TRUTHS VICTORY OVER ERROR.

OR,

An Abridgement of the Chief Contro­versies in Religion, which since the Apostles days to this time, have been, and are in agitation, between those of the Orthodox Faith, and all Adver­saries whatsoever; a list of whose names are set down after the Epistle to the Reader.

Wherein, by going through all the Chapters of the Confession of Faith, one by one, and pro­pounding out of them, by way of Question, all the Controverted Assertions; and answering by Yes, or No, there is a clear Confirmation of the Truth; and an evident Confutation of what Te­nets and Opinions, are maintain'd by the Adver­saries.

A TREATISE.

Most useful for all Persons, who desire to be instru­cted in the true Protestant Religion, who would shun in these last Days, and perillous Times, the Infection of Errors and Heresies, and all dan­gerous Tenets and Opinions, contrary to the Word of GOD.

EDINBVRGH, Printed by IOHN REID, Anno DOM. 1684.

To the Right Honourable GEORGE DRUMMOND Of Milnenab, Lord Provost,
Iohn Iohnston, Thomas Douglas, Thomas Fairholm, and Iohn Chanceler Bailiffs; Charles Murray Dean of Gild, Thomas Young The­saurer, and remanent Members of the Honourable Council of the Ancient City of Edinburgh.

May it please your Lordship, And the Honourable Senate▪

MY first Application is for Pardon, that I should adventure to prefix your names to the Frontispice of this small Fabrick, between which and your singular Merits, there is no Proportion, save what flows from the Uniformity and Deli­cacy of the Contrivance, and sincerity of his Respects who presents it. I have sometimes appeared in publick, though not with the Gold of Ophir, and Tyrian Purpure, wherewith the Persians were accustomed to present their Princes, and Benefactors, in testimony of their Obeysance and Gratitude; yet with Oblations sutable to my Ability as now, [Page] though unsutable to your Honour and Dig­nity.

Your unstained Reputation, Candour, and Ingenuity, by which you are guided in the Management of the weighty Affairs of the City. Your encouraging by your Au­thority and good example the holy Mini­stry, Vertue and Learning in Schooles and Universities, within the Verge of your Iuris­diction. The commemoration of Favours, which I have received from the Council, these many years bygone, have had no small In­fluence upon me, to make this publick, yet humble Address. And though I have done but little by way of Remuneration, yet Somewhat, to be a Remembrance of my hearty affection to the Good Town.

I have made some small attempts, during the twelve years I taught Peripatetick, and Experimental Philosophy, and since, for the Ad­vancement of Learning among others, which have not wanted success, whereby the Au­thor hath been encouraged; especially by the kind acceptance, his Writings have met with from the greatest Philosophers and Ma­thematicians in this Age, in England, Holland, Germany and France. It is yet recent in the minds of many Noble and worthy Persons, [Page] what esteem His Royal Highness had of my Observations, of the great Blazing Star, which appeared in December 1680, which since have been published. I do not mention this for applause, or out of vanity, but for some peculiar reasons hinted at below. But these studies being only Hand-maids, and Subser­vient to Divine Knowledge, and not so gene­rally useful, I have now given them a Ma­numission, unless I be animated by the be­nign, and favourable aspect of those, who may and can. I move in a distinct Sphere from Masters of Universities. They teach in Philosophy, the Causes and Reasons of Things. What I write is but Practical and Mechanical, for the promoting of natural Knowledge and Learn­ing, as do the Virtuosi. But in stead of such I present your Honours with a small bundle of Orthodox Truths confirmed by plain Scrip­ture Testimonies, wherewith the true Chri­stian Church hath in all Ages scattered the swarms of dark Errors, and damnable He­resies, Locusts from the bottomless pit.

But least I seem too tedious upon one Subject, I shall beg your Lordships liberty, to interpose for your Divertisement, this pleasant Interlude, the contemplation where­of may recreate the mind, and have its own [Page] usefulness. That brave Athenian Orator De­mosthenes writes, that there was a standing Ordinance among the Locrians a people in Greece, that whosoever desired a new Law to be made he should make an overture there­of to the whole Assembly with a rope about his neck. If it was Judged profitable for the Publick-Good, the Author was assoild, and got the thanks of the house. If not, he was instantly strangled. By this means for the space of 200 years and more, no new Law was made, save this only that follows. It was a received custome there, that if any man should strick out his neighbours eye; his on the other part was to be stricken out likewise, in imitation of Lex Talionis. Nei­ther was this crime to be expiated by any sacrifice, nor redeemed by any summ of Money or Gold, how great soever. A certain man who had but one eye, was threatned by his Adversary with the loss of it. This man taking it grievously, and judging the want of his sight more bitter than death, adven­tur'd with a halter about his neck to offer this new Law to the Senate, viz. that who­soever should strick out his neighbours eye, who had but one, he should be requited with the lose of both his, as a just recom­pence; that the one might share equally [Page] with the other in the same calamity. The Law was approven and Ratified by the whole meeting. Demosthenes relates this, teaching that in a well ordered City; Magi­strates should take special care that new Laws be not rashly made or changed. But I return thither whence the famous Orator hath led me aside by this digression.

I cannot but now after these wieghty per­swasives, make my next application for Ac­ceptance, and seriously entreat, that this little Book, if not for the value of the thing offered, yet for its design, which is that Truth may have victory over Error, and for the ingenuity and affection it flows fromIn mag­nis volu­isse satest., may be received into the tuition of your favour, and get a full protection against the Champi­ons of the uncircumcised Philistimes, and be­ing enlightned with the splendor of your Lordships name, and receiving the impression of the Councils Authority upon it, may by the Lords blessing, be useful to young Stu­dents in Religion, and others too. For which singular Favour, I shall fervently pray the Almighty God to bless you in your Persons, and Government, sub auspiciis Augustissimi regis Caroli a Carolo, the Ancient City may flourish with Religion and Righteousness, [Page] Peace and Truth, that the Lord may be in it, in the darkest night, a pillar of fire to enlighten and direct, in the hotest affliction a pillar of cloud to overshadow and pro­tect, and to us all both a Sun and a Shield. And shall think my self very happy, while I live to be under the Character of

Your Lordships and the Councils much Obliged Servant Geo. Sinclar.

TO THE HONEST HEARTED READER

THE two great Pillars upon which the kingdom of Satan is erected, and by which it is upheld, are Ignorance and Errour. And the two great Pillars which support the Kingdom of Christ, are Knowledge and Truth. Therefore our blessed Saviour resolving to subvert the kingdom of Satan among the Gentiles, tells the Apostle in his first Commission, that he was about to send him to open their eyes (namely their un­derstanding) by the Preaching and Know­ledge of the Gospel, and to turn them from darkness to light, from natural blindness and worldly ignorance, unto the right and true knowledge of GOD. This is the first step of our Manumission from that spiritual thraldom. The Understanding is the Guide, and Pilot of the whole man. It is that faculty which sits at the helme of the Soul. But as the most skilful Pilot [Page] may mistake his course in the dark, so may the Un­derstanding when it wants the light of Knowledge. This is an accomplishment so desirable, that the De­vil knew not a more alluring bate to tempt our first Parents in Paradise, Ye shall be as Gods (sayes he) knowing good and evil. When the Lord had refer'd it to Solomons option, what to choose, he choose Wisdom and Knowledge. When once the Devil understood, that by the Preaching of the Gospel, his kingdom was ruined, he invents two new stratagems to overthrow Religion, even in the infan­cy and beginning of it, to wit Persecution and Here­sie. Open persecution began in Nero, a very imp and graff of the Devil. When this Hirricano, and many others of that kind were past, and when the Churches of Christ were once at rest, he sends in a Deluge of Arianism, which in a short time so prodigiously spread, and over-ran the Christian World, that it seemed to carry all before it, an as­sault, that did not strike at the uppermost boughs of Religion, but at the Root and Beeing of Chri­stianity. But this second proved more sad than the first; for, where Persecution kills one thousand, He­resie kills ten thousand. The one is the Wild-Boar of the Forrest, the other is the little Fox, that eat­eth up the Grapes of the Lords Vineyard. The one kills the bodies of Men and Women, the other poison­eth the Souls of Christians.

In times of greater Light, as these and former [Page] times have been reputed to be, Satan comes not abroad usually to deceive with his gross forgeries, and cloven foot: for every one almost would discern his haltings, but with more mystical, yet strong­delusions, and invincible chains of darkness, where­with he binds his captives the faster to the judge­ment of the great day. And therefore the Watch word given in the bright and shining times of the Apostles was to try the Spirits, and believe not every Spirit, and take heed of Spirits, who indeed were only fleshly and corrupt men yet called Spirits, because they pretended to have much of the Spirit, and their doctrine seemed only to advance the Spirit, the fitest and fairest cob­webs to deceive and inveigle the world in these dis­cerning times, that possibly could be spun▪ out of the poysonful bowels of corrupt and fleshly men: for Heresie is a work of the flesh.

The times are now come, wherein by the refined mystical divinity of the old Moncks, all the ordi­nances of Christ in the New Testament are allegorized and spiritualized out of the world. They reject the outward word, because of an in­ward teaching. They reject the outward Baptism, be­cause of the inward Baptism. They reject the Lords Supper, because of the spiritual bread from hea­ven the Lord Jesus. They abolish the outward Sabbath, because of a spiritual and inward Sab­bath of rest in the bosome of Christ. This is very [Page] consistent with the observing the outward Sabbath. But they wickedly sever, and separat what GOD hath joyned together.

But as to what relates to the present Treatise, I am not ignorant, that many eminent and learned Divines, far beyond whatever I could profess, have beatten this path, and travelled round the world of Polemick Divinity. But their writings being so Voluminous and large, that he who desires to have a full sight at one look of the chief controversies, can no more have it, than a man from the Peak of Te­neriff, can get a clear sight of the whole Globe of the Earth. Which things, though they be princi­pally worth the knowing, nevertheless, for so much as their number, and variety are an impediment to themselves, and the multiplicity of matter, makes the mind abruptly flit from one thing to another. Therefore I have imitated Geographers, who after they have surveyed the whole Globe of the Earth, draw Universal descriptions thereof, and comprehend the the whole image of that great Terra-queous Body within a narrow circumference of a Card or Mapp. In so doing, I may perhaps contribute some what towards the satisfaction of some, who neither can nor are able, to trace the wearisome foot steps, of those eminent Divines, who have written fully.

This Treatise being Historical, none can expect, but I must have consulted others, and gleaned off their writtings what things were needful. I can­not [Page] here, as in writing Philosophy, or any such like Science, set up new Theorems, or Axioms, which have not been heard of before. This were to make a new Religion, a new System, and Body of Divinity, such as some giddy-headed Hereticks are thinking upon. I must confine my self to the good old way, and follow the heatten path-road, wherein men of sound principles have walked before me.

This Book is not designed for men of knowledge and learning, who are more conversant in such mat­ters than I am, but for the unlearned and new­beginners, who need to be instructed with the sound principles of the true Protestant Religi­on.

I hope none will think I have done amiss in menti­oning so many Religions, which had been better un­named (some may think) than named. This might have some weight, if there were no more Religions in the world at this time, but one only, to wit, the true Protestant Religion. But see­ing I cannot name so many here, as there are this day owned and professed in the Christian Church, I cannot be to blame.

This Book will be useful for understanding the Confession, and knowing the design of it. For how many read it, and commend it, that never knew the nature of it. Though there be a multipli­city of questions, and many in number, yet all of them [Page] to my best remembrance, are taken word by word out of the Confession. The answers are by Yes, or No. To which are subjoyned immediately the proofs of the Confession. These words which are often repeated, Well then, do not the Papists err, are nothing els but sure Conclusions drawn from two manifest propositions.

The design of this Treatise is good. The method is plain and easy. The order of the Questions, fol­low the order of the purposes in the Confession. The probations are such, as are made use of in the Confession, and by the Orthodox Divines, a­gainst the Adversaries. They are either the very words of the Scripture in Terminis, or such as by good and necessary consequence, are drawn from the Scripture. They pass reckoning for number. Let no man blame me for speaking somewhat for the Truth, because another man hath spoken better. If I have said little in defence if it, I am sure I have said nothing against it; as the Apostle says, We can do nothing against the truth, but for it. If I cannot please all men, I shall endeavour at least to please some. And if I can please none, I shall not displease my self. I hope my friends will censure favourably, if my enemies censure maliciously. I expect as many Adversaries of one sort, and of another upon my top, as a travelling man hath midges and wasps about his head in a warm summer even­ing. There are escapes in Authors, whose know­ledge [Page] is far beyond any thing I can profess. No mar­vel then, if a malicious Critick, like a viper from the fire of contention fasten upon a mans hand. For the Author being intent upon all, cannot lay out his whole industry upon every line, which a snarling Cur will bark at. I shal take it as a favour to have Learned and Iudicious men to censure me. Re­prove one (says Solomon) that hath un­derstanding, and he will understand know­ledge. Some perhaps may look awry upon me, be­cause I have medled with some ticklish Questions, and been too positive in my Iudgement. If any such Questions are, they have occur'd to me in the Road, which I could not pass by, without a Salutation. But as all of them have been weighed in the Ballance of the Sanctuary, so these like­wise, which some may call ticklish. I durst not for a world have been positive, if I had not judged them consonant to Truth, Therefore let all men, whatever perswasions they be of, judge charitably: for I have said nothing upon the account of fead or favour, nor any thing which may cause divisi­on or offence. For they that are such serve not our Lord Iesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words, and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. Rom. 16. 18. But I wish all who profess themselves to own the true Protest­ant Religion, were owning the sound principles of the Confession, and were sutable and conse­quential [Page] to them in their opinions and practises, and had not given too just cause and occasion to others to reproach all honest hearted men, as being of se­ditions and disloyal principles.

It is probable, I may be less noticed by the common Adversaries, than by some who are so vain that they glory in injuring the Merit of a Book. For as a Gentleman of great Parts and Learning says well in his reflections upon one of his late pieces, the meanest Rogue may burn a City, or kill an Hero, whereas he could never have built the one, or equaled the other.

As the method is plain and easy, so is the stile. I use only the common and plain Arguments. Some perhaps might have expected a dilution, or answer­ing of the Adversaries Reasons. It is hard to pro­pose them to their Palate. They complain their arguments are enervate and clipped. Neither is it expedient to bring forth from the Devils Armory and Magazin his fiery darts. In confuting the Adversaries, I use no worse language than Do not they err. Sometimes I treat the Quakers with such language, as they use against others. Though they look like Lambs, yet gall them but a little, and you will find them express the Matulent and Teen of their heart. And as Cacus spouted fire against Hercules, who persued him as a Theif, so will they against all who persue them as Hereticks.

Anno 1662. I published a little Book intitu­led [Page] Tyrocinia Mathematica, for the use of my Schollars, and young Students, which was dedi­cated to that great Hero, John Duke of Lauder­dail. Anno 1669, I had a large Book printed in Holland dedicated to the Earle of Winton. In the year 1672, a third was published, intituled the Hydrostaticks. Though some endeavoured to ruin the reputation of my Writings at home, yet they were not able to do it abroad. But least this peece may meet with the like welcome into the world, I shall beg liberty to cite one passage of a letter from a most intelligent Gentleman, in vindication of that Book intituled Ars Nova & Magna, against which so many flate contradictions were uttered, which the other two likewise met with.

Ostend, October 10. 1670. I must not for­get to tell you a passage anent your late peece. When we were at Breda, we had oc­casion to see Collonel Lauther, who fell in re­grating that Scots Spirits were not encouraged. And told he had seen a Book lately published by one Sinclar, whereof he had a great e­steem, and that many others as well as he esteemed it highly. For example, he told of a Dutchman▪ who is one of the French Virtuosi, that said he had seen nothing on that subject com­parable to it; and it was esteemed so in France. If you have any other thing to pub­lish, [Page] I pray you hasten it, for it will not want acceptance. This testimony was homologate after­wards by that famous Virtuoso, and Mathema­tician, Christopher Sturmius, a German, in his Book intituled Collegium Curiosum▪ which some here have seen. He hath gone thorow the Book diligently, and gleaned the finest purposes in it, and sent them abroad, not as his own Inventions, but as mine, which he would never have done, if the Experiments had been all of them either Un­truths and Lies, or not New, and unheard off. This testimony from a Stranger, vindicates suffici­ently. The rest of my writings are likewise com­mended by Mr. Boile, Sir Frances Hales, Doct. Glanvil, and others, men of eminent skill and knowledge in such matters, as I treat of.

In going thorow this Book, you will find the Pa­pists confuted upon threescore and fourteen several heads. The Quakers upon thirty and two. The Socinians upon fourty and seven. The Lutheri­ans upon thirteen. The Antinomians upon as many. The Anabaptists upon thirty and two. The Arminians upon twenty and seven. The rest are confuted, some upon fewer; some upon more heads; and that only according to their chief and grand Errors. For a man to confute all and every one of their false and absurd Tenets, would be a task, like the cleanseing of Augeas King of Elis his Ox­stall, which none but Hercules was able to do. [Page] Neither would it be worth the while, seeing by the confutation of those mentioned, you may the more easily confute the rest. If any be too curious to inquire, why the Author hath touched so many controver­sies in Religion, and yet hath medled nothing with the great controversie of the time. I answer, I had been both officious and impertinent to have touched matters, which lay not in my way. For in all the Confession, which is the onlie Road I walk in, there is not one Mum or Syllable of the one Govern­ment, or of the other.

The Book for Paper and Character may com­pare with many from abroad. The Printer a Person of special skill, hath done his dutie sufficient­lie in correcting; so that I find it needless to prefix or subjoyn Errata Corrigenda. If there be any Literal faults, which the most skilful Author, and best of Printers cannot prevent, let the Reader im­pute them only to invincible necessity.

Our good Lord, whose Prerogative it is to teach, to profit, bless this little Book, that it may be to thee as a light shining in a dark place, untill the day dawn and the day star arise in thy heart, that thereby thou mayest grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

In Summarium hoc Theologieum, Tetrastichon.

Quisquis aves Sophiam Coelestem noscere paucis, Huc ades, hic breviter namque Libellus habet.

Aureus est certè firmat quia Dogmata sana Codice Divino, falsa refellititem,

Upon Truths victory over Error.

Doth thou desire this Treasure to be thine,
Of sacred Truths, and Oracles Divine.
A fiery Pillar radiantly bright:
Come: it will guide thee in the darkest night.
Through Seas, and Rocks, and Mountains, on each hand,
Through Wildernesses to Canaan's land.
By Holy Writ the Truth it verifies,
By Holy Writ confutes all Heresies.
Though short, yet clear, for both do well agree
To make thy path unerring unto thee.
As Ophirs Gold, which from Malacca came,
Made Solomon on Earth the richest Man.
So will this Book make rich thy heart and mind,
With Divine Wisdom, Knowledge of all kind.
Thee richer make than Croesus of great name,
Thee wiser make than Solon of great▪ fame.
Than all the seven wise Sages, Greeces Glory,
I do protest it's true, and is no Story.

An Alphabetical List of the Proper and Pa­tronymick names of the Authors, of the old and late Heresies, confuted in the following Treatise.

A.
  • ADamites, so called from one Adam the Author of their Sect, or from the first man Adam, whose nakedness they imitate in their Stoves and Conventicles, after the example of Adam and Eve in Paradise. Page. 172.
  • Anthropomorphitans, so called from two Greek words Anthropos a Man, and Morphe, a Form, Figure, or Shape, because they maintain'd, that GOD had a Body, and was endued with Hu­mane shape. Page 21, 22.
  • Arians, from Arius a Lybian by Birth, and a Presbyter of Alexandria by profession. This Here­sie brake out under Constantine 290. years after Christ, and overran a great part of the World. It was condemned in the first famous Council of Nice, gathered by Constantines appointment; anno 325. page 23, 28.
  • Arminians, so called from James Arminius, Divinity Reader in Leyden, who 1605. published and maintained five Articles, which have occasioned great troubles to the Church of GOD, being eagerly maintain'd by his followers, called Remonstrantes. [Page] The five Articles are concerning Predestination, Redemption, GODS Grace, Free-will, and Perseverance. Page 12, 13, 31, 36, 40, 41, 42, 43, 47, 65, 69, 70, 72, 74, 76, 79, 81, 86, 93, 115, 125, 130, 157, 228, 334.
  • Anabaptists, so called from Re-baptising, had for their Author one Nicholas Storck, who pre­tended familiarity with GOD by an Angel, pro­mising him a kingdom, if he would reform the Church, and destroy the Princes that would hinder him. Page 12, 40, 45, 55, 66, 75, 89, 90, 104, 106, 110, 157, 175, 189, 198, 202, 212, 216, 226,▪ 239, 244, 246, 262, 276, 277, 283, 309, 314, 228, 334.
  • Antinomians, so called from two Greek words, Anti, against, and Nomos, the Law. They sprung up from one John Agricola, who affirmed, that the Moral Law was altogether needless, and that Christians were not tyed to the observation thereof. This Sect sprung up about the year 1535. Page 66, 82, 83,, 88, 89, 98, 99, 106, 114, 127, 132, 133, 145. 155.
  • Arabians, so named from Arabia, the Country where their Heresie was broached, and maintained under Philip the Emperor; 217. years after Christ. Page 40.
B.
  • Brounists, so called from their Author Mr. Ro­bert Broun of North-hampton-shire in Eng­land, sometimes a School-master in Southwork, hold there is no other pure Church in the World, but among themselves; as did the Donatists of old. Page 317.
D.
  • [Page]Dominicans, one of the Popish Orders, so called from Dominicus a Spainard. They were institute by Pope Innocent the third, Anno 1205. This man, with twelve Abbots, were appointed to preach down the Doctrine of the Albigenses, who by their preaching did so incense the Princes, that they took Arms, and killed 100000. of them. They were of the same Religion with the old Non-con­formists in England, who were called Puritans. Page 46. 257.
  • Donatists, from Donatus born in Numidia in Africk, who because Cecilian was preferred Bi­shop before him, to the Bishoprick of Carthage, ac­cused him, and all the Bishops, which had ordained him, to be Traditores; that is, such as had deli­vered up their Bibles to be burned by Idolaters, un­der the persecution of Maximius. Page 239.
E.
  • Epicureans, from one Epicurus, an old Heathen Philosopher, who placed mens chief happiness in the pleasure of the mind. He denyed Providence, and taught that the World was made by the concurse of Atoms. Page 40, 42.
  • Eutychians, so named from Eutyches an Abbot of Constantinople. This mans Heresies were con­demned by the fourth general Council held at Chal­cedon, under the Emperour Martianus; anno 451. page 58.
  • Erastians, so called from Thomas Erastus, a Physician in Heidelberg in Germany, who fol­lowing [Page] this mans footsteps, have taken away from the Church all Discipline and Government, and put it into the hands of the Civil Magistrate. Page 214, 254, 315, 324.
  • Enthusiasts, so called from the Greek word Enthusiadso, or Enthusiao, in Latine, Fanatico, I am inspired, or acted, with a Prophetical, or Di­vine fury. Page 4, 175, 232, 245, 305.
F.
  • Franciscans, another Popish order, so called from one Francis, an Italian Merchant, who before his Conversion (as the Papists say) lived a wicked and debauched life. He gathered many disciples, anno 1198. and appointed them to be obedient to Christ and the Pope. Page 46.
  • Familists, or of the Family of Love, whose Au­thour was one Henry Nicholas, a Hollander. Their first Founder was one David George of Delph; who called himself the true David, that would restore the kingdom to Israel. They maintain­ed many dangerous opinions. Page 116, 226, 260.
G.
  • Greeks, are these who inhabit Greece, viz. Ma­cedon, Epirus, Bulgaria, Moldavia, &c. They place much of their Religion in the worship of the Virgin Mary; and of painted, but not of carved I­mages. Pages 167, 228, 330.
H.
  • Hemerobaptists, so called from two Greek words, Hemera, a day, and Baptisdo, to Baptise; because they maintained, that men and women ac­cording [Page] to their faults committed every day, ought every day to be Baptised. Page 283.
I.
  • Jesuites, so called from our blessed Saviours name JESUS, which they falsely assume to themselves. They were instituted anno 1540. by Ignatius Loy­ala, first a Souldier; they are all well bred in Phi­losophy, and School Divinity, and in many other Arts and Sciences; and therefore they are employed as Emissaries from the Pope, and his Conclave, to ad­vance the Popish Religion. Page 31, 46.
  • Judaisers so called, because they think that all the Jewish ceremonies are still in force, and binding us who live under the Gospel. Page 141.
  • Independents, so called, because, they will have every particular Congregation to be ruled by their own laws, without dependency upon any other Church. Page 236, 309, 317.
L.
  • Libertines, from the liberty and freedom they take and give to others to commit sin. Their first Author was one Quintinus a Taylor in Picardy, who taught, that whatsoever good or evil we did, was not done by us, but by GODS Spirit in us; and ma­ny other blasphemous opinions. Page 44, 106, 114, 155, 175, 189, 245, 246.
  • Lutherians, who so call themselves, lyingly and falsely from Martin Luther, that eminent Man of GOD. Page 43, 65, 69, 86, 112, 139, 157, 244▪ 265, 269, 271, 280, 298.
M.
  • [Page]Manicheans, from one Manes a Persian by birth, and a servant by condition. The Manichean sect was the sink of all former Heresies. p. 19, 55, 261
  • Macedonians, so called from Macedonus Bi­shop of Constantinople 312. years after Christ. Their Heresie was condemned in the second general Council held at Constantinople by Gratian and Theodosius, anno 380. His followers were called Pneumatomachians, fighters against the holy Spi­rit, from Pneuma, a Spirit; and Machesthai, to fight. Page 28.
  • Marcionites, from one Marcion a Paphlago­nian, near the Euxine Sea, who was Cerdons scholar, a grand Heretick. He maintained Cer­dons Heresies at Rome, about 133. years after Christ. Page 55, 283, 334.
N.
  • Nestorians, so called from Nestorius Patriarch of Constantinople, who broached his errours un­der Theodosius the younger, 400. years after Christ. They made Christ to have two Persons, as he had two Natures. This Heresie was condemned by the third general Council held at Ephesus, under Theodosius the younger, anno 431. Page 57.
  • Novatians, so called from Novatus, who lived under Decius the Emperor, 220. years after Christ. He was an African by birth. P. 104, 108, 110, 230.
O.
  • Origenists, so called from famous Origen. His errors began to spread about the year of Christ, 247. [Page] under Aurelian the Emperour, and continued above 334. years. p. 332.
P.
  • Pneumatomachians. See the letter P.
  • Pelagians, from Pelagius a Britain (as they say) by birth. A Monk at Rome, afterward a Presbyter, under Theodosius the younger. p. 45, 64, 91, 115.
  • Puritans, otherwise called Kathari, because they esteemed themselves purer, and holier than o­thers. p. 66, 104, 230, 239.
  • Photinians, from Photinus, born in the lesser Galatia. He began to spread his Heresies about the year 323. at Syrmium, where he was Bishop under Constantius the Emperour. p. 334.
  • Papists are too well known: They are to be found in every other page almost of the book.
Q.
  • Quakers, so called, because sometimes they use to Quake and Tremble, when they prophesy, or when they are in a rapture. p. 4, 5, 12, 18, 23, &c.
S.
  • Socinians, so called from one Faustus Socinus, an Italian of Siena, place all Religion in the old condemned Heresies, following their Master a most vile Heretick. p. 1, 12, 13, 21, 23, 28, 31, &c.
  • Sabellians, so called from Sabellus, an Afri­can by birth. His Heresies began anno Christi, 224. Page 23.
  • Separatists, so called, because they withdrew themselves from the Christian Communion, and fel­lowship of others in the Worship of GOD. p. 257.
  • [Page] Scepticks, commonly called Seekers, main­tain, that the whole universal Church, hath perish­ed a little after the Apostles times, and are not to this day restored, until Christ from Heaven shall send new Apostles, for raising up again the Church Visible. p. 247.
  • Sabbatarians, so called, because they observe the Jewish Sabbath, imagining there is no precept or example in the New Testament, for observing the first day of the week. p. 192.
T.
  • Tritheits, or Tritheitae, so called, because they divided the indivisible Essence of the Godhead into three parts; the one they called the Father, the other the Son, the third the Holy Ghost. p. 19, 23.
  • Tertullianists, were so called from that famous Lawyer, and Divine, Tertullian, who lived under Severus the Emperour, about 170. years after Christ. p. 230.
V.
  • Vorstians, from one Vorstus an old Here­tick, who taught, that GOD had a Body, and was endued with parts, as the Anthropomorphi­tans affirmed. p. 21, 22.
  • Vaninians, from one Vaninus, a great promot­ter of Atheism. He was publickly burned at Tho­louse. p. 163.

CHAP. I. Of the Holy SCRIPTURE.

Question I.

IS the Light of Nature, and the works of Crea­tion and Providence, sufficient to give that know­ledge of GOD, and of his Will, which is ne­cessary to Salvation? No. 1 Cor. 1. 21. and 1 Cor. 2. 13, 14.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who mantain, That Men living according to the Law, and Light of Nature, may be saved? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, none can be saved, unless they be born again, by the incorruptible seed of the Word. 1 Pet. 1. 23. (2) Because, Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and no man cometh to the Father, but by the Son, Iohn 14. 6. (3) Because, there is none other Name under Heaven, given among men whereby we must be saved, but by the Name of Jesus, Acts 4. 12. (4) Because, men cannot believe in Christ without supernatural revelation: [Page 2] and therefore cannot be sanctified or justified; because all Justification, Sanctification, and Remission of sins, are by GODS Grace, and Faith in Jesus Christ, Rom. 3. 24, 25. Acts. 26. 18. Neither can men be so saved, viz. by liv­ing according to the light of Nature, because Salvation is promised onely to Believers in Christ, Acts 16. 31. Iohn 3. 16. (5.) Be­cause, all that know not GOD, will be punish­ed eternally, 2 Thes. 1. 8. But men without supernatural Revelation cannot savingly know GOD, 1 Cor. 1. 21. Matth. 11. 27. (6.) Men destitute of supernatural Revelation cannot know their own corruption and misery, by the first Adam, nor the remedy which is offer­ed by Christ, the second Adam. They are with­out GOD, without Hope, without the Promi­ses, without the Church, and covenant of God: and the mysteries of Faith are hid, and un­known to them allanerly, that perish, and are lost, Eph. 2. 11, 12. Rom. 9. 4. 2 Cor. 4. 3. Mat. 13. 11, 12. Matth. 11. 25, 26, 27.

Quest: II.

ARE the holy Scriptures most ne­cessary to the Church? Yes. 2 Tim. 3. 15. 2 Pet. 1. 19.

Well then, doth not the Popish Church err, that affirmes, the true Church to be infallible in [Page 3] teaching and propounding Articles of Faith, both without, and against the Scripture: and that their unwritten Traditions are of Divine, and equal Au­thority, with the Canon of the Scripture? Yes. Do not likewise the Libertines and Quakers err, affirming, that GOD doth teach, and guide the E­lect into all truth, by the alone instinct and light of the Spirit, without any written Word whatsoever? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Scriptures are the founda­tion, upon which the Church is built. Eph. 2. 20. (2.) Because, all things are to be examined, by the Rule of the Word; as the noble Bereans did, Acts 17. 11, 12. (3) Because, unwritten Traditions, are subject and lyable to many corruptions, and are soon, and quickly for­gotten. (4.) Because, we have Life Eternal in the Scriptures; therefore they must be most necessary to the Church, Iohn 5. 39. (5.) Be­cause, the Scriptures are given, that the Man of GOD, may be perfect, thorowly furnished to all good works, 2 Tim. 3. 16, 17. And the Scriptures are written, that men may believe, Iohn 20. 31.

Quest: III.

ARE these former wayes of GODS revealing his will unto his Peo­ple now ceased? Yes.

[Page 2] [...] [Page 3] [...] [Page 4] Well then, do not the Enthusiasts, and Quak­ers err, who maintain, ▪That the Lord hath not ceased yet, to reveal his Will as he did of old? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, GOD who at sundry times, and in diverse manners spake in times past unto the Fathers, by the Prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, Heb. 1. 1, 2. The Apostle calls the time of the New Testa­ment, the last days, because under the same, there is no more alteration to be expected, but all things are to abide without adding, or taking away, as was taught, and ordained by Christ, until the last day; See also Ioel 2. 28. Acts 2. 17. The Wayes, and Manners of old, was first by Inspiration, 2 Chro. 15. 1. Isaiah 59. 21. 2 Pet. 1. 21. Secondly, by Visions, Numb. 12. 6. 8. Thirdly, by Dreams, Ioh 33. 14, 15. Gen. 40. 8. Fourthly, by Urim and Thummim, Numb. 27. 21. 1 Sam. 30. 7, 8. Fifthly, by Signs, Gen. 32. 24. Exod. 13. 21. Sixthly, by audible Voice, Exod. 20. 1. Gen. 22. 15. All which do end in Writing, Exod. 17. 14. which is a most sure and infallible way of the Lords revealing his Will unto his People.

Quest. IV.

DO the Books of the Old, and New Testament come under the name of the holy Scripture, and Word of GOD? Yes.

[Page 5]Well then, do not the Quakers err, who maintain, That the Scriptures ought not to be cal­led the Word of GOD? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, Christ says, if he called them Gods, unto whom the Word of GOD came, and the Scripture cannot be broken, Ioh. 10. 35. Here it is evident, that the Word of GOD, and the Scripture, are the same. (2.) Because, the predictions of the Prophets, are expresly called the Word of GOD. Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the Word of the Lord spoken by the mouth of Ieremiah might be accomplished, 2 Chro. 36. 22. Here we see it is evident, that the written Prophesies of Ieremiah, which are a part of the holy Scrip­ture, are called the Word of GOD. (3.) Be­cause, what Christ calls the commandement of GOD, He calls the Word of GOD, Mar. 7. 9, 10. compared with v: 13. (4.) Because, the Apostle calls the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God. This sword, is the sword of the Holy Spirit, which he doth, as it were, put into our hand, to re­sist Satan, against all his temptations, Eph. 6. 17. Therefore, by the sword of the Spirit, must be understood the Scripture, not the Spirit it self, as some Quakers affirm. It is evident also, from the fourth chapter of Matthew, where Christ being tempted by the Devil, with three [Page 6] different temptations; resists him with three different places of Scripture. And being as­ked by the Pharisees, why his Disciples did pluck the ears of Corn upon the Sabbath day; answered by Scripture. Mat. 12. 1, 2, 3, 4. Teaching us, that Satans temptations, must be carefully answered, and that by Scripture, as the onely mean to overcome him, and his Instruments. (5.) Because, the Word of GOD, is quick and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, Heb. 4. 12. This cannot be understood of Christ, because Paul in his other writings doth not call the Person of Christ by this name, and therefore must be understood of the word of the Gospel, the power whereof is described, Rom. 1. 16. (6.) See these follow­ing places of Scripture, Psalm 119. 172. 1 Kin. 16. 12. and 2 Kin. 9. 36. and 2 Kin. 23. 16. Isa. 28. 13. Hos. 1. 1, 2. Isa. 37. 22. Prov. 30. 5. By the Scripture, or Word of GOD, we do not understand the bare letters, or the several written words of the holy Scripture, which the Adversaries may imagine, we call the Word of GOD. These are only the Vessels, which carry and convey that Heavenly Light unto us. But we understand thereby, the Do­ctrine or Will of GOD revealed unto reaso­nable creatures, teaching them, what to do, believe, or leave undone, Deut. 29. 29.

Quest. V.

ARE the Scriptures given of GOD, to be the Rule of Faith and Life? Yes. Luke 16. 29, 31. Eph. 2. 20. Rev. 22. 18, 19. 2 Tim. 3. 16.

Well then, doth not the Popish Church err, who maintain their Unwritten Traditions to be the Rule of Faith? Yes. Do not likewise the Enthusiasts, and the Quakers err, who main­tain, the Spirit within, that teaches the Elect, to be the only Rule of Faith.? And that the Dictates of the Light within, are of as great authority as the Scriptures? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Scriptures are called a Rule, Gal. 6. 16. (2.) Because, nothing is to be added to the Scriptures, Deut. 4. 2. and 12. 32. Prov. 30. 6. Rev. 22. 19, 20. (3.) Be­cause, we ought rather to follow the Scriptures in this Life, than a voice spoken from Hea­ven, 2 Pet. 1. 19, 21. (4.) Because, the Scrip­ture is written, that we may believe, Iohn 20. 31. (5.) Because, the Scripture is given for making the man of GOD perfect, 2 Tim. 3. 17. (6.) Because, we must betake our selves in the whole of Religion to the Law, and to the Testimony, Isa. 8. 20. (7) Because, Christ himself, refers the greatest question, that ever [Page 8] was, whether he be the Son of GOD, or not, to the Scriptures, Ioh. 5. 38, 39. Search the Scrip­tures (says he) for they testify of me. (8) Be­cause, the Holy Ghost did never give such a designation to his own Word, as an Histori­cal Rule, and dead Letter; or as some Qua­kers call them, not the principal Fountain of Truth, and knowledge, nor the first rule of Faith and Manners, but the Regula secundaria, subordi­nate to the Spirit; whence, as they affirm, the holy Scriptures have all their true worth, excellency, and certainty: whereas Paul sayes expresly, Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of GOD, Rom. 10. 14. (9.) Because, the spirits cannot be known, by any other Rule, than by the written Word. It is certain, that the Devil transforms himself into an An­gel of light, 2 Cor. 11. 14. There is a spirit of the World, 1 Cor. 2. 12. A spirit that rules in the hearts of the children of disobedi­ence, Eph. 2. 2. There is a lying spirit, 1 Kin. 22. 22. And a Spirit of error and delusion, 1 Iohn 4. 6. How shal these be known to be such, or the Spirit, which the Quakers obtrude upon us, not to be one of them, but by the Rule of the Word?

Quest. VI.

ARE the Books commonly called A­pocrypha, of Divine Inspiration? [Page 9] No. Luke 24. 27, 44. Rom. 3. 2. and 2 Pet. 1. 21.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who af­firm, That the books called Apocrypha, are of divine Inspiration, and of equal authority with the undoubted Word? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, they were never written in the Hebrew tongue, nor by any of the Prophets (2.) Because, they are never cited in the New Testament by Christ, or by any of the Apostles, as the books of the Canonical Scriptures are. (3.) Because, they contain many fabulous, and impious Doctrines, and Histories. First, in Tobit 5. 12. The Angel says, he was Aza­riah, the son of Ananias. This was a manifest lie, which cannot be attributed to a good Angel; and therefore the Spirit of GOD, hath not dictated this History. (2.) It is re­ported, Tobit 6. 6, 7, 16, 17. that the heart, and liver of a Fish, was good to make a per­fume, to drive away the Devil, if any man was troubled with him, or with any evil Spirit. And it is said, Tobit 12. 15. by the Angel, I am Raphael, one of the seven holy Angels, that presents the prayers of the Saints. This is only proper to Christ. (3.) Because, the fact of Simeon and Levi, condemned by Iacob, act­ed by the Spirit of GOD, Gen. 34. 25. in kil­ling the Shechemites, is commended by Iudeth, [Page 10] 9. 2, 3. (4.) Because, you will read of an offering for the dead, Prayers, and Recon­ciliation for the dead, that they might be deli­vered from sin, 2 Maccab. 12. 43, 44, 45. See what contradictions are in comparing to­gether, 1 Maccab. 6. 8. 2 Maccab. 15. 16. 2 Mac­cab. 9. 5.

Quest. VII.

DOTH the Authority of the holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, depend upon the testimo­ny of any man, or Church? No. 2 Pet. 1. 19. 21. 2 Tim. 3. 16. 1 Thes. 2. 13.

Well then, do not the Popish Writters err, who maintain, the Authority of the Scriptures, to depend upon the testimony of the Church, as to us? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Word is to be received by us, not as the word of man, but as the Word of GOD, 1 Thes. 2. 13. (2.) Because, the Doctrine of Christ, to be received by Beli­vers, dependeth not upon mans testimony, Ioh. 5. 34. (3.) Because, GOD only is true, and in­fallible, and all men are liars, Rom. 3. 4. Heb. 6. 18. He is of incomprehensible wisdom, Ps. 147. 5. Of great goodness, Exod. 18. 9. Rom. 11. 12. Ps. 34. 8. Of absolute power and dominion, Gen. 17. 1. Ps. 50. 1, 2. Of infallible truth, who can [Page 11] neither deceive, nor can be deceived. Ro. 3. 4. Tit. 1. 2. Heb. 6. 18. Therefore ought he to be cre­dited, in all his Narrations, Promises, Threatnings, and Prophesies, and obeyed in all his Commandements allanerly; because he himself hath said so.

Quest. VIII.

IS the whole counsel of GOD, con­cerning all things necessary for his own Glory, Mans Salvation, Faith and Life, either expresly set down in Scripture, or by good and ne­cessary consequence, may be deduced from it? Yes. 2 Tim. 3. 15. Gal. 1. 8, 9. 2 Thes. 2. 2.

Well then, doth not the Popish Church err, who maintain, The Scripture to be an imperfect Rule, and therefore to stand in need of a supply of unwritten Traditions? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, all Scripture is given, that the Man of GOD may be perfect, thorowly fur­nished to all good works, 2 Tim. 3. 16, 17. (2.) Because, the Psalmist sayes expresly, the Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul, Psal. 19. 7, 8. (3.) Because, nothing is to be added to the Word of GOD, Deut. 4. 2. Prov. 30. 6. Therefore the Scriptures, must be a compleat, and perfect Rule of Faith, and not an imperfect Rule, or but partly a Rule, as they teach.

Quest. IX.

IS it warrantable to argue in Articles, or Matters of Faith, by Consequences natively deduced from Scripture? Yes.

Well then, do not the Socinians, Quakers, Anabaptists, and Arminians err, who maintain, That all matters of Faith are set down expresly, and in so many words in Scripture, and that no matters of Faith (at least necessary to Salvation) can be built upon Consequences drawn from the Scrip­ture? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, Christ himself proves, that necessary point of Faith, The Resurrection of the dead, from the Scripture by a Consequence, Matth. 23. 29, 31, 32. To be any ones GOD, is to give one eternal life, Psal. 33. 12. Psal. 144. 15. Whence followeth, that those Pa­triarchs lived still with God, in respect of their Souls, (which these Sadducees also denyed) Acts 23. 8. and should also rise in respect of their Bodies, and live eternally: seing he is cal­led a God, not of one part of them only; but of their whole persons. And in that same chapter verse 43, 45. Christ proves his Deity by a consequence from Scripture against the Pharisees. (2.) So doth Apollos, Acts 18. 28. and Paul, Acts 19. 22. prove from the Old Te­stament, Jesus to be the Christ: but it is not expresly said in the Old Testament, that he is [Page 13] Christ. Is not that which necessarly followes from Scripture, contained in it implicitly, and implicitly revealed by God, and is infallibly true?

Quest. X.

IS the inward Illumination of the Spirit of GOD, necessary for the saving understanding of such things, as are revealed in the Word? Yes. Iohn 6. 45. 1 Cor. 2. 9, 10, 11, 12.

Well then, do not the Socinians and Armi­ [...]ians err, who maintain, That men without the revelation of the Spirit, are able to understand the Scriptures for their Salvation? Yes.

By what Reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Disciples of Christ, were not able to understand the Scripture, before he opened their eyes, Luke 24. 45. (2.) Be­cause, the Iews to this day, cannot understand the Scriptures of the Old Testament, until the Vail by the spirit of GOD be taken away, 2 Cor. 3. 14, 15, 16, 18. (3.) Because, the Psal­mist David seeketh from God, the opening of his eyes, that he may behold wondrous things out of his Law, Psal. 119. 18.

Quest. XI.

ARE all these things, which are ne­cessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation, so clearly propounded, and [Page 14] opened, in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the Learned, but the Unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a suffi­cient understanding of them, for their salvation? Yes. Psal. 119. 105, 130.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That things necessary to salvation are ob­scurely, and darkly set down in the Scripture; and that without the help of unwritten Traditions, and the infallible expounding of the Church, the Scrip­tures cannot be understood? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Word is a lamp unto our feet, and a light unto our paths, Psal. 119, 105. (2.) Because, the Scripture is a light, which shineth in a dark place, 2 Pet. 1. 19. (3.) Be­cause, the Scripture enlighteneth the eyes, and maketh the simple wise, Psal. 19. 7, 8.

Quest: XII.

HAth the Lord by his singular pro­vidence and care, keeped pure in all Ages the Old Testament in Hebrew, and the New Testament in Greek? Yes. Matthew 5. 18.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, the Old Testament in Hebrew, and the New Testament in Greek, which are the Fountains, to be corrupted; and that their common Latine Version is authentick▪ Yes.

[Page 15] By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, Christ sayes, till Heaven and Earth pass, one jot, or one title shall in no­wise pass from the Law, till all be fulfilled, Matth. 5. 18. (2.) Because, there can be no urgent necessity shown, why the Fountains are corrupted. (3) If any such corruption had been in the Scripture, Christ, his Apost­les, and the Orthodox Fathers had declared so much. (4) Because, they never have nor can make out any manifest corruptions in the Fountains, albeit most manifest and undeny­able demonstrations, are given of the corrup­tions of their Latine Version, which they make authentick.

Quest: XIII.

ARE the Original tongues, viz. the Hebrew and the Greek, to be translated into the Vulgar Language of eve­ry Nation into which they come? Yes. Are we commanded in the fear of GOD to read and search the Scriptures? Yes. Iohn 5. 39. 1 Cor. 14. 6, 9, 11, 12, 14, 24, 27, 28.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, There is no necessity of translating the Original Tongues, the Hebrew, and the Greek, into the vulgar Language of every Nation, unto which they come, but rather a very great hazard, and danger of Errors, and Heresies? Yes.

[Page 16] Do not likewise the same Papists err, who forbid the reading of the Scriptures in the vulgar tongues? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Scriptures were given long since to the Iews, in their own vulgar Lan­guage, that they might be read publickly and privately by all, Deut. 31. 10, 11, 12. Deut. 11. 18, 19, 20. (2.) Because, the New Testament was written in the Greek Language, which at that time was most generally known to all Nations. (3.) Because, Christ bids all promis­cuously, search the Scriptures, Ioh. 5. 29. (4.) Because, the Prophets, and Apostles preached their Doctrines, to the People and Nations, in their known Languages: Ier. 36: 15, 16. Act. 2. 6. (5.) Because, immediately after the Apostles times, many Translations were extant. (6.) Because, all things must be done in the Congregation unto edifying, 1 Cor. 14. 26. but an unknown tongue doth not edify. (7.) Because, all are commanded to try the Spirits, 1 Thes. 5. 21. 1 Cor. 10. 15. (8.) Because, the Scriptures teach the way of Life, Prov. 2. 9. Luke 16. 29. Acts 24. 14. (9.) Because, the Scriptures set forth the duties of every man in his place, and estate of his life, Deut. 17. 18, 19, 20. Iosh. 1. 8. Psal. 119. 24. 2 Chron. 23. 11. (10.) Because, they are [Page 17] the ground of Faith, Rom. 4. 20. 2 Chron. 20. 20. (11.) Because, they are the Epistle of God sent to his Church, Hos. 8. 12. Rev. 2. 1▪ 8, 12. (12) Because, they are his Testament, wherein we may find what legacies, he hath bequeathed unto us, 2 Cor. 3. 14, 16. Heb. 10. 16. Ioh. 14. 16. (13) Because, they are the sword of the Spirit, Ephes. 6. 17. (14) Because, being imbraced and known, they make a man happy, Psalm 119. 97, 98. Luke 10. 42. Luke 16. 29. Psalm 1: 2: Rev: 1: 3. (15) Because, when the Scriptures are neglected, or con­temned, they plunge men into all misery, Heb: 2: 3: Matth: 22: 29: Psalm 50: 16.

Quest: XIV.

WHen there is a Question about the true meaning, and full sense of any Scripture, must it be known and searched, by other places, which speak more clear­ly? Yes. 2 Peter 1: 21: Acts 15: 15, 16.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, The Scriptures not to be a sufficient Interpreter of it self, and that the sense of it can­not be gathered infallibly, when the text is doubt­full, from other places which speak more clearly, but onely from the Magisterial Traditions, and un­written Opinions of the Church of Rome? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the noble Bereans, compa­red [Page 18] Scripture with Scripture, for finding out the true and sure sense of it, Acts 17: 11. (2) Because, the Apostle Paul did the same, Acts 28: 23. (3) Because, the same was done by the council of the Apostles and El­ders, Acts 15. 15, 16, 17.

Quest. XV.

IS the holy Spirit, speaking in the Scripture, the Supream Iudge, by which all controversies of Religion, are determined, and all Decrees of Councils, Opini­ons of Ancient Writers, Doctrines of men, and private Spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest? Yes. Matth: 22: 29: 31: Eph: 2. 20: Acts 28. 25.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That the Church▪ of Rome, and the Pope, are the supream Iudges of all Contro­versies of Faith: and that his Decrees, and De­terminations, are to be believed, without exa­mination, and implicitly to be believed by all Belie­vers? Yes.

Do not likewise the Quakers err, who main­tain, that the Light within, which teacheth the Elect, is the only Iudge of all Controversies of Faith? Yes

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, God commands all men, to go to the Law, and to the Testimony, in [Page 19] doubtful matters, Isaiah 8: 20: (2) Be­cause, all doubts in Religion, are to be ex­amined by the Rule of the Word, Acts 17. 11. Galatians 6. 16. (3) Because, Christ and his Apostles, did alwayes dispute, and reason from the Scriptures, against the enemies of the Truth: Matth. 22: 31. Gal. 3. 13. (4) Because, the Church of GOD is founded upon the Writings of the Prophets, and Apostles, Eph. 2. 20. (5) Because, we are commanded to prove all things, and to try the Spirits, 1 Thes. 5. 2. 1 Iohn 4. 1, 6.

CHAP. II. Of GOD, and of the Holy Trinity.

Question I.

IS there but one onely the true, and living GOD? Yes. Deut. 6. 4. 1 Corinth. 8. 4. 6. 1 Thes. 1. 9.

Well then, do not the Tritheitae err, who maintain, three GODS numerically distinct, the Father, the Son, and Holy Ghost? Yes.

Do not likewise the Manicheans err, who maintain, That there are two Gods, being di­verse, and opposite, as to kind, viz. One good, the Author, and cause of all good things, and of things immaterial, being the God of the New Testa­ment. [Page 20] The other evil, to wit, the Devil, the Author, and cause of all evil things, and of things material, being the God of the Old Testament? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because though there be a plurali­ty of Persons mentioned in Scripture, yet it is ever God as One, as is evident from the first chapter of the Revelation, and the last. For if that one God have in himself all perfections, there can be no perfection be­side him, and so no God, but this one true God: for if there were; He should not be God, because not infinite in perfection. And if God be infinite in perfection, then surely there cannot be a multiplicity of Gods, seing that which is infinite, in that respect, cannot be multiplied. (2) It is evi­dent from Deut: 32: 39: where the Lord speaketh of himself, I, even I am he, and there is no God with me. (3) Be­cause, God is Omnipotent, and so cannot be hindred by any other, in his working. Rev: 15: 3: (4) It is evident from Christs words to the young man of the Gospel, there is none good but one, that is God. (5) From the Words of Hanna in her Song, for there is none beside thee (O Lord) neither is there any Rock; [Page 21] beside our God. (6) From the Testi­mony of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 8: 6: to us, says he, there is but one God. (7) From what Christ said to one of the Scribes, viz: the Lord our God is one Lord: Mark 12: 29: (8) Because, God is a most absolute, and most perfect Beeing, and so beyond all other things, One: Iohn 10: 29. Psalm 145: 3: 147: 5: (9) Be­cause, this one blessed God, is most abso­lutely sufficient, and furnished with infinite Power, and Wisdom, for the production, conservation, and ruleing all things in Heaven and in Earth. (10) Because, he is of all things without himself, the first and supream cause, from which all the Creatures visible, or invisible, have their rise and beginning. (11) It is evi­dent, lastly, from the testimonies of the most wise Heathens, who have been necessitated to acknowledge, but one God only.

Quest. II.

IS GOD infinite in beeing and perfection, Yes, Iob 11. 7, 8, 9. Iob 26: 14.

Well then, do not the Vorstians, Socinians, and Anthropomorphitans err, who maintain, that God is finite in beeing, and perfection? Yes.

[Page 22] By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, God hath a beeing from himself, and all things have their depen­dence from him: and therefore there can be nothing, by which he can be limited, Romans 11. 36. (2) Because, GOD is eve­ry where present, in heaven, and in earth, and beyond the Heavens, Ierem: 23: 24: Isaiah 66: 1. (2) Because, the Scripture affirms, that the perfection of God, is the highest, is unmeasurable, unchangeable, and infinitely great, beyond all creatures: Iob 11. 7, 8, 9. Psal. 145. 3. Iob 26. 14.

Quest. III.

IS the only living and true God, a most pure Spirit, invisible, with­out a body and parts? Yes. Iohn 4: 24: 1 Tim: 1: 17: Deut: 4: 15, 16: Luke 24. 39.

Well then, do not the Vorstians, Anthro­pomorphitans, and Socinians err, who maintain, God to have a body, and endued with parts, and an outward shape, and form? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, God is the Father of spi­rits, Hebr. 12: 9. (2) Because, God is in­visible, 1 Tim: 1: 17. (3) Because, God is like to no bodily thing, nor can he be repre­sented by any image, or corporeal likeness: Isa: 40. 18. Acts 17. 29.

Quest. IV.

ARE there in the unity of the God­head, three Persons, of one sub­stance, power and eternity? Yes. 1 Iohn 5. 7. Matth. 3. 16, 17. Matth. 28: 19. 2 Cor. 13. 14.

Well then, do not the Arians, and Soci­nians err, and others, Who deny the Godhead of the Son, and holy Ghost? Yes.

Do not likewise the Tritheitae err, Who deny the Unity of the Divine essence? Yes.

Thirdly, do not the Sabellians err, Who deny the real distinction of the Persons? Yes.

And lastly, do not the Quakers err, who maintain, there are no Persons in the Godhead? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) From the places of Scripture already cited. (2) From the Apostolical Bene­diction, in which the three Persons of the God-head, are called upon expresly: 2 Cor. 13. 14. (3) From, 1 Cor. 12. 4, 5, 6. Where the three Persons, are named Spirit, Lord, God. And from Iohn 15. 26. But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of Truth. (4) Because, there are three, that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Son, and the holy Spirit. 1 Iohn▪ [Page 24] 5. 7. These three, must be either three Per­sons, or three Gods. This last, is the hight of impossibility; therefore they must be three Persons. Here they are put to silence, and have nothing to reply; such is the strength, and power of Truth, which is able to stop the mouths of the greatest rebels against religion and reason. But there is good ground for the word Person, Heb. 1. 3. where Christ is said to be the express Image, or impression of the Fathers Person. Because, the Person of the Son, perfectly represents the Person of the Father, as an Impression doth the Seal: wherefore he is also called the image of the invisible GOD, Col. 1. 15. The Greek word is [...], Subsistence, or Person, whereby is understood, the Person of the Fa­ther as distinct from the Son, and subsists of himself, and in himself, and is, as the Original of the Person of the Son, by an eternal and in­effable generation. That there are three Persons in the Godhead; it is further evident, (1) from all the Epistles, written to the seven Churches of Asia. For, as may be gathered from Rev. 1. 1. it is the Father that sends, it is the Son that gives Iohn the Commission, and it is the holy Ghost in the close, that is mentioned as a joynt speaker. (2) Because, in that E­pistle written to Thyatira, there are three di­stinctly [Page 25] named, first, the Father and the Son, in these words, these things saith the Son of God. Next, there is named in the last verse of that second chapter, the Spirit, he that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the Churches. (3) Because, in the beginning of that Epistle to the Church of Sardis, they are all three put together, these things saith He, (to wit, the Son) that hath the seven Spirits of GOD. Here, GOD, that is the Father, is di­stinctly considered, as another Person. The seven spirits, are the holy Ghost. (4) Because, these three Persons are most fully and clearly distinguished in the fifth chapter. First, the Father sitting on the Throne. Secondly, the Lamb, or the Son of GOD: And thirdly, the se­ven Spirits, or the holy Ghost, so called from the pouring out of his Gifts upon the Churches, in that aboundant manner, as if he were seven Spirits, or a sevenfold Spirit.

It is evident also, that the Father, Son, and Spirit are really distinct from one another, and are three Persons. They are indeed in respect of their Essence, which is indivisibly communicable to them, One and the same GOD; but considered Personally, they dif­fer really, for the Father is not the Son, nei­ther is he, that sits upon the Throne, the Lamb. Neither the Father, nor the Spirit [Page 26] were incarnate, but the Son, who died, and was buried, which can be said of none, but of a Person. It cannot be said that the Father died, or that the Spirit died. Next, is not the holy Ghost the spirit of GOD, as the Son is the Son of GOD? And if that, suppose, a real di­stinct personality, this must do it also. Now if the Father be God, and the Son be God, and the Spirit God also, who have one, and the same divine nature, and essence indivi­sibly communicated to them; and so, if there be but one God, and yet these three really distinct, then they must be distinct per­sons, in respect of their Personal properties, seing they are Persons, and distinct. The Son, (as was said) is called the express Image of the Fathers Person, which evidently shews, that the Father, considered as distinct from the Son, is a Person, and subsists. If then, thus it be, must not the Son, as distinct from the Father, and so lively and expresly representing his person, be a person also, having this from the Father? The same must be true likewise, of the holy Ghost, who is GOD equal with both, yet different from both; for he who proceedeth from the Father, and from the Son, must differ from the Father, and from the Son; as he who is begotten, must be di­stinct from him that begat him.

[Page 27]Some Quakers either ignorantly, or per­versely, will have the word [...], transla­ted substance, (as it is Heb. 11. 1.) and thus they read, Heb. 1. 3. the Character or Image of GODS substance, which is to be understood of Christ, (say they) not simply as GOD, but as Man. But they might as well have said, it signifies confident, or confidence, because it is so translated, 2 Cor. 9. 4. and 2 Cor. 11. 17. But they speak here consequentially to their own Tenets, who in effect deny the Trinity, and all distinction between the Father, Son, and holy Ghost, not only in words, but in very deed. The Apostle in this place, is proving Christ the Son of GOD, to be Lord, and Heir of all things; because, GOD created the Worlds by him; He is the brightness of his glory, the express Image of his person, upholdeth all things by the Word of his power. These Titles are here given to the Son of GOD, as a Creator, and a Preserver of all things, which belong to him only, according to his Divine Nature: therefore these Titles must be understood of Christ, forasmuch, as he is the eternal Son of GOD, and a Light from the Eternal Light, of one Essence, and Glory with the Father; nevertheless distinguished from the Person of the Father, by whom the Father executes his Operations, and shews his Properties, even as the Sun by its light doth shine.

Quest. V.

IS the Son of God, of the same sub­stance, Power, and Eternity with the Father? Yes. 1 Iohn 5. 20. Rom. 9. 5. Isa. 9. 6.

Well then, do not the Arians err, who maintain, the Son to be a creature, brought forth before the foundations of the World? Yes.

Do not likewise the Socinians err, who maintain, the Son to have had no Existence, be­fore he was conceived in the Womb of the Virgin Mary? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) From the Scriptures above cited. (2) Because, the Son is Omnipotent, the Creator and Preserver of all things, Rev. 1. 18. Col. 1. 16, 17. (3) Because, he is Omniscient, and searcher of the heart, Matthew 9. 3, 4. Iohn 2. 25. Iohn 21. 17.

Quest. VI.

IS the Holy Ghost GOD? Yes. Acts 5. 3. 1 Cor. 6. 19, 20. 1 Cor. 3. 16, 17.

Well then, do not the Macedonians, or, Pneumatomachians, Arians, Socinians, and ma­ny of the Anabaptists err, who maintain, the Holy Ghost to be a Creature, as do the Macedo­nians, or a Power, Vertue, or Efficacy of the Father, as many Socinians, and others do? Yes.

[Page 29] By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Holy Ghost, is to be worshipped as God, Matth. 28. 19. 2 Cor. 13. 14. Rev. 1. 4. (2.) Because, he is omniscient, and knoweth all things, 1 Cor. 2. 10, 11. (3.) Because, he is omnipotent, the maker, and preserver of all things, the worker of mira­cles; and it is he, that sanctifies, and justifies the Believers, Gen. 1, 2. Psalm 33. 6. Matth. 12. 28. Compare Isaiah 6. 9. with Acts 28. 25, 26, 27. (4.) Because, Ananias is said to lie to the holy Ghost, Acts 5. 3. and verse 4. he is said, not to lie to men, but to GOD. (5.) Because, Believers, are said to be the Temple of God: 1 Cor. 3. 16, 17. And they are said, (1 Cor. 6. 19.) to be the Temple of the holy Ghost: therefore the holy Ghost is God, seeing to be the Temple of God, and the Temple of the holy Ghost, are the same. (6.) Because, none can be properly sinned against, but the true God: there­fore the Holy Ghost is God: because many have been said to have sinned against the ho­ly Ghost, Matth 12. 31.

Quest. VII.

DOth not the Holy Ghost eternal­ly proceed, from the Father, and the Son? Yes. Iobn 15. 26. Gal. 4. 6.

Well then, doth not the Greek Church err, [Page 30] who maintains, the holy Ghost to proceed only from the Father? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, he is sent by the Son; Iohn 15. 26. Acts 2. 33. (2.) Because, all things, which are the Sons, are the Fathers, except the Personal Properties, by which they are distinguished: and all things are communi­cated from the Father, to the Son, and con­sequently the holy Ghost: Iohn 16. 13, 14, 15. Matth. 11. 27. Iohn 17. 10. (3.) Be­cause, Christ gave to his Apostles the Spirit by breathing it upon them: Iohn 20. 22. To shew that he proceeded from him­self. (4.) Because, he is the Spirit of the Son, no less, than the Spirit of the Father: Gal. 4. 6. (5.) Because, if the holy Ghost did not proceed from the Son, as truely as from the Father, he would not be a person really di­stinct from the Son, which is contrary to Iohn 14. 16, 17. (6) Because, it is said, Iohn 16. 14. He shall glorify me (namely by his testimo­ny, gifts, and miracles) for he shall receive of mine, (that is, the doctrine of Salvation which I have taught you, he shall also reveal it unto you, seing he shal receive the same from me:) and shall shew it unto you. And Rom. 8. 9. He is cal­led the Spirit, both of the Father, and of the Son. It is said, if any man hath not the Spirit [Page 31] of Christ; that is, the same Spirit, which in the foregoing verse is called the Spirit of GOD, namely the Father, and is here also called the Spirit of Christ, because he also proceeds from Christ, and is procured for us by Christ, Iohn 14. 26. Iohn 16. 7.

CHAP. III. Of GODS Eternal Decrees.

Question I.

DId God from all eternity, by the most holy, and wise Counsel of his Will, freely and unchange­ably ordain whatsoever comes to pass? Yes. Eph. 1. 11. Romans 11. 33. Heb. 6. 17. Romans 9. 15. 18.

Well then, do not the Socinians, Arminians, and Iesuits err, who maintain, the things which come to pass in time, to fall out, and come to pass, without the Decree of God? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) From the knowledge of God, where­by from all eternity, he hath known all things infallibly, which come to pass, or shall be in time. Acts 15. 18. Iohn 21. 17. Heb. 4. 13. But all things, which come to pass in time, could not have been infallibly known from eternity, but in the Decree of his di­vine Will. (2.) From Gods natural way [Page 32] of working in time: 1 Cor. 12. 6. Rom. 11. 36. whence it is evident, that God worketh effect­ually, and immediately in time all things which are done: but he worketh by his will those things, which he will have to be in time (after that manner, and in that time, how, and when they come to pass) Psal. 115. 3. But that Act of willing, cannot happen to God in time, but hath been in him from all eternity, because God is un­changeable, Iames 1. 17. (3) By enume­rating several instances, concerning which, the Scripture affirms particularly, that they have been decreed by GOD, as the suffer­ings and death of Christ, Acts 2. 23. The glorifying of those, that are to be saved. Eph. 1. 4, 5. 1 Thes. 5. 9. And the foreordaining the rest to damnation to be punished for their sin; Iude v. 4. The like may be said of other things, which come to pass in time; see Psalm 33. 11. Psalm 115. 3. Isaiah 46. 10. Prov. 19. 21. That the Liberty and Freedom of the will, and contingency of events, is consistent with the Decree; is clear from Acts 2. 23. Acts 3. 17 (18. Acts 4. 27, 28. Gen. 45. 5.

Quest. II.

IS the Decree of Predestination, (namely the Decree of Election, and Reprobation) absolute, from the meer good [Page 33] will, and pleasure of God? Yes.

And is it particular concerning a certain number of Persons? Yes. 2 Tim. 2. 19. Iohn 13. 18.

Well then, do not the Lutherians, and Arminians err, who maintain, the Decree of Pre­destination to be general, and conditional, depend­ing upon persevering Faith (which they affirm depends upon the will of man) and foreseen infi­delity, and want of faith? Yes.

Do not likewise the Papists, and Socinians, err, who maintain, the Decree of Predestina­tion to be general, and to depend upon good and evil works, with Perseverance in them? Yes.

By what arguments are they confuted?

(1) From the Apostle Paul, who maketh the good will and pleasure of God, the on­ly cause, why this man is chosen, and an­other, as worthy rejected, and casten off; Rom. 9. 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. Where he moves an objection, against the justice of God, and answers it. (2) Because, our blessed Saviour assignes it, to the good will and plea­sure of God; that to some, the mysteries of Faith, for their conversion are revealed, and that they are hid from many others, who are nothing worse, but in some respect better; Matth. 11. 25, 26. (3) Because, a man of himself hath no good thing in him, whereby he may be differenced from ano­ther, [Page 34] but what he hath freely gotten from God; 1 Cor. 4. 7. (4) Because, the grace of Regeneration, justifying Faith, effectual Calling, and perseverance to the end, are given to all the Elect, and to them only; according to the eternal Decree of God: and therefore are Effects not Causes, or pre­required conditions of Election; Rom. 8. 30. Acts 13. 48. Matth. 24. 24. 2 Tim. 1. 9. Iohn 15, 16. Eph. 1. 3, 4, 5. Matth. 13. 11. Rom. 11. 6, 7.

Quest. III.

HAth it pleased God, according to the unsearchable Counsel of of his own will, whereby he extendeth, or with­holdeth mercy, as he pleaseth, for the glory of his Soveraign power, over his creatures, to pass by, and to ordain the rest of mankind to dishonour, and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious Iustice?

Yes. Rom. 9. 17, 18, 21, 22. Iude verse 4 Matth. 11. 25, 26. 2 Tim. 2. 19, 20.

Well then, do not many of the Quakers, and others err, who maintain, that God ne­ver ordained any man to perish eternally? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, Christ thanked his Father, Lord of Heaven and Earth, because he had hid those things from the wise and prudent, [Page 35] and had revealed them unto Babes; Matth. 11. 25, 26. (2) Because, the Scripture faith to Pharo, even for this same purpose, have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be de­clared throughout all the Earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will, he hardneth. Hath not the Potter power over the clay of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What, if God wil­ling to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much long suf­fering, the vessels of wrath fitted to destru­ction; Rom. 9. 17, 18, 21, 22. (3.) Be­cause, in a great house, there are some ves­sels to honour, some to dishonour; 2 Tim. 2. 19, 20. (4.) Because, the Apostle Iude says, there are some, who of old were ordain­ed to this condemnation, ungodly men. Note, that the cause of this reprobation, is not mans sin, but the absolute will, and good pleasure of God. Mans sin indeed is the cause, why God will punish, but no oc­casion, why he did ordain, to pass by, or to punish man. This Decree is just, because God has power over man, as the Potter hath power over the clay. Neither is the end of this Decree the condemnation of the crea­ture [Page 36] but the manifestation of Gods Justice. Lastly, sin is the effect of mans free will, and condemnation is the effect of Justice, but the Decree of God is the cause of neither.

Quest. IV.

ARE any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justifyed, adop­ted, sanctifyed, and saved, but the Elect only?

No: Iohn 17. 9. Rom. 8. 28. Iohn 6. 64, 65. Iohn 10. 26. Iohn 8. 47. 1 Iohn. 2. 19.

Well then, do not the Papists, Quakers, Socinians and Arminians err, who maintain, That all men, even Reprobates are redeemed by Christ, and that many Reprobates, are effectually Called, Iustified, Sanctified, and Adopted? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) From the Golden Chain, which can­not be loosed, mentioned by the Apostle Paul, Rom. 8. 30. Whom he did predestinate, them he also called; and whom he called, them he also justi­fied; and whom he justified, them he also glorified. (2) Because, those and those only believe, whom GOD hath ordained to Life Eternal, Acts 13. 48. Titus 1. 1. (3) Because, Christ himself says to the Iews, but ye believe not, because ye are not of my Sheep: My Sheep hear my voice, and I know them, Iohn 10. 26, 27, 28. Ye are not of my Sheep, that is, [Page 37] of the Elect, which the Father hath given me. (4) Because, Christ would not pray for the World, but for the Elect only; Iohn 17. 9. (5) Because, the Election, or Elect, have obtained it, and the rest were blinded; namely, who are not elected, and effectually called, Rom. 11. 7. (6) Because, Christ says, greater love hath no man, than this, that a man should lay down his life for his Friends. Such a love he never had to Re­probates, whom, he professes, he never knew; Iohn 15. 13. with Matthew 7. 23. (7) Because, according to the Scripture, Christ died onely for his own Sheep, to wit, intentionally, and Efficaciously; Iohn 10. 15. (8) Because, the Scripture often says, that Christ died for ma­ny; Matth. 26. 28. Matth. 20. 28. (9) Be­cause, there are many, who are living, under the Gospel, as well, as those who lived un­der the Law, who have not been so much as outwardly called, being nothing worse, than others who are called. (10) Because, to all and every one, the Grace of Regeneration, which is simply necessary to Salvation, is not offered: Neither do all, and every one get re­mission and pardon of their sins; Ephes. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. Deut. 29. 4. Matth. 11. 25, 28. with Matth. 13. 11. (11) Because, the Grace of Regeneration, is invincible, and of its own [Page 38] Nature, alwayes Efficacious and Powerful; Ezek. 11. 19, 20. Ephes. 2. 1, 5. Ephes. 1. 19. (12) Because, the Grace of Regeneration, can never be lost, or fail totally, or finally; 1 Peter 1. 5. 1 Iohn 3. 9. Whosoever are Called and Justified, are also Glorified, Rom. 8. 30.

CHAP. IV. Of CREATION.

Question I.

DID GOD create, or make of nothing the World, and all things therein?

Yes. Genesis first chapter to the end, Heb. 11. 3. Col. 1. 16. Acts 17. 24.

Well then, do not the Socinians, and other Hereticks, with many of the old Pagan Philo­sophers err, who maintain, the World to have been made of some pre-existent matter, not capable of production: And consequently, that Creation, or making something of nothing, is simply impossible?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) From the testimony of Moses, Genesis first chapter. (2) From the testimony of I­saiah, Isa. 40. 28. and 45. 18. (3) From the [Page 39] testimony of the Author to the Hebrews, Heb. 11. 3. Col. 1. 16, 17. Rom. 11. 36. (4) Be­cause, the Scripture attributeth to GOD on­ly, Eternity, and Incorruptibility; Psa. 102. 26, 27. Gen. 21. 33. 1 Tim. 1. 17.

It is reported of Socinus, by a very learned Man, who had it from one of his Disciples, that he privately denyed the World to be made of nothing, lest thereby he should be necessitated to acknowledge the Infiniteness of GODS Power: which Tenet afterwards was more publickly avowed, and maintained by some of his Followers.

Quest. II.

DID GOD create all things, whe­ther Visible, or Invisible?

Yes. Col. 1. 16. Acts 17. 24.

Well then, do not some Hereticks err, who maintain, That the Angels were not created by GOD? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) From the Psalmist David, Psalm 33. 6. and 148. 2. 5, 6. Col. 1: 16. Rom. 11. 36: Neh. 9. 6. (2) Because, they are the Servants and Sons of GOD, Brethren, and Fellow-ser­vants with us, willing and ready to obey the commands of GOD their Maker; Rev. 19. 10. Rev. 22. 9. Psalm 104. 4. (3) Because, ma­ny of the Angels left their first habitation, [Page 40] and did not continue in the Truth, and so made defection from the obedience of their Creator, and are reserved in everlasting chains, under darkness, unto the Judgement of the great Day; Iude verse 6. 2 Pet. 2. 4. Mat. 25. 41. Iohn 8. 48.

Quest. III.

DID GOD make Man Male and Fe­male, with reasonable and im­mortal Souls? Yes. Gen. 1. 27. Gen. 2. 7. Eccl. 12. 7. Luke 23. 43. Matth. 10▪ 28.

Well then, do not the Sadducees, and the Epicureans err, who maintain, The Souls of all Men to perish, and die for ever? Yes.

Do not likewise, very many of the Socinians, and others err, who affirm, The Souls of Men to be ex­tinguished or put out, till the Resurrection, and then to be brought to life again? Yes.

Do not likewise the Anabaptists, and many of the Arminians, and some called Arrabians err, who maintain, The Souls of Men, after death, till the Resurrection to fall asleep, (that is, to be with­out any sense, or motion, thought, or vital operation,) whether it be in their body, or in some cavernes of the Earth? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) From our blessed Lord and Saviours words, fear not them, (says he) which kill the Body, but are not able to kill the Soul: [Page 41] Matt. 10. 28. (2) From the testimony of Solomon: then shall the dust return to the earth, as it was, and the Spirit shall return to God, who gave it, Eccl. 12. 7. (3) Be­cause, Paul desired to be dissolved, trusting that his soul after death should have more near communion with Christ: Phil. 1. 23. (4) They may be confuted from several, and particular instances in the Scripture, as is clear from the souls of Dives and Lazarus, Luke 16. 22. From these words of Christ to the Theif, verily, I say unto thee, thou shalt be with me, this day in Paradise, Luke 23. 43. From the appearing of Moses, and Elias, upon the Mount with Christ; Mat. 17. 3.

Quest. IV.

DId God create man, Male and Female, with Righteousness, and true holiness, after his own Image, as being connatural to him?

Yes. Gen. 1. 26. Col. 3. 10. Eph. 4. 24.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who deny this, and the Arminians, who call this righteousness supernatural? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) From these words spoken by God himself, let us make man, in our own Image, Gen. 1. 26, 27. (2) From Gods own testimony, affirming the same thing; Gen. 9. 6. (3) Be­cause, [Page 42] before the Fall, both Adam, and Eve walked naked and were not ashamed: Gen. 2. 25.

CHAP. V. Of PROVIDENCE.

Question I.

DOth God uphold, direct, dispose, and govern all Creatures, their Actions, and all things from the greatest, even to the least?

Yes. Heb. 1. 3. Dan. 4. 34, 35. Psa: 135. 6. Acts 17. 25, 26, 28. Iob 38, 39, 40, 41, chapters.

Well then, do not the Socinians, Arminians, and that great Philosopher Durandus, with o­thers called the Epicureans err, who deny, that God preserves all things immediately: to be the immediate cause of all things, which fall out: to govern things, which are contingent, and the free acts of the will of man, and evil Actions?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, it is God, that worketh all in all. 1. Cor. 12. 5, 6. (2) Because, he worketh all things, according to the coun­sel [Page 43] of his own will. Eph. 1. 11. (3) Because, of Him, and through Him, and to Him▪ are all things; Rom. 11. 36.

Quest. II.

DOth the Almighty Power, unsearch­able wisdom and infinite good­ness of God so far manifest themselves in his Provi­dence, that it extendeth it self, even to the first fall, and all other sins of Angels, and Men; and that not by a bare Permission, but such as hath joyned with it, a most wise, and powerful bounding, and otherwise or­dering, and governing of them, in a manifold dis­pensation, to his own holy ends?

Yes. Rom. 11 32, 33, 34. 2 Sam. 24. 1. and 1 Kings 21. 22, 23. 1 Chron. 10: 4. 13, 14. 2 Sam. 16. 10. Acts 14. 16. Psalm 76. 10. 2 Kin: 19. 28. Genesis 50. 20.

Well then, do not the Lutherians, Papists, Arminians, and Socinians err, who maintain, that the Lord concurrs only to sinful actions, by a bare, naked, and idle Permission? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Scripture says, GOD blinds their eyes, and hardens their hearts, even actively, and judicially; Iohn 12. 40. Exod. 7. 3. Deut. 2. 30. Rom. 9. 18. (2.) Be­cause, God is said to punish one sin, with another. Rom. 1. 24, 26, 28 1 Thes. 2. 11, 12. (3) From the practise of Iob, and David, [Page 44] who, when they were afflicted, and perse­cuted looked to God, and took it patiently; Iob 1. 21.

Quest. III.

DOth the sinfulness of the action pro­ceed only from the Creature, and not from God?

I answer, from the Creature only; Iam. 1. 13. 14, 17. 1 Iohn 2. 16. Psalm 50. 21.

Well then, do not the Libertines err, who affirm, God (without blasphemy be it spoken) to be the Author and Cause of all sin? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) From Davids testimony; Psalm 5. 4. (2) From Moses his testimony; Deut. 32. 4. (3) From Daniels testimony; Dan. 9. 14 (4) From the testimony of Iames 1. 13. (5) From the testimony of Iohn; 1 Iohn 2. 16. and 1 Iohn 1. 5. (6) From the testimony of Paul; Rom. 3. 3, 4, 5. (7) From the testimony of Habukkuk; 1: 13: From reason (1) because God is in the highest degree, essentially, and infinitely Holy, and Good, and therefore pure, and free, from every spot, and blemish, Isaiah 6: 3. Psalm 78: 41: 1 Peter 1: 15, 16: Lev. 11: 44: (2) Because, God is absolutely perfect, and therefore he cannot fail, or be deficient in working (3) Because, God is the Judge of [Page 45] the World? He is the Forbidder, the Hater, and Revenger, of all sin, and unrighteous­ness, as contrary to his holy Nature, and Law: Exod chap: 20: Rom: 3: 5: 6: Gen: 18: 25: Rom: 1: 17: Psalm 5: 4: (4:) Because, by his own most absolute, and most supream do­minion, Soveraignty, and infinite perfection, He is in, and of himself, above all Law what­soever, and under the command of none, in Heaven; or in Earth.

CHAP: VI: Concerning the Fall of Man, of Sin, and the punishment thereof.

Question I.

IS the guilt of the sin of our first Parents imputed, and the same death in sin, and corrupted Nature, conveyed to all their Posterity, descending from them by ordinary generation?

Yes. Rom. 5: 12: 15, 16, 17, 18, 19: 1 Cor. 15. 21, 22, 45, 49. Psalm 51. 5. Gen. 5. 3. Iob 14. 4. Iob 15. 14.

Well then, do not the Pelagians, and late Anabaptists, Quakers, and Socinians err, [Page 46] who deny, original sin inherent? Yes.

Do not likewise the Dominicans, Franciscans▪ and Iesuits err, who maintain, the Virgin Mary, not to be conceived in Original sin? Yes.

Does not lastly, a certain Ring-leader of the Quakers err, who maintains, that to Infants, this Original sin, is not imputed, until by act­ual sin, they joyn themselves to it? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) From that well known place of Scrip­ture; Rom. 5. chap. which is the very seat, and foundation of this Doctrine, of Original sin. (2) Because, unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God; Iohn 3. 3. (3) Because, all men by Nature, and birth, are the children of wrath; Eph. 2. 3. (4) Because, whatever is born of the flesh, is fleshly; Iohn 3. 6. And who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one: Iob 14. 4. Iob 15. 14. (5) Because, all the thoughts, and imaginations of the heart of man (viz. of the natural, and unregenerate man) are evil continually; Gen: 6. 5. (6) Because, David confesseth, that he was shapen in ini­quity; and in sin, did his mother conceive him; Psalm 51. 5. (7) Because, Infants, that are guilty of no actual transgression, need a remedy against sin, to wit, absolu­tion, by the blood of Christ, a Seal whereof [Page 47] was given, according to Gods institution, un­der the Law to Infants, namely Circumci­sion, to which Baptism, under the Gospel succeeds; Deut. 30. 6. Rom. 2. 29. Acts 22. 16. Mark 1. 4. Col: 2. 12. Gen: 17. 12. Matth. 28. 19. (8) Because, all the Elect, (among which are infants; Matth. 18. 6. Mark 9. 42) are redeemed by Christ, and are set at liberty from slavery, freed from the fault, and penal punishment; Iohn 1. 29. Iohn 10. 15. 1 Tim: 2. 6. (9) Because, infants, are lyable to death, and other miseries, and ca­lamities, which are the wages, and punish­ments of sin; Rom: 6. 23. Gen: 3. 19.

Quest. II.

IS this corruption of Nature, albeit pardoned, and mortified through Christ in some measure in the Regenerate, both it self, and all the motions thereof truely and properly sin?

Yes. Rom. 7. 5, 7, 8, 25. Gal. 5. 17.

Well then, do not the Papists, Socinians, and Arminians err, who maintain, that Con­cupiscence or Lust, and the first motions thereof, which have not gotten the consent of the Will, are not properly and truely sin? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, they are forbidden by the Moral, and Natural Law, in the tenth Com­mand; Exod. 20. 17. Deut. 5. 21. Rom: 7. 7. [Page 48] (2) Because, Paul speaking of himself while unregenerate, calleth concupiscence and lust (of which the controversie is) often times sin and evil; Rom. 7: 5, 6. (3) Because, it is a great part of the old Man, which we must lay down, and must be mortified; Col: 3. 5, 6, 9. Ephes: 4. 22.

Quest. III.

DOth every sin, both Original and Actual, being a transgression of the Righteous Law of God, and contrary thereunto, bring in its own nature guilt upon the sinner, whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God, and the curse of the Law; and made subject to death, with all miseries Spiritual, Temporal, and Eternal?

Yes. 1 Ioh. 3. 4. Rom: 2. 15. Rom. 3. 9, 19. Eph: 2. 3. Gal: 3. 10. Rom: 6. 23. Ephes: 4. 18. Rom: 8. 20. Lam: 3. 39. Matth: 25. 41. and 2 Thes: 1. 9.

Well then, do not many of the Papists err, who maintain, That all sins are not contrary to the Law of GOD, nor transgressions thereof? Yes.

Do not all Papists err, Who deny every sin to be mortal, or to deserve Eternal punishment? Yes.

Lastly, Do not the Socinians err, Who deny that any sin can deserve Eternal punishment? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, all sins deserve Eternal death; Rom: 6. 23. Esek: 18. 4. Rom: 8. 6, 13. (2) Because, every sin is a transgression of the law; [Page 49] 1 Iohn 3. 4. (3) Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all; Iames 2. 10. 11. and therefore he deserves E­ternal punishment. (4) Because, those sins of Infirmity and Ignorance, which the Saints are subject to, and which the Papists call Venial sins, will not suffer them to stand in Judgement before GOD, nor can the Saints be justified from them, but by Faith: and therefore in strick Justice, they merit, and deserve Hell; Psalm 143: 2. Psalm 130: 3, 4, 8. (5) Because, GOD commanded Belie­vers under the Law, to offer typical Sacrifices, for making a propitiation for such sins; and Christ did really by his own pretious blood, purge them away, for by no less price, could they be pur­ged, he being made a curse for them, that he might liberate those from the curse of the Law, which they had deserved for such sins, as well as for others. Lev: 4. 2, 3, 14, 15, 20, 22, 24, 31. Lev. 5. 17, 18. Gal: 3. 13. Heb: 10. 10, 12, 14. Heb: 9. 14, 22. 1 Iohn 1. 7, 9. Ephes: 5. 25, 26, 27. 1 Peter 1. 18, 19. (6) Because, every sin is against the supreamest Law-giver, against his Holiness and Good­ness, against his Infinite Majesty: and flow­eth from a Formal or Virtual contempt of GOD; and therefore the least sin, cannot but deserve GODS wrath, and curse eternally; [Page 50] Iam: 2. 10, 11. Lev: 10. 3. Lev: 11. 44, 45. 1 Iob: 3. 4. Ephes: 5: 6.

CHAP. VII. Of GODS Covenant with Man.

Question I.

DId all these Sacrifices and other Types, and Or­dinances by which the Covenant of Grace was administerd before our Saviours Incarnation, ad­umbrate, and foresignifie Christ to come?

Yes. Heb: 8, 9, 10, chapters; Rom: 4: 11: Col: 2: 11, 12: 1 Cor: 5: 7:

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, that the Legal Sacrifices did not fore­signifie the expiatory Sacrifice of Christ, neither were Types nor Figures of it; but that those Sacrifices, which the Jews offered for sin, did really, and in ve­ry deed, purge away all the sins for which they were offered?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

There are here two parts to be considered; First, the Negative, That the Legal Sacrifices did not foresignifie. The second, the Affirmative, that they did truely make a real expiation and [Page 51] atonement. The first is evidently confuted from Scripture Testimonies; for the Law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very Image of the things, can never with those Sacrifices which they offered year by year, continually, make the Comers thereunto perfect; Heb: 10: 4. The Apostle calls here, these Legal Sacrifices, a Shadow: and Heb: 9: 9: he calls them a Figure: and verse 24, he calls them [...], Exemplaria verorum, the Figures of the True; and Col: 2: 17: he calls them a shadow of things to come, but the Body is of Christ, which is no­thing else, but that the thing signified is of Christ: that is to say, fulfilled in Christ. For all the shadows of the Old Testament, had a respect to Christ, and his Benefits; by whose coming they also have an end. And Iohn 1. 17. it is said, That the Law was given by Moses, but Grace and Truth came by Iesus Christ. By Grace, understand the Grace of Redemption, from the curse of the Law; Gal: 3. 13. and of Adoption for Children; Iohn 1. 12. Rom: 8. 15. By Truth, understand the fulfilling both of the Promises, 2 Cor: 1. 20. and of the Cere­monies, and Types; Col: 2. 17. For this cause the Apostles have alwayes pressed, the Abro­gation of the Legal Rites, and Ceremonies; because the Truth being exhibited, by the [Page 52] coming of the Anti-type, the shadows of the Type, ought deservedly to cease, and be no more: according to that of Daniel 9. 27.

The second part is likewise evidently con­futed; namely, that the Legal Sacrifices did truely and really purge away all the sins, for which they were offered. (1) Because, the Apostle sayes, the blood of Bulls, and Goats, cannot take away sin; Heb: 10: 4. (2) Because, those Sa­crifices were not able to make him that did the ser­vice perfect; Heb: 9: 9. (3) Because, these Legal Sacrifices did leave the sins of such as offered, unexpiated, until they were purged away by the death, and blood of Christ; Heb: 9. 15. (4) Because, the sins of Believers, under the Old Testament were forgiven and pardoned after the same manner, that our sins under the New Testament are pardoned; Acts 15. 11.

Quest: II:

WAS the administration of the Co­venant under the Old Testa­ment, sufficient for the time, and efficacious, through the operation of the Spirit, to instruct and build up the Elect, in the Faith of the promised Messiah, by whom they had full remission of sins, and eternal Salvation?

Yes: 1 Cor: 10: 1, 2, 3, 4: Heb: 11: 13: Iohn 8: 56.

[Page 53]Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, That life Eternal, under the Old Te­stament, was never promised to the Believers of that time, neither had they any promise to expect it from GOD?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, there are promises extant in the Old Testament of life eternal; Isaiah 45: 17: where it is said, Israel shall be saved with an e­verlasting Salvation; see Dan: 12: 2: (2) Be­cause, the Fathers under the old Testament, be­lieved and expected life Eternal; as Iob 19: 25, 26, 27: David, Psal: 17: 15: Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, all of these waited for eternal life; Heb: 11: 9, 10: (3) Because, some at that time were put into actual possession of it; as Enoch, Hebrews 11: 5. So was Elias taken up into Heaven, and put into actual possession likewise; 2 Kings 2: 11. (4) Be­cause, the Scripture of the Old Testament point­eth forth the way to Eternal life, as Christ witnesseth; Iohn 5: 39: and Paul, 2 Tim: 3: 15: (5) Because, Believers under the Old Testa­ment were most happy; Psalm 144: 15. (6) Because, Temporal good things, were to them pledges of Spiritual good things, and life eter­nal; Heb: 11: 8, 9.

Quest: III:

ARE there two Covenants of Grace, differing in substance; or but one and the same, under various dispensations?

One onely: Gal: 3: 14, 16: Acts 15: 11: Rom: 3: 21, 22, 23, 30: Rom: 4: 3, 6, 16, 17, 23, 24: Heb: 13: 8.

Well then, do not the Socinians err; who maintain; a Substantial; and not an Accidental difference between the old Covenant and the new?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, in both the Covenants there is the same promise of Grace, concerning re­mission of sins, and life Eternal freely to be given to Believers, for Christs sake; Gen. 3. 15. where the seed of the Woman, is promised to bruise the head of the Serpent: and Gen. 17. 7. it is said, I shall be thy GOD, and the GOD of thy seed after thee; and Gen. 22. 18. it is said, in thy seed shall all the Nations of the Earth be bles­sed: and Iohn 3. 36. it is said, he that believeth, hath Everlasting life: And Acts 15. 11. it is said, but we believe, that through the Grace of our Lord Iesus Christ, we shall be saved, even as they. (2) Because, one, and the same Faith, and O­bedience, on both sides, is required; walk be­fore me, and be thou perfect, Gen. 17. 1. and Mark 1. 15. Christ sayes, after he came to Galilee, preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom, the [Page 55] time is fulfilled, and the Kingdom of GOD is at hand; repent ye, and believe the Gospel.

CHAP. VIII. Of CHRIT the Mediator.

Question I.

DID the Son of GOD, when the fulness of time was come, take upon him Mans Nature, with all the essential Properties, and common Infirmities thereof, yet with­out sin; being conceived by the power of the holy Ghost, in the Womb of the Virgin Mary, of her substance?

Yes. Iohn 1. 1, 14. 1 Iohn 5. 20. Heb. 2. 14, 16, 17. Luke 1. 27, 31, 35.

Well then, do not those Hereticks called Marcionits, and the Anabaptists err, who main­tain, That Christ is not a true Man, but onely the Appearance, Shape, or Form of a Man?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Manicheans err, who maintain, That the Body of Christ, is not of the substance of the Virgin Mary, but a heavenly Bo­dy, brought from Heaven to the Womb of the Virgin?

Yes.

[Page 56] By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ is said to be made of a Woman; Gal. 4. 4. (2) Because, the Word was made Flesh; Iohn 1. 4. (3) By an indu­ction of the essential parts of a Man, and sin­less infirmities, which were found in him. First, He was endued with a rational Soul; Iohn 12. 27. Secondly, He had a real and substantial Body, and denyed he was a Spi­rit only; Luke 24. 39. Thirdly, Christ did hunger; Mat. 4. 2. Fourthly, He was weari­ed, and thirsty; Iohn 4. 6. Lastly, He was sad▪ he groaned in Spirit, and was troubled; Iohn 11. 33. and verse 15. He wept. None of which sinless perturbations, can agree to an Appearance, Shape, or Form of a Man. (4) Because, He was made of the seed of David, according to the Flesh; Rom. 1. 3. and descen­ded of the Iews; Rom. 9. 5. (5) Because, the promises were made in the seed of Abraham; Gen. 12. 3. and Gen. 18. 18. (6) Because, He took not on him the nature of Angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham, where­fore in all things, it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren; Heb. 2. 16, 17. (7) Because, otherwise, he could not have satisfied in our place, the Justice of GOD: seing it had been unjust, for another Nature to have suffered punishment, than that Nature which had of­fended and sinned.

Quest. II.

ARE there two whole, perfect, and distinct Natures in Christ, the God-head, and the Man-hood, inseparably joyned together, in one person?

Yes: 1 Cor. 8. 6. Eph. 4. 5.

Well then, do not the Nestorians err, who maintain, the Union between the Divine and Hu­mane Nature, not to be Hypostatical, but only by way of Assistence: and that, as there are two Na­tures in Christ, so there are two Persons, one proper to the Divine Nature, another proper to the Humane Nature?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, unless Christ-God-Man were but one Person, the Merit of his Death, would not be of so great value, as to redeem the Elect from infinite, and eternal punish­ment: seeing hence cometh, all the value, and worth of his death, that the same Per­son, who was God, did suffer, and die for us. (2) Because, otherwise, Christ had been swallowed up, and devoured by the wrath of God, against the sins of the Elect, which he himself undertook. (3) Because, Christ, if he had not been both God and Man, in one Person, he could not have been a Me­diator: for a Mediator must be One; 1 Tim. 2. 5.

Quest. III.

IS the Godhead, and Man-hood in Christ, united without Conversion, Composition, or Confusion?

Yes. Luke 1. 35. Col. 2. 9. Rom. 9. 5. 1 Peter 3. 18. 1 Tim. 3. 16.

Well then, do not those old Hereticks, the Eutichians err, who maintain, that as the Person of Christ is One, so his Nature is made One, by a composition, or Confusion of the two Na­tures together?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, such a Composition, is impos­sible, seing the Divine Nature, is most perfect, and cannot lose any, of its own per­fection, unless we would affirm, the Divine Nature, to be mutable, and changeable. (2) Because, that same Christ, who accord­ing to the Flesh descended of the Iews, is over all, God blessed for ever; Rom. 9. 5. (3) Be­cause, this doctrine takes away all means of Mediation: for, by taking away the distincti­on between the Natures, they take away the Natures themselves: and so neither could Christ have suffered in our place, because not Man: neither could he have given any vertue, value, or worth, to his sufferings, because not God.

Quest. IV.

DID Christ endure most grievous▪ torments immediately in his soul?

Yes. Mat. 26. 37, 38. Luke 22. 44. Matth. 27. 46.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that the soul of Christ, even from its first creation, was never affected with any sadness, or sinless perturbation of mind?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Scripture testifies, that his soul was sad unto death; Matth. 26. 37. (2) Because, the Apostle Iohn testifies, that when Christ saw Mary weeping for her bro­ther Lazarus, he groaned in Spirit, and was troubled; Iohn 11. 33. Iohn 12. 27. (3) Be­cause, his soul, was exceeding sorrowful, e­ven unto death, as was cited before, Matth. 26. 37. (4) The same thing is proven from Christs desertion, whereby the actual fruiti­on, and enjoying of Gods favour, as to his sense, was interrupted, and broken in the midst for a time, but in no wise, altogether taken away, which made him cry upon the Cross: My God, my God, why hast thou for­saken Me. Matth. 27. 46. Eph. 5. 2.

Quest. V.

HAD the Lord Iesus, by his per­fect obedience, and sacrifice of [Page 60] himself, which he through the eternal Spirit, once offered up unto God, fully satisfied, the Iustice of his Father?

Yes: Rom. 5. 9. Rom. 3. 25, 26. Heb. 9. 14, 16. Heb. 10. 14.

Well then, do not some, otherwise Ortho­dox err, who deny, Christs Active Obedience, to be a part of his satisfaction, performed in our place?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Active disobedience of the first Adam made us all sinners: therefore we must be made Righteous, by the Active O­bedience of the second Adam; Rom. 5. 19. (2) Because, Christ not only offered himself to the death for us, but for their sakes (that is, for the Elects sake) he sanctified himself (that is, he gave up himself, as a holy sacri­fice) Iohn 17. 19. (3) Because, it behoved Christ to fulfil all righteousness; Mat. 3. 15. (4) Because, we stood in need; not only of the expiation of sin, for saving us from eter­nal death, but of the gift of righteousness, for obtaining eternal life, according to that precept and demand of the Law, Do this, and thou shalt live. And therefore Christ is not only called our Ransom, but the end and perfection of the Law, to every one, that [Page 61] believeth Rom. 10. 4. That is, the aim of giving the Law by Moses, is that, thereby men being brought to the knowledge of their sin, should flie for refuge unto Christ, and his righteousness, as he that hath perfectly fulfilled the Law for us. (5) Because, the passive obedience of Christ, was not in it self meerly and purely passive, but his active obedience did challenge the chief, and prin­cipal part in it. Psal. 40. 7. Then said I, lo, I come,: in the volume of the book, it is written of Me. With these words, our Saviour Christ declareth his willing Obedience, to accept of, undergo, and execute the Mediatorship, by GOD imposed upon him. And (Isaiah 53. 7.) he offered up himself a sacrifice for sin, and by one Oblation, he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified; Heb. 10. 14. (6) Be­cause, whole Christ was given to us, with all his benefits: otherwise, if onely his passive Obedience were imputed to us, it would fol­low, that half Christ onely were given; to wit, Christ suffering, but not Christ doing those things which pleased the Father; taking away our sin, and saving from death onely, but not bringing Righteousness. But Christ was not given, and born for himself, but for us, that he might bestow himself wholly upon us, by doing for us, what we could not do, and by [Page 62] suffering for us, what we could not suffer.

Do not likewise the Socinians err, who main­tain, That this Orthodox Doctrine, (namely, That Christ did merit Eternal Salvation, to the Elect, and hath satisfied Divine Iustice for them;) is erroneous, false, and absurd?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Messiah doth finish the transgression, and maketh an end of sins, and maketh Reconciliation for iniquity, and shal be cut off, but not for himself, as the Prophet Daniel hath foretold; chap. 9. 24, 26. (2) Be­cause, his own self bare our sins in his own Bo­dy, upon the tree; 1 Peter 2. 24. (3) Be­cause, he hath reconciled those to GOD, that were sometimes alienated, and enemies in their mind, by wicked works, in the body of his Flesh through death; Col. 1. 21, 22. (4) Because, now once in the end of the world, hath he appeared, to put away sin, by the sa­crifice of himself; Heb. 9. 26. (5) Because, he hath given his life, an [...], a pretium redemptionis, a price of Redemption for many. (6) Because, the Prophet Isaiah sayes, that it plea­sed the Lord to bruise him, and put him to grief; and that he was wounded for our trans­gressions, and that he bare our iniquities; chap­ter 53. 5, 10, 11.

Quest. VI.

DID Christ, in the work of Medi­ation, act according to both Natures, by each Nature, doing that, which is proper to it self?

Yes: Heb. 9. 4. 1 Peter 3. 18.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that Christ is a Mediator only accord­ing to his humane Nature?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, it was needful, for perfect­ing the work of the Mediator, that Christ should overcome death; which could not otherwise be done, than by his Divine Na­ture; 1 Pet. 3. 18. Where it is said, he was put to death in the Flesh, but quickned by the Spirit. (2) Because, there are very ma­ny properties of the Mediator, which cannot in any wise agree to the humane Nature of Christ, as undertaking, and promising, that he will raise up all at the last day, whom the Father has given him; Iohn 6. 39. Again, he could not lay down his life, and take it up again, by the alone strength of his humane Nature: but all these are works proper to the Medi­ator; as is clear from the tenth chapter of Iohn v. 18. And (3) the application of those good things, which he hath merited, is the proper work of the Mediator, which can [Page 64] only be done, by the Divine Nature. (4) Because, Christ is a Prophet, a Priest, and a King, according to both his Natures. A Prophet; Matt. 11. 27. No man knoweth the Father, save the Son. A Priest; Rom. 5. 10. Heb. 9. 14. He is a King; Luke 1. 32. All which Offices, he executes according to both his Natures.

CHAP. IX. Of FREE-WILL.

Question I.

HATH Man by his fall, into an estate of sin, wholly lost all ability of will, to any supernatural good, accompanying salva­tion: so as a Natural Man being altogether averse from that Good; and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength to convert himself, or to prepare him­self thereunto?

Yes: Rom. 5. 6: Iohn 15. 5. Rom. 3. 10. 12. Iohn. 6. 44, 65.

Well then, do not the Pēlagians, and So­cinians err, who maintain, that the Natural Man, without supernatural, and divine grace, is able to convert himself to God, by his own strength?

Yes.

[Page 65] Do not likewise the Semipelagians, Papists, Arminians, and Lutherians err, who main­tain, That fallen Man, and corrupted with Origi­nal sin, is partly able by his own strength (the Grace of GOD assisting him) to prepare himself, and turn himself to GOD?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Natural Man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of GOD, for they are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them, because they are Spiritually dis­cerned; 1 Cor. 2. 14. Rom. 8. 7, 9. (2) Be­cause, all that the Natural Man doth, is sin, and cannot in any wise please GOD: be­cause, his works are not of Faith, nor to the Glory of GOD, as the Law requires; Rom. 14. 23. Heb. 11. 6. Titus 1. 15. Rom. 3. 10, 11, 12. Psalm 14. 3. Rom. 8. 8. (3) Because, a man hath no good in himself, whereby he may be differenced from the most flagitious, nor any good thing which he hath not re­ceived; 1 Cor. 4. 7. (4) Because, Conver­sion, Grace, and Salvation, are not of him, that runneth, or willeth, but of GOD, that sheweth mercy, and whom he will, be hardneth; Rom. 9. 15, 16, 18. Rom. 11. 7, 8. Matth. 11. 21, 22, 25. (5) Because, the Conversion of a Natural Man, is the quickning of one dead; [Page 66] Ephes. 2. 5. Col. 2. 13. It is a Regeneration, or bearing again; Ioh. 3. 5, 6: It is the creating of a new heart; Psalm 51. 10. It is the taking away the heart of stone, and the giving of a heart of flesh; Esek. 11. 19. Esek. 36. 26. And therefore as God raised Christ from the dead, so also he raiseth us from the grave of sin, by his own proper power; 1 Cor. 6. 14. And (6) because, GOD converts and calls men, not by works of Righteousness, which they have done; Titus 3. 4, 5, 5. but according to his own Purpose and Grace, which is given us in Christ Jesus; 2 Timoth. 1. 9.

Quest. II.

DOth a Regenerate Man, after his Conversion, perfectly and onely will that which is good?

No. Gal. 5. 17. Rom. 7. 15, 18, 19, 21, 23▪

Well then, do not the Puritans, (I do not mean the old Non-conformists) Antinomians, A­nabaptists, and many Quakers err, who main­tain, That all the Saints of GOD are free from eve­ry spot, and blemish of sin?

Yes.

Do not likewise some of the Popish Church and Socinians err, who maintain, That some Chri­stians, that are more advanced, may come that length to be without any spot, blemish, and act of sin: Nay that some have really win that length?

Yes.

[Page 67] By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, in many things we offend all, Iames 3. 2. (2) Because, Christ commands us to seek dayly remission of sins; Matth. 6. 12. Luke 11. 4. (3) Because, there is not one just man, upon the Earth, who doth not sin; 1 Kings 8. 46. Eccles. 7. 20. (4) Because, there is a continual war, between the Flesh and the Spirit; so that they (namely the Re­generate) are not able to do that, which they are willing, and ought to do; Gal. 5. 17. (5) Because, the Regenerate are not able to fulfil the first Command, namely, to love GOD with all their Heart, with all their Soul; Matth. 22. 37, 38. For we know here but in part, and therefore we love but in part: 1 Cor. 13. 9. Neither are the Saints free of all those inordinate motions of concupiscence, forbidden in the tenth Command, as is evident from Gal. 5. 17. and from the experience of Paul, and of all the other Saints. (6) Be­cause, if we say, we have no sin, we deceive our selves, and the truth is not in us; 1 Iohn 1. 8, 9. But when that same Apostle sayes, whosoever is born of GOD, doth not commit sin, for his seed remains in him, and he cannot sin, because, he is born of GOD; he must mean in the first Text, of sin dwelling in the best of Saints here-away; and therefore he [Page 68] expresses it by Hamartian Echein, peccatum ha­bere, which signifies, to have sin. In the se­cond Text, he means of sin, not only dwelling, but reigning in us, and made a trade of, and gone about, with the full and hearty consent of the will, and is expressed by the words Ha­martian poiein, to work sin, and to make a trade of it, as men do in any employment, they take delight in. (7) We see it from the grievous falls of the most eminent Saints; as Noah, Lot, Abraham, Iacob, David, Solomon, Asa, Iehoshaphat, and the Discsples of Christ.

CHAP. X. Of EFFECTUAL CALLING.

Question I.

ARE all those whom GOD hath predestina­ted to life, and those onely, in his appoin­ted, and accepted time, effectually called, by his Word and Spirit, out of the estate of sin and death, in which they are by Nature, to Grace and Salvation, through Iesus Christ?

Yes. Rom. 8. 30. Rom. 11. 7. Ephes. 1. 10. [Page 69] 11. 2 Thes. 2. 13, 14. Rom. 8. 2. Ephes. 2. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. 2 Cor. 3. 36.

Well then, do not the Papists, Arminians, and Lutherians err, who maintain, That men not Elected, are sometimes effectually Called?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Faith belongs to the Elect on­ly; Titus 1. 1. (2) Because, whom he did predestinate, those onely, and no other hath he called; Rom. 8. 30. (3) Because, though ma­ny hear the Gospel, yet none believe, but such as are ordained for everlasting life; Acts 13. 48. (4) Because, the Apostle testifies, that the Elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded; Rom. 11. 7. (5) Because, Christ manifested his Fathers name, to those only whom he chois­ed out of the world, and gave to him; Joh. 17. 6

Quest. II.

DOth GOD, whom he effectually Calls, Enlighten their minds Spiritually, and Savingly, to understand the things of GOD?

Yes. Acts 26. 18. 1 Cor. 2. 10, 12. Eph. 1. 17, 18.

Well then, do not the Arminians err, who maintain, That no supernatural light infused into the intellective Faculty, and thereby elevating it, is requisite to the saving understanding of these things, [Page 70] which are needful (in the Scripture) to be believed, done, and hoped for?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of GOD; for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned; 1 Cor. 2. 14. (2) Because, the carnal mind is enmity against GOD, for it is not subject to the Law of GOD, neither can it be; Rom. 8. 7. (3) Because, all unregenerate men are dark­ness; Ephes. 5. 8. And darkness cannot compre­hend the light; Iohn 1. 5. (4) Because, Christ sayes, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of Hea­ven and Earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to babes; Matth. 11. 25.

Quest. III.

DOth GOD take away from them, whom he effectually Calls, the heart of stone, and give unto them an heart of flesh, renew­ing their wills, and by his Almighty power, de­termining them, to that which is good, and effect­ually drawing them to Iesus Christ?

Yes. Ezek. 36. 26. Ezek. 11. 19. Phil. 2. 13. Ezek. 36. 27.

Well then, do not the Arminians err, who maintain, that the will of man, when he is rege­nerate, [Page 71] is not renewed, nor furnished with any new and Spiritual qualities?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Moses sayes, GOD shal cir­cumcise thy heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God, with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live; Deu. 30. 6. (2) Because, the Lord says, A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you; and will take away the stony heart out of your flesh; and I will give you an heart of flesh: and I will put my Spirit within you; and cause you to walk in my sta­tutes, and cause you to keep my judgements, and do them; Ezek. 36. 26, 27. (3) Because, It is GOD, that worketh in us, both to will, and to do, according to his good pleasure; Phil. 2. 13. (4) Because, all the faculties of the Soul are renewed; 2 Cor. 5. 17. If any man be in Christ, he is a new crearure: old things are past away, behold, all things are become new.

Do not likewise the same Arminians err, who maintain, That when the Grace of GOD begins to make an Infall upon the heart, in order to a mans conversion, it is indifferent, and may be resisted, and withstood; so that a man may be converted, or not converted by it? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

[Page 72](1) Because, if this Doctrine were true, a mans conversion, would be of him that run­neth, and of him that willeth, but not of GOD, that sheweth mercy; which is contra­ry to the Apostle, Rom. 9. 15, 16. (2) Be­cause, by this way, it should not be GOD, that worketh in us both to will and to do; Phil. 2. 13. (3) Because, by this way, a man himself should make the difference, and GOD should not make one man to differ from another, which is contrary to the A­postle; 1 Cor. 4. 7. (4) Because, if so, a man might glory, that he had in himself, what he had not received; which contradicts 1 Cor. 4, 7. (5) Because, it is GOD, that draws a man, before he comes to Christ; Iohn 6. 44. (6) Because, Conversion is a new Creation; 2 Cor. 5. 17. (7) Because, it is a resurrecti­on from the Dead; Ephes. 2. 5. (8) Be­cause, conversion is no less, than to be born over again; Iohn 3. 3.

Quest. IV.

IS this Effectual call, of GODS free and special grace alone, and not from any thing at all foreseen in man?

Yes. 1 Tim. 2. 9. Titus 3. 4, 5. Eph. 24, 5, 8, 9.

Well then, do not the Papists and Armi­nians err, who maintain, That an unregenerate man, may by the strength of Nature, and his Free­will [Page 73] do some good works: nay, often times hath act­ually done such good works, as may prepare him, and dispose him, for the receiving of the Grace of God?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, an evil tree cannot bring forth good fruit; Matth. 7. 17. (2) Because, the carnal mind is enmity against GOD: for it is not subject to the Law of GOD, neither indeed can it be; Rom. 8. 7. (3) Because, we have nothing in our selves, which we have not received, whereby we may differ from others; 1 Cor. 4. 7. (4) Because, what­ever is not of Faith, is sin; Rom. 14. 23. Heb. 11. 6. (5) Because, we are not able of our selves to think a good thought, but all our sufficiency is of GOD, 2 Cor. 3. 5. (6) Be­cause, before conversion we were dead in trespasses and sins; Eph. 2. 2, 5. (7) Be­cause, not by works of righteousness, which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of Regeneration, and renewing of the holy Ghost; Titus 3. 5. (8) Because, we were sometimes, that is, be­fore conversion, darkness; Eph. 5. 8. (9) Because, Christ says, without me, ye can do nothing; Iohn 15. 5.

Quest. V.

IS a Man in effectual calling onely passive, until being quickned, and [Page 74] renewed by the holy Ghost, he is thereby enabled, to answer this call, and to embrace the Grace offered, and conveyed in it?

Yes. 1 Cor. 2. 14. Rom: 8. 7. Ephes. 2. 5. Iohn 6. 37. Iohn 5. 25. Ezek. 36. 27.

Well then, do not the Papists and Armini­ans err, who maintain, That a Man in his con­version is not passive, but active?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

Before I do this, it is to be observed, that when I say a man is passive in his Conversion, I do not think he is physically passive, as a stock or a stone; while an Artist is about to make a Statue of them: but Morally, or rather Spi­ritually, as a Man is Spiritually dead, which is a true and real death, though he be naturally living. The (1) Reason, by which they are confuted is this, because we are dead in tres­passes and sins; Ephes. 2. 1. (2) Because, we are the servants of sin, until we be made free­men by the Son of GOD; Iohn 8: 34, 36. (3) Because, we are by Nature, under the power of Satan, and of darkness; Acts 26. 18. Col. 1. 13. 2 Tim. 2. 26. (4) Because, it is God, that worketh in us, both to will, and to do, of his own good pleasure; Phil. 2. 13. (5) Because, the Flesh lusteth against the Spirit; Gal. 5. 17. (6) Because, tho [Page 75] Scriptures ascribe that whole work to God, and no part of it to Man; Eph. 2. 8, 9, 10.

Quest. VI.

ARE Elect Infants, dying in infan­cy Regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when and where, and how he pleaseth?

Yes. Luke 18. 15, 16. Acts 2. 38, 39. Iohn 3. 3, 5. 1 Iohn 5. 12.

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, that no Infants are Regenera­ted?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Iohn the Baptist, was filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his Mo­thers Womb; Luke 1. 15. (2) Because, the Propher Ieremiah, was sanctified, from his mothers Womb; Ier. 1. 5. (3) Be­cause, the promise is made to believing Pa­rents, and to their Children conjunctly; Gen. 17. 7. Acts 2. 39. (4) Because, of such, says Christ, is the kingdom of Heaven; Mat. 19. 14. (5) Because, the Apostle calls Chil­dren, which are descended, but of one Parent, in covenant with God, holy; 1 Cor. 7. 14. (6) Because, God hath promised in the second Command, that he will shew mercy, unto thou­sands, [Page 76] that are descended of believing Parents; Exod. 20. 6.

Quest. VII.

CAN any not elected, although called by the Ministry of the Word, and having some common operations of the Spirit, truely come to Christ, and so be saved?

No. Matth. 22. 14. Matth. 7. 22. Matth. 13. 20, 21. Heb. 6. 4, 5. Iohn 6. 64, 65, 66. Iohn 8. 24.

Well then, do not the Arminians err, who maintain, that there is sufficient Grace given to all Men, for their conversion, to whom the Gospel is preached?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Quakers err, who maintain, that every man hath so much grace given of God, as if he would improve it, would bring him to heaven?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ says to his Disciples, to you it is given, to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven, but to them, it is not given; Mat. 13. 11. (2) Because, it is said, of the Jews, they could not believe because God had blinded their eyes, and hardned their hearts; Iohn 12. 39, 40. (3) Because, Christ said to his Disciples, there are some of you, that do [Page 77] not believe: therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father; Iohn 6: 64, 65: (4) Be­cause, the Prophet Isaiah complains, who hath believed our report, or to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? cap: 53: 1. (5) Because, many are called, but few are chosen; Mat. 22. 14: (6) Because, men in nature, do not discern, neither can they know the things of the Spirit of God; 1 Cor: 2. 14. (7) Because, the most part of the World, are buried in gross darkness, and have their understanding darkned, and are alienated from the life of God, through the ignorance, that is in them, because of the blindness of their hearts; Eph. 4: 18.

CHAP. XI. Of IUSTIFICATION.

Question I.

DOTH GOD freely justify those, whom he effectually calleth, not by infusing righte­ousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting, and accepting their persons, as righteous, not for any thing wrought in them, [Page 78] or done by them, but for Christs sake alone?

Yes: Rom: 9: 30: Rom: 3: 24:

Well then, do not the Papists, Socinians, and Quakers err, who maintain, that the righteousness, whereby we are justified before God, is not without us, but within us, and inherent?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, if inherent righteousness, did justify us, then good Works would justify us, but the Scripture denys that; Rom: 3: 20: Therefore, (says the Text) by the deeds of the Law, shall no flesh be justifyed in his sight: And verse 28: therefore we conclude, that a man is justified by Faith without the deeds of the Law. See Rom: 4: 6: Gal: 2: 16: Eph. 2: 8, 9, Titus 3: 5: In all which places, works are secluded expresly from our justification. (2) Because, the Righteousness, whereby we are justified, is not our proper own; 2 Cor: 5: 21: For he (to wit God) hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him; Phil: 3: 8, 9: and be found in him, not having my own righteousness, which is of the Law, but that which is through the Faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by Faith. (3) Because, we are not justified by the Law; Acts 13: 38, 39. (4) Because, [Page 79] our Justification, is given to us freely; Rom. 4: 4, 5. Rom. 11. 6. (5) Because, our in­herent righteousness, is imperfect, 1 Kings 8: 46: For this Scripture says, there is no man that sinneth not. See that parallel place; 1 Iohn 1: 8: Where it is said, if we say we have no sin, we deceive our selves, and the truth is not in us. (6) Because, if we were justified by inherent righteousness, we would have matter to boast of, which is contrary to Pauls doctrine, Eph. 2: 9: Not of works, least any man should boast. (7) Because, the righte­ousness of a Christian man, is the justifying of the ungodly. Rom: 4: 5.

Quest: II:

DOTH GOD justify men, by im­puting Faith it self, the Act of believing, or any other Evangelical obedience, to them, as their righteousness?

No. Rom. 4. 5, 6, 7, 8. 2 Cor: 5: 19, 21: Rom: 3: 22, 24, 25, 27, 28: Tit: 3: 5: 7: Eph. 1. 7. Ier: 23: 6. 1 Cor 1. 30, 31: Rom: 5: 17, 18, 19.

Well then, do not the Arminians err, who maintain, that Faith it self, and the Act of Believing, is imputed to us for righteousness?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Faith is that by which, we re­ceive righteousness; Acts 26: 18. Therefore [Page 80] if it be that by which, we receive righteousness, it cannot be righteousness it self: because, that which is received, is far different, and another thing from that, whereby we receive it. (2) Because, we are not justified by inherent righ­teousness, as is proven evidently against the Papists in the last foregoing Question, all which reasons do clearly evince, that we are not ju­stified by the imputation of Faith it self, or by the act of believing, as our righteousness.

Quest. III.

IS Faith, which is the alone instru­ment of justification, alone in the person justified?

No.

Is it ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead Faith, but worketh by Love?

Yes. Iames 2: 17, 22, 26. Gal. 5. 6.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who main­tain, That justifying Faith, may be truely, and really separated from Love, saving Hope, and all the rest of the Christian vertues?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, as the Body without the Spirit is dead, so Faith without works is dead also; Iames 2. 26. (2) Because, Faith worketh by Love; Gal. 5. 6. that is, by shewing forth the works of Love in us, towards GOD, and our [Page 81] neighbour. (3) Because, Faith purifies the heart; Acts 15. 9. (4) Because, he that hath Faith, is in Christ: but he that is in Christ bringeth forth much fruit; Iohn 15. 5. (5) Because, those who have Faith, are buried with Christ, and walk in newness of life; Rom. 6. 4. that is, in holiness and purity, which accompany Faith. (6) Because, he that saith, I know GOD, and keepeth not his Commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; 1 Iohn 2. 4.

Quest. IV.

DId Christ by his Obedience, and Death fully discharge the debt of all these, who are thus justified, and did he make a proper, real, and full satisfaction to the Fathers justice, in their behalf?

Yes. Rom. 5. 8, 9, 10. 1 Tim. 2. 5. 6. Dan: 9: 24, 26: Heb: 10: 10, 14: Isa: 53: 4, 5, 6, 10. 11, 12.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That Christ hath not made a full sa­tisfaction, to Divine Iustice, for the sins of those who are justified: and that Humane satisfactions do in part, satisfy the Iustice of GOD for sin?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Socinians err, who deny, all true and proper satisfaction to Christs sufferings?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

[Page 82](1) Because, the Prophet sayes, he hath born our griefs, and carried our sorrows, was wounded for our transgressions, was bruised for our iniquities; Isaiah 53: 4, 5. (2) Be­cause, by one Offering, he hath perfected for ever, them that are sanctified; Heb. 10. 14 (3) Because, Humane satisfactions, being finite, can never satisfy in part or in whole, the in­finite Justice of GOD, for the punishment of sin; Iob 35. 6. (4) Because, he hath blot­ted out the hand writting of Ordinances, which was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; Col. 2. 14. (5) Because, there is nothing more frequent in Scripture, than that Christ was a propitiation for our sins; Rom: 3. 25. (6) Because, Christ sayes, I lay down my life for my sheep, and no man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of my self; Iohn 10. 15, 18. (7) Because, the Son of man came to give his life, a ransom for many; Matth. 20. 28. see the first of Tim. 2. 6. Ephes. 5. 2. Gal 3. 13. Rev. 5. 9. 1 Iohn 2. 2.

Quest. V.

ARE the Elect justified, until the Holy Spirit, in due time, actual­ly apply Christ to them?

No. Col. 1. 21, 22. Titus 3. 4, 5, 6, 7.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who [Page 83] maintain, That the Elect are justified from eterni­ty; or when the price of Redemption was payed?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, all that are justified, have been strangers and enemies to GOD, and children of Wrath; Ephes. 2. 3. Col. 1. 21. Titus 3. 3. 1 Cor. 6. 10, 11. (2) Because, none are justified, until they believe in Christ; Gal. 2. 16. knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law, but by the Faith of Je­sus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ.

Quest. VI.

CAN those who are justified, by rea­son of their sins, fall under Gods Fatherly displeasure, and not have the light of his countenance restored unto them, until they humble themselves, confess their sins, beg pardon, and re­new their faith and repentance?

Yes. Psalm 89. 31, 32, 33. Psalm 32. 5. Psalm 51. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. Matth. 26. 75. 1 Cor. 11: 30, 32.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, that GODS love, and favour, towards those, that are once-justified, cannot con­sist with his anger and chastisement towards them?

Yes.

[Page 84] By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ says, as many, as I love, I rebuke and chasten; Rev. 3. 19. (2) Because, David was chastened, for his Adultery, and Murder; 2 Sam. 12, 10. (3) Because, the Lord says, if my children for­sake my Law, and walk not in my judge­ments, then will I visit their transgressions, with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes; Psalm 89. 30, 31. (4) Because, God was provoked, with the sins of the Corinthians, for which he punished them; 1 Cor. 10. 22. And 1 Cor. 11. 30.

Quest: VII.

IS the Iustification of Believers, under the Old Testament, one and the same in all respects with the justification of Believers, under the New Testament?

Yes. Gal. 3. 9, 13, 14. Rom. 4. 22, 23, 24. Heb. 13. 8.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, that the manner of justification, is not one, and the same, under both the Testa­ments?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Abraham was justified by Faith in Christ; Gen. 15. 6. And he believed in the Lord, and it was counted to him for righteousness. That [Page 85] is, God of his meer Grace, held him righte­ous, and justified that had no righteousness in himself, whereby to subsist and stand be­fore his justice seat, and that through Faith in his promises, and in the promised Media­tor, (2) Because Isaiah teacheth, that both himself and other Believers; were justified by the knowledge of Christ, Chap. 53 11. (3) Because, the holy Ghost expresly testifies, that Christ died for the Believers under the Old Testament; Heb. 9. 15. (4) Because, the justification of believing Iews under the old Testament, and believers under the New, are compared between themselves as equal; Acts 15. 11.

CHAP. XII. Of ADOPTION.

Question I.

ARE those who are taken into the number, and enjoy the liberties, and priviledges of the Children of God, and have his Name put upon them, and receive the Spirit of Adoption, are they (I say) ever cast off?

No.

[Page 86] Are they sealed to the day of Redemption, and inherit the promises, as heirs of everlasting Salva­tion?

Yes. Lam. 3. 3. Eph. 4. 30. 1 Pet. 1. 5.

Well then, do not the Lutherians err; who maintain, that the Chlidren of God, some of them, may be cast off, for a time totally, though not finally?

Yes.

Do not likewise, the Arminians, Quakers, and Socinians err, who maintain, that those who have received the grace of Adoption, may be cast off totally and finally?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, all the children of God are keep­ed through faith unto Salvation; 1 Peter 1. 5: (2) Because, Christ hath prayed, for the preseverance of all Believers; Iohn 17: 20: Iohn 11: 26: And all those, that are adopted, are the children of God by faith; Gal. 3: 26: (3) Because, no man, that is born again, as are all the children of God, doth sin; that is, he▪ suffers not sin to reign over him, for his seed remaineth in him; that is, Gods seed, whereby he is born again, namely the Word of God; 1 Peter 1: 23: Iohn 3: 5, 6: Remaineth in him, that is, doth not total­ly perish, but abideth thence foreward, work­ing [Page 87] the fruits of regeneration once begun in them; Phi: 1, 6: See 1 Iohn 3, 9: (4) Be­cause, all the children of God, request the Father, by the Son, that he may grant them perseverance to salvation; Matth: 6: 13: which perseverance is most needful to them, for that end; Matth: 24: 13. But Believers, when they seek things needful to Salvation, in the name of Christ, according to his promise, are al­wayes heard; Iohn 14: 13, 14: Iohn 16: 23. (5) Because, the Gifts and Calling of GOD are without Repentance; Rom: 11: 29. (6) Be­cause, all those who are justified are glorified; Rom: 8: 30: But all who are Adopted, are en­dued with Faith, and are justified; Gal: 3: 26. (7) Because, Christ keepeth all his A­dopted Ones, that none can pluck them out of his hand, or his Fathers hand; Iohn 10: 27, 28, 29. (8) Because, perseverance is a gift promised by GOD to all the Elect, in the co­venant of Grace; Ezek: 36: 26, 27, 28. Ezek: 11: 19, 20: Ierem: 31: 31, 32, 33. (9) Be­cause, justifying Grace is a Well of Water springing up into everlasting life, in every man, to whom it is given; Iohn 4: 14. And the Saints are like unto trees, planted by the rivers of waters, which bring forth their fruit in their season; Psalm 1. 3.

CHAP. XIII. Of SANCTIFICATION.

Question I.

ARE they who are effectually Called, and Rege­nerated, having a new Spirit created in them, farther sanctified, really and personally, through the vertue of Christs death, and resurrection, by his Word and Spirit dwelling in them?

Yes. 1 Cor. 6. 11. Acts 20: 32. Phil: 3: 10▪ Rom: 6: 5, 6. Iohn 17. 17.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, That those who are justified, are sancti­fied onely, by the imputed holiness of Christ; not by infusing inherent holyness, or any Spiritual quali­ties into them, by the help of which, they are en­abled to live holily?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Apostle says, follow peace and holiness with all Men, without which no man shall see God; Heb. 12. 14. (2) Be­cause, the fruit of the Spirit, is Love, Joy, Peace, long-suffering, Gentleness, and Faith; [Page 89] Gal. 5. 22. (3) Because, they who are in Christ, bring forth good fruit; Iohn 15. 5. (4) Because, they who belong to Christ, have crucified the Flesh with the affections, and lusts; Gal. 5. 24, 25. (5) Because, the A­postle commands us, to work out our salva­tion, with fear and with trembling; Phil. 2. 12. (6) Because, we ought to purify our selves, from all filthiness of the Flesh, and Spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God; 2 Cor. 7. 1. (7) Because, we ought to grow in Grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ; 2 Pet. 3. 18. (8) Because, the Lord circumcises the hearts of the Elect, that they may love the Lord their God, and taketh away the heart of stone; Deut. 30. 6. Ezek. 36. 26, 27.

Quest. II.

IS Sanctification imperfect in this life, there being some remnants of cor­ruption abiding in every part?

Yes. 1 Iohn 1. 10. Rom. 7. 18, 23. Ps: 3. 12.

Well then, do not the Antinomians, and many of the Quakers err, who maintain, That those who are justified, are perfectly sanctified?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Papists, Socinians, and A­nabaptists err, who maintain, the same, but differ in the manner?

Yes.

[Page 90] By what reasons are they confuted?

But first consider, that the Antinomians de­fend, that the most perfect holiness of Christ is im­puted to us, and is made ours, there being no in­herent holiness in us, nor required of us.

But the Papists, Socinians, Quakers, and Anabaptists affirm, and maintain a perfect inherent holiness, in this life.

They are confuted?

(1) Because, there is no man that sinneth not; 1 Kings 8. 46. (2) Because, if we say, we have no sin, we deceive our selves, and the truth is not in us, 1 Iohn 1. 8▪ (3) Be­cause, in many things, we offend all; Iames 3. 2. (4) Because, there is not a just man upon the earth, that doth good, and sinneth not; Eccles. 7. 20. (5) Because, we are all, as an unclean thing, and all our righteous­nesses are as filthy raggs; Isaiah 64. 6. (6) Because, the Psalmist prayeth, that GOD would not enter into judgement with him, for in thy sight (says he) shall no man be justified; Psal. 143. 2. (7) Because, no man can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin; Prov. 20. 9. (8) Be­cause, the Apostle complains heavily, con­cerning indwelling sin; Rom. 7. 18, 23. (9) Because, the Saints are obliged, to seek par­don of sin every day; Matth. 6. 12. (10) Be­cause, [Page 91] the Lord sayes, he that is holy, let him be holy still▪ Rev: 22. 11.

CHAP. XIV. Of SAVING FAITH.

Question I.

IS the grace of Faith, whereby the Elect are en­abled to believe, to the saving of their Souls, the work of the Spirit of Christ, in their hearts?

Yes. Heb. 10. 39. 2 Cor. 4. 13. Ephes. 1. 17, 18, 19.

Well then, do not the Pelagians err, who maintain, Faith to be a thing natural; who at­tribute the being thereof to our selves, and to the strength of our corrupt Nature?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Arminians err, Who though they grant Faith to be the gift GOD, yet they de­ny Faith to be given according to the precise will of GOD, for the saving of some men?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) I confute the Pelagians; for Christ sayes, [Page 92] no man can come to me (that is, believe) un­less the Father that hath sent me draw him; Iohn 6. 44. (2) Because, the Apostle sayes for unto you it is given, in the behalf of Christ, not onely to believe in him; but al­so to suffer for his sake; Phil. 1. 29. (3) Be­cause, that which is natural, is proper to all; but all men have not Faith; 2 Thes. 3. 2. (4) Because, Faith is reckoned up among the fruits of the Spirit; Gal. 5. 22. (5) Because, the very desire it self of believing is from GOD, and not from our selves; Phil. 2. 13. (6) Because, Christ, is the Author and Fi­nisher of our Faith; Heb. 12. 2.

By what reasons do you confute the Arminians?

(1) Because, Faith is given to the Elect onely, and to such, as are ordained to life e­ternal; Titus 1. 1. Acts 13. 48. (2) Because, he that believes, shall be saved; Mark 16. 16. Iohn 3. 15, 16, 18, 36. (3) Because, GOD wills precisely, the glorifying of all those whom he justifies; Rom. 8. 30. But they who have Faith, are justified; Rom. 5. 1. (4) Be­cause, GOD wills precisely, the gloryfying of all those, whom he inwardly, and efficacious­ly calleth; Rom. 8. 30. But all that believe in him, are powerfully called; 2 Thes. 2. 13, 14. (5) Because, all the Children of GOD, are heirs of GOD, and joynt-heirs with Christ; [Page 93] Rom. 8. 17. But how many soever believes in his Name; to them he gave power to become the Sons GOD; Iohn 1. 12.

Quest. II.

IS Faith the Fruit of Christs pur­chase?

Yes. Titus 3. 5, 6. Titus 2. 14. Ezek. 36. 25, 26.

Well then, do not the Arminians err, who deny Faith, and other saving Graces to be Christs purchase, or the fruits of his death?

Yes.

Do not likewise others of the same kind err, who granting the gift of believing, not to flow from mans free-will, or from any sufficient grace bestowed upon all, maintain, That it flows from GODS Sove­raign good-will, thinking fit to bestow that gift upon some whom he hath elected, and not upon o­thers; without respect to the merits of Christs death?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, if this be all, that Christ hath purchased by his death, that GOD might save fallen man, upon condition he believe; then Christ might attain his end in dying, and yet not one soul be saved by his death. (2) Because, it makes Christ a Ti­tular Saviour onely, purchasing salvation to all, without any full and certain intention of [Page 94] applying it to any. (3) Because, it is pro­mised to Christ the Mediator, as a satisfacti­on to him for his sufferings, that not only many through Faith in him, shall be justifi­ed, but that certainly, he shall see his seed, and the fruit of his Soul; Isaiah 53. 10. (4) Because, the washing of Regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; under which all particular graces may be comprehended, are said to be shed on us aboundantly, through Jesus Christ; Titus 3. 5, 6. (5) Because, the Lord hath promised to remove from us, the heart of stone, and to give us a new heart; to cleanse us from all our idols, and wash us with clean water. But these pro­mises are in one bundle, with the promises of his pardoning our iniquity, and remem­bring our sins no more; Ezek. 36. 25, 26. Ierem. 31. 33, 34. (6) Because, Christ is made unto us Wisdom, Sanctification, and Redemption, no less, than righteousness, un­der which, Faith and all saving graces need­ful to the working out of our Salvation are comprehended; 1 Cor. 1. 30, 31. (7) Be­cause, we are said to be blessed, with all spi­ritual blessings in Christ Iesus, (Ephes. 1. 3.) which by his merit are communicated to us. And is not Faith and saving Grace to be ac­counted among the Spiritual blessings? (8) [Page 95] Because, it is not a meer possibility of Re­demption, but actual Redemption, that the Saints in Heaven praise and extol Christ for; Rev. 5. 9, 12. An Arminian, cannot well sing a part of this song, while he thinks in his heart, he is no more beholden to the Lamb for his Redemption, than Cain and Judas.

Quest. III.

DOth a Christian by Faith, believe whatsoever is revealed in the Word, for the Authority of GOD speaking therein?

Yes. Iohn 4. 42. 1 Iohn 5. 10. Acts 24. 14. 1 Thes. 2. 13.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who commend and extol Implicit Faith; and who define Faith, rather by Ignorance, than by Knowledge?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God; and therefore, there can be no Faith, without knowledge; Rom. 10. 17. (2) Because, all believers, are taught of God; Isaiah 54. 13. Iohn 6. 45. (3) Because, Christ sayes, this is life eternal to know thee, the onely true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent; Iohn 17. 3. (4) Because, the Prophet Isaiah sayes, by his knowledge, shall my righteous servant justify many; chap. 53. 11.

Quest. IV.

ARE the principal Acts of saving Faith, Accepting, Receiving, and Resting upon Christ alone, for Iustification, Sanctification, and Eternal Life, by vertue of the Covenant of Grace?

Yes. Iohn 1. 12. Acts 16. 31. Gal. 2. 20. Acts 15. 11.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, Faith to be nothing, but a naked assent, to the truth revealed in the Word; it being placed by them, in the understanding onely?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Sccinians err, who put no difference between Faith, and the Obedience of Works?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, to believe, is to receive Christ, which is an Act of the Will; Iohn 1. 12. (2) Because, Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Or Faith, is a firm ground, or a firm confidence; that is, which causeth to subsist, or stand firm, the things which are promised by God in Christ, and which therefore are expected by hope, which is not done only by an assent, to Gods promises in our understanding, but also by a trusting to the same in our will. I say faith, is a firm [Page 97] ground of the things, which are hoped, and an argument of things not seen. Or a conviction, in Greeke Elegchos: for Faith respecting GODS Revelation and Promise, convinceth and as­sureth the heart of man, more strongly of the truth of a thing, than any other argu­ment brought from natural Reason, can do; Heb. 11. 1. (3) Because, we are justified be­fore GOD by Faith; Rom. 5. 1. but we are not justified by a bare and naked assent to the truth; otherwise the Devils should be justified; Iam. 2. 19. Neither are we justified by the Socini­ans Faith, which is every where condemned in Scripture; Rom. 3. 20, 28. Gal. 2. 16. Eph. 2. 8, 9. Phil. 3. 9. Titus 3. 4, 5.

CHAP. XV. Of REPENTANCE.

Question I.

IS Repentance unto life, an Evangelical Grace, the Doctrine whereof is to be preached by eve­ry Minister of the Gospel, as well as that of Faith in Christ?

Yes. Ezek. 12. 10. Acts 11. 18. Luke 24. 47. Make 1. 15. Acts 20. 21.

[Page 98]Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, That repentance is not an Evangeli­cal grace; and that it ought not to be preached by any Minister of the Gospel, seing it leads us away from Christ, and is many wayes hurtful and dan­gerous to us?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, GOD hath promised in the Covenant of Grace, that he will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Ierusalem, the spirit of Grace and Supplica­tion, which shall cause Christians under the Gospel, to repent and mourn for their sins; Zech. 12. 10. (2) Because, Repentance is numbered among the saving graces, which shall be bestowed and conferred upon Converts, un­der the Gospel, and is sometimes put for the whole Conversion of a man to GOD; Acts 11. 15, 16, 17, 18. (3) Because, the Mini­sters of the Gospel ought to instruct those with meekness; who oppose themselves; if GOD peradventure will give them Repen­tance, to the acknowledging of the Truth; 2 Tim. 2. 25. (4) Because, Repentance from dead works, is among the principles of the Doctrine of Christ; and is a foundation, which ought to be layed, before the Hearers of the Gospel can go on into perfection; I [Page 99] say, layed by the Ministers of the Gospel; Heb. 6. 1. (5) Because, Christ himself appointed Re­pentance, no less to be preached, through the world, than Remission of sins; Luke 24. 47. (6) Because, Christ and his Apostles preached Repentance, no less than Faith; Mar. 1. 15. Mat. 3. 2. Nay, the whole sum of the Gos­pel is placed in preaching Faith and Repen­tance; Acts 20. 20, 21.

Quest II.

DOth a sinner. (namely by Repentance) out of the sight, and sense, not only of the danger, but also of the filthiness, and odious­ness of his sins, as contrary to the holy Nature, and righteous law of God, and upon the apprehension of his mercy in Christ, to such as are penitent, so grieve for, and hate his sins, as to turn from them all unto God?

Yes. Ezek. 18. 30: Ezek. 36, 31. Isai. 30. 22. Ier. 31. 18, 19. Ioel 2. 12, 13. Amos 5. 15. Psalm 119. 6. 59. 106.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, we ought not by Repentance, to hate our sins, to mourn for them, and turn from them to God: but only to believe, that Christ in our stead and for us, hath Repented? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Repentance, being a turning from our sins, and evil ways, and a turning to God, and Christ being without sin, could not be capable to repent in our stead; 1 King. [Page 100] 8. 35. Heb. 7. 26, 27. Ioel 2. 12, 13. (2) Be­cause, they that repent, confess their sins, and are grieved for them; Ezra 10. 1. Mark 14. 72. They hate their sins; 2 Cor. 7. 11. They are ashamed, and confounded for them; Ier. 31. 19. (3) Because, Repentance, is a sor­row after a Godly manner, in the same very Persons, that Repent, wrought by God, by the preaching of the Word; 2 Cor. 7. 9. Acts 11. 18. (4) Because, Repentance, is called a renting of the heart; Ioel 2. 12. And they that Repent, hate and loath themselves for their abominations; Ezek. 36▪ 31. They are ashamed, and confounded; Ier. 31. 19. They are grieved, and pricked in their Reins; Psal. 73. 21 (5) Because, God promising Re­pentance, to the people of the Jews, being converted to Christ, after their backsliding, says, I will pour out upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Ierusalem, the Spirit of Grace and Supplication, and they shall look upon me, whom they have peir­ced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only Son; Zech. 12. 10, And shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness, for his first born. But is any man so foolish as to affirm, that when a man doth mourn, for his first born, he believes only, that another man, hath mourned in [Page 101] his stead? (6) Because, Faith is one thing, and Repentance specially so called, is another thing; Mark. 1. 15. Acts 20. 21. Heb. 11. 6. In which places, Faith and Repentance, are numbred two diverse things. And it is e­vident likewise, that Faith is the cause of Re­pentance, but nothing can be the cause of it self.

Do not likewise, the Papists err, who maintain, that we are not by Repentance converted from our sins to God; which they only make an en­dument, or quality fitting, and disposing us for conversion, and meriting it: which (say they) consists in heart contrition, mouth confession, absolution, and satisfaction. By the first, They have heart sorrow for sin. By the second, They con­fess their sins to the Preist. By the third, (Which can be no part of Repentance; seeing it is not a thing done by the sinner) they are absolved by the Priest, from theirsins. By the fourth▪ they make satisfaction for former sins, in performing some good work willingly undertaken, or enjoyned by the Priest after absolution; as Fastings, Chastising of their own bodies, Pilgrimages, and hearing of many Masses Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Word of God asserts no meritorious Work in us, to go before our conversion. Not by Works of righteous­nss,, which we have done, but according [Page 102] to his mercy, he saved us; Titus 3. 4, 5, 6. (2) Because, the only merit of Christ, is the meritorious cause of our Conversion; Heb. 9. 14. 1 Cor. 6. 11. (3) Because, true Repentance, is the infallible Antecedent, and forerunner of life; 2 Cor. 7. 10. Acts 11. 18. And they who truely Repent have all their sins pardoned; Acts 2. 38. Acts 3. 19. Nay, Repentance is a peice of the exercise of the life of Grace here, and worketh unto life, and salvation hereafter. But of no fore­going disposition, or qualification previous to Repentance, can these forecited places of Scripture be understood. (4) Because, Repentance, and turning to God, are some­times put, for the same thing: and the Pro­phets, while they study to excite, and stir up the people to Repentance, they signifie it, by the word Conversion and turning to GOD; Acts 11. 15, 16, 17, 18, 21. Ioel 2. 12, 13, Esek. 18. 31, 32. (5) Because, Whatsoever goes before our conversion to God, it cannot be of Faith; and therefore, it must displease God; Rom. 8: 8: Rom. 14. 23. But true Repentance is of Faith, and God delighteth in it; Ier. 31. 18, 19, 20. (6) Because, in very many places of Scripture, Repentance is described, by a departing from evil, and a turning to God. Isa. 1. 16, 17. Isaiah 55. 7. [Page 103] Psalm 34. 14. Hos. 6. 1. (7) Because, heart contrition, mouth (confession, and satisfacti­on for) former sins which they call Pennance, as they are explained by the Papists, may be found in Hypocritical Repentance, as is evident from the example of Iudas, and Abah; Matth. 27. 4, 5, 6. 1 Kings 21. 27. There may be true Evangelical Repentance, with­out Confession of the mouth made to a Priest, and without Pennance. If the mouth and heart confess to God only, it is sufficient, unless their be a publick scandal, commit­ted against the Church of God. As for Ab­solution, it can be no part of Repentance, for it is not a thing done by the Sinner, but (as I said) conferred by the Priest.

Quest. III.

IS Repentance to be rested on, as any satisfaction for sin, or cause of the pardon thereof?

No. Ezek. 36. 31, 32, Ezek. 16. 61, 62, 63.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that Repentance, is a satisfaction for sins (to wit, an imperfect satisfaction) and that it deserves the mercy of God, and pardon of sin?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because; Christ did satisfy the justice of God to the full: and it is his blood only, [Page 104] that purgeth us from all sin; Isai. 53. 4, 5, 6, 8. 11. 1 Iohn 1. 7. (2) Because, to satisfie for sin, is a part of the Priestly office of Christ, which cannot be communicated to any; Heb. 2. 17. compared with Heb. 7. 23, 24. (3) Because, the Lord pardoneth our sins, not for our sake, but for his own sake; Isai. 43. 25. Ezek. 36. 25. 31. 32. (4) Because, pardon of sin, is an Act of the free favour of God; Hos. 14. 2. Eph. 1. 7. But if it be of the free favour of God, then it is no more of works, and of Repentance▪ as a satisfacti­on for sin; Rom. 11. 6.

Quest. IV.

IS there any sin so great, that it will bring damnation upon those, who truely repent.

No. Isaiah 59. 7. Rom. 8. 1. Isaiah 1. 16. 18.

Well then, do not the Novatians, Anabap­tists, and Puritans called Kathari err, who maintain, that if any after Baptism, and Grace received, fall into grievous sins, offend willingly, there is no pardon remaining for them, even though they should repent?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, God under the Law, ap­pointed dayly sacrifices even for sins, that [Page 105] were commited willingly; Num. 28. 3. Lev. 6. 1. to the eight verse. (2) Because, God in the Covenant of Grace hath promised, that he will not utterly take from them (with whom he is in Covenant) his loving kind­ness: even though they have broken his statutes, and not keeped his commandments; Psalm 89. 30, 31, 32. (3) Because, GOD invites the Galatians, and Corinthians, who were guilty of Apostasie, and of very many gross scandals, to Repentance, from the hope of pardon, Gal. 3. 1. Gal. 1. 6. Gal. 4, 19. 1 Cor. 1. 11, 12. and 1 Cor. 5. 1, 2, 7, 8. 2 Cor. 12. 21. (4) Because, the Apostle Iohn says, even to such as have sinned willingly, after Baptism, and Grace received, if we truely Repent and confess our sins, God is faithful and just, to forgive us our sins; 1 Iohn 1. 9. see, 1 Iohn 2. 12. (5) Because, David after mur­der, and Adultery: and Peter, after deny­ing of his Master, obtained pardon, when they repented; 2 Sam. 12. 13. Iohn 21, 19. Therefore there remaineth pardon to such, as after Baptism, and Grace received, have fallen and repented.

Quest. V.

IS every man bound to make private confession of his sins to God, pray­ing for the pardon thereof?

[Page 106]Yes. Psalm 51. 4, 5, 7, 9. Psalm 32. 5, 6.

Well then, do not the Antinomians, Liber­tines, and Anabaptists err, who maintain, that those, who are once iustified, are not any more obliged, to confess their sins, to be grieved for them, or to Repent of them?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, whosoever doth call upon God the Father, in their pravers, they ought to seek dayly remission of sins; Luke 11. 2, 3, 4 (2) Because, God doth commend, the seri­ous confession of sins, and grief for them▪ in justified persons, and delighteth therein; Ier. 31. 18, 19, 20. Luke 7. 44. Isa. 66. 2. (3) Because, pardon of those sins, which justi­fied persons shall confess, is promised; Prov. 28. 13. Psalm 32. 5. 1 Iohn 1; 9. (4) Because, such are declared blessed, that mourn. Matth. 5. 4. (5) Because, in whom the Spirit dwel­leth, it worketh in them, being greatly weigh­ted, with the burden of their sins, a conti­nual groaning: and sorrow for the same; Rom. 7▪ 23, 24. Rom. 8. 26. (6) Because, true repentance, is a renewing of the image of God lost, at least greatly defaced, by the committing of sin, which in sanctification is not perfected, but only begun, and doth dayly increase through the vertue of Christs [Page 107] death, and resurrection; Eph. 4. 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24. (7) From the example of justified persons, as David, Iosia, Peter and others, who after justi­fication confessed their sins, grieved for them, and begged pardon; 2 Sam. 12. 13. Psalm 51. the 2 Kings 22. 19: Neh: 9. from the begin­ing; Mark 14. 72.

Quest: VI:

DO those, who confess their sins pri­vately to God, who pray for the pardon thereof, and forsake them, obtain mercy?

Yes. Prov: 28: 13: 1 Iohn 1: 9:

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that besides confession of sins made to God, and forsaking of them, an Auricular confession, and enumeration of all particular sins, committed after Baptism, must be made to our own proper Priest, as a necessary mean, for obtaining remission of them?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Psalmist says, who can un­derstand his errors; Psalm 19: 12: and they being moe, than the hairs of our head, how can they be mumbled over to a Priest? Psalm: 40. 12: (2) Because, Christ gave an abso­lution, without an enumeration of every sin; Mat. 9: 2: Neither doth he demand, an e­numeration, of all our several sins, though we [Page 108] be obliged to reckon, and rehearse, all that we are able to remember; Luke 7. 48. Luke 18. 13, 14. (3) Because, there is no com­mand, or example in Scripture, for any man to whisper, and round his sins into the ear of a Priest: and therefore, it not being of Faith, it is sin; Rom. 14. 23. (4) Be­cause, whosoever turneth from his sin to God, and confesseth them, he findeth mer­cy presently; Ezek. 18. 21. 28. Prov. 28. 13.

Quest. VII.

OUght he who scandalizeth his Brother, or the Church of Christ, to be willing, by a private, or publick con­confession, and sorrow for his sin, to declare his Repentance to those who are offended?

Yes. Iames 5. 16. Luke 17. 3, 4. Iosh. 7. 19. Psalm 51. throughout; 2 Cor. 2. 8.

Well then, do not the Novatians err, and others too, who maintain, that those, who have offended their Brother, or the Church of Christ, are not obliged to declare their repen­tance, to the parties offended; and that those, who are offended, ought not to require any such thing, as private, or publick confession, and acknowledge­ment, but that presently, they ought to be received, without doing any such thing?

Yes.

[Page 109] Do not likewise some Church-men err, who connive, and wink, at the publick scandals, espe­cially of the richer, and better sort?

Yes.

And lastly, do not many in these times err, who jear, and make a mock, at all publick confession of sins.

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, he that offendeth his Bro­ther, ought to return to him, saying I repent; Luke▪ 17. 3, 4. (2) Because, Christ did even value so much a private mans offence, that he was not to be admitted to the Altar with his gift, until he was reconciled to his Bro­ther; Matth. 5. 23, 24. (3) Because, the in­cestuous person, was not received into the communion of the Church of Corinth, before he had evidenced his repentance, by satisfy­ing the Church; 2 Cor. 2. 6. (4) Because, publick confession of sin, glorifies God; Iosh. 7. 19. (5) Because, those who sin, must be rebuked before all, that others also may fear; 1 Tim. 5. 20.

Quest. VIII.

ARE those, who are offended, bound to be reconcilled to the offending party▪ he declaring his Repentance, and ought they in love to receive him?

Yes. 2 Cor. 2. 8.

[Page 110]Well then, do not the Novatians and Ana­baptists err, who maintain, that Professors of Religion, falling into publick scandal, especially in denying the Truth, in the time of persecution, are no more to be received into the Church, even though they Repent?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ says, if they Brother trespasse against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him, and if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day, turn again to thee, saying I repent thou shalt forgive him; Luke: 17. 3. 4. (2) Be­cause, for a Heathen, and Publican (that is one casten out from the communion of the Church) he only is to be esteemed, who ne­glecteth to hear the Church; Matth. 18. 17. (3) Because, such as have offended the Church, after submission, to the churches censure, ought to be comforted; the Church ought to make their love known to them; and re­ceive them again into communion, least happly their grief, and sorrow increasing, they be swallowed up; 2 Cor. 2. 7, 8. (4) Because, if a man be overtaken in a fault, they who are Spiritual, ought to restore such an one, in the Spirit of meekness; consider­ing themselves, least they also be tempted; [Page 111] Gal. 6. 1. (5) Because, if men, repenting of their faults committed against their Brethren, and fellow Christians, be not received into the communion of the Church, both they and the Church are in hazard, lest Satan by his devices, gain an advantage of them; 2 Cor. 2. 10. 11. (6) Because, Miriam, who for her sedition, against Moses, was shut out from the Camp seven days, was brought in again; Num. 12. 15. So was the incestu­ous person, received into the communion of the Church; 2 Cor. 2. 8.

CHAP. XVI. Of GOOD WORKS.

Question I.

ARE Good Works onely such, as GOD hath com­manded in his holy Word, and not such as without the warrant thereof, are devised by men, out of blind zeal, upon any pretence of good inten­tion?

Yes. Micah 6. 8. Rom. 12. 2. Heb. 13. 21. Matth. 15. 9. with 1 Sam. 15. 21, 22, 23. Isa. 29. 13. 1 Pet. 1. 18. Rom. 10. 2.

[Page 112]Well then, do not the Papists err, who main­tain, That not only such works are good, which are done according to the Will and Law of GOD, but others also, which are commanded by the publick Authority of the Church; though over and above, what the Law of GOD requires. And that those also are good Works, which are done out of a good intention, to advance GODS Glory, or to perform Worship to Him, though they be not commanded by GOD?

Yes.

Do not likewise the old and late Libertines err, who maintain, That the difference between good Works, and evil, depends onely upon the pri­vate and particular Opinion of every man. For they think, that no work ought to be called evil, but in so far, as he that doth it, thinks it evil?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Good works are described by the Apostle to be such, as GOD before hath ordained, that we should walk in them; Eph. 2. 10. (2) Because, GOD expresly com­mands, that every man must not do that, which seems good in his own eyes, but onely such works, as he hath commanded, and must neither add thereto, nor diminish from it; Deut. 12. 8, 32. Iosh. 1. 7. Prov. 30. 6. Rev. 22. 18. (3) Because, the Lord openly testifies [Page 113] that in vain they do worship Him, teaching for Doctrines, the commandments of men, not requiring that Will-worship, which Phan­tastick men would give him; Isaiah 1. 13. Matth. 15. 9. Micah 6. 6, 7, 8. Col. 2. 23. (4) Because, the Scribes and Pharisees are severe­ly rebuked by Christ, that made the Com­mandment of GOD of no effect, by their Traditions; Matth. 15. 6. And it is often mentioned in the Books of the Kings, and Chronicles, as a fault in the Kings of Iuda, that the High-places were not taken away. And how severely were the Israelites punished, for their worshipping of the Golden-Calf? Exod. 32. And for worshipping the Calves, which Iero­boam set up at Dan, and Bethel, all know; 1 Kin. 12. 28. (5) Because, the Law of God, is the perfect Rule and Square of good works; To the Law, and to the Testimony: if they speak not according to this Word, it is, be­cause there is no light in them; Isaiah 8. 20. (6) Because, without Faith, it is impossible to please God; Heb. 11. 6. But Faith hath al­wayes a respect to the Word of God.

Quest. II.

ARE good works done in obedience to Gods commandments, the fruits, and evidences of a true, and lively Faith?

Yes. Iames 2. 18, 22.

[Page 114]Well then, do not the Antinomians, and Libertines err, who deny, That Believers, ought to make evident to themselves, and others, the truth of their Iustification, by good works, as fruits of a true, and lively Faith?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ sayes, by their fruits, ye shall know them: for a good tree bring­eth forth good fruit; Matth: 7. 16, 17, 18. (2) Because, we are commanded, to make sure our Calling and Election by good Works, as by the fruits of Faith; 2 Peter 1: 5, 6, 10, 11. (3) Because, in Scripture there are delivered many undoubted, and sure marks of Rege­neration, taken from the fruits of Faith, and good Works; 1 Iohn 1: 6, 7: and 1 Iohn 2: 3: and 1 Iohn 3: 9, 10, 14.

Quest. III.

IS our ability to do good Works, wholly from the Spirit of Christ, and not at all from our selves?

Yes.

And that we may be enabled thereunto, besides the Graces already received, is there not required an actual influence of the same holy Spirit, to work in us, both to will and to do, of his good pleasure?

Yes. Iohn 15. 4, 6. Ezek. 36. 26, 27. Phil. 2. 13. 2. Cor. 3. 5.

[Page 115]Well then, do not the Pelagians err, who maintain, That Good works done by the strength of our free-will, are conform to the Law of God, and worthy of the Kingdom of Heaven?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Papists err, who maintain, that good works may be done, by a meer general and common influence from God?

Yes.

Do not lastly the Arminians err, who main­tain, that good works flow only from God, as a Moral Cause?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ says, ye can do no­thing without me; Iohn 15. 5. (2) Because, of our selves, we are not able to think a good thought; 2 Cor. 3. 5. (3) Because, it is God, that worketh in us, both to will, and to do, of his good pleasure; Phil. 2. 13.

Quest. IV.

ARE they who are Regenerated, to grow negligent, as if they were not bound, to perform any duty, unless by a special motion of the spirit?

No.

Ought they to stir up diligently the Grace of GOD which is in them?

Yes. Phil. 2. 12. Heb. 6: 11, 12. 2 Peter [Page 116] 1. 3, 5, 10. Isa. 64. 7. 2 Tim. 1. 6. Acts 26. 6, 7. Iude verse 20. 21, 22.

Well then, do not the Quakers, Familists, and other Giddy-headed Persons err, who maintain, that Believers ought not to perform, any duties in Religion, unless the Spirit within, move and excite them, to those duties: and that we ought to forbear, when this is wanting?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Holy Ghost forbiddeth us, to be slow in performing such duties: nay, commands us to stir up the gift, which is in us, and use all diligence to perform duties commanded by himself; Phil. 2. 12. Iude verse 20. (2) Because, the Prophet confesseth that, as the great sin, of the Lords people, that there is none that calleth upon his name, that stirreth up himself, to take hold of him; Isaiah 64. 7. (3) Because, to neglect the wor­shipping of GOD, is an evident sign, and token of an Atheist; Ps: 14. 4. Ps. 53. 4. (4) Be­cause, the Lord hath threatned to pour out his fury upon the Heathen, that know him not, and upon the Families that call not on his Name; Ierem. 10. 25. (5) Because, the twelve Tribes, which hoped to come to the promise made to the Fathers, instantly served GOD day and night; Acts 26. 6, 7. And [Page 117] the Apostles gave themselves continually to Prayer, and to the Ministry of the Word; Acts 6. 4. (6) Because, Christ himself who had always the Spirit, was very frequent, in all those Exercises and Duties, as all the Histories, of the four Evangelists do te­stifie. Those Fanatick Recusants, either have the Spirit of God in them; or they want it. This last they will not grant. If then they have it, why do they refuse to perform duties of Religion, more then our blessed Saviour did, when opportunitie, and occasion, did call him. They have the Spirit but want the Impulse. But contrarywise, this impulse; is never wanting when there is a call. But the Spirits call is never want­ing, when opportunity is offered. (7) Be­cause, Christ will have the Gospel preach­ed to every creature; Mark 16. 15. And hath commanded the administration of the Lords Supper, even to his second coming; 1 Cor. 11. 26. And will have the work of the mini­stry to continue in his Church, for the perfecting of the Saints, for the edifying of the body of Christ; till we all come in the unity of the Faith, &c. Eph. 4. 11, 12, 13. (8) Because, we are commanded, to pray with­out ceasing; 1 Thes. 5. 17: That is, upon all opportunities, and in all our necessities. [Page 118] (9) Because, we are commanded, to trust in him at all times; Psalm 62. 8. (10) if we shall forbear outward duties, as prayer, and such like, then ought we to forbear inward exercises, as Acts of Faith, Love, and Fear, till we be moved thereunto, which is most absurd, for we are commanded (as was cited) to trust in him alwayes. (11) What assurance can men have, the next hour, or to morrow, more than in the present time, of the Spirits motion on their souls: or that they shall be thus, at a greater advantage, by putting off the duty, till they have some inward motion, and impulse thereunto, than by waiting on the ordinary call of the Word, or of Pro­vidence?

Quest. V.

ARE they, who, in their obedience, attain to the greatest hight, which is possible in this life, so far from being able to supererogate, and to do more, than God re­quires, that they fall short of much, which in duty they are bound to do?

Yes. Luke 17. 10. Neh. 13. 22. Gal. 15. 17. Iob 9. 2, 3.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That a man regenerated can not only fulfil the Law of God perfectly, but may do also more good, than the Law of God requires of him? This is their mad fancy, of the works of Supere­rogation. Yes.

[Page 119] By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, no man living, is able to fulfil the Law of God; Psalm 143. 2. Isaiah 64. 6. 1 Iohn 1. 8. Far less is any man able to do more than the Law requires. (2) Be­cause, we are obliged to seek remission of sins every day; Matth. 6. 12. But to seek pardon for sin every day, and to perform works of Supererogation, are inconsistent to­gether. (3) Because, Christ says, when you shall have done all things, which are com­manded you, say, we are unprofitable ser­vants; we have done that which was our duty to do; Luke 17. 10. (4) Because, ac­cording to this Doctrine of works of Superero­gation, we must accuse the Scripture, and Law of God, of imperfection, as if they were not a perfect Rule of life, and man­ners, which is contrary to the Psalmist 19. 8. And contrary to 2 Tim. 3. 15, 17. Deut. 4. 2. (5) Because, whatsoever things are true, honest, just, pure, lovely, of good report, these are commanded, as things necessary to all men: therefore, either the Works, which the Papists call works of Supererogation, are true, honest, just, and pure: and if they be such, they are commanded by God in Scripture, and not works of Supererogation: or they are unhonest, impure, unjust: and if such, then [Page 120] no man is so mad, as to call them Good-works, much less Works of Supererogation; Phil. 4. 8.

Quest. VI.

CAN our best works, merit par­don of sin, or eternal life, at the hands of God?

No. Rom. 3. 20. Rom. 4. 2, 4, 6. Eph. 2▪ 8, 9. Titus 3. 5, 6, 7. Rom. 8. 18. Psalm 16. 2. Iob 22. 2, 3.

Well then, do not the Papists, and some of the Quakers err, who maintain, that the Good works of Regenerate men, do truely, and pro­perly Merit, and deserve eternal life?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, there is no proportion, be­tween our imperfect works. and life eternal, between the work and the Reward; 2 Cor. 4. 17. For our light afflictions worketh for us, that is brings forth, not of any Merit, but of meer Grace for Christs sake, see Rom. 8. 18. Rom 3. 28. (2) If by our good Works, we deserved the pardon of sin, we might have whereof to boast; for if Abraham were justifi­ed by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God; Rom. 4. 2, But the Scrip­ture saith, he that glorieth, let him glorie in the Lord: 1 Cor. 1. 31. (3) Because, no creature, performing the most excellent [Page 121] Works, can deserve any favour from God, or oblige him, to give any thing as due. And according to the order of Gods justice, he can receive no favor from us; nor can any creature, confer any benefit on him; Ps. 16. 2. Iob 22. 2, 3. Truely, where there is no favour done, there can be no Merit: for merit presup­poseth a benefit accepted. (4) Because, our works are imperfect, as well, as to Parts, as to Degrees; Gal. 5. 17; Is. 64. 7. Deut. 27. 26. A Perfection of parts is, when we have a Part of every Grace, and are renewed in some measure in every power, and faculty of the whole man, though we be not come to the just and due measure in any of them. A perfection of Degrees, consists in the compleat measure of our conformity, and our exact correspondence to the Law of God, in respect of all whatsoever it requires. (5) Because, Christ says, so likewise ye, when ye shal have done all those things which are command­ed you, say we are unprofitable servants, we have done that which was our duty to do; Luke 17. 10. (6) Because, the Good Works, which we do, are not ours, but it is God that worketh in us, both to will, and to do; 1 Cor. 4. 7. Gal. 5. 22. Phil. 2. 13. (7) Be­cause, that heavenly blessedness, to be given to the saints, is expresly attributed to the mercy [Page 122] and pity of God; Plalm 103. 4. Matth. 5. 7. Titus 3. 5. Eph. 4. 6, 7, 8. (8) Because, when the Apostle proclaims death to be the wages of sin, he doth not affirm life eternal to be the reward of Good Works, but the free, and gracious gift of God, which we obtain by Christ, even in our sanctification, where­of the Apostle here; Rom. 6. 23. Which free Gift hath for its end, eternal life. Not that it merits this (for then it should not be a gracious gift) but because Christ, hath merited this for us, and shal of free Grace give it to us, as the following words, through Iesus Christ our Lord shew. (9) Because, God will have us to buy without money or price, Wine, Milk, Honey: that is, to receive all things requisite, and necessary for our spiritual life, for Nothing; and eternal life it self; Isaiah 55. 1, 2, 3. (10) Because, Christ should not be a perfect Saviour, if any thing from us were to be added, to the righteousness of his Merit. But Christ is a perfect Saviour; Eph. 1. 7. Eph. 2. 7, 8, 9. 1 Iohn 1. 7. Acts 4. 12. (11) Because, our best works, have such a mixture of corruption, and sin in them, that they deserve his curse, and wrath, so far are they from meriting; Isa. 64. 6. But we are all, saith the Prophet, as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses, are like [Page 123] filthy raggs. (12) If the works of regenera­ted men, did deserve eternal life, then should the whole contrivance of the Gospel be sub­verted, and the same very way of Life layed down, which was in the Covenant of works, as is clear from 2 Cor. 5. 21. The Gospel is so contrived, by the infinite Wisdom, and Goodness of God, that there is a judicial transferring of our sin, as a debt on Christ, the Cautioner, and a translation of his righte­ousness, and merit, to be imputed to us, for our justification, without the least respect to our works.

Quest. VII.

ARE Works done by unregenerate men, although for the matter of them, they may be things which God commands, and of good use, both to themselves, and others, are they (I say) sinful, and cannot please God?

Yes. Hag. 2. 14. Titus 1. 15. Amos 5. 21. 22. Hos. 1. 4. Rom. 9. 16. Titus 3. 5.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that not only, all the works of unre­generate men are not sinful, but also that some of their Works do indeed Merit, and deserve somewhat from God, namely (as they speak) by Merit of Congruity, that is, as they are agreeable to the Law of God?

Yes.

[Page 124] There is also (as they say) a Merit of Condig­nity, by which the works of the Regenerate, which follow justification, deserve eternal life, not from the imputation of Christs righteousness, but from their own intrinseck worth, and proportionableness to the Reward?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, as a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt, rotten tree, bring forth good fruit; Matth. 7. 18.

(2) Because all unregenerate men are dead in Trespasses and sin; Eph. 2. 1. (3) Because, all the works of unregenerate men are done, without Faith, and so cannot please God; Heb. 11. 6. Rom. 14. 23. (4) Because, if unregenerate men were able to do Good Works, or perform any duty which deserved somewhat from God, than would it follow, that a man were able to do some good of himself, which is contrary to Iohn 15. 5. Phil. 2. 13. (5) Because, it is clear from Scripture, that before renewing grace, all are the children of wrath; who of them­selves cannot have a good thought, nor any active concurrence, or putting themselves forth to the utmost, for their own Conver­sion; 2 Cor. 3. 5. Therefore no plea for me­rit, by any improvement of mens natural a­bilities; see Rom. 9. 15.

CHAP. XVII. Of the Perseverance of the SAINTS.

Question I.

CAN they whom GOD hath accepted in his beloved, effectually called, and sancti­fied by his Spirit, either totally or fi­nally fall away from the state of Grace?

No.

Shall they certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved?

Yes. Phil. 1. 6. 2 Pet. 1. 10. Iohn 10. 28, 29. 1 Iohn 3: 9. 1 Peter 1. 5. 9.

Well then, do not the Papists, Socinians, Arminians, and some Ring-leaders among the Quakers err, who maintain, that the Saints may totally and finally fall away?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Saints, are built upon the Rock, and not upon the Sand: there­fore when temptations of any kind assault, they can never fall, nor can the gates of hell [Page 126] prevail against them; Matth. 7. 24. Matth. 16. 16, 18. (2) Because, he that hath be­gun a good work in the Saints, will finish it, untill the day of Jesus Christ; Phil. 1. 6. (3) Because, Paul says, nothing can separate us from the love of God; Rom. 8. 35, 38, 39. (4) Because, they that fall away, have ne­ver had true justifying Faith; Luke 8. 13, 16. 1 Iohn 2. 19. (5) Because, it is impossible for the Elect to be seduced; Matth. 24. 24. I say impossible, not in respect of the will, and power of the Elect themselves, but in respect of the immutability of Gods Decree, con­cerning them, and of his purpose of keep­ing them powerfully against seduction, ac­cording to his promises, of which he cannot repent; see Iohn 10. 28. Rom. 8. 38, 39. 1 Peter 1. 5. (6) Because, they that believe in the Son of God have life eternal; 1 Iohn 5. 13. Iohn 6. 47, 54, 58. And they have passed from death, unto life, and shall ne­ver thirst, nor hunger any more; Iohn 6. 35. (7) Because, God hath promised in his Covenant, that though he chastise his own children for their faults, yet he will never take away his mercy, and loving kindness from them; Psalm 89. 30, 31, 32, 33▪ 34. Ier. 32. 38, 39, 40. (8)▪ Because, that Golden chain, that Paul speaks of, cannot [Page 127] be broken; Rom. 8. 30. Whom he did prede­stinate, them also he called, &c. (9) Because, Christs says, this is the Fathers will, which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me, I should lose nothing; Iohn 6. 39. (10) Because, we are keeped by the power of God through Faith, unto salvation, ready to be revealed in the last time; 1 Peter 1. 5. (11) Be­cause, he hath prayed for us, that our Faith fail not; Luke 22. 32. Iohn 17. 20.

Quest. II.

CAN Believers by reason of their sins, and failings incurr GODS displeasure, and grieve his holy Spirit, come to be deprived of some measure of their Graces, and Com­forts, have their hearts hardned, and their consci­ences wounded, hurt, and scandalize others, and bring temporal judgements upon themselves?

Yes. Isaiah 64. 5, 7, 9. Ephes. 4. 30. Psal: 51. 8, 10, 12. Rev. 2. 4. Cant. 5. 2, 3, 4, 6. Isa 63. 17. Psalm 37. 3, 4. 2 Sam. 12. 14. Psal. 89▪ 31, 32. Mark 16. 14. 1 Cor. 11. 32.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, That the sins of the Regenerate, do not displease GOD, and cannot grieve his holy Spi­rit: and that Believers are not chastised in any wise for their sins?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

[Page 128](1) Because, the Prophet says, thou art wroth, for we have sinned; Isai. 64. 5. (2) Because, it is said, that the thing which David had done (namely his Murder, and his A­dultery) displeased the Lord; 2 Sam. 11. 27. (3) Because, the Scripture testifies, that the sins of Believers grieve his holy Spirit; Eph. 4. 30. (4) Because, the Saints by reason of their sins, are deprived of some measure of grace and consolation; Psalm 51. 8, 9. Rev. 2. 4, 5. (5) Because, the Lord hath in­flicted temporal punishments upon Belie­vers for their faults; Psalm 89. 31, 32. 2 Sam. 12, 11. and 24, 15. 1 Cor. 11. 30.

CHAP. XVIII. Of assurance of Grace, and Salvation.

Question I.

MAY they who truely believe in the Lord Iesus, and love him in sincerity, and endeavour to walk in all good con­science before him; May they (I say) be certainly assured in this life, that they are in the state of [Page 129] Grace, and being enabled by the Spirit to know the things, which are freely given them of GOD, may they without extraordinary revelation attain there­unto?

Yes. 1 Iohn 2. 3. 1 Iohn 3. 14, 18, 19, 21, 24. 1 Iohn 5. 13. 1 Cor. 2. 12. Heb. 6. 11, 12. Ephes. 3. 17, 18.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that no man can be sure (namly sure by divine Faith) of Gods peculiar favour, towards himself, without extraordinary revelation?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Apostle commands us, saying, Brethren, give all diligence, to make your calling and election sure; for if you do these things, ye shall never fall; for so an entrance shall be ministred unto you aboun­dantly, into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord, and Saviour Jesus Christ; 2 Peter 1 10. 11. Heb. 6. 11. (2) Because, the Apostle commands the Corinthians, to examine them­selves, whether they be in the Faith; 2 Cor. 13. 5. (3) Because, the Scripture proposes, and setteth forth, sure Marks, and Tokens, by which a Believer, may be infallibly assur­ed, that he is one of the number of Christs sheep; Iohn 10. 4, 5, 27, 28. And that he is one of Christs Disciples; Iohn 13. 35. Nay, [Page 130] it is the scope, of the whole first Epistle of Iohn to propose such sure Marks to Believers, whereby they may know, that they have life eternal: 1 Iohn. 5. 13. (4) Because, the true Believer may be perswaded, that neither death, nor life, nor any other thing can se­parate him, from the love of Christ; Rom. 8. 38. 39. Where the Apostle not only speak­eth of himself, but of them, to whom he writes. (5) Because, Believers have receiv­ed the Spirit of Adoption, whereby they cry Abba Father, and he himself witnesseth with their Spirit, that they are the children of God; Rom. 8. 15. 16. (6) Because, Be­lievers have received not the Spirit of the World, but the Spirit which is of God, that they might know the things that are freely given to them of God; 1 Cor. 2. 12.

Quest. II.

IS this certainty, a bare conjectural, and probable perswasion grounded upon a fallible hope?

No.

But is it an infallible assurance of Faith?

Yes. Heb. 6. 11. 19. Heb. 6. 17, 18.

Well then, do not the Papists, and Armini­ans err, who maintain, that the assurance of salvation, is only conjectural, or at the most, only probable, which hath for its foundation, a failling, and fadeing Faith?

[Page 131]Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, assurance is from the testimo­ny of the Holy Spirit, witnessing with our Spirits, that we are the Children of God; Rom. 8. 16. (2) Because, this assurance is founded upon the promises of God, who cannot lie; Isai. 54. 10. Iohn 3. 36. (3) Be­cause, Believers are sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of their inheritance: but he that receiveth the earnest, not only hath right to the possession, but knows assuredly, that he hath that right, and shall be put in the actual possession thereof; Eph. 1. 13, 14. (4) Because, God willing more aboundantly, to shew unto the heirs of promise, the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath, that by two immutable things, in which it was im­possible to God to lie, we might have a strong consolation; Heb. 6. 17, 18.

Quest. III.

IS the infallible assurance of Faith, founded upon the divine truth of the promises of Salvation, and upon the inward e­vidence of those Graces, unto which these promises are made?

Yes. Heb. 6. 17, 18. 2 Peter 1. 4, 5. 1 Iohn 2, 3, and 1 Iohn 3. 14. 2 Cor. 1. 12.

[Page 132]Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, that none ought, or can gather any comfort, or assurance of Salvation from his own works of holiness; but that a Believer ought to lean and rest upon the alone testimony of the Spirit, with­out any Marks, or Signs: from which testimony he may (say they) be fully assured of the remission of his sins, and of his own salvation?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) From the example of the Saints, who gathered their comfort from the fruits of Faith, and works of holiness, as David did Psalm. 119. 6. And as Paul did; 2 Cor. 1. 12. (2) From the reckoning up of Marks, which are held out in Scripture, by which Believers may be known from unbelievers, as mutual love; Iohn 13. 35. Observing and keeping his Commandments; 1 Iohn 2. 3. Doing of righteousness; 1 Iohn 3. 14. And loving the Brethren; (3) Because, unless Faith be pro­ven by Marks, true Faith cannot be discern­ed from presumption; neither can assurance rightly founded, be discerned from a delu­sion of Satan; 1 Iohn 4. 2. (4) Because, reason requires, that from the knowledge of the effect, we should come to the knowledge of the cause, according to that of Matth. 7. 16. (5) Because, marks of Grace have so much [Page 133] clearness in themselves, that they will even beget in others, a judgement according to charity concerning the Election of others; therefore much more in those same very Persons, who are able to discern, and know better their own hearts; 1 Thes. 1. 3, 4.

Quest. IV.

DOTH this infallible assurance, be­long to the essence of Faith?

No.

May a true Believer wait long and conflict with many difficulties, before he be partaker of it?

Yes. 1 Iohn 5. 13. Isai. 50. 10. Mark 9. 24. Psalm 88 throughout. Psalm 77, to the 12. verse.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, That the assurance of Salvation, is Faith it self? And that Faith is nothing els, but the Eho of the Soul, answering the holy Spirit, my sins are forgiven me?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the sealing of the Holy Spirit which is the Earnest of our inheritance, is gi­ven to Believers, after they have believed; Eph. 1. 13, 14. (2) Because, Believers may sometimes not know, that they have eternal life; 1 Iohn 5. 13. And he that feareth the Lord, obeying the voice of his servant, may [Page 134] walk in darkness; Isaiah 50. 10. (3) Be­cause, if this assurance, which takes away all doubting, (as the Antinomians affirm) were of the Essence of faith, there should not be any degrees of faith, which is contrary to Mark 9. 24. Matth. 8. 10. Matth. 15. 28. (4) Be­cause, there are evident examples in Scrip­ture, from the Experience of the Saints; as that of faithful Heman, who thus complain­ed; Psalm 88. Why casteth thou off my soul? why hidest thou thy face from me? And of faithful Asaph, under very sad ex­ercise; Psalm. 77. to the 10 verse.

Quest. V.

DOTH this assurance of Salvation, incline men to loosness?

No. 1 Iohn 2. 1, 2. Rom: 8: 1, 12: 1 Iohn 3: 2, 3: 1 Iohn 1: 6, 7: Rom: 6: 1, 2: Titus 2: 11: 12, 14: 2 Cor: 7: 1:

Well then, do not the Papists err, who main­tain, That the Doctrine of Assurance of Salvation, is, of its own nature, hurtful to true Piety, and in­clines men to sin and wickedness?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because; the Apostle Peter argues the contrary way, and infers a far other conclu­sion; namely, because Believers know, they [Page 135] are redeemed, by the pretious blood of Christ, they ought to pass, the time of their sojourning here in fear; 1 Peter 1. 17, 18, 19. (2) Because, the Apostle Paul, who was certainly perswaded of his interest in Christ, rejects, and abominats that conclusion, with indignation, and wrath; Rom. 6. 1, 2. (3) Because, from the promise that God is the Father of Believers, the Apostle exhorts the Corinthians, by consequence, to cleanse them­selves from all filthiness of the flesh, and Spirit, and to perfect holiness. in the fear of God; 2 Cor. 7. 1. (4) Because, they who are in Christ, (to whom there is no con­demnation, and are assured of it) walk not after the Flesh, but after the Spirit; Rom. 8. 1. 12, 38, 39. (5) Because, a Believer know­ing God to be merciful, concludes that God ought to be feared; Psalm 130. 4. (6) Be­cause, whosoever hath that hope (namely that he shall see Christ, and be made like un­to him) he purifies himself, as he is pure; 1 Iohn 3. 3. (7) Because, it is evident from the example of those, who were perswaded of their salvation, who yet lived piously, and holily. As Paul; Rom. 8. 38, 39. com­pared with 2 Cor. 1. 12. Acts 24. 16. Next, we have the example of Abraham; Gen. 17. 1. compared with Rom. 4. 18, 19, 20.

Quest: VI:

ARE true Believers, when they fall into some special sin which woun­deth the Conscience, and grieveth the Spirit, desti­tute of the seed of GOD, and life of Faith?

No. 2 Iohn 3: 9: Luke 22: 32:

Well then, do not the Quakers and others err, who maintain, That true Believers falling into some special sin, can have nothing of the life of faith, and seed of GOD in them?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, whosoever is born of God, doth not commit sin, for his seed remaineth in him, and he cannot sin, because he is born of God; 1 Iohn 3. 9. For his seed remain­eth in him; that is, doth not totally perish, but abideth thenceforeward; work­ing the fruits of regeneration, once begun in them; Phil. 1. 6. (2) Be­cause, although Peter fell into that grievous sin of denying his Master thrice, yet he still retained, that seed of God, and life of Faith, and love to Christ; because Christ had said to him, I have prayed for thee that thy Faith fail not; Luke 22. 32. The like may be said of David, and others of the Saints of GOD, who by falling into some special sins, have wounded the Conscience, and grieved the holy Spirit.

CHAP. XIX. Of the Law of GOD.

Question I.

DID GOD give to Adam a Law as a Co­venant of Works, by which he bound him and all his Posterity, to Personal, Entire, Exact, and Perpetual obedience?

Yes.

Did he promise life upon the fulfilling; and did he threatten death, upon the breach of it?

Yes.

Was Adam endued with Power and Ability to keep it?

Yes. Gen: 1: 26, 27: Gen: 2: 17, Rom: 2: 14, 15: Rom: 5: 12, 19: Gal: 3: 10, 12: Eccl: 7: 29: Iob 28: 28:

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, that God made no Covenant with Adam in his integrity, in which he promised to him, and his posterity life eternal?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) From those places of Scripture, where [Page 138] the righteousness of the Law is described; Lev. 18. 5. Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. Ezek. 20. 11. 13. Whosoever, therefore keepeth my Statutes and Judgements, saith the Lord, shall live in them. And to whom life is promised for ever, upon their perfect obe­dience, and continuance in all things, writ­ten in the Book of the Law. And from those places, in which death is threatned to them, that in the least transgress the Law of God; Deut. 27. 26. Gal. 3. 10. Ezek. 18. 4. (2) From the words of our Saviour, who spoke to the Young man, according to the Co­venant of Works, in which the Lord pro­miseth life eternal, to such as shall fulfil the Law; Matth. 19. 17. Luke 10. 28. Observe, that Christ answereth here, according to the question, and opinion of this young man, who thought he was able to obtain salvation, by his own good works: and therefore Christ directs him to the Law, thereby to bring him to the acknowledgement, of his own imper­fection, and afterwards to Faith, in himself. (3) Because, man was created by God, in righteousness, holiness, and immortality, according to the similitude, and image of God; Gen. 1. 26. Gen. 9. 6. Eccl. 7. 29. Eph. 4. 24. Col. 3. 9, 10. And received from him, the Law of Nature, naturally ingraven [Page 139] upon his heart; Rom. 2. 14. 15. And besides this Law, a positive Law was superadded to it, that Adam should not eat of the Tree, of the Knowledge of Good, and Evil; that by obey­ing the same, he might give a Specimen, or proof of his obedience to the Law of Na­ture, in the perfect obedience whereof, so long as he should continue, he should live for e­ver. For the Lord threatned death to him only, if he should sin: and death is the wages of sin, which by sin entered into the world; Gen. 2. 17. Rom. 6. 23. Rom. 5. 12. 13. (4) From those places of Scripture, in which it is denyed, that believers, under the Cove­nant of Grace, are justified by the Law; but by Faith, and the righteousness of Christ, manifested in the Gospel. For that the Law is weak, powerless, or impotent, through the corruption of our Nature, to justifie us, and give us life; Rom. 3. 20, 21, 28. Gal. 2. 16. Gal. 3. 10, 11, 12, 13. Phil. 3. 9. Rom. 8. 2, 3.

Quest. II.

DO the first four Commandments contain our duty towards GOD, and the other six, our duty towards man?

Yes. Matth. 22. 37, 38, 39, 40.

Well then, do not the Papists, and Luthe­rians err, who maintain, that three only belong [Page 140] to the First Table, and seven to the Second: and that, thou shalt not make unto thee any gra­ven image with the foregoing, thou shalt not have any other Gods before me, are but one Command. And that, Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbours Wife, nor his man-servant, &c. are two distinct Commands? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the two first Precepts, com­mand diverse things. The one teacheth us, who is to be worshipped, to wit, the true and living God, and no other. The second instructs us, how he is to be worshipped, namely ac­cording to his own appointment, and not according to the appointment, and pleasure of men, as by Images and such like. (2) Because, it is one, and the same Concupiscence, which is forbidden in the tenth Command, the summ whereof, Thou shalt not covet, is cited by the Apostle Paul; Rom. 7. 7. and which is summarly exprest, in the close of the tenth Command, nor any thing which is thy neighbours. (3) If the tenth Command ought to be two, be­cause these words, thou shalt not covet, are twice repeated, then would it follow, there should be as many Commands, as there are things desired, forbidden: because it is evident, that these words Thou shalt not covet, are to be re­peated with every part.

Quest. III.

ARE all the Ceremonial Laws now abrogated under the new Testa­ment?

Yes. Col. 2. 14, 16, 17. Dan. 9. 27. Eph. 2, 15, 16.

Well then, do not the Judaisers err, who maintain, that all the Ceremonial Laws remain in their former strength, and vigour, and are oblig­ing to Believers under the Gospel, and not abroga­ted, or disanulled by Christ?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ hath abolished the Law of Commandments, contained in ordi­nances, that he might gather together, both Iews, and Gentiles, into one new man; Eph. 2. 14, 15. Col. 2. 14. Note, that the Apostle here speaks of all Believers, both of Iews, and Gentiles, as of one man: because, they being all under Christ the Head, as members of one spiritual Body, are made up, as one re­newed man. (2) Because, the Apostle sayes, let no man judge you, in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new Moon, or of the sabbath dayes: all which are shaddows of things to come, but the body is of Christ; Col. 2. 16, 17. This ver. is a conclusion of the Apostles foregoing discourse, against Ceremonies, and things [Page 142] commanded by the Ceremonial Law, which by the coming of Christ are abolished. He calls them in the 17 verse, a shaddow of things to come, but the body (says he) is of Christ. That is, the thing signified is of Christ: for all the shaddows of the Old Testa­ment, had respect to Christ, and his benefites, by whose coming they also have an end; Iohn 1. 17. Gal. 4. 3, 4, 5. (3) Because, the Apostle says, Believers are dead with Christ, from the Rudiments of the World: that is, from the Ceremonial Commands; as is evident from the Context. Why says he, as though liv­ing in the World, are ye subject to ordi­nances? That is, as if your life, and happi­ness, consisted in these outward worldly principles: but suffer your selves to be bur­dened, by such Teachers, with humane in­stitutions, and ordinances. The Apostle indeed; in these last words, is reasoning a­gainst the institutions, and ordinances of men, from this Medium, which is an argu­ment from the greater, to the lesser: if ye be dead with Christ from the Ceremonies of the Law instituted in the Old Testament, by God himself, much more are ye free, from the institutions, and ordinances of men, which are only grounded upon their own good pleasure; Col. 2. 20, 21. Gal. 4. 10, 11. [Page 143] (4) Because, the Apostle affirms, that the Observation, and useing of Circumcision, cannot consist, with true Faith in Christ, now after the Gospel is fully published. And he exhorts the Galatians to abide in their liberty purchased by Christ, and not to sub­mit themselves, to the yoke of Mosaical Ce­remonies; Gal. 5. 1, 2. (5) Because, those Teachers, who pressed the believing Gentiles to be circumcised, and to observe the Law of Moses, (I mean the Ceremonial Law,) were condemned by the Council of Apostles; Acts 15. 24. (6) Because, Ceremonial Commands, are neither of the Law of Na­ture, nor are they injoyned to Believers under the Gospel as things Moral. (7) Be­cause, these appointed Ceremonies, were figures only of things to come, imposed on the Iewes, until the time of Reformati­on; but taken away by Christ; Heb. 9. 9, 10, 11, 12. and Heb. 10. 9. Where it is said, he taketh away the first, namely all sorts of Pro­pitiatory Offerings which were used in the Old Testament, to settle the second, namely his obedience to the will of his Father. (8) Because, they were given to the Israelites, to foresignifie, and represent Christ, and his death, and to be marks of difference be­tween them, and the unbelieving Nations; [Page 144] Col. 2. 17. Eph. 2. 14. Where it is said, who hath made both these, namly Iewes, and Gentiles, one: and hath broken down, the middle wall of partition, whereby the Cere­monial Law is understood, which made a difference between the Iewes, and the Gentiles. Now, since Christ hath suffered death, and the Gentiles are called, all these Ceremonies, which did foresignifie his death, and made that difference, must of necessity cease. (9) Because, the Temple of Ierusalem, to which the Ceremonies were restricted, is destroyed, and could never since be rebuild­ed.

Quest. IV.

DId the Lord by Moses give to the Jews, as a Body Politick, sun­dry Iudicial Laws, which expired together with their state?

Yes.

Do they oblige any other now, further than the general equity thereof may require.

No. Exod. 21. from the first to the last ver. Exod. 22. 1. to verse 29. Gen. 49. 10. 1 Cor. 9. 8, 9, 10. 1 Peter 2. 13. 14. Matth. 5. 17. 38. 39.

Well then, do not some err, though other­wise Orthodox, who maintain, that the whole Iudicial Law of the Jews; is yet alive, and bind­ing all of us, who are Christian Gentiles?

Yes.

[Page 145] By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Judicial Law, was deli­vered by Moses to the Israelites to be observed, as to a Body Politick; Exod. 21 chapter. (2) Because, this Law, in many things, which are of particular right, was accommodated, to the Common-wealth of the Iews, and not to other Nations also; Exod. 22. 3. Exod. 21. 2. Lev. 25. 2, 3. Deut. 24. 1, 2, 3. Deut. 25. 5, 6, 7. (3) Because, in other things, which are not of particular right, it is neither from the Law of Nature, obliging by Reason; neither is it pressed upon Believers under the Gospel, to be observed. (4) Because, Be­lievers are appointed under the Gospel to obey the civil Laws, and commands of those under whose Government they live, provid­ing they be just, and that for Conscience sake. Rom. 13. 1. 1 Peter 2. 13, 14. Titus 3. 1.

Quest. V.

DOTH the Moral Law for ever bind, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof, and that not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the Authority of God, who gave it?

Yes. Rom. 13. 8, 9, 10. Eph. 6. 2. 1 Iohn 2. 3, 4, 7, 8. Iames 2. 10. 11.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, [Page 146] who maintain, that Believers under the Gospel are not obliged to the obedience of the Moral Law?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ sayes, he came not to destroy the Law, and the Prophets; that is, to alter, or disannul the doctrine of the Law, or of the Prophets; Matth. 5. 17. (2) Because, he says in the following verse; I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one title, shal in no wise pass from the Law till all be fulfilled; Matth. 5. 18. (3) Because, who­soever, shal break, one of these least Com­mandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven▪ that is, shall not at all be esteemed there, or shall not enter thereinto, verse 19. (4) Be­cause, that after the Apostle Paul, hath con­cluded the justification of Believers, to be of free Grace, he subjoines, Do we then make void the Law, through faith, God forbid: yea we establish the Law; Rom. 3. 31. (5) Because, all the Precepts of the Moral Law, belong to the Law of Nature, naturally in­graven, upon the hearts of men, which can­not be abrogated, but oblige all men perpe­tually, and necessarly from Natural Rea­son it self; Rom. 2. 15. (6) Because, all the Precepts of the Moral Law, are repeated in [Page 147] the Gospel and injoyned to all Believers by Christ; Matth. 19. 17, 18, 19, 20. Rom. 2. 13. (7) Because, Paul adjoyneth, and proposeth to Believers under the New Testament, both a command, and a promise of the Decalogue, as properly belonging to them; Eph. 6. 2, 3. (8) Because, the Apostle Iames setteth forth to Believers the moral law, as a Rule of life, which they are obliged to observe, and by breaking of which they are convinced of sins; Iames 2. 8, 9, 11. (9) Because, whosoever committeth any sin against the Moral Law, shall never enter into the kingdom of God: 1 Cor. 6. 9, 10. Gal. 5. 21. (10) Because, this Tenet of the Antinomians, turns the Grace of God into wantonness; overturneth the end of Christian liberty, and of the com­ing, and death of Christ, and paveth a way leading to all impiety, and the indulging of the lusts of the flesh, and fostering the Domi­nion of sin, contrary to these Scriptures; Iude verse fourth 1 Iohn 2. 16. 2 Peter 2. 18, 19, 20. Rom. 6. 14, 15, 16. Luke 1. 74, 75. Tit. 2. 11. 12. 1 Tim. 6. 9. Rom. 6. 21. 22, 23. (11) Because, Believers ought to study good works Titus 3. 8, to which they are created in Christ, that they should walk in them; Eph. 2. 10. (12) Because, Christ will render to every man, at his last coming, both to the good, and [Page 148] the bad, according to their works; Rev. 22. 12. Matth. 25. 34, 35, 41, 42.

Quest. VI.

ARE true Believers under the Law, as a Covenant of Works, to be thereby justified, or condemned▪

No. Rom. 6. 14. Gal. 2. 16. Gal. 3. 13. Gal. 4. 4, 5. Acts 13. 39. Rom. 8. 1.

Well then, do not the Papists and Socinians err, who maintain, that Believers under the Gos­pel, are justified, by their obedience to the Law of God (the Law (I say) either Moral, or E­vangelical) and condemned for the transgression thereof? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, by the Law is the knowledge of sin; Rom. 3. 20. (2) Because, for as many, as are of the works of the Law, are under the curse; Gal. 3. 10. (3) Because, there is not a Law given, which could have given life to fallen man; Gal. 3. 21. (4) Because, Christ is not dead in vain: for if righteousness be by the Law, then Christ is dead in vain, that is, without cause, reason, need, or fruit; Gal. 2. 21. see Iohn. 15. 25. (5) Because, it was promised by God, about 430 years before the promulgation of the Law, that all the Nations of the earth should be blessed in the seed of Abraham; Gen. 22. 18. Gen. 12. 3. with Gal. 3. 16, 17, 18. (6) Be­cause, [Page 149] Christ is become of no effect, to them, that are justified by the Law: they are fallen from Grace; Gal. 5. 4, (7) Because, Belie­vers ought to wait, through the Spirit, for the hope of righteousness by Faith; Gal. 5. 5. (8) Because, the Apostle (though a strick Observer of the law) counted all his works but loss, and dung, that he might be found in Christ, not having his own righteousness, which is of the Law, but that which is through the Faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by Faith; Phil. 3. 8, 9. (9) Be­cause, Christ is made of God to Believers righteousness; 1 Cor. 1. 30. 2 Cor. 5. 21. (10) Because, they that seek righteousness, not by Faith, but by their works, do not attain to it. And contrarywise, they that seek their righteousness, by Faith, and not by their works, do attain to it; Rom. 9. 30, 31, 32. (11) Because, Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnes, to every one that believeth; Rom. 10. 4. (12) Because, the justification of men under the Law, or Covenant of works is by the law and by the works of the law: but the justification of men under Grace, or the Co­venant of Grace, is by Faith; Rom. 10. 5, 6, 8, 9. 10. Gal. 3. 11, 12. Lev. 18. 5. But Belie­vers now are not under the Law, or the Co­venant of works, but under Grace, or the [Page 150] Covenant of Grace, Rom. 6. 14, 15. Gal. 5. 18. (13) Because, Believers under the New, and Old Testament, are saved by the Grace of Jesus Christ, and not by the Law, Whose yoke none were able to bear. That is, none were able perfectly to keep, nor to be justified thereby; Acts 15. 10, 11. (14) Because, whosoever transgresseth the Law, in the least, is under the curse of it; Gal. 3. 10. Deut. 27. 26. And deserveth death, and a curse; Rom. 6. 23. Ezek. 18. 4, 20. But all men, even the Regenerate sin dayly, and transgress the Law of God, and so are guilty of all; Iam. 1. 13, compared with Iames 2. 10, and with 1 Iohn 1. 8. (15) Because, Good works, do not go before justification, but follow after it; Titus 1. 15. Heb. 11. 6. Rom. 14. 23. Rom. 3. 9, 10, 23. (16) Because, the righteousness of God, which is by Faith in Jesus Christ, is manifested unto all, and upon all by Moses and the Prophets. For all the Apostles do witness, that whosover believeth in Jesus Christ, shall have remission of sins; Rom. 3. 21, 24, 25. Acts. 10. 43. (17) Because, Justification is from the free Grace of God; Rom. 3. 24. Not by the Works of the Law, otherwise Grace, should be no more Grace; nor work any more work; Rom. 11. 6. (18) Because, the good works of Believers are un­clean, [Page 151] and defiled; Isa. 64. 6. Gal. 5. 17. (19) Because, it is said, by the Spirit of God, the just shall live by Faith; Hab. 2. 4. Gal. 3. 11. (20) Because, it is written, that Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness; Gen. 15. 6. Rom. 4. 3. But to him that worketh not, but be­lieveth on him, that justifies the ungodly, his Faith is counted for Righteousness; Rom. 4. 5. (21) Because, believers must not glo­ry in themselves, but in God only; Rom. 4. 2. Rom. 3. 27. (22) Because, by the obedi­ence of ONE, many shall be made righteous, as was foretold, by the Prophet; Isaiah 53. 11. And is asserted by Paul; Rom. 5. 17. (23) Because, Justification by Faith, and not by Works, is expresly taught, at large by the Apostle, in that third to the Romans, and third to the Galatians.

CHAP. XX. Of Christian Liberty, and Liberty of Conscience.

Question I.

IS GOD alone Lord of the Conscience, and hath left it free from the Doctrines, and Command­ments [Page 152] of men, which are in any thing contrary to to his Word, or beside it, in matters of Faith, or worship?

Yes. Iam. 4. 12. Acts 4. 19. Acts 5. 29. Matth. 23. 8, 9, 10. 2 Cor. 1. 24. Matth. 15. 9.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who con­tradict this, both in doctrine (because they teach, that the Pope of Rome, and Bishops in their own Diocesses, may by their own authority, praeter Scripturam, beside the Word, make Laws, which oblige and bind the Conscience, under the pain of everlasting death) and in practise (because, they have obtruded, and do obtrude, many Eccle­siastical Rites and Ceremonies, as necessary in wor­ship, without any foundation in Scripture.)

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, there is one Law-giver, who is able to save, and to destroy; Iames 4. 12. Therefore no Pope, no Prelate, nor any meer man, can be a Law-giver. (2) Because, Christ rejects the Commandments of men, from the worship of God; Matth. 15. 9. (3) Because, the Apostles refused, to obey the orders of the Council, since they were con­trary to the Commands of God; Acts 4. 19. Acts 5. 29. (4) because, the Lord threatens to do a marvellous work among his peo­ple, because they drew near to him with their [Page 153] mouth (as the most part of the Ceremonial service, is but a drawing near to God with the mouth,) but had their hearts removed far from him; Isaiah 29. 13, 14. (5) Because, Christ expresly forbids such subjection and obedience to the Commands of men; Matth. 23. 9, 10. 1 Cor. 7. 23. (6) because, the Apostles themselves forbids all will-worship, such as the Popish Ceremonies are; Col. 2. 18, 21, 22, 23. (8) Because, the Apostle Paul, withstood these false Brethren, unawars brought in, who came in privily, to spie out his liberty, which he had in Christ Jesus, that they might bring him into bondage, to whom he gave place by subjection, no not for an hour; that the truth of the Gospel, might continue: where he lays so much weight upon Christian liberty; that, if that were taken away, the truth of the Gospel, would perish likewise; Gal. 2. 4, 5. (9) Be­cause, the Apostle commands Believers, to stand fast in their liberty, wherewith Christ hath made them free, and not to be intang­led again with the yoke of bondage; Gal. 5. 1. (10) Because Ceremonies are superstiti­ous, being a vice opposite to Religion in the excess, commanding more in the Worship of God, than he requires in his Wor­ship.

Quest. II.

IS not the requiring of an implicit Faith, and an absolute, and blind obedience, to the Church, or any Man, a destroy­ing of liberty of Conscience, and Reason also?

Yes. Rom. 10. 17. Rom. 14. 23. Isaiah 8. 20. Acts 17. 11. Iohn 4. 22. Hos. 5. 11. Rev. 13. 12, 16, 17. Ier. 8. 9.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who require, an Implicit Faith, to all the Decrees and Ordinances of their Church and Pope: and a blind obedience to their commands without a pre­vious judgement of discretion?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, no man performing any duty, out of blind obedience, can be perswaded in his mind, of the will of God therein: and so he that doubteth is damned, because it is not of Faith; Rom. 14. 23. (2) Because, all things must be examined, and proven by the Rule of the Word; Isaiah 8. 20. 1 Iohn 4. 1, 2. (3) Because, the Apostle says, prove all things and hold fast that which is good; 1 Thes. 5. 21. (4) Because, blind obedience makes us the servants of Men, which is contrary to 1 Cor. 7. 23. And against the command of Christ, forbidding us to call any man Father on earth; Matth. 23. 9. (5) Because, abso­lute obedience, is only due to God, whose [Page 155] commands are all most just: himself being the alone Law-giver; Iames 4. 12. (6) Be­cause, every man ought to be ready to ren­der a reason of the hope which is in him; 1 Peter 3. 15. This no man can do, who re­ceives the Commands of Superiors, with an Implicit Faith.

Quest. III.

DO they, who upon pretence of Christian Liberty, practise any sin, or cherish any lust, destroy thereby, the end of Christian Liberty?

Yes. Gal. 5. 13. 1 Peter 2. 16. 2 Peter 2. 19. Iohn 8. 34. Luke 1. 74, 75.

Well then, do not the Libertines err, who maintain, that the true Christian Liberty, which we ought to follow, and use, is to take away all diffe­rence, between Good and Evil: to esteem nothing of sin; nor to be touched with any Conscience, or sense of it: that every man ought to follow the swing of his own lust?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Antinomians err, who maintain, almost the same very Tenet, and opini­on?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, we being called to liberty, ought not to use our liberty, for an occasion [Page 156] of the flesh; Gal. 5. 13: And that with well doing, we ought to put to silence, the igno­rance of foolish men; 1 Peter 2: 15: (2) Be­cause, they that follow, the liberty of sin­ning, and promise liberty to others, are truely the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage: 2 Peter 2: 19. (3) Because, the end of that liberty, which is purchased by Christ, is that, being delivered out of the hands of our enemies, we might serve him without fear, in holiness, and righteousness, all the days of our life; Luke 1 74, 75: (4) Be­cause, whosoever committeth sin, is the ser­vant of sin; Iohn 8: 34: (5) Because, the Moral Law obligeth Believers to perform obedience, out of gratitude, and thankful­ness: for Christ came not to destroy the Law but to fulfil it; Matth: 5: 17: (6) Because, whosoever shall break one of these least com­mandments, and shall teach men so, he shal be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven; Matth. 5. 19:

Quest: IV:

MAY such men be lawfully called to an account, and proceeded against, by the Censures of the Church, and by the power of the Civil Magistrat, who publish such o­pinions, or maintain such practises, as are contrary [Page 157] to the Light of Nature, or to the known principles of Christianity, whether concerning Faith, Worship, or Conversation, or to the power of Godliness, or such erroneous opinions, and practises, as either in their own Nature, or in the manner of publishing, or maintaining them, are destructive to the external peace, and order, which Christ hath established in his Church?

Yes. 1 Cor. 5, 1, 5, 11. 13, 2 Iohn v: 10, 11: 1 Tim. 6: 3, 4: Titus 1: 10, 11, 13: Titus 3: 10. 1 Tim. 1: 19, 20: Matth: 18: 15, 16, 17: Rev: 2: 2, 14, 15, 20: Rev: 3: 9:

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, there should be no Ecclesiastical Cen­sures?

Yes.

Do not others also err, who maintain, that Church Censures, should not be inflicted upon Here­ticks?

Yes.

Do not lastly the Lutherians, Anabaptists, Arminians, Quakers, and all sort of Hereticks, and Sectaries err, who maintain, (under the pretext of Christian Liberty) that the Civil Ma­gistrat, is not obliged in duty, to punish any man with the sword, for errors in doctrine, but that they ought to be tolerated, and suffered, providing such persons as own them, do not trouble, or molest the Common-wealth!

Yes:

[Page 158] By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven, are for this end delivered to the Ministers of the Church, that with Censures, they may pursue Scandalous, and offending Persons, who will not obey admonition; Matth. 18. 15, 17, 18. But such also are Hereticks; Gal. 5. 20. Tit. 1. 10. 12. (2) Because an Heretick after the first and second admoni­tion, is to be rejected, avoided, or shuned. That is, let him not remain in the external Communion, of the Church; Titus 3. 10. (3) Because, Paul did excommunicat Hyme­neus, and Alexander, who had made ship­wrack of the Faith; 1 Tim. 1. 19, 20. (4) Be­cause, if any man obey not our Word, by this Epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be asham­ed; 2 Thes. 3. 14. 1 Tim. 6. 4, 5. Titus 1. 11: (5) Because, Christ approves, and commends the Pastors of the Church of Ephesus, because they could not suffer them, that are evil, but had tried them, which say they are A­postles, and were not, and had found them Liars; Rev. 2. 2. And Christ in that same chapter, accuses the Pastors of the Church of Pergamus, and Thyatira, and threatneth them, because they had suffered Hereticks to be in the Church.

[Page 159] The Lutherians, Anabaptists, Arminians, and other Sectaries are confuted?

(1) Because, it is evident, from many examples of Godly Magistrats, who did extirpat Idolatry, and inflict punishment up­on Idolaters, as did Iacob the Patriarch, who at least purged his family of strange Gods; Gen. 35. 2, 3, 4. Moses likewise took pu­nishment with the sword, upon those, who did worship the Golden-Calf; Exod. 32. 26, 27, 28. We have (2) the examples of He­sekia; 2 Kings 18. 4. Of Iosia; 2 Kings 23. Of Asa, who decreed that whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel (according to the law of God; Deut. 13. 9.) should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man, or woman; 2 Chro. 15. 13. Of Iehosa­phat; 2 Chron. 17. 6. Of Nehemia 13. 15, 17. (3) Were not good kings reproved, and was it not imputed to them, as a fault, that they did not take away the High-places? 2 Kings 12. 3. 2 Kings 14. 4. 2 Kings 15. 4. 2 Chron. 15. 17. Far more is it a fault to suffer Here­ticks. (4) It is evident from the office of the Magistrat, who is the Minister of God against them, that do evil, and beareth not the sword in vain: Rom. 13. 3, 4. (5) Because, it is expresly commanded in Scripture, that punishment be inflicted upon Idolaters, even [Page 160] by the nearest Relations. If then, the Fa­ther may kill the Son, may kill the Daughter, the Husband the Wife of his bosom: and if one brother may stone another brother with stones, that he die, for being Idolaters; much more may the Civil Magistrat do this; Deut. 13. 6. to the 13 verse; Deut. 17. 2. to the 7 verse; Lev. 24. 16. (6) Because, it is foretold, that under the New Testament, Kings shall be nursing Fathers to the Church, and Queens nursing Mothers, and that Hereticks, that were about to be hurtful, to the Church, shall be removed, and taken away; Isaiah 49. 23. Zech. 13. 2, 3. And it shall come to pass, in that day saith the Lord of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the Idols, out of the land (that is, all Idolatry whatsoever, so that the same shall not be so much as named, any more among you) and they shall no more be remembred. And I will also cause the Prophets, (the false Prophets) and the unclean Spirit, to pass out of the Land: that is, the false Teachers who teach impure doc­trines, through the inspiration of the unclean Spirit the Devil. Compare with this 1 Iohn 4. 1, 2, 3. For confirmation, consider what is foretold by Iohn; Rev. 17. 12, 16, 17. That the Kings of the Earth, shall eat the flesh of the Whore, and burn her with fire. All [Page 161] which are foretold, as blessings to be confer­ed upon the Church. (7) It is evident from the Epithets, whereby the pernicious, and destructive nature of Hereticks, is set forth in Scripture. They are called Wolfes, not sparing the flock, Thieves, Robers, Troublers of the Church, and Seducers, or Beguilers of poor souls. They are like unto a Gangren, or Canker in the body. They are as leaven, or soure dough, which leaveneth the whole lump; Acts 20. 29. Iohn 10. 8. Acts 15. 24. Gal. 5. 12. 2 Tim. 2. 17. Gal. 5. 9. (8) Be­cause, Ezra did esteem it, a great favour and blessing of God, conferred upon the Church; for which he thanked God, that had in­clined the heart of Artaxerxes, to publish a Decree, for the punishment of those, that did not observe the Law, whether it be, (saith the Text) unto death, or to banishment, or to confiscation of goods, or to impris­onment; Chap. 7. 23, 25, 28. (9) Because, we ought to pray for Kings, and all in Au­thority, that under them, we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, in all Godliness, and in Honesty, which end cannot be attained, unless the Civil Magistrat bridle and ty up Hereticks; 1 Tim. 2. 12. These words, in all Godliness, concerns Religion. or the first Table of the Moral Law, as the following [Page 162] word honesty, or civility, hath a respect to the commands of the second Table, and the duties which we owe to our neighbour, and to one another. For true Magistrates, are keepers and defenders of both Tables of the ten Commandments. (10) Because, the tolera­tion of Hereticks, as we may read of the Anabaptists in Germany, Thomas Muntzer, Iohn of Leidden, and their followers, first by rail­ling against the Ministry, as the Quakers do, and raging against Magistracy, brought both Church and State into confusion, put the country into burning flames, wherein them­selves at length were consumed to Ashes.

CHAP. XXI. Of Religious Worship, and the Sabbath day.

Question I.

DOTH the Light of Nature shew, that there is a GOD, who hath Lordship, and Soveraignty over all?

Yes. Rom. 1. 20. Acts 17. 24. Psalm 119 68. Ier. 10. 7. Psalm 31. 23.

[Page 163]Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, that there is no knowledge of God, im­planted naturally in the minds of men?

Yes.

Do not secondly, the Vaninians, and many of the Cartesians err, who under the pretext of maintaining a God-head, have in effect taught men to deny, there is a God?

Yes.

Do not thirdly, some Bee-headed Men err, who dispute against the Beeing of a God-head, because they cannot find a Demonstration for it called Dihoti?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood, by the things which are made, even his eternal power, and God­head: so that they are without excuse; Rom. 1. 20. (2) Because, the Psalmist saith, the heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth his handy work. That is, they give us matter and occasion to speak and discourse of his Omnipotency, Wisdom, and Goodness; Psalm 19: 1, 2, 3. (3) Because, the knowledge of the Law of Nature, is na­turally implanted in the minds of all men; Rom. 2. 14. Therefore, some knowledge of [Page 164] the law-giver, must be implanted in the minds of all men. (4) Because, in the most wick ed, and ungodly there are terrors and tortures of conscience, wherewith, nil they, will they, they are haunted and possessed: whence it is evident, that in the minds of all men, there is some lively knowledge of God. (5) Be­cause, men had rather worship a stock, or a stone, than they should think, there were no God; Acts 17. 23. (6) What a brave order, and comliness, shines forth, with so much wisdom, and power, in the government and preservation of things above and below; that no man can be in doubt, but there must be a God, who rules and preserves all those things. (7) Because, nothing can be the cause of it self: because then, it should be both the Cause, and the Effect, both before and after it self: therefore all things have their beginning, from one first and supream Cause, which is God. (8) Because, the ex­istence of a God-head, may be evinced from the foretelling of things to come; Isaiah 41. 23. And as Cicero says, si est divinatio, sunt Dii, if there be a foretelling, there must be also a God that foretelleth. (9) From the assaults, and suggestions of Satan, we find there is a devil, may we not then certainly conclude that there is a God? The Devil [Page 165] labours by all means to extinguish the light of the Gospel, to lead men on in ignorance, error, and prophanness, and to turn them out of the path of holiness. Now, why should Satan thus warr against God, his word, and his Saints? Why should he seek Gods dishonour, and mans destruction, if there were not a God, a Law, and an everlasting life? (10) Because, the mind of man is not satisfied with the knowledge of all things; nor the will of man, with the enjoyment of all things in this world, but still they seek and thirst earnestly, after some higher good. There is therefore, a soveraign▪ Truth, and Chief Good, which being perfectly known, and enjoyed, will give contentment, and satisfaction, to the Soul. In vain should the Powers, and Faculties of the Soul, be capable of happiness, or of the Chief Good; if there were not a Chief Good to be possessed, and enjoyed. (11) From the wonders, and mi­racles, which have been wrought, visible, and apparent works, extraordinarly wrought, not only above the ordinary course of Na­ture, but simply above the power of Nature. These effects do convince, that there is an infinite power, which is above, and over­ruleth all things. For every principal, and primary cause, is more excellent, than the [Page 166] effects thereof. (12) From the beeing of man, the curious workmanship of his body in the womb, which is wrought most artificially; namely with sinews, veins, arteries, muscels▪ and other parts of the body, even as an Em­broiderer sitteth, and joyneth many parcels▪ stuff, and dyed work of various colours, very artificially, and curiously together, un­till there cometh forth some goodly Pour­traiture, or other dainty workmanship; Psal. 139. 15. Iob 10. 10. But especially from the beeing of a mans soul, which is immaterial, invisible, rational, immortal, and which cannot be [...] traduce, from the power of the matter (as the sensitive souls of Bruits) nei­ther doth depend on the body in many of its operations. These, and all the works, which our eye doth see, or the mind doth apprehend do prove, that there is a God, who hath gi­ven a Beeing to them, and continueth them therein. (13) Because, seeing God is the the first cause, there cannot be any thing Prior to him, by which, as a cause, his exist­ence can be Demonstrated.

Quest. II.

IS the acceptable way of worshipping the true GOD, instituted by himself, and so limited to his own revealed Will, that he may not be worshipped according to the imaginations [Page 167] and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representation, or any other way not pre­scribed in the holy Scripture?

Yes. Deut. 12. 32. Matth. 15. 9. Acts 17. 25. Col. 2. 23. Exod. 20. 4, 5, 6.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who teach that the Images of Christ, and the Trinity ought to be worshipped, and that not improperly, but even properly, and Per se, with that same sort of wor­ship, wherewith Christ, and the blessed Trinity are adored?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Greeks err, who main­tain, that the painted Images of God, may be a­dored, but not the engraven, or carved images of God?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, it is expresly against the se­cond command; Exod. 20. 4, 5. (2) Be­cause, God is infinite, unmeasurable, in­comprehensible, and spiritual: and therefore nothing can represent him, as the Prophet well infers; Isaiah 40. 18, 25. (3) Because, every representation of God, by graven images, or pictures, is a most disgraceful changing of the glory of the incorruptible God; Rom. 1. 23. (4) Because, images, and pictures of this kind, are lies and vanities, which the [Page 168] Lord abhores, and mocks at with an holy scorn; Isaiah 44. from verse 9. to 18. (5) Because, the Lord expresly forbiddeth the Israelites to represent him under any form or shape, for (saith the Text) ye saw no man­ner of similitude, on the day that the Lord spake to you in Horeb, out of the midst of the fire; Deut. 4. 15. to verse 20. (6) Be­cause, though the Israelites worshipped the true God, by an image (for Aaron built an Alter, and made proclamation, and said, to morrow is a feast to the Lord) yet are they accused of the sin of idolatry, and for that cause severely punished; Exod. 32. 21, 27: 35 (7) Because, Ieroboam, and the ten Tribes, who worshipped the true God, by the Golden-Calves, set up at Dan and Bethel (for the wor­ship of false gods by images, was afterwards brought in by Achab, who is therefore said to have provoked the Lord more than all the Kings of Israel before him; 1 Kin: 16: 31, 32.) are accused for the sin of Idolatry, and are severely threatned; 1 King. 12. 29, 30. and 1 Kings 13. 2. which threatning was put in execution by Iosiah; 2 Kings 23. 15, 16, 20. (8) Because, the Apostle says, we ought not to think that the God-head, is like unto Gold or Silver, or Stone graven by art and mans device; Acts 17. 29.

Quest. III.

IS Religious worship to be given to God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and to him alone?

Yes.

Is Religious worship, to be given to Angels, Saints, or any other Creature?

No. Matth, 4. 10. Iohn 8. 49. 2. Cor. 13. 14. Iohn 5. 23. Col. 2. 18. Rev. 19. 10. Rom. 1. 25.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that not only God, but good Angels, and Saints departed, being Canonized by the Pope, ought to be worshipped, and called upon, even after a religious manner: but cheifly the Virgin Mary, and that there is a Divine Power in the Relicks of Saints, which therefore ought to be worship­ped?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Lord our God, and he only is to be worshipped; Matth. 4. 10. Deut 6. 13. (2) Because, the Object of invocati­on, and religious Adoration, is he only who is Omnipotent, Omniscient, and searcher of the heart. For there is none that knows our necessities and wants, but he that is Omnis­cient: and none can succour and help us, but he that is Omnipotent. But Angels are not Omniscient; Eph. 3. 10. 1 Peter 1. 12. Nei­ther [Page 170] are the Saints departed Omniscient, as is clear from Isa. 63. 16. Abraham is ignorant of us. (3) Because, they that are dead, know nothing of our condition; Eccl. 9. 5. (4) Because, no man ought to call upon him, in whom he doth not believe; Rom. 10. 14. But no man ought to believe in Saints, or Angels, but in God alone; Isaiah 26. 4. Ier. 17. 5. (5) Because, neither Saints alive, nor Angels would suffer adoration, and worship to be given to themselves; Acts 10. 25. Rev. 22. 8, 9. (6) Because, the worshipping of Angels doth derogate from the honour of Christ, in whom we have boldness, and ac­cess with confidence by the faith of him, Eph. 3. 12. (7) Because, the worshipping of Saints and Angels, is like a Polytheismus, the having of many Gods. For the Papists attribute to each one of their Saints, and An­gels, a proper divine power, as the Heathens did of old, to their Idols, and false gods.

Quest. IV.

IS any Religious worship given to God, since the fall, without a Me­diator?

No.

Nor in the mediation of any other, but of Christ alone?

No. Iohn 14. 6. 1 Tim. 2. 5. Eph. 2. 18. Col. 3. 17.

[Page 171]Well then, doth not the Popish Church err, who maintain, that Saints departed, but chiefly the Virgin Mary are Mediators and Intercessors between God and Man?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Scripture affirms expres­ly, that there is but one Mediator between God and Man, namely the Man Jesus Christ; 1 Tim. 2. 5. (2) Because, no man cometh to the Father, but by Christ; Iohn 14. 6. And by him, we have access to the Father; Eph: 2. 18. (3) Because, the Scripture pro­miseth that they shall be heard, that in the name of Christ, seek such things, as are ac­cording to the will of God: but there is no promise in all the Word, that they shall be heard that pray to Saints or Angels; Iohn 14. 13, 14. 1 Iohn 5. 14. (4) Because, the A­postle says, whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, not in the name of Saints; Col. 3. 17. (5) Because, Christ who is called the propitiation for our sins, is also called our Advocate with the Father; 1 Iohn 2. 1, 2. (6) Because, Mediation is a part of the Priestly office of Christ, which is only proper to himself; and which cannot be divided, between him and the Saints. (7) Because, the Saints are not to [Page 172] be called upon, as was proven in the forego­ing Question.

Quest. V.

IS prayer with thanksgiving, one spe­cial part of Gods worship, required by God of all men?

Yes. Phil. 4. 6. Psal. 65. 2.

Well then, do not the Adamites, and others long since err, who denyed, that God was to be called upon. For (say they) God is Omniscient, and bestowes all things upon us freely without our prayers?

Yes.

Do not likewise some late Hereticks err, who maintain, that unregenerate men ought not to call upon God?

Yes.

Do not also the Quakers err, who will not move, in the commanded duties of prayer, and thanks­giving, unless there be some inward call, and motion on their Spirit?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, there are extant many uni­versal precepts in the Word, by which the duty of prayer is commanded; Phil. 4. 6. 1 Thes. 5. 17. Iohn 16. 24. Matth. 7. 7. (2) Be­cause, God is the hearer of prayer, and to him shall all flesh come; Psal. 65. 2. (3) We [Page 173] have the example of David; Psalm 55. 17. Of Daniel, chapter 6. 10. The example of those many, who were gathered together, praying in the behalf of the Apostle Peter; Acts 12. 12. The example of Christ him­self; Iohn 17. chapter. (4) Because, the Apostle Paul, bids Simon Magus, who was in the gall of bitterness, and bond of iniquity, to repent and call upon God; Acts 8. 22. As to the Quakers, what assurance can they have the next hour, or the next day, more than now, of the Spirits moving on their souls? And are we not commanded to pray without ceasing; 1 Thes. 5. 17. That is, upon all op­portunities, and in all our necessities.

Quest. VI.

IF Prayer be Vocal, ought it to be in a known tongue?

Yes. 1 Cor. 14. 14.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who main­tain, that it is not needful, that publick prayers be in a known tongue; but that it is often-times expedi­ent, that prayers be performed, in a tongue-unknown to the Common-people?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Apostle teaches expresly the contrary; 1 Cor. 14. 9, 12. (2) Be­cause, prayers celebrated in an unknown [Page 174] tongue, are not for edification? 1 Cor. 14. 14. (3) Because, he that occupieth the room of the unlearned (that is, who understands not strange tongues) cannot say Amen; 1 Cor. 14. 16. (4) Because, the Lords prayer which is the special Rule of all our prayers, was prescribed in a tongue, at that time best known.

Quest. VII.

MAY we pray for the dead, or for those of whom it may be known, that they have sinned, the sin unto death?

No. 2 Sam. 12. 21, 22, 23. Luke 16. 25, 26. Rev. 14. 13. 1 Iohn 5. 16.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who main­tain, that prayers, almes, and masses ought to be appointed, and made for souls departed, as these, which will really profit them?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Dead are either happy; and so they need not our prayers; Rev. 14. 13. Or they are damned, and so our pray­ers cannot profit them: for out of hell there is no redemption; Luke 16. 26. (2) Because, we read that David mourned, and fasted for the Child, so long, as it was alive: but when once the Child was removed by death, wherefore (says he) should I fast? [Page 175] can I bring him back again? 2 Sam. 12. 22, 23. (3) Because, all our requests, and prayers are either founded upon a precept, or promise of God, to hear our prayers. But there is neither a promise that God will hear us, in order to the dead, nor a command to pray for them. (4) Because, we are al­together ignorant of the state, and condition of the dead: and therefore we cannot pray for them in Faith; Rom. 14. 23.

Quest. VIII.

IS the reading of the Scriptures, with Godly fear, the sound preach­ing, and comfortable hearing of the Word, in obe­dience to God, with understanding, faith, and Reverence, are they (I say) parts of the ordinary Religious worship of God?

Yes.

Are these with the due administration of the Sacraments, to wit, Baptism and the Lords Sup­per; to continue in the Church of God, till the end of the world, and the day of Christ?

Yes. Acts 15. 21. Rev. 1, 3. 2 Tim. 4. 2. Mat. 13. 19. Iames 1. 22. Heb. 4. 2. Isaiah 66. 2. Acts 10. 33.

Well then, do not the Enthusiasts, Libertines, Anabaptists, and other Sectaries err, who under a pretext, of being inspired by the Holy Ghost, that teaches them all things, despise and contemn all read­ing [Page 176] of the Scripture, and publick hearing of the Word preached?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Quakers err, who are down-right enemies, to all the publick ordinances, which Christ hath appointed to continue in his Church to the end of the world?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ commanded his A­postles, and in them, all the Ministers of the Gospel, to whom he hath promised his pre­sence, to the end of the World, to teach all Nations, and to preach the Gospel to every creature; Matth. 28. 19. Mark 16. 15. (2) Because, the publick preaching of the Word, by a Minister sent, and called, and the hear­ing of it, is a mean ordained, and appointed by God, and according to the ordinary manner, necessary for begetting Faith; and therefore needful to salvation; Rom. 10. 14, 15. 1 Cor. 1. 21. (3) Because, God hath promised to his Covenanted ones, to bring them to his holy mountain, and make them joyful in his house of prayer; that is, in the publick meetings of his Saints, and People; Isaiah. 56. 7. (4) From the example of those Believers; Acts 2. 42. who continued steadfastly in the Apostles doctrine. (5) Be­cause, [Page 177] the word of God, is the perfect Rule of life and manners. And all Spirits, are to be tried by it; 1 Tim. 3. 15. 1 Iohn 4. 1. Isaiah 8. 20. Neither ought we to follow, or hear any man, no not an Angel if he teach any thing contrary to the Word, or Heterodox from it; 2 Thes. 2. 2. Gal. 1. 8. (6) Because, the Word of God, is that in­corruptible seed, by which we are born again; 1 Peter 1. 23. (7) Because, God forbids ex­presly separations from publick assemblies (I mean so long as the Word is truely and purely taught, by those who enter in by the right door, that is Christ, and the way ap­pointed by him in his Word; Iohn 10. 7, 8.) Heb. 10. 25. (8) Because, the Lord hath joyned together these two, his faithful ser­vants, for teaching his people publickly, and the promise of the Spirit to guide them, and assist them in their work; Matth. 28. 20 Iohn 14. 16, 17, 26.

For confutation of the Quakers, two things must be made out: the one that the office of the Mini­stry, is of divine institution.

(1) Because, God hath particularly de­signed some persons to the work of the Mini­stry. For if God appointed some persons to be judges over Israel, then must the office of judgeing Israel be of divine institution. Christ [Page 178] appointed not only Apostles, the seventy Disciples, Evangelists, Prophets, whose call and gifts were extraordinary, but other or­dinary Pastors, and Teachers, whose Spirits were not infallible, whom the Scripture affirms to be as truely by Divine institution▪ as the former; 1 Cor. 12. 28. Eph. 4. 11. (2) Because, GOD hath given peculiar names and titles, to the persons designed for this of­fice, which he hath not given to other Saints. The onely wise GOD will not distinguish▪ where he himself hath made no distinction▪ or difference. These are called Pastors, Teachers, such as rule well, Stewards of the Mysteries of GOD, Preachers, Bishops or Overseers of the Flock, Stars in Christs right hand, Angels of the Churches. Christ evi­dently puts a difference between the Church­es and the Angels, set over them; Rev. 2. 1, 8, 12, 18. Rev. 3. 17, 14. (3) Because, the Lord hath taken a special care to bestow pe­culiar gifts and qualifications upon these per­sons, so designed for the Ministery; and that for the good of the Souls of his People, a­bove what is required in other Saints. Would ever the Lord have bestowed such qualifica­tions, if he had not appointed some for such an Office? Though gifts as gifts do not alone invest into such an office, yet when they are strictly required, they argue, that there is an [Page 179] Office. They must be apt to teach others; 1 Tim. 3. 2. And not onely so, but able to teach o­thers; able to convince them that oppose themselves; Titus 1. 9. They must be such as study to shew themselves approven unto GOD; workmen that need not be asham­ed; 2 Tim. 2. 15. And the Apostle in admi­ration of the difficulty of this employment, cryeth out, Who is sufficient for these things? 2 Cor. 2. 16. (4) Because, the Lord requires peculiar duties of his Ministers, which he doth not require of Believers; therefore, there must be such a distinct office, by divine institution. They must take special care of the Church of GOD; 1 Tim. 3. 5. 1 Pet. 5. 2. 3. They are not to neglect the gift which is in them; 1 Tim. 4. 14. They are to medi­tate on these things, and to give themselves wholly to them; 1 Tim. 4. 15. Acts 6. 2. 4. They are to preach the Word, to rebuke, to instruct gainsayers; 2 Tim. 4. 2. 2 Tim. 2. 25. To administer the Sacraments; Matth. 28. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 13. To ordain others for the Mi­nistry, by imposition of hands; 1 Tim. 4. 14. To watch over the flock, as those that must give an account; Heb. 13. 17. (5) Because, Christ requires peculiar distinct duties in the people, in reference to their Ministers; there­fore the office of the Ministry must be of di­vine [Page 180] institution. They must know and ac­knowledge those that are over them in the Lord; 1 Thes. 5. 12. Highly to esteem them in love for their works sake; 1 Thes. 5. 13. To obey them, to encourage them; Heb. 13. 7. To maintain them; Gal. 6. 6. To pray for them; 2 Thes. 3. 1. (6) Because, GOD hath made peculiar promises to his Ministers; as, Lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the world; Matth. 28. 20. The promise of special assistance; 2 Cor. 3. 5. 6. Of protection and defence in all aslaults; Rev. 1. 20. The pro­mise of the power of the keyes, which pro­mise was not limited to the Apostles, as A­postles, but was given to the Apostles, as Ministers of the Gospel, as is evident from Mat. 18. 17, 18. The promise of special sympa­thy with them; Matth. 10. 40. Luke 10. 16. Iohn 13. 20. 1 Thes. 4. 8. Now, would ever the Lord have promised to keep up, and main­tain that office in his Church which he had not set up and instituted.

The other thing to be made out, is that the office of the Ministry, is perpetually necessary?

(1) Because, the ordinances are perpe­tually necessary, by divine institution: there­fore the office of the Ministry, to dispense these ordinances, is perpetually necessary, by divine institution. For if God had only ap­pointed [Page 181] the ordinances, to continue in his Church, then would preaching, and admini­stration of the Sacraments fail: because, that which is every mans work, is usually and effectually no mans work. The Lord doth not immediatly administer them himself: neither are Angels employed for this work. But he hath committed this service to men, who are Stewards, and dispensers of the my­steries of God. It is evident that the preach­ing of the Word, shall continue to the end of the world, from Matth. 28. 20. Eph. 4 11, 12, 13. It is evident of Baptism, and the Lords Supper, which are conjoyned in the institution of Christ, with the Ministery of the Word. For to whom, he gave com­mission to preach, to them also he gave com­mission to administer the Sacraments. Bap­tism is an ordinance of the New Testament, ap­pointed by God himself. For Iohn was sent to baptize. God was the Author, Iohn was only the Minister. This was to continue perpetually, as is evident from Christs pro­mise, and his precept; Matth. 28, 20. The ends for which Baptism was ordained, are not temporary, but moral, and so perpetu­al. Do not all Christians, now need these means as the Christians during the age of the Apostles? Are not Christians to be baptized into his death, buried with him by [Page 182] Baptism, that like as Christ was raised from the dead by the Glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. It is called by the holy Ghost, a saving Ordi­nance, and is unto believers, and their seed in the New Testament, as the Ark was to Noah, and his family in the old World, who be­ing in the Ark, was saved from perishing in the waters, when the rest were drowned: so Baptism doth now save us, not only or mainly, the outward part of it, the putting away the filth of the flesh, (which is yet an Ordinance to further our salvation) but when the Spirit of Regeneration effectually concurs, so that we find there is a renewing of the holy Ghost, and thereby the answer of a good conscience towards God; 1 Pet. 3. 21. It is evident, that the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, is to continue to the end of the world. It was not only appointed for Apostles, to whom it was first administred, but unto all believers, both Iews, and Gentiles. And not only for that age, but for all generations succeeding, for Believers, are commanded, to shew forth the Lords death till he come, by eating this bread, and drinking this cup. Therefore, if these ordinances, be appointed by God, to continue to the end, it follows evi­dently, that he hath designed the office of [Page 183] the Ministry to hold up, and hold forth his Ordinances to the end of the world. (2) Be­cause, the promises, which Christ hath made to uphold the Ministry, are perpetual; there­fore the office must be perpetual; Matth. 28. 20. Go teach, and baptize all Nations, and lo I am with you to the end of the world. This promise cannot be limited to the particular age, during the lives of the Apostles; because the Holy Ghost, useth three expressions, to declare the perpetuity of this promise, Aion, that this promise, shall continue so long as the world continues. Secondly, Synteleia; Heos tes synteleias tu Aionos, that this promise shall have no end, till the world be consum­mat, or brought to a Period. Thirdly, Pasas tas Hemeras, all days, and successions of times. Not only Meth hymon hemeras hy­mon, not only with you, during your own dayes, but all the dayes of the Gospel, till time shall be no more, And this promise was made not to the Apostles, as Apostles, nor to the Apostles as Believers, but to the Apostles, as ministers and Stewards, of the Mysteries of God. (3) Because, the Elect require, the office of the Ministry perpetually. Our Natures are as bad, as Iews, and Pagans; Eph. 2: 3. Our judgements full of darkness, and ignorance; 1 Cor. 2. 14. Our wills [Page 184] stuborn and rebellious, and so alienated, that we rebel against the light. The delu­sions of Satan are strong. The multitude of false Teachers are very numerous, so that they are ready to seduce the Elect themselves, if it were possible. (4) Because, the ends for which Christ, hath appointed a ministry are perpetually necessary. The Elect must be called and gathered, for there will be some still in every age, to be added to the Church, of them that shall be saved. There are many sheep, which are not yet brought into his fold: many who belong to the Election, who are not yet effectually called, them also will Christ bring in, both Iews, and Gentiles, that there may be one fold, as there is one shep­hers. Now, God hath revealed no other ordinary way to convert, and bring these in­to his fold, but the Ministry of his word; for how shall they believe without a Preacher? Therefore, if there be some Elect, continual­ly to be brought into fellowship with Christ, and this end not fully attained, till the end of the World, then the Ministry assigned to this end, must be perpetually necessary.

Quest IX.

IS singing of Psalms with grace in the heart, a part of the ordinary wor­ship of God?

[Page 185]Yes. Col. 3. 16. Eph. 5. 19. Iam. 5. 13.

Well then, do not the Quakers, and other Sectaries err, who are against the singing of Psalms, or at least, ty it only to some certain persons, others being excluded? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) From the practise of Christ, and his Apostles; Matth. 26. 30. From the example of Paul and Silas; Acts 16. 25. From Moses, and the Israelites; Exod. 15. (2) Because, the singing of Psalms was commanded under the Old Testament, and that, not as a Type of any substance to come, nor for any cere­monial cause. Neither is it abrogated under the New Testament, but confirmed; Psalm 30. 4. Psalm 149. 1. (3) From the general and universal commands in the New Testament; Eph. 5. 19. Col. 3. 16. 1 Cor. 14. 15. (4) Be­cause, the Apostle Iames says, is any man afflicted, let him pray, is any man merry, let him sing Psalms; Chap. 5. 13. The meaning is not, that none should sing, but such as are merry: for then none should pray but such as are afflicted. (5) Because, by singing of Psalms, we glorifie God, we make his praise glorious. We edify others with whom we sing, as well, as we edify our selves. So the end to be proposed in singing, is teaching and admonishing one another, in [Page 186] Psalms, and Hymns, and spiritual songs; Col. 3. 16. Lastly, we chear and refresh our selves, by making melody in our hearts to the Lord; Eph. 5. 19. Which ariseth first from our consciencious going about it, as a piece of worship to God, and in so doing we are accepted in that. Secondly from its be­ing a part of Scripture, appointed for his praise, whether it agree with our case or not. That being the end wherefore it was designed to be sung, is a sufficient warrand for our joyning in the singing thereof.

Quest. X.

IS prayer, or any other part of Religi­ous worship now under the Gospel, either tyed unto, or made more acceptable, by any place, in which it is performed, or towards which it is directed?

No. Iohn 4. 21. Mal. 1. 11. 1 Tim. 2. 8.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who con­secrate Churches, and ascribe holiness to them, and appoint Peregrinations to Christs grave, and to other places far off, where they mumble their preach­ings, and mutter their prayers?

Yes.

Do not likewise many ignorant persons err, who think their private prayers, will be more acceptable to God, being said in the Kirk, than in their own private Closet?

[Page 187]Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Lord says, by the mouth of his Prophet, that prayers shall be offered up to him in all places, under the time of the Gospel: Mal. 1. 11. (2) Because, Christ commands us when we pray, to enter into our Closet, and the door being shut, to pray to our Father, which is in secret, least we should seem to desire praise, and approbati­on from men: which rite and ceremony of praying publickly, when we should pray privately, Christ clearly condemns, Matth. 6. 5, 6. (3) Because, Paul wills that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting; 1 Tim. 2. 8. (4) Because, Christ says the hour cometh, when we shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Ierusalem worship the Father; Iohn 4. 21.

Quest. XI.

HAth GOD in his Word, by a positive, moral, and perpetual Commandment, binding all men in all ages, parti­cularly appointed, one day in seven, for a Sabbath to be kept holy unto himself?

Yes. Exod. 20. 8, 10, 11. Isaiah 56. 2, 4, 6, 7.

Well then, do not some men err, who main­tain, [Page 188] that God hath not under the Gospel determi­ned any certain day, for his own worship, but on­ly hath commanded, that some indefinite time, be destined for publick worship, which time (say they) is left to be determined, by the Church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the determining of an ordi­nary and sufficient time, for divine worship, and as a Sabbath, belongs to God only, and not to man. For we do not read, that any such power or authority, is granted to man, either by the Law of Nature, or Scripture. Is it not a thing of very great moment? Is it likely, that the wisdom of God, would leave it uncertain? This might accuse the Scripture of imperfection. It is not sutable to the love of God, and his care towards his Church. By such mens doctrine, the Church Universal, and all Oecumenick Councils, should be guilty of a dreadful sin, which for so many ages, have been deficient in their duty. Therefore, it behoveth that there be one day of seven by virtue of the fourth Command, seeing no where els another ne­cessary day, is appointed, or prescribed in the Word. (2) Because, it is just and equi­table (as the adversaries grant) that one day should be set apart for GOD, who hath [Page 189] freely given us six. (3) Because, in six dayes, God made the Heavens, and the Earth, and rested on the seventh: not out of necessity, but to give us an example, to do the like. (4) Because, one day of ten, twenty, or thirty, cannot be thought conve­nient. Neither is such a thing commanded, in any place of Scripture. And would it not argue a neglect of divine worship, & the care of souls, if one day of twenty, thirty, or fourty were appointed? Neither, can the fifth, fourth, or sixth day be appointed, see­ing God hath commanded us to work six dayes. This would make our yoke more heavy than the Iewish yoke, which the Ad­versaries will not grant. (5) Because, it is the principal, and chief scope of the fourth Command, that one day of seven, in respect of us, be set apart, and consecrated to divine worship. Not truely that some indefinite time, be set apart. If this were true, the fourth Command, should differ substantially, from the other Precepts of the Decalogue; and so there behoved to be an useless Precept, or at least a Tautology ought to be commit­ted.

Do not likewise the Anabaptists, Socinians, and Libertins err, with whom we may take in the Quakers, (and other Antisabbatarians, that [Page 190] disown the Sabbath, as being carnal, and a Com­mand of the Letter) who teach, that whatever is contained in the fourth Command, is Ceremonial, and so properly, as to the matter, and substance, which it holds out, abrogated wholly. And there­fore (say they) by virtue of this fourth Command there is no day to be set a part, for publick divine worship? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the fourth Command, which appoints one day of seven to be set apart for God, is a positive, and moral Command, as to substance; seeing it was given to Adam in his integrity, before ever there was need of any Types, and Ceremonies shaddowing forth Christ; Gen. 2. 2, 3. (2) Because, it was repeated, before the promulgation of the Ceremonial Law; Exod. 16. 23. Thirdly, because it was written, with Gods own hand, and inserted into the midst of the rest of the moral precepts, and was put into the Ark of the Testimony, with the other nine, which ho­nour, was never conferred upon any precept meerly Ceremonial. (4) Because, all the reasons of this Command, are intirely Moral. He rested after six days, and allowed us six days to work, therefore in all equity we ought to rest after so many days work, and give God a seventh. (5) Because, Christ [Page 191] confirms this Command, in saying, pray that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day, where the Lord insinuat­eth that as travelling is troublesome to the bo­dy in winter, so would it be to the minds of the Godly to travel on that day, specially and solemnly set apart for Gods worship. Now, if there were no sabbath to continue after Christs ascension, or if it were not to be san­ctified, there would be no occasion of this grief and trouble, that they behoved to tra­vel on the Sabbath, and durst not tary till that day were by-past; and so no cause to put up this prayer which yet by our Lords exhortation seemeth to infer that the Sabbath was to be as certain in its time, as the Winter. And doubtless this cannot be meaned of the Iewish Sabbath; for that was to be abolished shortly. Next, travelling on the Iewish Sabbath was to be no cause of grief unto them, if indeed all days were a­like, neither would it be scroupled in such a case by the Apostles to whom he is now speaking.

Quest. XII.

WAS this one day in seven, from the beginning of the World, to the Resurrection of Christ, the last day of the week▪

Yes.

And was it, from the Resurrection of Christ, [Page 192] changed into the first day of the week?

Yes.

And is it to be continued, to the end of the World, as the Christian Sabbath?

Yes. Gen. 2. 2, 3. 1 Cor. 16. 1. 2. Acts 20. 7. Rev. 1. 10. Matth. 5. 17, 18.

Well then, do not the Sabbatarians err, who maintain, that the Iewish Sabbath, or the seventh day from the Creation, is to be observed?

Yes.

Do not others likewise err, who maintain, that the observation of the Lords Day, is only of Ecclesiastick and Apostolick institution?

Yes.

These Authors, (you see) do con­found, and make two things really distinct, to be but one, namely Ecclesiastick and A­postolick institution?

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the fourth Command standing, wherein one day of seven is appointed, the numbering is left free to God himself, that the right, and power may be reserved to Christ the Law-giver, and to his Spirit, for the change of the day, and continuing the wor­ship, prescribed in the fourth Command. (2) From the name it self; for our Sabbath is called the Lords Day, Rev. 1. 10. I was in the Spirit on the Lords Day: or on that Lords [Page 193] Day, or Dominick Day, or day which is the Lords; pointing out a day singularly, and a day, which in a particular, & special manner is cal­led His day; even as the Lords prayer and the Lords Supper are so called, because appointed by Christ the Lord. (3) Because, God only can abrogate the Lords day (the Adversa­ries granting so much) therefore, he that hath power to rescind hath power likewise to esta­blish. (4) Because, there is an implicit Com­mand, concerning the observation of the Lords day; 1 Cor. 16. 2. As I have (saith Paul) given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye the first day of the week, let every one of you lay by him. From which place, we reason thus; that not the seventh, but the first day, is the chief solemn day for worship after Christs Resurrection, because, the Apostles did pitch particularly and eminently upon that day, and that in diverse Churches, as the fittest time, for expressing their Charity. He doth not think it indifferent, what day it be done on, nor that all dayes are alike, but pitcheth on the first day, not in one Church only, but in many. Next, this command, supposeth them to be already ac­quainted with some special priviledges of the first day beyond others; and that there must be some peculiar thing in this day making [Page 194] it fit, yea more fit for such a purpose, rather than any other day. (5) Because, as the seventh day, was instituted, in remembrance of the works of Creation, so the first day, after the work of redemption was finished, succeeded as most convenient, for collating, and comparing both Mercies together. (6) Because, Christ on the first day of the week, appeared most frequently to his Disciples, and blessed it with his presence; Matth. 28. 9. Acts 1. 3. Iohn 20. 19, 26. (7) Because, on that day, the holy Ghost descended upon the Apostles. And on the same day Peter baptized three thousand; Acts 2. 1, 2, 3, 4, 41. (8) Because, the Church, in the time of the Apostles did observe the first day of the week, as holy; Acts 20. 7. But the pra­ctise of the Apostles, approven in Scripture, is equivalent to a Divine Institution. (9) Because, Christ was seen of his Apostles fourty dayes after his Resurrection, and spoke to them of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God, during which time he hath taught them all things needful to be known, and among the rest (it is probable) the change of the Sabbath, and the institution of the first day of the week, and that imme­diatly after his resurrection: he hath either immediatly by himself institute that day, or [Page 195] hath inspired his Apostles to observe it, from that same very time. (10) Because, the Lord hath remarkably owned this Christian Sabbath, in being remarkably avenged, up­on the breakers, and profanners thereof, as it is clear from several Histories.

Quest. XIII.

IS this Sabbath then kept holy unto the Lord, when men after a due preparation, of their hearts, and ordering of their common affairs before hand, do not only observe an ho­ly rest, all the day from their own works, words, and thoughts, about their worldly employments, and recreations, but are also taken up the whole time, in the publick and private exercises of his own worship, except what is spent in the duties of necessity and mercy?

Yes. Exod. 16. 23, 25, 26, 29, 30. Exod. 31. 15, 16, 17. Isa. 58. 13. Neh. 13. 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22.

Well then, do not some err, who think, that after publick worship is ended, the rest of the Lords day, may be spent, in ordinary exercises, recreati­ons, and such like sports as are not unlawful on other dayes, unless they be forbidden, by the Church, or Common-wealth wherein men live?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Lord says in the fourth [Page 196] Commandment, in it thou shalt not do any work. But ordinary recreations, games, and sports, are our own works. (2) Be­cause, Nature it self requires, that we be­stow, as much of the Sabbath day on God, who is the Lord of Time, and of all things which we have, as we can, and use to bestow upon our own affairs, on other days. (3) Because, the Lord says, if thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day, and call the Sab­bath a delight, the holy of the Lord honour­able, and shalt honour him, not doing thy own wayes, nor finding thy own pleasure, nor speaking thy own words, then shalt thou delight thy self in the Lord, and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the Earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Iacob thy Father for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it; Isaiah 58. 13, 14. See Ierem. 17. 22. Deut. 5. 12, 13, 15. Numb. 15. 32, 33, 36. And Neh. 13. 15. to verse 23. In those dayes saw I in Iudah, some tread­ing Wine-presses on the sabbath, and bring­ing in Sheaves, and lading asses, as also wine­grapes, and figes, and all manner of burdens which they brought into Ierusalem, on the sab­bath day; and I testified against them in the day wherein they sold victuals.

CHAP. XXII. Of Lawful Oaths and Vows.

Question I.

IS the name of GOD, that only by which men ought to swear?

Yes. Deut. 6. 13.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who in their swearing, joyn with their calling upon the name of GOD, the calling on Saints departed, and their Reliques?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, swearing is a part of divine worship, which is only due to God; Deut. 6. 13. Deut. 10. 20. Isaiah 65. 16. (2) Be­cause, God only is the judge of hidden and secret truth; and the Avenger to take ven­gence on them, that do not swear in truth. Therfore he only is to be called on as witness of those things, which are asserted, and pro­mised, which was the practise of the Apostle [Page 198] Paul, Rom. 9. 1. Rom. 1. 9. Phil. 1. 8. (3) Because, God condemns swearing by them, that are no Gods; Ier. 5. 7.

Quest. II.

IS an Oath warranted by the word of GOD, under the New Testament, as well, as under the Old, in matters of weight, and moment?

Yes. Heb. 6. 16. Isaiah 65. 16. Gal. 1. 20. Rom. 1. 9. Rom. 9. 1. 2 Cor. 1. 18. 23. and 2 Cor. 11. 31. with 2 Cor. 12, 19. 1 Thes. 5. 27. Rev. 10. 6.

Well then, do not the Quakers and Ana­baptists err, who maintain, that there is no lawful use of an Oath under the New Testament?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Papists err, who make it a degree of perfection, to abstain from all Oaths?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) From Isaiah 65. 16. where it is pro­mised, under the time of the Gospel, that the Nations to be converted to Christ, shall swear by the name of God, as is clear also from Ierem. 4. 2. (2) Because, the calling upon the name of God with due fear and reverence in swearing, is commanded in the third Command, as the profanation of his name is forbidden: but Christ came not to abolish the moral Law. (3) From the ap­proven [Page 199] examples of the Saints, which occurr in the New Testament; Gal. 1. 20. Rom. 1. 9. and 2 Cor. 1. 13, 18. Rev. 10. 6. (4) Be­cause, the end of an Oath, is approven by God, and is in all ages, necessary to all men, being the end of all controversie; Heb. 6. 16. (5) Because, an oath rightly taken, is an Act of Religion, whereby we glorifie God, and adore his attributes. We thereby, first, solemnly acknowledge his Beeing and Existence. Secondly, his Ubiquity that he is present in all places, and at all times, and within our hearing; Psalm 139. 7. His Omniscience, that he is the searcher of the heart. The Apostle calls him Kardiognostes; Acts 15. 8. We ac­knowledge, fourthly, his Truth and Veracity: he is a witness brought into the Court, that cannot lie, nor be impos'd upon, as saith the Apostle, be not deceived God is not mocked; Gal. 6. 7. Fifthly, his Supremacy over all creatures, for verily men swear by the great­er; Heb. 6. 16. We acknowledge, sixthly, his vindictive justice, as he is a Revenger of Perjury. Seventhly, we acknowledge his Providence, and Fatherly care of the concerns of mankind, owning the cause of the Righ­teous.

(6) Because, there being an express law for swearing (to wit rightly; Deut. 10 20.) [Page 200] it must either belong to the Moral Law, to the Judicial Law, or Ceremonial Law. The Adversaries will not call it, a part of the Judicial Law, which was given to the Iewes, as a Body Politick, which expired together with the state of that People. It is no part of the Ceremonial Law: for what was purely Ceremonial, was purely Typical: but the Law concerning an oath was not a Type of any thing to come. And if it was a Type, where will you find its Antitype in all the Gospel, or the thing represented by it? There­fore, it must be a part of the Moral Law; Deut. 6. 13. Ier. 4. 2, and consequently per­petual, which Christ came not to destroy. It is confirmed hence, that it was of Authen­tick use, and held sacred among the Patri­archs, before the delivery of the Levitical Law, as it is clear from Abraham the father of the faithful, and Abimelech; Gen. 21. 23, 24, 31. Consider also that other instance in Abraham; Gen. 24. 2, 3, 9. who would not give his servant an oath rashly, nor exercise his au­thority to impose on his conscience. It is evident also from the example of Isaac, who made a Covenant, and swore to Abimelech; Gen. 26. 28, 31, And from the example of Iacob, who made a Covenant with, and swore to his Uncle Laban, by the fear of his [Page 201] Father Isaac; Gen. 31. 53. That is, by God, who is called our fear, by reason of the filial awe, and fear we ought to stand in before him; Isaiah 8. 13. (7) Because, the reasons and usefulness of Oaths, are perpetual, and the same to us under the Gospel, as they were to them under the Law. There is as much need of oaths for ending of strife in this litigious age, as there could be in former times. (8) Because, oaths were once lawful, therefore they are lawful still; unless the Ad­versaries prove them repealled; which they must do, not by stealing out of the Scripture single words by themselves, making one part contradict another. (9) Because, we need not fear to imitate any thing, which is done in Heaven. Our Lord has taught us to pray, thy will be done in Earth, as it is done in Heaven. But the Angel (says Iohn; Rev. 10. 5, 6.) which I saw stand upon the Sea, and upon the Earth, lifted up his hand to Heaven, and swore by him that liveth for ever and ever. That Angel, calls himself our fellow-servant, and of our brethren the Prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this Book; Rev. 22. 9. And therefore the Angels being of the same fraternity with us, do not act un­der different dispensations from us.

Quest. III.

IS an Oath to be taken, in the plain and common sense of the words, without Equivocation, or Mental reservati­on?

Yes. Psalm. 24. 4. Exod. 20. 7. Lev. 19. 12. Ier. 4. 2.

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, that it is lawful in swearing, to use words of Equivocation?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Papists err, who main­tain Mental reservation, to be lawful in swearing?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Scripture requires from all men in their common dealing one with another, in their discourse, and conferences, Verity, and Simplicity; Matth. 5. 37. Eph. 4. 25. Much more are these things required in Swearing, wherein God is called to be wit­ness of the truth of those things, which are asserted. (2) Because, the Lord threatneth such as use guile, and deceit in their words; Psalm 15. 4. Psalm 24. 4. Gal. 2. 11, 12, 13. (3) Because, the Lord requires in every Oath, truth, righteousness, and judgement; Ier. 4. 2. (4) Because, Equivocations, and Men­tal Reservations, are against the very end of [Page 203] an approven Oath; which is to put an end to all debate, and controversie. (5) Because, if Equivocations, and Mental Reservations were lawful, in vain should the Lord have made laws against lying: for a lie may be excused by Mental Reservation. (6) If E­quivocations, and Mental Reservations were allowed, they would take away all commerce among men, and would make Bonds, Con­tracts, and Charter-parties of none effect.

Quest. IV.

IS a Religious Vow to be made to GOD alone, and not to any crea­ture?

Yes. To GOD alone; Ier. 44. 25, 26. Psalm 76. 11.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who main­tain, Vows may be made to Saints departed, and to Cenobiarchs, that is, to Priors of Monasteries, or Abbeys?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Vows are a part of our gra­titude, and thankfulness due to God only, for his favours and mercies conferred upon us; Psalm 50. 14. Psalm 66. 13, 14. (2) Be­cause, we are commanded in the Word to make our vowes to God, and perform them. But no where are we appointed to make our [Page 204] vows to Saints departed; Psalm 58. 14, (3) Because, God only is the trier, and searcher of the heart: and it is he only that knoweth the sincerity of the mans mind, that voweth, and is able to punish such as violate, and break their vows; Deut. 23. 21. (4) Because, the Lord threatneth those severely, that had vowed to any other Gods, but to himself alone, and accuses them of a very great sin; Ierem. 44. 25, 26.

Quest. V.

ARE Popish Monastical Vows of a perpetual single life, professed pover­ty, and regular obedience, so far from being degrees of higher perfection, that they are superstitious, and sinful snares, in which no Christian, may intangle himself?

Yes. Matth. 19. 11, 12. 1 Cor. 7. 2, 9. Eph. 4. 28. 1 Peter 4. 2.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain Monastical Vows of perpetual single life, professed poverty, and Regular Obedience, to be degrees of higher perfection?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, a Vow of a perpetual single life, is unlawful. For no man ought to Vow the performance of that, for which he hath not a promise of strength to per­form. [Page 205] But no man hath a promise of perpe­tual Continency which is necessarly required to a perpetual single life. Nay Christ says ex­presly, that the gift of Continency, is not given to all men; Mat. 19. 11. (2) Because, marriage is honourable among all men, and the bed undefiled; Heb. 13. 4. (3) Because, the A­postle bids every man take his own wife, for shuning of Fornication; 1 Cor. 7. 1, 2, 9. (4) Because, the forbidding of Marriage, is a Doctrine of Devils; 1 Tim. 4. 1, 3.

Next, the Vow of professed Poverty is unlawful.

(1) Because, the Lord did not allow Beg­gars to be among his people of old; Deut. 15. 7. (2) Because, Agur wished, that the Lord might not give him poverty, least he should steal, and take the name of God in vain; Prov. 30. 8, 9. (3) Because, the Lord will have every man to eat his bread, in the sweat of his face; Gen. 3. 19. (4) Because, the Apostle commands the Thessalonians to work with their own hands; 1 Thes. 4. 11. (5) Because, professed poverty, hindereth a greater good, to wit, our charity, and be­nevolence towards the poor, and indigent members of Christ, which is contrary to the Apostles Rule; Eph. 4. 28.

The Vow of Regular Obedience is likewise un­lawful.

[Page 206]1) Because, it makes us the servants of men, which is contrary to the Apostle. Ye are bought with a price, be not ye the servants of Men, viz. to do any thing for the service, or obedience of men (Superiours) which should be repugnant, to the Com­mands of the service of God. Or suffer not your selves, in spiritual things, to be brought in bondage by any men, that you should not freely use that which the Lord hath made free to us; 1 Cor. 7. 23.

CHAP. XXIII. Of the Civil Magistrate.

Question I.

HATH GOD armed the Civil Magistrat, with the power of the Sword, for the defence, and encouragement of them that are good, and for the punishment of evil doers?

Yes. Rom. 13. 1, 2, 3, 4. 1 Peter 2. 13. 14.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, that it is not the duty of the Civil Ma­gistrate, [Page 207] to punish the guilty with death?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, GOD hath expresly com­manded, that transgressing Idolaters be put to death; Deut. 17. 7. Deut. 19. 21. (2) Be­cause, it appertains to the office, and duty of the Magistrate, to punish the guilty with death; Rom. 13. 4. 1 Peter 2. 14. (3) Be­cause, the capital punishment of evil doers makes others stand in awe, and fear to offend; Deut. 13. 11. Deut. 19. 20: (4) Because, if the Magistrate shall neglect, to inflict due punishment, the Lord himself will be aven­ged on that Magistrate; 1 Kings 20. 42. Num. 25. 4. (5) Because, he that smitteth a man so that he die, shall surely be put to death; Exod. 21. 12. (6) Because, all that take the sword, shall perish by the sword; Matth. 26. 52. Namely without a lawful call, or or­der for it. They shall perish, by order and command of the Magistrate, to whom the Lord hath given the sword, for this same very end to punish evil doers with death; Gen. 9. 6. Rom. 13. 4.

Quest. II.

IS it the duty of the Civil Magistrate, to take order, that all Blasphemies, and Heresies be suppressed, all the ordinances of God, [Page 208] duely settled, administred, and observed; all abuses in worship, and discipline reformed, all Idolaters, Gainsayers, and other obstinate dissenters, be oblig­ed and forced to quite their tenets and opinions, and conform themselves to the true worship, and service of God, according to his Law?

Yes. Isaiah 49. 23. 2 Chro. 15. 12, 13. 2 Chro. 34. 33. 2 Kings 18. 4. 2 Kings 23. 1, to the 26 verse. Ezra 7. 23, 25, 26, 27, 28. Lev. 24. 16.

Well then, do not the Quakers, and other Sectaries err, who judge it Antichristian, and the practise of the Church of Rome, that the Ci­vil and Supream Magistrate, with the assistance of the Church, and her Censures, should by his coactive power, force, and oblige all his subjects, to a Refor­mation of Religion, and to a conformity to the true worship, sound doctrine, and discipline, of the Church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, it is foretold by the Prophet Isaiah, that in the dayes of the Gospel, Kings shall be nursing Fathers, and Queens nursing Mothers, to the Church of God; Chap. 49. 23. (2) Because, Artaxerxes, who was but a Heathen King, was very careful to make a decree, that whatsoever was commanded by the God of Heaven, should be diligently [Page 209] done for the house of the God of Heaven. And that whosoever would not obey the Law of GOD, and the King, judgement was to be executed speedi­ly upon him, whether by death, banishment, confiscation of goods, or imprisonment. For which singular mercy, Ezra blessed the Lord GOD of his Fathers, who had put such a thing in the Kings heart; chap. 7. 23, 25, 26, 27, 28. So did Nebuchadnezzar make a decree, that if any People, Nation, or Lan­guage, should speak any thing amiss against the GOD of Heaven, they should be cut in pieces, and their houses made a dunghill; Dan. 3. 29. The like we read of Darius, who made a Decree, that all men should tremble and fear before the GOD of Daniel, chap. 6. 26. (3) From the example of Hezekiah, who removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves, and brake in pieces the brazen Serpent, to which the Israelites did burn incense; 2 Kings 18. 4. (4) From the example of Iosiah, who made a through reformation; and made all Israel to serve the LORD their GOD. The word in the Original importeth, that he in a manner forced, and compelled them to the pure worship, and service of God, as a servant is forced, and compelled to his work. [Page 210] He by his Royal Power, and Authority kept them in order, forbidding Idolatry, and commanding them to serve God no other­wise, than according to his Word; 2 Chron. 34. 33. and 2 Chro. 15. 12, 13. They en­tered into a Covenant, to seek the Lord of their Fathers, with all their heart, and with all their soul: that whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel should be put to death, whether great or small, man or wo­man. (5) Because, whosoever blasphemed the name of the Lord, was surely put to death; Lev. 24. 16. This blaspheming, was a peircing through, or stabbing the name of the Lord, as the original word properly signifies: which may be done not only after this manner, but by maintaining blasphe­mous errors, and heresies. (6) Because, the supream Magistrate is Custos utriusque Tabulae, a Keeper of both Tables of the Law of God. As well of the first Table, which relates to Religion, and our duty to God; as of the second which relates to righteousness, and our duty to our neighbour. If then, he may punish evil doers, who offend against the se­cond Table, and force and compel them to obedience, by the sword of justice, which God hath put into his hand, much more may he punish Idolaters, and blasphemers, who [Page 211] offend against the first Table, and force and compell them to obedience: seeing there are many▪ sins against the first Table, which are more hainous, and odious, than the sins a­gainst the second Table. And though it be the sinful practise of the Church of Rome, to force men, and women, to be of their Re­ligion, which is superstitious, and Idolatrous, yet it is not so to others, who have the true religion among them. And though our blessed Saviour, and his Apostles did not use such means for propagating the Gospel, reserving the Glory of conquering of souls, to himself, and the power of his Spirit; yet he has taught nothing to the contrary, but that Kings and Magistrates, whom he has made nursing Fathers to his Church, may according to the laudable examples of the good Kings of Iuda, improve their power for Reformation, and maintainance of his own Religion. And though Religion, hath been much advanced by suffering, yet it will not infer, that a Christian Prince has not power to reform his own subjects, or extirpate blas­phemers, and Hereticks.

Quest. III.

IS it lawful for a Christian, to ac­cept and execute the office of a Ma­gistrate, when called thereunto?

Yes. Prov. 8. 15, 16. Rom. 13. 1, 2, 4.

[Page 212]Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, that it is not lawful for Christians to carry the office of a Magistrate?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, there is no power but of God, and the powers, which are, are ordained of GOD; Rom. 13. 1. (2) Because, Solo­mon says, by me (that is by the Lord) Kings reign, and Princes decree justice; Prov. 8. 15. (3) Because, the Magistrate exercises, and executes Gods judgements; Deut. 1. 17. (4) Because, the Magistrate receiveth all things from GOD, which are necessary, for the performance of his office; Numb. 11. 17. (5) Because, the Lord hath promised, that Magistrates under the Gospel, shall be nur­sing Fathers to his Church; Isaiah 49. 23. And shall make the Whore desolate, naked, and shal eat her flesh, and burn her with fire; Rev. 17. 16.

Quest. IV.

MAY the Civil Magistrate, now under the New Testament wage warr upon just and necessary occasion?

Yes. Luke 13. 14. Matth. 8. 9, 10. Rev. 17. 14, 16. Acts 10. 1, 2.

Well then, do not the Quakers, Anabap­tists and Socinians err, Who maintain, that it is al­together [Page 213] unlawful, now under the New Testa­ment, to wage warr?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, GOD appointed, and com­manded lawful war; Numb. 31. 2. For it is said, the Spirit of the Lord came upon Gi­deon, when he was to fight the battles of the Lord, against the Midianites, and Amalekites; Iudges 6. 34. Nay, the Lord himself, pre­scribeth the manner, and way of making of War; Numb. 10. 9. Numb. 31. 27. Deut 20. 2. And giveth knowledge, and skill, to his Generals, and Heroes, to fight his own bat­tles; Psalm 18. 34. Psalm 144. 1. All which are in no wise abrogated, and taken away, under the New Testament. (2) Because, the Centurion, that was converted to the Faith, did not lay down his office of a Captain of a hundred; which surely, he would have done, if to war under the New Testament, had been unlawful; Acts 10. 1, 2, 47. The same may be said of the believing Centurion; Matth. 8. 8, 9, 10. (3) Because, the office of a Souldier, is not reprehended, and reprov­ed, by Iohn the Baptist, but rather approven: Luke 3. 14. (4) Because, opposition, and defence, against unjust violence which often times cannot be done, without war, is the [Page 214] very law of nature. (5) Because, it is fore­told, that the kings of the Earth, shall make war against the Beast; Rev. 17. 14, 16.

Quest. V.

MAY the Civil Magistrate, as­sume to himself, the Admini­stration of the Word, and Sacraments, or the power of the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven?

No. 2 Chron. 26. 18. Matth. 18. 17. Matth. 16. 19. 1 Cor. 12. 28, 29. Rom. 10. 5. Hebr. 5. 4.

Well then, do not the Erastians err, who maintain, that the Civil Magistrate hath in himself all Church power; and so may administer the Sa­craments, and preach the Word, and may exercise the power of the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ hath given no such power to Magistrates: as evidently appears, from all those places of Scripture, where mention is made of the keyes. There is not in them, one syllabe, of the Civil Magistrate; Matth. 18. 17. Matth 16. 19. (2) If the power of the keyes of the Kingdom of Hea­ven, agree to the Magistrate, as a Magistrate, then ought it to agree, to every Magistrate, though the Magistrate were an Infidel, or a Woman, which is absurd. (3) A Magi­strate, [Page 215] as a Magistrate is not a Minister of the Church, as is evident, from all the Ca­talogues of the Ministers of the Church. For in them, you will not find any menti­on of the Magistrate; Eph. 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7. 8. 1 Car. 12. 8, 9, 10. (4) Because, before ever there was a Christian Magistrate in the World, the Church exercised all Acts of Church Jurisdiction, and Government. The Church ordained Ministers and Pastors; 1 Tim. 4. 14. And inflicted the Censure of Excommunication; 1 Cor. 5. 5. And Re­laxed the Penitent from this Censure. Cal­led a Synod, and stigmatized Hereticks; Acts 15. (5) Because, GOD hath put a difference, between the Church Govern­ment and the Civil, and hath appointed di­stinct Governours to them; 2 Chron. 19. 8, 9, 10, 11. (6) Because, God did severely punish Saul, and Uzzia for presuming to offer sacrifice, which was proper to the Priests only; 1 Sam. 13. 9, 10, 13. 2 Chron. 26. 16, 19.

Quest. VI.

HATH the Civil Magistrate power to call Synods, to be present at them, and to provide, that whatsoever is trans­acted in them be according to the mind of GOD?

Yes. 2 Chron. 19. 8, 9, 10, 11. and 2 [Page 216] Chron. 29, 30. chapters, Matth. 2. 4, 5.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who main­tain, that the judgement and care of Religion doth not belong to the civil Magistrate?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the custody and keeping of the divine law, is committed by GOD to the Civil Magistrate; Deut. 17. 18. (2) Be­cause, it was foretold, that Kings should be nursing Fathers to the Church; Isaiah 49. 23. (3) Because, it is the duty of the Magistrate, to take care, that subjects may lead a quiet and peaceable life, in all godli­ness, and honesty; 1 Tim. 2. 2. (4) From the commendable examples of the good kings of Iuda; 2 Chron. 29. 30. chapters.

Quest. VI.

DOth infidelity, or difference in Religion make void the Ma­gistrates just and legal authority?

No.

Doth it free the people from their due obedience to him?

No. 1 Peter 2. 13, Rom. 13. 1, 2, 3, 4. Titus 3. 1.

Well then, do not the Papists, Anabaptists, and others err, who maintain, that subjects ought not to suffer a King that's an infidel, or obey that [Page 217] King in his just commands, that differs from them in Religion? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, we are commanded to sub­mit our selves to every ordinance of man; 1 Peter 2. 13. Namely in all that they com­mand us, if it be not contrary to God and his command; otherwise, (according to Acts 4. 19.) it is better to obey GOD than man. And it is said, for the Lords sake, that is, be­cause it is GODS will to govern us by them. (2) Because, the Christians, which were at Rome, were commanded by the Apostle to subject themselves to the higher powers, and that without exception of Religion and Piety, and even to that heathen the Roman Empe­rour; Rom. 13. 1. (3) Because, the same Apostle writing to Titus, bids him exhort the Cretians his hearers, to obey Magistrates, what manner of ones soever they be, not only believing ones, but also those, that are unbelieving, as then, they were yet most of them; Titus. 3. 1. (4) Because, when the Apostle Paul was persued for his life, and charged with matters criminal, he appeal­led unto Cesar; Acts 25. 10, 11. (5) Be­cause, the Prophet Ieremiah did own the power of Zedekia, who had turned aside to a false worship, and had despised the oath, [Page 218] which he had made to the King of Babylon; Ezek 17. 16, 17. Now hear I pray thee, (says the Prophet) O my Lord the King, let my Supplication I pray thee be accepted before thee; Ierem. 27. 20. (6) Because, Christ himself payed tribute to Cesar, though he was free, being both the Son of GOD by nature, and the Son of David by birth; Matth. 17. 26. And he commanded and al­lowed others to pay; Matth. 22. 21. Rom. 13. 7. (7) Because, Paul did own and ac­knowledge the power of King Agrippa; Acts 26. 2.

Quest. VII.

IS it the duty of people to pray for Magistrates and honour their persons?

Yes. 1 Tim. 2. 1, 2. and 1 Peter 2. 17.

Well then, do not some err, who deny this?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Samuel at the request of Saul, whom he knew the Lord had rejected, re­turned again after him, and honoured him before the people; 1 Sam. 15. 31. (2) Because, the Lord having appointed Magistrates to administer justice and judgement in his name, is so far pleased to honour them, as to call them Gods, and the Children of the [Page 219] high; Psalm 82. 1, 6. (3) Because, the A­postle Peter says, fear God and honour the King, parallel to what Paul says, render to all men their dues; honour to whom honour is due; 1 Peter 2 17. Rom. 13. 7.

(4) Because, even heathen Magistrates, are called the Lords anointed; Isaiah 45. 1. And the Lord calls Nebuchadnezzar, his ser­vant; Ierem. 27. 6. If then such Magistrates ought to be honoured upon that account, much more Christian Magistrates. (5) Be­cause, if we be obliged not to speak evil of dig­nities; 2 Peter 2. 11, nor revile the Gods; Exod. 22. 8; we are obliged to honour dig­nities, for where a sin is forbidden, the con­trary duty is commanded. (6) Because, God commanded his people the Jews to seek the peace of the City (that is, the wel­fare and prosperity of Babylon) whither he had caused them to be carried away captives; Ierem. 29. 7. (7) Because, the Prophet, the man of God, besought the Lord in behalf of Ieroboam, and prayed for him, a man that had made Apostacy from the true wor­ship of God, and had made Israel to sin; 1 Kings 13. 3. (8) Because, our blessed Savi­our says, render to Cesar, the things that are Cesars; Matth. 22. 21. But prayers and sup­plications are as due to Cesar, as custom and [Page 220] tribute; 1 Tim. 2. 1, 2. (9) Because, the Apostle commands us to pray for all that are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life; which is the cause wherefore we must pray for Magistrates. For in the Apostles times, and long after, Magistrates were persecutors of the Church of GOD, and hindred the members of Christ to live in peace and godli­ness; 1 Tim. 2. 1, 2. (9) Because, Moses cryed unto the Lord in behalf of Pharoah; Exod. 8. 12. Abraham prayed unto God for Abi­melech; Gen. 20. 17. Iacob blessed Pharoah; Gen. 47. 7, 10. (10) Because, many blessed Martyrs going to death have prayed for their persecuting Magistrates, following the example, and command of our blessed Sa­viour; Luke 23. 34. Matth. 5. 44.

Quest. VIII

OUght any man at his own hand, or at the instigation of other men, to assassinate or kill a Magistrate, or any private or publick person, under the pretence, they are Hereticks, and Persecutors of the truth?

No. Exod. 20. 13: Prov. 1. 10. 11.

Well then, do not those men of the Romish-Church err, and others too, who own this dan­gerous Tenet? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

[Page 221](1) Because, all sort of murder is expres­ly forbidden in the sixth command, thou shalt not kill; Exod. 20. 13. Where there is a clear distinction made by Thou, between a private man and a publick Magistrate, that doth it by divine authority. (2) Because, though Saul was a man rejected of God (1 Sam. 15. 26.) yet David says to the Amalekite, how wast thou not affrayed to stretch forth thine hand, to destroy the Lords anointed; 2 Sa. 1. 14. see 1 Sam. 24. 5. 1 Sam. 26. 9. (3) Because, whatever may be alledged from Phineas his fact; Num. 25. 8. from Ehuds fact in stob­bing Eglon; Iudges 3. 21. from Samuels fact in killing Agag, 1 Sam. 15. 33. and from Elijahs fact in killing the Priests of Baal; 1 Kings 18. 40. they will not by any means favour private mens assassinations; for cer­tainly Phineas had a divine motion, as Ehud had; stirring him up, which was evident by the Lords approving the fact, and re­warding it. Samuel (no doubt) was moved hereunto by an inward motion and instinct of God, and the conduct of his Spirit, as was Elijah; so that their facts, and suck like were altogether particular, and cannot be abused by imitation, and followed by e­very one, as rules, whose calling is not pro­perly to use the sword of justice. (4) Be­cause, it would bring a Mass of confusion, [Page 222] to the utter ruine of all Societies, if every man at his own hand might execute vindi­ctive justice upon offenders, who deserve it, or upon pretence they do deserve it, which is to fight against God, who is the God of order politick, as well, as Ecclesiastick, and not of confusion. (5) Because, the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God; Ia. 1. 20. (6) Because, it is a contempt of publick laws, and publick order. It is an usurpation of the Magistrates sword, which God hath put into his hand for punishing and protect­ing, It is an invasion of Gods right and pre­rogative of executing vengeance, which he hath so expresly reserved to himself; Psalm 94. 1. Rom. 12. 19. Deut. 32. 35. Prov. 25. 21, 22. (6) Because, Solomon sayes, my son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not, if they say come with us, let us lay wait for blood, let us lurk privily for the innocent, walk not thou in the way with them. Prov. 1. 10, 11. (7) Because, a righteous man re­gardeth the life of his beast, much more ought a righteous man to regard the life of his neighbour; Prov. 12. 10. The sin of murder may be many wayes aggravated. First by the quality of the person murdered, whether he be a superiour, as a Magistrate, or Minister, or parent, or whether he be of [Page 223] a near relation, as a brother, or near kins­man. Secondly, from the manner, extream cruelty being used, or sudden and unexpect­ed death, putting a man into eternity in the twinckling of an eye. To which we may add deliberation and premediate murder, of which Solomon speaks in the forecited place.

Quest. IX.

ARE Ecclesiastick Persons ex­empted from due obedience to the Magistrate?

No. Rom. 13. 1, 1 Kings 2. 26. Acts 25 9, 10, 11. 2 Peter 2. 1, 10, 11. Iude verse 8. 9, 10, 11.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who main­tain, that the Clergy (as they call them) and their goods are altogether free, by the Law of God from Secular Powers?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the command of obedience is general, and universal. let every soul be sub­ject; Rom. 13. 1. (2) Because, Christ com­manded the Pharisees, who were of the Clergy, to render unto Cesar, the things which are Cesars; Matth. 22. 21. Nay Christ himself, payed tribute money, to wit, a Sta­ter, in value two shillings, and three pence, which Peter found in the fishes mouth, when [Page 224] he opened it; Matth. 17, 27. (3) Because, Paul did acknowledge himself subject to the Magistrate, when he appealled unto Cesar; Acts 25. 11. (4) From the example of the Priests who were subject to their Kings. Did not Abiather at Solomons command, go to Anothoth? 1 Kings 2. 26.

Quest. X.

HAth the Pope any Power, or Iurisdiction over Magistrates, in their dominions, or over any of their people?

No. Rev. 13. 15, 16, 17. 2 Thes. 2: 4:

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that the Pope of Rome, as Pope, hath full power by divine right, over the whole World, as well in matters Civil as Ecclesiasti­cal?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ expresly discharges his Disciples, from taking to themselves, any such power or dominion, Matth. 20: 25; Mark 10: 42: (2) Because, the Kingdom of Christ is not of this World▪ Iohn 18. 36. Neither ought the Popes Kingdom to be of this World who calls himself the Vicar of Christ. That is, one who supplieth Christs room, and taketh pains for him, his Depute here on Earth. (3) Because, [Page 225] when the people would have made Christ a King, he departed again into a mountain himself alone; Iohn 6. 15. (4) Because, the Apostle Peter discharged this Dominion; 1 Peter 5. 1, 2, 3. (5) Because, its never heard, that any of the Apostles did ever use any civil power, or command; or sate as judges in civil matters, but stood alwayes to be judged, by Civil powers, as is evident from the History of the Acts. (6) Because, GOD hath put a difference, between the Government of the Church, and the Civil Government; and hath given to each, their own proper, and distinct Officers. Neither can the one invade the other without very great sin; 2 Chron. 19. 8, 9, 10, 11. (7) Be­cause, it is the mark of Antichrist, to exalt himself above all, that is called God; 2 Thes. 2. 4.

CHAP. XXIIII. Of Marriage and Divorce.

Question I.

IS Marriage between one man and one woman?

Yes.

[Page 226] Is it lawful for a man, to have more than one wife, or for a woman, to have more than one husband at the same time?

No. Gen. 2. 24: Matth: 19: 5, 6. Prov: 2: 17:

Well then, do not the Anabaptists, and Fa­milists err, who maintain, that it is lawful for a Christian, not only to have more wives at the same time, but as many as he desires?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the having of two wives, or many wives, is contrary to the first in­stitution of Marriage, for the Lord gave to Adam, one wife only; Gen. 2. 24. (2) Be­cause, the Law of God forbidds expresly Bigamie, or two wives; Lev. 18. 18. (3) Be­cause, the Lord doth find fault sharply, with Polygamie, many wives; Mal. 2. 14, 15. (4) Because, Christ says, he that puts away his wife (except in the case of Adulte­ry) and marries another, committeth a­dultery; Matth. 19. 9. But if it were lawful to have at one time, more wives than one, he should not be guilty of adultery in marrying another, whether he put away the former wife or not. (5) Because, Bi­gamie and Polygamie, take away the true peace of a wedded life, as is evident from the [Page 227] examples of Iacob; Gen. 30. And of Elkana; 1 Sam. 1. 6. (6) Because, the invention of Bigamie; was the device of a wicked man Lamech; Gen. 4. 19.

Quest. II.

IS it lawful for all sorts of people to marry, who are able with judge­ment to give their consent?

Yes. Heb. 13. 4. 1 Tim. 4. 3. 1 Cor. 7. 36, 37, 38. Gen. 24. 57, 58.

Well then, doth not the Popish-Church err, that forbids, and discharges marriage to their Church men?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, marriage is honourable a­mong all men, and the bed undefiled; Heb. 13. 4. (2) Because, the Apostle commands, for avoiding fornication, every man to have his own wife, and every woman to have her own husband; 1 Cor. 7. 2. (3) Be­cause, the Apostle reckons up the forbid­ding of marriage, among the doctrines of devils; 1 Tim. 4. 3. (4) Because, a Bi­shop must be the husband of one wife; 1 Tim. 3. 2. 4. Titus 1. 6. (5) Because, the Apostle reckons over the qualifications which are requisite for Bishops wives; 1 Tim. 3. 11.

(6) Because, it can be gathered from Scrip­ture, [Page 228] that some of the Apostles, and other Ministers of the Gospel, have been married persons. Concerning Peter, the matter is evident: Matth. 8. 14. Mark 1. 30. And we read that Philip the Evangelist, had four daughters, all of them Prophetesses; Acts 21. 9. And sayes not the Apostle, have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well, as other Apostles, and all the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas; 1 Cor. 9. 5.

Quest. III.

OUght marriage to be within the degrees of consanguinity, or affinity forbidden in the Word?

No.

Can incestuous marriages ever be made lawful, by any law of man, or consent of parties, so as these Persons, may live together, as man, and wife?

No. 1 Cor, 5. 1. Amos 2. 7. Mark 6. 18. Lev. 18. 24, 25, 26, 27, 28.

Well then, doth not the Popish-Church err, that speaks in the decrees of the Council of Trent, after this manner. If any man affirm, that these degrees only of Consanguinity or Affinity, which are set down in Leviticus, may hinder a contract of Marriage to be made, or may dissolve a marriage contract already made; and that the Church hath not power to dispense with some of these degrees (that [Page 229] is to say to permit incest) or may not make new Laws, and constitute far more forbidden degrees, than are exprest in Leviticus, let him be an Ana­thema, and accursed?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

Before this be done, take notice, that there are here two heads to be considered.

  • First, Whether or not we must stand, to the forbidden degrees of Consanguinity and Affinity ex­prest in Leviticus:
  • Secondly, Whether, to these degrees set down as forbidden in Leviticus, new degrees may be added by the Church of Rome, which will render a marriage incestuous?

To which we answer, that it is not in the power of any creature to dispense (that is to say, to suffer that to be used, which is for­bidden by the Law of God) with any of these Laws in Leviticus, which forbid incestuous mar­riages.

And next, we affirm, neither is it in the power of any creature, to add to these degrees forbidden in Leviticus, any other which are not forbidden,

(1) Because, such a power of dispensing, is not to be found in all the Scripture. (2) Because, the Lord sayes expresly, what thing soever I command you, observe to do it: [Page 230] thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it; Deut. 12. 32. But the Lord himself hath made these Laws, and establish­ed these Marches so sure, that no Council, no Pope, no Creature, can either dispense with any of them, or add new ones to them. See Leviticus 18. (3) Because, these Laws are of common, and perpetual right; and there­fore cannot be dispensed with. For the breach of them is reckoned up, amongst the abominations wherewith the Nations about polluted and defiled the land; Lev. 18. 24. 25, 27.

Quest. IV.

IS it lawful to marry a second wife, after the first is dead?

Yes.

Is it lawful after divorce to marry another, as if the offending party were dead?

Yes. Matth. 5. 31, 32. Rom. 7. 2. 3. Matth. 19. 9.

Well then, do not the Novatians, the Pu­ritans of old, truely so called: and the Tertul­lianists err, who absolutely condemned second marriages?

Yes.

This absurd tenet is confuted from Rom. 7. 2, 3. and from 1 Cor. 7. 39.

Do not likewise the Papists err, who deny, [Page 231] that after divorce, second marriages are permitted to Christians?

Yes.

But here by two distinctions they explain their mind.

First, They distinguish between Cohabitation, the Bed, and the Ty.

The first is, the dwelling together of man and woman, in one family.

The second is, the right of giving, and requiring due benevolence.

The third is that, whereby both are made one: whereby the one cannot but be the others while they are both living.

They distinguish next, between persons that are believers, and that are unbelievers. If then both parties, or one of them be unbelievers, they grant that the marriage is valide, both as to Cohabita­tion, to the marriage bed; and to the Ty, or Bond.

But if both parties be Christians, they think that the marriage may be dissolved, as to bedding together, and Cohabitation, yet the Bond standeth sure, and abideth unloosable: especially, if the marriage be contracted after Baptism: and therefore a second marriage after divorce is unlawful to any of them.

But this is easily confuted?

(1) Because, Christ permitted marriage [Page 232] after divorce; Matth. 5. 31, 32. Matth. 19. 9. Here Christ forbidding a man to put away his wife, and to marry another, in express words, excepts the case of Fornication. Therefore he suffers a man to put away his wife in the case of Fornication, and to marry another. (2) Because, the Apostle says, but if the unbelieving depart, let him depart: for a brother, or sister, is not under bondage in such cases; 1 Cor. 7. 15. Therefore, if a brother or sister, when there is such a wil­ful and obstinate desertion, be not under bondage, then surely the Bond is dissolved: and all remedies being tryed in vain, for bringing back the obstinate party, I doubt not, but the innocent party may marry another without blame. If this be, then much more may the innocent party marry another, when a Divorce is obtained.

Quest. V.

IS nothing but Adultery, or such wilful desertion, as can no way be remedied, by the Church, or Civil Magistrate, a sufficient cause of dissolving the bond of Marriage?

Nothing. Matth. 19. 8, 9. 1 Cor. 7. 15. Matth. 19. 6.

Well then, do not the Enthusiasts, and Familists err, who maintain, that it is free to a man, to put away his wife when he pleaseth?

[Page 233]Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the God of Israel hatteth putting away; Mal. 2. 16. (2) Because, whosoever putteth away his wife, except in case of Fornication, he causeth her to com­mit Adultery; Matth. 5, 32. (3) Because, the Apostle says, art thou bound to a wife, seek not to be loosed; 1 Cor. 7. 27.

Do not likewise the Papists err, who main­tain that there are other causes of divorce, than A­dultery and wilful desertion?

Yes.

They first tell us, that marriage contracted, but not consummated, may be dissolved; to wit, by a Monastick Vow of a perpetual single life.

They tell us secondly, that infidelity, and here­sie are just causes of divorce. So say the Anabap­tists.

And thirdly, they tell us that murder committed upon the hope of getting such a Match, is a suf­ficient cause of divorce.

That coldness, perpetual impotency, and such like fancies are causes?

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ says, what God hath joyned together, let no man put asunder, Matth. 19. 6. But marriage contracted, and ratified, though not consummated, is made [Page 234] by God: therefore it cannot be dissolved by man. Neither ought any man once marri­ed, to turn a Monck; for a single life is only fit for those, that have the gift of Continen­cy; for God commands them, that have it not, to marry; 1 Cor. 7. 9. (2) Neither can infidelity, or heresie, be a ground of divorce, as is clear from 1 Cor. 7. 12, 13. If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the woman that hath an husband, that believeth not, if he be pleased, to dwell with her, let her not leave him.

CHAP. XXV. Of the CHURCH.

Question I.

DOTH the Catholick, or Universal Church which is invisible, consist of the whole number of Elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one under Christ, the head thereof?

[Page 235]Yes. Eph. 1. 10, 22, 23. Eph. 5. 23, 27. Col. 1. 18.

Well then, doth not the Popish-Church err, who deny any Catholick invisible Church, consist­ing of the Elect only, effectually called: who main­tain, the Catholick Church, to be absolutely visible, and as visible a Society, as the Republick of Venice, or the kingdom of France: and that it consists no less of reprobates, unbelievers, great and manifest sinners, void of all inward and true grace, than of the Elect effectually called?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, we profess to believe, ac­cording to the Creed, that there is a Church Universal, namely such a one, as we have now described: but what we believe must be invisible; Heb. 11. 1. (2) Because, the internal form of the Church (namely her effectual calling by the Word and Spirit; 1 Peter 2. 9.) is invisible; 2 Tim. 2. 19. 1 Cor. 2. 11. (3) Because, the glory of the Kings daughter (that is of the Universal Church, as the Adversaries themselves con­fess) is internal, and therefore hidden and invisible; Psalm 45. 13. (4) Because, the Word tells us, that there is a Church, even the number of those, whom Christ hath loved; for whom he gave himself to the [Page 236] death; whom he hath sanctified, and washen and cleansed, and redeemed, with his own blood, and whom at last, he will glo­rifie; Eph. 5. 25, 26, 27. (5) Because, the Scripture tells; that there is a Church, which is the mystical body of Christ (and there­fore invisible to the eyes) which by a most mystical, and most marvelous union, is conjoyned, and united straitly with him; Eph. 1. 10, 22, 23. (6) Because, the Church Universal, as to its internal forme, is a spi­ritual house, built of lively stones, in Christ; 1 Peter 2. 5. (7) Because, the members of the Church Universal, considered as to their internal state, and condition, are united, and conjoyned together in one body, by one Spirit, and by one Faith; 1 Cor. 12. 13. Eph. 4. 4, 5. (8) Because, the members of the Church Universal, considered the former way, are the lively members of Christ, which he himself doth cherish with a lively, and quickning nurishment; Eph. 5. 29, 30.

Quest. II.

IS the Visible Church, under the New Testament, Catholick and Universal?

Yes. 1 Cor. 1. 2. and 1 Cor. 12. 12, 13. Psal. 2. 8. Rev. 7. 9. Rom. 15. 9, 10, 11, 12.

Well then, do not the Independents err, [Page 237] who maintain, there is no Visible Church, under the New Testament, except what may meet in one place, and may perform all their holy services in a private Church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, in very many places of the New Testament, the word Church (to wit Visible) is so largely taken, that it cannot be restricted, to any particular Congregational Church; Acts 8. 3. Gal. 1. 13. Acts 2. 47. 1 Cor. 10. 32. Eph. 3. 10. 1 Cor. 12. 28. 1 Tim. 3. 15. (2) Because, it hath been foretold, in many places of the Old Testament, that the Catholick Church shall be Visible; Psalm 22. 22, 23, 25, 27, 28. Psalm 72. 8, 9, 10, 11. Psalm 86. 9. Isaiah 2. 2, 3, 4. Zech. 14. 9. (3) Because, the Donation, or the gift of the kingdom (that is of the Church Universal) made by the Father to the Son, is Universal, and of all the World; Psalm 2. 8. Psalm 72. 8. Isaiah 49. 6. Dan. 7. 14. (4) Because, the Gospel of the Kingdom, is Universal; and according to the stile of the Scripture, work­eth the visible conversion of the whole world, and therefore the Church visibly converted, and gathered together, is Catho­lick and Universal; Matth. 26. 13. Mark 14. 9. Col. 1. 16. (5) Because, the Visible Char­ter, [Page 238] which constitutes the Church is Uni­versal: and therefore since one Charter, con­stitutes one Politie, or Government, all the Visible particular Churches, which are con­stitute by that one Catholick Charter, are one Church Universal; Matth. 28. 19. Eph. 3. 6. (6) Because, if there be Officers of a Church Visible Universal, there must be a Church Visible Universal it self: but the first is true, since the Donation of the Mini­stry, and the giving of it in a gift, is made to the Catholick Church; 1 Cor. 12, 28. Matth. 28. 19. (7) Because, there is a ge­neral outward call, and a general outward covenant into which all Christians enter out­wardly, by vertue whereof all of them, are knit, and tyed together; Acts 2. 39. (8) Be­cause, that same individual System, and Body of external Laws, proceeding from that same Authority, in which all particular Churches are equally concerned, and by which they are ruled, is Universal; 1 Tim. chap. 3. and Titus 3 chap. (9) Because, that external union of brotherhood, which is amongst all the Visible Christians in the world, is Catholick, and Universal; Acts 15. 23. Acts 24. 14. Gal. 5. 14. (10) Be­cause, the initial Visible seal, admittance, and enrowlment, are things Catholick, and [Page 239] Oecumenical. For he that takes up his free­dom in a whole Corporation or Kingdom, is free of the whole, and in every part there­of, and hath right to all the general privi­ledges and immunities thereof. There is a Patent for Baptism Go and baptize all Nations. And by vertue of the Priviledges thereof, they that are baptized in any one Church, are accounted visible subjects of Christs Kingdom, in all places of the Christian world. Matth. 28. 19. (11) Because, all Churches are one Body; Rom. 12. 5. (12) Because, Peter writting to the strangers scattered a­broad throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia calleth them all one Flock; 1 Peter 5. 2. (13) Because, all the Churches of the World are one sheepfold; Iohn 10. 16. (14) Because, the Visible Church is one great house; 2 Tim. 2. 20.

Quest. III.

DOTH the Visible Church consist of all those thorowout the world that profess the Christian Religion, together with their Children?

Yes. 1 Cor. 1. 2. Psalm 2. 8. 1 Cor. 7. 14.

Well then, do not the Donatists, Anabap­tists, and Puritans of old so truely named, err, who affirm the visible Church to consist of those only, that are pious and holy?

Yes.

[Page 240] Do not likewise the Independents err, who think, none ought to be members of the Visible Church, save those, who in the judgement of men very spiritual, and discerning are esteemed true believers, and saints: who have given sufficient proof of their knowledge in the fundamentals of Religion: who have reported in order, and given a good account of the experimental work of their conversion, and effectual calling; who have shewed their conversation in the world, to have been with­out the omission of any known duty, or commission of any known fault, and that for a considerable length of time.

Yes.

Do not lastly the Quakers err, who think the only visible Church of GOD on earth, to be them­selves; and all others not of their profession, and practise, to be unregenerate, and wanting the Spirit?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the visible Church, is com­pared to a Garner, in which there is not only Wheat, but Chaff mixed with it. To a Field, in which Tares, and Darnel are mix­ed among the good Corn. To a Net, in which both good Fishes, and bad are taken; Matth. 13. chapter. To a great House, wherein are not only vessels of Gold, and [Page 241] Silver, but of Wood, and of Earth; 2 Tim. 2. 20. (2) Because, Christ will answer some at the last day; who will say to him, Lord, have not we Prophesied in thy name, and in thy name casten out Devils, and have we not eaten and drunken at thy table, I know you not. This evidently shews, that many have been members of the Visible Church, whom Christ will not own at the last day; Matth. 7. 22, 23. (3) From the Parable of the ten Virgins, five whereof were foolish, five wise; Matth. 25. 1. (4) From the Pa­rable of the Banquet, where one was found at the Table, without a Wedding Garment; Matth. 22. 11. (5) Because, many are of the Visible Church, who are not of the in­visible Church; 1 Iohn 2. 19. (6) Because the Apostle, calls the Church of Corinth, the Church of Christ, notwithstanding of their gross enormities; 1 Cor. 1. 11. 1 Cor. 3. 3. 1 Cor. 5. 1. 1 Cor. 6. 7. (7) Because, Moses did acknowledge, even those then to be members of the Visible Church, to whom yet he knew, the Lord had not given ears to hear, nor eyes to see, nor a heart to un­derstand, the great and wonderful miracles which he wrought in their sight; Deut. 29. 10, 11, 12, 13. compared with the verses 2, 3, 4. (8) Because, Iohn the Baptist did admit [Page 242] many thousands into the communion of the Visible Church, without making a narrow search of their true grace, and conversion; Matth. 3. (9) Because, the Apostles did instantly, and without the delay of one day, baptise all those that professed the Christian Religion; Acts 2. 38, 41. Acts 8. 12. Iohn 3. 26. (10) Because, the preaching of the Gospel, is appointed by God, as an ordina­ry mean, no less for the Conversion of men, and women, than for the advancement of those in grace that are converted; Prov. 9▪ 3, 4. 2 Cor. 5. 18, 19. 20, 2 Tim. 2. 24, 25 (11) Because, we are forbidden by the A­postle, to judge the spiritual state and con­dition of our neighbour; Rom. 14. 4. (12) Because, Christ did acknowledge Iudas the Theif, and Traitor, as a member of his Visible Church, whom yet he foresaw to be the son of perdition; Matth. 26. 23. (13) Because, Christ had a visible church on earth many hundered of years before ever there were such cattle as Quakers in the World. Unless they will alledge that the primitive Christians and all the Saints, since the Apostles dayes, have been their Predecessors, and claime kin to them, as the Samaritans did to Iacob, who were truely descended of the heathen; who were brought thither out of Assyria, as [Page 243] the Quakers are descended from the Enthusi­asts in Germany, about 160 years since, as Nicolas Strokins, Iohn Matthias, and Iohn of Leyden, notorious Hereticks, blasphemers, and bloody Murderers.

But how quite different, the Quakers are to the primitive christians, and holy men of God then, and since, will evidently ap­pear hence, that they did not contemn these two great ordinances of the Gospel instituted by Christ, to wit, Baptism and the Lords Supper. They had Bishops and Deacons to govern, and instruct them, who were or­dained to their functions by prayer and im­position of hands, whom they did not re­vile, with the ugly names of dumb dogs, and hirelings. These primitive christians, had not in their assemblies Women-preachers as the Quakers have, which is down right contrary to Pauls injunctions; 1 Cor. 14. 35. Neither were silent meetings ever heard of among the primitive christians. Nor did they ever out of contempt call churches, places appointed for the publick worship of God, Steeple-houses, but resorted to them for performing their devotions, and service to God, as did our blessed Saviour, and his Apostles; Iohn 18. 20. Luke 4. 16. Acts 3. 1. Acts 13. 5.

[Page 244] Do not likewise the Papists and Lutherians err, who will have none members of the visible Church that are unbaptized?

Yes.

Do not lastly the Anabaptists err, who will have no infants members of the visible church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, that God commanded in­fants, and little ones, should stand before him; should enter into covenant with him; Deut. 29. 10, 11. (2) Because, infants are called the people of God, no less than men and women come to age; Deut. 29. 11, 12, 13. (3) Because, the promise of Grace be­longs to children as well as to the parents; Acts 2. 39. (4) If children be not members of the visible church, they must be mem­bers of the visible kingdom of the devil, for there can be no midst; Eph. 2. 12, 13. And so there shall be no difference between the children of Believers, and the children of Turks and Pagans. (5) Because, infants un­der the Old Testament, had right unto the Co­venant of Grace; Gen. 17. 7, 12. And children of Believers under the New Testament have lost no right to that covenant of Grace, which children under the Old Testament had; seeing the covenant of Grace, now under [Page 245] the Gospel, is not more strickly, and sparingly administred, than long since under the law; Heb. 8. 6. Rom. 11. 12. (6) Because, infants are commanded to joyn themselves to Gods ordinances; Ioel 2. 16. (7) Because, if Christ, while an infant, was head of the visible church; then infants may be his members. But the first is true, from Isaiah 9. 6. Therefore the second must be true also. (8) Because, they whom the false Apostles would have to be circumcised, after the manner of Moses (and therefore infants) were called Disciples; Acts 15. 10.

Quest. IV.

IS there any ordinary possibility of Salvation out of the Visible Church?

No. Acts 2. 47.

Well then, do not the Enthusiasts, Quakers, and Libertines err, who affirm, that any man, may be a true christian, and be saved, though he live within no Visible Church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Lord IEHOVAH, in his visible Church (ordinarly) commands the blessing, even life for evermore; Psalm 133. 3. (2) Because, the visible church, is the mother of all Believers; Gal. 4. 26. By [Page 246] Ierusalem which is above, I understand the true Christian Church, which seeketh its salvation; not by the first covenant of the law, namely by the works of the law, but by the second of the Gospel; namely by the merits of Christ, embraced by a true Faith, which hath its orginal from heaven, by the powerful cal­ling of the Holy Ghost. (3) Because, they that are without the visible church, are with­out Christ; Eph. 2. 12. (4) Why are men and women joyned to the visible church but that they may be saved? Acts 2. 47.

(5) Because, they that are without the visible church, are destitute, of the ordinary means of life and salvation; Psalm 147. 19. 20.

Quest. V.

HATH Christ given to this Ca­tholick-church-visible, the Mi­nistry, Oracles, and Ordinances of God, for the gathering, and perfecting of the Saints in this life, to the end of the World?

Yes.

Shall there be alwayes a church on earth, to worship God according to his will?

Yes. 1 cor. 12. 28. Eph. 4. 11, 12, 13. Mat. 28. 19, 20. Matth. 16. 18. Psalm 72. 17. Psalm 102. 28. Isai. 59. 21.

Well then, do not the Socinians, Anabap­tists; and Libertines err, who affirm that the [Page 247] visible Church may fail, and perish out of the world?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Scepticks commonly called Seekers err, who affirm, that the whole universal church, which hath been upon the earth: and all religious worship, all external and outward preaching of the Word, all administration of Sacra­ments, and the use of all other religious things have perished a little after the Apostles times, and are not to this day restored, until Christ from Heaven, shall send new Apostles with an extraordinary com­mission, for restoring, and raising up again the visible church?

And that in the mean time, no man hath right or power, to dispense the Word, or administer the Sacraments, or perform any Ecclesiastical duty: and that they who are now called the preachers of the Gospel are not so?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Lord hath promised, that his church shall endure, so long as the ordinances of heaven shall continue; Isaiah 66. 22. (2) Because, Christ hath promised that the Gates of Hell shal not prevail against his church; Matth. 16. 18. (3) Because, there is no end to be put to the kingdom of Christ; Luke 1. 33. And therefore no end [Page 248] to his church; Isaiah 9. 7. (4) Because▪ glory will be to him, in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all Ages, world without end Amen; Eph. 3. 21. (5) Because, Christ who hath given power to his Ministers, to teach his church, and to administer the Sa­craments, hath promised to be with them to the end of the World; Matth. 28. 19, 20. (6) Because, the Lord hath promised to preserve a people to himself, to the end of the world which he shall rule, and govern, by his Word and Spirit; Isaiah 59. 20, 21. Isaiah. 9. 6, 7. (7) Because, the Lord hath chosen Zion: he hath desired it for his ha­bitation, where he will rest, and dwell for ever; Psalm 132. 13. 14. (8) Because, Christ hath given some to be Pastors, and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints, till we all come into the unity of the Faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God; Eph. 4. 11. And he hath appointed a Ministry to continue even after the Apostles dayes, as is evident from 1 Tim. 3 chapter. From Titus first chapter, where the Apostle sets down the or­dinary qualifications of Ministers, and the Rules for calling them to the Ministry. (9) Because, there is a general Rule set down, for the government, and discipline, of Christs church: which discipline and order, [Page 249] is to continue in it, to the end of the world; Matth. 1 18. (10) Because, the Lord commands, that we forsake not the assemb­ling of our selves together: and hath pro­mised to bless after a special manner, any that are gathered together in his name, any where, but our assembling for hearing the word of God, is done in the name of Christ; Heb. 10. 25. Matth. 18. 20. Matth. 28. 20. (11) Because, the death of Christ, in the last supper, is to be shewed till he come; 1 Cor. 11. 26. (12) Because, by the Word (even preached Rom. 10. 17.) we are born again; 1 Peter 1. 23. Iames 1. 18. By Bap­tism we are ingrafted into Christ; Rom. 6. 3, 4. Gal. 3. 27. In the Lords Supper, we have communion with Christ; 1 Cor. 10. 16. See more to this purpose; chap. 21. Que­stion eight.

Quest. VI.

HAth the Catholick church been sometimes more, sometimes less Visible?

Yes. Rom. 11. 3, 4. Rev. 12. 6, 14.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who affirm, that the church hath been, is, and shall be most gloriously Visible to all the whole world far and nigh?

Yes.

[Page 250] By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the church of GOD, in the Prophet Elijahs time was brought to that pass, that he thought none remained but himself; 1 Kings 19. 10. Rom. 11. 2, 3, 4. (2) Because, for a long time Israel was with­out the true GOD, and without a teaching Priest, and without the Law; 2 Chron. 15. 3. (3) Because, the Lord often complains, that his church and people have forsaken him, have not known him: that the faithful city hath become a harlot, that scarce a man could be found to do justice, and follow truth; all which is inconsistent with that glorious condition of the visible church, which the Papists dream of; Isaiah 1. 3, 4. Ierm. 2. 29. Ierm. 5. 1. (4) Because, in the time of the ten Persecutions, the visible church was much obscured, and darkned. And after these storms were over, arose the Arians, who did much trouble the church of Christ, as is clear from History. (5) Be­cause, two wings were given to the Woman, that is to the Church of GOD, two wings (I say) of a great Eagle, that she might flie into the wilderness, to hid her self; Rev. 12. 14. (6) Because, the Apostle Paul did foretel that general defection, and aposta­sy of the visible church mentioned; 2 Thes. [Page 251] 2, 3. (7) Because, Christ hath foretold, that before his second coming, he shall scarce find Faith on the Earth; Luke 18. 8.

(8) Because, the church of GOD is al­wayes lyable to trouble, and persecution while it sojourneth in this world. But troubles and persecutions do much obscure the brightness, and splendour of a visible church; Luke 21. 17. Iohn 16. 2. Psalm 129. 1, 2, 3.

Quest. VII.

ARE the purest churches under heaven subject both to mixture and error?

Yes. 1 Cor. 13. 12. Rev. 2. and 3. chapter Rev. 18. 2. Rom. 11. 18, 19, 20, 21, 22.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who affirm, that the church cannot err, neither in matters ab­solutely necessary, neither in other things, which it proposes to be done and believed by us?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the visible church, under the Old Testament, oftentimes made defection to Idolatry; Exod. 32. 8. Iudges 3. 7. (2) Because, as long as we are here, we know but in part; and therefore we are subject, and lyable to mistakes; 1 Cor. 13. 9, 12. (3) Because, the seven churches of Asia to which [Page 252] Iohn did writ, are accused of mixture, and errors; Rev. 2. 4, 5. (4) Because, while Christ was on earth, the Disciples dreamed of a worldly kingdom▪ and for a time, even after his resurrection they did believe it; Acts 1. 6. (5) Because, before the day of Christ be at hand, there shall be a falling away of the visible church, from the true Orthodox Faith to Antichristianism, which in great part is already come to pass, and more than is to come between this time and his second coming: 2 Thes. 2. 3. Rev. 13. 3. (6) Because, one of the chief differences between the Church Militant, and the Church Triumphant is this, that the one can err, but not the other; 1 Cor. 13. 9, 10, 12. (7) Because, Christ hath foretold, that there shall arise false Christs and false Prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, in so much, if it were possible they shall deceive the very Elect; Matth. 24. 24. (8) Because, when the Son of man cometh, he shall scarce find Faith on the earth; Luke 18. 8. (9) Because, the converted Iews erred, in being zealous for the Law; thinking that the Ce­remonial Law, ought yet to be observed, not understanding that the same was abolish­ed by Christ; Acts 21. 20. So did the Ga­latians err, in admitting circumcision; Gal. [Page 253] 1, 6. And the Corinthians, in their abuse of the Lords Supper; 1 Cor. 11. 18.

Quest. VIII.

IS there no other head of the Visible Church, but the Lord Iesus Christ?

No.

Can the Pope of Rome, in any sense be the head thereof?

No. Col. 1. 18. Eph. 1. 22.

Well then, doth not the Popish-Church err, who maintains, that not only Christ, is the univer­sal head of the Church, but that there is another visible head under him, who (say they) is the Pope of Rome, Christs Vicar, or Deputy under him?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, as not many husbands, but one only, is head of the wife, so Christ only is head of the Church; Eph. 5. 23. (2) Because, the Church is espoused to one only namely to Christ; 1 Cor. 11. 3. (3) Be­cause, the Church is the body of Christ only; Eph. 1. 22, 23. (4) Because, among all the Ecclesiastick orders instituted, and appointed by Christ, we do not read of such a creature, as an Universal Vicar▪ of Christ; Eph. 4. 11. (5) Because, the Church is one body only [Page 254] (unless it be a monster) but one body, can­not have two heads; Rom. 12. 4, 5. (6) Because, Christ only, can inspire, or breath in vigour, sense, motion, and spiritual life into his members; Eph. 5. 29, 30. Iohn 6. 48, 50, 51. Iohn 15. 1, 2. (7) Because, there must not be Lordship, and soveraignty a­mong them, that are under Christ their head and Lord; Luke 22. 25. 1 Peter 5. 2, 3.

(8) If the Pope be not so much as a Bishop of a particular Church, he cannot be univer­sal Bishop. The first is true, because he doth not perform the office of a Bishop, which is set down; 1 Tim. 3, 2, Titus 1, 7. 8, 9.

Do not likewise the Erastians, and others as Arminians err, who make the Supream Magi­strate head of the Church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Protestant Religion, as it is contained in the Harmony of Confessions, especially in the Confession of Faith, record­ed in the first Parliament of King Iames the sixth, laitly ratified, and confirmed, doth not acknowledge any Supream Head, or Governor in the Church, neither Angel, Man, Pope, Prince, nor Potentate, save the Lord Christ, from whom alone, all subordinate power [Page 255] and authority is derived, to the officers, of his own Church. (2) Because, if the Su­pream Magistrate be a church officer he must derive his power from Christ, and must be a Spiritual, and Ecclesiastick head and Governour, and not a civil only. And if such then Christ hath devolved his own place and office upon him, which is without Scripture proof. (3) Because, if the Su­pream Magistrate be head of the church, he must have a right to this Title, either by humane Law, or by a divine warrant. Laws of a Nation, cannot make him head of the church, because such laws cannot make him an Ecclesiastick, and Spiritual officer. There is no divine warrant, or commission from Christ, as is clear from Matth. 18. 17. From the Epistles to Timothy, and Titus. From Ephes. 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7, 8. And from 1 Cor. 11. 28.

Quest. IX.

IS the Pope that Antichrist, that Man of sin, and Son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church of God against Christ, and all that is called God?

Yes. 2 Thes. 2. 3, 4, 8, 9 Rev. 13. 6. Matt. 23. 8, 9, 10.

Though this be denyed by the church of Rome, yet the true discription of Antichrist agrees to him.

[Page 256](1) Because, he is not one single man, but an order, and race of men, succeeding to one another, in that same state, and office, which you will see, by comparing; 1 Iohn 4. 3. 2 Thes. 2. 7, 8. together. (2) His coming, is after the manner of Satan; 2 Thes. 2. 9. (3) As to his name, he calls himself a Christian, but in very truth an Adversary to Christ: and by consequence, one that denys Jesus to be the Christ; Rev. 17. 14. Rev. 19. 19. 2 Thes. 2 8. 1 Iohn 2. 23. (4) he sitteth in the Temple of GOD, as GOD; 2 Thes. 2. 4. (5) He ruleth in the great city, and exercises dominion over the Kings of the earth. 6) He deceiveth them, that dwell on the earth, with lying wonders, and miracles; 2 Thes. 2. 9. Rev. 13: 14, 15: (7) He causeth all sorts of Persons to receive his mark, on their right hand, or on their fore­head; Rev: 13: 16, 17: (8) To him agrees, what Paul sayes: and now ye know what with-holdeth (namely the Roman Emperour) that he might be revealed in his time; 2 Thes: 2: 6, 7:

CHAP. XXVI. Of the Communion of Saints.

Question I.

ARE the Saints bound by profession, to maintain an holy fellowship, and commu­nion in the worship of GOD, in perform­ing such other spiritual duties, as tend to their mu­tual edification?

Ye,. Heb. 10. 24, 25. Acts 2. 42. 46. Isa. 2. 3. 1 Cor. 11. 20.

Well then, did not the Donatists of old, and Separatists now err, who maintain, that Hypo­crites and wicked men, do pollute, and defile the worship of God, not only to themselves, but also to others that worship with them: and that there­fore, we must separate from Communion in the wor­ship of God, because of them?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Church of the Iews in Christs time was very corrupt; Matth. 15. 7. [Page 258] Mark 6, 7, 8. And yet both by his pra­ctise, and his command, he would not have his hearers to separate from it. For he both observed the feasts, and preached in their Synagogues; Iohn 8. 1. Luke 4. 15. Iohn 10. 22. And he commands his hearers to ob­serve what the Scribes, and Pharisees bad them do; Matth. 23. 2, 3. (2) Because, the Apostle is so far from commanding separa­tion from the Church of Corinth, that he praises their meetings; (1 Cor. 5. 4. 1 Cor. 11. 20. 1 Cor. 14. 23.) notwithstanding of the many gross scandals, which were among them; 1 Cor. 1. 11, 12, 13. 1 Cor. 5. 1, 2. And 1 Cor. 15. 12, 13. (3) Because, the Apostles calls the Galatians, the Church of Christ, brethren, and the children of God, who were yet in some measure removed from GOD, to another Gospel. Nay, says Paul, O foolish, (or senseless) Galatians, who hath bewitched you, (that is, so blinded the eyes of your understanding, that ye cannot see the right truth; as the Iuglars bewitch the outward eyes, that men think they see that which they see not) that ye should not obey the truth; Gal. 3. 1. And yet since it was a constitute true Church, it was his judgement, there should be no separation from it, notwithstanding of all the foresaid [Page 259] faults. (4) Because, the Church of Ephesus was a true Church, though they made de­fection from their first love. So was the Church of Pergamus, though there were in it who held the doctrine of Balaam. So was the Church of Thyatira, notwithstanding that they suffered Iesebel, that called her self a prophetess, and taught the servants of Christ to commit Fornication, and to eat things sacrificed to Idols. (5) If we must separate from the Communion of the Church in things lawful, for the faults of others, of for the faults of Ministers, and if their sins pollute the worship of God to others, than, we must not keep communion with any Church: seeing there can hardly be a Church where there are not some hidden Hypocrites. Nay, where there are not some, who are known to be such by the Minister. Yet such are not to be excluded, as Christ himself teaches; Matth. 13. 24. to 31. See the 47. and 48. verses of that same chapter. (6) If the worship be polluted to some, for the faults of others, with whom they worship, then must the Word and Sacraments, have their efficacy and worth from the Persons, that worship, and from the dispensers of them, which is absurd. (7) Because, wick­ed and evil men, do not pollute the worship [Page 260] to others, but to themselves only; as it ap­pears from the man, that wanted the wed­ding Garment; Matth. 22. 11. And from those who did eat and drink unworthily at the Lords Table. Such do not eat and drink damnation to others, but to themselves; 1 Cor. 11. 27, 29.▪

Quest. II.

DOth this Communion, which the Saints have with Christ, make them in any wise partakers of the Substance of his God-head, or equal with him in any respect?

No.

Is there a mixture of the Divine Essence, with the Substance of all the Creatures, because the Divine Essence is infinite, and every where pre­sent?

No.

Doth every règenerate man, that is united with God, by vertue of this union, become God the maker of Heaven and Earth?

No.

Are all the Acts of a mans will, and all his actions, even his most cursed, and wicked actions, wholly Divine, which to resist, and contradict is rebellion against God?

No. Iohn 1. 14. Col. 1. 18, 19.

Well then, do not the Familists err, who teach, that the Saints are made God, and Christ, [Page 261] by an Essential and Corporal Union with them?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Manicheans err, who blasphemously taught, that the Divine Essence, was mingled with soul and body of every man, and that therefore all his Actions were wholly Di­vine?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the personal union is given to none, but to Christ only; Iohn 1. 14. The Word was made Flesh, that is, a true man like unto us in all things, yet without sin. (2) Because, in him dwelleth all the fulness of the God-head bodily. Namely by an essential inhabitation of the Son of God in the humane nature, by the uniting of his Divine Nature with the Humane, in the unity of his Person. Bodily, that is Personally, Essentially, and Truely. (3) Because, the union of the Saints with Christ is by Faith, not indeed by a personal Union; Eph. 3. 17. (4). Because, there is no man that sinneth not; 1 Iohn 1. 8, 10. (5) Be­cause, Gods Essence, is most simple, and single, and infinitely above and beyond all creatures; Exod. 3. 14. (6) Because, holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God of Hosts; Isaiah 6. 3. (7) Because, Solomon in his prayer says, be­hold [Page 262] the heaven of heavens, cannot contain thee, how much less this house which I have builded to thy Name; 1 Kings 8. 27. (8) Because, the Prophet Isaiah says, behold the Nations are as a drop of a bucket, and are as the smallest dust of the ballance e­stemed; chap. 40. 15. (9) Because, the Ma­nichean error, is the outmost stretch of Satans invention, beyond which he is not able to go. They deserve not confutation, but to be looked upon, as Devils incarnate.

Quest. III.

DOth the Communion of Saints, which they have one with an­other, take away or infringe the Title, or propriety which each man hath in his own goods, and posses­sions?

No. Acts 5. 4. Exod. 25. 14. Eph. 5. 28.

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who affirm, that the goods and possessions of the Saints ought to be common?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, in the time of the primitive Church, no man was obliged out of necessity to deliver his goods. Neither did believers loss their right and propriety which they had to them; Acts 5. 4. (2) Because, the eight command, which is of perpetual use [Page 263] to all men, supposeth a distinction, and propriety of Goods. For if all Goods were common, it were impossible to steal. (3) Because, there should be no giving of Almes: there should be no Hospitality, which is con­trary to the Apostle; Eph. 4. 28. Heb. 13. 2.

CHAP. XXVII. Of the Sacraments.

Question. I.

ARE the Sacraments holy signs and seals of the Covenant of Grace, immediatly insti­tuted by GOD, to represent Christ, and his benefits; and to confirm our interest in him?

Yes.

Do the Sacraments put a visible difference, be­tween those that belong unto the Church, and the rest of the World?

Yes.

Do the Sacraments solemnly engage men and women to the service of God in Christ, according to his word?

[Page 264]Yes. Rom. 4. 11. Gen. 17. 7, 10. Matth. 28. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 23. 1 Cor. 10. 16. 1 Cor. 11. 25, 26. Gal. 3. 7. Rom. 15. 8. Exod. 12. 48. Gen. 34. 14. Rom. 6. 3, 4. And 1 Cor. 10. 16, 21.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, with the Anabaptists, who maintain, that the Sacra­ments, are not seals of the Covenant of Grace, in­stituted by God, to represent Christ and his benefits: but only bare tokens, and Tests of our Christian profession?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Circumcision is expresly cal­led a sign, and seal of the righteousness of Faith; Rom. 4. 11. Now, if Circumcision was a seal, and sign; why ought not Baptism, and the Lords Supper to be signs, and seals also? (2) Because, the names, and pro­perties of the things signified, are given to the Sacramental signs. Thus Circumcision is called the Covenant; Gen. 17. 10. The bread is called the Body of Christ; Matth. 26. 26. And Baptism is called the washing of regeneration; Titus 3. 5. For no other reasons, but because they represent and con­firm things spiritual to Believers. (3) Be­cause, the cup of blessing in the Sacrament, is the communion of the blood of Christ; and [Page 265] the bread is the communion of the body of Christ; 1 Cor. 10. 16. (4) Because, the Sa­craments bring into our memories, Christ and his benefits; and therefore, as it were, they set him before our eyes, and so increase and confirm our faith: 1 Cor. 11. 24, 25.

Quest. II.

IS the Grace, which is exhibited in, or by the Sacraments, rightly used; conferred by any power in them?

No. Rom. 2. 28, 29. 1 Peter 3. 21.

Well then, do not the Papists and Lutheri­ans err, who maintain, that the Sacraments of themselves are true, immediate, and effectual causes of our Iustification, and give life?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the holy Scripture attributes our Justification to Faith only, as an instru­mental cause, and to no other thing; Rom. 1. 17. Rom. 3. 28. Gal. 2. 16. And therefore the Sacraments cannot be the efficient causes of our Justification, and life. (2) Because, the Scripture makes an express difference, between the work of a man dispensing the Sacraments, and the work of the holy Ghost; Matth. 3. 11. (3) Because, signs and seals of Grace cannot confer, and effectuat Grace. [Page 266] But the Sacraments, are but signs and seals of Grace; because to signifie, and to have ver­tue, and power to do differ in nature and in kind. (4) Because, many are partakers of the Sacra­ments, who yet are not partakers of the Grace of GOD, as Simon Magus; Acts 8. 13. Ananias, and Saphira; Acts 5. 4, 9. And how many thousands do eat and drink unworthily, drinking and eating damnation to themselves; 1 Cor. 11. 29. (5) Because, many have been justified, before ever they did partake of a Sacrament, as Abraham; Rom. 4. 11. And Cornelius with his fellows; Acts 10. 46.

Quest. III.

DOTH the efficacy of a Sacra­ment depend upon the piety or intention of him, that doth administer it?

No. Matth. 3. 11. 1 Cor. 12. 13.

Well then, do not the Donatists, and Ana­baptists err, who maintain, that the Sacraments dispensed by a wicked, and graceless Minister are of no vertue, or efficacy?

Yes.

Do not also some others now a days err, who are not far from the same opinion?

Yes.

Do not lastly the Papists err, who maintain, that to the perfection of a Sacrament, the actual [Page 267] intention of the Minister, at least his vertual in­tention of doing that, which the Church doth, is necessary?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Iudas who was a Thief, and a Traitour, did according to the command of Christ baptize, as well as the rest: yet Christ, never called in question his Baptism. (2) Because, the efficacy of the Word, doth not depend upon the piety, goodness, worthi­ness, or good intention of the Instrument; Phil. 1. 16: Therefore, neither doth the ef­ficacy of a Sacrament depend upon the inten­tion of him, that doth administer it. (3) If the efficacy of Baptism depended upon the good intention of the Minister, then no Christian could be sure, that he is baptized: seeing no man can be sure of, or know the Ministers intention. (4) Because, the ope­ration, and efficacy of the Sacraments, de­pend upon the operation of the Holy Ghost, and the Word of institution; Matth. 3. 11. 1 Cor. 12, 13. (5) Because, the Papists themselves (which is argumentum ad hominem) cannot be sure, that the bread in the Eucharist is Transubstantiat into the Body of Christ. And therefore in their Adorati­on, and falling down to the Host, they com­mit [Page 268] most damnable Idolatry in worshipping that which is neither GOD, nor any divine thing. I say, they cannot be sure, because the Priests intention, may be deficient, while he is consecrating the Bread.

Quest. IV.

ARE there only two Sacraments, ordained by Christ, in the Gospel? I answer two only, namely Baptism, and the Lords Supper.

Matth. 28. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 20, 23.

Well then, do not the Romanists err, who make seven Sacraments, by adding to Baptism, and the Lords Supper, Confirmation, Pennance, Extream Unction, Ordination, and Matri­mony?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, no other Sacraments, save Baptism and the Lords Supper are instituted by Christ, in all the holy Scripture. (2) Be­cause, the description, and definition of a Sacrament, as you will find it in the first Question; doth agree only to Baptism, and the Lord, Supper, (3) Because, Christ was a Copartner, and sharer of Baptism, and the Lords Supper, which in his own per­son, he did sanctifie, and by them did testi­fie and profess his communion with his [Page 269] people of the New Testament, but never was a sharer of any of these five Bastard Sacra­ments.

Quest. V.

MAY Baptism and the Lords Supper, be dispensed by any but by a Minister of the Word, lawfully ordain­ed?

No. Matth. 28. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 20, 23. 1 Cor. 4. 1. Heb. 5. 4.

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, that the Sacraments may be dispensed, and administred by any Believer?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Papists and the Lutherians err, who maintain that it is lawful for Laicks, or Women, to administer the Sacrament of Baptism, in case of necessity?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ gave the power of dispensing the Sacraments to them only, to whom he gave the power of Preaching; Mat. 28. 19. But the power of preaching is not given to all men; Heb. 5. 4. (2) Because, all that ever did dispense the Sacrament of Baptism in the New Testament, were either called Ordinarly, or Extraordinarly: as is evident from the examples of Iohn the Bap­tist, [Page 270] and the disciples of Christ. From the example of Peter; Acts 2. 41. From the example of Philip, Acts 8. 38. From the example of Ananias; Acts 9. 18. From the example of Paul and Silas; Acts 16. 15. 33. (3) Because, it is unlawful for any man, to affix the Kings seal to a Charter, or Letters­patent, unless he be a person authorized, and deputed by the King for that use. But the Sacraments are seals, of the Covenant between God and his people; Rom. 4. 11. (4) Because, women are not permitted to speak publickly in the Church: therefore they have no power, to dispense the Sacra­ment of Baptism; 1 Cor. 14. 34. 1 Tim. 2. 12. (5) Because, the Adversaries grant that it is unlawful to women, or Laicks to administer the Lords Supper: therefore it is as unlawful for them to administer Baptism. No just cause of reason, or disparity can be given. (6) Because, the benefit of regeneration is not tyed (as the Adversaries may dream) to the outward Baptism, as is clear and evi­dent from the conversion of the Thief upon the cross. And from 1 Peter 3. 21. There­fore, there is no such necessity of Baptism, as the Papists, and Lutherians do fancy.

Quest. VI.

ARE the Sacraments of the Old Testament, in regard of the spiritual things, thereby signified, and exhibited, the same for substance with those of the New?

Yes. 1 Cor. 10. 1, 2, 3, 4.

Well then, do not the Papists and Luthe­rians err, who maintain, that the difference be­tween the Sacraments of the Old Testament, and the New, consists in this, that those did de­liniate and shaddow forth Grace; these contain, of­fer, and confer Grace?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Apostle (1 Cor. 10. 1, 2, 3.) expresly says, that the Cloud, and the passing thorow the Red-Sea, did signi­fie these same things to the Iews, which Baptism signifies to us. And that the Manna, and the Water from the Rock, did signifie the same thing to them; which the Lords Supper signifies to us.

(2) Because, the Sacraments of the Old and New Testament, did obsignate and seal up the same righteousness of Faith; Rom. 4. 11. (3) Because, the Scripture applyeth to Believers, under the Old Testament, the Sacraments of the New; 1 Cor. 10. 1, 2, 3. And on the other hand, the Scripture applyeth the Sacraments [Page 272] of the New Testament, to Believers under the Old; which is not done by reason of the sign, for the signs are diverse and different: there­fore it must be done, by reason of the thing signified; and by consequence the Sacraments of the Old Testament must agree in the thing signified with the Sacraments of the New. (4) Because, the Sacraments of both Testaments a­gree in the Word of Promise; Gen. 17. 7. Acts 2. 38, 39. Rom. 4. 11, 12, 13. Gal. 3. 29.

CHAP. XXVIII. Of BAPTISM.

Question I.

IS the Sacrament of Baptism with Water by Christs appointment, to be continued in his Church to the end of the World?

Yes. Matth. 28. 19, 20.

Well then, do not the Quakers err, who maintain, that Baptism with Water, is not an Ordinance of Divine institution, and that there is no Gospel precept for it?

Yes.

[Page 273] By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ taking his fare-well of his Disciples, gave them this Commission, Go ye therefore and teach all Nations, Baptising them in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Or according to the Original Word, make all Nations Disciples, by your Doctrine, Baptising them, in the Name of, &c. All which words are spoken with one breath. Whence it is clear, that the same very persons that were commanded to make all Nations Dis­ciples by their Doctrine, were commanded to baptise them. But it was not in their power to administer the Inward Baptism; that is, to baptise with the holy Ghost, and with fire. Men may well administer the Water, or external sign; but it is Christ that be­stowes the inward Grace, and thing signifi­ed; as is clear from Matth. 3. 11. where Iohn the Baptist, sayes, I indeed baptise you with Water unto Repentance, but he that com­eth after me, shall baptise you with the holy Ghost, and with fire. If any man had re­ceived this power of Baptising with the Holy Ghost, then surely Iohn should have receiv­ed it, whom Jesus so highly commends, as, that there was not a greater than he born of wo­men; Matth. 11. 11. And though our Sa­viour subjoyns, he that is least in the king­dom [Page 274] of Heaven, is greater than he, yet this will not infer, that any among the Teachers of the Gospel, had the power of baptising with the holy Ghost, which he had not; but only, that they did shew Christ more clear­ly, as having most perfectly accomplished whatsoever was requisite to our salvation; and did publish this, not only to the Iews, but also to the Gentiles. And so Christ as the Master employed only the Disciples, as his servants to dispense and act ministerially in his service, reserving the blessing of their em­ployments to himself. Now, baptizing with the holy Ghost, is the greatest blessing of the Gospel, and so cannot flow but from Christ himself. (2) Because, the Disciples of Christ acted only ministerially under him in working of miracles: therefore they could not administer baptism, with the holy Ghost, seing this is a greater power, than the other. The cureing of the soul is a far greater work, than to cure miraculously the body. The work of Conversion, and re­generation, is a work beyond the creating of heaven and earth. There was only here, the introducing of a new Form, but no con­trary Form, or quality to be expelled. But in this, the heart of stone must not onely be taken away, but a heart of flesh must be given. [Page 275] That they acted only Ministerially under Christ, it is evident from what Peter sayes, ye men of Israel, why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power and godliness, we made this man to walk; Acts 3. 12. And the same Peter says, Eneas, Je­sus Christ maketh thee whole; Acts 9. 34 See Mark 16. 17. 1 Cor. 12. 10. (3) Because, if this commission, empowred the Apostles to baptise onely with the Holy Ghost, and not with water; then they in the exercise of this Commission, would onely have baptized men and women with the holy Ghost, and not with water, but the con­trary is manifest. (Acts 2. 38.) where Peter makes a distinction between being bap­tized in the name of Jesus Christ, and re­ceiving the gift of the holy Ghost: namely the gifts and graces of the holy Spirit, which are common to all believers, and necessary to salvation. (4) Because, if baptism with the holy Ghost be here meant, then all whom the Apostles did baptize, were baptised with the holy Ghost, which is false: for Ananias and Saphira could not have been Hypocrites, if they had been baptized with the holy Ghost. And Simon was baptized and yet not with the holy Ghost, as appears by Peters answer to him verse 21, 22. of the fifth chapter. [Page 276] (5) Because, if Christs commission carry not a warrant for baptizing with water, whence then had the Apostles a warrant for baptizing with Water? Either they must produce and let us see another commission for it, or else they must acknowledge, that the Apostles did warrantably baptise with Water. But another commission the Quakers cannot shew us from Scripture.

Quest. II.

IS dipping of the person (to be bapti­sed) into Water necessary?

No.

Is Baptism rightly administred by pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person?

Yes. Acts 2. 41. Acts 16. 33.

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, Dipping to be an absolute and necessary ceremony in Baptism?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Greek word in the origi­nal signifies, as well to poure, and sprinkle wa­ter, as it signifies to dip; Mark 7. 4. Where it is said, and when they come from the mercat, unless they wash, or be Baptised, they eat not. (2) Because, we read of three thousand baptised in one day, in the streets of Ierusalem, by twelve Apostles at the [Page 277] most, where there was no river to dip them into; Acts 2. 41. And was not Ierusalem, and all Iudea, and the region round about Ior­dan, baptised by Iohn the Baptist himself a­lone, which could not be done to all and e­very one by Dipping? Matth. 3. 5, 6. (3) Were not many baptised in private houses, as we read in the History of the Acts, chapter 10. 47. and 18. 8. with 9. 17. and 16. 33. (4) Because, Dipping of Infants into water in these cold Countries, would be hurtful and dangerous to them. But GOD will rather have mercy than sacrifice; Matth. 9. 13.

Quest. III.

ARE the Infants of one, or both believing Parents to be baptised?

Yes. Gen. 17. 7, 9. Gal. 3. 9. 14. Col. 2. 11. 12. Acts 2. 38. 39. Rom. 4. 11, 12.

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, that no Infants though born of believing Parents ought to be baptised?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, to covenanted ones (of which number the Infants of Believers are no less than their Parents; Acts 2. 38, 39. Acts. 3. 25. Rom. 11. 16. Gen. 17. 7, 22.) that seal of the covenant, of which they are cap­able, is not to be denyed; Gen. 17. 7, 10, 11. [Page 278] (2) Because, the outward Sacrament of Water, cannot be denyed to such, as have received the Spirit of Christ, and to whom the pro­mises of the New Covenant, sealed up in Bap­tism do belong; Acts 10. 47. Acts 11. 15, 16, 17. But to some Infants of Believers, as well as to others come to Age, the Spirit of Christ hath been given; Ierem. 1. 5. Luke 1. 15. Matth. 19. 14. Mark 10. 13, 14. And to them do the promises belong; Acts 2. 39. (3) Because the Infants of Believers are members of the Church, which is sanctified and clean­sed, with the washing of water by the Word; Eph. 5. 25, 26. Ioel 2. 16. Ezek. 16. 20, 21. 1 Cor. 7. 14. (4) Because, Infants no less than others come to Age, were Baptised, in the Cloud and in the Sea; 1 Cor. 10. 2. (5) Be­cause, Christ commanded that all Nations should be baptised, a great part whereof were Infants; Gen. 22. 18. Matth. 28. 19. (6) Because, Christ commanded Baptism to be administred to Disciples, (Infants also are here to be taken in; Acts 15. 10.) Matth. 28. 19. The word in the Original is Matheteusate, Teach, Instruct, or make Disciples all Na­tions, or make Disciples among all Nations, baptising them. The signification of this Greek word may be gathered from Iohn 4. 1. where it is said, that the Pharisees had heard, that Jesus [Page 279] made Disciples. So that Matheteuein and Mathe­tas poiein, are both one thing. (7) Because, the children of Believers, were by a Divine right circumcised, under the Old Testa­ment: therefore, the children of Believers under the New Testament, ought to be baptis­ed; because the one hath succeeded to the o­ther. That Baptism succeeds to Circumci­sion, is evident first, because, they both seal up, the same very thing. Next, as Circum­cision was the initiating Seal, under the Old Testament, so is Baptism under the New: be­cause the Apostles did administer it so early to the Disciples at the first appearing of their new birth, and interest in the Covenant. Moreover, because by Baptism, we are said to put on Christ; Gal. 3. 27. That they both seal up the same thing, is evident by compar­ing Rom. 4: 11: with Mar: 1: 4: Acts 2: 28. Where Circumcision is declared to be a seal of the righ­teousnes of Faith, and Baptism is held forth to be a pledge of the remission of sins, as also may be seen; Rom. 4. 6, 7, 8. see Col. 2. 11. 12. Where the Apostle teaches, that our be­ing buried with Christ in Baptism, is our cir­cumcision in Christ; which shews that Bap­tism hath succeeded to us in the room of Cir­cumcision. (8) Because, the Apostle sayes, that the Infants but of one believing Parent [Page 180] are holy; 1 Cor. 7. 14. that is, are compre­hended in the outward Covenant of GOD, and have access to the Signs, and Scals of GODS Grace as well as they are, that are born of both believing Parents.

Quest. IV.

ARE Grace and Salvation so inse­parably annexed unto Baptism, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved without it?

No.

Are all that are baptised, undoubtedly regenera­ted?

No. Acts 8. 13, 23.

Well then, do not the Papists and Lutheri­ans err, who maintain, that Baptism is simply ne­cessary to Salvation; and that all, and those onely, who are baptised, are most surely regenerated, in that same very moment of time, wherein Baptism is administred?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Thief upon the Cross, and others were saved, that were never bap­tised; Luke 23. 43. (2) Because, persons unbaptised have had saving Faith; Acts 10. 22, 44. (3) Because, Infants that are prede­stinated unto life, though they die in their mothers belly, yet they cannot perish; [Page 281] Matth. 18. 14. (4) Because, some children before their Baptism, have been beloved of GOD, whose love is unchangeable; Rom. 9 11, 13. Others have been Regenerated by the Holy Ghost; Luke chap: 1: ver: 15: and some have also been comprehended within the Covenant of Grace; Acts 2. 39. (5) Because, that Baptism, without faith, and the inward operation of the holy Spirit, hath no efficacy to Salvation; Mark 16. 16. 1 Peter 3. 21. (6) Because, the Baptism of the Spirit, at one time goes before, at an­other time follows Baptism with water; Acts 10. 37. Matth. 3. 11. (7) Because, very many that are baptized within the visible Church, are damned; Matth. 7. 13, 14. (8) Because, in those that are come to age, Faith, and Repentance, are pre-required to Baptism; and therefore before they be bap­tized, they have the beginning of regenera­tion; Acts 2. 38. (9) Because, not all that are baptized are elected; Matth. 20. 16. But all that are elected by GOD, are in time re­generated; 1 Peter 1. 2. (10) Because, the Holy Ghost, is a most Free Agent, and Worker: and therefore his operation (whence the efficacy of Baptism depends) whereby we are regenerated, is not tyed to any one moment of time; Iohn 3. 8. (11) [Page 282] Because, Baptism is not a converting, but a confirming Ordinance, even as the Lords Supper is.

The Papists do otherwise contradict the second part, in affirming, that the vertue and efficacy of Baptism (as to the abolishing, and sealing up the remission of more grievous sins and faillings, which they call Mortal) doth not extend it self, to the time to come, but to the time past: so that if the person baptized, fall into some deadly and dangerous sin, which wounds the conscience, there is need of another Sacrament, to wit, Pennance, whereby the remission of that Mortal sin, as they call it, is sealed up unto him?

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Sacrament of Baptism, after the administration thereof doth not cease to be a Sacrament, of the blood of Christ which purgeth us from all our sins; Mark 1. 4. 1 Iohn 1. 7. (2) Because, justi­fication by faith (which is sealed up to us by Baptism; Rom. 4. 11. Col. 2. 11, 12.) is for all sins committed before and after bap­tism; Acts 13. 36. (3) Because, our Savi­our says, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; Mark 16. 16. (4) Because, not onely the beginning of our Salvation, is referred to baptism, but also salvation it self, and eternal life; 1 Peter 3. 21. (5) [Page 283] Because, the Scripture bringeth Arguments from the use and remembrance of baptism, by which we that have been baptized, are stir­red up to holiness, and newness of life, and to put off the old man, and consequently all those sins, which the Adversaries call Mortal; Rom. 3. 2, 3. Gal. 3. 27. Col. 2. 11. 12.

Quest. V.

IS the Sacrament of Baptism, but once to be administred to any per­son?

Once only; Gal. 3. 27. Titus. 3. 5.

Well then, do not the Marcionites err, who maintain, that men after grosser faillings ought to be re-baptized?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Hemerobaptists err, who maintain, that men according to their faults every day, ought every day to be baptised?

Yes.

Do not lastly, the Anabaptists err, who maintain, that children baptized, ought to be rebaptized, when they come to age?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Baptism is a Sacrament of Admission into the visible Church, and of Regeneration, (which is one onely, 1 Iohn [Page 284] 3. 9.) 1 Cor. 12, 13. Tit. 3. 5. Eph. 5. 26. (2) Because, there is a command for repeating, and frequent using the Lords Supper; 1 Cor. 22. 25, 26. But no Precept, or command for repeating Baptism. (3) Because, Cir­cumcision (to which succeeded Baptism) was never repeated, as the Passover was. (4) Because, Baptism is a seal of Adoption; Gal. 3. 26, 27. But whom GOD loveth, and hath once adopted, those he never casteth off afterwards; Rom. 11. 29. (5) Because, the Apostle sayes, there is but one Baptism; Eph. 4. 5. namely, not only in number, but also in the administration upon us all; Rom. 6. 3, 4.

CHAP. XXIX. Of the LORDS Supper.

Question. I.

IS the Sacrament of Christs Body and Bloud, cal­led the Lords Supper, an Ordinance of GOD, to be observed in the Church, unto the end of the World?

[Page 285]Yes. 1 Cor. 11. 23, 24, 25, 26. 1 Cor. 10. 16, 17, 21. Matth. 26. Luke 22.

Well then, do not the Quakers err, who maintain, the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to be no Gospel Ordinance, and that there is no Gospel precept, for the administration thereof, until his second coming?

Yes.

They look upon this Ordinance, as a Type onely and Figure, or shadow of Christs Body and Blood, which was commanded for that time, and for some time to come, but not unto his second coming. Thus they aban­don that most precious Ordinance of taking and eating the Bread and drinking the Wine, as they do baptism with Water, and all other Ordinances, to the introducing of black Atheism into the World. They pervert the true meaning of the Scripture for the defence of their damnable Tenets, as by this one instance Till he come, which is meant (say they) not of his second coming at the last day, but of his coming to dwell in his disci­ples and Apostles, as if Christ had not been in them, both before, and after his ascension; even as they deny baptism, in Christs com­mission (Matth. 28. 19.) to his Disciples, to be meant of Baptism with Water, because wa­ter is not exprest; they deny either wilfully, [Page 286] as their Ring-leaders do, or ignorantly, or by a delusion from the Devll, as the most part do, the most sure and evident Truths in Scripture, pratling and gagling in their dis­course, sense, and nonsense, being oftner out of purpose, than in a purpose, skipping from one subject to another, to save themselves from the strength of reason, like subtile Foxes, which when they are beaten from one hole, flie into another. But while they are obstinate, and per­tinacious, in maintaining Lies, and Untruths, they ought to be confuted, as the man was, that denyed Snow to be white. For it is not so much a blindness of mind, or a weakness of judgement, as many well meaning people are misled by, as a wilful, obstinate resisting of the Truth, as the perverse Iews did, or as, Iannes and Iambres withstood Moses. They that are against commanded Gospel Ordi­nances, and the Ministers of Christ, whom they look upon as the Priests of Baal, would (if they durst) shake off the very Scripture, and Word of GOD. And it is more than probable, that if they could shun the odium of open Blasphemy, and the hazard of stand­ing Laws against blasphemers, the most part of them would disown the Scriptures, as many of them have done. For what kindness or respect can they have for the [Page 287] Scriptures, but such as men carry to Topicks or common places, whence they draw Argu­ments to impugne others, or defend them­selves with. For they do not look upon the Word as their Rule, seing (as they dream) they have a Light within them, beyond that more sure Word of Prophesie, which the Aopstle Peter prefers to a voice from Heaven. Nay, they have so little veneration for the Scriptures, that they will not suffer them to be called the Word of GOD, contrary to many express places of the Scripture; as Iohn 10. 35. 2 Chr. 36. 22. Psalm 119. 172. Mark 7. 9, 10, 13. 1 Kings 16. 12. 2 Kings 9. 36. Ezra 1. 1. 2 King. 23. 16. Isaiah 28. 13. Ephes. 6. 17. Isaiah 37. 22.

Quest. II.

IS Christ offered up to his Father in this Sacrament?

No.

Is there any reall sacrifice made at all, for remis­sion of sin, of the Quick or Dead?

No. Heb. 9. 22, 25, 26, 28.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who main­tain, that in this Sacrament there is performed a true and real Sacrifice (commonly called the Mass) wherein Christ under the forms of Bread aud Wine, without sheding of blood, is offered unto GOD, by a Priest, and sacrificed for the living, and for the [Page 288] Dead, to obtain remission of sins?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the sacrificing and offering up of Christ, is a part of his own Priesthood; Heb. 9. 14. But the Priesthood of Christ cannot be transferred from himself to any other; Heb. 7. 24. Therefore, no Priest can offer him up under the forms of Bread and Wine unto GOD. (2) Because, the offering of the Body of Christ, is once for all. It is but one single offering, and cannot be repea­ted? Heb. 10. 10, 12, 14. (3) Because, the sa­crificing and offering up of Christ, is one on­ly, and of a most perfect Merit, and Efficacy; Heb. 9. 14. Heb. 10: 14. But the repeating of the same Sacrifice, and the multitude of Priests, are a token of an imperfect Sacrifice, Heb. 9. 25, 26. Heb. 10. 10, 11. (4) If Christ be often offered, he must often die and suffer; Heb. 9. 25, 26. But Christ being now raised from the Dead, cannot any more suffer and die; Rom. 6. 9. (5) Because, that one and most perfect Sacrifice of Christ, did abrogate and take away all those external Sacrifices, and caused them to cease; Daniel 9. 27. (6) Because, there can be no propitiatory Sacrifice for sin, without shedding of blood; Heb. 9. 22. Neither doth he die any more, but is [Page 289] now in Heaven to appear in the presence of GOD for us, and to interceed in our behalf; Heb. 1. 3. Heb. 9. 24. Heb. 10. 12. (7) Be­cause, in every Sacrifice there is required (and really is) a dying, and destruction of the thing sacrificed. But Christ still liveth, Rom. 6. 9. (8) Because, no man can offer Jesus up to GOD, but Christ himself; Heb. 7. 27. (9) Because, in all external sacrifices, properly so called, there is necessarly requi­red, a visible external Host, or thing sacrifi­ced, as the Adversaries grant. But the thing which is said to be offered up by the Mass-Priest, namely the Body of Christ, is neither external nor visible here, it being in Heaven and not on Earth with man; Acts 3. 21.

Quest. III.

ARE private Masses, or the receiv­ing this Sacrament by a Priest, or any other alone; as likewise the denyall of the cup to the People; worshipping the Elements, the lift­ing them up, or carrying them about for adoration, and the reserving them for any pretended Religious use; are all these (I say) contrary to the nature of this Sacrament, and to the institution of Christ?

Yes. Mark 14. 23. 1 Cor: 11. 25, 26, 27, 28, 29. Matth. 15. 9.

Well then, doth not the Romish Church [Page 290] err, whose Mass-Priests standing in the Altar, cele­brate private Masses, (the People eihter being absent, or standing idle) who take the Cup to themselves only, and drink thereof. That administer the Lords Supper privately to sick persons, and Bed-rid; That teach to administer the Communion to Laicks, under both the forms of Bread and Wine, is not only not necessary, but unlawful: Who teach, that for Adorations-cause, the Elements are to be lifted up, and carried about, and reserved for Religious uses?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ did institute the last Supper not for one a part, but for many toge­ther; Matth. 26. 27, 28. (2) Because, Christ in celebrating the last Supper, did not eat and drink himself alone, but the Disciples did al­so eat and drink with him; Matth. 26. 27, 28. (3) Because, the Apostle commands the Cor­rinthians, that when they come together to eat, they tarry one for another; 1 Cor. 11. 33. (4) Because, the Lords Supper is a Sacra­ment of Brother-hood, and communion of the Saints; 1 Cor. 10. 16, 17: 1 Cor. 11. 33. (5) Because, in the dayes of the Apostles, the Disciples and Brethren met together for breaking of bread; Acts 20. 7. (6) Because, Christ when he had taken bread, and distri­buted it, is said, to have likewise taken the [Page 291] Cup; 1 Cor: 11: 23, 24, 25, 26, 27. (7) Because, it is expresly said, and commanded (Christ foreseeing this black errour, which is now in their Church) drink ye all of it; Matth: 26: 27. (8) Because, the common People, which are Communicants, gather more Fruit from both the Forms, than from one onely; 1 Cor: 10: 16: and 1 Cor. 11: 26: (9) Because, the Blood of Christ, the sign whereof is the Wine in the Cup, is not one­ly shed for Apostles, Preachers, and Pa­stours, but also for Lay-men, and those that are not of the Clergy, as the Popish Church speaks; Iohn 3: 16. (10) Because, the A­postles and Christians of the Primitive Church, did communicate under both Forms; Mark 14: 22: 23: 1 Cor: 10: 11, chapters. (11) Because, it is a Villany to detract and with­draw any thing from Christs Testament: and therefore the Cup (which is left to us by Le­gacy; Matth: 26: 27, 28:) is not to be denyed to any Communicant; Gal: 3: 15: (12) Be­cause, Christ did not institute any Adorati­on of the Elements: therefore this Adorati­on is to be condemned, as Will-worship, Matth. 15: 9. (13) Because, the Adoration is founded upon the Corporal presence of Christs Body in the Sacrament, which is blasphemous, seing Christ now is at the Right Hand of GOD; [Page 290] [...] [Page 291] [...] [Page 292] Heb: 1: 3. (14) Because, this Popish Adora­tion of the Elements, is a worshipping of the creature together with the Creator, a most abominable Idolatry; Daniel 11: 38: Matth: 23: 16: to verse 23. (15) Because, if the Elements ought to be adored, because Christ is Sacramentally present in them; then ought believers (in whom Christ dwelleth; Iohn 14. 20.) to be adored, which is absurd. Nay the water of Baptism, ought to be worshipped, seeing the whole Trinity is no less present there, than in the Supper. (16) The worshipping of the bread, since no man (as the Adversaries confess) is able to know certainly, that the Host is consecrated, is a work done without Faith, therefore a sin; Rom. 14. 23. (17) Because, Christ commanded the Element of bread to be broken, eaten, and distributed. But no where doth Christ command the bread to be Reserved; 1 Cor. 11. 23, 24. (18) Be­cause, the bread which is the communion of the body of Christ, is the bread which we break; 1 Cor. 10. 16. (19) Because, the bread and the wine, are not Sacramental Symbols, but in the very action; 1▪ Cor. 11. 26. Here it is said, for as often, as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup; but not, as often as ye reserve this bread. (20) Because, GOD commanded, that nothing should be Reser­ved, [Page 293] of the Pasehal-Lamb (to which bread and wine in the Lords Supper have succeeded) till the morning; Exod. 12. 10. That it might not be put to any other use, whether for Idolatry, or common food.

Quest. IV.

DO the outward Elements in this Sacrament, in substance, and nature remain still, truely, and only bread and wine, as they were before?

Yes. Matth. 26. 29. 1 Cor. 11. 26, 27, 28.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that the Bredd and Wine, by the power of the words of consecration This is my Body, are truely Transubstantiat into the very body and blood of Christ; nothing remaining but the outward forms, and Accidents of the Bread and wine?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Doctrine of Transubstantia­tion makes Christs body every where present, invisible, that cannot be handled, without shape, and figure, without humane quanti­ty, which is contrary to Matth. 26. 6. Here Christ is only present in Bethany. And Iohn 20. 27. Thomas toucheth Christ. And ac­cording to Acts 3. 21. the Heavens must receive Him; and therefore cannot be every [Page 294] where. See Heb. 2. 14, 17. (2) Because, before and after consecration, the bread is called the communion of the body of Christ: but nothing is said, or can be the commu­nion of its own self; 1 Cor. 10. 16. (3) Be­cause, afrer consecration, the Apostle calls not the bread, a Species or form of Bread; 1 Cor. 11. 26, 27, 28. And after consecration, Christ calls the wine the fruit of the vine; Matth. 26. 29. (4) Because, Christ did in­stitute the Supper to be a memorial of himself until he come again. But a memorial, is not of things corporally present, but of things absent; 1. Cor. 11. 25. (5) Because, that which is properly broken, is not the bo­dy of Christ, but the bread is properly broken, therefore the bread is not the body of Christ, 1 Cor. 10. 16. (6) Because, Christ went up to heaven bodily, and is to tarry there until the end of the world; Acts 3. 21. (7) Tran­substantiation destroys the very Essence, and being of the Lords Supper. First, It de­stroyes the sign, because it takes away the substance of the bread and wine; the Acci­dents, and outward Forms only remaining. Secondly, It destroys the thing signified, for it robes and spoils the body of Christ, of its true quantity and dimensions (for according to that infallible Philosophical Maxim, sublatis [Page 295] dimensionibus corporis, tollitur ipsum corpus. That is, by taking away the length, breadth, and thickness of any Physical or Natural body, you destroy consequentially the very essence and being of that body) and introduces in­stead of one body, many bodies. (8) Because, Transubstantiation takes away the Sacramental Analogie: and so, when the sign is turned into the thing signified, all similitude be­tween them is gone, and ceaseth. (9) From this doctrine do follow many great Absur­dities inconsistent with Religion, Sense, and Reason. As first, that Christ in the Supper, did both eat and drink himself: that he was wholly in his own mouth: that he had a double and twofold body; one Visible, ano­ther Invisible: That a Mouse, or Rat, may eat Christs Body: That his body being reser­ved, and laid up into a Cupboard, in a short time may turn into Vermine. Must not Christs body be in many places at once? Must not his bo­dy, and all the parts thereof, his head, hands and feet be in the smallest, and least crumb of the Host? Must not Christs body, having now that bigness in Heaven, which he had upon Earth, be biger, than it self; longer, and thicker?

If Christs Body may be in diverse places at once, why may not a mans body be in di­verse [Page 296] places at once? this is granted by the Adversaries) but a man cannot be in di­verse places at once.

Can Peter, for example, be both at Edin­burgh and London, in the same moment of time? He may then be both a man and not a man, at the same time: he may be a man, because living at Edinburgh; and not a man, because dead at London. May not Peter at Edinburgh go to York, and meet Peter there from London? And what a mirry meeting must it be, when Peter shakes hands with Peter, and takes a glass of Wine from him? May not Peter from London be killed there at York, and Peter from Edinburgh be left alive? May not Peter alive be re-produced in a thousand Cities at once, and marry there a thousand wives, and beget in one night a thousand Sons, and Daughters? May not Peter be so many times re-produced, till he make up an hundred thousand fighting men? May not one candle by re-production be made as many; as may give light to the whole Universe? May not one bottle of water be made so many, as may serve an Army of an hundred thousand? May not one Guiney be reproduced as many times as may amount to five and twenty hundred thousand pounds sterling? A brave invention for paying five [Page 297] or six hundred thousand merks of debt: Next, as the Adversaries are engaged to maintaine that one body may be in many places a, once, so are they under a necessity to affirm that many bodies may be in one place to­gether, by way of Penetration, for in every crumb of the Host, is Christs Body. From which position, it follows that a mans body may be contained within a Nut-shel. That a Snuff-box may contain Athurs Seat: the hol­low of an Ox eye, the whole Globe of the Earth. That a Sparrow may swallow, one by one, the seven Planets, seeing each one of them, may occupy no more bounds, or space, than a grain of barly corn doth: and yet the Sun which is swallowed, will be as big as at present: for Christs body in the Host, is as big and tall, as when he was on the Cross, as the Adversaries confess. (10) We never read of a miracle wrought by GOD, but what was evident, and conspi­cuous to all, and evidently seen to be such. As when Moses his rod was turned into a Ser­pent, and became a rod again; Exod. 4. 2, 3. Such were the wonders of Egypt. Such was the dividing of the Red Sea: the stricking of the Rock: and the flowing out of the waters; Numb. 20. 11. The destruction of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, was evident to all the [Page 298] Israelites; Numb. 16. 31, 32. So were the mi­racles, which were wrought by the holy Pro­phets, such were the miracles which Christ and his Apostles wrought. Was not the water most evidently turned into wine; Iohn 2. 7, 8, 9. But after the Words of consecrationn uttered by the Mass Priest, the bread as to sense, is the same thing it was. The bread hath the same taste, thè same smell, that same touch, that same outward form, and figure, that same colour, that same weight. It occupies that same space and bounds, and hath the same quan­tity in all its dimensions. But the rod was seen a serpent, and the serpent was seen a rod. The water was seen wine: it was known to be wine by the taste, by the smell, by the colour. Christ never wrought such a miracle as the miracle of Transubstantiation. In all his miracles he appealed to our outward Senses. And was it ever heard that Christ wrought miracles without a necessity?

Quest. V.

IS the Body and Blood of Christ in this Sacrament corporally, or car­nally in, with, or under the brèad and wine?

No. 1 Cor. 10. 16.

Well then, do not the Lutherians err, who maintain, that the body and blood of Christ, are corporally in, with, and under the bread and [Page 299] wine: and that (as the Papists also teach) his body and blood, are taken corporally by the mouth, by all Communicants, believers, and unbelievers?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ was sitting with his body at the Table. (2) Because, he him­self did eat of the bread, and drink of the wine. (3) Because, he took bread from the Table: he took not his own body: he break bread, and did distribute it, he break not his own body: so he took the Cup, and not his own blood. (4) Because, Christ said, the Cup was the New Testament in his blood: but the Cup is not in, with, and under the Wine. (5) Because Christ said, the bread was his body, which was broken; the Wine was his blood, which was shed. But neither was his body broken under the bread, nor his blood shed under the Wine, seing Christ as yet, was not betrayed, crucified, and dead.

In the next place, the end of the Lords Sup­per is, that we may remember Christ, and de­clare his death until be come; Luke 22. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 24, 25, 26. Therefore if Christ be now present with his body, in, with, and under the bread, the Sacramental remembrance of Christ, and the declaring of his death, ought to cease.

This Doctrine of Consubstantiation, is con­trary [Page 300] to the Articles of our Faith. It is a­gainst the Truth and Verity of his Humane Nature, which is visible, palpable, and in a cer­tain place circumscriptive. It is against the Ar­ticle of his ascension: for it makes his body, which is now in Heaven, until the last day, to be in, with, and under a piece of bread. It is against the spiritual communion of the Saints with Christ the Head, which the Lutherians makes by this doctrine a corporal and carnal com­munion, contrary to 1 Cor. 10. 3, 4. Ephes. 1. 22. Ephes. 4. 4. Rom. 8. 9. 1 Cor. 6. 17. 1 Iohn 4. 13. Iohn 15. 5.

It brings with it many and great absurdities; as that the body of Christ, Non habeat partem extra partem; hath not one part of it without another; but as if all the parts of his Body, were in one part, which is contrary to the Nature of a true and real Quantum, which consists essentially in three dimensions, length, breadth, and thickness. It makes in effect his Body to be no body. It brings down the glorious Body of Christ from Heaven, and puts it under the base Elements of this Earth. It makes as many bodies of Christ, as there are pieces of Eucharistical bread. It makes his body to be broken in, with, and under the bread, and bruised with the teeth: It sends his Body down to the stomach, where it is turned into a mans substance, and afterwards throwen out.

[Page 301]Moreover, all true Eating brings life and Salvation; Iohn 6. 50, 51. but eating by the mouth profiteth nothing; Iohn 6. 63. Again, our union with Christ, (and therefore our eating of his Body, from whence ariseth this union) is not corporal but spiritual; Eph. 3. 17. And the Body and Blood of Christ, are meat and drink; not carnal but spiritual; even as the hunger, whereby we long for this meat is spiritual: and the life to which we are nourished, is spiritual, and the nutriment is spiritual. Lastly, according to this Doctrine of Consubstantiation, stiffly maintained by the Lutherians, it follows, that Christ did [...] his own body, while he did eat the bread of the first supper. That his Disciples did eat their Lord and Masters Body. That Christ before he was crucified, was dead: That his Disciples were more cruel and inhumane to him than the Iews were that crucified him: That he is often bu­ried within the intrals of wicked men.

Quest. VI.

IS the Body and Blood of Christ as really, but spiritually present, to the faith of Believers, in that Ordinance, as the Elements themselves are to the outward senses?

Yes. 1 Cor. 10. 16.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, that the Body and Blood of Christ, in [Page 302] the Sacrament of the Supper, are not really pre­sent?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the body of Christ in this Sa­crament, is spiritually eaten by Believers; and his blood is spiritually drunken. But a spiritual presence, is a true and real presence; because, it comes and flowes from true and real cau­ses, namely from Faith, and the Holy Spirit. (2) Because, in the right use of this Sacrament, Christ is united to a man by faith, and by the Holy Spirit; 1 Cor. 10. 16. (3) Because, the body of Christ, in so far as, it was given to the death, and was broken for us on the cross, and in so far, as his blood was shed for the remission of our sins; all these (I say) are the internal matter of this Sacrament; Luke 22. 19. Mat. 26. 28. 1 Cor. 11. 24. (4) Because, those who eat and drink unworthily, are said, not to discern the Lords bo­dy: and therefore to such as eat and drink worthily, the body and blood of Christ must be truely present, according to their spiritual sense, namely Faith; 1 Cor. 11. 24. (5) Because, length of time doth not hinder, but that Faith may make things past, and things to come spiritually present: and therefore distance of place doth not hinder, but that things most distant, as to place, may be made spiritually [Page 303] and truely present; Heb. 11. 1. Iohn 6. 56. Phil. 3. 10. Heb. 11. 9.

Quest. VII.

ARE all ignorant and ungodly persons, as they are unfit to enjoy Communion with Christ, unworthy of his Table?

Yes.

Can they without great sin against Christ, while they continue such, partake of these holy Mysteries?

No.

And are not therefore Church-officers to debar those who appear grosly ignorant, and scandalous?

Yes. 1 Cor. 11. 27, 28, 29. and 2 Cor. 6. 14, 15. and 1 Cor. 5. 6, 7, 13. Matth. 7. 6.

Well then, do not some men err, in their Practise, if not in their Opinion, who suffer many ignorant, scandalous, and ungoodly persons, to come to the Lords Table?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, ignorant and wicked men eating and drinking unworthily, are guily of the body and blood of Christ, and so bring judge­ment upon themselves; Cor. 11. 29. (2) Because, all were not admitted to eat of the Passover, neither was it for all promiscu­ously to partake thereof; Numb. 9. 6, 7. and 2 Chron. 23. 19. Esek. 22. 26. (3) Because, [Page 304] it was not lawful for any man to come to the Marriage feast that wanted the Wedding garment; Matth. 22. 11. (4) Because, Pearles are not to be casten before Dogs and Swine: men manifestly ungodly, and wicked; Matth. 7. 6. (5) Because, they who deserve to be ex­cluded from the Fellowship and Society of Believers, ought not to be admitted to the Sacrament of intimate Communion and Familiari­ty with GOD: but such are all these who walk inordinatly; 2 cor. 6. 16. (6) Because, if the Church willingly and wittingly admit such persons, they stir up the wrath of God, against them­selves, for suffering Gods Covenant, and his holy Symboles, to be openly prophaned; 1 Cor. 11. 30. (7) Because, the Lord will not suffer such as are manifestly and contumaci­ously wicked, to take his Covenant in their mouth: and therefore to such persons, the seals, and symboles of his Covenenat, ought not to be offered; Psalm 50. 17. (8) Be­cause, ignorant, prophane, and godless per­sons, ought to be esteemed as Heathens, and Publicans; Matth. 18. 17.

CHAP. XXX. Of CHURCH CENSURES.

Question I.

HAth▪ the Lord Iesus as King, and Head of his Church, appointed therein a Government, in the hands of Church-Officers, distinct from the Civil Magistrate?

Yes. Isaiah 9. 6, 7. 1 Tim. 5. 17. 1 Thes 5. 12. Acts 20. 17, 18. Hebr. 13. 7, 17, 24. 1 Cor. 12. 28, Matth. 28. 18, 19, 20.

Well then, do not the Erastians, and others err, who maintain, that in the Holy Scripture there is no particular form of Church Government set down, and appointed by Christ?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Lord Jesus Christ hath delivered to the Ministers of his Church, as to his own Delegates and Ambassadours (and there­fore according to his own laws) the whole power of Governing the Church, which he himself received from the Father, to be [Page 306] managed, and put in execution in his own name and authority; Iohn 20. 21. Matth. 28. 19. Acts 1. 2. Eph. 4. 7, 8, 11. (2) Be­cause, all the substantials of Church Govern­ment, under the New Testament, which ei­ther concern Ministers, Ordinances, Censures, Synods, Councils, and their power, are pro­posed, and set down in Scripture, namely in the third Chapter of the first Epistle to Timothy; Acts 15. chapter. And 1 Cor. 14. 26, 40. (3) Because, the Lord Jesus Christ, hath looked to the good of his Church, no less under the New Testament, than under the Old. Therefore, since the Church under the Old Testament, had a most perfect form of Government prescribed to it: and since there is as great need and necessity of Church order, and discipline, under the New Testa­ment, as was under the Old, it must follow, that there is a Patern and Form of Church government no less set down, and prescribed un­der the New Testament, than was under the Old; Heb. 3. 1, 2, 4, 5. Heb. 13. 8. 1 Cor. chap. 5. 1 Tim. 5. 20. And 1 Tim. 1. 20. (4) The end of the Church Government is spiritual namely the gaining of mens souls to Christ. But nothing that's meerly of humane autho­rity, can reach this end; Matth. 18. 15, 16, 17. (5) Because, all the parts of Church Govern­ment, [Page 307] are particularly set down in Scripture. As first, those things which concern the key of doctrine, as publick prayer, and giving of thanks; 1 Tim. 2. 12. 1 cor. 14. 14, 15, 16. Singing of Psalms; Eph. 5. 18, 19. Col. 3. 16. Publick reading of the Word, Preching, and Expounding the same; Acts 6. 4. Acts 13. 15, 17. Acts 5. 21. 2 cor. 3. 14. Matth. 18. 19, 20. 2 Tim. 4. 11. Heb. 6. 1. Gal. 6. 6. Secondly, those parts likewise, which con­cern the key of Discipline; namely the or­dination of Presbyters, with the imposition of the hands of the Presbytrie; 1 Tim. 4. 14. and 1 Tim. 5. 22. Titus 1. 5. Acts 14. 21, 23. Thirdly, the Authoritative giving of Judge­ment, and sentence concerning doctrine; and that according to the Word; Acts 15. 15, 24, 28. Fourthly, Admonition and publick Rebuking of those who have offend­ed; Matth. 18. 15, 16, 17. 1 Thes. 5. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 20. Fifthly, The excommunicating of those who are contumacious, and ungod­ly, and who are convicted of manifest crimes, and scandals; Matth 18. 17. Titus 3. 10▪ 1 Tim. 1. 20. 1 cor. 5. 2, 3, 4, 5. Lastly, the receiving again into the fellowship of the Church per­sons cast out by excommunication, having testified their Repentance; 2 cor. 2. 6, 7, 8, 9.

[Page 308] Do not the same Erastians err, who make no distinction between Church power and the Secular power?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ hath committed the keyes of the kingdom of Heaven to the Officers of his Church which are Gover­nours distinct from the civil Magistrate; Matth. 16. 18, 19. Matth. 18. 19. Iohn 20. 21, 22, 23. (2) Because, Church power, and civil power differ specifically. The church, and the common-wealth are Polities formally, and essentially different. They are not, as such, powers subordinate, at least in a right line, but co-ordinate; Acts 4. 19, 20. 2 chron. 26. 18. Next, God the Creator and Governour of the World; is the Effici­ent of the power of the civil Magistrate; Rom. 13. 1, 2, 4. But God-Christ, our blessed Mediator, and Lord of his church, is the Efficient of the church particularly, and of its Government. The matter (materia ex qua) of the civil Government, is the se­cular sword: but the matter of the church Government, are the keyes of the kingdom of Heaven. The matter of the civil Govern­ment (materia in qua) may be a Senate, many people, the Person of one king, of a [Page 309] child. [...] woman. But the matter of the church government, is not of this kind; Heb. 13. 22. 1. Tim. 3. 15. 1 cor. 14. 34, 35. The matter of the civil Government (materia circa quam) are men and women, as members of the common-wealth, without, as well as with­in the church: but as christians and members of the church, they are not such; 1 cor. 5. 13. The formal causes of both are distinct; the one inflicts punishments meerly spiritual; the other inflicts punishments meerly civil. Lastly, the end of this, is the corporal and external good of a society; but the end of that, is the spiritual good of the church and its edification; Matth. 14. 15. 1 cor. 5. 5. 2 cor. 10. 8.

Do not likewise the Socinians, Anabaptists, Quakers, many Independents, and others err, who maintain, that the key of Doctrine, or the publick preaching of the Word, is proper to any man furnished with sutable gifts, though not cal­led, and sent to that employment?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, no man can believe in Christ of whom he hath not heard, and how shal he hear without a Preacher; and how shal he preach unless he be sent; Rom. 10. 14, 15. (2) Because, Women may have sutable, and [Page 310] competent gifts for Preaching, and yet they are forbidden to speak in the Church; 1 Tim: 2. 12. (3) Because, the Scripture blames such, as have run, and yet have not been sent; Ierem. 23. 21, 32. (4) Because, no man taketh this honour to himself (that is, he ought not to take it) but he that is called of GOD, as was Aaron; Heb. 5. 4. (5) Because, the Scripture mentioneth, that GOD hath set apart certain peculiar Ministers, for the preaching of the Word; Rom. 1. 1. Ephes: 4. 11. Titus 1. 3. (6) Because, no man can take the office of a civil Magistrate, or of a Deacon of the church upon him, unless he be called thereunto; Luke 12. 14. Acts 6. 5. 1 Tim. 3. 10. And therefore no man ought to take upon him the publick preaching of the Word, unless he be called thereunto likewise. (7) Because, he that taketh upon him this office, without a call, he usurpeth Authority in the church, seing Preaching is an Act of Authori­ty; 1 Thes. 5. 12. (8) Because, the Titles which are given to the Preachers of the Gos­pel, are names of Office; they are called the Ambassadours of Christ; 2 cor. 5. 20. Stewards of the Word; Titus 1. 7. The Men of GOD; 1 Tim. 6. 11. and Angels; Rev. 2. 1. (9) Because, there is not one approven example, in all the Word of GOD, for a gifted brother to Preach [Page 311] without a call; and therefore seing it is not done in Faith, it must be Sin. Must every Fellow that takes a laxit in his tongue, go up to the Pulpit and ease himself? (10) Be­cause, there are Precepts and Rules set down in Scripture, for all the Ages of the church, to the end of the world, anent the calling of men to be Ministers of the Gospel; 1 Tim. 3. 2, 3, 6, 7. and 1 Tim. 5. 21, 22.

Do not likewise the Independents, Brunists, and Anabaptists err, who maintain, that the Right and Power of Governing the church, belongs no less to the multitude and community of Believers, than to the Officers of the church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Scripture expresly teaches, that GOD hath committed the Govern­ment of his church, and the care of his peo­ple, to certain chosen Persons, and not to all, and every one; Ephes. 4. 11. 12, 13. 1 Cor. 12. 28. (2) Because, if the power of the keyes were given to believers, in com­mon; either they are given to them as believers, or as they are gifted by GOD, with gifts, and qualifications above others, for Governing the church, and chosen out of the rest, for performing that office. If [Page 312] the last part be affirmed, it follows, that the power, and right of the keyes, is committed not to a community of believers, but to some select persons, which we own, and maintain: but the Independents deny. If the first be asserted, then it follows first, that the care of Governing the church is committed to Women, and children, being believers; and so they must necessarly have the power of seeing, as being eyes, and watch men to the church: the power of hearing, as being the ears of the church: and the body of the church must be deformed; because the whole body is the eye, and the whole body is the ear, and whose many members are made one member; 1 cor. 12. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19. (2) It follows, that the power of the keyes, it not only given to all, but to Believers only: but it is evident by the ex­ample of Iudas, and other Reprobates, that many in Christs name have preached, who were not Believers; Matth. 7. 22, 23. Phil. 1. 16, 17, 18. (3) Because, to whom Christ has given the power of Governing the church; to them also, he hath promised to give gifts, and enduments largely for performing that office; Iohn 20. 21, 22, 23. 1 Cor. 4. 6, 7. Matth. 28. 19, 20. But to a community of Believers, God has never promised a Spirit [Page 313] for the Ministry, nor gifts for that employment. Nor did he ever bestow, or confer any such enduments. (4) Because, Christ our Media­tor, appointed Ecclesiastical Officers and Church-Governours, before ever there was a formal church, under the New Testament gathered, and set up; Luke 9. 1. Luke 10. 1, 2, 3. Iohn 20. 21, 22, 23. Matth. 28. 19, 20. This was all done before his death. And before his ascension he did the like; Ephes. 4. 8. 11, 12. Acts 2. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Now it is evident, that there was no formal gathering together of a church, before the Feast of Pentecost; Acts 2. Ecclesiastick Ministers, and Officers were ap­pointed for calling in, and gathering together the Mystical body of Christ, to wit, his Members: therefore it was needful, that Ministers bap­tizing, ought to be before Persons baptized. That Gatherers of the church ought to be be­fore Persons gathered. That callers and inviters to Christ, ought to be before Persons called and invited. (5) This Democracy or popular Govern­ment, cannot but bring in great confusion, whence many absurdities will follow. As the church of GOD should not be an organical body. That Women who are forbidden to speak in the church, most have the keyes of the kingdom of Heaven hanging at their Belt, forsooth. All must govern, and none must be governed. All must [Page 314] attend the government of the church. All must be rendred uncapable for going about their particular callings, which God calls them to eve­ry day. Therefore seing this sort of Government, brings so much confusion with it, it is most probable, that it is not of God who is a God of Order, and not of confusion; 1 Cor. 14. 33.

Quest. II.

ARE Church Censures necessary for reclaiming, and gaining of offending brethren; for deterring of others from the like offences; for purging out of that leaven, which might infect the whole lump, for vindicating the honour of Christ; and the holy profession of the Gos­pel, and for preventing the wrath of GOD, which might justly fall upon the church, if they should suffer his covenant, and the seals thereof to be pro­phaned by notorious and obstinate sinners?

Yes. 1 Tim. 5. 20. 1 Tim. 1. 20. 1 cor. 11. 27. to the end; Iude 23. verse.

Are the Officers of the church for the better attaining of these ends to proceed by Admonition, by Sus­pension from the Lords Table, for a season, and by Excommunication from the church according to the nature of the crime or scandalous offence, and de­merit of the Person?

Yes. 1 Thes. 5. 12, 1 cor. 5. 4, 5, 13. Matth. 18. 17 Titus 3. 10.

Well then, do not the Socinians, Anabap­tists, [Page 315] Quakers; and other Sectaries err, who deny that any church censures should be inflicted up­on offenders?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Erastians err, who main­tain, there should be no suspension from the Lords Table or excommunication from the church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the power of the keyes, is gi­ven to the Ministers of the church, wherewith not only by the preaching of the Word, but also by church censures, they open and shut the kingdom of heaven; as will appear by comparing these places of Scripture together; Matth. 16. 19. Matth. 18. 17. (2) Because, he that offends publickly, and after Admonition, persists pertinaciously in his sin, should be esteemed as a Publican and Heathen; Matth. 18. 17. (3) Because, the Apostle says, if any man obey not our Word by this Epistle; note that man, and have no company with him. Note him, that is, either by excommu­nication, or some other note of church censure; 2 Thess. 3. 14. (4) Because, the Apostolick church, being moved by the same reasons (which now are) used the power of the keyes, and excluded from the Sacrament, men that were manifestly contumacious, and wicked; 1 [Page 316] Cor. 5. 2, 3. And 1 Tim. 1. 20. 2 Thes. 3. 6. 14. (5) Because, the Apostle sayes, them that sin (to wit publickly) rebuke before all, that others also may fear; 1 Tim. 5: 20. (6) Consider the various ends of Ecclesiastical censures, as the reclaiming of offending brethren, and the rest of them, which are set down in the Questi­on.

CHAP. XXXI. Of Synods and Councils.

Question I.

OUght there to be such Assemblies for the Government and further edification of the Church, as are called Synods and Coun­cils?

Yes. Acts 15. 2, 4, 6.

Are the decrees and determinations of Councils, and Synods, if consonant to the Word of GOD, to be received with reverence, and submission, not only for their agreement with the Word, but also for their power, whereby they are made, as being [Page 317] an ordinance of GOD appointed thereunto in his Word?

Yes. Acts 15: 15, 19, 24, 27, 28, 29; 30, 31. Acts 16, 4. Matth. 18. 17, 18, 19, 20:

Well then, do not the [...]unists and Inde­pendents err, who maintain; that every particu­lar Congregation, or church hath in it self, the full power of church Government for exercising the whole power of the keyes, without subordination, or subjection to any Classical or Synodical Meeting: and that Presbytries, and Synods, have only a power of counselling, advising, and exhorting, but no power of Iurisdiction, to command or enjoyn any thing in the Lord, to particular churches or congregations?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Apostolick church referred all weightier matters, which did equally con­cern many Congregations, to the free suffra­ges, and votes of the Apostles, Pastors, and select Brethren, and not to the determinati­on of any one particular church, or congregation; Acts 15. 23, 24, 25. Acts 6. 2, 3. (2) Because, it is evident from Scripture, that there have been many particular churches, and congregati­ons subordinate to one Presbytrie. For, in the church of Ierusalem, it is manifest, that there were more than one congregation. First, from [Page 318] the multitude of Believers, who were of a greater number than could be of one Con­gregation, for hearing the Word, and communi­cating; Acts 2. 41, 42. Acts 5. 14. Acts 6. 1, 2 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. Acts 21. 20. (3) From the multitude of Pastors, and Ministers, whose pains and labours many churches required; Acts 1: 12. 13, 14, 26. Acts 2. 1, 14, 37, 42. Acts 4: 31, 34, 35, 37. Acts 6. 2. Acts 8: 14: (4) From the diversity of Tongues among the Disciples at Ierusalem, which were given, not only for the edification of those that were of that Church; but also for signs and wonders to others, who were without, and not of that Church. (5) It is manifest from this, that in those dayes, they had no churches, or meet­ing houses built, but only met and conveened in private houses, and upper rooms.

The same is also true of the church of Antioch, Ephesus, and Corinth, from the Acts of the Apostles; and other places of Scripture. But all these congregations were ruled and governed by one Colledge of Pastors.

(1) Because, all these particular Congre­gations, are called but one church; Acts 18: 22: Acts 12, 5: (2) Because, in that one church, there were church Presbyters, who were called Governours, not of any one particular congregation, but of the church, which was [Page 319] made up of many particular churches; Acts 20. 17: Acts 15: 2: 3: Acts 13: 1, 2, 3: (3) Be­cause, these Presbyters did meet together for governing the church, and performed Acts of Iurisdiction, which concerned the whole church in common; Acts 11: 30: compared with chapter 4: 35, 37: And Acts 21: 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25: and Acts 13: 1, 2, 3: (4) Because, there is a particular example of a Synod, which had the power of Iurisdiction, and which consisted, and was made up of members, out of diverse Classical Conventions: For when the Question about circumcision, and the keeping of Moses Law, which troubled the Churches of Syria, Cilicia, Antioch, and Ierusalem, could not be determined in their own particular churches, the matter was referred to a Synod of Apostles and Presbyters, who met at Ie­rusalem, which decided the controversy, and appointed their decrees to be obligatory, and binding to all these foresaid churches; Acts 15. Acts 16. 4. Acts 21. 25. (5) Because, the Iewish church, which was a politick body, had in every city Sy­nagogues subordinate to one supream council, or great Synagogue which was at Ierusalem▪ Deut. 17. 8, 12. 2 chron. 19. 8. 11. Exod: 18. 22, 26. Seing therefore, dangers and difficul­ties for the preventing, and healing of which, the Lord hath appointed and set up, in that [Page 320] church such a government, may be as great, if not greater in his church, under the New Te­stament than was then: and seeing the Lord has no less consulted the good of his church now, than he did of old; it follows, that there must be councils, no less under the New Testa­ment than under the old, to which, particular churches ought to be subordinate. (6) From the Light of Nature, and right Reason: for the Law of Nature directs to a diversity of courts; namely, where there is any Rule or Govern­ment in a city or common-wealth, and orders the inferiour courts to be subordinate to the su­periour, the lesser to the greater, and Appeals to be made from them to the greater. And in bodies both Natural and Politick the parts ought to be subject to the whole, for the good of both. Besides there are, and will be very many Ec­clesiastick affairs which will concern many Con­gregations equally and alike, which cannot be determined by any one. (2) Because, the Pastors and Presbyters of particular Congrega­tions will stand in need each one of anothers help, and assistance mutually. (3) Because, cases and difficulties may occur, more intang­led, and intricate, than can be settled and composed by the Governours of any one Con­gregation. (4) Seing particular Congregations which ly nigh one to another, ought to shun [Page 321] divisions, and differences, and to live in peace and unity, it follows manifestly, that there ought to be Synods or Councils, con­sisting of the Presbyters of many particular congregations, which ought to be subordinate, to these Councils, and Synods. (5) From Christs own precept, and command, Tell the Church; Matth. 18. 15, 16, 17. For if our blessed Lord appointed, that for a single bro­thers offence, (he trespassing against GOD, or his brother, for gaining of him, and re­moving the Scandal) he be brought before the church, it follows by consequence, that the same course ought to be taken, when any one particular Congregation, offends against another, and remains obstinate in their scandalous Opinion, and Practise. For our blessed Lord, hath sufficiently prescribed a Remedy in this place, for removing of all Scandals, and Offences, whether of one bro­ther against another, or of one Congregation a­gainst another. Nay, surely, since Christ hath consulted so much the conversion of one brother, that hath sinned, and gone astray; much more will he look to the good, and conversion of a whole Congregation. (6) Be­cause, any one single congregation, with one Pastor only, hath not the power of Ordination, an instance whereof cannot be given, either [Page 312] from Precept, or Practise, in all the New Testa­ment. Nay, the Ordination of Ministers, in the New Testament, was alwayes performed by a Colledge of Pastors associate together; Acts 6. 6. Acts 13. 1, 2, 3. 1 Tim. 4. 14. (7) Because, from this doctrine of the Independents these and the like absurdities will follow.

First, that the Prophets must be censured, and judged by way of authority, not by other Prophets, but by the multitude: and vulgar of the Congregation, which is contrary to 1 Cor 14. 32.

(2) That all the Councils, in the times of the Apostles, which were convocated upon ne­cessary occasions for matters which concern­ed many churches alike, were but during the time, and extraordinary, and so not oblig­ing succeeding churches, though the occasions, and causes, why these Councils were convocated then, are, and will be to the end of the world. (3) That private Believers, must be the Bishops of their own Bishops, Watch-men of their own Watch-men. No communion or fellowship among Ecclesiastick Ministers. That single and particular churches, though they have defiled, and pudled themselves, with the most black, and ugly Heresies, with the most abominable faults, and vices, yet are not lyable to any Ecclesiastick Censure, but [Page 323] must be refered, to the immediate judgement of Christ, at the last Day. (4) That a Colledge of Pastors, and Presbyters conveened together from several congregations, shall have no more power of the keyes of the kingdom of Heaven, than any one particular man, that is able to look to the good of his brother. (5) That a Pastor, out of his own Congregation, hath no power to administer the Sacraments, or to preach the Word, or exerce any Mi­nisterial Act. From which Absurdities, it fol­lows evidently, that this kind of Church Go­vernment labours under a manifest defect of the Means of Propagating the Gospel. (6) That Christ, hath as many visible bodies, as there are particular congregations. That Men and Wo­men, are to be accounted Members only of a particular congregation, and not of the Church-Catholick. And that those who are excomuni­cated, are only casten out of a particular congre­gation not out of the Church Universal.

Quest. II.

MAY not the Ministers of the Church of themselves, by ver­tue of their office, meet in Assemblies, with other fit Persons upon delegation from their Churches, when Magistrates are open enemies to the Christian Re­ligion?

Yes. Acts 15. 2, 4, 22, 23, 25.

[Page 324]Well then, do not the Erastians err, who maintain, that the Ministers of the Gospel have no right or power in themselves, or by vertue of their office to meet in a Synod, or Council?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Church of GOD, in the primitive times, had power in themselves, to convocate their own Assemblies, for Worship and Government, not only without, but against the consent of the civil Magistrate, as is evi­dent from the Acts of the Apostles, and Church Histories. (2) Though the power, and right of meeting in church Assemblies be visible in the constitution, and exercise, yet it is intrinseck and within the church, as well as the power of Preaching.

Quest. III.

MAY Magistrates lawfully call a Synod of Ministers, and other fit persons to consult, and advise with, about mat­ters of Religion?

Yes Isa. 49. 23. 1 Tim. 2. 1, 2. Matth. 2. 4, 5. Prov. 11. 14.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who main­tain, that the civil Magistrate hath no right or pow­er to convocate Synods, or Councils, but that it be­longs to the Bishop to convocate Diocesian Synods; To the Metropolitan to convocate Provincial Synods; [Page 325] To the Primate and Patriarch to convocate National Synods: To the Pope onely to convocate and call Oecumenick and general Synods?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, under the Old Testament, Councils, and Synods were appointed and cal­led by godly Kings; 1 Kings 8. 1. 2 Kings 23. 1. 2 chron. 29. 4. (2) Because, it is the duty of the civil Magistrate being born within the church, to take care that Peace and Unity be preserved and keeped in the Church: that the Truth and Word of GOD, be intirely, and soundly Preached and obeyed: that blasphemies and heresies be kept under and sup­prest; that all corruptions in Worship and Dis­cipline be reformed: that all GODS Ordinances be lawfully established, administred, and pre­served. And if it should happen, that both Church and State Iudicaturies, should make an universal defection from the purity of doctrine and worship received and acknowledged, it is the duty of a godly King, by vertue of his Regal Power, and Authority, to set about a work of Reformation, and to call and com­mand all ranks of People to return to the true Worship and Service of GOD; Isa. 45. 23. Psalm 122. 7, 8: 9. Ezra 7: 23, 25, 26, 27, 28. Levit. 24. 16. Deut. 13. 5, 6, 12. 1 chron. [Page 326] 13. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. 2 Kings 23. from the first verse to the 26. (3) From the ex­ample of Constantine, that did convocate the first Nicene council: From Theodosius the el­der, that did call the first council of Constanti­nople: From Theodosius the younger, that did call the first council at Ephesus: From Martia­nus, that did call the Chalcedon council.

Quest. IV.

MAY all Synods or Councils since the Apostles dayes err?

Yes.

And have not many actually erred?

Yes.

Well then, doth not the Popish Church err, who maintain, that councils confirmed, and so­lemnised by the Popes authority, cannot err, neither in explaining Doctrines of Faith, nor in delivering Precepts, and Rules of Manners, common to the whole Church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, all the Priests, Levites, and Pro­phets of the Iewish church, who had the same Promises which the Christian church hath now under the New Testament; (1 Cor. 10. 3, 4. 2 Sam. 7. 16. Isaiah 49. 15, 16.) together with the High Priest have sometimes erred, as is clear from the following Scriptures; Isaiah 56. [Page 327] 10, 11. Ierem. 6. 13. Ierem. 14. 14. Hos. 9. 7, 8, 9. Mic. 3. 9. The Lords Prophets that were immediately guided, and inspired by him, must be excepted. (2) Because, councils un­der the Old Testament, lawfully called, have often-times erred; 2 Sam. 6. 6. 3. Ier. 26. 7, 8, 9. 1 Kings 22. 6. And under the New Testa­ment; Iohn 9. 35. Iohn 11. 47, 48, 52. Matth. 26, 57, 59, 65, 66. Acts 4. 5, 6, 17, 18. (3) Because, the Pope cannot shew a proof of in­fallibility; Rom. 3. 4. (4) Because, it is fore­told in the New Testament, that many Pastors, and Teachers shall become false Prophets, and turn Seducers; and that Antichrist shall sit in the Tem­ple of GOD, shewing himself that he is God; Mat. 24. 11, 24. Acts 20. 29, 30. 2 Peter 2. 1. 2 Thes. 2. 4. (5) It is most evident, that many councils approven and authorized by the Pope, have most foully erred, and that some have openly contradicted others.

CAAP. XXXII. Of the State of Men after Death, and of the Resurrection of the Dead.

Question I.

ARE the Souls of the Righteous, being made per­fect in holiness, received into the highest Hea­vens where they behold the Face of GOD in Light and Glory?

Yes. Acts 3. 21. Ephes. 4. 10.

Well then, do not the Greeks, Arminians, Anabaptists, and Papists err, who maintain, that the Souls of the Righteous are not presently af­ter death, admitted to enjoy happiness, which con­sists in seeing of GOD; but are put into some Mansion, though it be not a Heavenly one; yet a place above Hell, where they enjoy, even until the Resurrection, some Heavenly Delight, and Recrea­tion, without seeing of GOD?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Socinians err, who affirm, That the Souls of the Righteous after death, until [Page 329] the Resurrection, are extinguished, and put out, to speak so?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Souls of the Righteous after Death are with Christ in Heaven, and enjoy that blessed Vision; Phil. 1. 23. Acts 3. 21. Ephes. 4. 10. (2) Because, the Spirits of Iust Men after Death return to GOD, and are received by GOD; Eccles. 12. 7. Acts 7. 59. Note, that Solomon onely speaketh of the people of GOD. Yet some understand it of the Souls both of Believers and unbelievers, which are both sentenced by GOD, as supream Iudge, immediately when a man dieth, every man to his place, the Souls of Believers to Heaven, of unbelievers to hell. (3) Because, the Saints departed, together with the Angels, are said to sing perpetually Praises and Thanksgiving before His Throne; Rev. 4. 6, 9, 10, 11. Rev. 5. 8, 9, 10. Rev. 7. 9, 10. (4) Because, Christ promised, that the Thief should be with him in Paradise, that same very day he di­ed; Luke 23. 43. Paul also calls it the third Heaven; 2 cor. 12. 2. 4. (5) Because, the Spirits of just men, are said to be made per­fect in holiness and glory, and placed in the Heavenly Ierusalem with the Angels; Heb. 12. 22. 23. (6) Because, the Apostle sayes, that [Page 330] if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved we have a building of GOD, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens; 2 Cor. 5. 1, 2. (7) Because, the same Apostle sayes, therefore we are alwayes confident, knowing that whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord; 2 Cor. 5. 6, 8. (8) Because, the souls of the righteous after death are comforted, and carried into Abrahams bosom; Luke 16. 22. 25.

Quest. II.

ARE the souls of the wicked cast into hell, where they remain in torments, and utter darkness reserved to the judge­ment of the great day?

Yes. Luke 16. 23, 24. Acts 1. 25. Iude 6, 7. verses. 1 Peter 3. 19.

Well then, do not the Greeks, and others err, who maintain, that the souls of the wicked are not adjudged to hells torments, till after the resurrection?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Socinians err, who main­tain, that the souls of the wicked shall never be tormented in hell?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the particular judgement of [Page 331] every single man, follows immediately his departure out of this life; Heb. 9 27. (2) Because, the soul of the rich Glutton, after it departed from his body, was tormented in the flames of Hell; Luke 16. 22. 23. (3) Because, the souls of wicked men departed go to their own place, that is to hell; Acts 1. 25. (4) Because, the souls of wicked men, are no less punished in hell, than the Apostate Angels; Iude verses 6, 7. (5) Because, the Spirits of those who in the time of Noah were diso­bedient are said to be in prison; 1 Peter 3. 19. This prison is Hell; Matth. 5. 26, 27.

Quest. III.

DOTH the Scripture acknowledge any other place than heaven and hell for souls departed from their bodies?

No.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who be­sides these two places, have devised other four.

First, a place called Limbus patrum, in which the Faithful, who died before Christs passion, have been shut up, as in a dark prison, under ground; and being without torment, and for the time wanting happiness, have been keeped closs there until Christs Resurrection and ascension into heaven.

Secondly, a place called Limbus infantum, [Page 332] in which Infants which die without Baptism, suffer the eternal punishment, not of Sense, but of Loss.

The third is a most pleasant Meadow, in which as in a Royal prison, the Souls that are in it, want happiness, yet suffer no punishment of Sense, ex­cept what ariseth from the delay of happiness, but only of Loss.

This place seems to be the Elisian Fields, taken out of the sixth book of Virgils Aeneiods.

The fourth place is called Purgatory, which is a middle place between heaven and hell, in which are the Saints, who have departed from this life, without making satisfaction by temporal punish­ments, for their venial sins, yet have gone thither for the guilt of their punishment, the fault whereof is pardoned in this life: that when they have satis­fied and are well purged from every spot and blemish, they may be admitted to that blessed Vision in seeing GOD for ever.

Do not (I say) the Papists err, who besides heaven and hell maintain other four places, for souls departed?

Yes.

By what reasons do you confute Limbus patrum?

(1) Because, the Souls of the Faithful that departed before Christs passion, were made In­habitants of the same Heavenly Ierusalem, with [Page 333] the Angels; Heb. 12. 22, 23. (2) Because, the Spirits and Souls of the Faithful that died before Christ suffered, returned to GOD who gave them; Eccl. 3. 21. (3) Because, the ver­tue of Christs sacrifice did no less extend it self to Believers under the Old Testament, than to Believers under the New; Rev. 13. 8. (4) From the example of Enoch, and of Moses, and Elias, which two before the passion of Christ, were seen upon the mount with him; Gen. 5. 24. 2 Kings 2. 11. Luke 9. 30, 31. Heb. 11. 5.

By what reasons confute you Limbus Infantum?

(1) Because, the Covenant belongs to the Children of Believers though not baptised; in which Covenant, glory and life eternal are pro­mised; Acts 2: 39. (2) Because, Christ said, that the Kingdom of Heaven belonged to lit­tle children, though not baptised; Matth. 19. 14. (3) Because, the Infants of the Israelites dying before the eight day, were not shut up in Limbus Infantum, as the Adversaries them­selves confess. But the Nature and Essence of Baptism under the New Testament, and the Nature and Essence of Circumcision under the Old, are the same; Col. 2. 11, 12. (4) All the Arguments which are brought against the absolute necessity of Baptism, do clearly overturn this fiction of Limbus Infantum.

Thirdly, There is no such place, as a most [Page 334] pleasant meadow, in which, as in a Senatorian prison, the Souls that are in it want Felicity; yet suffer no punishment of Sense. This was made evident in the First Question. Lastly, there is no such place as Purgatory. (1) Be­cause, there is no such thing as Venial sin, as it is explained by the Popish-church, upon which false Foundation, is built this fancy of Purga­tory; Rom. 6. 23. (2) Because, temporal pu­nishments do not extend themselves beyond this life; Rom. 8. 18. 2 Cor. 4. 17, 18. 1 Peter 5. 10. For in this life onely, the Godly re­ceive their evil things, as the Wicked receive their good things; Luke 16. 25. (3) Because, after the fault is pardoned, there remains no pu­nishment to be undergone; Ezek. 18. 22. Psalm 32. 1, 2. Micah 7. 19. Rom. 8. 1, 33. (4) Because, the Thief upon the Cross, that was converted, did not suffer afterwards any pu­nishment in Purgatory; Luke 23. 43. Neither could his death, and confession upon the Cross, be accounted a perfect satisfaction (as the Adversaries affirm) because he did ac­knowledge, he had received the due reward of his deeds; Luke 23. 41. He that suffers as a Murderer, or as a Thief, or as an evi doer, his punishment cannot be accounted a satisfaction; 1 Peter 4. 15. (5) Because, they that die in the Lord, rest from all their labours; [Page 335] Rev. 14. 13. (6) Because, Christs satisfa­ction for the sins of Believers, is most full, compleat, and perfect, and doth not need our imperfect satisfactions, whether for the Fault or the Punishment; Isaiah 53. chapter; Titus 2. 14. 1 Iohn 1: 7: Heb: 10: 14: Col. 1: 20, 21, 22. Neither by our sufferings in Purgatory, is Christs satisfaction applyed to us. First, be­cause our sufferings there cannot be an in­strument for applying Christs Merits to us. For on GODS part, we have the Word, Sacraments, and the Spirit as means, for applying his me­rits to us. On our part we have Faith. Was it ever heard of in the Word of GOD, that the Lord made use of exquisite torments for applying his Grace? To apply Mercy by the execut­ing of Justice: Is forgiving debt, applyed by exacting the debt? Shall pardon be applyed to by the punishing of us?

Quest. IV.

WIll such as are found alive, at the last day not die but be changed?

Yes. 1 Thess. 4. 17. 1 Cor. 15. 51, 52.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who main­tain, that such as are found alive at the last day shall die?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

[Page 336](1) Because, Christ is ordained of GOD to be Judge of Quick and Dead; which distin­ction would be needless, if all truely Died; Act 10. 42. (2) Because, the Apostle says (as was cited) we shal not all sleep but be changed: which place of Scripture is not to be read, we shall all therefore sleep, as the Papists say, putting in the Greek particle oun, for ou, therefore for not. Because this illative particle oun, cannot agree sufficiently with the Apostles Preface, Behold, I shew you a mystery: This Mysterie is not death it self, but a change in place of death, which is a great Mystery indeed. (3) As the Resurrection of many of the bodies of the Saints, was a preamble of the great Resurre­ction of our bodies; (Mat. 27. 52.) So the tran­slating of Enoch, that he might not see death, seems to be a preamble of this change in place of death Heb. 11. 9.

Quest. V.

SHal the Dead be raised up, with the self same bodies and none other, although with different qualities, which shall be united again to their Souls for ever?

Yes. Iob 19. 26, 27. 1 Cor. 15. 42, 43, 44.

Well then, do not the Socinians, Arminians, Anabaptists, Photinians, and Marcionites err, who maintain, that the same individual body, is not raised up, which we carried about with us [Page 337] here, and laid down in the dust, but another body made of Air, or of some matter more subtile than Air, altogether void of flesh and blood, made a-new by Christ?

Yes.

Do not likewise many of the Quakers err, who maintain also, That the same individual body is not raised again, but that there is a change thereof in substance, as well as in quality?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, it is evident from Scripture, Phil. 3. 21. that there shall be a transforming of those vile bodies at the Resurrection, to be fashioned after the glorious body of Christ; and so not the forming and making of a new one, which is hard to conceive, if the same indi­vidual body should not be raised, and if this change here spoken of, be as well in sub­stance, as in quality. (2) Because, the Apostle sayes, He that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken your mortal bodies (and therefore not bodies made of Air) by his Spirit, that dwelleth in you; Rom. 8. 11. (3) The same Apostle sayes, For this corruption must put on incorruption, and this mortality must put on immortality; 1 Cor. 15. 53. (4) Because, the Iustice of GOD requires, that the same in­dividual bodies shal receive rewards, or pu­nishments, [Page 338] which have done good or evil, while life remained; 2 Cor. 5. 10. Rom. 2. 6. Eph. 6. 8. (5) Because, the body of Christ, who is the efficient cause of our Resurrection, (1 Cor. 15. 4, 12, 13, 16.) rose again that same individual body; Luke 24. 39, 40.

Quest. VI.

SHal the bodies of the unjust by the power of Christ, be raised to dis­honour?

Yes. Acts 24. 15. Iohn 5. 28. 29. Phil. 3. 21.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, there shall be no resurrection of the unjust?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Apostle sayes, We must all appear before the Judgment-seat of Christ, that every man may receive the things done in the body; 2 Cor. 5. 10. (2) Because, the hour cometh, in the which, all that are in their graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, un­to the resurrection of life: and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of dam­nation: Iohn 5. 28, 29. (3) Because, the Apostle sayes, being accused before Tertullus, there shall be a Resurrection of the dead, both of the Just and Unjust; Acts 24. 15. (4) Because, according to the Enochs Prophesy, [Page 339] the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his Saints, to execute Judgement upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them; Iude verses 14, 15. (5) Because, many of them that sleep in the dust of the Earth, shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame, and everlasting con­tempt; Daniel 12. 2.

CHAP. XXXIII. Of the Last IUDGEMENT.

Question.

SHal the wicked who know not GOD, and obey not the Gospel of Iesus Christ, be casten into everla­sting torments, and be punished with everlasting de­struction, from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power?

Yes. Matth. 25. 31, to the end; Rom. 9. 22, 23. Acts 3. 19. 2 Thes. 1. 7, 8, 9.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who de­fining eternal death to be the extinguishing of the Body and Soul, maintain, that the wicked are to suffer no torment in hell; and that their whole pu­nishment [Page 340] will be to be deprived of Eternity, or ani­hilated, that is, both Soul and Body turned into NOTHING?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Origenists, and some Ana­baptists err, who think, that not only the wicked, but the Devils themselves, after many torments in hell, shall be received by GOD into favour, and be made blessed and happy?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Apostle affirms, almost in so many words, that which we have asserted; 2 Thes. 1. 7, 8, 9, 10. (2) Because, Life E­ternal, and Death Eternal, are in Scripture opposed to one another in the same sense; Mat. 25. 46. But Life Eternal in Scripture, is not taken for being simply Eternal, but for being Eternally happy, or to be in a blessed Eter­nal state and condition; Psalm 133. 3. There­fore, Eternal death must be taken in Scrip­ture not for anihilation, or being turned into Nothing; but for an Eternal wretched and mi­serable state and condition. (3) Because, the Scripture saves, but the children of the kingdom shall be casten into utter darkness, there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth; Matth. 8. 12, 13. (4) Because, the Scripture affirms expresly, that the wicked are tormen­ted [Page 341] in hell; Luke 16. 24. Next, there are some degrees of torments there, but there are no degrees in non esse, that is, in not to be. (5) Be­cause, Abraham saves expresly, there can no man pass from the place of torment, to the place of bless and happiness; Luke 16. 26. (6) Be­cause, the torments of the wicked are called a Worm that dieth not; a fire that cannot be extinguished. (7) Because, the Scripture sayes, that the smoke of their torment ascen­deth up for ever and ever; Rev. 14: 11. Rev. 19. 3. (8) Because, the wicked will be car­ried into everlasting fire, prepared for the Devil and his angels; Matth. 25. 46. And the same wicked, are to rise again to shame, and everlasting contempt; Daniel 12. 2. And to suffer the vengeance of Everlasting fire; Iude verse 7. And now only is the accepted time, and now is the day of Salvation; 2 Cor. 6. 2.

FINIS.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.