The Covenant Sealed, Treatise · Chapter 5
CHAP. V.
Sect. I. Of Sacramental ſignes.
I ſhall here purpoſely wave ſeveral Schoole-niceties, as in what predicament a Sacrament is to be placed: Taking it in the whole nature of it (as conſiſting of a twofold matter, the one outward and earthly, which is the viſible ſigne; the other inward and heavenly, which is the thing ſignified: and of a twofold forme; one outward, which is the due participation of it, according to the way preſcribed of God; the other inward, conſiſting in the analogy between the ſigne, and the thing ſignified) it muſt needs be an Ens aggregatum, and ſo not capable of any place in that ſeries of being: And ſigne, and ſeale, being clearly relatives; I ſhall leave the Reader to informe himſelf from learned Keckerman, in the third Book and eighth Chapter of his Syſteme of Philoſophy: what is the Relatum, the Correlatum, the relation it ſelf, the foundation, and the terminus in this Sacramental conſideration; and ſhall go on to lay open the ſeveral parts of this definition. The whole of it being comprized in this text of the Apoſtle, every part affords ſome doctrinal Obſervation. In the firſt place I ſhall obſerve that,
Sacraments are ſignes,
The truth of this obſervation is ſo clear of it ſelf, that it needs no proof; Taking the word Sacrament in the largeſt ſenſe that we can ſpeak of it (in which it falls ſhort of theſe Goſpel-Ordinances known by that name) it is yet Sacrae rei Signum, the ſign of an holy thing: And might be made good by a particular induction, not only in thoſe that we receive as Sacraments, whether extraordinary as the Cloud, the Red-Sea, Manna, and the Rock, which the Apoſtle parallells with Baptiſme, and the Lords Supper, 1 Cor. 10.1, 2. But alſo in the ordinary ſtated Sacraments, by a ſtanding law to be obſerved. In Circumciſion there was a foreskin to be cut off, in the Paſſeover a Lambe to be eaten: In Baptiſme there is water to be applyed, and in the Lords Supper bread and wine to be taken, eaten, and drunk; God condeſcending in mercy to our weakneſs, by earthly things to informe our judgments, and ſtrengthen our faith in that which is heavenly. Though Papiſts are much put to it, to find an outward ſign in ſome of their Sacraments, (as indeed in ſome of them there is none at all) yet they yeeld to this truth; that Sacraments have their ſigns, knowing that to be a true, though not a full definition, tnat a Sacrament is an outward viſibie ſign of an inward ſpiritual grace. That we may come to a right underſtanding of Sacramental ſigns, we muſt
Firſt, know what a ſign in general is.
Secondly, the ſeveral ſorts and kinds of ſigns, ſo farre at leaſt as will conduce to a right underſtanding of the point in hand; and Laſtly enquire what Sacramental ſigns are, and their properties.
What is meant by a ſign.A ſign Auſtin hath long ſince defined to be, that which ſhewes it ſelf to the ſenſes, and ſomewhat more beſides it ſelf to the underſtanding; and in other words,aSignum eſtres praeter ſpeciem quam ingerit ſenſibus aliud aliquid ex ſefaciens in cogitationem venire. A ſign is a thing which brings to mens thoughts another thing, beſides that which it offers to the ſenſes. As the Rain-bowe offers it ſelf to the eyes (we ſee the ſhape of it, and the colours in it) and brings the promiſe of God into our minds, that the Floud ſhall no more return to deſtroy the earth. It were an endleſs labour to undertake to lay down the ſeveral kinds of ſignes, with all their ſub-diviſions: I never ſaw ſuch a Scheme of them, but I have thought many more might be added to them;Neque enim hujus generis quiſquam enmeravit omnia, naſcuntur enim nova pro homi num arbitrio. Pulling. Deca. 5. Ser. 6. A diſtribution of ſigns. Natural ſigns. yet thoſe at leaſt that are notable may be reduced to certayn heads. Some are naturall, ſome are prodigious, and ſome are ſigns by inſtitution. Natural ſigns are thoſe that of themſelves, and of their own nature are apt to ſignifie ſomewhat beyond themſelves; As ſmoke ſignifies fire, a Rain-bowe ſhowres, paleneſe ſickneſs, Teares trouble, and grief of mind; of theſe Chriſt ſpeaks, Matth. 16.2, 3. When it is evening ye ſay, It will be fair weather, for the skie is red; and in the morning, It will be foul weather to day, for the skie is red and lowring. Now theſe ſignes are ſometimes (as ſignes ſo alſo) cauſes of the thing ſignified; As the Sun beames in the dawning are a ſign, and alſo a cauſe of the day approaching. The interpoſition of the Moon between us and the Sun, and of the earth between the Sun and Moon (foreſeen in their motions) are ſigns, and cauſes of Eclipſes. Sometimes they are effects of the thing that they ſignifie; As ſmoke is the effect of fire, and paleneſs of diſeaſes. Some are barely ſigns, and neither cauſes nor effects; as the colour of the skie is no cauſe of rain, but barely an indication that there are thoſe watry vapours in the air that will diſſolve themſelves on the earth: They may be effects of that which is the, cauſe of the thing ſignified, but not the effects of that which is a ſign. The Rain-bowe is an effect of that which is a cauſe of rain;Rules for the right underſtanding of natural ſigns. Remote cauſes are not ſigns. Here we might lay down ſome rules or obſervations.
Firſt, Remote cauſes (which have their effects at a great diſtance, ſo that many things may interpoſe themſelves as remoraes, cannot be looked upon by any as ſigns. When that book of common-prayer was impoſed by authority upon Scotland, upon counſel then over-much heeded; it might have been eaſily concluded upon, as a ſign of troubles and diſſenſions in preſent there; But no rational man could then have made it a prognoſtick of all thoſe tragical ſtirs, which in three Nations have already happened, and we yet know not upon the flame kindled what may follow: The ſpark then kindled, might in probability have been quenched. The Stars ſay our Stargazers, have their influence upon mens bodies, and by conſequence indirectly upon the operations of their ſoules. Hereupon by the poſture of the Stars at mens birth, they will conclude the trade of life in which men ſhall be employed, the Arts that they ſhall profeſs, the fortunes (as the world calls them) to which they ſhall be advanced, and the very laſt period of their dayes. But here ſo many things may interpoſe, that the childs Genius ſuppoſedly thus diſpoſed, cannot ſway all theſe things, Parents, friends, wayes of Education, thouſands of obſtacles, and diverſifications ſo intervene, that no judgement can be given. If more were granted then ever will be proved of the heavens influence on mens minds and bodies to incline, or diſpoſe them; yet that of the Wiſe man would utterly ſpoyle all Predictions, Eccleſ. 9.11. The race is not to the ſwift, nor the battel to the ſtrong, neither yet bread to the wiſe, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.
Seeondly, Partial cauſes in nature cannot be looked upon as ſigns,Patrial cauſes are no ſigns but all muſt concurre that have any influence. This (if I do not miſ-remember) good Mr. Perkins doth ſet down in a ſimilitude to this purpoſe. The heat of an Hen ſitting upon Eggs is the cauſe of a brood of young ones; but ſuppoſe an Hen ſhould ſit on Eggs of divers kinds, ſome of a Dove, ſome of a Partridge, ſome of a Pheſant, ſome of a Hawk, ſome of a Kite; who could now from the heat of the Hen, give his judgement of what kind, the birds ſhould be, that this heat would hatch? would they not be different in kind according to the variety of ſubjects that this heat works upon? If we ſee flint before us, this is no ſign of fire to be kindled, unleſs we ſee ſteele with it; nor yet flint and ſteele without tinder; nor yet flint, ſteele and tinder, without a hand employed to ſtrike fire: all put together make up a ſign, and not otherwiſe. To apply this to our purpoſe.
Firſt, Let it be granted, that the heavens have their operations on mens bodies on earth, no otherwiſe then the heat of the Hen hath for procreation of ſuch a kind, or the flint to the working of fire, yet the heavens have their influence upon divers, and diverſified objects: not diverſified by their influence only, but done to their hands, we derive our being from Parents, not onelyonly in our eſſentials, and integrals, but in a great meaſure in our temperature of body and mind. Who ſees not vertues and defects of body and mind to be hereditary, and that from either ſex, Children do patrizare, follow their Parents inclination without any imitation? now the heavens were not in the ſame poſture, Mars, Jupiter, &c. were not in the ſame aſcendent, in their birth as in ours. A begger is delivered under the ſame poſture of the heavens with a Noble-woman, ſhall the children of both be of the ſame trade and way?
Secondly, If the Stars and their influences were univerſal cauſes of what is done in, and ſhall befall our perſons, yet theſe men profeſs acquaintance onelyonly with ſome few, and thoſe almoſt onelyonly the Planets; The Stars of an unfixt motion. Thoſe innumerable Stars, which we call fixt, and have been ſaid to be in the eighth (which we call the ſtarry) ſphere, are not obſerved nor known in their various poſtures, what ſome may incline to, others will thwart and deſtroy.
For a third rule,Natural ſigns when cauſes unleſſe an extraordi…a y power inte…v…ne w…rk un…voydably. thoſe ſigns which fairly may be looked upon as cauſes in nature, have their effects, and produce the thing ſignified unavoydable, irreſiſtible; ſo that is a labour in vain to uſe any wayes, a tempting of God to make any addreſſes to him for prevention; who ever prayed that the day and night ſhould not be of an equal length, at ſuch a day in the Spring and Autumne, which are known to us by the name of the aequinoctial; or, that the Sun ſhall not be eclipſed at ſuch a time when it is known that the body of the Moon will interpoſe it ſelf in that ſeaſon? If the heavens are alike cauſes of mans vicious wayes, & of the ruine and bane of Nations, endeavours for prevention will be equally vain; whether it be by prayer, or repentance. He that cannot make the Sun to ſtand ſtill, or to return backwards by prayer, let him not think to ſtand in the gap for a land, or turn away Gods fiery indignation, ſeeing the courſe of nature appointed of God, brings it about above reſiſtance. I have heard of ſome Rabbins that pray every night that the Sun may riſe again, and the earth enjoy a new morning, as though it were no otherwiſe in nature by the God of nature ordered, and ſetled, but it lay in them to hinder it; but Chriſtians have learned better, then to think by their prayers to impoſe a new courſe on the way of nature. And knowing that prayer and repentance are wayes appointed of God, and by experience ſuccesfull for reverſal of judgements, and prevention of National deſolations, they know that Stars in a way of nature cannot effect it, nor yet the ſons or diſciples of nature foreſee or foretell it.
Secondly, There are prodigious ſignes,2. Prodigious ſigne. ſuch that are, either miraculous, exceeding all power of nature; or elſe wounds and monſters in nature; And I know not the reaſon why Chamier, lib. 1. Cap. 11. de Sacramentis in genere, ſhould exclude them from the number of ſignes; certainly the return of the Sun in Hezekiahs time, was to him a ſign of his recovery from ſickneſſe, and of his deliverance from the Aſſyrian, Iſay. 3 S. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Thus ſaith the Lord, the God of David thy father, I have heard thy prayer, I have ſeen thy tears, behold, I will adde unto thy daies, fifteen yeares; And I will deliver thee and this City out of the hand of the king of Aſſyria, and I will defend this City; And this ſhall be a ſign unto thee from the Lord, that the Lord will do this thing, that he hath ſpoken; Behold, I will bring again the ſhadow of the degrees which is gone down in the ſun-dyal of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. The like may be ſaid of Gideons fleece, that had dew on it when all the earth was dry beſides; and again the fleece dry when upon all the ground elſe it was dew; This was to ſignifie that the Lord would deliver Iſrael by his hand; Thoſe eclipſes of the lights of heaven to the Egyptians when there was light in Goſhen to the Iſraelites, Exod. 10.21, 22. and at Chriſts death, when from the ſixth houre there was darkneſſe over all the earth unto the ninth houre, Matth. 27.45. was no other. I will ſhew wonders in the heavens, and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of ſmoke, the Sun ſhall be turned into darkneſſe, and the Moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord, Joel 2.30, 31. There ſhall be ſigns in the Sun, and in the Moon, and in the Stars, and upon the earth diſtreſſe of Nations, and perplexity, the ſea and the waves roaring, mens hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after thoſe things which are coming upon the earth, for the powers of heaven ſhall be ſhaken, which Zanchius underſtands of thoſe Comets, which as wonders in nature, in ſeverall ages have appeared. He that pleaſes may conſult the Author himſelf treating de Cometarum prognoſticis, lib. 3. de operibus Dei, Cap. 2. Theſ. 12.
Signes by Instition.Thirdly, There are ſignes by inſtitution: not ſo in nature, or by way of prodigy, but as they are deſigned to ſignify: Theſe are, 1. Of man, ſome by impoſition, man putting at pleaſure ſuch a ſignification upon them; words in this ſenſe are ſignes; no other reaſon of primitive names of things can be given, but his pleaſure that gave them; Some by cuſtome, as an Ivy buſh is a ſign of wine; Sometimes by covenant, or agreement, ſo the arrowes that Jonathan ſhot, with the words that he agreed to utter, were a ſign to David that there was peace, or that there was harm intended to him, 1 Sam. 20.20, &c. So the Scarlet thred was a ſign between Rahab and the ſpies, Joſhua 2.18. A Souldiers Colours, or the word that is given on his guard, or in fight is ſuch a ſign. 2. There are ſignes by inſtitution from God, ſuch was the rainebowe; It may be a naturall ſign of ſhowers; but it is by inſtitution, that it ſignifies, that there ſhall not be any more a flood to deſtroy the earth, Gen. 9.11. Theſe inſtituted ſignes, whether of God, or man, admit of other diſtinctions, which will be touched upon in the next place, in opening the nature, and ſhewing the properties of Sacramentall ſignes. There are ſignes of a fourth ſort which might have been ſpoken to, namely thoſe that are Diabolicall or ſuperſtitious; But I ſhall not trouble my ſelf or the Reader with them.
SECT. II. The properties of Sacramental ſignes.
FIrſt, Sacramental ſignes are externall, and ſenſible,Sacramentall ſignes are, 1. Exte…nal and ſ…nſible. ſuch that do not immediately, but by the help of the ſenſes, affect the underſtanding. There are indeed ſuch ſignes that immediately offer themſelves to the mind, which ſome call mentall, or intellectuall Signes; Theſe are either notions framed in the underſtanding, or actions that are paſt, and called into the thoughts, Matth. 12.39. An evill and adulterous generation ſeeketh after a ſign; and there ſhall no ſign be given to it, but the ſign of the Prophet Jonas. Though ſome Popiſh Writers have affirmed, that this ſenſibility of the outward ſignes, is not of the eſſence of the Sacraments; ſeeing God might if he had pleaſed have inſtituted Sacraments with ſignes meerly ſpirituall, yet they are diſliked in this by their own party; and themſelves alſo confeſſe, that the ſignes that God hath inſtituted, are external and ſenſible; and we enquire not after ſuch as God might have given, had he pleaſed; but ſuch that he hath pleaſed to give to his people.
Secondly, They are viſible ſignes.2. Viſible. It is not enough that they are the objects of other ſenſes, as ſuch that may be heard, felt, taſted; but Sacramentall ſignes muſt be the object of ſight; This is cleer by the induction of particulars. The foreskin in Circumciſion, the lamb in the Paſſeover, water in Baptiſme, bread and wine in the Lords Supper, with all the actions of each of theſe are viſible; And thus a Sacrament by the Ancients hath ſtill been defined, An outward and viſible ſign of an inward and Spirituall grace, which hath never been excepted againſt as unſound; but only as inſufficient. It is too ſhort, but in no part erroneous. And Auſtin, lib. 19. Contra Fauſt. Cap. 25. as he is quoted by Bellarmine, demands, what are all corporall Sacraments but certain viſible words? Other ſenſes may accompany the ſight, but nothing can be a Sacramentall ſign that excludes the ſight, nothing that is not in nature viſible. And therefore ſounds or words, are no Sacramental ſignes, which being no object of ſight, nor of any other ſenſe, but of that of hearing, they are not in any ſuch capacity. Here a man might think that Bellarmine and we were agreed, Seeing he ſo often gives Sacramentall ſignes that Epithete of viſible; and, lib. 1. de Sacramen. Cap. 18. putting it to the queſtion, whether Sacraments conſiſt of things as their matter, and words as their forme? he determines affirmatively, and laies this down for his ſecond propoſition, that,bIn Sacramentis omnibus novae legis inveniuntur res ut materia, & verba ut forma. In all Sacraments of the New Teſtament, things are found as the matter, and wordes as the forme, and none can doubt but things put in oppoſition to words as the matter of Sacraments are viſible. But he hath his art to come off by diſtinction, or rather contradiction. To the firſt he ſaies, thatcPrima particula, vel accipit elementum viſibile & tractabile, pro qualibet re ſenſibili, ut accipiant Catholicic &, Catholiques take the word viſible, and tractable element, for any thing that is any way ſenſible, that may be perceived by the eare, and not for that onelyonly, which by the ſight and touch onelyonly can be perceived, lib. 1. de Sacramentis in genere, Cap. 14. And ſo a ſound will make up his viſible, and tractable ſign, which is of neceſſity in Sacraments; And he can explain that ſecond propoſition with a fourth, which is,*Ut Sacramenta conſtare dicantur rebus, & verbis, non eſt neceſſe, ut res non ſint verba, & verba non ſint res, ſed ſat eſt, ſi a…quid funga…ur vice rei, aliud vice verbi. That Sacraments may be ſaid to conſiſt of things and words, but it is not neceſſary that things be not words, nor words be not things; But it is enough that ſomewhat ſupply the place of thinges or words, Cap. 18. And all this wild ſtuffe, which ſcarce I think can be parallelled in the moſt unlearned Writer, to make it good that their Penance and Marriage are Sacraments; in both which we muſt take words (which he ſaies are the form of thoſe Sacraments) for viſible ſignes, which alſo conſtitute the matter of them, or elſe we have no viſible ſign at all, and conſequently no Sacrament. Some here queſtion the caſe of blind people, by whom no ſign can be ſeen; but it is one thing to be viſible, and the proper object of ſight, and another thing to be actually ſeen viſible and viſum differre one from another; It is in it ſelf viſible, though through defect in the organ, it is not ſeen of ſome. Such are at a loſſe in receiving, though not equall to the loſſe of deaf people in the Word, which is to be heard, ſeeing when the Word is not heard, it affects no other of the ſenſes; but when bread and wine are not ſeen they are touched, and taſted; and where blindneſſe is not from the birth, there is ſome ſupply from the memory likewiſe
Thirdly, they are Analogicall ſignes,3. Analogicall. ſuch as carry Analogy and proportion with the thing ſignified; they have ever an aptneſſe in them for reſemblance. That of Auſtin is famous, If dSi enim Sacramenta quandam ſimilitudinem earum rerum, quarum ſunt Sacramenta, non haberent, omnino Sacramenta non eſſent.Sacraments carry no reſemblance of the things whereof they are Sacraments, they are no Sacraments at all. Gerrard. de Sacramentis, Cap. 3. Sect. 3. in the name of the Lutherane party doth confeſſeeNon negamus ſigna Sacramentalia foreign quandam cum fructu Sacramenti habere. Sed analogia illa ſignificativa eſt ſecundarium rei terrenae ſive elementi in Sacramentis Novi T. officium; primarium officium eſt ut ſit foreign, vehiculum & medium per quod res coeleſtis exhibetur, that there is ſuch Analogy in Sacraments, but he ſaith, that this Analogy in the Sacraments of the New Teſtament, is but the ſecondary office of it. The primary and chief office is to be a medium or vehicalum, a means for exhibition of the grace of the Sacrament to the perſon; But gives us no reaſon. And Suarez (as Chamier obſerves) denyes this Analogy between ſign and thing ſignified to be neceſſary, yet confeſſes that in all Sacraments there is ſuch Analogy found; But, as Chamier demands, how ſhall an univerſall neceſſity be concluded, but by particular experiments? and what is found in every one, we conclude to be of neceſſity in all; finding upon obſervation this Analogy in every Sacrament, we conclude it neceſſary in all Sacraments. There are ſome ſigns have their ſignification wholly from their inſtitution, and of themſelves carry no proportion. As the ſound of a trumpet which is the ſign of a troop of horſe, the ſound of a Bell which is the ſign of an Aſſembly, whether for civill, or for ſacred things; An Ivy buſh the ſign of wine to be fold.Diſtribution of Analogicall ſignes. There are other ſignes that of themſelves declare their own ſignification as the print of the foot on the ground whether of horſe or man, is a ſign of the foot that made the impreſſion; A ſhadow is a ſign of a body that darkens the place neer to it. There are a third ſort of ſignes of a middle nature, that have their reſemblance of the thing ſignified, but in that indeterminate confuſed manner, that they may rather be ſaid to be fit to ſignifie that whereof they are ſignes, then that of themſelves without further declaration added they do ſignifie. And ſuch are the ſignes in Sacraments, as Thomas Aquinas obſerves, part. 3. quaeſt. 60. artic. 6. and after him Bellarmine lib. 1. de Sacramentis in genere; and Chamier gives his aſſent to both, lib. 1. de Sacramentis in genere, Cap. 11. Water hath a faculty to waſh, as alſo to refreſh, and cool; when water is ſet apart for Baptiſme, though there be a fitneſſe in it to ſignifie waſhing; yet there muſt be a word to explain that it is to ſignifie waſhing, and with it the thing that is cleanſed.
4. Ritual.Fourthly, They are not barely ſubſtantial ſignes, but rituall alſo. The outward elements do not barely ſignifie, but the inſtituted actions likewiſe are ſignificant. In Circumciſion the foreskin alone was not a ſign, but the cutting of it off, in the way appointed of God, ſeemes the chief in ſignification. In the Paſſeover there is not onelyonly a lamb, but roſting, eating, &c. all which are ſignificant. In Baptiſme there is not onelyonly water, but the application of the perſon to the water in dipping, or the water to the perſon by infuſion, or ſprinkling. The word in Scripture uſe comprizes any waſhing; and therefore in Baptiſme it is of it ſelf indifferent. In the Lords Supper there is not onelyonly bread and wine, but the bread is broke, the bread and cup delivered, receiving, eating, and drinking. Some indeed queſtion, whether the breaking of the bread be any Sacramental rite; or at all of the integrality of the Sacrament? but all confeſſe that in caſe it be within an inſtitution, it is then neceſſary. About the beginning of the reformation, ſome that ſtood for the ejection of Ceremonies, pleaded for ſitting at the Lords Supper, as an inſtituted Sacramental rite, ſignifying our coheireſhip with Chriſt; But others that in after times did manage the ſame cauſe, ſaw that miſtake, and therefore urged not the neceſſity of ſitting upon that account, but onelyonly did except againſt kneeling, either as Idolatrous, or carrying too great an appearance of it.
Fifthly, They are diſtinguiſhing and differencing ſignes, ſeparating a people that receive them,5. Diſtingu…ſhing. from all others that are not intereſſed in them; ſo they have the nature of badges, or cognizances; Calvin juſtly rejects thoſe that make the Sacraments no more but bare teſtimonies of our profeſſion, or diſtinguiſhing marks. That as a Roman was known by his gown from a Grecian in his cloke; and in Rome the ſeveral orders had their diſtinctions. The Senatour was diſtinguiſhed from the Knight by his Purple, and the Knight from one of the Commonalty by his ring; as with us a Knight of the Garter is diſtinguiſhed by his blue Ribband, and a Knight of the Bath by the red; yet they cannot be denyed, but that they have this diſtinguiſhing uſe. By theſe Sacramental ſignes the people of God are known from others, which is herein plain, in that they are ſignes of the Covenant, and by an uſual metonomy called by the name of the Covenant, Gen. 17.20. Act. 7.8. And therefore diſtinguiſhed thoſe that received them from all that are out of Covenant. So Circumciſion diſtinguiſhed a Jew from all others. A man in uncircumciſion was an heathen. Circumciſion in the fleſh did denominate a Jew outwardly, as Circumciſion of the heart (which is that to which Circumciſion in the letter did engage) did denominate a man a Jew inwardly. That which Circumciſion was in this reſpect, Baptiſme is: As ſoon as any joyned himſelf to Abrahams family, and afterwards to the ſeed of Abraham in Covenant, he was to be circumciſed, Gen. 17.13. Exod. 12.48. None were to be as one born in the land, but a circumciſed man. As ſoon as any joyned himſelf to the body and ſociety of Chriſtians, he was baptized, ſo was Chriſts Commiſſion, Diſciple all Nations, baptizing them. No ſooner was Paul, the Eunuch, the Jaylour, Lydia, yea, Simon Magus made diſciples, but they were forthwith baptized, The Paſſeover as well as Circumciſion, the Lords Supper, as well as Baptiſme are diſtinguiſhing ſignes. But theſe find men beforehand diſtinguiſhed. The preceding Sacraments whereby men are initiated and firſt enrolled, are more properly diſtinguiſhing.
Sixthly, They are congregating, uniting and cloſing ſignes;6. Congregating this may ſeem contradictory to the former, which makes them diſtinguiſhing, and differencing. To unite and difference are evidently contrary, but theſe well enough agree, the contradiction being not ad idem. They are not the ſame that they unite and difference; They diſtinguiſh men in Covenant from ſtrangers, and they unite men in Covenant as one among themſelves. A Souldiers Colours difference him from all other companies, and unite him to thoſe of that body into which he is received. As Philoſophers ſay of heat, that it doth congregare homogenea, and diſſipare heterogenea, gather together thoſe things that are of a like, and ſeparate thoſe that are of a different quality; ſo it is with Sacraments. This the Apoſtle takes for granted, 1 Cor. 10.16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21. His buſineſs there is to take Chriſtians off from joyning with heathens in their Idol-ſacrifices, becauſe ſuch joyning makes them one body with thoſe Idolaters. Which is clear in the 19, 20, 21. v. What ſay I then? that the Idol is any thing? or that which is offered in ſacrifice to Idols is any thing? but I ſay, that the things which the Gentiles ſacrifice, they ſacrifice to Devlls, and not to God; and I would not that ye ſhould have fellowſhip with Devils; ye cannot drink of the Cup of the Lord, and of the Cup of Devils; ye cannot he partakers of the Lords Table, and of the table of Devils. And this he had alſo argued againſt, Chap. 8. Verſ. 10. And he proves that this makes them one Idolatrous body with Gentiles, in their ſacrifices to Devls, by way of an analogy with Chriſtian and Jewiſh worſhip. Becauſe joyning in the Lords Supper to partake of one bread, makes men one body Chriſtian, and partaking with Jewes after the fleſh, eating of their ſacrifices, made partakers of the Altar of the Jewes and one body Jewiſh, verſ. 17, 18. therefore joyning with heathens in their worſhip makes one body heatheniſh. A text which ſome weakly enough have brought againſt mixt communions, to prove, that none muſt joyn with a bad man in a Chriſtian Sacrament, when it onelyonly ſerves to prove that Chriſtians may not joyn with Idolaters in the Devils Sacraments. They difference us from all thoſe that want, and joyne us unto all thoſe that enjoy theſe badges of a Chriſtian profeſſion.
7. Engaging.Seventhly, They are engaging ſignes to anſwer the profeſſion that we make, the company or family to which we relate; The name that we bear, and to do the duty that we owe. What the name of Chriſtian, or ſervant, or people of God ſpeaks, the ſame theſe ſigns call for, As the Altar ſet up, Joſh. 22.24. did witneſs, that thoſe two Tribes and a half did belong with the other Tribes to the God of Iſrael; ſo theſe Sacramental ſignes witneſs the ſame thing likewiſe.
8. Remembrancing,Eighthly, They ace remonſtrative, and remembrancing ſignes; ſometimes of mercy conferred: The Paſſeover was a ſign of Iſraels freedom out of the land of Egypt, Exod. 12.26, 27. The Lords Supper ſhewes forth the Lords death untill he come, 1 Cor. 11.26. being appointed to be done in remembrance of Chriſt, Matth. 26.26. Mar. 14, 20. Luk. 22.29. 1 Cor. 11.24. of Chriſt dying, giving his body and blood for us. As thoſe twelve ſtones taken out of Jordan by twelve men, out of every Tribe a man, were for a ſign in ages following, a memorial unto the children of Iſrael for ever, that the waters of Jordan were cut off before the Arke of the Covenant of the Lord, when it paſſed over Jordan, Joſh. 4.6, 7. So theſe Sacramental ſigns are memorials of the mercy mentioned: They are alwayes memorials of the Covenant that we have entred, the duty in which we ſtand engaged. The Apoſtle having ſhewed, that Baptiſme doth ſignifie a death to ſin, and a life in righteouſneſs, Rom. 6.4. preſently thence gives warning, he that is dead is free from ſin, verſ. 6.
Ninethly, I might ſhew that they are ratifying and confirming ſignes, but this is diſtinctly mentioned.9, Ratifying. They are ſeals as well as ſignes which remaines to be handled.
SECT. III. Corollaries from the former Doctrine.
SEveral conſectaries follow from this obſervation, which containes one part of the definition of a Sacrament.
Firſt,The ſign and thing ſignified are analogically one. That the ſign and the thing ſignified in every Sacrament are one, not properly and really one, but in that manner one; as all thoſe things that remain diſtinct in nature one from other, yet bear proportion and reſemblance one with other are one; One, as Chriſt and a door, Chriſt and a vine are one; They are ſo one, that one may be ſaid to be the other; when yet one diſtinct thing from other cannot be ſaid to be the other in a ſenſe that is proper, my hand is not my writing, my writing is not my hand, but my hand is that which writes, and writing is written with my hand; and ſo my writing is uſually called my hand: and theſe ſpeeches are in all mouthes vulgar, & common; and are ſo far from being hard to underſtand, that indeed they help the underſtanding. A woman ſhewes a written peece of parchment, and ſayes, Here is my Dower or Joynture; when Dower, or Joynture is in Lands, not in Papers. Every one knows, that this ſpeech means, that it is that, which veſts her in it; we ſhew a paper, and ſay, This is my will, not meaning that faculty of the ſoul it ſelf, but a manifeſtation of what our deſire is ſhould be done with our eſtate after our deceaſe; ſuch a man lives on my trencher, that is on the meat which is laid on the trencher at my table: ſo that men ſhould bleſſe God for that he condeſcends to ſpeak in ſuch perſpicuity, and not complain in ſuch ſpeeches of difficulty. Upon account of this oneneſs between the ſign and the thing ſignified, ſometimes the ſign is ſaid to be the thing ſignified, as that Bread is the body of Chriſt, and the Cup the blood of Chriſt, Matth. 26.26, 27, So that that of Auſtin is famous, that Chriſt ſaid, This is my body, when he gave the ſign of his body. Circumciſion is called the Covenant, Gen. 17.9, 10, 11. Ast. 7.8. The Lambe is called the Paſſeover, Exod. 12.11, 21. Matth. 26.28. And the trees before ſpoken to, are called the tree of life, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil; ſee Ezek. 5.5. 1 Cor. 10.4. In all of theſe places, the ſigne hath the name of the thing ſignified; by reaſon of Analogy and repreſentation, and all by inſtitution: ſometimes on the other hand, the thing ſignified is called by the name of, and is ſaid to be the ſign, as, 1 Cor. 5.7. Chriſt our Paſſeover is ſacrificed for us; ſo, Joh. 6.55. My fleſh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed; fitly reſembled by meat and drink. Joh. 15.1. I am the true vine, fitly reſembled by a vine, ſee Joh. 10.10, 11. Sometimes the effect which the thing ſignified doth produce, is called by the name of the ſign, ſo in that ſpeech of Ananias related by Paul, Act. 22.16. Ariſe, and be baptized, and waſh away thy ſins, calling on the Name of the Lord; when it was not the water that he was then to uſe, but the blood of Chriſt, that could take away ſin, 1 Joh. 1.7. ſo Baptiſme ſaves, 1 Pet. 3.21. when as the Apoſtle there (as may be further ſhewen) explains his own meaning: ſo the putting off the ſins of the fleſh, is called by the name of Circumciſion, and of Baptiſme, Coloſ. 2.11, 12. Sometimes that which is the proper work of the ſign, is attributed to the thing ſignified, Deut. 10.16. Circumciſe therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be not ſtiffe necked. Theſe, and ſuch like ſpeeches as theſe, would be familiar with us, and we ſhould be able to give an account of them, in caſe we underſtood Sacramental relations, and other reſemblances frequent in Scriptures.
Secondly, Then it further followes,There is no ſuch things as tranſubſtantiation. that there can be no ſuch thing as tranſubſtantiation: The ſign and the thing ſignified remain diſtinct, and cannot properly be the ſame in any Sacraments. Of all Scripture-Sacraments, and all thoſe additional forged Sacraments of the Church of Rome, one onelyonly is by them thus honoured. The Paſchal Lambe was not turned into the body of Chriſt, nor is water turned into the blood of Chriſt in Baptiſme; Nor do any other of their ſuppoſed ſignes loſe their nature, onelyonly in the Lords Supper bread is not bread, (though it be ſtill called bread) but fleſh; wine is not wine, (though called the fruit of the vine) but blood; we ſee bread, we taſte bread, we handle bread; and yet we muſt not give credit either to our eyes, ears, taſte, or touch, but we muſt believe it is no bread. It hath the natural properties of bread and wine; it gives natural nouriſhment as bread and wine; the bread, if eaten in exceſſe, and the wine drunken will cauſe ſurfeit, and intoxicate as bread and wine. As the natural force, ſo the natural defects of bread and wine, ſtill remain after conſecration. The bread breeds wormes, and the wine turnes to vineger; yet we muſt believe. that God by miracle hath taken away bread and wine, given blood and fleſh, turned bread into fleſh, wine into blood, and yet ſtill by miracles keeps up the natural ſhape, properties and defects of theſe outward Elements. When God in Scripture wrought miracles, the miracles were ſeen and known. There have been tranſubſtantiations, but thoſe were never hidden; Moſes his rod was turned into a Serpent, and it was ſeen to be a Serpent; ſo that Moſes on ſight fled from it, Exod. 4.3. It was turned again into a rod, and known to be a rod, verſ. 4. Chriſt turnes water into wine. Joh. 2.9. that was not judged to be ſtill water, or called by that name, but by the taſte known to be of the moſt precious wine, verſ. 10. But our ſenſes having thus deceived us, and made us believe that there is ſtill bread and wine, when by miracle bread and wine is gone, where ſhall we find any Word to ground our faith to believe this deluſion? The words of the inſtitution or nothing muſt carry it.
This is my body, this Cup is my blood in the New Teſtament: But ſuch an interpretation, 1. Deſtroyes the outward ſign, and makes it no Sacrament. 2. Makes the ſpeech wholly not Sacramental. No Sacramental ſpeech can be proper, and we have enough from out adverſaries to excuſe our faith from the acknowledgement of any ſuch a change. If we look no further then three teſtimonies quoted by learned Mr. Gataker, from three Romiſh Cardinals in his diſcourſe of tranſubſtantiation, Pag. 2. 3. Cardinal Bellarmine (ſaith he) granteth that theſe words, This is my body, may imply either ſuch a real change of the bread as the Catholiques hold, or ſuch a figurative change as the Calviniſts hold; but will not bear that ſenſe that the Lutherans give it. And Cardinal Cajetan acknowledgeth, and freely confeſſeth, that there appeareth not any thing out of the Goſpel that may enforce us to underſtand thoſe words. This is my body properly. And he addeth, that nothing in the text hindreth, but that thoſe words may as well be taken in a metaphorical ſenſe, as thoſe words of the Apoſtle, the Rock was Chriſt; and that the words of either propoſition may well be true, though the thing there ſpoken be not underſtood in a proper ſenſe, but in a metaphorical ſenſe onelyonly. And he further q ſaith, he finds alleadged out of Biſhop Fiſher (whom Bellar. lib. de Scriptor. Eccleſiaſt. Pag. 209. makes both a Cardinal, and a Martyr) that there is not one word in St. Matthewes Goſpel from which the true preſence of Chriſts fleſh and blood in our Maſſe may be proved; out of Scripture it cannot be proved.
And being traduced for this quotation by an adverſary, as taking king it out of a nameleſs Author, ignorant, and unſincere in his aſſertions; In his defence of the ſaid diſcourſe, Pag. 44. he tells his adverſary, that his Author whom he thus brands, as ignorant and unſincere, is Biſhop Andrewes, in his anſwer to the Apology of Card. Bellar. againſt King James his admonitory preface, Chap. 1. and I find Muſculus in his common places de Coena Domin. Pag. 365. quoting the ſame words out of the ſame Author, and much more to the ſame purpoſe.—He that would be further furniſhed againſt this monſter of tranſubſtantiation, in our own language; let him read the fore-mentioned diſcourſe of Mr. Gatakers, together with the defence, as alſo Biſhop Mortons his Treatiſe divided into eight parts of the inſtitution of the Sacrament of the body and blood of Chriſt.
Gods goodneſſe ſeen in his condeſcenſion to our weakneſſe.Thirdly, We may ſee the goodneſs of God, in this way of condeſcenſion by earthly things, carnal, ſenſible, and ſuitable to our natures, to help our underſtandings, and ſtrengthen our faith in things heavenly. If we were meer incorporeal ſubſtances, and had ſpirits not ſhut up, and impriſoned in bodies, then (ſaith Chryſoſtome) we ſhould have had ſpirituall things in an anſwerable way, nakedly in themſelves held out unto us; then Parables had not been uſed, nor ſimilitudes borrowed, nor Sacramental ſigns inſtituted. But having ſouls affixt to bodies, that which our ſpirits ſhould learn, theſe things of earth are imployed of God to teach; God looked not at himſelf, when he choſe this method, It is farre below him to fill up his ſacred Oracles with theſe things, but at our imbecillity. In caſe he ſhould ſpeak as God, that is, in a language anſwering the Majeſtie of God, we muſt be as gods to comprehend his words, and underſtand his ſpeech; but dealing with us that have bodies made up of earth, and minds over eagerly addicted to earth, he is pleaſed in his tranſactions not to deal (if I may ſo ſay) as God, but as with man, ſeeking glory onelyonly in manifeſtation of his goodneſs, and tender regard of our weakneſs. Chriſt ſaw a neceſſity of this way of dealing, not onelyonly as God, by his omniſcience, but as man, by his practical experience. He taught Nicodemus the nature of regeneration by ſimilitudes borrowed from water, and from the wind, Except a man be borne of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdome of God. The wind bloweth where it liſteth, and thou heareſt the ſound thereof, but canſt not tell whence it cometh and whither it goeth; So is every one that is born of the Spirit. Joh. 3.5, 8. Notwithſtanding all this endeavour of Chriſt to cleare this truth, Nicodemus ſtill remaines ignorant, he anſwers and ſaies to Chriſt, How can theſe things be? Chriſt after a ſharp reproof, ver. 10. (Art thou a maſter in Iſrael, and knoweſt not theſe things? not onelyonly a Scholar, but a Teacher, and that not in any place of darkneſſe, but in Iſrael that valley of viſion) addes, ver. 12. If I have told you earthly things, and ye beleeve not, how ſhall ye beleeve if I tell you of heavenly things? Chriſt had not read a Lecture to Nicodemus of the water, or of the wind, neither had Nicodemus queſtioned either of thoſe aſſertions, The wind bloweth where it liſteth, thou knoweſt not whence it comes, nor whither it goes; that he ſhould on this account charge Nicedemus with not beleeving doctrine of this kind; But the meaning is, If I ſpeak of regeneration by earthly ſimilitudes, and expreſſions, obvious to the ſenſes, and you are not able to apprehend, and underſtand them; how then if I ſpeak to you of heavenly things in an heavenly manner, without any ſuch ſenſible repreſentation at all, would you then underſtand? This interpretation of theſe words Maldonate doth give, notwithſtanding Bullinger, Decad. 5 Ser. 6. had gone before him in it. Ravanellus in his Theſaurus, and Mr. Burges in his Ser. 35. pag. 211. give the ſame. In which we ſee our need of help this way, and the ſingular condeſcenſion of Chriſt Jeſus in dealing this way for our help, which place in my thoughts ſerves to cleere that ſpeech of the Evangeliſt, Mar. 4.33. And with many ſuch parables ſpake he the word unto them, as they were able to beare it; many are there reckoned up, and more by Matthew, Matth. 13. many more perhaps were uttered, then either Matthew or Mark relate; as they were able to bear, ſaith the text, according to their capacities, ſay the larger Annotations. And ſo Janſenius upon the words,fQuo ſignificat Dominum voluiſſe aptare ſuum ſermonem ad captum auditorum, & ob id locutum in parabolis, quod nudi ſermonis nondum eſſent capaces; at parabolas ſuas deſumſiffe a rebus vulgaribus, per quas idiotae utcunque induci & parari poſſunt ad myſteriorum captum. Hereby he ſignifies that Christ would fit his ſpeech to the capacity of the hearers, becauſe they were not capable of naked truthes, and he borrowed his ſpeeches from vulgar things, by which the moſt unlearned might be fitted for the myſteries of the kingdome of heaven. Though ſome underſtand the words as they were worthy to hear, and not to underſtand, parables being above the common capacities, and put for hard and difficult ſpeeches; As, Matth. 13.10. Chriſt being demanded, Why ſpeakeſt thou in parables? he anſwers, ver. 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. Becauſe it is given unto you to know the myſteries of the Kingdome of heaven, but to them it is not given: for whoſoever hath, to him it ſhall be given, and he ſhall have more abundance: but whoſoever hath not, from him ſhall be taken away, even that he hath. Therefore ſpeake I to them in parables, becauſe they ſeeing ſee not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they underſtand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Iſaiah which ſaith, By hearing ye ſhall hear, and not understand, and ſeeing ye ſhall ſee, and not perceive: For this peoples heart is waxed groſſe, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have cloſed, leſt at any time they ſhould ſee with their eyes, and hear with their eares, and ſhould underſtand with their heart, and ſhould be converted, and I ſhould heal them. But bleſſed are your eyes, for they ſee; and your eares, for they heare. But theſe texts may be reconciled; A parable or Similitude, when men ſtay in the outward bark of it, is as a riddle, nothing can be more obſcure; Some myſtery men know is hid under it, but they know not what. Therefore Chriſt having uttered a parable to the multitude, Matth. 15.11. and Peter requeſting, Declare unto us this parable, ver. 15. ſaith, Are ye alſo yet without underſtanding? Parables explained are the plaineſt way of teaching, ſhewing the face of heavenly things in earthly glaſſes; and therefore the Lord to ſet out his dealing with his own people faith, I have alſo ſpoken by the Prophets, and I have multiplyed viſions, and uſed ſimilitudes by the Miniſtery of the Prophets, Hoſ. 12.10. But the ſcope be not diſcerned, onelyonly that which is ſaid of earthly things, and no more is known. Now what words are to the eares in ſimilitudes and compariſons, that Sacramentall ſignes are to the eyes; by both the underſtanding is holpen, the memory refreſht, and as may (God willing) be unfolded, faith ſtrengthened. The cleanſing from ſin, we find in Scripture held forth under the metaphor of pouring out water, Ezek. 36.25. Then will I ſprinkle clean water upon you, and ye ſhall be clean from all your filthineſſe, and from all your Idols will I cleanſe you. To which the Apoſtle alludes, Epheſ. 5.26. where he ſaith, Chriſt loved the Church, and gave himſelf for it, that he might ſanctifie and cleanſe it by the waſhing of water, by the word. Which was typified alſo in thoſe divers waſhings mentioned by the Apoſtle, Heb. 9.10. which the blood of Chriſt doth really work, Purging our conſciences from dead works, to ſerve the living God, cleanſing us from all ſin, 1 John 1.7. and therefore it is called the ſprinkling of the blood of Jeſus, 1 Pet. 1.2. In Baptiſme, in a ſtanding Ordinance, this is held out, The party intereſſed in Covenant is dipped in, or waſhed with water, and the reaſon of it given, Acts 22.16. Ariſe, and be baptized, and waſh away thy ſins, calling on the Name of the Lord. Chriſt promiſes to his Church living bread, and water whereof whoſoever drinketh ſhall never thirſt. He further explaines himſelf: The bread which I will give, is my fleſh, which I will give for the life of the world, Joh. 6.51. My fleſh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed, Joh. 6.55. Chriſt being to dye, holds this out in outward ſignes, and with his own Comment upon them, Taking and breaking bread, he ſaith, This is my body; Taking the cup; he ſaith, This is the cup in the New Teſtament in my blood ſhed for them, and for many, for the remiſſion of ſinnes. In elements of frequent uſe, ordinary, eaſy to be compaſſed, theſe high myſteries and ſingular mercies are ſhadowed.
SECT. IV. A further Corollary drawn from the ſame Doctrine.
The neceſſity of explanation of Sacramental ſignes.FOurthly, Then there is a neceſſity that theſe Sacramental ſignes be opened, explained, the myſtery cleared, the thing ſignified held out, and the Analogy and proportion made known; otherwiſe the ſoul is ſtill left in the dark, and no benefit reaped, either for the help of our faith, or clearing of our underſtanding. There is no Sacrament (as Calvin well obſerves) without a promiſe preceding. The Sacrament is an appendant to the promiſe as a ſeal among men is to a Covenant; an earneſt to a bargain, or a ring hath been to a marriage; were there no promiſe, there were nothing in thoſe ſignes; As where there is no Covenant, there is nothing confirmed by a ſeal; where there is no bargain, nothing is ratified by earneſt given; where there is no matrimoniall conſent, the ring would be but an impoſture; the Word of promiſe gives being to the Sacrament, according to that received ſpeech,gAccedit verbum ad elementum & fit Sacramentum. The Word to added to the Element, and it is made a Sacrament. And there can be no improvement of the Sacrament, to any ſpirituall advantage, without underſtanding of the promiſe. Were the ſignes, ſuch as did proclaime their own ſignification, as a footſtep, the foot that made the impreſſion, or a ſhadow the body, then the ſignes might ſtand alone, and ſpeak their own intentions; But being creatures for civill uſes, and having only an aptneſſe in them to hold out the thing that they ſignifie, and (as hath been ſaid) equally apt to other ſignifications, a further explanation is neceſſary. Signes among men muſt have their ſignifications known as well as founds in muſical, and military inſtruments; otherwiſe as none could know in the one what is piped, or harped, nor upon ſound could prepare themſelves to battell, 1 Cor. 14.7, 8. ſo in the other, none can know what is ſhadowed out or reſembled. There was a cuſtome to ratifie Covenants by killing a calfe, and the Covenanters paſſage between the parts of it; as you may ſee, Jerem. 34. He that underſtood not the meaning of that ceremony, could know nothing of a Covenant, by that means between parties to be ſolemnized, none underſtand any more then by ſight, then many of us do now by the reading of it. A garland at the door (if cuſtome did not give us a reaſon of it) would ſpeak no more to a paſſenger without, then a flower in the window within. To ſee Baptiſme, and the Lords Supper, acted in the higheſt way of decency, and reverence, may poſſeſſe with wonder, but not at all edifie the ignorant beholder. Here as almoſt every where we have thoſe of the Church of Rome our adverſaries. And there hath been no ſmall conteſt, whether this word which gives being to Sacraments, be Concionatorium, or Conſecratorium, whether it be a word for communicants inſtruction, or the elements conſecration? He that pleaſes may read Bellar. de Sacramentis in genere, lib. 1. Cap. 19, 20. Suarez de Sacramentis, diſput. 2. quaeſt. Sexageſ. art. 8. on the one part. Chamier de Sacramentis in genere, Cap. 15. Whitaker praelect de Sacram. Cap. 6. on the other part. All of which was occaſioned (as Chamier obſerves) by a ſpeech of Calvin, lib. 4. Inſtitut. Cap. 14. Sect. 4. who ſpeaking to that common ſaying, that a Sacrament doth conſiſt of a word, and outward ſigne, ſaith,hVerbum enim intelligere debemus, non quod ſine ſenſu, & fide inſuſurratum, ſolo ſtrepitu velut magica incantatione conſecrandi elementi vim habeat: Sed quod praedicatum intelligere nos faciat quid viſibile ſignum ſibi velit. Quod ergo ſub Papae Tyrannide factitatum eſt, non caruit ingenti myſteriorum profanatione Putarunt enim ſatis eſſe ſi Sacerdos populo ſine intelligentia obſtupente, conſecrationis formulam obmurmuraret Imo id data opera caverunt, ne quid doctrinae inde ad plebem proveniret om nia enim Latine pronunciarunt aput homines illiteratos. Poſt ea, eouſque erupit Superſtitio, ut conſecrationem non niſi rauco murmure quod a paucis exaudiretur rite peragi crederent. We are to underſtand ſuch a word, that hath not power of conſecration of the element barely with a noiſe whiſpered, without ſenſe or faith, as by a magicall ſpell; But ſuch as being preached, or publiſhed, gives us to underſtand what the viſible ſign meanes. Therefore that which is done (ſaith he) under the Tyranny of the Pope, is not without a notable prophanation of the myſteries, for they have thought it enough for the Prieſt to mutter the forme of conſecration, while the people ſtand amazed, and without underſtanding; yea, they pupoſely provide, that no help in knowledge ſhould come to the people, pronouncing all in Latine among illiterate men; yea, afterward ſuperſtition ſo farre prevailed, that they beleeved conſecration to be done aright, when it was done with a low muttering ſound, which few could hear. A notable character worthy of his penne, ſetting out to the life their art, to hold the world in blindneſſe. In ſtead of giving an account, what hath been on both parts handled in this Controverſy, I ſhall lay down that which I will judge to be truth in ſeverall propoſitions.
Explicatory Propoſitions.
A word of inſtitution ne…eſſary.Firſt, That an inſtitution from God, and words from his mouth, that hold out ſuch an inſtitution of every Sacrament, is of abſolute neceſſity, even to the very being of a Sacrament; It were a dumbe element, and a ſuperſtitious, Ceremonious, obſervation without it, if we can find no inſtitution for water-Baptiſme: our men that ſtand for a pure ſpirit-Baptiſme, will have the upper hand in that particular. But here our adverſaries and we are at an agreement.
Conſecration reſpects not the elements but participants.Secondly, That conſecration, (if we may ſo call it) that is uſed in the publique ſolemnization of any Sacrament, is not in reſpect of the elements or outward ſignes themſelves, whoſe eſſence remaines entire and unchanged: But it is for their ſakes that uſe theſe ſignes, and unto whom in their uſe, onelyonly they ſuffer a change from common to ſacred: And therefore being not for the elements,Nam Catholici omnes docent, verbum Sacramenti eſſe pauca quaedum verba â Deo praeſcripta quae ſuper materiam a miniſtro pronuntianda ſunt. but for believers ſakes, a magical incantation is not of uſe, but verbal inſtruction. Therefore that of Bellarmine in the name of all the Catholicks (as he calls them) i That the word which makes a Sacrament, is only a few words preſcribed of God, to be pronounced by the Prieſt, over the matter of the Sacrament, is not to be ſuffered. Thoſe words might as well be concealed, as thus muttered, the elements do not heare them, neither do they ſuffer any change by them: That ſpeech of Auſtin we willingly grant, that the word is added to the element, and it is made a Sacrament: But not with a Romiſh Gloſſe upon it, that by the word there ſhould be underſtood, barely the uttering, or (as they would rather have it) the muttering of a few words; But the word of inſtitution, holding forth a Divine deſignation of it to that end and uſe, which is not to be concealed from thoſe for whoſe uſe it is ordained (as though it did work by way of a ſecret change) but in the plaineſt way to be made known to them. So that thoſe bare words in Baptiſme, I baptize thee in the Name of the Father, &c. are not that which makes it up into a Sacrament: But the command of Jeſus Chriſt, by the application of water to baptize in that Name. Neither is the uttering of thoſe words, This is my body, This Cup in the New Teſtament is my blood, ſufficient, but the whole ſeries of the inſtitution, in the words and actions of Chriſt Jeſus.
Thirdly, For an orderly adminiſtration of the Sacrament,Repetition and explanation of the words of inſtitution ſingularly uſeful. it is of ſingular uſe, that the inſtitution be repeated, and that in Scripture-language (which Bellarmine confeſſes we do alwayes in Baptiſme, and many of us at leaſt out of 1 Cor. 11. at the Lords Supper,) and much for edification, to have them briefly explained. This addes authority, and honour to the adminiſtration, and the underſtanding of many deploredly ignorant is hereby benefited. If Parents muſt teach their children, when they ſaw the rite of the Paſſeover, a reaſon of it, Exod. 12. then much, more ſhould Miniſters of the Goſpel teach it their people. Chriſtians ſhould act nothing in way of worſhip of God, but they ſhould ſee and know reaſon for their actings.
Fourthly, It is not eſſential to a Sacrament,A preciſe forme of wo ds not eſſentiall in a Sacrament. that a preciſe forme of words be obſerved in the adminiſtration of it, ſo that the being of a Sacrament is loſt if a word be changed; But it is ſufficient, that the ſumme and ſubſtance of the inſtitution be held out, and repeated; and the ſigns accordingly in the adminiſtration applyed to the end for which, they are ordained, to illuſtrate and ſeal the thing ſignified to thoſe that partake of it, (though a licentious freedom of variation of the words is to be avoyded, ſo the ſenſe and meaning of the inſtitution may be, if not loſt, yet at leaſt obſcured) there being no ſecret force in the ſyllables themſelves, uttered with all the conſecrating intention that the Prieſt can imagine, to create a new Sacrament.
Bellarmine, lib. 1. de Sacram. in genere, cap. 21. hath a propoſition to the contrary,kNon ſolum ſes, ſed etiam verba in Sacramentis novae legis is à Deo determinata ſunt, ut non liceat quickquam immutate. Not only the things themſelves, (ſaith he) in the Sacraments under the New Covenant, (of which he ſaith, there is little difference between them and us) but the words are ſo determinate, that they may not anything be changed; yet when he hath done, he is put to it, to limit his own propoſition, and ſhewes there may be a variation ſix wayes; in ſome of which the eſſence of a Sacrament is loſt, the ſubſtantiall forme being taken away; in others the accidental forme onelyonly, ſo that the eſſence continues notwithſtanding ſuch variation; ſo that he doth not onelyonly approve of the determination of Pope Zachary, who in an Epiſtle to Bonifacius reſolves, that when ſome out of ignorance of the Latine tongue did baptize in nomine Patria, filia, & ſperitua ſancta, that the ſubſtantial forme was not altered; But alſo acknowledges that the Baptiſme of the Greeks was valid, and the ſubſtance not changed when they baptized in this way, Let the ſervant of Chriſt be baptized in the Name, &c. yet allowing of it, onelyonly upon that account, becauſe the Church of Rome did tolerate it; ſo that their toleration, or prohibition can give, or take away the very ſubſtantial forme of Sacraments:Arguments evincing the truth of the propoſition. the eſſence of them is at their courteſie. The truth of this propoſition is clear. 1. No preſcribed forme of words is laid down in the Old Teſtament, as is confeſt; and therefore Bellarmine puts it into his propoſition, That in the Sacraments of the New Law, the words are ſo determinate, that nothing is to be changed: And that the Apoſtles did uſe any ſuch preſcript forme in ſo preciſe a way, cannot be proved; yea, the contrary is more then probable, conſidering the multitudes in ſo ſhort a ſpace baptized, Act. 2. Act. 8. Peter exhorts his converts, to be baptized in the Name of Jeſus Chriſt, Act. 2.38. And thoſe mentioned, Act. 19.5. were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jeſus. And Bonaventure (as he is quoted by Whitaker) ſayes that the Apoſtles baptized in the name of Chriſt. And Scotus (as the ſame Author affirms) ſayes, that if any ſhould baptize in that manner, he durſt not ſay it were no Baptiſme, and this with good reaſon; ſeeing Baptiſme in the Name of Chriſt, virtually comprizes the whole Trinity, Father, Son, and holy Ghoſt, His work being to reconcile man unto God, eſſentially, and not perſonally conſidered. 2. Either the very ſyllables themſelves, in which the inſtitution is ſet down, is the forme, and contains the eſſence of Baptiſme, or elſe the ſenſe and meaning: But it is not the very words and ſyllables themſelves. This is clear in reaſon, and confeſt by the adverſary. Firſt, it is clear in reaſon, then the ſame words and ſyllables muſt be uſed in which they were pronounced, when they were firſt inſtituted; That was the Syriack Tongue, (as is believed) being the language in Judea at that time, or at leaſt the Greek, in which Tongue the words of the inſtitution were committed to writing. But the forme of the Sacraments is never tyed to thoſe Tongues, to neither of them. Papiſts officiate in Latine, Orthodox Churches in their own language, in which the ſame thing in other ſyllables is held forth. This is confeſt by the adverſary. Bellarmine approves (as we have heard) the ratification of that Baptiſme, where ſcarce ever a word was aright uttered, and that upon this account, that it might be eaſily underſtood what he would have ſaid, as well by the act of baptizing as by the word, In nomine, In the name, for that was aright pronounced. It is not then the words, but that which ought to be intended in the words that holds forth the inſtitution, which may be further from the Jeſuite cleared, in that he confeſſes, Scripture to be too ſhort, to hold out the forme of Baptiſme-inſtitution, whichlNos reſpondemus, illud (hoc facite) referre ad totam actionem Chriſti, ita ut comprehendat etiam verba, Id quod (ut omittam nunc alia argumenta) diſcimus ex traditione, & uſu Catholicae Eccleſiae quae traditio ſi non recipiatur in dubium revocabitur etiàm forma baptiſmi, nam unde, quaeſo, colligitur, dum aqua aſpergitur, dicenda eſſe illa verba: Baptizo te in nomine Patris & filii & Spiritus ſancti? Certe non aliunde quam ex illis verbis Matth. ult. Docete omnes gentes, baptizantes eos in nomine Patris & Filii & Spiritus ſancti. At ex hoc loco id non poteſt certe colligi niſi recipiatur Eccleſiae traditio. Non enim Dominus ait, dicite Baptizo te in nomine Patris, &c. Satis igitur erit ſi aſpergentes aquam dicanus, innomine Patris, & Filii, &c. can be gathered from no place, he ſaith, but that of Matth. 28.19. Go teach all Nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghoſt. But there it is not ſaid, I baptize, (as he obſerves) nor doth Chriſt command to ſay, in the Name of the Father, of the Son, and holy Ghoſt; but to baptize in the Name of the Father, &c. If it be done in that Name by that authority, it were (ſaith he) ſufficient, had we not tradition to the contrary, De Sacramentis in Genere, cap. 19. All which makes it appear, that an inſtitution is neceſſary, and not a certain number of words of abſolute neceſſity.
Fifthly, A Sermon formally ſo called,A Sermon formally ſo called is not eſſential to a Sac…ament. to be preacht at the ſame time, as the Sacrament is adminiſtred, is no way of the eſſence of Sacraments. This Chamier worthily rejects, as a calumny put upon proteſtant Writers: No proteſtant Writer ever did affirm it: Bellarmine would fain faſten it upon Calvin, and Beza, but confeſſes that Calvin ſpeaks doubtfully in it; And ſometimes ſeemes to ſpeak of a Sermon, as diſtinct from the Sacrament. They that hold this opinion, muſt not onelyonly conclude it to be the greateſt of prophanations to adminiſter the elements when no Sermon is preached; But whenſoever they adminiſter any Sacrament, their Sermon muſt ever be of that ſubject; for to make a Sermon eſſential to Sacraments, which treats nothing about Sacraments, is to make the body of a bird eſſential to a beaſt. That which we ſay, is, that every word in the inſtitutions of Sacraments is for inſtruction of communicants, and without ſuch inſtruction, they can make no actuall improvement of them to any ſpiritual benefit, either of juſtification, or ſanctification; which yet is not of abſolute neceſſity to be preſt, as oft as ever the Sacrament is taken; And words about the Sacrament teaching, and conſecrating are not (as they make them) of an oppoſite kind. All words tending to conſecration as [I baptize thee in the Name of the Father, &c. This is my body, This Cup, &c.] are words as well to inſtruct, as to conſecrate; are Concionatoria as well, as Conſecratoria: ſo that all words of conſecration are words for inſtruction (though all for inſtruction are not for conſecration) as might many wayes be evidenced. 1. They are ſignificant words, to be uttered by the voyce of a publick teacher. 2. They are Scripture words, and whatſoever is there writen, is for our learning, Rom. 15.4. why is it wrote if not for reading? Why do we read if not for learning? 3. The Apoſtles to whom Chriſt gave charge concerning the Sacrament, were to underſtand themſelves what they did, and to inſtruct thoſe to whom they did commend it likewiſe. But they had no other way to know the Sacraments, either of Baptiſme, or the Lords Supper, but from the words of inſtitution, which they call by the name of conſecration. 4. The Apoſtle going about to reforme the abuſes about the Lords Supper, and to teach the Corinthians a right way of celebration, repeates the whole inſtitution, and layes down exactly that which they ſay is of the eſſence of conſecration, and that to inſtruct, & not to conſecrate. The words of conſecration are his words of inſtruction. 5. To this we may add that of Auſtin, not barely his Authority, but the ſtrength of his reaſon, Tract. 80. in Jo. Commenting upon his own words, The word is added to the element, and it is made a Sacrawent. mUnde iſta tanta virtus aquae, ut corpus tangat & cor abluat, niſi faciente verbo? non quia dicitur ſed quia creditur. Nam & in ipſo verbo, aliud eſt ſonus tranſiens, aliud virtus manens. Hoc eſt verbum fidei quod praedicumus ait Apoſtolus.Whence is there that power (ſaith he) that water ſhould touch the body, and the heart ſhould be made clean, but the word working it, not upon that account becauſe it is ſpoken, but becauſe it is believed? For in the word it ſelf the ſound that paſſes is one thing, and the efficacy that remaines is another; and this (ſaith he) is the word that is Preached. There is none can deny, but that the words of the Sacrament are to be believed, and in caſe they are to be believed, they are to be preached and heard, for who can believe on him of whom they have not heard, and how can they heare without a Teacher? Rom. 10.15. This place of Auſtin, nLocus hic mire torquere ſolet non nullos.Bellarmine ſaith, hath troubled many, and Whitaker ſaith, they have as much troubled him as any other. He rejects Calvins Interpretation of it, and then rejects ſeveral Interpretations of his own party, and at laſt produces his own, which Whitaker ſayes, is wholly borrowed out of Allen, oDico igitur, Auguſtinum hoc loco, non ſemper loqui de eodem verbo, ſed nunc de Sacramentali, nunc de concionali.that Auſtin ſometimes ſpeaks of the Sacramental word, and ſometimes of the Word as Preacht, which two with him are altogether different; and yet Auſtin muſt by all means be acquit from Equivocation; we willingly yeeld that he doth not equivocate, and therefore the Sacramental word is a branch of that word that is Preached. He that pleaſes may read Suarez and Bellarmines arguments anſwered by Chamier, lib. 1. de Sacra. in genere, cap. 17, 18.