A Rejoinder to Mr Drake, Part 1 · Section 6
Sect. 6 HAving aſſerted my ground, the ſtate of my queſtion, and my proofs, I muſt come now to my Reaſons, where if I do not ſometimes tye my ſelf to every particle, when there ſeems to me to be much repetition, & but little matter, yet will I endeavour, according to my ſmall ability, to give ſuch ſatisfaction I have, to every thing that is weighty (if not to all) in this buſineſſe between us: And I beſeech the Lord Ieſus to pity my infirmities, and aſſiſt his weaker veſſel, who is even helpleſſe of all ſtrength, but in dependance on him.
My Firſt Reaſon was from the Nature of the Sacrament, It is the ſhewing Chriſts death, a viſible Goſpel, and ſo a firm ground of Free-admiſſion. VntoUnto this, the ſumme of what he ſayes over and over, from p. 37. ad p. 52. comes but to this, All may be preſent, but not actually receive, granting the foundation.
I ſhall begin with the laſt, His words are theſe, The Word, and the Sacraments, 'tis true, must go hand in hand together; but the Covenant of Grace, or the Word, is not (viſibly) applicable to all, therefore not the Sacrament:
For my anſwer to this which is all his weight, with but a very few grains more; we muſt know, The Miniſters of Chriſt are the Miniſters of the new Covenant to be revealed, and that is not of the Abſolute, Heb. 8. which is ſecret, and belonging to Election, but of the Conditional Covenant, (or the Covenant in its conditional capacity) which is tenderable to all the world, and that more eſpecially applicable with a diſtinction of outward privileges or intereſſe to the Church. Now look what is the tenour of the Covenant, the Sacrament ſeals, and nothing elſe, for we both hold it is the ſame with the Word. Now I pray what needed ſuch a torrent of words in this plain caſe? May not I ſay to all, and every intelligent Church-member, If thou believe thou ſhalt be ſaved? and may not I ſeal to ſuch, what the Word ſayes? which he grants. And doe not all underſtanding men know, we cannot ſeal Jeſus Chriſt and his benefits to any, but on the Covenant terms, which is conditionally? Would one think Mr. Drake ſhould ask me ſuch a queſtion, p. 42. Dares Mr. Humphrey ſay to a perſon in the state of Nature, Sir, Be aſſured All the benefits of the Covenant are actually yours? The language of every actual giving is, Chriſt is thine in particular.
I anſwer, This is a manifeſt error, The language of the Sacrament, is the language of the Covenant, and that is not, Chriſt is thine, but Chriſt is thine if thou wilt believe. And who doubts but I dare ſay ſo to one in a ſtate of Nature, conceiving we know it not, and cannot judge thereof; even as unto one in a ſtate of Grace; Chriſt is thine upon the ſame terms, as he does to one viſibly worthy, yet really unworthy; that is, If thou do now reſolve to accept of him. For, Let me ask him again, Dare Mr. Drake ſay to the viſibly godly nay to the moſt really holy, Sir, Chriſt is thine Abſolutely, as in particular, I aſſure thee of it. If he dare, he enters upon the abſolute Covenant, and the Ark of God, and ſayes what no Mortal may ſay; But if he can ſay only Chriſt is thine in particular upon the condition of the Covenant, Here is no more than may be ſaid unto others.
If this will not ſuffice, but you ſtill think, though where a man is viſibly to be admitted, you can ſafely ſay to him, Chriſt is thine in particular, whether he be in the ſtate of Nature, or the ſtate of Grace, ſeeing indeed you know it not, yet you dare not ſay ſo, when you find (which thing I utterly renounce to be viſibly undertaken) that ſome are yet in their natural eſtate; I anſwer, In my opinion, for all this, you may only take the language of the Covenant wholy aright, which is thus, Here is Chriſt, If thou ſincerely acceptest of him, to ſave thee, if not, to condemn thee, unleſſe thou repenteſt, and all is ſafe nevertheleſſe.
The ſolidity of this anſwer, may appear the more by this mans weakneſſe to ſalve that objection, p. 48. which otherwiſe cannot be don. It is this, Does not the Miniſter ſeal to a Lye, if he ſeal to the unworthy? He anſwers moſt miſerably, He does but ſeal to an untruth, not to a lye, ſo long as he comes in to the Elders, and is thought viſibly worthy by them; Well, But what if the Elders ſhould admit one viſibly unworthy, and the Miniſter judge him ſo to be, yet the major part carrying it, What ſhall become of him then? Here his untruth muſt be a lye again; It is not his pleading an admonition, or that he cann't help it, will ſerve him, if it be poſſitively a lye, or a ſin to admit any that is viſibly unworthy, he may not offend his conſcience, and preſume upon God, though he loſt his place and life too. So that he muſt on neceſſity come over to us, and then he may know how neither to commit an untruth nor a lye neither, by ſaying, He offers or applies Chriſt but conditionally, or upon his own terms, and then the door is open for our Free-admiſſion. The truth is, ſeeing that the Miniſter is Gods Embaſſadour, and what he does, is by his Commiſſion, we may as ſoon ſay The God of Iſrael can lie, as that the Miniſter ever ſeals an untruth, or lie either, in doing his office; but you may ſit down by my Expreſſion hereof, p. 49. The Sacrament ſeals generally the truth of the Covenant (freely and abſolutely) to all engaging them unto it, but the intereſt of ſingle perſons in the benefits (as in the threats) is alway conditional, or according to the tenour of the Goſpel.
With my Readers leave, though this be both what is partly received, and ſufficient, I ſhall ſpeak a little more. The very body of our Religion, conſiſts in the knowledge of the Covenant, and Application of it. VnderUnder the Covenant, comes in the knowledge of our ſelves, our ſtates, our Mediator, and what he has done for us. And under the Application, the Spirit, and his office, The Miniſtery, and the Church. For what concerns us here; About the Covenant, we are to know the tenour of it, and the ſeal of it. The tenour of it is apparent, Mark 16.16. For the ſeal, Let us conſider, It is either the Real, true, effectual Seal, that ratified this Covenant between God and Chriſt; and that is his blood, Heb. 9. or the Symbolical, External ſeal, which is only a repreſentation of this unto us; and that is the Sacrament. Concerning the Application, we muſt know two things, the Applyer, and the Subject to whom it is applyed, Both are likewiſe External, or Internal. The Internal Applyer is the Holy Ghoſt, whoſe work is therefore call'd the ſeal of the Spirit, This glorious perſon cannot be called a ſeal otherwiſe (but by a Metonomy of the effect) as he is the inward Miniſter, to apply the Covenant both in working the condition, and ſealing thereof. The External Applier is our ſelves (the Miniſters) who are but his Earthen Veſſels, while the Excellency of the power we muſt leave freely unto him. For the ſubject to whom it is applyed, It is the Church. This is manifeſt, Chriſt Ieſus did lay down his blood for the Church, Acts 20.28. Eph. 5.23, 25. The Church then likewiſe is either the inviſible, which conſiſts of ſuch members that are truly in Chriſt; or the viſible, of all ſuch as do profeſſe him, as outward members thereof. Now by the bleſſing of God, our work may be done, if we do but rightly ſort theſe things together; The Internal effectual ſeal, with the Internal effectual Application; and the External ſeal with the external application. The Effectual ſeal of the precious blood of Chriſt is in the hand only of the Internal Miniſter, to apply it to the inviſible duplicate page duplicate page Members, in whoſe hearts he both writes the new Covenant, and ſeals it. The Outward ſeal of the Sacrament is in the hand of the Outward Miniſter, to apply it to the viſible Church, and the Members thereof. Now let but the External Miniſter take heed of entrenching on the Internal Miniſters office, as he would look to his life, in not medling with Gods Ark, and I hope the fear of God may end the controverſie between us.
For his other thing here, He grants We have proved that All may, or are to be preſent, but that must be all, If it be applyed ſo, tis death, &c.
Anſ. I am very ſorry to ſee what a frivolous thing man is, how every little trick and trifle can put us off.
1. If there be ſuch a ſtreſſe to be laid on Actual receiving, (which the Lord forbid) yet may the Miniſter be Free in his offer, in delivering the Sacrament in general, as Chriſt ſays, foreign, Take, Eat, in the plural number, and while he ſate at Table. There are 4 or 5 reaſons given by others for this way; but that which moves me moſt, is this our own reaſon, that tis a viſible word. Let the Miniſter then deliver it in general to his Congregation as he preaches the word; And while he declares to the whole Church This is the body of Christ which was broken for you, the Receivers make application to their own parts. Now if any Receiver who judges himſelf unworthy, ſhould wave his very Taking onelyonly unto the reſt, it might ſeem a kind of tender confeſſion, and act of humility. And ſo let but the buſineſſe lie there, and the offer of Chriſt ſhall be free, yet no guilt on the Miniſter; and the adminiſtration free, and no guilt on the Receiver. The Miniſter doe his office, and the people their duty, and both pleaſed.
2. This I ſpeak as to mens ſcrupulous ſuppoſitions, but I muſt confeſſe (though I like a delivery in General, rather than particular) I can no ways endure the rending theſe ſacred actions one from another; When Chriſt has ſaid, Doe this, this thing, or Doe thus, as it ſeems the Syriack reads it, that is after the ſame manner, Drink ye All of it, and they all drank of it, I think it an injury to the holy inſtitution, to ſeparate what Chriſt has joyned, as the Papiſts do, in withholding the Wine from the Laity. I muſt confeſſe this is a device ingenuouſly framed to ſerve the turn, and I fear it has got it ſelf reverence in the hearts of ſome godly men; yet does it ſeem to me a thing but of ſad conſequence to us, and indignity to God. For either this preſence muſt be held neceſſary, as our general duty, or left at our liberty: If we hold they may be preſent onelyonly, and bind not any to it as a duty, who does not know, that there is the confluence of the Word, Prayer, Singing, Meditation, in the adminiſtration, which to lay waſt is open impiety, and unbidding thoſe things, which are queſtlonleſſe yeelded to be means of converſion: But if we hold it (as certainly it is) to be our duty, not to neglect ſuch occaſions, ſo that we muſt come to the Sacrament, yet if we offer but to take and eat, this Actual receiving onelyonly, ſhall be our damnation; The ſinful adoration that was brought on the Elements, by the conceit of Real preſence corporally, had not ſo much dread in it, though more ſupenſtition. Nay, let us conſider a little, ſhall prophane men, while they ſtay the adminiſtration, think themſelves ſecure from guilt, ſo long as they do not eat and drink, only, as if the Covenant and the Seal was not otherwiſe applied to them, What hardneſſe on their hearts? What ſenſual apprehenſions will this bring on them? Nay, what unholy and contemptible thoughts of the God of Heaven, that looks on us, as if he regarded our very eating and drinking more than our ſpirits? Not that I am ſo moved at Free-preſence (let the prudent judge of it) but that actual receiving is not as free to our intelligent members. Indeed if perſons be Excommunicate, (as the Primitive Church did puniſh ſuch with bare preſence) or men have their gather'd Companies, if they do not communicate with thoſe that are preſent, and hear, their reaſon is open, they own them not as their members; but as for us that are not yet convinc'd by them, either we muſt maintain, or new mold our mixt Congregations.
This for his crop in general, there are ſome Ears yet ſtanding to be cut down in particular.
P. 37. If the Sacrament have the ſame latitude with the Word, then a Heathen may receive it as a Chriſtian.
He has here left out my main caution [Within the Church.] Let us know, the Goſpel may be conſidered as the Bare word, or a Sealed word; As an inſtrument in the writing to be declared, and read over to all, or as a ſealed inſtrument delivered to peculiar uſe. Or the Word may be conſidered as to the publiſhing the contents and tender of the Covenant, or to the appropriation of privilege we have in it. To the Jews belonged the ſacred Oracles, and the Covenants; The contents might be preached to bring in proſelytes, yet are they ſaid truly with diſtinction of outward privilege, to belong only to them. If you like not my phraſes, you may make better, but here lies the point; The blood of Ieſus Chriſt does peculiarly belong, by way of appropiation, to the Church, Eph. 5.23.25. This blood ſeals the Covenant, the Sacrament repreſents that blood: Now as the Spirit applies the Effectual ſeal only to the inviſible Church; ſo the Miniſter can apply the outward ſeal onelyonly to the viſible. Though the Word then may be declared to Heathens, It cannot be ſealed to them, but when they turn Chriſtians. The Covenant is a ſealed Covenant only to the Church. There is this diſtinction of privilege as it belongs to us, that it is ſealed in the outward application thereunto, that ſo every Member (without a juſt forfeiture) has a publick right, in the uſe of it.
P. 38. There are ſome righteous perſons in their own conceit, many ſelf-Juſticiaries, &c.
Anſ. Of all men I think that ſuch as theſe had need moſt of conviction, but I find not the Scripture ſends out any ſpiritual Hue and Cry, to make ſearch for them; if it did, I will not for any thing ſay who are the men; but ſure ſome Miniſters, upon certain marks, might begin with their own Elders: nay I think, upon the main known mark of I thank God I am not like other men (if you ſee Mr. D. p. 90.) ſome Elders might take up their own Miniſter, upon ſuſpition.
P. 39. All may be preſent at the adminiſtration, as at Preaching, and Baptiſm, but that All ought Actually to partake, —will lead thouſands into utter darkeneſſe.
Anſ. Not to mention his unhandſom language, where the ſenſe is ſo dreadfull, I anſwer,
1. If a man ſwear by the Temple it is nothing, but the gold of the Temple makes him guilty. If a man partake of the whole adminiſtration beſides, it is nothing for all his unworthineſſe, but if he actually receive, he becomes a debtor. Which is greater, the bare eating and drinking, or the whole ſacred inſtitution and conſecration, that ſanctifies the action?
2. It is not his inſtance of Baptiſm, will waſh off this ſuperſtition, wherein this good man has taken a deadly conceit, for there are no actions here to be repeated; the weakneſſe is clear as its own water. But I argue, if a man is bound at this Ordinance to make inward application (together with the Word) of what is repreſented, though the outward ſign is forbidden, as to be twice uſed; How ſhall we deny both the inward and outward application alſo in the Supper, where both are commanded? The truth is, the very ſealing the Covenant, applies wrath to every impenitent, and life to every one that has true faith, whether we ſhould ſee it only, or receive it. And if it be not eating commends us unto God, I do not ſtand upon this outward receiving, as any thing conſiderable, in compariſon of the reverential application of the Covenant, in a right uſe of it, according to our condition.
3. For admiſſion of all intelligent Church-members, I am free; but as for their own comming, I have ſpoken more tenderly, than his ſpeeches. Yet will I confeſſe my preſent inclination is thus, I hold, A man muſt examine himſelf (I place much on this) and ſo receive according to his eſtate. God commands John to deſtroy Ahab; Iohn his diſpoſition is evil in it, and does but commit murder, which God will puniſh, Hoſ. 1.4. yet nevertheleſſe muſt the thing be done, and as commanded, it is both approved, as good, and rewarded, 2 Kings 10.30. Chriſt Ieſus ſays to his Church, Doe this; Mr. Drake ſays, If an unregenerate member does it, he ſhall (I muſt ſay only he may) become guilty of Chriſts blood in the action. Nevertheleſſe it is not his diſpoſition being not right, that can nullifie Gods precept, but that he muſt both examine himſelf, and ſo eat.
4. Whereas then, He thinks my opinion will lead many thouſands to Hell, I am humbly afraid that his will do it; I do profeſſedly charge every ſoul, that they look well into their conſcience what they embrace, and the Lord be their direction. For my part, I am thinking, when Ieſus Chriſt ſhall call us both to account at the great day; he will ſay to me, Why have you brought in all unto my feaſt? I ſhall ſay, Lord, even as thou haſt commanded, Thou haſt ſaid, Do this, Drink ye all of it, and I muſt not miſtruſt the goodneſſe of thy word, and thy gracious efficacy to go along with it. I durſt not for my life make void thy bleſſed command. And what then, if he ſhall ſay to Mr. D. And why have you, contrary to my expreſſe words, taught your own Commandement for the precept of God, that it is an unregenerate mans duty to abſtain? When I ſaid Doe this, you have ſaid Doe it not, unleſſe you be ſure you can alſo ſo do it; whereby you have ſtrengthned the Careleſſe, hardned the impenitent, and afflicted tender Conſciences, laying waſte this Ordinance of mine in many places, whereas one ought ſtill to be done, and not leave the other undone: Let me ſeriouſly forewarn this pious man, that while he has laid that text, Ez. 13.22. ſo heavy on my ſoul, that he provide himſelf to anſwer unto it.
P. 40.41. He brings in my Simile, but takes hold of it by the left handle; We muſt not think as we are Miniſters ſet over Chriſts flock, we are ſent to them as Externally Rebels, that they muſt come in and profeſſe before us, to be admitted to thoſe privileges, which they have a right to already, as well as we. No, the main point of the Simile lies here, that the Inſtrument of peace, committed to us, is a ſealed Inſtrument, the word of reconciliation is a ſealed word to all the Church, Every member has an equal right to the Seal, as the writing, and we cannot pluck off, or put on, our Lords ſeal at our pleaſure. It is a weak conceit, that we are ſent to our Members, as it were with their pardons unſealed, to try whether they truly ſubmit, and according to our judgement, to ſeal them. We muſt conceive our Seal is ſet by Chriſt himſelf to his own Proclamation, and we have no other than what belongs to the whole Church; But if we look any further than Church-memberſhip, we enter the office of the inward Miniſter, and take a power of medling with the inward ſealing, which does not belong to us. It is the want of diſcerning between theſe inward and outward things, has miſlead Mr. D. who has not yet conſidered how the Covenant is a ſealed Covenant, to all that are but Chriſts external people, and that this Seal is a ſtanding ſeal, & both Covenant and Seal make up one publick inſtrument for the uſe of the Church. We may ſee this in Circumciſion (from whence we borrow the notion of a ſeal) Gen. 17. I will eſtabliſh my Covenant between are and thee, and thy ſeed after thee in their generations. Every man child among you ſhall be circumciſed. Here you ſee how it is a ſtanding ſeal ſet to the Covenant, and both eſtabliſhed with the whole ſeed, ſo that by this one act as it were, of publick delivery, Every Church-member (that was then any one of Abrahams ſeed,) had a right to the ſeal without any more plea, as other publick privileges, for ever after in their generations.
Now whereas he puts the caſe, that ſome who come to the Sacrament are but Rebels, and how ſhall we ſeal unto them? I anſwer, we cannot judge of the hearts of any that they are inward Rebels, and we may not judge that they are outwardly ſo, when they outwardly come in, unleſſe we hauehave ſomething to allege againſt them to prove their Rebellion, and then if it be ſuch as deſerves it, they may be Excommunicated, but while they are Church Members, we cannot deny them their common privileges. But for his expreſſions, Of their ſeeming to ſubmit, yet carrying Daggers, and Poyſon about them to murder their Prince, and therefore they muſt be ſearched, &c. Beſides the vanity of the words, I muſt tell him, 1. There is no Scripture that warrants his pretended tryal of Church Members, about their coming to the Sacrament, that is flat.2. Much leſſe, that he may take a power of ſearch as to the truth of grace, which is an entring on Gods Throne, and the Spirits work.3. This is clean contrary to Chriſts example, who ſet up no Sacramental tryal for Iudas, at leaſt for any thing we can find of it. But alas, that is nothing to Mr. Drake, he has found out a way to turn this off with a wet finger, p. 9. & 90. Which if you confer with this paſſage, he tels us, That they who are the Servants, by all means muſt needs try, examine, and keep men away, for fear of ſome ſecret Treaſon unto Chriſt in coming hither; but Jeſus Chriſt the Lord himſelf, muſt not have power to make tryal of, or ſuſpend Iudas that really intends to murder him, becauſe the Presbytery was not ſetled.
To p. 44. I anſwer, Godly Parents and Maeſters instruction of their Children and Servants unto the Lords Supper, may be good, as the Miniſters Catechizing them, without this ill language he heer gives me. I would willingly allow a man ſome Salt in his diſcourſe, but his is briniſh; there are ſome ingredients to be in ones Inck beſides Gall.
To that queſtion, what Chriſt ſealed to Iudas, p. 46, 47, 48. without regard to the reſt, which is amiſſe, I judge he ſpeaks well herein, The word and the ſeal both go together, and aſſure particular mercy or judgment to the Receivers, as they are worthy and unworthy, that is, according to the Covenant-tenour, and their own condition. This is good, though his compariſon of the bitter water following this, and that the Sacrament can never do good to any, but ſuch as are good already, ſeems to me ſuch a ſlander of that precious Ordinance, I would not be guilty of for all Mr. Drake is worth. But I pray conſider this really, whatſoever Chriſt does in his Miniſtry, muſt be a gracious act, and be capable of gracious ends, ſo that this action muſt be in its own nature a means to have done him good, if he had made a good uſe of it, and tis accidental to the thing, he did it not. Yet did Chriſt, in this actual eſtate of his, Mr. Drake ſays truly, ſeal to him judgement, (you muſt conceive it, as to his own part in Receiving, for the Miniſter ſeals no intereſt but conditionally.) Now the truth is, as the Word is a ſweet ſavour to God, and a means of ſalvation, in his threatnings as well as its promiſes, becauſe it does but ſtill declare the Covenant, whereof they are parts of it; ſo is the Sacrament, while it ſeals judgement, or while it ſeals life, ſeeing it does but ſeal the Covenant equally in both. Here then I humbly conceive ſtill (ſubmitting my ſelf unto mercy) lies the main upon the Receivers, to examine their hearts, and ſo to come in their addreſſes to Chriſt, that they rightly apply the Covenant unto themſelves, according to their condition. Always carrying in mind theſe two things; Firſt, That thou put far enough aſunder the bleſſed work of ſealing the Covenant, though it denounces thy judgement unleſſe thou repenteſt, (for it does it no otherwiſe) and that curſed ſin of thy abuſe hereof (if thou doſt not lay it to heart) in eating damnation. Secondly, That what the Word denounces, and Sacrament ſeals, they conveigh not Really, but only Relatively, for they are not Phyſical, but Moral inſtruments, (which Mr. Drake did not think of in his bitter compariſon) ſo that while they aſſure thee of damnation, they do thee no hurt, if thou make a good uſe of them for thy conviction, but if otherwiſe, as all means elſe, they ſerve but to encreaſe it. You may happily ſay this notion is ſtrange, but is it not true, and as for the ingredients, what every one yield? who will deny the Sacrament is a viſible word? Does not the word ſay, he that believes not, and repents, is damned? that is, is in a preſent ſtate of death. Muſt not every one lay this eſtate of his to heart? Does not the ſeal aſſure the ſame thing only with the Word? Is not our Receiving, the application of what is ſealed? And is not the application, or ſetting home the right part of the Covenant on a mans ſoul, the very buſineſſe (by the grace of God) of his conviction, and converſion? What then remains, but that man have the information, and God the glory?
He repeats often, Where the word is not applicable, neither the Sacrament. This is his ſtrength, and I cloze with him, and urge, But if every man is to apply the Word; and while he is impenitent, he is to lay to heart the threatnings, and wrath of God, as the only way to mollifie, and work him to repentance; then it is clear the ſeal may be applyed ſo likewiſe. The Seal and the Word (he ſpeaks fully) muſt go together. If you offer to ſay it ſeals not this part of the Covenant, but only the promiſe and grace, then you take away all danger, as it is ſealing to the moſt unworthy, and make our admiſſion more free; though if any dare ſay it ſeals not the whole Covenant, you may as well believe it is no ſeal at all.
P. 51. He has Infants up again, which is now five times, but for his words, Shall the Supper be free for Blaspemers, Murderers, &c. (which, who doubts but may be excommunicated, if not put to death) and his undertaking to prove his rule of viſibility to the Sacrament, to be as orderly as Baptiſm, it is like himſelf, to ſay all day, and prove at night.
For his anſwers to my 4 Conſiderations, I reply as briefly. To the firſt, An hiſtorical faith ſuffices unto Baptiſm, Acts 8.13. To the ſecond, Acceptance is either in ſincerity, which we cannot ſearch; or outward only and viſible, and that for Church-members, is their receiving. As for any other, the Scriptures he pleads as abundant enough, are none at all; but if ill words will do it, he has authority enough. To the third, where are many things, I ſay, 1. Though conviction is not enough to convert without grace, what then? Is it not a means therefore with it?2. His implicated errors are his own, for conviction of the truth of the Covenant, does come directly by ſealing it, and conviction of the general offer, by the applying it to every ſingle perſon. I think ſome nicety between offering and applying (which as to the Miniſter is the ſame) troubles the man, But3. Conviction, that Chriſt is mine in particular, as to a faith of particular evidence, as he expreſſes it, comes not at all by the Sacrament; Becauſe 1. The Sacrament ſeals nothing but the Word, which ſpeaks not particularly, I believe,2. What is common to the Hypocrite, with the true Believer, cannot bring any evidence to me. So that this ariſes onelyonly from the teſtimony of my own conſcience, and Spirit of God. If this man were leſſe confident, he might come to know more, and be better informed.
To the Fourth, It is true, the Goſpel may occaſion diviſions, as the Bridge doth the tumults, and noiſe of the Waters, but I think it no way of the Goſpel, that goes about to make them. Let the wiſe, peaceable and godly, mark the cauſe, and avoid it. As Factions are in State, Separations are in the Church; you ſhall never unite, ſo long as you maintain the ground of them. …t is a little thing will raiſe up the ſpirits of men, when we know not how to allay them again, and you ſhall ſooner divide them into more Schiſms, to ruine both the Miniſter and the Church, than reduce them to what they were: For the ſpirit of Diviſion being once up, will be ſtill fetching in more and more fewel to our opinions. Even as the Magician (in the Fiction, Camerarius Hiſt. Med. lib. 3. c. 15.) that was wont to take a ſtake of wood, and ſpeaking certain words to it, it would become a man, he bids it fetch him fire and water, and when it had done his work, with ſome other words turns it into a ſtake again. A certain Friend over-hearing theſe words, would needs do the ſame: He takes a ſtake, ſpeaks thoſe Words, It turns to a Spirit, fetches him fire and water, when he had enough, he bids it ceaſe, and bring no more; but having not the Words to charm it back into its ſelf, that continues; He fearing, takes an Ax, cuts it in two: upon this, inſtead of one, there is two men fetching fire and water, never leaving, till they had almoſt brought both him and the houſe unto confuſion.