The Covenant Sealed, Treatise · Chapter 13
CHAP. XIII.
SECT. I. Of the number of Sacraments.
AS a reſult from all that hath been ſaid of the nature and uſe of Sacraments, we may conclude the definite and diſtinct number of them. So many Ordinances that we can find in Old or New Teſtament-Scriptures, that are ſigns and ſeales of this nature, as here hath been ſet out from the Apoſtles words, ſo many Sacraments there are truly ſo called, equally worthy of that honour of Sacraments with this of Circumciſion, being every way of the ſame nature and uſe, they are deſervedly to have the ſame eſteem. But falling ſhort of ſuch, they are to have eſteem as they are, and their dignity may challenge, but not to be put into this number.The way to find out the number of Sacraments. And I know no other way then this to find out the ſet and definite number of them. Thoſe trifling arguments made uſe of by ſome, that the matter of New Teſtament-Sacraments, viz. Water and Blood, came out of the ſide of Chriſt, and that blood and water, as John affirms, bear witneſſe on earth, are not worthy to be mentioned, ſave onelyonly that they are uſed by ſome of eminent name. And upon diligent ſearch we ſhall find onelyonly two ſtated, ſtanding Ordinances in Old Teſtament-Scriptures, and onelyonly two in New Teſtament-Scriptures, that are to be thus received. We have not indeed any diſtinct Text in either of both Teſtaments, expreſly teſtifying that there are two, and two onelyonly Sacraments, as we find it ordinarily in Catechiſmes. Neither is there any diſtinct Text in the Law or Prophets, that as we would that men ſhould do to us, ſo we ſhould do to them. Yet our Saviour, Matth. 7.12. tells us, that that rule is both in the Law and in the Prophets, being a clear reſult from that which the Law and the Prophets have delivered. The like may we ſay concerning the number of Sacraments. It is as clear a reſult from that which is delivered to us both from Old and New Teſtament-Scriptures; ſo that the concluſion is twofold, drawn by way of deduction of this nature.
1.Two onelyonly ſtanding Ordinances in the Old Teſtament of the nature of Sacraments. Two onelyonly Sacraments in the New Teſtament. There were in Old Teſtament-times onelyonly two ſtanding Ordinances of the nature of Sacraments, viz. Circumciſion and the Paſſeover.
2. There are in New Teſtament-times onelyonly two Sacraments, viz. Baptiſme and the Lords Supper.
We ſhall begin with Old Teſtament-times; and here our way of diſcovery is; Firſt, To find out all thoſe Signes, or Ordinances that are ſet up in competition as Sacraments. Secondly, To enquire into the nature and uſe of them. Thirdly, To find out how nigh they come to the nature of Sacraments, and what agreement they have with them. Fourthly, where it is that they are defective, and fall ſhort of Sacraments truly ſo called.
SECT. II. Rainbowe no Sacrament.
THe firſt that offers it ſelf is the Rainbowe, of which we might ſpeak; Firſt, as it is in nature, for diſcovery of the phyſical being of it. Secondly, as a ſign appointed of God. But the firſt conſideration of it is not my buſineſſe, but the work of Philoſophers; who out of Ariſtotle have defined it to be, A Bowe of many colours ſeated in an hollow and duskiſh cloud, The definition of a Rainbow.appearing upon the reflection of the Sun in oppoſition againſt it. He that pleaſeth may read further in Magirus phyſiol. peripat. lib. 4. cap. 5. Keckerman Syſt. Phyſ. lib. 6. ad finem. Zanch. de oper. Dei, lib. 3. cap. 3. Valeſius de Sacrâ Philoſoph. cap. 9. So that the efficient cauſe is the Sun. The ſubject in which it appeares is a cloud ſtanding in Diametrical oppoſition. The thing it ſelf is the reflex of the Sun. The form and ſhape is a bowe of variety of colours. Whereupon it is generally concluded, that there were bowes of this nature before the flood, the Sun being then in equal vigour to produce it, and clouds in which the reflex might be apparent. And the cauſe being then as well as now in act, the effect muſt needs be likewiſe. But it was from that time, and not before, that it was appointed as a ſign; and under that conſideration we find it mentioned and largely ſpoke to, Gen. 9.8.Gen. 9.8, &c. opened. and following verſes, God spake unto Noah and to his ſons with him, ſaying, And I, behold, I eſtabliſh my Covenant with you, and with your ſeed after you; And with every living creature that is with you, of the fowl, of the cattel, and of every beaſt of the earth with you: from all that go out of the Ark, to every beaſt of the earth. And I will eſtabliſh my Covenant with you, neither ſhall all fleſh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood, neither ſhall there be any more a flood to deſtroy the earth. And God ſaid, This is the token of the Covenant which I make between me and you, and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations: I do ſet my bowe in the cloud, and it ſhall be for a token of a Covenant between me and the earth. And it ſhall come to paſſe, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bowe ſhall be ſeen in the cloud: And I will remember my Covenant which is between me and you, and every living creature of all fleſh, and the waters ſhall no more become a flood to deſtroy all fleſh; and the bowe ſhall be in the cloud. And I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlaſting Covenant between God and every living creature of all fleſh that is upon the earth. And God ſaid unto Noah, This is the token of the Covenant, which I have eſtabliſhed between me, and all fleſh that is upon the earth. In which words we may obſerve, 1. A Covenant entred. 2. The ſign whereby it is ratified and confirmed. In the Covenant it ſelf we ſee, 1. The parties in Covenant, God on one part; Noah, his ſonnes, their ſeed, every Living Creature on the other part. 2.The Rainbowe hath reſpect to a Covenant improperly ſo called. The nature of this Covenant, abſolute, and not conditional, as Pareus obſerves, and therefore it is a Covenant improperly ſo called, as appears upon a double account. Firſt, In that it is abſolute; when a Covenant properly ſo called, hath its conditions, as elſewhere I have largely ſhewed. Secondly, In that beaſts and birds, that are here parties in Covenant, are ſubjects capable of receiving mercies, but not of entering into Covenant, no more then the ſtones of the field are of capacity to enter league with man, as, Job 5.23. or to be witneſſes in any cauſe, as, Joſh. 24.17. therefore as a bare command is called a Covenant, Jer. 34.13. as a bare ſeal is alſo ſo called, Gen. 17.10. ſo promiſes elſwhere called a Covenant likewiſe, all of them in an improper ſenſe. In the Covenant we ſee the mercy promiſed, ver. 11. not to cut off all fleſh any more by a flood. In the ſign for ratification and confirmation we may ſee, 1. The Author. 2. The ſign it ſelf, the appearance of a bowe. 3. The place of ſituation, the Cloud. 4. The way of ſignification, and that is by inſtitution, as appears in that God ſets it for that very end. Some make the Rainbowe a natural ſign of that which the text ſaith is ſignified by it, which according to them is not that which is generally underſtood, that God will deſtroy the world no more by water, but onelyonly that no ſuch deluge ſhall at that time come when the Rainbowe appears; ſeeing it is a ſign that the Sunne hath got victory over any ſuch clouds, that might have tendency to ſuch a deluge: So Cajetan, as he is quoted by Rivet exercit. in Gen. who yet (as Rivet obſerves) contradicts himſelf, in that he ſaies any deluge of ſuch kind muſt needs be ſupernatural. It might then come upon the earth, from the hand of God, at the inſtant time that the bowe appears, any ſuch natural cauſe notwithſtanding. It is then,The Rainbow an inſtituted ſign. no natural, but an inſtituted ſign, to give aſſurance of the fulfilling of this promiſe. Upon ſight of this bowe, we may call to mind, that it is of free grace, that all fleſh does not periſh, and that the waters that are ſo uſeful to us, do not preſently deſtroy us: and to aſſure our ſelves, that through grace we ſhall be kept from periſhing. Pareus ſaies that the Jewes upon the appearance of the rainbowe, uſed to go out and make ſuch expreſſe acknowledgments. But open profeſſions of that nature, are in danger to turn to oſtentation, and meer formality, which yet muſt not hold us from our duty in humility, confidence and praiſe to make obſervation of it.Correſpondencyes obſerved by ſome in the Rainbow with the promiſe. Some find fit correſpondencies in the Rainbowe to ſignifie, and ſeal this mercy. Firſt, Becauſe of the place, which is in the clouds of heaven. whence came the rain that drowned the world before. Secondly, Becauſe the bowe is bended upward towards God, not towards the Creature below, as when it is taken in hand, to ſhoot at a mark; nor is there in the bowe any arrow, which is ſaid to be made ready upon the ſtring, when hurt is intended, Pſal. 11.2. Thirdly, becauſe the Rainbowe appeareth commonly with rain; and ſo where men might begin to fear the judgment, there they may take comfort againſt it in that it is a ſign of his Covenant for ſafety. Fourthly, becauſe the Rainbowe appears not, but when there is a clearneſſe and brightneſſe in ſome part of the skie, but at the generall flood it was all black with rain. Fifthly, That the Rainbowe conſiſting of divers colours, by the watery colour is repreſented the overwhelming rain paſt, and not to return; and by the fiery colour is prefigured the deſtruction of the World by the element of fire, as is foretold, 2 Pet. 3.10. Sixthly, Becauſe the Rainbowe where it toucheth upon any ſhrubs, leaveth a very ſweet and fragant ſmell behind; (as ſome Naturaliſts obſerve) it holds out the pleaſant acceptation of God as a ſweet ſmelling ſavour in his noſtrils. But ſeeing that theſe are not taught us in the Word, but found out by men, and Zanchy ſaies of them, that they are piae, but parum firmae, I ſhall paſſe them by. And to wind up all that we have to ſay of this thing,How far the Rainbowe is Sacramental. we ſee; Firſt, How farre there is an agreement between the Rainbowe, and the Sacrament. The Rainbowe we ſee, 1. Is a ſign. 2. A ſign not natural, but by inſtitution. 3. The inſtitution is of God. 4. It is to ſignifie and ſeal a promiſe made of God.How far it falls ſhort of a Sacrament. Thus farre it is of Sacramental uſe, yet it falls ſhort of a Sacrament properly ſo called in ſeveral particulars. 1. Sacraments are ſignes and ſeales of a Covenant properly ſo called; but here is no Covenant, but ſuch as is Synechdochically, and improperly ſuch as we have heard. 2. Sacraments are engaging ſigns, with reſtipulation; theſe are abſolute, nothing at all being called for from man, much leſſe from other creatures. 3. The Covenant people of God are the adequate ſubject of Sacraments; but here the whole world of mankind, and all fleſh is entitled. 4. This is onelyonly to be ſeen as it is ſet of God in the Cloud; but Sacraments are to be received, upon tender from God, and not onelyonly beheld. 5. Sacraments are ſeales of the righteouſneſſe of faith appointed for ratification of ſpirituall and ſaving mercies; but this is onelyonly a ratification of a temporal deliverance. As to this laſt diſſimilitude perhaps ſome exceptions might be taken. As the Rainbowe was immediately a ſigne and ſeal of a temporal mercy, ſo it was with the Paſſeover in like manner. The freedome of Iſrael in Egypt, when the firſt born were deſtroyed, ſeems to have no more ſpirituality in it, then our ſecurity from a deluge. And in caſe we make that of Egypt a type of a further deliverance in Chriſt, ſo we may make this deliverance a figure of like mercy, and ſo Zanchy indeed makes it. And the laſt Annotations hint ſuch a thing, Though this Rainbowe (ſay they) be a ſign of a temporal Covenant in the general extent of it to all creatures, yet the Godly may look upon it with reference to Chriſt, in whom all promiſes of what ſort ſoever, are Yea and Amen, and who is repreſented ſitting in his throne, compaſſed with a Rainbowe in light like unto an Emerald, Rev. 4.3. And in caſe this ſign had been peculiar to the Church, as was that deliverance in Egypt, and given of God, onelyonly to his people in Covenant; and in New Teſtament-Scriptures ſo applyed, as that of the Paſſeover is, it had been unqueſtionable: but being common to the world, all creatures in the world having like intereſt in it, and there being no touch of it in New Teſtament-Scriptures, it cannot be ſo conceived. OnelyOnly we may ſafely yield thus much, that as the godly may ſee a ſon-like title to every common mercy in Chriſt, and not barely as they are to others, a commmon providence and largeſſe: ſo they may ſee the Rainbowe ſhadowing out a like mercy; but in caſe this would conclude it to be a Sacrament, every creature enjoyed by a Child of God, would have the nature of a Sacrament likewiſe.
SECT. III. Sacrifices not Sacraments.
THe next Old Teſtament-ordinances that offer themſelves, as of the nature of Sacraments, are ſacrifices. Theſe being of ſeveral kinds are uſually ranked under four heads, The Burnt-offering, The Sin-offering, The Treſpaſſe-offering, and the peace-offering. Some of which alſo admit of ſeveral ſubdiviſions. Other diſtributions of them are alſo made by ſome under other notions, which would be beſides my purpoſe particularly to mention. There is much agreeable to the nature of Sacraments in them. 1. They had their inſtitution from God, as we may ſee in the Levitical Law, and ſo had all ſacrifices that from the beginning the people of God did offer. By Faith Abel offered a more excellent ſacrifice then Cain, Heb. 11.4. And nothing can be done in faith without warranty of a Divine preſcript. 2. Theſe were given in command of God, to his people in Covenant, Pſal. 50.5. Gather my Saints which have made a Covenant with me by Sacrifice. 3. Chriſt was held out in theſe Sacrifices, and conſequently, the righteouſneſſe of faith ſignified, as the whole body of the Epiſtle to the Hebrewes ſhewes. Some therefore will have them to be Sacraments properly ſo called, and are angry at that Divinity, as they call it, magiſterially impoſed by ſome, that the Jews had but two Sacraments, Circumciſion and the Paſſeover; and oppoſe againſt it, the Cloud, the Sea which Iſrael paſſed through, and Manna, and the Rock, which were to them in ſtead of the Lords Supper; and alſo the Sacrifices under and before the Law, appointed to the people of God. And doubtleſſe they had much of Sacramentality in them, being external rites appointed of God for his people in Covenant, Leading them unto Chriſt and remiſſion of ſinnes by his blood, and the Church (as it appears) for a long time had no other; yet doubtleſſe there are differences to be aſſigned between them. 1. Sacrifices were received of God from the hands of his people, being given to God by man, they were accepted of him. If the Lord were pleaſed to kill us, he would not have received a burnt-offering, and a meat-offering at our hands, Judg. 13.23. But Sacraments (as we have heard) are given of God to be received of his people; Abraham offered Sacrifice to God, but he received Circumciſion from God; And the Paſſeover was to be eaten by thoſe of the family, Exod. 12.4, 10. And though perhaps it may be proved, that the people had liberty to eat of ſome of their Sacrifices, yet that was not the proper end, and reaſon of them, as it was of the Paſſeover. The people brought them to offer rather then to eat of them. 2. Theſe Sacrifices led men unto Chriſt for attonement, by him to attain it; Sacraments are to ſeal up an attonement made, and already actually perfected, upon Gods terms to be applyed to us in particular. And ſo their difference from Sacraments properly ſo called is evident.
SECT. IV. The Cloud, the Sea, Manna, and the Rock were Sacraments extraordinary.
THe next that offer themſelves to our conſideration, are thoſe providences of God over his people, as they paſſed out of Egypt, and whileſt they were in the Wilderneſſe; and theſe are four, The Cloud, the Sea, Manna, and the Rock. For the cloud we have the hiſtory of it, Exod. 13.21, 22. And the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of a Cloud, to lead them the way, Exod. 13:21, 22. opened.and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light, to go by day and night. He took not away the pillar of the cloud by day, nor the pillar of fire by night, from before the people. As alſo, Exod. 14.19, 20. And the Angel from God, which went before the camp of Iſrael, removed and went behind them: and the pillar of the Cloud went from before their face, and ſtood behind them. And it came between the Camp of the Egyptians and the Camp of Iſrael, and it was a Cloud and darkneſſe to them, but it gave light by night to theſe. So that the one came not near the other all the night. Which is further enlarged in other texts of Scripture, Numb. 9.15, &c. Numb. 14.14. Deut. 1.33. with obſervations upon it, Neh. 9.19. Pſal. 98.14. concerning which many queſtions are multiplyed, of which ſome are not ſo needful to be anſwered. 1. For the number, Whether there were two clouds or onelyonly one?whether there was one onelyonly Cloud or two? The text quoted, Exod. 13.21. ſeems to imply that there were two Clouds; one dark, and the other bright, but the other text, Exod. 14.20. as alſo, Numb. 9.21. rather makes it to be onelyonly one, dark on the one part, and bright on the other, which ſeems more probable. The firſt being fitly underſtood of the various appearances of one and the ſame Cloud,The Cloud not ordinary but ſupernatural. and not a variety of Clouds. 2. For the nature of it, or matter whereof it did conſiſt, which doubtleſſe was Supernatural, and extraordinary. Had it been of the common nature of Clouds, which is a thick moiſt exhalation drawn up by the heat of the Sun, it could not have been of ſo many years durance, neither could it have ſubſiſted at all elſewhere, then in the middle region of the air. The reflex from the earth would ſoon have diſſolved it. 3. For the Motion of it, It is plain that it followed not the motion of the heavens,The motion of it guided by an Angel. ſo it could not at any time have ſtood ſtill; neither was it carried at all uncertainty with the blaſts of winds as ordinary Clouds are, but the motion was ordered according to the good pleaſure of God, by the Miniſtery of an Angell,The form of it was in appearance as a pillar. Exod. 14.9. 4. For the Forme of it, it was in appearance as a pillar. The ſmoke which in a calm ſeaſon aſcends out of Chimneys, ſets out the ſhape of it, being called pillars of ſmoke, Cant. 3.6. of no greater breadth then the tabernacle, as appears, Numb. 9.15. Had it been of any greater breadth, it had hindred the Iſraelites proſpect; and had it not been of eminent height, it could not have been viſible for the guidance of Iſrael in that diſtance in which many of them were often from it. The Ʋſe is that which is moſt conſiderable and that was two-fold.The uſe of it. 1. As Iſraels guide. 1. As Iſraels guide, as, Numb. 9. is fully held forth. When the Cloud ſtood ſtill, they were to keep in their quarters, and when that moved they were to march, and to march that way that it led. This was the conſtant uſe of it, as the Pſalmiſt, Pſal. 98.14. obſerves, and alſo the Levites on their day of Iſraels humiliation, Neh. 9.19.2. As Iſraels guard, 2. As Iſraels guard.Exod. 14.19, 20. It uſed to be in the van, now it was placed in the reare. It had formerly gone before them as a guide, but now it ſtood behind them as a guard; ſo that Egypt eagerly ſet upon the purſuit of them could not come near them. Of this the Pſalmiſt takes notice, Pſal. 150.39. He spread a Cloud for a covering, and a fire to give them light by night; ſo that here God was a Sun and ſhield.
The ſecond obſervable providence is, Iſraels paſſage through the Sea, which we find, Exod. 14.21, 22.Exod. 14.21, 22. opened. And Moſes ſtretched out his hand over the ſea, and the Lord cauſed the ſea to go back by a ſtrong Eaſt-wind all that night, and made the ſea dry land, and the waters were divided. And the children of Iſrael went into the mideſt of the ſea upon the dry ground, Several things obſervable in Iſraels paſſage through the Sea.and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left. With frequent Scripture-obſervations upon it, Joſh. 4.23. Pſal. 78.13. Pſal. 114.3. Heb. 11.29. In Moſes words we ſee; Firſt, The Author of this great work, and this is twofold; 1. Principal, the Lord. 2. Secondary, Moſes ſtretching out his hand upon the ſign given. Secondly, The inſtrument, a ſtrong Eaſt wind imployed of God to force the waters againſt their natural current. In which we ſee, 1. The continuance a whole night. 2. The effect that it wrought, to divide the waters, and to make the land dry; God will keep up his agents untill his work be done. 3. Iſraels paſſage, They went into the midſt of the ſea upon the dry ground. 4. Their ſecurity, The waters were a wall unto them on the right hand, and on the left. Some have thought, that there were ſeveral diviſions of the ſea into parts, according to the ſeveral tribes of Iſrael, but this is without ground; all that we can collect is, that the whole of Iſrael, and of thoſe that joyned themſelves to them had a ſafe paſſage made them; they all went out, both old and young, ſons and daughters, Exod. 10.9. and all theſe had a paſſage cut to their hand.
The third remarkable providence is Manna, The narrative of it we may ſee, Exod. 16.14, 15.Exod. 16.14, 15. opened. And when the dew that lay was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderneſſe there lay a ſmall round thing, as ſmall as the hoar-froſt on the ground. And when the children of Iſrael ſaw it, they ſaid one to another, It is Manna; for they wiſt not what it was. And Moſes ſaid unto them, This is the bread that the Lord hath given you to eat, and mentioned in ſeveral other Scriptures, Num. 11 7. Pſal. 78.24. Deut. 8.3. Nehem. 9.20. Joh. 6.31, 49, 58. Several remarkable occurrences might be obſerved about it, which is not needful to ſtand upon.From whence Manna hath its name. It had the name from the Iſraelites queſtion upon the ſight of it, not knowing it they ſaid Manhu, which is, what is this? It was given to Iſrael upon their complaint againſt Moſes and Aaron, that they had brought them forth out of the land of Egypt to kill them with hunger, Exod. 16.3, 4. And it continued with them till they came into the Land of Caanan, The time that it did continue with Iſrael.and had eaten of the old Corn of the Land, Joſh. 5.12. Whether it were of the ſame kind, with that which at this day in ſeveral Countries is found, is much diſputed; but whether it were the ſame, or in nature differing from it, it was certainly miraculouſly provided to their hands,It was miraculouſly provided. otherwiſe it would have been found in that wilderneſſe, both before and after thoſe fourty years of Iſraels travels through it. It was called by the name of Angels food, Pſal. 78.23. Not that the Angles feed upon it, but by reaſon of the excellency of it, as the tongue of him that excells is called the tongue of Angels, 1 Cor. 13.1. Though that which ſome talke of the rarity of it,A fable concerning it rejected. and would gather out of the Wiſdom of Solomon, Chap. 16.20, 21. that it was fitted to every mans taſte, and as any did fancy, ſo it was. If any did deſire to eat of an Egg, that was turned into an Egg, or to eat of an Hen, or Lamb, that was forthwith turned into ſuch a diſh, (and ſo was a figure of tranſubſtantiation) may well be reckoned amongſt the Legend-tales. Then the Iſraelites would never have complained that their ſoul loathed that light bread, Num. 21.5. Nor had they had cauſe to have ſaid, as they did, Num. 11.4, 5, 6. Who ſhall give us fleſh to eat? We remember the fiſh which we did eat in Egypt freely: the Cucumbers, and the Melons, and the Leekes, and the Onions, and the Garlick; but now our ſoul is dryed away; there is nothing at all, beſides this Manna before our eyes. They might (according to this fancy) have found fleſh, fiſh, cucumbers, melons, leekes, onions, garlick, and all things elſe in the Manna it ſelf, unleſſe any will turn it into an Allegory, that that which anſwers to all is found in Chriſt whom Manna did typifie.
Num. 20.9. opened.The laſt of theſe providences is the Rock. The hiſtory we may ſee, Exod. 17. Num. 20.9. and obſervations made upon it by the Pſalmiſt, Pſal. 78.15. Pſal. 105.41. Pſal. 114.7, 8. and the like by the Levites, Nehem. 9.25. As the Manna was given upon Iſraels want of bread, ſo this upon their complaint of want of water. Go on before the people, (ſaith the Lord) and take with thee of the Elders of Iſrael, and thy rod wherewith thou ſmoteſt the river, take in thine hand and go. Behold, I will ſtand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb,How the rock is ſaid to follow Iſrael. and thou ſhall ſmite the Rock, and there ſhall come water out of it, that the people may drink. How it is ſaid to follow the Iſraelites, 1 Cor. 10.4. is the great difficulty; Rocks being above all other things immovable: The Jewiſh fable that it was carried thoſe fourty years on Chariots in the wilderneſſe is not worthy to be named, in order to our inquiry into it. This muſt be taken for granted, that the Rock it ſelf is not here intended as a ſign, but the water flowing out of the rock; As the cup is not the blood of Chriſt in the New Teſtament, but the fruit of the vine that is in it, and this of following the Iſraelites being referred to the water which flowed out of the rock. That reſolution which is generally received, is moſt probable, that many running ſtreames, were framed to draw the water along, according to their ſeveral ſtations, and removals, to which River wil have that ſong, Num. 21.17, 18. to allude, Spring up O well, ſing ye to it; The Princes digged the well, Nobles of the people digged it by the direction of the Law-giver with their ſtaves. But if we referre it to Chriſt, the thing ſignified as Diodate on the words ſayes, it is very properly ſpoken; for not onelyonly his benefits are perpetual, but he himſelf who is the ſpring of them, is ever ſeparated from his, but reſideth alwayes in and with them by his Spirit. If now we look upon theſe reſpective ſigns with our Saviours, and St. Pauls Comment upon them, we ſhall not find for the time that they were in uſe, any thing that ſerves to make up the proper nature of Sacraments that was wanting in them.All that is eſſential in Sacraments was found in theſe providences during the time that they ſerved the Iſraelites. And the Apoſtles hope at which, it appears, he aimes when he ſpeaks of theſe, 1 Cor. 10.1, 2, 3. plainly doth evince it. The Corinthians taking themſelves to be high in the favour of God, by reaſon of their priviledge of Baptiſme, and the Supper of the Lord, the Apoſtle lets them know that the Jewes had that which anſwers to our Baptiſme; figuring out ſalvation by Chriſt to them, as Baptiſme to us: They were all baptized unto Moſes in the Cloud, and in the Sea. As the deliverance of Iſrael out of Egypt was a figure of their redemption by Chriſt; and their pilgrimage through the wilderneſſe, an image of the Elects life in the world; and the Land of Caanan, a ſhadow of that Kingdom of heaven: ſo their paſſage through the Red-Sea, and their being under the Cloud, were a ſacred figure, correſpondent to Baptiſme; And Manna, and the water coming out of the rock, a ſign which had its relation to the Lords Supper. And our Saviour applyes that type of Manna to himſelf, as we ſee, Joh. 6. throughout. When the Jewes ſaid, v. 31. Our Fathers did eat Manna in the wilderneſſe, quoting the Pſalmiſts words; He gave them bread to eat: Chriſt anſwers, Verily, verily I ſay unto you, Moſes gave you not that bread from heaven, but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world. And upon their requeſt, Lord, evermore give us of this bread, v. 34. he anſwers, v. 35. I am the bread of life, he that cometh to me ſhall never hunger, and he that believeth on me ſhall never thirſt. So alſo, v. 49, 50, and 51. Your fathers did eat Manna in the wilderneſſe and are dead; This is the bread that cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof and not dye. I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any man eat of this bread, he ſhall live for ever; and the bread that I will give is my fleſh, which I will give for the life of the world. Here is an outward viſible ſign given of God, and received of his Covenant-people, ſealing Chriſt, or righteouſneſſe by Chriſt unto them. The whole therefore that is of the eſſence of a Sacrament is found in them. OnelyOnly theſe were found with Iſrael, but for a time, namely, the time of the pilgrimage in the wilderneſſe, when Circumciſion, and the Paſſeover, Baptiſme and the Lords Supper are Ordinances, ſtated and conſtant; therefore the obſervation is, that in Old-Teſtament-times there were onelyonly two ſtanding Ordinances, of the nature of Sacraments.
Here ſome queſtions might be put neceſſary to be anſwered.
Object. 1 1. Though we have the word [Baptiſme] in this text of Scripture, yet the addition ſeems to make it no Sacrament; They were baptized into Moſes, ſaith the text, and being baptized into Moſes, how could it be the ſame with Chriſtian Baptiſme? We are baptized into Chriſt, and not into Moſes.
Anſw. Anſ. Into Moſes, is here no more, then the Miniſtery of Moſes, or by the hand of Moſes, who was a Mediatour in type, between God and that people. And though ſome would overthrow our argument drawn from Baptiſme into the Name of the Son, and holy Ghoſt, as into the Name of the Father, to prove that the Son, and the holy Ghoſt are God, as is the Father, ſeeing we are baptized (as they object) into Moſes; yet Moſes is not God; It will not yet ſerve their turn, ſeeing the Name of the Son, and of the holy Ghoſt are made equall in Baptiſme, to the Name of the Father, and ſo is not the name of Moſes. We are Baptized into the Name of Chriſt, and called by his Name; ſo the Iſraelites never were into the name of Moſes no more then the Corinthians into the name of Paul, 1 Cor. 1.13. That is Chriſts peculiar with the Father, and the holy Ghoſt, not communicated to any creature.
2. It is objected, that theſe outward elements were given not Object. 2 onelyonly to the Iſraelites, but alſo to their beaſts; for the water of the rock, the text ſaies, They drank of it and their cattel, Num 20.11. And as for Manna, Bellarmine contends that there can be no queſtion, but the Domeſtick creatures, as Dogs, and Hens did eat of it; that not by caſualty, or wickedneſſe, (as he confeſſeth they may of the Euchariſt, and ſo a Dog or a Swine eats Chriſt) but ordinarily or commonly.
Anſw. We muſt diſtinguiſh between the Natural and Myſtical Anſw. 1 uſe of this Manna, and of this water. The natural uſe was for their bodies, as well men, as beaſts; and of all ſuch beaſts as they had in their poſſeſſion. The Myſtical uſe, was as pledges of Spiritual mercies and favours.
2. The whole of thoſe elements were not Sacramental, but Anſw. 2 the eating and drinking of men in Covenant, is neceſſary to make them Sacraments. Participation is a part, (as I may ſay) of conſecration. The bread and wine is not unto us the body and blood of Chriſt, unleſſe it be eaten and drunk; neither was this Spiritual meat, or Spiritual drink before the Iſraelites ate and drank of it.
3. It is objected, that the Iſraelites ſaw no ſuch thing as Baptiſme Object. 3 in the Cloud, or in the Sea: nor any ſuch thing as remiſſion of ſin, which is the fruit of Baptiſme: nor any ſuch Spiritual nouriſhment in Manna, or the Rock. They ſaw the Cloud to be their preſent ſafety, and Manna and the Rock their ſuſtenance.
Anſw. 1. What Iſrael did ſee is one thing, and what theſe Anſw. 1 did hold forth to be ſeen is another.
2. That they ſaw not Chriſt in theſe Sacraments; nor yet Anſw. 2 in Circumciſion in that explicite cleare way, as we ſee him in Baptiſme or the Lords Supper, is evident: but they ſaw theſe to be evidences, and ſignes of God in Covenant with them, and that as they were hereby kept from the preſent, that ſo he would keep them from everlaſting danger. They ſaw Chriſt implicitely, though not explicitely in theſe Ordinances, and ſo for the time of their continuance, they had the nature, and were of the uſe of Sacraments.
SECT. V. The five ſuppoſititious Sacraments of Rome Examined.
IN the next place we are to make it appear that there are in New-Teſtament-times, onelyonly two Sacraments, Baptiſme, and the Lords Supper. In this we may be more cleare, ſeeing none is ſet up in competition with any fair colour. And here the five ſuppoſitious Sacraments of the Church of Rome offer themſelves; which are either ſuch which (according to them) belong to all in general, or thoſe that are reſtrained to ſome in peculiar. Of the former ſort there are three, Confirmation, Penance, and Extreame Ʋnction. Of the latter two, Orders, and Marriage.
SECT. VI. Confirmation no Sacrament.
THe firſt of theſe is Confirmation. For diſcovery of which we muſt leave the fountain of Scriptures, to rake in the dunghill of Popiſh Writers. In caſe therefore we ſhould dwell too long in it, the Reader would be in danger to nauſeate it; yet perhaps it may not be ungrateful to look into it, to ſee the mercy of our deliverance from it. Though they put it after Baptiſme in order,Confirmation preferred before Baptiſme. yet with them it goes before it in honour. In Baptiſme we are made the ſervants of Chriſt: in Confirmation they become his Champions or Souldiers; Confirmation therefore perfects what Baptiſme begins: and before confirmation, baptized ones are onelyonly one half Chriſtians; The loweſt Prieſt may therefore ordinarily baptize, and any other upon emergent neceſſity: but the Biſhop onelyonly may confirm. Concerning this the Councel of Trent hath determined: If any ſhall ſay, that confirmation of baptized ones, is an idle Ceremony, and not rather a true and proper Sacrament, or that heretofore it was nothing but a certain Catechiſme in which young perſons of growth, gave a reaſon of their faith before the Church, let him be accurſed. And now it is time for all that have ſworn to that Councel to ſee that they defend it. I ſhall briefly out of Bellarmine lay down the whole of it. The matter of it he laies down in four propoſitions. 1. Chriſme or Ʋnction is the matter of Confirmation. 2. The matter of Confirmation The matter of confirmation.is not ſimple oil, but oil mixt with balſame. 3. Chriſme which is the matter of confirmation is firſt to be conſecrated and bleſt. 4. The ointment of Chriſme ought to be made in the form of a croſſe in the forehead of the baptized perſon, that it may be the true and immediate matter of this Sacrament. The form The form.of this Sacrament is this, I ſign thee with the ſign of the croſſe, and confirm thee with the Chriſme of ſalvation in the Name of, &c. The fruitThe fruit. of it is, 1. To conferre grace, to ſtrengthen the ſoul againſt Satans aſſaults. 2. To conferre an indelible character whereby men are received into the Army of Christ, as in Baptiſme they are received into his family; ſo that it may not be reiterated any more then Baptiſme. The Miniſter The Miniſter.of this Sacrament is onelyonly the Biſhop, and no other; He that adminiſters other Sacraments, hath nothing to do with this Sacrament. The CeremoniesThe Ceremonies. are twofold. 1. At conſecration. 2. At adminiſtration. At conſecrationAt Conſecration. there are four Ceremonies. The Oyl and Balſame are bleſſed with prayer, with the ſign of the Croſſe. The Biſhop breaths certain times on the ointment, he ſalutes it with theſe words. All hail holy Chriſme. At the adminiſtrationAt the adminiſtration. there are eight Ceremonies. There muſt be a Godfather preſent, prayers muſt be uſed over them, the Biſhop gives a pax to the party now confirmed, he gives him a blow upon the face, the forehead muſt be bound with a fillet, ſome ſay ſeven daies, others onelyonly three. The head muſt not be waſhed, nor the forehead for ſeven daies ſpace. It muſt be adminiſtred at the feaſt of Pentecoſt. Laſtly, it muſt be done with faſting. When all this is conſidered we may well think that Auſtin was much deceived, when he ſaid that the Sacraments of the New Teſtament are few and eaſy. Bellarmine in order to prove this to be a Sacrament, laies down three requiſites in a Sacrament. 1. A promiſe of grace. 2. An outward ſenſible ſign as an organ or inſtrument to convey the promiſe. 3. A command of God for adminiſtration. But all of theſe we ſay are wanting in this Suppoſed Sacrament, and therefore according to himſelf it is no Sacrament. The promiſe of grace he thinks he finds in the fourteenth, fiftenth, and ſixteenth Chapters of St. John's Goſpel:Joh. 14.15.16. chap.. Luk. 24. Act. 1. vindicated. where the Holy Ghoſt is promiſed to the Apoſtles, to make them valiant and undaunted in the profeſſion of the faith. And, Luk. 24. where they are commanded to tarry at Jeruſalem until they be endued with power from on high. And, Act. 1. where they are promiſed to receive power after that the Holy Ghoſt is come upon them. Here if our Author may be heard, is enough. A divine promiſe, and that in Scripture, made to men baptized, for a larger meaſure of grace, for ſtrength, for confeſſion of faith. But our acute diſputant ſhould ſhew us where this promiſe is made to his Chriſme made up of oyl and Balſame. and thus croſs'd and bleſs'd. 2. He ſhould remember that he himſelf tells us, that the Apoſtles had this promiſe made good unto them without this or any ſign at all. 3. He might have found many of theſe promiſes in Old-Teſtament times, which yet made up no ſuch Sacrament in thoſe daies.Act. 8.17. vindicated. The outward ſenſible ſign he finds, Act. 8. where it is ſaid, They put their hands upon them, and they received the Holy Ghoſt. But, 1. Papiſts uſe no impoſition of hands in this ſuppoſed Sacrament. 2. In other Sacraments, both we and they make the outward ſign and matter, to be one and the ſame; why is it then that impoſition of hands is the ſign, and other things the matter? 3. The gifts there mentioned are not ſaving, but miraculous, proper to thoſe times, and not found in ours. 4. Thoſe were conferred before Baptiſme as well as after, Act. 10.44. Who can forbid water that theſe ſhould be baptized, ſeeing they have received the Holy Ghoſt as well as we? The command from God Bellarmine will prove from the Apoſtles uſe of this ſign; If God had not enjoyned impoſition of hands, The Apoſtles impoſition of hands no proof of Confirmation.they would not ſo ordinarily (ſaith he) have laid on their hands in conferring of gifts. Anſw. 1. we look for a command for that which our adverſaries do uſe, viz. their Chriſme, Balſame, Croſſe, and not for impoſition of hands, which they uſe not. 2. John did baptize, yet our Author will not allow that for a proof that he had a command to baptize. 3. The pen-men of the Holy Ghoſt wrote Scripture, yet that is no proof with him, that they had a command to write 4. Alex. Hal. part. 4 quaeſt. 9. affirms that Chriſt the Lord did neither inſtitute nor diſpenſe this Sacrament as it is a Sacrament. 5. Thomas Aquinas is more modeſt likewiſe, as we heard before when we ſpake to the Author of Sacraments, confeſſing that their Chriſme is not found in Scriptures, and he excuſes it as not belonging to the being but ſolemnity of Sacraments, therein confeſſing that all that belongs to the being of Sacraments ought to be written in Scriptures. But though his anſwer is more modeſt, yet it is leſſe adviſed; that which all his fellowes make the matter of this Sacrament, he denies to belong to the being of it.
The ancient uſe of that which afterwards did degenerate into this ſoppery,The ancient uſe of confirmation degenerated into this practice. Bellarmine out of Chemnitius layes down in ſix Propoſitions. 1. When a child baptized in infancy comes to diſcretion, he is to be inſtructed in the principles of Religion, and then to be brought before the Church, and put in mind of his Baptiſme, how and why he was baptized. 2. He is to utter a profeſſion of his own faith according as he hath learned. 3. He is to be examined in the principal heads of Chriſtian Religion. 4. He is to be admoniſhed that hereby he now differs from Heathens, Hereticks, and all of prophane opinions. 5. There is to be added an exhortation concerning the vow of Baptiſme, and the neceſſity of perſeverance in the doctrine. 6. This is to be concluded with prayer. And if laying on of hands be uſed, it may be well done, ſaith Chemnitius, without any ſuperſtition. But when care in Catechizing, and examination is wanting, it is no better (ſaith he) then an idle Ceremony, and with addition of the forementioned Ceremonies a meer foppery.
SECT. VII. Pennance no Sacrament.
THe next that they would obtrude upon us as a Sacrament is Pennance; Satan not enduring the grace of Repentance, hath made it his buſineſſe to rob us of the Word, and to bring in that of Pennance in the ſtead of it, leaving little that is of God in it, and making it up with the device of man. It is not my work in this place to ſpeak to Repentance, as it is held forth in the Goſpel to us, and to be practiſed of Chriſtians, whether as it is inward, the change of the mind and will from evil to good, from Satan to God; or outward, in anſwerable works of obedience. We confeſſe a neceſſity of it in this ſenſe, in the higheſt degree, a neceſſity as well medii, as praecepti, being not onelyonly enjoyned by command from God, but of that neceſſity that ſalvation cannot be obtained without it, Luk. 13.3. Except ye repent, ye ſhall all likewiſe periſh; but the Sacramentality of it, which they aſſert, we wholly deny. Our ſouls having all made ſhipwrack in our firſt parents, and upon that account made lyable to wrath, the firſt plank for ſafety they ſay is Baptiſme; in which all ſin, Original, or Actual, before contracted is actually pardoned; and that Sacrament is (as they ſay) of no further uſe, for the pardon of any ſins following after it. The ſecond plank for ſafety after ſhipwrack with them is Pennance, which is a following Sacrament for remiſſion of ſins, not ſo eaſie as the former; but attended with more trouble,The parts of pennance. 1. Contrition. conſiſting of three parts, Contrition, Confeſſion, and Satisfaction. The firſt of theſe aright underſtood, we willingly acknowledge to be a Chriſtian duty, and a neceſſary requiſite to the grace of Repentance, 2 Cor. 7.10. Godly ſorrow worketh Repentance to Salvation not to be repented of. Upon ſenſe of ſin, we are brought to turn from ſin.2. Confeſſion. Confeſſion we likewiſe acknowledge, knowing with Job, that it is an evil to hide our ſins as Adam, Job 31.33. and that the Apoſtle tells us, If we confeſſe our ſins, God is just and faithful to forgive us our ſins, and cleanſe us from all unrighteouſneſſe, 1 Joh. 1.10. But that which they would bring in, which is a whiſper of all in a Prieſts ear, in order to take from him ſome bodily Pennance, and accordingly receive his abſolution, we deny, and well know that it were a vain labour to ſearch into the Scriptures, or antiquity for it. Satiſfaction we ſo farre receive, that offenders to publick ſcandal, muſt make that publick acknowledgement, that the Church may with freedom receive them into communion.3. Satisfaction. But for ſatisfaction to God, we muſt let it alone for ever, unleſſe we will ſhoulder Chriſt out of that function, and take it upon our own perſons; he will never ſuffer that we ſhould be ſharers with him in it, and ſo we ſhould be for ever on the work (as the damned in hell are) and never able to go through with it. This is, as though a man were fined of his Prince, as much as the ſervant in the Parable was indebted to his Lord, ten thouſand talents, and ſhould attempt to pay it with a few pence of a counterfeit coyn of his own ſtamp, making good a leſſer crime with high treaſon. And whileſt theſe add all this of their own, they leave out the very whole of that, which according to Scripture is eſſential to repentance, which is a thorough change, and amendment of our wayes. And how they got it into their heads to thruſt it among Sacraments, a man might think of it, even to amazement. And they themſelves are ſo confounded about it, that they know not how to find any thing of a Sacrament in it. Bellarmine ſayes,Papiſts agree not what that is in pennance that makes up a Sacrament. that they affirm with great conſent; that Pennance is a Sacrament but confeſſes, that there is difference among them, to aſſign what in Pennance is the Sacrament; here then ſure is a glorious agreement. And it were eaſie to multiply arguments againſt it. 1. There is no outward viſible ſign appointed of God in this Pennance of theirs, with any promiſe annext,Arguments evincing pennance to be no Sacrament. which even adverſaries confeſſe is of neceſſity to the being of Sacraments. Bellarmine (who makes every thing to be viſible that is any way ſenſible) ſayes, That both confeſſion, and abſolution, is a viſible ſign in Pennance; ſo that the words of the Pennance-taker, and Pennance-doer concurre together to make a viſible ſign, and this ſign in that way viſible, as he can make it, he onelyonly affirms, but never proves to have any Divine inſtitution. And his brethren, Scotus, Major, Gabriel, Dionyſ. Ciſterſienſis, deny that confeſſion is any part of Pennance, as Ameſius obſerves; and Soto denyes, that abſolution is any part of it. 2. Repentance was in uſe in the Church, and of equal efficacy as now, when yet by their own confeſſion it was no Sacrament, viz. in the time of the Law, in the time of John Baptiſt, and of our Saviour Chriſt; and therefore now it is no more a Sacrament then it was then. 3. Baptiſme is of the ſame uſe, and ſerves for the ſame purpoſe, as that which they imagine to find in their Pennance, and engages to Goſpel-Repentance for remiſſion of ſins. And this is an undoubted confeſſed Sacrament, and there needs not therefore any fiction of a ſecond. And the Reader may find this ſo at large diſputed in Chamier, Vorſtius, Ameſius, that I ſhall ceaſe to add any more concerning it.
SECT. VIII. Extream unction no Sacrament
THe third which they obtrude, is Extream Ʋnction: A rite which they adminiſter upon mens departure out of this life, as a viaticum to carry them hence. And Bellarmine undertaking to make it good by reaſon, ſaith, It is meet that men ſhould have ſupport by divine providence in their departure out of the Church, as they have in their entrance into it. As they are ſaluted with a Sacrament, ſo he would have one for their farewel likewiſe. It is then wonder that the Jews had not one to anſwer Circumciſion, as they have novv found out one to anſvver Baptiſme. Providence it ſeems vvas then vvanting in that vvhichwhich the Jeſuite thinks meet ſhould then have been provided. The matter The matter.of this Sacrament is, oyl olive bleſt by the Biſhop. The form The form.is in theſe words, By this holy oyntment and his moſt tender mercy God forgive thee whatſoever thou haſt offended by ſight, &c. The effect The effects.of it is, firſt, the healing of the body if it be found good for the ſoul; though they never apply it, till this be deſperate. Secondly, the taking away of the remainders of ſin; but what ſin, they cannot determine. The Miniſter The Miniſter.of it is a Prieſt, conſequently a Biſhop, if he pleaſe. For the ſubject capable of it, ſix qualifications are required:Qualifications of the perſon capable of extream unction. 1. He muſt be a Chriſtian. 2. A weak one. 3. One dangerouſly ſick and weak. 4. One of years, with the uſe of reaſon. 5. One not excommunicated. 6. One that hath taken confeſſion and abſolution, if he be found guilty of ſin. CeremoniesCeremonies. uſed in this Sacrament are two: 1. The Letany and certain other prayers muſt be repeated. 2. Seven parts of his body muſt be anointed, viz. eyes, ears, noſe, mouth, hands, by reaſon of the five ſenſes, and the reins where is the ſeat of concupiſcence, and the feet upon account of the loco-motive faculty. But whether all of this be eſſential, they are loath to determine. They have two onelyonly Texts which they offer to produce to eſtabliſh this Sacrament. The firſt is, Mark 6.13. And they caſt out many devils, and anointed with oyl many that were ſick, and healed them. Mar. 6.13. vindicated.This Bellarmine denyes to hold out any Sacrament, and ſee alſo Janſenius upon the words, likewiſe Ruardus, Soto, as Bellarmine tells us. Bellarmine is induced to this opinion, as he ſayes, becauſe Luther, Calvin, and Chemnitius hold, that the ointment, Jam. 5. & Mark 6. are both the ſame. And he will make an hard adventure towards the loſſe of a Sacrament, rather then he will joyn ſo far with ſuch hereticks in opinion. And this Text alſo together with that of James 5.13. is rejected by Cajetan, as he is quoted by Chamier and Ameſius. It doth not appear (ſaith he) either from the words, or from the effect that theſe words ſpeak of the Sacramental anointing of extream unction, but rather of that oyntment which the Lord Jeſus inſtituted in the Gospel to be applyed by his diſciples to the ſick; For the Text doth not ſay, Is any ſick to death? but abſolutely is any ſick? And the effect is the raiſing up of the ſick: And it speaks of forgiveneſſe of ſins no otherwiſe then conditionally, when extream unction is not given but even at the point of death. And as the form of it ſpeaks, it tends directly to the pardon of ſin. Beſides, James commands that many Elders be ſent for to one ſick perſon, and many for prayer, Jam. 5.14, 15. vindicated.which is not done in extream Ʋnction. So that when there are but two texts pretended for this Sacrament, one Cardinal hath robb'd them of one, and another of both. Againſt the Sacramentality of this oyl we have theſe arguments. 1. Sacraments are for all the covenant-people of God in general, without reſpect had to this or that condition, and this is for the ſick onelyonly. 2. Sacraments are ſigns and ſeals of ſpiritual grace, this is a ſign onelyonly of recovery from ſickneſſe, being appointed for the ſick to raiſe them up. And whereas it is objected that pardon of ſinne is here mentioned; it is plain that it is onelyonly mentioned in order to the cure of the bodily infirmity, and to be obtained by prayer, not wrought by the oyl. The pardon of ſuch ſinne that may have brought upon the patient any ſuch ſickneſſe, as, 2 Chron. 7.14. When the Land is under famine or peſtilence, there the Lord ſaies, If my people that are called by my Name, do humble themſelves, and pray, and ſeek my face, and turn from their wicked waies, then I will hear in heaven, and pardon their ſin, and heal the land. The pardon of the Lands ſinne is there in order to the removal of the Lands judgement. The pardon of the ſinne of the ſick patient, is here for his healing likewiſe. Much more might be ſpoke againſt our adverſaries uſe of it. They limit it to Oyl olive, when Scripture ſpeaks of Oyl in general. They muſt have the Biſhops bleſſing upon it, when Scripture hath no ſuch thing; And in Scripture he that adminiſters a Sacrament, is ſufficient for the bleſſing of it. No one word of their form is found in the Scripture. They never intend recovery when that yet is the whole of Scripture-intention. For a right underſtanding of this text in James, about which moſt of the controverſy lyes,Jam. 5.14, 15. opened. it is not ſo eaſy to determine. It ſtands much upon matter of fact, and we are at too great a diſtance, for any clear diſcovery. It is ordinarily underſtood of a Miraculous power, as that other text, Mark 6.13. muſt be underſtood. And the miraculous gift ceaſing, the rite (ſay Divines) would ſoon appear ridiculous; and that it doth ceaſe, we need no more for proof then our own experience; and in caſe it had conſtantly held, it would have been look't upon as ordinary, and not miraculous. But I ingenuouſly confeſſe, I ſee more difficulties attending this interpretation, then I know well how to ſalve. 1. I ſee not in any age of the Church, any rule given to all that were ſick, to look after a miraculous way of healing; but that they made uſe of it as providence extraordinarily did offer the opportunity. 2. Had they had direction from God to ſeek for a miraculous cure, it ſhould ſtill have anſwered their expectation, when yet that is denied on all hands. And whereas it is ſaid, that they that had this power, had alſo with it a ſpirit of diſcerning to whom to apply it; why ſhould then the command be given to all promiſcuouſly to enquire after it? 3. Miraculous gifts were for healing of deaf, dumb, blind, as well as ſick perſons; (as Bellarmine not impertinently obſerves) why then are onelyonly the ſick here mentioned? 4. It ſeems to imply that all Elders of the Church had this gift of healing, which is contrary to that text, 1 Cor. 12.29, 30. Others underſtand it of a medicinal power in the oyl, but all Elders were not Phyſicians, and one oyl would not cure all diſeaſes. Some ſpeak of it as an hieroglyphick or outward Symbol which was in uſe amongſt the Jevves, to hold out any thing that is ſpiritual; but it is very doubtful, vvhether the Apoſtle vvould permit, much leſſe can I think that he would preſcribe the uſe of theſe to Chriſtians. I moſt readily therefore ſubſcribe to that of Ameſius, which I confeſſe gave me great content when I found it in him, that ſo I might not be ſaid to be alone in the opinionaOleum poteſt Synechdochice poni pro medicamento ſalut. This oyl (ſaith he) may be taken Synechdochically for any healing medicine whatſoever; And anſwering Bellarmines objection, why direction is here given onelyonly to the ſick, and not to the blind, &c. he ſaies,bConſilium datur tantum de aegrotis, quia non de miraculoſo uſu olei in genere, ſed de aegrotorum directione tractatur. that it is given onelyonly to them, becauſe the Apoſtle ſpeaks not of the miraculous uſe of oyl onelyonly, but the way to deal with ſick perſons. So that miracles where the gift was, are not excluded, but all means, whether ordinary or extraordinary, according to the Apoſtles preſcript, are to be applyed. The Elders are to be ſent for (ſaith he) especially for prayer and conſolation; but ſo that the uſe of means upon that pretence be not neglected, ſo that it is little other, than that which Chriſt gave in charge concerning the damſel that he had raiſed to life, that ſomething ſhould be given her to eat, Mark. 5.43. Some, as is ſaid, have made an eſſay to revive this cuſtome in theſe times, and in their viſit of the ſick, will follow the Apoſtle in the letter, they will pray, and praying will anoint with oil likewiſe. I would that theſe would give ſome diſtinct account of their proceedings. 1. Whereas there are in the world ſo many ſorts of oyl, even beyond number, whether any that is called oyl will ſerve the turn? Trayn-oyl (which yet in moſt places is readieſt) would ſure be thought too groſſe to be imployed in it. 2. To what part of the Patient they do apply it; and in what quantity? In our colder clinates, and eſpecially in colder ſeaſons, in ſtead of helping perhaps this liquid ſtuffe may ſoon wrong weak perſons. 3. What effect they expect from it; whether corporeal, or ſpiritual, or a mixture of both? 4. Whether they uſe it as an inſtrument, to work that which they expect upon application of it, or onelyonly a ſymbol for aſſurance that God will work? If they make uſe of it as an inſtrument, it muſt either be for conferring of ſpiritual grace vvhichwhich (as vve have heard) is denyed to Sacramental ſignes, or elſe for the obtaining of bodily health; then they muſt ſee that it be foreign, othervviſe they are in danger not onelyonly to uſe it in vain, but for harm. If they make uſe of it as a ſymbol or ſign to aſſure that God will work, then let them firſt produce a promiſe: there the effect is attributed not to the oyl, but to the prayer of faith; and ſecondly, let them acquaint us how to diſcern thoſe unto whom we may with ſucceſſe apply it, otherwiſe we ſhall not onelyonly loſe our oyl and our labour, but expoſe it unto ſcorn likewiſe. And it cannot be expected that all ſhould be thus healed.
SECT. IX. Orders are no Sacrament.
THe fourth which they would obtrude upon as is Orders, or the ſolemn way of the call of Miniſters to their functions. This, or rather theſe; they will have to be a Sacrament properly ſo called. And theſe Orders are divided into ſeven,The number of orders and their diviſions and offices. and one of the ſeven is ſubdivided inco two ſo that this one Sacrament if it hit right, hath gained ſeven more, and ſo they have fourteen Sacraments. The firſt of theſe is, the office of Prieſthood, which they ſubdivide into two; Biſhops, and Presbyters, which as they ſay, differ in order, and not in degree onelyonly, as a Biſhop, and an Arch-Biſhop; and therefore muſt have diſtinct Ordinations. The next is of Deacons, to aſſiſt the Prieſt in all things which are done in the Sacrament. The third is, Sub-Deacons, to bring the Chalice and Patin, the Cruſe with water, and Towell, to the Altar. The fourth is Door-keepers, to receive the Keyes. The fifth Readers, to read Scriptures in unknown languages. The fixth Exorciſts, to caſt out uncleane ſpirits. The laſt Acolythes, to carry Torches or Tapers when the Goſpel is read, or the ſacrifice to be offered. Bellarmine tells us that the Ordination of Preſbyters is a Sacrament by the conſent of all, and he himſelf determines, that the Ordination of Biſhops is a Sacrament, and according to him there is no other Scripture-Ordination, ſeeing all the Scriptures that ſpeak of it, ſpeak (as he ſayes) of the Ordination of Biſhops;Moſt of theſe doubted among themſelves whether they be Sacraments. though he multiplies Authors denying their Ordination to be any Sacrament. Ordination of Deacons, he ſayes, is very probable, and to be believed that it is a Sacrament, though it be no Article of faith to believe it; which he proves, becauſe it cannot be evidently deduced out of the Written Word, or tradition: Neither is there (ſaith he) any determination of the Church for it. For Sub-Deacons, he ſayes there is not that certainty as of Deacons, yet (he ſayes) it is very probable that it is a Sacrament, though he hath ſuch an argument againſt it, as that none but himſelf will be ever able to anſwer. Impoſition of hands, he ſayes, (and proves out of the fourth Councel of Cartharge, Canon 5.) is not uſed in it, and yet his whole nineth Chapter is ſpent to prove, that impoſition of hands is eſſential in this Sacrament. It is a Sacrament, ſave onelyonly that it wants the eſſentials of a Sacrament, as do indeed all their five ſuppoſititious ones. The four laſt which with them are the leſſer Orders, have not, (as he ſayes) that probability that they are Sacraments, as that of ſubdeaconſhip: yet the opinion that affirmes their Sacramentality,The matter of theſe Sacraments not agreed upon. is far more probable then that which denyes it. Their learned Councel are not yet agreed, what is the matter of this, or theſe Sacraments, whether it be the impoſition of hands, or the holding out of ſuch an inſtrument, as belongs to their function, as a Chalice to the Prieſt, &c. The words uttered to each reſpectively,The form. when ſuch an inſtrument is delivered, are the form. The effectThe effect. of theſe is, 1. A Spiritual and perpetual power for diſcharge of their function, of which the indelible character is a token. 2. Saving grace for a right diſcharge of their function. The MiniſterThe Miniſter. of theſe is a Biſhop, and the Ceremonies, Anointing, and Shaving. That the Ordination of Miniſters for their function is Goſpel Ordinance, we willingly grant, and that no man ſhould take upon him this honour, to deal for men in things appertaining to God unleſſe he be called, as Aaron; Tymothy was this way called to the work, 1 Tim. 4.14. and he hath a directory given him for the call of others, 1 Tim. 5.22. Titus is left in Crete for this purpoſe, Tit. 1.5. and Paul and Barnabas, in every City where they come, act in it. Yet it is far ſhort of the honour of a Sacrament properly ſo called.Reaſons evincing it to be no Sacrament. The outward rite of impoſition of hands was uſed, not ſo much for ſignificancy, as decency, being an uſage in religious acts, of ſolemnity before the Law, under the Law, and continued in Goſpel-times, as ſtanding with the ſimplicity of it; yet we dare not with Bellarmine, make it eſſential to Ordination, finding no inſtitution of it for a ſign, much leſſe any ſaving grace annext to it by way of promiſe; ſo that here, both an outward inſtituted ſign, and inward grace are wanting. …ither is it ſuch in which all the people of God are intereſted. One peculiar order onelyonly can claime to it. In the time of the law, this was in uſe, and yet by their own confeſſion, it was then no Sacrament. And it is very ſtrange, that not onelyonly power given for adminiſtration of Sacraments, ſhould be a Sacrament, but authority to open the door for theſe that come for the Sacrament; as for other Ordinances, ſhould be a Sacrament likewiſe. The greateſt thing that adverſaries talke of is, that Calvin in Inſtit. lib. 4.Calvin vindicated. cap. 14. ſect. 20. ſaith, that he can willingly ſuffer Ordination to be called a Sacrament; but they are unwilling to take notice that he denyes to number, or reckon it among Ordinary Sacraments, and therefore it is plain, that he takes the word in a more large acceptation then ordinary: which is further clear in that in his Comment on Jam. 5.14. he makes the oyl which Chriſts Diſciples uſed, Mark 6.13. for the time that the uſe of it continued to be a Sacrament, when yet he reſtrains the whole effect or fruit of it to the health of the body onelyonly, which falls far ſhort of his famouſly known definition of a Sacrament; ſo that Ordination neither according to Scripture nor Calvin is to be accounted a Sacrament.
SECT. X. Marriage no Sacrament.
THe laſt Sacrament which they would obtrude upon us is Marriage, which they have determined to be a Sacrament, as well as the reſt that ſerve to make up the number, whileſt the ſolemnizing of it holds; and the parties are upon the work. The words, or ſignes expreſſing conſent (according to Bellarmine) is both matter Matter.and form Form.of this Sacrament: But when the work is over, then the married couple, in their perſons are the matter; and the words or ſignes are the form. The married perſons expreſſing their conſent in any manner whatſoever, are themſelves the MiniſterMiniſter. of this Sacrament. Canus ſeeing how great a diſhonour it is to Sacraments, to make that which is acted in the moſt prophane and clandeſtine manner, a Sacrament, reſolves that the words of the perſons, thus expreſſing conſent, are the form of the contract of Marriage, and that upon that account marriage is valid; but it is no Sacrament, according to him, unleſſe it be done by a lawful Miniſter; but this Bellarmine oppoſeth as a ſingular and new opinion. A Sacrament then, according to him, is, whereſoever a marriage is, and marriage is, where conſent of Parties is expreſſed; though in the lewdeſt way, by perſons under Parents power, and not at their own diſpoſe, by divine appointment. We willingly yield it to be an Ordinance,Reaſons evincing it to be no Sacrament. eſtabliſhed by God, but very ſhort of the nature or honour of a Sacrament, for divers reaſons: 1. It was the ſame, as it Reaſ. 1 is now, from the beginning; and yet all that ſpace of time from Adam to Chriſts coming in the fleſh it was no Sacrament, by our adverſaries confeſſion. 2. It is an Ordinance Reaſ. 2 in common for mankind, and no Ordinance peculiar to the Church; The whole world of mankind have their intereſt in it; and Sacraments are known to be onelyonly Church-priviledges. 3. All the people of God are not tyed to it: ſome Reaſ. 3 have their liberty to abſtain from it; and all Sacraments are under a precept; yea, according to our adverſaries, it is a degree of perfection unto merit in all to keep out of it, and unto men of ſome orders a defilement. Laſtly, as Durand Reaſ. 4 doth obſerve, The whole that is done in it ſpeaks its own uſe and ſignification, and the uſe and ſignification of Sacraments wholly depends upon divine inſtitution. They have nothing that beares any colour to ſay for the Sacramentality of it, ſave that Text of the Apoſtle, Epheſ. 5.32. where the Apoſtle having illuſtrated that love, which is due from the husband to the wife, by that ſimilitude of the love of Chriſt to the Church, concludes, This is a great Myſtery: and having ſpoke, both of the union betwixt Chriſt and the Church, and between man and his wife; to prevent all miſtakes, he addes, but I ſpeak of Chriſt and his Church; ſo that firſt we have not the word Sacrament there, but the word Myſtery, which by Bellarmines own confeſſion is not elſewhere in Scripture to be underſtood of any Sacrament: and Cajetan on the words (as Ameſius obſerves) warnes the prudent Reader to obſerve, that we have not from Paul in this place, that Marriage is any Sacrament. So that neither word nor thing is found in Scripture, that Marriage is a Sacrament. Every one of theſe might have born a large diſcourſe, as is well known to all that are verſt in theſe controverſies. But ſo many having ſpoken ſo fully to them, though I was unwilling (intending a Treatiſe of the Sacraments,) wholly to omit them, yet was reſolved, that the Reader might not be overburthened, to be as brief as poſſible in them.
FINIS.
A POSTSCRIPT TO REVEREND and LEARNED Maſter BAXTER, IN WHICH, Theſe following QƲESTIONS are friendly debated.
Whether faith in Chriſt, quà Lord, be the juſtifying act?
Whether mans Evangelicall, perſonall righteouſneſs, be here perfect?
Whether the Morall Law is a perfect rule of righteouſneſs?
Whether Ʋnbelief, and Impenitence in profeſſed Chriſtians, are violations of the Covenant of Grace?
Whether Faith and Repentance be Gods conditions, or mans, in the proper conditionall Covenant?
Whether the Covenant of Grace require perfection, and accept ſincerity?
With an enquiry into the judgement of Antiquity about ſeverall things in reference to Juſtification.
Sicut meritum Chriſti non poteſt apprehendi ad juſtitiam & ſalutem, niſi per organon fidei, divinitùs ad hoc ordinatum: ita ſi fides alibi, quàm in ſuo proprio & principali objecto, quaerat Juſtificationem, non invenit nec accipitillam.
Chemnit. exam: concil: Trident: de fid: Juſtif: pag. 159.
LONDON, Printed by S. G. for Abel Roper, at the Sign of the Sun, againſt Dunſtans Church in Fleet-ſtreet. 1655.