FIRST Conference.

COme hither child, how old are you?

About thirteen, Sir.

And what do you remem­ber you did some twenty years since?

I did nothing, nor can re­memberWhat is not can do nothing. any thing so long ago; for then I was nothing, and so could do nothing.Therefore nothing th [...]t is, made it self but was made by others of it's own kind.

Who then made you bee, when you were nothing?

My Father and my Mother.

And who made them bee?

Their Fathers, and Mo­thers, my Grandfathers, and Grandmothers; who likewise were made bee by other fathers, and mothers, and so upwards till Adam, and Eve, the firstand those, fi­nally, by God. man and woman that ever were.

And who made Adam & Eve be?

God Almighty, who made all things; and after all the rest, made Adam of earth, and Eve wherefore of a rib of Adam's side.

And who made God Al­mightyGod was not made, to bee?

God always was, and so cannot be made; for, nothingbut can be made unless it once were [Page 15] not, that so it might be made.was ever

How do you know that God was always?

I was told so, but I cannot give a reason for it.

Yes, but you can; for, did you not tell mee, that what is not,else can do nothing? if then once there was nothing, nothing couldNothing could have been. have been made: and there would now have been nothing. Now you know therefore, that seeing now there is some thing,He is then Eternall. there was always some-what, and that which always was, is GOD. But what, did God make no­thing but Adam and Eve?

Yes, Sir, hee made all o­ther things besides, but I can give no accompt how I know it, no more then that I have been taught so, unless you can shew me again that I know it.A [...]am.

Well, think you it not as clear that God made the firstThe first of [...]ach kinds Horse, and the first Lyon, and so of every kind which we see go [Page 16] from sire and dam to young ones; as that he made the first Man, and Woman?

Yes Sir, for I see the same reason for all, since every kindbeing, fi­nally, m [...]de by God, must have a first, which could not come of it self; and therefore must have a maker of an other kind till it come to something that always was, which is God. and

And to what purpose would the Earth [...]ee, if none of thesethe Earth things we [...]e in it? No beasts, no trees, no fishes? for all these we see propagated by generation,being and therefore had a first, and so are brought up by degrees to their originall Author, God. to no pur­pose with [...]ut t [...]ese I [...] (and the ot [...]er Ele­ments) were made too, and so God made all things.

I cannot see to what purpose the Earth (and th [...] same is of the other Elements) should be an infi [...]it time without any of these things in it, for whom and whose su [...]enance it seems wholy to serve; & so easily beleeve it was not long before them, and that God made it, and all that either [Page 17] belong to, or are of like nature with it; which is, as I think, what you aim at: That God made all things.

You are in the right, andBut God can do all that (him­self or) his Crea­tures can do; that is it, which I would bring you to. But now tell me; he that makes a thing, is he not a­ble to do as much as the thing he makes?

Yes Sir, for seeing whatever the thing made does, is done by somewhat that thing has in itHe is then self; and all that thing has, was made, or given by the maker; and nothing can give what it self has not; the Maker must have in himself al that by which the the thing made had power to do such a thing; that is, hi [...]self has power to do the same.

Thus you see you have plainly shewn God to be Al­mighty; for, nothing can be done, but what's done by some­thing; and that some-thing, is made by God; therefore, seeing [Page 18] God can do whatever any thing made by him; 'tis clear he can Almigh­ty. do all things; which is, to be Almighty. But tell me now; doand Knows all that Himself you think when God does a thing, he knows what he does?

It were a shame to doubt of that, since we accompt him a fool who knows not what he does; besides, since God makes us know what we do; and isor himself perfecter than we, he must needs know what he does even better than we.

And he that knows aHis Crea­tures can do; thing, does not he know what that thing can do; for example, can a man know a knife or a clock, without knowing, thatand so is the one can cut, and the other tell the hour of the day?

That's impossible; as also that God should not know what any work of his can do.

See again how you shewAll­know­ing. that God knows all things: for, since he knows what him­self [Page 19] made, and what all the things he made can do, and no­thing is or can be done but what himself and they do; it follows that God knows all, and every thing that is done, great and lit­tle, to the number of the thoughts of men and angells, to the divi­sion of dust and sands, and whatever els is done; nay andWherefore what can be done, though it nei­ther be nor ever will be done. But now tell me, do you know by your body, or by your soul?

By my soul.

And wherein differs yourKnow­ledge be­longing to Spirits▪ soul from your body? is't not in this, that your body has many parts & takes up room or place; your soul on the contrary is in­divisible, and wants no place, nor has any parts, but is a Spi­rit.

Al this I remember to have learnt, now you put me in mind of it.

Then, seeing you sind that [Page 20] God knows all things, what do judge him to be?

Certainly a Spirit; but yetGod is a Spirit. I know not well what a Spirit is, nor what conceit or apprehen­sion to make of it.

Do you conceive what's meant by these words Mind, Understanding, Wit, Thought Knowledge &c. If you do, you have made some apprehension of a spirit. It suffices then at present to conceive God to beand, such a thing that he is a Know­ledge and works by it. But tell me, is God a Spirit joyn'd with a body, as our soul is, or a pure Spirit without any Body?

Methinks if God were madeHis Ex­istence being ne­cessary, up of Spirit and body, there were no impossibility i [...] him▪ but his Spirit might be without his Body, and so God might dy or not be, which makes against the necessityA pure Spirit of his being alwayes, formerly prov'd.

But yet this Mind or Spirit [Page 21] must have the perfection of all Bodies in it▪ since as is already shown) It can do whatever all Bodies can.

This is very clear in my minde.

Then you see that God isYet con­taining All kinds of perfe­ction ima­ginable. a pure Spirit or Minde contai­ning in it self the natures, and perfections of all things (that is) all Being and all Goodness.

Here the Catechist ought to exhart the Cathecumen (or per­son he catechizes) to the admira­tion and reverence of God, out of his plenitude of Perfection: To the fear of God, out of his Omniscience and Omnipotence: And to the love of him, out of his All-goodness.

SECOND CONFERENCE.

YOU remember you told me that God AlmightyTherefore made Adam. Can you tell mee why he made him? and first,He wan­ted not Adam whether he wanted him?

No, Sir, he could not want him; for seeing hee's All-good­ness, he could want no good thing; and for what's bad ornor naught, there can bee no want or need of that.

At least, did he get any thing by him? or was he richercould get after, then before?

No, Sir, he that hath all,profit can get nothing.

At least, as you have plea­sure when your hear your self [Page 23] commended, or see your self ho­nour'd and serv'd, so did God get any new content?

Sir, without doubt it could not but please him. For so I am taught that my good works please God, and my sins dis­pleaseor him.

'Tis very true that he is pleas'd with our good works, and displeas'd with our bad. But not so that he conceiv's new pleasure, or displeasure; but withpleasure by him, the pleasure of good, which hee had for ever, and the displeasure of bad likewise he had for ever. For, if hee could receive new pleasure, or displeasure, he would get some thing he had not before, which you told me he could not. But now, if he got neither profit, nor content by making Adam, why did he make him?

Sir, I cannot tell you that, for I never do good but I get something that contents me.

If you should finde a poor wretch in a wilderness, readybut made him to starve, and you had store of victuals, would you not give him some?

Yes sir; and should think my self unworthy to live unless I did.

And why? for you should neither have honour, nor profit, neither (though peradventure af­terwards you would have plea­sure) would you think of that when you did it.

I know not, Sir, why; but good nature would make me doout of pure Goodness; it.

And now you have told me why. For 'tis the nature of Good­ness to do good, as of heat to heat, and of cold to cool. And so, God being all Goodness, needs no o­ther cause why to do good, then that himself by nature is Good­ness, or as you call it, of a good nature. But, tell me again didand, God Almighty make you?

No Sir, my Father and my Mother made me.

Think you so? and I pray, if your Master should whip you, or make the Stationer give you a fine new book would you thank the Stationer, or be angry at the rod? or rather be thankfull or displeas'd towards your Ma­ster?

Towards my Master, Sir. But I do not see that God Al­mighty either bad my Father, or Mother make me: or used them to that end.

No? Did you not tell meby means of him, that God made Adam, Adam his Son? and so till it came to your father, and mother?

Yes Sir, but this is a great way off from God's making me.

It will come nearer: You told me also that God knew alland cau­ses that was to be done, or could be done by the things he made: And again, that what he did, he did [Page 26] out of his Goodness: you seeput by God and contin [...]'d from him, then, that hee knew your Fa­ther and Mother would make you, and would have it so; and, out of his Goodness, put the causes which should make you. What does your Master more when he either rewards or pu­nishes you, but onely puts theUs; causes out of which hee intends, and knows your good, or harm will follow. Well, if this bee a­greed on that God made you, tell me now whether you have any thing that God did not be­stow upon you?

No, Sir; for, what ever I should say I had from my self,even to the least thing wee have. or from any other, you will in the same manner shew that the causes coming from God, hee uses them to make mee have those things, and so bestow'd them on mee.

'Tis well sayd. But to whether are you more beholding for the thing you have? to God▪ [Page 27] or to him that immediatly gives it you? for example, for your life, and being, to God, or your parents? for your learning, to God, or your master?

Hitherto, S [...]r, I am sure I have given more thanks to my Parents, and Masters; but now I know not what I ought to do.

How soon have you for­got you own saying? did you not tell mee that your affection was not at all towards the Statio­ner,Wherefore or rod (to which your father, and master are compar'd) but onely to your Master that re­warded or corrected you? how then are you so soon ignorant, whom you are most to thank; God, or the next causes of your good?

By that rule I should ow no­thing to my parents and master but onely to God.

Not so neither, but to every one according to the good will he bears you, and the share he [Page 28] has in the good deed. Now, asall possible thanks for God Almighty, you know there is no cause concurring, nor any least part of the work which belongs not totally to him, on all sides, and from the very begin­ning: Therefore, how much theare good is, 'tis wholy and entirely due unto him; but your Parents, and Master are not the thou­sandth part of the Causes; and, therefore, though thanks be due to them in respect they are the immediate causes, yet in comparison of what's duetotally due to him. to God, you are not one thou­sandth part beholding to them. Again, you told mee God knew perfectly all things belonging to this good you possess, and the best owing of it; But, the next cause understands not perfectly what himself does, but is bent to his work beyond his own under­standing: as you may easily see by this, that your self when you walk know not how you do it, [Page 29] and we may be pos'd in twenty things which belong to walking, which nevertheless our selves do.nay ▪ But, amongst all things you have, are not works some? as singing, playing, understanding,Every least A­ction wee do comes fr [...]m God▪ eating, and the rest, and therefore also whatsoever you do, comes likewise from A [...]mighty God.

Yes, Sir, I see well enough, that because my self, and all other causes of my action come from God, it must needs follow that my actions come from him. But I dare not say so, for fear I should make him author of my(yet not sin, sins, which I have been taught he is not.

'Tis well thought on. But if you knew that S [...]n were but want of doing, or not-doing, you would not fear that conse­quence. For, as you see when ait being onely man takes a knife to cut with, the cutting p [...]oceed, from the man, but, that it cuts not so well as it should, proceeds from the blunt­ness [Page 30] or want of edge in the knife: and likewise, the writing proceeds from the Scrivener; but, that the pen gives not ink well, or blots, comes from the evill fa­shioning, or slitting of the pen: so, what a man does is from God, but that he does not so well as he ought (which is to sin) proceedsDefect of action) from some defect in the man. For, as from fire cold cannot proceed, nor from water driness; so from the Fountain of Being and Goodness, the want of good­ness and being cannot spring.Hence

By this you easily gather that God is the Governour of this God is Univer­sall Go­vernour of the World. world, seeing all things are done by his disposition and go­vernment.

Here the Catechist ought to exhort his Catechumen to re­member and perform his duty towards God; who as he gives us all things freely, so he de­serves that we offer, indepen­dently from reward, all our [Page 31] works and wills to him. As he made us, so, as creatures, wee are his slaves. As he gave us every thing we have, all our goods are his. As he is more cause then the next causes, so is hee to be preferr'd before all. As he does all our works in us, so requires hee the honour of all be attributed to him. As he is not author of sin, so is he not to be charg'd with any fault or want on his side. And, as hee's Governour of the world, so is he to be pray'd to, fear'd, and re­spected.

THIRD CONFERENCE.

VVEll; now Adam's made, what did God give him?

Sir, I know not that, for I have not read the Scripture,God be­ing a per­fect A­gen [...] whence that is co be known.

But you know what things make a man, and doubt not but God gave them perfectly to A­dam; for a good workmanmade his imme­diate wo [...]k, (Adam) perfect in Endow­ments makes his work good, and would be asham'd, if it should come out of his hands otherw [...]se than perfect; according to that saying, that a good tree cannot breed ill fruit.

I know a man is made of Body and Soul, and so Adam had those.

What are the perfections of the B [...]dy? are they not Health,of Body▪ which consists in the integrity of all parts of our body, and abili­ty to use them well? Strength, to carry, heave, draw, push; and and the like? Nimbleness, or a­gility? by which wee do our a­ctions with life, and quickness; and, lastly, Beauty which graces both body, and actions? Like­wise in the Soul wee see Under­standingand Minde ▪ and Will; Under­standing comprehends Memory of things past: Judgment of the present: and Forecast of things to come. Can you doubt whether these things were given to A­dam?

No, Sir, for seeing wee have them from Adam, sure Adam could not fail to have had them, and to have receiv'd them from God.

But do you think Adam had no more then wee have ei­therAlso ▪ in body or soul in our birth?

Yes sir; yet I am not well able to imagin what 'tis.

Do you think he knew and lov'd God above all things?

Yes sure; for, knowingHis Ma­ker hee was not from himself, but had receiv'd all from God, hee could not chuse but love him a­bove all things.

True: and God dispos'd all things fit for this: for, having fram'd his body [...]f red clay, heebeing his first ob­ject, stood in a visible shape before him, that when hee first look'd up, the first thing he saw was Almighty God finishing the creation of all things in him; soin Know­ledge and Love of of him a­bove all things. that his heart being rightly set for this purpose, free from all other affections, most passive by the daintiness of the mould as yet not mingled with any others: it could not bee but that this sight should make a most deep appre­hension, which must needs carry the whole powers of the soul with it, and totally subject it to [Page 35] Almighty God. But do you think this wrought any thing inwhich must work the Body.

I know not Sir.

Do you not finde that good news makes your body light, and jocond? have you not seen boys rid of the hiccock by an apprehension of fear; nay, some speak of those that have been freed from agues by fears, or angers; and does not in all this the soul work upon the body?in his bo­dy too why then should you doubt but so strong a love as Adam had, must needs have it's effects in the Body also, as indeed it had. And, as wee see the practice of memory makes men easy to learn without book, the practice of dis­coursing fit to discourse, and soDisposi­tions in all actions, and this by no­thing but by the fitting of the bo­dily instruments, and organs: So, this love did either fit the veryconforma­ble to tha [...] Love, corporeal disposition to such love, or increase that fitness it found [Page 30] [...] [Page 31] [...] [Page 32] [...] [Page 33] [...] [Page 34] [...] [Page 35] [...] [Page 36] there already: by this means ma­king the very corporeall desires subject to Reason, that this bodyor being prevented with reason, could not incline to any thingsubject to Reason. before Reason gave it leave and order. But tell me farther, have you not heard that children be like their fathers?

Yes, Sir, I know well 'tis thewhich would de­scend ordinary complement of Gossips to say the child is like the father, which shews that ordinarily 'tis so.

And this likeness, is it into the Bo­dies of his posterity; the body onely, or also in the Soul?

I cannot tell how one should be like another in the soul, which has no parts.

Did you not say the Souland works upon the body? if then you see those works which come from the soul to bee alike in two, can you think but that their souls be alike als [...]? [...]s▪ if they discourse alike, love like things, je [...]t, write [Page 37] a poem, or oration alike, would you not judge their Souls alike? So then 'tis not ill conjectur'd that when the body of the Son is [...]the Soul like the body of the Father; also the Soul of the Son is like the Soul of the Father. And I re­member to have heard judicious men say of some persons, that when they saw them jest or dis­course, they thought they saw their fathers.

How should the Soul which is made by God come to be like the Soul of the Father which had nothing to do with it?

If there were severall kindsbeing fit­ted of matter of divers [...] dispositions, as wax, wood, aq a vit [...], stu [...]ble, brimstone, &c. of which you in­tended to make Fi [...]e, or (as wee say in the schools) to introd [...]cethe Form of Fire into them: Though each would become indeed a thing able to burn, or Fire; yet, would you expect in reason that this active Principle, or power of [Page 38] burning call'd the Form of Fire, should bee equally in each of them?

No, Sir, I see plainly by ex­perience 'tis not to bee expected; each would have power to burn on a different fashion, and in a different degree. But I am not so wise as to see whence this dif­ference s [...]rings.

You see it springs not from the Form of Fire in each, for that has nothing else to do but to make it Fire or a thing able to burn.

True, Sir, for 'tis one thing to bee apt to burn, another to bee apt to burn differently. I conceive therefore this difference arises from the severall dispositions in the Matter, or severall Fuells you spoke of.

You see then 'tis the way the All-wise orderer of Nature takes, that a diversity in the dis­position of the matter determins to a diversity in the active Prin­ciple [Page 39] or Form, according to cer­tain degrees within the same spe­cies or kind. The Rational soul then being the Form of man's Bo­dy or that which makes him man; you see 'tis God's method to put like Souls into like bodies? there­fore the father making the bodyto the Bo­dy) of the son like his own, will not his soul also be made by God like to the father's soul? and so the souls of like bodies be like? of unlike bodies, unlike?

Yes sure, sir, that must be so, seeing the soul doth fit the body.

Then, if the soul of Adam had that operation on it's body as to make a special disposition in it by which it was subject to rea­son,to their Souls also. and this disposition proceed­ed from the strong love of Al­mighty God: as on the one side Adam would make a son like himself in that subjection to rea­son, so God Almighty would give his son a soul fit to love God [Page 40] above all things, the disposition of the soul proceeding from such a disposition of the body.

Yes, Sir, 'tis evident heethat is would, or else he should not put a fitting soul into the Son's body.

This prov'd, you must know that our forefathers callthey would have had the Love of God above all things, Justice, and Sanctity; which, because it was so given to Adam, as to descend unto his Heyrs, it was call'd Originall Iustice, and said to bee a natu­rallOriginall Justice. gift, and to come unto them by nature who were to bee born with it.

Besides this gift, God Al­mightyand fi [...]ted the place to the man that there should bee no e­vil [...] ayr, or other occasion of harm unto him; whence, be­cause wisedom kept him from mischance, and the place fromImmorta­tality. infection, hee could not dy but of Age; for remedy against which God had provided the tree [Page 41] of l [...]fe; and so, he would have liv'd for ever.

But, to proceed yet a little far­ther.But, losing the Love of God, If Adam left lovin [...] God, would he have this disposi­tion in his body?

No, Sir, for if the Love of God were the cause of this dispo­sition,contrary or passio­nate dis­positions the contrary would cause the loss of it,

You say well, specially if you add that hee could not leave off loving God, but because heewould immedi­ately succeed in [...]im; lov'd some other thing better; which love having it's effect in the body, must needs cross the o ther disposition left before, and if this bee so that he left off lovingand be deriv'd God, how would it fare with his children?

How, but that they would bee born subject to such disposi­tionsto all his from their birth as the love of other things b [...]ed in them? But, Sir, I have heard that Adam after his fall did pennance, and began to love God a new; wherefore me thinks [Page 42] he should again recover the dis­position of loving God, for himself and his posterity.

What you have heard is true, but not the good effect you gather. For his second love finding dispositions in the [...]recove­rably, body contrary to it's proper nature, cannot on the suddain extirpa [...]e them, but with a great deal of pain, and la­bour: and, as wee experience in our selves, never wholly, because these Affections are before Reason, and alter the temperament of the Body due and req [...]sit to Originall Ju­stice, which it lyes not in the power of Reason nor of other Bodies, being of a different tem­per, exactly to repair. Whence it never comes to pass, that the father can communicate his whole vertuous dispositionthat is, to his child, though wee see the likeness of a well practiz'dthey must all have father to be naturally in the [Page 43] son. And this is that which Christians call Originall Sin, Origi­nall Sin. the missing of Grace or Origi­nall Iustice in the child, through the fault of our first father; so that the want or privation is particular to every one; the cause or actuall guilt, onely in A­dam.

FOURTH CONFERENCE

THus far we have declar'd the nature of Originall Sin in it self, can you tell me the effects it works in us who are the posterity of Adam.

I have heard that sins, and ignorance, and also death and infirmities, have their origin from it.

Can you shew these things of it.

No indeed Sir, for anyExperi­ence tea­ches that Sense governs in a childe thing I know as ye [...], but I expect you will make me know it.

Then tell me, in a child three or four years old, which is stronger, Sense or Reason?

Sense without question. [Page 45] For, give him an apple & tell him it will offend God to eat it, I make no question but as soon as you have turn'd your back hee'l eat the apple without regar­ding the offence of God, so that I see Sense in him is stronger than Reason.

Right; for he understands not what is the offence of God, as yet: nay, accor [...]ng to theand p [...]r­verts ordinary Judgment of Divines, not till seven years of age: Sothe long therefore, sense has the whole government of a child;right working of reason in all till years of ripe judgment; and after seven, reason by litle and litle overcomes till the age of thirty. The Philosophers not ad­mitting maturity of wisdome and constant Judgment, till the standing part of our age, which is, when we leave growing; so that, till then, wee are on the lo­sing side. Now, what think you?therefore is't easy to conquer and root out a thing that's grown in and with us for thirty years together?

It must needs be very hard.these Im­pressions from sense

Do you think that hard which ev [...]y man does?

No Sir, that's easy whichare all can do, and the harder a thing is, so much the fewer can do it. [...]ard to be over­come per­fectly, and are subdu'd by sew or none; Hence Mankind is Slave to Sin; and Originall Sin cau­sing motions of sense not subject [...]o reason, all Actu­al Sin

Th [...]n, seeing to overcome Sense perfectly is very hard, and very few can do it, and most men do it not, Mankind is subject or slave to sin, as being for the most part conquer'd [...]y it?

This is very well; but you do not shew, that this comes from originall sin.

So that it seems you have forgot, that by originall sin it first came, that Sense has it's proper motion not subject to Reason; which if it had not, the more it should grow, the more vertuous it would make the man, because hee would still become more sub­ject to God and Reason.

Sir, I see now that all our Sins come from original sin; and in­deed 'tis no wonder that one sin [Page 47] should proceed from an other. Butsprings from ori­ginall. I expect how you wil [...] shew that Ignorance & Infirmities proceed from the same. For if they were then to be born (as we are now) children, and grow to be men, I think they must needs also be children in knowledge, and so have ignorance: so that this can­not be the ofspring of original sin: and likewise, if then they had eaten to grow and keep them­selves a live as we do now, they would not avoid, but meats should have their effect, and soAlso, breed diseases, when out of sea­son.

You are not well acquain­tedIgno­rance being with the difference of not knowing, and being ignorant: for, not every one is ignorant who does not know, but he who knows not what he ought, or what's fitting for him to know.the not knowing what's sit to know For example, what Master either of Divinity, or Philosophy, or a­ny other Art knows all which [Page 48] may be known in his Art? yet are they not therefore to be term'd Ignorant. So likewise, a­nyand man who knows what's fit­ting, is not ignorant. Now I pray,the state of Inno­cence if any one in that estate, knew not what was fitting to know, it was either because he could not, or would not?

True; for whosoever can and will do any thing, 'tis mostgiving clear he does it.

Then what think you inboth pow­er, and will that state could he not, or would he not know what was fitting? If he could not, it was want in himself, or in his teacher; But Adam was perfect in knowledge & could teach him. If himself were not capable, theto know what's fi [...], knowledge was above him, and so not such as was fitting, or such as the want thereof induces Ignorance. If there was want of will, it was because he lov'd some other thing better, and that heIgnorance was not wholy subject to reason: [Page 49] which cannot be without original sin, and so original sin is cause of Ignorance. Now, if ignorance be cause of sickness and death, you have no more to reply.and

No indeed. But I hear learn­ed men say that 'tis not in the power of nature to keep a man from death, and therefore I fear not ignorance should be the cause thereof.by cons [...] ­quence

But, what if ignorance or sin be the cause why nature can­not keep a man from death? let's see: death comes either by violence or sickness; violenceInfirmi [...] ­ties from man, or beast, or some dead thing. But, if men had not sin'd they would neither have fal [...] out▪ nor have been surpris'd by chance, which proceeds from not foreseeing; so that from Man no hurt could have proceeded.and Beasts would all have been tame, and in fear of man, as weDea [...] spring th [...]nce [...]. see those be which use men's com­pany, or as others might be made. [Page 50] And, for Accidents, unless a man puts himself in danger, they would not arrive▪ likewise, if we look into the cause of sick­ness in Physicians books, wetherefore shall see it proceeds from some excess or defect, which in that state would not have been, whenthe State of Para­dise man had wit and will to prov [...]de against both.

Sir, that was an happy age,Happy▪ or rather would have been, if man had kept his honour in which God had plac'd him.

True; but yet, this weyet ours not un­happy have would not be miserable, if our selves did not make it so by our own fault; not seeing what's before our eyes. For, consider,but through our own fault; For Sin onely causes ve­ [...]ion, [...] if you please, what's more cause of fin unto us than pleasure? yet no Sin can be without displea­sure.

Sir, that were hard to per­swade; since we see men dai­ly think nothing sweet but it; which could not be, did they ex­perience [Page 51] continual▪ displeasure in it.

Can you doubt but that must needs grieve a man which isunnatu­ral. against his inclination, and na­ture? then, if Reason be the na­ture of man, how can he see him­self do against reason (which nevertheless every sin does) without grief and pain. Again, does not sin set our hearts upon goods, which may be taken fromfixing our affections on perish [...] ­ble goods. us, as money, meat, play, and the like: it puts us then in perpe­tual danger of vexation & grief; for who looses what he's in love with, must needs be grieved ac­cording to the measure of his love. Again, if Reason have fore-cast of what's to come, and memory of what's past; Senseand (which is the cause of sin) onely consideration of the present; is't not manifest that sin by senseprecipita­ting us in­to incon­veniency. precipitates us into future incon­veniencies, which Reason keeps us out of? Again, Reason has [Page 52] one conduct and government through all occurrences; But Sense as many severall motions as the things desir'd are different;distra­ctive, which, because they are not ever had together, make the vitious man now follow one, now ano­ther; and sometimes miss both.suspensive Sometimes also be unquiet and uncertain, not knowing what he would have. And so we see a man given impotently either toand wealth, or pleasure, never to be at rest, but continually in a pain­fullweari­some. pursuit of what he never en­joyes. You have told mee that all mankind was subject to sin and the Devil, and by them, to other mischiefs; But, are you so good an historian, as to shew me this to have indeed pass'd accor­dingThe Hi­story as is declar'd.

No truly Sir; for, although peradventure in sermons I have heard much thereof, yet I carry away but litle.of

Wel, I am sure you have [Page 53] heard how God was oblig'd inMan­kinds Slavery to Sin layd out in some remarka­ble in­stances Justice (through the wickedness of mankinde) to destroy all but Noah & his family, eight persons onely, by the great floud. And I may add, that Noah might have talk'd with some who knew A­dam, so that the fresh memory of our loss of Paradise could not hinder the increase of sin. Peradventure mens lives, be­ing so long, the fear of death, & hope of future life was cold in them, & therefore God shorten'd our dayes for our greater good. Soon after, our forefathers grew into the vanity of building Babel tower; and not long after, in­to that prodigious luxury, which drew fire from heaven upon the five cities, whereof Sodom, and Gomorrah were the chief. Wherefore, God seeing all mankind could not be kept in good order, without an universal miracle destroying quite the present state of nature [Page 54] (and not perfecting it according as the particular natures requir'd) which therefore God saw incon­gruous for the wi [...]e administra­tion of the wo [...]ld, hereupon hee chose one family for his elected people, ply'd them with perpe­tuall apparitions, prophesies, rewards and punishments; gave them a law in force of mi­racles, and astonishing great­ness. Yet the books of scripture teach that they were perpetually straying from Gods law, till hee was provok'd to transport them to Babylon, whence they came after long and severe punishment little amended, and therefore still subject to oppositions and op­pressions by Greeks, and La­tins. So that with all the means which man could invent, it was not possible to keep mankinde out of Sin. Can you tell me theThe cause of this reason of it?

Sir, you have told it alrea­dy; that it was originall sin,is Sense making man prone to follow t [...]e pre­sent and s [...]u­p [...]d to conceit a­right his future true Good. [Page 55] which giving our Sense power to work without the command of Reason, caus'd all this mischief.

Right. But I desire to know what 'tis that it works, which makes mankind so back­ward to it's own good; Is't not that man makes no apprehension of Gods law, and the good of it?

Yes, Sir, the Sense follow­ing the present good, hinders the consideration of the future.

You see then the remedy ought to be, to make them be­lieve, and deeply apprehend the good of the next world; wheretotherefore men being not able to attain ei­ther by Sense or discourse, 'tis necessary to give them a Teacherto be re­medy' by a Teacher. of whom they are assur'd that he knows what he teaches, and will not tell them other then truth. But what must such a one do to persuade the world?

He must teach them? butwho [...]ught to bee seeing you say the matter is a­bove reason, I k [...]ow not how [Page 56] he should persuade them that things are so as he teaches them.

Will you not beleeve a man in things whose truth you see not if he work strange and miraculous effects in proof of his savings?miracu­lous,

Yes, Sir, or else I were ve­ry unreasonable.

If then this Teacher worksmost knowing and most true; wonders, which wee call Mi­racles, he will deserve credit at your hands.

Yes; for none can do mi­raclestherefore God: but Almighty God.

Neither is there any, who may not be suspected ignorant ofalso, most con­vinient to teach our na­ture such high matters, or safely held incapable of deceiving, but one­ly God: Nor can any one shew the way or bee a convenient Teacher for us but onely Man: so that you see our necessity forc'd God to become man, or else our whole kind hath been damn'd.& excite love of him; therefore Man. [...] hich rendring our way to Beati­tude con­naturall and plain. and so be­ing most [...]itting; Therefore God was made Man. To which if you add, that wee see and converse familiarly with [Page 57] man, and easily incline to love him: God, wee cannot appre­hend what hee is; so that, by by God's becoming man the way and means of loving Him, which is our high path to salvation, be­ing infinitly plain'd, & mankind made infinitly more capable of salvation than before, you will easily collect hence that it could not stand with the Goodness of God to let us [...]ly in misery, since he could remedy it by a way so connaturall to mankind, as was his assuming human nature, God therefore was made Man.

FIFTH CONFERENCE.

VVE have discours'd al­ready of God as our Maker, Governour, Redeemer; as Eternall, Almighty, Al­knowing, Al-perfect. But have you no other Attribute of God which bears an eminent place in our Beleef?.

Yes, Sir, that God is one & three, or that there is a Trinity; but I dispair of understanding in any measure so high a point; so that 'tis enough to beleeve 'tis so, and this I do already.

Doubt not God's Good­ness, if your self bee not wanting [Page 59] to your self. And, first, tell mee▪ Notions or appre­hensions of things as in themselves are got by our senses▪ have you any apprehension of God as hee is in himself?

I know not that; but I ob­serve that generally I make no apprehension of any thing as 'tis in it self, which I never heard, nor saw, nor perceiv'd by some sense.

Your observation is good; tell me next, what do you appre­hendand so o [...] mean by the words Good, just, mercifull, and such like? mean you not such perfectionsfrom crea­tures; by them as you observ'd in Creatures?

Yes, Sir, I know not else what I could mean by them, for I never converst with any thing else. Besides, I am perswaded, one that never heard of God means the same by those words as I do▪ which shows the mean­ingsand those of them is taken from crea­tures. But then mee thinks 'tis an injury to God to attributetransfer'd to God, such low perfections▪ to him [Page 60] which fall infinitly short of his dignity.

No harm, by the grace of God, as long as we hold fast this intention to attribute them to him onely so far as they signi­fy▪ perfection, and not as they in­cludewhich mean Perfecti­in [...] imperfection. In the mean time you see wee cannot speak of God, as in himself, but by means of those low conceits borrow'd from Creatures.

By this account wee must not s [...]y hee is one and three, for no Creature is such.

You object shewdly; but, since you have already prov'dtherefore chiefly to Know and Will, which are proper to Spi [...]its. God is a Spirit, and seen that a Spirit can Know and Will, if out of these it be made as plainly follow that God is one and three as out of other considerations that he is Good, Iust, &c. will it not bee a degree of satisfaction above what you could hitherto hope for?

I confess it will; and I ex­pect [Page 61] with longing you would lead me to this apprehension of so sublime a mystery, which hi­therto I knew nothing of.

Answer mee then first, what means this word to know?

I am sure I understand what it means, for I understand wellKnow­ledge then enough the meaning of my own words when I say, I know you are reaching me. But yet I can­not explain my self nor give ac­count of it.

You need not wonder you cannot give account of all that'simpor­ting some Likeness of the thing known; really in you, for this belongs to Study and Reflexion: But do not you conceive when you know a thing that you have some likeness of that thing in your Mind?

Yes, sure, for otherwise that Knowledge would be indiffe­rently a knowledge of any other thing or all things as well as this; if, when I knew this, there were in my Mind no speciall [Page 62] representation or Likeness of this.

You discourse well. What judge you then of a perfect Knowledge of a thing accordingand, so, perfect Know­ledge, to all respects imaginable? Must not the perfect Knower of that thing, as he is the Knower of it, have in himself the perfect Like­ness of it?

Yes, certainly; for, if eve­ry sleight Knowledge argue some Likeness, a Knowledge e­very way perfect argues by con­sequenceper­fect Like­ness, that is no Un­likeness, an every way perfect Likeness.

And those things which are every way alike are no way un­like, are they?

'Tis impossible they should.

And, if no way unlike, theythat is no Diver­sity, that is, Unity or Identity. can never be diverse or two.

No, Sir, for that Diversity whatever 'tis, would bee an Un­likeness.

And those things that are not diverse or two, are they not the same and one.

Questionless they are.

The thing then knownthe nature of the thing known perfectly perfectly, as in the Knower, is the self same as 'tis in it self.

This seems to me a riddle & strange; yet I see not how I can go back with credit, or answeris the same in the Knower, better than I have done, though I were to begin again.

'Tis backwardness and grosnes of Fancy and not ver­dict of pure Reason which makes you fly from unexpected consequences without seeing a fault in the Discourse. Let's pro­ceed; and tell me, what makes a thing bee what it is, for exam­ple,therefore Peter bee a man? is it not be­causethe Know­er▪ he has man's Nature in him?

Yes, without doubt.

If then the very nature ofas such, is it. the thing known be in the Knower, the Knower as such, is a thing of that nature; that is, that very thing.

I feel my self loath to grant i [...] ▪ but I needs must.

Tell me yet further, is not the thing known as such, distinct, and opposit to the Knower taken precisely as a Knower.

You seem to ask me whe­ther [...]ut as known not-knowing be opposit to knowing; for the Thing known consider'd barely as known, is, as such, not-knowing; which is no hard question.

'Tis easilier answer'd then;'tis op­posit to, and di­stinct from the Knower, therefre To know is to be another as ano­ther. but perhaps there's a further meaning in it; for, when you know a man, that man leaves not to bee what he was in the least for your knowing him; but stand [...] aloof from, is independent of, & totally unconcern'd by your knowing him; that is, he as the thing known is out of you and no wayes appertaining to you. The Thing known then, as such, is in some sence another or distinct from the Knower: And so to Know is to have the nature of another thing in it, or be that other thing as 'tis another. Tell me [Page 65] next; does God know himself?God then knowing himse [...]f is in himself as in ano­ther; that is, There is Distin­ction in God; yet, (the Ob­ject in the Knower being the same,) without prejudi­cing his Unity;

How can one doubt of this, since we account him a fool that does not?

You see then you have shown that God by knowing himself, is in himself as in ano­ther, that is, there is distinction in God.

This may advance to show God three, but will it not destroy his being one?

Have you forgot so soon what even now you were forc'd to grant, that perfect Knowledge was a perfect Likeness, & so the thing Known is the same in the Knower, taken as such, as 'tis in it's self? God, therefore, notwith­standing this distinction, is more one with himself, if possible, by knowing himself than other wise he would be.which he has

This puzzles me, but does not satisfy me; for still you show not how he is one and how three.

I have already shown you▪ according to his Nature, but you did not observe it: what knows God when hee knows himself, is it not his own Nature, Essence, Substance, Properties, &c.

Yes sure, Sir, the word Himself can mean nothing else.

Well then; add this consi­derationBeing, that the very self-same Nature of the Thing known isor in the Knower, it follows thatSub­stance God is one with himself in na­ture, Substance, Essence or Be­ing, (for those words import the same;) which is what Christians profess, that there is but one God,notwith­standing or one thing of a Divine Nature.

How did we agree God hadHis Di­stincttion distinction or opposition in him?

As knower and thing known.

And do you find that these words import substance or Being, as did the former words, God, according to the notions of Knowing and being Known▪ himself, Divine Nature, Essence, &c

No, Sir, Knowing and [Page 67] Known mean not so amongst us.

That therefore being the meaning of words which is us'd amongst us whence they arewhich are transferr'd to God, they retain the same manner of meaning there too: that is, of a Relation or re­spect; Relati­ons. for, you see plainly a Knower as precisely such, onely respects the thing Known, and the thing Known, as purely such, onely respects the Knower. which amounts to this in theand phrase of Logicians that God is one according to the notion or predicament of substance; three which according to the Predicament or notion of Relation. Learned men would also tell you that Relations, out of our under­standing are nothing but the things related (as that, two yards(God ha­ving to bee equall is nothing but to be each a yard; Peter and Paul to be the same in nature is nothing but to bee what they are, thatis, men) whence God being un­changeable, [Page 68] and so no Accidents [...] Acci­dents, ▪ relate, and so di­stinguish the Sub­stance; yet not substanti­ally. in himto be related, his very sub­stance must be the thing related, & have distinction & opposition in it, yet not substantially, but re­latively. But, I fear these terms may prove too subtle for your speculation, at least would need a longer time to explicate than the intent of so short a Cate­chism permits.

I have been taught that there is in God Father, Son and Holy Ghost, but Knowledge of the Divine Nature and the same nature Known look nothing like any of these.

Think you so, tell mee then what is it to be a Father?

'Tis to have a Son.

Wee are still as far toAnd. seek as formerly; for when I come to ask what 'tis to bee a Son, you may aswell answer 'tisa Son to have a Father, which word remaining yet unexplicated wee are still at a loss▪ But, to go your [Page 69] way, because either of those words explain'd tell the mean­ing of the other, tell mee what do you observe to be that which makes one call'd a Son?

I see hee comes or has his being from one of the same Na­ture,being as I have from my Father and Mother, whence also I am call'd their Son.

Is this enough? so, onea Living thing pro­ceeding from a Li­ving thing of the same nature as from a Principle remaining in it, Fire springs from another, yet the new Fire is not call'd the o­ther Fire's Son.

I see now they must both at least bee Living Things, else they cannot well bee call'd Fa­ther and Son.

I doubt this is not yet e­nough. Think you not likewise that the Father remains in the Son according to some part of him, of which the Son is made.

I imagin so, Sir, else I know not how I came by this matter I have, for I am told God creates none a new.

Summ up then what has been said, and you'l find that a Son is a living thing proceeding from a living thing of like na­ture as from a Principle re­maining in it; This being set­led: tell me next, what think you of God (or the Divine na­ture) is he not a living thing.

Yes, without doubt, he that gives life to all things must needsand Know­ledge in God himself have life or be living.

And, in God whence pro­ceeds this Knowledge of himself we spoke of.

Certainly, from Himself or God as Known; for, I observe that when I get any Knowledge, though my soul knows, yet the object or thing Known makes me know, or makes that Know­ledge. being

Adde then to these, that per­fect Knowing is a perfect resem­bling another, that is, a being perfectly It or of like nature with [...], (as was shown) and that this [Page 71] Nature, in our case, is in both Knower and Thing known, Li­ving; and, that Knowledge of God proceeds from God as ansuch in respect of he Di­vine Es­sence known, object or thing known; lastly, that the Divine Essence known remains in the Knowledge that proceeds from it; is't not plain that Knowledge of himself in God proceeds as a living thing That is truly call'd Son; from a living of the same nature as from a Principle remaining in it; that is, as we show'd, that this Knowledge is properly a Son, This, the Divine Nature known pro­perly a Father; and so, that There is in God Father and Son. Father.

Me thinks, Sir, I now begin to see some glimps how the Eter­nal Son is begotten of his Fa­ther, which before sounded strangely to me; how he is God of God, onely begotten, the Wisdome and Image of his Eter­nal Father, and such like ex­pressions which I have read in the Crreds and Prayer-books, [Page 72] but never could frame any con­ceit of them, which made my de­votion very dull and dry. ButLikewise, still you have told me nothing of the Holy Ghost.

Did you not tell me thatGod lo­ving Him­self, the same thing a Spirit has Will as well as Un­derstanding or Knowledge? If then the proper Act of the Will be Love, and that you grant God loves himself, that is, be the thing loving & thing loved, that is, the same nature, or Godis in both; yet, as loving and loved, importing distinction as well as Knowledge and thing Known, you will easily gather by a Dsi­courseLoving and Lo­ved; yet, as such, distinct; therefore there is besides in God, a a third, call'd Di­vine Love parallel to the former that there must be in God, besides Father and Son a third, that is, Love; One in Nature, yet di­stinct in Relation, which is that we call the Holy Ghost.

I apprehend in some degree how the Discourse goes, but I see not why the Holy Ghost is said to proceed from the Father, and the Son.

Remember well that theAlso▪ Holy Ghost is Love, and then tell me what is that whence Love pro­ceeds in rational things, or that which rational things love. Love in­telligent things proceed­ing from their pro­per Good▪

That which is their Good.

And what judge you to be the the proper Good of an In­tellectual Nature? Is it not Truth?

I think you mean by Intel­lectual, capable of knowing; and,which is Truth, then, 'tis plain nothing is so op­posit and destructive to it as Er­rour, (for they who have this per­fectly, know nothing) whereforeconsisting in this also Truth must by consequence be the perfection and proper Good of an Intellectuall na­ture.

You answer learnedly, butthat the Object be in the Know­ledge▪ I fear 'tis onely repeating by rote what I have so oft told you. Well; And in what consists Truth? Is it not in this that the Object is in the Knowledge?

I conceive so, Sir.

And what Object can beeDivine Love pro­ceeds from the Divine Essence, as Object, in the Divine Know­ledge, worthy Gods Understanding, or proportion'd to it?

None, sure, but himself or his own essence.

You see then that the Good proper to him and consequently the source of Divine Love, is that the Divine Essence as Object orthat is, from Fa­ther and Son. Known, be in the Divine Know­ledge, which includes (as was shown) Father and Son▪ From both therefore conjointly Divine Love or the Holy Ghost pro­ceeds.

I am much pleas'd with this;Whi [...]h Love but why is he call'd Holy? Are not the Father and the Son as Holy as he?

Yes; but you must con­ceiveis call'd that some sorts of actions are appropriated to each of those three, and so, as nothing can beHoly Spirit, because He makes us Holy, so proper to teach us knowledge of God, as that which is essenti­ally Divine knowledge or the Son (for which reason 'twas he [Page 75] came to be our Master) so no­thing is so proper to cause Love of God in us as that which is es­sentially Divine Love; Where­fore, since our Sanctity or Holi­nes consists in loving God, and to cause this is particularly attri­buted to him, he is from this pro­per effect of his call'd Holy, orby sometimes our Sanctifier. In like manner he particularly is styl'd Spirit, because 'tis his office toinspiring us inspire or breath into our Hearts those motions of Love of God, and such good Thoughts as ex­citewith Love of God or Charity, as also Comfor­ter▪ them. Also he is call'd our Comforter or Paraclite; because nothing more heartens and com­forts one in the pursuit of Hea­ven than ardent Love of it.

You have shown me, Sir, a Trinity in God, but I know not what those three are, nor how to call them. You forbid me to call them three Gods; and I cannot imagin what they should be else. Common Catechisms and ourAgain▪ [Page 76] Creed tell us they are three per­sons, but this leaves me as wise as I was, unless I under­stood what the word means.

Why, do not you under­stand what a person is?

No, Sir, not I.

No Sir, not you? and if I should send you to the Church [...] Person where men, and women, and other things were, and when you came back, ask you how many persons were there, what would you answer me?

I would tel you how many men and women were there.

And not how many ben­ches, and forms and candle­sticks,being or Altars withal?

No, Sir; wee do not call those persons, but things.

You see then that what in others you cal a thing, that in men you cal a person. For ifan Indi­viduall or One In­telligent substance, and God ha­ving no Accidents The di­stinction in him must bee▪ of Persons There are then in One God three Per­sons you were ask'd how many things were in the Church, you would countpictures, & forms, & other [Page 77] Animals if any such were there, and as many things as you could see; but being ask'd of persons, you would count onely men and women: so that 'tis no more to be a person then to be a ratio­nall or intelligent thing. Add then to this, that (as was said) there are no Accidents in God, (because hee is unchangeable) and it follows his Substance must bee three some way or o­ther; and three in an intelligent substance make three persons.

Me thinks, Sir, if a person bee a thing, there being in God three persons there must also bee three things; and then I see not how there are not three Gods.

The Mystery is very hard, as being the mystery of Myste­ries; yet your objection may bee answer'd. For, though every per­son be a thing, it does not fol­low that every two persons beyet two things; since you see that e­very [Page 78] thing is not a person, so that there is difference betwixt the being a thing and being a person; neither is it necessary that whatsoever makes difference in being a person, should make also difference in being a thing. And so it may happen that the same thing may bee different not neces­sarily, persons. Let this example help your imagination: you see this three-square Table; is it not one thing?

It is.

And is not every corner of of it one corner? and to bee a corner is not nothing.

That's likewise true.

Then as you see thatThree Things though a corner be in some sence a Thing, yet three corners may bee but one Thing; So conceive, that though a person bee a thing, yet three persons may bee but one Thing.

If we might understand parts in God, as wee do in the [Page 79] table this were well: but God's a Spirit.

What then? does the tables having parts hinder that three parts bee not one thing? and tru­ly one, not many tyd together? in which lies the whole knot of difficulty. If then, you are con­tent to admit, and can do no otherwise, that three corners may be one thing, and one cor­ner not the other, and yet the whole thing taken by every cor­ner; I do not see why in intelli­gible things and so high above our capacity as God himself, wee should be troubled to conceive the same. Which of the three persons was it that took flesh, or man's nature upon him?

The second Person, Sir, orOf these, the Second took our Nature, the Son.

How was this done? was God turn'd to man, or man turn'd into God, or both turn'd into a third thing, when God became man?

God cannot be chang'd, and, so none of these three mutations could be made: but man was joyn'd to God, and so God be­camenot by charging God, man.

Was he joyn'd equally to God so that the thing made was equally God and man, or no?

No sure, Sr, if God and man be in one thing, the main thingbut by joyning Man must needs be God; and man but a small portion of it. As we see if a litle water be cast into a great deal of wine, it remains still wine; so, since God is infi­nitly greater then man, the thing made remains principally God?

It remains then both God, and man: and seeing what hath not the nature of man is not man, and much more what has not the nature of God is not God; in Christ remain two natures, theto God's nature of God, and the Nature of man. How can two natures remain in one thing?

Sir, I cannot tell how, but I [Page 81] see it happens so sometimes, as when a young scion is grafted in a Tree of another nature: the same tree hath two natures.

You have said well; and in men, and things better then men,Person: as was shown, we call this to be joyn'd in Person. Know youAnd, now why the second person took man's nature upon him rather than any other?

You touch't the reason of it on the by, but it was very short; and I have, I fear, forgot it.

Do you not know thattherefore the Se­cond, God came to make us Sons of God? therefore was it fitting that amongst the three persons, the sonbecause 'tis p o­per to Know­ledge or Wise­dome to teach us or be our Master. should be chosen to be our pat­tern, and example, and as it were elder Brother. Besides, Divines say that Wisedome is appropriated to the Son; So then, hee coming to be our Master, and Teacher, it was fit the Wise­dome of God should be chosen for that effect; that is, the Son [Page 82] and second person. But how this was done, and the whole historyA shore History of some signal passages belonging to our Saviour. of his oeconomy, or dispensation in this world, you may find in the Gospels. Yet will I briefly deliver it unto you. It was (as is generally thought) the 25. of March upon which the Archan­gell Gabriel being sent from God, brought the Message of this great work unto the B. Virgin; and, having got her happy consent, by the power of the Holy Ghost wrought the frame of this glori­ous child in her entrails without the help of man; into which bo­dy, God, as into Adam, breath'd the breath of life in the womb of his Mother. Where having layd nine moneths he was brought forth in a stable upon the 25. of December, swadled in clouts, layd upon straw, began to feel hunger and cold, and such like extremities, as we see it fares with other Infants. After eight days he was circumcis'd, and his ten­der [Page 83] body painfully wounded. And these three Mysteries the Church celebrates on three seve­ral dayes. His Conception on the day we call our Lady's of Lent: his Birth at Christmass, and his Circumcision on New­years day. After this he is thought to have been kept in Bethlem till the three Kings came out of east to adore him; whereupon King Herod growing jealous, he [...]led into Egypt, and Herod executed his tyranny up­on all the children under two years old in all the confines of Bethlem. In Egypt you must imagin he was provided as poor people are wont to bee in strange countries; Yet there remains for some years till the death of Herod. After which being re­turn'd (for fear of Herod's Son) he return'd into Nazareth. Whence hee every year went to Hierusalem at the solemn feasts, and there was lost by his [Page 84] parents at 12. years of age; and, after three dayes seeking, found in the midst of the Doctors in the Temple astonishing them with with his wise and learned an­swers; so he liv'd, helping his Father to work, and being obe­dient both to Father and Mo­ther (for Father wee may law­fully call him who was maried to his Mother, and had paternal jurisdiction over him; as also his Mother call'd him) till the trum­pet of the Angel from the de­sert, summoning mankind to penance, sounded the march for him towards his Eternal Fathers work, for which hee was sent. Wherefore, baptised by S. John, and receiving the visible testimo­ny of the Holy Ghost, he made his tryall in the desart by a fast of 40. dayes, and 40. nights, and by the temptation of the Devil. His Baptism the Church cele­brates on Twelf day, the Tempta­tion on the first Sunday of Lent. [Page 85] Then, he began his preaching, & gathering of disciples, and wor­king of miracles: beginning from the changing of water into wine, which is likewise comme­morated upon Twelf day. So he proceded through great contra­dictions, and dangers, til the raising of Lazarus. Upon which he entred in triumph into Hieru­salem, which we solemnize on Palmsunday. Four dayes after he celebrated his last Supper, and the next day, his bitter Pas­sion: and, within three dayes, having set free our Forefa­thers (who never till then were admitted unto the sight of God) he rose, and instructing his Church 40. dayes, in it's sight ascended into heaven, whence after ten dayes, he sent the Holy Ghost, himself remaining there till the day of judgment: when he will return to take accompt of his benefits he hath be­stow'd upon us.

[Page 86]The Catechist ought to note out of the discourses pass'd, of how sublime and unparalell'd an essence our God is, who by his Nature, which is purest & most refin'd Quintessence of Substance or Being, added to his perfections of Knowing and Loving him­self, obliges us to affirm truly of him, thas he has in one Na­ture three Persons, which is high­est contradiction in the per­fect est of all Creatures existent or even possible. Also, how God was so good as (our nature be­ing imperfect of it self) super­naturally to help it with incom­parable graces and gifts. Se­condly, how death, Sickness, and all other mischiefs being exclu­ded by God, crept in by man's own fault, and the procuring of the Devil. How quickly our nature grew to that extremity, that of the whole world hardly eight men were found righteous; And, presently again not five [Page 87] men in five Cities. What a per­petual care God [...]d of the fa­mily of Abraham by promises, miracles, punishments, rewards; yet could not by those means keep them from sin, and damna­tion. What 'tis, for God to be made Man; the eternall, impas­sible, essentially-blisfull, to be­come a child, the most tender & passive of all creatures, and franght with miseries, and griefs. See his life nothing dif­ferent from ours, unless that it was more stuff'd with woes; from one end to the other in poverty, subjection, contradiction, affli­ction, and in the end and last act, the example of all indignity, that human wit could invent, and the shape of man endure: think how all this was suffer'd for our sakes, he knowing every one for whom he suffer'd, and of so great a number excluding none for whom he did not undertake these pains as if there were no other: [Page 88] as freely as the Sun shone on A­dam when he was alone, no less then upon the millions that now be. And, out of all these conside­rations let him strive to raise the Catechumen to admiration and love of so great Goodness, & a full resolution to make use of so many and so powerfull means to advance himself in virtue, which is the fruit of all that went before.

SIXTH CONFERENCE

HAving now learn'd that there is a God; his pro­perties;God [...] be­ing made Man how he created man; how he conducted him through so many ages, till the coming of himself into the world, in the se­cond Person of his blessed Deity; Having also understood the oeco­nomy of his sacred Humanity, till his bitter passion, glorious re­surrection, wonderfull ascension and gracious sending of the Ho­ly Ghost; which was the first ef­fect, and chiefest of his whole peregrination. It follows to con­sider the End of all, which was the stating of mankind in thatto redeem Mankind perfection, to which he intended [Page 90] to conduct him. Now then Child, can you tell me what was the in­tention of Christ's coming?

Sir, you have told me alrea­dy, that 'twas to redeem Man­kindfrom Sin, from the deluge of sin, wherein he was drown'd by the fall of Adam, and give him a stateand put him in the way to Heaven, by which he might attain to Pa­radise.

I but, what is the immedi­at step by which a man comes to Heaven?

That also me thinks I have learn'd to bee the Love of God above all things. For, you told me this was Sanctity: and I know we call those Saints, who either are in Heaven, or in the right way to it.

Well said. But I would have you shew me, that the Love of God makes a man go to Hea­v'n; and, because you cannot without help, hearken a little unto me. The Good of Heavenwhich consists see in see­ing God; consists in seeing God Almighty, [Page 91] not with the eyes by which you walls, and trees, and sun, and stars, but with the eyes by which you know you are this day, and neither yesterday nor tomorrow: & by which you know you must have been yesterday, yet it may happen you may nor be tomor­row; and other Truths or things of this quality, which the leastand of you is capable of. Now, he that loves God above all thingsLove of God (especially if he have done it long) cannot chuse but desire to know and see him whom he loves so much. Wherefore, when he dies and has no more any di­stractiondisposing by his senses, he is wholy set upon that object; and, so, extreamly miserable unless heand can obtain it: wherefore, if God be not hard-hearted (as Good­ness it self cannot be) what re­mains but that he must needs letdetermi­ning ne­cessarily to this, himself be seen by him? which is, to be in heaven. And, this a Divine would tel you, were to [Page 92] determin God of necessity to the giving of Bliss: as the putting of all second causes requisit to the making a man, determins him to the infusion of the rational soul. But we must not be so learn­ed. Do you know how the Di­vines or rather all Christians do ordinarily term this Love of God.

Yes, Sir, I think this is the vertue they call Charity, byMan is to love God, which we love God for himself, our neighbours for him: and for both their sakes, do all the rest of our actions, and so order our whole lives to the service of God.

'Tis well said; but can you tell what reason you have to loveas being God?

Yes. For, seing we natu­rally love that, which is good, as good meat, good drink, goodAll-Good, cloaths, &c. and God is Al­godness: there can be no doubt but we have great reason to love God. Besides, he hath done us [Page 93] many singular benefits, or ratherOur most bountifull benefa­ctour hath given us all we have; by which we know he loves us, and for both these causes, is to be lo­ved by us.and

Very well; and, you may add that we are like him, beingwhose Likeness or Image we bear. made wholy to his Image; and things that are like one another, are apt to love one another, as we see all creatures love their own kind. But, seeing you callAnd, this, Charity, and know there's a second part thereof, which is to love your Neighbour (or allour Neighbour other men) as your self, know you why you are to do so?

Sir, not wel.

Why? do you not see that all knives are to cut? hammersbeing made for the same End wee are, that is, for God; to knock? and, therefore, who would have a hammer to cut, or knife to knock, were out of [...]ason. So, likewise, al men be­ing of one Nature, are for one [...]nd, and fit for the same things. He therefore that would wish one [Page 94] thing for himself because 'tis fitwe ought to wish him that End and means to it, that is, love him as our self. Also, Love of God ne­cessarily disposing to see [...]m, who loves God has great rea­son to hope to see him; grounded in his Goodness and faithful­ness to his promise. for him, and not wish the like to his neighbour were very unrea­sonable. And, if he wishes the like to his Neighbour as to him­self, he loves him as himself. But tell me now, he that loves God, has he not reason to hope he shall see God?

Yes, Sir; since 'tis necessary that who loves God shall see God, no doubt but he has rea­son, not onely to hope, but to be confident of it, if he dy with this love of God.

And, what considerations make him confident?

The considerations of the Goodness of God, his love to­wards mankind, and his immu­table constancy, who hath pro­mis'd happiness to those that love him.

I, but, what if a man does not love God?

He can have litle hope of ever seeing God.

True: his Hope must be dead, and a far of: seeing God gives not Bliss but to those that love him; yet, if he has an in­tention to labour for the Love of God, he may have some; other­wise 'tis Presumption, not Hope.

Now you are arriv'd toput, Hope and Charity; see if therenone can love or hope, un ess knowing the things which, & motives why, taught by Faith; which se­cu ely re­lies On God's Truth, saying such things; and were not a step before, which you thought not of. For, unless a man know thus, as you have said, of God, how can he love him, or hope for any thing at his hands? by what means or vertue do you come to know these things?

By Faith Sir; for, Almighty God having told us that he is such as you have declar'd, either in his own person by Jesus Christ, or by his Messengers, Angels, and Prophets: we can no more doubt whether it be so or no; seeing God is all Truth, and a falshood can­not spring from Truth.

So far wel: but how do you know God spake it? for I [Page 96] am sure your self heard him not?

Those told me who told me all the rest, and so I have no more reason to doubt of this, than of all the rest.

You answer according to your pitch; but a wise man would ask better testimony for things a­bove nature, and which bee hard to beleeve, than for other ordina­ry things. Can you then tel me, what warrant God hath giv'n us to beleeve that this our doctrin comes from him.

Sir, I have heard talk, thatTradition or wee must beleeve what the Church beleeves; according to the Colliers Faith; but I know not why.

Why? do you not see thatthe Infal­lible Atte­station of the Church the Church is the congregation of Christians, which is dispers'd through the whole world, and therefore cannot come together to frame a ly? If then they con­sentthat he [...] them together that such a thing was deliver'd to them for the do­ctrin [Page 97] of Christ, it cannot chuse but be so. And this is that which Divines call Tradition; to which no Heresy layes claim: and up­on which, Religion is so groun­ded, that even all hereticks must acknowledge this same Autho­rity for the receiving Scrip­ture. So that you see your war­rant is the Universality of the Church; which cannot be uni­versal in time, if she hath once corrupted the former faith. For a wrong faith makes a wrong, orThere are then three vir­tues call'-Theologi­call (or immedi­ly respect­ing God) necessary to man­kind's saluation▪ rather no Church. Nor can she be universal in place if she main­tain a ly. For so many countries as are necessary to make Univer­sality cannot agree to make a ly. And, so, casting your ac­compts, you see you have found three vertues, Faith, Hope, and Charity; which Divines cal Theologicall; that is con­versant, or imploy'd about God; because you see in Faith [Page 98] we rely upon God's Truth, inFaith, Hope and Charity. Hope upon his Liberality, Cha­rity likewise we ground on this that he is all Perfection, and Goodness.

SEVENTH CONFERENCE.

IT follows, seeing we know Christian life, and perfecti­on consists in these three Vertues, to seek now the means to attain to them. Can you tell me what those means be?

Sir, how should I of my self be able, who knew not whither we were to go unless you hadFaith directed me?

See you not that Faith is abeing a Know­ledge of superna­turall things, the way to advance Faith knowledge by which you under­stand what's necessary for your salvation? your profession then being to get knowledge, and learning, how can you be igno­rant by what means you are to obtain, and increase Faith? Nay, [Page 100] if you look into it, your Learn­ing is but Faith. For do you not trust your Grammars, and Syntaxes that this Verb is of such a conjugation, this Nown of such a Declension, or Gender; or hath thus, or thus in the genitive case, or plural number; that it must have such a case or constru­ction: that such a syllable is long, suchshort; that such, and such customes, and places were a­mong the Romans, or Grecians, and the like. As then you getis Learning, so▪ you must get Faith.

Sir, we get learning by stu­dy. But I have heard that weto increase that Know­ledge by Study of such things, that is, by Prayer: of which Mentall has three parts must get Vertue by praying. And so we get play, not learning.

I child, but there's this dif­ference betwixt your prayer for vertue, and your prayer for play; that the one is a Study, the other not. And, not to detain you long, you have heard perhaps, that [Page 101] some Prayer is mentall, some vocall. And, first, to tel you what mentall prayer is, know there be three parts of it. The first is to know, and be sure of the truthTo Know the truth of the point, you are to consider: and this ra­ther belongs to him who pre­scribes the meditation in our pre­sent purpose; for 'tis his part to give a strong and plain conside­ration, that hee who comes to prayer, need not much ado to beTo re­solve ac­cording to that Know­ledge convinc'd of the truth. The next part is to make a resolution ac­cording to the knowledge pro­pos'd, by exhorting himself out of the weightiness of the consi­deration: and this is properly Meditation: for meditor sig­nifies to think on oft, conn, or exercise somthing: this partand then being frequent beating upon good life, & the rectifyingTo raise the heart to God, expecting a Blessing, of our heart and will, is properly meditation. The third is to turn our heart to God for whose sake we are to do al things, and from [Page 102] whom wee are to expect the en­crease of our labours. For, as al the husbandman's labour is to litle purpose unless God send rain, heat and fair weather at due seasons: so likewise, unless God direct our lives, 'tis to lit­tle purpose what ever our endea­vours go about.

Touching the Preparation to prayer, what's substantial, is, that your thoughts be not preoc­cupated by any other care ei­ther of play, or study; or any other such matter, which may draw you away: and therefore it ought to be the first thing you do after you are risen. Then shortly to remember that all other business be bables, and things not con­cerning you in respect of this: and this the onely thing which can do you good in this life and the next. Thus much is enough for a Catechism, the rest you are to seek-in treatises made purpose­ly of this subject; amongst the [Page 103] rest I recommend to you a little one of Antonius Molina a Car­thusian. As concerning vocall prayer, I hope you can tel me what that is.

Yes, Sir, Vocall prayer isVocall Prayer is that we say in our Primers, and beads, and other books.

How does this differ from the other, and in what is it bet­ter or worse, than Mentall pray­er?

It differs because we havebetter than Men­tall, set words in our books, which those who meditate have not. But, sure, Mentall prayer is better, because the greater sort use it. Yet Vocall is better for mee, for I know not how to m [...]d [...]tate.

'Tis well answer'd, thoughas being compos'd by able m [...]n, not so fully as I desir'd: Know then that Vocal prayer has two excellencie over Mentall. The first is that 'tis made by some who have more skil then weeand have, and therefore is more per­fectless dis­tractive; for the most part then one of [Page 104] our Mentall prayers. Secondly, it keeps from distraction much; because by our eyes, if we read them, or our memories if we say them without book, it holds ourBut, worse as [...]ess sa­tiating the Soul, Less pro­portion'd to it, and Desective the two first parts menti­on'd. Hence, of Mental, the writ­ten are b [...]st for beginners: of Vocall, Those which are best un­derstood, understanding to the matter bet­ter then when wee have no such determination. But, likewise, on the other side it has two disad­vantages: one, that it does not so we [...]l fill our souls, being nei­ther so much labour'd as what we make our selves, nor so na­turally proportionable to us as what we do our selves. Thirdly, for the most part it wants some of the three parts mention'd or rather wholy demurrs upon the last, neglecting the two former. But, those which are call'd written meditations, if they be wel done are very good for beginners, that practise themselves. sel me now which prayers you think the best?

I must needs say, the beads, and the Primer, or Manuall, for I have no other.

If you do those wel you are wel sped. But what I would counsel you is, to chuse such prayers as you understand rather then those you do not: As I fearand▪ you understand but few in your Primer. So that, though that be best in it self, yet those more befit you which you better under­stand. And, as for your beads, I fear you attend but little when you say them; you should there­fore have some mystery of our Sa­viour's,Well at­tended to. or our Lady's life, to thank God for, in every two or three Ave Maries; which might make you think of what you did. Two tens thus feelingly sayd,Lastly▪ [...] ▪ were better then three payr of beads tumbled over, with your mind upon your breakfast.

Sir, I will endeavour to get them as you say.

But, in the mean time, telPrayer▪ mee, what's the necessity or pro­fit of prayer?

Sir, it pleases God, spends [Page 106] our time well, obtains all bene­fits of him, and fulfils his com­mandments.

This is very true: but I look yet for another at your hands; which is, that tis the ve­rybeing way or walk to Heaven.

Sir, you said that Clarity was the way to Heaven.

And is not Prayer the con­siderationthe use of Considera­tions [...]i ca [...]io [...]sly moving to [...]ove of God, The fruit of Prayer is to ad­vance Charity; that i [...], Prayer is the high way to Heaven: of things necessary to our salvation? and not a dry consideration, but a moving of our will out of them; and last­ly the excercising of our Affe­ctions towards God Almighty, procur'd by the said considera­tion? Now, how do you think we journey to heaven but by our affections? or come to affecti­ons but by consideration? so that you see Meditation is nothing but the right way to Heaven, in which other men are lead by ser­mons, reading good books, and the like: but the meditatour goes of himself, by his own pains and [Page 107] industry. Moreover, the use of Mentall praver being the think­ingwheresore on, or considering that which is the chiefest good wee have; also, our soul being ever carry'd backward, unless by duewithout I [...], consideration it bee forc'd against the stream of our naturall incli­nations; hence we must needsRetreat in vertue is inevita­ble. live blindly, and go two steps back for one towards hea­ven without the use of Prayer, or something equivalent to it. And thus much may [...] for the Utility and Necessity of Pray­er.

EIGHTH CONFERENCE.

TO go on; do you think hee loves you that beats you without a cause, or keepsMoreo­ver, Charity, or [...]ove, obliging us to give what's due to those wee love, 'twill make us render To God, your own from you?

No Sir; perhaps, indeed, a friend may beat one hee loves when there's some reason for it; but, otherwise, hee's no friend and shews litle love.

Therefore if you love God, your self, and your Neighbour you must not hurt them; but do them all the good you can; espe­cially if it be due unto them. What can you do to God?

Good I can do none to him; [Page 109] but my duty is to be carefull in such things as concern his ho­nour, such as be all things whichService: belong to prayers & the Church.

You say well, and in La­tin the rites of serving God are call'd Religiones; whence this virtue is by Divines call'd Reli­gion; Priests, specially Bishops and Curats, and such as have care of the publik ceremonies of the Church, entitled Religiosi: as also such men as binde them­selves to certain pious observa­tions, are call'd Religiosi or Re­ligions for the same reason. Wel; tel mee first what do you ow to your self?

Nothing Sir; for I can for­giveTo our selves, my self if I did ow any thing to my self; and so it would be no debt or duty.

Now you speak beyond your skil; for seing you are made by God of a determinate nature, in so making you hee has dire­cted you to some actions, which [Page 110] you by your own free-will mustwhat's best for us, that is, 'twill make us prefer a greater good be­fore a less, which is perform'd by Tempe­rance; and avoyd a greater harm be­fore a less, which is done by Forti­tude: To our Neigh­bour, If Infe­iour or Equall, Love & Good will; If supe­riour, Obedience and Re­spect; not transgress but second; and; so you are bound to the conser­vation of your self, and ow to your self the endeavours confor­mable to such actions: and the principles of these actions are, not to prefer a lesser good before a greater, nor to chuse a grea­ter harm before a lesser. And this is done by two vertues; Temperance, by which you ab­stain from a less good to get the greater; and Fortitude or Va­lour, by which you undergo the less harm, that you may avoid the greater. What do you ow your Neighbour?

I have borrow'd nothing; but those who have, ow what they have borrow'd, or taken other­wayes from him.

Do you not know, your Neighbours are either your E­qualls, your Betters, or your In­ferioors? To your Inferiours you ow love, and to be ready to do [Page 111] them any good you can; as o­thers your betters have done, and daily are ready to do for you. To your Equalls the same in sub­stance, although in an other de­gree. To your Superiours and Betters, Duty or Obedience and Respect. All this you ow to your Neighbours; the vertue whe [...]eof is ordinarily call'd Justice. Sowhich be­long to Justice. Yet, these three Vir­tues, un­excited by Love of Hea­ven, have you found three vertues call'd morall, or Cardinall Concerning which you are to know two things; The first, that wee ought to exercise them for the Love of God, if we will have them profit us for going to hea­ven: although they have in them selves a kind of good. For as you see in a fair picture, garden, oravail not to It, castle or any such thing an im­pression of Reason (call'd Art) which is delightsome, and con­formablethough in some sort conform­able to Nature. to our nature; so also in the morall actions of man, there is a decorum, or honestas, which gives content both to the [Page 112] doer, and the spectatour; which entices morall men to do such actions. The other is that everyThey be­come one of these is divided into diverse sorts, and kinds, according to se­verall matters in which they are imploy'd: For example, Fortitude in an action full of difficulty isseverall particular Virtues called Courage; in suffering, Pa­tience; in length, Perseverance; in warr, Valour; &c. Tempe­rance towards women is call'das respe­cting Chastity; in drink, Sobriety; in action Modesty, &c. Iustice towards God, Religion, or devo­tion; towards your Country & Parents, Piety, towards Laws,severall Objects. and Superiours, Obedience; to­wards your Equalls, and Inferi­ours, in honour, Courtesy; in words, Affability. But I beleeve you have heard that the Moral Also, or Cardinal Virtues are four: Therefore let me have your help. Can you tel me what 'tis to bee Discreet.

I think it is to be wise.

Well ghess'd, although you miss a little: for true 'tis, everyDiscre­tion wise man is discreet, yet not eve­ry discreet man, wise. For if you look upon men's conversation, you shall observe some have good skil in human actions, yet for passion or other desires, fol­low not their knowledg. Others have their desires so as they should bee, but litle skill. Othersbeing have both skill, and will good; others both bad. And these last are both fools, and knaves for the most part. The formost of the other three, are Understanding men, but not Discreet; the others be discreet, but not understand­ing: The third are both: that is, Wise. Now I hope you will not fail to tel mee what makes a dis­creet The right se [...] of ou [...] Af­fecti [...] in o [...]d [...]r to Act on, and man.

Since a discreet man is h [...] who hath his affect ons right i [...] human action; and the three virtues above nam'd make a man's affections such; those [Page 114] three virtues make a man dis­creet.

'Tis very well say'd. For,the three fore a [...]d Virtues giving this, who has th [...]m, has also Dscretion, or, Pru­dence. if you note, hee who has these three virtues will use the skill he has to the utter most. And him we call discreet, who, according to his understanding, carries things well. Which virtue by Divines is called Prudence. It's office is to judge a right what is to be done, by him that has it, according to the proportion of the man's knowledge; and so you haveThere are then [...]our (Morall or) Car­dinall Virtues, your 4. Virtues call'd Morall, or Cardinall. But, before I leave, you must answer me one que­stion farther; which is, whether you think that hee who performs his action according to these Vir­tues, need have any scruple of the work done?

No Sir, certainly; for, ifaccording to which who acts, his action be vertuous, as pro­ceeding from a minde which has these vertues, it must needs be good.

And what? (though he has an affection to do wel) yet if he has not skil, can the deed be good?

I did not think of that. Then, indeed, it must be naught.

True tis, the action is notsince not byast by ill affections, needs not scruple his action, though it hap to be imperfect in some o­ther re­spect. good. Yet he need not make scruple of what is pass'd: because hee did his endeavour. But be­fore the action bee perform'd what is he to do, if hee cannot tel whether part is to be done?

Hee ought to ask some body that knows.

You say well; if hee cannot, or when he has ask't find no body that can tell, he may do whither he lists. And whither he miss or no, never make scruple of it, as long as h [...]'s sure that no [...]ll affection was guide in his choice, [...] that he proceeded out of the Love of God, and a good conscience.

In these three Conferences, [Page 116] the motives of vertue and good life frequently occurring, advertise the Catechist to make his Cathecumen reflect, and move himself unto them. They be plain of themselves.

NINTH CONFERENCE

YOu know by what is said,Christian Life is a Practice of the three Theologi­call and four Mo­rall vir­tues, for God's sake; what Christian life is, viz. the practise chieftly of the three Theologicall vertues; and in consequence of the four Cardinal ones; that is, of all vertues. But can you tell me what 'tis that gives life to all the rest?

I Imagin, Sir, 'tis Charity, because you said that it gave life to Hope, and that all Cardinal vertues were to be practis'd for God's sake. But I reach not un­to the reason unless you help me.

You know not your own strength. For tell me if you should see a dog, or a horse new [Page 118] kill'd how would you know whether it were dead or no?

By the stirring. For as long as it stirs I should think some life were yet in it. When I sawwhich is done by Chari [...]y, it stir no more, then I should take it for dead.

Very well; so far then is agree'd, that, to live is to have aWh [...]r fore since the Life of a Chri­stian is to move to­wards God power in it self to move or stir it self. Now can you tel me what is the first principle of stirring in you, and other men, as they are men. Do not you see the more in love they are with any thing, the more they stir to obtain it? so that you see love is that whichand stirs a man & makes him move, towards the thing belov'd.Love of God, or Charity, makes us do so, Wherefore, the Love of God or Charity is the thing which first moves the Christian to walk to­wards him: that is, to exercise all vertue. You see likewise thatIt onely is a Christi­ans Life what takes away from us the love of God, brings us death in lieu of life, as we are Christians. What is that?

That is, as I perceive now,and he dead without It. Wherefore what cau­ses ibis death is Mortall Sin. mortall Sin; for I imagin 'tis call'd Mortall or deadly, because it takes away l [...]fe, and life is Cha­rity. Therefore that sin is mor­tall which deprives our soul of the Love of God.

You are a great Divine; but what is't that takes away the Love of God or of any thing else from us?

I think 'tis hate; for hate is contrary to love; yet methinks no body can hate God, and so there would be no mortall sin if that were true.

You say wel: but do you not remember, that who so loves, must (as you told me) do goodwhich springs for him whom he loves if he can; whence it comes that the row of all other vertues follow Charity? he then who will notfrom love of Crea­tures a­bove all things. do any of those things which ne­cessarily follow upon Love, lo­ses his love. But no man would neglect those things unless he [Page 120] lov'd some other thing, whose love hinder'd him from perform­ance thereof: So that you see, how not onely hate of God, but Love of such things as hinder you to do what you ought in love to him, takes away Charity. Can you now tel me what Sin is mor­tall?

Why, Sir, whoever lovesa­ny thing in such sort that it cau­sesbringing neglect of our Du­ties; him not to perform to God, himself, and his neighbour, all he owes them (that is, all which the four Cardinall Vertues com­mand) sins mortally; for he loses Charity, which is, the sub­stance of Christian life.

You say wel if you under­stand what you say. For whatyet, think you? is not stealing against Justice, one of the Cardinal vertues? and yet you will not say that whosoeuer steals a pin com­mits a mortall Sin.

No indeed, Sir, but truly I know not why.

Did you not say that he whonot every such neg­lect, Mor­tall: but, In those to our Neigh­bour, such as would ab­solutely break Friend­ship; commits a mortal sin loses Cha­rity by it: & Charity you know is the Love of your Neighbour: if then not every thing, as the ta­king a pin, is sufficient cause for your Neighbour to fall out with you, you lose not his Love for ta­king a pin. Such a breach of justice then, as is a sufficient cause for ordinary wise men to break of conversation and friendship with you, is a mortal sin. But what is less than that, is not?

This is well, Sir, for a mans Neighbour; but towards GodIn those to our selves, such as done us by ano­ther Almighty, I think this measure will not hold. For no man that is in his wits will fall out with himself, neither is God subject to falling out as men are. There­fore I know not what to say con­cerning them.

Do you not remember that a man owes certain duties to him­self, whereof the neglect may come to be such as if another [Page 122] man should do it unto you, youwould make us fall out with him; would fall out with him. Do you not see then that if you do not fall out with your self for the like occasion 'tis not for want of cause: And, as for God Al­mighty,In those towards God, such mis­respect as to our Neigh­bour were want of [...]ove. see you not, that if you bore the respect to him you do to your neighbour, you would be as fearful to do such an indignity towards him, as you are to do it towards your neighbour? Now the sin is in your soul; if then you see in your soul misrespect towards God Almighty, such as towards your neighbour were want of love, it follows there wants Love towards AlmightyOther Neglects God. Can you tell me how ma­ny sorts of sins they be, which are not mortal, and how they are call'd.are Venial,

They be call'd venial but how many sorts there be of them I cannot tell.

They are indeed call'd ve­nial (that is, easily forgiven) by [Page 123] a name answering to Mortal in sence, but not in the word; and means a slight offence, and such as makes no breach of friend­ship. Of those Divines put three sorts, either because 'tis of a kind that generally men slightly re­spect, as being not worthy of much consideration; or because 'tis slight in it's kind, or because 'tis perform'd by oversight, or withour deliberation.

Having seen the nature of theFrom what's said fol­lows two lives (I mean of good, and bad) can you resolve me, which of the two is the pleasanter? I speak of that pleasure for which you prefer a good dinner before your ordinary fare, a play day before a study day, and the like?

There can be no doubt, but, considering that pleasure, sinful life is the pleasanter. For ver­tuous life hath it's fruit after death.

Think▪ you so? I pray tell [Page 124] me then, which do you think has the pleasanter life, hee that has greater harms, or hee whois has less?

Hee that has less.

Then, if Fortitude bee the chusing of lesser harms before greater, hee that uses that vir­tue, has the more pleasant life, e­venmost full wordly. Again, who has the pleasanter life? hee that has more, or fewer pleasures; greater, or lesser?

Sir, now I see what youof mean, and that 'tis very true that who lives vertuously has a more pleasant life, then who does not,Pleasure, if all were alike. For hee by the virtue of Temperance chuseth to abstain from a less pleasure to have a greater. But, Sir, I hear it say'd that a vi [...]tuous man can­not easily come to wealth, and without riches he cannot have pleasure.

What do Riches serve for▪

To have his content of mind.

Then, if he has content of mind, what need he care for Riches? consider the difference betwixt the merry cobler, and the carefull Usurer, and you wil see 'tis not Riches, but the dispo­sition of the mind which gives content. But tel me farther, is not the way to get Riches, to have much trading? that is, in great summs, and withmany men? and is not Credit the greatest stroke and power of a Marchant.

Yes, Sir, but credit comes by opinion of wealth.and

I Think you are a little mi­staken: look well and you will see it comes by opinion of hone­sty, and fair dealing in poor men; for who has the opinion of being Rich, is already rich, ordinarily speaking, and so is not now to come to wealth. 'Tis this opi­nion of honesty which makes that your word will goe farther then another mans bond, that because of your plain dealing, e­very [Page 126] man hopes to have no quar­relling with you; and the like;Credit, which are the things principally give Credit, especially that cre­dit which is the way to and goes before Riches; And are not all these caus'd by the virtue of Iu­stice? 'Tis virtue then, not Riches which gives all needfull Credit.

TENTH CONFERENCE.

PEradventure I need not ask you which of these lives isAlso fitter for the next life, since oneIt fits us for the next world ▪ is made for the world to come, the other not. Nevertheless I may ask a reason why, and per­haps so as may bring you to see it: Tell me then, shal we in the next world have the same desires we have in this?

Sir, how should I know who never spake with any had been there.

When you are a cold, do you desire to walk in the winde? or when you are hot, to go to the fire?

[...] Sir, but contrary.

Bu [...] ▪ what time is it that if a piece of M [...]chpane were offer'dFor, who loves God (or a [...]y thing) you though it were presently af­ter dinner, but you would finde a hole to put it in? What's the reason of this diversity? is't not that the one you desire for a pre­sent commodity, the other youfor it's self, is dis­pos'd think to be good of it self?

Yes, Sir, me thinks that's the very reason though I never re­cted on it before.

Then, if over night you lov'd any thing good for an oc­casion, or fot the present disposi­tion you are in, next morningto love it ever, you will not care for it, the oc­casion being pass'd: But, if you love a thing because you think it absolutely good, next morning you will as freely desire it, as you did over night?

'Tis certainly so.Where­fore, Love of God (or desire to see him) remaining in a soul separa­ted,

Then you see that when your soul is out of your body, what ever in the body it lov'd as [Page 129] good of it self, that it will love [...]ill. But, what it loved onely for some end, or upon the present disposition of it's body, it will not love. Now, what one loves in the second manner spoken of, either is God, or mortall sin; For it is lov'd for no farther end. But, to go on, do you think thatIt shall see him; else. hee who loves God in this sort shall enjoy his desire seeing after death he shall retain it?

Yes, for you told me hewould bee miserable for loving him, and God cru­ell. would be miserable else; and God cannot be so cruel as to let one be miserable for loving him.

And, do you think it will be a great content to see God?

Yes, surely, for every one has content to obtain that whichFurther, he desires. Besides, to see a good or strange thing breeds also con­tent.

Your answer is good; but me thinks there be two faults in this pleasure; one is, that the see­ing any fine sight is not so good, [Page 130] as eating a good dinner, orThe plea­sure of the Mind, playing at some pleasant game. The other, that the thing which is to be seen is but one, and so has not variety, and we perceive our selves soon weary of the same thing?

Sir, I like seeing better then eating, or playing; for I had ra­therhad by Know­ledge, go see a strange sight, or a fine play, than eat a good dinner, or play my self so much time: but for the other I cannot tell what to answer you.

You answer well; for See­ing, specially by our understan­ding, is the pleasure of the Minde, which must needs be greater than the pleasure of the Body since the body has pleasure by the minde;infinitly surpassing that of the body; and the minde is deaded by the body. But the Understanding infinitly surpasses the body; be­cause, as Philosophers say, it sees at once all particulars: as, who knows this universall that all men do such a thing, knows [Page 131] what Sense can never reach. But, bee your self judge: do you re­member, that ever at the sight of a dish of meat, or news of a playand day, you burst out in laughter?

No Sir.

But, if you heard a quick jest could you contain your self?

Many times I could not, although I bit my lip and us'd al means to restrain my self.

Then the pleasure of a jest being intellectuall, of the others, corporeall; which kinde of pleasure is most strong and effi­cacious?

I doubt not but the pleasure of the minde is stronger.The see­ing all Truths in God, as in the su­preme Cause, being the high­est Know­ledge▪

Now, of all sorts of know­ledge, that by which wee under­stand why a thing is so, or what makes it so (which Logicians call demonstratio à priori is that which gives greatest pleasure, and content; and the higher the Cause is the greater proportiona­bly the pleasure is too. Now, [Page 132] God being so high a Cause thatthe Sight of God hee's beyond al causes, and considerd as hee is in himself, a more sublime notion compre­hending both to be Cause, and Effect, and that in so noble and transcendent a manner as al the rest put together, are incompa­rably and infinitly short of Him; what pleasure must wee imagin it, to see Him as hee is in him­self? As for your d [...]fficulty; note, that you do not desire change, or variety til you have a satiety of what you enjoy, and have a time of rest and quiet in it, so that you have perfectly known it, and found it less than your de­sires. Now seeing God is beyond, beatifies a Soul. not onely the capacity of our de­sires, but of millions of millions better then us, and, is sufficient to satisfy and fill the boundless extent of his own immense will, 'tis not possible that who sees God should complain of want of Variety. Besides, if variety [Page 133] were desirable, in him is al [...] that can be desir'd: not onely because hee contains every thing, but because in him may be discern'd the essences, and reasons of e­very particular thing from the cre­ation of the heav'ns to the division of the least grain of dust in the high way; what they are all, their particular conditions, that they are, and why they are; so that nothing can be sought for which is not to be found in God.

Truly, Sir, I must confess this is a pleasure greater than eye hath seen, or ear heard, or heart can conceive. Nevertheless, meTo which is conse­quent thinks we should have some con­tent also of our friends in the next life.

You shal, of all their good;content in our own for­mer Acti­ons but. especially, every one shal have particular contentment of his own good actions; above all of those great ones, Martyr­dome, Teaching, and Virginity; also of the good of every saintand [Page 134] and creature in the world, and of the punishment of euery damned soul in hel; and the joy shal be greater according to eve­ry lawfull cause of content that nature affords us; as, kin­dred, acquaintance, and the like. But, not to forget our compari­son,Friend. lets see what the wicked shal have; shal they enjoy theirBut the thines desired by the wic­ked are tem­porall & fading, therefore, the d [...]sires of them remain­ing, desires? can you tell me first what their desires be?

Their desires were wealth, Authority, meat, drink and car­nall pleasures; which, sure, are then past and cannot be enjoy'd.

You say wel; and in case they do not enjoy them, how wil they be contented with the want of them?

They must needs be extreme­ly afflicted if they vehemently desire, and cannot obtain them; [...]x [...]ssively t [...]rments with and you say'd that if by choice of reason they took them for ab­solutely good, they must needs desire them.

Tell me then, are they in pain or no?

In Grief sir, I understandGree [...]; they are; but I do not see how they can be in Pain.

True 'tis, wee ordinarily take pain for corporall grief; whereas indeed 'tis but grief in­flictedwhich, inflicted by another, by another; onely be­cause we see none grieve but such as might leave of, if they would, we think no grief, pain. But, af­teris, this life when the wicked cannot chuse but grieve, if you re­membertruly, Pain. that all comes from Gods hand▪ you will see that their grief is also pain. But do you judge it equall to that pain which the Body feels?

I know the pains of hell are far the greater; though I know not well why.

If pleasure come from the soul to the body, must not grief do the like? and if the body dull the edge of pleasure, must it not necessarily dull that also? If then [Page 136] pleasure of minde infinitely ex­ceed pleasure of body, must notInfinit, as being in the Soul; the like be sayd of grief? But, when shall this grief have an end?

I know that neither heaven nor hel have end; but I knowand, not well the reason; more then that it so befits God's goodness,Enledss, and justice.

You are of a short memor [...]; did you not tel mee, God could not chuse but give him bliss that lov'd him above all things; and that, who saw him being All­goodness it ielf, could not but love him above all things?

Now I see, that, since neither the blessed can leave to love, norIn regard Those De­sires must ever re­main un­chang'd; God to bless those who love him, their happiness can have no end.

And do you think the wic­ked can lose the misery, unless they change their mind from lo­ving what they cannot obtain?The Soul

No Sir, but I know not why they should not change their minds.

Can they change their minds unless they see some thing of new which they saw not before, or leave seeing somewhat which they did see and know?

No certainly; but methinks(as indi­visible) they can think of what they wil.

Is not their souls indivisi­ble, and it's actions without mo­tion? and so, whatever they go about as soon done as 'tis doing? you see then, necessarily, that al they can do is already done, al perpetually present, and they seebeing unacces­sive. at once al they can see; where­fore they can never change their minds, but are to be everlastingly miserable; which God defend usYet Veniall Affecti­ons are change­ble from. But is there think you no middle condition between th [...]se two? and some in that condi­tion.

Yes Sir, there's a third state of those that dy in venial sin; who aae in Purgatory, and thence go to Heaven.

You are wel taught. For, [Page 138] some being in such a state at their death, as though they firmly think God their greatest good,therefore and are content to forgo al other goods for him; nevertheless they love worldly things withal, something irregularly, so as they are loath to leave them. These therefore cannot have perpetual bliss til such desires be taken off;may be purg'd and, like gold in the fi [...]e, puri­fi'd from all such dross; but til then remaining in pain, partly for their temporal losses by death; but, chiefly for their spi­rituall want, being not able to at­tain Bliss which they infinitly desire; til, by the Churches help, God of his mercy rectifies them and accomplishes their purga­tion; yet so as by Fire.

Me thinks Sir, in al this you talk not of burning, or gnashing of teeth, or such corporeall pains; which I have been taught are in Hell and Purgatory.

These things are said to be [Page 139] in Hell metaphorically when spoken of souls which want their bodies; and signify no more, than that they are tormented by fire; as, who is frighted, or da­zel'd is tormented, though notAlso, burn'd. But, are you able to tel me why, and when souls shall receive their bodies.

The time is at dooms-day.Souls shal finally re­ceiue their Bodies▪ The cause why they receive them is I think their love to them.

Do you not remember you told me the wicked have not their desires, and the just desire nothing but according to God's will: If so, it seems your conse­quencebecause wil not be very good. But, to make it so, you must know, naturally a man desires every thing because 'tis good, and good is as much as convenient to the desirer, who is not onely Soul but Body too; wherfore if natu­rallTheir de­sires of them. desire cannot be frustrated or disappointed by God the Authour of nature, and the desires of our [Page 140] life remain after death, it follows that the desire of good to our per­sonare naturall. is naturall and remaining af­ter death, and therefore must needs be supply'd. Can you tell me how this great work is to be done?

Sir, I know we shal al a­rise at the great day; more I know not.

Ile help you: when that Day comes, Christ shall appearThe man­ner [...]ow▪ in the ayr over Hierusalem (as 'tis thought) and suddenly all parts of the earth and sea shall render their carcases, and whole Mankind be restor'd to their Bo­dies. Where on the one part the Saints shall be carry'd in the ayr to meet Christ; the others shall remain below viewing their glo­ry, & dreading their own misery; till, judgment being given, those rest happy for ever with our Sa­viour, the other are swallow'd into hell, After which day all motion shall cease and there [Page 141] shall be no change or alteration but a state of permanency for ever.

Yes Sir, but I doubt not there will be other great diffe­rences betwixt the Saints, and the damned, if you would please to tell me them.

Do you not remember the giftswith you told me were conferr'd on Adam as to his Body? those veryThe en­dowments of Glorify'd same shal be perfected in the Saints. As for health, they shall have impassibility so that no­thing can hurt them. For their strength, they shall have a power which nothing can resist, call'd Impenetrability. For Agility, they shal have a power in the twinckling of an eye to pass be­yond any determin'd distance whatsoever. And, lastly, for Beauty, they shall have power to shine, and shew themselvs in what glory they please. As forand con­trary Dis­positions of damned Bodies. [...]he Damned, the heaviness of their minds shall make them not one­ly [Page 142] uncapable of all these advan­tages, but such distemper'd, de­form'd and every way ill-com­pos'd Bodies as are most sutable to so sadly and so outragedly di­stemper'd mindes.

What shall the Saints do with these perfections, if there be no motion?

These are not for use, but powers and qualities necessarily following the state of the soul in the body, of which shee is to be Mistress, and to have power to use it as her self pleases. AndHence A virtu­ous life so you see what good life brings you to, both in this transitory and the next eternall world. Can you shew me now that the Blessedfinally, brings Insinit more Pleasure, Honour, and Power, than a wicked, have all that even wicked men can desire?

Sir, I see they have more pleasure then this world can af­foord. And, as for honour, I see, Saints are more honour'd then Alexanders and Augustuses. Power I know not how they have, or wealth.

Wealth is not here desir'd but for necessity or magnificence; the time of both which is pass'd;and is above need of wealth. and for power, sure they want not that, who have all they wish, and can meet with no­thing to resist their will.

The Catechist also here hath great occasion to press his Cate­chumen to good life, by lively re­presenting him, the greatness of the Ioyes, and Pains of the next world, which are most incompa­rably moving if he declare them well.

ELEVENTH CONFERENCE.

NOw you are so learn'dThe means to bring corrupt Mankind to loue God, being as to know, what it was to which Christ labour'd so much to bring mankind: I pray tell me, what means he us'd to plant his doctrin, so, that it should continue so many ages, so deeply rooted in the heart of man, as we see it has, and beleeve it shall.Miracles and Teaching; and this ine [...]icaci­ous unless lively con­ceited by the Teach­ers, therefore Divine Love or the Holy Ghost was to descend upon the Apostles,

Teaching, and Miracles, which are the greatest Confirma­tions that can be.

Thus much you told me long ago, but what more? do you not know, Si me vis stere, dolendum est primum ipsi tibi. I mean, that if a man be not per­swaded [Page 145] affectionately of a thing himself, he cannot well perswade another. Consider then how ne­cessary it was to send the Holy Ghost, that is, the plenitude of it, upon his Apostles after his Ascen­sion. Which, according to the outward apparition, fill'd their hearts with fiery zeal, and their tongues with the praises of Al­mighty God: that they might be vehemently conceited themselves of the truth, and of the great goodin virtue of which primitive v [...]gour Christ's doctrin was brought down from them to us, that is, th [...] Church is truly Apostoli­cal; the knowledge thereof brought to the world, and earnestly de­sirous to breed the like conceit in others; and so it might descend in vertue of the first plantation by ordinary means to the end of the world. But tel me, who were those chiefly that receiv'd the Holy Ghost?

The Apostles were the chief; and all others who came since; have learn'd of them, and so I see the Church is truly Aposto­lical.

Yes, and onely shee; ask any Hereticks whether they re­ceiv'd their doctrin from the A­postles, they will answer, yes. By whose hands? they answer, by the scripture. But a Catho­like says, from his Forefathers & they from theirs &c. so that none lays claym to have their Church Apostolical, but onely Catho­licks. For the question's not whe­ther there were al the while some of their Religion; but whe­these who now are, were taught and receiv'd it from them by true succession. For, if two studying one thing in divers times, findeand the same, the one does not receive it from the other, and so 'tis not true succession. But where did the Apostles preach?

Through the whole world: for such was Christs command, nor can there be any doubt but they did what they were bid. And, so, I see the Church is Ca­tholikCatho­lik. over the world.

How can that be? seeing the Alc [...]ran is in as great a part of the world as Christ's Gospel. Nay, some Heresies have been spred in the greater part of the Christian world. But, because you are no very great Historian. I wil read you this riddle. You oughtas plant­ed by the Apostles univer­sally, therefore to know that the true Church is the onely Catholick in three respects. First because it a­lone was at first planted by the Apostles in the whole world; which is clear, since only one pre­tends her doctrin by successionas having some of her profes­sion in each c [...]untry, from Them, which al planted by them must needs do. Secondly, because it alone is found in the whole compass of the Christian world; all Hereticks, being every kind in some Countries, but none in all. Thirdly, because it aloneas the only emi­nent Con­gregation in C [...]i­stendome. commands in that part of Chri­stianity where Religion is in vi­gour. And these three come out of it's very nature; for, being the Truth, it alone can overcome. So [Page 148] you have now two signes or marks of the true Church. The third is sanctity: can you tel how the true Church is onely Holy?

Sir, I see ther's more pray­ing, more works of charity, de­votion, penance. austereness, and the like, in the Catholick Church, than among Protestans. But what is among others I know not.

'Tis wel answer'd; but, to go more orderly, you know sanctity is nothing but the pra­ctise or Confirmation in those virtues that lead us to heaven; which is the life God Almigh­ty sent his onely Son to give us.Also, Having an entire Body of Faith, or Doctrin fit to pro­mote San­ctity, Laws & Customes conform­able to that Faith, and extraordi­nary San­ctity at­tainable by her Princi­ples, and practis'd by her chil­dren, This consists in Three things. First in Faith and Doctrin; wherein you shall find all here­ticks, in the points of difference, swarve from this end, and the Catholick Church hold to it; as in praying to Saints, praying for the dead, and the like. Secondly, [Page 149] in Laws and Customs, which be­cause they are according to Faith, must needs be different ac­cording to it. Thirdly, in Life and executions of those Rules: wherein likewise the diffe­rence must hold, with this cave­at, that there may be more, and greater wickedness among Ca­tholicks by reason of the multi­tude of the professors of that Re­ligion; nay of it self; for who have not so good things to of­fend against, cannot be so wick­ed.

How then can Holiness be a sign of the true Church, if there be so much wickedness in the members of it?

Though there be much and perhaps more wickedness among Catholicks, yet is there more San­ctityshe is like­wise Holy. also. For, among others there is hardly ever any man of extraordinary devotion heard of: Congregations of men and wo­men abstaining from pleasures, [Page 150] and separating themselvs from the world, none are found un­less such as were begun in Ca­tholick times; extraordinary acts of penance, or heroick virtue are are not to be look'd for. In fine, very little more then nature af­foo [...]ds, besides some bare words of God, and Christ. And this follows of necessity from the na­ture of being the true Church, which by the soundness of its root needs must confi [...]m and have ef­fect wh [...]m the false ones fail. ButLastly, is there no other mark of the Church besides these three, Apo­stolik, Catholik and Holy?

Yes; and I have been taught, 'tis Unity.

You say well: And to be One, It must first have one prin­ciple in which all of this Religi­on agree: wherein if others should also agree, they could notHer rule of Faith (Tradi­tion) be of another Religion; This Principle is Tradition, to which none lay claym but onely Ca­tholicks. [Page 151] Secondly, it must beeHer ex­ternall Profession of Faith One in the Trofession of this faith, that is, in Sacraments, For, seeing Catholick Religion sprung from one Master, Jesus Christ,and necessary 'tis that it's R [...]tes, &, as it were, Essentiall Actions which (being outward Expressions of our Faith, and so proportion'd to it) are delivered by the same Jesus Christ, be the same also: whence no congregation but his Church can agree in all these, no more then any other can a­gree in all Faith. Thirdly, in Go­vernmentHer Go­vernment being the same all o­v [...]r, She is al­so his Church must be One, that there may be some end of controversies Civil and Theo­logical which happen betwixt her children; and this, in Eq [...]a­lity, cannot be. Therefore a­mongst the Apostles, S. Peter,One. amongst Bishops, His Succes­sours, have the supreme and defi­nitive sentence. What touches Faith we have already sufficiently explicated; For the second, can [Page 152] you tel me what a Sacrament is?

No indeed, for though I have often heard of it, I cannot remember it.

Sacramentum comes of sacer, or sacrando; and it is by which somewhat is made holy, Sacred Ceremo­nies or, an holy deed: and because a Secret, by an Oath becomes holy, it being a sacriledge to reveal it after oath, such an Oath is call'd Sacramentum, and from the oath the secret sworn is also styl'd Sacramentum, and in Greek Sacramentum is call'd Myste­rium, that is a Mystery. So, be­cause Christians us'd their rites amongst themselves, and kept them from the knowledge of In­fidels; they were called Sacra­menta. As the rites of Ceres or other false Gods, which were done hiddenly, were called My­steria. are either But you must distinguish a little more exactly betwixt o­ther ceremonies and Sacraments.

Sir, I know not what you [Page 153] mean, for I am a meer stranger in this matter.

Then you must know there were Sacraments in the Jew's law; there are in Christs law: as also things called Sacramen­talia, Sacra­mentalls that is Sacramentals. Which are all to be distinguish'd. For Sacraments are (as wee may so call them) the main hinges or knots of a Christian life, and their institution is from Christ. Sacramentals are instituted byinstituted by the Church; or Sacra­ments: of w [...]eh Those of the Old▪ Law made them onely ca­pable of Temporall Blessings; the Church: and are but certain formalities and Blessings. As for the Sacraments of Jews, you are to understand, that as God Al­mighty brought them to love and serve him by temporal pro­mises and rewards, that he might give them celestial in the next world: so their Sacraments made them but capable of temporal blessings; as, Circumcision made the Jew one, whose part was in the land of promise: their Puri­fications made a man one who [Page 154] might offer sacrifice, & be heard, for children, for good years,but for peace, for long life &c. where­fore were they said to cleanse the body not the soul; to be empty & poor instruments or elements. Those of the New Now, the Sacraments of Chri­stians give the inward thing which their promises signify. As,actually confer Spiritual ones. Baptism makes a man one of those whose share is in Heaven. Penance one to enter the Chri­stian Church, and be heard, when he prays, for Heaven: And the like. These Sacraments there­fore, when receiv'd as they ought, are efficacious, & give true goods, that is spiritual graces to those who participate of them. ButTheir Number can you tel me how many Sa­craments there are?

Seven: Baptism, Confir­mation, Eucharist, Penance,and Order, Extreme-Unction, and Matrimony. Please you tel me why there are so many?

Did not I tel you they [Page 155] were the hinges of Christian life?End. Now the soul being in a body proportionate to it, Christian life is also proportion'd to this temporal. Consider then that our corporal life is maintain'd by these degrees. In birth it takes t's beginnining; next, it gets greatness and strength, to live among so many contra­ries and difficulties, as this world is ful of. Then it conserves it self, while it may perform the actions for which 'twas made. And lastly gives life to others to succeed it's defect. These are the direct actions which conserve man's life. And to these corre­spond 4 Sacraments. Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, and Order: besides these, two more which concern human life in case of necessity; Physick, when we are sick; and Preservatives, when in danger. To the former, corresponds the Sacrament of Pe­nance: To the later, because our [Page 156] danger is double from the double power of our soul; against the fear of death we are secure by Extreme-Unction; and against the flesh, by Mariage. Where­fore you see that to furnish our spiritual to the proportion of our corporal life, the Sacraments are to be just seven. But tel mee, have you not heard that some of these are taken often, others butwhich re­iterable once?

Yes, Sir, Baptism, Confir­mation, and Order are taken but once; please you to yield the reason thereof.

Do you not see, if a thing be of an indivisible nature; itand why▪ can be done but once. As a book or such other thing can be given away but once. Why? because one can give but what's his own, and when 'tis given 'tis no more his to give: so, if a man give his service to God which he does in Baptism, as a Man; in Confir­mation, as a Souldier; in Order, [Page 157] as a married man to propagate God's Church; unless God will release his gift, he can never be his own to give again. And therefore these Sacraments can­not be given ofter; the others may. Onely Matrimony, and Extreme-Unction ought not, while the married couple or the same danger remains, be repeat­ed.

TWELFTH CONFERENCE.

BUt, which of these thinkOf these you the greatest?

The Eucharist without que­stion,The Eu­charist is chi [...]est it con [...]ining the Body, and Blood of our Saviour, and being call'd above others, the Blessed Sacrament.

You say wel; but there's another reason also. Do you re­member how the virtues were divided, and to which virtue this Sacrament is reduc'd? Do this, and I shall say you are a great Doctor.

That I can, for you saidas respe­cting the chief vir­tu [...], Cha­rity: virtues were divided by our duty to God, our selves, and our Neighbour: and that all Sacra­ments [Page 159] belong to the virtue of Religion, which exercis'd whatand, as being was due from us to God.

You have done more thanTh [...] Chri­stian Sa­crifice, which is the first act of Re­ligion. I expected; but there's a deeper reason; for this Sacrament is the Christian sacrifice; and Sacrifice, the principal part of Religion. For since al Religion is but a doctrin or practise to perform what's due from us to God; and we must first know there is a God, before we perform our duties to him; and to knowing, follows acknowledging, as the proper extern act; and Sacrifice is no­thing but a rit [...], or ceremony by which we acknowledg God to be our God; it follows that sa­crifice is the first, and chief act of Religion. Now, to shew you the particulars: God signifies as much as the Author of Being to al things, or as our phrase goes, Mas [...]er of life & death. To acknowledg this, we give a life or being to him; that is, we make it [Page 160] away from our selvs, in testimony that he is God; as we give the first fruit of our corn or other har­vest, in sign we acknowledg he gave it us. So now you see what means a Sacrifice; which is no­thing else but the making away the Being of something in testi­mony that God is the Author of all being to us, and ours. But, can you tel in particular what Christian Sacrifice is?

Sir, I know 'tis the SacrificeThe thing sacrificed, of our Lord Jesus Christ; the same that was made on the Cross; though in another manner; that is, not in the shape of flesh and blood, but in the shape of bread and wine.

That seems a hard case; why should he, now in Heaven, be sacrific'd every day so?

Sir, I cannot tel that: onely I know it does not hurt him; for his body is impassible, and so can receive no harm; further I know not.

Then I'le tel you: Know you not that how much greater the Religion is, so much greater(no other Substance su [...]ng with a su [...]r na­tural Religion) could bee onely Christ: the Sacrifice ought to be, at least in proportion. So that a superna­tural Religion must have a su­pernatural substance for it's pro­per Sacrifice. Now; substance supernatural none could be but God; and God to whom the Sa­crifice is made, must not be the host: wherefore had not God be­come a creature there had been no fit Host for Christian Sacri­fice. Therefore 'twas necessary God and Man should be sacri­fic'd to him?

'Tis hard, so great wonders should be done upon a sole con­venience.Both the increase of Charity in the re­ceivers, and The Au­thority of the Church requiring th [...].

I told you not so; for both the increase of charity, and de­votion in the Receiver, & the au­thority of the Church, where upon depend's all Christianity, are the ends and fruit of this miraculous work; so that, if rightly consi­der'd [Page 162] it wil seem so great a bene­fit, that all the rest without it had been defective. But, why in theThe shape of Bread and wine most proper, shape of Bread and wine?

I suppose, S [...], because 'twas not fit in his own shape; it be­ing both indecent to him, and hideous to us to see a human sa­crifice, and therfore God would not let Isaac be sacrific'd.

That's true; but you are to know besides, that in most sa­crifices 'twas the fashion foras being Things most com­monly and unresused­ly eaten, and even sig­nifying the very act of Eating, which be­longs to a Sacrifice. those who were present to eat of the thing sacrific'd; and that was part of the sacrificing: For you see the Priest stil is to con­summate the Host, and that the proper time of receiving is in the Mass. This sacrifice therfore ne­cessarily including a sacramen­tal eating, was to be instituted in the things most common▪ be­cause intended for all Man­kind. As also because those kind's best signify the substance of all eating, and drinking: be­ing [Page 163] as it were the ground work et al the rest; now let me hear what you think you receive when you communicate;

I firmly beleeve I receive the sacred Body & Blood of our Sa­viour Jesus Christ who dy'd for us.

That's well as to the Priest;Under each of these but you that receive but in one kind, must receive but one of them.

Yes Sir, both, for Christ isare Both Bo­dy and Blo [...]d; as also whatever is annext to Christs Person: whole under both kinds, and un­der every one.

You say true, and if this were not, Christ would be kill'd a new. Nor do you receive onely this, but his Quantity and figure, his wisdome and goodness; nay even his Godhead also. For no­thing that is truly in him can be separated from him, but al mustyet he no [...] d [...]vid [...]d when Bread is. be together. Can you tel me how it comes that when the bread is broken, he is not also divided into two; or when the bread is burn'd, he is not also burn'd?

Because his body is now impassable, and can receive no harm.

Do you not see when bread is cut in pieces, every piece is bread, then, if Christ's Body be put in the place and conditions of bread; by the division, both parts must be Christs body, not parts thereof: for a leg or an arm is not Christs body, no more than a piece of a chair is a chair, or one wheel of a Clock is a Clock. So then you see it cannot be cut or divided but must be whole in euery part. And, for the sameNor is [...] [...]here capable of suffering any indig­ni [...]y. cause, though men may be irreve­rent to it, yet they cannot an­noy him; for consider'd as in the Sacrament he sees not with his eyes, nor exercises sensation up­on those things which are about him here: so that in case any inde­cency happen or affront be of­fer'd, it annoy's him not at all, nor disgraces him any more than it does God, who by his Divinity [Page 165] is in al, even the most dishonou­rable places. But, hence there rises a great difficulty: For, if aAgain, Sacrifice sacrifice be a destroying of some thing, especially some living thing: and Christ is not destroy'd in the Mass, how is the Mass a sacrifice?

You can tel best; for, I ne­verbeing of that sort of Acti­ons, as leave no re­mainder after them▪ was taught so deep a lesson.

Have you not observ'd a­mong mens actions, some leave a a remainder made by them, others not: building leaves a house; cooking, meat; gardening, trees and hearbs &c. But speaking, acting, walking; when they are done, are wholy gon without any remainder of them left be­hind. Now, sacrifice being a kind of acting, or testifying by action, is of the nature of the later sort;though it be a De­struction, and, if any thing remain, 'tis so accidental to the sacrifice, that were it taken away, nevertheless the sacrifice were entire by theyet action or doing alone. So then, [Page 166] in our present case, God Almigh­tyChrist re­mains not destroy'd. (for onely his wisdome could have done it) has found an in­vention to put a sacrifice and de­struction, yet so that nothing re­mains destroy'd. For, seeing li­ving creatures are destroy'd by the separation of the bloud from the body, hee has found how to put the body separate from the bloud, without remaining so. All things remaining under the ap­pearance of wine by concomitan­cy with the Blood, though it bee onely put there; and al things re­maining under the appearance of bread by concomitancy with the Body though it only be put there: so that the sacrifice consisting in the separating or putting a [...]un­der, this is exactly perform'd without the parts remaining se­parate; an invention beyond the wit of men and Angels, and only to be at tributed to God. Now, can you tel me what the Mass is?

'Tis this sacrifice perform'd [Page 167] with the true solem [...]ities appoin­tedThis, per­form'd with due cere­mon [...]s, is call'd The Mass: part of whose Words is Doctrin; part, Prayer. by the Church; which con­sist partly of Actions, partly, of Words. The Words are of three sorts; some secret, which the Priest says to himself; others pu­blick; and these, some in manner of praying, others in manner of doctrin.

You say wel; and these in manner of doctrin are the Epistle and▪ two Gospels: al the rest, prayers or aspirations, call'd by diverse names: the difference is, that those which are secret, the Priest is to say softly to himself, not to withdraw the hearers at­tention from their proper devo­tions. The other to be said so high, that if the auditou [...]s be ca­pable, they may make their devo­tions of them. The doctrinal parts are to be pronounc't in a reading tone, with some little in­flexion of the voice; The others, in a tone conformable to the matter. Both agree in this, that [Page 168] they must boe read with such distinction that both the Reader and Hearer may com­prehend the meaning accor­ding to their capacity. As for the Action, every one is to re­member,It's Acti­on that as this sacrifice is the most reverend, and grave action of the Church of God, so he ought to have a greater re­spect for the decency and come­linessought to be the most reve­rend and grave ima­ginable; of it, than if he were to speak before a Prince. But, be­cause this is the sacrifice of al Christian people, as well as of the Priest; let me ask which part you think more principal and more to be attended to? that is, whether the Priest should have more care to say it with devotionand more [...]ym'd in himself, or with such gesture, as may stir up reverence and de­votion in the people.

That is too great a matter for me to venture on, therefore I desire to hear your judgement.

Do not your self perceive [Page 169] that in the eyes of God Almighty, two men, and much more a com­munity, wch has a kind of infini­ty (as not being limited init's na­ture, though it be in particular) [...]ear a greater respect thā one mā? if therefore the saying Mass de­cently procure the devotion of the community, & the private de­votion is but the good of a singleto excite publick Devotion person see you not that God will ask a greater account of the exter­nal reverence, thā of the internal devotion? whence we read of the sons of Ely, that their sin was very great, because they turn'd away men from e [...]e Sa­crifice of God. And, truly, seeingin the communi­ty of As­sis [...]ants, tha [...] p [...]i­vat in th [...] Priest: Priesthood is the greatest dignity in the Church of God; that Church, and Priest who seek not withall their power to perform this Sacrifice with the greatest re­spect they can, must needs ex­tremely dishonour themselves. One thing nevertheless I will note: that there are two devoti­ons [Page 170] requisit in prayer; one, ofwhich i [...] meant of Devo­tion con­sisting in his Atten­tion, For his in­tention is absolutely necessary. Intention, the other, of Attenti­on; by the one, we set upon the action with resolution to do it to the honour of God as it ought to be done. By the other, attending to our words and deeds, we ex­ecute every particular part with a speciall devotion. The for­mer is essential, without which it were better to let the action a­lone: and without which 'tis not prayer. The second is that of which we spake in comparing it with the outward decorum. Though, where the decorum con [...]es not to the peoples percei­ving, inward devotion is more to be respected then it; by this also I hope you understand your own duty in hearing Mass.

What's the best way to do so?

If you have capacity andTo attend [...]o the passages all along [...] frame o [...] private Devotion [...] thereto is the best way to [...]ar Mass▪ commodity, you should attend to all such passages as the Priest speaks out plain. For the rest, [Page 171] you should have your private devotions, which are so much the better if accommodated to the course of the Mass. But if not, no great matter.

By what you have sayd, Sir, I should offer the Sacri­fice, and say Mass as wel as the Priest.

Not so fast my friend: For, as in the ancient law eve­ry man brought his calf, or his sheep to have the Priest offer it for him; so in the new, God hath given his only Son to the whole world to be all and every ones▪ Sacrifice: but so, as to be offer'd stil by the Priest▪ Nevertheless you may offer it by his hands; which you do two ways; one by assisting with convenient devotion, or procu­ring the Mass to be sayd; the other, by communicating; which, as I told you, is the participation of this Sacrament. But, to say Mass is reserv'd by [Page 172] Almighty God only to Priests who are of his institution, as is the whole Christian law, & so none without his order can do it.

THIR TEENTH CONFERENCE.

YOu may remember we have said Communicating is a special way of joyning with the Priest in this great mystery; but, can you now tel me what disposition is requisit for Com­munion.

Sir, I am instructed we ought to go to Confession before Com­munion;The Bles­sed Sacra­ment I know no more. But, that I do; though I never study'd the reason.

True it is; and you know the reason too without studyingbeing a a spiritu­all B [...] quel▪ it: For, tel me, if you were to make a banquet, whom would you invite but your own friend? &, if amongst them some were not [Page 174] friends with one another, you would not invite them together,None but God's Friends and mutuall Friends to one an­other are to be in­vited; that is, Charity is the pro­per Dis­position to it; and It the Sacra­ment of Charity, being of incom­parable efficacy to bind Christians thereto. for fear of turning your mirth in­to quarrel or sorrow. So, there­fore, seeing Christ invites us in this Sacrament to a Banquet, he requires both that we should be friends with him, and with one another; that is, have charity. And therefore, the Ancient Chri­stians when the Pax is giv'n in the Mass (a grave, Ancient, and materiall ceremony, and not well begun to be neglected) were wont to kiss one the other in token of peace and charity, and so com­municate together: whence, not without reason, this Sacrament is call'd, the Sacrament of Cha­rity. Here tel mee (if mans wit can invent it) what greater means could God have us'd to bind Christians in love, and charity one to another? The greatest con­jurations are wont to be made by drinking of blood: The condi­tions requir'd in friendship, are [Page 175] Alacr [...]ty, and constancy, or strength; this is figur'd in Bread, the other in Wine. The sealing and concluding of solemn con­tracts is at a Feast, and so has he ordained in this. The Ty, some Oath by what we eminently love, or reverence; Here is no less then the death of God and man which we take upon our souls. Lastly, bread and wine are most fit emblems of Unity, for so our wills ought all to be the same by love and Charity; as a thousand corns and grapes are undiscernable to be different and fast united together in one loaf, or cup of wine.

As yet I see not why thisHence▪ makes Confession necessary.

Stay a while; do you notRepen­tance de­clar'd or Confes­sion, being most [...]it to re [...]p ir Cha­rity, see, if we have offended God o [...] our neighbour, the ready way to gain their love, is to repent and and confess our faults? By na­ture every noble heart seeing his enemy subject to him takes com­passion; [Page 176] and judging the party now not the same he was, thinks meet to change likewise his car­riageand [...] a soul, towards him. See we not again, that who has committed some soul fact secretly, it [...]oa [...]s his heart til he has broken his mind to some one or o her; as shewing how natural an eas­ment of sin, Confession is; so that, where Charity is broken, Repentance declar'd (that is,is natu­rally pre­requisit. Confession) is the most naturall soder left upon earth to cement it. Therefore the Council of Trent concluded, what the Apostle had commanded of every man's try­ing himself before Communion,In this was to be understood of Confessi­on. It remains to know how this Trial is made.

By three things; Contrition,joyn'd with Contriti­on and Satisfa­ction con­sists the Trial of one's self, ant [...]ce­dently, wh [...]se Method is First, to exa­min the Conscience by r [...]vi [...] ­ing our or­dinary & extraordi­nary. [...] [...]ions▪ Confession, and Satisfaction, whereof contrition signifies true hearty sorrow for our sins. Satis­faction, our performing the pe­nance impos'd by the Priest: Con­fession [Page 177] is already explicated.

You say well; but I must go more more particularly to work with you. I think the first thing you do is to examin your conscience: And I must know how you examin it, and of what?

For the manner, I look in­to the ordinary actions which I use every day; then con [...]de▪ what extraodinary have hap­pen'd since my last confession; and in both, note what I think I have done amiss.

You have a hard task if you note al that is sin. For, tel mee, is not all that's against reason Sin? and all you do, which you ought not to do; or, contrary wise, all you do not which you ought toby [...]ng The main points▪ do, is not that sin? I doubt the you note not al that's sin, but the chief heads. Wherefore, I would not trouble you wi [...]h so much nicety, but onely as far as you have a care to amend your self; that is, to note the main points, that you [Page 178] may strive against them Se­condly,Our Mo­tives, if you pretend to perfe­ction. I would wish you noted not onely the evil acts but the Motives and causes of them. Thirdly, examin such good acts as want either the intention, orOur care or dis­care, attention due to them; that is, which (however nothing ap­pear in them otherwise then right, yet) your self are guilty to your self to have done them ei­ther without the due end, orOur In­sti [...]tions: without consideration of due cir­cumstances. Fourthly, to under­stand what yourself, either by na­ture or the state you are in, are most subject to: and both more examin, more suspect, and more confess those faults.

Thus far I know: my nextNext endeavour is to procure grief forTo procure sorrow for sin▪ my sins: which has two parts; one, to be sorry for the past; the the other, to amend what's to come.

So far wel; but have you not [Page 179] heard that sorrow also has two parts, Contrition and Attrition? which I think I must help you to understand what they are. And in a word: you know that take a hard stone and grate it against a harder, you shal bring it in­to what fashion you list; yet you leave it stil hard in the middle: but, put it in a morter and beat it, you turn it al into dust. The first is call'd Attrition; the se­cond, Contrition. And, by a metaphor deriv'd from hence, if a man that has lov'd some un­lawful object or action, and, be withdrawn from it by fear of either loss of good, or inheri­ting evil, but so that stil hee keeps some longing towards the thing: such a man's attrite; But if he perfectly forgo and grow into a hatred of the thing before loved: then hee is contrite: and by this you see, how Attrition leaves a desire and stain to be burn'd and cleans'd hereafter in purga­tory▪ [Page 180] Contrition purifies the heart to go immediatly to hea­ven. But, whereon mustas bring­ing wee ground all our sorrow for sin?

On the love of God who isLoss of supernatu­rall and naturall Goods, offended with it, and on the fear of hell wherewith we are threat­ned for it.

well said. All hate is groun­ded on the loss of some good, or the enduring some evil; Each of which may be both natural, and supernatural. Supernatural goodsand lost by sin, are the friendship, and face of God in the next world: and the sweetness which is in such excellent virtues even in this life. The harm gotten is per­petuallTheir con­trary harms. damnation in the next: and perpetual torture of consci­in this, to those who know and conceive what they do. Natural goods lost by vice, are health, peace, credit, estate. Natural harms are the inconveniences which sin drives its lovers to [Page 181] dayly: as diseases, vexations, dis­credit, poverty, the usual effects of a disorder'd life. How do you procure amendment?

I purpose never any more to do what I confess, as firmly as IHence▪ can, by God's grace.

Wel. But 'tis very hard for a man to purpose to avoid what he's almost certain he shal not. Therefore, I take it for your su­rest way to purpose to do your best endeavour to escape all you confess, rather than directly and positively to purpose what'sfull pur­pose to endeavour amend­ment; not morally in your power; and to be sorry you are not likely to have your endeavours correspon­dent to your wil. And this I think enough. But is it enough think you to make this purpose?

Yes, surely; for I see not what a man can do more.

So may you come of­ten to Confession with little pro­fit. You must therefore considerwhich, if reall; the occasions which draw you [Page 182] into danger, and study with your self, and take your Ghostly Father's advice how without greater inconveniences, you may fly such occasions: that, so, the a­voiding of sin may be the easier. And know the causes of trans­gressionsstudies to avoid oc­casions, are as well in omission, as in commission. And prudent­ly use such pious exercises as may withdraw you from temptation. Neither can any be truly sor­ry for his sins, who thinks it not worth his care to study how to amend them. But what do you next?

Go to the Priest, and confess my sins as reverently as I can.

What affections do you exercise in coming to make your Confession?

I do but read my prayers, which are preparatory to Con­fession.

Consider then the counte­nanceAffecti­ons of a man who as [...] for­giveness of one whom he has of­fended; [Page 183] you shall see dejection▪ submission, shame fastness, sor­row and fear in him. Such as these too must be your affe­ctions. And when you make your Confession what do you ob­serve?

I tel al I think sins as wel as I can, that my Ghostly Fa­ther may understand mee.

Weldone▪ but you mustand some particular carriages observa­ble in con­session. note; first, to tel nothing in general, for that your Ghostly Father knows wel enough al­ready: as, that you love not God, and your neighbour as you should do, and such like, which spend time to no profit. Second­ly, to avoid, as near as you can, all unseemly terms, if your conscience force you to speak of unseemly things. Thirdly, to be as short as you can; as to say you have done such things so of­ten, expressing withal the neces­sary circumstances. As for ma­king general Confessions, after [Page 184] the first time, to what purpose it is I know not: for neither Absolu­tion is more certain, nor any o­ther notable profit comes of it. If it be to make the state of his soul known to his Ghostly Father, that will contain the space but of a little time? and may be done without particularities, and con­fession. But now what follows?

Nothing on my part but to do what my Ghostly Father en­joyns or councels mee.

True; but, on his part re­main two things, which belong to you▪ one, the giving absolu­tion; the other, imposing of pe­nance or satisfaction: the first contains rather a Theologicalwhat Absolu­tion of the Priest is; difficulty than Catechistical, that is, what Absolution the Priest gives. For, if a man betruly sor­ry, he is absolv'd before: if not, the Priest's absolution does him no good. And, in human judg­ment the Judge but declares, not makes one innocent. But we may be casily mistaken in this dis­course. [Page 185] For, since God Almighty has put this condition upon us, that we shal submit ourselves to the Priest's judgement, whoever is truly cont [...]te receives God's favour by being ready to fulfil this his law; and so, unless he does it when he can, is not con­trite, nor absolv'd. And when he does it, is absolv'd, by doing it. Whence ' [...]is clear the absolu­tion which the Priest gives is ne­cessarywhat, Satisfa­ction to­wards our Neigh­bour and a true forgiving. As for satisfaction, it has two parts; one towards God, and one to­wards your Neighbour. For, if you have broken Charity, you ow the making of it whole again; which, to your neighbour, is sub­mittingand that to­wards▪ God, or the pen­na [...]ce en­joyn'd. your self to amends for the wrong done. To­wards God, you must know, the satisfaction which the Priest imposes is but sacramentall, and significativ [...] ▪ [...]n performing where­of, you testify that you are wil­ling in this life and in the next to [Page 186] satisfy fully God's Justice accor­ding to his will. Therefore you must not wonder the penance of­ten is so little. For it is mode­rated, according as the Priest e­steems it fitting, for a medicin more than for a punishment.

FOURTEENTH CONFERENCE.

VVHat Sacraments are yet untouch'd?

These Sir? Baptism, Con­firmation, Matrimony, Ex­treme-Vinction, and Order.

[...] Matrimony and Extreme Vnction you shall be suffici­ently instructed, when you have use of them. Baptism, becauseof Baptism, tis common to al to administer it, I shall tell you the substance ofand, it is, to cast water on the child with these words. I Baptize It's mat­ter and sorm. thee in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost. As for Confirmation, [Page 188] do you think it necessary?

I hear some hold 'tis not.

The holding of some nei­therConfir­mation, makes the Opinion true, nor fiees it from Censure. For, as not every fault, so not every er­roura [...]d It's Ne­cessity. is still taken notice of. As to the point of necessity, it stands in its being a Sacrament, that is a principal [...] action of Christian life, whose Institution of it self is a Command. Besides, the ex­press words of our▪ Saviour: Un­less one be born again &c. Which Himself applies to this mystery. Add, the Traditions of the Church, Estimation of Councels, and Fathers, and the Proportion of it to corporall Augmenta­tion. What other Sacrament re­mains to be explicated?

That of Order, which I un­derstandHoly Order; to have two degrees: Holy or Greater, and Inferiour.

So far wel, but to what does it correspond in our corporall life?

To Marriage, and must [Page 189] consequently bee to breed spiri­tuall children.

How is that done? if you be so learned as to answer that question.

By Baptism; for that you said was the birth of Christians, as Christians.

Wel remember'd. 'Tis not enough that children be born, but they must be bred up, instru­cted,It's offi­ces, and govern'd. And this is wont to be divided into three actions. The first, to wean them from the love of naturall objects. The second, to instruct them, and let them know what's necessary to supernatural life. And, third­ly, to induce them to do what they have learnt is necessary. Which three actions in the my­sticall language are called the Purgative, illuminative, andand Division. unitive way. And according to these three is constituted the Ec­clesiasticall Hierarchy, of Bis­hops, Priests, and their Mini­sters who are chiefly Deacons & [Page 190] Subdeacons; and afterward the other four lesser orders. And is called Hierarchy; that is, Ho­ly Power or Principality. The first is done by ceremonies and majestickness of holy rites, at which sensual men standing in admiration, begin to think there is some greater mystery in the matter thus handled, and desire to learn and understand it. The second is done chiefly by Cate­chising: by which the people understand what's to be beleev'd, hop'd, and practis'd. The third by Government; by which men are set forward & kept in order, to do what they have understood to be their duty.

Sir, by this, the Deacons & Subdeacons should be the chief instruments of the Sacraments; whereas wee see they belong chiefly to Priests, and Bishops▪ Besides, I have heard Preaching is proper to Bishops, which is not Government▪ nor belong­ing therunto.

Sacraments and Ceremo­nies do two several wayes speci­ally belong to Deacons, and Sub­deacons. One, because they are principally instituted for those administrations, so that 'tis the heigth of their office, wheras 'tisof the Of­fices be­longing to Bishops and Priests▪ but an addition to the office of o­thers. Secondly, because they have no other spiritual employment, whereas Bishops and Priests have Government and Catechism.

Sir, I never understood but that saving Mass, and hearing Confessions was the greatest of­fice of a Priest; and likewise, of a Bishop to confirm and give Orders: whereas you seem to prefer other offices before these.

Do you not know that God has no need of our serving him, and therfore that all serving of God was made for the profit of man; and that more excel­lent which is most mankind's spiritual profit? So that if Con­fessions [Page 192] be more available toThat of Govern­ment is best devotion than Sacrifice, that ought to be preferr'd as more no­ble. Now then, which do you think more profitable to Mankind? Go­vernment, or giving Orders, which is the giving Authority to men to bee Governours? Cer­tainly Government, which is the end, the other being but a way to it. This therefore, as al­so Confirmation, is reserv'd to Bishops by Christ for authori­singtherefore the giving Orders▪ as also Con­firmati­on; r [...] ­s [...]v'd [...]o Bishops to autho­ris [...] the [...], as also the [...] Sacra­ments. their Government, that men should not be so presump­tuous as to seek other Governours who could not have these privi­ledges. Likewise, to Priests are reserv'd the Sacrifice, and other Sacraments to dignify their per­sons, whose respect is necessary for their office. Otherwise, we understand that Sanctity consists in Charity, and so much holier and higher things are, by how much more they approach to Charity: and because Instruction [Page 193] and Government are neerer Charity than Sacraments (in true Divinity; they are so much holier than the Sacraments, that they are such in a diverse sence; the one being formally and absolute­ly holy, the other but instrumen­tally and virtually: though in respect of the People which un­derstand onely the outside and appearances, these things give more authority, and reverence, than those which are the sub­stance: Thus much being now declar'd, can you tel me whether the Hierarchy compos'd of these three parts be necessary or no?

As for Priests and Servitors,The Hie­rarchy I see they are necessary; for un­less men bee revok'd by such means from their ordinary oc­cupations, I doubt they wil sel­dom ever think of Heaven. I see also that without instruction they know not what's to be done. But for Bishops I understandand espe­cially not how they are necessary fur­ther [Page 194] than for Confirmation and Orders.

Think you not then ther'sEpisco­pall Au­thority absolutely necessary for a Church, as much necessity of doing what we know, as knowing what we should do? or at least, as much difficulty in it? for sure, you are not ignorant that both the sin and punishment is greater after knowledg than before: accord­ing to that, When the command­ment came, sin revived: and, He that knows his Masters will and does it not, shall be beaten with many stripes. And, as for doing what was, commanded, regard­ing purely the command, with­out considering the means to per­form it, the difficulty is no less now, perhaps more. For this was it which made it necessary Christ should come. This was it wherin the Old Law was deficient. This was the proper effect of the holy Ghost. This is the field where nature & grace use their strata­gems, and fight their pitch'd bat­tels. [Page 195] This therfore is the point forA▪ Bishop b [...]ing which Bishops are necessary. Look into any community, if every Servant & Officer insteadChief Ma­gistrate and O­vers [...]er▪ in Ecclesia­stical of attending the publik good should aym at nothing but his own commodity, how wel would things be govern'd? and so must you imagin the Church is directed, where there are no Bishops. Can any thing that's govern'd by man go wel with­out counsel? or counsel succeed where there is not one end of the Counselers? or one end bee, where there is not one Gover­nour? in fine, 'tis as ridiculous to say a Bishop is not needfull in a Church, as that a King is not needfull in a Kingdom, a Master in a house, or Pilot in a ship; and so much the more by how much harder 'tis for men to bee go­vern'd in a supernatural, than natural Estate. But is this all for which a Bishop is necessa­ry?

[Page 196]S. It may be for me, who ne­ver knew a Bishop was necessa­ry for so much.and chief Di­rector in spiritual affairs;

Thus much is onely for the common. But, even for particu­lars, Bishops are necessary in or­der to spiritual direction. For, they being by Christ's institution the Supreme Guids and Princes of both speculative and Mysticall Theology, inferiour Priests and Directours are to take from them their rules, and judgment, in all spiritual affairs.

Sir, I ever thought, that for spirituall Directions we were ra­ther to go to spiritual men; that is, to Religious, who seem to have more practise therin.

Truly, if there were but one way to heaven by actually for­saking the world, what you say were advisable; but the spirits of secular persons being as different from the spirits of Religious, as one life is from the other; their direction also must be no [Page 197] less different; so that for a Religi­ous man to be fit to direct a secu­lar man inspirit, he must either live among seculars, or else have that defect supply'd by others directi­ons. Moreover even for spiritual life of Religious, Bishops are the Rule, and Judges. since all tend (though by diverse wayes) to the encrease of Faith and Charity, whose laws are put into their hands. And, hitherto we have declared the necessity of Bishops, or Hierarchy, which the Divines call necessitatem medii, that is to say, towards gaining the end, and consists in this; that though particular persons may come to salvation without the govern­ment of Bishops, yet whole Countries cannot; nor the Church be without them. Be­cause 'tis they who are to direct the whole, as every man by the understanding directs himself; and so we may see some commu­nities govern'd by Superiours [Page 198] without laws, and prosper for a while; but, never was there any seen govern'd by laws without Superiours; and, if there were, the Laws would be but occasions of quarrels, and dissensions. Now we must look into the other ne­cessityand that au­thority comman­ded by Christ, which is call'd of precept, that 'tis necessary to have Bi­shops, because Christ has so com­manded. Do you know Christ did so?

No, Sir, nor know I to whom the command is made, to Saint Peter or Bishops.

Then you have forgot, that Institution is a Precept, as I told you in the case of Confir­mation, and in this here is more evident? For, who institutes anin force of It's Institu­tion, Authority, by his very doing so commands obedience in them he puts under it: But, in this point 'tis specially to be consider'd, that Christ's coming was to build a Church, which in it self should have power to conserve [Page 199] and propagate it self: as you see all States and and Communities have. And this who understands government knows to be by e­stablishing an Order of Gover­nours, which wee call the Hier­archy; as the Pope, Bishops,Hence who im­pugns It, impugns Christ and destroye [...] his Church. Priests, and Ministers: and so, to build his Church included the creating all these. And whoever impugns these, impugns Christ, and seeks to destroy his Church. But can you tel me how this is known, that Christ set Bishops to govern his Church?

I who know nothing of the command, how should I tell you?

Do you not see Bishops o­ver al the Christian world? ask who made them? you shal find others who now are dead, and that their fore fathers told them they had receiv'd order to do so from Christ and his Apostles byAnd perpetual succession. And, I pray you, have you stronger motives to receive the blessed Trinity, Incar­nation, [Page 200] and Sacraments? FromHe who beleeves or teach­es 'tis not necessary, is [...] Here­tick. this follows if any for ambition, or indirect ends should believe, or [...]each, that Bishops are not ne­cessary in the Church of God, he is an absolute Heretick: as if he beleev'd or taught there were no Trinity, Incarnation, Blessed Sacrament, o [...] holy Scripture. But are there no degrees in the people or Subjects, correspon­dent to these of the Hierarchy?

Yes sure, there must be se­verallThe Sub­jects of the Hie­rarchy Classes answerable to those of the Clergy as persons employing their spirits some in the Purgative, some in the Illu­minative, and some in the Uni­tive way. But who they are I know not.distin­guisht cor­respon­dently to [...]t, into Lay­m [...]n and Religious;

You must distinguish them according to their states. The first are such as live in the world, whom wee ordinarily cal the People, or Lay-men. The other two sorts are of Religious per­sons. One, of these who dedi­cate [Page 201] their lives to works of mer­cy, as hospital-keepers and the like. The other, who addict themselves to Contemplation. But know you wherin these dif­fer from the ordinary people?

By the three vows of Pover­ty,w [...]o [...]e v [...]w [...] are three▪ Chastity, and Obedience. By Poverty they forsake riches, ho­nours, and such pleasures as fol­low them. By Chastity, the comfort of Marriage. And, by Obedience they subject them­selvs to the direction of a Supe­riour for their instruction in spi­ritual life.

Can you tel mee which a­mong divers Religions is the per­fectest?

No Sir, But I would glad­lyOf Reli­gions learn if peradventure it be my own fortune, or of some of my friends to have a mind to Reli­gion.

Attend then; Religiousthat is perfectest▪ life is a w [...]y to seek perfection; which perfectly consists in lo­ving [Page 202] God, and in nothing but in order to God. The means they take, is abstinence from whate­ver may draw their love to any other thing: and to think often of God. If then we consider this later part (which is the chiefest) so the most contemplative are the best, which are ordinarily thought among us to be the Car­thusians.which has best means to [...]d [...]ance Contem­plation. But, if we consider the other part, then those that live in more austerity are the perfect­est; among which I wil not de­termin the controve [...]sy, because here are many Competitours; onely this I add, that this want of corporal commodities is to be judg'd not by Metaphysical ob­ligations, but by real practise. And so (whoever is best) those who have no real practice of corpo­ral wants, must needs be the worst in the nature of Religious; however for their particular lives they may be Saints.

In these three Conferences the [Page 203] Catechist has occasion to recom­mend the use of Mass & Sacra­ments to his Catechumen, and also to let him understand which be the Superiours instituted by Christ over his Church, to whom he ows duty: which ver­tuous and good men, to whom he ows respect and honour, that so he may give every one his due.

FIFTEENTH CONFERENCE.

SIr, you have all this while commanded my answers; let me now beg leave to offer you some of my doubts. I have heard talk of an other Hierar­chy of Angels (if I wel remem­ber) wherof methinks you speak not.

I do not intend to tel you al I know: but what appertainsAngels & Saints, to you to know. As for the or­ders of Angels you may without inconvenience be ignorant of them, til it shall please God to bring you to the sight of them. 'Tis sufficient for you to know that God has ordain'd Angels to govern us; to every one, one: [Page 205] for our Saviour tels us that the Angels of the little ones see the being al­ready in Bliss▪ face of his heavenly Father; it has been the constant faith of Christians that every one has an Angel, for his Governour, or Guardian; to whom you may do wel often to recommend your self.

Since you are faln upon that point, I pray, what obliga­tionPrayers so th [...]m have I to pray to Angels and Saints? and how can they hear me, having no ears nor o­ther corporal senses by which to come to the knowledge of my prayers?

If we remember, Angelsare not for their, but the Churches good; and Saints are in perfect bliss and happiness, we shall easily discover that all service or ho nour done to Saints by us, is not for their good. but for ours. And so the keeping holy dayes, build­ing Churches, and setting up Altars unto God in memory of Saints, is to be moderated [Page 206] according to the utility which redounds to the Church by it: and, in proportion, the prayers or what sort of devotions soever are in private us'd to their ho­nours, are to be govern'd by the same principle. Now the utility redounding to the Church is, that wheras human nature is easilyand weary of being carri'd above it self by prayer and other spiritual exercises: and, on the other side, delighted with variety and no­velty; the weariness of devotion is help'd, and in part remedy'd by the variety, which is artifici­ally order'd in it. Again, mens humours and states of life being so diverse, it happens wel that every one may have examples in his own kind to affect him, and many times they make a greatertherefore, obligato­ry when shee com­mands them: profit by such an affinity to their own condition, than by a great deal of preaching or good coun­sel. By this▪ you may see what obligation there is to honour [Page 207] Saints, and pray to them: name­ly, when the Church, for the com­monotherwise, on [...]ly ac­cording to the ne [...]d [...]f particu­lar per­sons. good of her children, pre­scribes it, then that's to be done whatsoever she commands: O­therwise, as far as particular per­sons find need or help by the va­riety of devotion; so far they do very well to follow it.

Sir, I hear good men say, 'tis of great importance towards living well to have the assi­stance of some special Saints which are in high favour with Almighty God particularly of the Blessed Virgin Mother of God: and have been told stories how she ha's obtain'd remission of sins for some persons to whom Christ our Saviour her Son has deny'd it; nay, (if I remember wel) could not obtain it of his heavenly Father for them. And for this cause I understand some make themselves by vow▪ (as I think) her Slaves: and use extra­ordinary devotions to her, and [Page 208] have great confidence in such actions.

There can be no doubt butTheir Prayers for [...] a­vailable, the intercession of the holy An­gels and Saints works won­derful effects, and has a strong force to obtain of Almighty God what's convenient for our salva­tion, if they pray for us: nor yet can there be doubt but they pray for us, seeing they neither can be ignorant of our miseries, or their own favour with Almighty God; or that he is wel pleas'd they should pray for us; nor, being ful of charity, can they cease to help us, what lies in their power; their prayer being nothing but [...] desire of our releef represented to God, which al their desires per­petually are, and cannot chuse but be, in heaven, where their whole hearts are b [...]nt upon no­thing but through Him, and ac­cording to his laws. They ther­fore pray for us, and their pray­ers are profitable to us; and that [Page 209] Saint's most, which is highest in favour with Almighty God. Ne­vertheless I am fa [...] from belee­ving any of them so compassio­nat [...] no not the Blessed Mother of Christ) as is her God and Son. And he that should persuade one to turn his prayers from him to his Mother, misses the mark very wide. They therfore who counsel so many prayers to our Lady, are to be understood of such prayers as would not be said at all unless they were said to her: which re­turns to what I spake of: that 'tis to stir up a failing devotion in us; and not, as if the object were better. And, among other Saints, I doubt not but the least has favour enough to obtain al that's fitting for us, and our Saviour the Chief of Saints more then all; were not his Goodness alone, unmov'd by the petitions of others, so great, that when mens disposi­tions are not failing he cannot [Page 210] hold himself from doing favours. Whence we understand, that such stories (if authentical) are but parabolical expressions of the great assistance we receive from Saints, or rather figurative mo­tions to stir up in us due sorrow for our sins, and a greater ho­nour of the God of Saints

Then Sir, it seems you [...]ven Ad­dresses to particular Saints, profita­ble; think the devotions us'd to par­ticular Saints are of little effect; and, in particular, that of be­coming Slaves to our blessed La­dy.

No such thing follows out of my words: for whatever ex­cites, continues, or makes ourbut, making Professi­ons of Slavery to them, un­wa [...]ran [...] ­able; devotion more servent, I hold of great effect, and to that end, wel practic't. Indeed, concer­ning making our selves Slaves to any Saint, I very much doubt. For a Slave is hee whose service is onely profitable to his master, and nothing to himself. Now, our service is no ways profitable [Page 211] to any Saint, but much to our selves. Again, our Wil is so built by Almighty God as to be to­tally subject to him, because hee is Al-goodness and [...]e onely can move our soul perfectly and satify it: wherefore wee are bo [...]n his slaves, and accor­ding to nature we conform our selves in bending our whole wils to him. But, I fear mee, to do the like to any creature, were to wrong our creation, and attribute that homage which is due to God alone, that is, to be sole directour of our souls, to a creature. But, as for those who use it, I presume either they un­derstand not so much (for I hearAlso▪ they are not learned) or mean it in some improper sence. One­ly I would have you advertis'd that these extravagant devotions ordinarily argue either vanity or interest: for which private men run private paths, and desire to carry disciples after them; let [Page 212] us follow the troden path of our fore-fathers. Yet one thing wil I add; that wee have not by Jesus Christ or his Church left us any externall actions with pro­mise of grace and reward for the deed done, but onely the Sa­craments; which are necessary, more because they are professi­ons of our faith and charity, and certain initiations or associati­ons to Christ's Church in some degree, (whence the very exter­nall action proceeds from inter­nall grace when done as it ought:) than that there is any connexion betwixt those exter­nalFretences of extra­ordinary grants to certain Private Devoti­ons, as from Christs promise, without proof therof by manifest miracle, to bee sus­pected; actions and merit, by Christ's voluntary conjunction of them: and therfore all those de­votions which promise particu­lar effects or rewards to the say­ing of certain prayers, pretend­ing Christ's special grant to some Saint, as they cannot bee easily convinc'd of superstition, because God can if he please do [Page 213] such things, so they are not easily to be credited without manifest miraculous proof, at least of the good life of the Saint who be­gins such a devotion; and that certainly it came from him. Be­cause it is not acccording to the spirit which Christ has left to his Church; which is to make us ado­rers in spirit and truth: Andand breed ill-groun­ded con­fidences. therfore Christians ought to be drawn from putting their confi­dence in such things, to place their trust in Christ, and walk towards him in the known path of Charity and good works.

Sir, you forgot my doubt, how Saints hear our prayers, since they have no ears? and yet I have heard wiser men than my self stumble at it.

I thought you had been more learned; for it seems you think they should have this sensibleHow Saints hear our Prayers. passion which wee cal hearing, because we say they hear: but this word, hearing, in that [Page 214] speech has the meaning of gran­ting, or according to our peti­tion. So that your difficulty must be, how they know what wee ask of them; which is with their minds, or understandings, as men know sciences: and the A­stronomer sitting in his study, knows the situations, aspects, and courses of the stars: which knowledg, though in us it has the root in sense, yet in them may have some other means; or also have root in what came into their soul by the senses while they liv'd in this world. And let thus much suffice; for this present di­scourse bears not to wade into the depth of things. Besides, in many things we must be con­tented to know that they are, though we cannot penetrate how they are such as we know them to be.

Now I am sorry I drew you from your former discourse; wherfore to put you into it a­gain: [Page 115] I pray tel me, whether you think the use of pictures, and in particular the special honours done to some, as hanging of lights before them, carrying them in procession, and making pil­grimages to them, be among those whom you term extrava­gant devotions.

You ask many questionsUse of Pictures necessary for the Church, in one, I will begin with the principal, that is, the use of pi­ctures; which if we believe na­nature, and experience, is an use very profitable, and (as I think) absolutely necessary in the Church of God, for the instructi­on and spiritual profit of the faithful. First, for memory's sake;As help­ing the Faithfulls memories, for as oft as we see pictures, so oft we remember the thing pain­ted: and whether we have need of often remembring heaven and heavenly things, let even our cold and evil life bear testimo­ny. Secondly, When a man say's his prayers before the pi­cture [Page 216] of our Saviour or otherAs qui k­ning the apprehen­sion of de­vou [...] per­sons, Saint, he naturally makes a quicker apprehension of the pre­sence of him that's spoken to; and by consequence a greater re­spect and attention is bred in him that speaks. Thirdly, it ser [...]'s forAs serv­ing for an Address in Prayer, an Address of the prayer, espe­cially if there be any corporal ge­stures withal. For, as the ancient Christians were us'd to turn themselves to the East, and the Jews towards the Temple when they would adore God; the east and temple serving for a deter­mination of their action, where­by their adoration was known to be to God; so much more when I bow, or do any other reverence or pray before a pi­cture, 'tis a determination ofAs exc [...] ­ting the affection by a lively exhibiting som pas­sage. prayer or respect to God, or that Saint, whose picture 'tis. Lastly, 'tis a help to him that pray's; for it bears with it an expression of­tentimes which would cost ma­ny words and works of our me­mory. [Page 217] As who looking on a Crucifix would in his heart feel the wounds, and passions of his Redeemer to represent them ei­ther to God the Father, or to his own soul, may find a great faci­lity and quickness by having the picture before his eyes. These ad­vantages I know not how others esteem, but experience has per­swaded mee that they are of very great importonce.

I understand this wel, but I see not why they should be ho­nor'd, or lights hung before them for this; much less can there bea reason why they should be carry'd in processions; or pilgri­mages made more to one than to another, especially of the same Saint.If us'd [...] for a Re­ligious end, some kind of reli­gious re­spect proper to them.

As for simple reverence 'tis a barbarousness and want of common sence to deny them that, if you admit the use of them: for if they were us'd for a religious end, they are belong­ing [Page 218] to God, and Holy: and therfore to be treated with re­spect: try but any that deny this, in somewhat they esteem holy, and you shal find nature teaches them the same good manners; and 'tis a mear shortness of dis­course to disallow that to pictures which themselves grant to other things; for example, to Churches, a Bible, and such like. Now, the reason of preferring one picture before another, is some antiqui­ty or venerablenes of the figurePictures Some par­ticularly venerated and why, or other rarity which carries a force with it to stir up human hearts in some extraordinary de­gree. And men, coming with a greater apprehension, pray the better and obtain more at God's hands; also this opinion of gra­ces, redoubles devotion, and causes men to hang lights or car­ry them in processions, or the like; which Actions are the children of faith pass'd, and the mothers of faith and devotion following; [Page 219] and therefore allow'd and re­commended in the Catholik Church.

I imagin if I should askThe same, in propor­tion, to be said of Reliks. you any thing concerning Re­liks of Saints, you would answer me in the same manner you have done about honoring of pi­ctures; and therfore I will ra­ther reflect upon that which Re­liks make me think on; that is the Souls in Purgatory. But I hope I can satisfy my self; For, if they be in any pains, me thinks 'tis fair reason that the prayers of good people should have as much force for them as for ano­ther; since by their fresh memo­ry and the affection of the living towards them they seem as yet to be of our society and friend­ship.

You say true, and so you may learn the meaning of that Article of our Creed, The Com­munion of Saints, For Saints or holy persons being all either in [Page 220] pain or pleasure; you see how those who are saying communi­cate with the other two, by pray­ing to the Saints in heaven, and for them in purgatory; for whom also, as for us, those in Heaven pray. And likewise, if you look well, you shall find the explica­tion of all the rest in these dis­courses, so that you may be able to give an indifferent accompt of all, and make that profit to your self, as to find the way to heaven and eternal happiness; whither God of his mercy bring us all. Amen.

The Catechist must not for­get to exhort his Catechumen to the profitable use of prayers to Saints, and the like▪ devotions; so, as to be circums [...]ect and not subject to the superstitions cre­dulity of some poor people▪ who think good life and holiness stand in exteriour work, and mear exhibition of these devo­tions.