of Paul The Conversion of St. Paul himself was so clearly from a Preventing Grace that if it had not been miraculous in so many of its Circumstances it would have been a strong Argument in behalf of it These words of Christ seem also to assert it Without me ye can do nothing ye have not chosen me but I you and no man can come to me except the Father which hath sent me draw him Joh. 1.13.15.5 16. Phil. 2.13 Those who received Christ were born not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man but of the will of God God is said to work in us both to will and to do of his own good pleasure The one seems to import the first beginings and the other the progress of a Christian Course of Life So far all among us that I know of are agreed though perhaps not as to the force that is in all those places to prove this Point There do yâ—t remain Two Points in which they do not agree the one is the Efficacy of this Preventing Grace some think that it is of its own nature so Efficacious that it never fails of Converting those to whom it is given others think that it only awakens and disposes as well as it enables them to turn to God but that they may resist it and that the greater part of Mankind do actually resist it The examining of this Point and the stating the Arguments of both sides will belong more properly to the Seventeenth Article The other Head in which many do differ is concerning the Extent of this Preventing Grace for whereas such as do hold it to be Efficacious of it self restrain it to the number of those who are Elected and converted by it others do believe That as Christ died for all Men so there is an Universal Grace which is given in Christ to all Men in some degree or other and that it is given to all Baptized Christians in a more eminent degree and that as all are corrupted by Adam there is also a general Grace given to all Men in Christ. This depends so much on the former Point that the discussing the one is indeed the discussing of both and therefore it shall not be further entred upon in this place ARTICLE XI Of the Justification of Man We are accounted Righteous before God only for the Merit of our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ by Faith and not for our own Works or Deservings Wherefore that we are justified by Faith only is a most wholsome Doctrine and very full of Comfort as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Iustification IN order to the right understanding this Article we must first consider the true meaning of the Terms of which it is made up which are Iustification Faith Faith only and Good Works and then when these are rightly stated we will see what Judgments are to be passed upon the Questions that do arise out of this Article Iust or Iustified are words capable of two senses the one is a Man who is in the Favour of God by a mere Act of his Grace or upon some Consideration not founded on the Holiness or the Merit of the Person himself The other is a Man who is truly holy and as such is beloved of God The use of this word in the New Testament was probably taken from the term Chasidim among the Iews a designation of such as observed the external parts of the Law strictly and were believed to be upon that account much in the Favour of God an Opinion being generally spread among them that a strict observance of the external parts of the Law of Moses did certainly put a Man in the Favour of God In opposition to which the design of a great part of the New Testament is to shew that these things did not put Men in the Favour of God Our Saviour used the word saved in opposition to condemned Job 3.18 and spoke of Men who were condemned already as well as of others who were saved St. Paul enlarges more fully into many Discourses in which our being justified and the righteousness of God or his grace towards us are all terms equivalent to one another His design in the Epistle to the Romans was to prove that the observance of the Mosaiâ—al Law could not justifie that is could not put a Man under the grace or favour of God or the righteousnâ—ss of God that is into a state of acceptation with him as that is opposite to a state of wrath or condemnation He upon that shews that Abraham was in the Favour of God before he was Circumcised upon the account of his trusting to the Promises of God and obeying his Commands and that God reckoned upon these Acts of his as much as if they had been an entire course of Obedience Gen. 15.6 Rom. 4.3.22 for that is the meaning of these words Aâ—d it was imputed to him for righteousness These Promises were freely made to him by God when by no previous Works of his he had made them to be due to him of debt therefore that Covenant which was founded on those Promises was the justifying of Abraham freely by grace upon which St. Paul in a variety of Inferences and Expressions assumes That we are in like manner justified freely by grace through the redemption in Christ Iesus Rom. 3.24 That God has of his own free Goodness offered a new Covenant and new and better Promises to Mankind in Christ Jesus which whosoever believe as Abraham did they are justified as he was So that whosoever will observe the Scope of St. Paul's Epistles to the Romans and Galatians will see that he always uses Iustification in a sense that imports our being put in the Favour of God The Epistle to the Galatians was indeed writ upon the occasion of another Controversy which was Whether supposing Christ to be the Messias Christians were bound to observe the Mosaical Law or not Whereas the Scope of the first part of the Epistle to the Romans is to shew that we are not justified nor saved by the Law of Moses as a Mean of its own nature capable to recommend us to the Favour of God but that even that Law was a Dispensation of Grace in which it was a true Faith like Abraham's that put Men in the Favour of God yet in both these Epistles in which Iustification is fully treated of it stands always for the receiving one into the Favour of God In this the Consideration upon which it is done and the Condition upon which it is offered are two very different things The one is a Dispensation of God's Mercy in which he has regard to his own Attributes to the Honour of his Laws and his Government of the World The other is the Method in which he applies that to us in such a manner that it may have such Ends as are both perfective of Human Nature and suitable to an infinitely Holy Being
Testament answered 84 Concerning the various Readings 85 The nature and degrees of Inspiration 86 Concerning the Historical parts of Scripture 87 Concerning the Reasonings in Scripture 88 Of the Apocryphal Books 89 ARTICLE VII 91 NO difference between the Old and New Testament Ibid. Proofs in the Old Testament of the Messias 92 In the Prophets chiefly in Daniel 94 The Proofs all summed up 95 Objections of the Jews answered 96 The hopes of anotheâ— Life in the Old Testament 97 Our Saviour proved the Resurrection from the words to Moses 98 Expiation of Sin in the Old Dispensation 99 Sins then expiated by the Blood of Christ Ibid. Of the Rites and Ceremonies among the Jews 100 Of their Iudiciary Laws 101 Of the Moral Law Ibid. The Principles of Morality 102 Of Idolatry 103 Concerning the Sabbath Ibid. Of the Second Table 104 Of not coveting what is our Neighbours 105 ARTICLE VIII 106 COncerning the Creed of Athanasius Ibid. And the condemning Clauses in it Ibid. Of the Apostles Creed 107 ARTICLE IX 108 DIfferent Opinions concerning Original Sin Ibid. All men liable to Death by it 109 A Corruption spread through the whole Race of Adam Ibid. Of the state of Innocence 110 Of the effects of Adam's Fall 111 God's Iustice vindicated 112 Of the Imputation of Adam's Sin 113 St. Austin's Doctrine in this Point 114 This is opposed by many others Ibid. Both sides pretend their Doctrines agree with the Article 116 ARTICLE X. 117 THE true Notion of Liberty Ibid. The Feebleness of our present state 118 Inward Assistances promised in the New Covenant 119 The effect that these have on men 120 Concerning Preventing-Grace Ibid. Of its being efficacious or universal 121 ARTICLE XI 122 COncerning Iustification Ibid. Concerning Faith 123 The differences between the Church of England and the Church of Rome in this Point 124 The conditions upon which men are justified 126 The use to be made of this Doctrine 127 ARTICLE XII 128 THE necessity of Holiness Ibid. Concerning Merit 129 Of the defects of Good Works Ibid. ARTICLE XIII 131 ACTIONS in themselves good yet may be sins in him who does them Ibid. Of the Seventh Chapter to the Romans 132 This is not a total Incapacity Ibid. ARTICLE XIV 133 Oâ— the great extent of our Duty Ibid. No Counsels of Perfection 134 Many Duties which do not bind at all times Ibid. It is not possible for man to supererogate 135 Objections against this answered 136 The steps by which that Doctrine prevailed 137 ARTICLE XV. 138 CHrist's spotless Holiness Ibid. Of the Imperfections of the best men 139 ARTICLE XVI 140 COncerning Mortal and Venial Sin Ibid. Of the Sin against the Holy Ghost Ibid. Of the Pardon of Sin after Baptism 141 That as God forgives the Church ought also to forgive 142 Concerning Apostacy and sin unto Death 143 ARTICLE XVII 145 THE state of the Question 146 The Doctrine of the Supralapsarians and Sublapsarians Ibid. The Doctrine of the Remonstrants and the Socinians 147 This is a Controversy that arises out of Natural Religion Ibid. The History of this Controversy both in ancient and modern times 148 The Arguments of the Supralapsarians 152 The Arguments of the Sublapsarians 158 The Arguments of the Remonstrants 159 They affirm a certain Prescience 161 The Socinians Plea 164 General Reflections on the whole matter 165 The advantages and disadvantages of both sides and the faults of both 166 In what both do agree 167 The sense of the Article 168 The Cautions added to it Ibid. Passages in the Liturgy explained 169 ARTICLE XVIII 171 PHilosophers thought men might be saved in all Religions Ibid. So do the Mahometans Ibid. None are saved but by Christ 172 Whether some may not be saved by him who never heard of him Ibid. None are in Covenant with God but through the knowledge of Christ 173 But for others we cannot judge of the extent of the Mercies of God Ibid. Curiosity is to be restrained 174 ARTICLE XIX 175 WE ought not to believe that any are Infallible without good Authority Ibid. Iust prejudices against some who pretend to it 176 No Miracles brought to prove this Ibid. Proofs brought from Scripture 177 Things to be supposed previous to these Ibid. A Circle is not to be admitted Ibid. The Notes given of the true Church 178 These are examined Ibid. And whether they do agree to the Church of Rome 179 The Truth of Doctrine must be first settled Ibid. A Society that has a true Baptism is a true Church 180 Sacraments are not annulled by every Corruption Ibid. We own the Baptism and Orders given in the Church of Rome 181 And yet justify our separating from them Ibid. Objections against private judging 182 Our Reasons are given us for that end Ibid. Our Minds are free as our Wills are 183 The Church is still Visible but not Infallible Ibid. Of the Popes Infallibility 184 That was not pretended to in the first Ages Ibid. The Dignity of Sees rose from the Cities 185 Popes have fallen into Heresy Ibid. Their Ambition and Forgeries Ibid. Their Cruelty 186 The Power of deposing Princes claimed by them as given them by God Ibid. This was not a Corruption only of Discipline but of Doctrine 187 Arguments for the Popes Infallibility 188 No Foundation for it in the New Testament Ibid. St. Peter never clâ—imed it 189 Christ's words to him explained Ibid. Of the Kâ—ys of the Kingdâ—m of Hâ—â—vâ—n 190 Of binding and loosing Ibid. ARTICLE XX. 192 OF Church Power in Rituals Ibid. The Practice of the Jewish Church 193 Changes in these sometimes necâ—ssary Ibid. The Practice of the Ap stles 194 Sâ—bjâ—cts must obey in lawful things Ibid. But Superiâ—rs must not impose too much 195 The Church has Authority though not Infallible Ibid. Great Respâ—ct due to her Decisions 196 But no absâ—lute Submâ—ssion Ibid. The Church is the Depâ—sitary of the Scriptures 197 The Church of Rome run in a Circle Ibid. ARTICLE XXI 199 COuncils cannot be called but by the Consent of Princes Ibid. Tâ—e first were called by the Roman Emperors Ibid. Afterwards the Popes called them 200 Then some Councils thought on methods to fix their meeting Ibid. What makâ—s a Council to be General Ibid. What numbers are necessary 201 Hâ—w thâ—y must he cited Ibid. Nâ— Rules given in Scripture concerning their Constitution Ibid. Nazianzen's Complaints of Councils 202 Councils have been câ—ntrary to one another Ibid. Disâ—rders and Intriguâ—s in Councils Ibid. They judgâ— not by Inspiration Ibid. The Churches may examine their proceedings and judge of them 203 Concerning the Popes Bull confirming them Ibid. Thâ—y have an Authority but not absolute Ibid. Nâ—r do they need the Popes Bulls 204 The several Churches know their Traditions best Ibid. The Fathers do argue for the truth of the decisions but not from their authority Ibid. No prospect of another General Council 205 Popes are jealous of them Ibid. And the World expects little from them Ibid. Concerning the words
to pursue We are never to mix these two together or to imagine that the Condition upon which Justification is offered to us is the Consideration that moves God as if our Holiness Faith or Obedience were the moving Cause of our Justification oâ— that God justifies us because he sees that we are truly just For though it is not to be denied but that in some places of the New Testament Iustification may stand in that Sense because the word in its Signification will bear it yet in these Two Epistles in which it is largely treated of nothing is plainer than that the design is to shew us what it is that brings us to the Favour of God and to a state of Pardon and Acceptation So that Iustification in those places stands in opposition to Accusation and Condemnation The next Term to be explained is Faith which in the New Testament stâ—nds generally for the Complex of Christianity in opposition to the Law which stands as generally for the Complex of the whole Mosaical Dispensation So that the Faith of Christ is equivalent to this the Gospel of Christ because Christianity is a Foederal Religion founded on God's part on Promises that he has made to us and on the Rules he has set us and on our part on our believing that Revelation our trusting to those Promises and our setting our selves to follow those Rules The believing this Revelation and that great Article of it of Christ's being the Son of God and the true Messias that came to reveal his Father's Will and to offer himself up to be the Sacrifice of this New Covenant is often represented as the great and only Condition of the Covenant on our part but still this Faith must receive the whole Gospel the Precepts as well as the Promises of it and receive Christ as a Prophet to Teach and a King to Rule as well as a Priest to Save us By Faith only is not to be meant Faith as it is separated from the other Evangelical Graces and Virtues but Faith as it is opposite to the Rites of the Mosaical Law for that was the great Question that gave occasion to St. Paul's writing so fully upon this Head since many Judaizing Christians as they acknowledged Christ to be the true Messias so they thought that the Law of Moses was still to retain its force In opposition to whom St. Paul says That we are justified by Faith without the works of the Law Rom. 3.28 Gal. 2.16 Rom. 2.12 It is plain that he means the Mosaical Dispensation for he had divided all Mankind into those who were in the Law and those who were without the Law That is into Iews and Gentiles Nor had St. Paul any occasion to treat of any other Matter in those Epistles or to enter into nice Abstractions which became not one that was to Instruct the World in order to their Salvation Those Metaphysical Notions are not easily apprehended by plain Men not accustomed to such Subtilties and are of very little value when they are more critically distinguished Yet when it seems some of those Expressions were wrested to an ill sense and use St. Iames treats of the same matter but with this great difference that though he says expresly That a man is justified by Works and not by Faith only yet he does not say by the Works of the Law Jam. 2.24 so that he does not at all contradict St. Paul the Works that he mentions not being the Circumcision or Ritual Observances of Abraham but his offering up his Son Isaac which St. Paul had reckoned a part of the Faith of Abraham This shews that he did not intend to contradict the Doctrine delivered by St. Paul but only to give a true Notion of the Faith that justifies that it is not a bare believing such as Devils are capable of but such a believing as exerted it self in Good Works So that the Faith mentioned by St. Paul is the Complex of all Christianity whereas that mentioned by St. Iames is a bare believing without a life suitable to it And as it is certainly true that we are taken into the Favour of God upon our receiving the whole Gospel without observing the Mosaical Precepts so it is as certainly true that a bare professing or giving credit to the Truth of the Gospel without our living suitably to it does not give us a right to the Favour of God And thus it appears that these two Pieces of the New Testament when rightly understood do in no wise contradict but agree well with one another In the last place we must consider the signification of Good Works By them are not to be meant some voluntary and assumed pieces of Severity which are no where enjoyned in the Gospel that arise out of Superstition and that feed of Pride and Hypocrisy These are so far from deserving the name of Good Works that they have been in all Ages the Methods of Imposture and of Impostors and the Arts by which they have gained Credit and Authority By Good Works therefore are meant Acts of true Holiness and of sincere Obedience to the Laws of the Gospel The Terms being thus explained I shall next distinguish between the Questions arising out of this Matter that are only about Words and those that are more Material and Important If any Man fancy that the Remission of Sins is to be considered as a thing previous to Iustification and distinct from it and acknowledge that to be freely given in Christ Jesus and that in consequence of this there is such a Grace infused that thereupon the Person becomes truly just and is considered as such by God This which must be confessed to be the Doctrine of a great many in the Church of Rome and which seems to be that established at Trent is indeed very visibly different from the Stile and Design of those Places of the New Testament in which this matter is most fully opened But yet after all it is but a question about words for if that which they call Remission of Sins be the same with that which we call Iustification and if that which they call Iustification be the same with that which we call Sanctification then here is only a strife of words Yet even in this we have the Scriptures clearly of our side so that we hold the form of sound words from which they have departed The Scripture speaks of Sanctification as a thing different from and subsequent to Iustification 1 Cor. 6.11 Now ye are washed ye are sanctified ye are justified And since Justification and the being in the Love and Favour of God are in the New Testament one and the same thing the Remission of Sins must be an Act of God's Favour For we cannot imagine a middle state of being neither accepted of him nor yet under his Wrath as if the Remission of Sins were merely an extinction of the guilt of Sin without any special Favour If therefore this
Such a Faith as this justifies but not as it is a Work or meritorious Action that of its own nature puts us in the Favour of God and makes us truly just But as it is the Condition upon which the Mercy of God is offered to us by Christ Jesus For then we correspond to his design of coming into the World that he might redeem us from all Iniquity Tit. 2.14 that is justify us And purifie unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good works that is sanctify us Upon our bringing our selves therefore under these Qualifications and Conditions we are actually in the Favour of God Our Sins are pardoned and we are entitled to Eternal Life Our Faith and Repentance are not the valuable Considerations for which God pardons and justifies that is done meerly for the Death of Christ which God having out of the Riches of his Grace provided for us and offered to us Justification is upon those accounts said to be free There being nothing on our part which either did or could have procured it But still our Faith which includes our Hope our Love our Repentance and our Obedience is the Condition that makes us capable of receiving the benefits of this Redemption and Free Grace And thus it is clear in what sense we believe that we are justified both freely and yet through Christ and also through Faith as the Condition indispensably necessary on our part In strictness of words we are not justified till the final Sentence is pronounced Till upon our Death we are solemnly acquitted of our Sins and admitted into the Presence of God this being that which is opposite to Condemnation Yet as a Man who is in that state that must end in Condemnation is said to be condemned already Joh. 3.18 and the wrath of God is said to abide upon him tho' he be not yet adjudged to it So on the contrary a Man in that state which must end in the full Enjoyment of God is said now to be justified and to be at peace with God because he not only has the Promises of that state now belonging to him when he does perform the Conditions required in them but is likewise receiving daily Marks of God's Favour the protection of his Providence the Ministry of Angels and the inward Assistances of his Grace and Spirit This is a Doctrine full of comfort for if we did believe that our Justification was founded upon our Inherent Justice or Sanctification as the Consideration on which we receive it we should have just cause of Fear and Dejection since we could not reasonably promise our selves so great a Blessing upon so poor a Consideration but when we know that this is only the Condition of it then when we feel it is sincerely received and believed and carefully observed by us we may conclude that we are justified But we are by no means to think that our certain persuasion of Christ's having died for us in particular or the certainty of our Salvation through him is an Act of saving Faith much less that we are justified by it Many things have been too crudely said upon this Subject which have given the Enemies of the Reformation great Advantages and have furnished them with much matter of Reproach We ought to believe firmly That Christ died for all Penitent and Converted Sinners and when we feel these Characters in our selves we may from thence justly infer That he died for us and that we are of the Number of those who shall be Saved through him But yet if we may fall from this state in which we do now feel our selves we may and must likewise forfeit those hopes and therefore we must work out our Salvation with fear and trembling Our believing that we shall be Saved by Christ is no Act of Divine Faith since every Act of Faith must be founded on some Divine Revelation It is only a Collection and Inference that we may make from this general Proposition That Christ is the propitiation for the Sins of those who do truly repent and believe his Gospel and from those Reflections and Observations that we make on our selves by which we conclude That we do truly both repent and believe ARTICLE XII Of Good Works Albeit that Good Works which are the fruits of Faith and follow after Iustification cannot put away our Sins and endure the severity of God's Iudgment yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively Faith insomuch that by them a lively Faith may be as evidently known as a Tree discerned by the fruit THat Good works are indispensably necessary to Salvation that without holiness no man shall see the Lord is so fully and frequently exprest in the Gospel that no doubt can be made of it by any who reads it And indeed a greater disparagement to the Christian Religion cannot be imagined than to propose the hopes of God's Mercy and Pardon barely upon Believing without a Life suitable to the Rules it gives us This began early to corrupt the Theories of Religion as it still has but too great an influence upon the Practice of it What St. Iames writ upon this Subject must put an end to all doubting about it and whatever Subtilties some may have set up to separate the consideration of Faith from a holy Life in the point of Iustification yet none among us have denied that it was absolutely necessary to Salvation And so it be owned as necessary it is a nice curiosity to examine whether it is of it self a Condition of Justification or if it is the certain distinction and constant effect of that Faith which justifies These are Speculations of very little consequence as long as the main Point is still maintained That Christ came to bring us to God to change our Natures to mortify the Old man in us and to raise up and restore that Image of God from which we had fallen by Sin And therefore even where the Thread of Men's Speculations of these Matters may be thought too fine and in some Points of them wrong drawn yet so long as this Foundation is preserved that every one who nameth the name of Christ does depart from iniquity 2 Tim. 2.19 so long the Doctrine of Christ is preserved pure in this Capital and Fundamental Point There do arise out of this Article only two Points about which some Debates have been made 1st Whether the Good Works of Holy Men are in themselves so perfect that they can endure the severity of God's Judgment so that there is no mixture of imperfection or Evil in them or not The Council of Trent has decreed That Men by their Good Works have so fully satisfied the Law of God according to the state of this Life that nothing is wanting to them The second Point is Whether these Good Works are of their own nature meritorious of Eternal Life or not The Council of Trent has decreed that
or the body like the Notion that the Gentiles might have of their Februations or which is more natural considering to whom he writes like the Opinions that the Iews had of their Cleansings after their Legal Impurities from which their Washings and Bathings did absolutely free them The Salvation that we Christians have by Baptism is effected by that Federation into which we enter when upon the Demands that are made of our renouncing the Devil the World and the Flesh and of our believing in Christ and our Repentance towards God we make such Answers from a good Conscience as agree with the end and design of Baptism then by our thus coming into Covenant with God we are saved in Baptism So that the Salvation by Baptism is given by reason of the federal compact that is made in it Now this being made outwardly according to the Rules that are prescribed that must make the Baptism good among Men as to all the outward and visible effects of it But since it is the answer of a good Conscience only that saves then an answer from a bad Conscience from a hypocritical Person who does not inwardly think or purpose according to what he professes outwardly cannot save but does on the contrary aggravate his Damnation Therefore our Article puts the efficacy of Baptism in order to the forgiveness of our sins and to our Adoption and Salvation upon the vertue of Prayer to God that is upon those Vows and other acts of Devotion that accompany them So that when the seriousness of the mind accompanies the regularity of the action then both the outward and inward effects of Baptism are attained by it and we are not only Baptized into one Body but are also saved by Baptism So that upon the whole matter Baptism is a federal admission into Christianity in which on God's part all the Blessings of the Gospel are made over to the Baptized And on the other hand the Person Baptized takes on him by a solemn Profession and Vow to observe and adhere to the whole Christian Religion So it is a very natural distinction to say that the outward effects of Baptism follow it as outwardly performed but that the inward effects of it follow upon the inward acts but this difference is still to be observed between inward acts and outward actions that when the outward action is rightly performed the Church must reckon the Baptism good and never renew it But if one has been wanting in the inward acts those may be afterwards renewed and that want may be made up by Repentance Thus all that the Scriptures have told us concerning Baptism seems to be sufficiently explained There remains only one place that may seem somewhat strange St. Paul says that Christ sent him not to Baptize but to Preach 1 Cor. 1.17 Which some have carried so far as to infer from thence that Preaching is of more value than Baptism But it is to be considered that the Preaching of the Apostles was of the nature of a Promulgation made by Heraulds It was an act of a special Authority by which he in particular was to convert the World from Idolatry and Iudaism to acknowledge Iesus to be the true Messias Acts 8.26 to the end Now when Men by the Preaching of the Apostles and by the Miracles that accompanied it were so wrought on as to believe that Iesus was the Christ Acts 16.31 32 33. then according to the practice of Philip towards the Eunuch of Ethiopia and of St. Paul to his Jayler at Philippi they might immediately Baptize them yet most commonly there was a special Instruction to be used before Persons were Baptized who might in general have some Conviction and yet not be so fully satisfied but that a great deal of more pains was to be taken to carry them on to that full assurance of Faith which was necessary This was a work of much time and was to be managed by the Pastors or Teachers of the several Churches So that the meaning of what St. Paul says was this that he was to publish the Gospel from City to City but could not descend to the particular labour of preparing and instructing of the Persons to be Baptized and to the Baptizing them when so prepared If he had entred upon this Work he could not have made that progress nor have founded those Churches that he did All this is therefore misunderstood when it is applied to such Preaching as is still continued in the Church which does not succeed the Apostolical Preaching that was inspired and infallible but comes in the room of that Instruction and Teaching which was then performed by the Pastors of the Church The last Head in this Article relates to the Baptism of Infants which is spoken of with that moderation that appears very eminently through the whole Articles of our Church on this Head It is only said to be most agreeable with the Institution of Christ and that therefore it is to be in â—ny ways retained in the Church Now to open this it is to be considerâ—d that tho' Baptism and Circumcision do not in every particular come to a Parallel yet they do agree in two things The one is that both were the Rites of admission into their respective Covenants and to the Rights and Privileges that did arise out of them and the other is that in them both there was an Obligation laid on the Persons to the observance of that whole Law to which they were so initiated St. Paul arguing against Circumcision lays this down as an uncontested Maxim That if a Man was Circumcâ—â—â—d he became thereby a debtor to the whole law Parents had by the Iewish Constitution Gal. 5.3 an Authority given them to conclude their Children under that Obligation so that the Soul and Will of the Child was so far put in the power of the Parents that they could bring them under federal Obligations and thereby procure to them a share in federal Blessings And it is probable that from hence it was that when the Iews made Proselytes they considered them as having such Authority over their Children that they Baptized them first and then Circumcised them though Infants Now since Christ took Baptism from them and appointed it to be the federal Admission to his Religion as Circumcision had been in the Mosaical Dispensation it is reasonable to believe that except where he declared a change that he made in it in all other respects it was to go on and to continue as before especially when the Apostles in their first Preaching told the Iews that the Promises were made to them and to their Children Acts 2.39 which the Iews must have understood according to what they were already in possession of that they could initiate their Children into their Religion bring them under the obligations of it and procure to them a share in those Blessings that belonged to it The Law of Nature and Nations puts Children in the Power
of them Yet after all these Approbations and many repeated Desires to me to publish it I do not pretend to impose this upon the Reader as the Work of Authority For even our Most Reverend Metropolitans read it only as private Divines without so severe a canvassing of all Particulars as must have been expected if this had been intended to pass for an Authorised Work under a Publick Stamp Therefore my design in giving this Relation of the Motives that led me first to Compose and now to Publish this is only to justify my self both in the one and in the other and to shew that I was not led by any Presumption of my own or with any design to dictate to others In the next place I will give an account of the method in which I executed this Design When I was a Professor of Divinity Thirty Years ago I was then obliged to run over a great many of the Systems and Bodies of Divinity that were writ by the Chief men of the several Divisions of Christendom I found many things among them that I could not like The stiffness of Method the many dark Terms the Niceties of Logick the Artificial Definitions the heaviness as well as the sharpness of Stile and the diffusive length of them disgusted me I thought the whole might well be brought into less compass and be made shorter and more clear less laboured and more simple I thought many Controversies might be cut off some being only disputes about Words and founded on Mistakes and others being about matters of little consequence in which Errors are less criminal and so they may be more easily born with This set me then on composing a great Work in Divinity But I stayed not long enough in that Station to go through above the half of it I enter'd upon the same Design again but in another method during my stay at London in the privacy that I then enjoyed after I had finished the History of our Reformation These were advantages which made this Performance much the easier to me And perhaps the Late Archbishop might from what he knew of the Progress I had made in them judge me the more proper for this Undertaking For after I have said so much to justify my own engaging in such a Work I think I ought to say all I can to justify or at least to excuse his making choice of me for it When I had resolved to try what I could do in this method of following the Thread of our Articles I considered that as I was to explain the Articles of this Church so I ought to examine the Writings of the chief Divines that lived either at the time in which they were prepared or soon after it When I was about the History of our Reformation I had laid out for all the Books that had been writ within the time comprehended in that Period And I was confirmed in my having succeeded well in that Collection by a Printed Catalogue that was put out by one Mansel in the end of Q. Elizabeth's Reign of all the Books that had been Printed from the time that Printing-Presses were first set up in England to that Year This I had from the present Lord Archbishop of York and I saw by it that very few Books had escaped my search Those that I had not fallen on were not writ by men of Name nor upon Important Subjects I resolved in order to this Work to bring my Enquiry further down The first and indeed the much best Writer of Q. Elizabeth's time was Bishop Iuel the lasting honour of the See in which the Providence of God has put me as well as of the Age in which he lived who had so great share in all that was done then particularly in compiling the Second Book of Homilies that I had great reason to look on his Works as a very sure Commentary on our Articles as far as they led me From him I carried down my search through Reynolds Humphreys Whitaker and the other great men of that time Our Divines were much diverted in the end of that Reign from better Enquiries by the Disciplinarian Controversies and though what Whitgift and Hooker writ on those Heads was much better than all that came after them yet they neither satisfied those against whom they writ nor stopt the Writings of their own side But as Waters gush in when the Banks are once broken so the breach that these had made proved fruitful Parties were formed Secular Interests were grafted upon them and new Quarrels followed those that first begun the Dispute The Contests in Holland concerning Predestination drew on another Scene of Contention among us as well as them which was managed with great heat Here was matter for angry men to fight it out till they themselves and the whole Nation grew weary of it The Question about the Morality of the Fourth Commandment was an unhappy Incident that raised a new strife The Controversies with the Church of Rome were for a long while much laid down The Archbishop of Spalata's Works had appeared with great Pomp in King Iames's Time and they drew the Observation of the Learned World much after them though his unhappy Relapse and fatal Catastrophe made them to be less read afterwards than they well deserved to have been When the Progress of the House of Austria began to give their Neighbours great Apprehensions so that the Protestant Religion seemed to come under a very thick Cloud and upon that Jealousies began to rise at home in King Charles's Reign this gave occasion to two of the best Books that we yet have The one set out by Archbishop Laud writ with great Learning Judgment and Exactness The other by Chillingworth writ with so clear a Thread of Reason and in so lively a Stile that it was justly reckoned the best Book that had been writ in our Language It was about the nicest Point in Popery that by which they had made the most Proselytes and that had once imposed on himself Concerning the Infallibility of the Church and the Motives of Credibility Soon after that we fell into the Confusions of Civil War in which our Divines suffered so much that while they were put on their own defence against those that had broke the Peace of the Church and State few Books were written but on those Subjects that were then in Debate among our selves Concerning the Government of the Church and our Liturgy and Ceremonies The Disputes about the Decrees of God were again managed with a new heat There were also great Abstractions set on foot in those times concerning Iustification by Faith and these were both so subtile and did seem to have such a tendency not only to Antinomianism but to a Libertine course of Life that many Books were writ on those Subjects That Noble Work of the Poliglot Bible together with the Collection of the Criticks set our Divines much on the study of the Scriptures and the Oriental Tongues
had certainly put the chief strength of their Cause on this That they adhered to the Apostles Creed in opposition to the Innovations of the Nicene Fathers There is therefore no reason to believe that this Creed was prepared by the Apostles or that it was of any great Antiquity since Ruffin was the first that published it It is true he published it as the Creed of the Church of Aquileia but that was so late that neither this nor the other Creeds have any Authority upon their own account Great Respect is indeed due to things of such Antiquity and that have been so long in the Church but after all we receive those Creeds not for their own sakes nor for the sake of those who prepared them but for the sake of the Doctrine that is contained in them because we believe that the Doctrine which they declare is contained in the Scriptures and chiefly that which is the main Intent of them which is to assert and profess the Trinity therefore we do receive them tho we must acknowledge that the Creed ascribed to Athanasius as it was none of his so it was never established by any General Council ARTICLE IX Of Original or Birth-Sin Original Sin standeth not in the following of Adam as the Pelagians do vainly talk but it is the fault or corruption of the nature of every man that naturally is engendred of the Offspring of Adam whereby man is very far gone from Original Righteousness and is of his own nature inclined to evil so that the Flesh lusteth always contrary to the Spirit and therefore in every Person born into the World it deserveth God's Wrath and Damnation And this Infection of Nature doth remain yea in them that are regenerated whereby the Lust of the Flesh called in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which some do expound the Wisdom some Sensuality some the Affection some the Desire of the Flesh is not subject to the Law of God And though there is no Condemnation for them that believe and are baptized yet the Apostle doth confess That Concupiscence and Lust hath of it self the nature of Sin AFter the First Principles of the Christian Religion are stated and the Rule of Faith and Life was setled the next thing that was to be done was to declare the special Doctrines of this Religion and that first with relation to all Christians as they are single Individuals for the directing every one of them in order to the working out his own Salvation which is done from this to the Nineteenth Article And then with relation to them as they compose a Society called the Church which is carried on from the Nineteenth to the End In all that has been hitherto explained the whole Church of England has been all along of one mind In this and in some that follow there has been a greater diversity of Opinion but both sides have studied to prove their Tenets to be at least not contrary to the Articles of the Church These different Parties have disputed concerning the Decrees of God and those Assistances which pursuant to his Decrees are afforded to us But because the Foundation of those Decrees and the Necessity of those Assistances are laid in the Sin of Adam and in the Effects it had on Mankind therefore thâ—se Controversies begin on this Head The Pelagians and the Socinians agree in saying That Adam's Sin was Personal That by it as being the first Sin it is said that Sin entred into the World But that as Adam was made mortal â—om 5 1â— and had died whether he had sinned or not so they think the liberty of Human Nature is still entire and that every man is punished for his own sins and not for the sin of another to do otherwise they say seems contrary to Justice not to say Goodness In opposition to this Iudgment is said to have come upon many to condemnation through one either Man or Sin ver 1â— Death is said to have reigned by one and by one man's offence and many are said to be dead through the offence of one All these Passages do intimate that death is the consequence of Adam's Sin and that in him as well as in all others Death was the Wages of Sin so also that we dye upon the account of his Sin We are said to bear the Image of the first Adam as true Christians bear the Image of the second Now we are sure that there is both a derivation of Righteousness 1 Cor 15.49 and a Communication of Inward Holiness transferred to us through Christ So it seems to follow from thence that there is somewhat both transferred to us and conveyed down throughMankind by the first Adam and particularly that by it we are all made subject to Death from which we should have been freed if Adam had continued in his first state and that by virtue of the Tree of Life Gen. 3.22 in which some think there was a natural Virtue to cure all Diseases and relieve against all Accidents while others do ascribe it to a Divine Blessing of which that Tree was only the Symbol or Sacrament through the words said after Adam's sin as the reason of driving him out of Paradise lest he put forth his hand and take of the Tree of Life and eat and live for ever seem to import that there was a Physical Virtue in the Tree that could so fortify and restore Life as to give Immortality These do also think that the Threatning made to Adam That upon his eating the forbidden Fruit he should surely dye is to be taken literally and is to be carried no further than to a Natural Death This Subjection to Death and to the Fear of it brings men under a slavish Bondage many Terrors and other Passions and Miseries that arise out ofit which they think is a great Punishment and that it is a Condemnation and Sentence of Death passed upon the whole Race and by this they are made sinners that is treated as guilty Persons and severely punished This they think is easily enough reconciled with the Notions of Justice and Goodness in God since this is only a Temporary Punishment relating to mens Persons And we see in the common methods of Providence that Children are in this sort often punished for the sins of their Fathers most men that come under a very ill habit of Body transmit the Seeds of Diseases and Pains to their Children They do also think that the Communication of this liableness to death is easily accounted for and they imagine that as the Tree of Life might be a Plant that furnished men with an Universal Medicine so the forbidden Fruit might derive a slow Poyson into Adam's Body that might have exalted and inflamed his Blood very much and might though by a slower operation certainly brought on death at the last Our being thus adjudged to Death and to all the Miseries that accompany Mortality they think may be well called the wrath of
Literal and Grammatical Sense Since therefore the words God's wrath and damnation which are the highest in the Article are capable of a lower sense Temporary Judgments being often so expressed in the Scriptures Ex. 32.10 and 〈◊〉 the whole Old Testâ—ment Mat. 3.7 1 Thess. 2.16 Luk. 23.40 1 Cor. 11.29 1 Pet. 4.17 Rom. 13.2 2 Câ—r 7.5 John 8.10 11. Rom. 14.13 therefore they believe the loss of the Favour of God the Sentence of Death the Troubles of Life and the Corruption of our Faculties may be well called God's wrath and damnation Besides they observe That the main point of the Imputation of Adam's Sin to his Posterity and its being considered by God as their own Act not being expresly taught in the Article here was that moderation observed which the Compilers of the Articles have shewed on many other occasions It is plain from hence that they did not intend to lay a Burthen one Mens Consciences or oblige them to profess a Doctrine that seems to be of hard digestion to a great many The last prejudice that they offer against that Opinion is That the softening the terms of God's wrath and damnation that was brought in by the followers of St. Austin's Doctrine to sâ—ch a moderate and harmless Notiâ—n as to be only a loss of Heaven with a sort of unactive Sâ—â—ep was â—n effect of their apprehending that the World could very ill bear an Opinion of so strange a sound as that all Mankind were to be Damned for the Sin of one Man And that therefore to make this pass the beâ—ter they mitigated Damnation far below the Representation that the Scriptures generally give of it which propose it as the being adjudged to a place of Torment and a state of Horror and Misery Thus I have set down the different Opinions in this point with that true Indifference that I intend to observe on such other occasions and which becomes one who undertakes to explain the Doctrines of the Church and not his own And who is obliged to purpose other Mens Opinions with all Sincerity and to shew what are the Senses that the Learned Men of different persuasions in these matters have put on the words of the Article In which one great and constant Rule to be observed is To represent mens Opinions candidly and to judge as favourably both of them and their Opinions as may be To bear with one another and not to disturb the Peace and Union of the Church by insisting too much and too peremptorily upon matters of such doubtful Disputaion but willingly to leave them to all that liberty to which the Church has left them and which she still allows them ARTICLE X. Of Free-Will The Condition of Man after the Fall of Adam is such that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and good works to Faith and calling upon God Wherefore we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God without the Grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will and working with us when we have that good will WE shall find the same Moderation observed in this Article that was taken notice of in the former where all disputes concerning the degrees of that feebleness and corruption under which we are fallen by the Sin of Adam are avoided and only the necessity of a preventing and a cooperating Grace is asserted against the Semipelagians and the Pelagians But before we enter upon that it is fitting first to state the true Notion of Free-Will in so far as it is necessary to all rational Agents to make their Actions morally good or bad since it is a Principle that seems to rise out of the Light of Nature That no man is accountable rewardable or punishable but for that in which he acts freely without force or compulsion and so far all are agreed Some imagine That Liberty must suppose a freedom to do or not to do and to act contrariwise at pleasure To others it seems not necessary that such a liberty should be carried to denominate Actions morally good or bad God certainly acts in the perfectest liberty yet he cannot sin Christ had the most exalted liberty in his Human Nature of which a Creature was capable and his Merit was the highest yet he could not sin Angels and glorified Saints though no more capable of Rewards are perfect Moral Agents and yet they cannot sin And the Devils with the damned though not capable of further Punishment yet are still Moral Agents and cannot but sin So this Indifferency to do or not to do cannot be the true Notion of Liberty A truer one seems to them to be this That a Rational Nature is not determined as mere Matter by the Impulse and Motion of other Bodies upon it but is capable of Thought and upon considering the Objects set before it makes Reflection and so chuses Liberty therefore seems to consist in this inward capacity of thinking and of acting and chusing upon Thought The clearer the Thought is and the more constantly that our choice is determined by it the more does a Man rise up to the highest Acts and sublimest Exercises of Liberty A question arises out of this Whether the Will is not always determined by the Understanding so that a Man does always chuse and determine himself upon the account of some Idea or other If this is granted then no liberty will be left to our Faculties We must apprehend things as they are proposed to our Understanding for if a thing appears true to us we must assent to it and if the Will is as blind to the Understanding as the Understanding is determined by the Light in which the Object appears to it then we seem to be concluded under a Fate or Necessity It is after all a vain attempt to argue against every man's experience We perceive in our selves a liberty of turning our Minds to some Ideas or from others we can think longer or shorter of these more exactly and steadily or more slightly and superficially as we please and in this radical freedom of directing or diverting our Thoughts a main part of our Freedom does consist Often Objects as they appear to our Thoughts do so affect or heat them that they do seem to conquer us and carry us after them some Thoughts seeming as it were to intoxicate and charm us Appetites and Passions when much fired by Objects apt to work upon them do agitate us strongly and on the other hand the Impressions of Religion come often in our Minds with such a secret force so much of Terror and such secret Joy mixing with them that they seem to master us yet in all this a Man Acts freely because he thinks and chuses for himself And though perhaps he does not feel himself so entirely balanced that he is indifferent to both sides yet he has still such a remote liberty that he can turn himself to other Objects and Thoughts so
Remission of Sins is acknowledged to be given freely to us through Jesus Christ this is that which we affirm to be Iustification though under another name We do also acknowledge that our Natures must be sanctified and renewed that so God may take pleasure in us when his Image is again visible upon us and this we call Sanctification which we acknowledge to be the constant and inseparable effect of Iustification So that as to this we agree in the same Doctrine only we differ in the use of the Terms in which we have the Phrase of the New Testament clearly with us But there are two more material differences between us It is a Tenet in the Church of Rome That the Use of the Sacraments if Men do not put a bar to them and if they have only imperfect Acts of Sorrow accompanying them does so far compleat those weak Acts as to justify us This we do utterly deny as a Doctrine that tends to enervate all Religion and to make the Sacraments that were appointed to be the solemn â—â—ts of Religion for quickning and exciting our Piety and for conveying Grace to us upon our coming devoutly to them becomes means to flatten and deaden us As if they were of the nature of Charms which if they could be come at tho' with ever so slight a preparation would make up all defects The Doctrine of Sacramental Justification is justly to be reckoned among the most mischievous of all those Practical Errors that are in the Church of Rome Since therefore this is no where mentionâ—d in all these large Discourses that are in the New Testament concerning Justification we have just reason to reject it Since also the natural consequence of this Doctrine is to make Men rest contented in low imperfect Acts when they can be so easily made up by a Sacrament we have just reason to detest it as one of the depths of Satan The Tendency of it being to make those Ordinances of the Gospel which were given us as means to raise and heighten our Faith and Repentance become Engines to encourage Sloth and Impenitence There is another Doctrine that is Held by many and is still Taught in the Church of Rome not only with Approbation but Favour That the inherent Holiness of good Men is a thing of its own nature so perfect that upon the account of it God is so bound to esteem them just and to justify them that he were unjust if he did not They think there is such a real condignity in it that it makes Men God's adopted Children Whereas we on the other hand Teach That God is indeed pleased with the inward Reformaâ—â—on that he sees in good Men in whom his Grace dwells that he approves and accepts of their Sincerity but that with this there is still such a mixture and in this there is still so much Imperfection that even upon this account if God did straitly mark Iniquity none could stand before him So that even his acceptance of this is an Act of Mercy and Grace This Doctrine was commonly Taught in the Church of Rome at the time of the Reformation and together with it they reckoned that the chief of those Works that did Justify were either great or rich Endowments or excessive Devotions towards Images Saints and Relicks by all which Christ was either forgot quite or remembred only for form-sake esteemed perhaps as the chief of Saints not to mention the impious Comparisons that were made between him and some Saints and the Preferences that were given to them beyond him In opposition to all this the Reformers began as they ought to have done at the laying down this as the Foundation of all Christianity and of all our hopes That we were reconciled to God meerly through his Mercy by the Redemption purchased by Jesus Christ And that a firm believing the Gospel and a claiming to the Death of Christ as the great Propitiation for our Sins according to the Terms on which it is offered us in the Gospel was that which united us to Christ that gave us an Interest in his Death and thereby justified us If in the management of this Controversy there was not so critical a Judgment made of the Scope and several Passages of St. Paul's Epistles and if the Dispute became afterwards too abstracted and metaphysical that was the effect of the Infelicity of that Time and was the natural consequence of much disputing Therefore tho' we do not now stand to all the Arguments and to all the Citations and Illustrations used by them and tho' we do not deny but that many of the Writers of the Church of Rome came insensibly off from the most practical Errors that had been formerly much taught and more practised among them and that this matter was so stated by many of them that as to the main of it we have no just Exceptions to it Yet after all this beginning of the Reformation was a great Blessing to the World and has proved so even to the Church of Rome by bringing her to a juster sâ—nse of the Atonement made for Sins by the Blood of Christ and by taking Men off from external Actions and turning them to consider the inward Acts of the Mind Faith and Repentance as the Conditions of our Justification And therefore the Approbation given here to the Homily is only an Approbation of the Doctrine asserted and proved in it Which ought not to be carried to every particular of the Proofs or Explanations that are in it To be Iustified and to be accounted Righteous stand for one and the same thing in the Article And both import our being delivered from the Guilt of Sin and entitled to the Favour of God These differ from God's intending from all Eternity to save us as much as a Decree differs from the Execution of it A Man is then only Iustified when he is freed from Wrath and is at peace with God And tho' this is freely offered to us in the Gospel through Jesus Christ yet it is applied to none but to such as come within those Qualifications and Conditions set before us in the Gospel That God pardons Sin and receives us into favour only through the Death of Christ is so fully expressed in the Gospel as was already made out upon the second Article that it is not possible to doubt of it if one does firmly believe and attentively read the New Testament Nor is it less evident that it is not offered to us absolutely and without Conditions and Limitations These Conditions are Repentance with which remission of sins is often joined and Faith Gal. 5.6 Luke 24.47 Acts. 2.38 but a faith that worketh by love that purifies the heart and that keeps the â—ommandments of God Such a Faith as shews it self to be alive by Good Works by Acts of Charity and every Act of Obedience by which we demonstrate that we truly and firmly believe the Divine Authority of our Saviour and his Doctrine
to what was set out in its proper Place And although we set a due value upon some of the Apocryphal Books yet others are of a lower Character The First Book of Maccabees is a very grave History writ with much exactness and a true Judgment but the Second is the Work of a mean Writer He was an Abridger of a larger Work and as he has the Modesty to ask his Readers Pardon for his Defects so it is very plain to every one that reads him that he needs often many grains of allowance So that this Book is one of the least valuable Pieces of the Apocrypha and there are very probable Reasons to question the Truth of that Relation concerning those who were thus prayed for But because that would occasion too long a Digression we are to make a difference between the Story that he relates and the Author 's own Reflections upon it for as we ought not to make any great Account of his Reflections these being only his private Thoughts who might probably have imbibed some of the Principles of the Greek Philosophy as some of the Iews had done or he might have believed that Notion which is now very generally received by the Iews that every Iew shall have a share in the World to come but that such as have lived ill must be purged before they arrive at it It is of much more importance to consider what Iudas Maccabeus did 2 Maccab. 12.40 which even by that Relation seems to be no more than this That he finding some things Consecrated to the Idols of the Iamnites about the Bodies of those who were killed concluded that to have been the cause of their Death And upon this he and all his Men betook themselves to Prayer and besought God that the Sin might be wholly put out of remembrance He exhorted his People to keep themselves by that Example from the like Sin and he made a Collection of a Sum of Money and sent it to Ierusalem to offer a Sin-offering before the Lord. So far the matter agrees well enough with the Iewish Dispensation It had appeared in the days of Ioshua how much guilt the Sin of Achan though but one Person had brought upon the whole Congregation and their Law had upon another Occasion prescribed a Sin-offering for the whole Congregation to expiate Blood that was shed when the Murderer could not be discovered That so the Judgments of God might not come upon them by reason of the cry of that Blood And by a parity of Reason Iudas might have ordered such an Offering to free himself and his Men from the guilt which the Idolatry of a few might have brought upon greater Numbers such a Sacrifice as this might according to the nature of that Law have been offered But to offer a Sin-offering for the Dead was a new thing without ground or any intimation of any thing like it in their Law So there is no reason to doubt but that if the Story is true Iudas offered this Sin-offering for the Living and not for the Dead If they had been alive then by their Law no Sin-offering could have been made for them for Idolatry was to be punished by cutting off and not to be expiated by Sacrifice What then could not have been done for them if alive could much less be done for them after their death So we have reason to conclude that Iudas offered this Sacrifice only for the Living And we are not much concerned in the Opinion which so slight a Writer as the Author of that Book had concerning it But whatever might be his Opinion it was far from that of the Roman Church By this Instance of the Maccabees Men who died in a State of mortal Sin and that of the highest nature had Sacrifices offered for them Whereas according to the Doctrine of the Church of Rome Hell and not Purgatory is to be the Portion of all such So this will prove too much if any thing at all that Sacrifices are to be offered for the Damned The design of Iudas his sending to make an Offering for them as that Writer states it was that their Sins might be forgiven and that they might have a happy Resurrection Here is nothing of Redeeming them out of Misery or of shortening or alleviating their Torment So that the Author of that Book seems to have been possessed with that Opinion received commonly among the Iews That no Iew could finally perish as we find S. Ierom expressing himself with the like partiality for all Christians But whatever the Author's Opinion was as that Book is of no Authority it is highly probable that Iudas's design in that Oblation was misunderstood by the Historian and we are sure that even his sense of it differs totally from that of the Church of Rome A Passage in the New Testament is brought as a full proof of the Fire of Purgatory 1 Cor. 3. from V. 10. to 16. When St. Paul in his Epistle to the Corinthians is reflecting on the Divisions that were among them and on that diversity of Teachers that formed Men into different Principles and Parties he compares them to different Builders Some raised upon a Rock an Edifice like the Temple at Ierusalem of Gold and Silver and noble Stones called precious Stones whereas others upon the same Rock raised a mean Hovel of Wood Hay and Stubble of both he says every man's work shall be made manifest For the day shall reveal it because it shall be revealed by fire for the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is And he adds If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon he shall receive a reward and if any man's work shall be burnt he shall suffer loss but he himself shall be saved yet so as by fire From the first view of these words it will not be thought strange if some of the Ancients who were too apt to Expound places of Scripture according to their first appearences might fancy that at the last day all were to pass through a great Fire and to suffer more or less in it But it is visible that that Opinion is far enough from the Doctrine of Purgatory These words relate to a Fire that was soon to appear and that was to try every Man's work It was to be revealed and in it every Man's work was to be made manifest So this can have no relation to a secret Purgatory Fire The meaning of it can be no other but that whereas some with the Apostles were building up the Church not only upon the Foundation of Jesus Christ and the Belief of his Doctrine but were teaching Men Doctrines and Rules that were Vertuous Good and Great Others at the same time were daubing with a profane mixture both of Judaism and Gentilism joining these with some of the Precepts of Christianity a day would soon appear which probably is meant of the destruction of Ierusalem and of the Iewish Nation or
orantes inclinantesque se propter Deum ante istam crucem inveniant corporis animae sanitatem per eundem reisque dona veniam It is expresly said in the Pontifical Cruci debetur Latria and the Prayers used in the Consecration of a Cross it is prayed That the Blessing of that Cross on which Christ hung may be in it that it may be a healthful Remedy to Mankind a Strengthner of Faith an Increaser of Good Works the Redemption of Souls and a Comfort Protection and Defence against the Cruelty of our Enemies These with all the other Acts of Adoration used among them seem to favour those who are for a Latria to be given to all those Images to the Originals of which it is due and in like the Proportion for Dulia and Hyperdulia to other Images It is needless to prosecute this Matter further It seemed necessary to say so much to justify our Church which has in her Homilies laid this Charge of Idolatry very severely on the Church of Rome and this is so high an Imputation that those who think it false as they cannot without a good Conscience Subscribe or require others to Subscribe the Article concerning the Homilies so they ought to retract their own Subscriptions and to make Solemn Reparations in Justice and Honour for laying so heavy an Imputation unjustly upon that whole Communion There is nothing that can be brought from Scripture that has a shew of an Argument for supporting Image-Worship unless it be that of the Cherubims that were in the holiest of all and that as is supposed were worshipped at least by the High Priest when he went thither once a Year if not by the whole People But first there is a great difference to be made between a Form of Worship immediately prescribed by God and another Form that not only has no warrant for it but seems to be very expresly forbidden It is plain the Cherubims were not seen by the People and so they could be no visible Object of Worship to them Heb. 9.3 7. They were scarce seen by the High Priest himself for the Holiest of all was quite dark no light coming into it but what came through the Veil from the Holy Place and even that had very little Light Nor is there a word concerning the High Priests Worshipping either the Ark or the Cherubim It is true there is a place in the Psalms that seems to favour this as it is rendred by the Vulgar worship his footstool Psal. 99.5 9. for it is holy but both the Hebrew and the Septuagint have it as it is in our Translation worship at his footstool for he is holy and all the Greek Fathers cite these Words so Many of the Latin Fathers do also cite them according to the Greek and the last Words of the Psalm in which the same words are repeated make the Sense of it evident For there it is thus varied Exalt ye the Lord our God and worship at his holy hill for the Lord our God is holy These words coming so soon after the former are a Paraphrase to them and determine their Sense No doubt the High Priest worshipped God who dwelt between the Cherubims in that Cloud of Glory in which he shewed himself visibly present in his Temple but there is no sort of reason to think that in so Majestick a Presence Adoration could be offered to any thing else or that after the High Priest had adored the Divine Essence so manifested he would have fallen to Worship the Ark and the Cherubims This agrees ill with the Figure that is so much used in this Matter of a King and his Chair of State for in the Presence of the King all Respects terminate in his Person whatsoever may be done in his Absence And thus this being not so much as a Precedent much less an Argument for the use of Images and there being nothing else brought from Scripture that with any sort of wresting can be urged for it and the Sense and Practice of the whole Church being so express against it the Progress of it having been so long and so much disputed the tendency of it to Superstition and Abuse being by their own Confession so visible the Scandal that it gives to Iews and Mahometans being so apparent and it carrying in its outward appearances such a Conformity to say at present no more to Heathenish Idolatry we think we have all possible advantages in this Argument We adhere to that Purity of Worship which is in both Testaments so much insisted on we avoid all Scandal and make no Approaches to Heathenism and follow the Pattern set us by the Primitive Church And as our simplicity of Worship needs not be defended since it proves it self so no proofs are brought for the other side but only a pretended usefulness in outward Figures to raise the Mind by the Senses to just Apprehensions of Spiritual Objects which allowing it true will only conclude for the Historical Use of Images but not for the directing our Worship towards them But the effect is quite contrary to the pretence for instead of raising the Mind by the Senses the Mind is rather sunk by them into gross Ideas The Bias of Human Nature lies to Sense and to form gross Imaginations of Incorporeal Objects and therefore instead of gratifying these we ought to wean our Minds from them and to raise them above them all we can Even Men of Speculation and Abstraction feel Nature in this grows too hard for them but the Vulgar is apt to fall so headlong into these Conceits that it looks like the laying of Snares for them to furnish them with such methods and helps for their having gross Thoughts of Spiritual Objects The fondness that the People have for Images their readiness to believe the most incredible Stories concerning them the expence they are at to Enrich and Adorn them their Prostrations before them their Confidence in them their humble and tender Embracing and Kissing of them their pompous and heathenish Processions to do them Honour the Fraternities erected for particular Images not to mention the more universal and established Practices of directing their Prayers to them of setting Lights before them and of Incensing them these I say are things too well known to such as have seen the way of that Religion that they should need to be much enlarged on and yet they are not only allowed of but encouraged Those among them who have too much good sense that they should sink into those foolish apprehensions themselves yet must not only bear with them but often comply with them to avoid the giving of Scandal as they call it not considering the much greater Scandal that they give when they encourage others by their practice to go on in these Follies The enlarging into all the corruptions occasioned by this way of Worship would carry me far but it seems not necessary the thing is so plain in it self The next Head
oil in the name of the Lord and the prayer of faith shall save the sick and the Lord shall raise him up All hitherto is one Period which is here closed The following words contain new matter quite of a different kind and if he have committed sins they shall be forgiven him It appears clearly that this was intended for the recovery of the sick Person which is the thing that is positively promised the other concerning the pardon of Sins comes in on the by and seems to be added only as an accessary to the other which is the principal thing designed by this whole matter Therefore since Anointing was in order to healing either we must say that the Gift of healing is still deposited with the Elders of the Church which no body affirms or this Oil was only to be used by those who had that special Gift and therefore if there are none now who pretend to have it and if the Church pretends not to have it lodged with her then the Anointing with Oil cannot be used any more and therefore those who use it not in order to the recovery of the Person delaying it till there is little or no hope left use not that Unction mentioned by St. Iames but another of their own devising which they call the Sacrament of the dying It is a vain thing to say that because saving and raising up are sometimes used in a Spiritual sense that therefore the saving the sick here and that of the Lord 's raising him up are to be so meant For the forgiveness of sin which is the Spiritual Blessing comes afterwards upon supposition that the sick Person had committed sins The saving and raising up must stand in opposition to the sickness so since all acknowledge that the one is Literal the other must be so too The supposition of sin is added because some Persons upon whom this Miracle might have been wrought might be eminently Pious and if at any time it was to be applied to ill Men who had committed some notorious sins perhaps such sins as had brought their sickness upon them these were also to be forgiven In the use of miraculous Powers those to whom that Gift was given were not empowered to use it at pleasure they were to feel an inward Impulse exciting them to it and they were obliged upon that firmly to believe that God who had given them the Impulse would not be wanting to them in the execution of it This confidence in God was the faith of Miracles Matth. 21.21 of which Christ said If ye have faith as a grain of mustard-seâ—d ye shall say to this mountain remove hence to yonder place and nothing shall be impossible unto you 1 Cor. 13.2 Of this also St. Paul meant when he said If I have all faith So from this we may gather the meaning of the prayer of faith and the anointing with Oil that if the Elders of the Church or such others with whom this Power was lodged felt an inward Impulse moving them to call upon God in order to a miraculous Cure of a sick Person then they were to anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord That is by the Authority that they had from Christ to heal all manner of Diseases And they were to Pray believing firmly that God would make good that inward motion which he had given them to work this Miracle and in that case the effect was certain the sick Person would certainly recover for that is absolutely promised Every one that was sick was not to be Anointed unless an Authority and Motion from Christ had been secretly given for doing it but every one that was Anointed was certainly healed Christ had promised that whatsoever they should ask in his name â—ohâ— 14 1â— he would do it His Name must be restrained to his Authority or pursuant to such secret Motions as they should receive from him This is the Prayer of Faith here mentioned by St. Iames it being an earnest application to God to join his Omnipotent Power to perform a wonderful Work to which a Person so divinely qualified felt himself inwardly moved by the Spirit of Christ. The supposition of the sick Persons having committed sins which is added shews that sometime this vertue was applied to Persons of that eminent Piety that though all Men are guilty in the sight of God yet they could not be said to have committed sins in the sense in which St. Iohn uses the phrase signifying by it either that they had lived in the habits of sin or that they had committed some notorious sin But if some should happen to be sick who had been eminent Sinners and those sins had drawn down the Judgments of God upon them which seems to be the natural meaning of these words if he have committed sins then with his bodily Health he was to receive a much greater Blessing even the Pardon of his Sins And thus the Anointing mentioned by St. Iames was in order to a miraculous Cure and the Cure did constantly follow it so that it can be no president for an Extreme Unction that is never given till the recovery of the Person is despaired of and by which it is not pretended that any Cure is wrought The Matter of it is Oil Olive Blessed by the Bishop the Form is the applying it to the Five Senses with these words Per hanc Sacram Vnctionem Rituale Rom. Con Trid. Seâ—s 14. suam piissimam Misericordiam Indulgeat tibi Deus quicquid peccasti per visum auditum olfactum gustum tactum The proper word to every Sense being repeated as the Organ of that Sense is Anointed It is Administred by a Priest and gives the final Pardon with all necessary assistances in the last Agony Here is then an Institution that if warranted is matter of great Comfort and if not warranted is matter of as great Presumption Cons. Apost l. 3. c. 16. l. 7. cap. 42 44. Tertul. de bapt c. 10. Cypr. Ep. 70. â—lem Alex. paedag l. 11. c. 8. Dionys. Areop de Eccles. hier c. 7 8. In the first Ages we find mention is made frequently of Persons that were Cured by an Anointing with Oil Oil was then much used in all their Rituals the Catechumens being Anointed with Oil before they were Baptized besides the Chrism that was given after it Oil grew also to be used in Ordinations and the dead were Anointed in order to their Burial So that the ordinary use of Oil on other occasions brought it to be very frequently used in their Sacred Rites yet how customary soever the practice of Anointing grew to be we find no mention of any Unction of the sick before the beginning of the Fifth Century This plainly shews that they understood St. Iames's words as relating to a miraculous Power and not to a Function that was to continue in the Church and to be esteemed a Sacrament That earliest mention of it by Pope Innocent