to be proved by the Scriptures For if it belong to the Rule of Faith it is intended by the Scriptures though that intent is evidenced by the Tradition of the Church If to the Lawes of the Church the authority of it comes from the Scriptures though the evidence of it may depend upon common sense which the practice of the Church may convince If over and above both it is not receivable if not contained in the Scriptures And in this regard whosoever maintains the whole Scripture to be the Rule of Faith is throughly justified by all those testimonies that have been alleged to that purpose For though it be not necessary to the salvation of all Christians to understand the meaning of all the Scriptures yet what Scripture soever a man attains to understand is as much a Rule to his Faith as that which a man cannot be saved if hee understand not the sense of it whether in and by the Scripture or without it And though a man may be obliged to believe that which is not in the Scripture to have been instituted by the Apostles yet is he not obliged to observe it but upon that reason which the Scripture delivereth And upon these terms is the whole Scripture a Rule of Faith from which as nothing is to be taken away so is nothing to be added to it as the saying of S. Chrysostome in Phil. II. Hom. XII requireth And the saying of S. Basil in Esa II. and Ascet Reg. I. condemning all that is done without Scripture takes place upon no other terms than these Not as Cartwright and our Puritanes after him imagine that a man is to have a text of Scripture specifying every thing which hee doth for his warrant For as it is in it self ridiculous to imagine that all cases which fall out can be ruled by expresse text of Scripture our Christianity being concerned infinite wayes of which it is evident that the Scripture had no occasion to speak So if the words of the Scripture be lodged in a heart where the work of them dwelleth not a thing which wee see too possible to come to passe it is the ready way to make the Word of God a color for all unrighteousnesse not onely to others but to the very heart of him who hath that cloke for it It is therefore enough that the reason of every thing which a Christian doth is to be derived from that doctrine which the Scripture declaeth And where a man proceedeth to do that for which hee hath not such a reason so grounded as reasonable men use to go by then cometh that to passe which S. Basil chargeth Ascet Reg. LXXX That What is not of faith is sin It is true according to that sense which hitherto I have used after many Church Writers the Rule of Faith extendeth not to all the Scriptures but onely to that which it is necessary to salvation to believe and to know Which every man knowes that all the Scripture is not For though it be necessary to salvation to believe that all the Scripture is true yet is it not necessary to salvation to know all that the Scripture containeth And the reason why I use it in this sense is to distinguish those things contained in the Scriptures which Tradition extendeth to from those to which it extendeth not For upon these terms is the sense of them limitable to the common Faith But I quarel not therefore the opinion of them that maintaine the whole Scriptures to be the Rule of Faith acknowledging that whatsoever it containeth is necessarily to be believed by all that come to understand it And whatsoever it containeth not though the Scripture alone obligeth not to believe the truth of it is not necessarily to be observed for any other reason but that which the Scripture declareth As for S. Basil making it apostasy to bring that which is not written into the Faith It is a thing well known that the Arians were charged by the Church for bringing in words that were not in the Scriptures saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was a time when Christ was not And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That hee was made of nothing On the other side after the Council of Nicaea the Arians charged the Church for bringing in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same substance Where then lay the difference between the Inndelity of the Arians and the Faith of the Church Theodoret showes it Hist Eccles I. 8. out of Athanasius de Actis Concil Niceni 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith hee They were condemned by written words piously understood But how appears this piety For I suppose the Arians would not have granted it Hee addeth that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had been used by the Fathers which had it been inconsistent with the sense of the Church could not have been indured in a mater concerning the Rule of Faith whereas their terms were contrary to that which is found in the Scriptures Now S. Basil acknowledgeth that hee had elsewhere dealing with Hereticks used terms not found in the Scriptures to exclude their sense contrary to the Scriptures as you shall finde by the Authors alleged that the Council of Nicaea had done but to those who desired information with a single heart hee resolves to rest content with the Scriptures The terms whereof his meaning is that the Hereticks did not rest content with because they had a minde to depart from the Faith Upon the same terms Tertullian pronounces the Wo that belongs to them which adde to Gods Word upon Hermogenes because his error concerned the Article of our Creed that God made heaven and earth And S. Austine presumes the reason why there is no clear Scripture for the original of the soul to be because hee presumes that it concerns not the substance of Faith Besides these Observations some of those passages which are alleged may concern Christianity rather than the Scriptures
The Word shines upon all and is hid to none saith Clemens to the Gentiles But it is enough for his purpose that they may be convinced of Christianity whether the Scriptures contain it clearly to all understandings or not Tertullian prescribeth that when once wee believe wee are to believe that wee have nothing else to believe because the Gnosticks pretended secrets which our common Christianity they confessed contained not Claudius Apollinaris is afraid that our common Christianity might be thought unperfit if hee should write against Montanus And does not Christians writing one against another cast a mark of imperfection upon it in the opinion of unbelievers though Christians ought to know that God is not tyed to prevent offenses Assuredly the Gospel of which hee speaks is neither any one Gospel nor all four Nor can the word Gospel signifie either the New Testament alone or the Old and New both Nor could hee be thought to adde to them by expounding them and thereby maintaining the Church Therefore hee inferrs a good consequence that because it is forbidden to adde to or take from the Law therefore our common Christianity is not unperfit nor ought wee to do that whereby it may seem unperfit Now as for the sayings alleged out of S. Austine that import as much as the words which wee had afore Ego Evangelio non crederem having showed what is the effect and intent of them I shall not be very solicitous to show how all that is said to the same effect is answered For as there is no head so hard that cannot distinguish between the authority of the Church as it is a visible Body of men that could never have been cozened into the beliefe of Christianity upon pretended motives whether sufficient or not and as it is supposed by Christians to be a Body founded by God So is there no heart so hardned with prejudice as to refuse this demand That the authority of the Church as the Church presupposes the truth of Christianity and therefore proves it not And by consequence no truth that Christianity either containeth or inferreth Which being admitted if any thing be ascribed to the Church which seems not to suppose any part of Christian truth it must be referred to the authority and credit of the Church as a visible Body of men moving others to imbrace the Christian Faith For though this credit contribute to the making of those men Christians which are won to the Church already setled and so the Church is the Church before they are Christians Yet is the ground and reason which makes the Church a Body founded by God to wit the profession of Christianity more ancient in order of reason and nature than the being of the Church And upon supposition of this ground that is that the Church hath true reasons as well as sufficient to believe proceeds all that authority of the Church which S. Austine allegeth to the Manichees upon so high terms that hee would not believe were hee not moved by it to believe Neither was it the authority of the Church vested in the rest of the Apostles that gave S. Paul the authority of an Apostle over the Church though I have said afore that all the authority which the Church can ever have was in the Apostles and disciples of our Lord for the time And though it is manifest that S. Paul could not have had the Authority of an Apostle over the Church had he not been owned by the rest of the Apostles but the Authority of our Lord Christ in the Apostles of the same effect in obliging the Church to receive S. Paul for an Apostle as to receive that which they preached for the Faith Nor is the mater much otherwise in the receiving of any Scripture for Canonital For neither can any mans writing be owned for Canonical Scripture not supposing his person owned by the Apostles And his authority being so owned is necessarily before any authority of the Church and the very being of it That some Scriptures may be received in some Churches and not in others is not because any Church can have authority to reject that which another is bound to receive but because some Church may not know that some Scripture comes from a man so owned by the Apostles though another may know it and yet be a Church and salvation be had in the communion of it such knowledg depending meerly upon evidence in point of fact And therefore the act of the Church in listing the Scripture hath no authority but that which the presumption of such evidence createth As for the rest of that which is alleged for the authority of the Church if S. Jerome resolve to stand to the Church of Rome it is not because hee takes the sentence thereof to be infallible but because hee had reason to presume that it were in vain for an Angel in heaven to preach any other Faith to it than that which once had been received Nor doth S. Cyprian make the not believing the Popes infallibility the sourse of all Heresie and Schism but the neglect of authority derived from the Apostles upon the Heads of particular Churches in the consent of whom the visibility of the true Faith and Church both consisteth For it is meer slight of hand to take the Rock which the Gates of Hell vanquish not in S. Austine for the Church of Rome because hee spoke of it in the words next afore Being meant of the Vine which hee had speech of a little afore that to wit the Christianity which our Lord Christ preacheth For in S. Bernards time I grant the stile was changed and it might passe for good doctrine to say That the Faith cannot suffer any failleur in the Church of Rome As for all those passages of the Fathers which are alleged in recommendation whether of Tradition for the Rule of Faith or of Traditions which are the Lawes of the Church they are all mine own They cannot serve the turn of any opinion but that which I pretend That the Tradition of the Church witnessed and evidenced by the continual exercice and practice of the Church extant in the records of the Church not constituted and created by any expresse act of those that have authority in behalf of the Church as it giveth bounds to the interpretation of the Scripture in such things as concern the Rule of Faith So it discovereth what Lawes the Church received from the Apostles and by consequence what is agreeable and consequent to the intent of the same in future times according to the difference between that and the present state of the Church Let those things therefore which have been produced here be added to that which I alleged in the beginning to make evidence for the Corporation of the Church from the Lawes given it by the Apostles Irenaus shall serve both for the authority of the Scripture antecedent to the authority of the Church and for the Tradition of the Church bounding
is held and practised convincing where the truth is and on which side especially if wee content our selves with what is probable from it expecting from Tradition what is definite and certain For supposing so great a Congregation as the Church to take this for the ground of their Faith that nothing is to be believed for revealed truth but what they have received from hand to hand from the Apostles it must be granted First that they had the same perswasion from the beginning Because having never declared to their successors what are the particulars they are to receive either they had from the beginning this principle to distinguish mater of faith from that which is not or could never introduce it without grosse imposture And besides that holding this perswasion they could never admit any thing as received from their Fore-fathers which was not so indeed Because whole Nations can never agree so to deceive in a mater subject to sense as to say that they received this or that from their Fore-fathers when they did not the reason being the same in all ages since Christ as in our own For the Christian Faith being so repeated so inculcated by the preaching of the Apostles how long soever wee suppose the remembrance of their doctrine to have remained certain in the Church so long wee may inferre that age which had this certain remembrance must convey it as certain in a sensible distance of time and by the means of such distances that it must needs come no lesse certain to us Neither can any breach have been made upon the Faith without contesting the common principle of Tradition in the first place and secondly the consequence and correspondence which the Articles of Christianity have one with another by means whereof hee that questioneth one must needs by consequence prejudice others And Religion being a bond by observing which people are perswaded they shall attain happinesse the same motives to enter into this bond in general the same grounds of embracing Christianity in particular remaining how should wee imagine any part of it should be either lost or changed which necessarily must concurre to the effect of the whole For being dispersed as from the beginning it hath been over so many Nations whose authority can be a sufficient reason to perswade them all that which hee sayes to have been received from the Apostles not that which they were possessed of afore Who is able to move them with hopes and fears answerable to those which wrought them to imbrace it either to silence or to change it And yet so long as it can appear that the contrary was received so long time must the change require to prevaile and so much more to leave the truth forgot and yet subject to be evidenced by any Records that may remain So that there is no appearance that the principles producing such a change should so long time prevail as those motives that first evidenced the truth And further upon all this appearance in point of fact it is argued à priori and as it were in point of Right That God having provided so many possibilities to make the preservation of Christianity so easie the effect must needs have followed lest the means should have been provided in vain if no effect should insue All possibility being to no purpose when no effect followes and no effect but this answering the means that render it so possible CHAP. XXXI That the Scriptures which wee have are unquestionable That mistakes in Copying are not considerable to the sense and effect of them The meaning of the Hebrew and Greek even of the Prophets determinable to the deciding of Controversies How Religion delivered by Tradition becomes subject to be corrupted THis is the summe of this new account which to my understanding maintains the Infallibility of the present Church upon as high terms as those that resolve the reason of their Faith into it and yet not upon any gift of Infallibility intailed upon any visible act of any persons however qualified on behalf of the Church but upon a pretense of evidence made to common sense that those who acknowledge Tradition cannot receive any thing not onely which they believe to be but which is indeed inconsistent with it Wherein I shall protest in the first place that I have nothing to do with the terms of great error or Christianity so as to say here that either Christianity which hee calleth Christs Law or any part of it either hath been or may be renounced by them that pretend to admit nothing as revealed truth but what they believe was received from the Apostles and that so great an error as this may have crept into the Church For the present purpose being general to try how any thing in debate may be tryed whether agreeable to the Faith or not I should count it a great impertinence and the ruine of all that I design to infer upon sufficient principles which I pretend those which I reject not to be to be ingaged to show how great any error may be before I have a ground to inferre whether it be an error or not But if I may proceed to settle such a ground I shall make no doubt to convince all that remain convict of the truth thereof how great the error is which it convicteth It shall therefore suffice mee for the present to state the opposition which I make to this pretense upon these termes That the common sense of all Christians determineth those who pretend to admit nothing as of Faith but what they receive from our Lord and his Apostles to be subject neverthelesse under that pretense to receive things really inconsistent with it and which may be discerned so to be by the means which wee have to decide such questions The Scriptures interpreted by the Original and Catholick Tradition of the Church The evidence of this position necessarily consists in that which is to be said for Scripture and Tradition joyntly as the onely sufficient means to evidence Christian truths that is to say that having showed the arguments made against Scripture alone and for Tradition alone to be ineffectual and void That which remains for the truth will be this that the Scripture with Tradition to determine the meaning of it do both together make a sufficient means to determine the truth of any thing questioned concerning Christianity I say then in behalf of the Scripture which this plea so undervalueth as not to acknowledge any such thing but in favour to them whom they dispute with that it is a mervail to see how the greater difference with common enemies is forgot upon lesse quarrels among our selves For if there be any such men as Atheists that deny the beginning of the world and the marks of Gods providence expressed in the government of it as I would there were none I demand how they could be more gratified than by making it beleeved that we are no more tied to beleeve Moses writings
Church I say there was reason for these orders supposing that Scholars were to be admitted Christians upon this presumption Otherwise none And hence it commeth that the assembly of the Church being first by a Synecdoche called in Latine Missa from the dismissing of it which it ends with as in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Latine Collecta for the assembling of it the word Missa Latine as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek is now come to signifie the Sacrament of the Eucharist which came after the dismissing of Learners but went afore the dismissing of believers being the principall office for which the Assemblies of the Church were held But I will remit those that would understand the weight of this argument to that which they may read in Clemens his Poedagogus where they shall find the conversation which the Church required of those who professed to be Scholars of Christianity and to stand for baptism described in all the parts of it Perhaps somewhat in the way of Plato his Common-wealth or Xenophons education of Cyrus expressing many times what should be rather than what was But still what the Church on the behalfe of God required at their hands till being come to the end of the book he who had approved himselfe by his conversation likely to make a good Christian is in the end of it inducted by the Chatechist into the Church to demand that baptism which by this time he hath learned what it charges him with And if this be not argument enough what the Church in Gods behalfe demands of them that would be Christians it will be in vain to apply reason to argue any thing that is questionable For it is visible that the time of any mans continuing Catechumenus or a Probationer in Christianity was required upon no other ground nor to any other purpose but that the Church might be reasonably or legally that is according to custome assured that the party pretending to baptism was really resolved to stand to that which Christianity should require at his hands This the conversation of severall years for triall the frequenting of Gods service in the Church the hatred which he needs must undergo from the enemies of the Church Jewes and Gentiles must needs signifie supposing Christians to be reasonable people But that exception which I alledged out of the Constitutions most clearly That if any mans zeal to Christianity should be found so fervent that there was no reason to suspect his sincerity then the regular time of continuing in the state and rank of Catechumenus or a Scholar of Christianity might be abridged by the Church For this is the same confideration which takes place in many penitentiall Canons of the Church afterwards That if any man should demonstrate that zeal and eagerness in detesting the offences through which he had failed which might ground a confidence of his sincerity for the future the regular time of his Penance might be abridged The ground whereof is to be seen in the example of S. Paul abating the rigor of his censure upon the incestuous person at Corinth though not only in consideration of the persons own zeal but of the Churches submission to acknowledge themselves parties to his crime for bearing him out against the censure due to it before And this indulgence consisting in the releasing or abating of regular penance is without all quession according to the will and word of God Consider further another custome of the Church during this primitive estate Many men that were convicted in their judgements of the truth of Christianity finding dâ—fficulty in undergoing the Crosse of Christ and persecution for Christianity at least willing to avoid it though they went so far as to professe themselves Probationers in Christianity yet went not so far as to pretend to Baptism least by being admitted to it they should make themselves liable to persecution as Christians These men if any thing fell out to make themselves liable to persecution as Christians These men if any thing fell out to make them think their lives to be in danger would nevertheless desire to be baptized in their beds of sickness Neither did the Church make any question of granting it presuming that those who by the hand of God had been driven to demand it would prove true to that which by such an exigent they had been driven to seek Nevertheless these are those Clinicâ— whom we read of in the ancient Records of the Church of whose salvation though there were that presumption in regard whereof they were admitted to baptism yet not without some scruple Upon what account Not because they were not so well drenched with water being baptized in their beds as others But because their resolution to abide by the Christianity which they professed at their baptisme was counted more questionable than theirs who had frankly without reservation abandoned themselves to it Tertullian in his Book De Bapt. cap. XIX argues that none should make hast to Baptism that are not provided of that resolution which the performance of that which they undertake by it requires And upon this account he advises to delay the baptism of Infants to mans estate nay of single persons because of the temptations to which they are subject till they resolve to serve God either in the state of virginity and widowhood or of wedlock What the consequence hereof is in the matter of baptizing Infants his reason must determine And that sufficiently appears to be upon the profession which Baptism undertaketh For that which he apprehendeth is that not having well understood and digested what it is they undertake they should fail in making it good And truly let any man tell me why there should be so much doubt made of the salvation of those that died before baptism in the ancient Church notwithstanding that they had professed not only to believe the truth of Christianity but also that they intended to undertake the profession of it and were indeed of the rank of Catechumeni Scholars or Probationers in it For it is manifest that aster persecution was ceased there were many and many who professing Christianity forbore neverthelesse to be baptized sometimes many years sometimes till death as we see by the great Constantine who having professed so long before the beliefe of Christianity was not baptized neverthelesse till a while before his death sometimes therefore were prevented by death and died unbaptized of whose salvation there was some difficulty made in conceiving full assurance as it appears by the arguments wherewith S. Ambrose comforts himselfe in the case of the Emperour Valentiniane and his brother Satyrus Not that there could remain any doubt in the salvation of those who having resolved to undertake and profess Christianity by being baptized should be intercepted and cut off by inevitable casualties of mortality not procured by those delayes which the want of zeal in that resolution had brought to pass For it is clear that those who suffered
paines to make them partizans in questions which they understand not and give them the confidence to censure for Arminians those that resolve them in such termes as they comprehend not Neverthelesse at the last judgement of God they may have cause to complaine of them if not for teaching them to tye knoâ—s which they cannot teach them to loose yet for inducing them to breake the peace of the Church to obtaine freedome of professing or imposing upon others the beliefe of things thus prejudiciall to Christianity In the meane time it shall be enough for me by this short resolution to have drawn a line which they that will tread the Labyrinth of this dispute may be guided by the best that I can show from falling headlong on either side Not doubting that the skill of those who being more traded in it resolve to avoid both extremities may produce that information which may oblige me for further intelligence as well as the rest of the Church But having confidence that the denying of Gods Predetermination is not the denying of Gods effectuall Grace which I have showed that it doth stand with freewill according to the supposition that I advance though I undertake not to show how reason reconciles the parts of it And truly I am confident that when S. Austine in his book de Correptione Gratia distinguishes between that help of Grace without which we cannot obay the Gospell of Christ and that help by which we do it auxilium quo auxilium sine quo non and whensoever else he makes the efficacy of Grace to attaine the doing of that which it effecteth not onely the inabling of man to do it he never intended to determine the maner how it is effected For though S. Austin himselfe hath balked the ground which himselfe had laid for the distinction between the antcedent and consequent will of God in his book de Spiritu litera Chap. XXXIII by bringing in other expositions of S. Pauls words God would have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledg of the truth that are inconsistent with it Though I have not found him distinguish betweene necessity upon supposition and antecedent as Anselme in pursuance of his Doctrine hath don yet he that shall read what he hath said of the redemption of all mankind upon Psalm XCV besides abundance of other passages whereby he concurreth to witnesse that sense of the redemption of all mankind of Gods will that all be saved of sufficient Grace that is not effectuall which the Church generally declareth as I showed you before I say he that considereth them will find it more reasonable to reconcile him to his owne doctrine then to pretend a change in his judgement where he acknowledges none as in the mater of preventing Grace he doth not acknowledge Certainely seeing that Prosper in defending him frequently and clearely acknowledges Christ to have dyed for all mankind out of Gods will that all might be saved But the author of the book de â—â—catione Gentium never yet suspected for a partizane of the Semipelagians hath so plentifully maintained it during the time that the parties in Gaule charged one another for Semipelagians and Praedestinatians For during that time was it writ without peradventure they will never deserve well of S. Austine that defend him otherwise So far are we from being obliged by his doctrine to acknowledge grace to come to effect by Gods predetermining the wil of man to all that coms to passe when I have shâ—wed a supposition according to which it may be don without prejudice to Christianity though beyond my understanding to show how For supposing the common faith to be this That God appointeth them to life or to death whom he foreseeth to imbrace or not imbrace Christianity and to persevere or not persevere in the practice of it till death Can it not be true also that he hath appointed some and not others the meanes whereby he foresees that they will persevere Nay if some only persevere in the state of Grace when all might as the Council of Orange hath decreed what is there but Gods will to create the difference much more between them that never heare of the Gospell and those that refuse it And what hath Christianity hereupon to answer but Porphyries question why Christ came not afore That is why God suffered man to fall and sin to come into the world Why he maketh not all men true Christians when he might For one answer would serve all these questions Which if it be a scandall to Christianity that it is not answered it remaines that Christians be Porphyries disciples In the mean time absolute predestination to grace infers not absolute predestination to glory Nor obliges God to procure sin as the meanes to his end or as the meanes to that meanes to predetermine mans will to doe it But did Saint Austines doctrine in my opinion containe any thing contrary to the doctrine of the rest of the Church concerning the antecedent consequent will of God the coming of evill into the world and that the foreknowledge of God does not effect but suppose it the freedome of the will from necessity while slave to sin I would think my selfe obliged to renounce him that I might adhere to the rest of the Church Counting it a thing ridiculous and contrary to the principles of Christian truth acknowledging the tradition of Faith to come from the whole Church to advance the doctrine of a member thereof though so eminent as S. Austine against that which the rest of the Church is acknowledged to have taught If iâ— be said that the supposition of Gods foreseeing the event of mens resolutions by the objects and considerations which he appoints them to be moved with is an invention of the Jesuites or at least hath been much maintained by them I demand what advantage they have that espouâ—e the supposition of the Dominicans the first Inquisitors that is Ministers of persecution for Religion by the interest of the Church of Rome with secular powers Especially adding unto it the position of justifying faith by believing that we are predestinate so destructive to the Covenant of Grace Yet I give the reader that is willing to take the paines of being informed notice that the supposition which I advance is rather in the forme that is to be collected out of Durandus then in that which the Iesuites since have given it In fine let Maldonat and Jesuites think it their honour to professe that they like not such and such expositions of scripture because they come from the Hereticks by which names we know whom they meane Let Puritan preachers coâ—fe their simple heareâ—s with a prejudice against all that they like not as drawne from Arminians or Jesuites whose positions they understood not and when they are understood are nearer the truth then their owne I shall find my selfe never the lesse oâ—liged to follow that truth for Christs sake which I
give not thine heritage for a reproach Joel II. 12-17 Sure this is something more then not allowing a mans self to sinne or not liking that which he does when he sinnes which no man that ever heard of Christianity can do till he have contracted such a custome of sinning that he is not sensible of any remorse for it And it is a thing most strange that those who pretend to be the cream of Christianity should think the sinnes of the regenerate not to forfeit the state of Grace nor contract Gods displeasure because they are done with dislike Judas might have robbed the poor so oft that at length he might be without remorse but certainly he betrayed not his master without reluctation The regenerate if truly so and not hypocrites must needs find the burthen of sinne which they commit aggravated by the grace which they had received afore And therefore must needs find themselves obliged to a deeper measure of humiliation to expiate their ingratitude and to recover the favour of God which they had forfeited by abusing it afore This seems in my opinion to perswade a good Christian that workes of humiliation and Penance are requisite to recover the state of Grace and to render God againe propitious to those that have fallen from the grace of their Baptisme As that which I said afore seemes to show that it is not prejudiciall to the satisfaction of our Lord should be satisfied by such meanes Now the originall and generall practice of Gods Church punctually agreeth with that which hath been said Our Lord preacheth repentance but admitteth all that professe it to be his disciples not taking cognizance what they had been professing to become such as he requireth for the future So his Church knowing that there is no sinne so deep that his bloud cannot wash away admitteth all to Baptisme declaring that without repentance it availeth onely to their damnation but demanding no visible satisfaction of it in them that were not hitherto of the Church But those who falsify the profession upon which they were admitted to Baptisme and that so visibly that the forfeiture of Gods grace is visible by the same meanes those were so excluded the communion of the Church which ought to suppose a presumption of the state of Grace at least the possibility of it that at the first the greatest question was whether they should be admitted to any hope of reconcilement by the Church or not As it appeareth by the breaches of the Montanists and Novatians and partly of the Donatists and Meletians If this admission were granted it was onely to this effect at the beginning that they might tender the Church satisfaction of the sincerity of that sorrow wherewith they pretended to satisfy God that is to appease his wrath and to recover his grace Those who think Penance was injoyned to no other effect in the ancient Church then to make satisfaction for the scandall which the notoriousnesse of sinne had contracted are as farre wide of the truth as those who think it onely made satisfaction for a debt of temporall punishment the staine of sinne and guilt of eternall punishment being abolished by submitting it to the Keyes of the Church out of that sorrow which they call Attrition which they will have to be changed into Contrition by the humility of that confession which submitteth a mans sinne to the keyes of the Church In what sense attrition may be said to be changed into contrition by the ministery of Penance I shall have occasion to debate againe in the third Book For the present I must not forget the ground which I have presupposed that the Gosspel is presupposed to the being and constitution of the Church And therefore that remission of sinnes by the Church and the ministery of Penance in the Church supposeth the accomplishment of that condition and the production of that disposition which by the Gospel qualifieth for remission of sinne Neither can the ministery of the Church be otherwise necessary then as it may be effectuall to produce the same How in the Penitent that sorrow for fear of punishment which the first sight of sinne necessarily causeth which is attrition in their termes is changed into that sorrow for having offended God which the love of God causeth is to be understood I conceive by that which I said afore That the ministery of the Church cannot supersede or dispense with the meanes whereby that change is brought to passe as the argument proposed evidences by the Scriptures So from the Tradition of the Church I conceive I have peremptory evidence For those that deferred their Penance till danger of death then confessing their sinnes submitted to the keyes of the Church though they were not refused reconcilement in that estate though they were admitted to the communion of the Eucharist yet their salvation remained questionable in case they survived not to perform their Penance This you shall find at large in Saint Augustine Homilia XLI ex L. though some attribute it to Saint Ambrose But you have it in Saint Augustine againe de Tempore sermone LVII And when it is found in a letter of Faustus in answer to Paulinus of Nola it cannot be excepted that Faustus is a suspected author because of his opposition to Saint Augustine in a point wherein it is evident that he concurreth with Saint Augustine But in the fourth Councill of Carthage also Can. VII and VIII those that submit to Penance and receive the Eucharist in danger of death are not to think themselves acquitted of their sinne if they survive sine manus impositione That is without performing their Penance during which they were at the service of the Church prayed for with imposition of hands And therefore he who having thus submitted to Penance and received the Eucharist recovered might be promoted to the Clergy according to the IV Councill of Toledo Can. LIII and Concil Gerund can IX Whereas whosoever had done Penance in the Church could never be admitted to the Clergy afterwards Because such a one had not been properly under Penance the sinne that is supposed in the case of the former Canon not being specified but onely generally confessed for sinne Whereby it appeareth sufficiently that in regard it is possible the sorrow wherewith a man submitteth to Penance in that case should be so sincere as to obtaine pardon at Gods hands therefore the communion was not refused But in regard of the doubt that remained in the businesse the Church warranted not the pardon till satisfied of his conversion by the performance of his Penance And therefore it is manifest that the ancient Church did not believe attrition to be changed into contrition by submitting to the Keyes of the Church making question of the salvation of those upon whom the Keyes of the Church had passed because the operation of Penance injoyned was prevented by death And so the practice of the ancient Church concurreth with the doctrine of the Apostles to
is admitted to Baptism is likewise invested with a right and due title to the promises of the Gospel remission of sâ—nnes and everlasting life As it may appear to all that hâ—ve contracted with the Church of England in Gods name that continuing in that which they professed and undertook on ttheir part at their Baptism they are â—ssured of no lesse by the Church And therefore this is and ought to be accounted that power of the Keyes by which men are admitted to the House of God which is his Church as S. Paul saith At least that part of it that is seen and exercised in this first office that the Church can minister to a Christian And seeing no man can challenge the priviledge of that communion to which he is admitted upon condition of that profession which Baptism supposed unlesse he proceed to live according to it it cannot seem strange that the same should be thought to be exercised in the celebration of the Eucharist as it is done with a purpose to communicate the Sacrament thereof to those that receive I shall desire any man that counts this sâ—râ—nge to consider that which I quoted even now out of Epiphanius That the Patriarch of the Jews at Tiberias being baptized by the Bishop put a considerable sum of Gold into his hand saying Offer for me For it is written Whatsoever ye bind on â—atrh shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever ye lose on earth shall be losed in heaven For so it follows in Epiphanius And when S. Cyprian blames or forbids offering up the names or offering up the Eucharist in the names of those that had fallen away from the Church in time of persecution till they were reconciled to the Church by Penance doth he not exercise the power of the Keyes in his hands by denying the benefit of those Prayers which the Eucharist is celebrated with to them who had forfeited their right to it by failing of that which by their baptism they undertook As on the other side whosoever the Eucharist is offered for that is whosoever hath a part in those Prayers which it is celebrated with is thereby declared loose by the Church upon supposition that he is indeed what he professes And whatsoever Canons of the Church there are of which there are not a few which take order that the offerings of such or such shall or shall not be received they all proceed upon this suppoâ—â—tion that by the power of the Keys they are to be allowed or refused their part of benefit in the Communion of the Eucharist and the effects of iâ— For not to speak of what is by the corruption of men but what ought to be by the appointment of God it is manifest that the admission of a man to the communion of the Eucharist is an allowance of his Christianity as conâ—ormable to that which Baptism professeth though in no sâ—ate of the Church it is a sufficient and reasonable presumption that a man is indeed and before God intitled to the promises of the Gospel that he is admitted to the communion of the Eucharist by the Church because whatsoever profession the Church can receive may be counâ—erfeit But so that it is to be indeavoured by all means possible for the Church to use that the right of communicating with the Church in the Sacrament of the Eucharist be not allowed any man by the Church but upon such terms and according to such laws that a man being qualified according to them may be really and indeed qualified for those promises which the Gospell tendreth Which being supposed every Christian must of necessity acknowledge how great and eminent a power the Lord hath trusted his Church with in celebrating and giving of the Eucharist when he is convinced to believe that the body and blood of Christ is thereby tendred him though mystically and as in a Sacrament yet so truly that the spirit of Christ is no lesse really present with it to inable the souls of all them that receive it with sincere Christianity then the Sacrament is to their bodies or then the same spirit is present in the flesh and bloud of Christ naturally being in the heavens For suppose that by faith alone without receiving this Sacrament a man is assured of the spirit of Christ as by faith alone understanding faith alone as S. Paul meant it I shall show that he may be assured of it yet if he have determined a visible act to be done to the due performance whereof he hath annexed a promise of the participation of the Spirit of Christ by our Spirit no lesse then of the body â—nd blood of Christ Sacramentally present by our bodies And if he hath made the doing of this a part of the Christianity which under the title of Faith alone inâ—iâ—leth to promises of the Gospell for who can be said to professe Christianity that owneth not such an Ordinâ—nce upon such a promise Then hath he determined and limited the truth of that faith which onely justifieth us at the beginning of every mans Christianity to the Sacrament of Baptism but in the proceeding of the same to that of the Eucharist These being the first Powers of the Church and having resolved from the beginning that the power of the Church extends to the deterâ—ining or limiting of any thing requisite to the communion of the Church the determination or limitation wherof by such an act as ought to have the force of Law to them that are of the Church becomes requisite to the communion of Christians in the offices of Gods service in unity I cannot see any of the controversies whereby we stand now divided that can deserve a place in our consideration before that of the Baptism of Infants For as it is a dispute belonging to the first and originall power of the Church to consider whether it extend so farre as when it is acknowledged that there is no written Law of God to that purpose that it may and justly hath provided that all the Children of Christian Parents be baptized Infants so it will apear to concern their salvation more immediately then other Laws limiting the exercise of the Churches power or the circumstances of exercising those offices of God service which it tendeth to determine can be thought to do But Before I come to dispute this point I will here take notice once more of the Book called the Doctrine of Baptisms one of the fruits of this blessed Reformation commonly attributed to the Master of a Colledge in Cambridge proving by a studied dispute that it was never intended by our Lord Christ and his Apostles that Christians should be Baptized at all That John indeed was sent to baptize with water but that the Baptism of Christ is baptism with the Holy Ghost and fire And so long as the Ceremonies of the Law were not abolished in point of fact though become void in point of right so long also baptism by water was practised by the Apostles as
repaired but by the second coming of the second Adam and those helps of grace which by his obedience in the flesh he purchased to inable us to imbrace and undertake the condition proposed and to proceed in the performance of it to that which God accepteth In fine I have showed that the Sacrament of Baptism is that visible act which legally determineth and limiteth that profession of Christianity which intitleth to the Kingdom of God as consigning the profession of a Christian unto the hands of the Church by the means whereof Christianity is conveyed to us Therefore having showed these things I have no reason to think my selfe obliged to unty these Cobwebs thred by thred which I can sweep away at once with this besome Onely I will stand here so long as to admire whether the boldnesse or ignorance of these new dogmatists of new Religions be the greater when I see the baptism of John counted among the Ceremonies of the old Law for a foundation of this new doctrine of Baptisms never heard of by any Christian till this blessed Reformation was on foot which must be said à fortiori of that Baptism by water which our Lord Christ instituted by them that esteem it not the same Is it possible that any man that believes Christianity to be the Religion now in force to salvation by Gods appointment in opposition to Judaism should imagine that John the Baptist sent to declare our Lord to be the Christ that was sent of God to introduce it to the voiding of Moses Law should set on foot that Baptism whereby he prepared his Disciples for Christ or brought them to Christ by virtue of that Law which he intended to void Is it not essentiall to all the observations of the old Law that they be thought to be figurative of Christ to come at least supposing Christianity Can that Baptism figure Christ to come the intent whereof supposed him to be already come pretending to prepare his Disciples to receive him that was come But whether we say the Baptism of Christ was the same with Johns Baptism or another to say the Apostles of Christ when they baptize with water intended to figure that the Messias was coming from whom they had their commission to Baptize would be no lesse then a spice of madnesse I will also stay so long for Socinus as to answer that suspition which he draws from the words of S. Paul 1 Cor. I. 13 -17 to his purpose Is Christ divided was Paul crucified for you or were ye baptized into the name of Paul I thank God that I baptized none of you but Criâ—pus and Gaius that no man say that I baptize in my oâ—n name yet I baptized also the house of Stephans further whither I baptized any I know not For Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the Gospel If there were any thing in these words to intimate that the precept of baptizing is not of peâ—emptory and perpetuall necessity then must they signifie more then that it was not necessary that it should be done by S. Pauls own hands which is all they contain For he that would say that which was not necessary to be done by S. Paul was not necessary to be done would deserve to be laught at for his pains The question is then was any of them whom S. Paul baptized not left unbaptized or not If not how is it inferred that a man need not be baptized now because then they were not baptized by S. Paul If so how comes Socinus to grant that those who were first converted to Christianity were to be baptized And therefore before Socinus or any man go about to teach a new Religion it were fit for him to learn from the custome and practice of the Church that there is a difference between authority in ordering and ministery in executing And from the custome of the world that what a man does by his minister or officer that he does himselfe in Law though another do it in point of nature Which being supposed a little reason will serve to inferre that the Apostles being principal in the commission of the Gospell were to be imployed in the principall part of it that is in reducing men to Christianity And therefore so farre as that required their attendance inferiour offices which depended upon their order were to be left to the execution of their Ministers But to both these Heresies I say at once in the last place that they belie the very ground which they professe to be Christians The reason why the motives of faith cannot be doubted for truth is because all that are Christians have taken upon them their Christianity for a Law and entred into a communion and body of the Church to live and communicate in the faith and service of God according to certain Laws upon evidence that they come indeed from God Therefore that which all this body hath taken upon it to observe for Law from the beginning and constantly observed till Socinus his or the Antinomians time that belonged to the matter of Christianity as evidently as it is evident that the motives of Christianity recorded in the Scriptures are true which are therefore evidently true because it is evident that they have moved the world to receive Christianity which could not have been done had they been false For if all Christians could be deceived to believe that their Christianity requireth them to be Baptized if they will be saved why might they not be deceived to believe that those things were truly one which the Scripture alledgeth to evidence the Gospell to come from God when as indeed they were not Which is to say that who so pretends to void that which the whole Church observeth for a Law must not think that he can do it by showing that it is not commanded in the Scriptures until he can show that it is come into the Church not according to right having been from the beginning otherwise He must therefore first refuse all that I have said in the first Book to demonstrate that the Church alwaies was from the beginning one body governed by certain Laws originally proceeding from the Apostles by whom power was left it to determine and limite further all that the future estate thereof should require to be further determined for the maintaining of unity in the communion of the Church For granting this it will be impossible to show how so great a body should agree to receive that for a Law and that necessary to salvation as Baptism hath alwayes been esteemed which they received not for such at the beginning from our Lord and his Apostles CHAP. VII The ground of baptizing Infants Originall sinne though not instituted till Christ rose again No other cure for it Infants of Christians may be Disciples are holy The effect of Circumcision under the Law inferreth the effect of Baptism under the Gospel ANd these same are the reasons that I must have recourse to now that
of ransome Ephe I. 13. IV. 30. Unless a reason could be showed why S. Peter and S. John should travail from Jerusalem to Samaria to do that which they need not do at Jerusalem where they were Or originally why the Imposition of the Apostles hands should be requisite to procure some the Holy Ghost and not others This being that which the Scriptures record of the Apostles all men know how ancient how general the custome hath been in the Church for Bishops to confirm the baptized by praying for the effect of it which is the Holy Ghost with Imposition of hands Professing thereby that they own their Faith and Baptism and acknowledge them for part of their flock as acknowledged by them for their Pastors Which is that eminence of honour due to the Bishop in which the welfare of the Church consisteth saith S. Hierome advâ—rsus Luciferianâ—s For Tertullian also de Bapt. cap. XVII reserveth unto the Bishop the right of granting Baptism though he allow not onâ—ly Priests and Deacons but partly also Laymen to Baptize Now if from the beginning this priviledge was reserved the Apostles in signe of the truth of that Baptism which so they allowed If those who received Baptism at years of discretion hâ—â—ing theâ—â—elves made profession of their faith were neverthelesse to acknowledge thâ—ir Paâ—â—ors and the Unity of the Church wrapped up in them as that uâ—on which the effect of Baptism dependeth How much more those that are bâ—ptized Infanâ—s Who cannot otherwise according to the original constitution of the Church be secured that they profess the faith of the whole Church but by their Bishops allowance through whom they have communion with the wâ—ole Church For as I have showed that there was originally no other mean to maintain the unity of the Church but the faith of the Bishop to secure the whole Church of the faith of his flock So was the â—same the onely mean to secure the flock that they held the faith of the whole Church which owned their Bishop and his faith And howsoever the profession of faith may be limited and the Bishop in exacting the same yet is it necessarily an act of chief Power in the Church to allow the communion of the Eucharist So that when once Presbyterians share this part of the Bishops Power among their Triers allowing them to admit to the Communion those that can say the Catechism which they made themselves First they put upon us a new faith which we must own for the faith of the Church Then to debauch Partizans to themselves they authorize the malice of gross carnall Christians to domineer over their neighbours whom they may easily pick a quarel with for not answering their Catechism but are not able either to warrant or to teach them the truth of the least tittle of it which so neerly concerning their salvation how necessary is it that it be reserved to the Head of each Church Besides that by acknowledging him they visibly submit to the Laws of the Church by which he governs and to his authority in such maters as the Laws do not determine which is the very means of maintainidg Unity in the Church And truly the consideration of this point discovers unto us the onely sure ground upon which any man may resolve what offices of christianity may be ministred by the several Orders of the Church For when the power of Confirming proper to the Bishop evidenceth that he alone granteth Baptism either by particular appointment or by general Law in which his authority is involved but a Layman sometimes may minister it we see what S. Paul means when he sayes 1 Cor. I. 17. God sent me not to baptize but to preach the Gospel Our Lord having said Mat. XXVIII 19. Go Preach and make Disciles of all Nations baptizing them in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost To wit that the Power of appointing it not the ministery of doing it is proper to the Apostles and their successors Which reason will hold in sundry particulars concerning Ordination concerning Absolution and Penance concerning confirmation and others In all which this being once secured that no man act beyond the Power which he receiveth it will be no prejudice to the unity of the Church that some Orders do that by particular commission from their Superiours which their Order inables not all that are of it to do Because in such cases it is not Authority but Ministery which they contribute As for the order of Priesthood that the power of consecrating the Eucharist is equall to the Power of the Keys in which that Order hath an Interest in the inward Court of Conscience the outward Court of the Church being reserved to the Bishop with advice and assistance of his Presbyters whereas the power of Preaching and Baptizing is of ordinary Right communicable to Deacons For the proof of all this I referre my selfe to that which I have said in the Right of the Church Chap. III. and to that which must be said here in due place Let not then those of the Presbyteries or Congregations think their businesse done till they can give us some reasonable account how all the Christian world should agree to set up Bishops into a rank above their Clergy and People both if this had been forbidden nay if it had not been so ordered by the Apostles Not that I grâ—nt them to have any more appearance of evidence from the Scriptures to destroy the superiority of the Bishops and the concurrence of the Clergy to the maintenance of unity in the Church then the Socinians have to destroy the faith of the Holy Trinity and the satisfaction of Christ But because I do grant these as I granted the other that there is that appearance of evidence which every one that is concerned to be subject to Bishops cannot evidenly resolve as every one that is bound to believe the Holy Trinity and the satisfaction is not bound to be able evidently to resolve all objections which the Socinians can make against it out of the Scriptures For it is granted that S. Hierome hath alleged many texts of Scriptures to show that Bishops and Priests were both the same thing under the Apostles and that therefore the difference between them is but of positive humane right by custome of the Church and hath many followers in this opinion among Church Writers Though with this difference that it can never be pretended that S. Jerome or any Ecclesiastical Writer after or before S. Jerome ever alleged the words of S. Paul 1. Tim. V. 17. The Elders that rule well are worthy of double honour specially those that labour in the word and doctrine or any other syllâ—ble of the whole Scripture to show that any of those that S. Paul pronounces worthy of double honour were Laymen that is of the rank of the people Which is now an essential ingredient of the design both of our Presbyteries and also so farre as I know of the
at Jerusalem hearing that Samaria had received the word of God sent to them Peter and John Can S. Peter go upon commission from the Apostles who gives the Apostles the commission they have Those that preached circumcision at Antiochia had no commission for it from the Church at Jerusalem Act. XV. 24. It must have been from S. Peter if that Church had acted then by virtue of his Commission But he was present and is signified as one of them that writ these words Let any man stand upon it that will that the false Apostles whom S Paul writes against 2 Cor. XI 13. pretended commission from S. Peter because of the opposition which they made between him on the one side and S Paul and Apollos on the other side 2 Cor. I. 12. Though I showed you beter reason afore that they pretended that commission from the Apostles which they disowned Acts XV. 24. It is easie for me to say that they pretended not S. Peters name as Soveraign over the Apostles but as founder of the Church of Corinth as well as S. Paul which Dionysius of Corinth in Eusebius witnesseth Whereas when S. Paul pleads his Commission of Apostle from God and not from man Gal. I. 1. II. 6 9. and that in express opposition to S. James and S. John as well as to S. Peter it is manifest that they as well as S. Peter might have pretended to give it had he not been an Apostle but being an Apostle none but our Lord Christ And therefore when he resists S. Peter and reproves him to the face Gal. II. 11-14 understand this resistance and reproof as you please whither true or colourable had S. Peter been Monarch it had not been for an Apostle to colour his proceeding with a pretense inferring rebellion against his Soveraign Wherefore there may be lesand greater Apostles foâ— personâ—ble qualiâ—ies And S. Paul that is the least of them for his calling may be inferiour to none for his labours 1 Cor. XV. 9. 10. 2 Cor. XI 5. XII 11. 12. Nay S. Peter may have a standing pre-eminence of Head of the Bench to avoid confusion and to create order in their proceedings and yet their commission be immediate from our Lord and the mater of it and the power it creates the same for substance Having thus destroyed this ground upon which some people claim a Monarchy over the Church for the Pope by the scriptures without seeking for other exceptions to the pretense that may be made to the same purpose from the Tradition of the Catholick Church I proceed to setle the ground of that eminence and superiority which I conceive some Churches have over others for the unity of the whole Church Because of necessity the reason and ground upon which it stands must be the measure of it how farre it extends And the positive truth thereof will be negatively an exception to that Soveraignty which the Bishop of Rome by the succession of S. Peter pretendeth I say then that the Apostles and Disciples of our Lord Christ intending to convert the World to the Faith and to establish one Church of all that should be converted to it did agree and appoint that the Churches of the chiefe Cities should be the chief Churches and that the Churches of inferiour Cities should depend upon them and have recourse to them in all things that might concern the common Christianity whither in the Rule of Faith or in the Unity of the Church in the offices of Gods service reserving unto themselves the ordering of those things which being of lesse moment might concern their own peace and good order rather then the interesse of other Churches I do not pretend to produce any act under the Apostles hands in which this conclusion is signed but to proceed upon the principles premised to argue and to inferre that those things which I shall evidently show have passed in the Church could not otherwise have come to pass unlesse we could suppose that a constant order which hath wholly taken place in the Church ever since the Apostles could have prevailed over those infinite wayes which confusion might have imagined had there been no ground from whence this certain order should rise And here I do profess that if any man will needs be contentious and say that this order came not in by the appointment of the Apostles themselves because during their time the probability of converting the Romane Empire and other Nations to Christianity could not appear and that it doth not appear by any circumstance of Scripture that the Spirit of Prophesy was given them to such purposes I will rather grant all this then contend about those terms which I need not insist upon though I do firmly believe that before all the Apostles left the World the conversion of the Gentiles was their design and the design of their successors But I will provide on the other side that whither the Apostles themselves or their companions and successors in whom the power of governing the whole Church was as fully to all purposes as in the Apostles themselves for though they might be assisted by the Gift of Prophesy in those occasions as it is probable they were at the Council of Jerusalem Acts XV. yet must their authority proceed whether so assisted or not the obligation upon the Church must needs remain the same to cherish and maintain that Order which once might have been established by them the Unity of the Church which is the end of it not being otherwise attainable And upon this ground I maintain that the Churches of Rome Alexandria and Antiochia had from the beginning a priviledge of eminence above other Churches For Rome being the seat of the Empire Alexandria and Antiochia which had formerly been the Seates of the Successors of Ptolomee in Aegypt and Seleucus in Asia having from their first coming under the Romane Empire had their peâ—uliar Governours it is no marvail if the Churches founded in them held their peculiar priviledges and eminences over the Churches of their resorts from the very founding of Christianity in these mother Cities and the propagating of it from thence into inferiour Cities and thence over the confines And this is the onely reason that can be rendred why the Church of Jerusalem which in respect of the first abode of the Apostles and the propagation of Christianity is justly counted the mother of all Churches and which gave law to that of Antiochia and the rest that were concerned in the same dispute with it and during the Apostles time received oblations of maintenance from the Churches of the Gentiles became afterwards inferiour to these and in particular to that of Antiochia But he that shall compare these Cities and the greatnesse of them and eminence over their respective Territories with that of Rome not onely over the rest of the Empire but over those Cities with find it consequent to the ground of this design not that the Church of Rome should be
to restore those that were fallen away in persecution contrary to the resolution of the Church which had referred it to a Council as we learn by S. Cyprian Epist XXXVIII XL. with Fortunatus a Bishop of this party betaking themselves to Rome are first refused by Cornelius but upon appearance of a party in his Church for them put him to a stand In this case S. Cyprian writing his LV. Epistle acknowledges the Church of Rome the seat of S. Peter and the principal Church whence the unity of the Priesthood was sprung but maintaines that every Bishop hath a portion of Christs flock assigned him to govern upon his account to Christ And therefore that causes are to be ended where they riâ—e and the good intelligence between Bishops ought not to be interrupted by carying causes abroad to be judged again Is not all this true supposing the case For who câ—n chuse but blame a schismaticall attempt But could any man hinder Basilides and Martialis from seeking the Church of Rome had their cause been good seeing their adverse paâ—ty did and might seek to foâ—â—ain Churches Was it not necessary to seek both to Carthage and to Rome for the freeing of the Church of Arles under Marciâ—nus from communion with the Novatians Here I conâ—eive lies the truth Some causes of necessity have recourse to the Church of Rome to wit such as necessarily concern the whole Church either in the faith or in the unity of it Such was the cause of Marcianus which could not be ended but by the same consent which cast the Novatians out of the Church Was the cause of Basilides and Martialis of the same weight was it not meerly personal and concâ—rning mater of fact whither they had indeed sacrificed to Idols or not no question remaining in point of right that such could not be Bishops yet could not the Bishops of Spain over-rule the Bishop of Rome not to receive information from the aggrievâ—d Their way was to have recourse to other Churches the consent whereof might out-way the Church of Rome together with the goodnesse of the cause And the Church of Carthage must have done the same had Felicissimus and Fortunatus found reception at Rome and credit to balâ—nce their cause against S. Cyprian and the African Church So that causes of Faith necessarily concerning the whole Church whensoever they rendâ—r the peace thereof questionable those that for their weight do not concern â—he whole will concern it when they render the peace thereof questionable And so long as Law provideth not bounds to determine what causes shall be ended at home in the parts where they rise what cause is there that may not be pretended to concern the whole and by consequence the Church of Rome which being the principal Church what cause concerning the whole can end without it He that admits not this supposition conâ—â—sting in the regular pre-eminence denying the unlimited Power of the Church of Rome over other Churches will never give a reason why recourse is alwayes had to the Church of Rome and yet if the cause require to other Churches to ballance it The unity of the Church and communion with it is the thing that is â—ought The consent of the greatest Churches that of Rome in the 〈◊〉 place is the meanes to obtain it This businesse therefore is much of kin to that of the Donatists triall under Constantine when they petitioned the secular Power that they might be heard by the Bishops of Gaul intimating the reason vvhy they declined the Bishops of Italy to be because they might be tainted with falling away or shuffling in the perâ—ecution of Diocletian which they charged their adverse party in Africk with because they expresse this for the ground of their Petition in Optatus I. that under Constantius there had been no persecution in Gaâ—l Here I must pass by the consideration of any thing that may concern the dispute between secular and Ecclesiasticall Power as not concerning this place But when Constantine by his answer assigns them for Judges the Bishops of Rome and Milane with such and such of their suffraganes joyning with them the Bishops of Collen Autun and Arles in Gaul to satisfie them it is plain that he refuses them to transgresse that respect which the constitution of the Church challenged for the Churches of Rome and Milane that such causes as concerned the unity of the Church in the Western parts of the Empire should be determined not by the Pope alone noâ— the Church of Rome alone but by the Churches of Rome and Milane as the chief Churches of that part of the Empire the Church of Rome alwayes in the first place On the other side when the Donatists not satisfied with their sentence petition the Emperour again that it may be review'd and the Emperour adjourns them for a second triall to a Council at Arles it is plain that hee allowes them not an appeal from the former sentence because many of those that were Judges in the former Synod did vote in the later Synod But it is as plain that the parties then held not the Popes judgement either alone or in Council unquestionable unlesse all were madd in pretending to give either check or strength to that sentence which was originally unquestionable If therefore a sentence given by the Pope in a Council of Italy which some Gaulish Bishops joyned thereunto might be revised in a fuller Council of Gaulish Bishops with the concurrence of many others as well Italian and Spanish to say nothing of three from Britaine the first unquestionable record of the British Churches is it not manifest that Euclids axiome that the whole is greater then any part of it takes place in the Church as well as the words of S. Jerome Orbis major est Vrbe that the world is greater then the City of Rome Surely if S. Austine Ep. CLXII say well that the Donatists might have appealed to a General Council had they been justly grieved by the sentence at Rome his saying will hold if they had been grieved by the Council of Arles though concluding the Western Church But it will hold also of the Council of Arles that it had been madnesse to call it had not the generality thereof extended to conclude the Western Church further then the former at Rome though the cause came not to it by appeal CHAP. XX. Of the constitution and authority of Councils The ground of the pre-eminences of Churches in the Romane Empire The VI. Canon of the Council of Nicaea The pre-eminence of the Church of Rome and that of Constantinople Some instances against the superiority of Bishops out of the records of the Church what offices every Order by Gods Law or by Canon Law ministreth HEre the next consideration for time being that of the Council of Nicaea the VI Canon whereof first limited by written Law the pre-eminences of Churches in the Empire having taken place by custome before I will not repeat that
shall confirme it by so visible an instance as this Death was proposed to Adam for the mark of Gods wrath and vengeance which he was become liable to by sinne The turning of this curse into a blessing was to be the effect of Christs Crosse which was not yet to be revealed The life of the Land of Promise was proposed for the reward of keeping Gods law in stead of the life of Paradise Therefore the cutting off of that life was to be taken for a mark of that curse which mankind became subject to by the first Adam till it should be declared the way to a better life by the Crosse of Christ Therefore the Giants that left it with the markes of enmity with God upon them are described as within the dominion of Hell but not asleep unlesse we can think that it is a mark of misery to go to them that sleep when all do sleep Prov. II. 17. IX 18. XXI 17. Esay XXVI 14. For that there should be no praising of God after death holds punctually in virtue of the Old Covenant which brought no man to life and was then on foot though they who writ those things might and did know that by the virtue of the New Covenant under which they knew themselves to be they should not be deprived of the priviledge of praising God after death and before the resurrection how sparing soever they were to be in imparting this knowledge openly to all the world For how otherwise should they whom the Apostle Ebr. XI declareth to have sought the kingdom of heaven have showed themselves otherwise affected with death then the Martyrs that suffered for Christ were afterwards How could it be thought the same Spirit that moved them to such a difference of effects according to the difference of time And therefore the same Solomon that saith there is nothing to be done in the grave Eccles IX 10. saith further Eccles XII 8. that when the dust returns to the earth then the soul returns to God that gave it And when Exoch and Elias were taken away by God in their Bodies neither sleep they seeing Moses and Elias attend our Lord Christ at his transfiguration Mat. XVII 3 4. Mark IX 4 5. Luke IX 30. nor is it possible for any man that would have soules to sleep to give a reason why the Covenant by which all are ordered being the same the soules of Christians should sleep when their souls sleep not And therefore when our Lord proves the resurrection by this That God is called the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob whereas God is not the God of the dead but of the living Mat. XXII 32. Mark XII 26. Luke XX. 37. he not onely supposes that his argument is good but that his adversaries the Sadduces granted it to be good And so Saint Paul when he argues that if the dead rise not againe then are we the most miserable of all people As having no further hope then this life 1 Cor. XV. 19. For what needed more to them that owned the Law of Moses and the Gospel of Christ and yet would deny the world to come questioning the resurrection that supposes it For the rest I will not repeate that which I produced afore out of the Books we call Apocrypha which he that peruseth will find a difference between the language of the Patriarchs and Prophets speaking of themselves and the language of those Bookes speaking of them But I will insist upon this that our Lord when he proposeth the Parable of Dives and Lazarus manifestly accepts of that opinion which notwithstanding such difficulties from the Scriptures of the Old Testament had prevailed over the better part of that people by Tradition of the Fathers and Prophets To wit that the soules of good and bad are alive in joy and paine according to the qualities in which they depart hence and shall resume their bodies to give account in them for their workes here The same doth the appearance of Moses and Elias at his transfiguration the rendering of his soul into his Fathers hand the promise of bringing the thiefe into Paradise the same day signify Whereby it appeareth that whatsoever might seeme to argue either that the soules of the Fathers were in the devils hands till the death and resurrection of Christ or that all soules go out like sparks when men dy and are kindled anew when they rise againe prove nothing because they prove too much For if they prove any thing they must prove that there is no world to come as the disputes of Ecclesiastes and Job seem to say because by the accidents of this world there is no ground of a mans estate in it Which seeing it is so farre from leaving any dispute among Christians that among Jewes the Sadduces were reputed Sectaries It is evident that whatsoever may seem to look that way in the Old Testament cannot prove that the soules of the Fathers were in the Verge of Hell till Christ riseing againe the graves were opened and many bodies of Saints which slept arose and came out of the graves after his resurrection and went into the holy City and appeared to many as we read in the Gospel of Mat. XXVII 52 53. This indeed were something if the Scripture had said that those Saints who arose with their bodies when our Lord Christ was risen againe had ascended into heaven with him in their bodies Which because it derogates from the generallity of the last resurrection having no ground in the Scripture can beare no dispute Therefore seeing these Saints as Lazarus afore and the Widowes sonne of Naim whom our Lord raised restored their bodies to the grave there is no presumption from hence that their soules were brought from Hell by our Lord to be translated into the full happinesse of the world to come with his owne I do therefore allow that which is written in the Apocryphall 2 Esdras IV. 41 42. In the grave the chambers of souls are like the womb of a woman For like as a woman that travaileth maketh hast to escape the pressure of her travaile Even so do those places haste to deliver the things that are committed unto them And VII 32. And the earth shall restore those that are asleep in her and so shall the dust those that dwell in silence and the secret places shall deliver those soules that were committed unto them For in most of those writings which the ancient Church counteth Apocryphal because they are suspected to intend some poisonous doctrine excellent things are contained which the agreement of them with Canonicall Scripture and their consequence and dependance upon the truth which they settle renders recommendable even from dangerous authors And for that which is here said whether we suppose this book to be written by a Christian or not before Christ or after Seeing there is no mention of any Saints in those visions of the old Testament where God is represented sitting upon his Throne but
began to make some question of it upon some disputes which he met with That S. Gregory first professed an opinion of it granted upon no scripture no nor Tradition of faith but upon aparitions and revelations That there is great appearance that Venerable Bede having received it from S. Gregorys Scholars who planted Christianity here added much to it by his credulity in such maters And yet that they had yet assigned no quarter in the Verge of Hell for this purpose but onely believed it of certaine soules in some places of this earth untill the Schoole hammered out a debt of punishment to which souls acquited both of the guilt and staine of sin may remaine lyable The extending of indulgence to the voyding of this how properly soever it may be counted purging of soules made the position a mater of great jelousy for the interest of profit which our common Christianity abhorreth And indulgence indeed of Canonicall penance I have showed hath the first ground in S. Pauls example and necessary use in the Church But when redeeming of penance was come into practice in the Church it was granted upon considerations with Christianity and the safety of poore soules allowed not Of paying a rate of taking the Crosse against Infidels of moderne Jubiles But that there should be a stock of merit in the Church upon account of works of supererogation done by the Saints which theire owne reward answereth not and that the Church in granting indulgence of penance may allow it to his account that receives indulgence is a conceite as injurious to the merits of Christ the consideration of all pardon and to the Covenant of Grace the condition whereof it abateth so that hath no evidence from any rule or practice of the ancient Church But that they should be thought to be of force to redeeme soules out of Purgatory and that taxing the time which they grant and the like for which neither there is nor can be any ground The best that is said or can be said in defense of them who publish them to poore people by whom they are frequented is that they get themselves mony the account whereof being almes they charge themselves with And that people are by this meanes imployed in the works of devotion which if not available to the effect which they imagine are how soever good for their soules health As for the translating of soules to heaven before the day of judgement it is so diametrally contrary to all antiquity that the very naming of it takes away all pretense for Traditon on behalfe of Purgatory It is acknowledged indeed that a number of the ancient Fathers during the flourishing times of the Church doe believe that the fire which the world is to be burnt up with as it shall involve the wicked and cary them to be everlastingly tormented in the sink of the world so it shall touch and scorch even the Saints themselves to try if their works be such as Gods vengeance can take hold of and to purge away that drosse which the love of the world they dyed with importeth This is by divers called Origens Purgatory because they conceive his credit might move S. Hilary S. Basil S. Ambrose Gregory Nyssene and Nazanizain S. Jerome S. Austine and S. Chry. with divers others to follow it But Blondel having observed that it is found in the Sibyles verses will needs have them all to have taken it up from thence Which as I have no reason to yeild to having showed already that the credit of that book was not the foundation of other particular opinions which had vogue in the Church So do I not find those famous Doctors so affected to Origen whose writings concerning the exposition of the scriptures they were necessarily obliged to frequent as to admit an opinion so neere concerning the faith upon this recommendation on whom they declare so much jelousy in mater of Faith For my part as I find it very agreeable to the words of S. Paul when he saith that they whose works are burnt up shall escape themselves but as through fire So how mens works should be tryed or burnt up by that fire I find it not easy to be understood And therefore without taking upon me to censure so great persons for innovating in the Church or to maintaine that in which there is no concurrence of any Scripture with any consent of the whole Church I leave the truth of this to judgement as secure that it will not concern the common Faith But this I say peremptorily that admitting it there remaines no pretense for Purgatory in the Tradition of the Church unlesse it be by equivocation of words For this coming to passe at the day of judgement admitteth no release before And without release before Purgatory fire goes quite out No Indulgences no Jubilies no stock of merit to be dispensed by the Church to such workes of devotion as it limiteth can be any of any request if they take not effect afore the day of judgement Take away the opinion of translating souls from the Verge of hell which Purgatory to the sight of God and the Clergy of the Church of Rome shall no more eat the sins of the people as the Prophet complaines of the Priests under the Law For while the people are perswaded that their sins are cured by the sentence of absolution once pronounced Penance serving onely to extinguish the debt of temporall punishment remaining and that to be ransomed by the services which they pay for in the name of their friends which are dead the Clergy live by those sins of which the people dy because they are not duly cured For the lusts for which men sin not being cured by that hardship of Penance which the case requireth to change attrition into contrition the guilt of sin remaines upon the head of him in whose heart the love of sin remaines alive notwithstanding the keyes of the Church mistaking in that case Besides take away the opinion of translating soules from hell to heaven since the coming of Christ and there will remaine no ground for the translating of the Fathers souls from the verge of hell which is Limbus Patrum to the sight of God by the descent of our Lord into hell and his rising from the dead againe There will be no cause why that reason which I tender for that vanity of immaginations rather then opinions or belief in the Fathers which that which all agree in is intangled with should not be admitted For the translating of Christian soules from Purgatory to heaven not being believed why should the translating the Fathers souls remaine Why should not the simple Faith in which all Christians agree revive and take the place of Tradition in the Church which indeed it hath that between death and the day of judgement the good are in joy the bad in paine both incomplete till both be fulfilled after both shall have received their finall doome CHAP. XXIX The
â—omething for the placing of every man every momâ—nâ— â—◠〈◊〉 estate which thereby hee fore-seeth And the possibility oâ— fore-seeing what will follow being something because no conâ—râ—â—iction destroyes the consistence of the terms inâ—errs by the infiâ—â—â—â— perfection of God the actual fore-sight of what will come to pâ—â—â— though not in it self which is nothing yet in God who is all things And all this involving no predetermination of mans will by God the discourse cannot be superfluous which resolveth the foresight of future contingencies into the decree which supposeth the knowledg of things conditionally future not which inferreth the fore knowledg of things absolutely future For by this means nothing that is found in the Scripture will contradict the substance of Faith which predetermination destroyeth though disclaiming all possibility of making evidence to common sense how it may come to pass And though Gods decree to permit sin can be no sufficient ground of his fore sight that what hee hindreth not shall come to pass as I have argued pag. 209. yet if wee consider withall that there is no question of Gods permitting any man to sin but onely him that is prevented with temptation to sin it may not untruly be said that God fore-sees sin in his own deccee of permitting it including the state of him that is tempted in that case wherein God decrees to permit sin In which case God fore-seeth it properly in his decree of placing the man in that estate not of suffering himto sin which the opinion that I contradict in that place absolutely refuseth And upon these terms when it is resolved Chap. XXVI that predestination to the first Grace is absolute you must not understand predestination to the act of conversioâ— but to the helps which effect it For whatsoever be the motives upon which a man actually resolves it in whatsoever circumstance hee meets them nothing but his own freedom determines his conversion though without those helps hee had not or could not have determined it And therefore if it be said that it is a barr to the prayers and indeavors of those that are moved to be Christians to tell them that their resolution depends upon something which is not in their Power To wit that congruity wherein the efficacy of Grace consisteth The answer is That absolutely whatsoever is requisite to the conversion of him who is called to be a Christian is in his Power Though upon supposition of Gods fore-knowledg that may be said to be requisite without which God fore-sees hee will not be converted when absolutely if hee would hee might have been converted and when supposing hee had been otherwise moved hee would have been converted In which case it is absolutely enough to the charging of any man with his duty that absolutely hee wanted nothing requisite to inable him for a right choice Though upon supposition of Gods fore-knowledg the doing of his duty requires whatsoever God fore-sees that it will not be done without it I have no more to say but that the Contents of the Chapters are premised instead of a Table for which they may well serve in books of this nature And that in regard to the difficulty of the Copy and the ordinary faileurs of the Press the Reader is desired to correct the faults that are marked before hee begin and to serve himself in the rest THE CONTENTS OF THE First Book CHAP. I. ALL agree that Reason is to decide controversies of Faith The objection thaâ— Faith is taught by Gods Spirit answered What Reason decideth questions of Faith The resolution of Faith ends not in the light of Reason but in that which Reason evidenceth to come from Gods messengers Page 1 CHAP. II. The question between the Scripture and the Church which of them is Judge in matters of Faith Whether opinion the Tradition of the Church stands better with Those that hold the Scripture to be clear in all things necessary to salvation have no reason to exclude the Tradition of the Church What opinions they are that deny the Church to be a Society or Corporation by Gods Law 3 CHAP. III. That neither the sentence of the Church nor the dictate of Gods Spirit can be the reason why the Scripâ—ures are to be received No man can know that hee hath Gods Spirit without knowing that he is a true Christian Which supposeth the truth of the Scriptures The motives of Faith are the reason why the Scriptures are to be believed And the consent of Gods people the reason that evidences those motives to be infallibly true How the Scriptures are believed for themselves How a circlâ— is made in rendring a reason of the Faith The Scriptures are Gods Law to all to whom they are published by Gods act of publishing them But Civil Law by the act of Soveraign Powers in acting Christianity upon their Subjects 7 CHAP. IV. Neither the Dictate of Gods Spirit nor the aâ—thority of the Church is the reason of believing any thing in Christianity Whether the Church be before the Scripture or the Scripture before the Church The Scriptures contain not the Infallibility of the Church Nor the consent of all Christians 18 CHAP. V. All things necessary to salvation are not clear in the Scriptures to all understandings Not in the old Testament Not in the Gospel Not in the Writings of the Apostles It is necessary to salvation to believe more then this that our Lord is the Christ Time causeth obscurity in the Scriptures aswell as in other Records That it is no where said in the Scriptures that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scriptures Neither is there any consent of all Christians to evidence the same 25 CHAP. VI. All interpretation of Scripture is to be consined within the Tradition of the Church This supposeth that the Church is a Communion instituted by God What means there is to make evidence of Gods Charter upon which the corporation of the Church subsisteth The name of the Church in the Scriptures often signifieth the Whole or Catholick Church CHAP. VII That the Apostles delivered to the Church a Summary of Christianity which all that should be baptized were to profess Evidence out of the Scriptures Evidence out of the Scriptures for Tradition regulating the Communion of the Church and the Order of it Evidence for the Rule of Faith out of the records of the Church For the Canons of the Church and the pedegree of them from the order established in the Church by the Apostles That the profession of Christianity and that by being baptized is necessary to the salvation of a Christian CHAP. VIII That the power of Governing the whole Church was in the Apostles and Disciples of Christ and those whom they tooke to assist them in the part of it The power of their Successors must needs be derived from those Why that succession which appears in one Church necessarily holdeth all Churches The holding of Councils evidenceth the Unity of the Church
The nature and intent of it renders it subordinate to the Clergy How farre the single life of the Clergy hath been a Law to the Church Inexecution of the Canons for it Nullity of the proceedings of the Church of Rome in it The interest of the People in the acts â—f the Church And in the use of the Scriptures 368 CHAP. XXXII How great the Power of the Church and the offect of it is The right of judging the causes of Christians ceaseth when it is protected by the State An Objection If Ecclesiastical Power were from God Secular Power could not limit the use of it Ground for the Interest of the State in Church matters The inconsequence of the argument The concurrence of both Interests to the Law of the Church The Inâ—erest of the state in the indowment of the Church Concurrence of both in matrimonial causes and Ordinations Temporall penalties upon Excommunication from the State No Soveraigne subject to the greater Excommunication but to the lesse The Rights of the Jewes State and of Christian Powers in Religion partly the same partly not The infinite Power of the Pope not founded upon Episcopacy but upon acts of the Secular Powers of Christendom 381 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF Christian Truth The First BOOK CHAP. I. All agree that Reason is to decide controversies of Faith The objection that Faith is taught by Gods Spirit answered What Reason decideth questions of Faith The resolution of Faith ends not in the light of Reason but in that which Reason evidenceth to come from Gods messengers THe first thing that we are to question in the beginning is Whether there be any means to resolve by the use of reason those controverâ—â—es which cause division in the Church Which is all one as if we undertook to enquire whether there be any such skill or knowledg as that for which men call themselvs Divines For if there be it must be the same in England as at Rome And if it have no principles as no principles it can have unlesse it can be resolved what those principles are then is it a bare name signifying nothing But if there be certain principles which all parties are obliged to admit that discourse which admits no other will certainly produce that resolution in which all shall be obliged to agree And truely this hope there is left that all parties do necessarily suppose that there is means to resolve by reason all differences of Faith Inasmuch as all undertake to perswade all by reason to be of the judgment of each one and would be thought to have reason on their side when so they do and that reason is not done them when they are not believed There are indeed many passages of Scripture which say that Faith is only taught by the Spirit of God Mat. XVI 17. Blessed art thou Peter son of Ionas for flesh and blood revealed not this to thee but my Father which is in the heavens II. 25. I thank thee O Father Lord of heaven and earth that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent and revealed them unto babes 1 Cor. I. 26 27 28. For Brethren you see your calling that not many wise according to the flesh not many mighty not many noble But the foolish things of the world hath God chosen to shame the wise The weak things of the world hath God chosen to shame the strong The ignoble and despicable things of the world hath God chosen and the things that are not to confound the things that are John VI. 45. It is written in the Prophets And they shall be all taught of God Heb. VIII 10. Jer. XXXI 33. This is the Covenant that I will make with the house of Israel in those dayes saith the Lord I will put my Laws in their mindes and write them in their hearts These and the like Scriptures then asâ—ribing the reason why wee believe to the work of Gods Spirit seem to leave no room for any other reason why wee should believe But this difficulty is easie for him to resolve that diâ—â—inguishes between the reason that moveth in the nature of an object and that motion which the active cause produceth For the motion of an object supposes that consideration which discovers the reason why wee are to believe But the motion of the Holy Ghost in the nature of an active cause proceeds without any notice that wee take of it According to the saying of our Lord to Nicodemus John 111. 8. The winde bloweth where it listeth and a man hears the noise of it but cannot tell whence it cometh nor whither it goeth So is every one that is born of the spirit For wee must know that there may be sufficient reason to evict the truth of Christianity and yet prove ineffectual to induce the most part either inwardly to believe or outwardly to professe it The reason consists in two things For neither is the mater of Faith evident to the light of reason which wee bring into the world with us And the Crosse of Christ which this profession drawes after it necessarily calls in question that estate which every man is setled upon in the world So that no marvel if the reasons of believing fail of that effect which for their part they are sufficient to produce Interest diverting the consideration or intercepting the consequence of such troublesom truth and the motives that inforce it The same is the reason why the Christian world is now to barren of the fruits of Christianity For the profession of it which is all the Laws of the world can injoyn is the common privilege by which men hold their estates Which it is no marvel those men should make use of that have neither resolved to imbrace Christ with his Crosse nor considered the reason they have to do it who if they should stick to that which they professe and when the protection of the Law failes or act according to it when it would be disadvantage to them in the world so to do should do a thing inconsequent to their own principles which carried them no further than that profession which the Law whereby they hold their estates protecteth The true reason of all Apostasy in all trials As for the truth of Christianity Can they that believe a God above refuse to believe his messengers because that which they report stands not in the light of any reason to evidence it Mater of Faith is evidently credible but cannot be evidently true Christianity supposes sufficient reason to believe but not standing upon evidence in the thing but upon credit of report the temptation of the Crosse may easily defeat the effect of it if the Grace of Christ and the operation of the Holy Ghost interpose not Upon this account the knowledg of Gods truth revealed by Christ may be the work of his Grace according to the Scriptures for that so it is I am not obliged neither have I any reason here to suppose being to come in
I said there can be no sect as communicating in nothing visible as Christians But I need not have recourse to such an obscure Sect as this For the same is necessarily the opinion of all the sect that makes every Congregation Independent and Sovereign in Church maters For if particular Congregations be not obliged to joyn in communion to the constitution of one Church wee may perhaps understand the collection of all Congregations to be signified at once by the name of the Church but wee cannot imagine that the Church so understood can be obliged by any sentence that can passe in it And if this opinion be true it must be acknowledged as of late years it hath been disputed amongst us that there is no crime of Schisme in violating the unity of the Church but when a breach is made in a Congregation obliged to communicate one with another in Church maters For where there is no bond of unity what crime can there be in dissolving it This is then the ground of all Independent Congregations that there is no such thing as the Church understanding by the name of the Church a Society or Corporation founded upon a Charter of Gods which signification the addition of Catholick and Apostolick in our Creed hath hitherto been thought to determine But there is a second opinion in the Leviathan who allowes all points of Ecclesiastical Power in Excommunicating Ordaining and the rest to the Soveraign Powers that are Christian Though before the Empire was Christian hee granteth that the Churches that is to say the several Bodies of Christians that were dwelling in several Cities had and exercised some parts of the same right by virtue of the Scriptures As you may see pag. 274-279 287-292 Making that right which the Scriptures give them for the time to eschete to the Civil Power when it is Christian and dissolving the said Churches into the State or Common-wealth which once Christian is from thenceforth the Church And this I suppose upon this ground though hee doth not expresly allege it to that purpose Because the Scripture hath not the force of a Law obliging any man in justice to receive it till Soveraign Powers make it such to their subjects but onely contains good advice which hee that will may imbrace for his souls health and hee that will not at his peril may refuse Thus hee teacheth pag. 205. 281-287 If therefore the act of Soveraign Power give the Scripture the force of Law then hath it a just claim to all rights and Powers founded upon the Scripture as derived from it and therefore vested originally in it Hence followeth that desperate inference concerning the right of Civil Power in mater of Religion not for a Christian but for an Apostate to publish that if the Soveraign command a Christian to renounce Christ and the faith of Christ hee is bound to do it with his mouth but to believe with his heart And therefore much more to obey whatsoever hee commandeth in Religion besides whether to believe or to do The Reason Because in things not necessary to salvation the obedience due by Gods and mans Law to the Soveraign must take place Now there is nothing necessary to salvation saith hee but to believe that our Lord Jesus is the Christ All that the Scripture commandeth besides this is but the Law of Nature which when the Civil Law of every Land hath limited whosoever observes that Law cannot fail of fulfilling the Law of Nature These things you have pag. 321-330 The late learned Selden in his first book de Synedriis Judaeorum maintaining Erastus his opinion that there is no power of Excommunicating in the Church by Gods Law grants that which could not be denied that the Church did exercise such a Power before Constantine but not by any charter of Gods but by free consent of Christians among themselves pag. 243 244. Which if hee will follow the grain of his own reason hee is consequently to extend to the power of Ordaining and to all other rights which the Church as a Corporation founded by God can claim by Gods Law And upon this ground hee may dissolve the Church into the Common-wealth and make the power of it an eschere to the Civil Power that is Christian with lesse violence than the Leviathan doth Because whatsoever Corporations or Fraternities are bodied by sufferance of the State dissolve of themselves at the will of it and resolve the powers which they have created into the disposition of it And that this was his intent whoso considereth what hee hath written of the indowment of the Church in his History of Tithes of Ordinations in the second book de Synedriis of the right of the Civil Power in limiting causes of divorce in his Vxor Ebraica hath reason to judge as well as I who have heard him say that all pretense of Ecclesiastical Power is an imposture I say not that hee or the rest of Erastus his followers make themselves by the same consequence liable to those horrible consequences which the Leviathan admits But I say that they are to bethink themselves what right they will assign the Civil Power in determining controversies in Religion that may arise And what assurance they can give their subjects that their salvation is well provided for standing to their decrees Besides I was to mention these opinions here that those who take the sentence of the Church to be the first ground of Faith into which it is lastly resolved may see that they are to prove the Church to be a Corporation by divine Right before they can challenge any such power for it For that which is once denied it will be ridiculous to take for granted without proving it And whatsoever may be the right of the Church in deciding controversies of Faith it cannot be proved without evidence for this charter of the Church as you shall see by and by more at large CHAP. III. That neither the sentence of the Church nor the dictate of Gods Spirit can be the reason why the Scriptures are to be received No man can know that hee hath Gods Spirit without knowing that hee is a true Christian Which supposeth the truth of the Scripture The motives of Faith are the reason why the Scriptures are to be believed And the consent of Gods people the reason that evidences those motives to be infallibly true How the Scriptures are believed for themselves How a Circle is made in rendering a reason of the Faith The Scriptures are Gods Law to all to whom they are published by Gods act of publishing them But Civil Law by the act of Soveraign Powers in acting Christianity upon their Subjects IT would not be easie to finde an entrance into such a perplexed Question had not the dispute of it started another concerning the reason why wee believe the Scriptures whether upon the credit of the Church or for themselves or whether nothing but the Spirit of God speaking to each mans heart
is sufficient to evidence that it is the word of God which they contain This if wee can resolve in our way perhaps wee may discover ground to stand upon when wee come to the main Hee that sayes the Scriptures are to be believed for themselves exposes them to the scorn of unbelievers by tying himself to use no other reason for them least for that reason they should finde that credit which the seeking of it showes they had not of themselves Hee that sayes they are to be believed for the authority of the Church is bound to give account how wee shall know both that there is a Church which some persons may oblige And who is the Church that is who be the men whose act obliges the Church And that without alleging Scripture because hitherto wee have no reason to receive it And being but men how their Act obliges the Church which cannot be showed without showing that God hath founded a Corporation of his Church and given power to some men or some qualities or ranks of men in it to oblige the whole Which how it will be showed without means to determine the sense of the Scriptures the parties agreeing in nothing but the truth of Christianity and of the Scriptures is impossible to be said This position then induces that stop to all proceeding by reason which Logicians call a Circle When a man disputes in a round as a mill-horse grindes arguing this power to be in the Church by the Scriptures without which hee can say nothing to it and arguing the truth of the Scriptures back again by alleging the authority of the Church Which destroyes that supposition upon which all dispute of reason proceeds that nothing can be proved but by that which is better known than that which it proveth But are those that allege the spirit for the evidence upon which they receive the Scripture lesse subject to this inconvenience For is it not manifest that men may and do delude themselves with an imagination that Gods Spirit tells them that which their own Spirit without Gods Spirit conceives How then shall it discerned what comes from Gods Spirit what does not without supposing the Scriptures by which the mater thereof is discernable And is not this the same Circle to prove the truth of the Scriptures by the dictate of Gods Spirit and that by alleging the Scriptures To make the ground of this inconvenience still more evident I will here insist upon this presumption That the gift of the Holy Ghost presupposeth Christianity that is the belief and profession of the Christian Faith And therefore that no man can know that hee hath the Holy Ghost but hee must first know the truth of Christianity and of the Scriptures Not that it is my meaning either to suppose or prove in this place that whoso hath the Spirit of God doth or may know that hee hath it For that is one of those controversies which wee are seeking principles to resolve But that no man can know that hee hath the Spirit of God unlesse first hee know himself to be a true Christian That is to say that supposing for the present but not granting that a man can know that hee hath Gods Spirit and that it is Gods Spirit which moves him to believe this or that hee must first know what is true Christianity and by consequence the means to discern between true and false And this I propose for an assumption necessary to the evidencing of that which followes but not questioned by any party in the Church because it is a principle in Christianity that the Grace of the Holy Ghost is a promise peculiar to those that undertake it Who were they on whom the Holy Ghost was first bestowed Was it not the Apostles and the rest of Disciples assembled to serve God with the Offices of the Church that is to say already Christians When Philip had converted the Samaritanes came S. Peter and S. John to give them the Holy Ghost by laying on their hands till they were baptized Concerning the Disciples at Ephesus Acts XIX 1-6 there is some dispute whether they received the Holy Ghost by the imposition of S. Pauls hands by virtue of the Baptism of John which they had received before they met with S. Paul or whether they were baptized over and above with the baptisme of Christ and thereupon received the Holy Ghost by the laying on of S. Pauls hands But of this they that will have them to have been baptized only with S. Johns baptisme make no dispute that they were fully made Christians by it Can any thing be clearer than S. Pauls words Gal. II. 2-5 That by the hearing of Faith that is obeying it they had received the Holy Ghost which by the works of the Law they could not receive And 2 Cor. XI 4. If hee that cometh preach another Jesus whom wee preached not or yee receive another Spirit which yee received not or another Gospel which yee admitted not Another Jesus another Gospel inferreth another Spirit So Gal. III. 14. That the blessing of Abraham may come upon the Gentiles through Christ Jesus that yee may receive the promise of the Holy Ghost by Faith The promise of the Holy Ghost then supposeth the condition of Faith And Gal. IV. 6. Because yee are sons therefore God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts crying Abba Father Heb. VI. 6. It is impossible for those that were once inlightened and tasted the heavenly gift and became partakers of the Holy Ghost Upon inlightening that is baptisme followes the participation of the H. Ghost And seeing the resurrection of the flesh unto glory is ascribed by S. Paul to the Spirit of God that dwelt in it while it lived upon earth Rom. VIII 10 11. as the resurrection of our Lord Christ is ascribed to the Spirit of holinesse that dwelt in him without measure Rom. I. 4. John III. 34. of necessity the Holy Ghost dwelleth in all them that shall rise to glory But Baptisme assureth resurrection to glory Therefore it assureth the Holy Ghost by which they rise Nor can it be understood how wee are the Temple of God because the Spirit of God dwelleth in us 1 Cor. III. 16. but because the promise of the Holy Ghost dependeth upon that which distinguisheth Christians from other people In fine when our Saviour promiseth John XIV 23. If any man love mee hee will keep my word and my Father will love him and wee will come to him and abide with him Seeing the Father and the Son do dwell in those that love God by the grace of the Holy Ghost the gift of the Holy Ghost of necessity supposeth the love of God in them that have it And yet his discourse is more effectual Rom. VIII 1-9 That there is now no condemnation for those that are in Christ Jesus that walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit For as hee inferreth that if any man have not the
inward witness of Gods Spirit dictating to his Spirit that they are the word of God it will be utterly impertinent to our purpose For seeking as wee do the means to resolve one another it will be impertinent to allege that which though a man is inwardly satisfied with yet outwardly to another cannot appear And certainly if there be no reason to satisfie another man of the truth of the whole that is of Christianity or of the Scriptures It cannot be expected that there should be satisfaction why this or that should belong to the truth of Christianity or the intent and meaning of the Scriptures For of necessity whatsoever evidence can be made for this or that truth contained in the Scriptures must depend upon the reason for which Christianity is received as Gods truth In fine the reason why controversies in Religion may and are to be ended by dispute of reason is this as hath been premised because that the Holy Ghost which effectually moveth us to believe supposeth sufficient reason moving in the nature of an object proposed to believe Therefore neither the truth of Christianity nor the Scripture is admitted upon the dictate of Gods Spirit but supposing the reasons which convict us that they are to be admitted And correspondently the gift of the Holy Ghost that inableth to continue in the profession and exercise of Christianity supposeth the belief of that Christianity which a man from his heart professes And by consequence the reason why hee is to believe which will not fail to inferre the truth of the Scriptures But if it be said That any person or persons as Rulers of the Church have the promise of inspiration or revelation from God for a ground upon which others are to believe It hath been showed that all such grace supposeth the profession of Christianity and the truth of the Scriptures and therefore the grounds of the same If any man should say as I perceive some have a minde to say that the gift of Infallibility in the Church supposes no such inspiration or revelation but onely the qualities of such persons as have power to conclude the Church and that they do visibly proceed to determine It will be evident that they can no more challenge this right not supposing Christianity and the foundation of the Church than the High Priest of the Jewes could proceed to give answer by Uâ—im and Tummim not supposing that God had given the Law and appointed the Priest so to do The resolution of this Question may make it appear that Christians falling out among themselves maintain themselves upon such grounds as would leave no room for the truth of that Christianity which both suppose Had wee to do with the enemies of it it would easily appear wee must allege such reasons for the truth of Gods Word as might convince the enemies of it and not suppose the truth of it when the question is how it may appear to be true It were therefore fit to consider whether a man can reasonably be a Christian and yet question the truth of the Scriptures or rather not fit to consider that which there can be no doubt in The whole content of the Scripture is either the motives or the mater of Christianity They that professe Christianity suppose the motives of it true which they admit to be sufficient Supposing them true they cannot question the Scriptures that record them Supposing those Scriptures they cannot question those motives for true Whether sufficient is resolved by admitting Christianity Alwaies the same reason that moves a man to be a Christian resolves him to believe the Scripture neither would hee allege any other had hee to do with the enemies of Christianity What those motives are concernes not us proceeding upon supposition of common Christianity to determine differences within it Yet that I may be the better understood my meaning is That the miracles done by those from whom wee have the Scriptures is the onely motive to shew that they came from God and therefore that wee are obliged to receive what they preached and by consequence the Scriptures that containe it Not intending hereby to quit the advantage which the Law hath of Heathenism and the Gospel of the Law in regard of the reasonablenesse and holinesse of the mater of each above other respectively justified by the light of nature But because the businesse is at present onely to shew the evidence wee have that God did send whatsoever reason may be given why hee would send which without other evidence had remained unknown though never so probable or reasonable Not intending hereby to balk that witnesse which the Scriptures of the Old Testament yield to the truth of the New But because that witnesse depends upon the miracles done by Moses and the Prophets to evidence their Commission from God And so the credit which the New Testament hath from the Old is resolved into those miracles which evidenced the sending of Moses and the Prophets and consists in the miracle of fore-telling those things by the one which by the other are fullfilled I know the Jewes expresly deny the credit of the Law to depend upon any miracles done by Moses and the Prophets but onely upon the appearance of God at giving the Law to all that people and speaking to them mouth to mouth The like whereof not having been done nor to be done in giving Christianity belonging to all nations who could not meet at once to receive it they think themselves grounded thereupon that the Law is not nor could be reversed by it Thus are they content that God sending Moses on his ambussage with the miracles which hee gave him for his letters of credit shall be thought not to have convicted Pharao That the Law provided no legal tryal God no evidence to the conscience of his servants distinguishing true and false Prophets which cannot be imagined but by their sayings and doings predictions and other miracles Well may the delivering of the Law have circumstances which no other miraculous action recorded in the Scriptures can compare with Shall that obscure the glory of Christs resurrection fore-told by him expresse to witnesse the truth of his message Shall it make an Ocean of miracles done by him and his Apostles to stand for nothing Shall it disable God himself to do any thing competent to make faith of a message the nature whereof bore not those circumstances which hee had used afore Now if the reason why wee believe the Scriptures to come from God as they pretend be the motives of Christianity strange it is that a man should be troubled how to answer the difficulty that may be made how wee know the truth of those motives speaking onely to Christians which have admitted them to be true But I am sure neither the witnesse of the Church nor the dictate of the Spirit can be alleged to Infidels but by them that would have themselves and this Gospel laught at both at once Seeing
Church For it is manifest that hitherto the authorities of Church Writers cannot be considered any otherwise than as the opinions of particular persons which no wayes import the consent of the whole Church For whereas hitherto there is nothing to oblige the Faith of any Christian but that which is plaine by the Scriptures and the consent of the Church It no wayes appears as yet how the authorities of Church Writers can evidence the consent of Church I will not therefore be curious here to heap up the sayings of the Fathers commending the sufficience and clearness of the Scriptures One or two I will take notice of because they are all I can remember in which the limitation thereof to things which our salvation requires us to believe is expressed S. Augustine de doctr Christianâ— II. 9. In eis quae aperte in Scripturis posita sunt inveâ—iuntâ—r illa omnia qnae continent fideâ— moresq vivendi In those things which are plainty set down in the Scriptures is found whatsoever that Faith or maners by which wee live doth containe S. Chrysostome in II. ad Thessal Hom. III. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things are plain and plain and straight in the Scriptures all things that are necessary are mâ—nifest Whereunto wee may addâ— the words of Constantine to the Council of Nâ—â—â—a in Theodoreâ— Eâ—clef Hist l. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles and the Oracles of the ancient Prophets plainly teach us what wee are to think of God But I will also take notice that the same S. Augustine de doctr Christ III. 2. saith that the Rule of Faith which hee had set forth in the first book is had from the plainer places of the Scripture and the authority of the Church And the same S. Chrysostome in the same Homily sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Those things which the Apostles writ and those which they delivered by word of mouth are equally credible Therefore let us think the Tradition of the Church deserves credit It is a Tradition seek no more And Vincentius in the beginning of his Commâ—nitorium or Remembrance confessing the Canon of the Scriptures to be every way perfect and sufficient requires neverthelesse the Tradition of the Church for the steddy understanding of it And therefore I have just ground to say that all that is necessary to salvation is not clear in the Scriptures to all that can reade in the opinion of S. Chrysostome and S. Augustine But to all that reade supposing the Rule of Faith received from the Church to bound and limit the sense and exposition of the Scriptures And therefore may more justly suppose the same limitation whâ—n they speak of the perfection and sufficience and clearnesse of the Scripture at large without confining their speech to that which the necessity of salvation requires us to believe And this is already a sufficient barr to any man that shall pretend the consent of the Church which concurreth to evidence the truth of the Scripture for the perspicuity thereof in things necessary to be believed to all whom they may concerne For so long as Tradition may be requisite besides Scripture that cannot appear When it shall appear whether requisite or not then will it appear how farr the sufficience and perspicuity of the Scripture reacheth And this I come now to inquire CHAP. VI. All interpretation of Scripture is to be confined within the Tradition of the Church This supposeth that the Church is a Communion instituted by God What means there is to make evidence of Gods Charter upon which the Corporation of the Church subsisteth The name of the Church in the Scriptures often signifieth the Whole or Cathelick Church THis presumption then which is able to prejudice the truth by disparaging the means God hath given to discover it And that by possessing men that things pretended to be necessary to salvation would have been clear of themselves to all men in the Scriptures if they were true But nothing conducing to clear the doubtfull meaning of any Scripture that is never so true This presumption I say being removed and the authority of the Church as the reason of believing taken away it remaines that wee affirm whatsoever the whole Church from the beginning hath received and practised for the Rule of Faith and maners all that to be evidently true by the same reason for which wee believe the very Scriptures And therefore that the meaning of them is necessarily to be confined within those bounds so that nothing must be admitted for the truth of them which contradicteth the same Wee saw before that the Scripture consisteth of motives to Faith and mater of Faith That in the motives of Faith supposing them sufficient when admitted for true a difficulty may be made upon what evidence they are admitted for true That the conviction of this truth consisteth in the profession and conversation of all those who from the beginning receiving Christianity have transmitted it to their successors for a Law and Rule to their beliefs and conversations Wherefore there can remain no further question concerning the truth of that which stands recommended to us by those same means that evidence the truth of those 〈◊〉 for which wee receive Christianity Had there been no 〈◊〉 Christianity to have been read in the profession and practice of all that call themselves Christians it would not have been possible to convince the enemies of Christianity that wee are obliged to believe the Scriptures If the professing and practising things so contrary to the interest of flesh and bloud be an â—vidence that they are delivered and received from them who first showed reasons to believe It must first remain evident that there are certain things that were so professed and practised from the beginning before it can be evident that the motives upon which they are said to be received were indeed tendred to the world for that purpose This is that common stock of Christianity which in the first place after receiving the Scriptures is to be admitted for the next principle toward the settling of truth controverted concerning the meaning of them as flowing immediately from the reason for which they are received and immediately flowing into the evidence that can be made of any thing questionable in the same It is that sound ingredient of nature which by due application must either cure all distempers in the Church or leave them incurable and everlasting And truly if it were as easie to make evidence what those things are which have been received professed and practised from the beginning by the whole Church as it is necessary to admit all such for truth I suppose there would remain no great difficulty in admitting this principle But in regard it is so easie to show what contradiction hath been made within the pale of the Church to that which elsewhere otherwhiles hath been received I cannot tell whether men despaire to finde any thing generally received
corrupted the truth As Paul also saith A man that is an Heretick after one reproof and a second avoid Knowing that such a one is perverted condemned by himself Where you see it is not I but Irenaeus that expoundeth those words of S. Paul to this purpose The same Irenaeus III. 4. Cerdon autem qui ante Marcionem hic sub Hygino qui fuit octavus Episcopus saepe in Ecclesiam veniens exomologesim faciens sic consummavit Modò quidem latenter docens modò verò exomologesim faciens modò verò ab aliquibus traductus in his quae docebat malè abstentus est religiosorum hominum conventu But this same Cerdon also that was before Marcion under Hyginus who was the eight Bishop many times addressing to the Church and confessing ended accordingly Sometimes covertly teaching his Heresie sometimes confessing And sometimes being detected by some in those bad things which hee taught was excluded the assembly of the Religious Tertullian de praescript cap. XXX informes us that Marcion though hee was at the first refused Penance by the Church of Rome as I shall show you out of Epiphanius yet afterwards was cast out of the Church there which supposeth him admitted afore with Valentinus the Father of another Heresie and having been received once again at the last for good and all For having obtained to be re-admitted upon this condition that hee should reduce with himself all that hee had seduced at length hee died before hee was able to accomplish the same These things coming to passe so soon after the Apostles as they did and the same course being held in separating those Heresies from the Church which sprung up in their several ages afterwards there is no room left for any pretense that the Church never had power to do that which there never was any time that shee did not do For it is to be noted that these Heads of Heresies being condemned and cast out of the Church in which they first appeared and which they attempted to divide were thenceforth disowned by all Churches being certified of the proceeding that had passed against them upon the place And therefore Vincentius Lerinensis Commentario I. expounding S. Pauls words Gal. I. 8 9. Let him be Anathema Anathema sit inquit id est separatui exclusus nè unius ovis dirum contagium innoxium gregem Christi venenatâ permistione contaminet That is saith hee let him be separated set aside shut out least the direfull contagion of one sheep with any mixture of poison stain the innocent flock of Christ And again afterwards handling the words of S. Paul 1 Tim. VI. 20. Keep that which is committed to thy trust avoiding profane novelties of words What is it to avoid With such one not so much as to eat What is avoid If any come to you saith hee and bringeth not this doctrine receive him not home nor bid him God speed Where you see these are none of my collections gathered out of the Apostles words but that exposition of them which the practice of the Catholick Church inferreth CHAP. X. Evidence of the Apostles act from the effect of it in preserving the Vnity of the Church Of the businesse of Marcion and Montanus That about keeping Easter That of the Novations of rebaptizing Hereticks of Paulus Samosatenus of Dionysius Alexandrinus and Arius Of communicatory leters and the intercourse of the Church under and after the Apostles THis is indeed the true demonstration and evidence from the effect that the will of God and not the consent of men is the ground upon which the Corporation of the Church subsisteth The whole number of Christians dispersed over all the Empire and beyond the bounds of it continued for divers hundred years in one communion and in the unity of one Church Those that indeavoured to alter the Rule of Faith or to impose such Lawes as were found by the greatest part not to stand with the end for which the Church was founded being by the consent of the whole excluded the communion of it for Hereticks and Schismaticks Hee that sayes this was not the work of God or the means of effecting it none of his declared will why should not hee say the like of Christianity Indeed since the Council of Ephesus the Churches of Mesopotamia and Assyria are fallen from the Unity of the whole since the Council of Chalcedon those of Aegypt and Aethiopia Since that the Eastern Churches under the Patriarch of Constantinople have been divided from the Western under the Pope of Rome And these from one another into so many parties since the Reformation that wee are now come to dispute whether they ought to be united or not That ever they will be is so hopelesse that no man would undertake to dispute that they should be were it possible to preserve that little of Christianity that remaines without re-uniting the Church I allege here the most eminent passages that fell out in the Church from the Apostles to Constantine to show that it is a question whether the evidence be more That by Gods appointment there was from the beginning and ought to be alwaies one Catholick Church Or the hope lesse that ever it will be so again I cannot begin with a better evidence than that of Irenaeus because it containes the effect of the aforesaid ordinances of the Apostles for the separating of the Heresies set on foot by Simon Magus and Cerinthus from the Communion of the Church that the Unity thereof might be preserved by remaining distinct from them Wee understand by reading his first book that Basilides at Alexandria Saturninus at Antiochia Valentinus first in Aegypt then in Cyprus afterwards at Rome Cerintbus in Asia and elsewhere others in several parts of the World indeavored to adulterate that Christianity which the Apostles had delivered That they were so unanimously rejected and excluded out of the society of the Church from East to West that hee is able to affirm I. 3. that though dispersed all over the world yet it preserves the doctrine once preached as if it dwelt all in one house believing the same faith as if it had the same soul and heart and preaching and teaching the same as if it had but one mouth And can common sense imagine that the remotest parts of the world could remaine united to one another separated from Heresies sprung in the remotest parts of it which they could not have intelligence of but by communication of it with those parts of it where they sprung without that continual correspondence wherein the actual communion of the Church consisteth But the words of Irenaeus are so vigorous that I cannot leave them out here as they stand in his original Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Unity therefore of the Church was visible Otherwise it had been senslesse for Irenaeus to assume it as an evidence of the truth of that Faith the unity whereof became visible by the
it smelled so ranck that I conceived my self bound to cry out upon the venene that may be so closely couched under the words But to those that believe the truth of Christianity arguments from the mystical sense of the Old Testament must not seem contemptible those of our Lord Christ and his Apostles being such provided that the correspondence between the Law and the Gospel be preserved upon the right ground and in the right grain Provided also that no more waight be laid upon them than they are able to bear To wit no more than wee can lay upon the Law of Moses in proving the truth of Christianity Which if wee premise not the miracles of our Lord Christ and his Apostles done to witnesse their commission from God together with the excellence of Christianity above Judaisme even in the ballance of reason If wee make not good and constant correspondence between both wheresoever the ground of that correspondence takes place wee allege a reason that needs a reason to defend it But if wee do that wee imprest all the miracles done by Moses to introduce the Law to depose for the truth of the Gospel Wee furnish our selves of a magazine of argument in all points of Christianity to convince those who have received it what the conâ—â—itution of Gods ancient people and the truth then on foot will inferre upon the correspondence which they are supposed to hold with Christianity and with the Church I do then freely grant that Excommunication stood not immediately by Gods Law among Gods ancient people though by that Power which Gods Law had vested on them that first introduced it Were it Esdras by commission from the King of Persia as to the Power that inforced it with means to constraine though by the Law as to his Title before and against other men by the Law or whosoever it were besides But I will allege evidence for it after the return from Captivity which to my knowledge hath not hitherto been alleged Namely that which is called in the Greek Bible the third Book of Maccabees where it is râ—lated that when some of the Jewes at Alexandria had obeyed the Edict of Ptolomee Philometor commanâ—ing to worship an Idol which hee had set up the rest of the people 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Abhorred those of them that had turned Aposâ—â—â—es and condeâ—ned â—â—em as enemies to the Nation depriving them of mutual conversation and the henefit of it III. 25. Upon the consideration of which passage I easâ—ly conclude that of 1 Macc. XIV 38. not to be well understood nâ—â— translâ—ted where it is said that Razias 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying indeed that in the â—orâ—er times under Antiochus Epiphanes when so many Jewes departed from their Law hee had brought in the decree of not mixing Judaisme That is to say that hee had been the means of passing a decree that those who stuck to their profession should not commâ—nicate with the Apoâ—â—ates These things were done by virtue of the Law against the will of their Soveraignes and therefore Philometor complaines of them for it 3 Macc. III. 16. but it is by virtue of his decree being his subjects that they put them to death aftâ—rwards VII 8 9 10. I do also grant that the putting of a man out of the Synagogue which I admit to have come in by the act of those men who nâ—verthâ—lesse had their authority originally from that act of God which made them a people under those Lawes imported a great abatement of the temporal privilege of each Jewes estate in as much as it is evident that whosoever was banished the conversation of Jewes in whole or in part was at the same rate abated the privilege of a Jew which they held by the declaration of their Soveraignes to maintain them in the use of their own Lawes For the privilege which a man holdeth among his people whereof hee is a native will appeare of what consequence it is when hee comes to live among strangers But I do not therefore yield that to be excommunicate out of the Church by the original constitution thereof and the Law of God imports the abatement of any secular privilege Because of the difference between the Synagogue and the Church which God appointed to be gathered out of all Nations under the condition of bearing Christs Crosse For such a company refusing their Communion to such as they exclude can neither prejudice their persons goods nor fame which being doubtfull to the world so long as they professe the Religion which the world owns not returns by consequence when they quit that Religion to return to the Religion of the State Rather as the Leviathan truly sayes they make themselves liable to all the persecution that may be brought upon them by such as think they have had ill measure by being put out of the Church Now to that which is argued That because the Christians went for Jewes among the Gentiles at the beginning of Christianity injoying Jewes privileges and thereby the exercise of their Religion therefore the Excommunications used by them must needs be such as were in force among the Jewes according to Moses Law that is by the Power which it establisheth The answer is by denying the consequence The reason this The Christians at the beginning communicated with the Jewes in that service of God which they used as well in the Temple as in the Synagogue How should they have opportunity to make them acquainted with the Gospel otherwise But as sometimes they assembled secretly among themselves for fear of the Jewes Acts XII 12. John XIX 38. so also besides those Offices which they served God with among the Jewes in the Temple or in the Synagogue they acknowledged others which they held themselves bound to and for which they retired themselves from the Jewes Acts I. 13. II. 42 46. III. 23. V. 42. VI. 2. The ground of their Communion with the Jewes Christians know to have been the hope of winning them to be Christians lasting while that hope should continue the ground of serving God in their own Assemblies the obligation of Christianity for ever to continue In regard of the conversation and communion which they held with the Jewes whether Civil or Religious they were subject to be excommunicated by the Jewes That is part of our Lords Prophesie John XVI 2. They shall put you out of their Synagogues Nay the time cometh that whoso killeth you shall think that hee doth God service But whatsoever the effect of these Excommunications might be being driven and confined in a maner to the Communion of the Church by being excluded or at least abridged the Communion of the Synagogue must they not needs forfeit their Communion by not fulfilling the condition by which they held it Or could they forfeit it upon other gronnds or to other effect than those upon which and to which they held it Indeed I will not undertake to give you many Scripture examples of Excommunications
in the first book de Synedriis p. 214. acknowledges that it is not in use among the Jewes And the correspondence between the Law and the Gospel requires that those things which are prophesied in the Old Testament concerning the coming of God be understood to be completed in the second coming of Christ According to that of S. Paul Rom. XIV 10 11. Wee shall all be presented before the Judgment seat of Christ as it is written As I live saith the Lord To mee shall every knee bow and every tongue shall give glory to God Where that which the Prophet had said of the appearance of God in former judgments concerning his people Esa XLV 23. that the Apostle affirmeth to be fulfilled in the coming of our Lord Christ to judgment Therefore when S. Paul sayes Let him be anathema maranatha hee means let him expect vengeance at the second coming of Christ At which S. Jude sayes that the Prophesie of Enoch against the old world shall be accomplished upon those that hee writes against For how can hee say otherwise Enoch prophesied against these And can it be thought that a Jewish Excommunication can proceed upon supposition of the coming of our Lord Christ to judgment That were as much a jest as that of the History of Don Quixote where hee saith That the original Historian in the Arabick being a Mahumetane protests the truth of it upon the faith of a good Christian So when S. Paul saith again Rom. IX 3. I my self could wish to be anathema from Christ for my brethren my kindred according to the flesh I will not dispute that ingenious interpretation of Grotius which this Learned person with others allows That hee wishes in stead of an Apostle and Chief in the Church to be counted a man unfit for any Christian to converse with For it punctually agrees with S. Pauls stile 1 Cor. XII 12. For as the body is one and hath many members and all the members of the body being many are one body so is Christ That is to say the Church And so Gal. III. 27. Wee are baptized into Christ because into the Church But admitting this interpretation how can it be imagined to signifie a Jewish Excommunication that cuts of a Christian from the Church Hee that is put out of the Synagogue in as much as hee is put out of it is made Anathema to Moses not to Christ That is hee is cut off from the privileges of a Jew from the hope of returning into the Land of Promise and freedom in it from the yoke of forrain Nations Not from the hope of life everlasting which they indeed promise themselves by the Law of Moses but Christians know they cannot have unlesse they renounce the holding of it from the Law of Moses And therefore S. Paul when hee bids Anathema to whosoever shall preach another Gospel than that which hee had preached Gal. I. 8 9. must needs mean the same as a Christian which hee signifies to be meant by him that calleth Jesus anathema 1 Cor. XII 3. Hee that calleth Jesus anathema defieth him as rejected by God Anathema indeed signifieth that which is consecrated to God But it answers the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in Levit. XXVIII because consecration was a profession of abandoning for ever that which was consecrated implying a curse upon all that should lay hands on it to any other use And when the Jewes said to their Fathers or Mothers Be it Korban whatsoever thou mayest be the better for of mine They cursed themselves if ever their Father or Mother were the better for any goods of theirs as much as if they should give them things consecrated to eat or to drink Supposing that if they did so no man was to touch or come near them more than consecrated things So when God made Jericho anathema or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whatsoever was not for the use of Gods service was to be destroyed whatsoever might be for his service hee that laid hands on it to any other use became himself of the condition of that which was not for Gods service And such the Apostle professeth to hold him whosoever should preach any other Gospel besides that which hee had preached For I must not allow that the Church when it excommunicateth or the Apostle when hee biddeth anathema intendeth to curse that is to say to pray to God actually to bring those curses upon them which they are liable to Though I confesse this is not the place to dispute such a question because the resolution of it will suppose something which can neither be proved nor supposed without proof in this place where my purpose is to settle the Principles of Christian Truth by which Principles this is to be resolved It shall be enough to say here that it is evident that the Greek Church following an order or sentence of S. John Chrysostomes doth for the most part insist that Christians are not to curse Christians Whatsoever be the practice of the Church of Rome in the Bull of Maundy Thursday at this time And yet the very present practice of that Church doth not seem necessarily to import praying for Gods vengeance upon Hereticks and others who are then cursed Because it is their custome to pray for their conversion the very next day that is on Good Friday Therefore it may very well seem that all their Solemnities of cursing do not amount to signifie that the Church prayes for mischief upon them whom they declare to be accursed but by these solemnities expresse how they would have them esteemed by Christians Though by that corruption of Christian charity which time hath brought to passe it be now generally understood no otherwise than as a Prayer for Gods vengeance And there may be great reason to think that the ancient Fathers and Councils did not pronounce anathema against Hereticks in any other sense or to any other purpose Nay the words of Vincentius Lirinensis which I quoted afore make it most evident that the ancient Christians understood nothing else by Anathema when hee expounds S. Paul Gal. I. 8 9. Anathema sit inquit Id est separatus segregatus exclusus nè unius ovis dirum contagium innoxium gregem Christi venenatâ permistione contaminet Let him be anathema saith hee That is let him be severed set aside shut out least the direfull contagion of one sheep with any mixture of venene stain the innocent flock of Christ Which is enough to show that therefore it ought not to have been put into the definition of that Excommunication which is pretended to be made by the Power of the Church that it containeth a curse or curses against them on whom it is inflicted as you shall finde the first book de Synedriis doth in the place quoted afore Because those that agree in challenging that right for the Church do not appear to agree in that point And this will serve for an argument of difference between
But also evident reason hath been drawn from the difference between the Law and the Gospel why the consequence holds not The second because the supposition of a Society of the Church imports in it means of determining maters controverted in Christianity which the dissolution of Ecclesiastical Power into the Secular voideth The third because those means of determining maters of Christianity will inferre a limitation of that obligation which the determinations of the Church produce in them that are subject to them meerly upon this ground that they cannot produce any effect beyond the means upon which they proceed And these two differences as I have begun to open according as the subject of this discourse hath ministred occasion to do it having hitherto removed this opinion that makes the Church nothing in the nature of a Society nor the act thereof to have any force but that which the Soveraign Power allowes and coming now to determine the means of discerning between true and false in things questionable concerning Christianity together with the effect of the Determinations of the Church I shall have occasion to determine more distinctly in that which follows Which being done it will be time to limit the due bounds by the which the Secular and Ecclesiastical Power are to concurre in the establishment of things to be determined to Christian States and Kingdomes in the mater of Christianity Which will be the due place to meet with that objection which is so hotly pursued in the first Book de Synedriis cap. X. that the Excommunications of the Church have been always thought lible in Christian Common-wealths to be limited by the Secular Power And therefore that there is no Excommunication by divine right Which objection if it have any force must hold in all parts and rights of Ecclesiastical Power as well as in one CHAP. XX. The rest of the Oxford Doctors pretense The Power of binding and loosing supposeth not onely the Preaching of the Gospel but the outward act of Faith Christians are not at liberty to cast themselves into what formes of Churches the Law of Nature alloweth They are Judges in chief for themselves in mater of Religion supposing the Catholick Church not otherwise Secular Power cannot punish for Religion but supposing the act of the Church nor do any act to inforce Religion unlesse the Church determine the mater of it NOw because the Doctor of Oxford might think himself neglected or disparaged if having considered the first book de Synedriis which in the point of Excommunication hee hath made his own and the Leviathan I should take no notice of that which hee hath added I will not turn my Reader to him till I have noted the particulars in which hee seems to go alone Putting him first in minde to advise how to make his choice whom of the three hee will follow against all Christendom who upon several grounds have set upon the Church and the Article of our Creed that professes the same to destroy it Hee seems most to ground himself upon a supposition that the Power of the Keyes extends no further than the converting of a man to become a true Christian by preaching the Gospel or rather the convicting of him that hee ought so to be Resting therefore in the inward Court of the conscience and not reaching to any visible effect in the Church because nothing can be wanting to the salvation of such a one For him that is loose from sin by this means the Church cannot bind him that is bound by sin it cannot loose They that are by this means loos'd from sin have in themselves every one the Soveraign Power of judging between true false in Christianity as to the inward Court as to the outward their Soveraign They are therefore at their freedom to joyn in Ecclesiastical Communion with whom they like best and being so joyned do constitute a Church And Câ—rches so joyned may as they shall finde their proficience in Christianity require combine themselves with other Churches and assemble themselves in Synods to take order in maters of common concernment provided they be tyed no further by the resolutions of them than every man stands convict by the light which his loosing hath given him that they are either just or requisite By the same right they create themselves Pastors not with any Power to censure either people or Pastors further than reproving And such Churches as these hee imagines the first Synagogues of the Israelites under the Prophets to have been especially in the ten Tribes after Jeroboam Seeing they could not resort to Jerusalem yet resorted to such meetings for that service of God which was not confined to the Temple But the judgment of maters concerning Religion in the outward Court that is as to the world belonging onely to the Soveraign and the Powers derived from him hee vesteth even in the Heathen Emperors to the same effect as in Christian allowing a reason why they do well or ill in the exercise of it as they do that which the Scriptures allow or not but maintaining that they do not exceed their power whatsoever they do So that Excommunications Decrees of Councils Ordinations and whatsoever else may be done in behalf of the Church being done by virtue of this Power whether just or not are valid to â—y the outward man either to stand to them or to undergo the penalty assigned to the transgressing of them which being done in the name and the title of the Church are meer usurpations and nullities The ground then of this deceit which Aristotle calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the first mistake lies in this That a man is loosed from his sin meerly by the act of the inward man acknowledging himself convicted of the truth of Christianity or producing besides what inward act of faith this opinion can require Contrary to that which is settled by the premises that the outward act of professing Christianity is absolutely requisite to obtain forgivenesse of sins and other promises which the Gospel tendreth by the Holy Ghost the gift whereof the Sacrament inferreth For Baptisme presupposing the profession of the true Faith consigned into the hands of the Church requiring it as the condition upon which it tendreth remission of sins and the promise of the Holy Ghost inferreth also the communion of the Church unto which it admitteth Therefore is no body a Christian by believing the Scriptures nor hath by consequence any title to the Kingdom of God but by being baptized Nor is it worth the while among reasonable people to except those who may be prevented by unavoidable necessity of mortality of recovering that Baptisme which they had utterly resolved to submit themselves to any condition to obtain The Rule of the Law being a production of common reason that an exception confirmes a Rule in cases not excepted Now if it appear by the same consent of Christians that evidenceth our common Christianity that hee who obtains Baptisme
Christ shed for reâ—â—ission of sins the life of the Kingdom of heaven See the unbaptized deprived also of the bread and cup of life is divided from the Kingdom of Heaven where Christ the well of life remains So it appears that the African Church had this custome but held it not necessary to salvation as Baptism But by Gennadius de dogmatibus Ecclesiasticis Cap. LII It appears to have been a custome of the Church when Hereticks were reconciled to the Church by confirmation to give their little ones the Eucharist presently upon it And Ordo Romanus de Baptismo prescribes it after the solemn Baptism before Easter which the French Capitulary I. 161. and Alcuinus also de divinis officiis provideth for And in the Eastern Church Dionysius in the end of the booke de Hierarchiâ Ecclesiasticâ In the mean time it is to be considered that there being no order that all should be baptized Infants nor at what age Whereupon St. Gregory Nazianzene Orat. XLII in Sanctum Bapt. advises at three or four years of age it cannot be said to have been a generall custome of the Church Nor that it could be originall from the Apostles because the solemn times of Baptisme at Easter and Whitsontide cannot be thought to have been settled till Christianity was grown very vulgar For as for those that were baptized upon particular occasions or in danger of death it cannot be thought that the Eucharist was celebrated for their purpose nor doth any example appear that it was ever brought them from the Church On the contrary when the times of Baptisme came to be disused because it was found to be for the best that all should be baptized Infants upon this occasion the receiving of the Eucharist came to be deferred as much longer then was fitting in my opinion then it was given too soon in S. Cyprians time according to the example related by him in his Book de Lapsis where the Child whom the Pagans had given bread dipped in the wine that had been consecrated to their Idols because too young to eat of the flesh of their sacrifices receives the Eucharist in the Church CHAP. XXIV Two sorts of means to resolve whatsoever is resolvable concerning the Scripture Upon what terms the Church may or is to determine controversies of Faith And what obligation that determination produceth Traditions of the Apostles oblige the present Church as the reasons of them continue or not Instances in our Lords Passeover and Eucharist Penance under the Apostles and afterwards S. Pauls vail eating blood and things offered to Idols The power of the Church in limiting these Traditions I May now proceed I conceive to resolve generally upon what principles any thing questionable in Christianity is determinable and as franckly as briefly do affirm that there are but two sorts of means to resolve us in any thing of that nature Tradition and Argument Authority and Reason History and Logick For whatsoever any Artist or Divine hath said of the great use of the languages in discovering the true meaning of the Original Scriptures by the ancient Translations as well as the Originalls which I allow as much as they demand they must give me leave to observe that seeing all languages are certain Lawes of speaking which have the force of signifying by being delivered to posterity upon agreement of their Predeoessors all that helpe is duly ascribed to Tradition which we have from the Languages Indeed this is no Tradition of the Church no more then all History and Historicall truth concerning the times the places the persons mentioned in the Scripture concerning the Lawes the Customes the Fashions and orders practised by persons mentioned in the Scriptures in all particulars whereof the Scripture speaks which whether it be delivered by Christians or not Christians as far as the common reason of men alloweth or warranteth it for Historical truth is to be admitted into consequence in inquiring the meaning of the Scriptures and without it all pretense of Languages is pedantick and contemptible as that which gives the true reason to the Language of the Scripture whatsoever it import in vulgar use This helpe being applied to the Text of the Scripture it will be of consequence to confider the process of the discourse pursuing that which may appear to be intended not by any mans fancy but by those marks which cleared by the helps premised may appear to signifie it Which is the work of reason supposing the truth of the Scriptures And whereas other passages of Scripture either are clearer of themselves or being made clearer by using the same helps may seem to argue the meaning of that which is questioned whereas other parts of Christianity resolved afore may serve as principles to inferre by consequence of reason the truth of that which remains in doubt not to be impured therefore to reason but to the truth from which reason argues as believed and not seen this also is no lesss the work of reason supposing the truth of the Scriptures But whereas there be two sorts of things questionable in Christianity and all that is questionable meerly in point of truth hath relation to and dependance upon the rule of faith as consequent to it or consistent with it if we will have it true or otherwise if false I acknowledge in the first place that nothing of this nature can be questionable further then as some Scripture the meaning whereof is not evident createth the doubt And therefore that the determination of the meaning of that Scripture is the determination of the truth questionable For seeing the truth of Gods nature and counsails which Christianity revealeth are things which no Christian can pretend to have known otherwise then by revelation from God and that we have evidence that whatsoever we have by Scripture is revealed but by the Tradition of the Church no further then all the Church agreeth in it all that wherein it agreeeth being supposed to be in the Scripture and much more then that It followeth that nothing can be affirmed as consequent to or consistent with that which the tradition of the Church containeth but by the Scripture and from the Scripture So that I willingly admit whatsoever is alleadged from divers sayings of the Fathers that whatsoever is not proved out of the Scriptures is as easily rejected as it is affirmed limiting the meaning of it as I have said But whatsoever there is Scripture produced to prove seeing we have prescribed that nothing can be admitted for the true meaning of any Scripture that is against the Catholick Tradition of the Church it behoveth that evidence be made that what is pretended to be true hath been taught in the Church so expresly as may inferre the allowance of it and therefore is not against the rule of Faith But this being cleared so manifest as it is that the Church hath not the priviledge of infallibility in any express act which is not justifiable from the universall
the sense of it For if the same Faith which first was preached was afterwards committed to writing by the Apostles and how should those Christians which had not the use of leters be saved otherwise then was it the authority of the Apostles acknowledged by them that found themselves tyed to be Christians which made the Faith to oblige whether delivered by writing or without it The consent of all Churches in the same Rule of Faith serving for evidence of the Apostles act in delivering the same to the Churches Nor can any further reason be demanded why that knowledg which the Gnosticks prerended to have received by secret wayes should be refuted than the want of this And therefore it is in vain to allege that as they scorned the Scripture so they alleged Tradition for this secret knowledge The Tradition which they alleged being secret and such as could not be made to appear But no lesse contradictory to the Tradition of the Church than to the Scriptures both infallibly witnessed by the consent of all Churches And hereupon I leave the sayings of S. Austine setting aside the authority of the Council of Nicaea and affirming that former General Councils may be corrected by later without answer As also the sayings of them who affirm the Faith which our Lord hath taught to be the rock upon which the Church is built For if no building can lay that foundation upon which it standeth then cannot the Church make mater of Faith being founded upon it And that authority which may be set aside or corrected can be no infallible ground of Faith It is true it is pleaded that though in the Church of Rome there be some that do believe that the Church is able to make new Articles of Faith that is to make such determinations in maters of Faith as shall oblige all men to believe them as much as they are obliged to believe all that which comes from our Lord by his Apostles Others that do believe onely that the Church is able to evidence what the Apostles delivered to the Church and that this evidence is the ground whereon particular persons are to rest that whatsoever is so evidenced was indeed so delivered by the Apostles yet both these agree in one and the same reason of believing both of them alleging the Tradition of the Apostles to the Church for the ground of their Faith But this is more than any man of reason can believe unlesse wee allow him that affirms contradictories to ground himself upon one part of the contradiction which the other part of it destroyes For seeing that there must be but one reason one ground upon which we believe all that we believe and that it is manifest that those Articles of Faith which the determination of the Church creates being not such by any thing which that determination supposes are believed to be such meerly in consideration of the authority of the Church that determines them By consequence the Scripture and whatsoever is held to be of Faith upon any ground which the authority of the Church createth is no mater of Faith but by the authority of the Church determining that it be held for such On the other side hee that allowes Tradition to be the reason why hee believes the Christian Faith necessarily allowes all that hee allowes to be mater of Faith not onely to be true but to be mater of Faith before ever the Church determine it So that allowing him to say that hee holds his Faith by Tradition hee must allow mee that hee contradicts himself whensoever hee takes upon him to maintain that the Church creates new Articles of Faith which were not so the instant before the determination of the Church CHAP. XXXII Answer to an Objection that choice of Religion becomes difficult upon these terms This resolution is for the Interest of the Reformation Those that make the Church Infallible cannot those that make the Scripture clear and sufficient may own Tradition for evidence to determine the meaning of the Scriptures and Controversies of Faith The Interest of the Church of England The pretense of Rushworthes Dialogues that wee have no unquestionable Scripture and that the Tradition of the Church never changes AS little shall I need to be troubled at any reason that may be framed against this resolution having answered the prejudice that seems to sway most men to apprehend that God must have been wanting to his Church if all things necessary to salvation be not clearly laid down in the Scriptures For it is very manifest that the very same presumption possesses the mindes of the adverse party that God must needs have provided a visible Judge infallible in deciding all Controversies of Faith Whether the Church or any person or persons authorized in behalf of the Church for the present all is one I shall therefore onely demand that it be considered first that God was no way tied either to send our Lord Christ or to give his Gospel which because it comes of Gods free grace is therefore called the Word of his Grace and the Covenant of Grace Then that hee hath not found himself obliged to provide effectual means to bring all mankinde to the knowledge of it resting content to have provided such as if men be not wanting to their own salvation and the salvation of the rest of mankinde may be sufficient to bring all men to the knowledg of it And when it is come to knowledg all discreet Christians notwithstanding must acknowledg that the motives thereof fully propounded though abundantly sufficient to reasonable persons yet do not constrain those that are convicted by them to proceed according to them as necessary reasons constrain all understandings that see them to judg by them For how should it be a trial of mens dispositions if there were no way to avoid the necessity of those motives that inforce it Now if any knowledg can be had of truth in maters of faith that become disputable it must all of necessity depend upon the sufficiency of those motives which convict men to imbrace the Christian Faith And if there be any such skill as that of a Divine among Christians of necessity all of it proceeds upon supposition of the said motives which not pretending to show the reason of things which they convict men to believe convict them notwithstanding to believe that they are revealed by God For what conviction can there be that this or that is true unlesse it may appear to fall under those motives as the means which God hath imployed so to recommend it Therefore can it not be reasonable to require a greater evidence to the truth of things disputable among Christians than God hath allowed Christianity it self which being supposed on all hands it remains questionable whether this or that be part of it Therefore can it not be presumed that God hath made the Scriptures clear in all points necessary to salvation to all understandings concerned or that hee hath
provided a visible Judg infallible in determining Controversies of Faith either because originally his goodnesse requires it or because wee cannot suppose that men can be obliged to imbrace the Gospel upon other terms It is sufficient that having given the Scriptures hee hath over and above provided the Communion of the Church to preserve the Rule of Faith and the Laws of the Church in the sensible knowledg and common practice of all Christians that the means of salvation might be sufficient and yet men remain subject to trial whether they would render them uneffectual or not to themselvs and the rest of mankinde I confess indeed it would be much for the ease of the parties and would shorten their work very much if it might be admitted for a presumption that all things necessary are clear in the Scriptures or that the Church is an infallible Judg in Controversies of Faith For then the superficial sound of the words of Scripture repeated by rote in the Pulpit or out of the Pulpit would serve to knock the greatest question on the head without any advise what difficulties remain behind undecided upon no lesse appearances in Scripture On the other side a decree of the Council of Trent would serve to put the Scripture to silence without any proffer to satisfie the conscience that is moved with the authority thereof equally obliging with our common Christianity with the sense of the Church on the same side to boot Thus much is visible that they whose businesse it is in England to reconcile souls to the Church of Rome finde their work ready done when they have gained this point and men all their lives afore grounded upon contrary reasons in the particulars which are the subject of the breach change their profession without any coutrary resolution in those particulars that is their former grounds remaining in force Surely nothing were more desirable than a ready and short way to the truth in things so concerning But to pretend it upon a ground which if any thing can be demonstrative in this kinde is demonstratively proved that it cannot be true To wit the authority of the Church decreeing without means to derive that which it decreeth from the motives that should evidence it to be revealed by God This I say to pretend is no better than an Imposture And if this be true I remain secure of that which every man will object against the resolution which I advance that whereas the meaning of the Scripture alone is a thing too difficult for the most part of men to compasse I require further that it be assured by the records of the Church which are endlesse and which no mans industry can attain to know So that the meer despair of finding resolution by the means propounded will justifie to God him that followes probabilities as being all one in that case whether there be no truth or whether it cannot appear to those whom it concerns This Objection I say I do not finde so heavy upon mee that I have any cause to mince but rather to aggravate the difficulty of it having showed that the means provided by God to make evidence of the Faith to the consciences of particular Chaistians is not any gift of infallibility vested in any person or persons on behalf of the whole Church but the Unity of the whole Church grounded upon the profession of the same Faith as the condition of it For in all reason what Unity bindes that Division destroyes And whatsoever Unity contributes to the assurance of a Christian that hee is in the way to salvation so long as hee continues in the Unity of the Church that the Division of the Church necessarily derogates from the same assurance in him that cannot continue in that Unity which is once dissolved and yet believing the Scriptures and our common Christianity to be infallibly true cannot believe the parties to be infallible as they are And what hath hee that desireth the Unity of the Church to do but to aggravate that difficulty of attaining salvation which the division thereof produceth I do therefore grant and challenge as for mine own Interest that it is very difficult for unlearned Christians to discern the truth in those Controversies about which a settled division is once formed as now in the Western Church At least upon so true and so clear grounds as may assure them that they make their choice upon no other interest than that of Gods truth But I do not therefore yield to that which this difficulty it seems hath wrung from Vincentius Lerinensis with whom agreeth the Opus imperfectum in Mat. as you have them quoted afore That there is no means but Scripture to convince inveterate Heresies The reason whereof the later of those authors renders Because those Heresies have their Churches their Pastors and the succession of them and their Communion as well as Catholick Christians For hee supposeth Pastors lawfully constituted to have fallen away to those Heresies And truly the case of this difficulty was put when the Arian Faction had possessed so great a part of the Church that S. Gregory Nazianzene in the place afore quoted acknowledges that the true Church could not be judged by numbers With whom S. Hilary libro de Synodis agreeth But if the same Nazianzene scorn them that value the Church by numbers Liberius in the place afore quoted out of Theodoret revies it upon him in saying that the cause of the Faith could not suffer though hee were alone For not onely the Scriptures continue alwaies the same but though the present Church fail it follows not that the Tradition of the Whole Church must fail with it So long as the original sense of the Whole Church may be evident by the agreement thereof with the Scripture wee may discern what is Catholick without the sentence of the present Church And that which is not so to be discerned for Catholick wee may presume that our salvation requires us not to believe it And therefore Vincentius and his fellow are so to be understood that it is difficult indeed to make evidence to private Christians of Tradition contrary to that which they see received by Heresies And therefore that for the convicting of them in the truth recourie is to be had to the Scriptures But Vincentius who as I showed you acknowledges evidence for Tradition from written records of the Church need not have said that there is no means to convince inveterate Heresies but the Scriptures Be this difficulty then the evidence how much it concerns the salvation of all Christians that the Unity of the Church be restored That the choice of private Christians in maters concerning their salvation be not put upon the sentencing of those disputes the reasons whereof they are not able to manage For being restored upon agreement in those things which it is sufficient for all Christians to believe it will neither be easie for private Christians to frame to themselves opinions
destructive to their particular salvation within that compasse neither will their fall be imputable to the Church but to themselves if they do But neither shall this difficulty be so great an inconvenience in our common Christianity nor so insuperable as it seems to those that are loth to be too much troubled about the world to come For I never found that God pretendeth to give or that it is reason hee should give those means for attaining that truth by which wee must be saved which it should not lye within the malice of man to render difficult for them to compasse whom they concern I finde it abundantly enough for his unspeakable goodness and exactly agreeable with those means whereby hee convicteth the world of the truth of Christianity that hee give those whom it concerns such means to discern the truth of things in debate as being duly applyed are of themselves sufficient to create a resolution as certain as the weight of the mater in debate shall require And such I maintain the Scripture to be containing the sense of it within those bounds which the Rule of Faith and the Lawes given the Church by our Lord and his Apostles do limit For what is more obvious than to discern what the whole Body of the Church hath agreed in what not what is manifestly consequent to the same what not what is agreeable to the ground and end of those Lawes which the Church first received from our Lord and his Apostles what not Let prejudice cast what mists of difficulties it can before the light which God hath given his Church to discover the truth hee that stands out of their way shall discern much more art used to obscure than to discern it Neither is there any reason why it is so hard to make it discernable to all that are concerned but the unreasonable prejudices either of the force of humane authority in mater of Faith and the extent of Tradition beyond the Rule of Faith or that the consent of the whole Church may as well come from Antichrist as from the Apostles If the records of the Church were handled without these prejudices lesse learning than this age shows in other maters might serve to evidence the consent of â— Church in more controversies than wee have to those that would be content to rest in the Scripture expounded according to the same But if the Church that is those that uave right in behalf of the Church being perswaded of a sacrilegious privilege of Infallibility shall take upon them to determine truths in debate to limit Lawes to the Church without respect to this Rule which if they respect they manifestly renounce the privilege of their Infallibility I mervail not that God suffers his people to be tried with such difficulties whose sins I doubt deserve this tryal But then I say further that it is not the providence of God that is the means which hee hath provided to resolve men in debates of Christianity but it is the malice of man that makes that means uneffectual which God hath made sufficient I must now answer an envious objection that this resolution is not according to the positions of those that professe the Reformation with us To which I will speak as freely as to the rest having profess'd my self utterly assoiled of all faction and respect of mens persons to way against the means of finding the truth and for that reason devested even the Fathers of the Church of all authority which their merits from Christianity have purchased to hear what their testimonies argue in point of Historical truth I say then first that may saying no way prejudices the intent and interest of the Reformation whatsoever insufficience it may charge the expressions of Reformers with I know the worst that can be alleged in this point is that Luther in appealing from the Pope and Council called by him to a Council that should judg meerly by the Scriptures first framed this Controversie between the Scriptures and the Church which since hath been alwaies in debate so that hee which will not be tried by the Scriptures alone plainly seems to quit the party and give up the game Who has this imagination though never to apparent let mee desire him to go a little higher to the first commencing of the plea about Indulgences For there can be nothing more manifest than this That when those that undertook that cause against Luther found that the present practice of the Church could not be derived from any thing recorded in the Scripture they were forced to betake themselves to the authority of the Church not that which consisteth in testifying the faith once delivered but in creating that which never was of force untill the exercice of it Here let all the world judg for I am confident the case is so plain that all the world may judg in it whether Luther had any Interest to demand that the Scripture alone should be heard in opposition to the Tradition received from the beginning by the Church tending as I have said to nothing but to limit the meaning of the Scripture Or that his Interest required him to protest that the truth for which hee stood was not to be liable to the Sentence of the present Church And therefore when afterwards hee appealed to a Council which should pronounce by the Scriptures alone if this tend to exclude those means which are subordinate to the attaining of the meaning of the Scriptures I do utterly deny that it can be understood so to be meant by any man that would not defeat his own enterprize And therefore that it must be understood to exclude onely the authority of the present Church so farre as it proceeds not upon supposition of those grounds whereupon the Church is to pronounce For what hinders the sentence of the Church to be infallible not of it self alone but as it proceeds upon those means which duely applied produce a sentence that is infallible And truly were not his plea so to be understood all his Followers Melancthan Chemnitius and others who have written Volumes to show how their profession agrees with that of the Catholick Church should have taken pains to commit a very great inconsequence For as I have argued that those who maintain the Infallibility of the present Church do contradict themselves whensoever they have recourse either to the Scripture or to any Records of the Church to evidence the sense of the Scripture in that which otherwise they professe the authority of the Church alone infallibly to determine So those that will have the Scripture alone to determine all Controversies of Faith and yet take the pains to bring evidence of the meaning thereof from that which hath been received in the Church may very well be said to take pains to contradict themselves Some of our Scottish Presbyterians have observed that the Church of England was reformed by those that had more esteem of Melancthon than of Calvin and
that we have to come from God than we please For if it be fifteen or sixteen to one that the words which we have are not from God what respect can oblige us to do more And would Pagans and Idolaters think themselves lesse bound to us if we could perswade them that whatsoever is pretended in Scripture of a Covenant made by God with Abraham and his posterity to acknowledge and worship him alone for the true God may be denied so farre as by saying that no man can say we have any Record of it As for the Jews what a favour were it to them to quit them all that can be alleged against them out of Moses and the Prophets by saying That we cannot be assured that it is their writing For if it be said that whatsoever the Church hath interest to use against Atheists Pagans and Jews will be admitted upon Tradition having renounced Scripture can it be imagined that having granted that the whole narration upon which Christianity steppeth in may have been counterfeited in writing any man can undertake to show the truth of the same unquestionable by word of mouth Surely it may well astonish a man void of prejudice to see it so carefully alleged how many ambiguities and equivocations necessarily fall out in expressing mens mindes by writing never considering that the same may fall out in whatsoever is delivered by word of mouth so much more uncureably as a man writes upon more deliberation than hee speaks and posterity can affirm with more confidence that which is delivered by writing to have been said than that which is onely so reported For let common sense judg by what is usually done by men for the preserving of evidence concerning their estates whether it be more effectual to have it in writing or onely by word of mouth For whatsoever can be pretended to come by Tradition from the Apostles must first have been delivered in the Ebrew language at least that language which they spake and was so near the Ebrew of the Old Testament that in the New Testament it is called by that name Thence being turned into Greek or Latine it must have come afterwards into the now vulgar languages of Christendom Neither can any man imagine how the profession of Christians should be conveyed by Tradition and not by word of mouth Where though they that heard the Apostles certainly understood their meaning which there can be no question of when the intent is familiarly to teach it yet the terms wherein it was delivered not remaining upon record as much difference may creep in as there may be difference in several mens apprehensions saving that which the communion of the Church determineth And will any common sense allow that the meaning thereof shall be more certain than the words are more certain than the meaning of written words which are certain though obscure and yet not without competent means to bring the intent of them to light But I must not preferr any thing of this nature before any thing wee have in the Scriptures so long as both sides acknowledg it I demand then whether the precept of the Law which injoyned the Israelites to teach it their children concerned the written Law or not The Prophet David Psalm LXXVIII 1-8 shewes the practice of it and so do other passages of the Old Testament and surely there can be no doubt made that Moses himself did deliver and inculcate the sense of the precepts to his hearers But will any common sense allow that hee forgot his text when hee expounded the meaning of it Our Lord commands the Jews to search the Scriptures hee remits Dives in the Parable to Moses and the Prophets S. Paul presses that all things that are written are written for our learning that wee through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope That all Scripture inspired from God is profitable and a great deal more to the same effect and shall wee open the mouth of Atheism with an answer that this concerns not us who no way stand convict that wee have the words of Moses and the Prophets of our Lord and his Apostles Let this therefore passe for a desperate attempt of making a breach for Atheism Heathenism Judaism to enter in provided that the Reformation should have nothing to say against the Church of Rome But let it be demanded whether any of those that writ for the Church against Heresies were masters of the common sense of men or not And let it be demanded when they alleged the Scriptures against them whether they thought the meaning of them determinable or not It is true Tertullian prescribed against Hereticks that the Church was not tied to dispute with them out of the Scriptures and certainly had just reason so to do Because though they admitted the Apostles to have Gods Spirit yet they admitted not that Spirit to have declared to them the bottom of the truth as to themselves and therefore made use of the Scriptures as the Alcoran doth so farre onely as they agreed with the Traditions of their own Masters whom they supposed to have the falnesse of the truth Whereas it is manifest that Christianity admits no dispute from the Scriptures but from them that acknowledg no gifts of Gods Spirit that suppose not Christianity and the Scriptures Therefore those that disputed against the Heresies that grew up afterwards and acknowledged no revelation but that which had brought on Christianity what did they dispute upon For evidently they neither had nor used that prescription which Tertullian insisted upon against his Hereticks But as Tertullian might though not bound to so much use the Scriptures against such Hereticks as well as against Jews and Infidels did they who succeeded onely use it against succeeding Heresies that own no further revelation than that which Scripture came with not as necessity but to show the advantage they had for this they must do if nothing but probability is to be had from the Scriptures but the peremptory truth is without Scripture evident in the determination of the present Church which was first visible in ejecting Hereticks Certainly such a breach upon common sense cannot be admitted as for them that have evidence for the truth to compromise it to a dispute of probabilities Here therefore I do appeal to the common sense of all men that see how all the disputes that have been made from the beginning for the Faith against Heresies do consist of Scriptures drawn into consequence against them though in behalf of that which they professed to hold from the Apostles whether all this pains was taken to show what was probable or what was true upon the evidence of the true sense of Scripture falling within the compasse of that which they held from the Apostles The ground then of that account which pretends that wee have no Scripture is very frivolous For if common sense be valued by the experience of those that handle written Copies not by
translations those especially which are the most ancient by those who understand them is duely esteemed a help to that end and not a hinderance For as the turning of them into so many Languages prevents all errors of Copiers and assures the true reading so the comparing of the translations with the original showing how it was understood anciently by those who were better and nearer acquainted with the mater of them than wee are who must have it from them makes up a commentary of the meaning of the same and how farr it extends I do therefore here appeal to the common sense of all them that have been at charge or at pains to procure and compasse the Edition of all translations of the Bible especially the ancient in particular the Spanish Anwerpe and Paris which it is hoped is now improved to the same purpose here at London and do challenge all men to say first whether the designe be commendable or not then whether it can be commendable if it contribute not to preserve the true reading to determine the true meaning of the Scriptures As for that which I conceive I have sufficiently insisted upon in behalf of the truth that the writings of the Apostles presuppose a Rule of Faith received by those to whom they addresse together with certain Rules limiting their communion in the service of God upon supposition of that Rule I am here to claim the effect of it that the sense of the Scripture is to be limited to that which common sense may discover by the records of the Church to have been the sense and intent of the same But that this should argue an intent in God not to have given the Scriptures to determine debates that might arise among Christians concerning the common faith and that upon onely the visible profession of the Church all arguments to the contrary from the Scriptures all clamors of conscience are to be silenced without reconciling them to the primitive Faith and practice of the Church to which it is evident that if the Church be not wanting to their duty they are reconcileable this is that which I must and do proclaim to be utterly brutish and unreasonable And therefore to proceed to the next point I grant and insist that nothing but that which is received from our Lord Christ his Apostles can by any means seem receivable to any Christian But whereas it may be received either by writing alone or by word of mouth alone or by both I say that the receiving of Christianity by word of mouth alone cannot be pretended the power of the Church to create articles of Faith which was never heard of till the quarel with Luther was on foot being excluded but supposing it evident to common sense that the act of the present Church is the act of the Catholick Church from the Apostles Which so farr as I know was never heard of till Rushworths Dialog ues came forth The Christianity that was from the beginning received by word of mouth consists in the profession of believing a certain Rule of Faith and undertaking a certaine Rule of life as the Law and condition whereby all Christians hope to attain everlasting life Besides all Christians being upon this profession admitted to communicate with the Church in the service of God acicording to such Rules as determine the circumstances thereof first brought in by the Apostles These Rules may also be said to be received by word of mouth because the practice of them holds by custome from age to age though the expresse knowledg and profession of them is not the means to save particular Christians further than it is the means to maintain the service of God in the unity of his Church which is the means of it Here are then two heads of things received by word of mouth which hee that will speak expresly in this point must distinguish And according to this distinction I say that onely the Rule of Faith which is the Law of attaining everlasting life and the communion of the Church is delivered by word of mouth though when I say so I understand that the true intent and meaning thereof and what it importeth to common sense cannot be excluded Besides which there is of necessity infinite mater of discourse concerning things consequent or impertinent or repugnant to the same some whereof obtaining credit in some times and some parts of Christendom comes by tradition of word of mouth neverthelesse to other ages and places which therefore do truly bear the name of Tradition Though not as delivered from the beginning by the Apostles further then as by them the means is delivered whereby it may appear which of them is consequent which of them repugnant which of them impertinent to that which they have delivered indeed As concerning the Laws of the Church so certain and so manifest as it is that there were Rules delivered by the Apostles to have the force of Law in directing the communion of Christians in the publick service of God to the Unity of the Church So certain and manifest is it First that the same Laws are not capable to regulate the communion of the Church in all estates of it which the change of times should produce And yet secondly that whatsoever should be changed or taken away or added to the same ought to tend to the same intent which it is visible those of the Apostles did purpose Let any understanding that is capable but consider the difference that needs must arise by the Secular Power undertaking the protection of Christianity between the Church afore and the Church afterwards If hee say the same Laws will serve to maintain the communion of the Church in both estates supposing the society thereof to be the same upon the premises I shall then confesse that it is to no purpose to appeal to any discourse of reason in this whole dispute I say further that among those who professe that nothing ought to be received for revealed truth but that which was first delivered by our Lord and his Apostles nothing ought to have the force of Law but that which tendeth to the same purpose with that which they inacted Nothing hindreth things to be received into belief and practice that are really not onely impertinent to but inconsistent with that which indeed they have delivered to us The appeal is to common sense therefore let discourse and experience satisfie common sense Religion indeed is a bond by the condition whereof wee perswade our selves of peace with God of attaining the good and avoyding the ill which belongs to those that are so or otherwise And thus farre it is certain that Religion is a thing bred in mans nature which it is impossible for him to shake off or renounce But is it impossible for him to become perswaded hereof upon undue terms Whence then comes all false Religion whether of Jews or Pagans For we shall not need here to consider Mahumetanes whose Religion supposeth
it and the like blasphemies innumerable I know there are other Opinions of Justification by faith alone among those that professe it according to the senses which they may have of the nature of justifying faith and those perhaps of greater vogue than this which I have named Neither is it my intent to involve those that maintain Justification by faith alone in the blame which I charge the opinions hitherto described with The reason why I mention these opinions here is because they are in the extreams and therefore the mention of them seemed to propose the state of that question which I pretend to resolve For my way shall be in the first place to answer the question proposed concerning that disposition which the Covenant of Grace requireth the mind of him to be formally affected with that will be qualified for the promises which God therby tendreth Making this account that the treating of it will give us an overture into the consideration both of the effective cause that produceth it in those that have it and also of the meritorius cause that moveth God both originally to grant the said effective cause and consequently to accept the effect thereof for a competent qualification of them that have it for the promises which God by his Gospel tendreth those that receive it CHAP. II. Evidence what is the Condition of the Covenant of Grace The contract of Baptism The promise of the Holy Ghost annexed to Christs not to Johns Baptism Those are made Christs Disciples as Christians that take up his Crosse in Baptism The effects of Baptism according to the Apostles TO proceed to as brief and as clear a resolution of that point as I can propose I say That a sincere and resolute profession to undertake Christianity and to live according to it believing as our Lord Christ hath revealed and living as he hath taught consigned to God in the hands of his Church by the Sacrament of Baptism is that condition which the Covenant of Grace requireth to qualifie us for the promises which it tendreth This resolution is directly against the Antinomians and those that believe that a Christian is justified by the obedience of Christ imputed from everlasting to them whom he came to save Which indeed nullifieth the Covenant of Grace and converteth it to a meer promise on Gods part requiring no condition on mans part to be performed by him to qualifie hâ—m for it But this resolution opposing that conceit so roundly as positively to expresse the condition which I intend to maintain It will serve both against the conceit of Socinus that justifying faith is nothing but a firm beliefe that those who believed the Gospel purposing to live as God requireth are accepted by him as righteous Baptisme into the profession of Christianity not included But also of those that will have it to consist in the knowledge of our being predestinate to life from everlasting revealed by Gods word and sealed by his Spirit The proofs of it I will divide into three heads For consisting of so many branches as you see it cannot be expected that those Scriptures which shall serve to evidence it should every where expresse all the parts of it It is enough if the severall parts of it out of which the whole results be demonstrable by severall ranks of Scriptures The first of those Scriptures that concern the profession which God by our Lord Christ requireth and he by his Apostles and the Church after them to the worlds end of them that will be qualified for the Promises which the Gospel tondreth which I put in the first place expresly because they seem to contain the most visible and express arguments that the principles and practice of Christianity can yield to inforce this truth The second shall be taken from the nature of faith and the attributes ascribed to it by the Scriptures in justifying saving regenerating or adopting us for sons giving us the spirit of Gods sons remitting our sins and the rest that we expect at Gods hands by vertue of his Covenant of Grace The last shall be from those passages of the Apostles chiefly and consequently of other Scriptures that they expound wherein it is denied that we are saved or justified by Works or by the Law but affirmed that we are saved and justified by Grace and by faith The due sence and intent whereof is the thread to guide us through the intricacies of this whole dispure Though when this is done I shall not wish any man to resolve himself in this or in any other point of the whole book till he hath gone through the whole and considered what resolution this generall infers to all other branches or dependances of it And therefore shall think he does nothing that goes about to disprove any part of it without shewing the resolution which his opinion infers to those other points or dependances that the Reader may have the choice before him which he thinks most consequent in reason to the principles of Christianity received on all sides I will begin with the words of the Apostle 1 Pet. III. 20 21. where this seems to be couched in terminis He saith that the long suffering of God waited in the dayes of Noe while the Arke was making in which a few that is eight souls were saved the antitype whereof Baptism now saveth us not the laying down of the filth of the flesh but the having of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ The water of Baptism saveth us through the temtations of the World as they were saved through the deluge And what can be done more then to save us let no man think to defeat this by striving about words that to save and to justifie is not the same If Bapâ—ism import the condition of the Covenant of Grace which saveth us our justification will necessarily be wrapt up in the same packet though to justifie and to save be severall conceits And is it not strange that any man should be perswaded that there is nothing said or meant of the Baptism of water in all this passage but of the Baptism of the Spirit as that which moves a good conscience to professe Christianity For how can Baptism by the Holy Ghost and fire be the antitype of the waters of the deluge as the Baptism of water is and as that Baptism which the Apostle speaks of is The correspondence between the types of the Old and the antitypes of the New Testament by vertue of the premises consists in the correspondence between the temporall deliverance of that time and the spirituall deliverance of this both in order to the everlasting deliverance of the World to come Now it is certain that the visible Ceremony of Baptism signifies the temptations of this World out of which we escape by the means of that Sacrament as he that is baptized rises out of the water again According to that of the Psalm LXIX 1 15. Save me O God
be baptized who cannot make or are tied to any such promise To these I say no more but this that it is one thing to answer arguments and to give grounds of a contrary truth another thing to object difficulties which even the truth is not clear of especially that which comes by revelation from without as Christianity doth Because to the verifying of revealed truth it is not necessary that all things should be alike clearly revealed that are necessary to the clearing of objections The obligation of sticking to that which is revealed taking place no lesse though something belonging to the clearing of it be not so clearly expressed And generally that which is evident is never the lesse evident because there is something else evident the evidence whereof I cannot reconcile with it But this I say not as though I meant to dismiss these difficulties without that which I conceive ought to satisfie But because I have learned of Aristotle that it is the fashion of the unlearned to demand at once both the grounds of the truth and the clearing of difficulties A thing which might be done here but so that another place would require it to be done againe and not without balking the order which I intend My designe will bring me in due time to speak with the Pelagians first and afterwards with the Anabaptists To those points I will remit the answer to these objections Onely for the present to the former of these doubts I would say this That all that hath been said hitherto concerns onely that disposition which he that will come to salvation by Christianity must be firmly qualified with as the condition which the Covenant of Grace requireth All which being supposed it may and doth still remaine questionable how and by what meanes in the nature of an effective cause a man becomes qualified with the disposition so required To wit whether by the meer force of free will or by the help of Gods Grace And that being resolved upon what consideration in the nature of a meritorious cause those helps of Gods grace are furnished To wit whether by the free Grace of God or in consideration of the merits and satisfaction of Christ provided by Gods free Grace as the reason for which and the measure by which the helps of his Grace are dispensed To the latter of them I would onely say here That I conceive I have here maintained that reason for the necessity of Baptisme to the salvation of all Christians upon which the necessity of the Baptisme of Infants is to be tied Which is to say in plain English That I have by the premises re-established that ground for the necessity of Baptisme in generall the unsetling whereof was the onely occasion to make the necessity of Baptizing Infants become questionable CHAP. VI. Justifying Faith sometimes consists in believing the truth Sometimes in trust in God grounded upon the truth Somtimes in Christianity that is in imbracing and professing it And that in the Fathers as well as in the Scriptures Of the informed and formed Faith of the Schools NOW for those Scriptures wherein the nature of justifying faith is described by those effects which the promises of the Gospel tender I must here observe that which all observe that faith is many times made by the Scriptures to consist in believing the truth of Christs Message which he came to preach Otherwhiles neverthelesse in a grounded trust and confidence in the goodnesse of God declared through Christ For what is more manifest then that of S. Paul Rom. X. 9. If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe with thy heart that God raised him from the deád thou shalt be saved Where first that which the heart believeth is the rising of Christ from the dead signifying by one Article the rest of the Faith then that which the mouth professeth is nothing but the same truth Therefore neither the inward nor the outward act of faith reacheth any further then the acknowledgment of the said truth So the Apostle 1 John V. 15. 10. Every one that believeth that Jesus is the Messi as is begotten of God Who is he that overcomes the World but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God He that believeth in the Son of God hath the witnesse in himself He that believeth not God hath made him a liar because he believeth not the witnesse which God beareth of his Son Where it is plain that no difference is made between believing God and believing in the Son of God and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is no more then to believe Gods witnesse Mat. IX 28. Jesus faith to the blind Believe you that I am able to do this They say unto him yea Lord. Then touched he their eyes saying according to your faith be it unto you That faith which consisted in believing that he was able to do it So of John the Baptist our Lord Mat. XXI 32. John came to you in the way of righteousnesse and ye believed him not but the publicans and harlots believed him Which you seeing repeated not afterwards that ye might believe him And sure they obtained the grace of Christ that believed John the Baptish Our Lord to the father of the Lunatick Mat. IX 23. 24. If thou caust believe all things are possible to him that believeth And straight the father of the childe crying out said Lord I believe help my unbeliefe If thou canst believe that I am able to do this as afore Mat. XI 23. 24. He that shall say to this mountaine be thou removed and cast into the sea and doubt not in his heart but believe that what he sayeth cometh to passe is shall come to passe to him as he sayeth Therefore I say unto you all things that ye ask by prayer believe that ye shall receive and they shall come to passe to you John V. 24. He that heareth me and believeth him that sent me hath eternal life and cometh not into condemnation but is passed from death to life XX. 31. These things are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and that believeing ye may have life through his Name Acts VIII 37. Philip said to the Eunuch If thou believest with all thy heart thou mayest be baptized He answered and said I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God Upon which faith he is baptized Rom. IV. 3. Abraham believed God saying to him Thy seed shall be as the stars of heaven Gen. XV. 5. and it was impâ—â—â—ed to him for righteousnesse On the other side it is no rare thing to finde faith described by trust and confidence in God and the effects of saving faith ascribed to it as in the description of the Apostle Heb. XI 2. Now faith is the substance of thing hoped for the evidence of things not seen That which he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is that which the Hebrew expresseth by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
under the discipline of the Prophets their masters that Amos VII 22. alledges it as a strange thing that God had made him a Prophet of an heardsman and that therefore he could not but do his message And is Saul among the Prophets became a riddle rather then a Proverb not to be resolved but by another question And who is the father of them that is that God the Father of all Prophets could give his Graces where he pleased without meanes 1 Sam. X. 11. 12. And therefore at the election of S. Matthias to the office of an Apostle to which this grace belonged the disciples pray Acts I. 24. Thou Lord that knowest the hearts of all shew whether of these thou hast chosen shewing the Christianity of the heart to be the foundation of that choice And when S. Paul exhorteth to think soberly of themselves according to that measure of Faith which God had divided to every one it is manifest that this measure of faith extends to all graces the thought whereof may carry a man beyond the bounds of sobriety That is a'l wherein Christianity consisteth So that the measure or proportion of Faith is the measure and proportion of Christianity which being given by God though seconded with graces which all had not he forbids them to be puffed up with Againe when the same Apostle hopeth that the faith of the Corinthians being increased should be magnified abundantly through them by his preaching the Gospel to the parts beyond them according to his own rule 2. Cor. X 15 16. What is that increase of faith but the setling of them in their Christianity which when it were done he hoped by their meanes to find accesse to preach to their neighbours I do confidently chalenge to this signification that text of S. Paul Gal. V. 6. In Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision but faith that is acted by love Because I know that no man that understands Greek can deny that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in this place passive and because it cannot be understood without violence how faith should be acted by love but when that profession which we make at our Baptisme is performed for no other motive but that of God and his love What is then that work of the Thessalonians faith which S. Paul commendeth 1 Thes I. 3. which he prayeth God powerfully to fulfill 2 Thes II. 11. but the doing of that which they undertook to do when they were made Christians And what is the ministry of the Philipians faith Philip. II. 17. but the service which S. Paul did God in labouring to make them good Christians And what is the faith in which he would have the Corinthians to stand 1 Cor. XVI 13 Wherein He and Barnabas exhort the Churches to continue Acts. XIV 22 The bare profession of Christianity or the liabituated resolution of living according to it By which reason whensoever the profession of Christianity is signified by the name of Faith in the writings of the Apostles in which sense it stands as frequently there as in any other this habituated resolution is presupposed because upon presumption thereof men are made Christians to the Church as well as to God For that no man is really and naturally a Christian to God untill he be so legally to the Church unlesse it be when the effectuall purpose of being so is prevented by that necessity which reasonably cannot be prevented And hereupon it is that though men believe the truth of Christianity before they are made Christians by being baptized yet even in the Scriptures themselves believers and Christians are many times all one 1 Tim. V. 8. 16. If any man provide not for his owne and especially those of his houshold he hath denyed the faith and is worse then an infidell If any believer he or she have widows let them support them and let not the Church be charged VI. 2. Those servants that have believing masters let them not despise them because they are brethren but serve them the ratheâ— because they are faithfull and beloved Titus I. 6. If any man be blameless the husband of one wife having children that believe not blamed for riotousnesse or disobedience Apoc. XVII 14. They that are with the Lamb are such as are called and choice and believers And hereupon when the Apostle faith John III. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 His meaning of necessity is this Beloved thou shalt do like a Christian what thou shalt do for the brethren and strangers Because no private trust but the common tye of Christianity obligeth to do good to Christian travelers of whom he speakes there And therefore Acts II. 38 44. S. Peter having said to those that were pricked in heart upon conviction of the resurrection of our Lord Repent ye and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ unto remission of sins And this being done it followeth But all the believers were together and had all things common Here I must not forget the stile and language of the most ancient Fathers of the Church who deriving from and referring all their studies to the Scriptures must needs speak in the same stile with them in matters of Christianity I do not intend therefore to say that they do not use the word Faith to signifie the belief of those things which the Gospel declareth to be true and that trust and confidence in God through Christ which the truth thereof naturally tendeth to produce Having shewed that both these conceptions are frequently signified by the terme of faith in the writings of the Apostles their masters But I say further that it is oftentimes used by them in this third sense which I spake of last to signifie Christianity that is the profession thereof presumed by the Church not to be counterseit This is very visible in Tertullian in whose language Faith and Baptisme are many times the same thing de exhortatione castitatis Cap. I. Nec secundas post sidem nuptias permittitur nosse And is not permitted to know any second marriage after Baptisme De Pudicitia Cap. XVI Quae amisso viro Fidem ingressa She who entered into the faith having lost her husband Is that became a Christian Ibid. Cap. XVIII Ante fidem post fidem Signifies before and after Baptisme Therefore in his Scorpiace Cap. VIII Talia a primordio prâ—cepta exemplâ— debitricem Martyrii Fidem ostendunt Such precepts such examples from the beginning shew that Faith is indebted in Martyrdome For it is Baptisme that obliges a Christian to Martyrdome rather then renounce the Faith So S. Cyprian following his master Epist ad Antonianum Si fidei calor praevalet If the heat of faith prevail And Deâ—opere Eleemosyna Credentium fides novo adhuc fidei calore fervebat The faith of believers was servent with the heat of faith being yet new For so Tertullian had said of Morcion in the place alledged in the first book Cont. Marc. IV. 4. In
time of persecution but the performance of it alwayes because alwayes difficult and laborious alwayes the following of Christ with his Crosse on our shoulders When the powers of the World professe Christianity then is the scandall of profession taken away because they must cherish so farre must they needs be from persecuting that which they professe But the scandall of the Crosse in performing of it remaines so much the more difficult to be avoided by how much a man is more subject to be tempted by evill example to hope for salvation without performing it Therefore as I shewed you asore those who professe to believe the truth of Christianity many times delayed their Baptisme in the Primitive Church whether as loth to retire to that strictnesse of life which it required or as sensible of their own weaknesse and desiring to finde confidence of themselves that they might walk worthy of it before they undertook it Whereupon Tertullian as I shewed you advises to deferre it till a man were setled in a state of continence or wedlock And because the reason of this delay was doubtfull therefore there remained in the Church some doubt of the salvation of those that died in this estate But to him that should resolve to wear the profession for a quality rendring him capeable of the priviledges of a Christian by the laws of Christian powers but to fulfill it no further then the law should require to him is the scandall of Christs Crosse quite voided though by as great a scandal as that which diverts from Christianity namely that of Simon Magus who became a Christian for gaine He that expressely resolves not this within himselfe but in the effect of his life and conversation hath no more regard to the reason of his Christianity then if he had expressely resolved it is necessarily of the same form and all that care not to perform what they undertake according to the ranck and degree of their negligence reducible to it But besides it is manifest that during the heat of persecution those that believed not the whole faith of a Christian that is hereticks those who for matters not concerning the Faith broke the unity of the Church that is schismaticks were many times ready to suffer death for their sect and for that part of Christianity which it allowed So far were they from dis-believing it Shall we say that any of these had in them the virtue of faith Let us consider what might move them to believe and it will appear first that they might be moved to believe that for their own sake which a Christian believes for Gods sake then that it can be no part of the virtue of Faith to believe the truth for a mans own sake and not for Gods If sensuality can move a worldly man to believe the truth so long as the advantages of the world attend it well may it be said to be the grace of God that gives him sufficient reason to believe supposing for the present not granting that these reasons are the helps of Gods free grace to bring men to believe but that he sets himself in Gods stead in believing that for his own advantage which he should believe out of obedience to God and for his service is not grace but wickednesse be it never so true never so holy that he believes He that dis-believes part of that which it is necessary to salvation to believe he that breakes the unity of the Church upon true grounds though not necessary for who can make a sect without some pretense in our common Christianity he hath the fulfilling of his own will and singularity for his reward and cannot claime that faith to be a grace of God which God rewardeth not Nor is this to say that the least beginning of Faith is to be had without Gods Grace supposing for the present but not granting that the worke of Salvation is the work of Gods praeventing Grace from the very beginning of it But that there may be a reall beleefe of Christian truth in the understanding of him that hath no part of good will to be a true Christian The Vâ—article of the Councill of Orange providing only Initium fidei ipsumque credulitatis affectum That the beginning of Faith and the very inclination to beleeve be thought to come Per inspirationem spiritus sancti corrigentem voluntatem nostram ab infidelitate ad fidem ab impietate ad pietatem By inspiration of the Holy Ghost correcting our Will from unbeleefe to faith from ungodlinesse to godlinesse For though when first a man is shewed reason to beleeve both these reasons and the least inclination to follow them be ascribed to Gods Grace because the scandall of the Crosse is to be overcome to which all that inclination tendeth yet when that scandall is voided by falling upon as great the assent of the understanding remaines the effect of humane discourse upon the sufficience of reasons proposed all the goodnesse that otherwise must have been ascribed to Gods Grace in the inclination of the will being void and dead And all this though properly said of those that are converted to Christianity at yeares of discretion seeing the difference between the cases is punctually true in them that are bred Christians supposing them to have the Grace of the Holy Ghost by being baptized infants and to have destituted the same afterwards The beleefe that remaines in them being meerly the effect of humane discourse upon the motives of Faith which are indeed helpes of Grace without us without any respect of submission to the will of God for the effect of them within us which who giveth cannot be so wanting to the Grace of God as we suppose these But this being said I shall now leave it to the Reader to judge whether this may have been the occasion or upon what other occasion it may be thought to have come to passe that in the Doctrine of the Schoole the inward act of beleeving without the inward resolution of outwardly professing hath been taken for the whole virtue of Faith I say without including that inward resolution of the heart whence that outward profession proceedeth when it is true and is alwaies presumed by the Church to proceed when the contrary appeares not And that from hence have proceeded the disputes concerning faith without forme which they will have to be that dead faith without works which S. James II. 17 19 20. compareth with the faith of devils that believe and tremble And faith informed by the love of God which they will not have to adde any thing to the nature of it so that it shall consist in any thing else then in believing the truth of the Gospel but to qualifie it to justifie him that before was a sinner to God as containing in it all the righteousnesse of a Christian But though at the present I determine not what is true in this position what not I must determine as to the point in
to depend upon the consequence of it No more can Christianity allow the assnrance of this truth I am justified supposing it to be true to be the ground why it is true And if any man say that justifying faith is not the assurance of this truth I am justified but of this truth I am â—redestinate to life the reason being Because the obedience of Christ appointed for the salvation of the elect alone is imputed to him once for all to life not onely for the present to righteousnesse can any reason be given why this reason should not take effect from everlasting but depend upon the knowledge of it wherein justifying faith is said to consist For if the onely consideration that intitles him to the promises of the Gospel be the obedience of Christ why shall not that right take place from the same date from which the consideration tendered for it takes place Why should not the opinion of the Antinomians at least that which I make to be ground of that Heresie take place rather then this of Presbyterians For both of them being equally destructive to the Gospel of Christ that which agrees best with it self the several assumptions whereof are most consistent with and consequent to one another is doubtlesse the more receivable Now whether we make justification granted from everlasting to the elect for whom alone Christ was sent to go before faith as the object goes before the knowledge and assurance of it Or whether we make it to depend upon faith though passed meerely in consideration of the obedience of Christ deputed for the salvation of the elect alone there will remaine no obligation upon the elect to performe any obedience to God being intitled to and assured of salvation afore it and without it For the Gospel is the last Law of God derogatory to any declaration of his will antecedent to it and not suffering any other to take place further then is provided by it So that supposing that God hath published salvation to the elect meerly in consideration of Christ without requiring any terms at their hands Well may it be said that notwithstanding he may determine them to do those things which he would have them do that shall be saved But it cannot be said that he can oblige them to any condition to be performed of their free choice Or consequently that there can remaine any difference between good and bad in the doings of them who are free from all obligation to the meanes because intitled to the end without them And truly it is more modesty to say that the actions of the elect to which God determines them upon these terms are not good then to say as by consequence it must be said that the actions of the reprobates are bad which upon these terms are not their actions but Gods nor imputable to any will of theirs but to his But this inconvenience being unavoidable whether we make justification to depend upon that faith which consists in assureing us of the same and that is to make an object to depend upon the act which it produceth or that faith to depend upon it as included in predestination to liâ—e both of them being destructive to Christianity it is but a poor plaister by contradicting a mans self to seem to salve so great an inconvenience And truly t is much to be wondered at how those that professe nothing but Scripture could ever perswade themselves of an imagination for which there is nothing to be alledged out of the whole tenor of the Scriptures Whatsoever can be produced out of the Old Testament for that trust which the people of God might or ought to have in God for the obtaining of his promises whatsoever out of the New for that peace and security with which Christians may and ought to expect the world to come supposing but not granting all that can be pretended thereby do but demand where it is said that a man hath this trust this peace this security by having it and all will be mute And therefore having shewed that the trust and peace of a Christian supposeth that ground upon which he is justified I will spend no more words to shew that the knowledge and assurance of justification or predestination supposes the being of it and that the ground whereupon it takes place CHAP. VIII The objection from S. Paul We are not justified by the Law nor by Workes but by Grace and by Faith Not meant of the Gospel and the workes that suppose it The question that S. Paul speakes to is of the Law of Moses and the Workes of it He sets those workes in the same rank with the workes of the Gentils by the light of nature The civil and outward workes of the Law may be done by Gentiles How the Law is a Pedagogue to Christ THE last reason whereby I prove my intent consists in the assoiling of that Objection which is alledged from the disputes of S. Pauls Epistles arguing that a Christian is not justified by the Law or by the works of the Law and therefore by Grace and by Faith For he that is justified by ingaging himself to professe Christianity and to live according to the same must needs be justified by performing his ingagement Unlesse a man would say that he is justified by making a promise which he never observeth and which it concerns him not to keep being once justified by making of it And truly having said that God admits a man into the state of his Grace in consideration of the act of undertaking this profession I do not onely grant but challenge for my privilege to maintaine that he hold him in the same state in consideration of the act or acts whereby he performes the same And therefore to the Objection I returne this in generall That I do not grant any man to be justified by any thing that supposes not of the Gospel of Christ since the publishing of it That is not by such works as can be done by him that hath not yet admitted and imbraced the Gospel of Christ and that by virtue of that Grace of God which sets on foot the Covenant of Grace For the Law going before the Gospel and being unable to produce that obedience which God would accept in lieu of the World to come further then as containing in it self the Gospel and the effects of it It is manifest that righteousnesse cannot be attributed to the Law nor the works of the Law And yet if we consider that the Gospel it self is a law of God whereby he ties at least himself to certain rerms upon which he declares that he will be reconciled with his enemies There is no reason to understand when S. Paul sayes that a man is not justified by the Law or the works of the Law that he meanes to deny a Christian to be justified by doing according to the Gospel which is the law that God pretends to introduce in stead of that law by which the
them in the world to come that should heartily and faithfully serve him in this Which adding to it the profession of the Name and warrant of Christ as the Author of that contract whereby we undertake so to do is Christianity I have yet said nothing of the passage of S. James II. 14 where he disputes expresly that faith alone justifieth not but Faith with works for it seemes to make a generall argument by it self though in truth the reason which he brings that Abraham was justified by works necessarily depends upon the true reason why S. Paul saith That Abraham was justified by faith Which reason they that will not admit deserve to crucifie themselves everlastingly to find how he can be truly said to be justified by workes that is justified by faith alone without works afore were it not pitty that the Scriptures should be set on the rack to make them confesse a meaning which the words in no language by any custome of humane speech will bear For if the Faith of him that hath no good works will not save him not justifie him as the Apostle expresly affirmeth can the workes that are said to do this be said to do it Metonymicalâ—y because they are signes or effects of Faith which doeth it when it is said that faith without them doth it not And though by the way of Metonymy the property or effect of the cause may be attributed to the effect of that cause Yet when that property or effect is denied the cause and attributed to the effect will any language indure that it should be thought properly to belong to the cause which is denied it and attributed to the effect only by Metonymy that is in behalf of the cause that is denied it Is there any need to come into these straits when by saying that a man is justified by faith alone according to S. Paul meaning by undertaking Christianity a man will be obliged to say that he is justified by works also according to S. James to wit by performing that which he undertaketh unlesse you will have him justified by undertaking that which he performes not For when it is said that a man is justified by undertaking Christianity it is supposed that he undertakes it sincerely and heartily Which sincerity containing a resolution of all righteousnesse for the future justly qualifies him for those promises which overtake him in sinne so that for the present he can have nothing to justifie him but the righteousnesse of this faith alone which the Gospel tells us that God accepteth But for the time to come just ground is there to distinguish a second justification which proceeds upon the same consideration but supposes the condition undertaken to be performed from that first which though done by faith alone inferreth the necessity of making good what is undertaken that it may be available Is not this that the Apostle saith James 11. 15 16 17. If a brother or sister be naked or want daily food and one of you say to him Go in peace be warmed and fed and yet give them not things fit for his body what is he the better So also faith if it have not workes is of it self dead Where lies this comparison but in this that he who professeth Christianity but doth not according to it is like him that professeth love to his brother but relieves not his necessities And so when it followes But a man may say thou hast faith and I have workes shew me thy workes by thy faith and I will shew thee my faith by my workes For he that liveth like a Christian it is plaine he sheweth his Faith by his workes which is evidence that he professeth Christianity sincerely but he that onely professeth is yet to make evidence by his workes that his profession is sincere As for the example of Abraham the Apostles words are these Abraham our Father was he not justified by works when he offered Isaac upon the altar Thou seest that faith wrought with his workes and by works was his saith perfited And the Scripture which saith Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousnesse was fulfilled and he was called the sonne of God What is this but that which we read 1 Mac. 11. 52. Was not Abraham found faithfull in triall and it was counted to him for righteousnesse For it was counted to him for righteousnesse that not being weak in saith he considered not his own body already mortified as being a hundred years old nor the mortification of Sarahs wombe nor doubted through want of belief in Gods promise but was strengthened in faith giving glory to God and being satisfied that he is able to do what he hath promised As S. Paul saith Rom. IV. 19 20 21. And therefore much more must it needs be counted to him for righteousnesse that by faith he offered Isaac when he was tempted and that he who had received the promises offered his onely begotten sonne of whom it had been said In Isaac shall posterity be counted to thee Reckoning that God was able to raise him from the dead Whence also he received him in a parable As the Apostle saith Heb. XI 17 18 19. For here as I shewed afore it is the act of faith and not the object of it that is imputed to righteousnesse And in that obedience whereby this temptation was overcome though there was a good work yet there was an act of that faith And therefore the Apostle deservedly addeth that his faith wrought with his workes But the faith that moved him to travail after Gods promise was perfected by this work wherein that faith moved him to tender God obedience And therefore the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse Because that which Moses had said that God counted Abraham righteous for his faith was made good and proved not to have been said without cause but that he was righteous indeed as righteous he must be whom God so accounts that obeyed God in such a triall as this So that which S. James addeth of Rahab Likewise Rahab also the harlot was she not justified by works receiving the messengers and sending them out another way How shall it agree with that of the other Apostle Heb. XI 31. Through faith Rahab the harlot perished not with the unbelievers receiving the spies in peace But by virtue of the same reason that having conceived assurance of the promises of God to his people that she might have her share in them she resolved to become one of them upon such terms as the case required wherein certainly the preservation of their spies was required So if by Faith then by Workes if by Workes then by Faith I must not leave this point till I have produced another sort of Scriptures in which the promises of the Gospel are made to depend upon workes which Christianity requireth AS namely when forgivenesse of sinners is promised upon condition that we
by and by Si quis igitur post Evangelum Christi adventum filii Dei Paedagogae Legis observat ceremonias audiat populum consitentem quod omnis illa justitia panno sordidissimo comparetur cui Esther diadema suum quod erat regiae potestatis insigne comparat Where it is to be considered that the righteousnesse which is in the Law in comparison of the purity of the Gospel is called uncleannesse For that which was counted glorious is not glorious in regard of that glory that excelleth And If any man then after the Gospel of Christ and the coming of the Sonne of God observe the ceremonies of that Pedagogicall Law let him hear the people confesse that all that righteousnesse is comparable to a most filthy ragg◠Wherewith also Ester compares her diadem though the ensigne of Royall Power The Prophet brings in the Synagogue confessing it self destitute of righteousnesse The Apostles shew that the Church onely furnisheth that righteousnesse through faith which the Synagogue by the Law cannot have And shall we say that S. Jerome abuses the Prophet in limitting that uncleannesse which the Prophet acknowledgeth even in their righteousnes to that which is to be had by the Law For though he name onely the workes of the Ceremoniall Law yet is all the righteousnesse that is to be had by the learning of the Letter of the Law of the same nature not attaining to be done with that disposition of the heart which onely the Gospel produceth O Ecumenius upon James II. 14. speaking the sense of some Fathers hath expressed all the points of my position in these tearmes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But some of the Fathers have thus judged of this businesse For they say that distinguishing Abraham by times he is the patterne of both Faiths Whereof one going before Baptisme requires no Workes but onely Faith and the profession of salvation and the word whereby we are justified believing in Christ The other is coupled with workes So the Spirit that spoke in the Apostles shewes no contrariety The one justifying him that approcheth by profession alone in case he presently depart this life For such a one hath no workes but the cleansing of Baptisme is to him a sufficient passeport to salvation The other demanding of him that is already baptized that he should shew good workes He had proposed before another way of reconciling the Apostles by distinguishing severall significations in the terme of Faith which in that effect and consequence falls in with this S. Gregory In Evang. Hom. XIX Quod cum it a sit fidei nostre veritatem in vitae nostre consideration◠debemus agnoscere Tunc enim veraciter fideles sumus si quod verbis promittimus operibus complemus In die quippe baptismi omnibus nos antiqui hostis operibus atque omnibus pompis abrenunciare promisimus Itaque unusquisque ad considerationem suam mentis oculos reducat si servat post baptismum quod ante baptismum spopondit certus jam quia fidelis est gaudeat Which seeing so it is we are to acknowledge the truth of our faith in the consideration of our life For then are we truly faithfull or believers if we accomplish by workes what we promise by words For at the day of our Baptisme we promise to renounce all the workes and all the pompes of our ancient foe Let every man therefore turne the eyes of his minde to the consideration of himself and if he observe after baptisme that which he promised before baptisme being now assured that he is faithfull or a believer let him rejoyce He ascribeth that justification which requireth good workes to the fulfilling of that promise which our Baptisme presupposeth To the same purpose the commentary upon S. Pauls Epistles that goes under S. Ambrose his name upon Rom. III. 8. Manifeste beati sunt quibus sine labore vel opere aliquo remittuntur iniquitates peccata teguntur nulla ab his requisita poenitentiae opera sed tantum ut credant By and by Quemadmodum autem ad paenitentium potest pertinere personam cum dicit Beati quorum tectasunt peccata Cum constet paenitentes labore ac gemitu peccatorum remissionem acquirere Aut quomode Martyrio congruit quod dicit Beatus vir cui non imputabit dominus peccatum Cum sciamus gloriam martyrii passionibus pressaris acquiri Propheta autem tempus foelix in adventu servatoris praevidens beatos nominat quibus sine labore vel aliquo opere per lavacrum remittuntur teguntur non imputantur peccata Manifestly they are happy whose iniquities are remitted and whose sins are covered without the labour of any work not requiring of them any paines of Penance but onely to belivee And But how can it belong to the person of Penitents when he saith Blessed are they whose sins are covered Seeing it is manifest that Penitents attain remission of sins by labour and grones Or how agrees that which he saith with Martyrdome Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin Seeing we know that the glory of Martyrdome is attained by sufferings and pressures But the Prophet foreseeing a happy time at our Saviours coming names them blessed whose sins are remitted and covered and not imputed by the laver of Baptisme without the labour of any work Whether or no this opposition between remission of sins which Baptisme alone and that which Penance and Martyrdome giveth he pertinently here alledged and like a Divine for Baptisme is the undertaking of Martyrdome if God require it and Penance is the voluntary undergoing of it when sin requireth it evident it is that Baptisme is here the boundary of that justification which faith alone promiseth And upon Heb. IV. 16. he saies that God gives requiem sempiternam fidem habentibus eam tamen quae per dilectionem operatur non credentibus poenam perpetuam Ne forte relicta pollicitatione quam dedimus Deo in baptismo iterum revertamur ad opera infidelitatis quae abdicamus coram multis testibus Everlasting rest to those who have faith but that which worketh by love perpetuall paine to those who believe no. Least peradventure abandoning the promise which we made to God at our Baptisme we return againe to the works of infidelity which we renounce before many witnesses Where the damation of a Christian is imputed to the transgressing of that promise which he makes to God in Baptisme And the true S. Ambrose when he saies lib. 1. Epist 1. Nec enim fides sola ad perfectionem satis est nisi etiam baptismatis adjiciatur gratia sanguinem Christi redemptus accipiat For neither sufficeth faith alone to persection unlesse the grace of baptisme be added and be that is redeemed receive the blood of Christ Cleerly compriseth the Sacrament of Baptisme after which the baptized alwaies received the Eucharist in the ancient Church whereupon S. Augustine afore mention Sacramenta fidei in
the plurall number the Sacraments of faith within that faith which alone justifieth But the same S. Ambrose Offic. II. 2. Habet ergo vitâ—m aternam fides quia fundamentum bonum est habent bona facta quia vir justus dictis et rebus probatur Therefore faith hath eternall life because the foundation is good And so have good works because a man is tried to be righteous by both saying and doing That is by doing as he saies By doing these works which by his Baptisme he undertakes to do S. Basil De spiritu sancto cap. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For faith is perfected by Baptisme and Baptisme is founded upon faith and both are fulfilled by the same names For as we believe in the Father Son and Holy Ghost so are we baptised in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost And profession goes afore introducing to Salvation but baptisme followes sealing up our assent Not onely to the demand doest thou believe in the Father Son and Holy Ghost but when it is further demanded wilt thou be baptized upon these termes And this profession so sealed is that which saveth him that departs upon it not him that survives to falsifie it S. Chrysostom in Rom. IV. 2. Hom. VIII makes a long comparison to shew that man glorisies God more by believing then by keeping his commandments Which certainly proceedeth not not can hold in those workes that presuppose faith having in them all that whereby faith glorifyeth God and more And therefore is to be limitted to works done before faith And therefore of those workes is S. Chrysostme to be understood when he sayes as oft times he doth that a man is justified without workes by Faith or by Grace in Gal III. 12. In Rom. III. 27. Homil. VII In Ephes II. 10. Homil. IV. The reason being alwayes that of Theodoret upon Galat. III. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Seripture of God convinceth both those that were afore the Law and under it as transgressors as well these of Moses Law as those of the Law of Nature Offering the salvation that is promised by faith for an antidote both for these and for those If the Law of Moses were not of force to justify much lesse the Law of Nature Now the Gospel supposeth both Jewes and Gentiles under sinne and liable to Gods wrath till the Gospel come as S. Paul in the beginning of his Epistle to the Romanes declareth Not as if no man had been saved under the Law or before it But because they who then were saved belonged not to the Law of Moses or that of Nature but to the Gospel as saved by the meanes of it So said S. Jerome afore that they were saved by the preaching of Faith under the Law of Nature And thinne was the number of them who thus were saved that it was requisite the Gospel should come least the meanes which God had used to restore man afore might seem to have been imployed to no purpose So to be saved by faith and not by workes is the same with S. Paul according to the Fathers as to be justified by being a Christian and not by being a Jew by the Gospell and not by the Law So Tertullian cont Marc. V. 3. Ejus ergo Dei erit fides in qua vivit justus cujus Lex in qua non justificatur operarius Proâ—nde si in Lege maledictio est in Fide benedictio Therefore that faith whereby the just liveth shall be the same Gods whose the Law is whereby he that worketh is not justified Accordingly if the curse come by the Law then the blessing by faith For that Faith which properly stands in oppostion to the Law is Christianity S. Hilary In Mat. Can. VIII Movet Scribas remissum ab hommine peccatum Hominem enim tantum in Jesu Christo intuebantur remissum ab eo quod Lex laxare non poterat Fides enim sola justificat The Scribes are moved that sinne should be remitted by a man For they looked upon Jesus Christ as a meere man who remitted that which the Law could not loose For Faith alone justifieth Faith onely justifieth in opposition to the Law which remitteth no sin Therefore faith is Christianity Clemens Alexandr Strom. II. To learn is to obey the commandments which is to believe God Because forsooth to professe the Faith is to undertake to live by Gods commandments Strom. IV. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He therefore playes false with God that believes not God But he that keepeth not the commandments believes not Againe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All therefore whatsoever ye do do to the glory of God whatsoever it is permitted to do under the rule of Faith Here that part of Christianity which prescribes a Christian what he is to do what not is called the Rule of Faith Because he believes that God requires it at his hands though he undertake more then to believe it Strom. VII 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He is a believer or faithful that receives the commandments upon due consideration and keeps them Pelagius upon Rom. X. 4. Talis est ille qui in Christum credidit die qua credidit qualis ille qui universam legem implevit Such is he that believeth the day that he believeth as is he that hath fulfilled the whole Law In the day of his Baptisme that is if he lives not to transgresse it His title to heaven is as good as if he had done whatsoever the Law requireth I shewed you before that Pelag. in the matter of justification departs not from the Church Clemens of Rome S. Pauls Scholar whom I will end with in his Epistle to the Corinthians p. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Abraham who was called friend was found faithful in that he became obedient to the word of God p. 40. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wherefore was our Father Abraham blessed was it not because he did righteousnesse and truth through Faith p. 41. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They were all therefore glorified and magnified not by themselves or their owne workes or just actions which they had done but by his will And therefore we who are called by his will through Christ Jesus are not justified by our selves or our owne wisdome or understanding or workes that we have done with holinesse of heart But by faith whereby Almighty God hath justified all from the begining of the world The Fathers were not justified by their own workes but because being called by the will of God as we to Christianity through Christ Jesus they were found faithfull in doing righteousnesse truth through faith as he said of Abraham before For the workes of Faith cannot be counted our own works which we had never done had not Gods call gone afore That Faith then which alone justifieth importeth as great and as reall a change in the jugdement and resoution of him that attaineth it from unrighteous to righteous as the
astray Jude 11. 2 Pet. II. 15. Is interpreted Apoc. II. 15. That then were in the Church of Pergamus those that held the doctrine of Balaam that taught Balak to lay a stumbling block before the children of Israel to eat of things offered to Idols and to commit whordome So hast thou saith he those that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes Which by and by is attributed to Jezabel the Prophetesse The second argument is that both S. Peter and S. Jude in the places alledged do manifestly shew that the doctrines which they writ against tended to reconcile the licentiousnesse of the flesh with the hope of the world to come which I have shewed was the pretense of the Gnosticks And makes it very probable that the same Hereticks found accesse to those Christianes to whom S. James writes and intimated to them hope of salvation through the bare profession of Christianity without those workes whereby it is fulfilled which is the occasion that he takes James II. 14. to lay down those termes of the justification of Sinners which I have declared in due place For consider the terms in which S. Peter writes Many shall follow their corruptions for whom the way of truth shall be blasphemed For what can this signifie but that which is witnessed by so many of the Fathers that the ill opinion which the Gentiles had of Christianity was unjustly occasioned by the vilainies of the Gnosticks who though holding in secret a faith utterly destructive to Christianity neverthelesse counterfeited themselves Christians to withdraw Christians to themselves Againe Those that go after the flesh through the pollution of concupiscence And Thinking it pleasure to revel it by day spots and staines making good chere in their deceitâ— when they feast with you having eyes full of adultery not to be quieted from sinning And they beguil with the lusts of the flesh those who had truly escaped those that live in error promising them liberty but being slaves to corruption themselves For by whom a man is subdued his slave he becoms 2 Pet. II. 2 10 13 14 18 19. And S. Jude These dreaming defile the flesh And the things which they know by nature as bruit beasts in them they corrupt themselves Comparing them to Sodom and Gomorrah who went a whoring in like manner as these following after strange flâ—sh Jude 7 8 10. Which he who compares with the vilainies of the Gnosticks related by Irenaeus Epiphanius and others either he hath lost his right senses or knowing by Iraeneus that all the Gnosticks sprang from Simon Magus and that Simon Magus pretended to shew how to attain the world to come by loosing the raines to all vilainy must needs allow that they are of this traine whom these Apostles writ against Nor is the testimony of Hegesippus related by Eusebius Eccles Hist III 32. to the contrary He saith indeed that the Church had continued a pure Virgine under the Apostles and their hearers he saith that it began to be defloured in the next age Not by the coming in of Anti-Christ as some imagine unlesse they will have Simon Magus to have beene Anti-Christ which though true is not for their turne but by the coming in of the Gnosticks For though it appeare by the writinges of the Apostles that they were very busy during their time in seducing Christians by counterfeiting themselves the like yet may it well stand good that the Church continued a Virgine by casting them out according to the precept of S. Jude which I spoke of afore But that aster the death of them and their hearers they prevailed so farre that they might be said to have defloured the maidenhead of Christianity for the number of Christians whom they had seduced Besides it is easy to take notice that the relation of Hegesippus concernes particularly the Church of Jerusalem as following upon the martyrdome of Simeon and the confession of our Lord Christ to Domitian made by his kindred according to the flesh For so Eusebius expresly affirmeth And truly having related afore the Heresies of Simon Magus and Menander of Ebion of the Nazarites and of Cerinthus he must have given himself thely had he intended to say out of Hegesippus that the Gnosticks began under Adriane though being the time when Saturninus Basitides Valent ne and probably others set up for themselves But I will wish the enemies of this light which the knowledge of good learning that will surely be revenged of them who neglect it tenders to the obscure passages of the Apostles no worse punishment then to be bound to expound them without it For make use of it and all is plain and smooth before you unlesse it be a small circumstance that they tremble not to blaspheme glories 1 Pet. II. 10. Or as S. Jude 8. that they despise dominion and blaspheme glories Whereas if you put it out you will necessarily reason of the Apostles discourse as blind men do of colours And in truth there are two severall passages of Hegesippus related by Euseb the former whereof I have quoted assigning this deflouring of the Church to the time of Simeons martyrdome But the other though related by Eusebius IV. 22. at the time of Hegesippus assignes it unto his beginning immediately insuing upon the martyrdome of S. James and the choice of Simeon for Bishop of Jerusalem and that by a very expresse mark of the author thereof one Thebulis so R. Stevens copy reads it not Tâ—ebuthis that missed the Bishoprick there and upon that attempted to deflour the Church which they called then a Virgine saith Hegesippus expresly there Now it is manifest that the martyrdome of James was before the warre which the Romanes the same year that Festus left the Province as you have it in Eusebius II. 23. at which time it may be a question whither either the second Epistle of S. Peter or that of S. Jude were written at all or not Wherefore it is manifest that Hegesippus assigneth the deflouring of the Church to the time of Simeons martyrdome when none of the Apostles remained alive But so that Thebulis began to deflour it from the death of S. James and the beginning of Simeon That is the Church of Jerusalem because he was refused the Bishoprick of it But I must not forget Epiphanius his relation of Cerinthus that he was one of those that first contended with S. Peter about admitting Cornelius and his company to baptisme that afterward raised the contention about Circumcision in the Church of Antiochia which we see decided by the Apostles Acts XV. and that afterwards it was he or his disciples that troubled the Church of Corinth and the doctrine which S. Paul had taught it For the argument is undeniable that the things done under the Apostles have in them expresse markes of that which the succeeding Hereticks did and taught afterwards 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For those men stepping aside and becoming false Apostles
Christ not the Son of God who made the world they could not rightly say that they held God the Father So that his argument being proper against them demonstrates who they are And this is the reason of that which went afore And ye have an unction from the holy one and know all things I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth but because ye know it and that no ly is of the truth And of that which immediately followes Let that therefore which ye have learned from the beginning remaine in you If that remaine in you which ye have heard from the beginning ye also shall remaine in the Sonne and in the Father For because they knew what Faith they had imbraced when they became Christians no man need tell them that they who would not have our Lord Jesus to be the Christ were liars and the holy Ghost which good Christians receive upon the hearty profession of Christianity he justly presumes will maintaine them in it This for the text of Saint Jude But I say further that the Name of the true God the great God the onely God which all of them attribute to God is attributed to him in equivalent terms not onely in those texts of the Old Testament when the proper name of God is given to the Angels that spake in the person of God which I spoke of afore But also in those where the name attributes an action of the onely true great God are given to the Messias which we agree is our Lord Jesus And therefore that there can be no cause to bring in unusual figures of speech to expound these texts for fear they should say that which is so many times said in the Scriptures S. Paul Rom. XIV 10 11. We shall all stand before the judgement seate of Christ saith he For it is written As I live saith the Lord unto me shall every knee â—ow and every tongue give praise to God Which any man may see is said of God by his Prophet Isa XLV 23. And therefore I marvaile it should seem strange that the same person should be called the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ Titus II. 20. when the appearance there mentioned is not the appearance of the Father but of Christ who shall appear judge at the last day though he have from the Father the glory wherein he shall appear Againe when he saith 1 Cor. II. 8. Had they known they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory It is manifest that he ascribes unto Christ the title of the onely true and great God in Psal XXIV 7 8 9 10. So the Apostle Heb. I. 10. affirming that to be said of Christ which we read Psal CII 25 26 27. Thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the foundations of the earth and the heavens are the work of thine hands They shall perish but thou shalt indure They all shall wax old as doth a garment And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up and they shall be changed but thou art the same and thy years shall never fail For whereas they grant that the end is of Christ where he speakes of ending the world at his coming to judgement But not the beginning where he speaks of making the world because there he is called by the proper name of God I call all the world to witnesse what there is in the words to argue that he speakes not still of the same person of whom he began to speak What will they not do to rack the Scriptures and force them to say what they never meant that are not ashamed to advance pretenses in which there is so little appearance rather then confesse what all the Church of Christ maintaineth So when the Prophet sayes Mal. III. 3. Behold I send my messenger and he shall sweepe the way before thee and suddenly shall the Lord whom ye seek come to his Temple It is so manifest that he ascribes the title of the onely true God to the Messias that Grotius who is so much carried away with the Socinians exposition of divers texts in this point could not forbear to say that the hypostaticall union is signified by this And therefore it is manifest what Lordship we are to understand where Zachary saith to the Baptist his Sonne Thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his wayes Luke I. 46. So when the Prophet David saith of the Messias Psal CX 1. The Lord said to my Lord sit thou on my right hand untill I make thine enemies thy footstool And the Apostle inferreth upon it Heb. I. 13. To which of the Angels said he ever Sit thou at my right hand untill I make thine enemies thy footstoole He remitts us for his meaning to that which he had premised there of Christ Heb. I. 3. that having merited by himself the cleansing of our sinnes he sate down on the Throne of Majesty in the highest heavens And againe Heb. VIII 1. We have such an high Priest as is set down on the right hand of the Throne of Majesty in the heavens For the Majesty of God being presented in the Scripture by that which is most glorious upon earth of a King upon his Throne as king of heaven and earth whose commands all the Angels stand about the Throne ready to execute To seat our Lord Christ upon the same Throne is to commit the highest degree of treason against the Majesty of God by challenging for him the honour due to God alone if he be not the same God on whose behalfe those words challenge it Ask any Jew that hath learned God from the Old Testament what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Thron of Glory is or rather what he is that sits on it and see if he do not refuse our Lord Christ that priviledge because he must allow him to be the onely true God if he do not But why should I be troubled to fit him with the title of the onely true God wo expressely challenges to be esteemed aequall to God John V. 21 22 23. For as the Father raiseth and quickneth the dead so also doth the Sonne quicken whom he please For neither doth the Father judge any man but hath given all judgement to the Sonne that all may honour the Sonne as they honour the Father He that honoureth not the Sonne honoureth not the Father that sent him Which is as much as if he had said he that honoureth not the Sonne as he honoureth the Father having said afore That all may honour the Sonne as they honour the Father As for that answer of his John X. 32-36 The Jewes answered him saying For a good work we stone thee not but for blasphemy and because thou being man makest thy self God Jesus answered them Is it not written in your Law I have said ye are Gods If he called them Gods to whom the Word of God came and the Scripture cannot be voided Tell you him whom the Father hath sanctified and
thence forth to recover man from the labor of sinne to which when he became mortall he was condemned to Paradise from whence he had been expulsed And therefore our Lord Christ according to S. Peter 1 Pet. IV. 18 19 20. going out of the world by that Spirit whereby he was made alive when he had been put to death in the flesh to wit speaking in his Apostles preached to the Spirits in prison that had been disobedient in the days of Noe Converting the Gentiles by the gift of his Spirit granted upon his sufferings who had refused the same in Noe the Preacher of righteousnesse 1 Pet. II. 5. When God said My Spirit shall no more strive with man Gen VI. 2. For the pilgrimage of the Patriarchs the Promise of the Land of Canaan the Law given by Moses was all but the further limitation and rule of that outward and civile conversation under which the traffique of Christianity was then driven by Prophets who spake by Gods Spirit This Reason Socinus being obliged to miskenne by making our Lord Christ a meer man cannot give that account of the grace of Christ before his coming which the Church doth Acquiting thereby my position That the Law covenanteth expresly onely for the Land of Promise of all suspicion of compliance with his intentions By this you see that Pelagius and Socinus both are carried out of the way of Christianity because they will not acknowledge the decay of mankind by the fall of Adam and the coming of Christ to repair it But those of Marseilles and the parts adjoyning in France that formalized themselves against S. Augustines doctrine of Predestination and effectuall Grace freely and heartily acknowledging Originall sin seem to have justified only upon the true interest of Christianity in that free will which the Covenant of Grace necessarily supposeth though mistaking their way out of humane frailty they failed of the truth though they parted with Pelagius They made faith or at least the beginning of faith and of will to beleive to repent and to turn unto God the work of free will in consideration whereof God though no way tied so to do grants the help of his Grace and Spirit to performe the race of faith Most truly maintaining according to that vvhich hath been professed in the beginning of this book that the act of true Faith is an act of mans free will which God rewardeth with his free Grace To wit with the habituall gift of his spirit inabling true believers to go through with that Faith which thereby they undertake as I have shewed you both these elsewhere Most expresly acknowledging the preaching of the Gospel going before in which whatsoever help the coming of our Lord Chirst hath furnished to move and winne the world to believe is involved But miskenning the grace of the Gospel granted by God in consideration of his obedience to make him a Church that might honour him for it If Pelagius acknowledged no more in the coming of Christ then to make his message appear to be true so that the imbracing of it might oblige God to grant his grace by preventing it with an act of free will complying with it The reason was not because this very tender being the purchase of our Lord Christs free obedience could be subject to any merit of man But because he was engaged to maintaine that we are borne in the same estate in which Adam was made needing nothing but Gods declaration of his will and pleasure towards the fulfilling of it But for them who acknowledge the decay of our nature by the fall of Adam and the coming of our Lord to repair the breaches of it to ascribe the grace which God furnisheth those that believe with for the performing of that which by believing they undertake to the act of freewill in believing which themselves acknowledge to be prevented by so many effects of Christs coming as the preaching of his Gospel necessarily involveth and which the Scriptures so openly acknowledge to be prevented by the Grace of his Spirit purchased by his sufferings must needs argue a great deal of difficulty in the question which the worse divines they appear must needs justifie them to be much the better Christians And indeed there is great cause to excuse them as farre as reason will give leave in a case wherein the Fathers that went afore Pelagius seem to be ingaged with them For it is ordinary enough to read them exhorting to lay out the indeavovrs of free will expecting the assistance of Gods Grace to the accomplishment of that which a man purposes And besides S. Augustine who acknowledges that before the contest with Pelagius he did think faith to be the act of free will which God blesseth with Grace to do as he professeth It cannot be denied that S. Jerome so great an enemy to the Pelagians with some others have expressed that which amounts to it But it is true on the other side that the same Fathers do frequently acknowledge the beginning as well as the accomplishment of our salvation to the grace of God Which is not onely an obligation so to expound their sayings when they set free will before grace as supposing the cure thereof begunne by Grace But also a presumption that those who expresse not the like caution are no otherwise to be understood Especially supposing expresly the motives of faith provided by the holy Ghost granted in consideration of our Lords sufferings in virtue whereof the resolution which is taken for the best must of necessity proceed though by the operation of the same Spirit whereby they are advanced and furnished It is therefore no doubt a commendable thing to excuse the writings of that excellent person John Casiane so farre as the common Faith will give leave as you may see the learned Vossius doth as speaking ambiguously in setting grace before free will sometimes as well as other whiles free will before Grace For Faustus his book De libero arbitrio I cannot say the same though I must needs have that respect for his Christian qualities which the commendations that I read of him in Sidoius Apollinaris deserve For besides that the stile of it is generally such as seems to make free will the umpire between the motions of grace and of sinne which ascribes the ability of well doing to God but the act to our selves that the Fathers under the Law of nature were saved by free will he delivers expresly with Pelagius An oversight grosse enough in any man that shall have considered upon what terms Christianity is to be justified against the Jews out of the Old Testament There is therefore appearance enough that the II Council of Orange which finally decreed against the heresie of Pelagius was held expresly to remove the offenses which that book had made And evidence enough that the articles of it are justified by the tradition of the whole Church For those prayers of the Church that way and subject of
to doe all the evill that it does and that without this determination no evill can be done with it no evill can but be done For alas the covering will be too shortâ—â— to say that God produceth onely the positive action of sinne the malice incident to it consisting in the meere want of conformity to the rule which it ought to follow proceeding from the imperfection of the creature For the difference between the action of sinne and the sinne which it acteth consisteth meerely in the conceit of mans understanding not apprehending at once all the particulars wherein the action consisteth No action possibly being so badde that in some generall considerations common to those which are good it may not be counted good But those generall considerations expresse not the particular act which is supposed to be sinne So soone as the nature thereof is sufficiently expressed so soone it will appeare to be essentially sinne Therefore if God determine the creature to the act or sinne he determines it to sinne And though upon these termes there can neither be sinne nor vertue good nor evill Law nor Gospel providence nor judgment to come yet upon these termes the actions of the creature will be imputable to God alone though not as good or badde or as the actions of God yet as the actions of him that is supposed to be God in wordes but denied to be God in effect As for that which was said as if otherwise the efficacy of Gods praedestination and that grace which by it he appointeth for those that shall be saved could not subsist or as if otherwise God could not be maintained to be the first cause I will say no more now then what I said of the ground for Gods foreknowledge of future contingences That when I come to say how God determines future contingences I will doe the best I can to render such a reason as may maintaine him to be the first cause and so to foresee all future contingences by the same meanes by which he determines that they shall come to passe without giving just ground to inferre that there is neither contingence in the effect nor freedome in the cause no providence no judgment no Christianity appointed by God But if I faile of giving such a reason I disclaime it here before I give it and will rather allege that I have none to give and yet beleeve both Gods effectuall providence and the freedome and contingence of mens actions then beleive the determination of mans will by the immediate operation of Gods providence to be the sourse of freedome and contingence which I have shewed leaves no roome for contingence or providence And now I may freely grant that Jansenius hath avoided the charge of telling what it is that comes between the last instance of deliberation and the first of resolution by the immediate act of God to inable a man to do that which he that is able to deliberate and act both is not able to bring to passe Which is the same Chimaera with the imagination of infallibility in every sentence of the present Church when it comes to pronounce though the premises upon which it proceedeth do not appear even to them that pronounce infallible Nor will I envy him the advantage that he may make of the distinction between the sense of that which is said to be necessary including this praedetermination and not necessary setting it aside For having shewed that it is to no effect but to destroy contingence that is Christianity and to multiply contradiction to that common sense which all own I may well bid much good do it But I am not therefore bound to believe that it will serve his turn proceeding upon the account of indifference in the creature and the necessary effect of a secondary cause who standeth upon that necessity of Grace which Originall sinne introduceth For how shall he say that setting aside Gods praedetermination the Will may have Grace sufficient to do the work of Grace including the same it cannot but do it who makes the will utterly unable to do it till it be determined to do it And therefore takes away all difference between effectuall and sufficient Grace all intent of Christs dying for them that shall not be saved Indeed if he extend his opinion to the reconciling of mans free will with Gods Providence in matters not concerning the work of saving Grace he may make use of praedetermination in giving account how sinne is foreknown and the rest which hitherto he resolveth not But grounding himself upon the exigence of Originall sinne it were not wisdome for him to scandalize his own opinion by making sinne as necessary by Gods act as he makes the work of Grace There is extant a briefe resolution of the whole question by that learned Gentleman Thomas White where he concludeth Paragr X. That God determineth every man so to determine himself in whatsoever he does by the love of good infused and the causes which his Providence useth to represent it desirable that he cannot do otherwise How he would answer concerning evil is not so plain by his words He sayes indeed it is not the same thing to determine and cause to determine as for the Ammonites and David to kill Vrias But if the murther be duly imputed to David for procuring meanes towards it that might have failed would he have God procure meanes that cannot fail It cannot be allowed but thus that though of themselves they might fail yet supposing the foreknowledge of God that imployeth them that is supposing them to take effect which supposition all the experience in the world concludeth cannot be cleared till the effect follow they cannot fail And the nature of freedome the ground of the account to come consisteth in this that determining a man to act he might not have acted till the act was done For certainly it were a contradiction to say that which determines the will to act speaking not of the thing without but of the consideration thereof in the minde may not be extant when a man determines himself in virtue of it Nay were this consideration whereby God determineth indefeasible of its own nature for as imployed by Gods Providence that is supposing the effect to follow it is it were that very predetermination which I have infringed by the premised discourse coming from God in order of reason first and in the very next instant producing that choice wherein the determination of the will formally consisteth I will therefore conclude that wheresoever through the whole Bible God calls any man or his ancient people or by the Gospell all people to yeild him that inward obedience and worship in spirit and truth which Christianity requireth all this proceeding supposing the corruption of mans nature by the fall of Adam there he will take account of his disbursements by that which the creature shall have done not finally determined to do it by any thing preceding the choice Putting you
afore in resolving whether there is any such faith to be â—ound as is not the vertue of a Christian For accordingly I will distinguish that faith is either the beliefe of the gospell and Christianity or the profession of it whether sincere or counterfeit I say then that the sincere resolution of professing of Christianity being the condition to which all the promises of the Gosple are due as I have showed is the worke of that grace which the obedience of Châ—â—ath purchased for us In order whereunto though the preaching of the Gospell contayneth sufficient motives to convince the world of the truth of it yet seeing the publishing of those motives by the Apostles of Chrâ—stâ—â—â— the purchase of his blood and seeing those motives being though sufficient yet not demonstrative are resisted by the greater part it is the worke of Gods grace wheresoever they become effectuall to move any man to believe that Christianity is true in order to the resolution of imbracing it Notwithstanding in as much as the profession of Christianity when it is proâ—ected by the powers of this world is no disadvantage but a priviledg especialy where there is difference about Christianity and a man professes what the Secular Power professes it is easy to see that there is reason enough in this world to move a man to professe Christianity for his own sake and not for Gods Much more to believe the truth of it for which he haâ—â— sufficient reason besides But this Faith not being that which is called Faith absolutely but with an addition of abatement we are absolutely to conclude with the council of Orange that to believe as a man ought is not the worke of freewill but of Gods grace The limitation of as a man ought serving to exclude such counterfeit faith as I have described Now though this reason of professing Christianity for advantage of this world be the most ordinary and visible when Christianity is protected by the Lawes and Powers of the world yet may it as well come to passe and effect otherwise or at least that which countervailes it For Aristotle observes unto us in his Morals that all men are not caried away either with the profit of this world or the pleasure or honours there are those that prefer vertue whether speculative or active Though this active vertue he describes to consist in that meane which the discretion of the world determines For he often repeats this for his principle in that work that the difference of good and bad must be taken for granted from that which the civility of the world accknowledges But how easy it is for them who have addicted themselves to the profession of that civility of that knowledg which the world pretends not to to imbrace and professe opinions which the world allowes not and having made it their businesse in the world rather part with their lives then be constrained either to beleive or not beleiving to professe otherwise How much more in the knowledge of God and the hope of happinesse which we suppose Christianity truly to promise may a man that pursuâ—s not the truth of it with that humility which it requires by the judgement of God fastning upon false principles by virtue of them be induced to imbrace those conclusions which he shall rather part with his life then refuse and yet for his owne sake not for Gods who teaches them not And upon these premises we may determine whether all the actions of the Gentiles and unregenerate are sins or not at least so far as it is requisite to determine any thing in it For on the one side it is evident that seeing it is imposible that they should by nature attaine to a resolution of doing all that they do in obedience to the will of God with an intent of his service It is not possible that their actions should have that utmost end which they ought to have On the other side seeing it appeareth that nothing hinders them to do things for the meere regard of honesty or of doing good to others without making themselves positively and expressely the end of what they doe It is manifest that the next end which they intend by them may be good and that the things which they doe are such as of their owne nature may be ordered and directed to the service of God though by them not so intended And therefore when it is said that unregenerat men doe all for themselves as their utmost end we must distinguish in themselves the seeds of virtue which the common notions of difference between good bad containe from the corâ—tion of orignall concupiscence For well may we say when they are moved with regard of honesty to doe any thing that they do it for themselves because it is the native worth of their man-hood which moves them to doe it But when it is said That adicting themselves to the riches or honours or pleaof this world fro which they addict them selves to love of themselves they make themselves their utmost end This must be understood as in Morall matters for the maine part of their doings The love of riches honour or pleasure much lesse of civil vertue not disabling them or so swallowing up all consideration of that which of it self suits with the worth of mans nature but that without any other regard they may many times chuse to do it And therefore having made good the grounds aforesaid I shall leave it to the readers owne judgement whether he will hold all their actions to be siâ—s because they are not positively directed to the utmost end of Gods honour and service or those which are don for honesties sake to be vertues because they are positively directed to that next end that is according to Gods will and might have been directed to his service Assuring my selfe that no interest of Christianiny obliges either me or him to determine this or that And now before I leave this point I inferr againe here from the reasons which I have used to prove the capacity of inâ—â—fference in the will of man excluding the actuall determination of it before he determine himselfe That all this is not to say that indifference is requisite to all freedome but to the freedome of man alone in this state of travaile and proficience For my ground is Gods â—enâ—â—r of a treaty and conditions of peace and reconcilement together with those precepts and prohibitions those promises and threats thâ—se exhortations and dehortations which it is inforced with So that it is â—â—â—â—â—ly impertinent to alleage here the freedome of God and Angels the freedome of the â—aâ—â—s in the world to come the freedome of our Lord Christs humane soule to prove that this indifference is not requisite to the freedome of man because it is not found in that freedome which they are arived to to whom no covenant is tendred no precept requisite no exhortation usefull as being either the cause of all rule of goodnesse
from damnation by his sufferings And therefore that this cannot be the intent of Christs descent into hell which the Apostles Creed declares I pretend not here to dispute what are the paines of the damned or what were the paines of the soul which our Lord Christ indure-ed upon the Crosse Or in order to it How essentially requisite it is in the paines of the damned that they should despair of Gods favour for ever and therefore ever to come free of that estate This I inferre upon the premises that the redemption of mankind doth not require that Christ should suffer the same kind of paines which we must have suffered had not â—e interposed for us But that he tendred that obedience to God in undergoing whatsoever the execution of that commission which God hâ—d imposed upon him required which coming from the Sonne of God was valuable in worth to move God to dispense in that Original Law which he had made the rule of our actions by right of our creation upon paine of everlasting death and to allow everlasting life upon remission of sinnes to all that should imbrace Christianity For seeing the sufferings of Christ were not intended meer for punishment so that he induring that which we were liable to we should no longer remaine chargeable with it but to tender God a consideration valuable to satisfy him not to execute the penalty of his Originall Law upon us but to abate of it by tendring us new terms of reconcilement and peace with him there can be no reason why he should undergo the same kind and nature of punishment which we must have suffered had not â—e interposed And therefore whatsoever the paines were which Christ indured in his soule either upon the Crosse or in order to his Crosse being abandoned by God to the will of Satan and his ministers even unto death which here I am not concerned to dispute this I must inferre from the premises That we are to seeke for no other consideration for which we are admitted to Grace but that which the whole tenor of the Scriptures and the consent of Christs Church holds forth to us that is to say the precious bloud of our Lord Christ shed upon the Crosse for us Having thus excluded the two extreme opinions concerning the justification of sinners by the Gospell of Christ which I hold to be equally destructive to Christianity on contrary sides the one acknowledging no condition to qualify us for the promises of the Gospell but the immediate imputation of the merits and sufferings of Christ sent to dy for us The other acknowledging no consideration of Christ in sending or accepting the Covenant of Grace and the condition which it requires I will now proceed to resolve the merit of meane opinions concerning the same from the premises The first is the opinion of many of the Reformation that make the justification of sinners by the Gospell to consist in remission of sinnes tendred and imbraced by that Faith which consisteth in a resolution of trusting and reposing confidence in God for the obtaining of his promises tendred us in Christ Jesus But supposing allwayes and premising Repentance as a condition requisite to make this confidence lively and Christian not sensuall carnall and presumtive And supposing allwayes and inferring upon it the promise of Gods spirit sanctifying and inabling to performe that new obedience which qualifieth for the world to come That there is this opinion amongst the Reformed and those of them that labor most to interpret the Reformation so as not to contradict the Faith of the Church I may well say without going further then my selfe who doe acknowledge this to have been mine opinion for many yeares and doe certainly know that it was maintained in my time against the furious pretenses of Zelots in the University of Cambridge And of this opinion I will say three thinges First that it is not destructive to the true Faith of Gods Church My reason is because of that Repentance which it supposeth and the consideration of new obedience in obtaining everlasting life which it inferreth For Repentance in this argument cannot signify conversion from any particular sinne but the change of the whole man of his intentions and by consequence of his actions to seek God in stead of himselfe and this world And therefore containeth in it whatsoever the Gospell can require to make any man that is surprised in the state of sinne capable of Gods grace by Christ In as much as this change cannot be wrought without the tender of pardon for Christs sake upon that which his Gospell requireth For Repentance thus understood as it turneth from all sinne so it importeth a resolution to all that goodnesse which Christianity prescribeth Which is all that he who is presently surprised in sinne can have to come out of it supposing this resolution not to be supperâ—iciall but rooted in him by frequent prayers and teares which such workes of humiliation as are onely able and absolutely requisite to make effectuall impression in mans mind allwayes apt through variety of objects to entertaine impressions tending to contrary resolutions And therefore this Repentance being required to the truth of living and justifying Faith as new obedience to the attaining of the world to come And every thing required by Gods Law being of necessity that which qualifyeth for Gods promises in his account who tenders the Law The condition which this opinion requireth to qualify for the promises of the Gospell is materially and for the things it contains the same which I have showed that the Gospell requires Though formally and in expresse termes it renounces all consideration in the justification of sinners but that of Christ and his obedience imbraced by Faith as I have said This I may say that in the remembrances of those thinges which I have said in publick to the people concerning this point during the time that I was of this opinion I doe not remember now that their is any thing that I could not presently say my Judgment being thus farre changed For secondly I must say that this opinion is not true As may appear by that which hath been said to show what it is the Gospell requires on our part to qualify us for the promises which it tenders on Gods and by consequence what is that Faith which alone justifieth For having showed the true sense of the Scriptures according to that which the Jewes opinion that S. Paul disputs against still extant and visible in their Constitutions which the consent of Christs Church which the consequences of the difference between the literall and mysticall sense of Moses Law pointed out in part by some moderne writers hath taught me I doe conclude the sense of them which this opinion inferreth though it be not destructive to Christianity yet not deducible from the principles of it by good divinity And truly to require repentance to the truth of that faith which onely justifieth and not to make
Covenant of Grace and by that Faith whereby we undertake that Christianity wherâ—into we are baptized they who make the office oâ— Faith in justifying no more then beleeving the Gospell to be true seeme as voide of the truth in that as those who place it in reposing trust and confidence in God upon it For as the Gospell gives sufficient ground of trust and confidence in God from the first moment that any man heares of it what state soever it is and how sinfull in which it overtakes him if we speak of confidence that we may or shall obtaine remission of sins upon condition of imbracing and performing the condition which it advanceth So if wee speake of trust and confidence in God as indeed and actually reconciled to God seeing it supposeth justification it must needes suppose that Faith which justifieth And so justifying Faith cannot be said to consist in it but by consequence of nature to produce it On the other side whereas all the works that a man can doe after he sincerely beleeves the truth of the Gospell but before he hath made profession of Christianity by being baptized cannot availe to the forgivenesse of sinne much lesse to intitle him to everlasting life according to the doctrine of the Apostles It can by no means be imagined that when they attribute justification to Faith whether alone or in opposition to workes or to the Law they doe attribute it to that Faith whereby he remains not justifyed not to that which he iâ— necessarily justifyed as soone as he hath And this is the true end of that endlesse dispute between Faith and good workes when it is questioned whether true Faith can be without Good workes or not For it is manifest that Hereticks Schismaticks and sinfull Christians doe as truely beleeve either the whole Gospell so farre as the Common salvation of Christians requireth or at least that part which their Heresy or Schisme contesteth not as a good Christian really doth It is nolesse manifest that not onely Heretickes and Schismatickes but even badde and sinfull Christians also not onely may but really have a true and reall confidence in God as to the world to come without which those that beleeve the world to come could not live and dy in that course which indeed renders them uncapable of it But the Faith which whosoever is baptized plighteth to God to professe the Faith which he hath taught to the death and to live according to it must needes either be counterfeite and so produce no effect but the damning of him that is baptized with it or produce the workes of Faith so long as it is and continues sincere And thus is the Tradition of the Church concerning justification by the good works of Christians reconciled not onely with the doctrine of the Apostles that a man is not justified by the workes that go before Christianity But also with the Tradition of the Church concerning the ingredience of Baptisme into the same work And with the doctrine of the Fathers manifestly distinguishing that true Faith which produceth good workes from that dead faith which doth not not by the accession of Love but by marks intrinsecall to the nature of it manifestly distinguishing those good workes which indeed doe justify from those which for the mind which they are done with doe not justify but for their kind might had they been done by Christians by the boundary between them which is baptisme But so that the workes themselves are but the materiall part that is the thing which the Covenant of Grace requireth But the reason and consideration in which they are accepted by God to that effect is not the influence of our free will though cured of concupiscence as cured it may be in this life and acted by Gods Spirit but the Grace of God moving him in consideration of our Lord Christs sufferinges first to publish the Gospell then to accept the profession and life of Christians according to it for a condition qualifying them for that which he promiseth by it Which is but the English of that which is commonly said that God accepteth of our workes as dipped in Christs bloud which he accepteth not if he accept them not to that effect which his Gospell promiseth having as he doth if the Gospel be true all that he accepteth not to that purpose Having said this in common as it were to both these opinions in particulare to that which I propose last or rather to the rest of it I say three things First that it may be understood two wayes To wit that this holds Either by virtue of the originall Law of God or by virtue of that dispensation in it that abatement of the penalty of it which the Gospell imports For so long as it is onely said that God infuseth into him that receives the Sacrament of Baptisme out of a resolution of Loving God above all an habit of supernatuall righteousnesse which is formally the remission of sinnes as extinguishing them by contrary dispositions and that this is the righteousnesse which he pleades to God for the reward of the world to come I say all this while it is not said whether the nature and kind of the quality thus produced oblige God to give him that happinesse of the world to come in recompense of it or whether the promise of the Gospell decreed and declared out of his meer goodnesse render that due by way of recompense which otherwise this disposition could no way claime For he that sayes that the naturall worth of the qualities here supposed claimes the reward as due by Gods justice must needes say that they justify by Gods originall Law But he that sayes by Gods promise and onely by that justice which consists in keeping promise by the Covenant of Grace Now then I say if that this opinion proceed upon first ground it is destructive to the Christian faith For I have shewed that the Gospel containes a Covenant of Grace not onely in regard of helpes of Grace to fulfill the condition which it requires which I have shewed that God grants in consideration of our Lord Christ and his obedience but also because in the same consideration he accepteth of the condition both to extinguish the debt of sinne and to intitle us to everlasting life which otherwise it inables us not to claime And both these regards I have showed belong to the Christian Faith Now he that affirmeth that the righteousnesse which God infuses into those that are baptized challengeth remission of sinnes and everlasting life or rather challengeth everlasting life because it extinguisheth sinne by Gods originall justice acknowledges indeed the Grace of God in granting those helps by which we attaine the said righteousnesse and that in consideration of our Lord Christ and his obedience But acknowledgeth not the Grace of God through Christ in accepting of it to such purpose and therein as I suppose denies the Covenant of Grace which the Gospel containâ—s Secondly I
suspended and interrupted as in him that cannot have confidence in God as reconciled to God in regard of these sinnes the seed of it notwithstanding remaining by virtue of that act of Faith whereby being reconciled as these are that are for ever reconciled to him he remains certaine of helpes of grace that shall be effectuall to work in him true repentance and of reconcilement upon supposition of it Whereupon it must be said the contrary that those whom God receiveth into grace without any purpose of granting them the grace of perseverance cannot be said to be justified without some terme of abatement signifying the justification granted them to be as to the sense of the Church or to an opinion unduely conceived by themselves but not as to God So that their faith also must be understood to be a confidence unduely grounded the failing whereof is not the disanulling of that which once was good but the discovering of that which once seemed good and was not This opinion so limited as I have said I should not think destructive to Christianity for the reason delivered afore concerning that opinion of justiing faith upon which it followes But as I then concluded that though not destructive to the Faith yet that opinion from whence it followeth is not true according to the true sense of the Scriptures wherein the skill of a Divine consisteth So must I here conclude that this opinion of perseverance which proceedeth upon that supposition of justifying faith which though not destructive to the Faith yet is not true is also not true though not destructive to the Faith The other which proceeds upon that supposition of justifying faith and predestination which is destructive to the faith remaining both untrue and destructive to the faith I grant that though the gift of the holy Ghost which is as I have said the habituall assistance of it being granted in consideration of a mans undertaking Christianity becomes void upon not performing that which a man undertakes yet God of his free goodnesse not as obliged by any promise of the Gospel may continue the assistance thereof but upon the same terms as he first grants the help of it to bring men out of the state of sinne into the state of grace I grant that the resolution of believing the faith of Christ and of living according to the same in the profession of Christianity having been once made upon reasons convincing a man that he is bound so to do cannot be changed at his pleasure in an instant though it fall out that he be overtaken with some sinne that laies wast the conscience But the promises of the Gospel being made in consideration of undertaking the profession of Christianity and therefore incompetible to those that live not according to it I say that they all become void to him that falls into such a sinne For the Covenant of Grace passing upon supposition of originall concupiscence remaining in the regenerate and insnaring them all with the occasions of sinne It cannot be imagined that all sinne makes it void But on the other side some sinnes being of so grosse a nature that a man cannot be surprized by them but that the being so conquered must imply a resolution to preferre this world before the world to come must needs forfeit those promises which depend upon the Covenant of Grace a rebellion against which they containe and declare So that unlesse the free grace of God by the operation of his Spirit bring a man back to repentance the whole resolution of being a Christian shall in time be blotted out though the profession because it imports the benefit of this world in Christian states remain counterfeit This is then the reason of my resolution necessarily following upon the premises that the sincere profession of Christianity is the condition of the Covenant of Grace seeing it is not imaginable that any man should hold any priviledge at Gods hands by professing that which he performeth not The profession as it serveth to aggravate the sinne which it committed under it as done in despite of all the grace of God and the conviction which it tendereth to reduce us to Christianity and the profession made in submission to the same condemning a man by his own sentence So containing the condition upon which all the promises become due upon the violation whereof on the contrary they must of necessity become void And this is the reason that leaves no place for any composition of this difference by saying that a man remains absolutely justified when the particular sinne which is not yet repented of is not pardoned For seeing the wages of it is death so farre as the Covenant of Grace dispenses not and seeing the Covenant of Grace cannot protect him that transgresseth the termes of it of necessity he falls into the same estate which he was under setting the Covenant of Grace aside as if to him our Lord Christ had neither been borne nor crucified nor risen againe Those that suffer the truth of this condition to be obscured by defective interpretations of that faith which alone justifieth and the scripturs concerning the same it is no mervaile if they can imagine a reconciliation betweene the state of sinne and the state of grace in the same man at the same time which makes the positive will of God declared by the Gospell to dispense with the necessary and naturall hate he beares to all sinners for their sinne But when it is once discoverd that by the termes of the Gospell God who declares himselfe ready to be reconciled to all sinners is declared unreconcileable to any so long as he continueth in sinne then must it necessarily appeare that the positive will of God declared by the Gospell concurring with the naturall detestation of sinne which is essentiall to the purity of his nature whosoever is under the guilt of sinne remains liable to his wrath And proceeding upon this ground as I doe I shall not thinke my selfe obliged to take notice of those thinges which have lately beene disputed in great volumes upon this point to and againe For presuming that the parties have not the ground upon which I proceed in debate As of necessity he who seemes to come short of proving his intent without it may with it be able to make the conviction effectuall which he tenders So he that seemes to have made the worse cause seeme the better without considering it must provide new evidence to make the condition of the Covenant of Grace seeme otherwise then I have showed it to be before he can thinke to have done his worke Notwithstanding because there are many texts of Scripture which evidently fortify the summe of Christianity setled upon the termes of the Covenant of Grace by demonstrating the failleure of the promise upon failleure of the condition to which the Gospell makes it due I take it to be part of my businesse to point at the cheife of them without being much troubled to
bring all that might be alleged Because I may make this generall inference from the premises that all precepts all exhortations all promises all threats made to induce man to perseverance in that estate to which the promises of the Gospell are any way signified to be due are necessary arguments to show that those to whome they are made may faile of the perseverance to which they induce And this by virtue of the generall reason premised that they are all evidences of that free will of men which the grace of God destroyeth not but cureth And therefore as when they are used to induce men to imbrace Christianity they containe an evidence that he may doe otherwise So also when they are used to induce man to persevere in that profession which he hath once undertaken they must necessarily by the same reason containe an evidence that it is possible for any man not to persevere who is induced by them to persevere in the course of a Christian For if it be said that without the grace of God they cannot with it they cannot but be effectual Either it is supposed the grace of God here named shal become effectuall to induce them to persevere to the end supposing that God foresees that they shall soâ—persevere or something else including the fore-sight of the perseverance it selfe or not If so it is no mervaile that the said exhortations cannot but prove effectuall because God foresees they shall be effectuall and that which shall not be can never be foreseene But if not supposing this any man undertake to say that the exhortation of the Gospell with the helpe of Gods inward grace must necessarily prove effectuall he will necessarily fall into all the inconvenience which I have charged them with who maintaine that the will of man is immediately determined by the will and operation of God to doe whatsoever it doeth Which is no lesse then the destruction aswell of all civility as of Christianity But let us see what the Apostle writes Heb. VI. 4-7 For it is not possible to renew unto repentance those that being once inlightned and having tasted the heavenly gift and been partakers of the Holy Ghost and relished the good word of God and the powrs of the world to come fall a way and crucify to themselves and traduce the Sonne of God For the earth that drinkes the raine that oft comes upon it and beares herbes fit for them by whome it is tilled receives a blessing from God But that which beares thornes and thistles is reprobate and neare a curse the end whereof is to be burned Could more have been said to expresse the state of grace For if any man can undertake to have the Spirit of God without premising Christianity I say confidently there is no cause why any man should be a Christian Therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here as Ebr. X. 32. signifieth neither more nor lesse then Christened 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the ancient Church signifies Baptisme because of the darknesse of Hethenisme or Judaisme which it dispelleth What is then the heavenly Gift which Christian tast be it remission of sinnes or be it the Gift of the Holy Ghost that followes expressing the same thing in severall parallel termes my businesse is done if the Gift of the Holy Ghost be not granted but upon that condition which makes all other promises of the Gospell due Wherefore I am content that relishing the good word of God shall signify no more then that conditon to wit That sense of Christianity which resolveth a man to undertake it But to relish the powers of the world to come no man can be understood but he that upon supposition of the said condition becomes sensible of that peace and joy of the Holy Ghost which under Christianity onely Christianity can give And therefore though I dispute not here how he means that it is impossible to renew those that fall from Christianity to repentance yet I challenge that impossibility of renewing to contain both a former right in and a possession of that estate to which they are renewed by repentance and also the present losse of it by falling from the condition which gâ—ves it So that the comparison which followes of fruitful and barren land upon tillage as it expresses a promise of following helpes of grace to them that use those which went a fore aright contained in the promise of giving the Holy Ghost to inable them who sincerely professe Christianity to performe that which they undertake So it convinceth the fruitlesse to be liable to the curse of fire which it is said to be neare because it is called reprobate The same is the effect of the like exhortation Ebrews X. 26 -29. For if we sinne voluntarily after receiving the acknowledgement of the truth there remaines no more any sacrifice for sinne but a certaine terrible expectation of vengeance and glowing of firâ— that is to consume opposers If one set at naught the Law of Moses without mercy he dies upon two or three witnesses Of how much worse punishment think you shall he be thought worthy that treads the Sonne of God under foot and esteems the blood of the Covenant by which he is sanctified unâ—leane and doth despite to the Spirit of Grace I say this is to the same effect if it be once granted that this sinne may be committed by a true Christian which no man can deny For can a Christian be thought to doe that despite to the Spirit of Grace which the Scribes and Pharises are said in the Gospell Matt XII 28. 32. Marke III. 29. Luke XII 10. to doe in sinning that sinne against the Holy Ghost which our Lord there pronounces irremissible Is it not manifest that their sinne consisted in attributing the miracles by which our Lord sought to convert them to the uncleane spirit being in Judgment convinced that by the Holy Ghost alone they were done And is it not as manifest that a Christian having received the Spirit of Grace promised to those that are baptized out of a sincere resolution of Christianity abuses the spirit which is so given him and which he hath and which had allready wrought that worke of conviction which the scribes and Pharises sufferd not to take effect in their harts Especially when the Apostle expressely premiseth the washing of them called here sanctifying by the blood of the Covenant which is the cleansing of that vessell by remission of sinnes into which the new wine of the Holy Ghost is to be put Wherefore I will not say that the faith of these men is true faith if you meane that onely to be true faith which lasts to the end which is many times in common language that which truth signifieth But if you meane that to be true faith which effecteth remission of sinnes and qualifieth for the world to come he must set the scripture upon the rack that will make it confesse any other sense Now consider what the Apostle
Law cousened and slaine as enimy to Christianity which tenders the onely cure of sinne Whereunto the conclusion agrees well enough For when having questioned Miserable man that I am who shall deliver me out of the body of this death He answereth I thank God by Jesus Christ our Lord He seemeth to declare that the Gospel having overtaken him in this estate and discovered him to himself in it the imbracing of it cured him and gave him cause to thank God through our Lord Jesus Christ for his deliverance from it All the rest that followeth between these terms in the discourse of Saint Paul serving for a very lively description of that mans estate who being convinced of the truth of Christianity findeth difficulty in renouncing the pleasures which sinne furnisheth for the obtaining of those promises which the Gospel tendreth There remaineth yet one difficulty concerning the Polygamy of the ancient Fathers before and under the Law which to me hath allways seemed an argument for the truth which I maintaine rather then an objection against it If any soule sensible of the feare of God can imagine that Gods Jewells his choice ones the first fruits of his creatures knowing themselves to be under the Law of having but one wife not to be parted with till death should notwithstanding take many and those many times so qualified as the Law much more Christianity allows not as Jacob two sisters Abraham his neece and so Amram and to outface the Law hold them till death and never come short of Gods favour whose Law they transgresse with bare face as the Scripture speakes let him believe that a Christian living in sinne can be in the state of grace But he that sees the Law to have restrained marying with the neice which he sees practiced afore and sees withall that plurality of wives is not forbidden by the Law for besides wives of an inferior ranke which may be called concubines a captive Deut. XXI 11. and an Ebrew maid sold for a slave Ex. XXI 8. 9. 10. there can be no question in the Law of two wives whereof the one is beloved the other not Deut. XXI 15. besides that the Law restraining the King from having many wives seemes to allow him more then every man hadde and therefore that David might be within compasse of the Law though Solomon trode it under foot I say he that considers these things will be moved to be of opinion that the Pharises interpretation of Levit. XVIII 18. is true and that before that Law there was no prohibition for a man to marry two sisters which is there first introduced and yet with an exception in Deuteronomy in the case of a brother deade without issue which before the Law was also in force as by the story of Judah Gen. XXXVIII doth appeare I will therefore conclude that as the knowledge of God increased by giving the Law so was the posterity of Abraham restrained from more by the Law then the posterity of Noe upon the promises given them had been restrained from after the deluge From whence in all reason it will follow that the posterity of Abraham according to the spirit which is the Church of Christ should be still restrained from more then the posterity of Abraham according to the flesh by the law And so that the Fathers before and under the Law living in Gods grace did not withall live in open violation of Gods Law but that they knew themselves not to be under the Law of one wife to one husband though intended in Paradise by virtue of Gods dispensation in it till Christianity should come For unlesse we presume that not onely all thinges necessary to our salvation but all thinge necessary to the salvation of all men since the world stood are recorded in the Scriptures there can be no reason to presume that they could not understand what Lawes they were under but by those Scriptures which for our salvation have been granted us I argue yet further that it will be impossible for true Christians and good Christians to attaine unto assurance of the state of Grace if it be to be had for them that commit such sinnes as Christianity consists not with And this upon supposition of the premises for the ground of this assurance For without doubt were not some thing in the condition which the Gospell requireth impossible for flesh and blood to bring forth it were not possible for him that imbraceth the Gospell to assure himselfe that he doeth it out of obedience to God not out of those reasons which hypocrites may follow But I having declared afore and maintaining now that no man by the force of flesh and blood that is to say of that inclination to goodnesse which a man is born into the world with is able to profess Christianity out of a resolute and clear intention to stand to it am consequently bound to maintaine that he who soe doeth not onely may but must needes assure himselfe of the favour of God in as much as he cannot but assure himself of that which himselfe doeth For in as much as he knowes what himselfe means and what he does as S. Paul sayes that no man knowes what is in man but the spirit of a man which is in him so sure it is that a mans selfe knowes what he means and what he does as it is sure that another man knowes it not But not allowing nor presupposing this ground of a mans knowledge how shall he know it Shall a man by having a perswasion that he is in the number of Gods elect or by having in himself an assurance of Gods love to the effect of everlasting happinesse be assured that his assurance is well grounded and that he is of that number which is elected to life everlasting As if it were not possible for the temptations of Satan and carnall presumption to possesse a man as much even to this effect as the Spirit of God can do Where is then the effect of Christianity seen if not in limiting such grounds and such termes as he that proceedeth upon shall not faile of that grace of God whereof he assureth himself upon those grounds But he that placeth that faith which alone justifyeth in believing that he who believeth is predestinate to life everlasting Or in the confidence of Gods grace in attaining the same I demand upon what ground he can pretend to distinguish this faith from that which he cannot deny that it may be false For if it be said that the Spirit of God that is in him assureth him that his perswasion is well grounded It is easie for me to say that the question to be cleared that is to say whether it be the Spirit of God that tells him so or not cannot be the evidence to clear it self And therefore that he standeth obliged to bethink himself of some meanes whereupon he may assure himself that it is the Spirit of God not the temptation of Satan or carnall
any now unlesse the signification thereof be fuâ—ther limited by other terms which being added to it every man will allow may determine a sense utterly prejudiciall to it True it is divers have observed that the word merâ—râ— in good Latine especially of those later ages in which the Fathers writ signifies no more then to attaine compasse or purchase Arguing from thence that the workes of Christians merit heaven in their sense and language no otherwise then because they are the meanes by which we attaine it So Cassander observes that S. Pauls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. I. 13. is by S. Cyprian translated misericordiam merui not intending to say that S. Paul deserved that mercy which he professes to have received of Grace But onely to signify that he found mercy and attained it But though I should grant that this word may signify no more in the language of the Fathers yet the Faith and the sense out of which it is evident that they spake will inforce that it doth signify as much as I say when they speak of our coming to heaven by our workes For having once resolved that the Covenant of Grace renders life everlasting due by Gods promise to those that lâ—ve as at their Baptisme they undertook though not for the worth of their workes yet by the mercy of God in Christ which moved him to tender such a promise he that sayes a man attaines heaven by the meanes of those workes which he lives in like a Christian sayes that those workes of his do merit heaven in the sense that I challenge For as for those that will have the workes of Christians to merit heaven of their own intrinsicke value Of those I have already said that I conceive they do prejudice the Christian â—aith in not allowing the necessity of Gods grace through Christ in accepting the condition which the Gospel requires for such a reward as the intrinsick value of it cannot deserve by Gods originall law For granting those helps of Gods grace in Christ being supernaturall and heavenly to hold proportion and correspondence with the reward of life everlasting which is the same Yet will it not follow that in all regards for the purpose in that the actions which they produce are momentany the reward everlasting which is the consideration S. Paul uses Rom. VIII 18. 1 Cor. VII 17 18. the correspondence will produce an equality of value And though the first principle of them be heavenly and supernaturall which is the help which God for Christs sake allowes yet seeing that it comes not immediately to effect but by the meanes of the faculties of mans soule infected with originall concupiscence it cannot be said that they can demand a reward correspondent to heavenly grace alone when earthly weakness concurres to imbase and allay the value of that which it produceth But as it cannot be denied that the Church of Rome in which that Order which maintainâ—s this extremity hath so great credit allowes this doctrine of merit to be taught yet can it not be said to injoine it Because there have not wanted to this day Doctors of esteem that have alwayes held otherwise Among whom I may very well name Sylvius now or lately Professor of Divinity at Doway who in his Commentaries upon the second part of Thomas Aquinas his Summe expounds that meritum de condigno which the Schoole attributes to the workes of Christians to be grounded in dignatione Dei because God vouchsafes and daignes to accept them whose they are as worthy of the reward expressing also the promise of the Gospell whereby this condescension of God is declared The Schoole Doctors found out the termes of meritum ex congruo ex condigno merit of congâ—uity and condignity Some of them because they thought That the workes of meer nature deserve supernaturall grace in regard that it is fit that God should reward him that doth his best with it That works done in the state of Grace are worth the Glory of the world to come But as the former part of the position which is planted upon these terms is rejected by many So they who onely acknowledge meritum congrui in workes done in the state of grace that is to say that it is fit for God to reward them with his kingdome say no more then that it was fit for God to promise such a reward Which whoso denieth must say that God hath promised that which it was unfit for him to promise And if the dignity of our works in respect of the reward may have this tolerable sense because God daignes and vouchsafes it The Councill of Trent which hath inacted no reason why they are to be counted merits can neither bear out these high opinions nor be said to prejudice the Faith in this point For The kingdom of God is not in word but in power if S. Paul say true And therefore though I affect not the terme of merit which divers of the Reformation do not reject Yet can I not think it so far from the truth so prejudiciall to the faith as the peevish opinions of those that allow not good workes necessary to salvation but as signes of Faith For that which necessarily comes in consideration with God in bestowing the reward which the condition he contracteth for must necessarily do though it cannot have the nature of merit because the Covenant it self is granted meerly of Grace in consideration of Christs death yet it is of necessity to be reduced to the nature and kind of the meritorious cause Nor can the glory of God or the merit of Christ be obscured by any consideration of our works that is grounded upon the merit of our Lord Christ and expresseth the tincture of his bloud The end of the Second Book Laus Deo OF THE LAWES OF The Church The Third BOOK CHAP. I. The Society of the Church founded upon the duty of communicating in the Offices of Gods Service The Sacrament of the Eucharist among those Offices proper to Christianity What opinions concerning the presence of Christs Body and Blood in the Eucharist are on foot IF God had onely appointed the Profession of Christianity to be the condition qualifying for the world to come leaving to every mans judgment to determine what that Christianity is and wherein it consists which it is necessary to salvation hee professe and what that conversation is which his salvation requireth There had been no cause why I should go any further in this Dispute But having showed that God hath appointed the Sacrament of Baptisme to be a necessary means to salvation limiting thereby the profession of Christianity which hee requireth to be deposited and consigned in the hands of his Church whom hee hath trusted for the maintaining and propagating of it I have thereby showed that hee hath appointed all Christians to live in the Communion of the Church The effect of Baptisme being to admit unto full Communion in those Offices wherewith God is
Sacrament mystically I conceive I am excused of any further answer and am not obliged to declare the maner of that which must be mystical when I have said what I can say to declare it Onely I will take leave to tell him that hee will remain neverthelesse obliged to believe the truth both of the sign and of the thing signified and that by virtue of the Sacrament that is of the consecration that makes it a Sacrament not of the faith of him that receives it though I answer not all that hee demands upon the question What the Sacramental presence of the body and bloud of Christ in or with or under the Elements of the Eucharist signifies I would now consider wherein the Consecration of the Eucharist consists that I might thereupon inferre what kind of presence it inforceth But I hold it fit first to set aside those two opinions the one whereof I said ascribeth it to the Faith of them that receive being accidental to the Consecration and not included in it The other to the Hypostatical Union and that communication which it inferreth between the properties of the united natures That which I have already said I suppose is enough to evidence the mystical and spiritual presence of the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Elements as the Sacrament of the same before any man can suppose that spiritual presence of them to the soul which the eating and drinking Christs flesh and bloud spiritually by living Faith importeth Onely that I may once conclude how faith effecteth the Sacramental presence in the Elements as well as the spiritual in the Soul I will distinguish between the outward profession of Christianity which maketh us Members of Gods visible Church and the inward performance or faithful purpose of performing the same which makes a man of that number whom God owns for Heirs of his Kingdome whether you call that number an invisible Church or not And then I say that it is the visible profession of true Christianity which makes the Consecration of the Eucharist effectual to make the body and bloud of Christ Sacramentally present in the Elements of it But that it is the invisible faithfulnesse of the heart in making good or in resolving to make good the said profession which makes the receiving of it effectual to the spiritual eating and drinking of Christs body and bloud For supposing that God hath instituted and founded the Corporation of his Church upon the precept or the privilege of assembling to communicate in the offices of his service according to Christianity Whensoever this office is rendred to God out of that profession which makes men Members of Gods Church there the effect followes as sure as Christianity is true Where otherwise there can be no such assurance But if eating and drinking the body and bloud of Christ in this Sacrament unworthily be the crucifying of Christ again rendring a man guilty of his body and bloud then is not his flesh and bloud spiritually eaten and drunk till living faith make them spiritually present to the Soul which the Consecration maketh Sacramentally present to the body And it is to be noted that no man â—â—n say that this Sacrament represents or tenders and exhibites unto him that receiveth the body and bloud of Christ as all must do that abhorre the irreverence to so great an Ordinance which the opinion that it is but a bare sign of Christ crucified necessarily ingendreth but hee must believe this Unlesse a man will say that that which is not present may be represented that is to say â—â—nâ—râ—d and exhibited presently down upon the place It is not therefore that living faith which hee that receiveth the Eucharist and is present at the consecrating of it may have and may not have that causeth the body and bloud of Christ to be Sacramentally present in the Elements of it But it is the profession of that common Christianity which makes men Members of Gods Church In the unity whereof wheresoever this Sacrament is celebrated without enquiring whether those that are assembled be of the number of those to whom the Kingdome of Heaven belongs thou hast a Legal presumption even towards God that thou receivest the flesh and bloud of Christ in and with the Elements of bread and wine and shalt receive the same spiritually for the food of thy Soul supposing that thou receivest the same with living faith For one part of our common Christianity being this That our Lord Christ instituted this Sacrament with a promise to make by his Spirit the Elements of bread and wine Sacramentally his body and bloud so that his Spirit that made them so dwelling in them as in his natural body should feed them with Christs body and bloud that receive the Sacrament of them with living faith This institution being executed that is the Eucharist being consecrated according to it so sure as Christianity is true so sure the effect follows So that the faith which brings it to effect is the faith of them who believing Gods promises proceed to execute his Ordinances that they may obtain the same Whereas those that would have justifying faith to consist in believing a mans own Salvation or the decree of God perempâ—orily passed upon it and the Sacrament of the Eucharist to be appointed for a sign to confirm this faith which is nothing else but the revelation of this decree are not able to say how the signifying of the eating of Christs body and bloud conduces to such a revelation as this or why any such thing is done which conduceth not to the purpose Besides that having showed wherein justifying faith indeed consists I have by that means made it appear that the Sacramental nourishment of the Soul is the means of the spiritual nourishment of the Soul as well as the resemblance of it Here indeed it will be requisite to take notice of that which may be objected for an inconvenience That God should grant the operation of his Spirit to make the Elements Sacramentally the body and bloud of Christ upon the dead faith of them who receive it to their condemnation in the Sacrament and therefore cannot be said to eat the body and bloud of Christ which is onely the act of living faith without that abatement which the premises have established To wit in the Sacrament But all this if the effect of my saying be throughly considered will appear to be no inconvenience For that the body and bloud of Christ should be Sacramentally present in and under the Elements to be spiritually received of all that meet it with a living faith to condemn those for crucifying Christ again that receive it with a dead faith can it seem any way inconsequent to the Consecration thereof by virtue of the common faith of Christians professing that which is requisite to make true Christians whether by a living oâ— a dead faith Rather must wee be to seek for a reason why hee that â—ateth this bread and drinketh
wee have received from our Lord Christ and his Apostles But if from hence any man would inferr that seeing the Sacrament of the Eucharist that is to say the body and bloud of Christ crucified there present by virtue of the Consecration is a propitiatory and impetratory Sacrifice for the Congregation there present for their relations and for the Church therefore it is so whether they proceed to receive the Eucharist or not therefore it is so whether they proceed to offer up the Eucharist present by their prayers for the necessities of the Church or not therefore it is so whether they pray with the Church or noâ— the consequence will straight appear to fail because those reasons which make it such a Sacrifice make it so in order to the receiving or to the offering of it by the prayers of the Church in behalf of the Church It is well enough known what opinions and abuses in the use and concerning the virtue of Masses had vogue under the dark time of the School though noâ— authorized by the Catholick Church For in regard the Eucharist can pretend no virtue by the nature of the work impertinent to any spiritual effect but meerly by the institution of Christ the efficacy thereof ex opere operaâ—o according to the language of those dayes and by virtue of the very â—oâ—ke was so extended as to take effect without any good motion in them thâ—t celebrate it And the intent of the Priest whose act the consecration was tâ—ken to be was thought to extend it to whom and to what he pleased And â—â—â—â— so farre from requiring that any but the Priest should communicate that even at this day it is not thought necessary by the looser sort of that side that the people should understand what the Priest does or sayes much lâ—sse assâ—t him with their devotions the intent of the Priest which the Canon it selfe alwaies extends to all that are present serving to give it virtue On the other side how hath this been taken construed As if every Mass pretended to sacrifice Christ a new who by offering himselfe once hath perfited for ever those who are sanctified as saith the Apostle Heb. X. 14. And therefore as if every Mass did challenge the virtue of Christs sacrifice upon the Cross And it is true the properties and efâ—ect of things signified are in some certain sense truly attributed to the signs But he that inlarges his Language beyond that sense may give and he that understands not the limitations requisite may take offense when there is no need Otherwise the reasons of those limitations are evident enough to save any sober and charitable men either from inflanâ—ing or taking up offenses For common sense which tells all men that what is once done can never be done again obliges them to understand an abatement in the property of that Language which attributes the sacrificing of Christ to a Priest because once done upon the Crosse it can never be done agâ—in Neither can it be in reason supposed that he who inflames the improperty of his Language intends therefore to renounce the common faith concerning the redemption of man-kind by the sacrifice of the Cross But when all derive all virtue in the Mass from it to take such Language for equalling the Mass to it will require a great lust to maintain partiality in the Church And make but once the consecrating and offering of the Eucharist for the necessities of the whole Church by the prayers of those who celebrate it to be the act of the respective assembly by the ministry of him whom the Church deputes for the purpose it will easily appear what follows For the virtue thereof will still be ex opere operato in opposition to the Sacraments of the old Old Law The spirituall intent whereof not being discerned by all because not openly preached at that time the spirituall effect of them could not be attributed to the common work but to the particular intent of those that belonged to the Gospel under the Law which is a true ground of opposition between opus operatum and opus operantis The work meerly done and done by such a one Besides seeing the truth of Christs body and blood is eaten and drunk by living faith without the Sacrament He that believes that God instituted not the Sacrament to no purpose though he abhorre to think that the effect thereof can be had without any good motion must of necessity allow the devotion which a living faith is exercised with in assisting the celebration of it an effect by virtue of that work which without it it cannot challenge As for the effect of the Prayers which it is offered with it is not to be ascribed to the quality of the Priest and therefore in that regard also it may be ascribed to the work it selfe not to the quality of him that doth it But seeing the common obligation of all Christians extendeth their Prayers to all necessities of Christs Church it will not lye in the intent either of the Priest or of the whole assembly whose act more properly it is to make it more beneficial to particular Christians then it can be thought that God accepteth the charity and devotion of particular Christians more particularly for their particular relations As for the mater of private Masses and the assistance of the people with their devotion as well as presence of an unknown tongue in Gods service of the extending of the benefit thereof to the dead Thus much being said generally here I referre the rest to their own places In fine what other reason soever can be pretended by any that shall make it his interest to maintain not to excuse the abuses of the Church of Rome why the Eucharist should be counted such a Sacrifice if it be not contained in that which hath been said will easily be wiped off by that which hath been said Those Scriptures which wee ground our selves upon when wee make the Eucharist a Sacriâ—â—ce being the onely ground to determine though not the onely means to evidence for what reason and to what purpose it is to be counted such a Sacrifice For how much regard soever wee ought to have to the consent of the Church in this point as without doubt if in any then in this without doubt the agreement and correspondence visible to common sense betweâ—n the original practice and sense of the Church and that which hath been alleged out of the Scriptures will be evidence enough of the right reason or reasons for which the Eucharist is not or is to be esteemed a propitiatory Sacrifice There is no man can thrust his nose into the writings of the Fathers even of the first times but hee shall finde the Oblations of the faithfull that are once deputed to the celebration of the Eucharist called Sacrifices in that regard This consideration therefore is not owned by them that strive most to make the Eucharist properly a propitiatory Sacrifice
sacrificed unto Idolâ— which were not God To gods whom they knew not to new gods that came newly up whom your Fathers seared not Sacrificing to new gods they sacrificed to devils Psal CVI. 35 37 38. And they served their Idols which were a snare to them yea they sacrificed their sonnes and daughters unto devils and shed innocent bloud even the bloud of their sonnes and daughters whom they offered to the Idols of Canaan and the land was defiled with bloud Offering their sons and daughters to the Idols of Canaan they offered them to devils And S. Paul 1 Cor. X. 19 20 21. What say I then that an Idol is any thing Or that which is offered in sacrifice to Idols is any thing As afore VIII 4. we know that an Idol is nothing in the world and that there is but one God but I say that the thinges which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to devils and not to God And I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of devils Ye cannot be partakers of the Lords table and the table of devils Having said that an Idol is nothing and that things sacrificed to Idols are nothing because they are sacrificed to that which is nothing and that because there is but one God how doth he inferre that things sacrificed to Idols are sacrificed to devills Surely idols are nothing because there is but one God in regard they pretend to be gods that is to say images of gods whereas indeed there can be no more Gods but one And if this were all since nothing can have no effect sacrificing to idols being nothing could not pollute the sacrifices as some Christians alledged to prove that they might eat of things sacrificed to Idols But because in sacrificing to nothing the devill steps into Gods place having caused that nothing to be taken for a God and maintaining that conceit by the same wayes which he raised it with therefore all that communicated in serving those idols which all did that communicated in the feasts which they made of those sacrifices communicated in the worship of devils Whereby it is evident that idolatry presupposeth an erroneous opinion of a false Godhead under which the devil suborneth himself to be worshipped whom did men take for that which Christians take him for they would be farre enough from worshipping him for God And herewith agreeth the reason of idolatry in the worshipping of images For by the premises it is evident that idolatry is more ancient then the worship of images and perhaps the truth is it came not in till the custome came up to worship dead men for gods which as I said afore I believe was later then the worshipping of the elements of the world though I go not out of my way to prove it nothing obliging me so to do Now it appeares by Varrâ— in S. Augustine De Civitate Dei IV. 31. that the Romanes had subsisted above CLXX yeares before they had images But let no man therefore imagine that they were not idolaters during that time For it is evident that there is no record of learning so ancient among the Gentiles as their Idolatries onely the Scripture recordeth time before the same The words of Varro there recorded by the said Saint Augustine tell us truth in that businesse that those who brought in images errorem addidisse metum dempsisse Increased error abated Religion For it is not strange that a knowing man as Varro was should bear witnesse to that truth which the Centiles imprisoned in unrighteousnesse by acknowledging an error in the multitude of their Gods which was by that time grown so ridiculous that a child should it have spoken what reason indited might have reproved it This Error then Varro saith not that it sprung from Images but that they were the means to increase it though to the a batement of Religion which could be but counterfeit when men tooke upon them to make their own Gods But was it thus with the Romans onely was not the case the same with the Grecians also before Sculpture and Picture and other waies of Imagery were devised chiefly for the advancement of this error as the wise Jew Wisdom XIV 18-21 and diveres of the ancient Fathers of the Church as S. Austine de civitate Dei XVIII 24. in Psalm CIII do often alleage Why doe we reade then in Pausanias his most excellent survay of Greece that of old time they worshiped stones onely sharpned at the top for their Gods Could they have found in their heart so to doe had they not formerly imagined a Deity which they meant to remind themselves of by so grosse a marke rather then image But is not this madnesse an evidence that they came by degrees to the representation of those Dieties which they had imagined afore and sought onely meanes to have them alwaies present Joseph Scaliger in that learned appendix to his book de Emendatione Temporum showeth us that the Phenicians had the like custome of having of rude stones for the symboles of their Gods And no marvile For by the act of Jacobs pouring oyle upon the stone at Bethel it appeareth that the Fathers themselves used such records of the true God and of his worship which Idolaters afterwards imagined their false Gods to be present at and thereupon no marvrile that the Law prohibited afterwardes Levit. XXVI 2. seeing it is evident by the writings of the Grecians and the Romans that Idolatry increasing it became an ordinary custome to make every stock and every stone a monument of that Worship which every superstitious sool thought he had cause there to tender to his God by pouring oil upon it as Jacob did Gen. XXVIII 18. by dedicating garlands or the like as Tilullus hath expressed in these verses Et veneror seu stipes habet desertus in agris Sive quiâ— exiguus florea serta lapis with infinite more authors to that purpose And can any man doubt that the Idolatrie of the Persians were not as bad as these though they had neither statues nor pictures Surely those Hethen Philosophers found it otherwise who being weary of the Empire under Justinian because of the ill countenance they found there in favour to Christianity and betaking themselves into Persia as Agathias in his second book relateth found themselves quickly weary of it in regard of those barbarous customes as they understood them which the Idolatries of the Persians had introduced Thus much for certaine that worship which the fire was served with by the Persians was not that which could be tendred in honour of God that made it as conceiving it a prime creature So that considering these things without prejudice wee must needs stand convict that Idolatry in generall is more ancient then the worship of images though particular Idolatries must needs be advanced by it And in that instance that the wise Jew propoundeth for the beginning of idolatry
answer to the Jesuites Challenge Pag. 308-326 that the spoiling of Hell is attributed by the Fathers to the rising of our Lord Christ from the grave whereby the law of death was voided Which if it be true what Tradition can there remaine in the Church that our Lord Christs soule should harrow hell and ransacke it of the soules of the Fathers there detained or in the Verge of it Saint Basil de Sp. S. cap. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How then do we go down to Hell aright Imitating the buriall of Christ by Baptisme For the bodies of these who are Baptized are as it were buried in the water Saint Chrysostome in 1 ad Cor. Hom XL. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For to be baptized and first to sink then come up againe is an Embleme of going down into Hell and coming up againe And truly if the force of Christs death in voiding the dominion of death stood by the merit of his sufferings Then was the descent of his flesh into the grave of force to that effect without any descent further of his soul into the lower parts thereof And if the death of Christ and his continuing in death for the time that God had appointed was declared by God to be accepted by him to that effect then was his rising from death his triumph over hell and death whereby the title of his rising againe being declared it must needs appear that neither death nor hell nor the devil hath any more interest in Christians Nor is it so strange that the descent of Christ into hell should be mentioned by the Apostles Creed after his buriall if it signify not the descent of his soul as it would be that it should be left out of other Creeds if it did signify that it is necessary to the salvation of all so to believe For neither is it expressed in the Creed of Nicaea or Constantinople nor was it found in that which the Church of Rome or that which the Churches of the East used saith Ruffinus upon the Creed who notwithstanding expoundeth it because the Church of Aquileia which he belonged to used it Which had the signification of it been a distinct truth necessary to the salvation of all to be believed the Churches could by no meanes have connived at one another in not delivering it And truly seeing the dominion of death intimating the second death to which those who belong not to the New Testament are accursed is signified in the Old Testament by going under the earth The signification of going down into Hell in the Creed can by no meanes be thought superfluous though our Lord neither went thither to rescue the Fathers soules nor to triumph over the Powers of darknesse For as thereby the common curse from whence we are redeemed so is also the reason and meanes of our deliverance from it intimated And seeing there is appearance from that which hath been said that the divell himself did not understand the secret of Gods intent to dissolve his interest in mankind by the death of Christ untill it appeared by what right our Lord resumed his body which he had Laid downe this being declared in the other world by his rising again and in signe thereof the soules of the saints that slept rising againe with him and resuming their bodies there is no reason why the mention of his resurrection following immediately upon the descent into Hell in the Creed should not sufficiently expresse that triumph which this declaration importeth Which triumph being effected by the Godhead though in his flesh it will be no marvaile to meet with some sayings of the Fathers that ascribe it to his Godhead Now the common doctrine of the Schoole maketh it no matter of Faith to believe the descent of Christs soule into that Hell where the damned were but onely to the Verge of it where the souls of the Fathers were It is enough with them that the effect of this Power reached to the place of the damned Cardinall Bellarmine when he published his controversies held it probable that the soul of Christ descended to the place of the damned But upon better consideration in the review of them thinks that the other opinion of Thomas and the rest of the Schoole is to be followed And yet it is not possible to distinguish between this Verge and the lowest hell by any Tradition of the Church Nay Durandus goes so farre out of their rode as to maintaine that the soul of Christ went not to hell that is to Lymbus but onely by the effect of it in making the soules of the Fathers happy Which is in my opinion declaring to them the reason of their happinesse And the opinion of Suarez the Jesuite is remarkable That taking an Article of Faith for a truth necessary for the salvation of all Christians to be known the descent of Christ into hell is no Article of Faith For that is not very necessary for single Christians to know And for that cause perhaps it is not in the Nicene Creed which whoso believeth believes enough to save him And that perhaps for this cause some Fathers expounding the Creed to the People make no mention of it In III. Disput XLIII Sect. II. and IV. I may adde for the advantage of my opinion That if it be not necessary for single Christians to believe much lesse is it necessary for the Church as a body to believe it For those things which the Church believeth as a body it imposeth to be believed upon them who are of the body But it cannot be reasonable for the Church as a body to impose upon the members thereof the beliefe of that which it is not necessary to their salvation as single Christians to believe And therefore allowing the conscientiousnesse of S. Augustine who having presumed that he who believes not the descent is no Christiane doubts not that by the descent as many were delivered as Gods secter justice thought fit Epist XCIX And of Saint Jerome in Eph. II. allowing some work of God to be managed by it which we understand no more then what good our Lords death did the good Angels I allow also the reservedness of those of the Confession of Auspurg or of Suisse who acknowledging the literall sense of this Article find not themselves bound to maintaine for what reason it was I am not offended with those in the Church of England that assigne the triumph of our Lord for the reason of it But believing with Saint Gregory Nyssene in Pascha Resurrect Christi Epist ad Eustath that our Lord by the descent of his body into the grave abolished him that had the power of death by his soul made way for the thiefe into Paradise where it self was count this enough for the salvation of all Christians to be believed And therefore that the Church cannot impose upon them as the necessary meanes of their salvation to believe any more I do not intend to say much more
bodies the holy Ghost that dwelt in them here raiseth This is that precious pearle and that hid treasure this is that grain of mustard seed that leaven which being purchased at the price of all we have and sowed in the heart and layd up in the past of our thoughts makes all our actions fruitfull to the riches of everlasting happinesse This is that little spot of truth for the maintaining whereof so many bloudy fields of Controversies in Religion are and have been fought by soules that perish by maintaining division in the Church to the prejudice if not the losse of that truth for which they fight As the country alwaies suffers by the warre that is made for it All this while it is to be remembred that Baptisme tieth not onely to professe this faith unto death but to live according to Christianity Whether it be by virtue of Moses Law cleared by our Lord of the false glosses of the Scribes and Pharisees or by the New Law of Christ clearing the spiritual intent of the Old it is not necessary to salvation for a Christian to know For Irenaeus briefly distinguishing mater of Faith from mater of Knowledge in the Scriptures 1. 2 4. makes all that which concerns the reason of the difference in Gods proceeding under the Law and the Gospel to be mater of abundant knowledge not of necessary faith But it is necessary for the salvation of a Christian to know that by being a Christian he undertakes to suppresse mortify and prevent as far as in him lies even the first motions of concupiscence whether in the lusts of the flesh or the lust of the eyes or the pride of life as our Lord in the Gospel hath clearly laid forth howsoever the Law have expressed or intimated the same And this is that warre with the devil the world and the flesh for the keeping of Gods commandments which our Baptisme undertaketh For there is no difference in things to be done concerning a private Christian as a private Christian that seems to be any considerable ground of division in the Church The substance of our common Christianity in that part seems to remain without dispute In things that are to be believed it were well if it could be said so truly that there is no part of the rule of Faith in dispute In the meane time the substance of Christianity containing whatsoever it is necessary for the salvation of all Christians to know whether in matter of Faith or of maners whereof to speak properly the rule of Faith signifieth onely the first part consisteth onely in that which concerns a particular Christian as such whether to be believed or to be done But what then shall the beliefe of one holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church in our Creed signify Onely that there are Christians in the world Shall a Christian be saved by believing that which all Christians see that there is a company of men that call themselves Christians Or shall it therefore be necessary to the salvation of all Christians to know that God hath founded the whole body of the Church consisting of all Churches for a Society and Corporation subsisting by his Law shall it concern the salvation of simple Christians to understand the nature of Corporations and to know how visible communion in Christian Offices makes the Church such a one believing that this comes by Gods appointment I do not imagine any such thing Indeed whosoever allowes no ground of difference between true Christians on the one side and hereticks and schismaticks on the other side cannot admit the belief of one Catholicke Church for an article of his Creed For had there never been heresie or schisme the communion of all Christians with all Christians going forwards without interruption the Church had been no lesse Catholicke then now that it is called Catholicke to distinguish it from heresies and schismes which prevailed sometimes in some places but never spread nor lasted with the Church But had there been no profession qualifying for communion with the Church Had there been no power in the Church to limit the Order and circumstance of Communion in the Offices of Christianity it could never have been visible whom a Christian was to communicate with professing himself bound by believing one Catholicke Church to communicate with it Because by this meanes it was visible and because being visible an obligation was acknowledged of communicating with it the profession of this obligation was to be part of the common Christianity which the Creed was to signify But when it is no more visible whom a Christian is to communicate with by reason of division in the Church what is it then that resolves whom a Christian is to communicate with That is indeed the question which this whole businesse intends to resolve For the Reformation having occasioned division in the Church the parties are both visible but which is the true Church remaines invisible so long as it remaines in despute For though it be not invisible to that reason which proceeds aright upon due principles yet that is not required of all Christians that would be saved And therefore if it be not visible to the common reason of all men it is invisible This I alledge to no further purpose then to show how much all parties stand obliged to procure the reunion of the Church as answerable for the soules that may miscarry by chusing amisse in that which Gods ordinance makes visible but mens disorder invisible to common sense For the more difficult the way of salvation proves by this meanes the more shall all estates stand obliged to clear it Let us then see wherein the difficulty of the choice consisteth let us see what satisfaction the parties tender common sense that salvation is to be had by leaving of them The Word and the Sacraments are the markes of the true Church So say the Doctors of the Reformation so say perhaps their confessions of Faith It were too long to dispute that But how are these markes distinctive For I suppose they pretend not to make known the Reformed Churches to constitute the true Church in opposition to the Church of Rome by markes common to both And will any common sense allow that the Church of Rome will grant that they have not the word of God or the Sacraments which they allow the Reformed to have If you adde the pure preaching of the Word and the pure ministring of the Sacraments you advance not a foot For is common sense able to judge that the Reformed way is pure that of the Church of Rome impure It judgeth that they who call it so think so Whether it be so or not it must come under dispute And appealing to the Scriptures it appeareth that common sense is not judge in the meaning and consequence of them upon which the resolution depends It is therefore manifest that the preaching of the word and the ministring of the Sacraments is no mark of the Church unlesse
therefore how shall it appeare to signify here any more then him that pretends to be the Christ For it is evident that Saint John both there and 1 John IV. 3. speakes of his own time As for the Revelation neither is it any where said that it prophesieth any thing of Antichrist nor will it be proved that it saith any thing of the Pope Much of it being a Prophesie hath been expounded to all appearance of something like the Pope though with violence enough All of it without Prophesying what shall come to passe could never be expounded to that purpose and it is not strange that so great a foundation should be laid upon the event of an obscure Scripture such as all Prophesies are to be conjectured by that which we think we see come to passe For I referre to judgement how much more appearance there is that it intendeth the vengeance of God upon the Pagan Empire of Rome for persecuting Christianity both in the Text and composure of the prophesie and in the pretense of tendring and addressing it Nor is there any thing more effectuall to prove the same then the Idolatries which it specifies that the Christians chused rather to lay down their lives then commit True it is no man can warrant that by praying to Saints for the same things that we pray to God for and by the worship of Images Idolatry may not come in at the back door to the Church of Rome which Christianity shuts out at the great Gate But if it do the difference will be visible between that and the Idolatry of Pagans that professe variety of imaginary deities by those circumstances which in the Apocalypse expresly describe the Idolatries of the Heathen Empire of Rome And therefore I am forced utterly to discharge the Church of Rome of this imputation and to resolve that the Pope can no more be Antichrist then he that holds by professing our Lord to be the Christ and to honour him for God as the Christ is honoured by Christians can himself pretend to be the Christ Nay though I sincerely blame the imposing of new articles upon the faith of Christians and that of positions which I maintaine not to be true yet I must and do freely professe that I find no positinecessary to salvation prohibited none destructive to salvtion injoyned to be believed by it And therefore must I necessarily accept it for a true Church as in the Church of England I have alwaies known it accepted seeing there can no question be made that it continueth the same visible body by the succession of Pastors and Lawes the present customes in force being visibly the corruption of those which the Church had from the beginning that first was founded by the Apostles For the Idolatries which I grant to be possible though not necessary to be found in it by the ignorance and carnall affections of particulars not by command of the Church or the Lawes of it I do not admit to destroy the salvation of those who living in the comunion thereof are not guilty of the like There remaines therefore in the present Church of Rome the profession of all that truth which it is necessary to the salvation of all Christians to believe either in point of faith or maners Very much darkned indeed by inhansing of positions either of a doubtful sense or absolutely false to the ranck and degree of matters of Faith But much more overwhelmed and choaked with a deal of rubbish opinions traditions customes and ceremonies allowed indeed but no way injoyned which make that noise in the publick profession and create so much businesse in the practice of Religion among them that it is a thing very difficult for simple Christians to discerne the pearl the seed and the leaven of the Gospel buried in the earth and the dough of popular doctrines and observations so as to imbrace it with that affection of faith and love which the price of it requires But if it be true as I said afore that no man is obliged to commit those Idolatries that are possible to be committed in that communion it will not be impossible for a discerning Christian to passe through that multitude of doctrines and observations the businesse whereof being meerly circumstantiall to Christianity allows not that zeale and affection to be exercised upon the principall as is spent upon the accessory without superstition and will-worship in placing the service of God in the huske and not in the kernell or promising himself the favour of God upon considerations impertinent to Christianity As for the halfe Sacrament the service in an unknown language the barring the people from the Scrptures and other Lawes manifestly intercepting the meanes of salvatian which God hath allowed his people by the Church It seems very reasonable to say that the fault is not the fault of particular Christians who may and perhaps do many times wish that the matter were otherwise But that the Church being a Society concluding all by the act of those who conclude it there is no cause to imagine that God will impute to the guilt and damnation of those who could not help it that which they are sufferes in and not actors Nay t is much to be feared that the authors themselves of such hard Lawes and those who maintaine them will have a strong plea for themselves at the day of judgement in the unreasonablenesse of their adversaries That it is true all reason required that the meanes of salvation provided by God should be ministred by the Church But finding the pretense of Reformation without other ground than that sense of the Scriptures which every man may imagine and therefore without other bounds and measure then that which imagination for which there are no bounds fixeth They thought it necessary so to carry matters as never to acknowledge that the Church ever erred in any decree or Law that it hath made Least the same error might be thought to take place in the substance of Christianity and the Reformation of the Church to consist in the renouncing of it Which we see come to passe in the Heresy of Socinus And that finding the Unity of the Church which they were trusted with absolurely necessary to the maintenance of the common Christianity whereby salvation is possible to be had though more difficult by denying those helps to salvation which such Lawes intercept They thought themselves tied for the good of the whole not to give way to Laws tending so apparently to the salvation of particular Christians On the other side supposing the premises there remaine no pretense that either Congregations or Presbyteries can be Churches as founded meerly upon humane usurpation which is Schisme not upon divine institution which ordereth all Churches to be fit to constitute one Church which is the whole I need not say that there can be no pretense for any authority visibly convayed to them by those which set them up having it in themselves before I
who create the parties by heading the division have to look about them least they become guilty of the greatest part of soules which in reason must needs perish by the extremities in which it consisteth And the representing of the grounds thereof unto the parties though it may seem an office unnecessary for a private Christian to undertake yet seemeth to me so free from all imputation of offense in discharging of our common Christianity and the obligation of it that I am no lesse willing to undergoe any offense which it may bring upon me then I am to want the advantages which allowing the present Reformation might give me In the mean time I remaine obliged not to repent me of the resolution of my nonage to remaine in the communion of the Church of England There I find an authority visibly derived from the act of the Apostles by meanes of their successors Nor ought it to be of force to question the validity thereof that the Church of Rome and the communion thereof acknowledgeth not the Ordinations and other Acts which are done by virtue of it as done without the consent of the whole Church which it is true did visibly concurre to the authorizing of all acts done by the Clergy as constituted by virtue of those Lawes which all did acknowledge and under the profession of executing the offices of their severall orders according to the same For the issue of that dispute will be triable by the cause of limiting the exercise of them to those termes which the Reformation thereof containeth which if they prove such as the common Christianity expressed in the Scriptures expounded by the original practice of the whole Church renders necessary to be maintained notwithstanding the rest of the Church agree not in them the blame of separation that hath insued thereupon will not be chargeable upon them that retire themselves to them for the salvation of Christian soules but on them who refuse all reasonable compliance in concurring to that which may seem any way tollerable But towards that triall that which hath been said must suffice The substance of that Christianity which all must be saved by when all disputes and decrees and contradictions are at an end is more properly maintained in that simplicity which all that are concerned are capable of by the terms of that Baptisme which it ministreth requiring the profession of them from all that are confirmed at years of discretion then all the disputes on both sides then all decrees on the one side all confessions of faith on the other side have been able to deliver it And I conceive I have some ground to say so great a word having been able by limiting the term of justifying faith in the writings of the Apostles according to the same to resolve upon what termes both sides are to agree if they will not set up the rest of their division upon something which the truth of Christianity justifieth not on either side For by admitting Christianity that is the sincere profession thereof to be the Faith which onely justifyeth in the writings of the Apostles whatsoever is in difference as concerning the Covenant of Grace is resolved without prejudicing either the necessity of Grace to the undertaking the performing the accepting of it for the reward or the necessity of good works in consideration for the same The substance of Chrianity about which there is any difference being thus secured there remaines no question concerning Baptisme and the Eucharist to the effect for which they are instituted being ministred upon this ground and the profession of it with the form which the Catholick Church requireth to the consecration of the Eucharist Nor doth the Church of England either make Sacraments of the rest of the seven or abolish the Offices because the Church of Rome makes them Sacraments Nor wanteth it an order for the daily morning and evening service of God for the celebration of Festivalls and times of Fasting for the observation of ceremonies fit to create that devotion and reverence which they signify to vulgar understandings in the service of God But praying to Saints and worshipping of Images or of the Eucharist Prayers for the delivery of the dead out of Purgatory the Communion in one kind Masses without Communions being additions to or detractions from that simplicity of Gods service which the originall order of the Church delivereth visible to common reason comparing the present order of the Church of Rome with the Scriptures and primitive records of the Church there is no cause to think that the Catholick Church is disowned by laying them aside It is true it was an extraordinary act of Secular Power in Church maters to inforce the change without any consent from the greater part of the Church But if the matter of the change be the restoring of Lawes which our common Christianity as well as the Primitive orders of the Church of both which Christian Powers are borne Protectors make requisite the secular power acteth within the sphere of it and the division is not imputable to them that make the change but to them that refuse their concurrence to it Well had it been had that most pious and necessary desire thereof to restore publick Penance been seconded by the zeal and compliance of all estates and not stifled by the tares of Puritanisme growing up with the Reformation of it For as there can be no just pretense of Reformation when the effect of it is not the frequentation of Gods publick service in that forme which it restoreth but the suppressing of it in that form which it rejecteth So the communion of the Eucharist being the chiefe office in which it consisteth the abolishing of private Masses is an unsusticient pretense for Reformation where that provision for the frequenting of the communion is not made which the restoring of the order in force before private Masses came in requireth Nor can any meane be imagined to maintaine continuall communion with that purity of conscience which the holinesse of Christianity requireth but the restoring of Penance In fine if any thing may have been defective or amisse in that order which the Church of England establisheth it is but justice to compare it in grosse with both extreames which it avoideth and considering that it is not in any private man to make the body of the Church such as thâ—y could wish to serve God with to rest content in that he is not obliged to become a party to those things which he approves not conforming himself to the order in force in hope of that grace which communion with the Church in the offices of Gods service promiseth For consider againe what meanes of salvation all Christians have by communion with the Church of Rome All are bound to be at Masse on every Festivall day but to say onely so many Paters and so many Aves as belong to the hour Not to assist with their devotions that which they understand not much lesse