Exposition of Romans 4, Exposition · Verse 9, 10, 11, 12
VERS. 9, 10, 11, 12.
9. Cometh this bleſſedneſs then upon the Circumciſion onelyonly or upon the uncircumciſion alſo? for we ſay, that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteouſneſs.
10. How was it then reckoned? When he was in circumciſion, or in uncircumciſion? not in circumciſion, but in uncircumciſion.
11. And he received the ſigne of Circumciſion, a ſeal of the righteouſneſs of the faith which he had yet being uncircumciſed: that he might be the father of all them that believe though they be not circumciſed; that righteouſneſs might be imputed to them alſo.
12. And the father of Circumciſion to them who are not of the Circumciſion onelyonly but alſo walk in the ſteps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumciſed.
THe ſcope and dependence of this paſſage is diverſly conceived: Some think the Apoſtle here propounds a new argument, for juſtification by Faith, againſt juſtification by Works; and theſe alſo diverſly collect it. Some thus; Abraham was juſtified before he was circumciſed; Ergò, He was not juſtified by circumciſion; nor by conſequent, by any works of the Law: The ground of which argument is this; becauſe if circumciſion were cauſe of his juſtification, then muſt he needs have been circumciſed before he was juſtified: for the effect cannot be without, or before the cauſe. Others thus; Paraeus ad loc.If Abraham were juſtified by faith, then muſt all men, whether circumciſed or uncircumciſed be ſo juſtified; But Abraham was juſtified by faith: Ergo. The conſequence of the propoſition they imagine to have this proof; becauſe Abraham is father of both people, and they both his ſonnes; wherefore by good conſequent they think it follows; that as be was juſtified, ſo others muſt be ſith there is one reaſon of the father and children; of the pattern, and the imitatours; of the head of the covenant, and of thoſe that in him are admitted into the covenant.
The ſcope But methinks, weighing the words, the ſcope ſeems no more but this, To ſhew that the bleſsing of juſtification belongs indifferently to Jews and Gentiles believing: A point touched before chap. 3. and here again reſumed, and more purpoſely proved, becauſe he had immediately before made mention of Abrahams juſtification: and their gueſs is not without ground, that think the Apoſtle now frames anſwer to that ſecond quaere of Jews. Rom. 301. What profit of Circumciſion? which to this place he hath purpoſely deferred, becauſe from Abrahams caſe it receives fitteſt anſwer. Neither let it ſeem ſtrange, that the Apoſtle ſhould thus digreſs from his principall concluſion; ſith we know, it is frequent with him in his paſſage, as well to clear doubt, as to confirm his purpoſe. And for the ſcope thus far: See Rom. 3.
Now, the paſſage to this Concluſion, is by way of Prolepſis: Came this bleſſedneſs then? &c. Wherein we have 1. The doubt. 2. The reaſon of it. 3. The ſolution. The doubt is, whether this bleſſedneſs, that is, juſtification, belongs to the circumciſion, that is, to the Jews onelyonly; or to the uncircumciſion alſo; that is, to the Gentiles yet uncircumciſed? Metonymia adjuncti frequens, as Rom. 2.28. the ſupply of the Verb; whether it be (falleth), as Theophylact; or (cometh) as our Engliſh: or (is) as others; we have no cauſe to enquire of; the ſenſe being apparently ſuch as we have ſhewn.
The reaſon of the doubt: For we ſay that faith was imputed to Abraham for righteouſneſs,] as if he had ſaid, This is in confeſſo, that Abrahams faith was reckoned to him to righteouſneſs: Now the queſtion here is, Whether, ſith it is apparent Abraham was circumciſed, this bleſſedneſs of juſtification, or having faith imputed to righteouſneſs, belong to circumciſion onelyonly, or alſo to the uncircumciſed? The ſolution follows, carried artificially, as this whole paſſage is, in a Rhetoricall Dialogiſme: How was it then imputed? &c. as if he had ſaid, If this be the doubt, ſee in what ſtate Abraham was when he received this teſtimony of righteouſneſs; and you ſhall find it was long before he was circumciſed: For, this imputation of faith to righteouſneſs, whereof we treat, was whiles he yet had no child, as appeareth Gen. 15.2. and the ordinance of circumciſion began after this, towards a fourteen years: For, after the promiſe made by God, and the teſtimony of righteouſneſs given to Abraham, took he Hagar to wife, and of her had Iſhmael, being 86 years old, Gen. 16.16. and many years after, was given him in charge the ordinance of circumciſion; and the execution thereof fell into the year 99 of Abraham, and of Iſhmael the 13. Gen. 17.24, 25, ſo that by the hiſtory it is clear, he was juſtified long before he was circumciſed: and this, as the Apoſtle ſeems to intimate, wanted not his myſterie; the Lord thereby teſtifying, that juſtification is not had to circumciſion, but that the uncircumciſed believing, may alſo be ſharers with Abraham in that bleſsing.
Obſerv Thus far of the Context, and ſenſe of the firſt clauſe.
Now, the things here obſervable are theſe. Firſt That very circumſtances of Scripture ſtories, afford often, ſubſtantiall concluſions. A weighty concluſion, that juſtification belongs to Gentiles; and that which was long controverſed in the days of the Apoſtle, See Act. 15. Gal. 5. And it is determined by a circumſtance in the ſtory: Abraham was juſtified in time of uncircumciſion; therefore juſtification belongs not to the circumciſed only. A like caſe we have determined, by like evidence Gal. 3.17. out of circumſtances of ſtory conferred; the bleſſing muſt needs be ours by promiſe, and not by the Law. How is it proved? becauſe the Covenant was made with Abraham, in Chriſt 430 years, before the giving of the law in Sinai, in Heb. 7.12, 13 14. The Apoſtle proves this concluſion; that perfection was not by the leviticall Prieſthood. What is his arguments? becauſe another Prieſt was to ariſe, according to Davids prophecy, not after the order of Aaron; even Chriſt, a Prieſt for ever, after the order of Melchiſedek: And, becauſe it might be ſaid, that that other Prieſt, though another, yet might be of Aarons order; nay, ſaith the Apoſtle, that appears falſe, by this circumſtance; for, our Lord Chriſt, of whom David ſpeaks, was of another tribe, even of the tribe of Judah unto which tribe, Moſes ſpake nothing concerning Prieſthood. I might be infinite in this kinde, but a taſt ſufficeth.
And it teacheth us, in our ſtudy, and ſearch of Scripture, not to let paſs the ſmalleſt circumſtance, ſith under it, lye hid Doctrine ſo ſubſtantiall: For wiſdome we ſhould ſearch, ſaith Solomon, as men do for ſilver, Prov. 2.4. turning up every clod, and almoſt grain of duſt, wherein the leaſt portion of pure metall may ſeem to lye hid. In ſacris liter is nihil eſt, quod non ingentem theſaurum contineat modò ſcrutatorem habeat: Ruizius, reg. 118. è Chryſoſtomo; ſinguli ſermones, ſyllabae, apices, & puncta in divinis Scripturis, plena ſunt ſenſibus; Hieron. ad Ephes. 3.
Howbeit, that we miſtake not; we muſt not forget, that even the Scripture hath its foreign: and therefore, it is not ſafe always, to reaſon from order of narration; except by other circumſtances, it be evident, that the narration be to the order of times,
A Second collection of ſome Interpreters hence, is this: That the grace of juſtification, is not tyed to Sacraments; becauſe it may be had without them: And that was it, (as they think) the Lord would teach us by the time of Abrahams circumciſion, and juſtification: that look as the Lord, furniſhing the earth with hearbs, and fruits, before he made ſtarrs, by their heat, or influence, to give them vigour, or raine to yeild them moyſture, would teach us, that they are but Arbitrary Jnſtruments, which he uſeth, ad Placitum; So the the Lord giving Abraham Teſtimony of righteouſnes, before his circumciſion, would thereby teach us, that his grace may be had, without the Sacraments: The queſtion hath been already treated, ad cap: 2. Let us yet, resume it, that at leaſt Our Judgement may be more manifeſt.
Neceſſity of Baptiſme (whereof the queſtion chiefly is) may be two ways conceived. Firſt, Calvin juſtifi. lib. 4. cap. 19. Serm. 26.Whether the receiving thereof, be a neceſſary duty, preſſing the conſcience by the law of God? Whereto we anſwer, with joynt conſent; it is neceſſary, and ſo neceſſary, that the wilfull contempt, yea neglect of it, where it may be had, lays guilt of ſin upon the conſcience of the negligent, or contempuous refuſer.
Secondly, It may be thus apprehended; whether it be neceſſary, as a mean of ſalvation? In this alſo we conſent; that it is neceſſary, as a mean of ſalvation: Becauſe, 1. The obſervation thereof is a work of obedience, and ſo part of that vita Regni, 2. Becauſe in the right uſe, it ſerves to confirm faith, and to nouriſh all graces, that do accompany ſalvation.
What is then the queſtion betwixt us, and Papiſts? It ſtands chiefly about the decree, or manner of neceſſity; namely, whether it be abſolutely neceſſary, Vt perijſſe protinùs exiſtimetur, cui ejus obtinendi ademta fucrit facultas? Bellarm de Bapt. lib. 1. cap. 4.As Calvin explains it. This meaſure of neceſſity of Baptiſme we deny; Papiſts affirm: The queſtion is ſaith Bellarmine, whether Baptiſme be neceſſary, as a mean of ſalvation, ſo that if any be not Baptiſed, he periſheth? etiamſi forte obignorantiam excuſetur a praevaricatione praecepti: that they affirm: and, if any demand, what time it came to this height of neceſſity, They anſwer; Baptiſmus Chriſticaepit eſſe neceſſarius, neceſsitate medii, & praecepti, a die pentecoſtes.
As touching what we are to hold, in this queſtion; I had rather utter in Bernards terms, then in my own; conſidering what adverſaries we are are to deal with: He therefore thus delivers his judgment, Bernard. Epiſt. 77.That, whoſoever in men of years if any man, ſince the publiſhing of that remedy for ſin, refuſeth to be Baptized, he adds to the generall contagion of nature, the crime of pride, and ſo carries with him, a double cauſe of juſt damnation; if he ſo dye: yet, if before death he repent, and have a will and deſire to be Baptized, and cannot, being prevented by death; ſo be it, he want not fides recta, ſpes pia, charitas ſincera, propitius ſit mihi deus, quia huic, Ambroſe de obitu valentiniani imperator.ob ſolam quauam, ſi defuerit, nequaquam deſperare poſſum omnino ſalutem, nec vacuam credere fidem nec confundere ſpem, nec excidere charitatem, tantum ſi aquam non contempus, ſed ſola prohibeat impoſsibilitas: His reaſons are, Firſt, from authorities of Ambroſe, and Auguſtin. Ambroſe doubts not of the ſalvation of Valentinian, for his faith only, though he dyed unbaptized; becauſe he had a purpoſe, S. Auguſtin. de Bapt. lib. 4. cap. 22.and deſire to be baptized: Hear himſelf ſpeak; I hear, ſaith Ambroſe, you are grieved, becauſe he received not the Sacrament of Baptiſme: Hear his reply: Dicite mihi, quid aliud nobis eſt, niſi voluntas, niſi petitio? Atqui etiam dudum hoc voti habuit, ut cúm in Italiam veniſſet, initiaretur & proximè baptizari ſe a me velle ſignificabit, &c. Non habeat ergó gratiam, quam deſideravit? Non habet, quam popoſeit? Certe quia popoſcit, accepit; & mox: quem eram regeneraturus amiſi; ſed illi gratiam, quam ſperaverat, non amiſit: To Ambroſe Saint Bernard adds: S. Auguſtine determining, that not only ſuffering for Chriſt, but faith alſo, and converſion of the heart doth ſupply the ſtead of Baptiſme, when not contempt of religion, but point of neceſſity excludes the Sacrament of Baptiſme.
2. His next reaſon is collected, out of Mark. 16.16. Our Saviour in likelihood, when he ſaid, he that believes and his baptized, ſhall be ſaved; even for this, ſo cautelouſly did not repeate; he that is not baptized, but onelyonly he that believes not, ſhall be damned; intimating no doubt, ſolam interdum ſufficere fidem ad ſalutem, & ſine ipſa ſufficere nihil.
3. His third Reaſon that which gives Martyrdom its value, and cauſeth it to ſupply the ſtead of Baptiſme, ſhall it be thought ſo weak, that what it gives to another thing, it cannot alone by it ſelf obtain; we cannot think it.
Now faith gives Martyrdome this power, that without any doubt, it is reputed Baptiſme; For, what is Martyrdome without it, niſi poena? It therefore alone may, out of caſe of contempt, ſuffice to ſalvation.
4. Suppoſe the Lord ſee as great Faith in the heart of a man dying in Peace as in his that ſuffers martyrdome? Surely, God needs not outward evidences for diſcerning of faith; and there may be in a man dying in peace, a readineſs to ſuffer death, for the maintenance of faith, ſuppoſe now this man to deſire Baptiſme, but prevented by death, to die without it; damnabit fidelem ſuum Deus? damnabit (inquam) hominem proſe etiam paratum mori? God forbid, his peremptory concluſion is this: Pro certo cùm non aliunde martyrium, niſi ex Fidei merito illam obtinuerit praerogativam, ut fingulariter vice Baptiſmi ſecure ſuſcipiatur; Non video cur non ipſa aeque, & ſine Martyrio apud eum tantundem poſſit, cùm & ſine Martyrii probamento proculdubio innoteſcit.
5. In ſins, The will is, in eſteem, the Fact; Matth. 5.28. Why not alſo in good duties? niſi forte putetur in malo, quam in bono efficacior inveniri voluntas apud Deum, qui Charitas eſt, & promptior eſſe ad ulciſcendum, quam ad remunerandum miſericors, & miſerator Dominus.
Add to this the conſent of Bellarmine, That martyrdom, Bellarm. de Bapt. l. 1. c. 6.and true converſion of the heart, in caſe of neceſſity, ſupplies the ſtead of Baptiſm: And, follows is not thence, that the Baptiſm of Water is not of ſo abſolute neceſſity to ſalvation, that he that dies without it periſheth everlaſtingly?
A man would now think the odds is not great betwixt us, and Papiſts, touching this point of neceſſity of Baptiſm; They teaching, as we, that out of caſe of contempt, faith and converſion avail to ſalvation without the Sacrament: But, will you hear a Merciles diſtinction? It is true, they ſay, of grown men, inaſmuch as they have faith, and converſion to ſupply the ſtead of Baptiſm; but yet, for infants, it is their peremptory concluſion; though they be born of believing parents, are not capable of perſonall contempt, yet periſh they, in their originall ſinne, for want of Baptiſm, if they die unbaptiſed; For, they have nothing to ſupply the ſtead of baptiſm? Anſw. 1. Let them ſhew us, where the Lord hath made the condition of infants, in this reſpect, worſe then that of grown men? 2. Let them prove, that in grown men, faith and converſion, therefore exempts them from condemnation, becauſe they ſupply the ſtead of Baptiſm. 3. What hinders to ſay, that the faith of the parents is available to ſalvation of infants, without baptiſm, as well as with it? In caſe they be baptized, they confeſs with Bernard, that through grace it is granted them, to have benefit, by others faith, as they were damnified, by anothers fault; yea, faith Bernard, there is no doubt, but that the ſtain contracted by others, may and ought to be purged alſo by the faith of others: doth the faith of a grown man ſupply the ſtead of baptiſm, out of caſe of contempt, and ſhall not the faith of infants do as much for them? No; For it is ſaid, Except a man be born again of water, and the holy Ghoſt, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God? But, I demand, is this underſtood of Baptiſm, generally belonging to all men? or, muſt it be limitted to infants onelyonly? If of all, then methinks of grown men alſo: If of infants onelyonly. 1. What meant Chriſt to propound it to Nicodemus? was it his purpoſe to teach him, that inaſmuch as he was not baptiſed in his infancie, he could not not enter into the kingdome of God? then ſure, I ſhall not wonder, if Nicodemus conceited a neceſſity, for an old man deſiring to come to Heaven, to return back into his mothers womb, and be born again. 2. Will they ſay, it muſt have this gloſs by limitation; If a man want baptiſm by contempt, and not otherwiſe? Why then ſhould it ſtand in force againſt infants, in their own perſons not capable of contemning, and whoſe parents haſten to it with deſire, but are prevented by neceſſity? alas! poor infants, that you free from contempt in your ſelves, and your parents, muſt to Hell for bare want of baptiſm; and elders, in the ſame want have acceſs to Heaven, ſo they be free from contempt: Can we imagine bare want to be more prejudiall to infants, then to grown men.
Now, what if it ſhall appear to us, that the place cannot, in that ſtrict manner, be underſtood of baptiſm, but of regeneration? The point I wil labour to clear againſt Papiſts only, comparing it thus expounded, with other of their grounds.
For ground this I wil lay; That the ſentence of our Saviour had truth at that time, when he had conference with Nicodemus, yea long before ever ſince the fall of Adam: 1. For that our Savior blames Nicodemus, for his ignorance in this point, the neceſſity of that which he calls the new birth, v. 10. Art thou a maſter of Iſrael and knowſt not theſe things? Now ſure, if it muſt be underſtood of baptiſm, the ignorance of that ordinance could have been no ſuch blemiſh to Nicodemus, the ordinance being ſo new, and of him, till that day, unheard of. 2. Beſides this, the purpoſe of our Saviour more then ſeems to be this, to exhort Nicodemus to preſent labouring for that, whoſe neceſsitie Chriſt teacheth to be ſo abſolute: Now, ſhall we ſay, that at this time baptiſm was of ſo abſolute neceſsitie? hear Bernard, He was informed of one that taught, how that ever ſince this ſentence was pronounced by our Saviour, none could in any wiſe be ſaved, without actuall receiving the viſible Sacrament, or martyrdome in ſtead thereof: Now ſure, ſaith Bernard, Bernard. Epiſt. 77.De Temporis praefixione durum nimis, auſterúmque videtur, ut videlicet verbum abſconditum palam jam noceat, & ante judex feriat, quàm minetur: His arguments in ſhort are theſe. 1. It is improbable it ſhould ſo be, becauſe many ſhould by this means be damned, that never had knowledge of any ſuch precept: For this of baptiſm is not, as ſome other things are, that are known by nature, factitium enim quodammodo eſt, & non naturale mandatum; but that is impoſſible, Rom. 10. John 15. Ergò. 2. Circumciſion as yet ſtood in force, and had its virtue, as Baptiſm. 3. And from the dayes of John Baptiſt, the kingdome of heaven ſuffered violence. 4. Fit injuria antiquo illi Dei aeque mandato, ſi novo adhuc furtive ſuperveniente, non tamen ſubveniente, illud ita ſubito evanuiſſe putetur, ut prodeſſe deinceps non valeret. 5. And Bellarmine confeſſeth that Baptiſm became not thus neceſſary, as a mean, untill …he day of Pentecoſt: The inference is this; that which Chriſt teacheth Nicodemus to be thus neceſſary, was neceſſary at that time, when he had conference with Nicodemus; Baptiſm was not then ſo neceſſary, Therefore that that Chriſt ſpeaks of is not Baptiſm: And do we think Chriſt taught Nicodemus, that after the time of Pentecoſt, Baptiſm ſhould become thus neceſſary? The ſenſe then muſt be this: Nicodemus, look that thou procure Baptiſm, betwixt this and the next Pentecoſt after my death; if then thou want it, there is no hope for thee to enter into the kingdom of Heaven: From thoſe circumſtances of the text, beſides others elſewhere pointed at, it is clear, I think, that the place is not to be underſtood of Baptiſm of water, but of that which they call the Baptiſm of the Spirit, that is, of Regeneration: And ſee, whether the reaſon annexed prove not as much Regeneration neceſſary; for, whatever we have by the firſt birth, is fleſhly, and corrupt: Now, ſhall we ſay, that corruption is removed onelyonly by Baptiſm? or, at leaſt, not without it? Faith purifieth the heart Acts 15.9. and ſometimes, ſaith Auguſtine, S. Auguſt. de Bapt. contr. Donat. l. 4. c. 24.before Baptiſm, the ſpirit is obtained, as he gives inſtance in Cornelius, Act. 10.
I have dwelt, perhaps, too long in this queſtion; yet it repents me not, conſidering how I ſee many, carried away with authority of ſome ancients, incline to this mercileſs errour of Papiſts, ſhutting up all infants that die unbaptized, under condemnation, except (perhaps) ſome extraordinary work of Gods power exempt them from hel: We were wont to teach, not that Baptiſme gives title to the Covenant; but the Covenant to Baptiſme: ſo we reaſon againſt Anabaptiſts; the Promiſes are theirs Acts 2.39. the ſpirit theirs, Acts 10. Mark 10. Gods kingdome theirs; therefore Baptiſme muſt not be denied them: how turn we the argument now? on this manner; They muſt be baptized, that they may come nto the Covenant, and that they may have title to the promiſes of God, and kingdome of heaven. And how ſtand theſe arguments in force, againſt baptiſme of Turkiſh, and other Pagan infants? Nay, if in Baptiſme there be this vertue, to give the baptized title to Gods kingdome, if want of it ſo perillous; mercileſs were we, if we forced it not upon ſuch children. What ſhould we imagine the cauſe of this change of judgement? One, or both of theſe? 1. The authority of ancients. 2. An inconvenience they deſire to prevent in the people: For the firſt of theſe; Let ancients (on Gods name,) have their reverence; but yet, ſhall we be ſo ſworn to their words, that we ſhall ſuffer them to lead us with them into their errours? Love Auguſtine, and give him reverence; yet let truth be preferred in eſteem before him: as to the ſecond, The perill of our peoples neglecting this holy ordinance upon perſwaſion, that it is not of ſo abſolute neceſsity: 1. Where learn we in Divinity to expell poyſon with poyſon? one errour with another? 2. Beſides that, arguments there are ſufficient, to preſs on their conſcience, the uſe of this ordinance; if it were but that it ſtands in force, by Gods commandment; and, as Bernard ſpeaks. V…ra & plena Fides univerſa praecepta amplectitur. And, this is one, yea a chief one of Gods commandments. Quomodo denique Fidelis, qui Dei contemnit Sacramentum? Contemtu violatum iri Domini foedus affirmo, ſaith Mr. Calvin. Calvin in ſtit. lib. 4. cap. 16. Ser. 26.Are not theſe arguments ſufficient, to ſupport the reverence of the Sacrament; unleſs we winde in Infants in the peril of remedileſs damnation, not for their own, but for their parents contempt. 3. Nay ſee, whether as great miſchiefs follow not upon this concluſion; as, profaning theſe myſteries by unconſecrated hands of Lay-people: For, where grew the ancient audaciouſneſs of midwives Baptizing? ſave only from this errour; that without Baptiſme, the infant dyes condemned? 4. Yea conſider, I beſeech you, into what a gulfe of comfortleſs griefe, poor Parents are by this means plunged: when once they cannot be perſwaded, but their children are gone to hell: who ſhall blame them, now, if they weep for their children, I ſay not, as Rachel, becauſe they are not; but as Heathens, and men without hope, becauſe they are for ever, ſhut up under condemnation?
To cloſe up this point, touching neceſsity of Baptiſme, there are theſe opinions;
Firſt, That it is none at all, but meer ſuperfluity; ſuch miſcreants abhorre.
Secondly, That it is ſo abſolute, that bare want excludes from heaven; ſuch cruelty deteſt.
Thirdly, That it is neceſſary, where it may by any means, be had regularly; ſo as the contempt is damnable in thoſe, that omit it; yet not ſo prejudiciall to the infant, as to plunge it into hell: This the ſentence of Scripture; herein reſt.
Now, let us go to that which followeth; And he received the ſign of circumciſion, a ſeal of the righteouſneſs of faith, &c.] The point here proved, is this, as we have heard; that to believing both Iewes and Gentiles, the bleſſing of juſtification belongs: proved from the firſt branch becauſe Abraham had righteouſneſs, being yet uncircumciſed.
Now that to Jews onelyonly it belongs, is next concluded: and to this the paſſage is by a new Prolepſis; the objection whereof, as it ſeems, hath theſe two branches: If Abraham were juſtified in time of uncircumciſion, to what purpoſe was he circumciſed? The uſe of circumciſion ſeems needleſs; yea, and if becauſe he had it in uncircumciſion, therefore Gentiles are ſharers in it; follows it not, that the circumciſed Jews have no part in that bleſſing? Anſw. Neither of theſe follow; for though he had righteouſneſs, being uncircumciſed; yet he tooke the ſigne of circumciſion, an evidence, that to the circumciſion it belongs alſo: and he took it to be a ſeal of the righteouſneſs of faith; therefore not unneceſſarily; for it is not vain, that faith ſhould receive confirmation: and if any ſhall further demand a reaſon of both theſe, why he had righteouſneſs before circumciſion; and why, having righteouſneſs, he was after circumciſed? It was for this; That he might be the father of both people believing: This the Context.
In the words, let theſe particulars be obſerved. 1. Abrahams fact. 2. The object; what he received, the ſign of circumciſion. 3. The end of it; a ſeal of righteouſneſs. 4. The applying of the whole to the purpoſe in hand, by aſſigning the end of Gods diſpenſation in Abraham; that he might be the Father.
Obſerv From Abrahams act, conſidering together with the ſtate of his perſon, amounts this inſtruction: That no meaſure of grace received, exempts any from uſe of Sacraments: or thus, That men enjoying the grace ſignified by the Sacraments, are yet bound to the uſe of Sacraments. The collection is direct, and naturall; Abraham was juſtified, before he was circumciſed, yet received he the ſign of circumciſion: Who then ſhall think himſelf free from uſe of them? Cornelius had received the Spirit of God, Act. 10. Doth that prove, he needed not be baptized? It makes him capable of baptiſme, ſaith Peter; yet give water that they may be baptized. What needs much proof? Its a point of righteouſneſs, ſaith our Saviour to Iohn Baptiſt, Mat. 3.15. Vera, Bern. epiſt. 77.& plena fides univerſa praecepta complectitur, ſaith Bernard; & fidem convincitur non habere perfectam, ſi negligit ſacramentum.
Add to this, conſideration of thine own neceſſity; for dareſt thou aſſume to thy ſelf perfect perſwaſion of thy juſtification, ſo that at no time, thou feeleſt wavering? ſure that arrogancy, (for it is no leſs) ſorts not with the practice of faith: And Abraham, though he be commended for his foreign, at ſome time; yet, at others, bewrayed diſtruſt: But ſay, it is perfect for the preſent may it not be ſhaken? to preſerve that perſwaſion, to prevent doubtings, thou haſt need of Sacraments.
Laſtly, Canſt thou aſſume to thy ſelf perfection of ſanctification? for ſhame leave that pride to Cathariſts: count it a part of thy perfection to acknowledg imperfections, and with Paul to ſtrive for it: What need more words? The uſe is enjoyned to all, neceſſary for the moſt perfect; therefore upon no pretence to be neglected.
Who dare then ſtand up to defend the profaneneſs of thoſe fanaticall ſpirits, that ſcoffe at theſe ordinances; more meete (they ſay) for carnall Jewes, then for ſpirituall Chriſtians: Forſooth, they have the ſpirit immediately, to work what Sacraments ſerve to ſignifie, or exhibite; and what needs the Element, where the grace is received? They had beſt taxe God of indiſcretion, that of his mercy hath ordained them to be helps, for our weekneſs; and fitting himſelf to our ſtate in the fleſh, in ſenſibilibus intelligibilia praebet, Chryſoſtom. Homil. ad Pop. 60. and 83. in Matth.as Chryſoſtome; in things ſenſible reacheth unto us things intelligible: They boaſt of the ſpirit; they have a ſpirit indeed, but not of God; but of fornication, as the Prophet ſpeaks, or of deluſion, that hath cauſed them thus to erre. No man, ſaith Paul, ſpeaking by the Spirit of God, defieth Ieſus, 1 Cor. 12.3. Moman, ſaid I, taught by the Spirit of God, contemneth the ordinances of Chriſt eſtabliſhed in the word.
But, what need Sacraments, when the thing they ſignifie is obtained? Let Paul anſwer thee from the caſe of Abraham; he was juſtified before he was circumciſed; yet received the ſign of circumciſion, to be a ſeal of the righteouſneſs of faith, which he had being uncircumciſed.
No leſs abſurd is that ſaying of them, that in heat of affection, inveighing againſt dumbe Miniſters, ſtick not to affirm their actions are meer nullities; Baptiſme no Baptiſme, that is adminiſtred by a non-Preacher: Well then, why receive they not a new Baptiſme, ſith the old is a blank? They anſwer, they have the inward Baptiſme, and therefore need not the Sacrament: Be well adviſed; if thou hadſt the meaſure of Abraham, or of the bleſſed Virgin in regeneration, thou art not exempted from uſe of any Sacrament.
From Abrahams act, proceed we to the object: What received Abraham? The ſign of circumciſion: genitivus ſpeciei; frequent in Scripture, and common language; the gift of tongues, the gift of healing, 1 Cor. 12. That is, tongues, and healing, which are gifts; the ſign of circumciſion; that is, circumciſion which is a ſign.
Obſerv The things here obſervable, are. 1.The natvre of a Sacrament opened. Bellarm. de Sacrament. lib. 1. cap. 17. A brief deſcription of the nature of Sacraments.
Sacraments are ſignes ordained of God to ſeal up unto us the righteouſneſs of faith: Your collection is naught, ſay Papiſts: For, you conclude a generall from a particular: It follows not, that if circumciſion were ſo and ſo to Abraham, that therefore all Sacraments are ſuch, and to all men ſuch? But, it is well anſwered, that what belongs in common, to all the ſpecies may well enough be attributed to the generall: For, that which all the ſpecies have in common, Parcus ad loc.they have from their generall: proceed we therefore, to the explication.
Touching the name of Sacraments, it is idle to contend; though in ſo many letters, and ſyllables, we have it not in Scripture, yet the thing we have: and, why ſhould we be ſo abhorrent from the word ſo ſignificant, and of ſo long continuance in the Church of God?
The firſt thing, in the nature of a Sacrament, is this: Auguſt. de Doctr. Chriſt. lib. 2. cap. 1.That it is a ſigne: Now, a ſigne, ſaith Auguſtine, is that, which beſides the ſpecies it offers to the ſenſes, cauſeth ſome other thing to come to our mind; as, when we ſee ſmoak, we ſay, there is fire; when we ſee the rain bow, we think of the covenant God made with all fleſh.
Signes are of two ſorts: Naturall, Voluntary; Auguſtine calls them data: others, foreign. Naturall ſignes are ſuch, which naturally, without the will or appointment of any of themſelves, cauſe us to think of what they ſignifie: as ſmoak, of fire: Voluntary ſignes are ſuch, as ſignifie what they do ſignifie, by the will and appointment of thoſe that make them ſignes; as the rain-bow, of the Covenant; which it ſignifies, not Naturally, but by the will of God: and of this latter ſort are Sacraments.
Again, of theſe Voluntary, or made ſignes; ſome are analogica, that carry a reſemblance of things they ſignifie; ſome not ſo, but meerly by appointment, and conſtat of the impoſers, ſignifie what they ſignifie: as, Ivy buſh, wine.
Sacraments are in the firſt kind: whereupon, ſaith Auguſtine, if Sacraments had not ſome ſimilitude, and likeneſs of the things, Auguſt. epiſt. 23. ad Bonifacium.whereof they are Sacraments, they could, at no hand, be Sacraments: Therefore, in all Sacraments, God hath made choice of ſuch ſignes, as have a fitneſs naturall, though indeterminate, to repreſent what they are ordained to ſignifie; though actually they do not ſignifie it, till Gods ordinance have therto determined them: for example, waſhing in water hath a fitneſs to ſignifie ſpirituall cleanſing by Chriſts bloud; actually, it ſignifies it, onelyonly by appointment of God, &c.
Moreover, Popiſh Schoolmen, in this queſtion of Sacraments have deviſed other diſtinctions of Signes, which it ſhall not be amiſs to propund: Scotus ad ſent. l. 4. diſt. 1.Firſt thus: Signes are either Rememorative, which, by their ſignification, call to remembrance ſomething paſt; or, Demonſtrative, as it were pointing at ſomething preſent; Aquinas part. 3. qu. 6. art. 3. Bellarm. de Sacram. l. 2. c. 9.or Prognoſticall, foreſhewing ſomething to come: Sacraments of the new Teſtament are al theſe; Memorials of Chriſts Paſſion; demonſtrating the effect of the Sacrament: Foreſhewing eternal glory: Although though this we muſt obſerve, ſaith Bellarmine, Bellarm. de effect. Sacrament. lib. 1. c. 8.that that which Sacraments of the new Law chiefly, and eſſentially ſignifie, is onelyonly juſtifying Grace: According to him therefore, our Sacraments are chiefly, yea eſſentially onelyonly, demonſtrative. Yet, they further diſtinguiſh: of ſignes, Scotus, ubi ſuprà.ſome are ſpeculative onelyonly; they are ſuch, as are ordained to no other end, but to ſignifie: ſome are withall practicall which are ordained to effect, and work that which they ſignifie: and of this latter ſort they will have our Sacraments to be.
Thus farre of the generall nature of Sacraments: Proceed we now towards enquiry of the difference, that we may ſee, what it is, that diſtinguiſheth Sacramentall ſignes, from others.
Signes then are, all of them, amongſt thoſe things, quae dicuntur ad aliquid: Every ſigne is a ſigne of ſomething; and by being a ſigne, leads us to conſider of that, whereto it ſtands in relation: What is it then, that Sacramentall ſignes do ſignifie?
For better underſtanding; we are to conſider in every Sacramentall ſigne, Two things, as Parts, after a ſort of it, as it is ſuch a ſigne: Firſt, a Subſtance, or Matter. 2. Actions about that matter: as, in Circumciſion, the matter was the Foreskinne; The Action thereabouts, The cutting off the Foreskinne: In Baptiſm, the Matter is water; the Sacramentall action, the dipping or ſprinkling of the child, &c. If the queſtion now be, what Sacraments in common ſignifie? Anſw. The Matter, or Subſtantiall element ſignifies the perſon of Chriſt, or ſomething therein: The actions of the Miniſter, the actions of God the Father, and his Spirit, communicating Chriſt, and his benefits unto us: The Sacramentall actions of the people, their receiving Chriſt, and his benefits.
The Authour of them comes next to be treated of, as part of the difference, whereby they are diſtinguiſhed from other ſignes of mans impoſition: The Authour of them, is God onelyonly. 1. Becauſe, He onelyonly can determine ſignes, to ſuch actuall ſignification. 2. And can alone by them aſſure us of the grace they ſignifie.
Laſt is, the Uſe, or End of Sacraments; which is intimated in the next words; ſeals of the righteouſneſs of faith: Let us explain the words, and then examine the doubts.
The office of a ſeal ſtands in four things. 1. Concealment. 2. Diſtinction. 3. Impreſſion. 4. Confirmation According to which ſeverall uſes of ſeals, the explanation is here diverſly conceived: Some think the Apoſtles metaphor hath reſpect to the firſt office, Concealment; and they thus expound it; Circumciſion ſealed up righteouſneſs, that is concealed, Sasbout ex origine.and cloſed it up for a Time, namely, Till by Chriſts coming in the fleſh, it ſhould be revealed. That dotage needs no confutation.
Another ſort take it well nigh, Stapleton, in Antidoto. Cajetan, ad loc.as Anabaptiſts; and they will have it ſo called, onelyonly becauſe it is a mark of the righteouſneſs of faith, by which men might know, that they had obtained the righteouſneſs of faith; but that office of Sacraments (if there be any ſuch) is ſufficiently expreſſed in the former Title when it is called a ſigne.
Whether, in the third reſpect they are called Seals; becauſe they leave a ſtamp, and impreſſion of the righteouſneſs of faith: that abſurdity I wonder ſome of them fell not up…; conſidering, that they teach, they confer grace, by the work done: but, the place it ſelf ſufficiently confutes it; becauſe Abraham had this righteouſneſs, before, either he received; or God ordained the ſign of circumciſion.
It remains then, that in the laſt reſpect, they are called ſeals; becauſe, they are ordained for greater confirmation, and aſſurance given to us of righteouſneſs, promiſed in the Covenant of grace: So Theophylact, as Sasbout conceives him; a ſeal, whereby God ſealed up righteouſneſs to Abraham, and teſtified it to be moſt true, and certain; as we are wont to ſet ſeal to that, which we would teſtifie to be ſure, and firm.
Now, if any demand, what they ſeal up, or confirm unto us the anſwer is; It is the righteouſneſs of faith; that is, remiſſion of ſins, and that eſteem of righteouſneſs, which the Lord allows to all truly believing: If this be not all they aſſure us of, yet it is the principall other ends being all ſubordinate to this; other uſes leſs principall, and dependent thereon. Now ſee we what it is that adverſaries except againſt our deſcription of Sacraments, hence collected: Forſooth, they tell us, that we reaſon abſurdly, from one ſpecies, to the whole kinde, affirmatively; thereto hath been already anſwered.
They limit this uſe of circumciſion to Abraham only; and though to (him) it was a ſeal, in this ſence, yet not therefore to others: But, I demand, Bellarm. de Sacram. lib. 1. cap. 17. Gen. 17.7, 10.was the Covenant made with Abraham only, or with his ſeed alſo: or, was circumciſion a ſign of the Covenant to Abraham only, or elſe, to his ſeed alſo. If the Covenant belonged to (all;) if circumciſion was to (all,) a ſign of their being in the Covenant; why not to (all) alſo, a ſeal of righteouſneſs? Forſooth, ſay our adverſaries, one end of Abrahams circumciſion was peculiar to Abraham, as that he ſhould be the father of all believers; therefore this alſo of being a ſeal of the righteouſneſs of faith? Anſw. And I wonder, why we may not conclude, by the like reaſon, that to Abraham only, it was a ſign of the Covenant? becauſe this end they mention had place in Abraham only: But, let us more neerly view the Reaſons: It was Abrahams priviledg only, to be the father of all believers, both circumciſed, and uncircumciſed: Ergo, His priviledg onelyonly, to have circumciſion a ſeal of righteouſneſs: How prove they their conſequence? Forſooth, Paul joyns both together, and therefore they are of like priviledg? Anſw. Why may we not ſay, (ut ſupra) that the neceſſity of the ſign of circumciſion, was alſo Abrahams priviledg, becauſe it alſo is joyned to the reſt? But, for more full ſatisfaction; view we the ſcope of the text, which is this; To ſhew that juſtification belongs to believers of both people: The proof is from a ſign; Abraham had righteouſneſs in uncircumciſion; Ergo, Righteouſneſs belongs to the uncircumciſed; For, this was that the Lord myſtically intended to ſignifie, in juſtifying Abraham before circumciſion; and in commending circumciſion to him juſtified: But, to what end mentions he that end of circumciſion, ſealing up the righteouſneſs of faith? Anſw. To anſwer that which he ſaw might be objected, on this manner: If Abraham were juſtified before circumciſion, what profit received he by that Sacrament? Anſw. It (ſealed) unto him the righteouſneſs of faith: And, ſhall we ſay now, it was Abrahams priviledg to be confirmed, in perſwaſion of righteouſneſs? belike then, his poſterity either needed no ſuch confirmation, and ſo Abrahams priviledg ſhall be, to be the only weakling in faith, that needs means of confirmation; or elſe, his ſeed ſhall lack that help, that Abraham had for eſtabliſhment, though the Covenant were equally made with them. It is too tedious, to follow them, in all their diverſions; here therefore, an end of his enquiry, touching the generall nature, and uſe of Sacraments.
What is it now, that our adverſaries want, in our deſcription, that ſerves to expreſs the generall nature of Sacraments? that pulcherima definitio of a Sacrament extant in the catechiſme of Trent Councill, and ours, beſides the homonymie of the word righteouſneſs, they can aſſign no difference, but in a term onelyonly: Sacramentum (ſay they) eſt res ſenſibus ſubiecta, Bellarm. de Sacram. lib. 1. cap. 11.quae, ex dei inſtitutione, ſanctitatis, & juſtitiae, tum ſignificandae, tum efficiendae vim habet: Sacramentum (ſay we) eſt res ſenſibus ſubjecta, quae ex dei inſtitutione, juſtitiae tum ſignificandae, tum obſignandae vim habet: ſealing of righteouſneſs they like not, though the Apoſtle hath pointed us thereto; It ſhould be effecting, or working of righteouſneſs, and then all were well: See we therefore a little, whether this be of the nature of Sacraments, and amongſt the uſes to which they are aſſigned, to effect, or work righteouſneſs.
Where we have to things to conſider. Firſt, What grace they are appointed to work? they anſwer, juſtifying grace; which (after them) ſtands in the habit of faith, hope, charity. Secondly, How they work it? Not as principall efficients; for, that is peculiar to God: but as inſtruments, as the Maſter of ſentences expreſſeth it: Lumbard. l. 4.Homo non quaerit ſalutem â Sacramentis, quaſi (ab) eis, ſed (per) ea, à Deo: Haec enim praepoſitio (A) *Scotus ad lib, 4. diſt. 1.denotat Cauſam agentem; (per) verò notat cauſam inſtrumentalem.
Well, let us yeild them to be organa; whether Morall or Phyſicall? It pleaſeth not Bellarmine, Bellarm de effect. Sacram. lib. 2. cap. 11.that they ſhould be cauſes Morall, though he confeſſe a ſtream of their own Writers run current that way: But they muſt be Phyſicall inſtruments, that is ſuch as properly and by inherent vertue, work, or cauſe juſtification: And if any ask what that vertue is that God hath put in them to effect this grace? He anſwers, It is nothing but Gods moving or uſing of them to that purpoſe: For by this, that God uſeth the Sacramentall action to produce grace, he doth elevate it above the nature, and makes it reach to an effect ſupernaturall.
Now, I might be long in ſhewing the contrary judgement of his own ſide; ſome making them means, or inſtruments of grace, per modum continentiae, becauſe they contain the grace they ſignifie; ſome by concomitance onelyonly, &c. I will propound the ſentence of Scotus onelyonly, whom ye ſhall find thus to reſolve; There is not (ſaith he) in Sacraments, aliqua Cauſalitas activa propriè dicta reſpectu gratiae; but they are ſaid to be cauſes of grace improperly inaſmuch as the receiving thereof is an immediate diſpoſition to grace: & mox; For thus hath God diſpoſed and ſet down the order, and hereof he hath certified the Church; that to him that in due manner receives the Sacrament, he will give the effect thereby ſignified. This, I trow, is far from Bellarmines conceit. But let us further examine his concluſion: In all ordinary Phyſical inſtruments, which God uſeth to effect his purpoſes by, there is (beſides Gods uſe of them) a vertue, and power, and fitneſs given them to produce what he uſeth them unto; as meat, to nouriſh; clothes, to warm; Sun, to cheriſh the earth &c. and ſhall Sacraments be ordinary Phyſical inſtruments and yet lack this inherent vertue? What Philoſophy, yea or Divinitie, ſo teacheth?
Beſides this, Sacraments all ſuppoſe thoſe habits, wherein they make juſtifying grace to conſiſt, Acts 8. Matth. 28.to be in him that receives them, they muſt have faith or, at leaſt; foreign, before Sacraments may be applied unto them: and ſhall we think they are elevated by this uſe and motion they ſpeak of, to work what is already wrought?
Laſtly, if they wrought thus Phyſically, as it were potions; methinks, then, every one to whom they are applyed, muſt needs receive their effect unavoidably; and ſo Simon Magus muſt receive the grace of the Sacrament, as well as Simon Peter; which if it be abſurd, as abſurd it is, to make them Phyſicall inſtruments, or Active cauſes of this grace, which they call juſtifying.
To conclude this whole queſtion; May it not be granted that Sacraments are inſtruments or means of grace?
Anſw. No doubt, yes; but inſtruments morall onelyonly; that is, ſuch as whoſe vertue ſticks not in them; but onelyonly becauſe where they are duely uſed, God is preſent by covenant to work grace ſupernaturall. So Scotus, ut ſuprá: ſo ſome of our Divines.
Yet more nearly; 1. Conſider what grace they are ordained to work, as means. 2. How they concur to the working of it. The grace they work is; 1. Confirmation in perſwaſion of juſtification. 2. Care and increaſe of ſanctification, &c. How work they it? Anſw. Occaſionally onelyonly; quatenus they repreſent Gods actions, Chriſts perſon and benefits, our duty &c. by which repreſentations Gods ſpirit worketh in our hearts in theſe or the like diſcourſes: God hath in the Goſpel promiſed remiſſion of ſins to all thoſe that believe in Chriſt; and for further aſſurance hath been pleaſed to ordain Sacraments as it were his ſeals ſet to his covenant; wherein I ſee repreſented the death of Chriſt, that procured pardon of ſinns; and in the Miniſters action delivering the Sacrament to me, Gods act in delivering Chriſt and his benefits to me is reſembled. Now, his promiſe is, that if I bring faith to the uſe of the Sacraments, the things they ſignifie are mine. How then aſſumes conſcience; I believe what God in the Goſpel promiſeth what in Sacraments he ſeals unto me: and thence follows as a concluſion, my faith confirmed, &c.
Now, what ſay our Adverſaries to this manner of Sacraments efficacy? Forſooth if in this manner onelyonly they have their efficacy, there ſhall then be no difference betwixt Sacraments of the Old Law, and thoſe of the New Teſtament? Anſw. What, none at all? Bellarm. de effect. Sacram. lib. 2. c. 8.They confeſſe elſewhere that we agree with them, in the differences thus far: 1. The ſignes are others. 2. The number leſs. 3. The facility more. 4. Clearneſs of ſignification greater. 5. Manner of ſignifying different. 6. Endurance of new longer.
Object. Yea, but in the point of efficacy, there is left no difference: For thus theirs were effectuall, by ſtirring up faith by their ſignifications, and by the devotion of the receiver which they call. The work of the Worker.
Obſerv Is that the matter? then hear what I think the Apoſtle here teacheth; or, at leaſt, warrants us to teach by collection; That Sacraments of the Old Teſtament were the ſame with ours, in matter ſignified, in uſe, ends, and efficacie. What is Baptiſme unto us more, then a ſigne of our initiation into the Covenant? Gen. 17.7. Rom. 4.11. Deut. 30.6.A feal of the righteouſneſs of faith? An occaſionall mean of ſanctification? The ſame was Circumciſion to Abraham, and to all his poſterity; in the ordinary meaſure of efficacy there might be ſome odds; in efficacy and manner of it, none at all that can be aſſigned. For, 1. In their Sacraments they had Communion with Chriſt; They ate the ſame ſpirituall meat, 1. Cor. 10.3, 4.drank the ſame ſpirituall drink, that we do, though under other ſignes or elements.
Object. Rhenenſes ad loc. Bellarm. de effect. Sacram. lib. 2. c. 17. Auguſt. de utilit. Poenit. cap. 1.2.Nay, rather (ſay Papiſts) the ſame amongſt themſelves, not the ſame with us? Anſw. Then let us hear Auguſtine: Eundem (inquit) cibum ſpiritualem manducaverunt: quid eſt (eundem)? niſi quia eum, quem etiam nos? & mox, Eundem non invenio quomodo intelligam, niſi eum quem manducamus & nos. Inſt. What Paul there ſpeaks of were not Sacraments. Anſw. How then fit they Pauls intention? which is apparently this, to take from this people vain confidence in Sacraments, 2. What means Paul to ſay of their paſſage through the ſea, &c. it was a baptizing of them? Cyprian. Epiſt. 76. Auguſt. in Pſal 77.Hear ancients; Cyprian, Mare illud Sacramentum Baptiſmi fuiſſe, declarat beatus Apoſtolus Paulus, dicens. Nolo vos ignorare fratres, &c. 1. Cor. 10. Auguſtine, Per mare tranſitus Baptiſmus eſt. The ſame Augustine; Cùm eſſent omnia communia Sacramenta, non communis erat omnibus gratia, quae Sacramentorum virtus eſt; ſpeaking of the very elements.
Inſt. The ſame let them be, but in ſignification; not in vertue or efficacy. Anſw. They drank of the Rock, which was Chriſt: ſome of them, I mean, as Auguſtine expounds in Pſalm, 77. And if therein they had Communion with Chriſt, how are they not the ſame in efficacy? Will they ſay, the effect was one; the efficiency, or manner of producing, different? It is eaſie to ſay any thing: their proof we want, and require.
Not to be long: Scholaſt. ad 4. ſenten.Concerning the Sacrament of Circumciſion, their own Divines confeſs many of them, that it had the ſame effect with Baptiſme; and in the ſame manner, namely, the work wrought. Why may we not then conclude, that their Sacraments were one with ours in Uſe, Ends, and Efficacy?
Forſooth, their Sacraments had no abſolute promiſe of grace, ours have. But before I anſwer their objections, the Reader muſt be entreated to obſerve; that they change the ſtate of the queſtion: For, the queſtion is not betwixt them and us, Whether their Sacraments conferred juſtification, as ours? For we maintain, that neither confer juſtification though both equally confirm it, in manner aboveſhewn. But the queſtion is whether theirs had the ſame efficacy that ours have, to the uſes, and ends whereto they were deſigned. And ſo we affirm; that the ſame promiſes for ſpirituall things, were made to both people, in both Teſtaments, and confirmed in both Sacraments. The ſame promiſe that is made to us, was made to Abraham; yea, firſt to Abraham, and firſt to the ſeed of his loins, walking in the ſteps of his faith, Gen, 17. How elſe reaſons the Apoſtle from the example of Abraham? the promiſe was given Abraham through faith; Ergò, Its ours through faith and not by the Law, &c. and again, How makes he Abraham the father of believers in both people, except that the Covenant was ſtabliſhed in him as the father, for his children of both people?
But have our Sacraments abſolute promiſe of grace juſtifying to be conferred by them? then what lets infants, even of hereticks in baptiſme of hereticks, to receive juſtification? And if juſtification may be had in the Conventicles of hereticks, why not alſo ſalvation? We will henceforth be of comfort in the Church of England, and we will hope for our infants yet that they may go to heaven.
2. Where have we ſuch an abſolute promiſe made to our Sacraments? Mar. 16.16. this I read, He that believes, and is baptized, ſhall be ſaved. Acts 2.39. He that repents, and is baptized, ſhall receive remiſsion of ſins: Never, He that is baptized ſhall have juſtification, or ſalvation ſimply, becauſe he is baptized.
To omit all other their objections, bewraying too foul ignorance in the matter of the Covenant of grace; their laſt onelyonly I will take notice of: It lies thus; Our Sacraments are ſaid to ſave, to regenerate, to juſtifie; and no ſuch thing is read of theirs in the Scriptures; Ergò. They are not equal in efficacy? Anſw. Many of the places alledged, are to be underſtood of the Baptiſme of the Spirit; as that, 1. Pet. 3.21. Tit. 3.5. Joh. 3.5. And what is that to the Sacrament? 2 If in other places remiſſion of ſins be in ſhew of words aſcribed to the Sacrament; it muſt be underſtood ſignificativè, at moſt, but concomitanter.
Ʋſe Let us now leave a while theſe toileſome controverſies and ſee what uſe of this concluſion redounds to us: And, it ſhall be the ſame that Paul once made to the people of Corinth, 1 Cor. 10. upon this ground: That none of us preſume upon Sacraments, as if they ſealed up impunity to willfull tranſgreſſions; there is no greater vertue in ours, then was in Iewiſh Sacraments: And their Murmurings, Idolatry, Fornication, Tempting of God was ſeverely puniſhed even in thoſe that partook Sacraments, the ſame with ours, in ſignification, uſe and efficacy: And, why ſhould any of us adventure the diſpleaſure of God, upon vain confidence of the work done of Sacraments? Conſider we, that they are not only obſignations of favour but obligations to duty; and ſo bined to dutifull carriage; that they ſeal up pardon of no more ſins, then are repented, and forſaken: It is in this reſpect with Gods pardon, as with like indulgence of Princes to Malefactours; they binde for ever to good behaviour: And, I could wiſh our people thus perſwaded of them. But thus it fares with moſt, through their ignorance; as it is ſaid of the Hart, when he is wounded, he runs to the herbe dittany known, by naturall inſtinct, to be ſoveraign: So our people, when they have wounded their ſouls even to death, with the vileſt abominations; they poſt to Sacraments for medicine, adding to their other ſins, this of profaning Gods ſacred ordinances: By the law of God given to the Iewes, it was ordained, that none that had contracted any legall pollution, ſhould on pain of death adventure on their Paſſeover, till ſuch time as his cleanſing, according to the law was accompliſhed: The ſtatute for the letter, bindes not us; but the ſignification thus far ſerves to inſtruct us, that none of us renewing his ſins ſhould adventure on Sacraments, without renewing repentance.
The laſt thing here obſervable, is this; That Sacraments are ordained, not to confer juſtification; but to confirm us in perſwaſion of it: As, to Abraham circumciſion gave not righteouſneſs, but as a ſeal confirmed it unto him; for what? ſhall we ſay, as Papiſts, This Sacrament was ſo to Abraham only, as his priviledg, not ſo ours, to us? Thereto hath already been anſwered; and the caſe is as plain for Baptiſme in Cornelius, as this for circumciſion in Abraham: Kemnit. Exam. part 2. de ſacram. efficac. & Ʋſu.or, ſhall we ſay, theſe inſtances were extraordinary, and therefore afford no generall rule? Firſt, How appears it of either, that there was any thing extraordinary? Secondly, Whence ſhould we fetch the rule, to judg of the ordinary uſe of Sacraments, ſave from their perſons, that firſt received them. Let it ſtand therefore for a concluſion, that the uſe of Sacraments, is not to confer faith, or juſtification, but to confirm it: For which cauſe we ſhall finde, that ordinary faith is required as a pre-diſpoſition neceſſary in all, that are admitted to the Sacraments; yea, Act. 8.faith of the Meſsiah and confidence in him for juſtification; between which faith and juſtification, the connexion is inſeparable.
Ob. If any ſhall ſay, that they cannot have uſe in infants?
Anſw. To omit other anſwers, though in infants, while they are infants, they have not actually that uſe; yet, to … end they are miniſtred to infants, that when in time to come, they ſhall believe to righteouſneſs, their faith may receive confirmation by baptiſme in infancy received. Auguſt. de Bapt. contra Donat. lib. 4. cap. 24.To this purpoſe, ſaith Auguſtine, In Abraham praeceſſit fidei juſtitia, & acceſsit circumciſio ſignaculum juſtitiae fidei, &c. that in ſome, juſtification goes before the ſeal; as in Abraham, and Cornelius: In others, the ſeal is before righteouſneſs: Hear his words: Sicut in Iſaac, qui octavo ſuae nativitatis die circumciſus eſt, praeceſsit ſignaculum juſtitiae fidei; & quoniam patris fidem imitatus eſt, ſecuta eſt increſcente ipſa juſtitia, cujus ſignaculum in infante praeceſſerat: Ita & in baptizatis infantibus, praecedit Regenerationis ſacramentum; & ſi Chriſtianam tenuerint pietatem, ſequitur etiam in corde converſio, cujus myſterium praeceſſit in corpore.
Senſe The laſt thing in this period remains to be explained; and that is the application of all this to the purpoſe; by ſetting down the end which God aimed at, in giving Abraham teſtimonie of righteouſneſs, before circumciſion, and enjoyning him circumciſion, after juſtification: The end was, that he might be Father of Believers in both people: whereout amounts the concluſion intended, That the bleſſing of juſtification belongs, by Covenant, both to uncircumciſed Gentiles, and circumciſed Jews believing.
That he might be Father] That is, that he might be declared, or known to be; For, theſe things made him not ſo, but ſignified him to be ſo: ſo Matth. 5.45. Bleſs them that curſe &c. that ye may the ſonnes of your father in Heaven, that is, that ye may be known to be: Frequent is that phraſe in Scripture: whence is that old rule; That a thing is ſaid to be, when it is (known) to be; John 15.8. Ye ſhall be my Diſciples: 2 Tim. 2.21. He ſhall be a veſſel unto Honour, that is, known to be ſo: Pſal. 2.7. This day have I begotten thee, that is, manifeſted that I have begotten thee, as many expound that place, Acts 13.33.
Father of all them that believe.] Rolloc. ad Loc.Father, that is, ſay ſome, Pattern of juſtification: And they ſuppoſe it uſuall in Scripture, that thoſe in whom a thing is firſt exemplified, ſhould be called Fathers thereof: Cajetan.Say others, Father, becauſe of him Believers are, after a ſort, begotten, in reſpect, that by example of his faith, others believed; others, becauſe from him the Bleſſing of juſtification is derived, as an inheritance, or Free paſſeth from the Father to the Son: Thus rather I think, He is called the father of believers in both people, becauſe in him the covenant is made with all believers: And, they are all counted Abrahams ſeed, with whom the Covenant of Grace is made in Abraham the Father, that walk in the ſteps of his faith.
Of them that believe, foreign] That is, of Gentiles uncircumciſed; by uncircumciſion, enallage praepoſitionis, as Rom. 2.27. Howbeit, perhaps, it may ſtand without any ſuch enallage, as intimating, that the want of circumciſion occaſions, after a ſort, the Gentiles betaking themſelves to faith; thereof if any difficulty be ſhall be after explained.
Obſerv Obſerve we here, out of the body of the Text: That many the actions, and accidents of Patriarchs were not without their myſtery: Gregories ſpeech is ſomething too large, if we take it univerſally; but make it particular, it hath frequent Truth; Scriptura, dum narrat geſtum, prodit myſterium: Abraham was juſtified, before circumciſed; chat wanted not its myſtery: Thereby was ſignified, that Abraham was father even of uncircumciſed believers: That of his two wives, and their children, with their ſeverall condition and iſſues, Gal. 4.24.the Apoſtle hath avouched to be myſticall: the like thinks Auguſtine of his offering his ſonne; of taking Keturah to wife after Sarahs death, and reſolves (though too largely) Quicquid dicit Scriptura de Abraham, & factum eſt, & Prophetia eſt.Auguſtin. Ser. 72. de Temp.
Auguſtine, out of this ground, takes occaſion, though not to juſtifie the falls of Saints, yet to defend the Scriptures of the old Teſtament, recording them, Nos Scripturas ſanctas, non hominum peccata deſendimus: Auguſtin. contr. Fauſtum Manich. l. 22. c. 45. &c. 42.againſt Fauſtus the Manichee; and ſhews how many the ſinnes of Saints are holily recorded in Scripture, though wickedly committed by them: They are recorded, ſaith he, as Propheſies, and preſignifications of things to come; God ſo diſpoſing even of their falls, that they figured myſtically ſome matter, either of knowledge, or practice: one inſtance he gives of Lots Drunkenneſs, and Inceſt, allegorizing it vainly, as he doth many other things; and at length concluding; Illud factum cùm in ſancta ſcriptura narratur, prophetia eſt; cùm verò in illorum vita, qui hoc commiſerunt, conſideratur, Flagitium eſt: Better ſatisfaction to the Manichees cavill he gives after; Narrata iſta ſunt, non laudata, &c.
Papiſts, ſome of them, have hereby taken occaſion to turn the whole Scripture into an Allegory, and endeavour a myſticall interpretation of every part of Scripture: It were a wonder, they ſhould attempt it in the ten Commandments; Yet, that ye may ſee, how ſpiritually theſe men underſtand all things in Scripture, Dionyſ. Carthuſ. in Exod. 20.the very Decalogue hath, with ſome of them, beſides the ſenſe literall, another myſticall.
Others of them more judicious, acknowledge, that there is not in every ſentence of Scripture, to be found or ſought after this ſpirituall, Bellarm. de verb. Dei interpretat. l. 3. c. 3.or myſticall ſenſe: But yet in many they acknowledge it; And in ſo many they hunt after it, as may afford them, either arguments to ſupport their errours, where the letter fails them, or evaſions, to decline the ſtroke of the letter, when it directly ſtrikes at them.
An acute diſputant amongſt them, would needs take upon him, to prove by Scripture, the Imperiall power an underling to the Papacie: What is his argument? God made two lights, the ſun (the greater light) to rule the day and that ſignified the Pope; the Moon, to govern the night, and that was the Emperour: Another would prove, that ſpirituall, and temporall juriſdiction are both, by Chriſts ordinance inveſted in the Popedome: For, Peter ſaid to his Maſter, Ecce duo gladii hîc: The like in ſundry anſwers to our arguments they practiſe; ſuch, and ſuch texts muſt be underſtood myſtically. My purpoſe is not, on this occaſion, to run out into that controverſie: I note it onelyonly, for that I have long obſerved it with grief; our Miniſters growing into a Fryer-like Preaching, turning all things almoſt into Allegories; wherein howſoever they make ſhew of ſome ſuch wit, as he ſpeaks of, Wit whither wilt? yet queſtionleſs, with judicious men, they loſe all authoritie in Conſcience, the chiefeſt point of eloquence in a Preacher.
I would entreat them to conſider, the inconveniences ſhould I terme them, or miſchiefs? ſuch dealing with Scriptures brings with it: As 1. Leaving little, or no certainty in the ſenſe of Scripture, and ſtrenthening many in that blaſphemous opinion of the waxen nature of Scripture, flexible to any ſenſe that mans wit ſhall bring unto it.
2. Occaſioning many, through ignorance, to denie the truth of the Hiſtory, underſtood according to the letter, and to fanſie all things after the courſe of Allegories: From my experience, and knowledge ſomething I can ſpeak; An id to once falling on a Fryer Allegorizing, after their faſhion, The Hiſtory of David, and Goliah, grew ſtiff in the opinion, that there never was ſuch a monſter as Goliah; He would have added, nor ſuch a Saint as David: His reaſon; For Goliah ſignifieth the Devil; David, Chriſt; the ſtone wherewith he was ſlain, the Word of God: and what, I wonder, the ſcrip, and ſling? But ſuch miſchiefs draw wreſted Allegories frequently with them.
But, affords not Scripture, often, ſuch Allegories?
Anſw. No queſtion, Yes; but, it is good for us to be ſure, we have Gods ſpirit directing us, in their accommodation, before we propound them, as things intended by the inſpirer of Scripture, leaſt we belie the Holy Ghoſt, in fathering on him a ſenſe, that he never intended: Hieron. praeſat. decem viſion. Eſaiae.Saint Hierome ſpeaking of Origen, (the Father of Allegories) though himſelf be faulty enough in that kind; Yet, caſts on him this aſperſion; Origines (ſaith he) liberis Allegoriae ſpatiis evagatur & ingenium ſuum facit Eccleſiae ſacramenta: Would God not many of our Miniſters alſo! And other ancients, though bold enough this way; Yet, ſet limits to us, in this kind. Baſil in Hieron. Hieron. in Zech. 4. & Gal. 4.1. Ever preferring the ſenſe literall. 2. Prohibiting Allegories to be attempted in praeceptis, quae ad vitam pertinent & in his quae perſpicua, & manifeſta ſunt: Later Divines have ſtraighter bonds. as, 1. That it be done, Parcè. 2. For illuſtration, rather then proof; except where Gods ſpirit points at the Allegorie. 3. Let this be added, that as ſimilitudes, ſuch things may be uſed; ſo be it, we be not too peremptory, in fathering that ſenſe upon the Spirit of God: For example, it is ſaid of Moſes, He brought the Iſraelites to the skirts of Canaan; but Joſhua gave them poſſeſſion of it; perhaps in that was this myſtery: That the Law prepares to Gods kingdome, but it is the Goſpel, that brings thereinto: howbeit, it were too much audaciouſneſs, in any, to ſay any ſuch thing was taught thereby; though, by way of ſimilitude, it may be ſo applyed, Of this obſervation, thus farre.
2. Whereas Abraham is ſaid to be the Father of all that believe in uncircumciſion; Note we, That the Covenant of Grace made with Abraham, reached, by Gods intention, from the beginning, even to the Gentiles believing: And this appears, Gen. 17. inaſmuch as to ſtrangers, and thoſe bought with money, Circumciſion muſt be adminiſtred: And long after, when the greateſt encloſure of Grace to Jews ſeemed to be; if ſtrangers ſojourning amongſt them, would conſent to be circumciſed, they might eat the Paſſover; there was one Law, for the home-born, and for the ſtranger, ſojourning amongſt them. Exod. 12.48, 49. And if any ask, Why Paul ſaith of them, They were ſtrangers from the common-wealth of Iſrael, Aliens from the Covenants of Promiſe, Epheſ. 2.12. Anſw. In reſpect of the diſpenſation of the Covenant, the body of the Gentiles were Aliens; becauſe God had not yet ſo generally manifeſted his Grace to them, by calling, Epheſ. 3. Yet, in reſpect of Right, it belonged to as many of them, as walked in the ſteps of Abrahams faith: or otherwiſe thus; The Covenant, from the beginning, was intended to Gentiles; Howſoever the Viſible admiſſion of them into the Covenant, was not, till the dayes of the new Teſtament: ſo that, who can blame the Lord of hard dealing towards Gentiles, even before Chriſts coming, that (even in Iſrael) gave place unto as many of them, as would ſubmit to the conditions of the Covenant? will any ſay, the Lord ſhould have called them, as he did the Jews? Anſw. Who hath given him first, and it ſhall be recompenſed him? Rom. 11.35. And, his church was conſpicuous, and eminent in the eyes of the whole world, that who ſo had hearts, might thereto joyn themſelves, and ſhare in the priviledges thereof.
And father of circumciſion] That is, of Jews circumciſed: To them, &c.] that is, to as many as unto circumciſion added imitation of Abrahams faith.
So then circumciſion alone while it ſtood in force as a Sacrament, made no man a child of Abraham; they muſt as well imitate his faith, as admit circumciſion, that would be indeed and truth of that ſeed of Abraham, to whom the Covenant belonged: Children of Abraham were of three ſorts; ſome ſuch by propagation onelyonly, ſo Iſraelites, yea Iſhmaelites, are all his children: ſome by imitation onelyonly, as Gentiles, that deſcended not out of his loyns: ſome both by propagation and imitation, as believing Jews. Now here let it be obſerved, that faith is the predominant, and that that hath chief virtue, in making children of Abraham; ſuch I mean as to whom the Covenant belonged; inſomuch, that faith ſevered from circumciſion, made children of Abraham; circumciſion ſevered from faith not ſo. The Jews, ſaith Theophylact wanting faith, Theophyl. ad loc.vaunting of circumciſion, are as they that make ſhew of a ſealed bag, emptie of money; ſuch Jews, ſaith he, marſupium geſtiunt, circumciſionis ſigno munitum &c.
And why may we not ſo ſay of Baptiſme, the Sacrament of the New Teſtament? Hath it more virtue to bring us into the Covenant, then had Circumciſion? He that believes, and is baptized, ſhall be ſaved, Mar. 16.16. he that believes not, ſhall be damned, yea though he be baptized. Why then do Papiſts obtrude upon us the work done of our Sacraments, as if it had ſuch virtue to make us ſharers in the Covenant of grace? they will never be able to prove unto us a diſparity in this kind, betwixt old and new Sacraments. Indeed, ſaith Peter Baptiſme ſaves; but it is not the element, but the interrogation of a good conſcience, 1. Pet. 3.21. And let me here once again adviſe our people, to adde to that they call their Chriſtendome, faith unfeigned, as they deſire to become Chriſtians indeed; and to ſhare with Chriſt in his benefits conveyed unto us in the Covenant of grace. They erre dangerouſly to their ſouls peril, that think the naked Sacrament makes them Gods confederates: To us indeed, the baptized are ſuch till they diſcover hypocriſie; to God, none elſe but hearty believers. Now in deſcribing the circumciſed ſons of Abraham, that are ſuch not by propagation onelyonly, or participation of the Sacrament, but by imitation; the phraſe of the Apoſtle is to be obſerved: They are ſaid to walk in the ſteps of his faith; A Metaphor expreſsing the exacteſt kind of imitation. Not much unlike is that, that Job hath, expreſsing his preciſe, and accurate obedienee; Job 23.11. My foot hath held his ſteps. So accurate would the Lord have us, in imitating the virtuous examples of his Saints: But of this point of imitation, with the cautions and limits thereof, more hereafter on another occaſion. Here it ſhall ſuffice to obſerve, that whoſo will ſhare with Abraham, in the bleſsing of righteouſneſs, muſt imitate Abraham in the condition of righteouſneſs; Believe as he believed, and as near as may be, tread in the ſteps of his faith: Needs proof? ſee verſ. 24. and conſider, that the conveyance of all bleſſings is made to Abraham and his ſeed, on even terms: From hence is it, that in the next verſe the Apoſtle takes it for granted, that as the promiſe is one made to Abraham and his ſeed; ſo the condition is one, required of Abraham, and his ſeed. OnelyOnly let it be remembred, that Abrahams meaſure is not required of all; ſo we follow him in faith, though we keep not pace, we have intereſt in his bleſsing; provided alwayes, we ſtrive to equal, yea to excell him, albeit through weakneſs, we reach not his perfection.
This point, had it been well underſtood, or conſidered of ancient Jews, they had not periſhed ſo many, through vain confidence in their carnall deſcent from Abraham; but ſo beſotted were they in that preſumption, that they thought very birth of Abraham to give them title to his bleſſings; what more frequent in the mouths of the moſt incredulous, then this, We have Abraham to our father? Joh. 8.36, 39. We be Abrahams ſeed; Abraham is our father. But our Saviour well diſtinguiſheth, They were his ſeed by generation; not his ſeed by imitation: If they were Abrahams children, they would do the works of Abraham, but now they ſeek to kill Chriſt, thus did not Abraham, &c.
And I know not how that Jewiſh errour hath place in many of our people; that think they have enough even to ſalvation, that they proceeded from the loyns of virtuous Parents. A bleſſing, I confeſs, not to be diſpiſed; and ſuch an one, as in temporall favours, brings a ſhare often, even to graceleſs children: But what advantage in ſpirituall things a religious parent brings to degenerating poſterity, I conceive not; except, perhaps, the heavier condemnation, Read Ezek. 18. And of this period thus far. Proceed we in the Text.