it theâ— he did more sensibly and firmly rest upon God for the performance of his promise to him 2. If mens persons are justified before God by their own personal good works then they are so justified either by those good works they do before their faith or by those that follow after their faith but they are not justified before God by their own personal good works which they do before their Faith nor by those which they do after their Faith or after they believe in Christ therefore they are not justified before God by their own personal works 1. Their persons are not justified before God by their works which they do before they believe in Christ because they are not formally good they are not pleasing unto God for as much as they spring not from faith in Jesus Christ neither do they make men meet to receive grace and so do not dispositivè justifie as Papists hold or as the School-Authors say deserve grace of congruity yea rather for that they are not done as God hath commanded them to be done we doubt not but that they have the nature of sin So saith the Church of England in her 13th Article of Religion Works done before faith in Christ though they may be materially good yet they are not formally good but are perfectly evil yea are * Virtutes Eâ—hnicorum sunt splendida peccata Rom. 1. 17. sins for whatsoever is not of faith is sin saith St. Paul and the Church of England Rom. 14. 23. Homily of good Works T. 1. p. 30. 2. Their persons are not justified before God by those good works which they do after they believe in Christ and which proceed from Faith in Christ which I prove thus 1. By the twelfth Article of Religion of the Church of England Albeit that good works which are the fruits of faith and follow after justification cannot put away our sins and endure the severity of Gods judgment 2. Because they are imperfectly good and so stand in need of the perfect righteousness of Christ to cover their infirmities as may be proved by our Homily for Good-Friday T. 2. p. 177. Our acts and deeds be full of imperfectness and infirmity and therefore nothing worthy of themselves to stir God to any favour much less to challenge that glory that is due to Christ acts and merits 3. Because they follow the justified and are done after their justification and this argument the Church of England teacheth out of Saint Augustine in her Homily of good works T. 2. p. 82. Good * Bona opera non praecedunt justificandum sed sequntur justificatum S. August de fide operibus c. 4. 14. And this Doctrine John Lambert Martyr sealed with his blood Fox Book of Martyrs p. 1091. works go not before in him which shall afterward be justified but good works do follow after when a man is justified 4. Because it was confessed on all hands that no mens persons were ever justified before God by doing of evil works and therefore the Apostle had no need to prove that men were not justified by them but the works of unbelievers are †If an Heathen may cloath the naked feed the hungry and do such other like works yet because he doth them not in faith for the honour and love of God they be but dead vain and fruitless works to him Hom. of Faith p. 31. See there also p 30. all the life of them that lack true faith is sin Ibi. p. 31. evil works for an evil tree cannot bring forth good fruit Mat 7. 17. And whatsoever is not of faith is sin Rom. 14. 23. And without faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11. 6. Therefore it follows that the Apostle Paul did intend to prove that the good works of men which proceed from faith do not justifie menspersons in Gods sight 5. And lastly Papists themselves distinguishing of a twofold Justification first and second confess that all works are excluded from the first Justification which only is properly Justification their second is Sanctification properly Bellarmine himself Lib. 4 c. 15. de Justificatione confesseth that the Apostle Paul doth in the Epistle to the Romans dispute of the first Justification therefore he excludes all our works from the Justification of our persons before God 4. It is contrary to the Confession of Faith of the Reformed Churches of Christ as may clearly be seen in the Harmony of Confessions Sect. 9. To give you a sight of some things they declare at large the latter Confession of Helvetia c. 15. saith thus To justifie in the Apostles disputation touching Justification doth signifie to remit sins to absolve from the fault and the punishment thereof to receive into favour to pronounce a man just for the Apostle saith to the Romans God is he that justifieth who is he that can condemn where to justifie and condemn are opposed and in the Acts of the Apostles Act. 13. the Apostle saith Through Christ is preached unto you forgiveness of sins and from all things from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses by him every one that believeth is justified For in the law also and in the Prophets we real Deut. 25. 1. That if a controversie were risen amongst any and they came to judgment the judg shaâ—l judg them that is justifie the righteous and condemn the wicked And in the fifth Chapter of Isaiah Wo to them that justifie the wicked for rewards Now it is most certain that we are all by nature sinners and before the judgment-seat of God convicted of ungodliness and guilty of death but we are justified that is acquitted from sin and death by God the Judg through the grace of Christ alone and not by any respect or merit of ours For what is more plain than that which Paul saith All have sinned and are destitute of the glory of God and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus for Christ took upon himself and bare the sins of the world and did satisfie the justice of God God therefore is merciful unto our sins for Christ alone that suffered and rose again and doth not impute them to us but he imputeth the justice of Christ unto us for our own so that now we are not only cleansed from sin and purged and holy but also endued with the righteousness of Christ yea and acquitted from sin death and condemnation finally we are righteous and heirs of eternal life To speak properly then it is God alone that justifieth us and that only for Christ by not imputing to us our sins but imputing Christs righteousness unto us But because we do receive this Justification not by any works but by faith in the mercy of God and in Christ therefore we teach and believe with the Apostle that sinful man is justified only by faith in Christ not by the Law or by any works For the Apostle saith Rom. 3. We
aversion from that which is good materially 't is an inclination to that whiâ—h is morally evil There is in the will of man 1. an impotency to that which is spiritually good as the understanding of a meer natural man cannot rightly think of any thing that is spiritually good so the will of a meer natural man cannot rightly of it self will any thing that is spiritually good 2 Cor. 3. 5. Not that we â—â— sufficient of our selves to think any thing as of our selves but our â—â—ciency is of God Phil. 2. 13. It is God that worketh in us both to 〈◊〉 and to do of his own good pleasure 2. A proneness only to that whicâ— is evil Gen. 6. 5. God saw that the wickedness of man was great in 〈◊〉 eâ—rth and that every imagination of the thoughts or purposes or desireâ—â— his heart was only evil continually 3. Aversness from that whiâ—â— is good Rom. 8. 7. The carnal mind is enmity against God for 't is 〈◊〉 subject to the Law of God neither indeed can be Read Rom. 3. 10 11 12. Ephes 2. 1 2 3 5. We are all dead in trespasses and sins and 〈◊〉 by nature the children of wrath by nature not pure but corrupt aâ—â— that corrupted by Original sin That which is born of the flesh 〈◊〉 flesh John 3. 6. and who can bring a clean thing out of an uncâ—â— Job 14. 4. Now Papists grant that original sin imputed is pâ—â—perly a sin but inherent they say is not properly a sin Pelagâ—â— that old Heretick was the Father and the Popish Arminian aâ—â— Semi-pelagian Divines are the 〈◊〉 and followers of it Beâ—â—mine T. 4. l. 2. de peccato c. 3. saâ—â— from Jam. 1. Quod 〈◊〉 Jacobo in illo 〈◊〉 Bellar. l. 5. de amissione gratiae c. 3. 9. c. 10. Peccatum inhabitans Rom. 7. non nisi improprie dicitur peccatum non vocatur peccatum illud non est peccatum quod parit peccatum non est peccatum And Dr. Jeremy Taylor one 〈◊〉 Archbishop Lauds Chaplains late â—â—shop in Ireland in his further Exâ—â—nation of original sin saith expresly thus That original sin is not our sin properly not inherent in us but is only imputed so as to bring evil effects upon us for that which is inherent in 〈◊〉 is a consequent only of Adams sin but of it self no sin for theâ—â— being but two things the constituent parts of original sin the want of original righteousness and concupiscence neither of these caâ— So Pelagius and Arminius picad be a sin in us but a punishment 〈◊〉 Adams sin they may be P. 459. And p. 475. of the same book he saith That original sin is 〈◊〉 an inherent evil not a sin properly but metâ—nimically that is it is the effect of one sin and the cause of many a stain not a sin it doth not damn any infant to eternal pains of hell And p. 474. he saith thus And since no Church did ever in join tâ— any Catechumen any penance or repentance for original sin iâ— sâ—â—ms horrible and unreasonable that any man can be damneâ— for that for which no man is bound to repent But Sir is that only properly sin for which the Church injoins penance Did the Jews injoin any penance for Poligamy and doth the Christian Church injoin penance for inward sins is not the 19th Commandment made void by this Doctrine did not King David 〈◊〉 51. 5. and St. Paul Rom. 7. confess their original sin or was King Davids and St. Pauls Confession one of your Brother Dr. Haâ—â—onds free-will offerings commended even to meriting And I pray read there his Explanation of the 9th Article of the Church of England and then judg whether that of Knot the Jesuit be not true Preface to Charity maintained Sec. 2. Heylins Cypr. Anglicus l. 4. p. 252 253. viz. That the Doctrine of the Church of England began to be altered in many things for which our Progenitors forsook the Roman Church for example it is said that the Pope is not Antichrist prayer for the dead is allowed Limbus patrum it is maintained that the Church hath authority in determining controversies of faith and to interpret Scriptures about free-will predestination universal grace that all our works before effectual vocation are not sins merit of good works inherent righteousness faith alone doth not justifie Traditions Commandments possible to be kept your Thirty nine Articles are patient nay ambitious of some sense in which they may seem Catholick for Dr. Heylin in his Cyprianus Anglicus lib. 4. p. 252. alledgeth much of this charge of Knot as a commendation of our Church and upon the 20th and 34th Articles he saith That more power than this the Church of Rome did never challenge and less than this was not reserved unto it self by the Church of England in his Introduction to his Cyprianus Anglicus p. 20 21. where he saith That in the year 1571. the Articles agreed upon in the year 1562. were re-printed and this clause the Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies and also in controversies of Faith as he saiâ—h was left out by the power of the Genevian * That was the Parliament that that year confirmed the Articlâ—s to which alone subscription was injoined yet Heylin saith it left out the Prayer against the Pope out of the Letany faction if it were not for the Genevian-faction your faction would soon bring us all to Rome but the times bettering and the Governors of the Church taking notice thereof there was care taken 't is believed 〈◊〉 A. B. Land as Mr. Prin and Burton discovered that the said â—â— should be restored unto its place in all following impressions of that â—â— but if it may be said to be restored to its place 't is wondred 〈◊〉 Dr. â—â—ocket Warden of All-Sâ—â— Colledge and Chaplain to A. B. â—â—bot Heylins Cyp. Angl. l 1. p. 76. And 't is left out of the Articles of Ireland 1615 which were allowed by King James should forget to put it into thâ—â— 20th Article when he made his book in Latin intituled De politia Ecoleâ—â— Anglicanae in which he set down all our Liturgy the 39 Articles of Religion the book of Ordination of Priests and Deacons and Consecraâ—ion of Bishops c. I say if it had been in the Article 〈◊〉 very strange that a man of his learning and integrity and pâ—â— and expectation too should leave it out but you see 't is put in 〈◊〉 you may well guess by whom and to what purpose by what 〈◊〉 Heylin saith of it it reserved or rather restored to it self as much power as the Church of Rome ever challenged which Knot the Jesuit observed That their Churches as the Jesuit goes on â—â—ginning to look with a new face their walls to speak a new language that men in talk and wriâ—ing use willingly the once fearful names of Priests and Altar and are now put in mind that for exposition of Scripture they are
Barjona for flesh and blood hath 〈◊〉 revealed it unto thee but my Father which is in heaven 2 Cor. 3. 5 〈◊〉 that we are sufficient of our selves to think any thing as of our selves 〈◊〉 our sufficiency is of God Joh. 15. 5. Without me ye can do nothing 〈◊〉 Christ Phil. 2. 13. It is God that worketh in you both to will and to 〈◊〉 his good pleasure Ephes 2. 8. For by grace ye are saved through faâ—â—â— and that grace or that faith is not of your selves It is the gift of 〈◊〉 And so is repentance the gift of God Act. 5. 31. Act. 11. 18. 2 〈◊〉 2. 25. If God will give them repentanceâ— to the acknowledgement of 〈◊〉 truth 3. Because 't is contrary to the Doctrine of the Reformed Protestant Churches As 1. To the eighth Article of Lambeth which as you hearâ— before was declared to be the Doctrine of the Church of England The eighth Article of Lambeth is this No man can come to Christ unlesâ—â— it be given to him and unless the Father shall draw him nor are all men 〈◊〉 drawn by the Father that they come to the Son 2. To the 32 Article of Religion of Ireland None can come 〈◊〉 Christ unless it be given unto him and unless the Father draw him 〈◊〉 all men are not so drawn by the Father that they may come unto the Soâ—â— neither is there such a sufficient measure of grace vouchsafed unto eveâ— man whereby he is enabled to come unto * The nature of man through the transgression of our first parents hath lost free-will and retaineth not now any shadow thereof saving an inclination to â—ill those only excepted whom of his grace he hath sanctified and purged from their Original leprosie King James his Declaration against Vorstius p. 368. of his Works everlasting life This Confession includes the 8th and 7th Articles of Lambeth 3. To the latter Confession of Helvetia which saith thus Therefore man not as yet regenerate hath no free will to good no strength to perform that which is good In regeneration the understanding is illuminated by the Holy Ghost that it may understand both mysteries and will of God and the will it self is not only changed by the Spirit but is also endued with faculties that of its own accord it may both will and do good Harmony of Confessions Sec. 4. c. 9. p. 62 63. and the like may be there seen in the former Confession of Helvetia p. 65. art 9. See the Confession of Bohemia For that will of man which before was free is now so corrupted troubled and weakned that now from henceforth of it self and without the grace of God it cannot chuse judg or wish nay it hath no desire nor inclination much less any ability to chuse that good wherewith God is pleased Harmony of Confessions Sect. 4. p. 68. The Confession of the French Church is much to the same effect there to be seen p. 70. and there in the same Section is the Confession of Belgia full and clear to the same purpose with notable proofs out of Scripture against mans natural power to convert himself to God as John 3. 27. John 6. 44. Rom. 8. 2 Cor. 3. 5. Phil. 2. 13. John 15. 5. And p. 74. of the same Section is the Confession of Auspurg to the same purpose And p. 75. they say thus We condemn the Pelagians and all such as they are who teach that by the only powers of * This is directly contrary to Dr. Patricks Doctrine before recited in the Margent nature without the holy Spirit we may love God above all and fulfill the Law of God as touching the substance of our actions The Confession of the Church of Saxony is to the same effect there to be seen p. 77. That man by his natural strength is not able to free himself from sin and eternal death but this freedom and conversion of man to God and this spiritual newness is wrought by the Son of God quickning us by his Holy Spirit In the same Section p. 82 83. the Church of Wirtemberg saith thus And whereas some affirm that so much integrity of mind was left to man after his fall that by his natural strength and good works he is able to convert and prepare himself to faith and the invocating of God it is flatly contrary to the Apostolicâ— Doctrine and the true consent of the Catholick Church Rom. 5 By one mans trespass evil was derived unto all men unto condemnation Ephes 2. When ye were dead in trespasses and sins wherein in times paâ—â— ye walked according to the course of this world and after the Prince c and we were by nature the children of wrath as well as others he saith Dead in sins and the children of wrath that is strangers from thâ— grace of God But as a man being corporally dead is not able by his oâ—â— strength to trepare or convert himself to receive corporal life so be which is so spiritually dead is not able by his own power to câ—â—vert himself to receive spiritual life The Synod of Dort c. 〈◊〉 Article 3. say thus All men are conceived in sin and born 〈◊〉 children of wrath untoward to all good tending to salvation forward to evil dead in sins slaves of sin and neither will nor 〈◊〉 without the grace of the Holy Ghost regenerating them 〈◊〉 streight their own crooked nature no not so much as dispose theâ— selves to the amending of it And Article 4. they say thus Bâ—â— so far short is he from being enabled by this imbred light to coâ— to the saving knowledg of God and to convert himself unto hiâ— that he doth not make right use thereof in natural things and â—vil affairs nay that which it is he many ways defileth it all 〈◊〉 withholdeth it in unrighteousness and by so doing becomâ—â— inexcusable before God Who in the 4th error rejected reject thâ— error of those that teach That an unregenerated man is not properly nor totally dead in sins nor destitute of all strength tendâ—â— to all spiritual good but that he is able to hunger and thirst aftâ—â— righteousness or everlasting life and to offer the sacrifice of 〈◊〉 humble and contrite heart even such as is acceptable unto God For these assertions march against the direct testimonies of Scripture Ephes 2. 1 5. Ye were dead in trespasses and sins Gen. 6. 5. 8. 11. Every imagination of the thought of mans heart is only evil continally Moreover the hungring and thirsting for deliverance out of misery 〈◊〉 for life-eternal as also the offering to God the sacrifice of a broken â—â—eâ—â— is proper to the regenerate and such as are called blessed Psal 51. 1â— Matth. 5. 6. That the efficacious grace of God in mans effectual calling or conversion doth not depend upon the aptitude or co-operâ—tion of the will of man but is from the supernatural work of Goâ—â— which the holy Scripture calls the drawing of the Father to the
are willing to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord which necessarily implies that they did believe that as soon as ever their souls were gone out of their earthly homes they should be present with the Lord in heaven for of that they say we are confident And. 10. Of this opinion and belief was St. Pauls as you may see in Phil. 1. 21 23. For to me to live is Christ and to die is * Mori lucrum quaesi dicat mors est lucrum heatitudinis mortem ergo non timeo quia si occidar moriar vitam aeternam lucrabor inevolabo praesensque sistar ac fruar Christo So Chrisostom Anselm Theophilact Oecumenius Thomas Aquinas in locum gain How could his death begain to him if he must not go immediately to Heaven but to Purgatory there first to suffer hellish punishments for his sins Yet if I live in the flesh this is the fruit of my labour yet what I shall chuse I wot not for I am in a strait between two having a desire to depart and to be with Christ which is far better Here you see the Apostle Paul desired to depart out of the Tabernacle of his body and why that he might be with Christ he believed that as soon as his soul was departed out of his body she would presently be and remain with Christ but where not in the Popes Purgatory for there Christ was not but in heaven there he believed he was whom the heavens must receive till the restitution of all things Act. 3. 19. He believed that his soul would presently be with Christ in Heaven and therefore he saith that death temporal would be better for him than temporal life Certainly had St. Paul believed that after his soul had ended her work in his body here she should be carried into the Popes Purgatory and there be punished for his sins for a time it may be till the day of judgment he would have easily resolved himself that it had been better for him as well as for the Philippians to abide in the flesh and not to die I desire to be dissolved and to be with Christ is as if he had said thus I am now bound q. d. Jam alligatus sum corpori si hoc vinculo solvar ero cum Christo illique astringar Cor. a lapide in locum to my body but if I were loosed from this bond I should be with Christ and bound to him saith Cor. a lapide Hence note saith he that souls altogether pure do presently when they leave the body not sleep but are with Christ in heaven and eternal life and therefore the Apostle desired to be dissolved and dye that he might be with Christ but if he ought to expect after death the day of judgment that then at length he might enjoy Christ he had in vain desired to be dissolved rather than live because then after his dissolution and death he should be absent from Christ as much as if he had remained in this life much more he there speaks out of Chrysostome Theophilact Oecumenius and Cyprian to the same purpose 'T is observable that he saith that souls that are altogether pure pass presently out of their bodies into Heaven and this he saith is the opinion of Turrian and of Suarezius and that St. John Apoc. 14. 13. speaks of souls perfectly just Now this I say is their shift to put off all our Protestant Divines have alledged from sacred Scripture against their Purgatory for they hold that those that are cast into Purgatory are not perfectly purged but must be purged perfectly by suffering temporal punishment and thereby making penal satisfaction to the justice of God of the fondness of which hereafter but I 'le close with them and assume Position 2. That the souls of those persons that are justified by faith is Christ's blood are perfectly purged from their sins if not immediately before yet at the moment of their death and that therefore by their own concessions and affirmations they go not into the Popes Purgatory but to Heaven as I have proved before and for the clearing of this know that not only their Angelical Doctor as Papists call Thoâ—â— Aquinas but our own Divines hold that there are three effects of sin 1. Reatus the guilt 2. Macula the spot or stain 3. Paâ—â— the punishment of it Now 1. The guilt worthiness or desert of sin which obligeth the sinner to the sustaining of just punishment for his sin is washed away in our justification by the perfect satisfaction and merits of our blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as the Church of England abundantly testifieth in her books of Articles Homilies and Common-Prayer and the Canonical Scriptures plainly declare as in John 1. 29. Beâ—â— the lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world 1 John 1. 7. 〈◊〉 the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin 1 John 2. 12. If 〈◊〉 man sin we have an advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the righteous and he is the propitiation that is the propitiator for our sins who doâ—â— make atonement expiate satisfie and purge away the guilt of oâ—â— sins and make peace and pacifie his wrath and make him propitiâ—â— merciful favourable and good unto us and 1 Tim. 2. 6. He gâ—â— himself a ransome for all Himself God-man a ransome for all Hâ—â— 9. 14 15. How much more shall the blood of Christ who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God and lest the adversary shoâ—â— say that he did not perfectly purge away all sin read Heb. 10. 〈◊〉 and by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified 〈◊〉 Apoc. 1. 5. 't is said of Christ that he washed us in his own blood 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 3. 11. Such were some of you but ye are washed but ye are sanctified but ye are justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God And upon this account doth the Apostle declare and infer Therefore there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus God in our justification imputeth * 2 Cor. 5. 19. not our sins unto us and consequently not our guilt but he imputeth the righteousness of our Saviour Jesus Christ unto us and doth repute us just as though we had no sin and consequently no guilt upon us but Papists do acknowledg by Christ Jesus a freedom from sin according to the guilt of sin but they deny it according to the punishment of which hereafter 2. Macula the spot stain or filth of sin which deprives the soul of its spiritual beauty which it should have and is made vile Mat. 15. 11. Apoc. 21. 11. is taken away by sanctification 1 Cor. 3. 11. But ye are washed but ye are sanctified Eph. 5. 26 27 That he might sanctisie and cleanse it i. e. His Church with the
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God-man And therefore is it said that he descended into Hell as 't is in our Creed and that he humbled himself and became obedient to death even the death of the Cross Phil. 2. 8. And that by himself he purged our sins Heb. 1. 3. And that he himself suffered Heb. 2. 18. And that he offered up himself Heb. 7. 27. Heb. 9. 26. And that he gave himself a ransome for all that do in believe him 1 Tim. 2. 6. 2. Because as a demonstration that he had fully satisfied the justice of God by what he had done and suffered for his peculiar people 1. God let him out of Prison at his Resurrection He rose again the third day with the same Numerical body that he suffered in 1 Cor. 15. 3 4. Joh. 20. 25 26 27. And he ascended up into heaven 2. He advanced him to the Government of the World Heb. 1. 3. When he had by himself purged our sins sate down on the right hand of the Majesty on high Phil. 2. 9 10 11. Wherefore God also hath exalted him and given him a name which is above every name Where by Name Calvin Beza Diodate Dr. Featly and many others understand dignity and authority and renown as the word is * Jacet sine nomine truncus commonly taken as Calvin saith And it signifieth that the highest authority is given to Christ and that he is placed in the highest degree of honour and authority and that there is not the like dignity to be found in heaven or in earth Which I take to be an Exposition of Mat. 28. 18. And Jesus came and spake unto them saying All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth which is not to be understood of his Essential but of his Mediatory power whereby he hath power to gather govern sanctifie justifie and glorifie his Church and in order hereunto to subdue and rule all his and their enemies and make them all to be subject to him that at the name of Jesus that is not at the * The Ceremony of bowing at the Name of Jesus was revived to crush the Puritans as our reverend Dr. Heylin saith that the Prelates and Clergy assembled in Convocation Ann. 1603. Seeing the Puritan faction to get ground among us revived the old custom used in time of Popery ordered the uncovering of the head in all the acts and parts of publick worship Can. 18. When the Name of Jesus shall be mentioned due and lowly reverence shall be done by all persons present as it hath been accustomed Introduct to his Cyp. Anglic. p. 18. naming of the word Jesus as the Sorbonists would have which saith Calvin is ridiculous the honour here by Paul required being due to Christ our Lord and Saviour All creatures in heaven and earth in the whole world are and shall be subject to the power and authority of Jesus Christ God-man And this honour and authority Christ acknowledgeth is given to him Mat. 28. 18. and is clear here Phil. 2. 9. which is an undeniable evidence That he hath fully satisfied Gods justice and pacified his wrath and procured his favour for those for whom 〈◊〉 died upon the Cross And further 't is said That from thence he shall come 〈◊〉 judg both the quick and dead 3. God hath declared That in â—iâ— he is well pleased Mat. 3. 17. Mat. 17. 5. And that we are compleat in him Col 2. 18. That we are justified in and by him Rom. 3. 24. Act 13. 39. That we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ and access to this grace wherein we stand 〈◊〉 rejoice in hope of the glory of God Rom 5. 1 2. That there is 〈◊〉 condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus Rom. 8. 1. And that he saves his people from their sins to the uttermost Mat. 1. 21. Heb. 5. 2â— And that none of them the Father gave him is lost Joh. 17. 12. Yea what need any more proofs of this Truth Papists themselves hold that Christs merits are sufficient to save the whole world and therefore they are sufficient to save his own peculiar people from their sins and consequently from these temporal punishments of their venial sins Christus Deus quantum * Medina in 3. partem q. 1. a. 2. p. 98. ad sufficientiam satisfecit pro omnibus quantum efficatiam verò pro iis qui salvi fiunt tantum Thomists hold That satisfactio †Medina in 3. partem q. 1. a. 2. p. 99. Christi Domini fuit sufficiens perfectè immo excedens peccata multoque omnium debita omnium hominum ex toto rigore justitiae that is That Christs merits are sufficient to satisfie for the sins of all men but efficacious only to them that are saved And that the satisfaction of Christ the Lord was perfectly sufficient yea exceeding all sins and the debts of all men and that in rigor of justice that if Christs merits were put in one scale and the sins of the whole world were put in the other scale Christs merits would out-weigh them all Now all these things laid together and well considered do make it manifest that Papists Purgatory a covetous fiction of their own brains is not only without but also against Sacred Scripture injurious not only to believers souls and blasphemous against God making him unjust but also abominably sacrilegious against Christ robbing him of the honour of his full perfect and sufficient satisfaction which he hath made unto God for all the sins of Gods Elect and contrary to their own Doctrine in other * Wisdom 3. The souls of the righteous are in the hand of God and there shall no torments touch him points Lastly many other things might be objected against their Doctrine of Purgatory As 1. that their Purgatory-fire being as they say material cannot work immediately upon separated souls which are immaterial 2. That by their own confession there remains nothing to be purged away but punishment which is not a sin nor doth it beget a spot and therefore needs no purging and cannot be purged away by inflicting it it 's impossible that Purgatory should take away punishment and inflict it together But I have been too long upon this selfish covetous blasphemous and antichristian Romance because it is so much against the glory of God and the honour of Jesus Christ and is the source and spring from whence many other Popish Errors do flow and by overthrowing it their Papal Indulgences Prayers for the Dead their selling of Masses their doing of many good works to merit to release souls out of Purgatory will fall to the ground Obj. But Bellarmine answereth That there is no injury done to Christ hereby that is by putting man to make satisfaction for himself for saith he the whole virtue of good works and satisfaction doth depend upon Christs merits and that which we do his Spirit doth do Answ To this 't is answered 1 That there is
St. Peter who spake of the Church at Literal Babylon which he knowing and hearing St. John whose Scholar they say he was by Babylon in his Revelations to mean Rome thought Peter to mean so too which was the ground of his Error that Peter was at Rome and of those that inconsiderately followed him Old Writers have misreported things and yet have said they had them from the Elders and they from the Apostles Irenaeus who wrote in the next Age after the Iren. l. 2. c. 39. Apostles reports That the Lord Jesus taught forty or fifty years and that this he had of all the Elders of Asia and that they had it from St. John and that St. John lived with them till Trajan's time and that Mr. Calamy was mistaken and abused by a Writer and Printer of his Casual Sermon preached at Aldermanbury after the Act a-against Nonconformists Preaching viz. That we should be delivered Anno 1666 but he affirmed no such words but reproved that vain conceit some of those Elders did not only see John but other Apostles and they heard these things from them And yet notwithstanding all these great Authorities or Traditions this was an erroneous opinion of Irenaeus and that of Epiphanius is held the sounder That Christ lived but about thirty-three years and theâ— suffered death and this is believed because it is most agreeable to Scripture Therefore I say that the testimony of Papias yea of Jerome is not to be credited where there is not good ground in Sacred Scripture for their opinions especially where many probable reasons are produced from Scripture against their uncertain opinions And so I may say of the Fathers that said that Peter was at Rome and died there Some of our Divines produce Jerome to prove that he was Crucified at Jerusalem Papists say that he was Crucified which was a Jewish death and that Paul who without doubt suffered death at Rome was beheaded which was a Roman death Dr. * Confer c. 6. d. 3. p. 265. â—yranus a Papist upon Mat. 23. 34. saith Some of them ye shall kill as James the Brother of John c. Some shall ye crucifie as Peter and Andrew his Brother Vid. also Chrysostom in Mat. 23. 34. Reynolds tells Hart that a learned man viz. Velenus in opusculo inscripto Petrum non fuisse Romam 〈◊〉 illic passum of our side having weighed and seeing the dissention of Writers touching the time that he came to Rome and knowing by the Scripture that their speech of his abode in Rome is false and marking the shameful practise of the Romanists in forging calos for their own advantage as Constantines Donation and espying some such forgery among their Monuments of Peter 〈◊〉 Linus fable of his death and finding his Martyrdom mentioned by Jerom and Lyra in such sort as though he had been crucified by the Scribes and Pharisees he was brought by these and the like perswasions into this opinion that Peter never came to Rome And of this opinion was Balaeâ—â— in Act. Rom. Pont. l. 1. praefat and so have been many others since And besides there were Christians at Rome in the time of Tiberius and Caligula before ever Peter is reported to be at Rome as Eusebius witnesseth Hist l. 2. c. 2. and Tertullian in his Apology c. 5. And if we may believe * Libro 1. recognitionum Clementio Object Papists object that if Peter long ago preached to the Gentiles Act. 15. 17. Ergo he preached at Rome Answ I answer thus 1. That it follows not 2. Paul preached to the Gentiles before Peter did Act. 〈◊〉 3. Before Peter saw the Vision of the sheet and heard the command of the Lord be thought it unlawful for him to go to the Gentiles Act. 10. 28. 4. Peter first preached Christ to Cornelius and his friends at his house in Caesaria Act. 10. 5. 'T is most probable that Antioch received the Gospel from Barnabas and Paul and others before Rome and they were first called Christians Act. 11. 19 26. 6. Some of those strangers of Rome that were at Jerusalem Act. 2. 10. might preach the Gospel at Rome Clement Barnabas was there before Peter And that which is objected out of Act. 28. 21. that the Jews told Paul That they had received no Letters out of Judea concerning him and that neither any of the brethren shewed or spake any harm of him is not to be conceived that they had not received or heard of his Epistle which he sent to the Romans some few years before but concerning his particular business and occasion of his being sent Prisoner then to Rome And it makes much as I observed before against St. Peter's being so long Bishop at Rome as Papists would have that these Jews should hear nothing of Paul and be so ignorant of the Doctrine of the Gospel of Jesus Christ of which Peter was by special agreement an Apostle to them Thus I suppose I have sufficiently overthrown the main foundation of the Popes Primacy and Supremacy For if Peter was never at Rome then he was not Bishop of Rome and if he was not Bishop of Rome then the Pope of Rome is not his Successor in the Episcopacy thereof and then by Papists own consequence he is not supreme Bishop of all the Church 3. The Pope of Rome successively was and hath been the inventor and setter forth of Superstitious and Pharisaical Sects which are against the Word of God and the glory of his name To shew in particular how every Pope brought some Superstition into the Church would be very Voluminous for that therefore I must refer you to the Centurists to Dr. Reynolds Conference with Hart to Dr Henry More 's Mystery of Iniquity and the little Treatise of ancient Ceremonies called Vitis degeneris Bishop Jewel's Works and the Mass in English and Latin by James Mountain Printed 1641. I might refer you to the Popes Decretals and indeed they are a good evidence against themselves but they are late forgeries devised to justifie their latter Superstitions and Usurpations therefore I forbear though some Romanizing Protestants have them in too high estimation Though â—ome real Hereticks were the first Inventors of some Superstitions yet the Popes and their Agents were the first setters up imposers of theâ—â— in the Church bringing of Spittle Salt Cream Oyl and the sign of the Cross into the service of God at Baptism is well known to be theirs Kneeling or adoring as * Bishop Sparrow in his Rationale p. 273. some men call it at the receiving the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Vsing the sign of the Cross above thirty times praying to and for the Dead at their Mass worshipping of †Vide ubi supra p. 〈◊〉 what the Church of England saith in her Homily against peril of Idolatry part 3. p. 70. Images of Saints departed this life of Crucifixes the Cross Altars bowing to the East their Superstitious Fasts and Feasts putting holiness in times
Homilies fit to be read in publick to teach people manners 3. That they do not explain * Ecclesiasticus or the Book of Wisdom saith the first Prologue to it contains many dark sentences and parables many things in the Canonical Scripures but are as obscure as I hinted before the 24th Chapter of Ecclesiasticus is and might be manifested in many more yea they obscure the holy Scriptures and render them doubtful yea they are contrary to the Canonical A. B. Vsher Sum of Ch Relig p. 15. and Diodate say and shew that Baruch is contrary to Sacred Scripture and in 2 Mac. 12. 42 43 44 45. is prayer for the Dead which is condemned by all our sound Divines Scriptures 4. If their conformity to the Canonical Scriptures for the most part be a sufficient reason for their appointment to be read in publick I humbly conceive that there might be found many Nonconformists works as Mr. Allen's Vindiciae Pietatis Mr. Ball 's Catechism a Treatise of the Covenant Mr. Burrough his four Treatises Mr. Dod upon the Commandments Dr. Jacomb upon Rom. 8. Mr. Jeanes his mixture of Scholastical with Practical Divinity wherein he hath clearly worsted your great Goliahs Dr. Hamond and Dr. Taylor Dr. Manton's work upon James and Jude Dr. Spurstow of the Promises Mr Watson's Sermons and many others which I name not because I have not read them more conformable to the pure word of God than these Apocryphal Books but especially the learned Assembly of Divines their larger and shorter Catechisms and Confession of Faith commended by learned A B. Vsher as the best that ever were made by any Church since the Apostles times in which I believe the severest Conformist that is cannot by all his wit and learning clearly prove by Canonical Scripture any error either concerning Faith or manners and therefore sure if the Bishops reason be good they are more fit and profitable to be appointed to be read and taught in publick than the Apocryphal Books that are appointed by our Bishops 5. Papists 't is to be feared will say that Th. Aquinas his Sums and Pet. Lumbard his Sentences collected out of the ancient Fathers are for the most part conformable to the Canonical Scriptures and that therefore by our Bishops reason they may be read as well as the Sacred Scriptures at least for instruction for manners what they will say for their lying Legends as Protestants commonly call them I know not but I am sure that several of our learned Protestants as well as Jerome and Augustine of old look upon Tobit and Judith the History of Susanna Bell and the Dragon to be but Comedies Romances or feigned Stories such as the Popish Legends are A B. * Sum of Christian Relig. p. 15 16. Vsher calls many of the Apocryphal Books fables Bishop †Fascic contr cap. 1. q. 2. pag. 16. Prideaux saith 't is uncertain whether Tobit Judith the fragments of Susanna Bell and the Dragon are not rather to be taken for Comedies or fictions than true Narrations Diodate in his Advertisement concerning Apocryphal Books saith That the matter of the Book is full of strange Narrations that have neither ground nor conformity with Authentical Scripture as those of the love of a Devil to a chaste and holy maiden of the death of her husbands of the manner of driving him away of binding him to a certain place of the long conversâ—â—â— of the holy Angel with him things which do savour of a Jewish fable composed for delight to give some instruction of vertue according to the manner of that Nation which seems to be confirmed because neither in Josephus a curious searcher of Jewish Antiquities as Bishop Prideaux assures me nor any other Jewish Author there is any tract of this History That Judith is a feigned Narration he proves by undeniable Arguments The Additions to Daniel of which the Song of the three Children is part part of which was gotten into our Common-Prayer-Book in the Benedicite and the History of Susanna and Bell and the Dragon are other parts Aman. Polanus affirms that St. Jerome Polan Syntag. l. 1. c. 34. p. 63. and Augustine call them Fables Obj. But Bishop Prideaux saith further in answer to this Objection That Canonical Scriptures are laid by and Apocryphals substituted in their stead to be read in publick That in eading that is not always proposed which 〈◊〉 Bishop Prideaux Fasc Controversiarum cap. 1. q. 2. p. 16. in itâ—s self most excellent but that which doth most serve to the edification of the hearers 1 Cor. 14. 26. That when their Apocryphals are read they are not equalled with Canonicals but are interposed as certain easie institutes which excite the slower hearers to embrace the Canonicals as Homilies and Sermons do Answ To this I answer 1. That these things are said but not proved 2. That if the Bishops Answer be to the Objection his words imply That the reading of the Apocryphals which are fabulous erroneous and contrary to the word of truth is more inservient to the edification of the hearers than the reading of Gods holy and pure word of Truth is which I deny and prove to be false thus 〈◊〉 That which is either the pure Word of God or is consonant thereunto and so free from fabulousness falseness approbation of toleration of evil must needs be more conducing to edification of the hearers than that which is fabulous false and contrary to the Word of God both for Doctrine of faith and manners and approves of and tolerates sin but that the latter is so of Apocryphals I have proved and the former you dare not deny of Canonicals Ergo your Apocryphals do not conduce more to the edification of the hearers than the pure and true Word of God doth 2. Thus that which teacheth false things and evil manners doth not edifie the hearers more than that which teacheth nothing but the truth and good manners But Ergo your Apocryphals do not build upward but downward they do edificare ad Gehennam as Tertullian ad ruinam as another speaks they build men down to Hell and prepare men to destruction Their publick reading actively scandalizeth for a scandal is a word or deed spoken or done yielding to another occasion of ruin and you cannot Aquinas 22. q. 43. a. 1. c. Scandalum est dictum vel factum minus rectum praebens alteri occasionem ruinae plead that 't is accidental as 't is said of Gods Word for the reading and preaching of Gods Word is commanded and so necessary but reading of Apocryphals is not commanded by God and is therefore unnecessary and being erroneous both for matters of faith and manners is of it self * Aquin. 22. q. 43. a. 1 ad 4. inductive to sin to sinful opinions affections and practises as may by any understanding Christian be evidenced in those Particulars I have instanced in before 3. 'T is evident that if not for
Orthodox Carleton's place at Chichester who wrote against Mountagues Books and Popish Goodman who * Cyp. Angl. l. 4. p. 446. lived and died a Papist was made Bishop of Gloucester in Orthodox Smith's place who opposed Laud in his Altar-worship there yea though A. B. Abbot was by Laud's means sequestred from the execution of his office and his authority committed to such hands as were no favourers of the Genevean faction they are Heylin's own words of which Bishop Laud as Heylin * Cypr. Angl. l. 3. p. 170. saith informed the King that A. B. Abbot was the head viz. to Mountain Bishop of London Neile Bishop of Durham Buckeridg Lauds Tutor Bishop of Rochester Howsâ—â— Bishop of Oxford and himself Bishop of Bath and Wells or any two of them yea when Laud was gotten uppermost and had gotten stout-hearted Williams Bishop of Lincoln into the Tower and had his Spies upon Orthodox Hall Bishop of Exceter and Davenant Bishop of Salisbury two of those learned Divines which were sent by King James to the Synod of Dort and had almost and did what he listed in promoting those of his party and suppressing those of the Genevean party as Dr. Heylin evidenceth yea brags in his Cyprianus Anglicus yet I say he never durst put those five Arminian points to the hazard of decision by the Convocation though he had a great mind to it as appears by his moving the Duke of Buckingham about it and his consulting with Bishop Andrews about it as Dr. Heylin relates in his Cyprianus * Lib. 2. p. 133. 'T is probable he first advised and then ordered the Catalogue of the most eminent Divines distinguished according to their perswasions by the Letters O and P made him fear the Convocation and therefore take his other courses which brought himself and others to ruin Cyp. Angl. l. 2. p 133. And the eighth Article objected against him viz. That there must be a blow given to the Church such as hath not been yet given before it would be brought to conformity Cyp. Angl. l 5. p. 512 513. might be brought to prove his fear of the Convocation as is said Anglicus least they should be condemned by our Convocation as well as they were by the Synod of Dort and by Bishop Carleton Dean Sutcliff Dr. Featly Mr. Goad Mr. Yates Mr. Ward Mr. Burton Mr. Rouse and Mr. Pryn asunder that the encounter seemed to be betwixt a whole army and a single person as Heylin writes in his Cyprianus Anglicus l. 2. p. 155. and by Dr. Prideaux in the Chair in the Divinity School at Oxford as they had been by learned Dr. Humphries Dr. Holland and Dr. Abbot before him and by Dr. Whitaker Mr. Perkins Dr. Davenaut and Dr. Ward and many more at Cambridg and by many more in the Universities and elsewhere in Cities Towns and Country Parishes And were never declared either by any Convocation at or since the first reformation or by any Parliament except in Queen Maries reign to be the Doctrine of the Church of England And for further confirmation of this truth that those five Arminian points condemned by the Synod of Dort to which Synod King James sent several Learned and Orthodox Divines who joined with the rest of that Learned Synod in condemning and rejecting all those five Armanian points which sure neither he nor they would have done if they had been the Doctrine of the Church of England were not the Doctrine of the Church of England read King James his Declaration against Vorstius wherein he writes thus to his Ambassador Sir Ralph Winwood Trusty and Welbeloved c. You shall repair to the States-General with all possible diligence in our name telling them that we doubt not but that their Ambassadors which were here about two years since did inform them of a forewarning that we wished the said Ambassadors to make unto them in our name to beware in time of * Arminians called seditious and heretical Preachers seditious and heretical Preachers and not to suffer any such to creep into their State Our principal meaning was of Arminius who though he were late dead yet had he left too many disciples behind him Declarat pag. 350. of his Works That Vorstius hath published such monstrous blasphemy and horrible Atheism in a scandalous Book fit to be burnt and the Author punished and that Arminius late Divinity-Reader at Leyden was but of little better stuff who though he be dead hath left his sting yet living among them Ibid. p. 350 351. And in pag. 355. he saith thus in his Letter to the States-General We had well hoped that the corrupt seed of that enemy of God Arminius did sow amongst you some few years since had given you sufficient warning to take heed of such infected persons seeing your own Country-men divided into factious upon this occasion a matter so opposite to unity which is indeed the only â—roâ— and safety of your State next under God as of necessity it must by little and little bring you to utter ruin if wisely you do not provide against it and that in time Ibid. p. 355. It is true it was our hard hap not to hear of this Arminius before he was dead and that all the Reformed Churches of Germany had with open mouth complained of him But as soon as we understood of that distraction in your State which he left after his death behind him we did not fail to use some such speeches to your Ambassadors as we * That is those above named to beware of seditious and Heretical Preachers thought fittest for the good of your State which we doubt not but they have faithfully reported unto you For what need we make any question of the arrogancy of these †Arminians called Hereticks or atheistical Sectaries Hereticks or rather Atheistical Sectaries among you when one of theâ— at this present that is Bertius a Scholar of Arminius as he described and called him in his former Letter to his Ambassador Ibid. p. 354. remaining in your Town of Leyden hath not only presumed to publish of late a blasphemous * Bertius his Book de Apostasia Sanctorium called a blasphemous Book Book of the Apostasie of the Saints but besides hath been so impudent as to send the other day a copy thereof as a goodly present to our Archbishop of Canterbury together with a Letter wherein he is not ashamed as also in his Book †To say that the Doctrine therein contained is agreeable to the profession and Doctrine of the Church of England a gross lye to lye so grosly as to avow that his Heresies contained in the said Book are agreeable with the religion and profession of our Church of England for these respects therefore have we cause enough very heartily to request you to root out with speed those * Arminianism Heresie and Schism Heresies and Schisms which are beginning to bud forth among you which if you suffer to
afterward when A B. Vsher drew up the Articles of Ireland to which all the Clergy there in Convocation assembled yielded assented and subscribed as was shewed before And the reason why he yielded not to them at the Conference at Hampton-Court was because he did not understand what they were Conference Ibid. p. 40. 2. He wished that the Doctrine of Predestination might be very tenderly handled and with great discretion lest on the one side Gods Omnipotence might be called in question by impeaching the Doctrine of his eternal Predestination or on the other a desperate presumption might he arreared by inferring the necessary certainty of standing and persisting in grace Conf. p. 30. 3. He saith That Predestination and Election dependeth not upon any qualities actions or works of man which be mutable but upon Gods eternal and immutable decree and purpose Conf. p. 43. 4. This I suppose was one great reason why learned King James called Arminius his Scholars Atheistical Hereticks in his Declaration against Vorstius Because 1. Their conditional and incompleat Election of singular persons and not peremptory until at the last they do persevere doth by necessary consequence deny Gods nature For let it be granted as they distinguish and say That Gods eternal Decree of Election of particular persons be not absolute but only conditional if they do believe and not peremptory and compleat till they do believe and persevere in believing and to the hour of death and that this their faith and perseverance doth depend upon mans Free-will which is very corrupt uncertain and changeable and which they say may and doth determine it self always as it pleaseth and may finally resist Gods will and offers of Grace then it will follow that Gods knowledg is very confused and uncertain that he doth not distinctly and certainly know whether this or that man will or shall believe in Christ and persevere in holiness and that therefore he doth but conditionally elect him to eternal Salvation viz. if he do believe in Christ and persevere and not peremptorily until he see him do so and then it will follow that God is not omniscient and that there is a separable accident in God and that God is compounded of subject and accident and not a perfect and simple essence and so not God which is contrary to Sacred Scripture Job 6. 64. But there are some of you that believe not for Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not and who should betray him And 2 Tim. 2. 19. Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure having this seal the Lord knoweth them that are his Which two places of Scripture do plainly shew that the Lord doth distinctly and certainly know who are elected and who are reprobated and who would believe in Christ and who would not believe in him and this too from the beginning And their Doctrine of resistibility viz. that the will of Gods elect can finally resist Gods will denies consequentially Gods Omnipotence and makes man stronger than God which is contrary to that of our Saviour Joh. 10. 29 30. My Father which gave them me is greater than all and none is able to pluck them out of my Fathers hand I and my Father are one And so they run directly against King James his words which they have brought out of the Conference at Hampton-Court before mentioned where he willed That the Doctrine of Predestination should be handled tenderly lest Gods Omnipotence should be called in question 3. Their Doctrine of Gods incomplete and revocable decree of Election makes God mutable which is contrary to Mal. 3. 6. I the Lord change not Jam. 1. 17. With God there is no variableness nor shadow of turning To this may be added that which the industrious and judicious Author of the Book intituled the * C. 7. S. 6. p 210 211. Practical Divinity of the Papists tells us that Papists have too much of forcery and inchantment in their Sacramentals and such like things as in Consecrated water Salt Oyl Bread Waxen-tapers branches of Trees Roses Bells Medals and Agnus Dei's To such things as these they ascribe marvelous and supernatural effects a virtue to save and sanctifie fouls to blot out sins to expel Devils to cure diseases to secure Women in travel to preserve from burning and drowning Pope * De Consecrat D. 3. C. aqua Alexander in the Decrees which they ascribe to him asserts that water mixed with salt and consecrated doth sanctifie the people purifie the unclean break the snares of the Devil and bring health to body and soul The form of exorcising salt which we have in their authorized Books tells us it is exorcised that it may be to all that take it both health to body and soul The exorcised water is to take away all the power of the Devil and root him out Pope Vrban the fifth lib. 1. de Ceremoniis cap. ult tells us that an Agnus Dei drives away Lightning and all malignancy delivers pregnant Women destroys the force of fire secures from drowning and which is more destroys sin even as the blood of Christ doth Bellarmine * De cultu Sanctor l. 3. c. 7. p. 1594. saith they are of power for blotting out venial sins for the chasing away Devils for the curing of Diseases Others †Tribuitur Thom Cajetan Soto in Suarez T. 3. Disp 15. S. 4. ascribe to them a power to excite gracious motions even ex opere operato Now it is acknowledged that the natural power of these things cannot reach such effects and that there is no virtue in or of themselves to produce them no more than there is in such things by which Magicians and Conjurers work their strange seats Nor hath the Lord instituted them or any where promised to impower them for such purposes no more than he hath promised to make the charm of any sorcerer effectual for marvelous operations Bellarmine * Ibid. ubi supra confesseth that such things have their force not by any promise of God expressed And Suarez †Ib. p. 187. saith the effect thereof is not founded in any special promise of God because as he had said it doth not appear there is any such promise And they confess there is a tacit Invocation of the Devil in using things for effects to which they have no power natural or Divine There is such an Invocation of the Devil saith Cajetan * Sum. verbo Divinatio when one useth any thing or word as having power for an effect for which it appears not to have any virtue either natural or Divine And so Silvester †Sum. verbo supersâ—â—cio after Aquinas if the things made use of for such effects appear to have no power to produce them it follows that they are not used for this purpose as causes but as signs or Sacramentals and consequently they belong to some compact with the Devil And this even the Jesuits will acknowledg Thus Cardinal