Divine power should be of the nature of Substance but such confusion and havock in nature to bring in an unnatural Dogm is no ways to be admitted not out of any defect in the Divine Power but an incapacity of the Creature to be so order'd against its nature And as this Condition of Species subsisting or existing separately of themselves is contrary to their nature So the significativeness of these Species is contrary to Christs Intention and Institution which were to make a representation of his death and passion by Bread and Wine and not by the Similitudes of Bread and Wine And this is to be noted That when the Ancient Fathers both Greek and Latin do affirm that Christs Body or Blood are present under the Species and Forms of Bread and Wine they do not mean such Species as the Schools of Aristotle have introduced for I find not that they took any notice of them distinct from the subject to which they relate but they took them in a more plain sense for the thing it self so affected and formed and Under the Species signified with them as much as Under the Kinds of Bread and Wine Christs Body was present And they never destroyed the Sacrament it self to give an extraordinary Being to the Body of Christ therein CHAP. XLIII The principal Reasons for Transubstantiation answered AND If this be once made good That there is a Proper Sacrament remaining after Consecration it will be much less difficulty to agree upon the manner of Christs presence in the Sacrament For the doubt will not be so much about the Concomitance and co-existence of it with the Sacramental Signs as Whether that which we See with our eys and touch and taste be properly and not denominatively and Figuratively only the Body of Christ And in effect Whether it be the very Sacrament it self or whether only in the Sacrament The Doctrine of the Church of Rome determines not only that There it is but directly and expresly This it is and this we deny as that which indeed must include such a Transubstantiation as is by them affirmed and the chiefest grounds whereof we are now to examine And First from Scripture they are wont to argue and that from the Old Bellarm Lib. 1. Cap. 3. De Sacram. Eucharist Testament where are recorded many Types and Figures of Christ and particularly his Passion which were no less if not much more clear than the representations in the Eucharist if Christ himself be not there otherwise than Figuratively For the Paschal Lamb slain seems to represent Christs Passion more Lively and expresly than the Sacramental Elements Therefore if that the Sacraments of the Gospel might exceed them of the Law it is necessary that what was done there Figuratively only should be properly and really performed in our Sacraments Answ But first supposing Transubstantiation is Christ more clearly in the Sacrament than if there were no such thing Or can the Sacrament of the Gospel be said to be more clear for this when in truth it is more Mystical and abstrufe But though it be not more clear to the sense or Reason yet it is in it self more really present For otherwise the Legal Sacrament must have been only a Figure of this Figure of Christs Body and not of the Bertramus Body it self But the answer of Bertram to this about eight hundred years ago is sufficient to this purpose that both the Paschal Lamb and the Sacramental Elements both Figured and represented Christs body The former Christs Body future and its Passion and the other Instant as at the Institution or Part and compleated So that in truth a great preheminence there is in the Sacraments of the New Testament above them of the Old which is the thing contended for But Christ was really received in both The next Argument taken from Christs words in the sixth of John where he saith amongst many other things I am the Bread of Life And again Verily Joh. 6. 48. 53. 54. Verily Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood ye have no life in you For my Flesh is meat indeed and my Blood is drink indeed Is answer'd two ways First from a consent on both sides by some of the Learnedest That Christ spake not of a Sacramental Eating and Drinking of him but Ordinary in receiving him by Faith preached But because as many on both sides affirm that he pointed at the Eucharist in these words therefore I think it most reasonable and equal to take in both senses and that Christ intended the receiving of him by Faith in the word preached and in the Eucharist too And though Christs Flesh be meat indeed and his Blood drink indeed it doth not follow at all that it is properly so For things Metaphorically such are really though not Properly And Christ doth not say Caro mea est verus cibus or Sanguis meus verus est potus i. e. My Flesh is true meat or Proper My Blood is true Drink but My Flesh is Meat indeed and my Blood is drink indeed that is verily and really And besides the difference before intimated between these expressions and that at the Celebration of the Eucharist when he calls the Bread his Body is very great especially with the precise stickers to the Letter For according to these Christ Transubstantiated Bread into his Body but here according to the same Rule of interpretation he should convert his Body into Bread the words being alike operative But if Christ did at no time make a Transubstantiation of his Flesh or body into bread though he affirmed his Body to be bread What reason is there we should believe upon no better grounds than he affirming bread to be his Body should thereby change it into his proper Body A Third principal Argument is taken from the words of Christ at the Celebration viz This is my Body and This is my Blood And upon the proper acceptation of these words they make no doubt to put to silence all seeming oppositions and contradictions and impossibilities in nature For be it say they how it will Christ saying it who is truth it self no doubt is to be made of it For as they teach the vulgar to speak If Christ should say that this stone were his Body we ought to believe it All which is granted But we must distinguish as all sober men do between Loquela and Sermo He that rehearses a certain number of Articulate words doth Loqui or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but he only who doth deliver the word conceived in his mind which is his meaning at his mouth doth Sermocinari or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now if it can be proved by any certain Circumstance that Christ meant these words in a proper sense and not improper in which he delivered no small part of his doctrine in the Gospel we have done the Controversy is at an end we are to lay our hands on our mouths and
and to deny Luk. 22. 20. V. 17. their senses when he saith This is my Body And as reasonles and frivolous are their Answers to St. Augustine who 1 Cor. 11. 27. affirms it to be a Prophane and blasphemous sense to understand Christ of Aug. de Doctrina Christ his proper Body and to eat it For can any thing be more Elusorie and ridiculous than to Scholie on him with a That is As meat is bought and sold in the Shambles Nam Sacramentum Alâ—ptionis suscipere dignatus est Christus et quando circumeisus est et quando baptizatus est et potest Sacramentum adoptionis Adoptio â—uncupari sicut Sacramentum coâ—poris et sanguints jus quod est in pane poculo consecrate Corpus jus sanguinem diciâ—us Non quod proprie corpus ejus sit panis poculum sanguinis Sed quod in se Mysterium coâ—poris ejus et sanguinis ejus contineant Hinc ipse Dominus Benedictum panâ—m Calicem quem Discipulis tradidit corpuaae sanguinem ejus voâ—â—vit Quocirea sicut Christi fideles sacramentum Corporis sanguinis ejus accipientes Corpus et sanguinem ejus recte dicuntur accipere c. Facundus Hâ—rmianensts Pro. 3. Capitulis Lib. 10. Cap. 5. But if it be possible to express any thing more clearly Facundus Hermianensis and that as set forth by Syrmondus doth both expound St. Austins meaning and our Saviour Christs yet more irrefragably writing against the Eutichians in these words For Christ vouchsafed to take on him the Sacrament of Adoption both at his Circumcision and at his Baptism and the Sacrament of Adoption may he called Adoption as the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ which is the Bread and Cup Consecrated we call his Body and Blood not that properly his body is Bread or his Blood the Cup but that they contain in then the Mystery of the Body and Blood of him Whence our Lord himself called the Blessed Bread and Cup which he delivered to his Disciples his Body and his Blood Wherefore as Christian believers taking the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of him are said truly to take the Body and Blood of Christ So Christ when he took the Sacrament of Adoption of Children might truly he said to take the Adoption of Children Thus he and Syrmondus in his notes upon this place doth confess these to be very harsh expressions like unto some of St. Austins there mentioned And to our urging the name fruit of the Vine given to the Consecrated substance and thence concluding that the real nature of Wine remains they answer that it is not unusual to give the name to a thing as a little before it was or seems to be Which we deny not And by the parity of reason return upon them to their loss For we know it is not unusual for a thing to be called by the name not which is proper to its nature but which it represents And to the eye of Faith the consecrated Elements Heb. 5. are the Body and Blood of Christ and so may not unaptly be so called by those whose senses are exercised as the Apostle speaks to discern both good and evil though in nature they be farr otherwise Some indeed as I conceive have been but too free of the Figures in this question supposing that the very word Est or Is must not be taken in its proper sense but stand for as much as Significat Signifies but this is without ground in Grammar or Divinity For he that saith as St. Paul 2 Tim. 4. 17. is interpreted to speak Nero is a Lion doth not lay the agreement upon Est or Is but upon the subject Nero For the Verb Substantive is equally indifferent to Comparative and Proper Speeches and continues so applied to any thing The Signification or Similitude lies in the two Terms Nero and a Lion and Bread and Wine and the Body and Blood of Christ Now there being no difference between a Similitude and a Metaphor but that the one is at large and in many words what the other is in one To say Christ is a Lamb or This which is bread is Christ is no more than to say Christ is as a Lamb and Bread is as Christs Body For the many agreements between the natural and Spiritual senses The one and that principal is that of Sacrifice which ought here to be briefly explained CHAP. XLIV Of the Sacrifice of the Altar What is a Sacrifice Conditions necessary to a Sacrament How and in what sense there is a Sacrifice in the Eucharist GREAT contentions have been about the Sacrifice of the Altar and perhaps though with just Cause yet not so great as is generally believed For these two Terms do much illustrate one the other For neither is the Altar upon which Christians offer properly an Altar any more then as is said before the Lords-Day now observed is properly a Sabbath nor is the Sacrifice thereon performed properly a Sacrifice Some will have that only truly called a Sacrifice which consisted of living Creaturs slain and offered to God Dixerunt aliqui quia Sacrificium non est nisi de Animalibus et erraverunt in hoc c. Guliel Parisien de Legib. Cap. 3. and to this sence do I most incline For there must be in all things some one thing which is as a Rule and Law and gives denomination to others according as they agree with it Now if all offerings to God as fine Flower and fruits of the Earth be called a Sacrifice in an equal sence to the most proper then have we no Rule to go by in Judging of Sacrifices And therefore Gulielmus Parisiensis who rejecteth the former acceptation because we Read in Leviticus 20. of a Sacrifice of fine Flower and Exodus 31. Sweet Smell seemeth himselfe to erre as he saith others do in the Notion of a Sacrifice For either these things and such-like were more properly called Oblations than Sacrifices or when they were called Sacrifices they were so called because of the Proper bloudy Sacrifice as the principal thing to which they were adjuncts Five things are said to be required to constitute a Sacrifice 1 A Proper Lessius de Ju. Just it Minister who is the Priest Heb. 5. Secondly the Matter must be sensible 3. The form of that matter must be changed and that after the nature of it Thirdly It must be directed and devoted to a Good end God And fiftly It must be offered in a proper place But not all these are certain and constantly true For Cain and Abel and Noah and Abraham and the rest under the Law offered proper Sacrifices but that they had peculiar Temples or Altars is not true For until that injuction of God in Deuteronomie Take heed to thy selfe that thou offer not thy burnt offerings in Deut. 12. 13. 14. every place that thou seest But in the place which the Lord shall
such opinion of it as in truth agrees only to God He directly intends who really supposes falsly any Creature to be God and intends to worship it as God or certainly he who otherwise out of perverted affection desires to worship that which he well knows to be a Creature as God He intends indirectly who no ways intending directly to honour a Creature as God yet outwardly notwithstanding this doth bestow divine honor on the Creature as God So that in the judgment of sober men he may be thought to account the Creature for God as if any man through fear of death should sacrifice to Idols Therefore if actually a man worships that which is not God his intention to worship only the true God can relieve him no farther than his opinion and intention to accompany with his own wife excuses him from Casual Adultery in lying with another woman and that is but little unless circumstances be such as may render the ignorance of the Fact invincible as they say or unavoidable And the intention and opinion if they be against ordinary presumptions to the contrary do not excuse Now to apply it to the last Case of Christ corporally present in the Sacrament This is agreed upon by us that what Christ saith to be so is infallibly true seem it never so contrary to our outward senses But seeing the words of Christ according to the like expressions in Holy Writ where things that bear Analogy with one another are said positively to be one another as where St. Paul saith Believers are Christs bone and Christs flesh which is not true in the natural sense but Metaphorical for otherwise unbelievers might be said so to be which St. Paul never intended do not necessarily infer that sense and all the ends imaginable are attainable no less by the spiritual sense and metaphorical acceptation of the words than by the more gross and natural And lastly to suppose what is said above concerning this subject testimony of senses bear witness to the contrary as much after Consecration as before the upshot of the business will be this Whether there remains any such infallible inducements to produce an opinion of such a thing there being whether such gounds unresistible there be for to found such an intention that may excuse from errour And therefore I absolutely deny Spalatoe's opinion saying I answer I acknowledge no Idolatrous De Republ. Eccl. Lib. 7. cap II. num 2. crime in the adoration of the Eucharist so long as the intention is directed aright For they who teach that Bread to be no longer bread but the body of Christ c. For if they knew that the Body of Christ did not lye hid under the Species and his blood under those of Wine they would not so worship This I say satisfies not because they have no sufficient grounds that so it is or so Christs words are to be understood Secondly and as to this point principally because Idolatry is primarily a defect and errour in the understanding as their own men confess and only secondarily and by consequence in the will or purpose which altogether overthrows the moderate sense of Forbes likewise to Forbes ubi supra p. 439. say no more For as for that other evasion and purgation whereby they would fetch off Papists from Idâ—latrous worship in the Eucharist because there can be no doubt made but Christ may be adored as Austins known words are in the Eucharist with all outward and bodily as well as mental worship is much less to the purpose For This quite changes the question which is wholly about the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the ancients call them the objects appearing whether they be Christ and to be worshipped as Christ For Christ in the Sacrament we may worship without exceptions of any divine or corporal manner Christ's body and blood are really present in the Eucharist we grant and in a more eminent manner then in other places or divine ordinances but when we hear him say The faithful receive the body and blood of Christ in Forbes ibid. themselves corporally but yet after a spiritual miraculous and imperceptible manner we grant the manner to be wonderful and imperceptible but we cannot grant it to be Corporally and Spiritually in the same respect without a contradiction For What is corporally to receive a thing but modo corporali after a corporal manner and therefore to correct as it were that Expression with that which follows viz. Modo tamen spirituali yet after a spiritual manner is quite to destroy what he seem'd to say before For Nothing can be received Corporally after a spiritual manner And it is much more intelligible than that of the Romanists which saith That the Body of Christ may be received spiritually and bodily For the body according to them is taken into the mouth and so bodily received by the wicked and unbelievers and it is by the faithful besides received by Faith spiritually which may stand together But to suppose any spiritual way to explicatory of the corporal way of receiving Christ is to suppose contradictions But this belongs to another place Let us now touch the third exception I make against the distinction of Material and Formal Idolatry taken from the Novelty of it and singularity as never heard of before late dayes when extremities put mens wits to study for new forms of Speech to dress up the new body of Divinity framed to themselves Why did not the Heathen come off so For surely they might Why did not this enter into the head of the ancienter School-men who I dare say make no mention of it How comes it about that the aneient Fathers and Councils knew no other Idolatry than that which even moderner Papists approve of when the soberer mode is on them viz. The worshipping as God that which is not God without any notice taken of Material and Formal worship contenting themselves with the general distinction of Ignorance of the Law and Ignorance of the Fact or wilful Ignorance and unwilling Or vincible and invincible Surely this implies somewhat singular in this case which they either are ashamed to express or can not which latter is my case For I confess I see no reason why we may not distinguish two sorts of Heresie as well two sorts of Schism two sorts of Adulterie two sorts of Drunkenness and Murder Material and Formal as of Idolatry And yet we hear little or no mention of this distinction but only as it is applyed to Idolatry which besides what is abovesaid renders it more suspected and the coyners and users of it Fourthly and lastly The dangerousness of this distinction and apparent damage it doth to Christian Religion declares it to be wicked and intollerable while it both opens a way to all carelessness in worshipping we know not how nor what contrary to our Faith and then when we may receive competent information of our error and should repent it lulls us asleep
A Course of Divinity OR AN INTRODUCTION To the Knowledge of the True Catholick Religion Especially as Professed by the CHURCH OF ENGLAND In two Parts The one containing The Doctrine of Faith The other The Form of Worship By MATTHEW SCRIVENER LONDON Printed by Tho. Roycroft for Robert Clavil in Little Brittain MDCLXXIV THE ENTRANCE FOR the better conceiving and judging of this ensuing Treatise I have held it necessary Christian Reader to premise and propound to thy consideration these two things principally viz. The Occasions me thereunto moving and the manner of proceeding in it One Occasion given me was the multitude and variety of the like Books set forth by other Churches whereby not only the persons under them were trained up in the Knowledge and Faith professed there but the minds of many of our Church were prepossessed and their manners swayed by such Doctrines which seemed to me as forreign in nature as place to those of our Church and the Ancient I could have here given the Reader the names of above fourty Tractates of this nature many of which have been translated into the English Tongue to the corrupting of weaker judgments And not so much as the Christians of New-England have been wanting to the Interest of their Religion so far as to â—mit so advantagious a Work but by John Norton Teacher as he calls himself of the Church at Ipswich in New-England have collected certain Principal Heads of Divinity into a Body called The Orthodox Evangelist And as the great number of forreign Books have incited me so the Paucity of the like in and from our Church hath no less emboldened me to undertake this I am prevented by Industrious Mr. Baxter in giving any account of such who have made attempts this way and what hath been done by them without bringing their design to desired issue Only that excellently Learned Person Mr. Thorndyck passed over by him in his declining years hath given greater demonstrations of his zeal and learning in behalf of the English Church than any extant before him in one continued Body purposing a Review in the Latin Tongue wherein he intended to have more clearly expressed his meaning in some things of which it might be said as of St. Pauls writings they were hard to be understood and he himself saw to be wrested to evil ends and senses but his declining body and years would not suffer him to accomplish so good a Work What Mr. Baxer himself hath performed in his late large Volume I shall not give my censure but how well he is qualified for such a Work I may presume to give the Reader in the words of Esâ— Baxterus câ—â—is desiinatis sententiâ—s minimè omnium hominun addictus ut qui non plus faveat Presbyteriants quam Independentibus nec est infensus Hierarchicis sed medius dubiusque partibus nisi in causa Dei sanctitatis vitae Ludovicus Molinaeus Patroni p. 12. a great admirer of him Baxter saith he is of all men least addicted to any resolute opinions being one that favoureth not more the Presbyterians than the Independents neither is he sharp against the Episcopal Party but between them and doubtful what side to take except in the cause of God and holiness of Life The greatest part of which Character is but too true being as much with me as if he had said He were of no Religion at all For however Beza and Cartwrights opinions of a certain and definite Discipline Essentially requisite to a Church as a Church is to Christian Religion be by Puritans laid aside for the present and like embers buried up in the Ash-heap till they shall rise again next day and kindle a new fire and now nothing but Get Christ Purity of Ordinances is notorious amongst them to the Vulgar yet when people are deceived by that they call Pure and Powerful Preaching of Christ into new Societies of their own Manufacture then presently doth most apparent Reason and inevitable Necessity constrain them to invent and impose new Covenants and Bonds to conserve them in their new Fraternities contrary altogether to that General Liberty before propounded and promised them No more than doth the charm of Christian Liberty sound in their ears No more of the free use of Indifferent things so contrary to the Decrees and Practise of a Church but then come into credit again such sayings as these There must be Order There must be Government There must be unity in the Church dealing herein with poor simple Christians as men do with their horse they would take up carrying in one hand provender which they show him and make a great noise with and behind them in the other hand a bridle to hold him fast to them and ride him as they please And if Mr. Baxter be of no regulated determinate Society or Church adheres to no particular Communion submits to no Government nor Governours in special but to all or any as it should seem be must bear it as well as he can when he bears himself not out of passion or envie at his new and singular device of going to heaven but justice and reason censur'd for a man of no Religion at all or if any of his own making which teaches him to persevere in that fond and haughty design he once had when he took upon him to top his Brethren of the Ministery in the Western Parts and to frame Grounds and Aphorisms for both Civil and Ecclesiastical Politie of his own with as little judgment and humility as safety to the Church and State as if he had aim'd at nothing so much as to be according to forreign Phrase and Presidents an Extraordinary Pastor without any Original or Rule but from himself but failing of this he now thinks it best to become an Extraordinary Sheep of all and no fold writing Books as uncertain and contrary as himself on all sides and for all Palates as if he had found out the Universal Character for Religions like to that of Languages in which all men doing as he wou'd have them shou'd agree in going to Heaven And now all that lately and most officious and serviceable method of mounting our selves and crushing and trampling on the necks of others and them our Governours by most unjust and cruel acts most false and bitter language must be laid aside and thrown overboard as the Turks did their Cemiters when they lost the day at the battle of Lepanto not because they liked them not but because they could do them no more service and least they should come into the Christians hands and be used against them So indeed Sectaries now-a-dayes call for modesty and moderation on all hands casting away that unchristian language which stood them in so much stead against them they resolved to destroy not without horrible Success And yet we see while they call so charitably for moderation and would have no revilings of them that differ in opinions only their churlish nature and
bear the place of the Example 27. It may be granted that Images may be worshipped C. 23. improperly and by accident with the same kind of worship C. 24. with which the Exemplar but not for their own sakes and properly and therefore Latria is not properly and for themselves to be given for them 28. A Vow is an Act of Religion due to God only like L. 3. c. 9. De cultu sanctor as an Oath and Sacrifice as appears from the Scriptures whose Vowes are constantly said to be made to God Yet it is most certain that in some manner Vowes may be made to Saints 29. It is not probable that Christ in these words this is De Eucharist l. 1. c. 9. my Body would speak figuratively 30. One Body may be in divers places at once L. 3. c. 3. 31. That the Elements in the Eucharist are turned into L. 3. per. tot Christs Body 32. It is a truth necessary to be believed that whole L. 4. c. 21. 22. Christ is in the kind of Bread and whole Christ is in the kind of Wine 33. No more Grace is contain'd in one kind then in C. 23. both 34. Worshipping the Host excuses from Idolatry because C. 29. they believe there is no Bread remaining and no Catholick holds that Divine Worship is to be given to Bread 35. Our Sacrifice is truly and properly called a Sacrifice L. 2. de missa c. 2. no less than the ancient Sacrifices as is shown in the former Book 36. The Rite of Reconciling Sinners after Baptism which De Paenit lib. consists of Repentance discovered by external signs and the word of Absolution Catholicks affirm to be a true and proper Sacrament 37. There is a treasure of superfluous Merits in the Church De Indulg l. c. 2 3 11. which may by the Pope be applyed to the benefit of other persons by Indulgences 38. The Catholick Church doth openly affirm Extream Unction De Extrem Unct. c. 1. to be truly and properly a Sacrament 39. Orders are a Sacrament truly and properly so called De Ord. c. 1. 40. Matrimony of Believers is a proper Sacrament De Matrim c. 1. To these innumerable other might be added of strange nature to the Word of God and belief and practise of the ancient Church but these are more then sufficient to confront those vainly objected to us by them whereof some are most false others most true others false or true as they may be taken And now the manner of proceeding in this Discourse being propounded to be touched in the second place here must not be forgotten In which I confess I have not a little varied from my first intention and resolution which were in a plain compendious way to set down the Principal Doctrine of Faith and Worship agreeable to God's Holy Word and to the mind of the best Ancient Churches as well as our Own and that without Passion or particular Reflexions on any Party or Person by name knowing that of Synesius to be most true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes Ep 57. That Soul which would be a Vessel to receive God must be void of all Passions But finding some things both approved and disproved by me would scarce be credited without such instances I held my self obliged to forsake that resolution in the process of my Discourse and a little in the beginning where I was forced by ill Paper and Ink to write somewhat over the second time to make it legible Otherwise I determined to avoid Names and Testimonies of Authors after the manner of them who before me have written Institutions and Sums of this nature Yet have I not taken upon me in an imperious way to multiply Canons and Axioms and impose them with expectation of greater faith in them then such men will allow to the Decrees of the Holy Councils so called And this with a perswasion I know not how or why wrought into credulous persons that now-a-dayes only Scripture is understood and they only speak Scripture but others humane Inventions Which most bold demand 't is a wonder how many prone naturally to superstitious novelties do without the least suspicion of vanity and falsity readily receive for a most certain and fundamental Truth but is indeed a fundamental Error and the root of all Heresie towards the Faith and of all Schism towards the Church I remember how some years since enquiring of one very near to me what Divinity his Tutor grounded him in he answered me Wollebius And farther inquiring what Wollebius said of a certain point he replyed as he there found it against which when I put in my exception he wondered at me and indeavored to silence me by telling me It was a Canon I have not here proceeded so Canonically as others nor yet so Polemically but considering according to St. Johns distinction that there are Children in Christ 1 John 2. 13. and Young men and Old men commonly call'd Incipientes Prosicientes and perfecti i. e. Beginners Proficients and Perfect men I have here pitched upon the mean sort of these to whom to direct my Labors knowing there were but too many Catechises amongst us for the former and too few Treatises or none for the second And that to write Polemically for the satisfaction of the third required another more proper language and a more Scholastical Person and much more large Volumes then this one though this Book hath increased under my hands well nigh thrice as much as I at first intended And in truth it is to be lamented and blushed at that none of the Learned men of our Church have yet appeared in so noble and necessary a Work as the fuller and more entire managing of the Elenctical part of Divinity to the preventing daily mischiefs arising from the necessity of repairing to our Enemies of both sides to perfect Theological Studies without the due ballance on our side to prevent prejudice I hope God will stir up the spirits of some to set their hands to and enable them to go through so good a Work Voetius of Utrecht than whom I think none of this Age hath Certum autorem ejus qui solidè compendiosè accommodatè ad nestra tempora hee â—gat hâ—ctenus non vidi expectandum est ergo c. Voetius Bibl. l. 2. c. 5. been acquainted with more modern Authors much complains for want of some compendious Body of Elenctical Divinitie which to that day he had not seen And therefore expected that long defired Piece of Famous Altingius should at length come forth which was only in the hands of his Scholars in writing Yet I find this Work of Henricus Altingius to have been published the same year with Voetius his Bibliotheca viz. Anno 1654. and called Theologia Elenctica Nova viz. New Elenctical Divinitie which in truth hath not its name New for nothing in that manner of handling Divinity as none before
the several Senses and Meanings according to which the Scriptures may be understood IT being found what is the Letter of the Word of God It is necessary to know what is the true sense of it For this is only in truth the Word and not the Letters Syllables or Grammatical words To know this we must first distinguish a Sense Historical and Mystical The Historical Sense is the same as the Literal so called because it is that which is primarily signified and intended by such a form of words And this is twofold For either these words are to be taken in the proper and natural signification as I may call that which is in most vulgar use or in their borrowed and mataphorical Sense As when I call a thing hard and apply it to Iron or Stone I speak properly and according to the Natural sense but when I apply Hardness to the heart I speak improperly and Metaphorically and yet Literally too intending thereby to signifie not any natural but moral quality in the heart The Seven Ears saith Joseph in Genesis are seven years and the Seven fat Kine are Seven years And so Christ in the Gospel This is my Body and infinite others in Scripture are Metaphorical and Literal Senses both The Mystical Sense is that which is a translation not so much of words from one signification to another as of the entire Sense to a meaning not excluding the Historical or Literal Sense but built upon it and occasion'd by it And is commonly divided into the Tropological Allegorical and Anagogical which some as Origen make coordinate with the former saying The Scripture is a certain Intelligible world wherein are four Parts Origen Homil 2. In Diversos as four Elements The Earth is the Literal Sense The waters is the profound Moral Sense The Air is the Natural Sense or natural science therein found And above all the sublime sense which is Fire In another place he mentions only the Historical Moral and Mystical And generally Idem Homil. 5. in Leviticum the Fathers do acknowledg all these though with some variation not distinguishing them as we have as might be shown were it needful to enlarge here on that subject The Moral Sense is that which is drawn from the natural to signifie the manners and conditions of men The Allegorical is a sense under a continuation of tropes and figures The Anagogical a translation of the meaning of things said or done on earth to things proper to heaven The Oxe being suffered to eat while he trod out the Corn according to St. Paul in the Moral sense signified that the labourer was worthy of his hire Mount Sinah and Mount Sion as the same Gal. 2. 24 25. Apostle saith signified the two Cities of God Earthly and Heavenly Allegorically And the Church of God upon Earth the Church Triumphant in heaven It is therefore without reason and modesty both that some strickt Modern Divines have set themselves against the Antient in contracting all these senses into one so as to allow no more which is of very ill consequence to the Faith both of Jew and Christian For generally all the hopes of the Jews concerning the Messias to come and all the proofs of the Christian taken from the Old Testament That he is come would come to little or nothing seeing there is manifestly a Literal or Historical sense primarily intended upon which the Mistical is built So that the arguments of the Evangelists and St. Paul in his Epistles convincing that Christ was the true Messias must needs be invalid seeing their quotation to that purpose had certainly another Literal Sense And it is against the condition of the whole Law it self which as St. Paul Heb. 10. 1. saith was a Shadow of good things to come and not the very things themselves It is here replied commonly That all these are but one Literal Perkins on Galâ—â— 22. sense diversely expressed which is to grant all that is contended for but with a reservation of a peculiar way of speaking to themselves that having been so infortunate as to judge of things amiss they may in some manner solace themselves with variety of phrase too commonly found amongst such as resolve to say something new where there is no just cause at all And to that which seems a Difficultie That no Symbolical sense can be argumentative or prove any thing in Divinity we answer That it cannot indeed unless it be known first to be the true Mistical sense of the words alledged For neither is the Literal sense it self until it be known that such was the true intent of the Speaker But those things which were symbolically and Mystically delivered in the Law being well known to Christ and his Apostles as likewise to the Learnedest of the Jewish Doctors by a received current tradition amongst them were of force to the ends alledged by them But where such a Mystical sense is not received nothing can be inferred from thence which is conclusive CHAP. X. Of the true Interpretation of Holy Scriptures The true meaning not the letter properly Scripture Of the difficultie of attaining the proper sense and the Reasons thereof IT availeth a Christian as little to have the Letter of the word of God without the genuine sense as it doth a man to have the shell without the Kernel For the sense is the word of God not the Letter Wicked men yea the Devil himselfe maketh use of the Letter to contradict the truth it self as St. Hierome hath observed and other Fathers and constant experience certifieth not without the consent of the Scripture it self which saith of it self In it are some things hard to be understood which 2 Pet. 3. 16. they that are unlearned and unstable wrest as they do all other Scriptures to their own destruction Therefore because it is very necessarie to be informed of the difficulties and dangers in misinterpreting Scripture before we can throughly apply our selves to prevent and avoid them we will First shew briefly That many things are difficult in Scripture and the Reasons why and after proceed to the most probable means rightly to interpret the same And these obstacles in attaining the true sense of Gods word are either found in our selves or in Gods wisdome and Providence or lastly in the Word of God it self Some indeed piously but inconsiderately make all the reason of difficulties not denied by them altogether in the Scripture to be in Man supposing they hereby vindicate Gods Providence from that censure it might otherwise be liable unto if so be that God should deliver such a Law to man which could not well be understood but apt to mislead men into errour And therefore say they It is the darkness and perversness of mans understanding and will that make things in Scripture obscure and not the condition of the Scriptures themselves But this no ways doth attain its end For when did God deliver his written word unto Mankind
without blame before him in love And it hath been shewed before how that when in the New Testament we read of Gods Calling and choosing and electing we are not so much to understand the eternal purpose or decree of God but the execution thereof in Gods actual calling and electing certain persons to the profession and belief of the Faith of Christ which he effected by the fulfilling of the Prophesie made by Christ in St. Matthews Gospel relating to the Matth. 24. 31. destruction of the Jewish Polity and Church and erecting of the Christian instead thereof viz. And he shall send his Angels that is his Messengers and Ministers with a great sound of a trumpet i. e. the Gospel preached and published and they shall gather together his elect i. e. such as he shall make choice of from the four winds i. e. from all quarters of the world from one end of heaven to the other Now these persons by Gods word and good-will called from such vanities ignorances and vices are in the Scripture called Saints not so much because they were all so throughly or absolutely sanctified from their former natural or moral impieties contracted in their state of Nature and Gentilism as that they should retain no sin and none of them should fail of heaven hereafter But first either from the better part the whole was denominated actually holy which is not unusual in all speech Or because having made renunciation of the World and Flesh and Devil in Baptism they were called and consecrated to Holiness Or lastly because they made open and solemn profession thereof however some so called might be and did appear to be reprobates And names and appellations are given not from any inward affection or quality which sense cannot judge of but from such things as are visible and apparent And thus in the Old Testament as well as New it is used As in the Psalmes Gather my Saints Psalm 50. 5. together unto me those that have made a Covenant with me by Sacrifice which imply the whole body of the people of Israel as the words going immediately before do also declare And wherever in the Book of Psalms which is in divers places we find the Congregation of the Saints is meant the Israelites in general And in Daniel Chap. 7. v. 8. 21 22 25 27. is the word necessary taken Now it being most customary with the Penmen of the New Testament to borrow the phrase of the Old this tearm Saints was translated from the Jewish Synagogue to the Christian Church by St. Paul expresly to the Romans saying To all that be in Rome beloved of Rom. 1 7. God called Saints so the original better then the insertion of to be made in the translation As likewise in his first Epistle to the Corinthians To the Church of God which is at Corinth to them that are sanctified in Christ 1 Cor. 1. v. 2. Jesus called to be Saints withall that in every place call upon the name Jesus Christ their Lord and ours And the like salutation we shall find in most of St. Pauls Epistles as also most frequently in the body of them as may be obvious to any reader though I deny not but sometimes in the New Testament it is taken in a more restrained sense signifying especially the victorious and triumphant not Militant Saints From all which it doth sufficiently appear in what sense the Church may and ought to be described a Society or Collection of Saints And withal how miserably and mischievously they err who giving that title to a Party hold themselves bound to gather a certain select number out of Christians not accusable of any notorious errour from the Faith of Christ as the Apostles of Christ did out of Heathens and Jews and to constitute and call them Saints Another thing requisite to the constitution of a Church is That it be a Communion of Saints it sufficing not that persons elected or selected as above-said be many in number but holy by nature or institution as God ordained of old in the forming of the Jewish Church Deut. 7. 6. Thou art Deut. 7. 6. 26 19. 18 9. an holy people unto the Lord thy God The Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself above all the people that are upon the face of Earth Which words are with advantage applyed unto the Christian Church by St. Peter Whence it is that the same St. Peter maketh it an 1 Pet. 2. 9 10. 2 Pet. 1. 4. end of calling this company together That they may be partakers of the Divine Nature or as it is otherwise more plainly render'd Of a Divine Nature Holiness drawing us near unto the Nature of God himself As the Wiseman also writeth The giving heed unto her Laws is the assurance Wisdom 6. 18 19. of Incorruption and Incorruption maketh us near unto God And not only must they be holy but to that end must of necessity hold a twofold communion The one Invisible with one Head Christ The other Visible and external with one another For the Apostle tells us speaking of Christians The head of every man is Christ And to the Ephesians The 1 Cor. 11. 3. Ephes 5. 23. husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the Church and and he is the Saviour of the world There can therefore no question be made but it is most essential as well to the Church in general as every particular Christian or Member of the same that Christ be the Head of his Church as St. Paul yet more clearly expresseth it to the Colossians excepting against such Professors of Christian Religion as held not the Head from which all the Body by joynts and bands having nourishment ministred and knit 2 Col. 2. 19. together encreaseth with the increase of God Therefore leaving that as on all hands granted we come to the external communion of the Church CHAP. XXIV A Preparation to the knowledge of Ecclesiastical Society or of the Church from the consideration of humane Societies What is Society What Order What Government Of the Original of Government Reasons against the Peoples being the Original of Power and their Right to frame Governments Power not Revocable by the People IN the outward Communion of the Church two things are to be enquired into First the Nature of it wherein it consisteth Secondly the Adjuncts or Affections thereof First we shall treat Civitas à conversatione multorum dicta est pro eo quod plurimorum in unum constituat contineat vitas Origin Homil. 5. in Genesim briefly of the Nature of this Communion To understand which clearly it will be expedient to begin with the definition of Communion in General or Society humane For Communion is nothing else but Humane Society And Humane Society is nothing else but a conversation of men out of natural reason inclining and moving them thereunto for the mutual supply of the
Gods Word already confirming this duty and to leave others to every ingenuous Christians diligent use of it to avoid prolixity And for the objections which may be made and are commonly found against what is above delivered for the same reason I pass them over as likewise because I intend not here Controversie but Positive Institutions CHAP. XXVII An Application of the former Discourse of Civil Government to Ecclesiastical How Christs Church is alwayes visible and how invisible Of the Communion of Christ and his Members The Church of Christ taken specially for the Elect who shall infallibly be saved never visible But taken for true Professours of the Faith must alwayes be visible though not Conspicuous in comparison of other Religions or Heresies THE Reasons moving me to insist a while upon Civil Government before I entred upon Ecclesiastical are First because I find Authors of the grounds of Christian Religion to treat of the same generally Secondly because where breaches have been made often in the Faith and Discipline of the Church there necessary provision ought to be made to secure them for the future but for want of due understanding of this Doctrine licencious zeal blinded with presumption hath transported very many into unchristian practises Thirdly because it is a necessary introduction to the more clear and compendious pursuing of our subject of the Spiritual Society of the Church of Christ and particularly its Form The Form of Christs Church may be distinguished according to the vulgar Notion into invisible and visible or inward and outward Invisible we here call that which doth not at all offer it self to our outward sense of seeing cannot be beholden with our eye Or that which may in some manner appear to our sight but not as a Church of Christ though in truth it so may be According to the first acceptation of invisible we understand the Body Mystical of Christ consisting of himself the only proper Head the Holy Spirit animating and influencing the same and the particular members of the holy most happy invisible Spirits in heaven and Saints on earth spiritually united to them by Christ in the divine band of holiness And hitherto do the words of the Apostle to the Ephesians seem to be applyed saying Having made known the mystery of his will That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather Ephes 1. 9 10. together in one all things in Christ both which are in heaven and which are in earth even in him signifying hereby the mystical conjunction of Men and Angels in Christ Jesus although there are who not improbably and more literally do understand these words only of the collection and uniting of Jews who in respect of their peculiar exaltation to Gods service and favour are stiled in Scripture heavenly compared with the Gentiles and Gentiles into one Faith and Church of Christ which therefore divers times is called a Mystery as Romans the 16. 25 26. Ephes 3. v. 3 4 5. Col. 1. 26 27. 1 Tim. 3. 16. because as is there expressed it was an hidden and incredible thing to the Jews that the Gentiles should be taken into the like priviledges and rights of serving God as were once esteemed incommunicable to any so fully as to the Jews But whether the Scripture according to its most genuine and literal sense intendeth at any time to comprehend into one Society Angelical Peings and Humane as the Church of Christ as I do not find though the Ancients as well as Modern have held such an opinion so do I not oppose the Mystery of which we now speak being sufficiently verified in the preternatural and invisible conjunction of Christ and his Church in the indissoluble bands of his Spirit guiding the members thereof into all sufficiencie of Grace here and immortal absolute glory hereafter in heaven To understand this co-union or conjunction of Christ and his Members the better we are to call to mind a threefold union intimated in holy Writ unto us First a conjunction of Nature when more are of the same individual nature as the three Persons in the Holy Trinity are united in the same Divine Nature though in themselves distinct which is so proper to that mystery of the Trinity that it is not to be found elsewhere no not in that intimate communion we now speak of between Christ and his Members their natures continuing distinct Again another conjunction proper to Christian Religion is the union of two natures into one Person as in the Mystery of Christs incarnation when the humane and divine Nature become one so far as to constitute but one Person Christ Jesus So do not Christ and his Church But by a third way are Christ and his Church united into one aggregate Spiritual Body or Society which is effected by his Spirit which yet do not make properly a Part of that Body but by its manifold divine Graces do produce and conserve the same Christ thereby and his Church being as St. Paul saith One Spirit He that is joyned unto the Lord is one Spirit And 1 Cor. 6. 17. St. John likewise saith Hereby we know that we dwell in him and he in us because he hath given us of his Spirit This truly and only in a proper sense is invisible and that alwayes and hath two Parts the triumphant in Heaven which is a most perfect pure holy and blessed Society which have through the bloud of the Lamb and the power of his Spirit overcome the three grand Enemies Sin Death and the Devil and reaped the fruits of their sufferings and labours all tears being wiped from their eyes all sorrows being fled away all temptations for ever conquered and ceasing to molest them Now this part of Christ's Church remains alwayes invosible unto us here below And as for the other Part which is called Militant and are described to be A number of faithful and elect people living under the Cross and aspiring towards the perfection of Grace and Glory hereafter supposing at present what may hereafter be farther discussed viz. That such a peculiar number of holy persons there are within the visible Church of Christ which shall infallibly attain to everlasting bliss in heaven yet neither are these as such at any time visible or discernable to our common senses It being scarce if at all possible to judge infallibly who shall be saved and who shall not be saved it being much more difficult for any man to be assured of another mans salvation than of his own seeing that as is said hereunto an inward testimony of Gods Spirit is required which is the ground of that sound hope which is commonly called Assurance but the Promises of God in holy Scripture do not extend in like manner to the assuring of any man that another shall be saved as that he himself shall or that anothers faith shall not fail as that his own shall not but thus far only probably a truer and more certain sentence may
a Church in two things principally First in the matter The material part of a believer as he is a Christian not as he is a man is his Faith consisting of its several Articles and Branches But the matter of the Church is the Christians themselves whereof it consisteth Secondly they differ in their Form too For no man is properly a Christian though he believes all the Articles of a Christian and lives accordingly unless he be formed and fashioned Formale autem Ecclesiae Catholicae est professio fi dei Christi intâ—gra sub suis Legitimis Rectoribus à Christo institut â—â— ministris cum Sacramentorum obsignatione participatione Sec. Marcus Anton. Spalat Lib. 7. cap 10. §. 26. by the Sacrament of Regeneration which is Baptism But the Form of Christs Church doth consist in that outward disposition and order of Superiour and Inferiour communicating mutually in all Christian Acts and Offices necessary to the conservation of the whole Body and the edification and encrease of every Member thereof This Description of Christs Church is warranted us from St. Paul to the Ephesians who expresly maketh * Eph. 4. 15 16. Colos 2. 19. Christ the Head of his Church From whom the whole Body fitly joyned together and compacted by that which every joynt supplyeth according to the effectual working in the measure of every Part maketh increase of the Body unto the edifying its self in Love The like words to which we find to the Colossians chap. 2. 19. It must therefore from hence be granted That there is to be Government in Christs Church and that the Government ought to be proportionable to the Body thereby ordered and ruled To the Internal Body of Christ or Mystical Church not visible to us an Internal Mystical and Invisible administration is very agreeable and sufficient from Christ the Head and by the influence of the Holy Spirit but the external Church standeth in need necessarily of external Rule and Direction as much as it doth of external Doctrine Instructions and Sacraments though it be inwardly informed by the Spirit of Christ Now if it be enquired what that Government is whereby Christ would have his Church directed which is the most famous Question of late dayes though scarce ever call'd in question for some hundred years after Christ the resolution will be facilitated from what we delivered concerning Government civil For first if Government Ecclesiastical be so essential to the subsistence of a Church that without it it cannot be of any continuance without a Miracle it cannot be imagined with any probability of Reason that God or Christ should make one part of his Church and leave it to the liberty and pleasure of Man to make the other but least of all can they be of this opinion who think so sacredly of all Ecclesiastical Orders that to admit any of humane invention or prudence is to prophane the whole Systeme Again upon the grounds laid down in civil Government If Christ be the Author of Government Ecclesiastical in General he must also be the Cause of some one Government in Particular otherwise he could not be the Authour of any at all seeing Institution Political as well as Creation Natural must of necessity have some Object to terminate it as its effect Generals in all cases following Particulars in the things themselves though the way of knowledge or learning these things is to begin with the General and so to descend to Particulars Thirdly to understand what kind of Government Christ instituted in his Church what more certain and compendious way what more equal than to judge rather from matter of Fact than long and uncertain Disputations built on Arguments which are subject to diverse casualties from mans Passion and Interests prosecuted thereby whereas there is evidence sufficient from the thing it self to settle belief in that Point Fourthly we are here to note That when we speak of Government we intend not to comprehend therein all Accruments Ornaments or Additions which happened after the thing it self For these may be and doubtless oftentimes have been the effects of humane Prudence regulated by general Precepts but we speak of the Form it self or the Kind of Government For though we said God was the Author of All well grounded Government and do not mean that every particle thereof or inferiour additional Grace must proceed from the same hand For God having permitted if not ordered that every nation should conform it self in outward matters to the condition of the time and place God must have made for several Ages and several Places several Regiments which no man hath presumed to affirm the Divine Right or Institution extending only to those things wherein all at first agreed So that as children receive from the Nature of man at first created by God in Adam their fouls and bodily shape with the several parts necessarily thereunto belonging but their behaviours gestures gates favour and complexions are commonly derived from their immediate Pareâ—â—s So doth every true Body of Christ every Church receive common forms and shapes from the first Institution of Christ extant in the Primitive times but their particular modifications and customes are owing to to their Spiritual Fathers whether mediate or immediate Which frowardly and peevishly to reject or disobediently to oppose without higher warrant what is it else but to imitate such graceless and unnatural children who are ashamed of their own Parents Fifthly A distinction ought to be put between the nature and degrees of any thing and especially of the Church which had its conception in the womb of the Jewish Church its infancy during our blessed Saviours Tum maxime Deus ex memoria hominum labitur cum beneficiis ejus fruentes honorem dare divinae indulgentiae deberent Lactantius lib. 2. cap. 1. de Origine Erroris 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazienz Orat 1. contra Julianum abode upon the earth its minority during the Apostolical Age of One hundred years its perfect state soon after the first Christian Emperours advanced it and augmented it with secular strength and glory And it is certain that as the Roman Empire became more corrupt and declined so Christs Empire degenerated in many things contracting deformities in Doctrine and Discipline even from secular advantages granted unto it by the Devotion and Bounty of the best Wishers to it We are not then to be so narrow in our judgment of the Churches state to allow no more to it then when it but just crept out of the womb or when having gathered a little strength it could stand alone but not act according to the prime Institutours intention but as it was habited and affected in its riper years when we may behold that in more conspicuous manner which at first was obscurer yet essentially the same For as nothing is more evident to all but such as resolve they will understand nothing that they dislike than that in nature the Father is made before
autority he had it was for the edification and not destruction 2 Cor. 10. 8. of the Church The argument therefore taken from an Hereditary Right in the Crown of England of being Governour and Defendor of our Church to the apparent ruine and destruction of it we know very well from whence it proceedeth and whether it tendeth but where it will end as yet God only knows This we know that Papists are mad when that scoff and reproach which they have constantly put upon both King and Church from that Title upon due enquiry makes so little to their purpose And therefore they will fight with us with the name only CHAP. XXXII Of the Exercise of the Political power of the Church in Excommunication The grounds and Reasons of Excommunication More things than what is of Faith matter sufficient of Excommunication Two Objections answered Obedience due to Commands not concerning Faith immediately Lay-men though Princes cannot Excommunicate Mr. Selden refuted NAture in all Bodies that have Life casts out of it what ever corrupts afflicts or oppresseth the same and by Struglings and contentions endeavours to deliver it self from such noxious humors as would destroy it And this is the reason men take Vomits Purges and Sudorificks that the deadly humour being expelled the wholesome may prevail and the Whole be preserved There can then be nothing more reasonable or Christian than to put this in practice in Bodies Political or Ecclesiastical We see how Thieves Robbers Murderers and such like malefactors who are enemies to humane Society be denied and that justly the benefit of that Society against which they have so offended by confinement in Prison or deprivation of Life it self forfeited justly in seeking or acting the ruine of another And can any that grants the Communion of Christians to be a Body knit together by its several joints and nerves and consisting of several Members deny but the like Evil may befal in its kind to it what doth happen to others in another viz that some noxious humor of Heresie corrupting the Faith in which as the Scripture saith of the Blood is the life of a Christian and the Church it self may poison it And some violence of Schism may dissolve or dismember it And shall not it be allowed the like remedy or means of Cure which are held necessary in like cases No opinion how heretical or immoral so ever is more pernicious to Christian Society than that which absolutely denyes power to the Church to eject unsound and tainting members out of it and to provide for the security of the Body even by the abscission and destruction of any one Part infesting it For this opinion strikes not at one part of the Body but all neither at one point of Faith but all though not immediately and directly but indirectly and by consequence For as upon the fall of the House the persons within must needs be crusht to death so upon the dissolution of the outward Frame of the Church the Faith itself must of necessity in a short time perish and be reduced to nothing And therefore those men of reason as they would be accounted give us but little cause to think them better men than Christians who affirm rawly and loosely without qualification or due explication of their mind that no man is to be cast out of the Church but for something which is necessary to salvation or which Christ doth not require or forbid absolutely either denying or not considering a man can scarce tell which by their works hereby that Christ and St. Paul and our Creed it self require conservation of the unity of the Church both as a thing admirable in its self and necessary to the Faith it self For any man therefore to broach or publish such an opinion as this That every man may use what Ceremonies he pleases in the publick service of God or if he pleases he may use none and this That the Church hath no power to command or forbid any thing which is not expressed in the Scripture when as Rules general and several Examples in Scripture justify the contrary These I say being contrary not only to some one Church but all even those they would by no means have touched thereby do no less in their consequence mischief to the Church than the denial of the Mystery of the Trinity it self or of Christs incarnation however I grant they in their form are nothing so foul And therefore I presume to conclude them matter of Excommunication and so I judge St. Paul doth where he advises nay commands in the name of the Lord 2 Thes 3. 6. Jesus Christ the Thessalonians to withdraw themselves from every one that walketh disorderly and not after the tradition he received of us These traditions were as it is here implied concerning orders of the Church and manners of Worship which in all probability are most of them lost to us St. Paul therefore requiring that whoever did not walk according to those prescriptions delivered by him should be separated doth not warrant the like proceedings now For t is the very same thing whether the Church withdraws it self or whether it expells another When the Israelites warned by Moses departed from the tents of the wicked Corah Dathan Num. 16. 26 and Abiram who only walked disorderly not erroneously in the matter of worship that we read of and their complices and touched nothing of theirs they Anathematized them no less than if they had set them packing into remoter parts from the Congregation Nay if now-adayes as lately Sectaries should prevail so far as to possess themselves of all the Publick and Lawful places of Worship and eject the true Church they might stand no less legally and Really Excommunicate than if they were thrust formally from thence themselves For'tis not the place but the Cause and the Body from which they are cut that makes the Excommunication just and valid This we are confirmed in by the same Apostle afterward And if any man obey not our word by this Epistle note that man 2 Thes 3. 14. and have no company with him that he may be ashamed Now St. Paul in this Epistle had delivered many things not essential in themselves to salvation And where the company of Christians was not great and their society not formed and their outward power little or nothing as in the beginning of all Churches there it sufficed in liew of Formal excommunication to withdraw themselves from such troublers of the Church And this we read further of in St. Paul to the Romans saying Now I beseech Rom. 16. 17. you brethren mark them which cause Divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned and avoid them St. Paul generally in his Epistles not only insists upon unity of Faith but unity of Charity and outward communion they therefore that were Authors of unnecessary divisions are they whom he would have noted and avoided which when it is done with Publick
on him It was a sign likewise that his Seed were specially chosen to Gods favour to inherit that promised Land and many other temporal blessings which no wayes concerned other Nations It might have likewise many other moral purposes which are ingeniously sought out and largely prosecuted by others and especially Postillers 'T is true that many Nations observed this Rite of Circumcision but not by the appointment of God nor by their own invention but as transmitted to them from such who either descended from Abraham or received it from him Neither was it to such of the Nature of a Sacrament because not given them of God and having no promises annext to that Act in them but only as in Abraham For the Covenant that God made with mankind which we have call'd the Covenant of Works in opposition to that of Faith in Christ made after the Fall was made to Adam and all his for ever though all the Posterity of Adam reaped not the like visible benefit from it And this second Covenant received several additions according to the several Revelations it pleased God to make unto some part of mankind above others and that with Abraham and his Seed The first eminent Act of God was to Abraham himself when he gave him the Promise that the Messias should descend from him and gave him the sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of the Rom. 4. 11. Faith which he had being uncircumcised c. Now what Faith was that which Abraham had before he was circumcised Not that which moved him to offer his Son Isaac to God and yet believe that he should inherit the blessings promised to him but it was that Faith which he had in the more ancient and general promise with Adam concerning the Messias For otherwise the Apostles argument to prove that we are justified by Faith and not by works of the Law would not hold good which in effect is this The same way that the Patriarchs and particularly your Father Abraham was justified the same way must ye be justifid too but Abraham was not justified by the works of the Law but by Faith in Christ v. 10 11 12 13. And this appeareth plainly For if Abraham were justified before the Law and before Circumcision then surely Circumcision and the works of the Law could not avail to his Justification For how was Faith reckoned to Abraham for righteousness In circumcision or in uncircumcision not in circumcision but in uncircumcision And he received the sign of Circumcision as a seal of the Righteousness of the Faith he had being yet uncircumcised From whence it appeareth That what Covenant was made with Abraham by Circumcision was not absolutely a new Covenant but a special Priviledge and Interest given to him in that long before made with Adam after his breaking the first Covenant of Obedience and Works And thus we see the nature and end of the first Sacrament given to the Jews before Christ Circumcision And the second Sacrament of Note was much of the same nature as not being given to make an absolute generally new Covenant with Mankind but only to signifie the peculiar Right that People had to the general Covenants above others that as Gods First-born sons of all Nations they should have a double portion of that Grace which was common otherwise to all And farther an addition of Temporal blessings was made sure to them by it upon the due observation of those Rites and Laws given them And this blessing was twofold hereby signified First that passed in delivering them so eminently and miraculously from the destroying Angel who killed the First-born of the Aegyptians and brought them from that tedious and grievous bondage by which they were oppressed And therefore it was called the Passover The second consisted in an Assurance of the promised Possessions in the Land of Canaan Now besides these litteral significations and ends there were two other Spiritually intimated by them relating to the Gospel and its Services And they were the remission of sins in Baptism and the right to heaven and bliss after death by the participation of the means of Salvation the Mannah of his Word and the Sacraments of his Promises Baptism and the Holy Eucharist CHAP. XXXVI Of the Evangelical Sacraments Of the various application of the name Sacrament Two Sacraments Vnivocally so called under the Gospel only The others Equivocally Five conditions of a Sacrament Of the reputed Sacraments of Orders Matrimony and Extream Vnction in particular AS under the Old Testament There were some special Sacraments and properly so called besides many others which by mens interpretation rather than Gods Institution were so called as the Tree of Life in Paradise Noahs Ark Passing through the Red Sea the Brasen Serpent and the like so also under the Gospel as St. Paul saith There are Gods many and Lords many but to us there is but one God So are there Sacraments many and many Sacramental things but to us there are but two Sacraments properly so called Baptism and the Eucharist or Supper of the Lord. Therefore purposing to speak of all the reputed as well as real Sacraments of the Gospel because though not Sacraments yet very Sacred and deserving well to be understood we shall divide them into equivocal or improper and univocal or proper Sacraments Of the former rank we make Orders sacred Matrimony Penitence or Repentance Confirmation and extream Unction Of the latter sort are Baptism and the Supper of the Lord. Now to understand the just reason of this discrimination between Sacraments it is necessary that we pitch upon some general Definition of a true Sacrament by which as a Light and Rule the False are to be examined and judged And therefore shall resume our Definition before laid down of a Sacrament A Sacrament is a visible sign instituted by God to produce an invisible grace in the soul of man which we have already defended But if men will religiously contend about words it cannot be denyed That many of the Ancient and Holy Fathers and the perpetual language of the Church have accustomed themselves to call many more things than Two or Seven or perhaps Seven times seven Sacraments because they do contain something sacred and mysterious in them but yet amount not to the perfection either of our received two Sacraments or perhaps of the other five And so long as men hold to the true and real Sacraments and have the due use of them it matters not much if they give the Name Praelect de Sacram. Qu. 6. c. 1. Sacrament unto those things which are not worthy of it as Whitaker hath well said But the Reasons against more than two Sacraments in the proper sense may be these First That we read not of the institution of any more than two by God or Christ in the New Testament and of these two clear evidence there is found as may more fully be seen when we come to treat of them Nay
saved but he that believeth not shall be damned This Covenant was typified by the Sacrament of Circumcision made between God and Abraham with his seed thus This is my Covenant Gen. 17. 10. which ye shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee Every Man-child among you shall be circumcised c. And this was yet more cleerly prophesied of by Ezekiel saying Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you and Ezek. 36. 35 ye shall be clean from all your filthiness and from all your Idols will I cleanse you And as with men that is no sure Covenant which doth not consist of proper matter mutually passed from one Party to another and of due form of words thereunto required So neither is that proper Baptism which makes no express or implicite stipulation between God and man and that with that form of words and Action by Christ enjoyned And the Matter of this Sacrament is expressed already to be water by many places of Scripture as Mat. 3. 6 11. Joh. 1. 26. Joh. 3. 23. Act. 8. 36 c. And having none other mentioned by Christ we are not so much to argue presumptuously of insufficiency of that Element to effect so great matters upon the soul and thence conclude That it is unlikely God should be so rigorous to exact indispensably a little water or cause the party to perish in his sins for 1. This way of reasoning holds no less against Gods severe imposition of Circumcision which was the cutting off of a small pitifull piece of Flesh and yet that omitted God threatneth positively to cut off the soul of the child from his people Exod. 17. 14. 2. This takes away the Liberty and power of God to dispose of his Graces upon what terms he pleases for the manner of conveying whereof he may choose what means he pleases though never so improbable to sense to attain such ends that it may appear the vertue is not in the thing so much as God 3. God in such Cases doth not so much tye himself as tie us He doth indeed oblige himself to those means himself hath ordained but not confine so himself to them that he cannot or may not work the same effect without them Yet as he so restrains that he threatens wrath and makes no promise at all but upon our dutiful observation of such his Prescriptions But as when a man not by any wilful neglect or disesteem of the usefulness of this Sacrament shall by invincible necessity be detained from it with a fervent desire to be partakers of it God by his abundant Grace may supply the want of it In like manner where there is no proper natural water to be had rather then the solemnity should wholly be omitted and denied to one earnestly craving the same Use may be made of that which comes nearest to it so of a nature cleansing But this needs farther determination to put out of doubt than any private Doctour can give For we read in Scripture of no other element though in Ecclesiastical History we do than water And there appears no greater inconvenience Pallad Lausic Historiâ or ill consequence for men to be brought to that extremity for want of natural water than to want the general means of Christianity itself or Children to die unbaptized But the manner of applying this water to the party baptized by Immersion or dipping into the water or by Aspersion or Sprinkling and that thrice or once only is not much to be insisted upon For though 't is undeniable that it was a general Ablution by sinking the Baptized into the water as St. Paul intimateth when he speaketh of being buried with Christ in Rom. 6. 4. Col. 2. 12. Math. 3. 16. Act. 8. 38. Baptism that as Christ was laid under the earth after his death so Christians under the water and were buried unto sin And other phrases of Scripture which speak of ascending out of the waters and descending into the waters Yet that any washing by aspersion or sprinkling sufficed appears from the Analogy between the Sacramental Purgations of the Old Law and the New For as infinite places certifie us the blood of the Sacrifices and waters of Purification were to be sprinkled on the Persons therein concerned And so the end of the Sacrament of Baptism is to signify and conferr Grace on the baptized by such outward Elements to Exod. 29. 2. Levit. 14. 7. which the vertue of the Sacrament not consisting in the nature of the thing but in the Institution of God greater quantity can conduce no more then less provided so small quantity be not taken which should hide and hinder the significancy of the Elements And besides Gods rule being I will have mercy and not Sacrifice and never intending to save the Soul by such means as in common probability may destroy the Body the condition of some persons being so frail and weak and of some Climates so hard and hurtful he is pleased to accept the most safe way the substance of the duty being entirely observed And such persons are not only Infants but the Sick and very Aged too who were baptized with water and that upon a necessity of entring into the Kingdome For could scarce any thing betray Calvine with his Followers such as Perkins and Cartwright more to suspicion of insolence and singularity than his seeking to elude the plain precept of Christ concerning Elemental not Spiritual water Job 3. 5. 6. and washing only contrary to the universal consent of all Catholicks and Hereticks before him as if he had taken the rise of his Fancy from these two famous Anabaptists Balthazar and Satelare in Germany who Cassand Praefar ad Anabaptist Mat. 19. 13. 14. reading in the Scripture one Ground of Paedobaptism to be Christs saying Suffer little Children to come unto me for of them is the Kingdom of heaven interpreted the same of Children in Spirit and not in Age with the like probability both And of the subject of Baptism or the persons to be baptized and capable of that Sacrament this in sum may be said out of the Scripture as the foundation of all as even now out of St. John Unless a man be born Tit. 3. 5. of water and the Holy Ghost he shall not enter into the Kingdom of God And St. Paul to Titus saith that According to his mercy he saved us by the washing of Regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost And to the Corinthians 1 Cor. 12. 13 Cap. 12. For by one Spirit we are all baptized into one Body c. And the like is comprehended in that General Law of Christ given to his Disciples to be Executed Matthew 28. 29. Now from these general Rules laid down by Christ in his word a just and particular inference may be made to the entitling Children to a Right in this Sacrament it being a Rule which holds no less in Divine than Humane Laws That where the Law
defines it 1. Qu. 8. Ar. 1. 2. The communication of one thing with another so many waies as a Body imparts it self to another so many may it be said to be Present to it And these ways are commonly resolved to be two First by immediate contact and conjunction Secondly by a Virtual or Effectual communication with it the Substance it self continuing remote So that though Christs body should be determined to one certain place in Heaven yet may it by its vertue communicate it self to us in the Sacrament and be said to be Present really though not Corporally after the manner of bodies in their natural state by contiguity And what we now say of the Subject of this Sacrament will hold no less in the Case of Participation of Christs Body and Blood in the Eucharist For as Christs Body may be said to be really though not Corporally Present and immediately So may it be said to be received Really and not Phantastically only though not Corporally after the manner that other bodies are received For they that affirm that Christs body is Corporally Sacramentally received do say if not what they know not themselves yet what no body but themselves can apprehend For either these terms are really distinct or Not. If they be not then are they either superfluous or at most explicatory one of another but this latter cannot be said because Sacramentally is more obscure than Corporally and Corporally signifies a much grosser degree of Presence than the Framers of this distinction will admit to agree with these Divine Mysteries If they be distinct whence shall we fetch the nature of this Sacramental Presence whenas there is nothing to be found in Nature to resemble or explain it but it must be described by it self And Sacramentally Present is no more than to be present in the Sacrament But what it is to be present in the Sacrament or how a thing may be said to be present in the Sacrament otherwise than in other Cases we shall ever be to seek and consequently never learn Therefore we must be constrained at length to reduce this large and unintelligible Presence Sacramental to one of the two old sorts of the Presence of Influence only or Presence of Substance it self or Suppositum So that either the Influence only of Christs Body and Blood should be found in the Eucharist and the vertue of them be therein communicated unto us or the very natural Substance also We have hitherto spoken of the Presence it self precisely taken from its Causes and manner external For according to Philosophers there is a Modus Essentialis and a Modus Accidentalis The Essential manner is simply to be after the intrinsique natureof a thing as the intrinsique nature and manner of a Body is to be Corporally and of a Spirit to be Spiritually that is As a Body and as a Spirit But as a Body ordinarily and naturally palpable and visible may remain a true real Body and yet not be seen or felt so may a Spirit remain a Spirit in substance and yet appear as a Body So that it is possible Christs Body may be present corporally in the essentials and formal nature of a Body and yet not appear in the accidental or separable formalities of a Body which are actually to be seen and felt at a competent distance These I call accidental because they may be wanting as well by reason of the defect of the senses which should perceive them as of the sensiblenes of such objects For a Divine power may take away the one as well as the other by impeding the sense though seeing the very nature and essence of a Body consisteth in being extended and quantitative it cannot be conceived how a Divine Power can divide them which mutually constitute one another though it may render them imperceptible to outward sense And so Christs Body may be in the Eucharist so far corporally as to have all real and essential modifications of a Body but not so Corporally as to appear in the proper forms of a Body But granting or supposing rather that Christs Body were in this Latter sense present in the Sacrament there appears no great reason why this should be called a Sacramental Presence more than that presence when he was with his Disciples at Supper and as the Scripture saith Vanished out of their sight Luk. 24. 31. that is as the word and sense import not translating his Body suddainly to another place but disappearing in that place or ceasing to be seen by them answerable to the contrary power shewn in his sudden appearing without any previous Act and standing in the midst of them before they V. 36. could be aware of it or suppose any such thing which was occasion of their great Affrightment and amazement supposing him to be a Spirit 37. But it is one thing to be Possibly and another Actually so to be And yet farther Actually for Christs Body and Blood so to be present and to be so Present as there should remain nothing substantial or material besides them and the Signs to be changed into the things signified by them absolutely and totally the shew or Accident only excepted So that the Question is double First Whether those Substances of Bread and Wine remain after consecration really the same they were before or be totally abolished Secondly It is inquired not so much whether Christs Body and Blood be really present in the Sacrament but whether it be really the Sacrament it self as it must necessarily be if so be that they be in such manner really present as there remains no other substance besides them For the former of these the knowledge of the Real Presence of Signs Bread and Wine do exceedingly conduce to the understanding of the Real Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ under or through those Signs And it should seem that the Roman Advocates of the New sense of a Real Presence of Christs Body and Blood proceed not in the proper and natural method rightly to found their Doctrine For as according to them there must be in order of nature though not of time a Desition or abolition of the Elemental substances before there can succeed those Divine substances so should they have first by sound and sufficient arguments proved the destruction of the preceeding Bodies and then have inferred the succeeding But on the contrary They first presume on the Second upon what grounds we shall hereafter see viz That Christs Body is so really subsisting there and then conclude that the Elements are not there subsistent For he that holds that the Sacramental Signs do not exclude the Body and Blood of Christ doth likewise hold that the Body and Blood of Christ are not inconsistent with the Real Presence of the Elements It must not be denied that those texts of Scripture which are commonly alleadged to Parallel Christs words and consequently to give a more favourable sense than that of Transubstantiation do not exactly
fit the Case For when the Scripture saith Christ is a Door or Christ is a Vine or a Lamb it is not the same formally as to say that a Lamb is Christ or a Door or a Vine is Christ Yet if that rigour must be observed in Scripture Propositions to have them true that without a Trope or Figure they must be understood otherwise we must be reproached to deny Scripture the foresaid speeches must as necessarily inferr a Transubstantiation of Christ into the Nature of a Door or Vine or Lamb as his bare words at the Celebration do inferr a Transubstantiation of the Elements into his Nature And no apparence of disparity can be here shown if so be Christs Literal meaning must be here urged as they do Now That the Signs which were before are Really Present in the Sacrament after Consecration doth appear from the most-Essential thing to a Sacrament A Sacrament we have defined to be a Visible Sign with Austin and infinite others I say a Visible and Real Sign and not Visibly Apparently or Seemingly a Sign or a Sign of a Sign as the deluding Specieses remaining after supposed Transubstantiation are said to be And it is an Impossible thing as is before shewed in the general treating of Sacraments that the Sign should be the thing signified For if some Sign could be the thing signified then something signified should be a Sign and so both wayes the Relate and Cor-relate should be the same too and two should be one and one should be two and if this may be what may not be or at least said to be For as to the instances given That in some Cases a thing may be a Sign and the thing signified it hath been showed how defective they are in that they are a Sign of the same nature perhaps or rather some qualification of it and not of the same thing numerically as the individual Sign in the Lords Supper is believed to be of that it is Therefore from hence they are put to their choice Whether of the two they will suffer the loss of the Sacrament or the absence of Christs Body in their sense For not only the nature of the thing now expressed require Sacramental Signs as well as the thing signified but the manifold Autorities of the Ancientest of the Greek and Latin Fathers have for this reason called the Sacramental Elements Signs Figures Representations Types Antitypes of Christs Body and Blood as might at large be shewed our Adversaries not denying it But what answer do they make to them The Modern Greeks as Cardinal Bessario who is herein followed by some more modern than himself Latinizing answer confessing that the Fathers Bessario Do Eucharist Sacramento often so speak but say they they speak only of the Bread and Wine before Consecration and not after Here is some wit in this shuffle and evasion but no truth at all For before Dedication and Consecration they are not Signs or Figures or Antitypes at all They have no more relation to the Body and Blood of Christ than the like Elements at our Common tables and therefore they must be understood to speak of them after Consecration But the Answer of the Scholastical managers of this controversy in the Latin Church shows less modesty and no more truth For Aūg. in Psal 3. they say St. Austin who calls the consecrated Elements a Figure of Christs Body spake not of every empty Figure but of a Figure of a thing really present All this we grant willingly viz that the Signs Sacramental are not Signs of things future or Absent This is nothing at all to the purpose And the Second answer is notoriously and boldly false saying That St. Austin might there speak as Manichee who denied the Real Body Contra Adamant C. 12. of Christ For it was in confutation of Manicheans And of Tertullians words who likewise calls the consecrate Elements Signs they make non-sense joyning head and tail together that they may really signifie nothing least they should signify that for which we alleadg them Tertullian saies Hoc est Corpus meum Id est Figura Corporis mei Figura Corporis mei saies one after his greater Doctors is referred not unto Corpus meum as an Fisher Jes explication thereof but unto Hoc in this manner Hoc id est Figura Corporis mei est Corpus meum i. e. This that is the Figure of my Body is my Body If it be not sufficient conviction of their Errour and confusion that they are driven to such unnatural tossing of mens words against common sense and Grammar and having so done to affect nothing but what is directly false or unintelligible as this Scholie is making the Figure and the Body the very same thing I confess I have nothing to say For this is the subject we have at present in hand That the Sign and thing signified must by eternal necessity be distinct but this opinion of Transubstantiation destroys this and destroying this destroys the Sacrament For whereas they say That the remaining Species supply the place of the Substance abolished and are Signs This cannot consist with the impossibility of such Accidents without a subject in that contrary to their definition they should stick and not stick to a thing in that they are Accidents their nature requires that they should have a subject and the nature of this mutation requires they should have none And where as they argue That what any Creature can do the Creatour can much more do and therefore if the Creature can sustain Accidents the Creatour God Almighty can I answer If the Creature could sustain Accidents without a subject then doubtless could God the Creatour but doth it follow that because the Creature can be a subject to them therefore the Creatour can also All that a Creature can Do the Creatour can do but all that the Creature can Suffer I trow the Creatour cannot But to be the subject to Accidents is a Passion and imperfection and no Action and therefore nothing can be concluded from hence Therefore they proceed one strain higher not doubting to say That what the Creature can do by its Passive Capacity the Creatour can do by his Active which if it did not imply a contradiction in nature itself I should easily grant but this it doth For first it is to make an Accident a Substance For t is the nature of a Substance to subsist of it self without the aid or support of any other thing distinct from it Not that the Secondary being can subsist without the First God himself but without any thing Created And therefore seeing that Substance it self cannot continue in its Being without Gods omnipotent hand supporting it this doth equalize the nature of Accidents to that of Substance in that it supposeth that Accidents by a divine power may subsist of themselves as well as Substance For substance cannot subsist at all without a Divine power and thus Accidents by a
freely to conclude with them But until this be better evinced what make they with so many zealous professions of their believing of Christ or protestations against others that herein they believe not Christ It becomes then the principal doubt of all not what were Christs words but what was the drift and purpose of them And surely they must needs grant this to be worthily doubted of when they consider how sundry of their eminent Doctors do yield such an Indifferency in the words as that they are capable of both senses as might easily be made apparent But saying that We ought to take the Scriptures always literally where it will consist with the analogy of Faith they say no more than we But if it happens as here it doth that our Analogy of Faith differs from theirs what are we the neerer For our Faith tells us Christs words were spiritual as well here as in St. John where he expresly testifies so much saying Joh. 6. 63. The words that I speak unto you they are spirit and they are life that is spiritually and not properly to be understood And Literal sense we understand two ways First as being the same as the prime signification of the words according to common use And this Literal sense we deny of these words But affirm them literally to be taken taking Literal for that which by the same words was immediately and primarily intended by the speaker in which way all Metaphorical speeches are Literally to be taken For he that says of a vicious man He is a Beast doth literally mean that he is of beastly qualities and not the very nature of a Beast So that Metaphorical and Literal are not opposite but Metaphorical and Natural and Natural and Spiritual We say then That this Proposition as in the Eucharist is Metaphorical and yet Literal But it is a weak and spiteful slander to say That because we say this therefore we hold that Christs Body is only Metaphorically and Figuratively in the Eucharist For we profess it to be really and properly and really and properly received in the Sacrament and not as they would fain perswade the World of us imaginarily only But the figurativeness is not so much in the Presence of Christ as the Predication of Christ of the visible Elements We say plainly the Elements are Christ only Figuratively and improperly and as St. Ambrose hath Ambros de Sacrament Lib. 4. C. 4. it or rather had it before a false Cause here as elswhere constrained men to foul practises After Consecration that which was remains and yet is changed into another It retains its nature it is changed to its name to its use and ends and effects and these are sufficient The Fathers who are alledged to prove Christ spake here properly do speak of many changes made in the Elements but then they do as often deny the substance to be changed sometimes they say The Nature is changed but we know Nature is somtimes used more largely than to imply the very Being and Essence it self We say commonly Such a man is quite of another nature from what he was We do not mean his very Essence or Being is changed but his condition It is said in the first Book of Samuel 1 Sam. 10. v. 9. that after his anointing to the Kingdom God gave Saul another heart I hope not in substance but in disposition But it is neerer to our Case what St. Paul saith of Christ and us in his Epistle to the Ephesians We Eph. 5. 30. are members of his body of his flesh and of his bones Can any thing be more expresly affirmed than this to signifie a corporeal unity and identity with Christ if the Verb Copulative Are must here be taken Substantively as they say Is must in these words This Is my Body As they profess with much ardour and zeal they will believe Christ say he what he please and be the thing never so contrary to our common sense and reason so do we And no less do we believe St. Paul speaking by the same spirit This he hath said and therefore we must not dispute but believe He hath said as plainly as words can make it that we are the very flesh of Christ and the bones of Christ and that he cannot be understood of the same in Kind but number is manifest from his argument when he saith No man ever hated his own flesh but as his flesh is anothers in nature we know there is nothing more common Now the like if not same interpretation will satisfy the Scripture in one place and other And not only so but the Fathers who are urged for the literal signification of the words rather than Literal sense of the Author of them speak diverse times of a Real change of the foresaid Elements but saying the same in other cases as in the holy Chrysm after Benediction and specially the water of Baptism we would have one give meaning to the other And the Modern Greeks who are arrived at higher expressions and sense than their forefathers yet when occasion serves can affirm the substance of Bread and wine to remain and would never fully receive the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Transubstantiation as the Latins do which declare how much they suspect an Evil sense in the Roman Church Again as they are defective in their characterizing this change to that degree so are they excessive according to the Latins opinions in ascribing too great a change upon Consecration For they make no such distinction as the other between Nature or substance and the Accidents And they deny as much there remains any Accidents as any substance of Bread wherein they seem to take Christ more Literally than the Papists For if as they give out we must take Christ at his word and hold him hard to the Letter we must and ought to do it no less in reference to the Accidents than the Substance For Christ made no distinction and then why should we By vertue therefore of his words the Accidents must be changed as well as the Substance And so in truth we believe and to make our meaning clear will allow no effect of Christs words upon the one which we will not upon the other And if they oppose sense to discriminate the Cases saying that we see and feel that the Specieses and Accidents are the same We must tell them in their own words and that without fraud or dissimulation that we believe Christ rather than our own senses And were it not so yet we cannot teil that they are the same individual Accidents which were before consecration though like them and appearing so to be And I could never as yet meet their reason worth the noting 〈◊〉 remembring which should move them to be lead by their senses to interpret Christs words when he saith Positively and with the same Verb Suâ—â—â—an â—â—ve This Cup IS the New Testament in my blood and commands them to drink the Cup
Sanctified by the word and â— Tim. 4. 5. Prayer But the word and Sanctification there are no preaching or consecration but only signify that God by the Gospel which is his word proper removed the sentence of uncleannesse from things so judged to be under the Law and set them as free as other reputed Clean But prayer's proper Act and Office it is to bring down a special Benediction upon Sacramental and Familiar food On the other side the difference being so vast and Sacred between Common Creatures of bread and Wine and the Sacramental it was lookt upon as a thing of greatest use and concernment to all believers to know whether such consecration was performed or not But where the form was so loose and indetermined as it must needs be consisting in the various and Prolix office belonging thereunto how could it possible be diserned when the Host was consecrated and whether seeing neither the whole Canon could be said thereunto absolutely necessary nor could it be assigned what part thereof essentially and essectually performed he Consecration Hereupon the Latine Church hath taken upon them to define the Conversion of the Elements into Christ for that they make Consecration to a very few precise words used by Christ at the First Institution of his Holy Supper viz This is my Body and This is my Blood And I have not found how the Arguments on either side can be well answered while the Opinion of trans-elementation or such supposed conversion stands Good and is accepted but otherwise it is no hard matter to answer Both. For supposing not a change of the proper natures and substances of the Elements into the Body of Christ naturall What inconvenience would it be to be undetermined by a certain number of words when the mystical change was wrought granting that this change Relative is made by the word and Prayer as the change of water in baptism is made not by any special number or form of words but by the Office whether longer or shorter And therefore the necessitie of putting the whole virtue in those few words recited was received presently upon the doctrine of Transubstantiation which is an argument that the Greek Church never admitted it in the Latin sense however I know they would not in their Councels contend with them about that but kept themselves to the tradition of their Predecessors who restrained not the Consecration to such number of words but must have with the like prudence and necessity have done so had they so apparently and expresly received such a simple conversion as being true all Christians ought to be so punctually assured of and venerate that nothing in their Creed could be more necessary and not contented themselves with the Relative change only of the things themselves which precisely to know stood them not so much in hand seeing the Reverence given to the Visible objects could not exceed that communicable to Creatures It may be granted therefore that the words of Christ are so necessary that Consecration cannot rightly be performed without them but yet denied to be so operative that upon the plain recitation of them they should presently effect that great alteration of them as the Story I make no doubt feigned to beget belief of this new opinion implieth telling us That certain Shepheards while it was the custom to pronounce the Canon of the Mass openly having learned it Henorius in Gemma Animae 1. 103. and recited it over their bread and wine which they had before them in the field as they were at their ordinary Meal the bread was turned visibly into Christs body and the Wine into his Blood and that the Shepheards were struck dead from heaven Whereupon it was decreed in a Synod that from thence forward no man should rehearse the said Canon Audibly or out of Sacred Places or without Book or without Holy Vestments or without an Altar A tale as likely to be true as the thing they would prove by it And so let them pass together while we proceed to the CHAP. XLVI Of the Participation of this Sacrament in both Kinds The vanity of Papists allegations to the Contrary No Sacramental Receiving of Christ in One kind only How Antiquity is to be understood mentioning the receiving of one Element only The pretended inconveniences of partaking in both kinds insufficient Of Adoration of the Eucharist SECOND Thing formally necessary to this Sacrament which is Celebration in both Kinds or Bread and Wine In treating whereof we must do so much Justice to the Cause as to acknowledge a reasonable distinction between the Sacrament it self and the Communicants in it To the former I suppose it is agreed that indispensably both Elements are necessary and Essential and that there can be no Sacrament without them both whatever solemnity may be acted to the eye or ear For the Sacrament noâ— being a thing of natural force or vertue but instituted the very formality of the Institution consisting in the joint concurrence of both Elements the Removing of One is the Adulteration of the Whole and destruction neither can that be said to be a Sacrament of Christs Institution but if at all of mans devising Neither do I see how the argument should not hold in the Participation of that Sacrament as well as Consecration viz that as consecration in one Kind only maketh not a Sacrament so communication in one Kind where both are in being should be receiving the Sacrament For the natures of things as Aristotle hath it are like numbers which with the addition or Substraction of one change their kind We do not make Bread of the Nature of Wine or on the contrary but we make them both equally of the nature of that Sacrament which by Christs own Institution was an Aggregate thing constituted of both and therefore to withdraw or deny one is in effect to deny both And the Evasion to salve this is both ridiculous and prophane which saith The blood is contained in the Body of Christ and therefore in taking one both are received But 't is nothing so For the Blood of Christ in the Sacrament is no more contained in the Body than the Body in the blood And besides we say that he who not at all receives the Cup cannot at all receive the signified body of Christ but only the signifying Again How can this assertion consist with the opinion of an Incruent Sacrifice For either the Sacramental Body of Christ hath Blood in it or it hath not If it hath then is it a Bloody and not Incruent Sacrifice For I think there is no ground for a man to say a Sacrifice was called Bloody or Cruent because only Blood was shed before it was Sacrificed and not because even at that time it contained blood in it For Cruent and Incruent are the same in the Law from whence the Gospel borrows this Phrase as Animate and Inanimate Sacrifices If it hath not how can it be said to have the blood
denied him as having no pre-existent matter out of which they can be said to be fram'd It must be consessed the word Create and Creation in Scripture is not so strictly used as in Philosophers Books but imports any notable production as well as that simple one without pre-existence Yet the thing it self is affirmed as where it is said All things were made by God for there nothing is excepted or exempted from his Power as Heb. 11. Heb. 11. 13. Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Word of God so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear and he only can preserve all things who maketh all things But God in Christ or Christ through God upholdeth all things by the word of his Power Heb. 1. 3. Rev. 4. 11. And in the Revelations it is said Thou hast created all things and for thy pleasure Chap. 10. 6. they were and are created And in the tenth Chapter the Angel sweareth by him that liveth for ever and ever who created Heaven and the things that are therein and the Earth and the things that therein are and the Sea and the things that are therein And aptly do the words of the Psalmist answer the History of the Creation who speaking of the particulars Psal 148. 5. of this natural world saith of God He commanded and they were created this being the only means and method that we read all things to have been produced viz. the word of his Power Let there be Light Let there be the Firmament c. which being a demonstration of his immediate will most wisely implieth as some eminent Philosophers have with great admiration observed the proper Power of God Almighty to whom nothing is difficult that he willeth should come to pass Now where there is no limitation upon an agent but what proceeds from its own will there nothing is impossible and if it be possible for God to will as must be seeing man may desire to produce somewhat from nothing it must be possible to come to pass what so is willed by him otherwise God should be disappointed and frustrated in his intentions than which nothing can be thought more absurd or repugnant to the Nature of God And thus at the same time it appears as well what God made as how viz. That there is nothing extant whether visible or invisible but what was framed by him and that absolutely as the Apostle more expresly testifieth to the Colossians By him were all things created that are in heaven and that are in Col. 1. 16. earth visible and invisible whether they be thrones or dominions or principalities or powers all things were created by him and for him By which we understand that all the Angels and several orders of those invisible Spirits in Heaven were the effect of his Power no less than were inferior and visible Creatures And though there be no particular mention of the time order place or manner of the Creation of Angels yet that they were so created general assurance we have from the Word of God the holy Ghost advisedly omitting and mens wits only conjecturing at the other things to prevent pride and curiosity in man to whom it was sufficient to make a description of those things which related to this visible world and concerned him to know So that the Heavens themselves with the glorious and numerous Lights thereof are no farther explained unto us than as their influences concern the nature and actions of Man It is a true Axiom that all things were made for man but it is not true that they had no other end why God created them namely Heavens heavenly Bodies and heavenly Spirits but for to serve the uses of man next to the ultimate end of all his own Glory For though it be said of Angels and we take the word in the properest sense and not as it may be for the several Messengers and Dispensers of Gods will and Word to the several Ages of men Are they not all ministring Spirits Heb. 1. 14. sent forth to them who shall be heirs of salvation Yet we look on their attendance in such cases as an honorary command and tuition over us and secondary end to their first Institution rather than any thing of subjection or servility For when the Shepherd looks to his Flock and when the King is said to be for the People we are not in reason or sobriety to imagine a worth in the governed above the governour as some have sondly wretchedly and dangerously concluded For that Rule The end is more excellent than the means or thing ordained to that end holds true only when the thing is so ordain'd that its own end and good is not equally or more eminently included in the same or when the end is the principal agent in instituting such a thing to such an end But the Sheep never appointed the Shepherd to serve to rule and protect them nor did men oblige Angels to wait upon them nor as is above demonstrated the People firâ—t erect or constitute Governors or Governments over themselves these were done by a superior Power over them neither at this day can they that is ought by any imaginary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoretus Haeret. Fabular lib. 5. cap. 7. Charter alter the Archetype of Gods Institution And they that do attempt and have pretended to confer Power sometimes on Governors can at all do it directly and validly But they seem and are interpreted by many so to do when they unwarrantably and unreasonably deny it to others and submit to their own favourites though how lamely and improperly these acts of strength and not of right are carried on is also elsewhere shewed For no question but if the common sort of men could extend their presumptuous Power to Spirits as they do to Princes they would take such offence against their tutelary Angels as to put them out of office when they find themselves crossed in their inclinations or designs by them or perswading themselves they are neglected by them choosing others in their places and justifie such their acts from a dignity supposed in themselves from being the end of their care and ministration If indeed we appointed Spirits or Princes over us as men do choose servants to do their work for them and serve them then surely we might as justly turn them off again when ever they became unserviceable and prejudicial to us but seeing both are appointed by God we are to know our distance notwithstanding the good offices they do for us And that considering secondly That their own ends are no less principally and primarily served in such ministrations than the ends of others And yet I make no doubt but many persons to whom God hath given holy and righteous Spirits to protect and preserve them being ungoverned and refractory lewd and licentious contrary to the mind and motions of them presiding over them do in effect
God in Christ Jesus necessary to a Christian Sanative Grace and Operative or Healing and Helping Grace The soul of Man being maimed and disabled by his Fall must have a Grace to cure and restore the broken state thereof before outward means can avail to the enabling it to be obedient and to perform acts of a new and spiritual Life adding That it would be all one for to offer Grace to the soul of man so diseased as it would be to offer a pair of Spectacles to a blind man or a staff to him whose leggs be broken And I wonder much to find him charged by a very learned Authour of late that he hath not given us the true efficient cause of the wills of obedience wherein as he well observes consisteth the principal difficulty of all but only the Formal and wherein the efficacie of Grace consisteth For he that shall consult his Fourth Book De Gratia Christi cap. 1. and so on will easily perceive he Id. Tom. 3. lib. 3. c. 1. makes it to be The Grace of God sweetly and unutterably delighting by which the Will is prevented and bowed to will and do whatever God hath ordained it should do and will Surely this is much more than a formal Cause whereby a thing actually is whatever it is And in this manner is the true Believer made partaker of the benefits of Christs Death and Passion to his Sanctification and Justification CHAP. XVIII Of the effect and benefit of Christs Mediation in suffering and rising again seen in the Resurrection of Man The necessity of believing a Resurrection The Reasons and Scriptural Testimonies proving a Resurrection Objections against the same answered OF the Justification and Sanctification of a man by Christ we have heretofore spoken it remains now for the Conclusion of this First Part that we here speak of the most perfect and noble effect of Christs mediation seen in the salvation of Man or his state of perfect Restitution in bliss to which Grace here in this life is but a Prelude and an Introduction And to this end the immediate way hereunto the Resurrection is to be explained as a principle Article of Christian Faith For this also is an effect of Christ our Mediatour as St. Austin witnesseth in these words The Resurrection Aug. Tract 23. in Joann John 6 54. of souls is effected by the eternal and immutable substance of Father and Son but the Resurrection of the Body is by the temporal and not co-aeternal Dispensation of the humanity of the Son And St. Ambrose speaks well to this Ambros de Fide Resurrect Illi quidam qui dicunt animas c. purpose They who think that souls are immortal do not sufficiently pacifie me while they redeem me but in part For what great favour can it be to me when I am not wholly delivered What life can that be if the work of God in me must perish Where is Gods justice if the same natural end be to the just and wicked in common They that would therefore make sure work against infidelity bring their grounds for this point from the Gentiles themselves whom they would convert to this opinion But both the artificial and inartificial arguments reason and testimony of the most famous Philosophers not taken from and grounded upon Divine Revelations will certainly be found insufficient For surely it may be said of the profession of this Article of Faith what Christ saith of Peters confession of him Flesh and Bloud hath not revealed it unto thee For what the Heathen invented of their own heads concerning the Immortality of the Soul if that they invented and not rather received from others better informed they soon corrupâ—ed into an opinion of Transmigration and shifting of Possessions as men do Farms when their Lease is expired or as Liquor is transfused from vessel to vessel For so much one of their principal words imports used to signifie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their meaning And of the Bodies Resurrection little or nothing do we read amongst them But this is the chief point in our Christian Faith and this is that which the ancient Fathers contend for proving there is no proper resurrection but this as particularly the Constitutions of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Cons Apost Lib. 5. c. 6. Epiphan Lib. 2. Haeres 64. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Theodoret. Haeretic Fabular lib. 5. cap. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athanas de Incarnatione 2 Macch. 7. 9. Heb. 11. 35. 2 Kings 4. Wisd 3. Resurrection say they is of things that were fallen Which solid argument is also used by Epiphanius shewing that because the Body only properly falls to earth therefore it is the body chiefly we are to believe shall be raised again And therefore the Athanasian and Nicene Creeds as supplements to the Apostolical express the body in particular and the flesh to be restored And however fair and laudable attempts are made by the Ancients to perswade rather then prove a Resurrection from the several prettie Analogies found in nature of things perishing and after a while returning again to their pristine beauty and perfection yet not to except against them particularly How can we suppose they who knew little of the true God should understand so much as Gods people who had not this revealed in direct terms but in types and shadows and resemblances which have a more litteral and historical sense than this would be And it hath exercised the Pens of learned men both wayes to enquire Whether the Jews generally believe any more than Pythagoras or Plato might have learnt of them a life after the dissolution of the body and a state of bliss after a just and miserable life and death in this world all which as they prove not the Resurrection of the body which is the chief point of Christian Faith The expressions in the Book of Maccabees of the Mother expecting to have her children raised again especially taking the Comment of St. Paul upon that Text as is generally believed along with it though it may well be understood of those more Canonical Histories relating how the Shunamites son was restored to Life again by Elisha And the many divine sayings in the Book of Wisdome do declare a great and glorious prerogative belonging to the Just and Righteous above the wicked in the world to come but what is said may be restrained to the Immortality of the Spirit of men little or no mention being made of the Resurrection of the Body Yet in Esdras we have these words expresly Wheresoever thou findest the 2 Esdr 2. 23. dead take them and bury them and I will give thee the first place in my Resurrection But this Book is not received by the Romanists themselves and in all probality was much later then the rest however it may be said to deliver the current opinion of that Church then And in Maccabees there 2 Macc. 7. 14. is mention
7. 1. Eph. 5. 21. place The Psalmist saith They have no fear of God before their eyes St Paul saith Perfecting holiness in the fear of God and elsewhere Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God All which with many more places import as much as Religious worship of God And so doth the Love of God also as in St. Luke our Saviour saith to the Pharisees Wo to you Pharisees for ye tithe Mint and Rue and all manner of Herbs and pass over Judgment and the Love of God where Love of God stands for the Luk. 11. 42. true Service of God and duely to him as Judgment insinuates our duty towards our neighbour And so St. Paul to the Thessalonians The Lord direct your hearts into the Love of God And St. John most frequently in 2 Thes 3. 5. all his writings Leaving therefore this general consideration let us in this order inquire farther into 1. The Parts 2. The proper States of serving 3. The special Kinds of Divine Worship CHAP. II. Of the two parts of Divine Worship Inward and Outward The Proof of outward worship as due to God and that it is both due and acceptable to God Several Reasons proving bodily worship of God agreeable to him Wherein this Bodily worship chiefly consists Certain Directions for Bodily worship Exceptions against it answered BY what is expressed in our General description of Worship it may appear that there are two Principal Parts of it The one consisting in inward affection and the other in the outward Actions The inward disposition of the mind or soul of man is that on all hands is agreed upon as most justly due and proper to God alone in the supreamest manner God calleth for the heart so often in his holy word as his proper portion and the Spirit as that which draweth nearer to the nature of God as purely spiritual and incorporeal For God saith Christ is a Spirit and they that worship him must worship him in Spirit and in Truth Though if we should take these words according to the prime intention they would be found not to aim so much if at all at diverse manners of worship under the same kind but at several kinds such as were the Judaical and Christian the meaning of Christ being this that the hour or time was coming when there should be no longer use of those corporal services and Sacrifices under the Law but in lieu of them the spiritual and true worship of the Gospel should succeed But no question can be made of the excellency of that true spiritual inward devotion of the heart and mind to God as the most absolute most required most accepted and in comparison of that all outward worship being no better without it than gross Hypocrisie rather incurrs the displeasure of Almighty God than pleases him Therefore leaving that which all Christians are in their judgements sufficiently satisfied in and hold themselves obliged unto we shall take up the defence of the outward worship in great manner opposed by too many And truly They that argue so contemptuously and wildly as the vulgar custome doth against outward worship of God shall not need to go far to see their own folly For to say God is a Spirit and 'T is the heart that God calls for and 'T is the zeal of the Soul and such like loose sayings what do they but cut the throat as much of vocal prayer and Preaching as of any thing else For if God will accept the heart and looks no farther than the purity and good dispositiâ—n of the mind Audible Prayer and Preaching must together with the rest be excluded as impertinent in Gods service We know that the prayer of the heart as in the Case of Hannah is accepted of God at some times and in some places as the true Love and Charity to our Neighbour inclining us to do him good and relieve him when it lies not in our power but St. James looks on them and censures them as meer uncharitable mockers and not relievers of their neighbours who shall only pretend they mean them well inwardly and say unto them Depart Jam. 2. 16. in peace be ye warmed and filled notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body Even so Faith and so the will and the heart and the Spiritual worship without works are all dead and are a meer mockery of the divine Majesty a corrupting and perverting of his holy word and a bitter Sarcasm turning it against himself and as much as if it should be said Seeing you will needs have the heart you shall have it that is so as to have nothing more It were superfluous and shameful to cite the many misunderstood and misapplied texts of Scripture to delude the most ignorant and at the same time most presumptuous of Scripture None speak more after the phrase which hath deceived so many than that not long since quoted Wo be to you Pharisees for ye tithe Mint and Rue and Luk 11 42. all manner of Herbs and pass over Judgment and the Love of God Doth not the Scripture here seem to condemn and that under a curse such litle services as are there expressed It seems so indeed and really doth as much as any outward worship of God But it doth but seem so For undoubtedly it was most agreeable to it that such minuter services should be perform'd but that so performed as studiously and superstitiously to neglect the other more weighty was it which incensed God against them And here comes in that general argument also above touched Fast from sin say they and for outward fasts it matters not Wisely and profoundly said like able Divines indeed And so fast or abstain from sin and ye shall never need to pray nor hear Sermons nor to feed the Hungry nor cloth the Naked no nor to believe in God which is all such persons have left them of Religion starved into an unactiveness Would it not make a mans Hair stand upright to see and hear what precipices of Heathenism and follies Men dispute themselves into And so they may as they suppose enjoy their lust of contradiction and contempt of others strike through the loins of all Reason and Religion at the same time Reason which they set by such sophistry as this to fight against it self For Serving of God in Spirit and in truth and abstinence from all sins as well of Omission as Commission is the very perfection and end of all Religion And if there were no more required but a simple command to do it on Gods part not directing us to the way and no more on our part but presently and immediately to become holy and perfect without the proper means conducing to such high and not easie ends then forsooth these Disputants were the best Councellors but if there be outward means ordained in general by God and applicable many times by humane prudence to the effecting such ends and
his Son for marrying without his liking and approbation fall into the guilt of those Hereticks against which the Scripture and Antiquity both make who simply condemn Marriage in it self as unclean and evil No more surely doth that Church which prohibits it conditionally to her children We hear of many husbands dying who leave their wives such an additional Estate as they could not by any Law challenge so long as they continue unmarried or upon condition of continuing in the state of widowhood And so may a Father gratifie and oblige his children if he pleases without incurring the suspicion of holding marriages unlawful whatever other censure may pass upon them And when the Church saith she will not admit any to minister in her Family more immediately before God what doth she say more than that Master of a Family who will not have a married servant in his house about him but likes it very well to use his service in other matters And does this deserve such noise and out-cryes as are made against it Undoubtedly it is as free for the Church to judge of persons fit and unfit for her use as for any Lord or Master whatever And to make a Law not absolute that such a thing should not be done but that none that do such things should beimplyed in such offices And what reason is there that Civil Policie shall directly deny this but Ecclesiastical prudence may not Are there not many other Societies as well as Ecclesiastical which without reproach do the very same thing Men have a Freedom to do the thing or not to do it and more the Scripture hath not left us but to do it without observing any condition from Superiour neither the Law of God or Man hath left free Can there be therefore any more moderate or equal course than so to leave the matter that the one singleness of life shall be commended above the other and peradventure countenanced and encouraged but the other accepted too Yet neither extream will be content with this But one will have a Law to abstract and the other as it should seem by their reasons out of Scripture have it enjoyn'd though they put a stop to the conclusion and will not have it contain what if their Premisses be good it must For if every Bishop must be the husband of one wife and every Priest be a Bishop surely every Priest must marry And if innocencie and purity can be no otherwise maintained surely the Scripture requiring these requires that too But now we come to the conveniencies and incommodities of the state Virginal and Vidual in reference to the Clergy For now waving the supposition of any Divine injunction several Divine and Political reasons have been invented sufficient to determine against Priests some of which being ridiculous some profane and some heretical we shall mention only such as have somewhat of sobriety The first whereof may be That it becometh such as attend on so sacred a thing as Gods Altar to be pure of body and mind too And therefâ—re to abstain from all fleshly acts We know how that Flesh in Gods word goes under suspicion generally of somewhat impure and contrary to spiritualness and true purity and so indeed all fleshliness must be avoided But in it self it implies no more than a state of imperfection not inconsistent with though much inferiour to spiritual acts In the first sense Covetousness Ambition Pride and such like are Fleshly lusts no less than Venery In the second Conjugal acts and state are in the sense of the Gospel no more Fleshly than eating and drinking But whereas we find many to have been willing to be mistaken in so colourable a piece of Religion as to declare even against the natural pollutions as they may be called as prejudicial in themselves to spiritual perfection whether the will concurs thereunto or not and though proper circumstances be duly observed I cannot excuse them from Munichaean errour wholly or at least Judaical And Zonaras hath in a learned and sober Tractate on purpose declared Zonaras apud Leunclavium Jur. Graeco Lat. Tom. 1. p. 351. Chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tom. 6. Serm. 19. the contrary showing it no more a pollution of the Flesh than a foul nose may to which I refer the learned as also to a peculiar Treatise Chrysostome hath of Virginity where he satisfies both the superstitious and brutish Christian him who though he declares against ancient Heresies concerning lawful marriage yet advances such arguments to commend and prefer Virginity which Hereticks were condemned for using this man in that he at large disputeth against Marcion Valentinus and Manes by name for their excessive magnifying Virginity to the absolute condemnation of marriage and yet withal abounds in the praise and prelation of Virginity and sheweth that it is necessary to hold marriage lawful and of God before any man can please God in virginity He sheweth first that no such Heretick as condemns Marriage absolutely shall be rewarded for their pretended purity He proveth next They shall be damn'd rather for it while the Catholicks shall be promoted to the Societies of Angels become bright Lamps in Heaven and which is above all abide with the Bride He showeth they are worse than the Heathen Greeks who so judge of Virginity and Marriage The Gentiles saith he shall surely go to Hell but yet with this advantage that they enjoy the pleasures of Marriage Riches and other worldly comforts for a time But Hereticks shall be punished both here and hereafter Here they they are punished by voluntary abstinences there by involuntary Plagues The Gentiles shall neither be the better nor worse for their Fastings and Chastities but Hereticks shall suffer extream punishment for the things they expected ten thousand thanks For Fasting and Virginity are neither good nor evil in themselves but only according to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys ib. the choice of them that use them they may be either Nay says he afterwards the sobriety of Hereticks is much worse then the riotousness of any Heathens For this only opposes Man but that fights against God And afterward Hereticks professing Chastity not only pollute their souls but bodies also And again He that condemneth marriage injureth Virginity also And much more to this purpose Now if after all this he abounds in the extolling of Virginity above Marriage making it an Angelical life at which Puritans are wont to mock and scoff which have stood them in more stead then Scripture it self to make way for their opinions with what pretense of antiquity can the Levellers of all orders and states of Christianity object against Virginal or Vidual Chastity either as not possible or not lawful or not more commendable than a wedded state And with what hazard of incurring the censure upon ancient Hereticks do modern Patrons of Chastity raise their building upon their rotten foundations as too many who are ashamed of it do notwithstanding Surely this may
it is That divine Adoration receives its specification from the intention which is an act principally of the will so that be the object what it will yet if I have no intention to worship any other than the true God I worship him when I direct my worship to that which we may suppose not to prove upon tryal God But this is not to be granted that intention is sufficient to denominate worship or constitute it true and Catholick though it suffices abundantly to make a worship false when it is intended for such And then may a man be said to intend false worship not only when he knows it to be false but when he might possibly know it to be so and when he intends to worship that which actually is a false object For as hath been said Idolatry consists principally in the understanding as also the Scripture intimateth when it charges the Idolatrous Israelites with ignorance 2 King 17. 26. Isa 4. 9. of God For were not the Samaritans Idolaters who knew not the manner of the God of Israel And what saith the Prophet Isaiah They that make a graven Image i. e. to worship it are all of them vanity and their delectable things shal not profit and they are their own witnesses they see not nor know that they may be ashamed Surely if any man saw and were convinced of his error he would be ashamed of it but 't is his ignorance that detains him as well as precipitates him into such errors Ephes 4. 18. as St. Paul witnesses of the Gentiles Having their understanding darkened through the ignorance that is in them because of the blindness of their heart Fifthly There is no reason to grant that simplicity and sincerity of Intention and Resolution of worshipping none but the true God may not consist and hold good in worshipping more than one God as in the Act. 17. 23. case of the Athenians worshipping the unknown God in the Acts For as Pausanias in Eliacis taking notice of this inscription hath it The Persians threatning Greece with War the Athenians sent to the Lacedemonians to beg aid of them Pan met their Embassador Philippides and expostulated with him why the Athenians had made no statue to him but left him our adding that if they received him he would stand by them Hereupon they erected this Monument To the unknown God Others say That they being miserably harrassed with the Pestilence and finding no relief from them they worshipped bethought themselves there might be a God neglected by them who might relieve them and so dedicated an Altar To the unknown God Might not all these things stand with very great sincerity of intention And yet I suppose it was Idolatry So that sincere resolution and intention of worshipping none but the true God only may be found where many are worshipped For though to us as St. Paul saith * Toletus Instruct Sacerdotum l. 4. c. 14. § 6. There is but one God and one Lord yet with all Nations it was not so they might really and stedfastly believe there were more Gods than one And therefore Tolet the Jesuit well writeth thus Therefore Idolatry is the exhibiting of a Divine worship to a false God For to worship him for true God who is not God either by praising him or invoking him or Sacrificing to him or any wayes prostrating our selves to him is to commit Idolatry False adoration which is Idolatry is never but where an Error in the understanding goeth before †De Ratione lure definiend pag. 273. Num ut Supersationis caput est Id. 〈◊〉 iâ—a emnus Dei caltus non solum extrav ritatem fidei sed etiam extra uniatem Ecclesis alterius Dei cultum in se contnet ab coquem Fides Christiarorum communis intra Ecclesiam colendum propâ—nit Omnis enim Commentitia religio talem sibi Deum colendum pâ—â—ponit qualem sibi ipsa commenta sit non qualem se ipse ostendit Quod Idololatrioe instar quoddam est And besides all this the Author of this tenet in another place acknowledges it to be a sort of Idolatry to feign or device a worship of God otherwise than was instituted of God and that not only to worship God out of the verity of Faith but out of the unity of the Church containeth in it a worship of another God than is propounded by the Christian Faith to be worshiped in the Church And again All commentitions religion propounds such a God to be worshipped as it hath feigned to it self not as he hath declared himself to be By which words I understand him to explain himself and draw nearer to the common notion of Idolatry than he is commonly taken to do For granting that it is a kind of Idolatry to offer any superstitious worship interdicted by God and that in thus doing a man doth in effect frame to himself a God distinct from the true God it may be easily granted that all Idolatry consisteth in Polytheism or plurality of Gods because in effect a man makes strange Gods though not formally as he that constituteth one of purpose to worship as the object of his Devotion And this agreeth with what othet learned men have written of Idolatry Quicunque de Deo secus sentit quam revera est c. Erasm in symbolum Catechesm 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epict. Cap. 38. Perkins Cases of Conscience l. 2. c. 11. Luther Colloq Mensalia p. 91. extending it to a false notion or judgment of the one true God For Erasmus in his Catechism on the Creed saith Whosoever thinketh otherwise of God than in truth he is or doth not believe him to be such as the Authority of the Holy Scriptures hath described him to us believeth not in God but in an Idol To the same purpose speaketh Mr. Perkins thus If adoration be given to the true God with a false and erroneous intention it makes him an Idol For example if the body be bowed with this intent to worship God out of the Trinity as the Turk doth Or if he be worshipped out of his Son with the Jews thus doing we worship not the true God but an Idol To these I add these words of Luther All manner of Religion let it have never so great a name and lustre of Holiness when people will serve God without his word and command is nothing else but plain Idolatry It may be said in behalf of Jews and Turks that they are not Idolaters because they worship God according to the true Light of Nature asserting and magnifying above all men the unity of God and directing their worship after the manner of the service of God before Christ To which answering I shall wave the question about the measure of knowledg the Jews had of the Trinity before Christ of which somewhat hath been said before and rather distinguish between the manner of their believing or disbelieving those mysteries For it is much different
say out of the Decalogue Six days shalt thou labour and do all that thou hast to do Therefore 1 Tim. 4. 3. must thou not keep any Holy-day to Gods Service but Sunday So say they God hath created all Meats to be received with Thanksgiving Therefore you must not abstain from them Indeed one place excellently well interprets the other For just as God hath said Six days shalt thou work so hath he said All Meats shall be eaten under the Gospel And as it would be unlawful under that supposed command to rest on any of the Six days from labour so is it unlawful under the Gospel to fast or abstain from meat any one day How can or dare any man if such arguing as this will hold good cease any one day from eating and drinking if it be a command that we must eat and drink all meats now not hurtful to our bodies and that without any exception or limitation of time Do not they much more offend against Christian liberty and Gods command who will not eat at all those creatures that God hath commanded or sanctified to our use by his Word than they who eat some sort of Gods good creatures but omit others But undoubtedly God never intended to enact a formal Law or give a Precept that the one or other should be done but to grant a liberty and indulgence so to do Now no Indulgences are Commands nor being not accepted generally offend the Donor God in the Decalogue had chosen one day to himself and for the six remaining left them free to do that which he forbad to do on the Seventh And this is all that is meant by Thou shalt labor six days God under the Gospel hath taken of the distinction of meats clean and unclean legally and freely pronounces us at liberty to eat what of them we please for none of them can hurt or defile us naturally as the Manichaeans held nor any Legally as the Jews held But they may Evangelically and Morally I hope when we commit gluttony with them may they not Yes excess they except but their Argument excepts not excess taken from the natures of things For ten pounds of meat and many quarts of wine are as clean as an ounce or a pint and God hath made all alike And so fish is as clean and as much Gods creature as flesh and flesh as fish Have they heard of any so blockish as to deny it of late dayes But what saith St. Paul They are evil to that man who eateth with offence Offence of whom Rom. 14. 2â— Of a mans own self no surely but offence of others And to eat against lawful commands fish or flesh is an offence to Superiours and that is much more an offence than to offend ones equal ones brother or inferiour as it would be for a man to strike his Master or Father than his Brother or Fellow servants Whence then I wonder to astonishment should it proceed to credibility that the Conscience of an obscure and inferiour Christian no doubt but an extraordinary person in his own eyes and opinion should preponderate the outward Laws and inward Consciences of his Governours according to which restrictions were devised and concluded Against such Aegyptian Pursuers of the Israel of God the Church a cloud of Witnesses may be opposed but they who dare consult ancient Presidents know it too well to put it to that issue That of the resolute and conceited man in the Commedian sitting their purpose much better Ego mihi video Ego mihi sapio Ego mihi credo plurimum Plautus I see for my self I am wise for my self I believe my self exceedingly And therefore to finall purpose is it to use allegations here which for the Observation of the Lenton Fast hath been so amply and exactly handled by a late Right Reverend and Learned Hand And for the Vigils Septuagesima Sexagesima Ember and Rogation weeks sufficient Authority and Reason are produced before their distinct Offices in the above-mentioned Collection of Private Devotions of old composed and by Authority instituted to the benefit of such as pretend to be of the Reformation established But those that are taught solemnly to quarrel at the whole no wonder they oppose it in such parts of it But yet something to their fears of superstition in distinction of Meats besides what is already said What if they be mistaken and the Church distinguishes not fish from flesh Undoubtedly at the first Institution of Fasts Christians were equally interdicted both and this custom is to this day retained in the Greek Church Our Christian Ancients not distinguishing between the flesh of fishes and the flesh of beasts properly so called living on the earth Imitating in their Fasts the perpetual Abstinence of the Fathers before the Floud eating neither one nor other but contenting themselves with the fruits of the earth and of trees flesh and wine being brought into the World together by Noah for the use of man For as Clemens Alexandrinus hath observed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. p. 717. Origen in Gen. 1. v. 29. Hieronym in Jovin lib. 1. Munsterus in Gen. 3. 17. Man before the Floud was an eater of Grain rather than of Flesh And Origen after him upon Genesis saith This History plainly declares that God at first only permitted hearbs and the fruits of Trees for mans food But afterward license was granted to Noah to eat flesh And St. Hierome about the beginning of his Treatise against Jovinian saith the same and of late Munster and others which to cite here were needless The Western Church for ought can be perceived at first abstained equally from fish and flesh And therefore St. Hierome where he states the case of the Church making choice of Meats and shows the difference between the judgment of it and Hereticks such as were Marcion and Tatianus of whom he understandeth the Apostle to speak in his Second Epistie to Timothy addeth Nec hoc dicimus quòd negamus Pisces caetera si 2 Tim. 4. Hieron in Jovin lib. 2. cap. 1â— voluntas suerit in cibo esse sumenda whereby it may seem as if no less scruple had been made about the eating fish then of flesh But it is evident that about that time some distinction in Use not in Nature of Meats was made by the Church nothing scarce more frequently occurring in the decrees of Councils and Fathers writings than the defense of the Church her practise in discriminating Meats and yet condemning and anathematizing such Hereticks as abstaâ—ned from any Meats proper for mans use out of opinion of uncleanness that should be naturally in some more than others But the Western Church through favour and indulgence hath for many Ages permitted the use of fish to all obedient Sons as also of wine at such times as her Fasts are observed It is therefore a great mistake in her Enemies and Accusers to judge her of rigour in limiting
which is an endless and causeless pursuit of outward sensible acts and ceremonies to the corrupting of the more sound and necessary part of Religion starving this by bestowing all cost and care on that and seeking to quiet the restless and suspicious mind by new and vain inventions in which the Roman Church and especially the vulgar there knoweth no mean And that we term Negative Superstition which on the contrary thinks every small matter a load unsupportable which is imposed upon them thinking it no less necessary to salvation not to do such things than the other to observe them and imagining they cannot serve God in Spirit and in Truth with such things as the opposite party suppose they cannot serve God without when both are false and both vainly deceived We may first give an Instance of both in the Indians as a great Traveller hath reported The Indians saith he Vincent le Blanck Trav. Par. 1. adjacent to the River Ganges impute such Worth and Sanctity to it that they believed it washed them from all their sins and value it as the best water in the world for which reason the Portugals hate it extreamly and will not but upon great necessity make use of it a superstitious humor This is exactly the Case between the superstitious Papist and the superstitious Puritan The Papists have sundry Intolerable superstitions next to Idolatry of these we speak not They have likewise many ancient and laudable Rites and Ceremonies innocent in themselves and very useful to Christians being not extolled above their Nature and Office which are to be subservient to and not to domineer over the more material part of Religion to the extinguishing or oppressing of it But they being advanced to such an unreasonable and dangerous esteem with them the Puritans fearful Religion tells him he can never sufficiently quit himself of them nor detest the number and nature of them enough this is their superstitious humor too Calvin in the treatise even now mentioned disputing against the Anabaptists Calv. contra Anabapt p. 8. in 8o. who opposed Pedobaptism or Baptism of Children argueth from the antiquity of the practice against which because they were wont to put in an exception as not Scriptural but rather Popish he proceedeth to shew that It was not brought in under the raign of the Pope which Ut simpsiciores faciam hos Fanaticos impudenter calumniari c. saith he I thought good to touch for no other reason but because I would advertise the simpler sort that these Fanatiques do impudently slander when they would perswade men that this so eminent Observation is a new Superstition and fein it to proceed from the Pope whereas the universal Church held it before it understood what the Popes Kingdom meant or had heard any thing at all of it Thus he And how many Rites and Customs do the Fanatiques now-a-days detest and declaim against right loudly and ignorantly because they hear and that many times by most false and vain Relaters that Popish Churches do use them as if they were the Authors and inventors of them who received most of their ancientest Ceremonies as they did the Scriptures and Councils themselves from the Eastern Churches and that before the Roman Church ever so much as pretended to that Power or was infected with that Leaven it now is And this doth plainly appear to any unprejudiced eye able to read but a little way into the monuments of the Church And I remember to have been within hearing of a great Zealot but God knows of little knowledge preaching up his Directory and consenting and advising that the Three Creeds now in our Liturgy should be taken into the Body of the Directory to garnish it as his own word was But because they were not pure Scripture and were admitted into the impure Missal what should be here done He resolved this by saying there was no great danger herein because these were not made nor brought in by the Pope but they were in use before the Pope was Antichrist It were to be wished they would extend this somewhat farther and the greatest number of grievances and superstitious scruples would easily vanish But Seneca de Ira. l. 2. c. 12. truly said Sencca of such persons Vana vanis terrori sunt Vain men are soon scar'd with vain things especially where there shall be invented such a supream piece of Religion which shall perswade men that the more full of exceptions doubts scruples and fears the more godly and the more tender Conscienced men not distinguishing between a sore Conscience and a tender one nor a distemper'd one and a quick sens'd We know very well that they who are sick are soonest a waked and those parts that are inflam'd and swell'd with corruption are most tender of all And so is it with such Consciences which are no more nor so much moved as others in matters of undoubted Good or Evil such as are division disobedience and uncharitableness and scandal and on the contrary humility and study of unity but so sore and tender in lighter matters that the least touch offends them and enrages them Which Tully according to his natural Superstitio qua qui est imbutus quietus esse nunquamposset Cicero de Natur. D. l. 1. wit found to be most true when he said Superstition was such a thing that he who is affected with can never be quiet Every thing but what he devises to himself molests and confounds him And out of this unsetled and unsatisfied humor every man would very gladly have the constituting and modelling the worship of God to prevent all superstition but what he himself is full of and to avoid the imaginary Idolatry of others inventions fall into the subtile and pleasant idolizing of his own imaginations But if way should be given to this not only Religion but even the world it self would soon come to an end if we believe that wise and Learned Doctour of the Jews Maimonides writing thus For the judgment of man is small and Maimonides deIdol cap. 2. §. 4. weak neither can all mortal men attain the pure truth But if every man should yield to his own conceits we should find the world run to destruction through the weakness of his understanding There can therefore be no more deadly superstition than for a man to fear no man but him that flatters him and every thing but what pleases him and to require much more clear demonstrations for the satisfaction of his pretended and superstitious fears than possibly he can give to ground them and so become contumacious under such colours But to rip up this sore disease at the Core we shall see so little Religion in the tempers of these obstinately superstitious people that there will appear nothing of common reason justice or ingenuity at the bottom of all For striking into mens minds hearts the sparks of their dividing and factious principles as men do fire into a
by the Greater sort who commonly by building themselves large and stately Pews and inclosing what is every poor Christians Freehold as well as the richest and noblest of the parish make it more sacred to the common Christian than any other part of the Church besides For that must be kept under lock and key and if not yet the greatness and power of the person who hath laid that out for himself suffices to deter any ordinary man from making the like use of that as of any other part of the Church lest his secular hand lye heavier upon him than the Ecclesiastical power can or must upon him for such invasion of every parishioners right as well as his So that what it is not lawful for or just to do to the Common for beasts or Town-Green where he lives he makes no scruple at all to do to Gods Peculiar and the Common to Christians As if so be Churches now-a-dayes were of the same nature with new found and possessed Lands in the Indies every man may have what he can enclose and fense in for himself and his friends only Whereas this should be well understood by every good Christian that hath the fear of God as a Christian ought before his eyes that the poorest person that takes collection in the parish hath as much reason and right to erect places in the Church to themselves and to possess themselves of any part of it as the rich but that it is not so much in his power And doth any man think he hath a good Right because he can do it That we can do saith the Law which we can Idpossumus qued sure possumus lawfully do But that we can lawfully do which the Common Law doth not interdict alwayes For the Common Law whether because it concerns altogether men in their civil capacities and proprieties such as this is not or whether it hath not heretofore been such a Dragg to enclose all it could lay hold on without consideration of other Courts Ecclesiastical which were alwayes received in all Christian Commonwealths but left many things to the decision of the more peculiar Laws made in behalf of Churches and Ecclesiastical Cases hath made no provision at all for the securing of the Rights of the Church or Christians thereunto belonging I mean in their Capacities properly Ecclesiastical so that scarce any remedy can be obtain'd from thence if a man shall steal any thing off the very body of the Church it self And can any man that hath any sense of Religion take sanctuary or protection from that in defense of his violation of Christians Rights and think all well done that is not punishable by that Law and lawful that it doth not interdict For by the same reason a man may inclose to himself a third part or more of the Church But they will modestly say that were unreasonable and I will boldly say so is the other and especially where when the Authours of such Fabricks making no use of them themselves shall deny the use of them to others case so requiring But that which is yet more intolerable is That the power and purse of the Great man who is alwayes to remember that the poorest man in the parish hath as much Law and Right on his side to shut him out as he hath to exclude and over-top the poor in his building should enable and embolden him so far as to take a considerable part of Gods sanctuary and inclose that from all use and access to lay the bones of his Family in and wholly to alienate it from all Divine Services and dedicate it only to corruption and with impudent Sacriledge to erect many Monuments and Tombs in a Canton they have usurped to themselves which being as is said no less lawful for any man than for one man instead of Christians in time we should have a Church filled with Sepulchres of the dead And when this is once done to endeavour a redress of such sacrilegious invasions of Gods and good Christians Rights is to expose Gods servants to not only the obloquy power and mischief of too potent an Adversary but to the dammage of Common Law which though it can give no right so to do yet will certainly defend the wrong-doer if he can plead custom But I have often thought that God in this last Age hath done himself Justice against such Families as have been guilty of such prophane usurpations in that he hath stirred up a barbarous Sect of Christians of late and let them justly into Churches like Goths and Vandals to break to pieces pull down and raze the scandalous monuments of many Churches erected to the honour of Man and dishonour of God At first all dead Bodies were lookt upon by the Heathens themselves as unclean and unworthy to be buried within the walls of their City Lycurgus was the first that suffered Corps to be interr'd in the City and that Plutarch in vita Lycurg Eutropius Lib. 8. Cicero de Legibus l. 2. near the Temples in Lacaedemon saith Plutarch The first of all Roman Emperours and much more of the inferiour people that was buried within the City was Trajane the Emperour which was prohibited by a Law of the twelve Tables as Cicero witnesseth And St. Vedastus was wont to say That the dead should not be buried within the walls of a City which was a place for the living and not for the dead as Alcuinus in his life writes And it is certain no Christians at all were buried in Churches for many hundred years but certain proper Cemateries or Dormitories were allotted for that purpose remote from Churches Pope Nicholas the first about the year 867 was thought to be preferred to be buried before the Church doors of St. Peter saith Nauclere And the same Nauclere writeth how Nauclerus Vol. 3. p. 64. ibid. p. 94. that about the year 983 Otho the third Emperour was buried at the Threshold of St. Peter at Rome And when they had brought dead bodies to the Church door they soon presumed to bring them in and found a reason so to do because the bodies of true Believers and holy Servants of God were not to be looked on as unclean or unworthy of so sacred a place because they had been themselves Temples of the Holy Ghost and were to be rennited again to their blessed spirits in heaven And not only so but the nearer the Altar always the better mistaking that place in the Apocalypse I saw under the Altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God and Rev. 6. 9. for the testimony which they held collecting from hence that for Martyrs and holy persons that was the properest place to be buried in And the Cannon Law surely misguided by such a vain perswasion hath decreed it necessary to the Consecration of a Church that there be the body or at least some Relique of a Saint there posited But more reasonably doth it erre when it
affirmeth that it is Desecrated by the interrment of Hereticks there But certainly the words in the Revelation expressing a Vision meant no such thing as they are alledged for but only that in that Vision the holy Apostle beheld the souls of Saints and Martyrs departed humbled before or at the foot of the Altar as the manner was anciently to pray especially at the time v. 10. of offering crying aloud and with great importunity for justice and revenge upon the Persecutors of the Church and Murderers of them for the Testimony of Christ Jesus But because such hath been and I fear ever will be the corruption of Christian Religion that he that hath power in his hands and money good store in his purse shall be Sainted so far as outward ceremonies and priviledges can advance him he that would be at the charge of breaking up of the ground hath not been denyed nor dare any that I know whatever they ought to do deny him the liberty of being buried in the Church This may be and must be passed over but the affectation or irreligious ambition of building stately Seats and making that which is common to all Christians peculiar to some house so as upon no occasion it must be used by others is wicked and sacrilegious and much more the taking in of any the least part of Gods ground as the Church is to the prophane uses of making Tombs and Sepulchres and no other They are wont to say There is room enough besides It may be so for they commonly who thus enclose or usurp Gods Land have thin'd the inhabitants of the place where they live by illegal enclosures of the Common belonging to the Parish and so almost dispeopled the place But what is that to them more than any body else And why may not any man upon the same reason violently or fraudulently take away certain Acres of Land from him and say in his defense He hath left him enough still And least such as are Patrons of Churches and have certain supposed Prerogatives over the Chancels above what can be pretended to by the common sort of people should conceive they may there do as they please they are to know That in right and conscience such fore-mention'd practises can least of all be done For as the Founder of the Church so likewise the Builders of Chancels from whence only they can pretend such priviledge and as the maintainers of it in repair do at the time of the consecration consent to a total alienation of all civil propriety from themselves they can neither build nor bury there nor incommodate the place more than any other man for they are only Guardians and not Owners of that place upon which they may and ought to exclude and refuse all such incommodations of others as may any way deface or straiten or empair the same but they have no more right to do any such things there themselves then he that is Trustee or Guardian to an Orphan to seize upon his estate or any part thereof to his own use And it is only civil custom which hath given him a peculiar right of burial there rather then any body else And this may seem sufficient if not too much to have said of the Negative force of Dedication of Churches against Usurpers of Gods and Christians Rights The positive effect which is a veneration and worship therein of God Almighty doth farther confirm this and is contained in the end expressed as well as in the form of Dedication used by Solomon as the constant practise of the Jews whose Tabernacle or Temple had nothing of constant preaching or instruction of the people but only Prayers and Sacrifices Afterward their Synagogues called also Proseuchae for convenience because Acts 13. 27. all people could not meet at the Temple were erected where as the Scripture tells us the Law was read and Moses preached every Sabbath day but they had their special denomination fâ—ouâ— the Office and Acts of Prayer Synagogue signifying no more than an Assembly in general From whence if not also from the consent of all Nations besides who had Temples to their Gods it may appear that the most principal end of Gods House was alwayes till an ignorant irregular Generation sprang up esteemed the House of Prayer and Worship and teaching and instruction of people very necessary indeed as the foundation upon which all worship must be built was not that main end as is pretended And this worship being in its proper place in the Church was always and ought to be performed in most publique manner and most solemn as to outward appearance as well as inward affection to which too many deluded by a gross and cheap piece of Sophistry would confine Gods worship It is time we have no direct precept in the New Testament that I can call to mind enjoyning any particular behaviour at the time of Gods service nor yet in the Law And why so were not that very necessary in case any outward carriage were necessary Yes truly if so be such a Religious manner of worship could be known to us no other way than by Revelation extraordinary For Gods word is very sparing in those things of which we may by the common light of Nature attain to the knowledge For who is there that knows there is a God that knoweth not also that he is to be worshipped Who is there that knoweth that God is to be worshipped thar knoweth not also that he is to worshipped in the most lowly and reverent manner And that reverence outward is mutable and various according to the opinion of several Countries and therefore no one general Rule could be made comprehending and obliging all people but this is laid down to us that what is accounted in any Nation most solemn humble and reverent is that which is required of us in the worship of God But surely kneeling bowing the body uncovering the head yea and prostration of the body in convenient time and place are acts of worship such as were in use among the Jews of old continued by the Apostles and successors in Faith and Devotion as innumerable places of Holy Writ in the Old and New Testament intimate unto us where falling low at Gods footstool bowing the knee and such like outward acts of reverence are put for prayer it self which they never would have been had not they been the known manner of worship And Salvian describes Salvian de Provid lib. 7. Ad domos statim dominicas 〈◊〉 c. to us the custom of Christians in his early days thus We presently haste to the Lords house we cast our bodies on the floor and pray with weeping and joy mixt together And I am not advis'd of more then one place which interdicts any one piece of irreverence as unnatural and that the superstition of Puritans hath cast them into and that is covering of mens faces in the time of publique prayer when the hat as an instance