The Covenant Sealed, Treatise · Chapter 2
CHAP. II.
Sect. I. Of Sacraments in mans ſtate of integrity.
I ſhall leave the word which is of leaſt moment, being not of divine original, and come to enquire after the thing which muſt be diſtinguiſhed before it can be defined either in the general what a Sacrament is, or what this or that Sacrament, viz. Baptiſme or the Supper of the Lord is in particular. Now Sacraments (being inſtituted of God for the uſe of men) in tendency towards their happineſſe muſt be conſidered according to the ſeveral ſtates of man, and diſpenſations in which God hath manifeſted himſelf to him.Diſtribution of Sacraments. And man may be conſidered either in his ſtate of integrity, or in his fall, either before ſin, or under it. For the ſtate of integrity enquiry is made, whether man enjoyed any Sacrament at all, or were in capacity of any? In which we have Thomas Aquinas his concluſion, Part 3. Queſt. 16. art. 2. in the negative,aIn ſtatu innocentiae homo non indigebat Sacramentis, nec pro remedio peccati nec pro perfectione animae. The tr…e of life and the tree of the knowl…dge of good and evil w…re Sacraments. That man in innocency needed no Sacrament, neither for any remedy of ſin, or perfection of his ſoul. His followers (it ſeems) not ſatisfied, with his determination, unleſſe they themſelves may have the interpretation of it (yet not daring to adventure on a contradiction of their maſter) are at odds among themſelves about his meaning, enquiring what he means by neceſſity, and what by innocency: whether he means Adams own ſtate, in which he actually ſtood, or that which he ſhould have attained if he had ſtood in his integrity? A labour worthy of their pains, had they before hand had aſſurance that an unerring oracle had uttered it: But others have concluded, that the tree of life in Paradiſe was no other then a Sacrament to our firſt parents, and it is marvell that Aquinas who denies it, hit not on that of Auſtin, to have made up at leaſt a fourth objection, thatbErat homini in lignis aliis alimentum, in hos Sac amentum. In other trees there was nouriſhment, but in this a Sacrament. For the clearing of this point I ſhall lay down ſeveral propoſitions.
Firſt,Poſitions tending to the illuſtration and c…nfi…mation f…t. That all Sacraments whether in the ſtate of integrity or under ſin, muſt anſwer to the Covenant which they are appointed for to ratifie and confirm. Now the Covenant of God entred with man in his ſtate of integrity, was for his preſervation, not for his reparation, as I have ſhewed in a Treatiſe of the Covenant, Chap. 3. pag. 10. and ſo muſt this tree of life in caſe it have the nature of a Sacrament be a Sacrament of preſervation, not reſtitution. And ſo Thomas Aquinas his foundation, on which he builds, that man in integrity needed no Sacrament, becauſe the whole need not the Phyſician, but thoſe that are ſick, Matth. 9.12. is anſwered. There being a Covenant for mans preſervation as well as his reſtauration, there may be a ſuitable Sacrament for preſervation alſo, and ſo there is a plain fallacy in his argument, à dicto ſecundum quid, ad dictum ſimpliciter, becauſe our Sacraments in the ſtate of ſin are for recovery from the diſeaſe of ſin, he will have it to be ſo in all Sacraments even before our fall into ſin. Chamier returning anſwer to this argument, diſtinguiſhes of perſons ſubject to ſickneſs;cReſp. aegrotos, alios actutales dici, qua les omnes homines poſt pecatum, al…os potentia, in quorum natura principium eſt morbi propinquum vel remotum. Some are actually ſick ſo are all men (ſaith he) in the ſtate of ſin; ſome are in poſſibility or danger of ſickneſſe, having a principle in them capable of it, either more immediate or remote; ſo it was with man in integrity, he needed Phyſick for prevention, not for cure; to keep him in the ſtate in which he ſtood that he might not fall: not to recover him out of evill being fallen.
Secondly, The Covenant of works paſſing between God and man in an immediate way without any reference had to Chriſt, (as hath been largely ſhewn, and objections anſwered, Treatiſe of the Covenant, pag. 13. &c.) the Sacraments annexed muſt needs be without reference to Chriſt likewiſe: I know many learned men ſuppoſe that Chriſt was a Mediatour between God and the Angels, and between God and man in his integrity: and theſe will have the tree of life, Gen. 2.9. to be a ſymbole of Chriſt, as the bread and wine in the Lords ſupper, which indeed neceſſarily followes upon that ſuppoſition: but that falling all the ſuppoſed relation of ſign and thing ſignified between the tree of life and Chriſt falls with it. That opinion of theirs referring the tree of life to Chriſt they ſuppoſe hath ſtrength from that ſpeech of Chriſt to the Church of Epheſus; To him that overcometh I will give to eat of the tree of life which is in the midſt of the Paradiſe of God, Revel. 2.7. which all Interpreters refer to Chriſt, ſeeing there is no life but in Chriſt, 1 Joh. 5.12. He that hath the Son hath life, he that hath not the Son hath not life. As alſo from Revel. 22.2. ſpeaking of the new Jeruſalem, it is ſaid, In the midſt of the ſtreet of it and of either ſide of the river was the tree of life, &c. which can be no other but that Sun of righteouſneſs with healing in his wings, Mal. 4.2. But neither of theſe places ſerve their purpoſe, nor is the argument drawn from thence at all cogent. The tree of life in the literal Paradiſe was a ſymbole of immortality, and everlaſting bliſſe, which man perſiſting in obedience ſhould have enjoyed, whether on earth or in heaven, ſtill remained in Gods choyce to determine; In the ſtate of ſin this could not be without Chriſt, and every ſymbole of it, therefore in this ſtate leads to Chriſt. But it followes not that it was ſo in mans ſtate of integrity. He ſhould then have enjoyed it, by ah immediate gift from God, & not through Chriſt, whoſe whole work was not to keep man in ſtatu quo, as before ſin, but to recover from ſin into which he was fallen. In thoſe places of the Revelation there is (after the manner of the viſions of that book) an alluſion borrowed from that tree in Paradiſe, which as Ravanellus obſerves was a type of immortality. This tree aſſured man of it in Paradiſe on tearms of bedience. In the ſtate of ſin the ſame is to be had through Chriſt on Goſpel tearms and conditions. In caſe any will aſſign the work of mans ſupport in any tranſcendent way to the ſecond perſon in the Trinity, who is ſaid to uphold all things by the word of his power, without any reference to his wotk of mediation, as to be incarnate: as I dare not aſſert it, ſo I will not contend about it. But in this I am confident the ſubſtance of our Sacraments is Chriſt incarnate, and all the benefits of them is through and by chriſt, but ſo it was not in the Sacraments in Paradiſe.
Thirdly, The life promiſed in the Covenant of works to man in caſe of obedience, was not barely a prorogation of his being or preſervation from diſſolution to an immortality in nature. This he might have enjoyed and have continued for ever perfectly wretched, and ſo the performance of the promiſe ſhould have been a curſe, and no bleſſing. As it was ſaid by our Saviour of Judas upon his great ſin of betraying Chriſt, It had been good for that man that he had never been born, Matth. 26.24. So it might have been ſaid of Adam, though he had never ſinned it had been good for him that he had never been created, and therefore thoſe that ſee no more towards bliſs, in this promiſe of life then a perpetuation in being, according to the vulgar acceptation of it, underſtand that ſpeech of God concerning our firſt Parents, Gen. 3.22. And now leſt he put forth his hand, and take alſo of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever, to be a ſpeech of mercy to keep man from an immortality of miſery: and according to that opinion the curſe threatened for tranſgreſſion had been ſuffered, and the bleſſing affixt to obedience at once enjoyed, which is the greateſt of paradoxes; life then (as elſewhere I have ſhewed) in the promiſe compriſes true bleſſednes, a fruition of all that ſerves to make happy, and a freedom from all that tends to miſery, ſo that man lived no longer then he ſtood and ſinned not; death in its meaſure immediately ſeized, though the full execution in the higheſt degree to ſome is delayed, to others the whole reverſd.
Fourthly, The names given to theſe reſpective trees muſt not be accounted vain (as it fares many times with names given by men) ſeeing the Spirit of God hath affixed theſe names to them. But ſomething muſt be found in the trees, or from God by the trees, anſwering the names that they carry: When God gave Abram the name of Abraham, which ſignifies a father of multitudes, Gen. 17.5. the event we find anſwered, how improbable ſoever (when the name was given him) it appeared; Therfore (ſaith the Apoſtle) ſprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, ſo many as the ſtarres of the skie in multitude, and as the ſand which is by the ſea-ſhore innumerable, Heb. 11.12. Solomon was called Jedidiah, 2 Sam. 12.25. which ſignifies beloved of the Lord, and was not barely ſo named, but indeed beloved, Nehem. 13.26. Among many Nations there was no King like him who was beloved of his God. The name of that wonderfull birth, Eſay 7.14. was Immanuel, which the Spirit of God hath interpreted, God with us, Matth. 1.23. he was ſo named, and this he did effect, 2 Cor. 5.29. God was in Chriſt reconciling the world to himſelf, not imputing their treſpaſſes unto them. Our firſt Parents therefore were to expect ſome way both life and knowledge from theſe trees: They had their names in reality, and not by way of fiction, or fancy given to them.
Fifthly, This tree of life with that other of the knowledge of good and evil had not any natural power or innate efficacious vigor, to anſwer their names in giving life by the taſte, or eating of them, as Satan bore the woman in hand concerning the one of them. This I know hath been the opinion of ſome, which falſe ſuppoſition hath occaſioned an hot and curious diſpute, whether this tree ſhould have given man life totally and wholly to a full immortality? or whether it ſhould have preſerved his life to ſome definite time of ſome thouſands of years? But the contrary is plain both by reaſon and experience, and ſo the ground of this diſpute is taken away.
This appears, firſt by reaſon.dArbores enim infra homines ſunt, imo infra an malia, quia ne ſenſus quidem capaces fuere ergo propter aliud & ex inſtitutione, adeoque Sacrameenta. Trees (as Chamier well obſerves) are below men, yea, below other creatures that were made for the uſe of man, being capable of a vegetative life, onelyonly for growth, but not of ſenſe, and ſo could not confer on man by any power from themſelves either life or knowledge. Some that ſtickle for this opinion ſee the force of this reaſon, and therefore yeeld that it is above them to produce any ſuch effect directly. But indirectly they ſay there may be ſuch an efficacy; Meates that are ſingularly ſuitable to nature have their work, in a direct way on the animal ſpirits for a life of nature, and indirectly upon the organs of the inward ſenſes. A good conſtitution (which a wholeſome dyet works) ſerves to the preſervation of health, and hath hereupon its work upon the faculties of the mind, and conſequently preſerves life, and increaſeth and quickneth knowledge.eSed hac ratione omnes arbores horti potuſſent arbores ſcientiae boni & mali appellari. Par eſt enim credere, Deum qui ad e…um hominis in ſta…u integritatis conſtituti arbores illas creaverat, eis etiam talem vim & ſuccum ind…d…ſſe quo hominis innocentis corpus non gravaretur ſed alacrius eſſet ad omnes ſuas functiones, & per conſequens o… gana ſenſuum, &c. But (as Rivet well obſerves) all the trees of the garden might in this ſenſe have been called trees of life, and trees of knowledge of good and evil, as well as thoſe two trees in the midſt of the garden: All of them being for food, and to keep men in a due temperature both of body and mind.
As the truth of this appears in reaſon, ſo alſo by experience, in that tree forbidden; when Eve liſtened to Satan and did eat of it (and her husband by her ſollicitation) knowledge was not gained but loſt, which mankind ſadly knowes; For that ſpeech of the Lord before mentioned, Gen. 3.22, 23, 24. And the Lord God ſaid, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil. And now leaſt he put forth his hand, and take alſo of the tree of life, and eat and live for ever. Therefore the Lord God ſent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drave out the man, and placed at the Eaſt of the, garden of Eden Cherubims and a flaming ſword, which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life; which may ſeem to imply that in caſe man had been permitted to have put forth his hand, and eaten of the tree of life, he had lived for ever, in ſuch an interpretation we ſhould ſcarce conceive the tree to be any creature of God, but an omnipotent agent, ſtanding in oppoſition againſt God, when God for ſin had denounced againſt man the ſentence of death, this tree againſt this ſentence would give him life; fQuid audimus? an ſuam Adae incorruptionem à qua jam deciderat reſtituere peterit fructus ille?What is it that we hear? (ſaith Calvln) can that fruit reſtore te Adam the integrity that he had loſt? Me thinks the former part of the two and twentieth verſe ſerves well to interpret the latter. Behold, man is become like one of us. Even as the tree of knowledge of good and evil made man like God, in a full omniſcience, ſo the tree of life would have rendred him equally like in immortality. If we confeſſe an Irony in the former, as is concluded by Interpreters, we muſt underſtand the like, or ſomewhat much like it, in the latter. Man will have like immortality in ſin, as he had omniſcience by ſin. Therefore he puts, and keeps him out of Paradiſe, that now being deprived of the thing, he might not delude himſelf in the outward ſign or Sacramental repreſentation of it.
Sixthly, It remains therefore that theſe trees were ſet apart of God from other trees of the garden for a Sacramental uſe, having no more power of themſelves to confer life or knowledge then water in Baptiſme or bread and wine in the Lords Supper to conferre pardon of ſin or ſpiritual life on the ſoul.gArbor igitur vitae non ab in ſita vivificandi facultate ſed à Sacramentali ſignif…c…tione ſic dicta eſt. The tree of life was ſo called (ſaith Wollebius) not from any innate quickning faculty, but from a Sacramental ſignification. Paraeus indeed putting it to the queſtion whether the tree of life be ſo called by reaſon of the effect that it had produced had man ſtood, or by way of ſignification? ſaith, theſe two opinions in his judgment may be joyned, and ſayes,hSine dubio habitura erat haec arbor ſeu ut cibus ſeu ut medicina vim conſervandi hominis ſanitatem & vitam, ne corpora vergerent in ſenium, aut ſentirent defec…um, donec in coeleſtem immortalitatem tranſirent. Deinde data fuit homini in vitae Sacramentum. The tree might give life as food or as phyſick, and preſerve from age till man ſhould be tranſlated into an heavenly immortality, and then proceeds to ſhew how it is a Sacrament of life. But ſure theſe opinions are altogether inconſiſtent, Sacraments are ſo ſigns that they are not phyſical cauſes of the thing that is ſignified. If they had any ſuch effect in nature, then all myſtery in the Sacrament ceaſed and there needed no word from God to clear it, every man would know that food hath a natural tendency to life, and phyſick to health, if there were no Scripture. If we were able to make it good that they were phyſical cauſes of life and knowledge, then we muſt diſclaime their Sacramental uſe; but ſeeing that cannot appear, and the contrary is evident; This other muſt be aſſerted, It may eaſily be made out that the tree of life was a Sacramen. Man was to put forth his hand to eat of it, as the Jewes did the Paſſeover, and we do the Lords Supper.iVoluit igitur hominem quoties fructum arboris illius guſtaret in memoriam revorareunde vitam haberet: ut ſe agnoſceret non propria virtute, ſed Dei unius beneficio vivere; Neq…e eſſe intrinſecum bonum ut vulgo loquuntur ſed à Deo provenire. And as often as he ate of it, or had his eye upon it (as Calvin well obſerves) he was to remember from whom he received life and bliſſe, and by whom he was preſerved and upheld, that he had no principle of life and bliſſe in himſelf, but as he received it from God, ſo by his favour and free Grace it was continued: And to mind himſelf of his duty on what tearms he ſtood with God, and upon what condition his life and bliſſe was continued: whileſt he ſinned not he muſt not dye, as long as obedience laſted he muſt enjoy a life in happineſs. Others add that it ſhadowed out Chriſt, by whom both he and the Angels ſtood in happineſſe: but I have already ſpoke my thoughts to that particular. But how to bring that other tree of the knowledge of good and evil ſo aptly to hold out the nature and uſe of a Sacrament, is not ſo eaſie: and I find many Interpreters aſſerting it, but not any that I can meet with demonſtrating it. And it muſt be confeſt that this Sacrament did herein differ from all other Sacraments. Thoſe did conſiſt in their uſe; This in mans abſtinence from it. In this it is ſaid thou, ſhalt not eat: In the Paſſeover and the Lords Supper the communitants muſt eat. But God hath it in his power to inſtitute Sacraments according to pleaſure, by way of prohibition, as well as by way of injunction. In other Sacraments in the due uſe, men attain to the good that is promiſed: In this by abſtinence man ſhould have avoyded the evil threatned. In eating of the tree of life, while man perſiſted in obedience, he was aſſured of life, that was a ſeal and pledge of it. And while he abſtained from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, he had like aſſurance of freedom from death. This alone was a negative Sacrament, and it was proper to this Sacrament onelyonly, that not the fruition of good, but the avoydance of evil was the thing ſignified. The reaſon of the name is the enquiry of many why it was called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? Some that would deny it to be any Sacrament, ſay that it had the name from the natural effect that it was apt to produce, being created to quicken or ripen man in the uſe of his reaſon, conceiving that our firſt Parents were created weak in knowledge, of an infant underſtanding: And to know good and evil (that is, chooſe the good, and refuſe the evil) in the Hebrew phraſe ſetting out the uſe of reaſon, as, Eſay 7.16. Before the child ſhall know to refuſe the evil, and chooſe the good: They ſay this tree was to work them to this maturity in knowledge. How falſe this is of our firſt Parents weakneſſe in knowledge is clear by the names that man gave to all creatures upon ſight, as he had dominion over them, ſo he underſtood the nature of them, as alſo in that ſpeech that he uttered concerning Eve, when the Lord upon her creation brought her to him to give her in marriage. The Wiſe man ſayes that God made man upright, Eccleſ. 7.29. And this uprightnes comprizes mans whole conformity to God in all in which his image doth conſiſt, which was as the Apoſtle tells us, in knowledge, as in righteouſneſſe and true holineſſe, Col. 3.10. To avoid ſuſpition of inclination to any ſuch opinion, ſome when they ſpeak of mans firſt eſtate, purpoſely avoid the word innocency, and chooſe to uſe the word integrity. And how unapt the fruit of a tree could poſſibly be in nature to produce any ſuch effect, that which was ſpoken concerning the tree of life being applyed hither may demonſtrate. And whence this opinion came but from the Devil I cannot tell, who told our mother Eve, that God did know that in the day that they eat thereof their eyes ſhould be opened, and they ſhould be like unto gods, knowing both good and evil, Gen. 3.5. He was the firſt that vented it, and ſhe was the firſt that believed it; when ſhe ſaw that the tree was good for food and pleaſant to the eye, and a tree to be deſired to make one wiſe; ſhe did take and eat thereof, Gen. 3.6. The taſte it ſeems was the taking quality; the other trees were good for food, and doubtleſs lovely to the eye, but this alone anſwerable to the name with the Devils comment upon it was a tree to be deſired for this end, but ſhe found the contrary; light was not only not encreaſed, but put out, ſo that man now is a beaſt by his own knowledge; others therefore conclude that it had name, not from any ſuch effect that in nature it was apt to produce, but by reaſon of the event that followed, and upon the taſte of it muſt of neceſſity follow; now they experimentally know the good which they had by ſin loſt, and the evil which they had incurred.kQuemadmodum qui medicus eſt theoretice vim morbi & ſanitatis bonum cognoſcit, in morbum delapſus amiſſa ſanitate nova quadam ratione, per experientiam bonum ſanitatis, & malum morbi cognoſcit. As a Phyſician (faith Ri vet) that hath the theory of health, and ſickneſſe, underſtanding what health is to deſire it, and what ſickneſſe is to ſhun it, yet falling into ſickneſſe he hath another manner of knowledge out of his own experience. Pererius the Jeſuit diſlikes this Interpretation; he that pleaſeth may read his reaſon on theſe words, and Rivets vindication, Exer. 18. in Gen. He fixes upon a third, that this name was given to this tree, upon occaſion of the ſpeech of Satan, bearing Eve in hand, that in eating of it, ſhe ſhould gain the wiſdom of God, to know both good and evil; And therefore it had the name of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. But whoſoever gave the name, whether God himſelf who placed the tree in the garden, or Adam who to his coſt knew it, or Moſes that wrote of it, it is not probable they would borrow a name from Satans deluſion; The former therefore which the Jeſuit confeſſed to be an opinion moſt received, I judge to be moſt probable, and till I ſee more ſhall not recede from it.
SECT. II. Corollaries from the former aſſertion.
FIrſt, hence we ſee the neceſſity of the uſe of means, Neceſſity of the uſe of means for our help and ſtreng…h in the way of fai h and obedience.for our help and ſtrength in wayes of faith and obedience, in all the wayes preſcribed and appointed by God, In caſe our firſt Parents in their integrity were to make uſe of a Sabbath to give God a time in a more ſolemn way as we ſee, Gen. 2.2,3. and alſo of Sacraments; who are we, that we ſhould caſt off Sabbath and Sacraments? that our faith and obedience ſhould be riſen to that growth, and arrived at that height, that all helps ſhould be laid aſide? It is no marvel, that upon this account, ſo many that ſeemed to be ſomewhat, refuſing the aſſiſtance of God provided, wholly degenerate and come to nothing: In caſe it be replyed, that Adam was left to his own keeping, carried his life in his own hands, but we have another manner of ſupport and defence; We are kept by the mighty power of God through faith unto Salvation, 1 Pet. 1.5. and ſo we need not to be ſo ſollicitous of our ſelves. I anſwer, though there be truth in that which is objected, yet the objection is to no purpoſe, as eaſily may be manifeſted: Jeſus Chriſt would not have provided Ordinances in New-Teſtament-times, for the perfecting of the Saints, for the edifying of the body of Chriſt: in caſe he would not have his to make uſe of them, and had not ſeen that they ſtand in need of them: we are not ſo kept, that we ſhould ſit ſtill, no more then Iſrael was in the conqueſt of the promiſed Land. Gods power in o…r preſervation, and our diligent (though not diffident) and anxious care very well ſtands together: Elſe Peter had not from thence inferred, wherefore gird up the loynes of your mind, be ſober and hope to the end, for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jeſus Chriſt, 1 Pet. 1.13. Nor yet having ſet out Satans vigilancy annext that exhortation, Whom reſist ſtedfaſt in the faith, 1 Pet. 5.9. nor yet had the Apoſtle John told us that He that is begotten of God keepeth himſelf, and the evil one toucheth him not, 1 Joh. 1.18. Souldiers are taught to go out and fight in the Name of the Lord, and that he covers their head in the day of battel; yet this doth not abate any thing of their watchfulneſs, or diligence; they do not caſt off weapons either offenſive, or defenſive. This is an artifice of Satan, to lay mens throats open to him for ſlaughter, and deſtruction, under pretence of Divine protection.
Sacraments are without Spiritual profit to thoſe that live in breach of Covena…t.Secondly, Know that there is no ſaving benefit received by any Sacraments which are ſeales of the Covenant, longer then men in Covenant, make it their buſineſs to keep up to the tearms of it; Adam was in a Covenant of life from God, upon tearmes of preſerving himſelf from ſin, and had it by a Sacrament confirmed to him, he wilfully runs upon ſin; the tree of life now can no more give life to him: Satan then perſwades to believe, that in eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they ſhould as gods know both good and evil. He now perſwades, that being baptized in water, which holds forth the Spirit and blood of Chriſt (if they underſtand any ſuch ſymbolical repreſentation) they partake of the Spirit, and blood of Chriſt: And that taking the Bread and Cup, they enjoy all that they ſignifie and hold forth: That no more then a Sacrament, needs to make up a Chriſtian compleat. This is an outward work, that may be done, and all luſt alive within; An eaſie work to go through, and here man would fain reſt; but look further to the duty, to which theſe engage; otherwiſe thou wilt find no more of Chriſt in the Sacrament, then Adam found of life in the tree of life. See Mr. Burges Spiritual Refining, Ser. 19.
Covenant failing all Sacraments relating to it neceſſarily fall with ….Thirdly, It yet further followes, That a Covenant falling to which Sacraments are annext as ſignes, and ſeals, the Srcraments fall together with it. The Covenant of works being no longer of uſe to the attainment of Salvation; the Sacraments which under that Covenant were appointed, are taken out of the way, and no uſe of them remaint. I know that it is aſſerted by as learned hand, that Chriſt doth not abſolutely make null or repeal the Covenant of works, but that it ſtill continueth, to command, prohibit, promiſe, and threaten; yet confeſſing this aſſertion to be difficult, and diſputable, to which I readily yeeld; and therefore in a buſineſs of no greater moment then this is, I had rather ſuſpend, then either ſubſcribe or oppoſe. He and I are wholly agreed, as to that for which it is here produced, ſeeing he ſaith, We muſt neither take that Covenant as a may to life; as though we muſt get Salvation by our fulfilling of its conditions; nor muſt we look upon its curſe, as lying upon as remedileſſely. This is as much as I aſſert, or rather imply in that which I ſay, that the Covenant of works is of no uſe to the attainment of Salvation: upon which the Sacraments of that Covenant, the ſee are laid aſide with it: we hear no more of a tree of life, or the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Rivet Exer. 40. on thoſe words. Leſt he put forth his hand, and take of the tree of life, and live for ever, Obſerves a reſemblance between that proceeding of God, and the Churches proceeding in keeping unworthy men from the Sacrament: The lQuemadmodum nunc ex Dei inſtituto à Sacramentis arcentur indigni ne ſibi Symbola ſumant ad judicium & condemnationem, ita hac prohibitione uſus eſt Deus tanquam ex communicatione minori quam abſtenſionem vocant, ad hominem magis & magis humiliandum, ut ſe indignum agnoſceret vita qui à vitae Symbolo arcebatur.unworthy (ſaith he) are kept from the Sacrament, leſt they ſhould eat of thoſe ſignes to their judgement: And ſo God made uſe of this prohibition as a leſſer excommunication called ſuſpenſion, for the further humiliation of man, that he might ſee himſelf to be unworthy of life, being kept from the outward ſymbole or Sacrament of it. But me thinks this is ſo far from reſemblance of that kind of Excommunication which is called the leſſer; that it is a ſentence in terrour farre above that which is higheſt, and greateſt: And this it ſeemes my Author ſaw, and therefore addes:mPraeterea tale Sacramentum, homini lapſo, non erat amplius aptum: quia arbor vitae non data erat ut vitam reſtitueret mortuo ſed ut viventem in ſtatu vitae commodo conſervaret. Ergo Adamo per peccatum mortuo mutanda fuerunt Sacramenta. Furthermore, ſuch a Sacrament was unmeet, or unſuitable to fallen man; becauſe the tree of life was not given to restore a man dead to life, but to preſerve life in a living man; therefore Adam being dead by ſin, and his condition changed, the Sacraments were to be changed likewiſe. Two ſorts of men then are here fitly to be parallelled with Adam, in this proceeding of God againſt him.
1. Thoſe that God caſts out of Covenant, taking away their Candleſtick, and his Kingdom, refuſing to be their God, or to own them as his people; God denying them his Covenant, all muſt deny them the ſign and ſeal of it.
2. Thoſe that caſt themſelves out of Covenant, and apoſtatize from the faith of Chriſt Jeſus. Where there is no Covenant in which men may expect happineſs, where there is no profeſſion of ſuch expectation, there is to be no Sacrament; there the ſeal is put to a blank, and theſe Sacred Myſteries are prophaned: Therefore I cannot but marvel at thoſe, that deny the Church of Rome all being of a Church; and affirm, that they are in no Covenant-relation to God; yet yeeld that they have Baptiſme in truth among them, explaining themſelves, that it is as a true mans purſe in the hand of a theefe. But the purſe, and the man ſtand not in that relation as Covenant and Sacrament; the Covenant being gone, the Sacrament hath no truth of being remaining.
Satans imitation of God in his precepts of worſhip to his followers.Fourthly, Let us yet ſee, how forward Satan is to imitate God, in preſcribing a way of worſhip to his ſervants; and how ready the world is to follow Satan in theſe things by him preſcribed. God appointed a tree of life, as a ſign and pledge of immortality; in the due uſe of which man might have lived for ever, and been preſerved from the evils, and infirmities of age; and Satan among thoſe in the world, that are his for worſhip, hath of old found out a fiction of certain meats, called by them Ambroſia, and certain drinks named Nectar, and Nepenthe; which the gods uſing to take, were preſerved from age and death. It cannot be imagined, how they ſhould reach ſuch a fancy, but that the poſterity of Noah, had ſcattered ſome Divine light of this tradition among them. Their gods, who were but men, and ſome of them the worſt of men, bringing all wickedneſs to renown by their example, being ſuppoſed to have an immortal being, muſt have ſome way or means to come up to immortality. As they had their meats, and drinks, that made immortal; ſo alſo their fountains (found out by Cadmus; to whom they aſcribe the firſt invention of letters) Aganippe, Hippocrene, Caſtalius near to Parnaſſus, at which their Muſes drunk; which raiſed them in eloquence. Theſe they have borrowed from theſe ſymboles of the tree of life, and the tree of knowledge of good, and evil; dreaming of a Phyſical operation, and not underſtanding any Sacramental efficacy: God alſo inſtructed his people in the uſe of ſacrifices, which we know was with his people from the beginning; and I cannot believe with ſome Jeſuits that this was of the dictates of nature: which (as they ſay) led them without any revelation, to the uſe of ſacrifices: For in what ſenſe ſoever we take ſacrifices, Nature could never teach man to give it unto God. If we take it more largely, for a gift tendred, reaſon would tell, that the Divine Majeſtie ſtands in no need of it: And in caſe we underſtand it more ſtrictly, and make the deſtruction of that which is offered eſſentiall to a ſacrifice: how could this in reaſon enter into any mans thoughts; that when a man had ſinned, a beaſt muſt dye? And that of the Apoſtle, Heb. 11. doth fully contradict it, Abell offered by faith, and faith is not of nature, but above it. This then was a worſhip of God by inſtitution, not commanded in the firſt, but ſecond Commandment: and this Satan is ready to follow. As there was ſcarce a Nation, as the Orator obſerved, but worſhipped a god: ſo there is ſcarce a Nation, that did not ſacrifice to thoſe gods: and the Apoſtle gives us to underſtand, what thoſe gods were: The things that the Gentiles offer in ſacrifice, they offer to Devils, and not to God, 1 Cor. 10. It is his worſhip, and he teacheth his the way of it. As in duties of worſhip, there is this imitation ſeen, ſo in wonders, and prodigies in like manner, there is an emulation: God had his miracles in Egypt, and Satan his We know the general Deluge in the ſacred Hiſtories; in which none were preſerved from death, but Noah and his family, by an Arke preſcribed of God: Heathens muſt have a fable in imitation, and tell us of drowning of the World, onelyonly Deucalion, and his wife Pyrrha, in an Arke preſerved likewiſe. And as Noahs Arke reſted on the Moutains of Ararat, upon the aſſwaging of the waters: ſo theirs reſted on the Mountain of Parnaſſus. We have a narrative of Jonah caſt into the Sea, and received by a Whale; and after three dayes, and three nights, caſt ſafe upon the ſhore: Satan muſt ſet up his Arion, and make him famous in his Hiſtorians and Poets; A skilfull Harper of Greece, having by excellency in muſick, gained a great ſumme of money in Italy, and Sicilia, returning to his own Countrey with his treaſure; Mariners with whom he agreed for his Fare, greedy of his money, caſt him into the Sea: a Dolphin delighted with his muſick, carries him ſafe, and landed him at Taenarus. See the relation and application, elegantly brought home to this purpoſe by Dr. Abbot, Lect. 15. on Jonah: making notable obſervations of Satans policy. In caſe the Narrative carry any truth in it by his wonders, ſo far as his art, and power can reach. Satan then makes it his buſineſs, to diſgrace Gods miracles, and caſt diſhonour upon them by his imitation: though he falls farre ſhort of the Originall, as he there ſhewes: and followes him as little Aſcanius his Father, with very unequal ſteps. And in caſe we take it, for a meer fiction: (which is his judgement upon it) his art is no leſſe obſervable to diſcredit, as farre as in him lyes, the writings of Scriptures: When this miracle of Jonahs ſhall be Preached and publiſhed in the world, Arions fable ſhall be produced, that like faith may be yeelded to either of both. See Mr. Burges Spiritual Refining, Pag. 131, 132. Where this thing in many particulars is enlarged. And the more high the wayes of Religion are raiſed of God in a Spiritual way, the more eaſie it is for Satan, who is a ſpirit, to delude. The Spirit is the great Goſpel-promiſe, to be poured out on all fleſh; that is, on men of all ſorts, Joel 2.28. God will be ſerved in types and ſhadowes no longer, but in Spirit, and truth, Joh. 4.23. When the Jewes gloried of Circumciſion, as that which did denominate them a people of God, and diſtinguiſhed them from all other Nations: and urged the neceſſity of it to ſalvation: the Apoſtle tells us, that they are the Circumciſion, that worſhip God in Spirit, Phil. 3.3. Satan now on the other hand, can take the hint, and heighten his way in a deſtructive manner to Goſpel wayes. All outward Ordinances ſhall now be decryed as formes, and beggarly rudiments: and with Circumciſion in the letter laid aſide, though they be Ordinances of the Spirit it ſelf; in which the Spirit expreſſes its power and efficacy. 1. The written Word, which was dictated by the Spirit, 2 Pet. 1.19. (is the ſword of the Spirit, by which it exerciſes his power on the ſoul) muſt be laid aſide as a dead letter, and over carnal. The Miniſters of the Word, that great gift from the Fathers right hand, Epheſ. 4.11. ſet over the flocks by the holy Ghoſt, Act. 20.28. on this pretence are to be caſt off with Moſes and Aaron; taking too much upon them, when all the Congregation is holy: notwithſtanding for a real confutation, when this Spirit was firſt given in glory, it came upon the heads of his Miniſters, in forme of tongues, fiery, cloven, Act. 2.3. To let all know (is that great appearance that was there) (that their tongues are ſanctified of God, to Preach the Word in power and life to all Nations. And as the gifts of the Spirit encreaſed; ſo the Miniſters of the Spirit were multiplyed; and that very title and name given Miniſters of the Spirit, 2 Cor. 3.6. And the mind of Jeſus Chriſt made known, that theſe in a peculiar order, diſtinct from other men; are ſet apart to preach the Goſpel, as the Prieſts under the Law in a peculiar order were to wait at the Altar, 1 Cor. 9.13, 14. Upon the ſame pretence, Sacraments muſt be laid aſide; the Baptiſme of the Spirit is pleaded, for the overthrow of the Baptiſme of water: Though the Apoſtle that firſt ſpake by the Spirit after it was given in glory, doth argue the clean contrary, Act. 10.47. Who can forbid water, that theſe ſhould not be baptized, which have received the holy Ghoſt as well as we? They that have the Spirit, will be raiſed in zeal for the honour, and eſtabliſhment of every Ordinance of God by the Spirit: the more ſpiritual men are, the more care they will take to advance the Word, the Miniſters of the Word, Sabbaths, Sacraments. Let us then obſerve his imitations his falſifications: He vents doctrine of his own, ſets up wayes of his own, that carry a reſemblance of Gods wayes: And ſimilitude, is mater erroris: we ſhall never heed them, as long as we know they are the Devils: but when he transformes himſelf into an Angel of light, and puts the ſtamp of God upon his own coyn, we muſt not be ignorant of his ſleights; but to have our ſenſes exerciſed, to diſcern between good and evill.