The Protestant Religion Truly State and Justified, Part 41 – Part 44
The Three and Fortieth accuſed Point.
That no Interior Grace is given by Impoſition of hands in Holy Orders: And that ordinary Vocation and Miſſion of Paſtors, is not neceſſary in the Church.
Anſ. Contrarily the Reformed Catholicks hold, 1. That God often gave miraculous interior gifts to men, by the Impoſition of the Apoſtles hands.
2. And if he pleaſe he may now bleſs Ordination to the increaſe of men's mental fitneſs for the Miniſtry; and when he doth ſo, we know not.
But we hold, 1. That men ſhould be ſuppoſed by the Ordinances to be true Chriſtians, and to have competent Miniſterial Abilities before they Ordain them.
2. That now miraculous gifts ceaſe, no man can tell when any other inward Grace is given by Impoſition of hands in Ordination, than Relative, which is Obligation and Authority for the work of the Miniſtry. And Durandus and other of their School-men, ſay that their Indelible Character is no other. And the reſt know not what to make of it.
3. If we read of Multitudes of Debauched, Ignorant, Apoſtatical Popes and Prelates, and many Ages of Church Barbariſm, and Bruitiſhneſs, (even in Baroni…s, Genebrard, and the fierceſt Papiſts;) and if we ſee Prieſts after Ordination to be Ignorant, Drunkards, Fornicators, unable and unapt to Teach, haters of a Godly Life, we cannot tell what Grace it is that theſe men are ſaid to receive in Ordination: Whatever it is, it will not keep them out of Hell, as it keeps them not from ſerving Satan.
4. We take an ordinary Calling and Miſſion to be ordinarily needful to the Church Miniſtry. This Calling conſiſteth, 1. In neceſſary Abilities, without which God ſendeth none. 2. In willingneſs and Conſent. 3. In the Ordination by Senior Paſtors, where it may be had. 4. And to fix them in relation to particular Congregations, the mutual conſent of themſelves and the Flocks.
5. But we know Rules of meer Order are for the things ordered, and the Edification of the Church, for which all Church Power is given, and God Commandeth that all be done: And we know that God who will have Mercy and not Sacrifice, would not have us deſtroy the ſubſtance by pretence of a Ceremony. And that in ſeveral Caſes, Miniſters may be lawfully called without Impoſition of hands, and Canonical Ordination. As, 1. In caſe men be caſt into Infidel Countries, where no Biſhops or Paſtors can be had: As by Shipwrack, or Merchants Factory, or Embaſſadors, or when a Biſhop with them dyeth by the way: They muſt not be without all publick Church Worſhip, for want of an Impoſing Biſhop.
2. In caſe Perſecution drive all the Biſhops out of reach.
3. In caſe the perſecuted Biſhops refuſe to Ordain for fear of ſuffering.
4. In caſe the Biſhops be Hereticks, or intollerable Uſurpers and no true Biſhops, wanting the Eſſentials of a Qualification and a Call.
5. In caſe the Biſhops impoſe any falſe Oath, Subſcription, Covenant, or Profeſſion, or any other Sin, as the Condition without which they will not Ordain, (which is the caſe of all the Papiſts Prelates;) their Ordination in theſe caſes is not neceſſary.
6. We know that in ſuch caſes the Miniſtry faileth not, but there may be a true ſucceſſion of Paſtors, though regular Canonical Ordination be interrupted. For there is nothing neceſſary after Gods Law, which ſpecifieth the Office by ſtated Inſtitution, but only the determining who the Perſons are that God would have in this Office: Which may be well known without Canonical Ordination, where that cannot lawfully be had. There are inſtances in the ancient Churches, that when ſome Elected to be Biſhops, fled or hid themſelves; the Biſhops Ordained them abſent, by writing, without impoſition of hands.
7. Yea, we know that if in any one Church or Nation, the ſucceſſion were totally interrupted, for many years, God hath left means ſufficient to reſtore it. 1. His Word deſcribeth the Office, and giveth the Authority and obligation to the Perſon when determined of. 2. That Determination may be made, 1. By the due Qualification of the Perſon: 2. The inviting Neceſſities of the People and opportunity. 3. Mutual Conſent; and without theſe the Ordination and Miſſion of a Biſhop is vain.
8. The Church of Rome more needeth this Doctrine than the Proteſtants: For it is notoriouſly certain, that regular Succeſſion hath failed oft and long in the Papacy, and conſequently in its Clergy. 1. There is no more notorious interruption than by the utter incapacity of the Unqualified: And ſuch have been thoſe that were Children or declared Sots, Beaſts, Simoniſts, filthy Lechers, Hereticks, Infidels, Schiſmaticks, by General Council, and the moſt Papal Hiſtorians. Their Succeſſion now is from Eugenius the 4th. depoſed as an Heretick by a General Council.
2. When there have been two or three Popes above twenty times, no man knoweth which was the right.
3. Either Election is in the power of ſome in ſpecial, or not; if not, the Turks, or Heathens, or Hereticks, may chooſe a Pope: If it be, Then who have the Power? Its known that at firſt the Biſhop of Rome was choſen by the People of one Congregation: After by the Clergy and people of the Chriſtians of the City: After that by the Biſhops of the Dioceſs: Sometimes by the Emperors: Or Arrian Kings (with the Clergy and people:) Sometimes by General Councils: Sometimes againſt General Councils, by an Armed Faction: And of late times by things called a Colledge of Cardinals. If all theſe were lawful, no one ſort have the Electing Power: If any was unlawful, the Succeſſion hath been interrupted.
4. Either the Ordination of a Superior is neceſſary, or not: If yea, then the Pope having no Superior, was never truly Ordained: If not, then a Presbyter may be Ordained without a Biſhop. Rome is more concerned to anſwer theſe things than we.
The Four and Fortieth accuſed Point.
That Prieſts and other Religious perſons who have Vowed their Chaſtity to God, may freely Marry notwithſtanding their Vow.
Anſ. 1. Muſt none keep Vows but Prieſts and Religious People.
2. The known Doctrine of the Proteſtants about Oaths and Vows (which you may ſee in Sanderſon de Juramento,) is, 1. That Antecedently it is unlawful to enſnare our ſelves by unneecſſary Vows, of that which is out of our Power, or ſo mutable, that it may hereafter be made our Duty which now is not. 2. But having once Vowed, we muſt diſtinguiſh of the Impoſing, the making of the Vow, and the Matter of it. And that, 1. Though it was by Parents, or others unlawfully impoſed, 2. And by our ſelves, by temerity unlawfully made or ſworn, 3. Yet if the Matter conſideratis conſiderandis be neceſſary or lawful, the Vow muſt be kept: But if it be Sin that is Vowed, it muſt not be done. Becauſe Man's Vows cannot abrogate or ſuſpend Gods Laws. Can any of your Caſuiſts deny this?
Therefore, if Boys or Girls Vow Chaſtity, and it prove thar they cannot keep it without ſin, the Matter becometh to them unlawful, and they muſt break it: As for inſtance: 1. If they cannot keep it without apparent hurt to their Souls by Luſt. 2. Or if the Heir of the Crown, or ſome great Eſtate, Vow it, and if he keep it, the Kingdom or Church is like to ſuffer by it. 3. If Parents or Prince countermand the Vow in Youth.
But if they can keep it, and that keeping become not Sin by conſequent accidents or changes, they ought to keep it; though they muſt repent of their raſh unlawful making it. Gods Law is perfect, and maketh Duty enough for us, and we ſhould not fooliſhly make more as Law-givers to our ſelves, when we are conſcious how far ſhort we come of keeping Gods own Laws.
The Five and Fortieth accuſed Point.
That Faſting and abſtinence from certain Meats, is not grounded on Holy Scripture, nor cauſeth any Spiritual good.
Anſ. Still deceitful Confuſion: Proteſtants hold, 1. Faſting is a needful Duty to ſeveral Perſons in ſeveral caſes. As, 1. To take down the Fleſh when it groweth too ſtrong in Luſt. 2. For the cure of many Diſeaſes from fulneſs. 3. To exerciſe our Humiliation in times of publick Danger and Calamity, or of perſonal repentance for ſome great Sin, or under ſome affliction that calleth for great Humiliation.
2. They hold that Abſtinence is needful in it's time and place, as Faſting is in it's: And that all Eating and Drinking is unlawful, which gratifieth the Appetite by Quantity or Quality againſt Men's health, and the juſt Rules by which we ſhould judge what is healthful: Yea, that bare Eating and Drinking to pleaſe the Appetite, which doth not ſome way conduce to fit us for our Duty, is Sin.
3. We know that the ſame Meat and Drink for Quality and Quantity which is beſt for one, is hurtful and mortal to another: And we know that Faſting is as Phyſick, whether for Health, or for the Soul: and if we are fallen into the hands of ſuch Phyſicians, as will tye all the Land and all the World to take the ſame Phyſick, and on the ſame days, to take a Purge or a Vomit every Wedneſday, Friday, and Holy Evens, we ſhall obey them when we are a-weary of our Lives. I think our London Colledges would deride ſuch preſcribers.
4. And if any will tell us that we ſhall merit of God, and ſave our ſelves by forbearing the courſeſt ſort of Fleſh, and eating the more coſtly Fiſh, Junkets, Sweetmeats, and drinking Wine and ſtrong-Drink, we abhor ſuch Mock-Faſts, for God will not be mocked: But Hipocrites turn all Religion into a Mockery. I have heard thoſe called ſtrict preciſe Proteſtants, accuſed as being againſt abſtinence and Faſting; and upon enquiry I found that thoſe of my acquaintance, eat and drink leſs all the year, than their accuſers of my acquaintance do on their Mock-faſting days. To ſuch their Diet would ſeem a ſtrict Faſt, even Calvin that macerated his body, with eating but a few bits once a day, is by ſome Papiſts called a ſenſual Glutton, (though Maſſonius ſaith the contrary.)
The Six and Fortieth accuſed Point.
That Jeſus Chriſt deſcended not into Hell, nor delivered thence the Souls of the Fathers.
Anſ. 1. And do not theſe falſe Accuſers know that both the Creed which we all profeſs, and the Articles of the Church of England, ſay expreſly that Chriſt deſcended into Hell? 2. And thoſe ahat diſlike the Tranſlation of foreign into Hell, yet grant Chriſt went into foreign; and that's all the Scripture ſaith: So that all the doubt is but what foreign ſignifieth? Whether the Hell of Torment, or more Generally the unſeen ſtate of ſeparate Souls! If you mean the laſt, what Proteſtants deny it? If you mean the firſt, what preſumptuous cruelty is it, to believe that all the Souls of the Fathers were in Hell, till the Death of Chriſt? Chriſt alleadging, I am the God of Abraham, of Iſaac, and of Jacob, ſure meant not, that God was their God, becauſe they were in Hell: Was Lazarus in Hell when Abraham ſaid, Now he is Comforted? It was a Hell of Joy and Comfort: Were Samuel, Eliſha, Job, Daniel, &c. in Hell? Was Moſes in Hell, that appeared in Glory on the Mount with Elias? But what is it that the Infallible Church cannot make good, when they have once preſumed to affirm it?