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
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
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
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
them hee is fain to argue very hard that their women ought their men ought not to be vailed at divine Service Concluding that if his reasons would not prevail the contentious must rest in this That wee have no such custome neither the Churches of God Why so if particular Churches be not tied to keep unity with the whole And by and by proposing another disorder in that they received not the Eucharist in commune poore and rich hee reproveth it as contrary to that which hee had delivered to them from the beginning Concluding that The rest will I set in order when I come So 2 Thess II. 25. Stand therefore brethren and hold fast the Traditions which yee have been taught either by word of mouth or by any letter of ours Neither can it be imagined that all Christians should be bound to heare the Apostles and not be bound to hold those things for Lawes to their conversation in maters of Religion which the Apostles should teach them to that purpose Of this nature is the decree at Jerusalem Acts XV. 20 28. that the then Churches of the Gentiles should abstain from things strangled and bloud as well as from fornication and the pollution of Idols For what is the ground or the purpose of it but to preserve them in unity with the Churches of Jews become Christians Of this nature is that blessing or Thanksgiving mentioned by S. Paul 1 Cor. XIV 16 17. 1 Tim. II. 1. being as I have showed in a Discourse of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church pag. 350-370 a form of Prayer or Thanksgiving delivered in substance by the Apostles for which the Sacrament of our Lords Supper hath been alwaies called the Eucharist because it is to be celebrated with it Of the same nature is tha order which S. James gives of praying for the sick anointing them with oile aswell for the forgivenesse of their sins as for the recovery of their bodily health James V. 14 15. Which I suppose no man will deny that it concernes all Churches alike If there be this evidence in the Scriptures for the beginnings of Church Law the practice of the Church from this beginning will afford much more Hee that would deny the Tradition of the Rule of Faith what will hee say to the Creed of the Apostles Not that I would have the words and syllables of it to containe whatsoever it is necessary for the salvation of a Christian to believe But because the Creed is not the words of the Creed but the sense and meaning of them together with that coherence and dependence of the parts thereof one upon and with another which the reasons and grounds of them inforce But first let it be understood that I make a difference between the Rule of Faith and the substance of Christianity Supposing Christianity to consist partly in mater of Faith partly in mater of maners Partly in things to be believed partly in things to be done though the Creed extend onely to mater of Faith There is nothing more evident in the practice of the whole Church before the world had admitted the profession of Christianity than this That there was a time allowed and required by the Church for those that professed themselves converted to believe the truth of Christianity to give trial of their conversation before they were admitted to Baptisme The Constitutions of the Apostles VIII 32. name three years but with this limitation that if any man demonstrate extraordinary zele to Christianity hee be received without so long trial Therefore if Clemens Alexandrinus require five it makes no difference For what marvail if several Churches at several times had several customes when as upon extraordinary occasions they were dispensable The Constitutions require extraordinary trial of those that had practised any sort of Magick judging by the experience of the times that it was hard to part with such superstitions It is enough for my purpose that during this time they might learn to behave themselves as Christians by conversing among Christians by coming to Church and bearing a part in the praises of God and hearing the Scriptures read and expounded And what is more notorious in the practice of the ancient Church than the difference between Missa Catechumenorum and Missa Fidelium Between that part of the Office of the Church which Pretenders to Christianity were admitted to or Hearers that is Scholars and Learners of it and that which was peculiar to Believers that is those that were Baptized and made Christians It is the designe of Clemens Alexandrinus his Paedagogus to show how the Word whether our Lord Christ or his Gospel is the Pedagogue of mankinde in bringing them to be Christians Not as wee mistake that word to signifie the Master of a School but as the fashion was then for men of quality to appoint a sonne a Governor to conduct him to School and home againe to attend on him at his exercises and upon all occasions to put him in minde how it might become him to behave himself and to report to his Father if hee proved untractable Thus hee maketh Pretenders to Christianity to be conducted by our Lord Christ and his Gospel in the conversation of Christians till they come to demand their Baptisme of the Church As it is manifest by the end of the Book where this Governor conducting his charge to the Church gives him up into his own hands so hee saith expresly as no more Governor of children but Master of men in the School of his Church Supposing then the point of maners and godly life to be part of the substance of Christianity it is evident that the Church alwaies acknowledged a certain Rule of Faith in that those who were thus prepared were alwaies taught their Creed that is required to repete it and heare it expounded by those whom the Church trusted for that purpose It is not my intent here to insist that the words of the Creed were delivered by the Apostles themselves or that the Rule of Baptisme delivered by our Lord in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost is not a sufficient Symbole or cognizance for a Christian For what is there necessary to the salvation of all Christians that is not contained in the profession of him that desires to be baptized into this Faith But it is enough for my present purpose that it was alwaies requisite that whosoever is baptized should be instructed upon what termes hee is to expect to be saved by Christ and that which all were required to professe for that purpose to be the Rule of Faith For whether it may appeare that this or that is of that nature must come to trial though the question be only of the sense of the Creed supposing that the very words were delivered by the Apostles themselves For example It is not possible to render a reason of the coming of Christ not mentioning the fall of Adam nor of that not
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
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
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
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
the motives of Christianity could never have prevailed to introduce it into the belief and profession of all Christendom had they not been true But it followeth not therefore that Christianity beeing settled and a Power to conclude the Church lawfully vested in some members of it in behalf of the whole within due bounds The act of this Power transgressing the due bounds shall not be able to produce in so great a Body an opinion of the like obligation upon the expresse act of this Power as upon Tradition truly derived from the Apostles For the truth of Christianity professed called in question mens lives and fortunes which they were not therefore so ready to ingage upon an imposture But if when Soveraigns own the act of that Power which concludeth the Church hee that acknowledges it not calls in question his estate and reputation or whatsoever good of this world the protection of the Church ingageth Upon this account then it is possible that innovation should come into the Church without calling in question the common principle that nothing is to be admitted which comes not from the Apostles Nay without calling in question other points of Christianity so received Because nothing hinders things inconsistent with or at least impertinent to that which the Apostles have delivered to be received as consequent to that which indeed they have delivered though not as expresly contained in the same And because I would not speak without instance in a businesse so general I demand of those that hold this opinion whether they believe that the Greek and Latine Church at such time as the Schism fell out between them did both believe Tradition as well as Scripture And when it appears that there was no visible difference between them in that regard at that time I shall desire them to tell mee what they think of their demand that all Sectaries have alwayes left Tradition to betake themselves to Scripture alone For though I pretend not to suppose either the one party or the other guilty of Schism or Heresie in this place yet I pretend it visible to common sense that they who pretend to receive nothing but from the Apostles may think that which is not to be received from the Apostles unlesse contradictories may be both true at once Another instance I will give that learned Gentleman Tho. White who professeth to put Rushworths Dialogues into the world as his ward and an Orfane out of the book which hee hath published of the mean state of souls between death and the general Judgment to show that there is a Tradition of the Church that the greatest part of the souls of Christians that are not damned continue in a state of joy or grief proportionable to the affection they had to this world while they were of it to be purged thereof at the general Judgment but are not translated by any prayers of the Church to the kingdom of heaven from Purgatory pains For I demand of him that believes this whether it be received now or not how hee will defend his Ward that maintains the present Tradition to be alwaies the same For if it be said that it is not decreed by the Church though generally believed and practiced accordingly I will say that my businesse is done when the most votes by so many degrees are consenting to that which hee maintains is contrary to the Tradition of the Apostles his vote and perhaps two or three more in the communion of the Church of Rome not hindring that which is received in practice to be a more effectual Law in force than abundance of things inacted in writing that will never come to effect A third instance I will give in the difference between the Reformation and the Church of Rome concerning the Canon of Scripture Supposing that the late Scholastical History thereof hath made evidence that those books belonging to the Old Testament which the Council of Trent maketh Canonical Scripture were never received for such from the Apostles In as much as it is evident that there were in all ages of the Church that did not take them for Canonical Scripture For this being supposed what question can remain that this decree cannot be taken to proceed from Tradition of the Apostles But from a mistake in the Power of the Church as grounded upon a gift of infallibility tyed by God upon the visible act of persons inabled to decree in Council Otherwise men of reason would not have taken upon them to make that Canonical Scripture which there is evidence that they never received for Canonical Scripture And indeed I who have no more to demand here but that something may be thought by the Church to come from the Apostles which in truth it never received from the Apostles do seek no more by the premises but this That no general presumption from the present Church be receivable against evidence of historical truth in the records of by-past ages That men will not take that for the Tradition of the Catholick Church which some part of the Church they see hath not owned for such That they will abate of the generality of their position as the particulars out of which the induction must rise may require I take not upon mee to say here that any foundation of Faith necessary to the salvation of all hath been or can have been extinguished by Tradition of the present Church But I say here that something may be taken by the present Church to come from the Apostles which in truth comes not from the Apostles And so long as that is true I say that the choice of Religion cannot be prejudged by common sense without taking into consideration the weight of those truths which may appear to be held otherwise by the present Church then originally they have been received from the Apostles Now to that which is said that unlesse Christianity continue as it was delivered the possibilities provided by God to that end will be in vaine Though it be a dispute as unseasonable here as to little purpose yet because it requires no more than common sense to judge I say that the ends of Gods creatures and works are none of Gods ends My meaning is that it is one thing to say God would have this to be the end of his creature happinesse for example to be the end of man another thing to say that hee made man to bring him to happinesse The difference being the same in the works of his providence whether it be said that hee provided such means as of their nature tended to propagate the truth of Christianity preached by the Apostles to all posterity or that hee intended thereby to propagate the same In a word whether it be said to be Gods end or the end of his works And truly hee that sayes it was Gods end consequently sayes that God falls short of his end if it come not to passe But hee that will speak of God with reverence must not imagine
their turn that differences in religion should be everlasting the subject of great Volumes written for and again Ye to them that are content to set aside that which cannot here be decided I am confident there remains so little to be said that the resolution of them will appear to be meer consectaries and inferences from that truth which hitherto hath been premised For supposing that which common sense is able to inform that the writings which wee call Apocrypha are more ancient than the Church of Christ And that whether they were written by inspiration from God as wee believe the Law and the Prophâ—â—s to have been the Church never had any expresse revelation beside the credit upon which it received them from the Synagogue it remains that whether they were received by the Synagogue as inspired by God is all that can remain questionable Seeing it is not within the compasse of common sense to imagine that being not inspired by God at the beginning when they were penned they can become inspired by God by virtue of any act of the Church inducing them to be received for such Here then is to be seen the use of that distinction which was made between the Church as a Society of men visible to common sense and the same Church as a Society of men founded by God and visible onely to the faith of Christians For the belief of this later presupposes the truth of Christianity the motives whereof without more ado must evidence the truth of the Scriptures And so this question must be decided by such means as are more evident than the being of the Church in this later sense to wit by the being thereof in the former sense And this is that which I said that the testimony of the Synagogue in maters of this nature is every whit of as much force as the testimony of the Church Both of them proceeding upon the same evidence which the visible consent of such a company of men advanceth to common sense In fine if it may appear that the writings in question were from the beginning admitted by the Synagogue in the nature of writings inspired by God there will remain no cause why they should not be received into the same credit with other writings whereof the Old and New Testament consisteth If it may appear to the contrary it will be utterly in vain to allege any act of the Church to inforce that which is as evidently beyond the Power of the Church as it is evident that there is such a thing as the Church Neither can there be any question whether these writings were ever received by the Synagogue in this nature seeing it is evident that they do not receive any Prophets after Malachi I will not undertake that they do not believe that any body after that time was inspired by God to foretell things to come For that is not all that belongs to those whose writings are to be received as inspired by God It must appear further that they are sent by God to his people with commission to declare his will to them There must be evidence that they are moved to speak by the Holy Ghost and by consequence the people of God to whom they are moved to speak obliged to receive them How else should the gifts of Gods Spirit and the commission upon which they that have it are sent challenge of duty the acknowledgment of Gods people I reade in Josephus of divers things foretold with truth after this time nor I do I finde my self obliged to maintain that the motions were not from God But in as much as they were not furnished with such means as God appoints to manifest unto his people whom hee sends on his message they are not to receive them as sent from God whatsoever his secret purpose may be in sending such motions but shall alwaies remain obliged to govern themselves according to his will otherwise declared Now there is nothing more manifest than the declaration of Josephus intending to acquaint the Gentiles with the Faith and Laws of the Jews That untill the time of Artaxerxes that succeeded Xerxes being in his opinion the time whereof I speak the Prophets had written the relation of their own times But after that time things were written indeed but not with the like credit because there was no succession of Prophets Cont. Ap. I. And what can be more agreeable to the conclusion of the Prophet Malachi IV. 4 where having warned them to give heed to the Law of Moses the Statutes and Ordinances which God by him had given Israel Behold saith hee I send you Elias the Prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord come and hee shall turn the hearts of the Fathers to the children and of the children to the Fathers least I come and smite the Land with a curse Which the Gospell tell us was fulfilled in sending John the Baptist to make way for the Christ the Chief and end of all the Prophets Luke I. 17. Mat. XI 14. XVII 12. according to the saying of the ancient Jews that the Christ is to be annointed that is solemnly invested in his Office by Elias And for this reason when Judas Maccabeus purged the Temple and the question was what should be done with the stones of the Altar that had been polluted it is said 1 Mac. IV. 46. And they laid up the stones in a fit place in the Mount of the Temple untill a Prophet should come and give answer concerning them And speaking of the persecution after the death of Judas it is said 1 Mac. IX 27. And there fell out so great tribulation in Israel as had not been from the day that no Prophet had been seen in Israel And this time it is whereof it is either said or prophesied Psal LXXIV 10. Wee see not our tokens there is no Prophet any more neither any that understandeth any thing Now it is manifest that in the Scriptures as well as in the Jews writings the name of Prophet is not understood onely of foretelling things to come but of uttering things unknown to humane understanding And so the Law and the Prophets contains all the Scriptures of the Old Testament If therefore there were no Prophesie from those times to the coming of our Lord and John the Baptist it followeth that there is no Scripture inspired by God left us by those times according to the words of Eusebius in his Chronicle at the XXXII year of this Artaxerxes Hucusque Hebraeorum divinae Scripturae annales temporum continent Hither to the divine Scriptures of the Hebrews contain the annals of the times And the Synagogue in S. Jerome in Es cap. XLIX lib. XIII Post Aggaeum Zachariam Malachiam nullos alios Prophetas usque ad Joannem Baptistam videram From Haggai Zachary and Malachy to John the Baptist I had seen no other Prophets And so S. Austine de Civ Dei XVII 24. Toto ille tempore ex quo
Valerianus de Flavigny Professor of the Ebrew in the University of Paris written in opposition to an opinion vented in the Preface to the great Bible lately published there in disparagement of the Ebrew Copy of the Old Testament Where hee shall see that opinion refuted with that eagernesse and the contrary attested by the opinions of so many Divines of so great note in the Church of Rome since that Council that no man that sees them can deny that notwithstanding the decree it is free for every man to maintain the original Copies to be authentick And truly hee that should affirm the credit of the Scripture to stand upon the decree of the present Church or upon the testimony of the Spirit must by consequence have recourse to the same visible decree or to the same invisible dictate whensoever it shall be necessary to accept or refuse the reading of any text of Scripture with that faith which if it be false the whole truth of Christianity will be forfeit What Rushworth and his possession would do to evidence what reading of the Scripture is indeed authentick when as it doth not appear what is the reading which the Church is truly in possession of let him advise For in that case hee must expresly avow the consequence of his position that the Scripture is not considerable in resolving Controversies of Faith Because the Church is not in possession of the certain reading of any Scripture For if hee say hee hath made short work in that question having discharged the Scripture of being necessary to the Church and therefore acquitted himself of any necessity to show how wee may come by true Scripture and in stead thereof and all other means of deciding Controversies in the Church established the tradition presently in possession First it will be easier for mee to verifie the short Rule of Faith by the Scriptures interpreted according to that which by records may appear to have been from the beginning of force in the Church than it will be for him to show what is the Tradition which the Church is in possession of at present And that this being showed I shall not need to fear any great danger that hee may object from the variety of reading which may be found in several Copies the necessity of salvation being secured And then in the next place to say That the Scripture is not necessary though not for the salvation of every Christian yet for the salvation of the Body of Christians which is the Church Though that faction which separation ingenders will suffer no opinion to be plausible but those which are in extreams Yet I hope the malice of Satan hath not yet debauched the ears of Christians to indure And thus as afore it was settled that the whole Scripture is received for the word of God upon the credit of Tradition so of every part and parcel of it wherein the credit of several Copies consisteth it is consequently to be said that nothing can oblige the faith of a Christian to receive it unquestionably for the word of God the Tradition whereof is not unquestionable But thus mâ—ch being settled That what was originally delivered in Greek and Ebrew is to be received for the authentick Word of God What was originally delivered in Greek and Ebrew may still remain questionable That is to say this being agreed it may still remain questionable what Copies they are that do contain that which was originally delivered in Greek and Ebrew How probable it is I need not yet say but any man of common sense must say that it is possible through the changes that time is able to produce that the translations shall prove better than the originals and that the Scriptures shall be truer read among those that have received than among those that delivered them And this is indeed the true state of the question which is now come to be disputed upon due terms as it seems To wit whether the Ebrew Copies which now wee have from the Jews and the Greek Copies of the New Testament now extant contain that Scripture which all Christians are bound to receive upon their Christianity not onely in opposition to the Vulgar Latine which the Council of Trent injoyneth and to the authority of the present Church thinking that it is concluded in that decree but in opposition to that Tradition which other ancient Copies either original or translated may and do contain and evidence In which point I shall in the first place professe as concerning the Old Testament that I finde it no inconvenience but a great deal of reason to grant that at what time those books were made up into a Body and consigned unto the Synagogue the reading which wee have received from them was not delivered as unquestionable so that it should be any prejudice to the Law of God to suspect it but as the most probable and by admitting whereof no prejudiee to the said Law could follow And the safety of this position both Jews and Christians will witnesse with mee For if the Jews rruly acknowledg and insist that their Judaism is sufficiently grounded and witnessed by the leter of the Old Testament which wee have the Christians that their Christianity is as sufficiently to be evidenced by the Copies wee have as Christianity was intended to be delivered by the Scriptures of the Old Testament Is it possible that it should be a mater of jealousie for mee to admit that in that Body of the Old Testament which the Christians have received from the Jews there may be found some passages the reading whereof was not received as unquestionable when the Body of the Old Testament was consigned to the Synagogue from whence the Church receiveth it I say not when this time was nor would I have that which I affirm here to stand upon a circumstance so disputable I do believe the Jews when they tell us of the men of the Great Synagogue after the return from the Captivity from whom and by whom the Scriptures they believe were settled and delivered to their posterity I do also believe that this Assembly might and did indure whilest the Grace of Prophets had vogue and was in force among Gods people For if I believe them when they tell mee that there was such a company of men I cannot disbelieve them that the Prophets Haggai Zachary and Malachi the Scribe Esdras the same with Malachi as they tell us for any thing I know for why should I not believe Malachi being appellative and signifying my messenger to be Esdras his surname given him from that which is prophesied Mal. III. 1 Mordecai Nehemias Josue the son of Josedok and many others of that time were of it But shall I believe that their Prophetical grace was imployed to decide the true reading of the Scripture shall I believe that a new revelation was given to notifie how every leter and syllable was to be read when neither the consequence of the mater required it
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
answer this question then which we are thus secured that it cannot be answered to the prejudice of the Church and the faith thereof It will be worth the while to compare the discourse of our Lord to the company that followed him to Capernaum in the sixth of John with this to Nicodemus For no man can be so unreasonable as to imagine that the Sacrament of the Eucharist was instituted by our Lord at the time of that discourse or by virtue of it of the institution whereof we have so due account in the Gospells before the suffering of our Lord. And yet it would be a strange thing to imagine that all that long discourse of our Lord should have no relation to that Sacrament Especially seeing it is so agreeable to all reason that our Lord should deliver unto his disciples the effect of his Gospel in such terms as suted best with the ceremony of that Sacrament wherewith he intended to establish the same For supposing the eating of the flesh of Christ crucified and the drinking of his blood to be the consideration of his passion tending to a resolution of taking up his Crosse we have in it the summe of Christianity consisting in the bearing of Christs Crosse that is in conforming our selves to his sufferings Report we this to the discourse of our Lord with Nicodemus and it will seem strange to me that any man should marvaile that when the Sacrament of Baptisme was not yet instituted our Lord should propose his Gospel to him upon this ground that no man born of the flesh could attain to the kingdome of God without being born againe of water and the holy Ghost Seeing that whether he understood or not what our Lord meant by water it is enough that the Spirit which reneweth the old birth of the flesh dependeth upon that which it signifies whatsoever it is Whether Nicodemus for the understanding of our Lord betake himselfe to the consideration of the several Baptismes of the law or to the Baptism of John the Baptist or to the Baptisme by which proselytes were made Jews which divers learned men have both declared and alleadged to the clearing of this difficulty to very good purpose certaine it is by the premises that the condition of salvation is the profession of Christianity by baptisme that the gift of the holy Ghost is not promised upon any other terms Therefore the Sacrament of Baptisme being instituted there is no assurance of salvation without it where the precept thereof takes place therefore the first birth of the flesh is liable to originall sinne CHAP. X. The Old Testament chargeth all men as well as the wicked to be sinfull from the wombe David complaineth of himselfe as born in sinne no lesse then the Wise man of the children of the Gentiles How Leviticall Lawes argue the same And temporall death under the Old Testament The book of Wisdome and the Greek Bible BUt it is requisite that we look into the Old Testament to see what arguments of the same will discover themselves there provided that we be advised not to expect the reasons upon which the necessity of the Gospel is grounded clearly expressed there where the Gospel it felf is but intimated Those that will not admit the Faith of the Church without such proofes as themselves require may with the Jewes disbelieve the Gospel if our Lord will not prove it by such miracles as they would have and when and where they would have them done But admitting the truth of Christianity upon such reasons as God hath made effectuall to subdue the world to it it will be consequently necessary that there should be arguments of originall sinne in the Old Testament but darker then those which have been and shall be propounded out of the New Certainly it deserveth much consideration that Moses saith Gen. VI. 5. And the Lord saw that great was the evil of man upon earth and every imagination of the thoughts of his heart onely evil all the day long And againe Gen. VIIâ— 8. Upon smelling Noahs sacrifice God saith to himself I will no more curse the earth for man because the imagination of mans heart is evil from his youth For first God declares himselfe as a severe judge to take vengeance upon the sinnes of mankind by the deluge because the world was overflowed with sinne And afterwards either for the same reason because sinne cannot be washed out no not with the waters of a deluge so long as mankind is in being upon the earth or notwithstanding it he declares that he will curse the earth no more for mans sake Here it will be impossible to render a reason of that deluge of sinne which first brought a deluge of waters but could not overcome Gods goodnesse for mankind without a principle common to all mankind Such variety there is in their fansies such contrariety in the inclinations which they produce that it is impossible that they should agree in mischief were they meerly of Gods making And therefore Solomon having premised a hard word for women That seeking account one by one he had found a man of a thousand but a woman of all these he had not found inferreth Eccl. VII 29. Onely this behold I have found that God made man right but they have found out many devises Where I suppose he summoneth all men to inferre that between the uprightnesse in which God made man and the many crooked devises which they have found out to themselves there must something have fallen out to create a common principle to which those many inventions may be imputed But the act of Adam which passed away so soon as it was done had it left nothing behind it could have born the blame of it self alone and of nothing else When God commandeth the Israelites to put a fringe upon the corners of their garments he giveth this reason for it Numb XV. 39. And ye shall see it and remember all the commandments of the Lord and do them And not look after your hearts and your eyes after which ye commit whoredome Surely when he sets the lusts of their eyes and the imagination of their hearts in opposition to the commandment of God he justifies the words of our Lord Mat. X. 36. taken from the Prophet Mich. VII 6. to be fulfilled in every mans heart A mans enemies are those of his own house And Solomons taunt to the young man Eccles XI 9 Walk in the wayes of thine heart and in the light of thine eyes But know thou that for all these things God will bring thee to judgement Gods complaint by the Prophet Ezek. VI. 9. I am broken with their whorish heart which hath departed from me and with their eyes which go a whoring after their Idols Leadeth us for the reason and ground of both to that of the Apostle 1 John II. 16. For whatsoever is in the World the lust of the flesh the lust of the eyes and the pride of life is not of
That they were in being during the Apostles time Where and when the Haeresie of Cerinthus prevailed and that they were Gnosticks The beginning of the Encratites under the Apostles It is evident that one God in Trinity was then glorified among the Christians by the Fullnesse of the Godhead which they introduced in stead of it I Should have propounded that evidence for originall sinne which is drawn from the necessity of the Grace of Christ before that which is drawn from the Old Testament had it not been for that exception which the Socinians make to it by questioning the state of our Lord Christ before his coming in the flesh In regard whereof I hold it the shortest course to void this issue first and then see what witnesse the necessity of the Grace of Christ renders to originall sinne And because that Tradition of historicall truth which remaines in the records of the Church evidences that meaning of the Apostles writings which I shall advance I shall not make difficulty to propound in the first place some things upon undeniable record in the Fathers that may serve to argue the intent of the Apostles in this point I say then that it is a thing undeniable to common sense that what time the Apostles writ there were divers Hereses in being whether openly divided from the church or lurking within it under the common profession to get opportunity to pervert the simple and in fine to withdraw them from the Church The first whereof was that of Simon Magus who being discovered by the Apostles to have onely counterseited himselfe a Christian to get the power of doing those miracles which the Apostles did that he might draw followers after himselfe fell away from Christianity to declare himselfe among the Samaritanes who expected the Messias no lesse then the true Jewes to be the Christ whom the Apostles preached our Lord Jesus to be But withall it is certaine that he taught his disciples that he alone could reveale unto them God whom their Fathers knew not for that the world had been at first made by Angels in opposition to him who also gave the Law and brought in among men the difference between good and bad which he by that knowledge of God which he professed undertook to teach how men should become free from and by this freedome attaine the fellowship of God in the world to come It cannot then be said that the author of this heresie continued any longer in the Church because when S. Peter saies to him Acts VIII 22. 23. Repent thee of this thy malice and beseech God if perhaps this devise of thy heart may be forgiven thee For I see thou art in the gall of bitternesse and the bond of unrighteousnesse Though he answer Pray ye to the Lord for me that none of the things which you have said come upon me For we find not that his after behaviour deserved that he should be admitted to penance and reconcilement with the Church And when he declared himself to be the Christ as did after him his disciple Menander witnesse Irenâ—us Epiphanius and Theodoret when he being dead and gone his pretense appeared vaine then was he of necessity at defiance with the Church and all Christians But this must be said which upon the faith of historicall truth is averred by the same witnesses that of him and the seeds of his doctrine came afterwards many Sects the authors whereof not pretending themselves to be the Christ pretended all to make known God otherwise unknowne to their disciples and by that knowledge to save them in the world to come through abandoning them to all licentiousnesse in this Which sects were therefore called by the common name of Gnosticks or knowers though there was one of those Sects which had no other particular name besides Among these one was set up by Nicolas one of the seven Acts VI. 5. Or at least under his name For though some in Clemens Alexandrinus seem to hold him an holy man yet no man doubts that there was a sect of Gnosticks which either because raised by him or by others upon mistake of some things that he had taught bore his name Which though it be not requisite here to decide yet it is evident by S. John Apoc. II. 6. that then the Sect was on foot And though we dispute not the time when Basâ—lides at Alexandria Saturninus at Antiochia Valentine at Rome or in Cyprus and Aegypt Carpocrates Marke the Magician or others set up so as to affirme that they were in being when the Apostles writ yet it is evident that under the Apostles there were such as counterfeited themselves Christians with an intent to withdraw the simple sort of Christians to this doctrine which these Fathers of Hereticks in their severall times were the heads of whosoever then set them on work I will use but two arguments to evidence this The first is the common infection which they brought in every where of eating things sacrificed to Idols that is to say of worshipping Idols For the feasts and entertainments of Idolaters consisting of those things which had been sacrificed to their Idols to feast with them was to communicate in their Idolatries This cannot be more evident then it is evident by S. Paul 1 Cor. X. 7. Nor be ye Idolaters as some of them were as it is written The people sate down to eat and drink and rose up to play The Idolatry of the Israrlits consisting in the feast as well as in their sacrifices And by Moses Exod. XXXIV 15 16. Least thou make a league with the inhabitants of the Land and they go a whoring after their gods and sacrifice to their gods and invite thee and thou cat of their sacrifices And thou take of their daughters to thy sons and their daughters go a whoring after their gods and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods Which you see how punctually it came to passe in the businesse of Baal Peor Num. XXV Now it is manifest by the most ancient Writers of the Church Justine the Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus Irenâ—us Tertulliane Origen that the Gnosticks did generally communicate in the Idolatries of the Gentiles whose testimonies have been produced by Doctor H. Hammond in divers of his writings And the reason is plaine by that old observation That the gods of the heathens are good fellows but the true God onely a jealous God That is to say That false gods never grutched one another the worship of God because all set up by the devil to whose service that worship redounded For the Gnosticks being themselves Idolaters and Magicians it is no marvaile that they communicated as freely in the Idolatries of the Gentiles as they in one anothers Idolatries But it is no lesse manifest that these Heresies which the Apostles writ against agreed all in teaching to eat things sacrificed to Idols and to communicate with Idolaters For the way of Balaam in which they are by the Apostles charged to go
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
the Church and to make voâ—â— the Laws which settled it they cryed up this position as much as the rest But when it came to order that confusion which they had made themselves they then found it necessary to limit both the mater and form though not the words which the offices of divine service should be celebrated with Which what was it but Plowdens case that for the form of Gods service to be prescribed by themselves it is not only lawful but requisite by the Church altogether abâ—â—inable And indeed those who must needs take upon them to appoint the persons who are to minister to the People must needs take upon them to appoint the form in which it was to be done They who make the one to depend upon the moâ—ion of Gods Spirit must make the other do the like though never able to make evidence of any such motion in any person that ever pretended it And yet is that all that ever hath been alledged so farre as I know for all opinions so new to Gods Church That S. Paul forbiddeth to quench the spirit 1 Thes V. 19. I do not deny that other texts of S. Paul have been alleged who in 1 Cor. XXI XIV discourseth so largely of the use of spiritual graces ordering also how they should be exercised and imployed in the said Church Nor that writting to the Romans VIII 23. 26. 27. he saith That the Spirit which groaneth for the resurrection in those that have the first fruits of it helpeth the infirmities of the Saints not knowing what to pray for as they ought interceding for them with grones unutterable which the searcher of hearts knowing the mind of the Spirit findeth to be made after the will of God But in these sayings there is nothing like a precept much lesse such a one as may seem to oblige the whole Church On the contrary the evidences are so frequent and so palpable in the discourse of S. Paul to the Corinthians that the Graces whereof he speaketh are miraculous Graces such as God then furnished the Church with to evidence the presence of his Spirit in it as well as 〈◊〉 their edification in Christianity assistance in Gods service that it were madnesse to require the Church to sollow the rules which suppose them which now appear no more in the Church And truly with what conscience can he alledge against the Church of Rome that miracles are ceased the grace whereof is ranked by S. Paâ—l with those which tend to the edification of the Church 1 Cor. XII 8. 9 10 28 29 30. who challengeth for himselfe or his fellows the priviledge of those Graces in Gods Church With what conscience can they hear S. Paul say 1 Cor. X. 17. That the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit with And challenge themselves the priviledge of profiting the Church by Teaching or by Praying without any manifestation of the Spirit For are they not challenged every day to make manifest that ever any of them did speak by Gods Spirit and not by the Spirit of this World inspiring the fruits of the flesh by carnal or rather diabolical pride innovating in matters of Faith and destroying the uniformity of Gods service And therefore when S. Paul having said Quench not the Spirit addeth Deipise not Prophesies what hath been alleged what can be alleged why it should not be thought that he repeateth in brief that order which he had declared so largely to the Corinthians that the grace of speaking in unknown languages should not be discountenanced in the Church and so the Spirit extinguished But that Prophesies the grace whereof he there preferreth so farr before it should no way be neglected for it Truly he that saith The manifestation of the spirit is given to all to profit with doth say in effect that the Spirit which groâ—neth for the resurrection in them which have the first fruits that is the prime graces of it makes intercession for the Saints according to God by helping that infirmity of theirs whereby they know not what to pray for of themselves For those who had not alwayes had the Apostles Doctrine sounding in their ears but onely were instructed by them and their fellows so farr as to be fit for Baptism remaining neverthelesse novices in Christianity why should we think them fit to know what to pray for in all occasions Why should we think it strange that God should give the first fruits of his Spirit to profit them with in this case But the faith of Christ with the reasons and consequences thereof being setled and the order of the Church being established as the gift of miracles ceased as well to the bodily health and support of Christians and the Church as to the demonstration of Gods presence and witnesse to the truth of Christianity As the delivering of incorrigible sinners to Satan to the destruction of the flesh by bodily diseases and death ceased when obedience to Gods Church was established so is it no marvail if the Graces of Gods Spirit which profited the Church in teaching them what to pray for should no more be granted when the Church had not onely knowledge but good order established by which those offices might be preformed to the profit and edification of Christians Let them then who find that they can cure the sick by their prayers anoint them with oyl upon that ground and to that purpose Let them who can sing Psalms extempore so as to become the praises of God because S. Paul saith When ye come together every one of you hath a Psalm hath a doctrine hath a tongue hath a revelation hath an interpretation And that may be as well suggested upon the place as afore hand S. Paul saith that if a stranger coming into the Church should hear divers speak in strange languages that which they made not their hearers understand he would say were madd 1 Cor. XIV 23. dotwithstanding that it might appear that they would not speak those languages but by Gods Spirit I will onely demand of them not to abuse and dishonour Gods Spirit by imputing â—nto it those operations which it is not for the honour of God to acknowledge And then tell them that they must be tried by our common Christianity whether that they pretend to say or to do by the same agree with it But further order of Gods service in the Church let us proceed according to the principles premised comparing that which we find extant in the Scriptures with the original and general practice of Gods Church to say That the service of God consisting of his praises the doctrine of the Scriptures read and expounded and the prayers of the Church especially those which the communion of the Eucharist is celebrated with In the first place the Psalms of David that is the Book of Psalms is necessarily by the practice of the whole Church a form of Gods praises determined to the Church Which conclusion as it
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
AN EPILOGUE TO THE TRAGEDY OF THE Church of England BEING A Necessary Consideration and brief Resolution of the chief Controversies in Religion that divide the Western Church Occasioned by the present Calamity of the CHURCH of ENGLAND In three BOOKS viz. Of I. The Principles of Christian Truth II. The Covenant of Grace III. The Lawes of the Church By HERBERT THORNDIKE LONDON Printed by J. M. and T. R. for J. Martin J. Allestry and T. Dicas and are to be sold at the sign of the BELL in St PAUL's Church-yard M.DC.LIX A PREFACE To all Christian Readers IT cannot seem strange that a man in my case removed by the force of the Warr from the Service of the Church should dedicate his time to the consideration of those Controversies which cause division in the Church For what could I do more to the satisfaction of mine own judgment than to seek a solution what truth it is the oversight whereof hath divided the Church and therefore the sight whereof ought to unite it But that I should publish the result of my thoughts to the world this even to them that cannot but allow my conversing with those thoughts may seem to fall under the Historians censure Sâ—ipsum fatiganâ—o nihil aliud quâm odium quaerere extremae esse dementiae That to take pains to get nothing but displeasure is the extremity of madness Socrates if wee believe his Apology in Plato could never rest for his Genius alwayes putting him upon disputes tending to convict men that they knew not what they thought they knew The displeasure which this got him hee makes the true cause of his death The opinion which I publish being indeed the fruit of more time and leisure of less ingagement to the world than others are under will seem a charge upon those who ingage otherwise And when besides so much interest of this world depends upon the divisions of the Church what am I to expect but Great is Diana of the Ephesians My Apology is this The title of Reformation which the late Warr pretended mentioned onely Episcopacy and the Service The effect of it was a new Confession of Faith a new Catechism a new Directory all new With chapter and verse indeed quoted in the margine but as well over against their own new inventions as over against the Old Faith of the Church This burthen was as easily kicked off by the Congregations as layed on by the Presbyteries As carrying indeed no conviction with it but the Sword and what penalties the Sword should inforce it with Which failing what is come in stead of it to warrant the salvation of Christians but that the Bible is preached which what Heresie disowneth and by them whom the Tryers count godly men Make they what they can of it I from my non age had embraced the Church of England and attained the Order of Priesthood in it upon supposition that it was a true Church and salvation to be had in it and by it Owning nevertheless as the Church of England did own the Church of Rome for a Church in which salvation though more difficult yet might be had and obtained That there is no such thing as a Church by Gods Law in the nature of a Body which this state of Religion requireth is opposite to an Article of my Creed who alwayes thought my self a member of such a Body by being of the Church of England The issue of that which I have published concerning that title of Reformation which the Warr pretended was this That they are Schismaticks that concurr to the breaking or destroying of the Church of England for those causes And the objection there necessarily starting Why the Church of England no Schismaticks in Reforming without the Church of Rome My answer was that the cause of Reforming must justifie the change which it maketh without consent of the Whole Church For the pretense of Infallibility in the Church on the one side the pretense of the Word and Sacraments for marks of the Church on the other side I hold equally frivolous As equally declaring a resolution never to be tried by reason in that which wee alwayes dispute For what dispute remains iâ— the Decrees of the Council of Trent be Infallible If that form of Doctrine and ministring the Sacraments which the Reformation may pretend be marks to distinguish a Church from no Church If they were where there is no such form there are no such marks And therefore no such thing as a Church Nor is it so easie to destroy these doubts in mens judgments as the Laws by which the Church of England stood And if the salvation of a Christian consist in professing the common Christianity as I show you at large shall not the salvation of a Divine consist in professing what he hath attained to believe when hee thinks the exigent of the time renders it necessary to the salvation of Gods people How shall hee otherwise be ministerial to the work of Gods Grace in strengthening them that stand in comforting and helping the weak in raising them that are fallen in resolving the doubtfull without searching the bottom of the cause Nay how shall hee make reparation for the offenses hee may have given by not knowing that which now hee thinks hee knows The causes of division have a certain dependence upon common principles a certain correspondence one with another which when it cannot be declared the satisfaction which a man intends is quite defeated when it is declared that dissatisfaction which the consideration of particulars of less waight causeth must needs cease Whether it were the distrust of my own ability or the love of other imployment or whatsoever it were that diverted mee from considering the consequence of those principles which I alwayes had till I might come to that resolution which now I declare Neither was I satisfied till I had it nor having it till I had declared it And if I be like a man with an arrow in his thigh or like a woman ready to bring forth that is as Ecclesiasticus saith like a fool that cannot hold what is in his heart I am in this I hope no fool of Solomons but with S. Paul a fool for Christs sake Now the mischiefs which division in the Church createth being invaluable all the benefit that I can perceive it yield is this that the offenses which it causeth seem to drown and swallow up as it were that offense which declaring the truth in another time would produce For Unity in the Church is of so great advantage to the service of God and that Christianity from whence it proceedeth that it ought to overshadow and cover very great imperfections in the Laws of the Church All Laws being subject to the like Especially seeing I maintain that the Church by divine institution is in point of right one visible Body consisting in the communion of all Christians in the offices of Gods service and ought by humane administration in point
of fact to be the same For the Unity of so great a Body will not allow that the terms should be strict or nice upon which the communion thereof standeth But obligeth all tâ—at love the general good of it to pass by even those imperfections in the Laws of it which are visible if not pernicious But where this Unity is once broken in pieces and destroyeâ— and palliating cures are out of date the offense which is taken at showing the true cure is imputable to them that cause the fraction not to him that would â—ee it restored For what disease was ever cured without offending the body that had it The cause of Episcopacy and of the Service is the cause of the whole Church and the maintenance thereof inferreth the maintenance of whatsoever is Catholick Owning therefore my obligation to the Whole Church notwithstanding my obligation to the Church of England I have prescribed the consent thereof for a boundary to all interpretation of Scripture all Reformation in the Church Referring my â—pinion â—n point of Fact what is Catholick to them who by their Title are bound to acknowledg that whatsoever is Catholick ought to take place While all English people by the Laws of the Church of England had suffiâ—iâ—nâ— and probable means of salvation ministred to them it had been a fault to acknowledg a fault which it was more mischief to mâ—nd than to bear with But when the Unity that is lost may as well be obtained by the primitive Truth and Order of the Catholick Church as by that which served the turn in the Church of England because it served to the salvation of more I should offend good Christians to think that they will stand offended at it In fine all variety of Religion in England seems to be comprised in three parties Papists Prelatical and Puritanes comprehending under that all parties into which the once common name stands divided All of them are originally as I conceive terms of disgrace which therefore I have not been delighted with using This last I have found some cause to frequent when I would signifie some thing common to all parties of it If with eagerness at any time the English Proverb says Loosers may have leave to speak I finde my self disobliged by the Papists in that desiring to serve God with all Christians they barr mee their CoÌ„munion by clogging it with conditions inconsistent with our common Christianity I finde my self disobliged by the Puritanes in that desiring to serve God with all Christians but acknowledging the Catholick Church I stand obliged by the Rule of it not to communicate with Hereticks or Schismaticks I complain for no Benefice or other advantage That desiring to communicate with all Christians I am confined for opportunity of serving God with his Church to the scartered remains of the Church of England is that for which I complain If owning this offense I suffer mine indignation at the pretense of Inâ—allibility or of Reformation to escape from mee I do not therefore intend to revenge my self by words of disgrace Let him that thinks so call mee Prelatical let him use mee with no more moderation than I use In the mean time I remain secured that the offense which my opinion may give is imputable in the sight of God to those that cause the division One offense I acknowledg and cannot help That I undertake a design of this consequence and am not able to go through with it as it deserves I should not have set Pen to paper till my materials had been prepared in writing that no term might have escaped mee unexamined Till the quotations of mine Authors had been all before mee so as to need no recourse to the Copies A labor which I have not been able every where to undergo In fine till I had cleared all pretense of obscurity or ambiguity in my language For the obscurity of my mater I am not sory for If writing in English because here the occasion commences the reasons by which I determine the sense of the Scriptures in the Original if the consequence oâ— it in some maters seem obscure I conceive it ought to teach the World that the people are made parties to those disputes whereof they are not able to be judges And I am willing to bear the blame of obscure if that lesson may be learned by the people The desire of easing my thoughts by giving them vent hath resolved mee to put them into the world â—ough-baked on purpose to provoke the judgments of all parties â—or the furnishing of a second Edition if God grant mee life with that which shall be missing in this I am therefore content to confine my self to the model of an abridgment and referr my self for the consent of the Church to those books which I am best satiâ—fied with in each point When that could not be done I have alleged authorities which I may call translatitias because I lay them down as I finde them alleged Not doubting that I justifie my opinion so farr as I desire to do here that there is no consent of the Church against it What the sense of the Church is positively and hath been into which I conceive that which here I say hath made mee a fair entrance I shall upon examination of particulars indeavor to give satisfaction in that which may be found missing here In the mean time it shall suffice to have advanced thus much towards the common interest of Christianity in the re-union of the Church But let no man therefore barre mee the lot of Reconcilers To be contradicted on all sides I profess no such thing It is enough for the greatest Powers in Christendom to undertake If it be an offense for a man of my years equally concerned with all Christians in our common Christianity to say his opinion upon what terms the parties ought to reconcile themselves it remains that offenses remain unreconcileable But contradiction from all parties I shall not be displeased with Hee that will tell mee alone in writing what hee findes fault with and why shall do a work of charity to mee alone Hee that will tell the world the same shall do mee the same charity that hee does the world in it Hee who can delight in that barbarous course which Controversies in Religion have been managed with among Christians by casting personal aspersions Let him rather do it than be silent provided the stuff hee brings be considerable to bear out such inhumanity among civil people But let him consider the dependences and concernments of the point hee speaks to let him not say for answer that these things are answered by our Divines It is easie to make â—bjections but not easie to clear difficulties And whether or no these difficulties were clear already I must referr it to the Reader to judge In the mean time though no arbitrator to chuse a middle opinion for partiâ—s to agree in I take upon mee the person of a Divâ—ne in
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
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
question hereafter for the Principles which here wee seek to decide but supposing sufficient reason propounded to make it evidently credible And hee that alleges Gods Spirit for what hee cannot show sufficient reason to believe otherwise may thank himself if hee perish by believing that which hee cannot oblige another man to believe Here wee must make a difference between those men whom God imployes to deal with other men in his name and those which come to God by their means For of the first it is enough to demand how it appears that they come from God To demand by what means hee makes his will known to them supposing they come from him is more than needs at least in this place For if it be granted mee that the Apostles and Prophets were the messengers of God suppose I cannot tell how Prophesies are made evident to the souls of them to whom the Spirit of God reveals them No body will question Whether or no hee ought to believe these whom hee acknowledges Gods messengers And therefore it will be no prejudice to my purpose to set aside all curious dispute how and by what means God reveales his messages to those whom by such revelations hee makes Prophets But those that derive their knowledg from the report of such as are believed to come from God must as well give account how they know that which they believe to come from such report as why such report is to be believed For if wee believe that God furnished those whom hee imployed with sufficient means to make it appear that they came on his message wee can dispute no further why their report is to be believed If wee believe it not there will be no cause why those who pretend themselves to be Gods messengers should not be neglected as fools or rejected as impostors Nay there will be no cause why wee should be Christians upon the report of those that show us not sufficient reason to receive them for Gods messengers But this being admitted and believed unlesse evidence can be made what was delivered by them that came on Gods message it is in vain to impose any thing on the Faith of them that are ready to receive whatsoever comes upon that score The resolution then of all controversies in Religion which the Church is divided about consists in making evidence what hath been delivered by them whom all Christians believe that God sent to man on his message And therefore there will remain no great difficulty about the force and use of reason in matters of Faith if wee consider that it is one thing to resolve them by such principles as the light of reason evidenceth another to do it by the use of reason evidencing what Gods messengers have delivered to us For all dispute in point of Faith tends only to evidence what wee have received from the authors of our Faith Till that evidence come doubt remaineth when it is come it vanisheth Without the use of reason this evidence is not made though not by that which the light of nature discovereth yet by those helps which reason imployeth to make it appear what wee have received from those from whom wee received our Christianity Which without those helps did not appear But if competition fall out between that which is thus evidenced to come from God on the one side and on the other side the light of reason seeming evidently to contradict the truth of it First wee are certain that this competition or contradiction is only in appearance because both reason and revelation is from God who cannot oblige us to make contradictory resolutions Then there is no help without the use of reason to unmask this appearance I will not here go about to controule that which may be alleged on either side in any particular point by any general prejudice chusing rather to referre the debate to that particular question in which cause of competition may appear then to presume upon any thing which the truth of Christianity the only supposition which hitherto I premise appeareth not so contain Only this I will prescribe It is not the exception of a Christian to say That which the light of reason evidenceth not to be possible is not true though commended to us by the same reasons which move us to be Christians For the nature of God the counsails of God the works of God being such things as mans understanding hath no skill of till it be enlightened by God from above That sense of Gods oracles which the motives of Faith do inforce is no lesse undisputable then it is undisputable whether that which God saith be true or not who inacts his revelations by those motives CHAP. II. The question between the Scripture and the Church which of them is Judge in matters of Faith Whether opinion the Tradition of the Church stands better with Those that hold the Scripture to be clear in all things necessary to salvation have no reason to exclude the Tradition of the Church What opinions they are that deny the Church to be a Society or Corporation by Gods Law THe cure of all diseases comes from the sound ingredients of nature when they get the upper hand and restore nature by expelling that which was against it Neither can the divisions and distempers of the Church be cured but by the common truth which the parties acknowledg when the right understanding of it clears the mistakes which mans weaknesse tainteth it with There is a sufficient stock of sound Principles left all the parties which I mean when all of them acknowledg the Scriptures that is so much of them as all agree to contain the word of God But supposing the truth of them to come from God First it remaines in difference how the meaning of them may be determined when doubt is made of it And then because nothing but the true meaning of the Scripture can be counted Scripture if there be a way to determine that Whether any thing over and above it is to be received for the word of God with it Concerning which point it is well enough known what opinions there are on foot When Luther first disputed against the Indulgences of Leo X Pope those that appeared in defense of them the Master of the Popes Palace and Eckius finding themselves scanted of mater to allege out of the Scriptures betook themselvs to the common place of the Church and the Power of it the force whereof stood upon this consequence That whatsoever the Church shall decree is to be received for unquestionable Afterwards certain Articles extracted out of Luthers Writings being condemned by a Bull of the Pope Luther interposes his appeal to a Council that should decree according to the Scripture alone This is the rise of the great Controversie still on foot between the Church and the Scripture between Scripture and the Tradition of the Church of what force each of them is in deciding controversies of Faith They that hold
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
is sufficient to evidence that it is the word of God which they contain This if wee can resolve in our way perhaps wee may discover ground to stand upon when wee come to the main Hee that sayes the Scriptures are to be believed for themselves exposes them to the scorn of unbelievers by tying himself to use no other reason for them least for that reason they should finde that credit which the seeking of it showes they had not of themselves Hee that sayes they are to be believed for the authority of the Church is bound to give account how wee shall know both that there is a Church which some persons may oblige And who is the Church that is who be the men whose act obliges the Church And that without alleging Scripture because hitherto wee have no reason to receive it And being but men how their Act obliges the Church which cannot be showed without showing that God hath founded a Corporation of his Church and given power to some men or some qualities or ranks of men in it to oblige the whole Which how it will be showed without means to determine the sense of the Scriptures the parties agreeing in nothing but the truth of Christianity and of the Scriptures is impossible to be said This position then induces that stop to all proceeding by reason which Logicians call a Circle When a man disputes in a round as a mill-horse grindes arguing this power to be in the Church by the Scriptures without which hee can say nothing to it and arguing the truth of the Scriptures back again by alleging the authority of the Church Which destroyes that supposition upon which all dispute of reason proceeds that nothing can be proved but by that which is better known than that which it proveth But are those that allege the spirit for the evidence upon which they receive the Scripture lesse subject to this inconvenience For is it not manifest that men may and do delude themselves with an imagination that Gods Spirit tells them that which their own Spirit without Gods Spirit conceives How then shall it discerned what comes from Gods Spirit what does not without supposing the Scriptures by which the mater thereof is discernable And is not this the same Circle to prove the truth of the Scriptures by the dictate of Gods Spirit and that by alleging the Scriptures To make the ground of this inconvenience still more evident I will here insist upon this presumption That the gift of the Holy Ghost presupposeth Christianity that is the belief and profession of the Christian Faith And therefore that no man can know that hee hath the Holy Ghost but hee must first know the truth of Christianity and of the Scriptures Not that it is my meaning either to suppose or prove in this place that whoso hath the Spirit of God doth or may know that hee hath it For that is one of those controversies which wee are seeking principles to resolve But that no man can know that hee hath the Spirit of God unlesse first hee know himself to be a true Christian That is to say that supposing for the present but not granting that a man can know that hee hath Gods Spirit and that it is Gods Spirit which moves him to believe this or that hee must first know what is true Christianity and by consequence the means to discern between true and false And this I propose for an assumption necessary to the evidencing of that which followes but not questioned by any party in the Church because it is a principle in Christianity that the Grace of the Holy Ghost is a promise peculiar to those that undertake it Who were they on whom the Holy Ghost was first bestowed Was it not the Apostles and the rest of Disciples assembled to serve God with the Offices of the Church that is to say already Christians When Philip had converted the Samaritanes came S. Peter and S. John to give them the Holy Ghost by laying on their hands till they were baptized Concerning the Disciples at Ephesus Acts XIX 1-6 there is some dispute whether they received the Holy Ghost by the imposition of S. Pauls hands by virtue of the Baptism of John which they had received before they met with S. Paul or whether they were baptized over and above with the baptisme of Christ and thereupon received the Holy Ghost by the laying on of S. Pauls hands But of this they that will have them to have been baptized only with S. Johns baptisme make no dispute that they were fully made Christians by it Can any thing be clearer than S. Pauls words Gal. II. 2-5 That by the hearing of Faith that is obeying it they had received the Holy Ghost which by the works of the Law they could not receive And 2 Cor. XI 4. If hee that cometh preach another Jesus whom wee preached not or yee receive another Spirit which yee received not or another Gospel which yee admitted not Another Jesus another Gospel inferreth another Spirit So Gal. III. 14. That the blessing of Abraham may come upon the Gentiles through Christ Jesus that yee may receive the promise of the Holy Ghost by Faith The promise of the Holy Ghost then supposeth the condition of Faith And Gal. IV. 6. Because yee are sons therefore God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts crying Abba Father Heb. VI. 6. It is impossible for those that were once inlightened and tasted the heavenly gift and became partakers of the Holy Ghost Upon inlightening that is baptisme followes the participation of the H. Ghost And seeing the resurrection of the flesh unto glory is ascribed by S. Paul to the Spirit of God that dwelt in it while it lived upon earth Rom. VIII 10 11. as the resurrection of our Lord Christ is ascribed to the Spirit of holinesse that dwelt in him without measure Rom. I. 4. John III. 34. of necessity the Holy Ghost dwelleth in all them that shall rise to glory But Baptisme assureth resurrection to glory Therefore it assureth the Holy Ghost by which they rise Nor can it be understood how wee are the Temple of God because the Spirit of God dwelleth in us 1 Cor. III. 16. but because the promise of the Holy Ghost dependeth upon that which distinguisheth Christians from other people In fine when our Saviour promiseth John XIV 23. If any man love mee hee will keep my word and my Father will love him and wee will come to him and abide with him Seeing the Father and the Son do dwell in those that love God by the grace of the Holy Ghost the gift of the Holy Ghost of necessity supposeth the love of God in them that have it And yet his discourse is more effectual Rom. VIII 1-9 That there is now no condemnation for those that are in Christ Jesus that walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit For as hee inferreth that if any man have not the
spirit of Christ hee is none of Christs So hee had premised Rom. V. 1-5 Being justified by Faith wee have peace towards God through our Lord Jesus Christ together with the joy of hope by the love of God poured out in our hearts through the Spirit of God which is in us The Kingdome of God consisting in righteousnesse and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost Rom. XIV 17. If it be here objected that the Grace of the Holy Ghost is necessary to bring a man to Christianity and therefore cannot suppose it Supposing this for the present but not granting it because it is in controversie and must be resolved by the grounds which wee seek It will be easie to distinguish between the grace of the Holy Ghost and the gift of the Holy Ghost For hee that is converted to believe the truth of Christianity may acknowledge it to be of Grace but must not presume of the gift of the Holy Ghost that it is bestowed on him for his own till his conversion be complete by undertaking the profession of Christianity If it be further alleged that Cornelius and his company received the Holy Ghost before they were baptized The answer is ready from that maxime of Law That every exception against a Rule establishes the Rule in cases not excepted Cornelius no Jew but converted from Idols to worship the true God under the promises which the Jewes expected with his company of the same Faith being in the state of Gods grace upon that account receives the Holy Ghost before Baptisme because God knew him ready to undertake the profession of Christianity so soon as it could appear to be commanded by God And this for the satisfaction of S. Peter and the Jewes in that secret which hereby begâ—n to be declared that the Gentiles as well as the Jewes belonged to the Church It is true the graces of the Holy Ghost are of two kindes For some of them are given for the benefit and salvation of those in whom they are Some for the benefit and edification of the Church And it is true that both kindes are meant and expressed by these Scriptures But it is no lesse true that neither of them is to be had but supposing the truth of Christianity and of the Scriptures For the first kinde is granted to none but those that imbrace Christianity with a sincere intention of living according to that which they professe Being indeed the help that God by his Gospel promises and allowes them to go thorough with that high and difficult profession which they undertake Wee see the Apostles forsake their Lord and make a doubt of his resurrection before the coming of the Holy Ghost Whom having received they are ready to professe Christ in the midst of utmost dangers And S. John as hee giveth the reason why the righteous sin not because their â—eed abideth in them that is the word of the Gospel by which they were ingendred anew to be Christians 1 John III. 9. So hee giveth the reason why they were not to be seduced by the Heresies of that time because the unction which they had received from the Holy One taught them to know all things 1 John II. 20 27. Thus the Unction of the Spirit supposes the seed of the Word and the seed of the Word inferres the Unction of the Spirit And as when the Word of God came to the Prophets they were withall possessed by Gods Spirit moving them to deliver it to the people So when the word of Faith is established in the heart of a Christian as David saith the Spirit of God possesseth him with an inclination both to professe it and to live according to it As for the second kinde it is true they are granted to those that are not heires of Gods promises as it appeares by the instances of Saul surprised with the Spirit of Prophesie when hee intended the death of David 1 Sam. XIX 23 24. Of those that have prophesied and cast out Devils and done miracles in our Lords name to whom hee shall say I know you not Mat. VII 22 23. Of Caiaphas who prophesied of our Lords death when hee was compassing of it John XI 49 -52. And of Balaam in the last place as all know But as the former kinde supposeth true Christianity in him that hath it so doth this correspondently suppose the profession of it as under the old Law the profession of the true God The tryal of a Prophet under the Law was not the doing of a miracle alone If hee seduced from God in stead of taking him for Gods messenger they were to put him to death Deut. XIII 1-5 So the tryal was the doing of a miracle under the profession of the true God Under the Gospel No man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus anathema nor can any man call Jesus Lord but by the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. XII 3. Supposing that a man speaketh such things as must come either from Gods Spirit or from evil Spirits the tryal is whether hee professe Christ or not And 1 John IV. 2 3. Every Spirit that confesseth Jesus come in the flesh to be Christ is of God And every Spirit that confesseth not Jesus Christ that is come in the flesh is not of God Every Spirit that is every inspiration which a man of himself cannot have God will not have his people so tempted that under the profession of the true Religion the Devils instruments should have power to work miracles to seduce them from it Upon these terms prophesied Saul under the Law and upon the same terms prophesied those under the Gospel whom our Lord will not own having done miracles in his name As for Caiaphas it doth not appear that hee spoke those words whereby S. John saith hee prophened of our Lords death by revelation or inspiration from God For the reason is given why hee prophened because hee was High Priest that year Now when the High Priests declared Gods orders to his ancient people there is no appearance that they were inspired by revelation with that which they declared But that putting on the Pontifical robes Gods will appeared by the brest-plate of Urim and Tummim though now wee know not how Accordingly to were Caiaphas his words ordered this gift being ceased many ages afore as to containe a Prophesie of our Lords death by Gods intent but without his But Balaams case is farre otherwise Arnobius advers Gent. I. tells us that Magicians in their operations met with contrary Gods whom hee calls Antitheos that would not suffer them to proceed Balaam met with the true God and knew him to be so and all his Inchantments controlable by him and yet sacrifices to false Gods that by their help hee might curse Gods people In this case Balaam though commanded as a subject is not as a friend inspired by God when God forces him to speak what hee would not If any man then resolve the credit of the Scripture into the
inward witness of Gods Spirit dictating to his Spirit that they are the word of God it will be utterly impertinent to our purpose For seeking as wee do the means to resolve one another it will be impertinent to allege that which though a man is inwardly satisfied with yet outwardly to another cannot appear And certainly if there be no reason to satisfie another man of the truth of the whole that is of Christianity or of the Scriptures It cannot be expected that there should be satisfaction why this or that should belong to the truth of Christianity or the intent and meaning of the Scriptures For of necessity whatsoever evidence can be made for this or that truth contained in the Scriptures must depend upon the reason for which Christianity is received as Gods truth In fine the reason why controversies in Religion may and are to be ended by dispute of reason is this as hath been premised because that the Holy Ghost which effectually moveth us to believe supposeth sufficient reason moving in the nature of an object proposed to believe Therefore neither the truth of Christianity nor the Scripture is admitted upon the dictate of Gods Spirit but supposing the reasons which convict us that they are to be admitted And correspondently the gift of the Holy Ghost that inableth to continue in the profession and exercise of Christianity supposeth the belief of that Christianity which a man from his heart professes And by consequence the reason why hee is to believe which will not fail to inferre the truth of the Scriptures But if it be said That any person or persons as Rulers of the Church have the promise of inspiration or revelation from God for a ground upon which others are to believe It hath been showed that all such grace supposeth the profession of Christianity and the truth of the Scriptures and therefore the grounds of the same If any man should say as I perceive some have a minde to say that the gift of Infallibility in the Church supposes no such inspiration or revelation but onely the qualities of such persons as have power to conclude the Church and that they do visibly proceed to determine It will be evident that they can no more challenge this right not supposing Christianity and the foundation of the Church than the High Priest of the Jewes could proceed to give answer by Uâ—im and Tummim not supposing that God had given the Law and appointed the Priest so to do The resolution of this Question may make it appear that Christians falling out among themselves maintain themselves upon such grounds as would leave no room for the truth of that Christianity which both suppose Had wee to do with the enemies of it it would easily appear wee must allege such reasons for the truth of Gods Word as might convince the enemies of it and not suppose the truth of it when the question is how it may appear to be true It were therefore fit to consider whether a man can reasonably be a Christian and yet question the truth of the Scriptures or rather not fit to consider that which there can be no doubt in The whole content of the Scripture is either the motives or the mater of Christianity They that professe Christianity suppose the motives of it true which they admit to be sufficient Supposing them true they cannot question the Scriptures that record them Supposing those Scriptures they cannot question those motives for true Whether sufficient is resolved by admitting Christianity Alwaies the same reason that moves a man to be a Christian resolves him to believe the Scripture neither would hee allege any other had hee to do with the enemies of Christianity What those motives are concernes not us proceeding upon supposition of common Christianity to determine differences within it Yet that I may be the better understood my meaning is That the miracles done by those from whom wee have the Scriptures is the onely motive to shew that they came from God and therefore that wee are obliged to receive what they preached and by consequence the Scriptures that containe it Not intending hereby to quit the advantage which the Law hath of Heathenism and the Gospel of the Law in regard of the reasonablenesse and holinesse of the mater of each above other respectively justified by the light of nature But because the businesse is at present onely to shew the evidence wee have that God did send whatsoever reason may be given why hee would send which without other evidence had remained unknown though never so probable or reasonable Not intending hereby to balk that witnesse which the Scriptures of the Old Testament yield to the truth of the New But because that witnesse depends upon the miracles done by Moses and the Prophets to evidence their Commission from God And so the credit which the New Testament hath from the Old is resolved into those miracles which evidenced the sending of Moses and the Prophets and consists in the miracle of fore-telling those things by the one which by the other are fullfilled I know the Jewes expresly deny the credit of the Law to depend upon any miracles done by Moses and the Prophets but onely upon the appearance of God at giving the Law to all that people and speaking to them mouth to mouth The like whereof not having been done nor to be done in giving Christianity belonging to all nations who could not meet at once to receive it they think themselves grounded thereupon that the Law is not nor could be reversed by it Thus are they content that God sending Moses on his ambussage with the miracles which hee gave him for his letters of credit shall be thought not to have convicted Pharao That the Law provided no legal tryal God no evidence to the conscience of his servants distinguishing true and false Prophets which cannot be imagined but by their sayings and doings predictions and other miracles Well may the delivering of the Law have circumstances which no other miraculous action recorded in the Scriptures can compare with Shall that obscure the glory of Christs resurrection fore-told by him expresse to witnesse the truth of his message Shall it make an Ocean of miracles done by him and his Apostles to stand for nothing Shall it disable God himself to do any thing competent to make faith of a message the nature whereof bore not those circumstances which hee had used afore Now if the reason why wee believe the Scriptures to come from God as they pretend be the motives of Christianity strange it is that a man should be troubled how to answer the difficulty that may be made how wee know the truth of those motives speaking onely to Christians which have admitted them to be true But I am sure neither the witnesse of the Church nor the dictate of the Spirit can be alleged to Infidels but by them that would have themselves and this Gospel laught at both at once Seeing
therefore that Christians do believe for the same reasons for the which Infidels ought to believe I shall yield that it is onely the credit of Gods ancient people and of Christs Church that maâ—â—â— evidence that those miracles were truly done which I affirm to be the onely motive to believe being done at such distance of time and place from us But let not those that would learn mistake what is meant by the name of the Church For if you suppose the Church to be a Society of men whereof some by Gods appointment have power to oblige the whole then will the credit of the Scripture be resolved into the authority of the Church if the truth of those miracles on which alone the credit thereof is said to depend be grounded upon such a witnesse of the Church But my meaning is to suppose no more by the name of the Church in this place but the whole number of believers from Christ to the worlds end And so to say that there is no other reason why wee believe that such men as Moses and the Prophets as our Lord and his Apostles did such works as the Scriptures report to evidence that they came from God but the consent of all Christians that have imbraced the Gospel upon that motive Neither shall the Gospel hereby depend more upon the witnesse of man which may fail than it depends upon the witnesse of him who upon seeing what was done by our Lord and his Apostles should be moved to imbrace the Faith For though they had not taken effect with him but for the report of his eyes yet did not the force of them depend upon it Hee that considers shall finde that the consent of all believers in the whole motive of Faith more than supplies the use of our eyes in showing us sufficient reason to believe There is a distance of place as well as of time And God forbid wee should say those that never saw our Lord and his Apostles do the works for which wee believe had not sufficient reason to believe Their ears supplyed to them the use of their eyes inasmuch as experience and common sense shows that those things wherein the world agrees are no lesse certain and evident though morally than those which wee see with our eies Hee that should not traffick into the East or West-Indies or travail to Rome or Constantinople before hee had seen them must resolve not to see them The reason is because the world can have no common interest to deceive or to be deceived Much lesse could the Law of Moses least of all the Gospel of Christ have found credit the one imposing such an endlesse morosity of precepts to observe the other the Crosse of Christ had it not been originally manifest that such things were done to evidence that and this By which it appears that this reason supposes no authority in the Church founded upon the Gospel as a Society communicating in it because it supposes the same in the people of the Jewes as in the Church The authority of the Church standing upon the Gospel that which was over the Jewes on the Law whereof the one was to be removed when the other took place The reason because it referreth nothing to the Church but that intelligency which the community of mankinde furnish one another with for assurance in those things whereof all cannot be eye-witnesses by the consent of all which common reason makes to be as good evidence as our own senses And now it will not be difficult to say how the Scriptures are to be believed for themselves For inasmuch as the motives of believing are things recorded in Scripture it will be necessary to grant that the Scriptures are to be believed for themselves which are to be believed for those things which the Scriptures report But if wee be further demanded for what reason those motives which if true are sufficient to oblige all men to believe are taken to be true Hee that saies because they are recorded in the Scriptures grants that there is no reason to believe the Scriptures granting that there is no reason to believe the motives of faith but the report of those Scriptures the belief whereof supposes the truth of those motives But if wee impute the belief of that truth to the common sense of all who upon the supposition of them have submitted to Christianity and hold it wee have the whole truth of the Scripture evidenced upon such a ground as shall serve to inforce a resolution of whatsoever is questionable in Christianity upon it Whereas they who make the authority of the Church or the dictate of the Holy Ghost the reason of believing must either stand still when they are demanded the reason or give it by supposing Christianity and the Scriptures the truth whereof they pretend to prove by it which is the Circle that I spoke of afore admitting neither principle nor conclusion of discourse To confirm that which hath been said let me demand how the Writings of Homer or Virgil of Aristotle or Plato of Tully or Demosthenes of Hippocrates or Galen come to be admitted without any question for their Writings after some two thousand years more or lesse Is it not because ever since they were penned there have been those that have studied them for paterns of good Language and Oratory for the lest authors in Philosophy and Physick Because by them and through their hands they have been transmitted from age to age Is not their credit by this means so unquestionable that a man would be laught at that should ask other reason for it And yet what is this in comparison of that which is to be said for the Scriptures That all nations having starred aside to worship many Gods one people of the Jewes took upon them the worship of the onely true God according to the Lawes recorded in the books of Moses and that of so ancient time That being planted in the land of Canaan God stirred them up Prophets from age to age to keep them close to the service of their God That howsoever they kept them they alwaies professed to be under those Lawes as Gods That our Lord Jesus and his Apostles by commission from him in due time preached both Jewes and Gentiles to be rebels against God And that neither the Law of nature nor of Moses was able to free them from sin Tendering in Gods name the terms upon which all may be reconciled to God and evidencing their Commission by the works which they did in Gods name That all parts of the civil world being by that means convicted of the truth hereof undertook to professe Christianity notwithstanding the persecutions to which it was lyable and do continue in it till this time Is not this infallible evidence that wee have the very Writings of Moses and of the Prophets and Apostles and that they who left them us were sent by God seeing them admitted for Lawes to mens lives and conversations which
words of S. Augustine contra Epistolam fundamenti cap. V. which alwaies have a place in this dispute though I can as yet admit S. Augustine no otherwise than as a particular Christian and his saying as a presumption that hee hath said no more than any Christian would have said in the common cause of all Christians against the Manichees Ego Evangelio non crederem saith hee nisi me Ecclesiae Catholicae moveret authoritas I would not believe or have believed the Gospel had not the authority of the Catholick Church moved mee For some men have imployed a great deal of learning to show that moveret stands for movisset as in many other places both of S. Augustine and of other Africane Writers And without doubt they have showed it past contradiction and I would make no doubt to show the like in S. Hierome Sidonius and other Writers of the decaying ages of the Latine tongue as well as in the Africane Writers if it were any thing to the purpose For is not the Question manifestly what it is that obligeth that man to believe who as yet believeth not Is it not the same reason that obliges him to become and to be a Christian Therefore whether moveret or movisset all is one The Question is whether the authority of the Church as a Corporation that is of those persons who are able to oblige the Church would have moved S. Austine to believe the Gospel because they held it to be true Or the credit of the Church as of so many men of common sense attesting the truth of those reasons which the Gospel tenders why wee ought to believe What is it then that obliged S. Austine to the Church The consent of people and nations that authority which miracles had begun which hope had nourished charity increased succession of time settled from S. Peter to the present the name and title of Catholick so visible that no Heretick durst show a man the way to his Church demanding the way to the Catholick So hee expresseth it cap. 111. And what is this in English but the conversion of the Gentiles foretold by the Prophets attested by God and visibly settled in the Unity of the Church Whereupon hee may boldly affirm as hee doth afterwards that if there were any word in the Gospel manifestly witnessing Manes to be the Apostle of Christ hee would not believe the Gospel any more For if the reason for which hee had once believed the Church that the Gospel is true because hee saw it verified in the being of the Church should be supposed false there could remain no reason to oblige us to take the Gospel for true All that remaines for the Church in the nature and quality of a Corporation by this account will be this That it is more discretion for him that is in doubt of the truth of Christianity to take the reason of it from the Church that is from those whom the Church trusteth to give it than from particular Christians who can by no means be presumed to understand it so well as they may do For otherwise supposing a particular Christian sets forth the same reasons which the Church does how can any man not be bound to follow him that is bound to follow the Church So that the reasons which both allege being contained in the Scriptures the Church is no more in comparison of the Scriptures than the Samaritane in comparison of our Lord himself when her fellow-citizens tell her John IV. 12. Wee believe no more for thy saying For wee our selves have heard and know that this is of a truth the Saviour of the World the Christ For the reasons for which our Lord himself tells us that wee are to believe are contained in the Scriptures But by the premises it will be most manifest that the same Circle in discourse is committed by them who resolve the reason why they believe into the dictate of the Spirit as into the decree of the Church For the question is not now of the effective cause whether or no in that nature a man is able to imbrace the true Faith without the assistance of Gods Spirit or not Which ought here to remain questionable because it is to be tried upon the grounds upon which here wee are seeking And therefore that Faith which is grounded upon revelation from God and competent evidence of the same is to be counted divine supernatural Faith without granting whatsoever wee may suppose any supernatural operation of Gods Spirit to work it in the nature of an effective cause which must remain questionable supposing the reason why wee believe the Scriptures But in the nature of an object presenting unto the understanding the reason why we are to believe it is manifest by the premises that no man can know that hee hath Gods Spirit that knoweth not the truth of the Scriptures If therefore hee allege that hee knowes the Scriptures to be true because Gods Spirit saith so to his Spirit hee allegeth for a reason that which hee could not know but supposing that for granted which hee pretendeth to prove To wit That the dictate of his own Spirit is from Gods Spirit Indeed when the motives of Faith proceed from Gods Spirit in Moses and the Prophets in our Lord and his Apostles witnessing by the works which they do their Commission as well as their message who can deny that this is the light of Gods Spirit Again when wee govern our doings by that which wee believe and not by that which wee see who will deny that this is the light of Faith and of Gods Spirit But both these considerations take place though wee suppose the mater of Faith to remain obscure in it self though to us evidently credible for the reasons God showes us to believe that hee saith it If any man seek in the mater of Faith any evidence to assure the conscience in the nature of an object or reason why wee are to believe that is not derived from the motives of Faith outwardly attesting Gods act of revealing it hee falls into the same inconvenience with those who believe their Christianity because the Church commends it and again the Church because Christianity commends it As for that monstrous imagination that the Scripture is not Law to oblige any man in justice to believe it before the Secular Powers give it force over their subjects Supposing for the present that which I said before that it is all one question whether Christianity or whether the Scriptures oblige us as Law or not Let mee demand whether our Lord Christ and his Apostles have showed us sufficient reasons to convince us that wee are bound to believe and become Christians If not why are wee Christians If so can wee be obliged and no Law to oblige us supposing for the present though not granting because it is not true that by refusing Christianity sufficiently proposed a man comes not under sin but onely comes not from under it but
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
of the Languages and of Historical truth to the text of the Scripture And many things more may be cleared by applying the light of reason void of partiality and prejudice to draw the truth so cleared into consequence No part of all this can be said to be held upon any decree of the Church Because no part of the evidence supposes the Church in the nature and quality of a Corporation the constitution whereof inableth some persons to oblige the whole Because there are maters in question concerning our common Christianity and the sense of the Scriptures upon which the great mischief of diviâ—â—on is fallen out in the Church it is thought a plausible plea to say that the decree of the present Church supposing the foundation of the Church in that nature and the power given to every part in behalf of the whole of which no evidence can be made not supposing all that for truth which I have said obligeth all Christians to believe as much as the Scriptures supposing them to be the Word of God can do Which they that affirm do not consider that it must first be evident to all that are to be obliged Both that the Church is so founded and whoâ—e Act it is and how that Act must be done which must oblige it Seeing then that the Scriptures are admitted on all sides to be the Word of God let us see whether it be as evident as the Scriptures that the act of the Pope or of a General Council or both oblige the Church to believe the truth of that which they decree as much as the Scriptures I know there are texts of Scripture alleged First concerning the Apostles and Disciples Mat. X. 14 15 40. Luke IX 5. X. 10 11 16. where those that refuse them are in worse estate than Sodom and Gomorrha And Hee that heareth you heareth mee Hee that neglecteth you neglecteth mee Mat. XXVIII 19 20. Go make all Nations Disciples teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you and behold I am with you to the worlds end 1 Thess II. 13. Yee received the Gospel of us not as the word of man but as it is indeed the word of God Then concerning S. Peter as predecessor of all Popes Mat. XVI 18 19. Vpon this rock will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it And I will give thee the keyes of the Kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou bindest on earth shall be bound in heaven whatsoever thou loosest on earth shall be loosed in heaven Luke XXII 32. I have prayed for thee that thy Faith fail not and thou once converted strengthen thy brethren John XXI 15 16 17. Simon son of Jonas lovest thou mee Feed my lambs feed my sheep Again concerning the Church and Councils Mat. XVIII 17-20 If hee heare them not tell the Church If hee hear not the Church let him be to thee as a Heathen or a Publican Verily I say unto you whatsoever yee binde on earth shall be bound in heaven whatsoever yee loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven Again I say unto you If two of you agree on earth upon any thing to ask it it shall be done them from my Father in heaven For where two or three are assembled in my name there am I in the midst of them John XVI 13. The Spirit of truth shall lead you into all truth Acts XV. 28. It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us 1 Tim. III. 15. That thou mayest know now it behoveth to converse in the house of God which is the Churchof God the pillar and establishment of the truth You have further the exhortations of the Apostles 1 Thess V. 12 13. Now I beseech you brethren to know them which labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you And esteem them more than abundantly in love for their works sake Heb. XIII 7 17. Bee obedient and give way to your Rulers for they watch for your souls as those that must give account That they may do it joyfully and not groaning Which is not for your profit And afore Rememeer your Rulers which have spoken to you the Word of God And considering the issue of their conversation imitate their Faith Those that spoke unto them the Word of God are the Apostles or their companions and deputies whom hee commandeth them to obey no otherwise than those who presently watched over them after their death In the Old Testament likewise Deut. XVII 5-12 Hee that obeyeth not the determination of the Court that was to sit before the Ark is adjudged to death Therefore Hag. II. 12. Thus saith the Lord the God of Hosts Ask the Priests concerning the Law Mal. II. 7. The Priests lips shall preserve knowledge and the Law shall they require at his mouth For hee is the messenger of the Lord of Hosts The answers of the Priests resolved into the decrees of the said Court therefore they are unquestionable And this Power established by the Law our Lord acknowledging the Law allowes Mat. XXIII 2. The Scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses chair whatsoever therefore they command you that do But according to their works do not This is that which is alleged out of the Scriptures for that Infallibility which is challenged for the Church If I have left any thing behinde it will prove as ineffectual as the rest In all which there are so many considerations appear why the sense of them should be limited on this side or extended beyond the body of the Church that it is evident they cannot serve for evidence to ground the Infallibility of it For is it not evident that the neglect of the Apostles in questioning their doctrine redounds upon our Lord who by sending them stamps on them the marks of his Fathers authority which hee is trusted with Not so the Church For who can say that God gives any testimony to the lie which it telleth seeing Christianity is supposed the Infallibility thereof remaining questionable Is it not evident that God is with his Chu ch not as a Corporation but as the collection of many good Christians Supposing that those who have power to teach the Church by the constitution thereof teach lies and yet all are not carried away with their doctrine but believe Gods truth so farre as the necessity of their salvation requires If there were any contradiction in this supposition how could it be maintained in the Church of Rome that so it shall be when Antichrist comes as many do maintain Besides is it as evident as Christianity or the Scriptures that this promise is not conditional and to have effect supposing both the teaching and the following of that which our Lord lud taught and nothing else Surely if those that refuse the Gospel be in a worse state than those of Sodom and Gomorrha it followeth not yet that all that refuse to hear the Church without the Gospel are so For the truth of the Gospel
supposeth that there is no means but the Gospel to save us But if wee be saved by believing the Gospel wee may be saved not believing that which the Church teacheth without it For that which the Gospel obligeth us to believe unto salvation it is agreed already that wee cannot be saved without believing it Suppose now the Church to continue till the last day not as one visible Body but broken into pieces as wee see it so that alwaies there remain a number of good Christians for whether or no they that communicate not with the Church of Rome may be good Christians is the thing in question not to be taken for truth without proving shall the gates of hell be said to prevail against the Church all that while Besides Grotius expounds those words to signifie no more but this That death and the grave which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Hell in the stile of the Old Testament signifies shall never prevail over Christians That is that they shall rise again And I suppose it is not so evident that this exposition is false as that the Gospel is true As for the Keyes of Christs Kingdom let him that saith they argue Infallibility say also that they cannot be abused But hee will have more shame if not more sense than to say it The Thessalonians received the Gospel as the Word of God because they supposed it to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word which God sent them newes of Would they therefore have received the decrees of the Church with the same reverence not supposing them the Word of God till some body prove it But suppose the promises made S. Peter to import as much as the power of the Apostles is it as evident that the present Pope succeeds S. Peter as that Christianity is from God That hee succeeds him in the full right of that Power which is given the Apostles Certainly wheresoever two or three are assembled in the name of Christ there is not the Infallibility of the Church Therefore it cannot be founded upon the promises made to all Assemblies of Christians as Christians It is very probable that the Council of the Apostles at Jerusalem had a revelation upon the place signifying how they should order the mater in question because there are many instances in the Scriptures of inspirations at the very Assemblies of Gods people as I have showed in the Right of the Church Therefore it is not evident that all Councils may say the like Therefore they cannot presume that the Holy Ghost will lead them into all truth whatsoever they take a humor to determine because it was promised that hee should lead the Apostles into all truth concerning our common Christianity But if the Church be the pillar and foundation that upholdeth the truth then must that truth first be evidenced for truth before the effect of the Churches office in upholding it as pillars uphold an house can appear The exhortations of the Apostles 1 Thess V. 14 15. Hebr. XIII 7 17. to yield obedience to the Rulers of the Church are certainly pertinent to this purpose But it is evident that this obedience is limitable by the grounds and substance of Christianity delivered afore as it is evident that all Power of the present Church presupposeth our common Christianity As for the obedience required in the Old Testament to the Governors of the Synagogue and Priests confirmed by our Lord Mat. XXIII 2. I am very willing to grant the Church all Power in decreeing for truth that can appear to have belonged to the Rulers of the Synagogue because I am secure that those who could put malefactors to death as they could were not therefore able to tye men to believe that which they say to be true But the great subtilty is the Prophesie of Caiaphas John XI 48-52 who because High Priest could not but truly determine that our Lord must die least the people should perish even in resolving to crucifie him Indeed at the beginning God was wont to conduct his people by Oracles of Urim and Tummim in the High Priests brest-plate And though this was ceased under the second Temple as wee have reason to believe the Jewes yet was it no marvail that God should use the High Priests tongue to declare that secret which himself understood not being the Person by whom hee had used to direct his people in former ages But hee that from hence concludes the Church infallible must first maintain that Caiaphas erred not in crucifying our Lord Christ Now if it be said that the consent of all Christians though not as members of the Church because as yet it appeareth not that the Church is a Corporation and hath members determines the sense of these Scriptures to signifie Infallibility which they may but do not necessarily signifie Let him consider the disputes that succeeded in the Church upon the decree of the Great Council at Nicaea the breaches that have succeeded upon the decrees of Ephesus and Chalcedon the division between the Greek and the Latine Church between the Reformation and the Church of Rome For is it imaginable that all Christians holding as firmly as their Christianity that the acts of the Pope and a Council that is the greater part of the present Church is to be believed as much as the Scriptures not onely the decree of Nicaea should be disputed again but breaches should succeed rather than admit their decrees retaining the common profession of Christianity What disputes there have been betwixt the Court of Rome and the Paris Doctors whether it be the act of the Pope or of a General Council that obligeth the belief of the Church is as notorious to the world as that they are not yet decided And yet the whole question is disputed onely concerning the Western Church The East which acknowledgeth not the Pope appeareth not in the claim of this Infallibility were both East and West joyned in one and the same Council Now among them that maintain the Pope it is not agreed what acts of the Pope they must be that shall oblige the Church to believe as it believes the Scriptures For it is argued that Popes have decreed Heresie Liberius Honorius Vigilius and perhaps others And though I stand not to prove I may presume that the contrary is not so evident as our common Christianity or the Scriptures And that some of them have held Heresie seems granted without dispute Is it then as evident as our common Christianity what act of the Pope obliges us to believe That hee cannot decree that error to be held by others which it is granted himself holdeth Besides how many things are requisite to make a true Pope whose Power unlesse it be conveyed by the 〈◊〉 act of those that are able to give it the acts thereof will be void which it does not appear that the present Pope is qualified with as it appeareth that the Scriptures are true And may not the same question be
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
that was risen again it followes Then opened hee their mindes to understand the Scriptures which were onely then those of the Old Testament Surely Justine the Martyr in many places of his dispute with Typho the Jew as truly as manifestly professes that the understanding of Christianity in the Old Testament was a grace given to the Disciples of Christ among the rest of distributions of his Spirit upon his ascension into heaven shed forth upon the Church Eph. IV. 8 which being showed the Jews their eyes were darkened as their hearts hardened that they could not understand the truth in them Now it is not my purpose to say that thereby hee challenges to himself the same miraculous grace of the Spirit and that the Prophesies that concern Christ are by that grace interpreted by him in his writings and therefore as truly as those in the writings of the Apostles It is enough that the true meaning of the Scriptures in that behalf was first revealed to the Disciples of Christ by the immediate and extraordinary operation of Gods Spirit Though Christians building on that which they received from persons so inspired may have added many things inconsequent to those principles Now I suppose it is manifest to all mens reason that those things are not clear in the Scriptures to all understandings that could not be discerned in it without a miraculous operation of Gods Spirit But nothing can be more manifâ—st than those particulars of the Law which our Lord and his Apostles in the New Testament have by way of allegory expounded to be meant of his Person and Gospel and Kingdome That the first Adam was to be the figure of the second though to a contrary effect of life by Christ in stead of death by Adam and that hee took our flesh to be the Lord of all things in it as to the effect of the Gospel which the first Adam was made as to the dominion of the creature is clearly declared by the Apostles Rom. V. 12-14 1 Cor. XV. 45-49 Ebr. II. 6-15 That Noe and what befell the world hy the deluge under him was the figure of what befalls the Church under Christ by Baptisme is no lesse manifestly the doctrine of the Apostle 1 Pet. III. 20 21 22. And not onely this particular but all the rest that befell the Fathers and Prophets and Martyrs under the Old Testament is evidently made a figure of what befalls the Disciples of Christ under the Gospel Ebr. XI As it is also evident that the pilgrimages of the Patriarchs Abraham Isaac and Jacob and of their posterity the Israelites from Aegypt through the Wildernesse into the land of Promise is there declared and of all Christians received for the figure of that Journey which all professe to travail from sinne wherein it findeth them to the Kingdome of heaven and happinesse How else should the argument hold which the Apostles draw from that which befell the Children of Israel travailing through the Wildernesse to the land of Canaan to the duty of Christians in their Journey toward everlasting happinesse 1 Cor. X. 1-11 Ebr. III. 7 -IV 11. But after their coming into the land of Promise as the persecutions which the Prophets indured Ebr. XI 36 37 38. Mat. XXIII 34 evidence them to be the figures of Christs Crosse as the expiation made by all High Priests is evidently expounded by the Apostle to the Ebrewes to shadow the taking away of sinne by Christ So it is no lesse evident that all the Judges and Kings and High Priests and Prophets of Gods people anointed by God were figures of our Lord both in regard of his Church and the enemies of it than it is evident that our Lord Jesus is the Christ foretold by the Prophets Which things unlesse wee say as no man in his right senses will say that they are manifest to all that reade the Old Testament though they never heard of Christianity or the New wee cannot imagine that the substance of Christianity necessary to the salvation of all Christians is clear to all understandings in the Old Testament No lesse clear is it by the sayings and doings of our Lord recorded in the Gospels that it was not his intent freely and openly at least all waies and every where to declare the truth and substance of it by the said sayings and doings Manifest indeed it is that hee did publickly and freely declare himself to be that Christ whom the Prophets had foretold and the Nation expected and of this no doubt can be made by any man that with common reason examines all that is written in the Gospels Though not all times so free in declaring even this truth As it is evident by the words of the Jewes to him John X. 24. How long holdest thou our mindes in suspense If thou be the Christ freely tell us it And wee see Mat. XII 14 20. what difference of opinions there were about it in his life time forbidding his Disciples to declare it till his death But granting this to be manifest by the Gospels neither is it manifest by them that nothing else is requisite to salvation to be believed concerning his Person and Kingdome nor that thereby hee intended to make manifest what hee knew requisite to be believed of them that should imbrace it when it was become requisite This is enough to answer the Leviathan with pretending that it is not necessary to the salvarion of a Christian to believe any more than this that our Lord Jesus is the Christ Which if it could appear by the Gospels alone then would I not dispute any further that all the truth that is necessary to salvation is clearly delivered by the Gospels I do for my part believe that the substance of Christianity necessary to salvation is contained in the badge and cognisance which our Lord hath marked it with by his Commission to his Apostles Mat. XXVIII 19 20. Go make all nations Disciples baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you But shall I say it is clearly contained in these words about the intent and effect whereof there hath been and is so much dispute The Church it is well enough known hath alwaies rejected those that acknowledge not the Holy Trinity Father Sonne and Holy Ghost subsisting in one and the same Godhead At this day Socinus and his followers will have us believe onely that wee are to professe whether wee be baptized or not that our Lord Jesus is a man that was born of a Virgin by the power of God which is the Holy Ghost And for undertaking or for doing Gods message tendring reconcilement with God to mankinde hath by Gods gift the same power with God to govern his Kingdome and is to be honored as God for it Whether or no they would have us to believe this sense of theirs positively or would not be tyed to believe positively the sense of the
Church in time perhaps they may declare I have not hitherto understood Shall I say there is not sufficient argument for the sense of the Church in the Gospels It is no part of my meaning Shall I therefore say it is clear of it selfe in the Gospels that is to say by the sayings and doings of our Lord recorded in the Gospels Doth not our Lord plainly make himself equal to the Father John V. 17-23 Doth hee not answer again being questioned for this John X. 33 34 35. by the words of David spoken of meer men Psal LXXXIII 6. I have said yee are Gods Doth hee not say plainly again My Father is greater than I John XIV 28 Which things as it is plain by argument that they may stand with the sense of the Church so that those arguments are plain of themselves to all understandings is as much as to say That a seeming contradiction argues an intent in our Lord that all men should see the resolution of it Again that all that will be saved by our Lord Christ must take up his Crosse and professe him to the death is plaine by the Gospels But so long as the Disciples might and did believe that they should raigne with our Lord in his Kingdome over that people which should destroy their enemies was the intent of suffering death for Christ to raign with him in heaven plaine by the Gospels That the Law should stand for ever is it not plainly delivered by our Lord in the Gospel and is it not as plainly of the necessity of salvation to believe that wee are saved by the Gospel and not by the Law I appeal to S. Pauls Epistles Though I dispute not whether this be abrogating the Law as Divines commonly speak or derogating from it Certainly though I know not whether the Socinians would be content with the Leviathan that no thing be thought necessary to salvation to be believed but that our Lord is the Christ Yet I know they would be astonished to hear that hee who believes that and lives according to the Lawes of his Soveraign hath done the duty of a Christian and may challenge his share in the kingdome of heaven for it But this I must not dispute further in this place Onely here I must answer his reasons out of the Scripture and show you upon what a weak pinne hee hath hung all this waight Christ is the foundation 1 Cor. III. 11. Mat. XVI 18. which all the Gospels pretend to induce us to believe John XX. 31. as also the exhortations of the Apostles Acts XVII 2 3 6. by this the good thief was saved believing onely our Lord anointed by God to his Kingdome Luke XXIII 42. Everlasting life is to be had by believing this and the Scripture because it witnesseth this John V. 39. and XVII 3. XI 26 27. Which is all blown away with this breath That hee that admits our Lord to be the Christ cannot refuse any part of his doctrine And therefore salvation is justly imputed to that which whoso receiveth shall be bound to admit and undergo whatsoever his salvation requireth This is eternal life to know thee the onely God and whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ John XVII 3. These things are written that yee may believe that Jesus is the Christ and that believing yee may have life John XX. 31. How have life believing Because hee that believes will be baptized and hee that is baptized must undertake to live as Christ teacheth professing to believe in the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost which believing in Christ coming from the Father to send the Holy Ghost implieth And therefore the Eunuch Acts VIII 36 37. is baptized upon this Faith as others into it Acts II. 38. VIII 16. XIX 5. The belief of the Creation of the world of Providence the Resurrection and Judgment to come not being introduced by Christianity but found in force among the Jewes when our Lord came So that limitation by which the Leviathan inlargeth his sense of that which the believing of our Lord to be the Christ implieth is not worth a straw It is not onely necessary to salvation to believe all that the Messias was to be or to do to be verified and to have been done by our Lord Jesus Unlesse we believe that wee are to believe and to do whatsoever hee taught us to believe and to do And that as I have showed is not determinable by any means but that which Christ by himself or by his Apostles hath provided us neither whether so or not and much lesse whether necessary to salvation or not That which hath been alleged to show That the substance of Christianity necessary to the salvation of all under the Gospel is not clearly contained in the Old Testament nor in the sayings and doings of our Lord related by the Evangelists Holds not in the writings of the Apostles For being directed to Christians already reduced into Churches constituted upon supposition of the knowledge and profession of Christianity there is no reason why they should be sparing in declaring the truth of it to those to whom they write True it is and evident by their writings that they used great reservation in declaring to those that were of Jewes become Christians the discharge of their obligation to Moses Law But whatsoever their proceeding was in that case not onely the reason of the truth but also the reason of that proceeding is clearly declared by their writings But if all their writings suppose in them to whom they write knowledge sufficient for the salvation of all Christians and none of them pretend to lay down the summe and substance of that whereof the salvation of all Christians requireth the knowledge evident it is that the perfection of none of them nor the whole Scriptures consisting of them and those which wee have spoken of hitherto requireth that they clearly contain all that is necessary to the salvation of all Christians For the Perfection of every writing consisteth in the sufficience of it for the purpose to which it is intended If therefore the occasions of the Apostles writings and so the purpose of them evidently express not an intent to lay down clearly to all understandings the whole substance of that which is sufficient to render all Christians capable of salvation as evidently neither any nor all of them do then neither doth the perfection not sufficience nor clearnesse of the Apostles writings require that all things necessary to the salvation of all be clear in them to all understandings For let no man object That they were all of them necessary to the salvation of all or most of them to whom they were sent Unless it could be said That whatsoever was necessary to the salvation of those to whom the Apostles writ is necessary to the salvation of all Christians Which so long as there is a difference between necessity of means and necessity of precept That is between that which is necessary to the common
from the beginning and therefore lay aside this principle not as false but as uselesse and not to be put in practice Wherein that men mistake not themselves they must take notice That it will not concerne my position That all original Catholick Tradition is to be supposed for unquestionable truth in deciding what is questionable concerning the truth of the Scripture that concerning most maters there is no Catholick Tradition or consent of the Church For I do professe that were not the Church or had it not been one Society one visible Body Communion or Corporation of men from the beginning the communion whereof alwaies confined the profession and conversation of Christians to some certain visible Rule I should think it impossible to make evidence of any common truth received of all Christians But if it can be made to appear that the Church was from the beginning such a Society then may such Rules as reasonably appear to be original and Catholick as it can appear reasonable to any man that hee ought to be a Christian Here I must note that concerning the State of the Church whether it be such a Society as I have said distinct from all Civil Societies of Christian Kingdomes and Common-wealths there may be two questions made The one of Fact whether indeed the Church hath been such a Society since the first being of it and the conversion of believers to Christianity The other of Right whether by the appointment of God or by humane consent of such who being converted to Christianity agreed to live in communion by whatsoever Rule it may appear they have admitted But these two are so near one another that if the question of Fact can be voided and it appear that such was the Church from the beginning it will be a presumption in a maner peremtory of the Churches Title by divine right Though there is difference made between them as appeâ—rs by the opinion related afore that the power of Excommunication was settled in the Church afore Constantine by humane consent not by Gods appointment Which by consequence of like reason extends to all other points wherein the power of the Church consists For my present purpose it were enough to make it appear that the Church was de Facto such a Society from the beginning But the proving of the point of Right will be only making the same inference which hath been alwaies concluded out of that evidence which resolveth the point of Fact And the conclusion thus inferred will be both necessary and effectual to clâ—are the positive right of the Church in deciding Controversies of Faith which will be the best satisfaction why negatively it cannot extend to create the ground upon which wee are to believe I will therefore wrap them up both together in the processe of my discourse In which I finde that difficulty which S. Augustine observeth in proving any of those things which are most manifest to common reason and sense For it shall be hard to bring arguments that are much clearer than that which they intend to prove That the Church had been from the beginning one outwardly by visible Communion as well as one inwardly by invisible Faith and love could not be questioned so long as it prevailed Neither was it foreseen at dissolving the Unity of the Western Church for the Reformation that it would ever come to this dispute whether there had been alwaies and ought to be one Catholick and Apostolick Church For each party hoped well to be so themselves as being perswaded that their adversaries ought to unite themselves unto them upon acknowledgment that the truth was on their side And truly I acknowledge that there is no clear mention of a precrpt of God commanding all Christians to hold the unity of the Catholick Church by outward communion with it For the intent of God to call the Gentiles to Christianity seemeth to be the utmost of that which is clearly declared by the Scriptures That his intent was to unite all Christians in one visible communion of the Church there is evidence by consequence to be had from the Scriptures But what the form should be before the materials were prepared it were as strange to think that the stones and timber particular Christians ought to know as that the Surveyors the Apostles and their fellowes should not know That therefore the Church was from the beginning and ought to be one visible Communion must be showed by the ingredients and principles or elements of all visible Societies Which in the Society of the Church will appear proportionable to the nature and pretense of it Supposing from common sense and experience that all Civil Societies or Common-wealthes unto which the name of Societies or Communities principally because most visibly belongeth are constituted and founded upon certain Rights of Soveraigne Power which some call in Latine Jura Majestatis being indeed the particulars wherein the Right and Power of Soveraignty consisteth For when it is once resolved in what hands that Power is to remaine then is the State and Form of Government constituted and thereby distinguished from other formes of Common-wealth according to the qualitie of those persons in whom this Power is established That being ruled by certain Lawes acknowledging certain Governors being subject to the Power of the Sword by which those Governors execute those Lawes are the effects of Soveraigne Power being the principal of the said ingredients or particulars the certain and necessary marks of a distinct Common-wealth is that which I suppose from common experience There are Societies which subsist by the Law of Nature and Nations As that which Aristotle observes among those that are imbarked in the same bottome for the same voyage That which the Jewes Law supposes among the Caravans of the East consisting of subjects and members of several Common-wealthes There are Communities and Corporations which subsist by the Act of Soveraigne Power in each Common-wealth allowing that Power over the Members to the whole ihat is such persons as are allowed to act for the whole as they think fit If the whole Church from the beginning have acknowledged certain Lawes by which they were governed in those things wherein the Communion of the Church consisteth certain Governors to whom they ought to give respect according to those Lawes a Power of putting out of the Church answerable to the Power of putting to death by the sword into which the coâ—ctive Power of Common-wealths is resolved then is the Church and alwaies was such a Society wherein the same Rule of Faith might be and was alwaies from the beginning preserved by Tradition and Custome which is my present businesse to show And if the Church alwaies was so de Facto then is it so alwaies de Jure If it did alwaies hold unity in the Faith and communion in the service of God by the meanes of certain Lawes certaine Rulers certaine Power of granting or refusing this Communion Then was there a precept of
God delivered to the Church by the Apostles commanding them so to live For that which was as difficult as impossible to have been introduced without conviction of the will of God as the rest of Christianity of necessity must go for a part of it But that in such variety of mens fannies reasons and inclinations the Church consisting from the beginning of all Nations and dispersed all over the world should of their own inclination not swayed by any information of Gods will received with Christianity agree in the same Lawes and Rulers submitting to the exercise of the same Power upon themselves is as impossible as that the world should consist of the casual concurse of atomes according to Democritus and Epicurus The name of the Church without peradventure was first used to signifie the whole body of Gods people in the Wildernesse when they might be and were called together and assembled upon their common occasions which the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies After which time the people continuing still one and the same by virtue of the same Lawes then received and the Powers placed in their Ruler Not onely the whole people but such parts of it as resorted to the same Government have still born and do bear the same name The Synagogue of Libertines Cyrenaeans Alexandrians Cilicians and Asians by example Acts VI. 9. which name first belongs to the respective Bodies of Jewes that subsisted at Rome Cyrene or Alexandria in Cilicia or Asia And consequently by Metonymy to the Places where such of those Bodies as chanced to be at Jerusalem might assemble themselves And to so many of those Bodies as being at Jerusalem did assemble at those Places Now no Christian can doubt that the Body of Christians succeeds in the stead of Gods ancient people And therefore the name of Gods Church when it stands without limitation signifies no lesse As when our Lord saith Mat. XVI 18. Vpon this rock will I found my Church Whatsoever the Disciples then conceived the Church should be our Lord that knew all by the name of it meant all that duly beares the name And therefore when hee saith once again Mat. XVIII 17. Tell it to the Church It is strange there should be Christians that should think hee means the Jewes and their Rulers And that the precept concernes Christians no longer now they have left the Jewes Though it is true a man cannot tell his cause to the whole Church but to that part of it to which hee can resort which is called by the name of the Whole as I said even now of the Synagogue S. Paul to the Colossians II. 24 25. calling the Church the Body of Christ saith That hee by the dispensation of God towards them which hee is trusted with is become the minister of the Church to wit as Angels are ministers of the Church because ministers of God towards it And therefore minister of the whole Church which is the Body of Christ not of any particular Church as if an Apostle could be bound to execute his office according to the discretion of any Church which for Gods cause hee attends As all Ministers are bound to execute their Office according to the will of them whose Ministers they are It is therefore the whole Church in which God hath set Apostles Evangelists Prophets and the use of the Graces rehearsed 1 Cor. XII 28. Eph. IV. 11. Because the Office of these Graces can by no means be confined either to any particular Church or to any part of the whole Church The name of the Church signifies the same thing again Eph. I. 22. III. 21. V. 23-32 While all Christendome was contained in the Church at Jerusalem the name of the Church is so used Acts II. 47. V. 11. VIII 1 3. that it is no mater whether wee understand by it the whole Church or the Church of Jerusalem The reason Because all right and power that can at any time be found vested in the whole Church was then as fully in the Church at Jerusalem as it can be at any time in the whole Church though in respect of a Body never so much greater than it As a childe is as much a man the day of his birth as the day of his death and a tree as much as a tree when it growes one as when it is come to the height But Christianity being propagated among Jewes and Gentiles as wee reade of the Churches of Judaea Samaria and Galilee Acts IX 31. and must needs understand the Epistles to the Ebrewes to have been written to Churches consisting onely of Ebrewes as those of S. Peter and that of S. James which mentions the Elders of the Church James V. 14. So the Churches of the Gentiles in S. Paul Rom. XVI 4. wee easily understand to be the Churches of Asia 1 Cor. XVI 9. Apoc. I. 11. the Churches of Galâ—â—ia 1 Cor. XVI 1. the Churches of Macedonia 2 Cor. VIII 1. and the rest that were visible in S. Paâ—ls time Now suppose for the present that these Churches mentioned by the Apostles were no more than so many Congregations as our Independents would have it Seeing they deny not so many Churches to be so many Bodies what reason can they give why the name of the Church when it stands for the whole Church should not signifie the like There is a prerogative attributed to the whole Church by S. Paul 1 Tim. III. 25. when hee calls it the base and pillar of Truth For that this should be said of any particular Church it were too ridiculous to imagine Can the Church bear this attribute if it be not capable of doing any act that may verifie it And if it be not a Body what act can it do In fine the correspondence between Gods ancient people and his new Israel according to his Spirit seems to require That as the Religion of the Jewes and not any Civil Power of the Nation makes them all one Body at this day in point of fact by sufferance of Soveraignes because they were once so in point of right So the Religion of Christians should make them one Body in point of right how many Bodies soever they are burst into in point of fact by their own wantonnesse For the Independents exception which I spoke of can be of no force unlesse they will make it appear that all those Churches that are mentioned in the writings of the Apostles did assemble in one place Not that if this could be made to appear they had done their businesse But because if it do not appear their plea is peremptorily barred Wee reade then of M M M soules added in one day to CXX of the Church at Jerusalem Acts I. 15. II. 41. To these were added or with these they became VM Acts IV. 4. To whom were added multitudes of men and women Acts II. 47. V. 14. These assembled daily in private to serve God as Christians as well as in
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
And yee shall be my Disciples And Luke XIV 26 27. Whoso cometh to 〈◊〉 and hatâ—th not father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters yea and himself cannot be my Disciple And whose taketh not up his Crosse and followeth â—ee cannot be my Disciple To the same purpose Mâ—â— X 38. XVI 24. Mark VIII 34. X. 21. Luke IX 23. And S. Paul plainly declareth the Galaâ—ians fallen from all benefit of the Gospel if to avoid the Crosse of Christ they should â—alk the profession of their Christianity to be circumcised Gâ—l V. 11. VI. 12 14. S. John charges the Churches of Pergamus and Thyatira Apoc. II. 14 15 20. to have some that hold the doctrine of Balaâ—m who taught Balak to lay a stumbling block before the children of Israel of things offered to Idols and Whâ—râ—dome which is the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes And to suffer the woman Jâ—zabel calling her self a Prophetesse to teach and lead the servants of God into the error of whoredome and eating things sacrificed to Idols S. Peter 1 Pet. II. 15. and S. Jude 11. charge the Gnosticks whom they write against in those places that they go the way of Balaams that brought the Israelites to joyn with Bâ—â—l Peâ—r taking the invitation of their mistresses to the sacrifices of their Idols Whom Ireneus Justin the Martyr Origen Clâ—mons Alexandriâ—us and Tertulliâ—â— witnesse to have made the outward act of Idolatry in eating things sacrificed to Idols an indifferent thing that they might avoid persecution by complying with the Gentiles in that as with the Jewes in being circumcised And now after sixteen hundred yeares Wee are told that all that ever suffered for Christianity since the Apostles who were to witnesse what they saw our Lord doe and heard him say were mutinous sooles in laying down their lives to testifie that which they were not obliged to witnesse or rather which they were obliged not to witnesse the secular power requiting them not to witnesse it Wee have found one that calls himself a Christian wiser than our Lord and his Apostles as they called themselves Gnosticks because they pretended to know more than the Apostles that can tell Christians a way to escape the Crosse of Christ by renouncing Christianity and not fail of the promises thereof by believing the truth of it But they were the Disciples of Simon Magus and not of Christ that did so nor did they expect salvation by the Christianity which they counterseited but by that secret knowledg which they pretended to have discovered beyond that which all Christians had learned from the Apostles Though they went for Christians among the Gentiles who knew not what Christians were so that the Name of God was blasphemed because of them as the Apostle saith 1 Pet. II. 2. because their monstrous abominations were thought to be the practices of Christians Whether any man besides before this new Dogmatist pretending to be a Christian professed a freedom to renounce Christ in any case I am yet to learn Sure I am the Jewes under Antiochus Epiphanes died freely rather than eat Swines flesh or give any occasion to think that they fell from their Law and from God that gave it as the Prophet Daniel and his Fellowes had left them example to do And therefore by the same means and upon the same grounds for which wee receive our Christianity it stands evidenced to us that wee are bound to profess it that is to say by the Scriptures and the consent of all Christians that receive the Scriptures As for Traditions regulating the order to be observed in the communion of the Church there is so little question to be made of the consent of all Church writers that it shall serve my turn to produce the noted words of Tâ—rtullian de Cor. cap. III. Plaâ—â— nâ—gabimus traditionem recipiendam si nulla example prejudicent aliarum observationum quas sine ullius Scripturae instrumento solius traditionis titulo exinde consuetudinis patrocinio vindicamus Denique ut à baptismate ingrediar Aquam aditnri ibidem sed prius in Ecclesiâ sub Antistitis manu contest amur nos renunciare Diabolo pompae angelis ejus dehinc ter niergitamur amplius aliquid respondentes quà m Domintes in Evangelio determinavit Indè suscepti lactis mellis concordiam praegustamus Exque eâ die lavacro quotidiano per totam hebdomadam abstinemus Eucharistiae sacramentum in tempore victlus omnibus mandatum à Domino etiam antelucanis coetibus nec de aliorum manu quà m praesidentium sumimus Oblationes pro defunctis pro natalitiis annuâ die facimus Die dominico jejunium nefas ducimus vel de geniculis adorare Eâdem immunitate à die Paschae ad Pentecosten usque gaudemus Calicis aut panis etiam nostri aliquid in terram decuti anxiè patimur Ad omnem progressum atque promotum ad omnem aditum exitum ad vestitum ad calceatum ad lavacra ad mensas ad lumina ad cubilia ad sedilia quaecunque nos conversatio exercet frontem crucis signaculo terimus Plainly wee must deny to receive this Tradition if there be no examples of other observations for a prejudice which without any instrument in writing the onely title of Tradition and plea of Custome from it maintaineth In fine to begin with baptisme Going into the water not onely there but somewhat afore in the Church under the hand of our President wee take witnesse that wee renounce the Devil his pomp and Angels Then wee are drenched thrice answering somewhat more than our Lord in the Gospel hath limited Being taken up from thence wee fore-taste a mixture of milk and honey And from that day wee forbear our daily bathing all the week The Sacrament of the Eucharist which our Lord commanded at the time of meat and all wee take also at our assemblies before day but at no mans hand but our Presidents Wee offer for those that dye and again upon the anniversary of their birth Wee count it unlawfull to fast or worship kneeling upon the Lords day The same privilege wee injoy from Easter to Whitsuntide Wee are troubled to have any thing even of our ordinary cup or bread scattered upon the earth At all going forth or advancing at all coming in and going out at putting on clothes or shooes at watching at lying or sitting down or to table at bringing in light whatsoever conversation wee exercise wee rub our foreheads with the sign of the Crosse I must here take notice of an exception to this authority of Tertullian that hee was a Montanist or inclining to the Montanists when hee writ it And marvail that prejudice in Religion should transport learned Christians so farre as to deny the records of the Church that credit which common sense allowes all records of historical truth and which all Learning allowes the writings of Mahumetans Jewes and Pagans And this consideration I interpose the
rather here to prevent the objection that may be made that I ground my selfe upon the authority of men when I allege the testimonies of Church Writers For those that may abuse themselves with such a fond imagination as this are to consider that I claime as yet no other credit not onely for Tertullian who after hee turned Montanist was not of the Church but for the Fathers of the Church but that which common sense allowes men of common sense in witnessing maters of historical truth To wit that they who published writings that are come to posterity would not have alleged things for true which every man might see to be false in point of fact Because by so doing common sense must needs tell them that they must of necessity utterly discredit the cause which they meant to promote As in the case in hand If wee say that Tertullian being a Montanist alleged against the Church things so notoriously false that all the world might see and know them to be false wee refuse him the credit of a man in his right senses For what were hee but a mad man that would tell the Church that such or such Customes you know are practised among Christians knowing that they were not practised by the Catholick Church though they might be among the Montanists Therefore though I put a great deal of difference between the authority of Tertullian and S. Basil in regulating the Church yet in witneshng mater of fact I can ascribe no more to S. Basils testimony in his book de Sp. S. cap. XXVII than I do to this of Tertullian His words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of things decreed and preached that are kept in the Church some wee have from written doctrine some wee have received as delivered in secret down to us from the Tradition of the Apostles both of the same force to godlinesse And this will no man contradict that hath but a little experience in the rules of the Church For if wee go about to refuse unwritten customes as of no great effect wee shall unawares wound the Gospel in the dangerous part or rather turn the Faith preached into a bare name As first to mention the first and commonest Who taught us by writing to mark with the figure of the Crosse those that have hoped in the name of our Lord Christ Jesus What Scripture taught us to turn to the East when wee pray Which of the Saints left us by writing the words of invocation upon discovering the bread of Thanksgiving and the cup of Blessing For wee are not content with those which the Apostle or the Gospel mentions but promote and inferre others as of great force toward the Sacrament which wee have received by unwritten doctrine Wee also blesse the water of Baptisme and the oile of anointing and besides the man himself that is baptized from what Scripture and not from silent and secret Tradition And indeed what written word taught the very anointing of oile And that a man is drenched thrice whence comes it And other things about Baptisme renouncing Satan and his Angels from what Scripture come they And not from this unpublished and secret doctrine I will not here dispute the saying of S. Basil that these orders are of the same force toward Christian piety as the Scriptures And that Christianity would be but a bare name were it not for these unwritten customes how the truth of it holds Nay it were easie to instance against him as well as against Tertullian that among the particulars which they name there are those which never were in force through the whole Church but onely in some parts of it My present purpose demands onely this that Christians had rules which they observed for Lawes in the exercise of their communion And therefore by the intent of those who inforced those rules do constitute a Society or Corporation by the name of the Church Which Corporation Tertullian whether a Montanist or not when hee writ the book which I quote claimeth to belong to in reckoning himself among those that observed the Rules of the Catholick Church If wee suppose the Church to be one Body consisting of all Churches which are all of them several Bodies it will be not onely reasonable but absolutely necessary by consequence to grant that some orders there must be which shall have the force of the whole others onely in some parts of it And though S. Basil or Tertullian mistake local customes for general yet had there not alwaies been a Body capable of being tied by general customes there had been no room for this mistake No prejudice shall hinder mee to name here the Canons and Constitutions of the Apostles Not as if I meant to maintain that the writings so called were indeed penned by them But because they contain such limitations of customes delivered the Church by the Apostles as were received and in use at such times and in such parts of the Church where those who penned those writings writ For though I should grant that those limitations are not agreeable to that which was brought in by the Apostles no man would be so ridiculous as to demand that there were never any orders or customes delivered the Church by the Apostles which succeeding times did limit otherwise The book of Canons which was acknowledged by the representatives of the whole Church in the Council of Chalcedon if it be survayed shall be found to contain onely particular limitations of general orders held by the Church before those Canons were made by the several Councils either the same with those in the Canons and Constitutions of the Apostles or differing onely according to several times and places For wee have yet extant a book of Canons made out of the Africane Councils containing the like limitations of the same customes and orders which though not the same yet served to preserve the Churches of Africk in unity with the rest of the Church This Code wee finde added to the former by Dionysius Exâ—guus in his translation of the Canons together with the Canons of the Council at Sardica And Cassiodore who lived the same time with Dionysius affirmes that this collection was in use in the Church of Rome at that time Divin lect cap. XXIII But there is extant a later Collection of Canons under the title of the Church of Rome consisting of the same Canons together with some of the Rescripts of Popes which were come into use and authority in the Western Church at such time as the said Collection was made Of the same Canons consisteth another Greek collection printed by du Tillet and commented by Balsamon which addeth hereunto the Canons of the sixth and seventh Synod in use in the Greek Church but not acknowledged by the Latine Where instead thereof the collections of Martinus Braccarensis and Isidorus Mercator of Burchardns Bishop of Wormes and Ives of Chartres where last of all the collection of Gratiane the Dominican Monk was in
may have an issue which I pretend requires the Tradition of the Church and that the communion and Corporation of the Church as the onely meanes to maintain and propagate Tradition in it This our Independent Congregations cannot allow but must stand upon the other plea of those Hereticks that it came in beside if not against Gods appointment which the Donatists questioned not And therefore you shall finde S. Austine in the place aforenamed allege against them the Scriptures fore-telling the calling of all Nations which hee supposeth fulfilled in the Catholick Church then visible and therefore supposeth the communion to be ordained by God wherein the visibility thereof consisteth Otherwise it had been strange to tell the Donatists that they communicating with the Catholick Bishop of Rome communicated with all the Church that acknowledged him but the Donatists acknowledging the Donatist Bishop whom they had set up at Rome were therefore disowned by all the Church beside I do not deny that those of the Reformation are to give account of those things which the Donatists are charged with Nor do I imagine that their account cannot be sufficient because that of the Donatists was not But I say that the trial must be by the Scriptures which both parts acknowledge And I say further that the rest of the Reformation may and ought to admit the Unity of the Church in visible communion as the Donatists did because otherwise they cannot pretend that others are bound to bâ— what they are But our Independent Congregations cannot because if all were as they there could be no one Church obliged to that communion which makes it visible Now I must here caution that I intend not here to inferre that these Rulers succeeded the Apostles by a title of Divine Right as if it were Gods Law that this succession should alwaies continue For I demand for the present upon the exception of those of the Reformation that succession of Faith and doctrine is of more consequence than succession of persons And therefore that there can be no Law of God whereby the right which men hold by personal succession can or ought to hinder the Reformation of Faith and doctrine of Christianity if it may appear that the succession of persons hath not been effectual to preserve the succession of Faith That which I demand from the premises is this That no man in his right senses can imagine that all Christendome should agree in acknowledging those for lawfull Rulers of the Church in the times next the Apostles that had usurped their places contrary to the will of the Apostles and those Disciples which concurred to the work of the Apostles and those who derived their authority from either of both during the time of the Scriptures which I spoke of afore For those of the Reformation that make this exception by making it do acknowledge that there was such a visible succession of Pastors the correspondence of whom as here I argue maintained the unity of a visible Corporation in the Catholick Church And how many records of historical truth undeniable of all that would not be thought to renounce their common sense do testifie unto us visible acts of the Apostles giving power to them whom they left behinde them as those whom they gave it to have transmitted the like power to their successors But when it once appeares that they were owned by the consent of all Christians communicating with them in that quality which they held in their own Churches it can no more be imagined that they could attain those qualities by deceit or violence contrary to the will of their predecessors than it can be imagined that the common Christianity which wee all acknowledge could prevail over all by imposing upon their belief such motives to believe as never were seen because never done And therefore whatsoever change may have succeeded in those qualities from that which the Apostles instituted from the beginning or by abuse of the same in the Faith which they were trusted to propagate without adding or taking away which changes may be the subject of Reformation in the Church and the belief of it yet that this point is not of that nature That all lawfull authority in the Church is derived from that which was in the Apostles propagated by some visible act of theirs I will presume upon as proved by the premises CHAP. IX The Keyes of the Church given the Apostles and exercised by Excommunication under the Apostles The ground thereof is that profession which all that are baptized are to make That Penance and abatemeut of Penance hath been in force ever since and under the Apostles In particular of excluding Hereticks IN the last place the right of Excommunication consists in the power of remitting and retaining sins given by our Lord to his Church with the Keyes of it First to S. Peter alone our Lord saith Mat. XVI 19. I will give thee the Keyes of the kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou shalt binde on earth shall be bound in heaven whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed there But afterwards to the Body of his Disciples Mat. XVIII 17 18. If hee heare thee not tell the Church If he hear not the Church let him be unto thee as a Heathen or a Publicane Verily I say unto you Whatsoever yet binde as afore And to the XII breathing upon them John XX. 22 23. Receive yee the Holy Ghost Whose sins soever yee remit they are remitted and whose sins soever yee retaine they are retained By virtue of this Commission S. Peter saith to Simon Magus discovered a counterfeit Christian Acts VIII 20-24 Thy money perish with thee because thou hast thought to purchase the gift of God with money Thou hast neither part nor lot in this Word for thy heart is not right before God Repent thorefore of this thy malice and pray God that if possible this device of thine heart may be forgiven thee For I see thou art in the gall of bitternesse and the bond of unrighteousnesse And Simon answering said Pray you to the Lord for mee that nothing come upon mee of that which you have said Where having excluded him from the benefit of Christianity what hee is to expect hee leaves to the trial of future time But most manifestly S. Paul 1 Cor. V. commandeth them to deliver the incestuous person to Satan adding directions and reasons why they are to abstaine from the conversation of such Christians And pursueth this discourse with a charge of ending the sutes of their Christians within the Church 1 Cor. VI. which either signifies nothing or inforces the power of Excommunication to oblige the parties to stand to the sentence But the case of the incestuous person is made still more manifest by the reason of the sentence in joyned upon his repentance and the sorrow testified by the Church 2 Cor. II. 4-11 VII 8-11 In the Epistle to the Ebrewes VI. 4-8 X. 26-29 the Apostle declaring that they
But hee that complaineth of that will be bound to advance some other meaning of those texts which may be free from contradiction both to the Rule of Faith and to Historical truth which common sense justifieth And yet admit no mention of publick Penance in the Church no intent to speak of it in all the Scriptures there alleged Which perhaps will be too hard to do Further I labor not I will suppose no man so wilfull as to dispute the right of excluding from the Communion of the Church granting a power of limiting the conditions upon which it is to be restored to them who forfeited it And this is visible It was but a mater of LXX years after the decease of S. John according to Eusebius his Chronicle that Montamis appeared to demand that Adulterers might not be readmitted to the communion of the Church upon Penance That those that had married the second time might not communicate That the rule of Fasting might be stricter than was in use That it might not be lawfull to fly from persecution for the Faith It is manifest that these were his pretenses by Tertullian that maintaines them being seduced with the opinion of inspirations and revelations granted him and his partizans to that purpose These pretenses were afterwards in part revived at Rome by Novatianus to get himself the Bishoprick there by excluding from Penance and reconciliation those that had fallen away in the persecution of Decius It appeareth also that those men alleged for themselves the very passages of the Apostles which I allege to my intent Neither can it appear that ever any son of the Church did contradict them by saying that the Apostles meant nothing of Penance as they imagined And now let all men judge whether the Church have reason to hold this evidence of Penance and by consequence of its own being a Church Was Epiphanius and all that writ against the Novatians troubled to no purpose at the VI of the Ebrews when those Schismaticks alleging it for themselves might have been silenced by denying that it concerned Penance Why did not the Church allege that the sin unto death 1 John V. 17. is no such thing as Apostasy from Christianity when the Novatians alleged it to prove that Apostates were not to be reconciled to the Church How came it to passe that there was so much doubt made in the Church of Rome of admitting the Epistle to the Ebrews for Canonical Scripture witnesse S. Jerome Epist ad Dardanum as thinking that it did absolutely contradict the re-admitting of Apostates which had been practised in that Church before Montanus Tertullian of all men was troubled without cause that the incestuous person whom hee supposes to be excommunicated at Corinth by S. Pauls Order 1 Cor. V. should be re-admitted by his Indulgence 1 Cor. VII De Pudicitiâ cap. XIII XIV XV. because hee saw this was a peremptory exception against Montanus that a crime equal to Adultery should by S. Paul be admitted to Penance How easie a thing it had been for him to say that there is nothing of Penance nothing of Excommunication which Penance presupposes and therefore inferres in delivering to Satan the incestuous person in commanding them not so much as to eat with those that are called brethren that is Christians but are indeed such as the incestuous But hee being some fourteen hundred years nearer the beginning of Christianity than wee and being satisfied by his five senses of those things which new Heresies and Schismes oblige us to argue by consequences found that his Patriarch Montanus could not answer so And therefore thinking that the Church could not answer their arguments forces an answer to this by saying it was not the same man that is excommunicated by the Apostles Order 1 Cor. V. and restored by his Indulgence 2 Cor. VII Because hee saw the reconciling of a sinner to the Church by Penance as lively described and signified by S. Pauls Indulgence there as by any record of the Church at such time as it was most in use And can there remain any doubt of this Excommunication because the Church cannot now deliver to Satan for destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus Surely all the writings of the Apostles do bear witnesse that the miraculous graces of the Holy Ghost which they had then but all Christians see the Church hath not now served not onely to witnesse the truth of Christianity but the authority of the Apostles in behalf of it This authority having taken effect by those Ordinances which the Church hath received at their hands It is no longer requisite that God should bear witnesse to his own Ordinances by such miraculous effects seeing hee doth no longer bear witnesse to the truth of Christianity by the like Hee that believes that whosoever is not in the Church is in the power of Satan needs no reason why hee is delivered to Satan that is put out of the Church Hee that believes it not is not to be perswaded that there is a power of Excommunication granted the Church But that the Christian saith which the Church preacheth is true for that without peradventure preached the Church At least till some body show us that this reason is insufficient hee must not demand that wee give an Article of our Creed and all the help to salvation which the communion of the Catholick Church pretendeth for such an objection as this Chuse now whether you will say as I say That under the Apostles difficulty was made of re-admitting some sorts of sins but never any peremptory order against it and so that Montanus and Novatianus were Schismaticks for seperating from the Church when the whole Church was agreed that there was a necessity of it or look about for a more reasonable sense to assoile the great difficulties of these passages Provided that you offer not violence to common sense and historical truth by imagining that so near the Apostles time there could be so much question about Penance they having neither meant nor ordained any thing about it To this argument all the most ancient records of the Church wheresoever mention is made of reconciling by Penance all the Penitential Canons of later ages will bear witnesse For who can undertake to answer or rather to obscure the evidence made in the place aforenamed that some sins were refused Penance and reconcilement in the first ages of the Church When wee have a whole book of Tertullian contending with Montannus to impose a Law upon it of re-admitting no Adulterers When wee know a whole sect of Novatians that left the Church that they might re-admit no Apostates As for the Penitential Canons of later ages it is manifest to any man that shall peruse and compare them with that which hath been said of the primitive times that they are nothing else but the abatement of that rigor of Discipline which during the primitive heat and zele of
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
the Synod of Antiochia mad when they writ the Leter which you may reade in Eusebius VII 30. in the name of the Churches represented by that Synod to the rest of the Churches in Christendome signifying the sentence of deposition pronounced against Samosatenus and requiring them to joyn with it If it be madnesse to think them so mad as to summon the rest of the Churches upon an obligation which they did not acknowledge what shall it be to think that this obligation was but imaginary or at least voluntarily contracted not inacted by the will of our Lord declared by his Apostles The Emperor Aurelian being appealed by the Council to cause Samosatenus to be put our of his Bishops house by force who maintained himself in it by force against the sentence of the Synod decreed that possession should be given to him whom the Christian Bishops of Italy and Rome should acknowledge for Bishop by writing to him under that title Certainly this Heathen Emperor in referring the execution of the Synods decree to the consent of those remarkable parts of the Church whereupon the consent of the rest might reasonably be presumed understood the constitution of the Church by his five senses better than those learned Christians of our time who argue seriously that this Paulus Samosatenus was not excommunicated by the Synod of Antiochia but by the Emperor Aurelian For this is the course by which all the acts of the whole Church ever came in force those parts of the Church which were not present at the doing of them concurring ex postfacto to inact them and the civil power to grant the execution of them by secular power Perhaps it will not be fit here to let passe that which Athanasius relates libro de sontentiâ Dionysii Alexandrini That this Dionysius writing against Sabellius gave occasion to the Bishops of Pentapolis who resorted to the Church of Alexandria as wee see by the VI Canon of Nicaea to suspect him of that which afterwards was the Heresie of Arius And that Dionysius of Rome being made acquainted by them with a mater of that consequence to the whole Church this Dionysius writ him an Apology on purpose to give satisfaction of his Faith wherein S. Athanasius hath great cause to triumph that the Heresie of Arius which arose afterwards is no lesse condemned than that of Sabellius presently on foot Grant wee that it was an office of Christian charity to tender this satisfaction where it was become so requisite The example of Samosatenus shows that their addresse tended to question if not to displace their Bishop by the authority of the rest of the Church ingaging the consent of his own had hee been discovered to harbor the contrary Heresie to that of Sabellius And indeed what was the rise of all those contentions about Arius that succeeded in the Church after the Council of Nicaea but this question whether Arius should be re-admitted one of the Presbyters of the Church at Alexandria or remaine excommunicate And those truly that do not believe there is any Church but a Congregation that assembles together for the service of God must needs think all Christendome stark mad for so many years together as they labored by so many Synods to attain an agreement through the Church in this and in the cause of Athanasius that depended upon it But those who believe the power of the Church to eschere to the State when it declares it selfe Christian must think the Emperors Constantius and Valens mad when they put themselves to that trouble and charâ—e of so many Synods to obtain that consent of the Church which in point of right their own power might have commanded without all that ado In the decrees of divers of those many Synods that were held about this businesse you shall finde that those Churches which the said decrees are sent to are charged not to write to the Bishops whom they depoâ—e That is to say Not to give them the stile of Bishops not to deal with them about any thing concerning the Church but to hold them as cut off from the Church Just as the Emperor Aurelian afore commanded possession to be delivered to him whom the Bishops of Italy and Rome should write to as Bishop This little circumstance expresses the means by which the communion of the Church was maintained To wit by continual intercourse of leters and messengers from Churches to Churches whereby the one understood the proceedings of the other and being satisfied of the reason of them gave force and execution to them within their own Bodies And this course being visibly derived from the practice of the Apostles sufficeth to evidence the Unity of the Church established by the exercise of that communication which maintained it When wee see the Apostles from the Churches upon which they were for the time resident dare Leters to other Churches signifying the Communion of those Churches one with another by the communion of all with the Apostles who taught and brought into force the termes and conditions upon which they were to communicate one with another have wee not the pattern of that intercourse and communion between several Churches by which common sense showeth all them that look into the records of the Church that the Unity and Communion of the whole was continued to after ages The words of Tertullian de praescript haeret cap. XX. must not be omitted here Itaque tot ac tantae Ecclesiae una est illa ab Apostolis prima ex qua omnes Sic omnes prima Apostolicae duâ— unà omnes probant veritatem Dum est illis communicatio pacis appellatio fraternitatis contesseratio hospitalitatis Quae jura non alia ratio regit quam ejusdem Sacramenti una traditio Therefore so many and so great Churches are all that one primitive Church from the Apostles out of which all come So all are the primitive and Apostolical while all agree in proving the truth While they have the communication of peace the title of brotherhood the common mark of hospitality Which rights nothing but the same tradition of the same mystery ruleth It is to be known that among the Greeks and Romans if a man had made acquaintance and friendship in a forrain City the fashion was to leave a mark for a pledge of it with one another which was called tessexa upon recognisance whereof hee that should come to the place where the other dwelt was not onely to be intertained by him whereupon these friends are called hospites signifying both hosts and guests but also assiisted in any businesse which hee might have in that place Such a kinde of right as this Tertullian saith there was between Christians and Christians between Churches and Churches Hee that produced the cognisance of the Church from whence hee came found not onely accesse to the communion of the Church to which hee came but assistance in his necessities and business in the name of a Christian
Thus S. Paul calleth Gaius his host and of the whole Church Rom. XVI 23. signifying that as hee intertained him S. Paul so hee was ready to intertaine any Christian as a Christian And addeth to that Epistle a recommendation whereby Phaebe might be acknowledged and received as a Deaconesse of the Church at Cenchreae Rom. XVI 1. Whereas otherwise leter◠were written expresse to that purpose which S. Paul himself calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or commendatory 2 Cor. III. 1. The termes in which S. Paul recommends Phabe are these That yee receive her in the Lord as it becometh the Saints and stand by her in any businesse where shee may stand in need For shee also hath stood by many and by mee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at Athens was strangers patrone For at Athens a stranger that came to live there could not act for himself but by his patrone The same S. Paul thus chargeth Titus III. 22. Send away Zenas the Lawyer and Apollos with care that they want nothing That is put money in their purse as their journey shall require As the Aegyptians sent away the Israelites with care when they furnished them with all that they demanded Wisedome XIX 2. But the passage of S. Johns Epistle III. 5-10 is very remarkable You saw how in his second Epistle hee forbids them so much as to salute Hereticks much lesse to intertaine them or any that should not bring with him the true Faith That is a cognisance that they professed it Here hee commends Gaius for assisting some Christian strangers that travailed for the name of Christ that is upon the businesse of the Church taking nothing of the Gentiles because themselves were Jewes turned Christians These hee saith had born witnesse to Gaius his love before the Church by writing leters to acquaint the Church from whence they came with their intertainment Wishing him so to dispatch them as may be fitting towards God because by so doing a man assists the truth And whereas Diotrephes had prevailed with the Church not to receive them and did labor particular men to that purpose upon pretense it seemes of some strangenesse between the Jewes and Gentiles that were turned Christians forbids him to be ruled by his factiousnesse Wee heare S. Paul in the end of his Epistles relate the saluations of the brethren that is of the Church from whence hee dates and also of particular persons eminent there to the Body of the Church hee writes to What ground had there been for this intercourse had not the Apostle taught them that they were all of one Body and so ought to preserve themselves How often do they charge them to salute one another with a holy kisse or the kisse of love Rom. XVI 16. 2 Cor. XIII 12. 1 Thess V. 14. 1 Pet. V. 14. which the Constitutions of the Apostles showes was done before the Consecration of the Eucharist to signifie the love of one another in Christ and for Christ wherewith they professed to rceive the same Though Origen upon Rom. XVI sayes it came after Prayer And Tertullian therefore calls it signaculum orationis de Orat. XIV the seal of prayer To wit of that prayer which the Eucharist was celebrated with Therefore chose salutations joyned with the charge of saluting one another in token of this love signifie no lesse than the expression of the same love from forrain Churches which they professed among themselves in the communion of the same mysteries That is that they who absent thus saluted them did no less communicate with them in the same Sacrament than they did with one another who saw one another communicate with one another face to face This is then that communication of peace that title of brotherhood that recognisance of the marks of hospitality which Tertullian allegeth for the means whereby all Churches make one Church the same with that primitive and original Church which was first founded by the Apostles The unity whereof being grounded upon the same Faith delivered and received at the Sacrament of Baptisme is able to make evidence of the same Faith Do not all the records of the Church from the Apostles time justifie the same visible communion in Christianity by the same intercourse and communion of counsailes and businesse which were trouble to no purpose were not the intent of it to maintain the Unity of the Church Look upon the Epistles of Ignatius and observe in them two things for the present purpose The first that Ignatius being carried in bands from Rome to Antiochia the Churches by which hee passed not onely those hee writes his Epistles to but divers others send deputations of the principal persons among them to conferre with him about their present estate Which are the occasions of the leters hee directs to them The second that hee desires them to depute and ordaine certain persons to go to Antiochia to his Church there to congratulate with them that since hee was taken from them they were returned from persecution into their wonted body The preservation whereof I suppose every man will imagine this conference advice and comfort of so many Churches was the means to advance The same is to be seen by that of Clemens or rather of the Church of Rome in whose name hee writes it to the Church of Corinth divided within it self into factions to reduce them to peace and unity For I suppose the premises will show the reason that must oblige the parties to respect the advice of the Church of Rome To wit the obligation of communicating with the whole Church Seeing reason requires that the party which should refuse to return to unity must be refused the communion of the Church of Rome and those Churches by consequence that should adhere to it Look now upon S. Cyprians leters look upon the leters of Dionysius of Alexandria out of which for the greatest part Eusebius hath compiled the seventh book of his Ecclesiastical Histories look upon the rest of the intercourse by which the unity and communion of the Church was maintained distinct from all Heresies and Schisms from the Apostles time till Constantine and let mee know what probable reason can be assigned to move forrain Churches to give that respect to strafigers which was effectual to the purpose intended had not all sides been perswaded that this was the end with the Apostles after our Lord had ordained this the meanes to procure it Take for an instance the leter of tha Synod at Antiochia about Paulus Samosatenus in the place afore quoted There showing that having deposed him they had made a new Bishop in his stead they write further 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This wee have given you notice of that you may write to him and receive from him communicatory leters But let him that is deposed write to Artemon and let them of Artemons sect communicate with him These leters then were a mark and cognisance that they acknowledged him
Ecclesiastical may be from God though limitable by the Secular hitherto this is evidence As for the holding of Councils I mervail to see this Doctor so securely to dream that the calling of them all belongs onely to the State and that it were an usurpation in the Church to hold any but by commission from it For hee is not ignorant how many Synods were held by the Church afore Constantine and that upon the same right as those meetings of the Apostles which I have showed had the power and force of General Councils without asking leave either of Jewes or Romanes Which is enough for the present purpose to infringe the argument made by this Doctor in the former part of his book Not that there is no Church but that there can be none where there is a State Wherein hee out-vieth the first book de Synedriis his Master who having granted that the Excommunications of Christians were taken up by the voluntary consent of Churches hath by consequenâ—e granted that the Church was a Church that is a Corporation before Constantine And therefore I referr the consideration of the time after Constantine till I speak of the bounds of Ecclesiastical and Civil Power in Church maters Where it will as easily appear as it is easie to look into any record of the Church that the holding of Synods was a mater of course and Canon and custome allowed indeed by the Empire but constituted and limited by the Church Not because the State might not have forbid them Had they gone beyond the bounds of that right which the constitution of the Church establisheth justly unjustly if they had not So that the power of forbidding to be just the use of it unjust But that the Church was yet unacquainted with the motives of transgressing those bounds and so the State had no just cause to interpose Of General Councils I say not the same Not as if the Church afore Constantine had usurped a right not due had it assembled by representatives in a General Council But whether such assemblies were forborn as mater of more jealousie to the State than either ordinary meetings for the service of God or Synods Or of more charge to the Church It must be acknowledged that the first General Council of Nicaea could not have been assembled without the command as well as the charge of Constantine That other General Councils were never assembled without the concurrence of the chief Powers of Christendome That every Soveraign hath a Power to command the presence of every subject where and when hee shall please And that Constantius when hee constrained the Council of Ariminum to sit against their will to the prejudice of the respective Churches on purpose by this duresse and the opportunities of time to bring them to his will abused his Power indeed but usurped it not For if the constitution of the Church be no ground for any temporal Right then can no quality in the Church exempt any man from the service which as a member of the Common-wealth hee owes his Soveraign But whether they acted by commission from Constantius or by the quality they held in the Church the successe of his designe witnesseth For as I have showed you that without being assembled they had both right obliging them and means inabling them to maintaine the Faith by mutual intelligence and correspondence So being assembled alters nothing in the case saving the opportunity it giveth to imploy their right to that end which their quality pretendeth Their assembling upon his command signifying no trust which they undertook to him prejudicial to that which their quality in the Church importeth Having said this in general to that general Argnment upon which this Doctor pretends to build his opinion I am content to turn my Reader loose to him provided hee be content to consider also that which shall be found requisite to be said when I have done with his two predecessors CHAP. XII That the Law expersly covenanted for the Land of Promise A great Objection against this from the Great precept of the Law The hope of the world to come under the Law and the obedience which it requireth was grounded upon reason from the true God the Tradition of the Fathers and the Doctrine of the Prophets The Love of God above all by the Law extendeth no further than the precepts of the Law the love of our Neighbor onely to Jewes Of the Ceremonial Judicial and Moral Law SO much difference as there is between these two or these three opinions and the reasons upon which they proceed it is manifest that the issue and pretense of all is the same That there is no such thing as a Church Understanding by that name a Visible Society or Corporation of all Christian people subsisting or that ought to subsist by a Charter from God one and the same from the first to the second coming of Christ Which therefore remaines distinct from all States and Soveraignties that professe Christianity by the Rights upon which it subsists though the persons of which both consist may be the same if it so fall out that Christianity be professed by all the Soveraign Powers under which there are Christians But that is the reason why I am forced to quote both Authors and Opinions by name which in other points I shall avoid Not onely because I would be as short in this abridgment as my designe will bear But because nothing seemes to mee more odious or further from the profession of a Christian than the affectation of contradicting the opinions of men in repute for Learning which therefore I would have avoided by silencing the names of these had I not found so much difference in the means from which they would inferre the same consequence And truly the Leviathan hath done like a Philosopher in making the question general that is general indeed and giving that resolution of all the branches of it without which whatsoever is said to some parts of it leaves the whole unresolved while any part so remaines Those that onely dispute the power of Excommunication are neverthelesse to give account what Right the Secular Power can have to appoint the Persons that shall either determine or execute maters of Religion to decide Controversies of Faith to minister the Sacraments which they may do themselves by much better Title than by their Deputies than if they resolved and maintained all this as expresly as the Leviathan hath done It may be indeed hee hath made his resolution more subject to be contradicted by so freely and generously declaring it But whosoever shall undertake the same pretense will stand no lesse obliged to God and to his Church to give account how every part of that Power which as well before as since Constantine hath been exercised by the Church should henceforth be exercised by Secular Powers without prejudice to Christianity before hee go about to void it Though hee give not the truth so much advantage against
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
Be it therefore granted that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with such additions as the place where they stand requires signifie that Body which at the time when our Lord spoke was Gods ancient people This signification if I mistake not descending from the first bodying of them into a Commonwealth in the Wildernesse when they might and were all called and assembled together to take resolution in what concerned their posterity as Commonwealths are presumed to be everlasting Bodies as well as themselves When after the return from the Captivity of Babylon they became dispersed into Aegypt Syria Mesopotamia Asia and elswhere owning still or challenging the same Lawes by owning which they first became one Body such Bodies of them as lived in Alexandria Antiochia Ephesus Nearda Sora Pombeditha or other Cities and their respective territories are by the same reason to be called the Synagogues of Alexandria Ephesus and so forth Being by that name sufficiently distinguished from the Gentile Inhabitants of the same Cities and Territories Neither is it pretended that there is any thing in the original force of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 why they should not both signifie the same But suppose our Lord Christ declare an intent of instituting a New people upon condition of imbracing his Gospel and use the old word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie this New people as well hee may use it for the near correspondence between them necessary it is that his hearers understanding him understand by that terme something else than the Law had deâ—clared afore And very convenient it was afterwards that when there fell out not onely distinction but opposition between the two Bodies they should be divided by names as they were by affections As the one is signified in all Church Writers by the name of the Synagogue the other by the name of the Church to signifie the distance which ought not to be between them but is For though nothing is more odious than to quarrel about words Yet as in divers things else the not appropriating the term of Synagogue to the Jewes as of Church to the Church which the Fathers throughly observe is an argument of not well distinguishing between the Law and the Gospel Which gives them a privilege in understanding the Scriptures above our times because as I said afore this is in my judgment the prime point of it notwithstanding all the advantages wee have above them for learning and a means to convey the same confusion to the minds of our hearers When therefore wee reade in the Apostles Writings of the Churches of Judaea and Samaria the Churches of Syria Asia Macedonia and Achaia when wee reade of the Church of Rome of Corinth Ephesus Philippi or Thessalonica And again in other places finde the name of the Church absolutely put without any addition to signifie the whole that containeth all the Churches named in other places so often do wee meet with so many demonstrations to common sense of several bodies signified by those that so speak as intended to constitute one whole Body of the Church After which nothing can be demanded but whether the intention of the Apostles prove them to be so onely in point of fact or in point of right which demand a Christian cannot make Our Lord in particular when hee answereth Mat. XVI 18. Thou art Peter and upon this rock will I build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it cannot be understood to speak of building the Synagogue which Moses had built so long afore Here I would desire him that thinks it so strange that our Lord should understand by the Church something else than the Jewes signified by it to ask the Author of the Leviathan what reason hee had when hee acknowledged that the Church of Corinth Ephesus and Thessalonica is the Body of Christians living in those respective Cities And whether hee had reason to affirm that the Church so signified did do those acts of right which onely Bodies can do and which hee affirmeth the Church under the Apostles did do For if these reasons be not reconcileable it will be worth the considering what truth there is in that position which is maintained by two that cannot agree about the reasons upon which they maintaine it Neither let any difficulty be made from the difference that may arise who they be to whom our Lord conmands there to resort whom hee bids tell the Church one or more or all For when it is resolved that the Church is a Body or a Society it will be by the nature of the subject manifest that the right of acting in behalf of this Body must by the constitution thereof be reserved either to one or to a few or to the whole in some principal acts in others referring themselves to their Deputies as in popular Governments And whosoever they are that this right is reserved to hee that resorts to them is properly said to resort to the Church though our Lord declaring here the purpose of instituting a Church declare not whom hee will trust the power of acting for the Church with Before I go further I must inferre against the Leviathan that seeing the whole Church is signified by the name of the Church absolutely put without addition by the Apostles as the body which all particular Churches constitute therefore the Church is understood and intended by them as a Body capable of right and able to act though not by all that are of it yet by persons trusted for it A thing which hee that had remembred his Creed could not have doubted of For though the name of a Church may be said to rest in a number of men not united by any right into a visible Body yet one holy Catholick and Apostolick Church cannot consist of all persons maintaining the profession thereof in opposition to all Societies claiming that name but not holding the profession requisite but it must be distinguished by something which it acknowledgeth for Law to oblige it they do not Again if the Name of Church in the Apostles rest upon the bodies of Christians in the Cities of Rome Coriâ—th and Ephesus then can it not now as of divine right signifie the several States Kingdomes and Commonwealths wherein Christianity subsisteth Not onely because the bounds of Christendom are not either materially or formally the same with the bounds of those States under which it is now maintained But chiefly because the signification of that name in the Apostles once resting by divine right upon those Congregations can never be transferred upon those Commonwealths which subsiâ—t not by the same right but necessarily descendeth upon those Bodies which derive their succession from them by visible acts of humane right Against both I further inferre that the Church being signified as one by divine right in the Scriptures can never be understood now to consist in all those
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
And therefore as every Church is a Body by it self and all Churches notwithstanding bound to make one Body by visible communion one with another which Body is the Catholick Church So is this common stock of the Church provided for the maintenance first of that Church whose it is then of the whole Church by defraying the charge of those correspondences whereby the unity thereof is intertained In the place afore-quoted out of my Book of the Right of the Church in a Christian State you shall finde those Scriptures alleged which speak of the Collections of other Churches for the maintenance of the Church of Jerusalem the then Mother Church of all Churches And in this Book afore Chap. X. you have evidence that the correspondence between all Churches by which the communion of all was to be maintained was instituted and set on foot by the Apostles You have therefore evidence that such a stock was requisite even in regard of correspondence between several Churches when you see upon what businesse it was spent Whether this correspondence were exercised in holding of Councils or by dayly intercourse and intelligence the case was alwaies the same as at the Council at Ariminum where the Fathers complained that they were detained against their will as to the great charge of them who were to maintaine their Representatives there And if my memory faile not the British Bishops particularly in Sulpitius Severus that their Churches were not able to maintaine them there at the charge which was requisite For Constantine indeed at the Council of Nicaea had furnished not onely the wagons of the Exchequer to convey them to the place but also the greatest part if not their whole charge during the action But his son intending by duresse to constrain them to decree that which hee intended because hee knew that if they decreed it not his authority would be of no more effect to induce the Church to receive it than the Heathen Emperors had been to induce it to renounce Christianity using his Soveraign Power in commanding his subjects to assemble and continue assembled layed for a further burthen and duresse upon them to continue their at their own charge that is at the charge of their Churches I will conclude with a memorable passage of S. Gregory Nazianzens in Julianum I. where hee tells us that among other designes os the Apostate to extinguish Christianity one was to bring the Lawes of the Church into use among the Gentiles as the means to propagate and maintain their Idolatry which was visibly the means to propagate and maintain Christianity Indeed it is a testimony that concerneth all parts of Church Law and evidences all the parts of Ecclesiastical Power that I have insisted upon But because it mentioneth partly the erecting of Hospitals for the correspondence of Christians I have put it here in the last place where I allege the practice of the Church for the corporation of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hee was ready to set up Auditories in stead of Churches in every City and Presidents of higher and lower States readings and expositions of the doctrines of the Gentiles both which compose mens manners and the more abstruse Also in part the forme of Prayers and censuring of sinners according to their measure Of Catechizing also and Baptizing and other things which manifestly belong to the good order that is among us Besides to found Hospitals to intertain strangers and convents of Virgins and Monasteries and the humanity which wee use to the poore Also beside the rest of our order that of leters of mark which wee give to those that need when they travail from Countrey to Countrey Julian believed not that these Orders came from God because hee believed not Christianity Those that can believe as hee did of these Orders why not of Christianity Those Christians whose purses maintained the charge of them would not have been so forward had they thought themselves left free to themselves without obligation from our Lord by his Apostles And to that which hath been said to make evidence of this Law and other Lawes whereby the Church was made a Corporation by the Apostles I will here desire the Reader to adde all that hee shall finde written by Epiphanius in the end of his work against all Heresies concerning the Rules and customs of that one Church which continueth so only by separating from them Perhaps they who can think the Constitutions and Canons of the Apostles meer fables because the books were not written by them to whom they are intitled will not believe that Epiphanius would have writ the same things had they not been real and visible CHAP. XVII The Power of Excommunication in the Church is not founded in the Law What argument there is of it in the Old Testament The allegorical sense thereof is argumentative It was not necessary that the Christians should incurre persecution for using the Power of the Keyes and not by virtue of the Law I Am now come to the point principally insisted on for all this is premised for a ground to that contradiction which I must frame to that which hath been said against the Power of Excommunicating in the Church To which insisting upon the premises I say That I am so farr from pretending that right to depend upon the Church by virtue of the Law that I insist expresly that there was no such thing introduced by Moses Law or in force under the Law of Nature in the time of the Patriarchs And not onely admit but as for my Interest demand all that for truth which the first book de Synedriis hath proved at large and saved all them that believe it the pains of doing iâ— again That Excommunication came in force in the Synagogue after the Captivity and in the dispersions of the Jewes when they desiring as their duty was to maintaine Gods Law by which they were to be governed and not having the Power of insticting Penalties requisite to maintaine it as not being inabled by their Soveraignes devised a course that might appear reasonable because necessary upon â—upposition of their own Law and yet lesse presuming upon the Soveraigne Power Which was to devest those that should incurr that forfeit of the privilege of a Jew and to banish him the conversation of his native people either in whole or in part as the penalty was to be measured by the offense And truly I count my self with the world obliged to him that hath imployed so much learning to show it and that it will onely become the wilfulness of them who neither understand the Scriptures themselves nor will learn of them that do to imagine an Ecclesiastical Court distinct from the Secular under the Law in which the Priesthood were Judges And to take paines to show themselves uncapable of truth by seeking to maintain that which hee hath showed to be evidently false But this being granted I do not understand what reason can be imagined why it
should follow that under the Gospel there should be no such Power in the Church For had it been never so clear never â—o much granted that such a Power was in force under the Law yet could it not be derived upon the Church mediately or immediately from some act of our Lord Christ founding his Church it would not have served the turne The Law of Moses continuing Scripture to the worlds end but Law to none but to those whom it was given to oblige That is the people that subsisted by receiving it and that for that time when it was intended to be in force But if it may appear that the Church is made one Society and Communion by the act of them that founded it and that such it cannot be without a Profession limiting or uniting the right of that Communion to him that makes it nor stand such without power of denying the same to him that visibly makes that Profession and visibly failes of it Whether any such thing were in force under the Law or not under the Gospel it shall not therefore fail to be in force True it is that this cannot be true unlesse a competent reason may be made to appear of something answerable to it under the Law in the same proportion as the correspondence between the Law and the Gospel between the Synagogue and the Church holds But such a one will not be wanting in this case They that argue from the excluding of Adam out of Paradise to the putting of sinners out of the Church if they argue no more than a figure discernâ—ble by the truth when competent evidence of that truth is made conclude not amisse For though this be before the Law yet not before the purpose of God in figuring Chriâ—â—ianity was set on foot And that Paradise as it is a figure of heaven and the joyes thereof so likewise is a figure of the Church upon earth is necessarily conâ—equent to the reason upon which the mystical sense of the Old Testament is grounded So likewise under the Law the shutting of Lepers out of the camp of Israel answerable in the Jewes Law to the City of Jerusalem and supposing the truth of the Gosâ—el a figure of the visible Church neither signified any cause nor produced any effect but of a legal incapacity of conversing with Gods people But supposing a spiritual people of God intitled by their profession to remission of sins and life everlasting a visible failleure of this profession is the cause which producing inviâ—ble separation from God is competent to produce a visible separation from the Church which is visibly that people The penalty allotted to the neglect of circumcision is The childe to be cut off from his people Which penalty beginning there is afterward much frequented by the Law in many cases the penalty whereof is to be cut off from Gods people Signifying as hee hath learnedly showed and saved mee the pains of doing it again that such a forfeiture should make him that incurred it lyable to be suddenly out off by Gods hand from the land of his people And because it was an evident inconvenience that a civil Law should leaye such faults to Gods punishment who never tied himself to execute the punishment though hee made the transgressor lyable to it therefore the Antiens of Gods people according to Gods Law have allotted to such faults the punishment of scourging as next in degree to capital for grievous But there are several other crimes mentioned in the Law which who incurres is by the same Law cut off from Gods people by being put to death I demand now what correspondence can be more exact supposing the Law that tenders the happinesse of this life in the Land of Promise to them that undertake and observe it to be the fore-runner of the New Covenant that tenders remission of sins and life everlasting upon the same terms than is seen betwixt the invisible and visible forfeiture of the privileges of Gods people in the Land of Promise and the invisible and visible forfeiture of the Communion of Gods people as the sin is notorious or not Nor will it serve his turn to scorn S. Cyprian urging as you may see by my book of the Right of the Church that Origen and S. Austin do pag. 27. that Excommunication in the Church is the same as putting to death under the Law As proving that by a meer allusion which if it have not other grounds is not like to be received For S. Paul saith well that the Scriptures are able to make a man wise unto salvation through Faith in Christ Jesus 2 Tim. III. 15. speaking of the Scriptures of the Old Testament Because without faith in Christ upon the motives which his coming hath brought forth to the world they are not able to do it but supposing those motives received do inable a Christian to give a reason of that different dispensation whereby it pleased God to govern things under the Law and so not onely to attain salvation but with wisedom to direct others in it and take away stumbling blocks oâ—t of their way to it And in this case should a man go about to perswade Christians to admit such a Power over them by no other argument than this well might the motion be scorned by them to whom it were tendred But there being no pretense in this allegation but of rendring a reason for a Power of the Church from that of the Synagogue and the Fathers so well stated in the difference between the Law and the Gospel as not easily chargeable of the indiscretion to use ridiculous arguments it is to be maintained that they have given such a reason from the Old Testament as is to be required by such as would be wise to salvation by it Indeed I could not but observe in the late History of Henry the Eight p. 157. where the Writer imagines what reasons Cardinal Woolsey gave the Pope for his consent to the dissolving of some little Monasteries for the erection of his Colleges at Oxford and Ipswich that hee alleges among others That the Clergy should rather fly to Tropes and Allegories if not to Cabbala it self than permit that all the parts of Religious worship though so obvious as to fall easily within common understandings should be without their explication The intent whereof may justly seem to charge the Clergy to have advanced the mystical sense of the Scripture as a means to make the Religion they maintaine more considerable for the difficulty of it But I would there were not too much cause to suspect from other writings of the same Author a compliance with Porphyry Celsus Julian and other enemies of Christianity that have not spared to charge our Lord Christ and his Apostles with abuse and imposture in alleging the Scriptures of the Old Testament impertinently to their purpose though here hee charge onely the Clergy for that wherein they follow his and their steps To mee I confesse
during that time For when it appeared that the Apostles discerned the secrets of mens hearts and inflicted death on those that proceeded hypocritically in their Christianity it is no mervail that none of the rest durst joyne themselves to them as S. Lâ—ke informes us Acts V. 13. that is of those that were not perswaded sincerely to imbrace and untertake Christianity And Excommunication is onely for those who appear not to be sincerely Christians denying it either by expresse profession or by consequence of their actions inconsistent with it Simon Magus may well be reckoned the first Who being sentenced by S. Peter to have nor part nor lot in this Word that is in any thing which Christianity pretendeth to give because it appeared that hee had professed it out of hope to learn how to do such strange feats as might advance the credit and ends of his Magick is by him exhorted indeed to repentance but so that the Apostle engages not himself that is the Church to pray for him as not satisfied yet of the truth of his repentance and conversion to Christianity Acts VIII 18-24 Which is the very practice of the primitive Church as I have showed more at large in the Right of the Church pag. 17-27 towards Apostates Murtherers and Adulterers whom many times and in divers parts they restored not to the Communion of the Church As counting it very difficult for them that had failed so grosly to give competent assurance of sincere Christianity though exhorting them to repentance and giving them hope of forgivenesse from the goodnesse of God when they found not reason to ingage the Church by restoring them to become the warrant of it In consequence to this passage of S. Peter with Simon Magus and in consideration of those Texts of the New Testament which I have handled afore though I acknowledg a Power of excommunicating in the Church yet I do not imagine that any man could be absolutely excommunicated further than this severity of Discipline was in force which refused Penance to some of the most grievous sinnes For whosoever was or might be by the custome in force re-admitted upon Penance is rather excommunicate by his own act if hee refuse it than by any act of the Church that requires it But in as much as whosoever is refused communion till hee perform his Penance is absolutely refused not performing it there is never a Penitential Canon in the records of the Church never a passage mentioning Penance in any of those that writ before the Canons of the Church were in writing that deposes not for a Power of excommunicating in the Church As for those whose sinnes were allowed no hope to be re-admitted though they were absolutely shut out of the Church yet in as much as they were sent to God with hope of mercy they were saved if saved by that Key which by authority as well as knowledge let them into heaven by shutting them out of the Church But suppose this case may be understood otherwise for the possibility of the thing those that were subject to be excommunicated by the Synagogue are not therefore disabled to excommunicate one of themselvs any more than those who now depart from the Church of Rome are disabled to excommunicate one of their own though wee suppose them to passe for Jewes to the Romanes their Masters and to injoy thereby the exercise of their Christianity For so long as their Interest obliged not the Romanes to distinguish between carnal and spiritual Jewes it is no mervail if allowing the Jewes to governe themselves in the Land of Promise they allowed them also to persecute those whom they took for Apostates though their own subjects But when the persecution upon the death of Steven ceased whether by the conversion of Paul or by the death of Herod or whatsoever might move the Jewes to surcease not the Romanes to forbid it no mervail if the Romanes maintained that liberty which the Jewes tolerated that is persecuted not in those whom they held Apostates For if the Romanes themselves in after times did not alwaies persecute Christianity when they allowed it not is it any thing strange that the Jewes who held their own Religion from the meer grant of the Romanes should finde cause not to persecute their Apostates as they counted the Christians with that Power which they were allowed by the Romanes This being the case of the first Christians in Palestine it will be easie thereby to take measure how it must stand with them in the dispersions of the Jewes to whom they were to bring the Gospel in the first place For suppose it intertained with that repute among them which might preserve it from being persecuted the fore-said reason would oblige the Christians to communicate with the Jewes as well in the service of God in the Synagogue as in civil converse Though obliged moreover as they should be able to assemble themselves for the service of God as Christians So the Christians of Antiochia whom Paul and Barnabas assembled in the Church for a year together Acts XI 26. were not to forbear to serve God with the Jews in the Synagogue so long as they and Christianity could hold so much credit with them as to give hope of reducing them to it So when the same Paul and Barnabas created Presbyters for the Churches which they had founded Acts XIV 23. sure they intended them not for the Synagogue which was provided without them But to maintaine the communion of those Churches in the service of God as Christians As for the Romanes their Soveraignes by whose grant the Jewes injoyed all that use of their Lawes which they injoyed no man will mervail that they took no notice of the difference between Jewes and Christians so long as the Jewes complained not when wee see them refuse to make themselves executioners of their wrath upon the Christians when they did complain Wee must not forget Gallio Acts XVIII 12-17 when Paul was brought afore him taking the difference to be onely about names and terms of their own Law and refusing to be judge in it though leaving them to persecute the Christians as by their own Customs namely by scourging they might do Nor mervail that hee at that time should think no more of it when wee finde by Origen that Celsus the Epicurean writing against the Christians two hundred years after takes it for a suit about goats wooll which is nothing As for the Edict of Claudius that all Jewes should depart from Rome Acts XVIII 2. the case is plain that Aquila and Priscilla and all native Jewes though Christians were involved in it and bound to withdraw But whether or no it layed hold on those that had been converted to Christianity being Gentiles and had not the legal mark of Jewes which was Circumcision upon them by the text of S. Luke appears not No though wee suppose that which I have showed in the Primitive Government of Churches p. 53-57 to be
to a Christian but due from all that will be what they professe So the indowing of the Church to those purposes for which the communion thereof standeth though called Alms even by the Laws of this Land had never prevailed over all Christendom had not the obligation thereof been a part of our common Christianity But now as concerning the Power of determining Controversies of Faith I do here insist upon this argument That because no Secular Power is inabled by God to determine Controversies of Faith therefore God hath provided a Society of the Church for preservation of unity among Christians by such determinations as may reasonably satisfie the consciences of those for whom they are made Though not in order to any penalty of this world pretending by outward force to constrain obedience but onely in order to the Communion of the Church that is to the holding or loosing of it as a man conforms to the determination or not All outward force and constraint being acknowledged to proceed from the power of the Sword which the Soveraign beareth This difficulty onely the Leviathan answers they who denying the Power of Excommunication dissolve the Communion of the Church and the Society thereof into the Community of a Christian Common-wealth contenting themselves to name godly Magistrates which term I use not because incompetible to the Soveraign or Christian Powers as if their godlinesse or Christianity did intitle them to this Power though it might have concerned them to show how the Profession of Christianity comes to oblige Christian Subjects to the determinations of Christian or godly Powers if they would not be thought to begg the question which they tye themselves to answer For I also say that all Christians stand bound to the decrees of godly Powers because I suppose and the presumption of piety implies them to suppose that it is a part of godliness to profess one holy Catholick and Apostolick Church the unity whereof once professed obliges a private Christian to be of it a publick person to maintain it Which if the Soveraign do then must hee maintain those persons who by the Society of the Church have right to act in behalf of the Church both in doing their duty and in giving force to their Acts. For I acknowledge as I have already done two points of that right which Secular Power hath in the acting of Church maters The first is that which the trust of Secular Power importeth in all maters As they hold it not by their Christianity and therefore not by the Church so that they suffer it not to be invaded upon pretense of Christianity and the Power of the Church For as experience hath showed that there may be such pretenses So the reasons whereupon I ground the Society and right of Soveraign Power show that Christianity abridgeth not the Soveraign Power in any thing that may concerne the publick peace The second arises from Christianity Which as it giveth all Christians an interest both in all Christian truth and in the Communion of the Church as the common birth-right of Christians So it giveth publick Powers a publick interest in the maintenance of the same That is of all truth which the Church by the acts of the Church done by the Power of the Church for the preservation of Christianity stands possest of and of all Lawes whereby the Communion of the Church in the service of God according to Christianity is duely maintained But this interest presupposeth therefore a Society of the Church by the acts whereof Christian truth and the unity of the Church is to be maintained And importeth in the Soveraign a Right to constrain even those that act in behalf of the Church not to transgresse their own profession that is either the due power of determining things questionable which the Society of the Church inferreth or the acts which have been duely done by the same Therefore not supposing this Society that is such an Act of the Church as it may be evident that the Soveraign may or ought to maintain because it may be evident that the Church transgresses not those grounds which it professes and supposing Controversies among Christians about Christianity I say the Secular Power can have no right to determine them that is to oblige those that are under their Power to stand to the determination which they shall makeâ— unlesse wee do grant that by their Christianity they may be obliged to believe one thing and by their Allegiance to professe another For seeing there be Soveraignes that professe Christianity whereof some are of the Eastern others of the Western Church and of these some of the Communion of the Church of Rome others that are departed from it some Calvinists others Lutherans and Socinus his Sect no man knowes how soon some Soveraign may follow besides new Religions that appear how shall the common profession of Piety or Christianity oblige several Nations to obey those Lawes whereby several Soveraignties may establish contrary things in Christianity but by obliging them to professe contrary to what they believe For what contradictions soever are held among Christians neverthelesse they are sensible that no mans private spirit that is any evidence of Christian truth in the minde of one man can oblige another man to follow it because it imports no evidence to make that which hee thinks hee sees appear to others What becomes then of the Christianity of Christian Subjects obliging them to stand to the Determination of their Soveraignes in all things questionable If the Soveraign Power have right to limit all that is questionable this right will create an obligation of professing and doing the contrary of that which Christianity will oblige a man to believe and to think fit to be done Unlesse all the Subjects of each Soveraign have the strange hap to believe as their Soveraigns in all things questionable Besides if the Soveraign Power have right to determine them it will be impossible to show a reason why this Power in him that is no Christian should not have the same right Seeing it is plain that the common profession of Christianity being in Soveraigns that command contrary things does it not and the Soveraign Power which remains is the same in those that are not Christians as in those that are And therefore I conceive that the Leviathan hath done like a Philosopher in this to object unto himself the greatest of those difficulties that his opinion is liable to and hath but pursued his own principles when hee inquires what a Christian should do when a Soveraign that is no Christian commands him to renounce Christianity For when hee argueth that every Soveraign by being a Soveraign is the chief Teacher of his people whom it is manifest that Soveraigns Teach not but by their Laws or commands but that Christianity onely inableth to use this Power right Hee must know that there is no Power that will not oblige when it is used amisse though not to all purposes
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
the Church provided for the service of God upon supposition of this common Christianity evidently destroyeth what it pretendeth to maintain I leave the case at present for their plea who cannot obtain the consent of the whole if they reform themselves But you see what reason I have to deny that this Reformation consisteth in voiding the obligation of the acts and decrees of the Church For the same reason the authority of Pastors is as visibly derived from the act of the Apostles in primitive Churches as their own authority is visible in the Scriptures And unlesse all Christendom could be cousened or forced at once to admit such an imposture they can be no Churches further than the name in which it is derived from the Law of nature and reason and the liberty left private Christians to dispose of themselves in Ecclesiastical communion where they please For of that liberty neither the Scriptures nor all Christianity since the time of them will yield one example I marvel therefore that S. Pauls commission to Timothy 1 Tim. V. 17. should seem to import no more then a reproof and that at the discretion of him that is reproved whether hee will admit it or return him as good as hee brings For if S. Pauls commission to Timothy extend no further what could hee have done more himself had hee been present And the Apostle injoyning obedience to those who first brought the Gospel and to those who presently ruled those Churches in the same terms Hebr. XIII 7 17. must needs be thought to give the successors their predecessors authority saving the difference observed afore So certain is it which I have advanced in another place that this opinion is not tenable without denying the authority of the Apostles in the quality of Governours of the Church For as to the exception that may be made concerning the use of this Power I have already demurred to the doubt that may rest in difference between the succession of Faith and the succession of persons In fine not to insist here what the respective interests of publick and private persons in the Church are and ought to be because it is a point that cannot here be voided It shall be enough to say that of necessity the authority of publick persons in and for the whole must be such as may make and maintain the Church a Society of reasonable people not a Common-wealth of the Cyclopes in which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no body is ruled by any body in any thing according to Euripides As for the Synagogues that may be presumed rather then evidenced to have subsisted in the ten Tribes during the Schisme Let him make appear what hee can hee shall never have joy of it towards his intent so long as the difference between the Law and the Gospel stands which I have â—ettled that the Church and the State were both one and the same Body under the Law as standing both by the same title of it But several under the Gospel the one standing upon the common ground of all Civil Government the other upon the common Faith of Christianity which ought to make all Christian States one and the same whole Church For in the two Tribes who were at their freedom to resort to the Temple for that service of God which was confined to the Temple which all could neither alwayes do nor were bound to do there is no record of any settled order for assembling themselves to serve God either in the Law obliging of right or actually practised according to Historical truth How much lesse in the ten Tribes being fallen from the Law by the Schism And if there wanted not those who had not bowed the knee to Baal nor Prophets and schools of Prophets under whom they might assemble themselves yet was this far from a Society formed by a certain Rule and Order for communicating in Gods service as I have shewed the Church is And therefore hee who upon that account thinks himself free from the Rule of Gods service under which wee now have in the Church of England must first either nullifie the Gospel as owning no such thing as one visible Church or prove the Church in which hee received his Christianity to be apostate Now I confesse our Doctor here makes use of an assumption which I intend not to deny being an evident truth That every man hath the Soveraign Power of judging in mater of Religion what himself is to beleeve or to do For how should any man be accountable to God for his choice upon other termes But hee will intangle himself most pitifully if hee imagine That God hath turned all men loose to the Bible to make what they can of it and professe the Religion that they may fansie to themselves out of it Even those who make men beleeve the Infallibility of the Church must in despite of themselves appeal to the judgement of whomsoever they perswade to pronounce that so it is And for the rest how much soever he referre himself to him that hath intangled him in that snare it proceeds wholly upon this supposition to which hee hath once made his understanding a slave But if all the world should do as men do now in England make every fansy taken up out of the Bible a Law to their Faith not questioning whether ever professed owned or injoined by the Church or not it would soon become questionable whether there be indeed any such thing as Christianity or not these that professe it agreeing in nothing wherein they would have it consist And for my part the the mater is past question supposing what hath been said That God provided from the beginning of Christianity that all Churches should be linked together by a Law of visible Communion in the service of God and so to make one Church For by this means to become a Member of any Church was to become a Member of the whole Church by the right of visible Communion with all Churches into which all Members of any Church were baptized And this it is which made the Church visible For when a man had no further to enquire but what Christians they were who in every City communicated with all Christians besides the choice was ready made without further trial avoiding the rest for Hereticks or Schismaticks And this choice being made there was no fear of offense by reading the Scriptures the sense whereof this choice confined to the Faith and Rules received through the whole Church So that speaking of Gods Institution every man is Soveraign to judge for himself in mater of Religion supposing the Communion of the Church and the sense of the Scripture to be confined within that which it alloweth But hee who thereupon takes upon him to judge of Religion out of the Scripture not knowing what bounds the Communion of the Church hath given the sense of it shall never impute it to Gods Ordinance if hee perish by chusing amisse Now if it be objected
be said that God granteth the Secular Power any right to punish him for that choice for which hee maketh him unaccountable The ground of my reason lies in that which hath been said against the Infallibility of the Church For if the sentence of the Church be not of force to oblige any man to believe the truth of it much lesse can the sentence of any Christian though never so Soveraign oblige the meanest of his Subjects to believe that Religion to be true which hee commandeth because hee commandeth it And whatsoever penalty the Soveraign inflicteth upon those that concurre not to the exercise of that Religion which hee holdeth forth as when hee denieth them protection in the exercise of their own which as I have showed is no mean one implieth a command of exercising his and is inflicted in consideration of obeying Gods command which the Subject is inabled by God to judge that hee hath against all the world to the contrary So that upon these terms the Secular Power which is inabled to judge for it self upon the same account with the meanest Subject thereof cannot have power to punish any Subject for exercising any Religion which it alloweth not For all Power as I said afore is a moral quality consisting in a Right of obliging another mans will by the act of his will that hath it Therefore if a Subject cannot be obliged by the will of his Soveraign to professe and to exercise that Religion which his Soveraign prescribeth then cannot the Soveraign have power to impose any penalty upon his Subject for professing or exercising that Christianity which hee believeth All Christianity obliging a man to the utmost of his ability to professe and to exercise that Religion which hee believeth to be true And the reason is manifest For Christianity is from God and the Secular Power is from God though by several means Christianity by the coming of Christ and the preaching of his Apostles Secular Power by what means I will not here dispute nor yet suppose any thing that is questionable That which serves my turn is evident to the common reason of all men That by another act of God than that upon which Christianity standeth That Christianity dependeth not upon it That as I argued against the Leviathan by a Law which no Secular Power can abate If therefore God oblige a Christian by his Christianity to serve God otherwise than his Soveraign commandeth hee is bound by the same bond to disobey his Soveraign to obey God which obliged the primitive Christians to suffer death rather than renounce the Faith But I intend not to say that absolutely which I say upon supposition of this Doctors sense Nor do I intend here to dispute that which I have resolved in another place what kind of penalties Secular Power is able to inact that Christianity with which it self professeth The question is now how the Secular Power is able or becomes able to impose penalties in maters of Religion which as a Christian it is not able to oblige the Subject to acknowledge not how far these penalties may extend A question which cannot be answered not supposing the Church A question which is no question supposing it For supposing that God sending Christianity founds for part of it the visible society and corporation of a Church assuring the common sense of all people thereby what is the condition upon which Salvation is to be had by communicating with it What will remain but to conform to the communion of this Church labouring to work out every man his own Salvation by the means which the communion thereof furnisheth Which whoso doth not but pretends to disturbe it will remain punishable by the Secular Power for I have said already that the Church is not inabled to inflict temporal penalties not absolutely because it is Christian but upon supposition that it maintaineth the true Church The acts whereof as Excommunication by the original constitution thereof inforceth So did not the Secular Power inforce that Excommunication it must of necessity become ineffectual when the world is come into the Church and Christianity professed by the State And this is the resolution that I have given in another place that the acts of the Church for the mater of them are limited by the Church that is to say by persons qualified by the Church and in behalf of it but the force that executes them must come from the State For supposing the Church to be founded by God and the power of it resolved into that act wherein this foundation consisteth Whatsoever the Church is by this power inabled to do will belong to the Church by Gods Law to do though the mater of that which it doth be not limited by Gods Law but by the act of men inabled by Gods Law to do it S. Cyprian and others of the Fathers have reason when they argue that the acts of the Church are the acts of God For no man capable of common reason can doubt that what is done by commission from superiour Power is the act of that Power which granted the commission so far as it ownes the execution of it And I have sufficiently limited the Power granted the Church heretofore by the mater of that communion for which it subsisteth and the supposition of the Christianity upon which it subsisteth What is therefore done by virtue of this commission though perhaps ill done for the inward intent with which men do it yet being within the bounds of the Power established by God is to be accepted as his own act without contesting whose act of founding the Church it cannot be infringed Which if it be true so far is the Secular Power from being able to create or constitute a Church by creating that difference of qualities in which the difference between several Members thereof consisteth that it is not able of it self to do any of these acts which the Church that is those who are qualified by and for the Church are thereby qualified to do without committing the sinne of Sacrilege in seizing the Powers which by Gods act are constituted and therefore consecrated and dedicated to his own service into its own hands not supposing the free act of the Church without fraud and violence to the doing of it CHAP. XXI How the Tradition of the Church limits the interpretation of Scriptures How the declaration of the Church becomes a reasonable mark of Heresie That which is not found in the Scriptures may have been delivered by the Apostles Some things delivered by the Apostles and recorded in the Scriptures may not oblige S. Austines Rule of Apostolical Traditions ANd by this means I make account I have gained another principle towards the interpretation of Scripture and resolution of things questioned in Christianity either concerning the Rule of Faith or such Laws and Customs determining the circumstances of Ecclesiastical Communion as I showed afore are understood by the name of Apostolical Traditions Which principle that no
is evident that hee allowes them that which the Apostles had forbidden because it is evident that this is one of those differences which Jews by the Law were bound to make If therefore there be this difference in the Scriptures it is manifest that the leter of them doth not determine what obliges So again the same Apostle 1 Cor. XI 1-16 disputeth at large that men ought not but women ought to cover their heads at praying or prophesying in the Church For the intent whereof though it hath been the subject of whole books in this age I conceive I need go no further than Tertullians book de Velandis Virginibus who living so much nearer the Apostles knew better the custoÌ„ms of their Churches than all the Criticks of this time Hee disputes the case in question then whether Virgins had a privilege not to vail their faces at Divine Service by arguing that they cannot be excepted from S. Pauls words and alleging the example of the Church of Corinth where at that very time the Virgins vailed their faces at Divine Service as other women did Which whether it tye the Church or not at this time it will scarce be granted by those who now practice it not And in another place 1 Tim. V. 3-6 hee showeth that there was then an Order of Widowes whose maintenance hee ordereth to come from the stock of the Church as likewise how they are to be qualified and how imployed Of which Order there is no where any step remaining in the Church at â—resent though nothing be more imperative than the Order concerning it So the precept of the Apostle serves not to oblige the Church at present though by Scripture And if I may use the argument ad hominem upon the supposition of those that I dispute with who intend not to take any thing for true which I prove not as debating the principles of Christian truth it is manifest that the Apostle James V. 14. appointeth that the sick be anointed with oil together with prayers as well for the recovery of their health as for the forgivenesse of their sins Which it is manifest that it cannot appear not to oblige the Church at this time by virtue of that Scripture which injoyneth it And therefore to say nothing at present whether it do indeed oblige the now Church or not those that believe it doth not oblige cannot be able to give a reason why it obligeth not by the Scripture alone And this is the argument whereby I prove that the interpretation of Scripture as concerning mater of Law to the Church or the means to be used in determining what obligeth what not cannot transgresse the tradition and practice of the Church Because that which is propounded in the Scriptures as meer mater of fact may oblige and that which is propounded as mater of precept creating right may not oblige the Scripture not determining whether it intend that obligation to be universal or not For having showed afore that the Church is a Society instituted by God to which these Rules are given as Laws to govern it in the exercise of those Offices wherein the Communion therâ—of consisteth all reasonable men must grant that as the intent and meaning of all Laws is to be gathered from the primitive and original practice of that Society for which they were made so is the reason of all Orders delivered to the Church by the Apostles and by consequence their intent how farr they were to oblige to be measured by the first and most ancient practice of the Church which first had them to use Whereunto let us adde these considerations That the Orders delivered the Church by the Apostles were of necessity in force before mention can be made of them in their writings That the writing of them is neither the reason why they oblige nor a thing thereunto requisite but meerly supervenient to the force of them And that there is sufficient evidence that those motives to believe which the Scripture recordeth but cannot evidence are neverthelesse true and that the truth of those motives cannot be evident but by the Society of the Church which the said Laws do maintain For upon these conâ—â—derations it will appear necessarily consequent that as there be Apostolical Traditions which the Scripture evidently witnesseth so evidence may be made of them without Scripture The Rule of S. Austine how to discern what Traditions do indeed come from the Apostles is well enough known to be this To wit that which is observed over all the Church though it cannot be discerned when where or by whom it came first in force that is in his times by the authority of what Synod it was settled that must be deemed and taken to come from the authority of the Apostles themselves I will not use the terms of Synod or Synods because I conceive the Church was from the beginning by virtue of the perpetual intelligence and correspondence settled and used between the parts of it a standing Synod even when there was no Assembly of persons authorized to consent in behalf of their respective Churches Such things as became requisite to be determined in any Church being thereby so communicated to the rest as the order taken in one either to be accepted by them or redressed Neither will I say that the Rule is so effectual as it is true For I cannot warrant how general the practice of every thing that may come in question can appear to have been over the whole Church nor whether it may appear to have begun from some act of the Church to be designed by some place or persons or not which in S. Austines time I doubt not might be made to appear and being made to appear would maintain the Rule to be true Nor have I need of any such Rule as may serve to discern whatsoever may become questionable whether it come from the Apostles themselves or not It shall suffice mee here to presume thus much that no man can prescribe against any Rule of the Church that it comes not from the Apostles because it is not recorded in the holy Scriptures And therefore that nothing hindereth competent evidence to be made of the authority of the Apostles in some Orders of the Church of which there is no mention in the Scriptures Correspondently to that which was settled afore concerning the Rule of Faith that no man can prescribe against any thing questionable that it is no part of it because it is not evident in Scripture or because such arguments may be made against it out of the Scriptures which every one whose salvation it concerns is not able evidently to assoile And all this being determined I intend neverthelesse that it still shall remain questionable how farr these Orders of the Apostles oblige the Church Because I intend not to prescribe from all this that those Orders which shall appear to have been brought in by the Apostles may not become uselesse to the Church CHAP.
XXII The Authority of the Fathers is not grounded upon any presumption of their Learning or Holinesse How farr they challenge the credit of Historical truth The pre-eminenee of the Primitive The presumption that is grounded upon their ranks and qualities in the Church Of Arnobius Lactantius Tertullian Origen Clemens and the approbation of posterity THese things being said wee have got ground for a resolution in the dispute concerning the authority of the Fathers in maters questionable concerning Christianity and the interpretation of the Scriptures For truly did the credit of those things which they affirm consist in the reputation of their holinesse or learning whether or no the premises be true the consequence would be lame Hee that could make a question of the godlinesse and of the Christianity of those persons to whom wee owe the maintenance and propagation of Christianity under God by preserving Christs flock from the contagion of Heresies by intertaining the unity of the Church and by laying down their lives for the truth must by consequence question though not that Christianity which hee hath sansied yet that which was delivered by the Apostles Which notwithstanding if the Holy Ghost that was in them to save them by saving the common Christianity hath not given the Church evidence that hee was given them to preserve them from error in understanding the Scriptures wee wrong them and the Holy Ghost in them if wee take the truth of their doctrine upon their credit For though the having of the Holy Ghost presupposeth the profession of Christianity as I have showed yet that importeth no evidence to warrant the truth of all that they might say in defense or interpretation of it And though their learning in that which is proper to Christians that is their skill in the Scriptures be such as these ages that boast so much of learning can never equal because they made it in a maner their whole businesse of study And though some of them as Clemens Tertullian Origen and S. Hiâ—rome that looked about them for further helps to the defense and interpretation of Christianity may well challenge the curiosity of these times for great knowledg Yet because mans wit is alwaies fruitfull in that which it is imployed about and may still be well imployed in clearing the true intent of Christianity and the Scriptures so long as there are contrary opinions and sects which cannot all be true I will not create any prejudice to the learning of this time upon that score which it is evident may and doth imploy more helps of learning than they ever did imploy towards the understanding of the Scriptures Two privileges there are belonging to the Fathers of the Church which no man that writes in these dayes can pretend to how godly how learned soever hee may be The first is that of their age and time creating an infallible trust in point of historical truth concerning the state of Christianity during those ages in which they lived or which they might know This is that which neither Pagans nor Jews nor Mahumetanes can refuse them any more than Christians can refuse to believe them in maters of fact which they relate not as things done in private which themselves with a few more may pretend to have had means to know but which were visible to the world at such time as they writ and wherein had they been otherwise they might have been reproved as imposing upon the world not the belief of that which doth not appear to be true but of that which doth appear to be untrue Neither do I demand that upon this score their credit be admitted any further than that which I have premised will inforce For if I have well concluded that the Church is a Society instituted by our Lord Christ and his Apostles in trust for the maintenance and propagation of Christianity contained in the holy Scriptures which hee deposited with it then is the sense of that time which is nearest the age of the Apostles a legal presumption of the truth of that which it was trusted with And as all Writers that relate things subject to the sense of all men as well as their own have the credit of historical truth and Church writers in maters of fact concerning the Church of their respective ages the state thereof being alwaies visible So those that write under the first ages of the Church though competent authors for the truth of nothing in Christianity for then why should not Christianity be believed upon their credit yet must be admitted as unquestionable witnesses of that Christianity which came hot and tender from the forge of our Lord and his Apostles Nor do I complain that any man refuses them upon this score But when I see how many pretending to search the Scriptures and the truth of things questioned in Christianity never make use of any information they might have from them to argue thereupon the true sense of the Scriptures who if they were to expound any Author of humane learning would count him a mad man that should neglect the records of those Authors that lived nearest the same time and perhaps do themselves imploy the writings of Jewes and Pagans in expounding the very Scriptures I cannot chuse but take it as a mark of prejudice against some truth that men care not to be informed of the primitive Christianity least consequences might be framed against some prejudices of their own which supposing onely the credit of historical truth might prove undeniable And here I must needs mervail at the Cardinal of Perrons demand that the trial of what is to be thought Catholick or universally received in the whole Church of God should proceed chiefly or at least necessarily upon the testimonies of those Writers which lived about the fourth century of years from Christ as that which flourished most for number and learning of Writers For seeing the authority of Church Writers is not grounded upon presumption of their learning And that the credit of historical truth cannot be denied even the single witnesse of those that writ when they were more scarce and lesse knowing at least in Secular studies But what is primitive what accessory is not to be discovered but by the state of those times which were before additions could be made hee that demands to be tryed by the times of three hundred years distance from the original wherein what change may have fallen out not presumption but historical truth must determine I say hee that demands this tryal demands not to be tryed Not that I would deny the Writers of that age and such as follow the credit which their time in the consideration now on foot allowes But that the resolution of what is original and primitive must not come from the testimony thereof but from the comparison of it with the testimony of those ages that went afore The second consideration in which the writings of the Fathers are valuable cometh from that which is now
proved that is from the Society of the Church and the unity thereof from whence it follows that what is founâ—d to be taught in the Church by men authorized by the Communion thereof and qualified to teach and that without contradiction is not contrary to the Rule of Faith but if it be taught with one consent it is part of it Without contradiction I mean here when a man is not charged to transgresse the Faith of the Church in that which hee teacheth much lesse disowned by the Church for teaching it Not when no man is found to hold a contrary opinion which alwaies falls out in things disputable For the Communion of the Church necessarily importeth that a man qualified with authority in it professe nothing contrary to that Faith the profession whereof qualifies all to be of the Church Though other things there be many wherein a man may be allowed not onely to believe but to professe contrary to that which another professes and yet qualified not onely to be of the Church but to bear that authority which the Society thereof constituteth The name therefore of Fathers importeth at least some part of that superiority which the Society of the Church giveth And therefore belongeth not properly to those that are not so qualified though they that are not so qualified may be the authors of such writings as have the lot to remain to posterity But the authority of Fathers which is grounded upon this presumption that persons qualified in the Church teach nothing contrary to the Faith of it because their quality in the Church would become questionable if they should teach that which agrees not with the Faith of the Church This authority I say cannot appear in the writings of private Christians Because the Church is no further chargable by allowing him the Communion of the Church who declareth to believe onely that which indeed contradicts the Rule of Faith then of taking no notice what a private man professes to think out of that ignorance which may beseem a capacity of being better informed Hereupon it is that I think it no exception to the due authority of the Fathers that Arnobius or Laectantius should be utterly disdained in some particulars The one known to have been a Novice in Christianity when hee writ and writing as S. Jerom testifies to declare himself a Christian by trying his stile as being Master of a School of Eloquence in defense thereof against the Gentiles had it seems the ill chance to light upon some writings of the Gnosticks according to Saturninus or Basilides and taking them for Christians because they affected to go under that name translated their monstrous opinions into his work as points of Christianity The other whether a novice or no I cannot say marked neverthelesse by S. Jerome as one more able to refure Gentilisme than to give an account of Christianity and therefore to have been converted to Christianity but not to have learned it what presumption a discreet man can make of Christianity by his Book let every discreet man judg I will not say the like of Justine the Martyr a man who hath deserved farr more of Christianity by renouncing the world and taking upon him the profession and habit of a Philosopher among the Gentiles thereby to gain opportunity of maintaining Christianity on all occasions which the Heathen Philosophers took to maintain the positions of their several sects A resolution truly generous and Christian In the mean time having in him more of a Philosopher than of a Scholar and gathering his knowledg rather from travail and conversation than from reading it is no mervail if hee hath suffered many impostures at least in maters of historical truth which hee that should demand that the Church should answer as allowing his books to be read would be very unreasonable When as bearing no rank in the Church above that of all Christians for any thing I can perceive if hee should have mistaken himself in any thing neerly concerning the substance of Christianity his eminent merits towards the Church might have been of force to have drowned all consideration of them and given his writings passeport to posterity notwithstanding I will not extend this consideration to the writings of Clemens Alexandrinus of Origen and of Tertullian The last whereof that is Tertullian belongs not to this rank having put himself out of the Communion of the Church by making a party against the Church of Carthage upon the pretenses of the Montanists The second that is Origen whatsoever opinions hee had cannot be said either to have held them so resolutely or to have professed them so publickly that those that were nearest him could be thought accessories to them And therefore as his very great merits of the Church otherwise held him in his rank in the Church during his time so his extravagancies cannot impeach that authority which others and hee also in such things as hee agrees with them in do truly purchase by the allowance of the Church The same is to be said of his Master Clemens whose writings as they are not so many so neither his extravagancies so great and considerable But even these eccentrical Writers by being marked for positions particular to them besides the credit of historical truth which in times nearest the Apostles is of great consequence to inform us of the primitive state of Christianity and therefore of incomparable value towards the settling of a right judgment in all things now questionable I say beside that which is common to them with all Writers they get by the exceptions which are made against them the advantage of a Rule of Law in the rest that is to say that setting aside those points in which they are excepted against they are according to the Rule of Faith in things not excepted against against In fine the authority of the whole Church is found to be expresly ingaged in all things that have passed into effect either from the determination of Synods which having been assembled by the free consent thereof have been received by the like free consent whether all or part were present at the Synod or from the act of any particular Church the proceeding and grounds whereof hath been approved of and received into effect by the whole Which in some measure may be said of the writings of particular Doctors In as much as it is manifest that extravagant doctrines may have been published in several parts of the Church which particular Doctors may have imployed their pens to contradict before any Church had imployed any censure to condemn As by Epiphanius in the Heresie of the Origenists it appeareth that Origen was contradicted by Methodius If therefore such extravagances so contradicted be extinguished such writings have continued cherished by the Church it is evidence enough that the Church it self is ingaged in the condemnation of those extravagances which have been suppressed by the means of such writings And all this serves to maintain and
world And truly no more than this can be thought requisite to the purpose of the whole Prophesie of incouraging them to continue constant in the profession of Christianity notwithstanding all persecutions as foreknowing the issue Now hee that continues constant in Christianity and never knew this Prophesie shall want nothing necessary to his salvation though hee want so nething very effectual to the having of that which is necessary To wit of perseverance in Christianity The intent of this Prophesie being to perswade them to it Which is enough to show any man a difference between the right understanding of this Prophesie and any part of the Rule of Faith As for the custome of giving the Eucharist to Infants so soon as they were baptized I answer that the evidence which I will give you that it was never used out of an opinion of necessity to Salvation as the Baptisme of Infants was seemeth to be an exception sufficient against the universal use of it as supposed to come from the Apostles Hee that will shew mee any Writer of the Church by whose testimony it may be presumed that the Church did not baptize Infants out of an opinion that they could not be saved without it I speak not now of the truth of this opinion but onely of the point of fact whatsoever may be argued from thence by virtue of the premises I will yield him that the same Writer did believe that the giving of the Eucharist to Infants upon their Baptisme was commanded by the Apostles I acknowledge it is the opinion of Tertullian for which there is no mark upon him as ever a whit the lesse Catholick that it was not expedient to baptize Infants because of the danger of years under discretion to seduce them from the fulfilling of their profession before they could throughly understand what it imported But I deny that this was because he or any body then believed that they could go out of the world unbaptised and yet be saved For when the vigilance of Parents and the diligence of all might assure them not to fail of Baptism in case of necessity it is no marvail if the reason alledged might move men to defer it to the years of manhood beleeving no lesse the necessity of it Now in the writings of Fulgentius a worthy African Prelate there is extant a little piece in answer to a Letter of Ferrandus a Deacon of his it seems about a certain Moore who being converted and having divers times made profession of Christianity as the custome of the Church then required after that being taken sick was baptized without being able by speaking to make the like profession as the rule required all at their baptism to make Upon other considerations the Letter desires resolution of the salvation of this Moore But upon this also because he survived not to receive the Eucharist which is clearly answered in the affirmative upon as good reasons of Scripture as a good Christian can desire Which is without exception to show that they had not that opinion of the necessity of the Eucharist as of Baptism sufficient to argue a severall beginning of observing them both And truly seeing it is granted on all hands that it is no inconvenience in Christianity that the Church or any part of it mistake the true meaning of some Scriptures the alledging of our Lords words Vnless yee eat the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his blood yee have not life in you Joh. VI. 53. seems to argue that this came to be an order from some new act of the Church or part of it rather then that it was practised as coming from the Apostles Whereunto if we add that which here follows though it appear chiefly by S. Cyprian de lapsis to have been frequented in Africk though it were practised in the Western and Eastern Church yet perhaps it will appear to comeshort of S. Austins rule of discerning what comes from the Apostles as affording appearance that it was neither Original nor Catholick as for how prejudiciall this is not the place to determine it The words of Innocent I Pope out of which it is commonly taken for granted that this custome was in use at Rome are these Epist XCIII Apud Augustinum Illud verò quod eos vestra fraternitas asserit praedicare parvulos aeternae vitae praemiis etiam sine baptismatis gratiâ posse donari perfatuum est Nisi enim manducaverint carnem filii homins biberint sanguinem ejus non habebunt vitam in â—semetipsis But that which your brotherhood affirms that they publish that Infants may have the reward of eternal life given them even without the grace of baptism is very foolish For unlesse they eat the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his blood they have not life in themselves Where it is plain that eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Christ which he makes necessary to salvation is that which consists in being baptized but of giving them the Eucharist not a word more then this The same fense concerning the eating of the flesh and drinking the blood of Christ in and by baptisme and that onely necessary to salvation S. Austine also most manifestly delivers in a passage alledged by Gratain de Consecrat dist 2 Cap. Quia passus est dominus out of a certain Homily de infantibus which Bede also hath in 1 ad Cor. X. Nulli est aliquatenus dubitandum unumquemque sidelium Corporis sanguinis Dominici tunc esse participem quando in baptismate membrum efficitur Christi nec alienari ab illius panis calicisque consortio etiamsi antequam panem illum comedat calicemque bibat de hoc seculo migraverit in unitate Corporis Christi constitutus No man is any way to doubt that every believer then becomes partaker of the body and blood of Christ when he is made a member of Christ by baptism Nor does he become a stranger to the communion of that bread and cup though before eat that bread and drink that cup he goes out of the world estated in the unity of Christs body And thus he expounds also the eating of Christs flesh and drinking his blood de peccatorum meritis remis III. 4. And so he is likewise there to be understood Cap. XX. And to this purpose all those passages of his are in force whereby he requireth nothing but Baptisme to the salvation of Infants And in this sense Hypognost ad Art V. Quomodo vitam regni coelorum promittitis parvulis non renatis ex aqnâ spiritu non cibatis carne atque non potatis sanguine Christi qui fusus est in remissionem peccatorum Ecce non baptizatus vitali etiam cibo poculoque privatus dividitur à regno coelornm ubi fons viventium permanet Christus How do ye Pelagians promise little ones not born again of water and the spirit noâ— fed with the flesh nor drenched with the blood of
Christ shed for reâ—â—ission of sins the life of the Kingdom of heaven See the unbaptized deprived also of the bread and cup of life is divided from the Kingdom of Heaven where Christ the well of life remains So it appears that the African Church had this custome but held it not necessary to salvation as Baptism But by Gennadius de dogmatibus Ecclesiasticis Cap. LII It appears to have been a custome of the Church when Hereticks were reconciled to the Church by confirmation to give their little ones the Eucharist presently upon it And Ordo Romanus de Baptismo prescribes it after the solemn Baptism before Easter which the French Capitulary I. 161. and Alcuinus also de divinis officiis provideth for And in the Eastern Church Dionysius in the end of the booke de Hierarchiâ Ecclesiasticâ In the mean time it is to be considered that there being no order that all should be baptized Infants nor at what age Whereupon St. Gregory Nazianzene Orat. XLII in Sanctum Bapt. advises at three or four years of age it cannot be said to have been a generall custome of the Church Nor that it could be originall from the Apostles because the solemn times of Baptisme at Easter and Whitsontide cannot be thought to have been settled till Christianity was grown very vulgar For as for those that were baptized upon particular occasions or in danger of death it cannot be thought that the Eucharist was celebrated for their purpose nor doth any example appear that it was ever brought them from the Church On the contrary when the times of Baptisme came to be disused because it was found to be for the best that all should be baptized Infants upon this occasion the receiving of the Eucharist came to be deferred as much longer then was fitting in my opinion then it was given too soon in S. Cyprians time according to the example related by him in his Book de Lapsis where the Child whom the Pagans had given bread dipped in the wine that had been consecrated to their Idols because too young to eat of the flesh of their sacrifices receives the Eucharist in the Church CHAP. XXIV Two sorts of means to resolve whatsoever is resolvable concerning the Scripture Upon what terms the Church may or is to determine controversies of Faith And what obligation that determination produceth Traditions of the Apostles oblige the present Church as the reasons of them continue or not Instances in our Lords Passeover and Eucharist Penance under the Apostles and afterwards S. Pauls vail eating blood and things offered to Idols The power of the Church in limiting these Traditions I May now proceed I conceive to resolve generally upon what principles any thing questionable in Christianity is determinable and as franckly as briefly do affirm that there are but two sorts of means to resolve us in any thing of that nature Tradition and Argument Authority and Reason History and Logick For whatsoever any Artist or Divine hath said of the great use of the languages in discovering the true meaning of the Original Scriptures by the ancient Translations as well as the Originalls which I allow as much as they demand they must give me leave to observe that seeing all languages are certain Lawes of speaking which have the force of signifying by being delivered to posterity upon agreement of their Predeoessors all that helpe is duly ascribed to Tradition which we have from the Languages Indeed this is no Tradition of the Church no more then all History and Historicall truth concerning the times the places the persons mentioned in the Scripture concerning the Lawes the Customes the Fashions and orders practised by persons mentioned in the Scriptures in all particulars whereof the Scripture speaks which whether it be delivered by Christians or not Christians as far as the common reason of men alloweth or warranteth it for Historical truth is to be admitted into consequence in inquiring the meaning of the Scriptures and without it all pretense of Languages is pedantick and contemptible as that which gives the true reason to the Language of the Scripture whatsoever it import in vulgar use This helpe being applied to the Text of the Scripture it will be of consequence to confider the process of the discourse pursuing that which may appear to be intended not by any mans fancy but by those marks which cleared by the helps premised may appear to signifie it Which is the work of reason supposing the truth of the Scriptures And whereas other passages of Scripture either are clearer of themselves or being made clearer by using the same helps may seem to argue the meaning of that which is questioned whereas other parts of Christianity resolved afore may serve as principles to inferre by consequence of reason the truth of that which remains in doubt not to be impured therefore to reason but to the truth from which reason argues as believed and not seen this also is no lesss the work of reason supposing the truth of the Scriptures But whereas there be two sorts of things questionable in Christianity and all that is questionable meerly in point of truth hath relation to and dependance upon the rule of faith as consequent to it or consistent with it if we will have it true or otherwise if false I acknowledge in the first place that nothing of this nature can be questionable further then as some Scripture the meaning whereof is not evident createth the doubt And therefore that the determination of the meaning of that Scripture is the determination of the truth questionable For seeing the truth of Gods nature and counsails which Christianity revealeth are things which no Christian can pretend to have known otherwise then by revelation from God and that we have evidence that whatsoever we have by Scripture is revealed but by the Tradition of the Church no further then all the Church agreeth in it all that wherein it agreeeth being supposed to be in the Scripture and much more then that It followeth that nothing can be affirmed as consequent to or consistent with that which the tradition of the Church containeth but by the Scripture and from the Scripture So that I willingly admit whatsoever is alleadged from divers sayings of the Fathers that whatsoever is not proved out of the Scriptures is as easily rejected as it is affirmed limiting the meaning of it as I have said But whatsoever there is Scripture produced to prove seeing we have prescribed that nothing can be admitted for the true meaning of any Scripture that is against the Catholick Tradition of the Church it behoveth that evidence be made that what is pretended to be true hath been taught in the Church so expresly as may inferre the allowance of it and therefore is not against the rule of Faith But this being cleared so manifest as it is that the Church hath not the priviledge of infallibility in any express act which is not justifiable from the universall
originall practice of the Church whither in prescribing what is to be believed what is to be professed or what is to be done So manifest must it remain that nothing can be resolved by plurality of votes of Ecclesiasticall Writers as to the point of truth For then were the priviledge of infallibility in the votes of those Writers which themselves disclaim from the substance of what they write And it is to say that what had no such priviledge when it was written if it have more Authors survive that hold it shall be and must be held infallible Which consequences being ridiculous it followeth that for the tryal of truth within the bounds aforesaid recourse must be had to the means premised And the effect of those means every dayes experience witnesseth For the obligation which all men think they have firmly to hold that which by these means they have all concluded from the Scriptures is the consequence of these principles in expounding the same Which obligation though sometimes imaginary in regard that between contradictory reasons the consequence may be equally firm on both sides yet that it cannot be otherwise he that believes the truth of Christianity must needs imagine For true principles truly used necessarily produce nothing but true consequences Which if it be so why should any question be made that the Church may and sometimes ought to proceed in determining the truth of things questionable upon occasion of the Scriptures concerning the rule of Christian faith or which is all one that the exercise of this power by the Church produceth in those that are of the Church an obligation of submitting to the same Indeed here be two obligations which sometimes may contradict one another and therefore whatsoever the matter of them be the effects of them cannot be contraries The use of the means to determine the meaning of the Scriptures produceth an obligation of holding that which followeth from it which obligation no man can have or ought to imagine he hath before the due use of such meanes whither his estate in the Church oblige him to use them or not But the visible determination of the Church obliges all that are of the Church not to scandalize the unity thereof by professing contrary to the same And to both these obligations the same man may be subject as the matter may be to wit as one that hath resolved the question upon true principles not to believe the contrary and as one of the Church that believes the Church faileth in that for which he is bound not to break the unity thereof not to professe against what the Church determineth For I am bold to say again that there is no society no communion in the world whether Civill Ecclesiasticall Military or whatsoever it be that can subsist unlesse we grant that the Act of superiour Power obligeth sometimes when it is ill used In the mean time I say not that this holds alwaies and in matters of whatsoever concernment nor do take upon me generally to resolve this no more then what is the mater of the rule of Faith which he that believes may be saved he that positively believes it not all cannot It shall be enough for me if I may give an opinion whether that which we complain of be of value to disoblige us to our superiours or not As concerning what is questioned amongst us whither it be of the rule of Faith or not But this I shall say that to justifie the use of this power towards God requireth not onely a perswasion of the truth competent to the weight of the point in question in those that determine for the Church but also a probable judgement that the determination which they shall make will be the meanes to reduce contrary opinions to that sense which they see so great Authority profess and injoyn For without doubt there can be no such means to dissolve the unity of the Church as a precipitate and immature determination of something that is become questionable For effectually to proceed to exercise Ecclesiasticall Communion upon terms contrary to that which hath been received afore is actually to dissolve the unity of the Church The ingagement to make good that which men shall have once done being the most powerful Witcheraft and Ligature in the world to blind them from seeing that which all men see besides themselves or at least from confessing to see that which they cannot but see But if we speak of things which concern the communion of the Church in those offices which God is to be served with by Christians or that tend to maintain the same besides the meaning and truth of the Scriptures there remains a further question what is or ought to be law to the Church and oblige them that are of the Church seeing that whatsoever is in the Scripture obligeth not the Church for Law though obliged to beleeve it for truth the resolution whereof will require evidence of the reason for which every thing was done by the Apostles for as it holds or not so the constitution grounded upon it is to hold either alwaies or onely as it holds And this reason must be evidenced by the Authority of the Church admitting that reason into force whither by express act or by silent practice When the Israelites are commanded to eat the Passeover in haste with their loins girt and their staves in their hands there is appearance enough that the intent of it was onely concerning that Passeover which first they celebrated in Egypt not for an order alwaies to continue because then the case required haste and because then the Angell passed over their houses upon the door-posts whereof the blood was commandded to be sprinkled that by that marke he might passe over them to smite the Egyptians For though Philo would have the Passeover to be celebrated at home and not at Jerusalem though perhaps onely by those of the dispersions those that dwelt in the Land of promise being all tied to resort to Jerusalem yet all that acknowledge the Talmud think it not lawfull to celebrate it but at Jerusalem contenting themselves with the Supper and abatng the Lambe as one of those sacrifices which the Law forbiddeth every where but before the Ark. But had not the practice of the Nation and the Authority of the Elders trusted by the Law to determine such matters appeared in the businesse our Lord who according to his own doctrine was subject to their constitutions had not had a rule for his proceeding So in the infancy of Christianity it is no marvail if the Christians at Jerusalem entertained daily communion even at board also among themselves and that they gave their estates to the maintenance of it not by any law of communion of goods but as the common necessity required For what could make more towards the advancement of Christianity And when at Corinth and in other Churches the communion was in use though not so frequent nor giving up their
estates but offering the first fruits of them to the maintenance of it yet still was the Eucharist frequented at these occasions as it was first instituted by our Lord as by the express words of Tertullian we understand that it was even in his time But when the number of Christians so increased that the use of the like communion could not stand with the maintenance of the world which Christianity supposeth when the same discipline could not prevail in so vast a body which had ruled at the beginning is it then any marvail to see these Feasts of love laid aside whether with the Eucharist or without it and the Sacrament of the Supper of our Lord become so unfrequented at Supper that it is strange to the rest of Christendom to see it so used in Egypt on Maundy Thursday in remembrance meerly of the primitive custome What shall we say of the order of Widows whereof S. Paul writeth Is it not manifest that there was then a necessity of such persons as might give attendance upon the sick and poor and impotent of every Church that might minister hospitality to those strangers that should travail by every Church and were to receive entertainment according to the custome And is it not manifest that when Christianity increasing daily oblations could not serve for this purpose but standing indowments were to be provided this course could not serve the turn nor the office continue necessary when the work ceased There is nothing more evident then that which I have said in another place concerning the rigour of Penance under the Apostles Nothing to intimate that they forbade any sinne how grievous soever to be admitted to reconcilement with God by the Church Many evident Arguments that they left it in the power of the Church to grant it or not But the increase of Christianity abating the sincerity and zeal of Christians made it so necessary to abate of that rigour and to declare free access even for Adulterers Murtherers and Apostates to the worship of Idols that Montanus first and afterwards the Novatians are justly counted Schismaticks for departing from the Church upon that which the change of times made necessary for the preservation of unity in it Which the Donatists remain much more liable to breaking out afterwards upon a branch of the same cause Yet is nothing more evident to them that use not the unction of the sick then that instance For what is or what can be alleadged why an expresse precept of the Apostles backed with the uninterrupted practice of the Church should not take place but the appearance that the reason for which it was commanded ceaseth the miraculous curing of bodily sickness no more remaining in the Church and so drawing after it the ceremony which signified procured it But in S. Pauls dispute of womens covering their heads in the Church the case is not so clear unless we admit two suppositions both evident upon the credit of Historicall truth The first that neither Jews Greeks or Romanes ever used or knew what it meant to uncover the head in sign of reverence What use soever they made of Hats or Caps as they had use of them though not to continue all as we have seeing you never find that they put them off in sign of reverence it is impossible that keeping them on should be understood among them for a sign of irreverence And therfore that the whole dispute nothing concerns the question of preaching with a Hat or a Cap on in the Church The second is that which we learn by Tertullians Book de Velandis Virginibus The subject whereof being that Virgins are not exempted by any priviledge from vailing their faces in the Church is argued by consequences drawn from this dispute of S. Paul And namely it is alledged that in the Church of Corinth at that time according to S. Pauls order they vailed their faces Whereby it appears that S. Paul was understood to speak of a vail which covering the head came down before the face which S. Paul therefore one while calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 another while 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying that which is so upon the head as it comes down before the face in English a vail And so Clemens Alexandrinus and others understand it This being the case what is the reason which ceasing the precept thereupon may be thought to cease Surely nothing else but because those Christians which overcame the Romane Empire did not think that civility and the modesty of women required them to keep their faces vail'd as the opinion and custome of Jews Greeks and Romanes to whom S. Paul preached did require And though he argueth that nature which teacheth women every where to let their haire grow at length teaches them to vail their faces because even unclothed they are provided of a vail yet when he addeth If any man be contentious we have no such custome neither the Chuches of God It is manifest he intends no law of Nature but an inference which civility making from Nature was fit to be maintained by the custome of the Church as that custome for the unity of the Church But when those Nations whose civility had not made the same inference received Christianity is it marvail that Christianity should not impose that upon them which being no part of Christianity had no ground unlesse they would be bound to receive the civility of other Nations upon the account of the common Christianity In the decree of the Apostles at Jerusalem prohibiting the Gentilish Christians things sacrificed to Idols strangled and blood it appeareth by the disputes of sundry learned men admitting the Jews Tradition that all the Sonnes of Noe received seven precepts from God which when other Nations fell away to Idols remained visible onely in the practise of such as not being Jews nor circumcised are neverthelesse in sundry places of the Law allowed to live among them in the Land of promise under the name of the stranger within the Gates For this allowance was upon condition of undertaking these seven precepts When therefore Gentiles were admitted to Christianity with Jews and the question resolved that they were free of the Law of Moses and yet an expedient was requisite not to scandalize the Jews by the use of that freedom that Jews and Gentiles might the more kindly joyn in one Church it appears that the precept of blessing the name of God that is worshipping God was sufficiently provided for by the Christian faith The precepts of maintaining Courts of Judicatures and of forbearing rapine were sufficiently provided for by the Government of the Empire and the precept of the Sabbath out of date under the Gospel It remaineth therefore that by prohibiting things sacrificed to Idols and fornication with that which was strangled and blood the Apostles establish such compliance between Jewish and Gentilish Christians as was in use between Jews and strangers Proselytes in the Land of promise Not as if
to provide for themselves such an order in the communion of Christianity as may stand with the Scriptures and the unity of the Church though without consent of the whole Church of the present time For it is evident that this disorder may be so great in the Laws of the Church as to make them uselesse and unserviceable not onely to the profession of the true faith or to the service of God for which the communion of the Church standeth but even to the unity of the Church it selfe which is the prime precept that all which the Church does ought to aim at It is evident also that this is the true cause which the reformation hath to dispute against the Church of Rome But this I say that though particular Churches must necessarily have their particular Lawes which are the differences which severall Churches observe in the exercise of the same Ordinances yet may not any particular Church make it selfe any Law which may tend to separation by disclaiming the unity of the whole Church or either expresly or by due construction denying the same This is done by abrogating Apostolicall Traditions as inconsistent with Christianity for the mater of them not because the reason and ground of them is ceased For they who disclaim the Authority of the Apostles cannot acknowledge the unity of the Church And they who make Apostolical Ordinances inconsistent with Christianity do necessarily disclaim the Authority of the Apostles The same is done by abrogating the constitution of the Church done by virtue of the Authority left it by the Apostles For to disclaim the Church in this Authority is to disclaim the Apostles that left it And though this Authority may be so abused that particular Churches that is to say parts of the whole Church may thereby be authorized yea obliged to provide for themselves without the consent of the whole yet not against the authority of the whole that is to say of the Apostles from whence it proceedeth Nor is every abuse thereof a cause sufficient to warrant the scandals that such proceedings necessarily produce And this shall be enough for me to have said in this place Having I suppose established those principles by the right application whereof he that can make it may judge what is the true plea whereby that separation which the reformation hath occasioned must either be justified or be thought unjustifiable From that which hath been said the difference between Heresie and Schisme and the true nature of both crimes in opposition to Christianity may and ought to be inferred in this place because it ought not to be forgotten which ought daily to be lamented that at the beginning of the troubles it was questioned in the Lords House whether there were any such crimes or not or whether they were onely bug-bares to scare Children with and that hereupon every man sees England over-run with both The word Heresie signifies nothing but Choice and therefore the signification of it is sometimes indifferent importing no more then a way of professing and living which a man voluntarily chuseth as S. Paul useth it when he saith That he lived according to the most exact Heresie of the Iewes Religion a Pharisee Act. XXVI 5. For it is known that besides the necessary profession of the Jews Law there were three sects which no man by being a Jew was obliged to but by his own free choice the Pharisees the Sadduces and the Essenes which being all maintained by the Law as it was then used the common name of them cannot signifie any crime among them to whom S. Paul then spoke whatsoever we believe of the Sadduces And thus it sounds among them who use it to signifie the Sects of the Grecian Philosophers allowed by those who imbraced them not As in the Title or Lucians discourse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But because it is too ordinary for men of their own choice to depart from the rule to which they are or ought to stand obliged thereupon the word is most part used to signifie the free choice of a rule of living contrary to that rule which they stood obliged to before In which sense Adam is called by Tertullian the first Heretick as he that first departed from the will of God to live according to his own Supposing now that Christianity obliges both to the rule of faith and to the society of the Church by virtue of that rule because the beliefe of the Catholick Church is part of it as hath been declared afore it is manifest that whosoever dis-believes any part of that rule the beliefe whereof is the condition upon which a man becomes a Christian and thereby forfeits his interest in those promises which God hath made to Christians doth or may either lead others or follow in living according to that belief which he chooseth whether professing it as a Christian ought to profess his Christianity or not And in this sense it seems to be used by S. Paul when he sayes Titus III. 10. 11. A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition avoid Knowing that such a one is turned aside and sinneth being condemned by himselfe For when he speaks of admonishing them he signifies that he speaks not of such as had actually departed from the communion of the Church but sheltred themselves under the common profession of Christians doing every thing as they did that by such means they might inveigle such as suspected nothing to admit their infusions which I showed before to have been the fashion of the Gnosticks whose Doctrines the Apostle 1 Pet. II. 1. calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pestilent Heresies And whom S. Paul must needs speak of in this place because there were no other on foot so as to be mentioned by their writings Such a one then the Apostle saith is condemned by himselfe in the same sense as the Councills and Chuch-Writers say of one in the same case in seipsum sententiam dixit He hath given sentence against himselfe because by refusing the second admonition he hath declared himselfe obstinate in that which the common Christianity maketh inconsistent with the communion of the Church And this more proper to the circumstance of this text then S. Jeroms interpretation of those that condemn themselves to be put out of the Church by voluntarily leaving the communion of it though that also is not farre from truth concerning them who are properly signified by the generall name of Hereticks For it is very evident that when S. Paul saith 1 Cor. XI 17. There must be Heresies among you his meaning is onely of such factions as tended to Schism whereof he admonisheth them 1 Cor. I. 10. That there be Schisms among them Now it is manifest how much difference there is between him who holdeth something contrary to the faith and yet departeth not from the communion of the Church and him that departeth from the commnion of the Church though holding nothing contrary to the substance of
knowledge as to think himselfe fit to recall the Lawes of his Country and give new Laws to the Church of God in it is not ashamed to admit that the reason why the Idolatries of Israelites were so odious to God was because he had not commanded them by the Scriptures As if God had never forbade them to worship Idols by the Scriptures For otherwise he could not have inferred by the words of the Prophet that a Christian ought to do nothing without a Text of Scripture to warrant it much lesse to admit any Law of the Church without such evidence Which had it been granted him with power to give the Church such Laws he could not have proceeded without demanding this exception that those which Cartwright should make without any such warrant might be counted godly and religious but these which the Church superstitious CHAP. XXVII Why it was death to transgress the determinations of the Jews Consistory and what power this argueth in the Church A difference between the authority of the Apostles and that of the Church The being of the Church to the worlds end with power of the Keyes makes it not infallible Obedience to Superiors and the Pillar of truth inferre it not IT will not be more difficult to show how the true sense of all those Scriptures which are alleadged towards the infallibility of the Church concurs to make good the terms upon which I have resolved the dispute in hand For having showed that the Law of Moses was given the Jews for the condition of holding the land of promise they ruling as well their civil communion as the service they tendred to God according to it I will demand but one thing more from the general experience of all civill people which is this That no form of Laws can be propounded to any community of men whatsoever so as to serve it without further determining and limiting of such things as time and the occurrences of time shall discover to be undetermined by that Law and therefore questionable So that Moses Law though given by God who foresaw whatsoever could become questionable concerning the mater of his Law yet because given for the civil Law of the people must needs be given liable to want such limitations as the occurrences of time should make requisite Neither can the truth hereof be better evidenced then by showing the course which God by the Law hath taken for the ending of all such disputes arising upon the Law I do therefore not onely grant but insist upon this that the power established by the law of Deut. XVII 8 -12 extendeth to all maner of debates arising upon occasion of any recept of Moses Law and to the determining of them by limiting those things which the leter of the Law had not expressed I do likewise grant that death is allotted for a penalty to whosoever should not conform to any such determination and the practice of the Law according to it And I do find so much reason for it that I do not understand how possibly that people should subsist and by consequence the Law which made them that people in practice of it without such a provision as this An opinion of the intent and meaning of God in the practice of any precept being sufficient to divide that people into parties not to be reconciled but by the voice of God either upon the occasion or by the Law warranting the sentence of those whom he authorizeth to declare what he requireth of his people Setting aside for the present to dispute whether it be the Priests alone or the Priests with the chiefe of the People in whom this Power is vested by the Law as for the present I dispute not who the persons are in whom the power of Church maters rests in behalf of the Church it is plainly by this Law a capitall crime to teach and do contrary to what the publick Power of that People should determine concerning the intent and practice of any Precept of that Law And therefore accordingly I grant insist that in the new Israel of God according to the Spirit which is the Church of Christ there is and ought to be a Power of putting out of the fellowship of the same any man that shall not stand to the resolution which legally is able to conclude it For without such a Power it cannot be imagined how the unity thereof should subsist seeing that there can be no community in which debates shall not arise about those things wherein they communicate I grant further and insist that he who is justly put out of the Church though meerly for violating the unity thereof by disobeying that just order which unites it is thereby condemned to the death of the world to come As he that teaches and does contrary to the sentence of that power that concludes the Synagogue is put out of this Notwithstanding as many other crimes besides this are capitall by the law of Moses so there be many other causes both of faith and of life by which a man forfeits his interest both in the world to come and in the communion of the Church But if any man argue that because a man forfeits the Communion of the Church by disobeying the determination thereof therefore all the determinations thereof are infallibly true and obliging by virtue of Gods Law I shall deny the consequence by virtue of that very Law of Deut. XVII 8 -12 upon which this Argument is grounded For whereas it makes disobedience a capital crime there are other Laws that suppose a breach of the Law even in following the determinations of that power which it establisheth At least if we admit the practice of those Jews that follow the Talmud in those precepts of Levit. VI. 13 -21 Numb XV. 21 -26 which indeed cannot reasonably be otherwise understood How should the Congregation offer sacrifices to expiate that ignorance wherein all were involved but as those that had power to make wrong determinations should expiate that ignorance which the Congregation by following had incursed Neither saith our Lord any lesse in the Gospel though in a mater of greater consequence when having condemned them that transgressed Gods commandment for the Tradition of their Predecessors Mat. XV. 5-10 Mar. VII 8-12 neverthelesse he commands them to observe and do all such things as the Scribes and Pharisees sitting in Moses Chair should command Mat. XXIII 2. to wit because the authority of Moses his Chair presupposed the Law of God but extended not to nullifie any part of it In like maner the authority of the Church presupposing the truth of Christianity the profession whereof makes Christians the Body whereof is the Church It is not possible that it should reach so farre as to warrant any man to believe that which those grounds upon which the truth of Christianity stands cannot evidence to be true I say not that the Church cannot determine what shall be taught and received in such disputes as
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
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
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
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
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
Christianity as the corruption of it Surely he that considers not amiss will finde that it was a great ease to them that were convinced to acknowledg a God above them to imagine the name and honor of this God to rest in something of their own choice or devising which being set up by themselves reason would they should hope to please and have propitious by such obedience and service as they could allow Correspondently God having given the Jewes a Law of such precepts as might be outwardly performed without inward obedience whosoever believe the most difficult point of Gods service to be the submission of the heart will finde it a gain that hee can perswade himself of Gods peace without it whatsoever trouble whatsoever cost hee be at for that perswasion otherwise If then there be in mans nature a principle of Paganism and Judaism notwithstanding that men cannot be at quiet till by imbracing a religion they think they are at peace with God Is it a strange thing that they who have attained the truth of Christianity should entertain a perswasion of peace with God upoâ— terms really inconsequent to or inconsistent with the true intent of it Surely if wee reflect upon the motives of it and the motives of them it cannot seem strange I have said and it is manifest that the nature of Christianity though sufficient yet were purposely provided not to be constraining that the effect of them might be the trial of those dispositions that should be moved therewith And is it a mervail that means to perswade those that have received Christianity that things inconsistent with that which was first delivered are indeed consequent to the same should be left among those that professe that they ought to receive nothing but what was first delivered by our Lord and his Apostles I say nothing now of renouncing Christianity while men professe this for I confesse and insist that while men do believe that there is a society of men visible by the name of the Church it will not be possible for them to forget their whole Christianity or to imbrace the contrary of it But I say that notwithstanding the profession of receiving Christianity from our Lord and his Apostles the present Church may admit Lawes whether of belief or of Communion inconsistent with that which they received at first I allege further that so long as all parts of the Church held free intercourse and correspondence with one another it was a thing either difficult or altogether impossible to bring such things either into the perswasion or practice of all parts of it according to the difficulty of bringing so great a body to agree in any thing against which any part might protest with effect And this held not onely before the Church was ingraffed into the State of the Romano Empire but also so long after as this accessory help of Christianity did not obscure and in the end extinguish the original intercourse and correspondence of the Church For then it grew both possible and easie for them who had the Secular Power on their side to make that which the authority thereof was imployed to maintain to passe for Tradition in the Church Seeing it is manifest that in the ordinary language of Church Writers Tradition signifies no lesse that which the Church delivers to succeeding ages than that which it received from the Apostles Adde hereunto the opinion of the authority of the Church truly pretended originally within the true bounds but by neglecting the due bounds of the truth of Christianity which it supposeth infinitely extended to all States which Powermay have interest to introduce For if it be not impossible to perswade those who know they have received their Christianity upon motives provided by God to convince the judgments and consciences of all that see them to imbrace those things to which the witnesse of them may be applyed that they are to imbrace whatsoever either the expresse act or the silent practice of the Church inforces whether the motives of Faith be applicable to them or not Then is it not impossible to perswade them any thing which this Power shall think to be for their Interest to perswade For no mans Interest it can be to go about to perswade the world that expresse contradictories are both true at once And if it were not impossible that the imaginations of most of them that dispute Controversies for the Church of Rome should be so imbroyled with the equivocation of this word Church as not to distinguish the Infallible authority thereof as a multitude of men not to be deceived in testifying the truth from the authority of it as a Body constituted upon supposition of the same Shall it not be easie for those who can obtain a reputation of the World that their act is to oblige the whole Church to obtain of the same to make no difference between that which is presently decreed and that which was originally delivered by the Apostles The said difference remaining disputable not onely by any text of Scripture but by any record of historical truth testifying the contrary to have passed for truth in any other age or part of the Church Upon these premises I do appeal to the common sense of all men to judge whether the Church professing to hold nothing but by Tradition from the Apostles may not be induced to admit that as received from the Apostles which indeed never was delivered by the Apostles For when the Socinians pretend that the Faith of the Trinity of the Incarnation and Satisfaction of our Lord Christ not being delivered by the Apostles in their writings crept into the Church as soon as they were dead they still maintain that nothing is to be admitted but what comes from our Lord and his Apostles But upon their supposition that Antichrist came into the Church as soon as they were dead are obliged to renounce all that can be pretended to come by Tradition and in that very next age Which I yield and insist that whosoever shall consider the intercourse and correspondence visibly establisht by the Apostles between all parts of the Church shall easily perceive to be a contradiction to common sense But when so much difference is visible between the State of the Church in several ages and what change hath succeeded in things manifest to inferre what may have succeeded in things disputable Hee must have his minde well and thoroughly possessed with prejudice to the utter renouncing of common sense that can indure a demand so contrary to all appearance to be imposed upon his common sense The same I say to the other demands of certain and sensible distances of time which they that see the end of may be certainly assured what was received at the beginning of them and so by mean distances this age what was held by the Apostles Of the like time for blotting out the remembrance of the truth as for introducing falshood For it is evidently true that
that hee hath any end but himself nor that hee doth any thing to any other end than to exercise and declare his own perfections If hee do sundry things which of their nature have necessarily such an end as they attain not it is to be said that Gods end never fails in so much as by failing of the end to which they were made they become the subject of some other part of that providence wherein his perfections are exercised and declared Seeing then that all Controversies concerning the Faith have visibly their original from some passages of Scripture which being presupposed true before the foundation of the Church ought to be acknowledged but cannot be constituted by it And seeing that no man that out of the conscience of a Christian hath imbraced all that is written can deny that which hee may have cause to believe to be the sense of the least part of the Scripture without ground to take away that belief It remains that the way to abate Controversies is to rest content with the means that God hath left us to determine the sense of the Scripture not undertaking to tye men further to it than the applying of those means will inferre And truly to imagine that the authority of the Church or the dictate of Gods Spirit should satisfie doubts of that nature without showing the means by which other records of learning are understood and so resolving those doubts which the Scriptures necessarily raise in all them that believe them to be true and the word of God is more than huge cart-loads of Commentaries upon the Scriptures have have been able to do Which being written upon supposition of certain determinations pretended by the Church or certain positions which tending to reform abuses in the Church were taken for testified by Gods Spirit have produced no effect but an utter despair of coming to resolution or at least acknowledgment of resolution in the sense of the Scriptures Whereas let men capable of understanding and managing the means heretofore mentioned think themselves free as indeed they ought to be of all prejudices which the partialities on foot in the Church may have prepossessed them with and come to determine the meaning thereof by the means so prescribed and within those bounds which the consent of the Church acknowledges They shall no sooner discern how the primitive Christianity which we have from the Apostles becomes propagated to us but they shall no less clearly discern the same in their writings And if God have so great a blessing for Christendom as the grace to look upon what hath been written with this freedom there hath been so much of the meaning of the Scripture already discovered by those that have laid aside such prejudices and so much of it is in the way to be discovered every day if the means be pursued as is well to be hoped will and may make partizans think upon the reason they have to maintain partialities in the Church If God have not this blessing in store for Christendom it remains that without or against all satisfaction of conscience concerning the truth of contrary pretenses men give themselves up to follow and professe that which the protection of secular Power shall show them means to live and thrive by In which condition whether there be more of Atheism or of Christianity I leave to him who alone sees all mens hearts to judge CHAP. XXXIV The Dispute concerning the Canon of Scripture and the translations thereof in two Questions There can be no Tradition for those books that were written since Prophesie ceased Wherein the excellence of them above other books lies The chief objections against them are questionable In those parcels of the New Testament that have been questioned the case is not the same The sense of the Church HAving thus resolved the main point in doubt it cannot be denied notwithstanding that there are some parts or appertenances of the Question that remain as yet undecided For as long as it is onely said that the Scripture interpreted by the consent of the Church is a sufficient mean to determine any thing controverted in mater of Christian truth there is nothing said till it appear what these Scriptures are and in what records they are contained And truly it is plain that there remains a controversie concerning the credit of some part of those writings which have been indifferently copied and printed for the Old Testament commonly marked in our English Bibles by the title of Apocrypha And no lesse concerning the credit of the Copies wherein they are recorded For though it is certain and evident that the Old Testament hath been derived from the Ebrew the New from the Greek in which at first they were delivered to the Church Yet seeing it appeareth not of it self impossible such changes may have succeeded in the Copies that the Copies which the Jews now use of the Old Testament are further from that which was first delivered than the Vulgar Latine as also the Copies of the Greek Testament now extant It is a very plain case that this doubt remaining it is not yet resolved what are the principles what the means to determine the truth in maters questionable concerning Christianity I must further distinguish two questions that may be made in both these points before I go further For it is evidently one thing to demand whether those writings which I said remain questionable are to be counted part of the Old Testament or not Another whether they are to be read by Christians either for particular information or for publick edification at the assemblies of the Church And likewise as concerning the other point it is one thing to demand what Copy is to be held for authentick another thing to dispute how every Copy is to be used and frequented in the Church To wit whether translations in mother languages are to be had and into what credit they are to be received For it is manifest that the one sense of both questions demands what the body of the Church either may do or ought to do in proposing or prohibiting the said writings or Copies to be used by the members thereof for their edification in Christian piety But the other what credit they have in themselves upon such grounds as are in nature and reason more ancient than the authority of the Church and which the being and constitution thereof presupposeth And as manifest as it is that these are two questions so manifest must it needs remain that the one of them to wit that which concerns the authority of the Church and the effect of it does not belong to this place nor come to be decided but upon supposition of all the means God hath given his Church to be resolved of any truth that becomes questionable As for the other part of both questions though it hath been and may be among them that will not understand the difference between principles and conclusions because it is for
redierunt de Babyloniâ post Malachiam Aggaeum Zachariam qui tunc prophetaeverunt Esdram non habuerunt Prophetas usque ad Salvatoris adventum All that time from their return from Babylonia after Haggai Zachary and Malachy who then prophesied and Esdras they had no Prophets till the Saviors coming Excepting those whom wee finde mentioned in the Gospels And truly it is manifest by historical truth that there was a part of that Nation that gave themselves to use the Greek Language in there dispersions whereas those that returned into the Land of Promise as well as those that remained in Babylonia had learned the language of that Countrey being very near their own which was retained onely amongst the book-learned Seeing then that it is manifest that these books were committed to writing in the Greek for the most part at least it cannot in reason be imagined that the whole Nation acknowledged them as Scriptures inspired by God must have been acknowledged which no man can say that ever they came generally to be used by the whole Nation or could come to be used being onely in Greek Wee shall not finde much of them translated for the use of them that conversed in the Ebrew unlesse it be Tobit For Ecclesiasticus it is true was first written in Ebrew and but translated into Greek When the Old Testament was translated into Greek then and among them that used it were they added to the writings of the Prophets and so received by the Church that received those Scriptures from them in Greek in the same nature and upon the like credit as it was visible they held them from the time that first they were received It is now no mervail to see some men upon the truth of these reasons quite renounce all the advantage which Christianity hath by the witnesse which these writings being impartial as uttered before it came into the world do render it because they are unduely advanced by others to the rank of those that are inspired by God For the spirit of contradiction naturally carries weak men to oversee to destroy their own Interest so they may be farr enough from those whom they desire to bear down So wee are content to yield the Socinians all the advantage which the consent of the Church gives us against them upon condition that the differences wee have with the Church of Rome may be decided by Scripture alone And so are wee content to betray the Church to fight without the armes that are to be had out of these books that wee may be free of them when they seem to crosse some prejudice wherein wee have ingaged our selves But if that which hath been said of the fulfilling of the Prophets in the literal sense at this time between the return from Captivity and the coming of our Lord be not premised amisse Without doubt all the world could not recompense the losse of the books of Maccabees and the use of them to the understanding of the Prophets so inestimable is the benefit of them to that purpose And truly I should not stick to the reasons which I have premised if I should not observe here that when that people began to be persecuted for their Religion by the Gentiles it pleased God so to order the mater that for their comfort and resolution in adhering to it the truth of the Resurrection and Judgment and the World to come should be openly and clearly received and professed which though never questioned yet had been sparingly and darkly preached by the Prophets themselves Wee see it in the exhortations of the mother of the Maccabees to her children 2 Mac. VII 23. 29. and in their own protestations according to the words of the Apostle Heb. XI 35 36. that they suffered in consideration of the world to come And it is as well to be seen in those visions whereby the Resurrection is figured out to the Prophets Daniel and Ezekiel for in their time began the persecution of Gods people And as in their time those revelations were granted so by their doctrine and the doctrine of the Prophets their successors were the people of God fortified against Apostasy by the assurance of the resurrection and the world to come And by this means also and upon this ground that inward and spiritual obedience which the mystical intent of the Law requireth in order to everlasting life is so clearly and so plentifully expressed in those moral writings of the Wisedom of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus that it is a great mervail to see those who are so eager to perswade Christian poople to be informed in the Law of Moses and the Prophets though many times not knowing the reason upon which the obligation of the Law ceaseth they are not onely scandalized thereby with Jewish opinions but lost and seduced to be circumcised so violent to prohibite them the information which from hence they may have in their Christianity For so sure as the Apostle in the eleventh to the Ebrews shows that all the Fathers were saved upon the same terms as Christians are so sure as the Fathers of the Church as I have elsewhere alleged convince the Jews that the Fathers before the Law were saved as Christians and not as Jews so sure an advaatage hath Christianity fro◠all that is written before it came in force Whether because it could not have been received by the Synagogue had it contained things contrary to that rule of piety and means of salvation which in the Synagogue within which it is acknowledged on all sides that means of salvation was found was in force Or whether because being written by the immediate successors of the Prophets they had as it were the sound of that doctrine still in their ears which they had received from them by word of mouth For hee that would make a question that the doctrine of the world to come is more plentifully and clearly delivered in these writings than in the Scriptures of the Old Testament inspired by God And by consequence that inward and spiritual obedience which becomes due in order to the same more plentifully here described hath no more to do but to turn over the books and compare them which will not fail to justifie what I affirm As for the book of Judith though perhaps ignorant people may scandalize themselves at it yet I shall professe to think it no disparagement to the credit or to the right and due use thereof if the conceit which Grotius hath published and confirmed by several circumstances observed in the tenor of the book should hold both in it and in the book of Tobit To wit that it was not written for a history nor requireth historical faith that such a thing was ever done but as an allegory or figure described by way of Romance to expresse the malice of Satan under the shadow of Nebuchadnesar against Jewry signified by Judith a widow and fair exercised by his Deputy Holofernes in the person of Antiochus
God in Spirit and truth which the Gospel requireth is so plentifully preached in all those writings which wee call Apocrypha Whereas in our Saviors and his Apostles time and much more afterwards they promised themselves the kingdome of heaven upon the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees That is upon the outward and carnal observation of Moses Law and preciseness in all those little niceties which their Masters had fensed it with For it is no mervail that they who under persecution promised themselves a part in the resurrection of the righteous cleaving to God and his Law should finde themselves tyed to that obedience in spirit and truth which God who is a Spirit sees and allows But lesse mervail it is that having attained the carnal promises of the Law in the possession of the Land of Promise they should fall away from the like zeal and yet promise themselves the world to come upon that form of godliness which they observed being destitute of the force and power of it As an argument that this consideration is well grounded and true I will here adde the authority and practice of the primitive Church prescribing these books to be read by the Catechumeni or those that professed to believe the truth of Christianity and offered themselves to be instructed in the mater of it in order to Baptism and being made Christians For seeing these might be as well Jews as Gentiles this signifies that the doctrine of them was held by the Church a fit instruction towards Christianity even for those that were already acquainted with the doctrine of the Prophets S. Athanasius then in Synopsi testifieth that these books were read to the Catechumeni To the same purpose it is read in the Constitutions of the Apostles though the place is not at hand at present And that which the last Canon of the Apostles prescribes that besides the Canonical Scriptures the book of Ecclesiasticus be read by the youth seems to tend to the same purpose To the same purpose Dionysius de div Nom. cap. IV. calls the Book of Wisedom an Introduction to the divine Oracles But let no man think to inferr that the Apostles took these Books for Scripture inspired by God because I grant that they borrowed from them in their writings Origen hath met with this objection Prol. in Cant. where hee observeth That the Apostles have borrowed some things out of Apocryphal Scriptures as S. Jude out of the books of Enoch and the departure of Moses and yet addes that wee are not to give way to the reading of them because wee must not transgresse the bounds which our Fathers have fixed Where you see hee distinguisheth those books which the Church did not allow to be read under the name of Apocrypha from those which it did allow to be read and are therefore more properly called Ecclesiastical Scriptures which name hath particularly stuck by way of excellence upon the Wisedom of the son of Sirach though I contend not about names when wee call them Apocrypha because I see that S. Jerome hath sometimes done it And if S. Paul have alleged Aratus Menander and Epimenides heathen Poets hee did not thereby intend to allow the authors but the mater which hee allegeth If these things be so I shall not desire to abridg any mans liberty from arguing against the mater of these Books to prove them not inspired by God because not agreeing with those which wee know and agree to have been inspired by God But I shall warn them that take upon them thus to argue first to look about them that they bring not the unquestionable parts of Scripture into an undue suspicion for agreeing in something for which they have conceived a prejudice that these Books are not to be received The design of Judith and her proceeding in the execution of it is charged not to agree with Christianity neither is it my purpose here to maintain that it doth But I am more than afraid that those who object this do not know how to distinguish it from the fact of Jaell the wife of Heber the Kenite in the book of Judges which the Spirit of God in Deborah the Prophetesse so highly extolleth The like is to be said of the like passages questioned in the book of Tobit and the Maccabees and namely the fact of Razias killing himself least hee should fall into the hands of persecutors which seemeth to be related with much approbation 2 Mac. XIV 41-46 For to distinguish this fact from Samsons it will not serve the turn to say that Samson did it by inspiration of Gods Spirit supposing afore that it was contrary to Gods declared Law to do it The difficulty being greater in saying that the declared Law of God is violated by the motion of Gods Spirit when as the Spirit of God is not granted to any man but upon supposition of acknowledging Gods declared Law For howsoever Saul or Caiaphas or Balaam may be moved by the Spirit of God to speak such things as by the Scriptures inspired by God wee learn that they did speak Yet that God should imploy upon his own Commission as the Judges of whom it is said that the Spirit of God came upon them were manifestly imployed by God whom hee favored not is a thing which cannot agree with the presumption which all Christians have of the salvation of the Fathers As for the passage of Eccles XLVI 23. which seems to say that it was the soul of Samuel the Prophet and not an evil Spirit assuming his habit that foretold the death of Saul I do not understand why all this may not be said according to appearance not according to truth For it will still make for the honor of Samuel that the King whatsoever opinion hee had of this means of fore-knowledg should desire to see Samuel as him whom in his life time hee found so unquestionable But if it be said that this cannot satisfie the leter of the Scripture yet can it not be said that as Saul a wicked man did believe that hee might see Samuel so a good man at that time might not have the same Being then no part of the truth which true piety obliged all men to acknowledg In the book of Tobit there are several things besides questionable But they that imagine conjuring in the liver of a fish to drive away an unclean Spirit do not consider those exorcisms whereby it is evident both by the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles besides divers of the most ancient Fathers of the Church that the Jews both in our Lords times and after did cast out unclean Spirits For what force could they have but from the appointment of God from whom at first they were delivered for a testimony of his residence among his people Which makes me stick to condemn that relation of the Jews in the Talmud extant also in Suidas that there were admirable remedies delivered by Solomon which hee caused to be writ upon
that they were inspired by Gods Spirit or that the authors thereof ever spoke by the same And with this resolution the testimonies of Ecclesiastical writers will agree well enough if wee consider that to prove them to have the testimony of the Church to be inspired by God it is not enough to allege either the word or the deed either of Writers or Councils alleging the authority of them or calling them Holy Divine or Canonical Scriptures Nothing but universal consent making good this testimony which the dissent of any part creates an exception against For if those to whom any thing is said to be delivered agree not in it how can it be said to be delivered to them who protest not to have received it Wherefore having settled this afore that no decree of the Church inforceth more than the reason of preserving unity in the Church can require wee must by consequence say that if the credit of divine inspiration be denied them by such authors as the Church approveth no decree of the Church can oblige to believe them for such though how farr it may oblige to use them I dispute not here It shall therefore serve my turn to name S. Jerome in this cause Not as if Athanasius in Synopsi Melito of Sardis in Eusebius S. Gregory Nazianzene abundance of others both of the most ancient Writers of the Church and of others more modern who justly preferr S. Jerome in this cause did not reject all those parts or most of them which the Church of England rejecteth But because were S. Jerome alive in it there could be no Tradition of the Church for that which S. Jerome not onely a member but so received a Doctor of the Church refuseth For it will not serve the turn to say that hee writ when the Church had decreed nothing in it who had hee lived after the Council of Trent would have writ otherwise The reasons of his opinion standing for which no Council could decree otherwise Hee would therefore have obeyed the Church in using those books which it should prescribe But his belief whether inspired by God or not hee would have built upon such grounds the truth whereof the very being of the Church presupposeth Nor will I stand to scan the sayings of Ecclesiastical Writers or the acts of Councils concerning the authority of all and every one of these books any further in this place There is extant of late a Scholastical History of the Canon of the Scripture in which this is exactly done And upon that I will discharge my self in this point referring my Reader for the consent of the Church unto it And what importeth it I beseech you that they are called Sacred or Canonical Scriptures As if all such writings were not holy which serve to settle the holy Faith of Christians And though it is now received that they are called Canonical because they contain the Rule of our Faith and maners and perhaps are so called in this notion by S. Augustine and other Fathers of the Church Yet if wee go to the most ancient use of this word Canon from which the attribute of Canonical Scripture descendeth it will easily appear that it signifieth no more than the list or Catalogue of Scriptures received by the Church For who should make or settle the list of Scriptures receivable but the Church that receiveth the same it being manifest that they who writ the particulars knew not what the whole should contain And truly as I said afore that the Church of Rome it self doth not by any act of the force of Law challenge that the decrees of the Church are infallible So is it to be acknowledged that in this point of all other it doth most really use in effect that power which formally and expresly it no where challengeth Proceeding to order those books to be received with the like affection of piety as those which are agreed to be inspired by God which it is evident by expresse testimonies of Church writers were not so received from the beginning by the Church So that they who made the decree renouncing all pretense of revelation to themselves in common or to every one in particular can give no account how they came to know that which they decree to be true So great inconveniences the not duely limiting the power of the Church contrives even them into that think themselves therefore free from mistake in managing of it not because they think they know what they do but because they think they cannot do amisse It remaineth therefore that standing to the proper sense of this decree importing that wee are to believe these books as inspired by God neither can they maintain nor wee receive it But if it shall be condescended to abate the proper and native meaning of it so as to signifie onely the same affection of piety moving to receive them not the same object obliging Christian piety to the esteem of them it will remain then determinable by that which shall be said to prove how these books may or ought to be recommended or injoyned by the Church or received of and from the Church CHAP. XXXIII Onely the Original 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 Jewes AS to the other point it is by consequence manifest that the Church hath nothing to do to injoyn any Copy of the Scripture to be received as authentick but that which it self originally received because it is what it is before the Church receive it Therefore seeing the Scripture of the Old Testament was penned first and delivered in the Ebrew Tongue for I need not here except that little part of Esdras and Daniel which is in the Chaldee the same reason holding in both that of the New in the Greek there is no question to be made but those are the authentick Copies Neither can the decree of the Council of Trent bear any dispute to them who have admitted the premises if it be taken to import that the Church thereby settleth the credit of Scripture inspired by God upon the Copy which it self advanceth taking the same away from the Copy which the author penned That credit depending meerly upon the commission of God and his Spirit upon the which the very being of the Church equally dependeth But it is manifest that it cannot be said that the said decree necessarily importeth so much because it is at this day free for every one to maintain that the Original Ebrew and Greek are the Authentick Copies the Vulgar Latine onely injoyned not to be refused in act of dispute or question which hindreth no recourse to the Originals for the determining of the meaning which it importeth Hee that will see this tried need go no further than a little book of Sorbonne Doctor called
and sufficient means had been given to certifie common sense how to proceed I know the good Father S. Irenaeus was made to believe that the Scriptures were quite lost during the Captivity of Babylonia and that the Copies wee have contain onely that which Esdras by inspiration of Gods Spirit writ anew for the books of the Old Testament I doubt not there are enow that finde this unreasonable which cannot hear without a great grain of jealousie that Esdras supposing him the man that made up and consigned the Body of the Old Testament to the Synagogue should deliver any thing but upon such credit that if any syllable of it should be admitted questionable the Law of God it self must become questionable To wit because Esdras is supposed to have been indowed with Gods Spirit though it cannot be supposed to what purpose For otherwise why should it seem so dangerous to believe that there are faults in the reading of the Jews Copies of the Old Testament which wee use That excellent Humanist Joseph Scaliger hath maintained that there are corrupt readings in the Copies that wee use more ancient than Esdras Ludovicus Capellus at this day maintaineth that the Ebrew Copies may be mended not onely by other texts of the Old and New Testament but by the Translations which have been made before those corruptions might prevail I can neither pretend here to maintain nor to destroy that which either of them hath said I will say further to the same purpose The Syriack of the Old Testament which is a translation made by Christians out of the Original Ebrew seemeth to have followed another reading than that which wee finde in our Ebrew Copies and that many times considerable I will give you a few instances Gen. II. 2. It hath been thought so strange that God should finish the work that hee had made upon the seventh day who is said elsewhere to have made heaven and earth in six dayes That the Jews have reported that the Greek translates it the sixt day least the Gentiles should stumble at it But when wee see the Samaritane and the Syriack follow the Greek shall not the credit of them balance the credit of the Ebrew Copies Gen. XLIII 28. wee are brought in that hee may roule himself upon us or fall upon us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is read many times in the sense of casting down a mans self prostrate That it can signifie simply falling I do not believe any Ebrew can justifie Reade but with the Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 changing onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the sense will be as proper as the Ebrew to put tricks upon us Num. XXXI 28-47 according to the Ebrew the spoil being divided in two the army are commanded to consecrate one of five hundred to God the Congregation one of fifty In the Syriack both one of fifty And the numbers specified afterwards differ accordingly Now whereas these are consecrated to God as the first-fruits of the spoil it is manifest that one of fifty was the legal rate of first-fruits which any man might exceed but no man was to go lesse As S. Jerome upon Ezekiel agreeing with the Talmud witnesseth Which is the reason why I must account this reading considerable notwithstanding the Ebrew 1 Sam. XVII 12. And the man went among men for an old man in the dayes of Saul Translate And the man in the dayes of Saul was old and stricken in years Reading with the Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not with the Ebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And then let any man that understands Ebrew and sense tell mee which is the more proper Ebrew which is the more proper sense 2 Kings X. I. Jehu writ and sent leters to Samaria to the Princes of Jezreel the Elders and to those that brought up Ahabs children Here is a great question which all that maintain the Ebrew to be without fault will have much ado to answer How should Ahab sending to Samaria send to the Elders of Jezreel And the Syriack assoils it not according to the Paris Copy But in the readings of the Great Bible it is noted that our Copies reade it not And truly hee that would say that wee are to reade the Elders of Israel for the Elders of Jezreel might have much to say for himself But that the Elders of Samaria should be the Elders of Jezreel cannot be reasonable 2 Kings XVIII 27. Rabshakeh said unto them Hath my master sent mee to speak these words to thy master and to thee or to the men that sit upon the wall that they may eat their dung and drink their piss with you So wee reade it But in conscience were it not farr better sense to reade it with the Syriack That they may not eat their dung and drink their piss with you For how could hee have said a fitter reason to make the people mutiny then by telling them that his master had sent them that good counsail that they might not by standing out the siege be put to eat their own dung and drink their own piss with Ezekiah and his Counsail I might have brought more than these but it is a work by it self for him that would try what that Translation would afford and this may serve for an Essay And therefore to mee it seemeth farr safer to yield that it may be so than utterly to ruine the credit of Gods Law in the opinion of those men who being told that no tittle thereof can be questionable without granting that it came not from God do neverthelesse finde sensible reason to doubt of the reading of some passage This being said in the next place I shall as freely professe that I finde no reason in the world to suspect that the Ebrew Copies which wee now have from the Synagogue are maliciously corrupted and falsified by the Jews I grant that precious Saint of God Justine the Martyr did so believe and so charges them Dial. cum Tryphone and Eusebius Eccl. Hist IV. 18. is bold to pronounce that the Jews were convinced by him in this point But without disparagement to the great merit wherewith that blessed Martyr hath obliged Christs Church it may and must be yielded which I said before that a person so curious in all things which hee could inquire out tending to the advantage of Christianity hath suffered himself to be imposed upon in divers particulars of historical truth concerning that purpose And that this is one of them I shall for proof need no more but to send them to the place and desire them to consider whether those passages which hee alleges to have been falsified by the Jews were indeed so read as hee recites them in the true Greek Copies of the Old Testament at that time Or whether hee was imposed upon to believe that they were true Copies which reade them as hee does though indeed they were not Neither do I finde that the Christians after him have
of their people that wee have the vulgar Latine and that ancient and worthy Christian translation into the Syriack is there any body will undertake to say Either that having these helps wee cannot assure our selves of the Scripture which God delivered to the Church so farr as the necessity of the Church requireth to be assured of it Or that nothing but the Copy which now wee have from the Jews is to be regarded God having provided us so many helps over and above For suppose the Samaritane Copy of the Law to have been fâ—lâ—ified by Desitheus must it not needs have been falsified upon some certain design And will one certain design require or will it indure that all should be falsified whether it concerned that design or not So suppose those Jews of Alexandria who turned the Old Testament into Greek gave themselves liberty to make the Book of Job the Proverbs more of the Old Testament if more can be alleged not what the original contained but what themselves fansied would be handsom shall wee therefore say the whole work is not a translation but a Romance which wee see stick so close to the original in the most of the Scripture Surely the very great antiquity of both Copies and the experience which all that study the Scriptures with an intent to clear the meaning of them have of the great advantage which the comparing of the Greek advances more and more every day to that design will no way indure that it should be counted no translation of the Old Testament Or that though a man pretend not to build upon the credit of either of those Copies alone in opposition to the Ebrew which wee now use Yet the agreement of them with other Copies together with the reason and consequence or pertinence of sense inforced by the text of the Scripture may give him just ground to assure himself and the Church of the true reading of the Scripture yea though the present Ebrew should not agree with others For I shall not need here to say what or how great faults may be found in our Ebrew Copies who had rather be assured that there were none at all to be found greater or lesse But that wee who neither relye upon the dictate of the Spirit to them that are able to conclude the Church nor much lesse to particular Churches for assuring the true reading of Scripture are not bound to resolve our faith in it into the present Tradition of the Synagogue having over and above so considerable helps to the verifying of the same For magnifying first the providence of God in that the Jews having Christians in utter hatred should neverthelesse neither be willing for their interest nor able for their malice to falsifie those things in their own books which bear witnesse against themselves Seeing God hath given the Church that most ancient Greek Translation which is commonly ascribed to LXX Interpreters sent from Jerusalem but more justly to the Jews of Alexandria besides that Copy of the Law which the Samaritanes still use Since wee have considerable remains of those Greek Translations made by Aquila Symmachus and Theodotion the Bodies whereof to the great losse of the Church have perished with the worthy labors of Origen in joyning them in columes to the Ebrew Since wee have those ancient translations into the Chaldee which the Jews make so much esteem of Since wee have the Syriack and Vulgar Latine made by Christians to say nothing of the Arabick whether made by Jews or Christians or of any other though ancient translations which have not had the like use and credit in the Church So far am I from giving way to that unreasonable demand so destructive to the being of Christianity that wee cannot assure our selves that wee have any Scripture That in all that I have to say or shall have said concerning the dispute on foot in England about Religion I shall neither undertake to assure men that will be content with reason that I allege nothing for Scripture which I cannot justifie so to be or else undertake to resolve that which shall come in debate without the help of that which I cannot assure to be such Not intending in that which follows to allege any more evidence hereof in the particulars than I have done in the premises But building my self upon the resolution premised and intending that there shall be nothing to be objected from the true means of questioning and settling the true reading of the Scriptures that may breed any considerable scruple concerning the truth of those Scriptures which I shall imploy to my purpose As for the part of the difficulty which remains concerning the true reading of the New Testament it is in vain to maintain the decree of the Council of Trent by pretending that the Greek Copy out of which the Vulgar Latine was translated vvas more intire and of better credit than the Greek Copies novv extant Understanding that decree to make that Copy authentick in point of faith by virtue of any gift of Infallibility intailed upon the decrees of the present Church For if it be onely made authentick because the use and credit of it is not allowed to be questioned in the Church it is another question as I have said already vvhich I pretend not to touch in this place For supposing the Copy from which the Vulgar Latine was translated to have been better than any Greek Copy now extant the credit of the Vulgar Latine is not to be ascribed to the decree of the Council that decrees this any more than the fundamental Laws of this Kingdom of England were the fundamental Laws thereof by virtue of any Act of Parliament by which they were not constituted but declared and acknowledged to be such And if the credit of the Vulgar Latine be derived from the Greek Copy out of which it was translated then is it no further authentick than as it expresseth the authentick reading which then was found in the Greek out of which it was translated And so the whole credit of the Scripture is resolved into the credit of the Originals whereof wee stand possest in the translations of them that remain in whatsoever Language So that the question comes to be the very same that remained before concerning the authentick Copy of the Old Testament and the resolution clear that the Original Greek is the authentick the reading thereof being first assured neither by the dictate of Gods Spirit to any persons inabled to oblige the Church by their decrees nor to any never so good Christian much lesse by the Tradition of any particular Copy which the Church stands possest of but by that Tradition which is justified and assured by all Copies wherein the leter of the Scripture is recorded to the Church For though I do for disputation sake suppose yet do I not grant for a truth that the Copy out of which the Vulgar Latine was translated is to be held of better credit than that
it and the like blasphemies innumerable I know there are other Opinions of Justification by faith alone among those that professe it according to the senses which they may have of the nature of justifying faith and those perhaps of greater vogue than this which I have named Neither is it my intent to involve those that maintain Justification by faith alone in the blame which I charge the opinions hitherto described with The reason why I mention these opinions here is because they are in the extreams and therefore the mention of them seemed to propose the state of that question which I pretend to resolve For my way shall be in the first place to answer the question proposed concerning that disposition which the Covenant of Grace requireth the mind of him to be formally affected with that will be qualified for the promises which God therby tendreth Making this account that the treating of it will give us an overture into the consideration both of the effective cause that produceth it in those that have it and also of the meritorius cause that moveth God both originally to grant the said effective cause and consequently to accept the effect thereof for a competent qualification of them that have it for the promises which God by his Gospel tendreth those that receive it CHAP. II. Evidence what is the Condition of the Covenant of Grace The contract of Baptism The promise of the Holy Ghost annexed to Christs not to Johns Baptism Those are made Christs Disciples as Christians that take up his Crosse in Baptism The effects of Baptism according to the Apostles TO proceed to as brief and as clear a resolution of that point as I can propose I say That a sincere and resolute profession to undertake Christianity and to live according to it believing as our Lord Christ hath revealed and living as he hath taught consigned to God in the hands of his Church by the Sacrament of Baptism is that condition which the Covenant of Grace requireth to qualifie us for the promises which it tendreth This resolution is directly against the Antinomians and those that believe that a Christian is justified by the obedience of Christ imputed from everlasting to them whom he came to save Which indeed nullifieth the Covenant of Grace and converteth it to a meer promise on Gods part requiring no condition on mans part to be performed by him to qualifie hâ—m for it But this resolution opposing that conceit so roundly as positively to expresse the condition which I intend to maintain It will serve both against the conceit of Socinus that justifying faith is nothing but a firm beliefe that those who believed the Gospel purposing to live as God requireth are accepted by him as righteous Baptisme into the profession of Christianity not included But also of those that will have it to consist in the knowledge of our being predestinate to life from everlasting revealed by Gods word and sealed by his Spirit The proofs of it I will divide into three heads For consisting of so many branches as you see it cannot be expected that those Scriptures which shall serve to evidence it should every where expresse all the parts of it It is enough if the severall parts of it out of which the whole results be demonstrable by severall ranks of Scriptures The first of those Scriptures that concern the profession which God by our Lord Christ requireth and he by his Apostles and the Church after them to the worlds end of them that will be qualified for the Promises which the Gospel tondreth which I put in the first place expresly because they seem to contain the most visible and express arguments that the principles and practice of Christianity can yield to inforce this truth The second shall be taken from the nature of faith and the attributes ascribed to it by the Scriptures in justifying saving regenerating or adopting us for sons giving us the spirit of Gods sons remitting our sins and the rest that we expect at Gods hands by vertue of his Covenant of Grace The last shall be from those passages of the Apostles chiefly and consequently of other Scriptures that they expound wherein it is denied that we are saved or justified by Works or by the Law but affirmed that we are saved and justified by Grace and by faith The due sence and intent whereof is the thread to guide us through the intricacies of this whole dispure Though when this is done I shall not wish any man to resolve himself in this or in any other point of the whole book till he hath gone through the whole and considered what resolution this generall infers to all other branches or dependances of it And therefore shall think he does nothing that goes about to disprove any part of it without shewing the resolution which his opinion infers to those other points or dependances that the Reader may have the choice before him which he thinks most consequent in reason to the principles of Christianity received on all sides I will begin with the words of the Apostle 1 Pet. III. 20 21. where this seems to be couched in terminis He saith that the long suffering of God waited in the dayes of Noe while the Arke was making in which a few that is eight souls were saved the antitype whereof Baptism now saveth us not the laying down of the filth of the flesh but the having of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ The water of Baptism saveth us through the temtations of the World as they were saved through the deluge And what can be done more then to save us let no man think to defeat this by striving about words that to save and to justifie is not the same If Bapâ—ism import the condition of the Covenant of Grace which saveth us our justification will necessarily be wrapt up in the same packet though to justifie and to save be severall conceits And is it not strange that any man should be perswaded that there is nothing said or meant of the Baptism of water in all this passage but of the Baptism of the Spirit as that which moves a good conscience to professe Christianity For how can Baptism by the Holy Ghost and fire be the antitype of the waters of the deluge as the Baptism of water is and as that Baptism which the Apostle speaks of is The correspondence between the types of the Old and the antitypes of the New Testament by vertue of the premises consists in the correspondence between the temporall deliverance of that time and the spirituall deliverance of this both in order to the everlasting deliverance of the World to come Now it is certain that the visible Ceremony of Baptism signifies the temptations of this World out of which we escape by the means of that Sacrament as he that is baptized rises out of the water again According to that of the Psalm LXIX 1 15. Save me O God
to be in regard of the world to come what would he have Christians to be but Libertines and Rebels True it is God imposeth it not as upon his subjects but tendreth it as to his rebels for the condition upon which they may become his subjects instead of his rebels And that is a just reason why it is called a Covenant rather than a Law And that reason justly reproves the Leviathans imagination that it can oblige neither more nor less than the Law of Nature For being positive as tendred by the meer will of God and upon what terms he pleased as the Precepts thereof which are Gods Laws to his Church and the institution of the Church it selfe is meerly positive there is no reason at all to presume that the moral Precepts which are in force under it are bounded by the Law of Nature Though whether it be so or not I undertake not here to determine But we know what S. Paul saith Rom. III. 27. Where is boasting It is shut out By what Law Not by the Law of works but by the Law of Faith That is by the Gospel which requireth that Faith of which I am inquiring wherein it consists for the condition of obtaining the promises which it tendreth And S. James 11. 8. 12. If ye fulfill the Royall Law which saith Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self ye do well And So speak ye and so do ye as being to be judged by the Law of Libertie For the liberty of being Gods subjects and under Gods royall Law the Gospel giveth Neither is S. Paul otherwise to be understood when he saith Rom. VIII 2. The Law of the Spirit of Life which is in Christ Jesus hath freed me from the Law of sin and of death The imbracing of the Gospel being the Law that is the condition upon which we become partakers of the Holy Ghost free from sin and from death And truly I cannot but pity the blindness of error so oft as I remember that I have heard Antinomians alledge the words of the Prophet Jer. XXXI 31 -34. quoted by the Apostle to show the difference between the first and second Covenant Heb. VIII 8 -11. Behold the dayes come saith the Lord that I will settle with the house of Israel and the house of Judah a new Covenant not according to the Covenant that I made with their Fathers when I tooke them by the hand and brought them out of the Land of Aegypt for they abode not in my Covenant and I neglested them saith the Lord For this is the Covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those dayes saith the Lord Putting my Laws into their mind I will also write them upon their hearts and I will be to them for their God and tâ—ey to me for my people Neither shall they teach every man his neighbour and every man his Brother saying Know the Lord For they shall all know me from the least of them to the greatest I say I cannot but pity them that upon these words ground themselves that the Covenant of Grace is a meer free promise not onely freely made for so I say it is free for what but Gods goodness moved him to tender it but freely without condition contracted for at their hands For cannot God by his Prophet foretell the effect of the Covenant of Grace but he must be presumed to set down the terms of it And if he express them not there is he the less free to demand them when he tenders them Especially the Covenant it self being to remain a secret till Gods time to reveal it I say then that this Prophesie hath taken full effect in the lives of those who submitting themselves to the terms of Christianity have received of God the gift of the Holy Ghost to understand their profession that they might live according to it But that this gift of the Holy Ghost that is to say the habituall assistance thereof neither was due nor bestowed but upon supposition of Chnstianity professed by baptisme which God by our Lord Christ hath revealed to be the condition which he requireth of them that will injoy the same CHAP. IV. The consent of the whole Church evidenced by the custome of chatechising 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 BUT I am now come to the argument that is to be drawn from the practise of the universall Church to my purpose And truly he that shall consider for what reason the Apostles should require those whom they had converted to be baptized will find himselfe intangled in rendring it unless he settle the ground of it upon the obligation of professing true Christianity And the effect of it in admitting to the unity of the Church which may require the performance and maintain the exercise of it And the consequence thereof they that are or shall be imployed by the Church to preach to unbelievers will find to be such that either they must insist upon the terms which I hold with them or they shall make them but aequivocall Christians That is such as may wear the Cross of Christ to man for a cognizance but not in the obligation of their hearts to God rather to suffer death than either to profess or act against that which he hath taught The next point in the visible practice of the Catholick Church is the custome of catechizing The circumstances whereof for time and manner though no man can mantain to have been the same in all Churches yet it may be argued to have been generally a time of triall for them that had been wonne to believe the truth of Christianity how they were likely to apply themselves to live like Christians and what assurance or presumption the Church might conceive that they would not betray the profession thereof And therfore I appeal to the common sense of all men whether they that exercised this course did not admit men to Christianity and baptism upon the condition of professing and undertaking so to do Besides those things which I alledged in the first Book in the Constitutions of the Apostles in the most ancient Canons of the Church and generally in all Church writers we read of Missa Catechumenorum and Missa fidelium In English the dismission of Scholars and the dismission of Believers Because during the Psalms during the reading of the Scriptures expounding the same reason was that learners should be present as well for their instruction in Christianity as for discharge of their â—uty in the praises of God and prayers to God Though the same prayers were not to be offered to God for Learners as for believers but they were to be dismissed with peculiar prayers of the Church for their particular estate such as yet are extant in the ancient Offices of the
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
by some of theit own body that they who demanded Baptism were no counterfeits but would stand to what they undertook it ought to be an Argument that they were to undertake that which they give the Church security to perform And indeed this custom being nothing else but an appertenance or consequence of the Interrogatories of Baptism I need say no more but that it appears thereby what those that were admitted to Baptism undertook when they were to have Sureties to undertake for them that they dissembled not in that which they undertook But in the next place I will alledge the constitution of the Church and all the authority of it Grounded as by the means which I have imployed to make evidence of it appeareth upon supposition and presumption that by being baptized into the visible communion thereof we attain invisible communion in the promises which the Gospel tendreth There are some that take upon them to censure the ancient Church for the abuse which I spoke of even now in delaying of Baptism These men if they will go alwaies by the same weights and measures must call S. Paul to account why he makes this demand 1 Cor. V. 12 13. What have I to do to judge those that are without do not ye judge those that are within But those that are without God shall judge For those who professed only to believe Christianity though obliged to learn how to behave themselves like Christians for with what face could they demand Baptism otherwise yet to speak properly were not Christians were not of the Church Therefore Clemens Alexandrinus in the end of his Paedagogus bringeth in the Word that is our Lord Christ or his Gospel which he calleth the Paedagogue for governing these Children and Novices in Christianity in their way to the Church giving up this Office to himselfe as being to become for the future their Doctor and Master and Bishop◠at their entrance into the Churcch The passage is remarkable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But it is not for me to teach these things further saith the Paedagogue We have need of a Doctor to expound these holy Oracles and to him we must go And truly it is time for me to give over my Office of Paedagogue and for you to become the Doctors Hearers He receiving you bread with good government having behaved themselves well during the time of their trial shall teach you these Oracles And in good time here is the Church and the onely Doctor the Bridegroom the good mind of a good Father Christ or the Gospel of Christ is the Paedagogue that guides and governs Children in Christianity to the School that is to the Church to demand baptism having behaved themselves well by the way during the time of their triall When that is done he teaches them no more as children are taught by a Paedagogue But as a Master teaches his Scholars so Christ those that are become his Disciples by being baptized Therefore afterwards 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Paedagogue having set us in the Church hoth recommended us to himselfe the Word the Doctor and Bishop of all And this is our Lords Commission to his Apostles to make them Disciples that should take up his Crosse by baptizing them in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost Then to teach them to observe all that he had given them in Charge The same is the ground of Cassanders observation which is much to my purpose That the Church putteth no man to penance whatsoever his life may have been for any thing done before Baptism Zosimus thinks he layes a great imputation upon Christianity in pretending that Constantine finding no means to come clear of the bloud of his Wife Fausta or his Son Crispus gave ear to Christianity because it pretended to wash away all sin That Constantine should seek those meanes which Heathenism pretendeth to purge sin with may well be thought to proceed from the malignity of the Gentiles against the first Christian Prince For the rest not disputing of his doings before Baptism because the Church judgeth not that those are without though he professed Christianity when they were done it would be a disparagement to that Fountain which God hath opened for Juda and Jerusalem that there should be any sin which it cannot cleanse supposing the change sincere which the undertaking of Christianity professeth If not God is his Judge But though the Church refuse no man Baptism because professing Christianity he had delayed his Baptism yet as it appeared sufficiently by the scruple that was made of the salvation of those that died in that estate that the Church disallowed it so when they were come into the Church a mark of the authority of the Church was fastened upon them in that those that were baptized in their beds were made uncapable by one of those Canons which I spoke of in the first Book that were in force before the Church had any Canons in writing of being promoted to the Clergy For this you shall find objected to Noratianus by Cornelius in Eusebius Eccles Hist VII 43. That by the Canons he ought not to have been promoted to any rank in the Clergy because he had been baptized in his bed of sickness having delayed his Baptism for fear of persecution till he found himselfe in danger of death And though the Church put no man to penance for his life before Baptism because Christianity it selfe pretendeth a totall change in him that imbraceth it and that the Church judgeth not but presumeth of the truth of that change which is pretended by him that is without yet it fasteneth a mark of the authority which it purchaseth upon Christianity by providing that no man who had been ever put to penance should be promoted to any rank of the Clergy The reason is expressed in those words of Clemens his Epistle to the Corinthians pag. 54. speaking of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Preaching over Countreys and Cities they made the First-fruits of them whom they had converted Bishops and Ministers of them that should believe The learned Bloudell will have these First-fruits to signifie those that were first converted to Christianity A mistake more sutable to the prejudice which he had undertook to maintain then to the rest of his learning For who knoweth not that First-fruits are the best the floure the cream of the whole And if no man that dared not to professe Christianity no man that had been put to penance for failing having profest it is to be of the Clergy you see why they are called the First-fruits of Christians In the mean time if the Church judge not those that are without doth it not judge those that are within according to S. Paul Show me any thing that ever was called a Church that is shew me the time when and the place where Christianity was ever settled and exercised according to order and rule where those that had received Baptism were not under a discipline
man for Communion with the Church by Baptisme but of that which the Church professeth to have received from our Lord and his Apostles And this is the true ground of the foundation of the Church and the Society thereof whereof so much hath been said To wit that God giving his Gospel for the salvation of mankind did think fit to trust the guard and exercise of it to men once instructed by those to whom at the first he had given immediate Commission to publish and establish Christianity Rather then leave them to expect at his hands every day new revelations and miracles for introducing that which had once been sufficiently declared And also rather then leave every man to his own head to make what he can of the Scriptures and think he hath salvation by living according to it For supposing that Christianity which is delivered by the Scriptures once subject to be misunderstood and corrupted of which we have but too much experience an effectual course to preserve it will be to found a Corporation or Society of the Church the members whereof each in his owne ranck should remaine intrusted by God but by the meanes of their predecessors from whom they received Christianity to preserve both the profession of Christian truth and the exercise of Gods service inviolable Nor is it effectuall to say that the unity of the Church may fail being divided by Heresies and Schismes insomuch that that Baptisme which is visibly valide and good shall be void of that invisible effect which it pretendeth For it is not requisite that God should provide such meanes of salvation as may be undefeisible It is enough that they are reasonable He that is Baptized into a profession destructive to that which all Christians are bound upon their salvation to believe perishes for want of Faith setting aside the unity of the Church which his Herisie violates over and above But if the unity of the Church be of such advantage to the maintenance of our common Christianity as it was before the dissolving of it it is no marvaile if the Baptisme of Schismaticks though valide and good for the visible forme become voide of effect to them who by receiving it make themselves parties to the breach of the unity of the Church We agree that the Power of the Church of Rome is the occasion of many abuses in the Church What they are it is my present businesse to enquire He that bounds the interpretation of the Scriptures within the sense of the Catholike Church shall not transgresse the Law of Gods truth in that inquiry He that accepts the bounds of his own fansy in stead of them is it not just with God if he die If once common Christianity and the maintenance thereof depend so much upon the unity of the Church is it not reason that the benefit of it should depend upon the same he who having attained the true Faith and according to the same seeking the unity of the Church faileth of it without any fault of his owne if he who so seeketh it can be supposed to faile of it hath the difficulty of overcoming his own ignorance to pleade for his excuse But for them who have the consent of all Christians from the beginning to oblige them to undertake the profession of Christianity by Baptisme but out of hatred to the present Church the abuses of it neglect baptisme upon presumption that they have the holy Ghost without it or that the reason why the Apostles Baptized is now ceased I say that for them I suppose there remaines no just plea seeing that by the unity of the Catholike Church they ought to have been guided in judging what is of the abuse of the present Church and what is not And thus that consideration which some seeme to be not without cause scandalized at when these effects of Christianity the power whereof must necessarily consist in an unfained heart are made to depend upon an outward ceremony of Baptisme which the Church gives is utterly voided by that reason which the Apostle insinuates when he sayes that Baptisme saves us not the laying down of the filth of the flesh but that profession to God which is made with a good and a sincere conscience Whereas those that distinguish that faith which alone justifieth from the profession thereof which baptisme executeth oblige themselves to make Baptisme a ceremony not whereon the promises of the Gospel depend but to signifie that they are had and obtained without it But to whom signifie not to God who giveth them Not to him that has them and by his faith knows he has them Not to the Church which can never be certified that he hath them indeed and demands onely to be certified that he wants nothing requisite to presume him to be such So that Baptisme being required onely to presume that a man is a Christian and that presumption being legally had by any act the Church or any that call themselves the Church can require as well as by being Baptized If that be all there is no reason to be given the Sociniant why Baptisme should be necessary to the salvation of Christians and therefore why it should not be in their power to use it or not to use it And truly I do much marvel to see the Socinians that have very well seen the truth concerning the twofold meaning of the Law literall and spirituall and the promise of the land of Canaan tied to the carnall observation thereof as that of everlasting life to the spirituall obedience of it I say I do marvel to see that in consequence hereunto they should not inferre that God hath appointed a spirituall people of the Christian Church answerable to Israel according to the flesh and that his spirituall promises should depend upon the visible imtiation of eveâ—â— Christian into the body of that people as the right of his temporal promises depended upon their initiation into the body of carnall Israelites not according to birth but according to promise Onely when I consider on the other side that without regard to the Article of the Catholick Church which Christians make a part of their Creed they rest in such a communion as their private perswasion of the sense of the Scriptures shall be of force to produce I do not marvail to see them not owne the consequence of their own principles when they see it not stand with other prejudices which they have imbraced I know there are two things will be objected here the one is a meer prejudice that by maintaining of free will by maintaining the Covenant of Grace to consist in an act of it we shall incurre the Heresie of Pelagius The other that if the condition of the Covenant of Grace be an expresse profession vow and promise to live as well as to believe according to what Christ hath taught and that without the use of reason no such promise can be of force or take place then infants cannot
that believe not might know by seeing Christians spring from his Doctrine Neither is that which followes any thing less clear He was in the World and the World was made by him and the World knew him not Though Socinus hath used his skill to darken it with a strange devise of three senses of this one word World in this one sentence which he conceives will be an elegant expression if we understand the World when it is sayd He was in the World to signifie his new people when it is sayd The World was made by him The Church that is all Christians When it is sayd The World knew him not the unbelievers And truly I believe most Languages will justifie the people among whom a man lives to be called the World The ordinary French sayes Il y a beaucoup de monde dâ—ns ceste ville There is a great deal of World in this Town word for word But that in the two clauses following the World should stand first for Believers then for unbelievers is such a figure without any thing added to give occasion so to understand it as nothing can be added to make it passable though something might be added to make it to be understood Besides consider what followes He came to his own and his own received him not For are the Jewes his own people onely because he was of that people Are the Jewes no otherwise his own then the English may be called mine own because being English I bring that which here I have written to the English Surely S. John meant to aggravate their fault more then by charging them to have refused a Countryman of their own To wit him that had made them and whose they were upon that score Consider what went before This is that true Light that lighteth every man that comes into the World For unless we understand this to be every man that comes into the Church which will be to deny that Christ gives any light to unbelievers at least to be signified by these words and to make them import no more then the same great secret that Christ is the Author of Christians we must understand by it as the truth requires it to be understood That our Lord came into the world because he came to live among that people called the world by that most ordinary figure of speech that is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the World so properly called and therefore all that it containeth that is the World 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so called to wit that people was made by him and that neverthelesse this world being the body of that people knew him not that is owned him not being his own as all people are whom he enlightneth And what meanes the Apostle when he saies of the Sonne Heb. I. 2 3. Whom he made heir of all things by whom also he made the Worlds And Who beareth or moveth all things with his powerfull word For if any man attempt to apply the same salve to this wound also what will he have these worlds to be but those of which he saith againe Heb. XI 5. By faith we understand that the worlds were made by the Word of God To wit the world of invisible things and this visible world which by the Jewes writings we understand that their ancestors were wont co call this world and the world to come because they expected to live in it after this Whereupon the same Apostle saith againe Heb. II. 5. For he hath not subjected the world to come to Angels meaning the invisible world of Angels which to us is to come As for that which followeth whether he sustaine or whether he move all things by his word seeing it is his word that does it the same is Gods Word that made all things called his word also because incarnate And what is it lesse for him to move all things then that which S. Paul saith of God Acts XVII 28. that in him we live move and have our being And S. Paul Col. I. 16. For in him or rather through him were all things created that are in heaven and that are on earth visible things and invisible whether dominions or magistrates or powers all things were created by him and to him For what hath Christ done for the angels that he should be said to have made them suppose the redemption and reconcilement of mankinde make a new world with us is the reconciling of the Angel to us by reconciling of us to himself the making of them as it is the new making of us Is the making of him head of them the making of them If it be it is not he that made them seeing it is the Father that made him head of them But what shall become of all visible things besides man which are said here to have been created by Christ and cannot be made anew Therefore it is the whole world that S. Paul meanes was first made not men and Angels that he meanes were restored by Christ And when he saies they were made by him and to him that is for him he barres that snare which some put upon the Apostles words when he saies By whom also he made the worlds To wit that he meanes for him he made the worlds according to a common saying among the Jews which they think he points at That the world was made for the Messias I see that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both serving to signify a meane which belongs still to the effective cause As when it is said that all things subsist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apoc. IV. 11. that the martyres overcome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apoc. XII 11. that the false Prophet deceives 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apoc. XIII 14. It is all one whether we understand For the will of God For the blood of the Lamb and the word which they witnesse For the signes which were granted him to do Or by and through the same because both import a mean effective cause But that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should signify 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the final cause is that which no Greek will indure And in this place S. Paul having said that all things were made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through him and to him that is for him Leaves no room to understand any thing else by these words But there is a further reason in the case and theme which S. Paul speaks to whereby it is evident that he challengeth the making of all things to Christ because he challengeth to him that worship which the Hereticks whom he writes against tendred to Angels as those by whom the World was made Which I shewed before was the doctrine of Simon Magus and Cerinthus both in the Apostles times and inferreth the abstinence from Gods creatures as proceeding from another principle from which also Moses Law came according to their doctrine the observation whereof they therefore pressed not as Moses had delivered it
God which it restraines in these words to the Father from any that by the sense of him that speaks them can be understood to be included in it And that the sense of our Lord may be notwithstanding this onely to include the Sonne in the property of this attribute the true God I go no further then the sense of all Christians who all affirme the father to be the onely true God but believe the Sonne to be the same onely true God neverthelesse And that this is his sense I referre my self to the titles attributes workes and worship of the onely true God challenged hitherto from his words And this sense the words of S. John the meaning whereof according to the ordinary reading I have shewed before not to advantage Socinus seem to intend according to the true reading which the Vulgar Latine justified by the Marques of Velez his Spanish Copies as you may by the readings added to the Great Bible preserveth We know that the Sâ—nne of God is come and hath given us understanding to know the true one Et sumus in vero filius ejus Jesu Christo And we are in his true Sonne Jesus Christ This is the true God and eternall life Whereas it is ordinarily read And we are in the true One in his Sonne Christ Or Through his Sonne Jesus Christ 1 John V. 20. For it seemeth that the Apostle folding up both attributes of the True one that is as it followeth the True God and the True Sonne of God in our Lord Christ pointeth at the words of our Lord recorded by himself alone John XVII 3. This is eternall life to know thee the onely true God and whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ Challenging for him that he is no more to be excluded from the Title of onely true God then from that of author of eternall Life If it be said This cannot be Because there would be then more then one onely true God The answer is ready that this is not an argument from the force of these words that this cannot be the sense of them But from the light of reason that this sense cannot be true I know it is a trick that Crellius puts upon the Reader throughout his first Book de Deo Trino Vno that the sense of the Church is not the sense of the Scriptures because it contradicteth the evidence of natures light But when the sense of the Scripture is in question the dictate of reason concerning the truth of the matter is to be set aside that it may be judged without anticipation of prejudice from evidence planted in the very words of it And this is the answer to the rest of those texts that have the like exclusive but not in so strong terms as this Now when our Lord saith Of that day and hour knoweth not the Sonne I know S. Hilary laboureth very eloquently to shew that he meanes no more then that he had not commission to declare it But this would make the sense of our Lord to be the sense of those men who when they are asked that which they hold unfit to declare and yet would not seem to refuse the civility of declaring it do answer that they know not to wit so as to hold it fit to be told I will not tye my self to maintaine this reservation fit for our Saviour to use Especially where no circumstance of the case or the discourse appeares to intimate such a meaning to them whom he discourseth with When he said in the Comoedy Tu nescis id quod scis Dromo si sapias If thou beest wise thou knowest not what thou knowest Every man understands his meaning to be thou wilt not declare it Whether when the Messias saith I know not the day of judgement Men would conceive that he meant no more then this That he is not to declare it seems to be very questionable I can by no meanes comprehend how it can be prejudiciall to the Faith to say that the humane soul of Christ the knowledge whereof is necessarily limitted to the capacity of a creature and knowes things above nature by voluntary revelation of the Word and Spirit which knowes whatsoever is in God 1 Cor. II. 10 11. should be ignorant of something that is to come Luke II. 40 52. It is said The child grew and waxed strong in Spirit growing full of wisdome and the grace of God was upon it And Jesus improved in wisdome and stature and grace with God and men Shall I go and say that he seemed thus to grow as boyes in the Schools when they cannot answer texts of Aristotle that he speakes there in the sense of the ancient Philosophers The Schoole Doctors will have our Lords humane soul to have known all from the moment that he was conceived and think him not â—ound in the Faith that doubts of it But if onely originall Tradition be matter of Faith according to the Principle that is setled the meaning of particular texts of Scripture cannot be such Especially when it is evident that such a meaning is not necessarily consequent to that which is matter of Faith And if you look but upon the sayings of the Fathers that are alledged by the learned Jesuite Petavius 1 De Trinitate III. 5-11 You shall easily perceive how truly it is said by Leontius de Sectis pag. 546. Speaking of the Agnoâ—tae who were a Sect of Eutychians which held that our Lord knowes not all things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But we say that we are not to stand stifly upon these things Therefore neither did the Synod of Calcedon trouble is about any such position as this Yet it is to be known that many of the Fathers even almost all say that he was ignorant Certainly Irenaeus and Athanasius if narrowly examined demand no more but that he is ignorant of nothing according to his Godhead So that it is so farre from being matter of Faith that it is not in the Church ever to make it so whatsoever the Church may do to oblige the members of it not to declare their judgment to the scandale of others in a point so obscure Now the words of S. Paul do manifestly distinguish between our Lord Christ and all Creatures insisting thus Who is the Image of the invisible God the first born of the whole Creature For in him were all things created whether in Heaven or on Earth Surely he in whom as by whom all things are sayd to have been made is not intended to be comprised in the number of things made by being called the first born of the whole Creature And therefore I conceive the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the compound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to signifie according to the Hebrew not first but before We have eminent examples in the Gospels John I. 15. the Baptist sayth of our Lord Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because he was before me Our Lord. John XV. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The world
not did so order the meanes by which this obedience was effected or not that he might know that it would or would not come to passe And this preaching of the Gospel and the meanes and consequence of it being granted in consideration of Christ that the reason why such meanes was requisite is to be drawn from the fall of Adam and the corruption of mans nature by it And to this sense seeme the words of our Lord to belong John X. 28 29. I give my sheep eternal life nor shall they ever perish nor any man snatch them out of my hand My Father who gave me them is greatest of all nor can any man snatch them out of my Fathers hand Although it seems that he inlargeth the same sense to another effect John XVII 6 -12 I have manifested thy name to the men whom thou gavest me out of the world Thine they were and me thou gavest them and they have kept thy Word Now know they that whatsoever thou gavest me is from thee For the words that thou gavest me have I given them and they have received them and know of a truth that I am come forth from thee and thou hast sent me I ask for them I ask not for the world but for those that thou hast given me for they are thine And all mine are thine and thine mine and I am glorified in them And I am no more in the world but they are in the world and I come to thee Holy Father keep them in thy Name whom thou hast given me that they may be one as we When I was with them in the World I kept them in thy name These whom â—hou gavest me I kept nor is any of them lost but the Son of perdition that the Scripture may be fulfilled For afterwards it is said that our Lord spake to those that apprehended him to let his disciples go That the word which he had said might be fulfilled I have lost none of those whom thou gavest me John XVIII 9. But all this will not serve to make us believe that his then disciples alone were the men that the Father gave to Christ he having said expresly afterwards John XVII 20. I ask not for these alone but for those that shall believe in me through their word For this showes that he prayes for his then disciples in the common quality of disciples that is of Christians having other prayers to make for the world that is for those that were not As we see by and by John XVII 21. and Luke XXIII 34. But in that he saith so often that the Father had given them him from whose appointment the sufferings of Christ the power which he is advanced to the successe of the Gospel which he publisheth dependeth In that regard I conceive the helps of Gods grace by the second Adam whereby the breach made by the first is repaired necessarily to be implied in Gods giving unto our Lord Christ his disciples And of this sense much there is expressed by S. Paul Ephes I. 3. 11. Blessed God even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ that hath blessed us with every spirituall blessing in the heavens through Christ As he chose us in him before the foundation of the world that we should be holy and blamelesse before him in love Having foreappointed us to adoption to himself through Jesus Christ according to the good pleasure of his will To the praise of his glorious grace whereby he made us acceptable in the beloved Through whom we have redemption by his blood even the remission of â—â—nnes according to the riches of his grace which hath abounded to us in all wisdome and prudence Having made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure which he purposed in himself at the dispensation of the fullnesse of times to restore all things both in heaven and in earth through Christ in whom also we have received our lots appoinâ—ed according to the purpose of him that effects all things according to the counsel of his will For not to insist upon the force of those terms and phrases which Saint Paul uses whatsoever blessings it may be said S. Paul hereby signifies to have been appointed to the Ephesians from everlasting as Christians I suppose it cannot be denied that he presupposes that they were also appointed from everlasting to be Christians to whom by so being those blessings should become due And all this so many times and so manifestly said to have been appointed in Christ or by Christ or through Christ that it cannot be questioned that not onely the Gospell by which they were brought to that estate but also the meanes that inforce it and the consequences whereby it takes effect all depend upon Christ and the consideration of his coming to destroy the works of the devil in our first parents CHAP. XIX Evidences of the same in the Old Testament Of Gods help in getting the Land of Promise and renewing the Covenant And that for Christs sake That Christianity cannot stand without acknowledging the grace of Christ The Tradition of the Church In the Baptisme of Infants In the Prayers of the Church In the decrees against Pelagius and other records of the Church IT remaineth now that I shew how the same truth is signified to us in the Old Testament whereof I will point out three sorts of passages tending to prove it and when they are put together making full evidence of it The first is of those wherein it is acknowledged that the inheritance of the Land of Promise is not to be ascribed to any merit or force of their own but to the goodnesse and assistance of God Then which nothing can be produced out of the New Testament more effectuall to shew that whatsoever tends to bring Christians to the kingdom of heaven is to be ascribed to the grace of God There being the same correspondence between the helps of spirituall Grace whereby Christians overcome their spirituall enemies and the help of God whereby the Israelites overcame the seven nations as between the kingdom of heaven and the land of Promise And therefore all those promises whereby God assures them of deliverance from their enemies and maintenance in the possession thereof all acknowledgements of Gods free gift whereby they held that inheritance argue no lesse concerning those helps whereby the children of the Church answering to the land of Canaan here are inabled to continue true spirituall members thereof and to attain the land of promise that is above I shall not need to produce many particulars of this nature whereof all the Old Testament affordeth good store That of Moses Deut. IX 3-8 I must not forget where assuring them of God to go along with them he warns them not to ascribe that favour to their one righteousnesse though he acknowledgeth that God imployes them to punish the seven nations but to his covenant with their Fathers And that God enabled them to cast
infant should go out of the World unbaptized that is it which the great solicitude of Christians that no such thing should come to passe the provision that a Lay man might baptize in case of necessity which admitted not the solemnity of ministers of the Church the grief and astonishment which followed if at any time it came to passe will inable me not onely to affirm but to inferre both the reason of originall sinne which the baptisme of Infants cureth and the authority of the Apostles which it proclaimeth It may be sayd that Pelagius himself allowed and maintained the Baptisme of Infants to bring them to the kingdom of heaven not to everlasting life But this was but to make his own cause the more desperate For had any intimation of the Scripture any Tradition or custome of the Church justified any ground of difference between the kingdome of heaven and everlasting life he might have escaped by pleading it But being disowned in it he hath left a desperate plea for those that come after him to question the Baptisme of Infants and by consequence original sinne which if he so many hundred years agoe could have found ground for he need not have stood in the list of hereticks The visible ceremonies of Baptisme which are so resolutely pleaded by his adversaries for evidence of the same are effectual to the same purpose For if it was thought requisite on behalf of infants to renounce Satan and all his Pompe and angels and instruments of this world adhering to God Iâ— it were solemn by huffing and exorcizing to use the power which God hath given his Church over unclean Spirits for the chasing of them out of Infants that were baptized Certainly those that did it were so farre from thinking that man as he is born can be capable of that good Spirit which Baptisme promiseth that they thought him to be liable to the contrary To this argument I will adde the matter of that catechizing which the ancient Church prepared those for Baptism who pretended to it as I begun to shew you in the first book for it is in a great part repeated in divers of these ancient forms of celebrating the Eucharist which are yet extant under the names of the Liturgies of Apostles and Fathers which I have named in my book of the publick service of God The ancientest of them is that which is recorded in the Constitutions of the Apostles VIII 11. But you find also there VII 40. the order of Catechizing those that are to be baptized providing that they be instructed in the mercy of God that suffered not mankind being turned from him to perish but in all ages provided meanes to recall them from sinne and error to truth and righteousnesse by the Fathers first and by the Law and Prophets afterwards untill all this proving ineffectuall he spared not at length to send his Sonne And the same is the argument of that Thanksgiving which is premised to the consecration of the Eucharist in the place quoted as also in the same work afore II. 55. and in the Liturgies to which I referre you An evidence in my opinion very considerable to shew this point to belong to the substance of Christianity as the subject mater both of that instruction which is requisite to make a man a Christiane and of both Sacraments wherein the exercise thereof consisteth In the second place I alledge such an evidence for the grace of Christ as no point of Christianity can produce better from the practice of the Church For I alledge the prayers of the Church all over and from the beginning that they have alwaies contained three things The first is of thanksgivings for our Christianity that is for the coming of Christ the preaching of his Gospel and the effect thereof in converting us to be Christians The second of prayers that we may be able to persevere in that to which we are so converted and to perform what we undertake by professing our selves Christians notwithstanding the temptations of our ghostly enemies to depart from it The third and last in that these thanks and prayers are tendered to God in Christ for his sake signifying the acknowledgment of his grace in bringing us to be Christians and the expectation of those helps by which we must persevere from the consideration of his merits and suffering For as for Prayers and thanksgivings in generall it cannot be said that the offering of them can argue either the decay of our nature or the repairing of the same by Christ because those that acknowledge not Christ Jews and Mahumetans must and do use them if they pretend Religion and the service of God yea even Pagans according to their sense But to pray and give thanks to God to make men or because he hath made men Christians or for the helps of salvation which by being Christians that iâ— by Christ we attaine to as by him we attaine to be Christians must needs appear utterly groundlesse unlesse we suppose that there was no other way left for our salvation which cannot be understood by any meanes but by the fall of Adam and the consequences thereof to come to passe In the last place I alledge the decrees of the whole Church against Pelagius together with the consent of those parts of the Church which otherwise cannot be understood to be concluded by those decrees For it is manifest there was no decree of the whole Church against Pelagius as against Arius The Councils of Carthage and of Numidia that of Palestine and in aftertimes that of Orange being but particular Councils not containing the consent of the whole But this consideration in another regard turns to the advantage of the Churches cause For when those parts of the Church which are not obliged by the decrees do voluntarily and freely joyne in giving effect to them as it is manifest they did at that time by the concurrence of the Bishops of Constantinople and Alexandria and the great Council of Ephesus in Vossius Hist Pel. I. 38 39 47. and do since by owning the acts done against them there can be no pretense of faction to sway them to go along with those whom they are loth to offend but all must be imputed to the sense of that Christianity which hitherto they found themselves perswaded of and therefore agreed not to admit to their Communion those who acknowledged it not which is the effect of all such decrees of the Church In the mean time I forget not the records of the Church in writing that is the testimonies of those writers who going before Pelagius and giving testimonie against him cannot be thought to joyne in faction to oppresse any truth which he preached And upon this evidence I challenge both the belief of originall sinne to be necessary to the acknowledgement of the grace of Christ which Christianity professeth and also that the grace of Christ is that which inables us to begin continue and finish the good
reconcile aswell the activity of Gods providence generally in all things as the efficacie of his predestination and grace in supernaturall actions leading to the happinesse of the world to come wiith our common freedome For it is manifest that this opinion of predetermination proceeds not upon any supposition of originall sin but meerly of the nature and state of a creature and intends to affirme that whether Adam had sinned or not the will of man must have been determined by God to do whatsoever it should do as unable to determine it selfe otherwise then as every creature moves when God moves it And therefore I am here to acknowledg the answer is lâ—rger then the question at least then the occasion of it and the resolution then the ground of the doubt The necessity of the grace of Christ being grounded only upon the fall of Adam and that bringing on the dispute what freewill hath to do where the freegrace of God cannot be spared and herefore what freewill it is that remaines to be freed from the bondage of sin by grace But as the generall comprises necessarily all particulars it is no esse destructive to the covenant of grace that the freedome of the will should be denyed upon the account of the constitution of nature then of depravation by sin And therefore I find my selfe bound to answer in what estate the covenant of Grace overtakes man borne in originall sin whether upon the account of Originall sin or meerly of Gods creature But I do purposely observe this to all them of the Reformation that I believe their own consciences will tell them all if passion or faction give leave that all the controversy advanced against the Church of Rome about freewill in the works of Salvation was grounded upon the supposition of the necessity of grace occasioned by Originall sin from which so much is derogated as is arrogated to freewill without iâ— and therefore the controversy never needed about all kind of works but those only that tend to salvation the meanes whereof became necessary upon the account of Originall sin Which if it be true then cannot the Interest of the Reformation consist in any opinion concerning all maner of human actions without difference whether in the state of uprightnesse or sin Nor can any thing but the spirit of slander impute the maintaining of Gods grace without or against such opinions to any inclination towards the abuses of the Church of Rome but to the conscience of Gods truth without respect of persons For further evidence vvhereof I shall make good use of the evill of faction if not of division now on foot upon occasion of this dispute as vvell among those of the reformation as in the Church of Rome For seeing that both parties are divided about it though in the Reformation only the mater hath proceeded to a breach first between Lutherans and Calvinists in the Empire then in Holland between these and Arminians he that goes about to cast the aspersion of Popery upon that opinion which the Papacy injoyneth not though it aloweth must first answer whether the popery of the Dominicans the rest of them that hold predetermination whether the Popery of Jansenius his followers be Popery or not With all I shall think the way made towards the proof of my position by observing that the ground upon which I shall proceed to make evidence of freedome from necessity under originall sin will necessarily take place against the predetermination of the Will by God whether under Originall sin or in the state of uprightnesie And upon that ground I shall freely affirme that this position is not onely intended to contradict but also effectually contradicteth the opinion of the predetermination of the will by the immediate operation of God CHAP. XXII The Gospel findeth man free from necessity though not from bondage Of the Antecedent and Consequent Will of God Praedetermination not the root but the rooting up of Freedome and of Christianity Against the opinion of Jansenius THE ground which I speak of may be branched out into particulars as large as you please But it shall be enough for me to say That whatsoever is read from one end of the Bible to the other concerning a treaty tendred by God to man concerning an alliance or covenant contracted upon it concerning an inheritance or assurance of an inheritance upon that alliance concerning exhortations reproofes promises threats inducing to observe that contract and not to transgresse it all this and whatsoever else may be reduced to this nature evidenceth that neither freedom from necessity is lost by originall sinne nor the will of man determined by the immediate operation of God to do or not to do this or that I must further mention here that difference between the antecedent and the consequent the conditionall and the absolute will of God the first suspended upon some act of mans free will the second resolute as supposing the same past or not requiring it not because the divines as well of the Eastern as of the Western Church have imbraced it but because they all found that they could not discharge their account of the Scriptures without it But I must not forget to mention withall the rewards and punishments expressed in the Scriptures to be brought upon the compliance with or resistance of those helps which the antecedent and conditionall will of God requireth whether he choose it or not In the Old Testament you have the contestations of Moses in Deuteronomy often warning Gods people that he had set before them the good and the bad for them to make choice You have the Prophet Esay V. 3-6 contesting with Gods vineyard that he had done what he could do for it and that having born wild grapes in stead of good fruit it was therefore just with him to destroy it You have the Psalmist protesting the cause why he gave over his people to their enemies and to famine to be their disobedience Psal LXXXII 9-17 You have the Prophet Ezekiel XVIII 30 31 32. thus reclaiming them Return and repent of your transgressions and wickednesse shall not be to you a stumbling block Cast from you all your transgressions which you have transgressed with and make you a new heart and a new spirit for why should ye dye ye house of Israel For I delight not in the death of him that dieth saith the Lord God but repent ye and live For is not this to say of my self I desire not your death but because of your obstinacy in rejecting my Prophets By whom he so often protesteth that he had risen betimes to send them from age to age if by any meanes he might reclaim them to his Law and so preserve them in the inheritance of the Land of Promise In like manner our Lord in the Gospels Mat. XXIII 37 38. Luke XIII 34 35. Jerusalem Jerusalem that killest the Prophets and stonest them that are sent thee how often would I have gathered thy
children as a henne gathers her chickens under her wings and ye would not Behold your house is left unto you desolate And S. Steven Acts VII 51. Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in hearts and ears you do alwaies crosse the holy Ghost as did your Fathers And the Scribes and Pharisees in the Gospel made void the counsel and purpose of God towards them Luke VII 30. But above all you have the purpose of God manifested by the Gospel of sending our Lord Christ for the salvation of the World as John the Baptist sayes John I. 29. Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sinne of the World And our Lord to Nicodemus John III. 16 17. God so loved the world that he gave his onely begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him may not perish but have life everlasting For God senâ— not his Son into the World to condemn the World but that the world by him might be saved And S. Paul commandeth Timothy that prayers be made by the Church for all men even for the Powers of the World then their enemies as a thing pleasing to God Who saith he would have all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth For there is one God and one Mediator between God and man the man Christ Jesus who gave himself an expiation for all to be witnessed in his own time 1 Tim. II. 4 5 6. And if there be any other passages of the New Testament as others there are to witnesse that Christ is given by God for the reconciliation and salvation of all mankind One I will not omit because the mistake which is alledged to divert the sense of it is remarkable 2 Pet. III. 9. God slacketh not his promise as some men count slacknesse but is slow to wrath in our regard not willing that any should perish but all come to repentance Which they will have to signify that he would have none of us that is of the elect to perish because it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he is patient towards us the elect They might have seen that this is not the meaning of the words by Luke XVIII 7. Shall not God avenge his elect that cry to him day and night though slow to wrath in regard of them I tell you he shall avenge them speedily 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though slow to take vengeance in regard of them upon their oppressors Is here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 slow to take vengeance upon our oppressors for us which he hath promised to take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek of the New Testament signifying the delaying of vengeance due to them that oppresse Christians as you see by S. Luke the Apostle attributes to the desire of saving those whom he spares Nor will I stop here to shew you the insufficience of those expositions which in despite of the words are fastned upon these texts to avoid the difficulties which they create to prejudicate opinions For it is manifest that the consequence of them is no more but the very same that arises from any Scripture that testifies the meanes which God uses for the good of any man to become frustrate through his fault In consideration whereof that God shall call them to account at the last day who either being convict of the truth of his Gospel or having meanes offered to be informed of the same imbrace it not or having imbraced it notwithstanding persevere not in it by living as Christ requireth Or on the contraty that he shall reward them who imbrace it and persevere in it Which being so many that they are not to be avoided without setting a great part of the Scripture upon the rack I count it not worth the while to insist here that S. Pauls meaning is not that God would have some of all estates to be saved or that he would have many to be saved or those that are saved to be saved or upon any other of those lame expedients which have been applied to plaister the wound which these plain texts do make But I insist upon this that the meaning of them cannot be That God would have those onely to be saved that shall be saved Having such a swarm of Scriptures to evidence how many things there are which God would have done and are not done having all the importunities and complaints which God useth by his Prophets to assure us that he would have found that obedience at the handes of his ancient people which he found not all the preachâ—ng of his Gospel all the motives of believing all the exhortations to accept and perform the Covenant of Grace in the New Testament ready to witnesse what men are to give account for at the day of judgement All which must be satisfied before there can be cause to balk the plain meaning of S. Pauls words which cannot seem inconvenient in any other regard but because they make God to will that which comes to passe all the Scripture witnessing that all that shall be condemned shall be condemned for not doing that which God would have them do For wheresoever Gods justice punishes there is it of necessity that man had sufficient meanes to do otherwise Where it rewardes there was possibility of transgressing there was a capacity of indifference and a will actually undetermined to do or not to do this or that notwithstanding originall sinne But first to declare what I understand this antecedent will of God to be I must distinguish with some divines that God must not be said to will this because of that or for that but may be said to will that this be because of that or for that Deus non vult hoc propter hoc sed vult hoc esse propter hoc When I say because of that or for that I extend the observation to two kindes of causes To the finall cause for which a thing is said to be done and to the motive or impulsive cause because of which a thing is said to be done when we speak of the doings of understanding and free causes For these having something in consideration to move them to do what they do this motive which they consider holds on the side of the effective cause in as much as there had been no proceeding without the consideration of it Though it is also true that the motion which consideration produces being so called but out of that resemblance which it holdeth with the motions which naturall things are visibly transported with importeth no more then the appetite of some good thing the want whereof they apprehend which is nothing else but the effect of the finall cause So that the motive cause is no other then the finall cause in respect of that effect which it hath indeed moved the effective cause to produce So then when I say that God willeth not this for that or because of that I say that God can have no ends upon his creatures being
to mankind Seeing there is a reason to be given for all that fall under the same in the nature of the finall or the meritorious cause God stands as much glorified man as much obliged to worke out his salvation with feare and trembling as if he knew the bottome of Gods secret counsaile And thus the objection is void It remaineth that we consider the Tradition of the Church what it declareth concerning the truth of that which I have resolved or towards it Where we must take notice of the Monkes of Adrymetus under Valentine who received S. Agustines doctrine of Gods effectuall grace and predestination to it from everlasting in such a sense that they inferred from it all indeavours of men all exhortations reproofes instructions and prayers to be utterly fruitlesse and vaine as tending to that which dependeth upon the meere appointment of God which cannot be defeated and without which nothing can serve To rectifie this mistake S. Augustine lived to write them his book yet extant de correptione Gratia wherein he declareth all that he had said of the grace of God and the efficacy thereof to proceed upon supposition of free will in man though inslaved to sin by the fall of Adam from the bondage whereof the grace of Christ voluntarily though effectually redeemeth those that are freed by it whereby as by the rest of his writings concerning the grace of Christ against Pelagius he establisheth two points belonging to the foundation of the Christian faith The first of the freedome of mans will though not from sin since the fall of Adam yet from necessity determing the resolution of it when by the treaty which the Gospell advanceth it is invited to imbrace Christianity and to live according to it Which were all a mere nullity were not any man free to resolve himselfe upon it The second of the grace of God by Christ which if it may be purchased by the indevour of mans free will then was it not necessary to send our Lord Christ as the second Adam to repaire the breach which the first Adam had made This being the sum of the Catholike faith in this mater and the rest which is advanced to shew how those two points both stand true together belonging to the skill of a Divine not to the faith of a Christian so far as by maintayning them men destroy the foundation of Christianity on neither side Which it is no marvail that some things which S. Augustin had said in giving a reason hereof seemed to some to do seeing those that accepted of his doctrine in Africk drew from it a consequence utterly destructive to Christianity I speake of those in the parts of France about Provence and Marsailles who inferring from S. Augustines saying that in his opinion God makes the farr greater part of men on purpose to condemne them to death seemed to mainetaine the beginning of salvation to come from those indeavours of mans will born as he is under originall sin which God faileth not to second with those helps of Grace which the mater requireth There is great appearance of that which Jansenius disputeth so eagerly de Haeresi Pelag. VII 5. sâ—q that the maine ground of their opposition was the decree of predestination which S. Austine would have to be absolute As being perswaded that thereby the effects of free will become fatal in which that reason of reward and punishment which the Covenant of Grace establisheth requires contingence And herewith the occasion which Faustus pretendeth for the writing of his book de Gratia et Libero Arbitrio agreeth To wit that a certaine Priest called Lucidus is required by him in the name of a Synod held at Arles under Leontius Bishop to recant certaine positions tending to maintaine the necessity of being damned for originall sin by the foreknowledg of God in them for whom Christ dyed not dying onely for sin And this by a letter subscribed by one of the Bishops This recantation being made Faustus pretendeth to write at the intreaty of the Synod to lay forth their sense and reasons But to have added something upon the decree of an other Synod held afterwards at Lions True it is indeed which Vâ—ssius observeth Historiae Pelag. VI. Thesi XIV that whereas some of them insisted on nothing else others proceeded to deny the necessity of preventing grace For whatsoever we say of Cassianâ— who hath writ to severall purposes in severall places Faustus manifestly affirmeth that by the act of free will in beginning to believe a Christian obtaines the grace of God which his owne choice preventeth Which if we understand the Faith which he speaketh of to signifie Christianity and the act of believing to consist in becoming a Christian is nothing else but the fundamentall faith of Christianity That the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost is granted in consideration of a mans turning Christian But who believes that the actuall grace of the Holy Ghost whereby the world is converted to be as well as convicted that it ought to be Christiane is obtayned by the exaltation as purchased by the humiliation of Christ which Faustus supposing the preaching of the Gospell being the meanes which it useth no way denyeth acknowledgeth by consequence that act of faith which preventeth the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost to be prevented by the actuall helps of Grace which the preaching of the Gospel importeth And Jansenius de Haeresi Pelag VIII 1-9 acknowledgeth that they had no designe to destroy the grace of God through Christ as Pelagius had therefore did acknowledg not onely the outward preaching of the gospel but inward inspiration to make it effectuall Onely that making the effect of that grace which God appointeth to depend on free wil they fel into the heresy of Palagius which they desired to a void Now Pelagius indeed acckowledged that grace which the preaching of the gospell signifyed according to his own opinion which was false For not believing that our will is any thing the worse for Adams fall he could not allow that Christ hath purchased any help to repaire the breach and to cure the disease which he had made But as he could not deny it to be an act of bounty in God to propose the reward of everlasting life which is supernatupall So he must affirme that it is purchsed by the merre naturall act of free will without any help of grace granted of Gods mercy in Christ in consideration of his obedience And by this meanes he brought the death of Christ to no effect Seeing God might have assured the tender of his gospell to come indeed from him without it And so the merit of grace that is the reason that obliges God to give it is originally ascribed to the works of free Will according to Pelagius But according to those who acknowledging Originall sin acknowledg the cure of it by the helpe of grace purchased by Christ which the preaching of the gospell bringeth not
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
served by his Church It is plain enough to all that have the use of reason what that communion of the Church and the Society thereof is able to effect and hath effected in preserving the Rule of Christianity wherein the salvation of Christians consisteth free and intire from the infection of mens devices expresly or by consequence destructive to it as well as the conversation of Christians from unchristian manners But if the Church be trusted to exact the profession of Christianity of all that require by Baptisme to be admitted unto the Communion of the Church It must by consequence be intrusted to exact of them also the performance of that which they have professed that is undertaken to professe For the profession being the condition upon which they are admitted to the Communion of the Church the performance or at least a presumption of the performance must needs be the condition upon which they injoy it Upon this ground the Church becomes not onely a number of men but a Society Corporation and Communion of Christians in those Offices wherewith God hath declared that hee will be served by Christians For upon supposition of such a Declaration or such a Law of God it is that the Church becomes a Body or Corporation of all Christians though under several Common-wealths and Soveraignties of this world As there are in all States several by Corporations subsisting by some act or Law of the Soveraign Powers of the same For if God had not appoâ—â—ted what Offices hee will be served with by his people at their common Assemblies there could be no ground why the Church should be such a Society founded by God there being nothing appointed by God for the members of it to communicate in But were there nothing but the Sacrament of the Eucharist acknowledged to have been delivered by God to his people to be frequented and celebrated by them at their common Assemblies that alone would be enough to demonstrate the foundation and institution of the Communion and Corporation of the Church by God For of a truth the rest of those Offices wherewith God requires to be served by Christians are the same by which hee required to be served by his ancient people before Christianity setting aside that difference with the divers measure of the knowledge of God in this and in that estate must needs produce Though there is no serving of God by the blood of bulls and goats nor by other ceremonies and sacrifices of Moses Law under Christianity Yet were the praises of God the hearing of his Word read and the instructing and exhorting of his people in it and to it together with the sacrifice of Prayer frequented by Gods people under the Law as still God is served and is to be served with them under Christianity And upon this account I have truly said elswhere as I conceive it that the Corporation of the Church is founded upon the privilege which God hath granted all Christians of assembling themselves for the service of God though supposing that the Powers of the world should forbid them so to do For this privilege consists in nothing else but in that command which God hath given his Church of serving him with these Offices Whereupon it necessarily insues that notwithstanding whatsoever command of Secular Powers they are forbidden to serve God in the Communion of them that are not of the Church Seeing they cannot be commanded to serve God in the Communion of the Church but they must be forbidden to serve God in the Communion of them which are not of the Church And upon this ground stands all the Power which the Church can challenge in limiting the circumstances and conditions upon which men may communicate in these Offices Which as it may justly seem of it self inconsiderable to the world and the Powers that govern it So when those Powers take upon them to establish the exercise of it by their Lawes If they maintain not the Church in that Power which of right and of necessity it had from God before they professed to maintain Christianity they destroy indeed that which in word they professe But if they take upon them to maintain it in the right which originally it had to limit the said circumstances by such Rules as by the act of Secular Powers become Lawes to their people then must the Power of the Church become as considerable as it is indeed in all States and Common-wealths that retain the Christianity which they had from the beginning in this point This being the ground and this the mater of Ecclesiastical Lawes and the Sacrament of the Eucharist being that Office proper to Christianity in order to the Communion whereof all Lawes limiting the circumstances and conditions of the said Communion are devised and made It seems requisite to my designe in the first place to void those Controversies concerning the same which all men know how much they have contributed to the present divisions of the Church For the determination of them will be without doubt of great consequence to determine the true and right intent of those Lawes which serve onely to limit those circumstances which are onely the condition of communicating in this and those other Offices Concerning which there is no other controversie on foot to divide the Church but that which concerns the said circumstances Now what differences concerning the Sacrament of the Eucharist are mater of division to the Church I may suppose all the world knows the opinion of Transubstantiation being so famous as it is Which importeth this That in celebrating this Sacrament upon pronouncing of the words with which our Lord delivered it to his Disciples This is my Body this is my Bloud the substance of the elements Bread and Wine ceaseth and is abolished the substance of the Body and Bloud of Christ coming into their stead though under the species of Bread and Wine that is to say those accidents of them which our senses witnesse that they remain In opposition whereunto some have proceeded so farr as to teach that this Sacrament is no more than a meer sign and the celebration and communion thereof barely the renewing of our Christian profession of believing in Christ crucified whom it representeth importing no spiritual grace at all to be tendred by it from God Which may justly seem to be the opinion of the Socinians and properly to give the name of Sacramentaries to all that professe it For in reason and justice wee are to difference it from the opinion of those that hold it for a sign appointed by God to tender the Body and Bloud of Christ spiritually to be received by it of as many as with a lively faith communicate in it Though these also cannot pretend to make it any more than a sign by virtue of that consecration which makes it a Sacrament Seeing it is the faith of him that receives it as they say which makes it the Body and Bloud of Christ spiritually though truly
sorts of Oblations commanded by the Law and practised by Gods ancient people For First-fruits Tithes and accursed things that is things dedicated to God under a curse upon them that should convert them to any other use Leviâ— XXVIII were not dedicated to be spent upon the Altar in Sacrifices but to the maintenance of the Temple or of them that attended upon the service of it But seeing wee have now showed that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice it followeth that those Oblations which are dedâ—cated to God to be spent in the celâ—bration of the Eucharist in reference whereunto I have already showed that all Oblations of Christians are consecrated to God because dedicated to maintain the Communion of his Church whereof the Eucharist is that Office which is peculiar to Christianity are not barely consecrated to God but to the service of God by Sacrifice For those things which under the Law were consecrated to God to be sacrificed upon the Altar were not then first offered to God when they were killed and the parts of them burnt upon the Altar But from the time that they were declared Gods goods for that purpose as by the Law it self may appear in the precept of the second Tithe which for two years belonging to the poor the third year was to be spent in sacrificing at Jerusalem and so by Law and by no mans act consecrate to the Altar Deut. XIV 22-29 In as much then as I have showed that the Eucharist is a Sacriâ—iâ—e in so much and for that very reason that which Christians offer to God for the celebration of the Eucharist is no otherwise a Sacrifice than those things which were appropriated to the Altar under the Law were Sacrifices from the time that they were dedicated to that purpose Saving alwaies the difference between Sacrifices figurative of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse such as Christianity supposeth all the Sacrifices of the Old Law to be and the commemoration and representation of the same past which I have showed that the Eucharist pretendeth And truly having showed that this representative and commemorative Sacrifice is of the nature and kinde of Peace-Offerings in as much as it is celebrated on purpose to communicate with the Altar in feasting upon it And knowing that every beast that was sacrificed for a Peace-Offering was attended with a Meat-Offering of floure and a Drink-Offering of wine which are the kindes in which the Eucharist is appointed to be celebrated I must needs say that those species set apart for the celebration of the Eucharist are as properly to be called Sacrifices of that nature which the Eucharist is of to wit commemorative and representative as the same are to be counted figurative under the Law from the time that they were deputed to that use This is then the first act of Oblation by the Church that is by any Christian that consecrates his goods not at large to the service of God but peculiarly to the service of God by Sacrifice in regard whereof the Elemenâ—s of the Eucharist before they be consecrated are truly counted Oblations or Sacrifices After the Consecration is past having showed you that S. Paul hath appointed that at the celebration of the Eucharist prayers supplications and intercessions be made for all estates of the world and of the Church And that the Jews have no right to the Eucharist according to the Epistle to the Hebrews because though Eucharistical yet it is of that kinde the bloud whereof is offered to God within the Vail with prayers for all estates of the world as Philo and Josephus inform us Seeing the same Apostle hath so plainly expounded us the accomplishment of that figure in the offering of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse to the Father in the highest heavens to obtain the benefits of his passion for us And that the Eucharist is nothing else but the representation here upon earth of that which is done there These things I say considered necessarily it follows that whoso believes the prayers of the Church made in our Lords name do render God propitious to them for whom they are made and obtain for them the benefits of Christs death which hee that believes not is no Christian cannot question that those which are made by S. Pauls appointment at the celebration of the Eucharist offering up unto God the merits and sufferings of Christ there represented must be peculiarly and especially effectual to the same purposes And that the Eucharist may very properly be accounted a Sacrifice propitiatory and impetratory both in this regard because the offering of it up unto God with and by the said prayers doth render God propitious and obtain at his hands the benefits of Christs death which it representeth there can be no cause to refuse being no more than the simplicity of plain Christianity inforceth But whether the Eucharist as in regard of this Oblation so in regard of the Consecration may be called a propitiatory Sacrifice this I perceive is yet a question even among those of the Church of Rome For it is acknowledged that there is yet among them a party even since the Decree of the Council of Trent who acknowledging the nature of a Sacrifice propitiatory in the Eucharist in regard of the offering of it already consecrated according to the order of the Latine Masse to God for the necessities of the Church utterly deny any nature of such a Sacrifice in it by virtue of the Consecration otherwise True it is these men are looked upon as bordering upon Hereticks in regard they acknowledg no other nature of a Sacrifice but that which those who acknowledg no Transubstantiation may grant without prejudice to their positions And if my aim were onely to hold a mean opinion between â—wo extreams and not freely to declare what may be affirmed with truth it might seem very convenient to take up that position for which I may allege a party at present extant in the Communion of the Church of Rome But having resolved to set all regard of faction behinde the consideration of truth manifested by the Scriptures I stick not to yield and to maintain that the consecration of the Eucharist in order to the participation of it is indeed a Sacrifice whereby God is rendred propitious to and the benefits of Christs death obtained for them that worthily receive it But this perhaps neither in the sense nor to the interest of them who make it their businesse to maintain the present abuses of the Church of Rome by disguising the true intentions and expressions of the Catholick Church That I may be understood without prejudice in this point I will lay down the difference of opinion that remains in the Church of Rome â—â—nce the Council of Trent as I finde it reported by Jacobus Bayus de Eucharistiâ III. 15-18 Hee complains of an opinion that the nature of a Sacrifice is not seen in conâ—ecrating the Elements to become the body and bloud of
with virgines and once maried people And shall thy sacrifice freely ascend And among other affections of a good minde wilt thou desire chastity for thee and thy wife I dispute not here how lawfull it is to pray for the dead which Tertullian touches again de Monogamiâ X. de Animâ LVIII This Tertullian supposes that if a Christian have two wives hee must offer that the Eucharist may be celebrated and that at the celebrating of it the Priest may pray for those whom hee mentions as the occasion of celebrating it The birth-dayes of Martyrs that is the Anniversaries of their sufferings was another occasion of celebrating the Eucharist as in Tertullian so in S. Cyprian Epist XXXIV Sacrificium pro eis semper ut meminiâ—â—is offerimus quoties Martyrum passiones dies annuâ commemoratione celebâ—an us Wee alwaies offer sacrifice for them as you remember when wee celebrate the yearly commemoration of the Martyrs suffering dayes Therefore where the â—ame S. Cyprian forbids offering the names of those that had fallen away in persecution and offering for them Epist IX XI hee forbids the receiving of their offerings and by consequence praying for them at the Eucharist Epiphanius Haer. XXX speaking of the Patriarch of the Jewes baptized in private 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The said Patriarâ—â—â—aâ—inâ—â—â— his hand a very considerable summ of gold streâ—ched out his hand and gave it to â—â—e Bishop saying Offer for mee S. Cyril of Jerusalem Catech. Mystag V. Eâ—roe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Then that spiritual sacrifice that unbloudy service being done consecrâ—tâ—â— over that propitiatory sacrifice wee beseech God for the common peace of the Churches for the State of the world for the Kings their armies and allies for the sick c. adding that praying for the departed wee offer to God Christ cruciâ—â—ed â—or our sins to render him propitious to them and to us Of which effect in due place the intent hereby appears For here as hee calls it a Sacrifice upon the Consecration so hee plainly sets down wherein the propitiation which it effecteth consists according to the Catholick Church For to say truth to the purpose in hand I can produce nothing like that which I have said already in my Book of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church to which I remit you for the rest pag. 370-382 that in all the Liturgies there is a place where mention is to be made of all States of the Church for whom the Oblations out of which the Eucharist is consecrated are offered And likewise a place where the Eucharist being consecrated prayer is made in behalf of all States in the Church that is to say the Sacrifice of Christ his Crosse there present is offered up to move God to grant them all that is desired by the regular and continual prayers of the Church And among them there is a special place for those that offer at present If any man be moved to imagine that any part hereof is prejudicial to that Reformation which the Church of England professeth for I professe from the beginning not to be sâ—rupulous of offending those that offend it I remit him to that learned Appendix of Dr Field to his third book of the Church the purpose whereof in answer to the question where the Reformed Church was before Luther is to show that in this point as in others there handled the sense of the whole Church of Christ even to the time of Luther and to the Council of Trent was no other than that which the Church of England embraceth and cherisheth Thereby to show that the Reformation thereof never pretended to found a new Church but to preserve that which was by taking away those corruptions which time and the enemies of Christianity had sown in the Lawes and customs of it Which hee doth so evidently perform in this point that I must needs challenge any man that hath a minde to blast any thing here said with the staâ—e calumny of Popery to consider first Whether hee can prove those things which the Authors past exception there quoted declare to be the sense of the Catholick Church at that time to contain any thing prejudicial to the Gospel of Christ and that purity thereof which the Reformation pretendeth And because I know hee cannot do it I rest secure of all blasphemies or slanders that can be forged upon this occasion Openly professing that those who will not acknowledg that condition of the Gospel and the promises thereof which I have demonstrated to be essential to Christianity it is for their interest to defame the sense of the Catholick Church with the slanderous aspersions of Popery that so they might seduce miserable creatures to believe that there is a faith which inâ—itles them to the promises of the Gospel not supposing them converted to the Christianity which it rendereth For seeing that propitiation which the Sacrifice of the Eucharist pretendeth is grounded upon this condition of the Covenant of Grace as I have showed it is no mervail if they who pretend to reconcile the promises of the Gospel to the lusts of the flesh by which this world is injoyed indeavor to slander the purity of Christianity with those aspersions which they have seduced wretched people to count odious In fine it is not that consideration of a Sacrifice in the Sacrament of the Eucharist which the sense and practice of the Catholick Church inforceth but the violent interpretations of it which are made on both sides to both extremities that can give the leass pretense for division in the Church For while on the one side the sacrificing of Christ a new is so construed as if to doubt of the virtue of it in behalf of all that assist in it whether they communicate in it or not whether their devotions concurr to it or not were to doubt of the virtue of Christs Crosse it is no mervail if this create so great offense that the receiving of the Eucharist nay the assisting of it with the devotions of Christian people comes to be a mater of indifference On the other side while the renewing of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse by that representation thereof which the Eucharist tendreth for the redressing of the Covenant of Grace between God and those which receive is construed as prejudicial to that one Sacrifice whereby our Lord for ever hath perfected those whom hee sanctifieth no mervail if the very celebrating of it come to be a mater of indifference the effect whereof by believing that a man is predestinate or justified is had before and without it The mater of the Sacrifice then being so great a subject for the diviâ—ion upon so litle cause it is time for good Christians to awake and look about them and see that the lesse cause there is the greater good will the parties have to continue at distance In the mean time it is the common interest of Christianity even the means of their salvation by the
of his Gospel nor the faith of their Predecessors can make any appearance of freeing them from it what madness will it be not to expect it from not to impute it to that condition which succeedeth the condition by which the children of Gods ancient people stood intitled to the Land of promise CHAP. VIII What is alleadged to impeach Tradition for baptizing Infants Proves not that any could be saved regularly who dyed unbaptized but that baptizing at yeares was a strong means to make good Christians Why the Church now Baptize Infants What becomes of Infants dying unbaptized unanswerable What those Infants gâ—t who dye baptized ANd thus from the Scriptures alone I have proved that Infants are capable of Baptism and that the Church is bound to provide them of it unlesse we will say that the Church is not bound to provide them of that means of salvation which the Church alone dispenseth And upon these terms I conceive I may safely acknowledge that there is no Precept for baptizing of the Infants of Christians written in the Scripture presuming that it is written in the Scripture that Infants are to be provided of the necessary means of salvation by the Church For though it be not necessary that all Infants be baptized because they are Infants yet will it be necessary that they be baptized before they go out of the world And therefore while they are Infants rather then they should go out of the world unbaptized But the practice of the whole Church and that from the beginning challenges the effect of S. Augustines rule that what is received of the whole Church and not by any expresse act of the Church from which the beginning of it may be demonstrable must of necessity be imputed to the Tradition of the Apostles For the judgements of men being so diverse as they are how can it be imagined that so great a body and so farre dispersed as the Church should agree to impose such a bâ—rthen upon themselves had they not understood the obligation of it by the means of them from whom they received their Christianity The testimonies of Tertullian de Bapt. cap. XVIII of S. Gregory Nazianzene Orat. XL. in sanctum baptisma and of Walafridus Strabus de Reb. Eccles cap. XXVI that dehoâ—t froâ— baptizing Infants or declare that the Church in the first ages did not baptize during infancy are so farre from making any exception to this evidence that they contain sufficient evidence for the same truth if we be so considerate as to understand this Tradition not to require that all be baptized during infancy but that no Infant go out of the world unbaptized For he that will imploy a litâ—le common sense may see that there may be reasons to make men think it better that Baptism be ministred to those that can understand what it imports what they undertake provided that they go not out of the world unbaptized but that there be an effectual course taken for the baptizing of them in danger of death For that it is not my sense but the sense of the Churâ—h that makes the Baptisâ— of Infants necessary not because Infants but least they dye unbaptizâ—d I appeal to S. Austine Enchirid. cap. XLIII A parvulo enim recens nato usque ad decrepitum fenem sicut nullus prohibendus est à baptismâ— ita nullus est qui non peccato â—oriatur in baptismâ— Sed parâ—uli tantum Orginali For from the litle one new born to the decrepâ—t old man as none is to be hindred of Baptism so is there none that does not dye to sin in Baptism But little ones onely to Original He â—aith not that from young to old all are to be Baptized but none is to be refused Baptism supposing the necessity of his case and the rule of the Church to require it The same is to be said of the Canon of Neo-caesarea that allows the baptism of a woman with childe because it exâ—nds not to the baptizing of the Infant in her wombe before confession of faith And of the custoâ—â— of the Greeks to this day testified by Balfanum and Renaras upon that Canon For what need more words I acknowledge that Vives upon S. Austin de Civit. dei l. 27. gives very great reasons why it were better that the Baptism of Infants were differred till they come to the discretion of understâ—nding to what they ingage themselves But shall I therefore believe that Vives was an Anabaptist that he did not believe Original sinne that he acknowledged any cure for it without Baptism that he thought it not necessary to salvation that all should be Baptized before death A ridiculous thing once to imagine Thus much for certain so sure and evident as it is that when he writ this the custome of the Church was to baptize Infants so certain it is that when all that I have alledged was written and done that men should not be baptized in infancy there was a constant custome and practice in force in the Church whereby care was taken that no Infant should dye unbaptized And though they expresse reasons for which they had rather Christians should be baptized at years yet never any Christian expressed any opinion or any reason why Infants should not be baptized rather then dye unbaptized Never was there any opinion heard of and allowed in the Church that Gods Predestination adore without Baptism or any thing else beside it can be taken for a cure of Original sin Irenaeus is one of the next to the Apostles that we have He when he saith II. 39. Christus venit per seipsum omnes salvare omnes inquam qui per eum renâ—scuntur in deum infantes parvulos parvos juvenes seniores Christ came to save by himself all who by him are born anew unto God Infants and litle ones and children and young men and old ones If any man think fit to question whether in his language renati in deum can be understood without Baptism when he speaks of Infants must suppose that one that is not an Infant may bee regenerate without it Such a one must know that though he dare understand that which S. Paul never said when he calls Baptism the laver of regeneration Titus III. 5. yet Irenaeus with the whole Church of God never understood any regeneration without it Thus much for certain as to these words of Irenaeus if he understand the regeneration of men to be by Baptism he cannot understand the regeneration of Infants to come otherwise S. Cyprian whatsoever his reasons be when he contendeth for the baptizing of all Infants as he evidences the practice of the Church so he maintaines the same grounds upon which I have shewed that it did proceed Tertullian de Animâ cap. XXXIX S. Gregory Nazianzene Orat. XLII abundantly prove mine intent The words of Tertullian Huic enim Apostolus ex sanctificato alterutro sexu sanctos procreari ait tam ex seminis praerogativâ
But he that thinketh that within the Church the power of the Keys goes no further then Preaching and clearing the scandall of notorious offences can give no reason why those that arâ— converted to believe Christianity by Preaching the Gospel should be bound by their own profession to oblige themselves to it and by that means to enâ—â—r the â—ociety of the Church For they are as well certified before baptism as after that without repentance and conversion from sinne there is no remission of sinne or hope of everlasting life which if a mâ—n be left to his own choice whether he will imbrace or not after that he is come into the Church why not afore Why came he into the Church Or why was there provision made that the Church should be a corporation the communion whereof all Christians should be be bound to hold â—nd imbrace Therefore our Lord when he declares the depositing of the same Keyes or power of loosing and binding with his Church which he he gave elsewhere to S. Peter and the rest of his Disciples Maâ— XVIII 15-20 commanding that he who will not hear the Church be to the Church as Publicâ—ns und Sinners were then to the Jews inferreth that Whatsoever they should bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever they should loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven And again that where two of you that is of the Church shall agree upon any thing to ask it it shall be done for you by my Eather in heaven Where reducing him that heareth not the Church into the State of a Publican or a sinner to the Jews being the binding of sinne as to the Church upon supposition that he is bound by it already as to God in order to the loosing of the same as to the Church upon supposition that it is first loosed as to God is something else besides preaching or clearing the scandal of notorious sinne And if our Lord by inferring immediately a generall promise of hearing the prayer of Christians intend to intimate that he would accept of the prayerâ— of the Church for the reconciling of those whose sinnes were bound as I observed afore then of necessity something more then showing the guilt of sinne by Preaching is referred to the Church in procuring the loosing of him that is bound from the debt of sinne not from the scandall of it And what is this but that which we see done by S. Paul and by the Church of Corinth in obedience to S. Pauls commands concerning him that had maried his Fatherâ— widow 1 Cor. V. 2 -2 Cor. II. 5-11 VII 8-11 For when S. Paul blames them that they did not all mourn that he who had done the act might be removed fâ—om among them Certainly he means that he who had done the act was to mourn so much more that he might be restored unto them again For so it came to passe and upon such terms he is restored If any man hath grieved it is not me that he hath grieved but in part that I may not charge you all Enough to such a one is this rebuke of many So that contrariwise ye ought rather to pardon and comfort such a one least he be swallowed up with abundance of sorrow The reason followes For I see that that leter of mine grievâ—d you though but for a time Now I am glad not that I grieved you but that you were grieved to repentance For ye were grieved according to God that ye might in nothing be punished as from us For the sorrow that is according to God worketh repentance to salvation not to be repentâ—th of But the sorrow of the world worketh death I demand whether the repentance which S. Pauls censure brought forth were the repentance of that Church or the repentance of both the person guilty and of the Church For without question if this were the crime and that he was born out in it by a faction in the Church the act whereof prevailing redounds to the account of the whole then S. Paul justly blames the Church because they had not cleared their hands of it by putting froâ— them the guilty person with demonstration of â—hat sorrow which might evidence their adherence to the Christianity which they had once professed And accordingly if the Church were grieved to repentance such as procureth salvation being according to God and that having so done they are injoyned to restore the guilty person Therefore that the guilty person had been reduced to so much more sorrow as the crime concerned him more and that this sorrow also was repentance to salvation according to God wrought by the censure inflicted upon him by S. Pauls Bpistle Whether then S. Paul require them to re-admit him least Satan should get advantage upon the Church by this breach whose conceits we are not ignorant of saith S. Paul and least the party should be swallowed up with excessive sorrow Or least the party by dispair of reconcilement with the Church should be reduced to renounce Christianity or a division be made in the Church from under the authority of S. Paul This he plainly declares that he pardons the man whom they pardon in the person of Christ that no such thing come to passe That is acting by Apostolical commission according to which that which any mans Apostle or Commissary did was as if himself did it So that either we suppose the repentance wrought by the censure to be sufficiently evidenced or that S. Pauls commission is not trustily discharged This is more then then preaching the Gospel or removing offence from before the Church It is removing the sinne by procuring repentance and thereupon assuring of pardon which seems not well assured when there is not competent means used much lesse the effect of the means visible in procuring repentance But if a Physitian onely prescribing and applying the means of curing a disease is said to cure it much more the Church not onely prescribing and applying the means of curing sinne by the exercise of repentance in prayer with fastinâ— and alms-deeds but also constraining the sick person effectually to use the cure prescribed by excluding him the communion of the Church so long as he refuses to use it Now when S. Paul commandeth to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that the Spirâ—t may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus 1 Cor. V. 5. proving the powing of Excommunication necessary to the constitution and being of the Church and that who so is excommunicate falls under the power of Satan as excluded Gods Church I alledged that those miraculous operations which God gave the Church undâ—r the Apoâ—tles to witnesse the truth of Christianity by the evidene of his presence in the same were seen upon those which were cast out of it And that in that regard this man is commanded to be delivered to Satan The destruction of the flesh then for which he is so delivered may signifie the
guilty of those excesses which they are charged with by Epiphanius S. Jerome and others Of these particulars you may see in S. Augustine de Haeresibus and Sirmondus his Praedestinatus both of them Haeresi XXVI and LXXXVI But all the while the subject of this separation is the discipline of Penance received by the whole Church as from the Apostles the limitation of the practice thereof being the ground upon which the difference is stated And for the ground of this ground Whether it could then be pretended that the Keyes of the Church could do no more then cure the scandall of notorious sinne on the one side Or whether it could then be pretended on the other side that the Keyes of the Church import any Power to pardon sinne immediately not supposing that disposition which qualifieth for pardon visible to the Church and procured by those actions which the authority of the Church injoyneth All this I am content to referre to that common sense which is capable to understand these particulars I shall not need to say much of the Novatians at Rome and elsewhere the Donatists in Africk of the Meletians in Aegypt having said this of the Montanists all of them if we regard the subject of the separations which they made in severall parts of the Church being nothing else but branches of the same sect and forsaking the unity of the Church for their part of that cause which ingaged Montanus The Novatians because they would not indure that those who fell away from the Faith in the persecution of Decius should be readmitted to the communion of the Church upon demonstration of repentance The Meletians for the same cause in Aegypt under the persecution of Diocletiane The Donatists upon some appertenâ—nce of the same cause Onely they serve to evidence the discipline of Penance to have been as universall as the Church of Christ when no part of it is found free from debates about the terms liâ—iting the exercise of it They serve also to evidence the ground and the pretenâ—e of the Power of the Keyes in the discipline of Penance by the same reason which I alledged afore After these times when the customes of the Church which from the beginning was governed by un-written Law delivered by word of mouth of the Apostles but limited more and more by the Governours of several Churches began to be both reduced into writing and also more expresly determined by the Canons of severall Councils greater and lesse it were too vain to prove that by dicourse which of it selfe is as evident as it is evident that there are such Rules extant which in their time had the force of Law to those parts of the Church for which they were respectively made Onely I do observe the agreement that is found between the originall practice of the Church in this point and that order which I have showed you out of the Apostles writings evidencing that interpretation which I have given of them by that rule which common sense inforces that the meaning and intent of every Law is to be measured by the primitive practice of it For we see so much doubt made whether those three great crimes of Idolatry Murther and Adultery were to be reconciled by Penance that is by the visible and outward demonstration of inward repentance to the Church not onely by Montanus but partly by Novatianns that that great Church of Antiochia remained doubtfull a great while whether Cornelius or Novatians should be acknowledged the true Bishop of Rome We see the Eliberitane Canons which were unquestionably made divers years before the Council at Nicaea and therefore may be counted as ancient as any that the Church hath exclude some branches of those sinnes from reconciliation with the Church We see this vigor abated by the succeeding discipline of the Church It is indeed said in the Church of Rome at this time that the ground of the Heresie as without ground they call it of the Montanists and Novatians was this that acknowledging the Church to have power to forgive lesse sinnes they the Novatians denied it the Power to forgive Apostasy or Idolatry To which the Montanists added Murther and Adultery But I have showed in my Book of the Right of the Church p. 17-27 that within the Church also as well as among the Montanists and Novatians some of these sinnes were not admitted to communion no not at the point of death And that there never was any opinion in the ancient Church that the Church hath any Power to forgive sinne immediately but onely by the medicine of Penance which it injoyneth I referre my selfe to that which here followeth Now it is plain that neither those parts of the Church nor the Novatians did hold those sinnes desperate but exhorted them to Penance as their cure in Gods sight agreeing in not readmitting them whither for the maintenance of Discipline or for fear the Church warranting their pardon who might prove not qualified for it should become guilty of their sinnes according to S. Paul 1 Tim. V. 22. Lay hands suddenly on no man nor partake in other mens sinnes For S. John and the Apostle to the Hebrews had authorized the Church to make difficulty of it though S. Paul had readmitted a branch of one of them the incestuous person at Corinth whether for the unity of that Church then in danger to be divided upon that occasion or as reasonably satisfied of the truth of his repentance But when the zeal of Christianity decreased as the number of Christians increased within and persecution without withdrew so many that there was no means left to preserve the Body without abating this severity the number of Apostates in some persecutions being considerable to the number of Christians we need seek no other reason why the Montanists and Novatians should be Schismaticks not properly Hereticks then their separating from the Church rather then condescend to that which the Body of the Church found requisite to be granted Let us see what crimes they are which the Eliberitane Canons that is the Canons of the Council of Elvira in Spain exclude from the communion even in case of death As if a man at age after Baptism commit adultery in the Temple of an Idol cap. I. If an Idol Priest having been baptized shall sacrifice again II. If such a one after Penance shall have committed adultery III. If a Christian kill a man by Witchcraft wherein there is Idolatry VI. If a Christian commit adultery after Penance VII If a Woman leaving her Husband without cause mary another VIII If a Father or Mother sell a child into the Stews or a child it selfe XII If a professed Virgine shall live in uncleannesse XIII If a man marry his daughter to an Idol Priest XVII If a Clergy-man commit adultery XVIII If he who is admitted to communion upon adultery in danger of death shall commit adultery again XLVII If a Woman kill the childe which she hath conceived of adultery
the Gospel requires which therefore may be obtained without the Ministery of the Church For if it be said that these persons would willingly undergo Penance upon condition of being restored to the Communion of the Church upon supposition that by the Ministery thereof they are restored to Gods grace and that therefore the desire of reconciliation by the Church supplies it as the desire of Baptism is accepted when it cannot be had If this be said I will allow that he who refuses the Ministery of the Church tendring him a reasonable presumption of attaining reconcilement with God by the means of it according to the just Laws of Christianity can have no cause to promise himselfe pardon without it In the mean time it is not the desire of reconcilement by the Church that qualifies him for remission of sinne but onely takes away the barre that hinders Gods grace to work that disposition in him which qualifies for it For if it be a part of Christianity to be a member of the Catholick Church then are not they capable of the promises made to Christians that will not seek them by the Ministery of the Church when and how farre and according as their Christianity shall oblige them to seek them To the same purpose I alledge also the second reason of S. Pauls indulgence and the effects of it in the practice of the primitive Church To wit the admitting of those that had committed Idolatry in time of persecution or who were otherwise born out in their sinnes by faction in the Church to communicate with the Church when in such cases there could be no presumption of sufficient disposition in the parties for forgivenesse from God but onely to avoid a breach in the Church of all things most prejudiciall to the generall good of the Body For can there be any appearance that the Church in such cases could be satisfied of the true and sufficient conversion of those that are admitted upon such terms when it is manifest that they are not admitted of choice but to avoid a further inconvenience Wherefore seeing the Church could not justifie the doing of it if there were not possibility of their being qualified for the Communon of the Church it follows that this possiblity consists in that the means of grace being sufficient for all within the Church may be effectual without the ministery thereof provided it be within the unity of it Here I must alledge the custome even of the primitive Church imposing no Penance upon Clergy-men â— that weae degraded for those crimes for which Laymen were reduced to Penance I remember the first Book de Synedris alledges this for an objection against the necessity of excommunication seeing it was not necessary for the Clergy Not considering that excommunication is abated by Penarice as Penance is abated by degradation in the Clergy But casting a foul aspersion upon the whole Church for imposing Penance upon the people when as nothing required it if the Clergy needed it not And this upon a mistake whether in point of fact or in point of right For it is not true that the Clergy were not subject to Penance especially in the first times of Christianity either when the crime was of a deeper nature then such as ordinary Laymen did Pehance for Or when a Clergy-man having been censured to communicate among the People which was degradation at that time relapsed Though afterwards they were remitted to do their Penance in private not bringing them before the Congregation for the prayers thereof with imposition of hands Neither is the reason which the ancient Canons give to be neglected in point of right For the losse of their rank in the Church being to them a rebuke whereof Lay Christians are not capable it is necessary that a difference should be made between them and the people Especially the interest of the Church requiring it in regard of another rule that no man that had done Penance should ever be admitted to the Clergy because of the common Christianity imbased in them who have done Penance which in those who are promoted to the Clergy is required of the best For those who for their qualities might best serve the Church if they had done Penance were ever after unserviceable iâ— not might be restored Whereby it appeateth that the Church presumed of them who knew their duty better then ordinary Christians that the loss of their rank would be sufficient to reduce them to true repentance without further constraint from the Church As afterwards they were trusted to do their Penance in private But this is full evidence that the Church did not think all sin incurable without the Keys of the Church For then the Church could not have referred the applying of the means of pardon which they procure to any presumption of any mans good conscience The like appears in the reconciling of Hereticks and Schismaticks to the unity of the Church by sholes that is by whole Churches at once upon whom as it is impossible to imagine that the discipline of Penance should passe so is it known upon evidence of Historicall truth that those who were not to be baptized again as some Heresies were by the Canons in force were admitted onely with Imposition of hands that is with the blessing of the Church acknowledging thenceforth to pray for them as Christians not as those for whom she prayes that they may become Christians Which not supposing possibility of pardon for them not undergoing the discipline of the Church could not have been granted I avow it to be truly said in this case that the Baptism received among Hereticks revives and comes to effect by this blessing of the Church For seeing that the onely necessary barre to the effect of it was the denying of that point of Christianity which distinguishes every Heresie from the Catholick Church or the destroying of the unity of the Church speaking of Schismaticks those that so return professing thenceforth the whole faith and maintaining the communion of the Church cannot be said to want any thing necessary to qualifie them for the promises of Christianity Seeing then this possibility is not grounded upon the Ministery of the Church which passes not upon them but upon the common profession of Christians made by them when they were baptized and the taking away of that barre which made it ineffectuall afore by returning to the unity of the Church though without any ministration of Penance neither can it be said that the disposition qualifying for remission of sinne is not to be attained in the Church without the Ministery of the Church by the discipline of Penance nor that it is attained by the desire of it but onely that the barre is removed by submitting to it A visible instance hereof I will propose in the reconciling of England to the Church of Rome in Q. Maries days an act of the highest nature that the power of the Keys could do And yet it is notorious that
pardon and absolution and the blessing of the Church was given them who could not be induced to restore the Church goods seized by Hen. the eighth A thing excluding all pretence foâ— any presumption of true conversion in them whom it concerned and yet â—ound necessary for the restoring of the Body in unity But so that the said necessity made it to be evidently for the general good even upon these terms For maintaining those who could not be induced to do right in the point in the unity of the Church there was no reason why the Church should be thought to warrant that absolution as to God which it granteth as to the Church Because it appears that it is granted to avoid a greater mischief Leaving them who finde themselves concerned by the ministery of the Church the communion whereof they regain to be reduced to that course which may assure their absolution as to God But I use this instance onely ad hominem that my reason may be understood not intending to justifie the proceeding in point of right as I do undertake to justifie the Council of Nicaea in admitting the Meletians who were guilty of the crime of Schism not onely without satisfaction of their repentance but all in their ranks onely suspending the exercise of their offices till those that were presently possessed should depart Or as I might undertake to justifie Pope Melchiades in offering to do the like for the Denatists for which he is commended by S. Austine Epist XLVII which the Church supposing Schism to be a mortall sinne that is of that number which the now Church of Rome injoyns Penance could not do upon other terms then I have said and if it had thought no sinne reconcileable without the Church could by no means have done The same is to be said of those that are excommunicated and cast out of the Church without cause For as no man ever doubted that to be a case which comes to pass so can no Christianity allow that a man should be excluded the Kingdom of God for another mans fault He therefore that hath the knowledge in Christianity and the resolution for it to keep himself to the duty of a Christian in such a case though being destitute of all advantage by the communion of the Church it is difficult to do he I say shall obtain pardon of sinne without help of the Church and not by desiring the Ministery thereof otherwise then as not desiring of communion with the Church remains a barre to the work of Gods grace In fine consider the primititive order of the Church and that of the Church of Rome at this day by the law of secret confession once a year For he that considers how much businesse the reconciling of a Penitent made the Church in those days will never imagine that it could be presumed that all sins which now come under secret confession should then be expiated by the Keys of the Church I have given you the testimony of Origen directing to make choice of some of the Presbyters of the Church to make acquainted with secret sinne that if he should require Penance to be done in the face of the Congregation his prescription might be followed This inforces us to understand the other part of the alternative that if he required no such thing it should be enough to take that course of humiliation and mortification which he should prescribe in private And truly one of the Canons of the Council at Elvira XXXII orders Penance to be injoyned by a Priest not by the Bishop Which I understand to be in private and not in publick Allowing it very probable that this is not properly counted Penance but onely suspension from the Eucharist injoyned by some of those Canons in some case XXI L. LXXVII and is opposed to Penance Can. XIV So that probably one of the Presbyters might injoyn it in secret by these Canons But otherwise seeing that all this while there was no Penance but by order of the Bishop or as in some of S. Cyprians Epistles of the Bishop and Presbyters sometimes when the case was difficult as in Firmilianus quoted afore by order of a Synod what appearance is there in common reason that all sinnes that now come under secret confession could then come under the Keyes of the Church In the order which Nectarius abolished any man may discern there was nothing but a course of abridging publick businesse of the Church by referring Penitents to one Priest set aside to that purpose When that course was abrogated still they had recourse to the Bishop and Presbyters but it is manifest so many could not be dispatched as afore And now it is manfest that to require of every man to confesse all the sinnes that ever he did since he confessed last would be an unsufferable torture to mens consciences And therefore it is onely required that they confess those which they have in remembrance I ask then how those which they have not in remembrance come pardoned If by inward repentance restoring the disposition of a Christian it is that which I seek If by being willing to confesse them if I had them in remembrance he that is not qualified for remission of sinnes as Christianity requireth is not qualified becauâ—e he would have been so qualified had it not been his own fault I adde further that it is at this day resolved by Casuists of very good note that a Penitent is bound in conscience to impose upon himself further Penance then that which his Confessor injoyneth in case he be satisfied in conscience that he hath not imposed that which is sufficient For in the case of clave errante it is manifest that there is no remission by the Keyes and yet remission is to be had by the Gospel antecedent to the Church If then a mans own Christianity may supply that means of forgivenesse which the Keys of the Church fail of procuring it is manifest that the use of them is not absolutely necessary for every particular Christian though absolutely necessary for the whole Body of the Church Add hereunto the restimonies of Ecclesiasticall Writers by which it appears that as they maintained the discipline of Penance which I also would maintain so farre as truth will allow so they supposed remission of sins attainâ—ble without it The exhortations of Tertullian and S. Ambrose to Ecclesiastcal Penance will no way inferr that it was then actually a Law in force that all sins that void the grace of Baptism should be made known to the Church for the obtaining of pardon by the Keyes of it For how ill doth iâ— become any Law to begge obedience by alledging reasons which must inforce it if they be good were there no Law But on the other side what express testimonies what necessary consequences there are to inferr that there was no such Law in the primitive Church I remit the Reader to the Collections of the Aâ—â—hbishop of Spalato 5. VII 10-20 and
Congregations I do indeed acknowledge that there is difficulty in expounding those texts of the Apostles which speak to this purpose so as to agree them with the Originall and universal practice of the Church And therefore it is no marvail if learned men that have handled this point among us where without affectation I may say that it hath been most curiously and ingenuously disputed have gone several wayes upon severall grounds in assigning the reason why the degree of Deacons is mentioned next to the degree of Bishops in so many texts of the Apostles having the order of Priests between both as the original and perpetual custome of the Church required For it is well enough known that there is an opinion published and maintained by many learned observations in the primitive antiquity of the Church that during the time when those texts of the Apostles were written there were but two Orders of Bishops and Deacons established in the Church though Bishops also are called Presbyters the name not being yet appropriated to the midle order while it was not introduced as afterwards it came to be And this opinion allegeth Epiphanius very fitly confuting Aerius the Heretick or Schismatick objecting the same that at the beginning the multitude of believers in less places being so small that one Governour together with some Ministers to attend upon him in executing his Orders might well serve them it is no marvail if there be no mention of any more Orders in so many texts of the Apostles And it may be said that as there were Churches founded and governed by a certain order from the beginning that we read of them in the Apostles so no Bishop Priest or Deacon was appropriated to any particular Church till after that time by degrees they came to be selled to certain Churches by Ecclesiastical Law and Custome So that during the time of the Apostles themselves and their companions whom they associated to themselves for their assistance were in common the Governours of Churches then founded according as they fell out to be present in these Churches to whom they had the most relation by planting and watering the faith planted in them either by virtue of the agreement taken by the Apostles within themselves or by the appointment of some of them if we speak of their companions and assistances But afterwards when the faith came to be setled then as those which had been Governours of Churches in common before became chief Governours of particular Churches to whom by lawful consent they became appropriated so were they provided of Priests and Deacons to assist and attend them in the execution of their office towards the body of Christians then mulplyed in severall Churches I do confess to have declared an opinion something differing from both of these sayings about the reason here demanded As not being perswaded either that the Order of Presbyters was not yet introduced into the Church during the Apostles time or that chief Governours were not appropriated and setled in some Churches during the same though I have no need to undertake that in all they were believing and maintaining that the Apostles themselves in the Churches of their own planting and watering were acknowledged chief Governours in ordering notwithstanding their extraordinary both Power not confined to any one Church and graces and abilities porportionable In which regard and under which limitation visible to the common sense of all men of their own and the next ages I do maintain Bishops to be their successors Whereupon it follows that I allow the name of Bishops in the Apostles writings to comprehend Priests also because of the mater of their function common to both though with a chief Power in the Bishop in Priests so limited as to do nothing that is to say nothing of consequence to his Power over the whole Church without his consent and allowance But this variety of opinion in expounding these Scriptures draweth after it no further consequence to prejudice the primitive Law of Goverment in the Church then this That there are more waies then one to answer the seeming probabilities pretending to make the evidence of Catholick Tradition unreconcileable with the truth of the Scriptures in the agreement whereof the demonstration of this truth consisteth I conceive therefore I might very well referre my self to the Readers free judgement to compare the reasons which I have produced with those that since have been used Notwithstanding I shall not think much briefly according to the model of this design to express the sense I have of the most native meaning of the most texts alleged in this businesse that I may have opportunity to point out again the peremptory exceptions which â—re visible in them either to the imagination of mungrill Prâ—sbyteries compounded of Clergy and People during the time of the Apostles or of the chief Power of any such Presbyteries in their resepective Churches CHAP. XVII The Power given the XII under the Title of Apostles and the LXX Disciples That the VII were Deacons Of the first Presbyters at Jerusalem and the Interest of the People Presbyters appropriated to Churches under the Apostles S. Pauls Deacons no Presbyters No ground for Lay Flders FIrst then as the name of Apostle in the Originall meaning is very general to signifie any commissary Proxy delegate or Ambassador so the use of it in the Apostles writings is larger then to be confined to the twelve For when S. Paul saith That our Lord appeared to the twelve afterwards to all the Apostles 1 Cor. XV. 5. 7. He must needs understand other Apostles besides the twelve perhaps the same that he meant where he reckoned Andronicus and Junias remarkable among the Apostles Rom. XVI 7. And that in another â—ense then Paul and Barnabas are called Apostles Act. XIV 4. 14. For the name of Apostle intimating whose Apostle he is that is called an Apostle we have no reason to count Paul and Barnabas any mans Apostles but our Lord Christs though they were first sent with the blessing of such Doctors and Prophets as the Church of Antiochia then had Acts XIII 1. 2 3. whose authority cannot in any reason be thought to extend so farre as to constitute an Apostle parâ—llel to the Twelve which S. Paul so oft so expresly challenges For since we see their commission is immediately from the Holy Ghost that is from God we are not to value their right by the solemnity which it is visibly conferred upon them with Unlesse you will say that by virtue of that Imposition of Hands they were messengers and Commissaries of that Church and that they then appeared to be no more then so though afterwards God set on them marks of the same authority with the Twelve Truly those whom S. Paul calls false Apostles transferring themselves into the Apostles of Christ 1 Cor. XI 13. must neâ—ds be understood to have pretended commission from our Lord Christ himself For hereupon they stood upon it that they had
Samaria mentioned Acts IX 31. where the Harvest was lesse though somewhat elder yet not more considerable whither as Elders of the whole Church that is Bishops or as Elders of the Church of Jerusalem that is Priests supposing the same Order promiscuously called Bishops and Presbyters which I never doubted and since hath been largely and learnedly proved will scarce be decided by these Texts and the interesse of the Church will be secure though it be not decided For when the deputation of the Church of Antiochia is addressed to the Apostles and these Elders when they assemble to consider of it when the answer containing the decree goes forth in their name Act. XV. 2 4. 16 23. It is still the decree of the Princes and Elders of the Israel of God whether you take them for Elders of the Church of Jerusalem or Bishops of the whole Church Nor is the case much otherwise when Paul and his companions consult with Iames and the Elders almost about the same businesse Act. XXI 18. though of the twelve it seems there was none then left at Jerusalem but James whom for the many marks which the Scriptures give us that his care was appropriated though his power no way confined to that Church the Church calleth Bishop of Jerusalem and of those Presbyters many were either setled in or dispersed to other functions as those whom first we read of in the Church of Antiochia must have have been of that quality Act. XIII 1. no lesse then Barâ—abas and Silas Act. IX 27. XI 22-26 XV. 22. But is there any man that can pick out of all this any maner of pretense for the equality of whether Governors or Ministers of the Church for the concurrence of Lay Elders to the Acts of their Government For the concurrence of the people there may be some pretense because they are present at passing the decree and the leter that bears it goes in their name Act. XV. 4. 23. And because the choice of Matthias and of the seven proceeds upon upon their allowance and nomination of the persons Act. I. 20-23 XVI 3-6 But that therefore the cheif interess should be in the people is an imagination too brutish Cannot the Apostles finding themselves obliged to ordain persons so and so qualified for such and such offices in the Church appeal to the people whom they acknowledge so and so qualified Cannot S. Paul afterwards provide That no man should blame them in dispensing the Power which they are trusted with 2 Cor. VIII 20. but a consequence must thereupon be inferred against themselves that they are commanded by God to referre things concerning the salvation of Gods people in generall as the power of an Apostle the order of Deacon the decree of the Synod at Jerusalem to the temerity and giddinesse of the people When it is evident in the Text that the people are neither left to themselves whither to proceed or not nor to proceed but within bounds limited so that proceeding within those bounds â—hey could not prejudice the Apostles interess without they were to be restrained As for the mater of Faith determined at Jerusalem is any man so litle a Christian as to doubt whether it obliged them whom it concerned or whether by virtue of that act Those that so readily admitted it Act. XVI 4. did not The whole interess of the people consequent to this proceeding of the Apostles consists in being reasonably satisfied of mater of fact concerning persons and causes to be justiced by the Apostles and their successors in the Church And can no more argue the People to be chief in the Church then the triall by Juries can argue England to be no Monarchy Which interesse when it is shamefully abused to the dishonour of Christianity I say not I would have it taken away as in some â—laces perhaps it is but I say he that would not have the satisfaction which they may demand limited by certain bounds with force of Law that it may not be so abused any more can neither pretend to be reasonable nor Christian But that the people of one Church should do an act which must oblige other Churches is a thing so gross that they who allow their Christians the freedom to be tied to nothing but what themselves please do by consequence allowing others the same destroy all principles and grounds of one Catholick Church which having proved as largely as my design admits I remit those who may pretend themselves unsatisfieâ— in this point to void me these grounds before they claim of me that which cannot stand with the truth of them But the due interess of the people being thus satisfied and their pretended interess by the same means excluded what becomes of the Lay Elders interess upon their account For Lay Elders can be no more then the Foremen of the People to act that interess which they challenge to their due advantage And in this quality I have granted elsewere and cannot repent me of that opinion that in some parts of the Western Church some of the chief of the People that is that were not of the Clergy did concur to the acts of the Church in behalf of the People and of their Interess And in this quality Blondel the most learned of Presbyterians claims the Lay Elders of Gâ—nâ—va to be receivable Which as he knew very well and all his party will own to be utterly inconsistent with the meaning and intent of them who first brought them in at Geneva So will it both cut of all pretense for them that is derived from any other ground and leave the claim also to be limited by that which the preservation of the whole Church and the unity thereof will require In the mean time the Order of Bishops and the superiority thereof above the order of Priests stands exemplified in the person of S. Iames the brother of our Lord by so ancient testimonies concurring with such circumstances of Scripture marked out Bishop of Jerusalem whither one of the twelve or noâ— In that indeed the reports of the ancients are not reconcileable But if not why should S. Paul be so careful to protest that he received not his authority from him no more then from S. Peter and S. Iohn Gal. I. 18. 19. II. 9. 12. Could there be any question of receiving his authority from any but those of the Twelve Therefore and for other reasons elsewhere alleged I count it as shouldred by most probâ—bilities so a subject to least difficulty to believe him to be Iames the Son of Alphoeus as having nothing of consequence to answer but why Hegâ—sippus writing so soon after the Apostles hath not remembred it But of that let each man think as he finds most reasonable Those testimonies of antiquity which expound those circumstances of Scripture which mark him out for the head of that Church do not discharge him from the care of other Churches especially of the circumcision which perhaps by his care together with
S. Peter and Iohn were wonne to Christianity according to the division which S. Paul hath recorded unto us Gal. II. 9. 10. whereupon we see him exercise the the office of an Apostle to the Churches of the Jews dispersions by his Epistle Iames I. 1. But let us proceed S. Paul and Barnabas ordained their Presbyters Church by Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. XIV 23. And appointed Titus to constitute Presbyters in Creete City by City Tit. I. 5. Be it granted because Epiphanius hath said it and it is a thing in it self reasonable that in some places the number of believers was so small that there needed but a Bishop to govern and a Deacon or Deacons to attend upon the execution of his orders That there should be Churches constituted by the name of such Churches in such Provinces and no more people any where signified would make them Churches that might be not that were Tertullians saying Ubi tres Ecclesia licet laici Where there be three though of the Laity there is a Church is not meant of such Churches But that three Christians or two in our Saviours terms Mat. XVIII 19. that meet to serve God are a Church because so assembled being of the Church At least in mother Churches of mother Cities where the Apostles made their chiefe residence because the harvest was there greatest and likewise their Ministers that there should be no more Christians then one Bishop could govern and teach during the Apostles time seems to me to cary no appearance of truth And to imagine that those who were designed for Pastors of Churches in being were alwaies resident in the mother Church though occasions whereof there is no rule might and must cause their presence there many times the reason of their office admits not But if we admit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie more then one in a City and a Church it seems not to be refutable that they were appropriate to those Churches The name of Presbyters of such and such Churches bâ—ing relative to the people of their respective Churches Further S. Paul sâ—nding to Ephesus called to him the Elders of the Church whom by and by he saith The Holy Ghost had placed Bishops over his flock to feed the Church of God Act. XX. 17. 28. Here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by virtue of the article may referre us either to the whole Church or to that part of the Church which the speech most concerned or in fine to the very Church of Ephesus There is a conjecture that S. Paul makes them Bishops by saying that God had made them Bishops of his Church who were Presbyters when he sent for them But I allow not those of the Church of Rome that our Lord made the Bread and Wiâ—e of his last Supper his Body and Blood by saying This is my Body this is my Blood But by that which he did before he said it For the same reason therefore I cannot allow that S. Paul here makes them Bishops of Presbyters by saying God hath made you Bishops in his Church not declaring by any thing that he sayes or does any intent so to do thereby to be understood But I cannot but consider that Irâ—naeus III. 14. tells us that S. Paul at this time called together the Bishops and Presbyters Qui erant ab Epheso reliquis proximis civitatibus Which were of Ephesus and other the next Citâ—â—s and S. Jerome ad Evagr. that he called together omnes illos apud quâ—s praedicaverat All those wiâ—h whom he had preached Which if we grant the article of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will referrs us to that part of the Church that was concerned whereas the words as they lie as he sent to Ephesus and called the Elders of the Church referre us to the Church there mentioned of Ephesus When S. Paul addresses his Episâ—le to the Philippians together with the Bishops and Deacons Phil. I. 2. when in his instructions to Timothy he passes immediately from Bishops to Deacons 1 Tim. III. 1-8 It is said that the Bishops of the next Cities together with their Deacons were present or ordinarily resident on the Capital City according to that which I said even now of Ephesus And it may be said that they were Bishops and Deacons at large in respect to the Church at large not applyed to the functions either of Bishop or Priests in this or that Church And truly I do remember the words of Clemens ad Corinth speaking of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Preaching therefore the Word by Cities and by Countries and Baptizing they made the first-fruits of them whom they had baptized Bishops and Deacons of those that should believe And that S. Paul addresses his Epistles to the Church that is at Corinth and to all that called on the name of the Lord in all Achaia 2 Cor. I. 1. So that they provided for the ordering of them that should become or were become Christians before they were yet cast into Churches And it is reasonable to think that those were ordained in the mother Cities and there stood upon their guard expecting opportunity of framing their flocks And that this was a cause why the titles of Bishops and Presbyters are promiscuously used and attributed But I cannot therefore yield that one Bishop with one or more Deacons could serve the Churches of Philippi Corinth or Ephesus Or that as yet no Governours were affected and applied to several Churches For when S. Paul directs Timothy to dispose of the stock of the Church for the Honour that is the maintenance of widows and Presbyters to receive accusations against Presbyters under two or three witnesses and to rebuke them that should offend before all 1 Tim. V. 2. 16-28 it seems not reasonable to imagine Timothy the Judge of the Biships of inferiour Churches as regularly every Bishop is of his own Presbyters that he should rebuke the Bishop of Forâ—iâ—e though inferiour Churches before the people of his Church of Ephesus that he should dispose of the stock of his Church at Ephesus upon Widows or Presbyters of other Churches then that at Ephesus But rather that the proceeding of Timothy is prescribed as a â—orm for the proceeding of others in their respective Churches Another opinion saith That the Deacons whom S. Paul puts next to Bishops are Presbyters called also Ministers of God and Christ as Timothy 1 Thes III. 2. S. Paul himself 2 Cor. II. 23. Ministers of the New Testament as S. Paul 2 Cor. III. 6. Ministers of the Gospel as S. Paul Ephe. III. 7. Ministers of Righteousness into whom the Ministers of Satan are transformed 2 Cor. XI 15. Ministers of the Church as S. Paul Col. I. 25. Observing that the vulgar Latine of S. Jerome translates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phil. I. 1. 1 Tim. III. 8. Diaconos elsewhere in thirty places Ministros and concluding that these Deacons are the same with Presbyters under the Apostles and the Bishops their
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
in refusing Marcion her communion because excommunicated by his own Father the Bishop of Sinope in Pontus in bar to the pretense of Soveraignty in the Church of Rome For if Marcions Father Bishop of Synope in Pontus if Synesius Bishop of Ptolomais in Cyrenaica could oblige the Church of Rome and all Churches not to admit unto the communion of the Church those whom they had excluded because the unity of the whole could not be preserved otherwise then is not the infinite Power of one Church but the regular Power of all the mean which the Apostles provided for the attaining of Unity in the whole Not as if the Church of Rome might not have admitted Marcion to communion with it selfe had it appeared that he had been excluded without such a cause as obliged any Church to excommunicate For in doubtful causes the concernment being general it was very regular to have recourse to the chief Churches by the authority whereof the consent of the rest might be obtained But could it have appeared that such a thing had been done without any cause then would it have been regular for any Church to have no regard to such a sentence In the next place the consideration of Montanus his businesse at Rome there alledged shall evidence some part of my intent Being condemned and refused by the Bishops and Churches of Asia he sends to Rome to sollicite a higher Church and of more consequence to the whole to own the spirit by which he pretended to speak and to admit those stricter orders which he pretended to introduce A pretense for those that would have the Pope Soveraign but not so good as they imagine unlesse they could make it appear that he made the like address to no other Church but that of Rome For my part finding in other occasions frequent and plentiful remembrance of recourse had to other Churches as well as to Rome in maters of common concernment I find it necessary to impute the silence of his other addresses to the scarcity of records left the Church Not doubting that he and the Churches of Phrygia ingaged with him would do their utmost to promote the credit of his Prophesies by perswading all Churches to admit the Orders which he pretended to introduce And how much greater the authority of the Church of Rome was then that of an ordinary Church so much more had he prevailed by gaining it That no man may imagine that all lay in it nor yet that the consent of it signified no more then the consent of every Church For consider the Church of Carthage and the choler of Tertullian expressed in the beginning of his Book de Exhortatione Castitulis against Pope Aâ—phyrine for admitting adulterers to Penance And in consequence thereunto consider what we have upon record of Historical truth from S. Jerome Catal. in Tertull. and the authorities quoted afore that Tertullian falling to the Doctrine of Montanus upon affronts received from the Clergy of Rome set up a communion of his own at Carthage which continued till S. Augustines time by whom his followers were reduced to the Catholick Church For what occasion had Tertullian to break from the Church of Carthage because of the affront received from the Church of Rome in rejecting Montanus had not the Church of Carthage followed the Church of Rome in it The same is the consequence of that which passed in that famous debate of Victor Pope about breaking with the Churches of Asia because they kept not Easter on the Lords day as most Churches did but with the Jewes observing the Passion upon the full Moon celebrated the Resurrection of third day after that For might not or ought not the Church of Rome refuse to communicate with these Churches had the cause been valuable In case of Heresy in case of any demand destructive to the unity of the Church you will say that not onely the Church of Rome but any Church whatsoever both might and ought to disclaim the Churches of Asia But I have to say again that in any such case there is a difference between that which is questioned for such and that which is such and ought to be taken for such And that nothing can lightly be presumed to be such that any Church seems to professe But that in reducing such unavoidable debates from questionable to be determined the authority the chief Churches is by the constitution of the Church requisite to go before and make way towards obtaining the consent of the whole And that it cannot be thought that Victor would have undertook such a thing had it not belonged to him in behalf of his Church to declare himself in the businesse in case there had been cause All this while I would not have any man imagine that Victor having withdrawn his communion from the Churches of Asia the rest of Christendom were necessarily to think themselves obliged to do the same It is true there were two motives that might carry Victor to do it For seeing the Council of Nicaea did afterwards decree the same that he laboured to induce the Churches of Asia to it is too late to dispute whither side was in the right For that which was for the advancement of Christianity at the time of that Council was certainly for the advancement thereof at the time of this dispute And though in S. Johns time it might be and was without doubt for the best to comply with the Jews in maters of that indifference for the gaining of opportunities to induce them to become Christians yet when the breach between the Synagogue and the Church was once complete that reason being taken away the reason of uniformity in the Church upon which the unity thereof so much nependeth was to take place And therefore a man may say with respect to those Churches that the zeal of their Predecessors credit seduced them into that contentiousnesse which humane frailty ingendreth And those that after the decree of the Council persevered in the same practice are not without cause listed among Hereticks taking that name largely to comprehend also Schismaticks So I allow that Victor had just cause to insist upon his point But it is also â—vident that it would have been an increase of authority and credit to Victor and to his Church to seeme to give law to those Churches by reducing them to his Rule For reputation and credit with the world necessarily follows those that prevail And Victor being a man as I have granted his adversaries were might be moved with this advantage as much as with the right of his cause But though I allow that Victor had reason to insist upon his opinon yet I do no way allow that he had reason to interrupt the communion of the Church because those of Asia did not yield to it The mater it self not being of consequence to produce such an effect noâ— uniformity in all things necessary though conducing to the unity of the Church And therefore I do no
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
then a Patriarch it will neverthelesse be questionable how faâ—re it injoyes the same rights throughout the West or rather unquestionable that he did noâ— consecrate all the â—iâ—â—ops of the West as he of Alexandria did all the Bishops of Egypt and he of Antiochia all those of the Eastern Diocese On the other side it will be unquestionable that all causes that conceâ—n the whole Church are to resort to it And if Innocent I. mean none but those when he sayes that they are excepted from the Canon of Nicaea that forbids appeals Epist ad Victricium Rothâ—m He sayes nothing but that which the constitution of the Church justifies Bâ—t the cases produced before out of S. Cypriane show that there was muâ—h lâ—ft for custoâ—â— to determine Nay rules of discipline which in my opinon the good of the whole Church then requirâ—d that they should be common to all the West â—re of this rank noâ— could any of then ever oblige the West without the Bishop of Rome But that he alone should give rules to ty all the West may have had a regular beginning from voluntary references of Himerius Bishop of Farracona in Spain to Syricius of Exuperius Bishop of Tolouse and Victricius of Roven to Innocentius but argues not that it is the originall right of that Church But that it hath increased by custome to that height as to help to make up a claime for that infinite power which I deny in stead of that regular Power which I acknowledge Judge now by reason supposing the obligation upon all of holding unity in the Church and the dependance of Churches the mean to compass it For this will oblige us to part here with the Parallel of the Empire which having a Soveraign upon earth will require the Ministers of thereof immediate or subordinate to be of equall power in equall rights Praefects Lieurenants and Governours But the Head of the Church being in heaven and his Body on earth being to be maintained in Unity by an Aristocraty of Superiours and Inferiours whither was it according to the intent of those who ordered the pre-eminence of greater Churches thâ—t that the Church of the greatest City should be equall in power to the head Churches of o her Dioceses Or that the general reason should take place between them all an eminence of power following their precedence in ranck So that whensoever it become requisite to limite this generality by positive constitutions the pre-eminence of right to fall upon one exclusively to oâ—hers Surely though we suppose that all Christendom of their free consent agreed in this Order yet must we needs argue from the uniformity of it that it must needs come froâ— the ground setled by the Apostles For it is manifest that the rights of the head Churches of Provinces had a beginning beyond the memory of all records of the Church which testifie the being of them at the time of all businesse which they relate That the head Churches of Diocesses were not advanced in a moment by the act of the Empiâ—e but moulded asore as â—t were and prepared to receiveâ— that impression of regular eminence over inferiouâ— Churches which the act of the State should stampe the Cities with over inâ—â—riour Cities yet cannot be maintained that the greatest respect was and is by the Apostles act to be given to the greatest Churches that is the Churches of greaâ—est Cities and yet that the â—riâ—â—ledges necessarily accruing by positive constitution might as justly have been placed upon the head Church of any Diocess as upon that of Rome I know I have no thanks for this of the Romanists for as S. Paul sâ—yes How shall I serve God and please men both in such a difference as this but seeing the canon of Nicaea doth necessarily confine the Church of Rome to a regular Power is it not a great signe of truth that those things which appear in the proceedings of the Church do concur to evidence a ground for the Rule of it inferring that pre-eminence which the Churches of Alexandria and Antiochia cannot have but the beginning of the canon establishing ancient custome settleth Let us see some of those proceedings After the Council of Nicaea the Arians having Eusâ—bius of Nicomedia for their Head desire to be heard at Rome by Pope Julius in Council concerning their proceedings against Athanasius Here shall I believe as some learned men conjecture that Pope Julius â—s meerly an Arbitratoâ— named by one part y whom the other could not refuse and that any Bishop or at least any Primate might have been named and must have been admitted as well as he Truly I cannot considering that their hope being to winne themselves credit by his sentence I must needs think that they addresse themselves to him by whose sentence they might hope to draw the greatest prejudice on their own side It cannot be denyed indeed that whereas in a case of that moment the last resort is necessarily to the whole Church whither in council or by reference by referring themselves they brought upon their cause that prejudice which necessarily lights upon all those that renounce the award of the Arbitrators whom they have referred themselves to in case they stand not to the sencentence But though they had not been chargeable with this had they not referred themselves yet must they needs have been judged by the Bishop of Rome among the rest of the Church and in the first place and his sentence must needs weigh more towards the sentence of the whole Church then the sentence of any other Arbitrator could have done For let me ask in the mean time is this an appeal to Pope Julius or to him and his Council let the sequeâ—e judge For he that condemns the Arians for not appearing at the Council which they had occasioned he that condemns the Council of Antiochia at the dedication of the golden Church presently after where they were present for revereing the Creed of Nicaea and condemning S. Athanasius notwithstanding the sentence of Julius and his Council necessarily shows us that they were not quite out of their wits to bestow so much pains for procuring a decree at the Conncil of Antiochia that must have been void ipso facto because the mater had been sentenced at Rome that is in the last resort afore Therefore I coneive Julius had right to complain that they took upon them to regulate the Churches without him nor can I much blame Socrates or Sâ—zomenus in justifying his complaint Because Athanasius his cause as well as the Creed of Nicaea concerned the whole Church And for them to condemn him whom Julius and his Council held at the instance of the Arians had justified was to make a breach in the Church though at present we say nothing of the Faith Neither had they reason to alledge the good they had done the Church of Rome by their compliance in the cause of Novatianus or to expect the like from Julius in a cause of
in the visible communion of the same offices of Christianity if it be free for the parts of iâ— to withdraw themselves from the Lawes which have been received by the whole to limit the circumstances of their communion though not the conditions of it I have but one point more to mention before I leave this subject concerning what offices every degree is by Gods Law or by Canon Law able to minister in the Church necessary here to be mentioned where I have showed what persons are inabled to give Law to the Church and to do by consequence those acts wherein the execution of Law consisteth For by the premises the truth of that which I have proposed in the Right of the Church more clearly appears then it could appear there that the offices of Christianity which severall degrees are inabled to minister do argue the interest of those respective degrees in the Government of the Church Ordinations therefore wholly reserved to the Bishop as not to be made without his consent Saving such Ordinations of inferiour Ministers as not much concerning the state of his Church he may by way of delegation referre to his Presbyters or rurall Bishops Excommunications likewise as concerning the beeing of every Christian as a member of the Church As for the assistance concurrence and consent of the Presbyters of each Cathedrall Church in and to the Ordination of Presbyters and Deacons I referre my selfe to that which I have said elsewhere Seeing it were a thing ridiculous to require that all the Presbyters of each Diocese should concurre to all such Ordinances As for the ordaining of Bishops the rule is plain that being a part of the Provincial Synode no meere Bishop is to be ordained without the consent of the Synode the Bishop of the Mother City alwayes concurring Though all reason requiring that he who is to govern be taken out of the bosome of those whom he is to govern there is a right and priviledge of nomination due to the Clergy and of approbation or suffrage to the people of the Church For it is a thing most certain that the interest of the People in the Elections of Bishops in the ancient Church which is still more clear in the Election of Presbyters was grounded onely upon the knowledge which they must needs have of persons proposed either to approve them which was called their suffrage or otherwise Not that they had any right to go before their leaders the Clergy in nomination or to oblige the consent of the Synode of the Province Though it is true that many times they did prevent both and prevail and might without inconvenience so do when the eminence of some person was so discernable that their grosser judgements could noâ— mistake in the choice though transgressing their rank in demanding even the worthiest before their turn came The same rule holds in the ordaining of superiour Bishops seeing they have all their Church their People their Clergy and their Synode The difference that S. Austine Breviculo Collationis III. diei observes in the consecrating of the Pope that it is done by â—he Bishop of Ostia not by any Metropolitane is an exception to a rule So was Dionysâ—us ordained in the year CCLIX if we beliâ—ve the acts of S. Laurence And therefore that Pelagius I. was ordained by two Bishops and a Priest of Ostia as his life in Anastasius relateth by the strictness of the Nicâ—ne Canon voids it For how can he have caried the greater part of the Bishops The condescension of the Apostles Canon and consent ex postfacto might make it good and valid by the same reason as afore The state of particular Christians is not of such consequence to the Châ—rch that it should be regularly the businesse of a Synod though for the assistance concurâ—ence and consent of the Clergy of each Church I referre my self to that which I have said elsewhere â—nd which would be too particular to be debated in this abridgement As for the mater of Penance in things that come not to the knowledge of the Church I have no cause to repent me of thâ—t which I have said in the Right of the Church where I have showed that Pâ—nance and Absolution in the inward Court of the Conscience extends as farre as the Communion of the â—ucharist from which Penance excludes and to which Absolution restores That all Priests and none but Pâ—iests receive by their Ordination power of celebrating the Eucharist that is to say of consecrating and communicating the same and that it cannot be done by any other without very great Sacrilege And that for an argument of the Power of the Keys in the hand of every Priest though limitable by the rule and custome of the Church to the inward Court of the conscience That the offices of Preaching and Baptizing â—re regularly communicable to Deacons but in case of necessity even to thoâ—e of the people alwaies by delegation from their Superiors the Bishops In sign whereof neither was it the cusâ—ome that any man should consecrate the Eucharist Preach or Baptize in the Bishops prâ—sâ—nce but himself or by his appointment As for the reading of the Scriptures and the sâ—nging of Psalms in the Church it is so well known to have been the Deacons office in the ancient Church that there were severall ranks of Deacons appointed for those sâ—vâ—ral works Lectores Psâ—lâ—ae which now like those in the Church of Rome help to make the inferiour Orders the rule of the Church being grounded upon undeniable wisdome and the authority of S. Paul forbidding novâ—ces to be promoted that exercise in the inferiour offices of the Clergy might be a condition requisiâ— to advance unto superiour degrees in the Clergy Now for thâ— celebrating and blessing of Mariage by Priests only I must go no further at present because having showed that it is to be allowed by the Church I have not yet showed that it is to be solemnized by the blessing of the Church CHAP. XXI Of the times of God service By what Title of his Law the first day of the week is kept Holy How the Sabbath is to be sanctified by Moses Law The fourth Commandment the ground upon which the Apostles inacted it Vpon what ground the Church limiteth the times of Gods service Of Easter and the Lent Fast afore it Of the difference of meats and measure of Fasting Of the keeping o four Lords Birthday and other Festivals and the regular hours of the day for Gods service HAving thus showed first what are the Powers of the Church and then in whose hands they rest and having said before that the determining and limiting of all circumstances for the exercise of those offices of Gods service for the Communion whereof the Church stands and also of thoâ—e qualities which render men capable to communicate in that same is totally reserved to the Church so farr as Gods Law hath not prevented the determination of it We are now to consider the
unto his people which obliged them to resort thither as we see they did by the beginning of Samuel but that this purpose being declared void by the captivity of the Ark the high places came to be permitted again as before the Ark had begunne to settle in Shiloh In the mean time I hold the opinion neither blameable nor improbable which the best learned do advance for the beginning of Synagogues in the Land of promise that is to say of places where the people might and were to assemble for the service of God which was not confined to the Ark To wit that these high places were afterwards deputed to the residence of Prophets and their Disciples and to that service of God which all Israel could not be present at in the Temple Though those that submitted not to the Law as the determinaâ—ion of Gods choice to Jerusalem did not cease to offer sacrifices and burn incense in the High places especially in such times when Idolatry was grown so strong that it could not be punished by exterminating those Cities that were found to have a hand in it according to the Law Deut. XV. For it is evident that offering sacrifice in the High places was a great mean to palliate Idolatry and for that reason had been forbidden by the Law But what reason hath any man to reject this opinion having no beter evidence for any other place or opportunity for any religious assembly of Gods people but onely that before the Ark for so long time Indeed in those Psalms that are intitled to Asaph from LXXIII to LXXXIII there is mention more then once of other Houses of God besides the Temple But of those Psalms and the author and time of them there is difficulty made whither written by Asaph or afterwards given to his posterity to sing in the Temple For seeing they not onely seem to point out Nebuchadnezzar by the wilde bore out of the wood LXXX 13. but also the time when they had no Prophets LXXXIV 9. either we must grant that these things are said by the spirit of Prophesy or that they were written in after times I do indeed continue rather of the former judgement But I spare not to allege the uncertainty for an evidence how farr they were from having any written Law for the building of Synagogues which nevertheless was a thing so necessary for maintenance of their Religion and the service of God according to it that no man in his right senses can question whither they were tied to it or not Be it therefore uncertain how farr Synagogues were propagated in the Land of promise before the Babylonian Captivity For after the return which is the â—oot of account for the time from whence all Idolatry was detested by them from this time when their dispersions among the Nations began together with their detestation of their Idolatries be it resolved both that they did take upon them the building of Synagoues for that service not confined to the Temple which they found themselves tied to frequent And that they ought so to doe Now when Christianity first came in not severed from Judaism but distinguished by some offices namely of Baptism and the Eucharist tha is to say by such Prayers as were made at both it is no marvail that the Christians frequenting the service of God together with the Jews either the in Temple or in the Synagogue did content themselves to celebrate the offices proper to Christianity in private Houses For I confess when S. Luke says that they broke bread that is celebrated the Eucharist as the Syriack translates it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is at home or from house to house Act. II. 46. I rather think this was done in private houses though Beza might be my author that they had houses set apart for that purpose if I meant to strain mine opinion beyond the evidence of it But of the Church of Corinth I say not the same where I find no appearance by S. Pauls Epistles that there was any correspondence between the Jews and the Christians or any expectation that the service of God according to Christianity â—â—â—â—eeding Judaiâ—â—â— might convert Synagogues into Churches And when S. Paul says 1 Cor. XI 22. Have yee not houses to eat and to drink in or despise yee the Church of God and shame those that have not not onely the antitheâ—â—s between houses to eat and drink in and the Church of God but also the difference between shaming the poor and despising the Church of God seems to require that a Church there signifie a Church that is the place not the people Though not doubting that the assemblies of the Christians were there held many times in ordinary houses and upper rooms Acts I. 13. XX. 8. but finding the Church at Corinth so well setled that if those of Jerusalem contributed their estates to the maintenance of the people of the Church no man can marvail that they should disburâ—â— for a Church How â—arr then the Church began to be poâ—â—â—ssed of places set apart for the offices of Christianity seems to depend upon two points severally in severall places The probability of persecution and the compliance with Judaism Unless those two be reducible to one in regard of the great appearance that at the beginning all probability of persecution depended upon the interruption of compliâ—nce and correspondence with the Jews This all reason justifieth that the Christians so far as there was appearanâ—e of probability that they might injoy the liberty of meeting at certain known places did from the beginning set apart certain places for that purpose either uâ—on contribution of the Churches or upon the liberal devotion of particular persons And for the proof of this I think I need no more then the visible example of the Jews and the advantage which their Religion and the truth of God had found by by having set places to which not onely their own might resort to serve God out of a profession of his truth but even the Gentiles be wonne from the worship of Idols by becoming acquainâ—ed with the profession which they celebrated at such certain places The effect of this advantage is evident to us by the Acts of the Apostles and the mention which there we find of their preaching in the Jews Synagogues For commonly there is also mention of devout men and devout women and such as worshipped God of the Gentiles Being indeed those that were converted from the worship of Idols to the true God whom the Jews worshipped And therefore S. Paul when he sheweth that Christianity had the like advantage by the resort of Gentiles unto their assemblies 1 Cor. XVI 23. makes me think it still more probable that they had then at Corinth certain known places set apart for their Assemblies Onely I will adde the evidence of common sense how much more opportunity there must needs be for companies that are grown numerous to assemble in certain known places set
Hereticks Of those whose Baptism S. Cyprian excepts against Epist ad Jubaianum it is manifest that the Church voiding the baptism of the Samosatenians by the Canon of Nicaea the baptism of other Hereticks by the Canons of Arles and Laodicea must needs make void the baptisms of the greatest part being evidently further removed from the truth which Christianity professeth than those whose baptism the said Canons disallow And though it is admitted according to the dictates of the School that these words I baptize thee in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost contain a sufficient form of this Sacrament Yet that holdeth upon supposition that they who use it do admit the true sense of this word I baptize intending thereby to make him a Christian that is to oblige him to the profession of Christianity whom they baptize Which what reason can any man have to presume of in behalf of those who renounce their baptism once received in the Church of England to be baptized again For all reason of charitable presumptions ceaseth in respect of those who root up the ground thereof by Schism and by departing from the Unity of the Church And besides that wee do not see them declare any profession at all according to which they oblige themselves either to believe or live which is reason enough to oblige others not to take them for Christians not demanding to be taken for Christians by professing themselves Christians wee see the world over-spread with the vermine of the Enthusiasts who accepting of the Scriptures for Gods word upon a perswasion of the dictate of Gods Spirit not supposing the reason for which they are Christians do consequently believe as much in the dictates of the same that are not grounded upon the Word of God as upon those that are So that the imbracing of the Scriptures makes them no more Christians than Mahomets acknowledging Moses and Christ in the Alcoran makes him a Christian For whosoever is perswaded that hee hath the Spirit of God not supposing that it is given him in consideration that hee professeth Christianity supposing therefore the truth thereof in order of reason before hee receive the Spirit may as well as Mahomet in the Alcoran frame both the Old and New Testament to whatsoever sense his imagination which hee takes for Gods Spirit shall dictate This reason why it is necessary to follow the forms which the Church prescribes is more constraining in celebrating the Sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist as more nearly concerning the Christianity and salvation of Christians But yet it takes place also in the rest of those Offices whereby the Church pretends to conduct particular Christians in the way to life everlasting Hee that supposes that which I have proved how necessary it is that every sheep of the flock should acknowledg the common Pastor of his Church that the Pastor should acknowledg his flock upon notice of that Christianity which every one of them in particular professeth though hee may acknowledg that originally there is no cause why every Bishop should not prescribe himself the form of it in his own Church yet supposing that experience hath made it appear requisite for the preservation of Unity by Uniformity that the same form should be used must needs finde it requisite that it be prescribed by a Synod greater or less At such time as publick Penance was practiced in the Church when the Penitents were dismissed before the Eucharist with the Blessing and Prayers of the Church can it seem reasonable to any man that any Prayers should be used in celebrating an action of that consequence but those which the like authority prescribeth So much the more if it be found requisite that the practice of private Penance and of the inner Court of the Conscience be maintained in the Church For how should it be fit that every Priest that is trusted with the Power of the Keyes in this Court should exercice it in that form which his private fansy shall dictate Of Ordinations I say the same as of Confirmations Of the Visitation of the Sick and of Mariage as of Penance Onely considering that it is not likely that the reason whereupon the celebration of Mariage is an Office of the Church deriving from those limitations which the precept of our Lord hath fastned upon the Mariage of Christians should be so well understood by all that are to solemnize Matrimony as to do their Office both so as the validity of the contract and so as the performance of that Office which the parties undertake doth require In fine having showed that the Service of God upon the Regular Hours of the day is a Custom both grounded upon the Scripture and tending to the maintenance and advancement of Christian Piety It remains that I say that the form and measure of that devotion which all estates are to offer to God at those hours cannot otherwise be limited to the edification of all than by the determination of the Church They that please themselves with that monstrous imagination that no Christian is to be taught what or how to pray till hee finde himself inabled by the Spirit of God moving him to pray will easily finde that they can never induce the greater part of Christians to think themselves capable of discharging themselves to God in so high an Office as the sense of their Christianity requires They that observe the performance of those who take it upon them shall finde them sacrifice to God that which his Law forbiddeth the mater of their Prayers not consisting with our common Christianity For of a truth it is utterly unreasonable to imagine that God should grant inspirations of the Holy Ghost for such purposes as our common Christianity furnisheth And therefore the consequences of so false a presumption must be either ridiculous or pernicious Now if any man say that hee admits not the premises upon which I inferr these consequences it remaines that the dispute rest upon those premises and come not to these consequences Onely let him take notice that I have showed him the true consequences of my own premises which hee must reprove as inconsistent with Christianity if hee take upon him to blame the premises for any fault that hee findeth with their true consequences And to say truth as the substance and mater of Christianity is concerned in all these Offices though in some more in some less and by consequence in the form of celebrating them So the Unity of the Church is generally concerned in the form of celebrating them all in as much as any difference insisted upon as necessary and not so admitted by others is in point of fact a just occasion of division in the Church And therefore all little disputes of these particulars necessarily resort to the general Whether God hath commanded the Unity of the Church in the external communion of the members thereof or not Which having concluded by the premises I conceive I have founded
a prejudice peremptorily over-ruling all the pety exceptions that our time hath produced to dissolve this Unity which ought to have been preferred before them had they been just and true as none of them proveth CHAP. XXIV The Service of God to be prescribed in a known Language No pretense that the Latine is now understood The means to preserve Unity in the Church notwithstanding The true reason of a Sacrifice inforceth Communion in the Eucharist What occasions may dispense in it Communion in both kindes commanded the People Objections answered Who is chargeable with the abuse I Would now make one Controversie more how much soever I pretend to abate Controversies than hitherto hath been disputed between the Reformation and the Church of Rome because though wee hear not of it in our books of Controversies yet in deed and in practice it is the most visible difference between the exercice of Religion in the two professions that you can name For what is it that men go to Church for but to hear a Sermon on one side and to hear a Mass on the other side And yet among so many books of Controversies who hath disputed whether a man is rather to go to Church to hear a Sermon or not to hear a Mass but to receive the Eucharist This is the reason indeed why I dispute not this Controversie because the Mass should be the Eucharist but by abuses crept in by length of time is become something else untill I can state the question upon such terms as may make the reason of Reformation visible Whether the celebration of the Eucharist is to be done in a Language which the people for the most part understand not in Latine as the Mass supposing the most part understand it not is first to be setled before wee inquire what it is that Christians chiefly assemble themselves for Though the question concerns not the Eucharist any more than the other offices of Gods publick Service onely as the Eucharist if it prove the principal of them is principally concerned in it I am then to confesse in the beginning that those of the Church of Rome have a strong and weighty objection against mee why they ought not to give way that the Service of the Church though in a form preseribed by the Church as I require should be celebrated in the Vulgar Languages which every people understand The objection is drawn from that which wee have seen come to pass For the Service of the Church the form and terms of it being submitted to the construction of every one because in English hath given occasion to people utterly unable to judg either how agreeable maters excepted against are to Christianity or how necessary the form to the preservation of unity in the Church first to desire a change then to seek it in a way of fact though by dissolving the Unity of this Church For hee that maintains as I do that whatsoever defects the form established may have are not of waight to perswade a change in case of danger to Unity And secondly that those who have attempted the change have not had either the lot or the skill to light upon the true defects of it but to change for the worse in all things considerable must needs affirm that otherwise they could never have had the means to possess mens fansies with those appearances of reason for it which have made them think themselves wise enough to undertake so great a change And truly there is nothing so dangerous to Christianity as a superficial skill in the Scriptures and maters of the Church Which may move them that are puffed up with it to attempt that for the best which it cannot inable them for to see that so it is indeed Whereas they who hold no opinion in maters above their capacity because concerning the state of the whole are at better leisure to seek their salvation by making their benefit of the order provided Seeing then it cannot be denied that the benefit of having the Service of God prescribed by the Church in our Vulgar English hath occasioned so great a mischief as the destruction of it it seems the Church of Rome hath reason to refuse children edge tools to cut themselves with in not giving way to the publick Service of God in the Vulgar Languages Unless it could be maintained that no form ought to be prescribed which is all one as to say that there ought to be no Church in as much as there can be no Unity in the Faith of Christ and the Service of God according to the same otherwise Now that you may judg what effect this objection ought to have wee must remember S. Pauls dispute upon another occasion indeed but from the same grounds and reasons which are to be alleged for the edification of the Church in our case God had stirred up many Prophets in the Church of Corinth together with those who celebrated the mysteries of Christianity in unknown Languages and others that could interpret the same in the Vulgar partly out of an intent to manifest to the Gentiles and Jews his own presence in his Church including and presupposing the truth of Christianity but partly also for the instruction of the people novices in Christianity for a great part in the truth of it and for the celebration of those Offices wherewith hee is to be served by his Church It came to pass that divers puffed up with the conceit of Gods using them to demonstrate his presence among his people took upon them to bring forth those things which the Spirit of God moved them to speak in unknown Languages at the publick assemblies of the Church Who might indeed admire the work of God but could neither improve their knowledg in his truth nor exercice their devotion in his praises or those prayers to him which were uttered in an unknown Language This is that which the Apostle disputeth against throughout the fourteenth Chapter of his first Epistle to the Corinthians making express mention of Prayers Blessings which I have showed to be the consecration of the Eucharist and Psalms ver 14-17-26 and concluding v. 27 28. that no man speak any thing in the Church though it be that doctrine those prayers or praises of God which his own Spirit suggesteth unless there be some body present that can interpret Which what case can there fall out for the Church which it reacheth not For you see S. Paul excludeth out of the Church even the dictates of Gods Spirit evidencing his presence in the Church by miraculous operations unless they may be interpreted for the edification and direction of the Church What can hee then admit for the Service of God in the name of his Church or for the instruction thereof which it can neither be instructed by nor offer unto him for his service Nay what cause can there be why the Church should meet according to S. Paul if there be nothing done that is understood What
requiring of those who acknowledge the same absolute conformity in things altogether needlesse to the unity of the Church the true end of all due Power in the Church For were conformity in this point necessary to the unity of the Church had the Power of the Church of Rome and of the Pope in behalf of it been such by virtue of the first instituting of it as might have required it why then was it not required from the beginning that the service of God through the whole Empire should be celebrated in Latine being the language which the mother Church of the mother City did use and farr more frequented then in Greece than now in the West which is forced to use it Seeing then it appeareth that there is nothing at all to be alleged for so great an inconvenience but that which I have alleged for it and which I acknowledge to be truly alleged and justly but not justly admitted it remaineth that the Church is provided by God of other Laws the observation whereof is and would be a cure to the danger alleged from the change of the publick service of God into the vulgar languages For this danger proceedeth from nothing but from the false pretense of absolute and infallible authority in the Church which is indeed limited by the truth of that Christianity whereupon the Church is grounded and for the maintenance whereof it subsisteth For though this pretense may be a mean to contain simple people in obedience to any thing which shall be imposed so long as they know not any thing better that they ought to have yet if conscience be once awaked with reasons convincing that the authority instituted by God in his Church is abused to the prejudice and hinderance of the salvation of Gods people it is no marvail either that they should neglect all their interest of this world to seek themselves redress or that they should mistake themselves in seeking it and think the redress to be the destroying of all authority in the Church So that the preventing of danger by the necessary reformation of abuses in Church maters must not be thought to consist in pretenses as inconsistent with the common good of the Churches as with the truth of Christianity But in submitting to those bounds which the grounds of Christianity evidently establisheth And which unlesse Christianity make people more untractable then all the rudenesse which they are born and bred with makes barbarous Nations and wilde Beasts the sense of those mischiefs which difference of Religion hath brought in and maintained in Christendome must needs have disposed them to imbrace and to cherish for the future avoiding of the same In the next place supposing the Eucharist as the rest of the service to be celebrated in a language vulgarly understood we are to debate whither the Eucharist require Communion or whether the private Masses now allowed and countenanced in the Church of Rome be of the institution of our Lord and his Apostles Nor shall I need to use many words to free the term of private Masses from the exception which is sometimes made That all Masses are publick actions of the Church repeating the Sacrifice of Christ crucified to the benefit of his Church For seeing the term of a private Mass signifieth a thing visible The celebration of that Eucharist whereof no body but the Priest that consecrates it doth communicate I ask no man leave to use the term signifying no more by it but putting the rest to debate whither as de facto in the Church of Rome so de jure according to the institution of our Lord and his Apostles the sacrifice of Christ crucified is and ought to be either repeated or represented and commended by celebrating the Eucharist so as no body but the Priest that consecrates to communicate or whether the institution of our Lord require that Christians communicate in the Eucharist which they celebrate A dispute wherein nothing that is said in the Scripture concerning the order and practice of our Lord and his Apostles can leave any doubt For though there may be mention of celebrating the Eucharist where there is no mention of communicating in it which is an argument meerly negative not from the Scripture but from this or that Scripture and of no consequence to say S. Paul 1 Cor. XIV 14-17 1 Tim. II. 1-6 mentioneth the celebration of the Eucharist not mentioning any Communion therefore no body did communicate yet are we farr from the least inckling of any circumstance to show that there was this Sacrament celebrated when there was none but he that consecrated it to communicate Nay if we regard the institution Do this in remembrance of me referring as much to take eat and drinke as to the blessing or thanksgiving whereby I have showed that our Lord did consecrate If we regard S. Paul affirming that the bread which we bless and the cup which we drinke is the communion of the body and blood of Christ 1 Cor. X. 16. and reproving the Corinthians because the rich prevented the poor and suffered them not to communicate in their Oblations out of which the Eucharist was consecrated as I showed afore We shall be bold to conclude that so farr as appears by the Scripture all that did celebrate did communicate as all that assisted did celebrate if that be true which I proved afore that the Prayers of the Congregation is that which consecrates the Eucharist to wit supposing Gods Ordinance The same appears by Justine Martyr and other the ancientest Records of the Church that describe this office But I canot better express the sense of the Church in this point then by alleging the decretall Epistles of the Popes before Innocent the I. or his Predecessor Syricius which being forged by Isidore Mecater some DCC years after Christ as hath been discovered by men of much learning do notwithstanding contain this Rule that he who communicates not be not admitted to the service of the Church Which he that forged them would never have fathered upon the ancient Popes had it not been evident to all that were seen in the Canons of the Church that it was of old a mater of censure to be present at celebrating the Eucharist and not to communicate in it A thing evident enough by many Canons of Councils yet extant and foisted into those decretals to no other purpose but to make men believe in after ages that those Canons were made to prosecute and to bring to effect those things which the Popes had decreed afore as if their authority had been always the same as it was at the time of this forgery Now it is well enough known what pretenses have been made and what consequences drawn from the speculation of the sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross repeted or represented by this Sacrament to perswade Christendom that the benefit thereof in remission of sinnes and infusion of grace and all the effects of Christs Passion is derived upon Gods
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
be counted Sacraments for the same reason and in the same nature and kind for which any thing else is or can be counted a Sacrament No not though they may all in their proper sense be truly called Sacraments of the Church because the dispensing of them all is trusted with the Church For Baptisme by the premises enters a man into the Covenant of Grace as the visible solemnity whereby it is contracted with the Church in behalfe of God which unlesse in case of peremptory necessity cannot be invisibly contracted So it intitleth to all the promises which the Gospel pretendeth And so also doth the Eucharist being the visible ceremony which God hath appointed for the renewing of it and of our profession to stand in it and to expect the promises which the Gospel pretendeth upon supposition of the condition which it requireth not otherwise And truly the flesh and bloud of Christ mystically received by our bodies necessarily importeth his spirit received by our soules supposing them qualified as the Gospel requireth and in and by the Spirit whatsoever is requisite to inable a Christian to performe his race here or to assure him of his reward in the world to come And yet the necessity thereof not so undispensable but that supposing a man cannot obtaine the communion thereof from the Church but by violating that Christianity which it sealeth neither can a man obtaine it by the Sacrament nor without the Sacrament need he faile of it that is standing to his Christianity as well in all other things as in not transgressing his Christianity for communion in the Eucharist with the Church And this is the case of those which are unjustly excommunicate Seeing in matters indifferent he that yeilds not to the Church that is to them who have the just power to conclude the Church when they judge it for the common good for him to do that which otherwise he is not obliged to do must needs seem justly excommunicable So these two Sacraments have the promise of grace absolutely so called that is of all the grace which the Gospel promiseth which it is to be acknowledged and maintained that no other of those actions that are or may be called Sacraments of the Church doth or can doe upon the like terms as they doe For of a truth it is granted that both these Sacraments are actions and consist in the action whereby they are either prepared or used though with so much difference between the two For Baptisme is of necessity an action that passes with the doing of it Whereas in the Eucharist there is one thing done in the preparing another in the using of it insomuch that the effect of consecrating it which I suppose here to be signified in the Scriptures as well as the most ancient of the Fathers by the name of Eucharistia or Thanksgiving remaines upon the thing consecrated so that the bread and the wine over which God was praised and thanked are metonymically called the Eucharist And yet in regard the consecration in reason tends to the use of receiving it and that the Church is not trusted or inabled to do it with effect but to that intent the totall of both is necessarily understood by the name of that Sacrament For supposing the ancient Church might have cause to allow the use of receiving this Sacrament to them who were not present in body though in spirit at the celebrating of it which I for my part in point of charity find my self bound to suppose even when I am not able to alledge any reason why my self would have done the same in the same case So long as by reasonable construction which the practice of the Church alloweth or groundeth the consecration tendeth to the use of receiving it is reasonably called the Sacrament or the Eucharist in order to that use If it be consecrated to any other intent either expressed or inforced by construction of reason upon the practise of the Church such practice bordering upon sacriledge in the abuse of the Sacrament the Church hath nothing to do to answer for it Nor is it my meaning that the Sacrament of Baptisme or the Eucharist doth or can consist in the outward action of washing of the body or of praying over the elements and reciting the Institution of our Lord. It is true the very bodily action were able in a great part to interpret the intent of doing it to those who are already Christians and know what Christianity requireth But seeing that can never be enough much lesse allwayes It is necessary that the intent be declared by certain words signifiying it But these words with the bodily action which they interpret will by this discourse concurre to make but one part of the Sacrament which containing the solemnizing of the Covenant of Grace will necessarily containe that which all this signifieth of invisible and spirituall grace conveighed to those who are qualified for it by that which is said and done in virtue of Gods promise He that will speak properly of these two Sacraments must make the matter of them to consist in one of these two parts The form of them being not the signification which is the same in all ceremonies but the promise which tieth to them the whole effect of the Covenant of Grace to which purpose it were well if the world would understand them to be seals of it This createth a vast difference between these two and any of the rest which are called Sacraments Which whether the Councile of Trent sufficiently expresse by providing an Anathema for those who shall say that the seven Sacraments are so equall one to the other that none is more worthy then another Sess VII Can. III. or not let them look to it I dispute not Thus much we see a difference is hereby acknowledged But the difference is vast in this regard that whereas both these Sacraments take effect in consideration of every particular mans Christianity and the promises annexed to that end the rest all of them take effect in consideration of the Communion of the Church and that which it is able to contribute towards the effect of Grace Which necessarily consists in that which the Church is able to contribute toward the effecting of that disposition which qualifieth for it So whereas these two immediately bring forth Gods grace as instruments of his promise by his appointment the rest must obtaine it by the meanes of Gods Church and the blessing annexed to communion with it He that believeth not Gods Church in the nature of a Society grounded upon profession of the true faith and consisting in that communion which separateth it not from the whole may promise himself the benefit of his Baptisme and of the Eucharist whomsoever he communicateth with professing himself a Christiane He who believeth every Church to be a part of the whole Church as he must acknowledge it requisite to the effect of Baptisme and the Eucharist that they be ministred neither
which it is ministred under such an unhallowed opinion as that In the meane time neither is the promise of Grace annexed to the solemnity thereof in which there hath succeeded so vast a change as I have signified by Gods choice of any visible creature in which it is exercised as in Baptisme and the Eucharist but by that common reason for which it is a solemnity fit for the Church to execute it with nor is the promise of grace annexed to the office of the Churth any otherwise then as it becomes the meanes to retrive the condition of baptisme qualifying for the promise by the Covenant of Grace In fine the name and notion of a Sacrament as it hath been duly used by the Church and writers allowed by the Church extendeth to all holy actions done by vertue of the Office which God hath trusted his Church with in hope of obtayning the grace which he promiseth Baptisme and the Eucharist are actions appointed by God in certaine creatures utterly impertinent to the effect of Grace setting aside his appointment But apt to signifie all the Grace which the Gospell promiseth by vertue of that correspondence which holds between things visible and sâ—nsible and things intelligible and invisible Both antecedent for their institution to the foundation of the Church the Society whereof subscribeth upon condition of the first and for communion in the second The rest are actions appointed to be solemnized in the Church by the Apostles not alwaies every where precisely with the same ceremonies but such as alwaies may reasonably serve to signifie the graces which it praies for on the behalfe of them who receive them The hope of that Grace being grounded upon Gods generall promise of hearing the prayers of his Church which the constitution thereof involveth Nor am I solicitous to make that construction which may satisfie the decrees of the Councils of Florence and Trent who have first taken upon them to decree under Anathama the conceite of the Schoole in reducing them to the number of seven But seeing the particulars so qualified by ancient writers in the Church and the number agreed upon by the Greeke Church as well as the Latines I have acknowledged that sense of their sayings which the primâ—ive order of the Chatholike Church inforceth For though I count it a great a buse to maintaine simple Christians in an opinion that the outward works of them not supposing the ground upon which the intent to which the disposition with which they are done secures the salvation of them to whom they are ministred Which opinion the formall ministring of them seemeth to maintaine Yet is it a far greater abuse to place the reformation of the Church in abolishing the solemnities rather then in reducing the right understanding of the ground and intent of those offices which they serve to solemnize CHAP. XXX To worship Christ in the Eucharist though believing transubstantiation is not Idolatry Ground for the honour of Saints and Martyrs The Saints and the Angels pray for us Three sorts of prayers to Saints The first agreeable with Christianity The last may be Idolatry The second a step to it Of the Reliques of the Saints Bodies What the second Commandement prohibiteth or alloweth The second Councile of Nicea doth not decree Idolatry And yet there is no decree in the Church for the worshiping of Images ANd now I come to that resolution which I have made way for by premising these conclusions for assumptions to inferr it onely by the way I have resolved against those prayers which the Church of Rome prescribeth to deliver the soules of the dead from Purgatory paines I say then first that the adoration of the Eucharist which the Church of Rome prescribeth is not necessarily Idolatry I say not what it may be accidentally by that intention which some men may conceale and may make it Idolatry as to God I speak upon supposition of that intention which the profession of the Church formeth and which alone is to my present purpose I suppose them to beleive that those creatures of God which are the elements of that sacrament are no more there after the consecration having ceased to be that there might be roome for the body and blood of our Lord to come into theire stead I suppose that the body and blood of Christ may be adored wheresoever they are and must be adored by a good Christian where the custome of the Church which a Christian is obliged to communicate with requires it For that which wee see is enough for to certifie us that peremptorily to refuse any custome of the Church is a step to division and the dissolution of it which is the greatest evill that can befall Christianity next to the peremptory profession of some thing contrary to that truth wherein christianity consists and which the being of the Church presupposeth But I suppose further that the body and blood of Christ is not adored nor to be adored by Christians neither for it self nor for any indowment residing in it which it may have received by being personally united with the God head of Christ But onely in consideration of the said God-head to which it remaines inseparably united wheresoever it becomes For by that meanes whosoever proposeth not to himselfe the consideration of the body and blood of Christ as it is of it selfe and in it self a meer creature which he that doth not on purpose cannot do cannot but consider it as he believs it to be being a Christian And considering it as it is honor it as it is inseperably united to the God-head in which by which it subsisteth in which therefore that honour resteth and to which it tendeth So the God-head of Christ is the thing that is honoured and the reason why it is honoured both The body and blood of Christ though it be necessarily honored because necessarily united to that which is honoured yet is it onely the thing that is honored and not the reason why it is honoured speaking of the honor proper to God alone I suppose further that it is the duty of e-every christian to honour our Lord Christ as God subsisting in humane flesh whether by professing him such or by praying to him as such or by using any bodily gesture which by the custome of them that frequent it may serve to signifie that indeed he takes him for such which gesture is outwardly that worship of the heart which inwardly commandes it This honour then being the duty of an affirmative precept which according to the received rule ties alwaies though it cannot tye a man to doe the duty alwaies because then he should doe nothing else What remaines but a just occasion to make it requisite and presently to take hold and oblige And is not the presence thereof in the Sacrament of the Eucharist a just occasion presently to expresse by the bodily act of adoration that inward honour which we alwaies cary towards our Lord Christ as
fit for a private person to say what might be condescended to for the reunion of the Church stopping the way upon those mischiefs which the flourishing times of the Church have not prevented While all bounds are refused all extreamities maintained I alledge it for one of the most considerable titles for reformation without the consent of the whole As for the remaines of the Saints bodies and the honour of them having said this of their Souls whereof their bodies had been the instruments I shall need to say but a little Gennadius I will not forget De Eccles dogmat Cap. LXXIII Sanctorum corpora praecipue beatorum Martyrum reliquias acsi Christi membra sincerissime honoranda Basilicas eorum nominibus appellatas velut loca sancta divino cultui mancipata affâ—ctu piissimo devotione fidelâ—ssima adeundas credimus Si quis contra hanc sententiam venerit non Christianus sed Eunomianus Vigilantianus est We believe that we are most sincerely to honour the corpses of the Saints specially the reliques of the Martyres as of the members of Christ And to come to the Churches called by their names with most pious affection and most faithfull devotion If any man do against this sentence he is no Christiane but a follower of Eunomius and Vigilantius At the first the places of their buriall and times of their triumphs determined the circumstances of Gods service Afterwards when more Churches were requisite then there were Saints to bury their remaines where the Eucharist was celebrated seemes an honor proper for the purpose Nay though S. Jerome confesse that those pore women which lighted candles in houour of them had the zeale of God not according to knowledg supposing both Jewes and Gentiles had a custome to light candles on all occasions which they would honourably celebrate why should it seeme a ceremony unfit to expresse mens esteeme of Gods Grace in them If Vigilantius could not downe with this I have nothing to doe with Vigilantius But there were abuses even before that time Lucilla reproved by Cacilianus Deacon of Carthage for kissing the reliques of some questionable Martyre before the Eucharist by her mony and faction raised the schisme of the Donatist upon his being chosen Bishop Optatus I. S. Austin knew many Christians that worshipped tombes and pictures de moribus Eccles Cath. cap. XXXIV Vigilantius might desire onely that bounds might be put to prevent abuses and in that might be borne out by those Prelates whom S. Jerom taxes In that I doe not find Vigilantius condemned by the Church And those bounds were easily determined if prayer to Saints did not transgresse the bounds of revealed truth For were nothing done that should suppose that they heare the prayers that are made them there should be no considerable occasion to transgresse the bounds of honour due unto their reliques As for the worshipping of images of necessity the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or carved Image in the second commandement must either stand for any similitude so the making or having of any maner of image will be forbidden by the precept Or for the similitude of any imaginary Godhead And so no image but those are forbidden by it According to that former sense the making of the brazen serpent the Cherubins over the Arke is a dispensation of God in his own positive law which is easily understood But Solomon making the Buls the Lions Eagles Cherubins in his temple will be no lesse and wil require a revelation to warrant it According to the later making of images will be no more prohibited the Jewes then other nations by the Law But God having constituted a power in the Nation to limit the Law and so to make a hedge for it as the Jewes speake that which they forbid will be by that meanes prohibited by the Law And so there might be such an image in Davids house as we read of 1. Sam. XIX 12. that is such an one as was not so prohibited And by the sâ—me reason the tribute money might have Caesars picture on it which otherwise must be against the Law And when Josephus saies that Solomon incurred blame â—y making images of living creatures in the Temple it will appear that their constitutions in his time forbad the making of such Tertullian contra Marc II. 22. manifestly affirms the making of the Brazen Serpent Cherubines not to have been against the Law because not made for Idoles alleging the words of the precept Thou shalt not worship them nor serve them For a restriction limiting the generality of a carved image And this opinion I doubt not to be true and that there is no third to be named For if it be said that the meaning of the precept is Thou shalt make no Image that may give occasion to worship it Noâ— supposing a conceit of more Gods then one an image is not a thing that can make a man thinke so supposing the conceite of a God besides the true God without an image a man will worship the same Now either God by saying Thou shalt make no image that may give occasion to worship it refers it to every man to judge whether the image that he may make gives occasion to worship it or not And then he leaves it to every man to make any image which he judges to give none Or he refeâ—â— it to the power which he appointeth to oblige the nation in that behalfe to judge Which is that which I say And therefore seeing no man is left to himselfe to judge in that which God hath appointed a power to determine of necessity this sense is the same which I maintaine The consequence whereof is that it is in the power of the Church to judge whether images are to be had and that in Churches or not For the power that concludes the Church being the same with the power that concludes the Synagogue as the Synagogue and the Church are both one and the same people of God under the Law and the Gospell It is not possible to limit this power under the Gospell not to place images in Churches by vertue of this Law which provides nothing concerning Churches The case would come to be the same if we should suppose the precept to prohibit the making of an Image For then the matter would necessarily evidence that it was positive and given onely the people of the Jewes for that estate which the Law introduced Seeing not onely that which is ceremoniall but also that which is positive in Moses Law necessarily ceaseth to oblige Christians The reason why the Law provideth not to the contrary is that which I have alleged why Christians are not tyed to parte with wives or husbâ—nds that are Idolaters as the Jewes were out of S. Austine That whilst the blessings of the world were the promises which God conditioned to give them that should keepe his Lawes the prosperity of this world might move Israelites according to
is what course the Law of the Church should take And therefore the profession of that continence which single life requireth grounding a reasonable presumption of eminence in Christianity above those that are marryed there was all the reason in the world why the Church should indeavour to put the governement thereof into such hands by preferring them before others On the other side as all truth in morall and humane maters is liable to many exceptions it cannot be denyed that more abstinence from riot and from riches both more attendance upon the service of God is found some times in those that live marryed then in those that live single In which consideration it may well seem harde to conclude all them that are marryed unserviceable for the Church The moderation therefore of the Easterne Church seemeth to proceed upon a very considerable Ground not excluding marryed persons from a capacity of Holy orders but excluding persons ordayned from any capacity of mariage For those who were promoted to the Clergy being single knowing that they were not allowed mariage what can they pretend why they should hold their estate not performing the condition of it As for the promoting of those who are already maried it is the triall of their conversation in wedlock that may ground a presumption as well for that conscience which their fidelity in dispensing the goods of the Church as for that diligence in setting aside the importunities of marriage which their attendance upon the service of the Church requireth It was therefore to be wished that the Westerne Church had used the limitation which the Nicene councill by resting contented with confirmed to admit of persons maryed before orders preferring before them those that are single But it must be granted that as well in the West as in the East though the aime was to perfer single life yet here and there now and then those that were maryed were not excluded It is not to be thought that one Spanish councill which had no effect at all without the bounds of it could as easily be reduced to effect in practice as couched in writing Especially the Generall councill of Nicaea having waived the motion of inacting the same But this demonstrates the credite of the Church of Rome in the Westerne Church at that time that the Rescripts of Syricius Innocent Popes are found the first acts to inforce the same which that Spanish council had inacted For the African and other Westerne Canons that injâ—ine the same are for time after Syricius Whereby it appeareth though they doe not use that exception which the councill of Nicca had supposed yet that the rule of single life for the Clergy was so troden under foot that it was found requisite to seeke meanes by the Synods of severall parts and by the concuâ—rence of the See of Rome to bring it into force For let no mâ—n think that those Canons took effect so soon as they were made which were made on purpose to restraine the mariages of the Clergy Who for the most part had from the beginning lived single but neither before nor after could be totally restrained from maryage It would be too large a worke in this place to repeate either the particular Canons which were made and the discourses of the Fathers to inforce them on the one side or on the other side the saying of the Fathers and other records in point of fact whereby the in execution of them doth appeare Those that would be satisfied in it may see what the Arch-Bishop of Spalato hath collected and find Epiph. his saying still take place during the flourishing time of the Church But all this while you heare nothing of any vowe annexed to the undertakeing of Holy Orders by vertue whereof maryage contracted under them should become voide For the vowe of single life being an act that disposeth of a man and his estate in this world to a totall change of his courses if he mean to observe it what reason can admit any ground for presuming of it when it is not expressed And the custom of the Eastern Church reduceth the penalty thereof unto the ceasing ofâ— that ministry by consequence of that maintenance which the order intitleth to which is not the penalty of breaking a vowe But the effects of these rules and indeavours of the Western Church was never such as to exclude the Clergy from marryage how much soever they might exclude maryed persons from the H. orders When Greg. the seventh undertook to bring them under a total restraint from maryage it is manifest that other maner of meanes were imployed to make that restraint forcible then the constitution of the Church indowes it with For that was the time when the Church undertooke to dispose of Crownes and scepters and to extend the spirituall power thereof to the utmost of temporall effects And therefore it is to be granted that by such meanes indeed it might and did come to effect But in point of fact onely not in point of right as being a rigor which the practice of all parts was sufficient protestation that the Church in that estate was not able to undergoe For the horrible and abominable effects thereof have beene so visiblâ— that it is not possible the cause of them should seeme the production of that reason which the being of any law requireth and supposeth Nor can the See of Rome justly be admitted to charge that no bounds have been observed in releasing of it which it cannot be denyed that the ancient Church in all places did observe For I truely for my part have granted that even Lawes given by the Apostles for the better governement of the Church though written in the scriptures may be dispensed in by the Church when the present constitution of things shall make it appear to the Governours thereof that the observation of that rule which served for that state in which it was prescribed â—ends to the considerable visible harme of the Church in the present state of it And therefore I will not take upon me to say that the state of bigamy which S. Paul I have showed maketh an impediment to some Orders can by no means be dispensed with But the See of Rome which dispenseth with it as of course paying the ordinary fees I conceive cannot in justice charge the releasing of the rule of single life to all the Clergy though in some measure a Law of the whole Church And how many Canons of the whole Church besides are there which must be trampled under foot by bringing that unlimited power into effect which now it exerciseth I could therefore earnestly wish for mine owne parte that some reservation had beene used in the releasing of it that the respect due to single life by our common Christianity might have remained visible to Christian people by the priviledge of it in the Church Nor doe I thinke my selfe bound by being of the reformation to maintaine the acts by
by And besides this consequence another will rise that this is the sense of all Christendome to wit where Christians are governed by Christians that there is no such thing as any power of the Church by Gods Law because all Christendome agrees Soveraignes in doing subjects in admitting that it is limitable by the Secular which cannot limit Gods Law but its own This being the force of that objection which is so largly pursued in the first book de Synedriis cap. X. my answer is That having showed how the decrees of the Apostles themselves as for the mater of them are limitable and determinable by the Church to such circumstances as may make them usefull to the Church for another state then that for which they were first made I am to grant that the Lawes also and other acts of the Church may be limited by the secular power as for the execution and exercise of them For as the Society of the Church and all the acts thereof done in virtue of Gods Charter by which it stands supposing Christianity so Christianity supposeth common-wealths that is to say the government of this world in and by those Soveraignties which subsisted when Christianity came into the world or may lawfully come to subsist afterwards For not to dispute for the present whether civill Governement subsist by the law of God or by humane consent seeing it cannot be said to subsist by the same act that is by the same declaration of Gods will by which the Church that is Christianity subsisteth it is manifest that the title by which the Church standeth must not be inconsistent with that title by which civill governement deriveth it self from the will of God And therefore that they may and must suppose one an other Who ever challenges to the Church a power in all civil causes and over all persons to ordaine and by force of their armes to execute what the Church that is those that have right to conclude the Church shall thinke the consideration of Christianity shall require he I grant erecteth a Power destructive to the civill govâ—nement Which to stand tyed to execute a decree that may be contrary to the decree of those that governe is necessarily inconsistent with But that which I say is this That the Church hath power to determine all maters the determination whereof is requisite to mainetain the communion of Christians in the service of God and to oblige Christians to stand to that determination under pain of forfeiting that communion But no power to give execution to them by force of armes which the Soverain power of every state onely moveth Supposing for the present that no armes can be moved but originally from the soveraign nor any thing executed by any force which is not ultimately resolved into the power of the sword which the Soveraige beareth as known to common sense And by consequence I say that the Soveraign power having right to make the acts of the Church Lawes of the state by declaring to concur to the execution of them by the force which it moveth must needs have right to judge whether they be such as Christian powers ought or may concur to execute and accordingly limit the exercise of them But thereby I intend not to grant that Christian powers may not exceed their bounds of right in opposing and suppressing the effects oâ— those acts which may be duely don by the Church nor to dispute this point upon supposition that the particulars related in that X. Chapter I de Synedriis ought to have the esteem of precedents as things well done and within the limits of secular power in Church maters For I have already granted that the power of the Church that is to say of those that pretend it on behalfe of the Church hath so far transgressed the bounds as to suffer the temporall power of the Church in ordine ad spiritualia to be disputed and held being really destructive to all civill Governement and to act too many things not to be justified but upon suspition of it And therefore I think I demand but reason when I take leave â—o suppose that soverâ—â—gne powers are subject to erre as all men are especially in so nice a point as is their owne interest in Church matteâ—s And that these Errors may have proceeded to the hinderance of Christianity even by such acts as were intended to have the force of standing Lawes But what hath been well or ill done in this kind is not my businesse here to dispute That which I have to doe now is in generall to determine in what consideration the civill power which the Church of England granteth to be soveraign in all causes and over all persons both Ecclesiastical Civill in the dominions thereof giveth the acts of the Church the force of the Lawes of the state Which I have already expressed to be two-fold As soveraigne to suppresse whatsoever may seeme to importe an attempt upon the right of it whâ—ch subsisting without the Church iâ— to be maintained against all incrochment of whomsoever may claime in behalfe of the Church And as Christians because civill powâ—r being presupposed to the being of the Church which standeth upon supposition of the truth of Christianity the sword of Christians stâ—nd obliged to protect the Church against all pretenses For seing the society of the Church is a part of Christianity as hath been showed of necessity it followeth that Christian poweâ—s stand obliged by their Christianitie both to protect those that are lawfully possessed of right in the behalfe of the Church of their dominions in the exercise of it and also to restraine them when their acts whether expressely attempted or maintained by use of long time prove prejudiciall to that common Christianity which the being of the church presupposeth But as this necessarily presupposeth that those that claim on behalf of the Church may proceed to actions so prejudiciall to the state as may deserve to be punished or restrained by civill temporal penalties of all degrees So wil it necessarily infer that civill powers may proceed to excesses not onely in their particular actions but also in violating and oppressing the Church that the Church may be obliged to proceede against them by cutting them off from the communion of the Church so that therein subjects do stand obliged not to obey them in violating and oppressing the Church and to abstaine from communicating with them in the mysteries of Christianity continuing neverthelesse obliged to them in all the offices which the maintenance of the state which Christianity presupposeth will require at the hands of good subjects This being said I will summon the common sense of Christendom to give sentence of the truth or likenesse to truth of this argument All Christian Princes and States doe limit the use of Ecclesiasticall power within their owne dominions Therefore they doe not believe any such thing as a Church or any power derived from any Law of God by
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
restoreth and establisheth it not is not Baptisme or the Eucharist but by equivocation of words which so long as we are not secured of how should the word and Sacraments which such establishments hold forth be that word those Sacraments which are the marks of Gods Church And are they not revenged of the seven Sacraments in the Church of Rome beyond the measure of moderate defense who to renounce them for Sacraments suppresse the offices which by them are solemnized If they allow the Baptisme of Infants and the Covenant of Baptisme what reason can they have to abolish the solemne profession of it at yeares of discretion with the blessing of the Church for the performance of that to which their profession obliges What account will they give either for not blessing Marriages leaving private Christians to contract without the authority of the Church Or for blessing them without being warranted by the Law of the Church that they are such as Christianity alloweth Are they not most Christianly revenged of extreme Unction by providing no visitation for the sick Of auricular confession by consining the Keyes of the Church to the taking away not of sinne from before God but of scandall from before the Church Ordinations I mervaile not that all are forced to maintaine for how should altar be set up against altar not providing who should minister at it As for the ceremonies and circumstances of Gods service doth not superstitious strictnesse in abolishing them oblige reasonable men to think that they imagine themselves nolesse acceptable to God for neglecting them then the Papists for multiplying them beyond that which the order of them to their end can require That the memories of the Saints should be fit occasions of serving God which the Christianity of the ancient Church made one of the powerfullest means to extinguish Hethenisme is now so abhorred as if we had found out some other Christianity then that which it served to introduce That there should be set times of Fasting is so fâ—rre from the care of Reformers as if there were no such office of Christianity to be exercised by Gods Church In fine what is become of the substance while we talke of ceremony and circumstance Whether Churches were provided revenues founded persons consecrated to the intent that the service of God might daily and hourely sound in them by the Psalmes of his praises by the instruction of his word by the prayers of his people by the continuall celebration of the Eucharist Or that there should be two Sermons a sunday with a prayer at the discretion of him that preaches before and after it Provided nothing be done to signify that humility of mind that reverence of hart that devotion of spirit which the awfull majesty of God is to be served with I report my selfe to the piety of Christendome from sunne to sunne This I see woe worth my sinnes that have made me live to see it an effectuall course is taken that the Church dores be allwayes shut and no serving God there unlesse some body preach This is the summe of that which the premises inable me to allege why I can have no part in the present reformation so called Besides the utter want of all pretense for authority the whole title and pretense upon which and the end to which an equitable mind might question whether ordinary authority though of Gods institution and appointment may be superseded in a case of extrarodinary necessity to restore the true Faith and service of God which all authority of the Church presupposeth for the ground and proposeth for the end of all communion with it is found utterly wanting upon the best inquiry that I have been able to make I am to seek for a point any one point wherein I can justly grant that the change is not for the worse Even that frequency of preaching which was the outside of the businesse even granting it to be by the Rule of true Faith Yet hath the performance of it been so visibly so pittifully defective that he must have a hard heart for our common Christianity who can think that there is wherewith to defend it from the scorn of unbelievers had they nothing to do but to minde it I confesse as afore I allowed the Church of Rome some excuse from the unreasonablenesse of their adversaries So here considering the horrible scandales given by that communion in standing so rigorously upon Lawes so visibly ruinous to the service of God and the advancement of Christianity and the difficulty of finding that meane in which the truth stands between the extreames as our Lord Christ between the theeves saith Turtulliane I doe not proceed to give the salvation of poor soules for lost that are carried away with the pretense of Reformation in the change that is made even to hate and persecute by word or by deed those who cannot allow it For as for the appearance of Heresy though the mistake be dangerous to the soule because if followed it becomes the principle of those actions which whoso doeth shall not inherit the kingdome of God Yet it may be so tenderly held as not to extinguish other points of Christianity which necessarily contradict it For though indeed they do not stand with it yet it is possible that those who through the difficulty of finding the truth have swallowed a mistake may not proceed to act according to the consequence of it but of the rest of that Christianity which they retaine and contradicteth it For as for the authority of the Church the neglect wherof creates that obstinacy in consideration whereof heresy is held heretically the rigorousnesse of the Church of Rome extending it beyond all bounds that our common Christianity can allow and necessitating well disposed Christians to waive it what mervaile if the due bounds becoming in visible to common sense by communion with the Church the misprision of Heresy possesse them with the esteeme of Christianity And the difficulty of avoiding the temptation create an excuse to God for them whose intentions are single As for the crime of schisme justly sticking to them who presuming upon their understanding in the scriptures by the scriptures alone which God hath no where promised to assist without using the helpes which he hath provided by his Church though the sacrilege thereof justly render void of effect the ordinances of God which are ministered by virtue of that usurpation which it involveth yet there being abundance of soules that may live and dye without knowing any better much lesse that can ever be able to judge the best upon true principles why should I not hope that God passing by the nullities which it createth will make good the effect of his Grace to those who with singlenesse of heart seek it in a wrong way when by his Law he cannot be tied to concurre to the meanes But this resolution being the result of the premises demonstrateth how much reason the parties that is those
to one wife indissolubly as mariage hath alwaies been indissoluble among Christians could have taken effect among all Christians had it not been received from the beginning for a part of that Christianity which our Lord Christ and his Disciples delivered to the Church nor preserved so inviolable as it hath been but by the society of the Church He that will give a reason how this Law could have taken place otherwise must either alledge the Law of Moses or the Law of the Romane Empire There being no other Law extant when Christianity took place For the law of Moses it is evident that at such time as Christianity came into the world it was counted lawfull according to it to have more wives then one and to put away away a mans wife by a Bill of divorce I demand then how this should come to be prohibited by virtue of that Law which was hitherto thought to allow it It will be said by the true interpretaion of the Law which having been obscured by the false glosses of the Scribes and Pharisees our Lord by his Gospel Mat. V. 31. 32. XIX 3-9 Mark X. 11. 12. Luk. XVII 18. clears and injoyns upon Christians for the future But I showed before in the second Book that when our Lord saith so oft in his Sermon on the Mount You have heard it was said to those of old his meaning is that Moses said so to their Fathers when he gave them the Law not that the Scribes and Pharisees said so to their Predecessors when they corrupt it Besides there are two things evident in the Scripture beyond contradiction The first that divers Lawes of Moses either make it lawfull or suppose it lawful to have more wives then one Deut. XXI 15-17 the Law supposes a man to have two wives the one beloved the other not and provides accordingly Ex. XXI 6-11 the Law gives him leave that hath bought the daughter of a Jew to mary her to his Sonne who if he have another is â—bound to pay her the mariage debt of a wife so that if he do not she is to go free Deut. XXI 1-14 the Law inables him that hath taken a captive in the War whom he likes to marry her not conditioning if he have no other wife Call these two later wives or call them Concubines so long as the Law of God allows them evident it is that it allows that which Christians by their Christianity think themselves bound to forbear Adde hereunto that the King is bound not to take too many wives Deut. XVII 16. 17. that David is not reproved as transgressing this Law though Solomon is But on the contrary that God imputes it as a favour to him that he gave him many wives 2 Saâ— XII 8. which he could not do had he not allowed it I say adde the practice as the life of the Law to the leter as the carcase of it and I may justly conclude that Polygamy is not prohibited by the Law of Moses Besides the Law provides that an Ebrue slave who may go free at the seventh year if his Master have given him a slave of his own to wife and he have children by her must part wedlock with his wife and leave her and children to his Master for his goods Exodus XXI 3. 4. nullifying the contract of Mariage by the choice of him who proffers his freedom before his wife and children in bondage a thing utterly inconsistent with the insolubility of Mariage by Moses Law Secondly our Lord in the Gospel saith not onely It was said to them of â—ld He that puts away his wife let him give her a Bill of Divorce But I say unto you as Mat. V. 31. 32. But further when they ask him Mat. XIX 7. Why did Moses then command to give a Bill of divorce and seâ—d her away He answereth Moses for your hard-heartednesse suffered you to put away your wives But from the beginning it was not so Now I say unto you that he that puts away his wife for fornicatioâ— and maries another commits adultery and he that maries her that is put away commits adultery And all this having laid his ground afore He that made them from the beginning made them male and female and said therefore shall a mâ—n leave father and mother and cleave to his wife and they two shall be one flesh So they are no longer two but one flesh Therefore what God hath joyned let no man part Whereby it is evident that he derives not the prohibition of putting away a wife to take another from any interpretation of Moses Law to the provision whereof he opposeth the provision which hereby he introduceth But from the commission which he pretendeth by virtue whereof he restoreth the primitive institution of Paradise which the Law of Moses had either dispensed with or did suppose it to have been formerly dispensed with For he saith not onely You have heard that it was said to them of old which may be thought to be understood of the Scribes and Pharisees But also Moses said and I say opposing his own saying to that of Moses so farre as prohibiting that which he had allowed imports without licensing that which was prohibited by the Law And upon this ground that by mariage man and wife become one flesh he proceeds to prohibite the divorces which Moses Law alloweth so that the reason why mariage is indissoluble is because man and wife are one flesh by the Gospel of Christ according to the first institutions in Paradise This indeed is the difficulty which I here suppose already declared how this first institution lost or may appear to have lost the force of a Law till revived by our Lord Christ though I conceive the evidence of this truth cannot be obstructed by not declaring the reason of it here S. Paul having so fully laid down the effect and intent of his masters Law 1 Cor. VII 1-6 Now of that you writ to me about it is good for a man not to touch a woman Neverthelesse because of fornications sake let every man have his wife and every woman her husband let the man render his wife the benevolence that is due likewise the wife to the Husband The woman hath no power of her Body but the man Likewise the man is not master of his own Body but the wife Defraud not one another unlesse upon agreement for a time that ye may attend to fasting and prayer and come together againâ— least Satan tempt you for your incontinence For here it is manifest that because man and wife are one flesh they have an interess in one anothers bodies not to be disposed of upon any other to the prejudice of it And upon this supposition the mariage of the first Adam in this earthly Paradise being the figure of the mariage between the second Adam and his Church becomes the rule and measure of the Mariages of Christians in the Church as the same Apostle declares at large Ephes V.
22-33 And this will serve also to make evidence that the Law of Christians mariage cannot be imagined to come from the Lawes of the Empire granting as the truth is that they allowed no man to have more wives then one at once For. there is nothing more evident then this that this mutuall interesse in one anothers body was never acknowledgeded by Pagans noâ— cannot be thought to have stand by their Laws It were to be wondred at otherwise that whereas not only the Romans but in Greece the Athenians and the Germans among the Barbarians as Tacitus saith contented themselves with one man one wife Gods people should be licensed to have more then one But he that reflects upon the consideration in which these Pagans restrained themselves will not find it strange that Gods people should be permitted that which they denied themselves For this mutuall Interest in one anothers bodies which God provided for the means to prevent the sad effects of mans inbred concupiscence in dishonouring their bodies with uncleanness we shall not find to have been had in consideration among them or that uncleanness seemed at all dishonourable to man but prohibited as injurious to mens beds and the successions of families The Lawes of the Empire made it no adultery for the man to lye with another woman which in the woman it was as the Christians complain Lact antius Hist VI. 23. Non enim sicut juris publici ratio est solâ— mulier adultera est quâ— habet alium maricus autem etiam si plures habeat à crimine adulterii solutus est Sed divinâ— lex ita duos in matrimonium quod est in corpus unum pari jure conjungit ut adulter habeatur si â—uis compagem corparis in diversa distraxerit For the Woman onely is not the adulteress having another man but the husband free from the crime of adultery having more women as is the course of publick Law But the Law of God joyns two in wedlock that is into one body upon so equall right that the party is to be counted an adultererer which shall part the body so compacted into more S. Hierome Ep. ad Oceanum Aliâ— sunt leges Caesarum aliae Christi aliud Papinianus aliud Paulus noster praecipit Apud illos viris impudicitiâ— frâ—na laxantur solo stupro atque adulterio condemnatis passim perlupanaâ—ia aâ—cillulas libido permiâ—titur quasi culpam dignitas faciat non volunt as Apud nos quod non licet uxoribus aeque non licet viris eadeâ—â— servitus pars conditione censetur Other are the Laws of the Caesars then that of Christ other is that which S. Paul then that which Papinian prescribeth Among them the rains are let loose to mens uncleannesse and rape and adultery onely prohibited â—ust walks free all over stewes and maid-slaves as if the estate not the will made the fault Among us that which Wives may not do neither may Husbands the same obligation is taxed upon equall condition S. Augustine de adult Conjug II. 8. Sedâ—isti quâ— bus displicet ut inter virum â—xorem par pudicitiae forma servetur potius eligunt maximeque in hac cavsâ mundi legibus subesse quam Christi quoniam jura forensia non eisdem fâ—minas quibus viros pudicitiae nexibus videntur astringere legant quid Imp. Antoniâ—us But those who like not that the same form of chastity should be observed between man and wife and had rather especially in this cause be under the Laws of the world then of Christ because the Court Laws doe not seem to tie women by the same bond of chastity as men Let them read what the Emperour Antoninus Who knows not the lawfulnesse of unnaturall lusts among the Pagans that reads the first Chapter to the Romanes And can we think it strange that Husbands should not be forbidden unmaried persons Wherefore where the Lawes allowed not one man more wives then one there they punished not wandring lusts but provided for mens reputation and their successions Whereas the law of Moses which gives a man leave to mary a Jewess sold him for a slave to himself or to his Sonne provides her an interess in his body for the preventing of uncleanness as you saw before And all those Idolatrous Nations which Gods people were invironed with using more wives then one it is the lesse marvail that God allowed his people something in it that the race of those that feared him might not be quite extinguished and over-run by the multitude of them that served Idols And this is the true reason why S. Paul declares those that are converted to Christianity not to stand obliged to the Wives or Husbands which they had taken before 1 Cor. VII 12-15 Supposing first that by Moses Law the mariages of Jews with Idolaters were void and unlawfull to be used as we see by Ezra IX X. Nehem. X. 30. On the other side that in the Romam Empire the wife as well as the Husband had power to divorce her selfe and to dissolve wedlock which is argument enough how farre they were from being the mariages of Christians Whereupon I say that the mariages of Pagans not being made upon the same ground as the mariages of Christians which is the mutuall interess in one anothers boâ—ies as it is no marvail on one side that S. Paul obliges them not to part as Moses did because those that were not tied by Law might for the particular love they had to their wives turned Christians tie themselves to them alone and upon those who did so the wives had great advantage to grant them to Christianity as he alledges So it is evident on the other â—â—de why he allows them to part to wit having no confidence of that faith in wedlock from them which Christians of necessity professe The reason why the mariages of Jews with Gentiles were void by the Law is thus given by S. Augustine de adult Conjug I. 18. Namque hoc dominus aliquando per Ezdrâ—m Prophetam fieri jussit factâ—m est dimiserunt Israelitâ— uxores alienigenas quiâ—unque tunc haberâ—â—â—tuerunt per quas fiebat ut ipsi ad alienâ—s seducerentur deos non ut illâ— per â—â—â—ritâ—s vero acquirerentur deo Noâ—dum enim tanta gracia salvatoris illuxerâ—â— promissis temporaleâ—us vâ—teris T. adâ—â—â— inhiabat illius populi multitudâ— Et propterea cum bâ—na terrena quâ— pro magnâ— expectaâ—aâ—â— a domino viderent etiam his abundarâ— qui multâ—s falsâ—s colebant dâ—os blanditiis uxorum prius â—â—s verebantur offendere dâ—iâ—dâ— indicebantur colere For this the Lord once commanded to be done by Ezdras the Prophet and done it was The Israelites dismissed their stranger wives as many as then had of theâ— by whose means it came to passe that even they were seduced to strange Gods For as yet so great grace of our Saviour bad not shined oâ— them and the multitude of