Truth's Victory Over Error

Commentary on the Westminster Confession

by David Dickson

Table of Contents

CHAP I.: Of the Holy Scriptures

CHAP. II. Of God, and of the Holy Trinity

CHAP. III. Of the God's Eternal Decrees

CHAP. IV. Of Creation

CHAP. V. Of Providence

CHAP. VI. Concerning the Fall of Man, of Sin...

CHAP. VII. Of God's Covenant with Man

CHAP. VIII. Of Christ the Mediator

CHAP. IX. Of Free-Will

CHAP. X. Of Effectual Calling

CHAP. XI. Of Justification

CHAP. XII. Of Adoption

CHAP. XIII. Of Sanctification

CHAP. XIV. Of Saving Faith

CHAP. XV. Of Repentance

CHAP. XVI. Of Good Works

CHAP. XVII. Of the Perseverance of the Saints

CHAP. XVIII Of Assurance of Grace & Salvation

CHAP. XIX. Of the Law of God

CHAP. XX. Of Christian Liberty

CHAP. XXI. Of Religious Worship, & the Sabbath Day

CHAP. XXII. Of Lawful Oaths and Vows

CHAP. XXIII. Of the Civil Magistrate.

CHAP. XXIIII. Of Marriage and Divorce.

CHAP. XXV. Of the Church.

CHAP. XXVI. Of the Communion of Saints.

CHAP. XXVII. Of the Sacraments.

CHAP. XXVIII. Of Baptism.

CHAP. XXIX. Of the Lord's Supper.

CHAP XXX. Of Church Censures.

CHAP. XXXI. Of Synods and Councils

CHAP. XXXII. Of the State of Man After Death, And the Resurrection of the Dead

CHAP. XXXIII. Of the Last Judgement.

List Of Heresies

Of the Holy Scriptures

QUESTION I.

"IS the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence, sufficient to give that knowledge of God, and of his will, which is necessary to salvation?"

No; 1 Cor. 1.21. and 1 Cor. 2.13,14.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, That men living according to the law and light of nature may be saved?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because none can be saved, unless they be born by the incorruptible seed of the word, 1 Pet. 1.23.

2d, Because Christ is the way, the truth, and the life, and no man cometh to the Father but by the Son, John 14.6.

3d, Because there is none other name under heaven, given among men, whereby we must be saved, but by the name of Jesus, Acts 4.12.

4th, Because men cannot believe in Christ, without supernatural revelation: and therefore cannot be sanctified; because all justification, sanctification and remission of sins, are by God's grace, and faith in Jesus Christ, Rom. 3.24,25. Acts 26.18. Neither can men be so saved, viz. by living according to the light of nature, because salvation is promised only to believers in Christ, Acts 16.31. John 3.16.

5th, Because all that know not God will be punished eternally, 2 Thes. 1.8. But men without supernatural revelation cannot savingly know God, 1 Cor. 1.21. Mat. 11.27.

6th, Men destitute of supernatural revelation cannot know their own corruption and misery, by the first Adam, nor the remedy which is offered by Christ the second Adam. They are without God, without hope, without the promises, without the church, and covenant of God; and the mysteries of faith are hid, and unknown to them allenarly, that perish and are lost. Eph. 2.11,12. Rom. 9.4. 2 Cor. 4.3. Mat. 13.11,12. Mat. 11.25-27.

Quest. II. "Are the holy Scriptures most necessary to the church?"

Yes; 2 Tim. 3.15. 2 Pet. 1.19.

Well then, doth not the popish church err, that affirms, The true church to be infallible, in teaching and propounding articles of faith, both without, and against the Scripture; and that their unwritten traditions are of divine and equal authority with the canon of Scripture?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Libertines and Quakers err, affirming, That God doth teach, and guide the elect into all truth, by the alone instinct and light of the Spirit, without any written word whatsoever?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the scriptures are the foundation upon which the church is built, Eph. 2.20.

2d, Because all things are to be examined by the rule of the word, as the noble Bereans did, Acts 17.11,12.

3d, Because unwritten traditions are subject and liable to many corruptions, and are soon and quickly forgotten.

4th, Because we have life eternal in the Scriptures, therefore they must be necessary to the church, John 5.39.

5th, Because the Scriptures are given that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished to all good works, 2 Tim. 3.16,17. and the Scriptures are written that men may believe, John 20.31.

Quest. III. "Are these former ways of God's revealing his will unto his people now ceased?

Yes.

Well then, do not the enthusiasts and quakers err, who maintain, That the Lord hath not ceased yet to reveal his will as he did of old?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because God, who at sundry times, and in divers manners spake in times past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, Heb. 1.1,2. The apostle calls the time of the New Testament the last days, because under the same, there is no more alteration to be expected, but all things are to abide without adding, or taking away, as was taught and ordained by Christ, until the last day; See also Joel 2.18. Acts 2.17. The ways and manners of old were:

First, By inspiration. 2 Chron. 15.1. Isa. 59.21. 2 Pet. 1.21.

Secondly, By visions, Numb. 12.6,8.

Thirdly, By dreams, Job 33.14,15. Gen. 40. 8.

Fourthly, By Urim and Thummim, Num. 27.21. 1 Sam. 33.7,8.

Fifthly, By signs, Gen. 32.24. Exod. 13.21.

Sixthly, By audible voice, Exod. 20.1. Gen. 22.15.

All which do end in writing, Exod. 17,17,14. which is a most sure and infallible way of the Lord's revealing his will unto his people.

Quest. IV. "Do the books of the Old and New Testaments come under the name of the Holy Scripture, and Word of God?"

Yes.

Well then, do not the Quakers err, who maintain, That the scriptures ought not to be called the Word of God?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ says, If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken, John 10.35. Here it is evident, that the word of God and the Scriptures are the same.

2d, Because the predictions of the prophets are expressly called the word of God. Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the Lord spoken by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, 2 Chron. 36.22. Here we see it is evident, that the written prophesies of Jeremiah, which are part of the holy Scriptures, are called the word of God.

3d, Because what Christ calls the commandment of God, he calls the word of God, Mark 7.9,10. compared with v. 13.

4th, Because the apostle calls the sword of the Spirit, the word of God. This sword is the sword of the Holy Spirit, which he doth, as it were, put into our hands, to resist Satan, against all his temptations, Eph. 6.17. Therefore, by the sword of the Spirit must be understood the scripture, not the Spirit himself, as some Quakers affirm. It is evident also, from Mat. 4. where Christ being tempted by the devil, with three different temptations, resists him with three different places of Scripture. And being asked by the Pharisees, why his disciples did pluck the ears of corn upon the Sabbath day, answered by Scripture. Mat. 12.1-4. Teaching us, that Satan's temptations must be carefully answered, and that by Scripture, as the only mean to overcome him, and his instruments.

5th, Because the word of God is quick and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, Heb. 4.12. This cannot be understood of Christ, because Paul, in his other writings, doth not call the person of Christ by this name, and therefore must be understood of the word of the gospel, the power whereof is described, Rom. 1.16.

6th, See these following places of Scripture, Psalm 119.172. 1 Kings 16.12 and 2 Kings 9.36. and 23.16. Isaiah 28.13. Hos. 1.1,2. Isaiah 37.22. Prov. 30.5. By the Scripture, or the word of God, we do not understand the bare letters, or the several written words, of the holy Scripture, which the adversaries may imagine we call the word of God. These are only the vessels, which carry and convey that heavenly light unto us. But we understand thereby, the doctrine or will of God revealed unto reasonable creatures, teaching them what to do, believe, or leave undone, Deut. 19.29.

Quest. V. "Are the Scriptures given of God to be the rule of faith and life?"

Yes; Luke 16.29,31. Eph. 2.20. Rev. 20.18,19. 2 Tim. 3.10.

Well then, doth not the Popish church err, who maintain, Their unwritten traditions to be the rule of faith?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Enthusiasts, and the Quakers err, who maintain, The Spirit within, that teaches the elect, to be the only rule of faith? And that the dictates of light within, are of as great authority as the Scriptures?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the Scriptures are called a rule, Gal. 6.16.

2d, Because nothing is to be added to the Scriptures, Deut. 4.2. and 12.32. Prov. 30.6. Rev. 22.19,20.

3d, Because we ought rather to follow the Scripture in this life, than a voice spoken from heaven, 2 Pet. 1.19,21.

4th, Because the Scripture is written, that we might believe, John 20.31.

5th, Because the Scripture is given for making the man of God perfect, 2 Tim. 3.17.

6th, Because we must betake ourselves in the whole of religion to the law, and to the testimony, Isaiah 8.20.

7th, Because Christ himself refers the greatest question that ever was, whether he be the son of God, or not, to the Scriptures, John 5.38,39. Search the Scriptures, says he, for they testify of me.

8th, Because the Holy Ghost did never give such a designation to his own word, as an historical rule, and dead letter; or as some Quakers call them, not the "principal fountain of truth and knowledge, not the first rule of faith and manners," but the regula secundaria, subordinate to the Spirit; whence, as they affirm, "the holy Scriptures have all their true worth, excellency, and certainty:" Whereas Paul says expressly, Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God, Rom. 10.14

9th, Because the spirits cannot be known by any other rule than by the written word. It is certain, that the devil transforms himself into an angel of light, 2 Cor. 11.14. There is a spirit of the world, 1 Cor. 2.12. A spirit that rules in the hearts of the children of disobedience, Eph. 2.2. There is a lying spirit, 1 Kings 22.22. And a spirit of error and delusion, 1 John 4.6. How shall these be known to be such, or the Spirit, which the Quakers obtrude upon us, not to be one of them, but by the rule of the word?

Quest. VI. "Are the books commonly called Apocrypha, of divine inspiration?"

No; Luke 24.27,44. Rom. 3.2. and 2 Pet. 1.21.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who affirm, That the books called Apocrypha, are of divine inspiration, and of equal authority with the undoubted word?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because they were never written in the Hebrew tongue, nor by any of the prophets.

2d, Because they are never cited in the New Testament by Christ, or by any of the apostles, as books of the canonical scriptures are.

3d, Because they contain many fabulous, and impious doctrines and histories.

Tobit 5.21. The angel says, He was Azariah, the son of Ananias. This was a manifest lie, which cannot be attributed to a good angel; and therefore the Spirit of God hath not dictated this history.

It is reported, Tobit 6.6,7,16,17. that the heart and liver of a fish was good to make perfume to drive away the devil, if any man was troubled with him, or with any evil spirit. And it is said, Tobit 12.15. by the angel, I am Raphael, one of the seven holy angels, that present the prayers of the saints. This is only proper to Christ.

Because the act of Simeon and Levi, condemned by Jacob, acted by the Spirit of God, Gen. 34.25. in killing the Shechemites, is commended by Judith, 9.2,3.

Because you will read of an offering for the dead, prayers and reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin, 2 Maccab. 12.43-45. See what contradictions are in comparing together, 1 Maccab. 6.8. 2 Maccab. 15.16. 2 Maccab. 9.5.

Quest. VII. "Doth the authority of the holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, depend upon the testimony of any man, or church?"

No; 2 Pet. 1.19,21. 2 Tim. 3.16. 1 Thes. 1.13.

Well then, do not the Popish writers err, who maintain, The authority of the Scriptures, to depend upon the testimony of the church, as to us?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the word is to be received by us, not as the word of man, but as the word of God. 1 Thes. 2.13.

2d, Because the doctrine of Christ, to be received by believers, dependeth not on man's testimony, John 5.34.

3d, Because God only is true and infallible, and all men are liars, Rom. 3.4. Heb. 6.18. He is of incomprehensible wisdom, Psalm 147.5. Of great goodness, Exod. 18.7. Rom. 11.12. Psalm 34.8. Of absolute power and dominion, Gen. 17.1. Psalm 50.1,2. Of infallible truth, who can neither deceive or be deceived, Rom. 3.4. Titus 1.2. Heb. 6.18. Therefore he ought to be credited in all his narrations, promises, threatenings, and prophesies, and obeyed in all his commands allenarly, because he himself hath said so.

Quest. VIII. "Is the whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man's salvation, faith and love, either expressly set down in scripture, or by good and necessary consequence, may be deducted from it?"

Yes; 2 Tim. 3.15. Gal. 1.8,9. 2 Thes. 2.2.

Well then, do not the Popish church err, who maintain, The Scripture to be an imperfect rule, and therefore to stand in need of a supply of unwritten traditions?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because all Scripture is given, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished to all good works, 2 Tim. 3.16,17.

2d, Because the psalmist says expressly, the law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul, Psalm 19.7,8.

3d, Because nothing is to be added to the word of God, Deut. 4.2. Prov. 30.6. Therefore the Scriptures must be a complete and perfect rule of faith, and not an imperfect rule, or but partly a rule, as they teach.

Quest. IX. "Is it warrantable to argue in articles, or matters of faith, by consequences natively deduced from scripture?

Yes.

Well then, do not the Socinians, Quakers, Anabaptists, and Arminians err, who maintain, That all matters of faith are set down expressly, and in so many words in Scripture, and that no matters of faith, at least necessary to salvation, can be built upon consequences drawn from the Scriptures?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ himself proves, that necessary point of faith, the resurrection of the dead, from scripture by a consequence, Mat. 23.29,31,32. To be any one's God, is to give one eternal life, Psalm 33.12. Psalm 144.15. Whence followeth, that those patriarchs lived still with God, in respect of their souls, which these Sadducees also denied, Acts 23.8. and should also rise in respect of their bodies, and live eternally: Seeing he is called a God, not of one part of them only, but of their whole persons. And in that same chapter, v. 43,45. Christ proves his deity by consequence from Scripture, against the Pharisees.

2d, So doth Apollos, Acts 18.28. and Paul, Acts 19.22. prove from the Old Testament, Jesus to be the Christ: But it is not expressly said in the Old Testament, that he is the Christ. Is not that which necessarily follows from scripture, contained in it implicitly, and implicitly revealed by God, infallibly true?

Quest. X. "Is the inward illumination of the Spirit of God necessary, for the saving understanding of such things, as are revealed in the word?"

Yes; John 6.45. 1 Cor. 2.9-12.

Well then, do not the Socinians and Arminians err, who maintain, That men without the revelation of the Spirit, are able to understand the Scriptures for their salvation?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the disciples of Christ were not able to understand the Scripture, before he opened their eyes, Luke 24.45.

2d, Because the Jews to this day cannot understand the Scriptures of the Old Testament, until the vail, by the Spirit of God, be taken away, 2 Cor. 3.14,15,16,18.

3d, Because the psalmist David seeketh from God, the opening of his eyes, that he may behold wondrous things out of his law, Psalm 119.18.

Quest. XI. "Are all these things, which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation, so clearly propounded, and opened in some place of Scripture, or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them, for their salvation?"

Yes; Psalm 119.105,130.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That things necessary to salvation, are obscurely and darkly set down in Scripture; and that without the help of unwritten traditions, and the infallible expounding of the church, the Scriptures cannot be understood?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the word is a lamp unto our feet, and a light unto our paths, Psalm 119. 105.

2d, Because the Scripture is a light which shineth in a dark place, 2 Pet. 1.19.

3d, Because the Scripture enlighteneth the eyes, and maketh the simple wise, Psalm 19.7,8.

Quest. XII. "Hath not the Lord, by his singular providence and care kept pure in all ages the Old Testament in Hebrew, and the New Testament in Greek?"

Yes; Mat. 5.18.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, The Old Testament in Hebrew, and the New Testament in Greek, which are the fountains, to be corrupted, and that their common Latin version is authentic?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ says, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled, Mat. 5.18.

2d, Because there can be no urgent necessity shown, why the fountains are corrupted.

3d, If any such corruption had been in the Scripture, Christ, and his apostles, and the orthodox fathers had declared so much.

4th, Because they never have nor can make out any manifest corruptions in the fountains, albeit, most manifest and undeniable demonstrations are given of the corruptions of their Latin version, which they make authentic.

Quest. XIII. "Are the original tongues, viz. the Hebrew and the Greek, to be translated in the vulgar language of every nation into which they come?"

Yes.

Are we commanded in the fear of God to read and search the scriptures?

Yes; John 5.39. 1 Cor. 14.6,9,11,12,14,24,27,28.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, There is no necessity of translating the original tongues, the Hebrew, and the Greek, into the vulgar language of every nation, unto which they come, but rather a very great hazard, and danger of errors and heresies?

Yes.

Do not likewise the same Papists err, who forbid the reading of the Scriptures in the vulgar tongues?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the Scriptures were given long since to the Jews, in their own vulgar language, that they might be read publicly and privately by all. Deut. 31.10-12. Deut. 11.18-20.

2d, Because the New Testament was written in the Greek language, which at that time was most generally known to all nations.

3d, Because Christ bids all, promiscuously, search the Scriptures, John 5.29.

4th, Because the prophets and apostles preached their doctrines to the people and nations in their known languages, Jer. 46.15,16. Acts 2.6.

5th, Because immediately after the apostles times, many translations were extant.

6th, Because all things must be done in the congregation unto edifying, 1 Cor. 14.26. but an unknown tongue doth not edify.

7th, Because all are commanded to try the spirits, 1 Thes. 5.21. 1 Cor. 10.15.

8th, Because the Scriptures teach the way of life, Prov. 2.9. Luke 16.19. Acts 24.14.

9th, Because the Scriptures set forth the duty of every man in his place, and estate of his life, Deut. 17.8,19,20. Josh. 1.8. Psalm 119.24. 2 Chron. 23.11.

10th, Because they are the grounds of faith, Rom. 4.20. 2 Chron. 20.20.

11th, Because they are the epistle of God sent to his church, Hos. 8.12. Rev. 2.1,8,12.

12th, Because they are his Testament, wherein we may find what legacies he hath bequeathed unto us, 2 Cor. 3.14,16. Heb. 10.16. John 14.16.

13th, Because they are the sword of the Spirit, Eph. 6.17.

14th, Because being embraced and known, they make a man happy, Psalm 119.97,98. Luke 10.42. Luke 16.29. Psalm 1.2. Rev. 1.3.

15th, Because when the Scriptures are neglected or contemned, they plunge men into all misery, Heb. 2.3. Mat. 22.29. Psalm 50.16.

Quest. XIV. "When there is a question about the true meaning, and full sense of any Scripture, must it be known and searched by other places which speak more clearly?"

Yes; 2 Pet. 1.21. Acts 15.15,16.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, The Scripture not to be a sufficient interpreter of itself, and that the sense of it cannot be gathered infallibly, when the text is doubtful, from other places which speak more clearly, but only from the magisterial traditions and unwritten opinions of the church of Rome?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the noble Bereans compared scripture with Scripture, for finding out the true and sure sense of it, Acts 17.11.

2d, Because the apostle Paul did the same, Acts 28.23.

3d, Because the same was done by the council of the apostles and elders, Acts 15.15-17.

Quest. XV. "Is the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture, the supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest?"

Yes; Matth. 22.29,31. Eph. 2.20. Acts 28.25.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That the Church of Rome, and the Pope, are the supreme judges of all controversies of faith: And that his decrees and determinations are to be believed without examination, and implicitly to be believed by all believers?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Quakers err, who maintain, That the light within, which teacheth the elect, is the only judge of all controversies of faith.

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because God commands all men to go to the law and to the testimony, in doubtful matters, Isa. 8.20.

2d, Because all doubts in religion are to be examined by the rule of the word, Acts 17.11. Gal. 6.16.

3d, Because Christ and his apostles did always dispute and reason from the Scriptures against the enemies of the truth, Mat. 22.31. Gal. 3.13.

4th, Because the church of God is founded on the writings of the prophets and apostles, Eph. 2.20.

5th, Because we are commanded to prove all things, and to try the spirits, 1 Thes. 5.2. 1 John 4.1,6.

Of God, and of the Holy Trinity.

QUESTION I.

"IS there but one only the true and living God?"

Yes; Deut. 6.4. 1 Cor. 8.4,6. 1 Thes. 1.7.

Well then, do not the Trithetiae err, who maintain, Three Gods numerically distinct, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Manicheans err, who maintain, That there are two Gods, being diverse and opposite, as to kind, viz. one good, the author and cause of all good things, and of things immaterial, being the God of the New Testament. The other evil, viz. the devil, the author and cause of all evil things, and of things material, being the God of the Old Testament?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because though there be a plurality of persons mentioned in Scripture, yet it is ever God as one as is evident from the first chapter of the Revelation and the last. For if that one God have in himself all perfections, there can be no perfection beside him, and so no God but this one true God; for if there were, he should not be God, because not infinite in perfection. And if God be infinite in perfection, then surely there cannot be multiplicity of gods, seeing that which is infinite, in that respect, cannot be multiplied.

2d, It is evident from Deut. 32.39. where the Lord speaketh of himself, I even I, am he, and there is no God without me.

3d, Because God is omnipotent, and so cannot be hindered by any other in his working, Rev. 15.3.

4th, It is evident from Christ's words to the young man of the gospel, there is none good but one, that is God.

5th, From the words of Hanna in her song, For there is none beside thee, O Lord, neither is there any rock beside our God.

6th, From the testimony of the apostle, 1 Cor. 8.6. To us, says he, there is but one God.

7th, From what Christ said to one of the scribes, viz. the Lord our God is one Lord, Mark 12.39.

8th, Because God is a most absolute, and most perfect being, and so beyond all other things, one: John 10.29. Psalms 145.3. 147.5.

9th, Because this one blessed God is most absolutely sufficient, and furnished with infinite power, and wisdom, for the production, conversation, and ruling all things in heaven and earth.

10th, Because he is of all things without himself, the first and supreme cause, from which all the creatures visible or invisible, have their rise and beginning.

11th, It is evident, lastly, from the testimonies of the most wise heathens, who have been necessitated to acknowledge but one God only.

Quest. II. "Is God infinite in being and perfection?"

Yes; Job 11.7-9. 26.24.

Well then, do not the Vorstians, Socinians, and Anthropomorphitans err, who maintain, That God is finite in being, and perfection?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because God hath a being from himself, and all things have their dependence from him: And therefore there can be nothing by which he can be limited, Rom. 11.36.

2d, Because God is every where present, in heaven and beyond the heavens, Jer. 23.24. Isa. 66.1.

3d, Because the Scripture affirms, that the perfection of God is the highest, is unmeasurable, unchangeable, and infinitely great, beyond all creatures, John 11.7-9. Psalm 115.3. Job 26.14.

Quest. III. "Is the only living and true God, a most pure Spirit, invisible, without a body and parts?"

Yes; John 4.24. 1 Tim. 1.17. Deut. 4.15,16. Luke 24.39.

Well then, do not the Vorstians, Anthropomorphitans, and Socinians err, who maintain, God to have a body, and endued with parts, and an outward shape and form?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because God is the Father of spirits, Heb. 12.9.

2d, Because God is invisible, 1 Tim. 1.17.

3d, Because God is like to no bodily thing, nor can he be represented by any image, or corporeal likeness, Isa. 40.18. Acts 17.29.

Quest. IV. "Are there in the unity of the Godhead, three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity?"

Yes; 1 John 5.7. Matth. 3.16,17. Matt. 28.19. 2 Cor. 13.14.

Well then, do not the Arians and Socinians err, and others, Who deny the Godhead of the Son, and Holy Ghost?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Trithetiae err, Who deny the unity of the divine essence?

Yes.

Thirdly, Do not the Sabellians err, Who deny the real distinction of the persons?

Yes.

And lastly, Do not the Quakers err, who maintain, There are no persons in the Godhead?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From the places of Scripture already cited.

2d, From the apostolical benediction in which the three persons of the Godhead are called upon expressly, 2 Cor. 13.14.

3d, From 1 Cor. 12.4-6. Where the three persons are named Spirit, Lord, God. And from John 15.26. But when the comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth.

4th, Because there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, 1 John 5.7. These three must either be three persons, or three gods. This last is the height of impossibility; therefore they must be three persons. here they are put to silence, and have nothing to reply. Such is the strength and power of truth, which is able to stop the mouths of the greatest rebels against religion and reason. But there is good ground for the word Person, Heb. 1.3. where Christ is said to be the express image or impression of the Father's person. Because the person of the Son, perfectly represents the person of the Father, as an impression doth the seal: wherefore he is also called the image of the invisible God. Col. 1.15. The Greek word is hypostasis, substance or person, whereby is understood, the person of the Father as distinct from the Son, and subsisting of himself, and in himself, and is, as the original of the person of the Son, by an eternal and ineffable generation. That there are three persons in the Godhead; it is farther evident,

1st, From all the epistles written to the seven churches of Asia. For, as may be gathered from Rev. 1.1. it is the Father that sends, it is the Son that gives John the commission, and it is the Holy Ghost in the close, that is mentioned as joint speaker.

2d, Because in that epistle written to Thyatira, there are three distinctly named, first, the Father and the Son, in these words, These things saith the Son of God. Next, there is named in the last verse of that second chapter, the Spirit, he that hath an ear let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

3d, Because in the beginning of that epistle to the church of Sardis, they are all three put together, These things, saith he, (viz. the Son) that hath the seven Spirits of God. Here God, that is the Father, is distinctly considered as another person. The seven Spirits are the Holy Ghost.

4th, Because these three persons are most fully and clearly distinguished in the fifth chapter. First, the Father sitting on the throne. Secondly, The Lamb, or the Son of God. And, Thirdly, The seven Spirits, or the Holy Ghost, so called from the pouring out of his gifts upon the churches, in that abundant manner, as if he were seven Spirits, or seven-fold Spirit.

It is evident also, that the Father, Son, and Spirit, are really distinct from one another, and are three persons. They are indeed, in respect of their essence, which is indivisibly communicable to them, one and the same God; but considered personally, they differ really, for the Father is not the Son, neither is he that sits upon the throne the Lamb: Neither the Father nor the Spirit were incarnate, but the Son, who died, and was buried, which cannot be said of none but of a person: It cannot be said that the Father died, or that the Spirit died. Next, Is not the Holy Ghost the Spirit of God, as the Son is the Son of God? And if that suppose a real distinct personality, this must do it also. Now, if the Father be God, and the Son be God, and the Spirit be God, who have one and the same divine nature and essence, indivisibly communicated to them; and so, if there be but one God, and yet these three really distinct, then they must be distinct persons, in respect of their personal properties, seeing they are persons, and distinct. The Son, as was said, is called the express image of the Father's person, which evidently shews, that the Father, considered as distinct from the Son, is a person, and subsists: If then thus it be, must not the Son, as distinct from the Father, and so lively and expressly representing his person, be a person also, having this from the Father? The same must be true likewise of the Holy Ghost, who is God equal with both, yet different from both; for he who proceedeth from the Father, and from the Son, must differ from the Father, and from the Son; as he who is begotten, must be distinct from him that begat him.

Some Quakers, either ignorantly or perversely, will have the word hypostasis, translated substance, as it is Heb. 11.1. and thus they read, Heb 1.3. The character or image of God's substance, which is to be understood of Christ, say they, not simply as God, but as man: but they might as well have said it signifies confident or confidence, because it is so translated 2 Cor. 9.4 and 2 Cor. 11.17. But they speak here consequentially to their own tenets, who in effect deny the Trinity, and all distinction between the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, not only in words, but in very deed. The apostle in this place is proving Christ the Son of God, to be the lord and heir of all things; because God created the worlds by him, He is the brightness of his glory, the express image of his person, upholdeth all things by the word of his power. These titles are here given to the Son of God, as a creator, and a preserver of all things, which belong to him only, according to his divine nature: Therefore these titles must be understood of Christ, forasmuch as he is the eternal Son of God, and a light from the eternal light, of one essence and glory with the Father; nevertheless distinguished from the person of the Father, by whom the Father executes his operations, and shews his properties, even as the sun by its light doth shine.

Quest. V. "Is the Son of God of the same substance, power, and eternity with the Father?"

Yes; 1 John 5.20. Rom. 9.5. Isa. 9.6.

Well then, do not the Arians err, who maintain, The Son to be a creature, brought forth before the foundations of the world?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Socinians err, who maintain, The Son to have had no existence, before he was conceived in the womb of the virgin Mary?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From the Scriptures above cited.

2d, Because the Son is omnipotent, the creator and preserver of all things, Rev. 1.18. Col. 1.16,17.

3d, Because he is omniscient, and the searcher of the heart, Mat. 9.3,4. John 2.25. and 21.17.

Quest. VI. "Is the Holy Ghost God?"

Yes; Acts 5.3. 1 Cor. 6.19,20. 1 Cor. 3.16,17.

Well then, do not the Macedonians, or Pneumatomachians, Arians, Socinians, and many of the Anabaptists err who maintain, The Holy Ghost to be a creature, as do the Macedonians, or a power, virtue, or efficacy of the Father, as many Socinians and others do?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the Holy Ghost is to be worshipped as God, Mat. 28.19. 2 Cor. 13.14. Rev. 1.4.

2d, Because he is omniscient and knoweth all things, 1 Cor. 2.10,11.

3d, Because he is omnipotent, the maker, and preserver of all things, the worker of miracles, and it is he that sanctifies, and justifies the believers, Gen. 1.2. Psalm 33.6. Matth. 12.28. Compare Isa. 6.9. with Acts 28.25-27.

4th, Because Ananias is said to lie to the Holy Ghost, Acts 5.3. and v. 4 he is said not to lie to men, but to God.

5th, Because believers are said to be the temple of God, 1 Cor. 3.16,17. And they are said, 1 Cor. 6.19 to be the temple of the Holy Ghost; therefore the Holy Ghost is God, seeing to be the temple of God, and the temple of the Holy Ghost are the same.

6th, Because none can be properly sinned against but the true God; therefore the Holy Ghost is God, because many have been said to have sinned against the Holy Ghost. Matth. 12.31.

Quest. VII. "Doth not the Holy Ghost eternally proceed from the Father, and the Son?

Yes; John 15.26. Gal. 4.6.

Well then, doth not the Greek church err, who maintain, The Holy Ghost to proceed only from the Father?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because he is sent by the Son, John 15.16. Acts 2.33.

2d, Because all things which are the Son's are the Father's except the personal properties by which they are distinguished; and all things are communicated from the Father to the Son, and consequently the Holy Ghost, John 16.13-15. Mat. 11.27. John 7.16.

3d, Because Christ gave to his apostles the Spirit by breathing it upon them, John 20.22. to shew that he proceeded from himself.

4th, Because he is the Spirit of the Son, no less than the Spirit of the Father: Gal. 4.6.

5th, Because if the Holy Ghost did not proceed from the Son, as truly as from the Father, he would not be a person really distinct from the Son which is contrary to John 14.16,17.

6th, Because it is said, John 16.14. He shall glorify me (namely, by his testimony, gifts, miracles) for he shall receive of mine, (that is, the doctrine of salvation which I have taught you, he shall also reveal it unto you, seeing he shall receive the same from me) and shall shew it unto you. And Rom. 8.9. He is called the Spirit both of the Father and of the Son. It is said if any man hath not the spirit of Christ; that is, the same Spirit which in the foregoing verse is called the Spirit of God, namely the Father, and is here also called the Spirit of Christ, because he also proceeds from Christ, and is procured for us by Christ, John 14.26. and 16.7.

Of God's Eternal Decrees.

QUESTION I.

"DID God from all eternity, by the most holy and wise counsel of his will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass?"

Yes; Eph. 1.11. Rom. 11.33. Heb. 4.17. Rom. 9.15,18.

Well then, do not the Socinians, Arminians, and Jesuits err, who maintain, The things which come to pass, in time, to fall out, and come to pass, without the decree of God? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From the knowledge of God, whereby, from all eternity, he hath known all things infallibly, which come to pass, or shall be in time, Acts 15.18. John 21.17. Heb. 4.13. But all things which come to pass in time, could not have been infallibly known from eternity, but in the decree of his divine will.

2d, From God's natural way of working in time, 1 Cor. 12.6 Rom. 11.36. Whence it is evident, that God worketh effectually, and immediately, in time all things which are done: But he worketh by his will those things which he will have to be in time, (after that manner, and in that time, how, and when they come to pass) Psalm 115.2. But that act of willing cannot happen to God in time, but hath been in him from all eternity, because God is unchangeable, James 1.17.

3d, By enumerating several instances, concerning which the Scripture affirms particularly, that they have been decreed by God, as the sufferings and death of Christ, Acts 2.23. The glory of those that are to be saved, Eph. 1.4,5. 1 Thes. 5.9. And the fore-ordaining the rest to damnation to be punished for their sin, Jude ver. 4,5. The like may be said of other things which come to pass in time; See Psalm 33.11. and 115.3. Isa. 46.10. Prov. 19.21. That the liberty and freedom of the will, and contingency of events, is consistent with the decree, is clear from Acts 2.23. and 3.17,18. and 4.27.28. Gen. 45.5.

Quest. II. "Is the decree of predestination (namely, the decree of election and reprobation) absolute from the mere good will, and pleasure of God?"

Yes.

And is it particular concerning a certain number of persons?

Yes; 2 Tim. 2.19. John 13.18.

Well then, do not the Lutherans and Arminians err, who maintain, The decree of predestination to be general and conditional, depending upon persevering faith, (which they affirm depend upon the will of man) and foreseen infidelity, and want of faith?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Papists and Socinians err, who maintain, The decree of predestination to be general, and to depend upon good and evil works, with perseverance in them?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From the apostle Paul, who maketh the good-will and pleasure of God the only cause why this man is chosen, and another, as worthy, rejected, and casten off, Rom. 9.11-15. Where he moves an objection against the justice of God, and answers it.

2d, Because our blessed Saviour assigns it to the good will and pleasure of God, that to some, the mysteries of faith, for their conversion, are revealed, and that they are hid from many others, who are nothing worse, but in some respects better, Mat. 11.25,26.

3d, Because a man of himself hath no good thing in him, whereby he may be differenced from another, but what he hath freely gotten from God, 1 Cor. 4.7.

4th, Because the grace of regeneration, justifying faith, effectual calling, and perseverance to the end, are given to all the elect, and to them only, according to the eternal decree of God: and therefore are effects, not causes, or pre-required conditions of election, Rom. 8.39. Acts 13.48. Mat. 24.24. 2 Tim. 1.9. John 15.16. Eph. 1.3-5, Mat. 13.11. Rom. 9.6,7.

Quest. III. "Hath it pleased God, according to the unsearchable counsel of his own will, whereby he extendeth or withholdeth mercy, as he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign power over his creatures, to pass by, and to ordain the rest of mankind to dishonour and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice?"

Yes; Rom. 9.17,18,21,22. Jude ver. 4,5. Matt. 11.25,26, 2 Tim. 2. 19,20.

Well then, do not many of the Quakers, and others err, who maintain, That God never ordained any man to perish eternally?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ thanked his Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because he had hid those things from the wise and prudent, and had revealed them unto babes, Mat. 11.25,26.

2d, Because the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What, if God willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much long-suffering, the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction, Rom. 9.17,18,21,22.

3d, Because in a great house, there are some vessels to honour, some to dishonour, 2 Tim. 2.19,20.

4th, Because the apostle Jude says, there are some who of old were ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men. Note, That the cause of this reprobation is not man's sin, but the absolute will and good pleasure of God. Man's sin indeed is the cause why God will punish, but no occasion why he did ordain to pass by, or to punish man. This decree is just, because God has power over man, as the potter hath power over the clay. Neither is the end of this decree the condemnation of the creature, but the manifestation of God's justice. Lastly, Sin is the effect of man's free-will, and condemnation is the effect of justice, but the decree of God is the cause of neither.

Quest. IV. "Are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only?"

No, John 17.9. Rom. 8.28. John 6. 64,65. John 10.26. John 8.47. 1 John 2.19.

Well then, do not the Papists, Quakers, Socinians, and Arminians err, who maintain, That all men, even reprobates, are redeemed by Christ, and that many reprobates are effectually called, justified, and adopted?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From the golden chain which cannot be loosed, mentioned by the apostle Paul, Rom. 8.30. Whom he did predestinate, them he also called; and whom he called, them he also justified; and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

2d, Because those, and those only believe, whom God hath ordained to life eternal, Acts 13.48. Titus 1.1.

3d, Because Christ himself says so to the Jews, but ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep: My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, John 10.26-28. Ye are not of my sheep, that is, of the elect, which the Father hath given me.

4th, Because Christ would not pray for the world, but for the elect only, John 17.9.

5th, Because the election or elect, have obtained it, and the rest were blinded, namely, who are not elected and effectually called, Rom. 11.7.

6th, Because Christ says, Greater love hath no man than this, that a man should lay down his life for his friends. Such a love he never had to reprobates, whom he professes he never knew, John 15.13. with Mat. 7.23.

7th, Because, according to the Scripture, Christ died only for his own sheep, viz. intentionally, and efficaciously, John 10.15.

8th, Because the Scripture often says that Christ died for many, Mat. 24.28. Mat. 20.28.

9th, Because there are many who lived under the gospel, as well as those who lived under the law, who have not been so much as outwardly called, being nothing worse than others who are called.

10th, Because to all, and every one, the grace of regeneration, which is simply necessary to salvation, is not offered; neither do all, and every one, get remission and pardon of their sins, Eph. 1.7. Col. 1.14. Deut. 29.3. Mat. 11.25,28. with Mat. 11.13.

11th, Because the grace of regeneration is invincible, and of its own nature, always efficacious and powerful, Ezek. 11.19,20. Eph. 2.1,5. Eph. 1.19

12th, Because the grace of regeneration can never be lost, or fall totally or finally, 1 Pet. 1.5. 1 John 3.9. Whosoever are called and justified are also glorified, Rom. 8.30.

Of Creation.

QUESTION I.

DID God create, or make of nothing, the world, and all things therein?

Yes; Genesis first chapter to the end, Heb. 11.3. Col. 1.16. Acts 17.24

Well then, do not the Socinians, and other heretics, with many of the old Pagan philosophers err, who maintain, The world to have been made of some pre-existent matter, not capable of production: and consequently, that creation, or making something out of nothing is simply impossible?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From the testimony of Moses, Genesis first chapter.

2d, From the testimony of Isaiah, Isa. 40.28 and 45.18.

3d, From the testimony of the author to the Hebrews, Heb. 11.3. Col. 1.16,17. Rom. 11.36.

4th, Because the Scripture attributeth to God only, eternity, and incorruptibility, Psalm 102. 26,27. Gen. 21.33. 1 Tim. 1.17.

It is reported of Socinus, by a very learned man who had it from one of his disciples, that he privately denied the world to be made of nothing, lest thereby he should be necessitated to acknowledge the infiniteness of God's power: which tenet afterwards was more publicly avowed, and maintained by some of his followers.

Quest. II. "Did God create all things, whether visible or invisible?"

Yes; Col. 1.16. Acts 17.24.

Well then, do not some heretics err, who maintain, That the angels were not created by God?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From the psalmist David, Psalm. 33.6. and 147.2,5,6. Col. 1.16. Rom.2.36. Neh. 9.6.

2d, Because they are the servants and sons of God, brethren, and fellow servants with us, willing and ready to obey the commands of God their maker, Rev. 19.10. Rev. 22.9. Psalm 104.4.

3d, Because many of the angels left their first habitation, and did not continue in the truth, and so made defection from the obedience of their creator, and are reserved in everlasting chains, under darkness, unto the judgment of the great day, Jude ver. 6. 2 Pet. 2.4. Mat. 25.41. John 8.48.

Quest. III. "Did God make man male and female, with reasonable and immortal souls?"

Yes; Gen. 1.27, 2.7. Eccl. 12.7. Luke 23.43. Mat. 10.28

Well then, do not the Sadducees and the Epicureans err, who affirm, The souls of men to be extinguished or put out till the resurrection, and then to be brought to life again?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Anabaptists, and many of the Arminians, and some called Arabians err, who maintain, The souls of men, after death, till the resurrection, to fall asleep, (that is, to be without any sense or motion, thought or vital operation,) whether it be in their body or in some caverns of the earth?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From our blessed Lord and Saviour's words; Fear not them, says he, which kill the body but are not able to kill the soul, Mat. 10.20.

2d, From the testimony of Solomon; then shall the dust return to the earth, as it was, and the spirit shall return to God who gave it, Ecc. 12.7.

3d, Because Paul desired to be dissolved, trusting that his soul after death, should have more near communion with Christ, Phil. 1.23.

4th, They must be confuted from several and particular instances in the Scripture, as is clear from the souls of Dives and Lazarus, Luke 26.22. From these words of Christ to the thief, Verily, I say unto thee, thou shalt be with me this day in Paradise, Luke 23.43. From the appearing of Moses and Elias upon the mount with Christ, Mat. 17.3.

Quest. IV. "Did God create man male and female, with righteousness, and true holiness, after his own image, as being conatural to him?"

Yes; Gen. 1.26. Col. 4.10. Eph. 4.24.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who deny this, and the Arminians, who call this righteousness supernatural?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From these words spoken by God himself, Let us make man in our own image, Gen. 1.26,27.

2d, From God's own testimony, affirming the same thing, Gen. 9.6.

3d, Because before the fall, both Adam and Eve walked naked, and were not ashamed, Gen. 2.25.

Of Providence.

QUESTION I.

"DOTH God uphold, direct, dispose, and govern all creatures, their actions, and all things from the greatest, even to the lest?"

Yes; Heb. 1.3. Dan. 34.35. Psalm 135.6. Acts 17.25,26,28. Job 38,39,40,41. chapters.

Well then, do not the Socinians, Arminians, and the great philosopher Darandus, with others called the Epicureans, err, who deny, That God preserves all things immediately; to be the immediate cause of all things which fall out; to govern all things which are contingent, and the free acts of the will of man, and evil actions?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because it is God that worketh all in all, 1 Cor. 12.5,6.

2d, Because he worketh all things, according to the council of his own will; Eph. 1.11.

3d, Because of him, and through him, and to him, are all things, Rom. 11.36.

Quest. II. "Doth the almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God, so far manifest themselves in his providence, that it extendeth itself, even to the first fall, and all other sins of angels and men, and not by a bare permission, but such as have joined with it, a most wise and powerful bounding, and otherwise ordering and governing of them, in a manifold dispensation, to his own holy ends?"

Yes; Rom. 11.32-34. 2 Sam. 24.1. and 1 Kings 21.22,23. 1 Chron. 10.4,13,14. 2 Sam. 16.10. Acts 14.16. Psalm 76.10. 2 Kings 19.28. Gen. 50.20.

Well then, do not the Lutherans, Papists, Arminians, and Socinians err, who maintain, That the Lord concurs only to sinful actions, by a bare, naked, and idle permission?

Yes.

By what reasons are the confuted?

1st, Because the Scripture says, God blinds their eyes, and hardens their heart, even actively, and judicially, John 12.40. Exod. 7.3. Deut. 2.30. Rom. 9.18.

2d, Because God is said to punish one sin with another, Rom. 1.24,26,28. 2 Thes. 2.12.

3d, From the practice of Job, and David, who, when they were afflicted and persecuted, looked to God, and took it patiently, Job 1.21.

Quest. III. "Doth the sinfulness of the action proceed only from the creature, and not from God?"

I answer from the creature only, James 1.13,14,17. 1 John 2.16. Psalm 50.21.

Well then, do not the Libertines err, who affirm, God (without blasphemy be it spoken) to be the author and cause of all sin? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From David's testimony, Psalm 5.4.

2d, From Moses's testimony, Deut. 32.4.

3d, From Daniel's testimony, Dan. 9.4.

4th, From the testimony of James, Jam. 1.13.

5th, From the testimony of John, 1 John 2.16. and 1.5.

6th, From the testimony of Paul, Rom. 3.3-5.

7th, From the testimony of Habakkuk, Hab. 1.13.

From reason,

(1) Because God is, in, the highest degree, essentially, and infinitely hold and good, and therefore pure and free from every spot and blemish, Isa. 6.3. Psalm 78.41. 1 Pet. 1.15,16. Lev. 11.44.

(2) Because God is absolutely perfect, and therefore he cannot fail, or be deficient in working.

(3) Because God is the judge of the world. He is the forbidder, the hater, and revenger of all sin and unrighteousness, as contrary to his holy nature and law, Exod. 20. Rom. 3.5,9. Gen. 18.25. Rom. 1.17. Psalm 5.4.

(4) Because by his own most absolute, and most supreme dominion, sovereignty, and infinite perfection: he is in and of himself, above all law whatsoever, and under the command of none in heaven, or in earth.

Concerning the Fall of Man, of Sin, and the Punishment thereof.

QUESTION I.

"IS the guilt of the sin of our parents imputed, and the same death in sin, and corrupted nature, conveyed to all their posterity, descending from them by ordinary generation?"

Yes; Rom. 5.12,15-20, 1 Cor. 15.21,22,45,49. Psalm 51.5. Gen. 5.3. Job 14.4. and 15.14.

Well then, do not the Pelagians, and late Anabaptists, Quakers, and Socinians err, who deny original sin inherent?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Dominicans, Franciscans, and Jesuits err, who maintain, The virgin Mary not to be conceived in original sin?

Yes.

Does not, lastly, a certain ring-leader of the Quakers err, who maintains, That to infants this original sin is not imputed, until by actual sin, they join themselves to it?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From that well known place of Scripture, Romans 5, which is the very seat and foundation of this doctrine of original sin.

2d, Because unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God, John 3.3.

3d, Because all men, by nature and birth are the children of wrath, Eph. 2.3.

4th, Because whatever is born of the flesh, is fleshly, John 3.6. And who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one: Job 14.4 and 15.14.

5th, Because all the thoughts, and imaginations of the heart of man, (viz. of the natural, and unregenerate man) are evil continually, Gen. 6.5.

6th, Because David confesseth, that he was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did his mother conceive him, Psalm 51.5.

7th, Because infants, that are guilty of no actual transgression, need a remedy against sin, viz. absolution by the blood of Christ, a seal whereof was given, according to God's institution under the law to infants, namely circumcision, to which baptism, under the gospel succeeds, Deut. 30.6. Rom. 2.29. Acts 22.19. Mark 1.4. Col. 2.12. Gen. 17.12. Mat. 28.16.

8th, Because all the elect, among whom are infants, Mat. 18.6. Mark 9.42. are redeemed by Christ, and are set at liberty from slavery, freed from the fault, and penal punishment, John 1.29. and 10.15. 1 Tim. 2.6.

9th, Because infants are liable to death and other miseries and calamities, which are the wages and punishments of sin, Rom. 6.23. Gen. 3.19.

Quest. II. "Is this corruption of nature, albeit pardoned, and mortified through Christ in some measure in the regenerate, both itself, and all the motives thereof, truly and properly sin?"

Yes; Rom. 7.5,7,8,25. Gal. 5.17.

Well then, do not the Papists, Socinians, and Arminians err, who maintain, That concupiscence or lust, and the first motions thereof, which have not gotten the consent of the will, are not properly and truly sin?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because they are forbidden by the moral and natural law, in the tenth command, Exod. 20.17. Deut. 5.21. Rom. 7.7.

2d, Because Paul speaking of himself, while unregenerate, calleth concupiscence and lust, of which the controversy is oftentimes sin and evil, Rom. 7.5,6.

3d, Because it is a great part of the old man, which he must lay down, and must be mortified, Col. 3.5,6,7. Eph. 4.22.

Quest. III. "Doth every sin, both original and actual, being a transgression of the righteous law of God, and contrary thereunto, bring in its own nature guilt upon the sinner, whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God, and the curse of the law; and made subject to death, with all the miseries spiritual, temporal, and eternal?"

Yes; 1 John 3.4 Rom. 2.15. and 4.9,19. Eph. 2.3. Gal. 3.10. Rom. 6.23. Eph. 4.18. Rom. 8.20. Lam. 3.39. Mat. 25.41. 2 Thes. 1.9.

Well then, do not many of the Papists err, who maintain, That all sins are not contrary to the law of God, nor transgressions thereof?

Yes.

Do not all Papists err, who deny, Every sin to be mortal, or to deserve eternal punishment?

Yes.

Lastly, Do not the Socinians err, who deny, that any sin can deserve eternal punishment?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because all sins deserve eternal death, Rom. 6.23. Ezek. 18.4. Rom. 8.6,13.

2d, Because every sin is a transgression of the law, 1 John 3.4.

3d, Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all, James 2.10,11. and therefore he deserves eternal punishment.

4th, Because those sins of infirmity and ignorance which the saints are subject to, and which the Papists call venial sins, will not suffer them to stand in judgment before God, nor can the saints be justified from them by faith; and therefore in strict justice they merit and deserve hell, Psalm 143.2. and 130.3,4,8.

5th, Because God commanded believers under the law, to offer typical sacrifices, for making a propitiation for such sins; and Christ did really by his own precious blood, purge them away; for by no less price could they be purged, he being made a curse for them, that he might liberate those from the curse of the law, which they had deserved for such sins, as well as for others, Lev. 4.2,3,14,15,20,22,24,31. Lev. 5.17,18. Gal. 3.13. Heb. 10.10,12,14. Heb. 9.14.22. 1 John 1.7,9. Eph. 5.25,26,27. 1 Pet. 1.18,19.

6th, Because every sin is against the supremest law giver, against his holiness and goodness, against his infinite majesty, and floweth from a formal or virtual contempt of God; and therefore the least sin cannot but deserve God's wrath and curse eternally, James 2.10,11. Lev. 10.3. and 11.44,45. 1 John 3.4. Eph. 5.6.

Of God's Covenant with Man.

QUESTION I.

"DID all these sacrifices, and other types and ordinances, by which the covenant of grace was administered before our Saviour's incarnation, adumbrate, and foresignify Christ to come?"

Yes; Hebrews chapters 8-10. Rom. 4.11. Col. 2.11,12. 1 Cor. 5.7.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, That the legal sacrifices did not foresignify the expiatory sacrifice of Christ, neither were types nor figures of it; but that those sacrifices, which the Jews offered for sin, did really, and in very deed, purge away all the sins for which they were offered?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

There are here two parts to be considered; first, the negative, "That the legal sacrifices did not foresignify." The second, the affirmative, "That they did truly make a real expiation and atonement." The first is evidently confuted from scripture testimonies; for the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never, with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually, make the comers thereunto perfect, Heb. 10.4. The apostle calls here these legal sacrifices a shadow; and Heb. 9.9 he calls them a figure; and ver. 24. he calls them (antitypa toon alethinoon) examplaria verorum, The figures of the true; and Col. 2.17. he calls them a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ, which is nothing else, but that the thing signified is of Christ; that is to say, fulfilled in Christ. For all the shadows of the Old Testament, had a respect to Christ; and his benefits; by whose coming they also have an end. And John 1.17. it is said, That the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. By grace, understand the grace of redemption from the curse of the law, Gal. 3.13. and of adoption for children, John 1.12. Rom. 8.15. By truth, understand the fulfilling both of the promises, 2 Cor. 1.20. and of the ceremonies, and types, Col. 2.17. For this cause the apostles have always pressed the abrogation of the legal rites and ceremonies; because the truth being exhibited, by the coming of the anti-type, the shadows of the type ought deservedly to cease, and be no more; according to that of Daniel, chapter 9, verse 27.

The second part is likewise evidently confuted; namely, That the legal sacrifices did truly and really purge away all sins, for which they were offered.

1st, Because the apostle says, The blood of bulls, and goats, cannot take away sin, Heb. 10.4.

2d, Because those sacrifices were not able to make him that did the service perfect, Heb. 9.9.

3d, Because these legal sacrifices did leave the sins of such as offered unexpiated, until they were purged away by the death and blood of Christ, Heb. 9.15.

4th, Because the sins of believers, under the Old Testament, were forgiven and pardoned after the same manner that our sins under the New Testament are pardoned, Acts 15.11.

Quest. II. "Was the administration of the covenant under the Old Testament, sufficient for the time, and efficacious through the operation of the Spirit, to instruct and build up the elect, in the faith of the promised Messiah; by whom they had a full remission of sins, and eternal salvation?"

Yes; 1 Cor. 10.1,3,4. Heb. 11.13. John 8.56.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, That life eternal, under the Old Testament, was never promised to the believers of that time, neither had they any promise to expect it from God?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because there are promises extant in the Old Testament of life eternal, Isa. 45.17. where it is said, Israel shall be saved with an everlasting salvation, see Dan. 12.2.

2d, Because the fathers under the Old Testament, believed and expected life eternal, as Job 19.25,26. David, Psalm 17.15. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, all of these waited for eternal life, Heb. 11.9,10.

3d, Because some at that time were put into actual possession of it, as Enoch, Heb. 11.5. so was Elijah taken up into heaven and put into actual possession likewise, 2 Kings 2.11,5.

4th, Because the Scriptures of the Old Testament pointeth forth the way to eternal life, as Christ witnesseth; John 5.39. and Paul, 2 Tim. 3.15.

5th, Because believers under the Old Testament were most happy, Psalm 144.19.

6th, Because temporal good things were to them pledges of spiritual good things, and life eternal, Heb. 11.8,9.

Quest. III. "Are the two covenants of grace, differing in substance, or but one and the same, under various dispensations?"

One only: Gal. 3.14,16. Acts 15.11. Rom. 3.21,22,23,30. Rom. 4.3,6,16,17,23,24, Heb. 13.8.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, A substantial, and not an accidental difference between the old covenant and the new?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because in both the covenants there is the same promise of grace, concerning the remission of sin, and eternal life, freely to be given to believers for Christ's sake, Gen. 3.15. where the seed of the woman is promised to bruise the head of the serpent; and Gen 17.7. it is said, "I will be thy God, and the God of thy seed after thee;" and Gen. 22.18. it is said, In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; and John 3.36. it is said, He that believeth hath everlasting life; and Acts 15.11. it is said, But we believe, that through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, we shall be saved, even as they.

2d, Because one and the same faith and obedience, on both sides, required, Walk before me, and be thou perfect, Gen. 17.1. and Mark 1.15. Christ says, after he came to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent ye, and believe the gospel."

Of Christ the Mediator.

QUESTION I.

"DID the Son of God, when the fullness of time was come, take upon him man's nature, with all the essential properties, and common infirmities thereof, yet without sin; being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the virgin Mary, of her substance?"

Yes; John 1.1,14. 1 John 5.20. Heb. 2.14,16,17. Luke 1.27,31,35.

Well then, do not these heretics err called Marcionites, and the Anabaptists err, who maintain, That Christ is not a true man, but only the appearance, shape, or form of a man?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Manicheans err, who maintain, That the body of Christ is not the substance of the virgin Mary, but a heavenly body, brought from heaven to the womb of the virgin?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ is said to be made of a woman, Gal. 4.4.

2d, Because the word was made flesh, John 1.4.

3d, By an induction of the essential parts of a man, and the sinless infirmities which were found in him.

He was endued with a rational soul, John 12.27.

He had a real and substantial body, and denied he was a spirit only, Luke 24.39.

Christ did hunger, Mat. 4.2.

He was weary and thirsty. John 4.6.

Lastly, He was sad; he groaned in spirit, and was troubled, John 11.35. and verse 15. He wept. None of which sinless perturbations can agree to an appearance, shape, or form of a man.

4th, Because he was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, Rom. 1.3. and descended of the Jews, Rom 9.5.

5th, Because the promises were made in the seed of Abraham, Gen. 12.3. add Gen. 18.18.

6th, Because he took not on him the nature of angles, but took on him the seed of Abraham, Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, Heb. 2.16,17.

7th, Because otherwise he could not have satisfied in our place the justice of God: Seeing it had been unjust for another nature to have suffered punishment, than that nature which had offended and sinned.

Quest. II. "Are there two whole, perfect, and distinct natures in Christ, the God-head, and the manhood, inseparably joined together in one person?"

Yes; 1 Cor. 8.6. Eph. 4.5.

Well then, do not the Nestorians err, who maintain, the union between the divine and human nature, not to be hypostatical, but only by way of assistance: And that, as there are two natures in Christ, so there are two persons, one proper to the divine nature, another proper to the human nature?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because unless Christ-God-man were but one person, the merit of his death would not be of so great value, as to redeem the elect from infinite and eternal punishment; seeing hence cometh all the value and worth of his death, that the same person who was God, did suffer and die for us.

2d, Because otherwise, Christ had been swallowed up and devoured by the wrath of God, against the sins of the elect, which he himself undertook.

3d, Because Christ, if he had not been both God and man in one person, he could not have been a mediator: For a mediator must be one, 1 Tim. 2.5.

Quest. III. "Is the godhead and manhood in Christ united without conversion, composition or confusion?"

Yes; Luke 1.35. Col. 2.9. Rom. 9.5. 1 Pet. 3.18. 1 Tim. 3.16.

Well then, do not these old heretics, the Eutychiens err, who maintain, That as the person of Christ is one, so his nature is made one, by a composition, or confusion of the two natures together?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because such a composition is impossible, seeing the divine nature is most perfect and cannot lose any of its own perfection, unless we would affirm the divine nature to be mutable and changeable.

2d, Because that same Christ, who according to the flesh descended of the Jews is over all, God blessed for ever, Rom. 6.5.

3d, Because this doctrine takes away all means of mediation; for, by taking away the distinction between the natures, they take away the natures themselves: And so neither could Christ have suffered in our place, because not man; neither could he have given any virtue, value, or worth, to his sufferings because not God.

Quest. IV. "Did Christ endure most grievous torments immediately in his soul?"

Yes; Mat. 26.37,38. Luke 22.44. Mat. 27.46.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That the soul of Christ, even from its first creation, was never affected with any sadness, or sinful perturbation of mind?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the Scripture testifies, that his soul was sad unto death, Mat. 26.37.

2d, Because the apostle John testifies, that when Christ saw Mary weeping for her brother Lazarus, he groaned in Spirit and was troubled, John 11.33. and 12.27.

3d, Because his soul was exceeding sorrowful even unto death, as was cited before, Mat. 26.37.

4th, The same thing is proven from Christ's desertion, whereby the actual fruition, and enjoying of God's favour, as to his sense, was interrupted, and broken in the midst for a time, but in no wise altogether taken away, which made him cry upon the cross, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me, Mat. 27.46. Eph. 5.2.

Quest. V. "Had the Lord Jesus, by his perfect obedience and sacrifice of himself, which he, through the eternal Spirit, once offered up unto God, fully satisfied the justice of his Father?"

Yes; Rom. 5.9. and 3.25,26. Heb. 9.14,16. and 10.14.

Well then, do not some, otherwise orthodox, err, who deny Christ's active obedience to be a part of his satisfaction, performed in our place?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the active disobedience of the first Adam made us all sinners; therefore we must be made righteous by the active obedience of the second Adam, Rom. 5.19.

2d, Because Christ not only offered himself to the death for us, but for their sakes, that is, for the elects sake, he sanctified himself, that is, he gave up himself as a holy sacrifice, John 17.19.

3d, Because it behoved Christ to fulfill all righteousness, Mat. 3.15.

4th, Because we stood in need, not only of the expiation of sin, for saving us from eternal death, but of the gift of righteousness, for obtaining eternal life, according to that precept and demand of the law, Do this, and thou shalt live. And therefore Christ is not only called our ransom, but the end and perfection of the law, to every one that believeth Rom. 10.4. That is, the aim of giving the law by Moses, is that thereby men being brought to the knowledge of their sin, should fly for refuge unto Christ and his righteousness, as he that hath perfectly fulfilled the law for us.

5th, Because the passive obedience of Christ was not in itself merely and purely passive, but his active obedience did challenge the chief and principal part in it, Psalm 40.7. "Then said I, Lo, I come; in the volume of thy book it is written of me." With these words, our Saviour Christ declareth his willing obedience to accept of, undergo, and execute his Mediatorship, by God imposed upon him. And Isa. 53.7. he offered up himself a sacrifice for sin, and by one oblation, he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified, Heb. 10.14.

6th, Because whole Christ was given to us, with all his benefits; otherwise, if only his passive obedience were imputed to us, it would follow that half Christ only were given, viz. Christ suffering, but not Christ doing those things which pleased the Father; taking away our sin, and saving from death only, but not bringing righteousness. But Christ was not given, and born for himself, but for us, that he might bestow himself wholly upon us, by doing for us what we could not do, and by suffering for us what we could not suffer.

Do not likewise the Socinians err, who maintain, That this orthodox doctrine, (namely, That Christ did merit eternal salvation to the elect, and hath satisfied divine justice for them,) is erroneous, false, and absurd?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the Messiah doth finish transgression, and maketh an end of sins, and maketh reconciliation for iniquity, and shall be cut off, but not for himself, as the prophet Daniel hath foretold, chapter 9, verses 24 and 26.

2d, Because his own self bore our sins in his own body upon the tree, 1 Pet. 2.24.

3d, Because he hath reconciled those to God, that were sometimes alienated, and enemies in their minds by wicked works, in the body of his flesh through death, Col. 1.21,22.

4th, Because now once in the end of the world, hath he appeared to put away sin, by the sacrifice of himself, Heb. 9.26.

5th, Because he hath given his life, an (antilytron) a pretium redemptionis, a price of redemption for many.

6th, Because the prophet Isaiah says, that it pleased the Lord to bruise him, and put him to grief; and that he was wounded for our transgressions, and that he bare our iniquities, chapter 53.5,10,11.

Quest VI. "Did Christ in the work of mediation act according to both natures, by each nature doing that which is proper to itself?"

Yes; Heb. 9.4. 1 Pet. 3.18.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That Christ is a mediator, only according to his human nature?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because it was needful for perfecting the work of the Mediator, that Christ should overcome death; which could not otherwise be done, than by his divine nature, 1 Pet. 3.18. where it is said, he was put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit.

2d, Because there are very many properties of the Mediator, which cannot in any wise agree to the human nature of Christ, as undertaking and promising that he will raise him up at the least day, whom the Father has given him, John 6.39. Again, he could not lay down his life, and take it up again, by the alone strength of his human nature; but all these works are proper to the Mediator, as is clear from the tenth chapter of John verse 18. And,

3d, The application of these good things which he hath merited, is the proper work of the Mediator, which can only be done by the divine nature.

4th, Because Christ is a prophet, a priest, and a king, according to both his natures. A prophet, Mat. 11.27. No man knoweth the Father, save the Son. A priest, Rom. 5.10. Heb. 9.14. He is a king, Luke 1.32. All which offices he executes according to both his natures.

Of Free-will

QUESTION I

"HATH man, by his fall into an estate of sin, wholly lost all ability of will, to any supernatural good, accompanying salvation: so as the natural man being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able by his own strength to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto?"

Yes; Rom. 5.5. John 15.5. Rom. 3.10,12. John 6.44,65.

Well then, do not the Pelagians and Socinians err, who maintain, That the natural man without supernatural and divine grace, is able to convert himself to God by his own strength?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Semipelagians, Papists, Arminians, and Lutherans err, who maintain, That fallen man, and corrupted with original sin, is partly able by his own strength, the grace of God assisting him, to prepare himself, and turn himself to God?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned, 1 Cor. 2.14. Rom. 8.7,9.

2d, Because all that the natural man doth, is sin, and cannot in any wise please God, because his works are not of faith, nor to the glory of God, as the law requires, Rom. 14.23. Heb. 11.6. Titus 1.15. Rom. 3.10-12. Psalm 14.3. Rom. 8.8.

3d, Because a man hath no good in himself, whereby he may be differenced from the most flagitious, nor any good thing which he hath not received, 1 Cor. 4.7.

4th, Because conversion, grace and salvation, are not of him that runneth or willeth, but of God that sheweth mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth, Rom. 9.15,16,18. Rom. 11.7,8. Mat. 11.21,22,25.

5th, Because the conversion of a natural man, is the quickening of one dead, Eph. 2.5. Col. 2.13. It is a regeneration, or bearing again, John 3.5,6. It is the creating of a new heart, Psalm 51.10. It is the taking away the heart of stone, and the giving of a heart of flesh, Ezek. 11.19. Ezek. 36.25. And therefore as God raised us from the grace of sin, by his own proper power, 1 Cor. 6.15. And,

6th, Because God converts and calls men, not by works of righteousness, which they have done, Titus 3.4,6,7. but according to his own purpose and grace which is given us in Christ Jesus, 2 Tim. 1.9.

Quest. II. "Doth a regenerate man, after his conversion, perfectly and only will that which is good?"

No; Gal. 5.17. Rom. 7.15,18,21,23.

Well then, do not the Puritans, (I do not mean the old Non-conformists) Antinomians, Anabaptists, and many Quakers err, who maintain, That all the saints of God are free from every spot and blemish of sin?

Yes.

Do not likewise some of the Popish church, and Socinians err, who maintain, That some Christians, that are more advanced, may come that length, to be without any spot blemish, and act of sin; nay, that some have really win that length?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because in many things we offend all, James 3.2.

2d, Because Christ commands us to seek daily remissions of sins, Mat. 6.12. Luke 11.4.

3d, Because there is not one just man upon the earth, who doth not sin, 1 Kings 8.46. Eccl. 7.20.

4th, Because there is a continual war between the flesh and the Spirit; so that they namely, the regenerate, are not able to do that which they are willing, and ought to do, Gal. 5.17.

5th, Because the regenerate are not able to fulfill the first command, namely, to love God with all their heart, with all their soul, Mat. 22.37,38. For we know here but in part, and therefore we love but in part, 1 Cor. 13.9. Neither are the saints free of all those inordinate motions of concupiscence, forbidden in the tenth command, as is evident from Gal. 5.17. and from the experience of Paul, and of all the other saints.

6th, Because if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us, 1 John 1.8,9. But when that same apostle says, Whosoever is born of God, doth not commit sin, for his seed remains in him, and he cannot sin, because he is born of God; he must mean in the first text, of sin dwelling in the best of saints here-away, and therefore he expresses it by hamartian echein, peccatum habere, which signifies, to have sin. In the second text, he means of sin, not ony indwelling, but reigning in us, and made a trade of, and gone about with the full and hearty consent of the will, and is expressed by the words hamartian poiein, to work sin, and to make a trade of it, as men do in any employment they take delight in.

7th, We see it from the grievous falls of the most eminent saints, as Noah, Lot, Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, Asa, Jehoshaphat, and the disciples of Christ.

Of Effectual Calling.

QUESTION I.

"ARE all those whom God has predestinated to life, and those only, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually called by his word and Spirit, out of the estate of sin and death, in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation, through Jesus Christ?"

Yes; Rom. 8.30. Rom. 11.7. Eph. 1.10,11. 2 Thes. 2.13,14. Rom. 8.2. Eph. 2.1-5, 2 Cor. 3.3,6.

Well then, do not the Papists, Arminians, and Lutherans err, who maintain, That men not elected are sometimes effectually called?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because faith belongs to the elect only, Titus 1.1.

2d, Because whom he did predestinate, those only, and no other hath he called, Rom. 8.30.

3d, Because though many hear the gospel, yet none believe, but such as are ordained to everlasting life, Acts 13.48.

4th, Because the apostle testifies, that the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded, Rom. 11.7.

5th, Because Christ manifested his Father's name, to those only whom he choose out of the world, and gave to him, John 17.6.

Quest. II. "Doth God, whom he effectually calls, enlighten their minds spiritually and savingly, to understand the things of God?"

Yes; Acts 26.18. 1 Cor. 2.10,12. Eph. 1.17,18.

Well then, do not the Arminians err, who maintain, That no supernatural light infused into the intellective faculty, and thereby elevating it, is requisite to the saving understanding of these things, which are needful, in the scripture, to be believed and hoped for?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned, 1 Cor. 2.14.

2d, Because the carnal mind is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the law of God, neither can it be, Rom. 8.7.

3d, Because all unregenerate men are darkness, Eph. 5.8. And darkness cannot comprehend the light, John 1.5.

4th, Because Christ says, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to babes, Mat. 11.25.

Quest. III. "Doth God take away from them, whom he effectually calls, the heart of stone, and give unto them an heart of flesh, renewing their wills, and by his almighty power, determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ?"

Yes; Ezek. 36.26. Ezek. 11.19. Phil. 2.13. Ezek. 36.27.

Well then, do not the Arminians err, who maintain, That the will of man, when he is regenerate, is not renewed, nor furnished with any new and spiritual qualities?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Moses says, God shall circumcise they heart, and the heart of they seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live, Deut. 30.6.

2d, Because the Lord says, A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you, and will take away the stony heart of flesh: And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and cause you to keep my judgments and do them, Ezek. 36.26,27.

3d, Because it is God that worketh in us both to will and to do, according to his own good pleasure, Phil. 2.13.

4th, Because all the faculties of the soul are renewed, 2 Cor. 5.17. If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature; old things are past away, behold all things are become new.

Do not likewise the Arminians err, who maintain, That when the grace of God begins to make an infall upon the heart, in order to a man's conversion, it is indifferent, and may be resisted and withstood; so that a man may be converted, or not converted by it?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because if this doctrine were true, a man's conversion would be of him that runneth, and of him that willeth, but not of God, that sheweth mercy; which is contrary to the apostle, Rom. 9.15,16.

2d, Because by this way, it should not be God that worketh in us, both to will and to do, Phil. 2. 13

3d, Because by this way, a man himself should make the difference, and God should not make one man differ from another, which is contrary to the apostle, 1 Cor. 4.7.

4th, Because if so, a man might glory, that he had in himself, what he had not received; which contradicts, 1 Cor. 4.7.

5th, Because it is God that draws a man before he comes to Christ, John 6.44.

6th, Because conversion is a new creation, 2 Cor. 5.17.

7th, Because it is a resurrection from the dead, Eph. 2.5.

8th, Because conversion is no less than to be born over again, John 3.3.

Quest. IV. "Is this effectual call, of God's free and special grace alone, and not from any thing at all foreseen in man?"

Yes; 2 Tim. 2.9. Titus 3.4,5. Eph. 2.4,5,8,9.

Well then, do not the Papists and Arminians err, who maintain, That an unregenerate man may, by the strength of nature and his free-will, do some good works; nay, oftentimes hath actually done such good works, as may prepare him, and dispose him for receiving of the grace of God?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because an evil tree cannot bring forth good fruit, Mat. 7.17.

2d, Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can it be, Rom. 8.7.

3d, Because we have nothing in ourselves, which we have not received, whereby we may differ from others, 1 Cor. 4.7.

4th, Because whatever is not of faith is sin, Rom. 14.23. Heb. 11.6.

5th, Because we are not able of ourselves to think a good thought, but all our sufficiency is of God, 2 Cor. 3.5.

6th, Because before conversion we were dead in trespasses and sins, Eph. 2.2,5.

7th, Because not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost, Titus 3.5.

8th, Because we were sometimes, that is, before conversion, darkness, Eph. 5.8.

9th, Because Christ says, without me, ye can do nothing, John 15.5.

Quest. V. "Is man in effectual calling only passive, until being quickened and renewed by the Holy Ghost, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it?"

Yes; 1 Cor. 2.14. Rom. 8.7. Eph. 2.5. John 6.37. John 5.25. Ezek. 36.27.

Well then, do not the Papists and Arminians err, who maintain, That a man in his conversion is not passive, but active?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

Before I do this, it is to be observed, that when I say a man is passive in his conversion, I do not think he is physically passive, as a stock or a stone, while an artist is about to make a statue of them: but morally, or rather spiritually; as a man is spiritually dead, which is a true and real death, though he be naturally living. The first reason by which they are confuted is this, because we are dead in trespasses and sins, Eph. 2.1.

2d, Because we are the servants of sin, until we be made free men by the Son of God, John 8.34,36.

3d, Because we are by nature, under the power of Satan and of darkness, Acts 26.18. Col. 1.13. 2 Tim. 2.26.

4th, Because it is God that worketh in us, both to will and to do, of his own good pleasure, Phil. 2.13.

5th, Because the flesh lusteth against the spirit, Gal. 5.17.

6th, Because the Scriptures ascribe that whole work to God, and no part of it to man, Eph. 2.8,9.

Quest. VI. "Are elect infants, dying in infancy, regenerated and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when and where he pleaseth?"

Yes; Luke 18.15,16. Acts 2.38,39. John 3.5. 1 John 5.12.

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, That no infants are regenerated?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb, Luke 1.15.

2d, Because the prophet Jeremiah was sanctified from his mother's womb, Jer. 1.5.

3d, Because the promise is made to believing parents, and to their children, conjunctly, Gen. 17.7. Acts 2.39.

4th, Because of such, says Christ, is the kingdom of heaven, Mat. 19.14.

5th, Because the apostle calls children, which are descended but of one parent, in covenant with God, holy; 1 Cor. 7.14.

6th, Because God hath promised in the second command, That he will shew mercy unto thousands, that are descended of believing parents, Exod. 20.6.

Quest. VII. "Can any not elected, although called by the ministry of the word, and having some common operations of the Spirit, truly come to Christ, and so be saved?"

No; Mat. 22.14. Mat. 7.22. Mat. 18.20,21. Heb. 6.4,5. John 6.64,65,66. John 8.24.

Well then, do not the Arminians err, who maintain, That there is sufficient grace given to all men for their conversion to whom the gospel is preached?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Quakers err, who maintain, That every man hath so much grace given of God, as, if he would improve it, would bring him to heaven?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ says to his disciples, To you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given, Mat. 13.11.

2d, Because it is said of the Jews, they could not believe, because God had blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, John 12.39,40.

3d, Because Christ said to his disciples, there are some of you that do not believe; therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father, John 6.64,65.

4th, Because the prophet Isaiah complains, Who hath believed our report, and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? Isa. 53.1.

5th, Because many are called, but few are chosen, Mat. 22.14.

6th, Because men in nature do not discern neither can they know the things of the Spirit of God, 1 Cor. 2.14.

7th, Because the most part of the world are buried in gross darkness, and have their understanding darkened, and are alienated from the life of God, through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their hearts, Eph. 3.18.

Of Justification.

QUESTION I.

"DOTH God freely justify those whom he effectually calleth, not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous, not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ's sake alone?"

Yes; Rom. 9.30. Rom. 3.24.

Well then, do not the Papists, Socinians, and Quakers err, who maintain, That the righteousness, whereby we are justified before God, is not without us, but within us, and inherent?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because if inherent righteousness did justify us, then good works would justify us, but the scripture denies that, Rom. 3.20. Therefore, says the text, by the deeds of the law, shall no flesh be justified in his sight: and ver. 28, therefore we conclude, that a man is justified by faith, without the deeds of the law. See Rom. 4.6. Gal. 2.16. Eph. 2.8,9. Titus 3.5. In all which places, works are secluded expressly from our justification.

2d, Because the righteousness whereby we are justified, is not our proper own, 2 Cor. 5.21. For he, viz. God, hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him, Phil. 3.8,9. And be found in him, not having on my own righteousness which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith.

3d, Because we are not justified by the law, Acts 13.38,39.

4th, Because our justification is given to us freely, Rom. 4.4,5. Rom. 11.6.

5th, Because our inherent righteousness is imperfect, 1 Kings 8.46. For this Scripture says, there is no man that sinneth not. See that parallel place, 1 John 1.8. where it is said, If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

6th, Because if we were justified by inherent righteousness, we should have matter to boast of, which is contrary to Paul's doctrine, Eph. 2.9. Not of works, lest any man should boast.

7th, Because the righteousness of a Christian man, is the justifying of the ungodly, Rom. 4.5.

Quest. II. "Doth God justify men by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience to them, as their righteousness?"

No; Rom. 4.5-8. 2 Cor. 5.19,21. Rom. 3.22,24,25,27,28. Titus 3.5,7. Eph. 1.7. Jer. 23.6. 1 Cor. 1.30,31. Rom. 5.17,18,19.

Well then, Do not the Arminians err, who maintain, That faith itself, and the act of believing, is imputed to us for righteousness?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because faith is that by which we receive righteousness, Acts 26.18. Therefore if it be that by which we receive righteousness, it cannot be righteousness itself; because that which is received is far different, and another thing from that, whereby we receive it.

2d, Because we are not justified by inherent righteousness, as is proven evidently against the Papists in the last foregoing question; all which reasons do clear evince, that we are not justified by the imputation of faith itself, or by the act of believing, as our righteousness.

Quest. III. "Is faith, which is the alone instrument of justification, alone in the person justified?"

No.

"Is it ever accompanied with all other saving graces; and is no dead faith, but worketh by love?"

Yes; James 2.17,22,26. Gal. 5.5.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That justifying faith may be truly and really separated from love, saving hope, and all the rest of the Christian virtues?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also, James 2.26.

2d, Because faith worketh by love, Gal. 5.6. that is by shewing forth the works of love in us, towards God and our neighbor.

3d, Because faith purifies the heart, Acts 15.9.

4th, Because he that hath faith is in Christ; but he that is in Christ bringeth forth much fruit, John 15.5.

5th, Because those who have faith are buried with Christ, and walk in newness of life, Rom. 6.4. that is, in holiness and purity, which accompany faith.

6th, Because he that saith, I know God, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him, 1 John 2.4.

Quest. IV. "Did Christ, by his obedience and death, fully discharge the debt of all those who are thus justified, and did he make a proper, real, and full satisfaction to the Father's justice in their behalf?"

Yes; Rom. 5.8,9. 1 Tim. 2.5,6. Dan. 9.24,26. Heb. 10.10,14. Isa. 53.4,5,6,10,11,12.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That Christ hath not made a full satisfaction to divine justice, for the sins of those who are justified: And that human satisfactions do, in part, satisfy the justice of God for sin?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Socinians err, who deny, All true and proper satisfaction to Christ's suffering?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the prophet says, He hath born our griefs, and carried our sorrows, was wounded for our transgressions, was bruised for our iniquities, Isaiah 53.4,5.

2d, Because by one offering, he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified; Heb. 10.14.

3d, Because human satisfactions being finite, can never satisfy in part, or in whole, the infinite justice of God, for the punishment of sin, Job 35.6.

4th, Because he hath blotted out the hand writing of ordinances, which was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross, Col. 2.14.

5th, Because there is nothing more frequent in scripture, than that Christ was a propitiation for our sins, Rom. 3.25.

6th, Because Christ says, I lay down my life for my sheep, and no man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself, John 10.15,18.

7th, Because, the Son of man came to give his life a ransom for many, Mat. 20.28. 1 Tim. 2.6. Eph. 5.2. Gal. 3.13. Rev. 5.9. 1 John 2.2.

Quest. V. "Are the elect justified, until the Holy Spirit, in due time, actually apply Christ to them?"

No; Col. 1.21,22. Titus 3.4-7.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, That the elect are justified from eternity, or when the price of redemption was paid?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because all that are justified have been strangers and enemies to God, and children of wrath, Eph. 2.3. Col. 1.21. Titus 3.3. 1 Cor. 6.10,11.

2d, Because none are justified, until they believe in Christ, Gal. 2.16. Knowing that a man is not justified, by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ.

Quest. VI. "Can those who are justified by reason of their sins, fall under God's fatherly displeasure, and not having the light of his countenance restored unto them, until they humble themselves, confess their sins, beg pardon, and renew their faith and repentance?"

Yes; Psalm 89.31,32,33. Psalm 32.5. Psalm 51.7-12. Mat. 26.75. 1 Cor. 11.30,32.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, That God's love and favour towards those that are justified, cannot consist with his anger and chastisement towards them?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ says, as many as I love, I rebuke and chasten, Rev. 3.19.

2d, Because David was chastened for his adultery and murder, 2 Sam. 12.10.

3d, Because the Lord says, If my children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgements, then will I visit their transgressions with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes, Psalm 89.30,31.

4th, Because God was provoked with the sins of the Corinthians, for which he punished them, 1 Cor. 10.22. and 11.30.

Quest. VII. "Is the justification of believers, under the Old Testament, one and the same in all respects with the justification of believers, under the New Testament?"

Yes; Gal. 3.9,13,14. Rom. 4.22,23. Heb. 13.8.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, That the manner of justification is not one and the same, under both the Testaments?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Abraham was justified by faith in Christ, Gen. 15.6. And he believed in the Lord, and it was counted to him for righteousness. That is, God of his mere grace held him righteous and justified, that had no righteousness in himself, whereby to subsist and stand before his justice seat, and that through faith in his promises, and in the promised Mediator.

2d, Because Isaiah teacheth, that both himself and other believers were justified by the knowledge of Christ, chap. 53.11.

3d, Because the Holy Ghost expressly testifies, that Christ died for the believers under the Old Testament, Heb. 9.15.

4th, Because the justification of believing Jews under the Old Testament, and believers under the New are compared between themselves as equal, Acts 15.11.

Of Adoption.

QUESTION I.

"ARE those who are taken into the number and enjoy the liberties and privileges of the children of God, and have his name put upon them, and receive the Spirit of Adoption, are they, I say, ever cast off?"

No.

"Are they sealed to the day of redemption, and inherit the promises, as heirs of everlasting salvation?

Yes; Lam. 3.3. Eph. 4.30. 1 Pet. 1.5.

Well then, do not the Lutherans err, who maintain, That the children of God some of them, may be cast off for a time totally, though not finally?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Arminians, Quakers, and Socinians err, who maintain, That those who have received the grace of adoption, may be cast off totally and finally?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because all the children of God are kept through faith unto salvation, 1 Pet. 1.5.

2d, Because Christ hath prayed for the perseverance of all believers, John 17.20. John 11.26. And all those that are adopted, are the children of God by faith, Gal. 3.26.

3d, Because no man that is born again, as are all the children of God, doth sin, that is, he suffers not sin to reign over him, for his seed remaineth in him; that is, God's seed, whereby he is born again, namely the word of God, 1 Pet. 1.23. John 3.5,6. remaineth in him, that is, doth not totally perish, but abideth thence forward, working the fruits of regeneration once begun in them, Phil. 1.6. See 1 John 3.9.

4th, Because all the children of God request the Father by the Son, that he may grant them perseverance to salvation, Mat. 6.13. which perseverance is most needful to them for that end, Mat. 24.13. But believers when they seek things needful to salvation, in the name of Christ, according to his promise, are always heard, John 14.13,14. John 16.23.

5th, Because the gifts and callings of God are without repentance, Rom. 11.29.

6th, Because all those who are justified are glorified, Rom. 8.30. But those who are adopted are endued with faith, and are justified, Gal. 3.26.

7th, Because Christ keepeth all his adopted ones, that none can pluck them out of his hand, or his Father's hand, John 10.27,28,29.

8th, Because perseverance is a gift promised by God to all the elect, in the covenant of grace, Ezek. 36.26,27,28. Ezek. 11.19,20. Jer. 31.32,33.

9th, Because justifying grace is a well of water, springing up into everlasting life in every man to whom it is given, John 4.14. And the saints are like unto trees, planted by the rivers of waters, which bring forth their fruits in due season. Psalm 1.3.

Of Sanctification.

QUESTION I.

"ARE they who are effectually called and regenerated, having a new spirit created in them, farther sanctified, really and personally, through virtue of Christ's death, and resurrection, by his word and Spirit dwelling in them?"

Yes.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, That those who are justified, are sanctified only, by the imputed holiness of Christ; not by infusing inherent holiness, or any spiritual qualities into them, by the help of which they are enabled to live holily?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the apostle says, Follow peace and holiness with all men, without which, no man shall see God, Heb. 12.14.

2d, Because the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, and faith, Gal. 5.22.

3d, Because they who are in Christ bring forth good fruit, John 15.5.

4th, Because they who belong to Christ have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts, Gal. 5.24,25.

5th, Because the apostle commands us to work out our salvation with fear and trembling, Phil. 2.12.

6th, Because we ought to purify ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God, 2 Cor. 7.1.

7th, Because we ought to grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, 2 Pet. 3.18.

8th, Because the Lord circumcises the heart of the elect, that they may love the Lord their God, and taketh away the heart of stone, Deut. 30.6. Ezek. 36.26,27.

Quest. II. "Is sanctification imperfect in this life, there being some remnants of corruption abiding in every part?"

Yes; 1 John 1.10. Rom. 7.18,23. Phil. 3.12.

Well then, do not the Antinomians, and many of the Quakers err, who maintain, That those who are justified, are perfectly sanctified?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Papists, Socinians, and Anabaptists err, who maintain the same, but differ in the manner?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

But first consider, that the Antinomians defend, That the most perfect holiness of Christ is imputed to us, and is made ours, there being no inherent holiness in us, nor required of us.

But the Papists Socinians, Quakers, and Anabaptists affirm, and maintain a perfect inherent holiness in this life. They are confuted,

1st, Because there is no man that sinneth not, 1 Kings 8.46.

2d, Because if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us, 1 John 1.8.

3d, Because in many things we offend all, James 3.2.

4th, Because there is not a just man upon the earth that doeth good and sinneth not, Eccl. 7.20

5th, Because we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags, Isa. 64.6.

6th, Because the psalmist prayeth, that God would not enter into judgment with him, for in thy sight, says he, shall no man be justified, Psalm 143.2

7th, Because no man can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin, Prov. 20.9.

8th, Because the apostle complains heavily concerning indwelling sin, Rom. 7.18,23.

9th, Because the saints are obliged to seek pardon of sin every day, Mat. 6.12.

10th, Because the Lord says, He that is holy, let him be holy still, Rev. 22.11.

Of Good Works.

QUESTION I.

"ARE good works only such as God hath commanded in his holy word, and not such as without the warrant thereof, are devised by men, out of blind zeal, upon any pretence of good intention?"

Yes; Micah 6.8. Rom. 12.2. Heb. 13.21. Matt. 15.9. with 1 Sam. 15.21-23. Isa. 29.13. 1 Pet. 1.18. Rom. 10.2.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That not only such works are good, which are done according to the will and law of God, but others also, which are commanded by the public authority of the church, though over and above what the law of God requires. And that those also are good works, which are done out of a good intention to advance God's glory, or to perform worship to him, though they be not commanded by God?

Yes.

Do not likewise the old and late Libertines err, who maintain, That the difference between good works and evil, depends only upon the private and particular opinion of every man, For thy think, that no work ought to be called evil, but in so far, as he that doth it, thinks it evil?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because good works are described by the apostle to be such as God before hath ordained, that we should walk in them, Eph. 2.20.

2d, Because God expressly commands, that every man must not do that which seems good in his own eyes, but only such works as he hath commanded, and must neither add thereto, nor diminish from it, Deut. 12.8,32. Josh. 1.7. Prov. 30.6. Rev. 22.16.

3d, Because the Lord openly testifies that in vain do they worship him, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men, not requiring that will worship, which fantastic men would give him. Isa. 1.13. Matt. 15.9. Micah 6.6-8. Col. 2.23.

4th, Because the Scribes and Pharisees are severally rebuked by Christ, that made the commandments of God of no effect, by their traditions, Matt. 15.6. And it is often mentioned in the books of Kings and Chronicles as a fault in the kings of Judah, that the high-places were not taken away. And how severely were the Israelites punished, for their worshipping of the golden calf, Exod. 32. and for worshipping the calves, which Jeroboam set up at Dan and Bethel, all know, 1 Kings 12.28.

5th, Because the law of God is the perfect rule and square of good works, to the law and to the testimony, if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them, Isa. 8.20.

6th, Because without faith it is impossible to please God, Heb. 11.6. But faith hath always a respect to the word of God.

Quest. II. "Are good works done in obedience to God's commandments, the fruits and evidences of a true and lively faith?"

Yes; James 2.18,22.

Well then do not the Antinomians and Libertines err, who deny, That believers ought to make evident to themselves and others, the truth of their justification by good works as fruits of a true and lively faith?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ says, By their fruits ye shall know them; for a good tree bringeth forth good fruit, Matt. 7.16-18.

2d, Because we are commanded, to make sure our calling and election by good works, as by the fruits of faith, 2 Pet. 1.5,6,10,11.

3d, Because in scripture there are delivered many undoubted and sure marks of regeneration, taken from the fruits of faith and good works, 1 John 1.6,7. and 2.3. and 1 John 3.9,10,14.

Quest. III. "Is our ability to do good works, wholly from the spirit of Christ, and not at all from ourselves."

Yes.

And that we may be enabled thereunto, besides the graces already received, is there not a required an actual influence of the same Holy Spirit, to work in us, both to do of his good pleasures?

Yes; John 15.4,6. Ezek. 36.26,27. Phil. 2.3 2 Cor. 3.5.

Well then do not the Pelagians err, who maintain, "That good works done by the strength of our free-will, are conform to the law of God, and worthy of the kingdom of heaven?"

Yes.

Do not likewise the Papists err, who maintain, That good works may be done by a mere general and common influence from God?

Yes.

Do not, lastly, the Arminians err, who maintain, That good works flow only from God as a moral cause?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ says, Ye can do nothing without me, John 15.5.

2d, Because of ourselves we are not able to think a good thought, 2 Cor. 3.5.

3d, Because it is God that worketh in us, both to will and to do, of his good pleasure, Phil. 2.13.

Quest. IV. "Are they who are regenerated, to grow negligent, as if they were not bound to perform any duty, unless by special motion of the Spirit?"

No.

Ought they not to stir up diligently the grace of God which is in them?

Yes; Phil. 2.12. Heb. 6.11,12. 2 Pet. 1.3,5,10. Isa. 64.7. 2 Tim. 1.6. Acts 26.6,7. Jude 20-22.

Well then, do not the Quakers, Familists, and other giddy-headed persons err, who maintain, That believers ought not to perform any duty in religion unless the Spirit within move and excite them to those duties; and that we ought to forbear when this is wanting?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the Holy Ghost forbiddeth us to be slow in performing such duties; nay, commands us to stir up the gift which is in us, and use all diligence to perform duties commanded by himself, Phil. 2.12. Jude 20.

2d, Because the prophet confesseth that, as the great sin of the Lord's people, that there is none that calleth upon his name, that stirreth up himself to take hold of him, Isa. 64.7.

3d, Because to neglect the worshipping of God, is an evident sign and token of an atheist, Psalm 14.4. Psalm 53.4.

4th, Because the Lord hath threatened to pour out his fury upon the heathen that know him not, and upon the families that call not on his name, Jer. 10.25.

5th, Because the twelve tribes which hoped to come to the promise made to the fathers, instantly served God day and night, Acts 26.6,7. And the apostles gave themselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word, Acts 6.4.

6th, Because Christ himself, who had always the Spirit, was very frequent in all those exercises and duties, as all the histories of the four evangelists do testify. Those fanatic Recusants, either have the Spirit of God in them, or they want it. This last they will not grant. If then they have it, why do they refuse to perform the duties of religion more than our blessed Saviour did, when opportunity and occasion did call him. They have the Spirit, but want the impulse. But contrariwise, this impulse is never wanting when there is a call. But the Spirit's call is never wanting when opportunity is offered.

7th, Because Christ will have the gospel preached to every creature, Mark 16.15. And hath commanded the administration of the Lord's supper, even to his second coming, 1 Cor. 11.26. And will have the work of the ministry to continue in his church, for the perfecting of the saints, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come in the unity of the faith, &c. Eph. 4.11-13.

8th, Because we are commanded to pray without ceasing; 1 Thess. 5.17. That is upon all opportunities, and in all our necessities.

9th, Because we are commanded to trust in him at all times, Psalm 62.8.

10th, If we shall forbear outward duties, as prayer, and such like, then ought we to forbear inward exercises, as acts of faith, love, and fear, till we be moved thereunto, which is most absurd: for we are commanded, as was cited, to trust in him always.

11th, What assurance can men have, the next hour, or to-morrow, more than in the present time of the Spirit's motion on their souls; or that they shall be thus at a greater advantage by putting off the duty, till they have some inward motion and impulse thereunto, than by waiting on the ordinary call of the word or of providence?

Quest. V. "Are they who in their obedience, attain to the greatest height which is possible in this life, so far from being able to supererrogate, and to do more than God requires, that they fall short of much, which in duty they are bound to do?"

Yes; Luke 17.10. Neh. 13.22. Gal. 15.17. Job 9.2,3.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That a man regenerated cannot only fulfill the law of God perfectly, but may do also more good than the law of God requires of him? This is their made fancy of the works of supererrogation.

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because no man living is able to fulfill the whole law of God, Psalm 143.2. Isa. 64.6. 1 John 1.8. Far less is any man able to do more than the law requires.

2d, Because we are obliged to seek remission of sins every day, Matt. 6.12. But to seek pardon of sin every day, and to perform works of supererrogation, are inconsistent together.

3d, Because Christ says, When you shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants, we have done that which was our duty to do, Luke 17.10.

4th, Because, according to this doctrine of works of supererrogation, we must accuse the Scripture or law of God, or imperfection, as if they were not a perfect rule of life and manners, which is contrary to the Psalmist, Psalm 19.8. And contrary to 2 Tim. 3.15-17. Deut. 4.2.

5th, Because whatsoever things are true, honest, just, pure, lovely, of good report, these are commanded as things necessary to all men: Therefore, either the works which the Papists call works of supererrogation, are true, honest, just, and pure; and if they be such, they are commanded by God in Scripture, and not works of supererrogation: Or they are unhonest, impure, unjust, and if such, then no man is so made as to call them good works, much less works of supererrogation, Phil. 4.8.

Quest. VI. "Can our best works merit pardon of sin, or eternal life at the hands of God?"

No; Rom. 3.20. Rom. 4.2,4,6. Eph. 2.8,9. Titus 3.5-7. Rom. 8.18. Psalm 16.2. Job 22.2,3.

Well then, do not the Papists, and some of the Quakers err, who maintain, That the good works of regenerate men, do truly and properly merit, and deserve eternal life?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because there is no proportion between our imperfect work and life eternal; between the work and the reward, 2 Cor. 4.17. For our light affliction worketh for us, that is, brings forth, not of any merit, but of mere grace, for Christ's sake, see Rom. 8.18. and 3.28.

2d, If by our good works, we deserved the pardon of sin, we might have whereof to boast, for if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God, Rom. 4.2. But the Scripture saith, he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord, 1 Cor. 1.31.

3d, Because no creature, performing the most excellent works, can deserve any favour from God, or oblige him to give any thing as due. And according to the order of God's justice, he can receive no favour from us, nor any creature confer any benefit on him, Psalm 16.2. Job 22.2,3. Truly, where there is no favour done, there can be no merit; For merit presupposeth a benefit accepted.

4th, Because our works are imperfect, as well as to parts, as to degrees, Gal. 5.17. Isa. 64.7. Deut. 27.26. A perfection of parts is, when we have a part of every grace, and are renewed in some measure in every power and faculty of the whole man, though we be not come to the just and due measure in any of them. A perfection of degrees, consists in the complete measure of our conformity, and our exact correspondence to the law of God, in respect of all whatsoever it requires.

5th, Because Christ says, So likewise ye, when ye have done all those thigns which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants, we have done that which was our duty to do, Luke 17.10.

6th, Because the good works which we do are not ours, but it is God that worketh in us, both to will and to do, 1 Cor. 5.6. Gal. 5.22. Phil. 2.13.

7th, Because that heavenly blessedness which is to be given to the saints is expressly attributed to the mercy and pity of God, Psalm 103.4. Matt. 5.7. Titus 3.5. Eph. 4.6,7,8.

8th, Because when the apostle proclaims death to be the wages of sin, he doth not affirm life eternal to be the reward of good works, but the free and gracious gift of God, which we obtain by Christ, even in our sanctification, whereof the apostle here, Rom. 6.23. Which free gift hath for its end, eternal life, not that it merits this, for then it should not be a gracious gift, but because Christ hath merited this for us, and shall of free grace give it to us, as the following words, Through Jesus Christ our Lord, shew.

9th, Because God will have us to buy, without money or price, wine, milk, honey; that is, to receive all things requisite and necessary for our spiritual life, for nothing, and eternal life itself, Isa. 55.1-3.

10th, Because Christ should not be a perfect Saviour, if any thing from us were to be added to the righteousness of his merit, but Christ is a perfect Saviour, Eph. 1.7. and 2.7-9. 1 John 1.7. Acts 4.12.

11th, Because our best works have such a mixture of corruption and sin in them, that they deserve his curse and wrath; so far are they from meriting, Isa 64.6. But we are all, saith the prophet, as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags.

12th, If the works of regenerated men did deserve eternal life, then should the whole contrivance of the gospel be subverted, and the same very way of life laid down which was in the covenant of works, as is clear from 2 Cor. 5.21. The gospel is so contrived, by the infinite wisdom and goodness of God, that there is a judicial transferring of our sins, as a debt on Christ the cautioner, and a translation of his righteousness and merit to be imputed to us, for our justification, without the least respect to our works.

Quest. VII. "Are works done by the unregenerate men, although for the matter of them they may be things which God commands, and of good use, both to themselves and others, are they, I say, sinful, and cannot please God?"

Yes; Hag. 2.14. Titus 1.15. Amos 5.22,12. Hos. 1.4. Rom. 9.16. Titus 3.5.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That not only all the works of unregenerate men are not sinful, but also that some of their works do indeed merit and deserve somewhat from God, namely, as they speak, by merit of congruity, that is, as they are agreeable to the law of God?

Yes.

[Do not the Papists further err, in that they maintain, that] There is also, as they say, a merit of condignity, by which the works of regenerate, which follow justification, deserve eternal life, not from the imputation of Christ's righteousness, but from their own intrinsic worth, and proportionableness to the reward?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because as a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt rotten tree bring forth good fruit, Matt. 7.18.

2d, Because all unregenerate men are dead in trespasses and sin, Eph. 2.1.

3d, Because all the works of unregenerate men are done without faith, and so cannot please God, Heb. 2.6. Rom. 14.23.

4th, Because if unregenerate men were able to do good works, or perform any duty which deserved somewhat from God, then would it follow, that a man were able to do some good of himself, which is contrary to John 15.5. Phil. 2.13.

5th, Because it is clear from Scripture, that before renewing grace, all are the children of wrath; who of themselves cannot have a good thought, nor any active concurrence, or putting themselves forth to the utmost for their own conversion, 2 Cor. 3.5. Therefore no plea for merit, by any improvement of men's natural abilities, see Rom. 9.15,16.

Of Good Works.

QUESTION I.

"ARE good works only such as God hath commanded in his holy word, and not such as without the warrant thereof, are devised by men, out of blind zeal, upon any pretence of good intention?"

Yes; Micah 6.8. Rom. 12.2. Heb. 13.21. Matt. 15.9. with 1 Sam. 15.21-23. Isa. 29.13. 1 Pet. 1.18. Rom. 10.2.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That not only such works are good, which are done according to the will and law of God, but others also, which are commanded by the public authority of the church, though over and above what the law of God requires. And that those also are good works, which are done out of a good intention to advance God's glory, or to perform worship to him, though they be not commanded by God?

Yes.

Do not likewise the old and late Libertines err, who maintain, That the difference between good works and evil, depends only upon the private and particular opinion of every man, For thy think, that no work ought to be called evil, but in so far, as he that doth it, thinks it evil?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because good works are described by the apostle to be such as God before hath ordained, that we should walk in them, Eph. 2.20.

2d, Because God expressly commands, that every man must not do that which seems good in his own eyes, but only such works as he hath commanded, and must neither add thereto, nor diminish from it, Deut. 12.8,32. Josh. 1.7. Prov. 30.6. Rev. 22.16.

3d, Because the Lord openly testifies that in vain do they worship him, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men, not requiring that will worship, which fantastic men would give him. Isa. 1.13. Matt. 15.9. Micah 6.6-8. Col. 2.23.

4th, Because the Scribes and Pharisees are severally rebuked by Christ, that made the commandments of God of no effect, by their traditions, Matt. 15.6. And it is often mentioned in the books of Kings and Chronicles as a fault in the kings of Judah, that the high-places were not taken away. And how severely were the Israelites punished, for their worshipping of the golden calf, Exod. 32. and for worshipping the calves, which Jeroboam set up at Dan and Bethel, all know, 1 Kings 12.28.

5th, Because the law of God is the perfect rule and square of good works, to the law and to the testimony, if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them, Isa. 8.20.

6th, Because without faith it is impossible to please God, Heb. 11.6. But faith hath always a respect to the word of God.

Quest. II. "Are good works done in obedience to God's commandments, the fruits and evidences of a true and lively faith?"

Yes; James 2.18,22.

Well then do not the Antinomians and Libertines err, who deny, That believers ought to make evident to themselves and others, the truth of their justification by good works as fruits of a true and lively faith?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ says, By their fruits ye shall know them; for a good tree bringeth forth good fruit, Matt. 7.16-18.

2d, Because we are commanded, to make sure our calling and election by good works, as by the fruits of faith, 2 Pet. 1.5,6,10,11.

3d, Because in scripture there are delivered many undoubted and sure marks of regeneration, taken from the fruits of faith and good works, 1 John 1.6,7. and 2.3. and 1 John 3.9,10,14.

Quest. III. "Is our ability to do good works, wholly from the spirit of Christ, and not at all from ourselves."

Yes.

And that we may be enabled thereunto, besides the graces already received, is there not a required an actual influence of the same Holy Spirit, to work in us, both to do of his good pleasures?

Yes; John 15.4,6. Ezek. 36.26,27. Phil. 2.3 2 Cor. 3.5.

Well then do not the Pelagians err, who maintain, "That good works done by the strength of our free-will, are conform to the law of God, and worthy of the kingdom of heaven?"

Yes.

Do not likewise the Papists err, who maintain, That good works may be done by a mere general and common influence from God?

Yes.

Do not, lastly, the Arminians err, who maintain, That good works flow only from God as a moral cause?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ says, Ye can do nothing without me, John 15.5.

2d, Because of ourselves we are not able to think a good thought, 2 Cor. 3.5.

3d, Because it is God that worketh in us, both to will and to do, of his good pleasure, Phil. 2.13.

Quest. IV. "Are they who are regenerated, to grow negligent, as if they were not bound to perform any duty, unless by special motion of the Spirit?"

No.

Ought they not to stir up diligently the grace of God which is in them?

Yes; Phil. 2.12. Heb. 6.11,12. 2 Pet. 1.3,5,10. Isa. 64.7. 2 Tim. 1.6. Acts 26.6,7. Jude 20-22.

Well then, do not the Quakers, Familists, and other giddy-headed persons err, who maintain, That believers ought not to perform any duty in religion unless the Spirit within move and excite them to those duties; and that we ought to forbear when this is wanting?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the Holy Ghost forbiddeth us to be slow in performing such duties; nay, commands us to stir up the gift which is in us, and use all diligence to perform duties commanded by himself, Phil. 2.12. Jude 20.

2d, Because the prophet confesseth that, as the great sin of the Lord's people, that there is none that calleth upon his name, that stirreth up himself to take hold of him, Isa. 64.7.

3d, Because to neglect the worshipping of God, is an evident sign and token of an atheist, Psalm 14.4. Psalm 53.4.

4th, Because the Lord hath threatened to pour out his fury upon the heathen that know him not, and upon the families that call not on his name, Jer. 10.25.

5th, Because the twelve tribes which hoped to come to the promise made to the fathers, instantly served God day and night, Acts 26.6,7. And the apostles gave themselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word, Acts 6.4.

6th, Because Christ himself, who had always the Spirit, was very frequent in all those exercises and duties, as all the histories of the four evangelists do testify. Those fanatic Recusants, either have the Spirit of God in them, or they want it. This last they will not grant. If then they have it, why do they refuse to perform the duties of religion more than our blessed Saviour did, when opportunity and occasion did call him. They have the Spirit, but want the impulse. But contrariwise, this impulse is never wanting when there is a call. But the Spirit's call is never wanting when opportunity is offered.

7th, Because Christ will have the gospel preached to every creature, Mark 16.15. And hath commanded the administration of the Lord's supper, even to his second coming, 1 Cor. 11.26. And will have the work of the ministry to continue in his church, for the perfecting of the saints, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come in the unity of the faith, &c. Eph. 4.11-13.

8th, Because we are commanded to pray without ceasing; 1 Thess. 5.17. That is upon all opportunities, and in all our necessities.

9th, Because we are commanded to trust in him at all times, Psalm 62.8.

10th, If we shall forbear outward duties, as prayer, and such like, then ought we to forbear inward exercises, as acts of faith, love, and fear, till we be moved thereunto, which is most absurd: for we are commanded, as was cited, to trust in him always.

11th, What assurance can men have, the next hour, or to-morrow, more than in the present time of the Spirit's motion on their souls; or that they shall be thus at a greater advantage by putting off the duty, till they have some inward motion and impulse thereunto, than by waiting on the ordinary call of the word or of providence?

Quest. V. "Are they who in their obedience, attain to the greatest height which is possible in this life, so far from being able to supererrogate, and to do more than God requires, that they fall short of much, which in duty they are bound to do?"

Yes; Luke 17.10. Neh. 13.22. Gal. 15.17. Job 9.2,3.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That a man regenerated cannot only fulfill the law of God perfectly, but may do also more good than the law of God requires of him? This is their made fancy of the works of supererrogation.

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because no man living is able to fulfill the whole law of God, Psalm 143.2. Isa. 64.6. 1 John 1.8. Far less is any man able to do more than the law requires.

2d, Because we are obliged to seek remission of sins every day, Matt. 6.12. But to seek pardon of sin every day, and to perform works of supererrogation, are inconsistent together.

3d, Because Christ says, When you shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants, we have done that which was our duty to do, Luke 17.10.

4th, Because, according to this doctrine of works of supererrogation, we must accuse the Scripture or law of God, or imperfection, as if they were not a perfect rule of life and manners, which is contrary to the Psalmist, Psalm 19.8. And contrary to 2 Tim. 3.15-17. Deut. 4.2.

5th, Because whatsoever things are true, honest, just, pure, lovely, of good report, these are commanded as things necessary to all men: Therefore, either the works which the Papists call works of supererrogation, are true, honest, just, and pure; and if they be such, they are commanded by God in Scripture, and not works of supererrogation: Or they are unhonest, impure, unjust, and if such, then no man is so made as to call them good works, much less works of supererrogation, Phil. 4.8.

Quest. VI. "Can our best works merit pardon of sin, or eternal life at the hands of God?"

No; Rom. 3.20. Rom. 4.2,4,6. Eph. 2.8,9. Titus 3.5-7. Rom. 8.18. Psalm 16.2. Job 22.2,3.

Well then, do not the Papists, and some of the Quakers err, who maintain, That the good works of regenerate men, do truly and properly merit, and deserve eternal life?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because there is no proportion between our imperfect work and life eternal; between the work and the reward, 2 Cor. 4.17. For our light affliction worketh for us, that is, brings forth, not of any merit, but of mere grace, for Christ's sake, see Rom. 8.18. and 3.28.

2d, If by our good works, we deserved the pardon of sin, we might have whereof to boast, for if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God, Rom. 4.2. But the Scripture saith, he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord, 1 Cor. 1.31.

3d, Because no creature, performing the most excellent works, can deserve any favour from God, or oblige him to give any thing as due. And according to the order of God's justice, he can receive no favour from us, nor any creature confer any benefit on him, Psalm 16.2. Job 22.2,3. Truly, where there is no favour done, there can be no merit; For merit presupposeth a benefit accepted.

4th, Because our works are imperfect, as well as to parts, as to degrees, Gal. 5.17. Isa. 64.7. Deut. 27.26. A perfection of parts is, when we have a part of every grace, and are renewed in some measure in every power and faculty of the whole man, though we be not come to the just and due measure in any of them. A perfection of degrees, consists in the complete measure of our conformity, and our exact correspondence to the law of God, in respect of all whatsoever it requires.

5th, Because Christ says, So likewise ye, when ye have done all those thigns which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants, we have done that which was our duty to do, Luke 17.10.

6th, Because the good works which we do are not ours, but it is God that worketh in us, both to will and to do, 1 Cor. 5.6. Gal. 5.22. Phil. 2.13.

7th, Because that heavenly blessedness which is to be given to the saints is expressly attributed to the mercy and pity of God, Psalm 103.4. Matt. 5.7. Titus 3.5. Eph. 4.6,7,8.

8th, Because when the apostle proclaims death to be the wages of sin, he doth not affirm life eternal to be the reward of good works, but the free and gracious gift of God, which we obtain by Christ, even in our sanctification, whereof the apostle here, Rom. 6.23. Which free gift hath for its end, eternal life, not that it merits this, for then it should not be a gracious gift, but because Christ hath merited this for us, and shall of free grace give it to us, as the following words, Through Jesus Christ our Lord, shew.

9th, Because God will have us to buy, without money or price, wine, milk, honey; that is, to receive all things requisite and necessary for our spiritual life, for nothing, and eternal life itself, Isa. 55.1-3.

10th, Because Christ should not be a perfect Saviour, if any thing from us were to be added to the righteousness of his merit, but Christ is a perfect Saviour, Eph. 1.7. and 2.7-9. 1 John 1.7. Acts 4.12.

11th, Because our best works have such a mixture of corruption and sin in them, that they deserve his curse and wrath; so far are they from meriting, Isa 64.6. But we are all, saith the prophet, as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags.

12th, If the works of regenerated men did deserve eternal life, then should the whole contrivance of the gospel be subverted, and the same very way of life laid down which was in the covenant of works, as is clear from 2 Cor. 5.21. The gospel is so contrived, by the infinite wisdom and goodness of God, that there is a judicial transferring of our sins, as a debt on Christ the cautioner, and a translation of his righteousness and merit to be imputed to us, for our justification, without the least respect to our works.

Quest. VII. "Are works done by the unregenerate men, although for the matter of them they may be things which God commands, and of good use, both to themselves and others, are they, I say, sinful, and cannot please God?"

Yes; Hag. 2.14. Titus 1.15. Amos 5.22,12. Hos. 1.4. Rom. 9.16. Titus 3.5.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That not only all the works of unregenerate men are not sinful, but also that some of their works do indeed merit and deserve somewhat from God, namely, as they speak, by merit of congruity, that is, as they are agreeable to the law of God?

Yes.

[Do not the Papists further err, in that they maintain, that] There is also, as they say, a merit of condignity, by which the works of regenerate, which follow justification, deserve eternal life, not from the imputation of Christ's righteousness, but from their own intrinsic worth, and proportionableness to the reward?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because as a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt rotten tree bring forth good fruit, Matt. 7.18.

2d, Because all unregenerate men are dead in trespasses and sin, Eph. 2.1.

3d, Because all the works of unregenerate men are done without faith, and so cannot please God, Heb. 2.6. Rom. 14.23.

4th, Because if unregenerate men were able to do good works, or perform any duty which deserved somewhat from God, then would it follow, that a man were able to do some good of himself, which is contrary to John 15.5. Phil. 2.13.

5th, Because it is clear from Scripture, that before renewing grace, all are the children of wrath; who of themselves cannot have a good thought, nor any active concurrence, or putting themselves forth to the utmost for their own conversion, 2 Cor. 3.5. Therefore no plea for merit, by any improvement of men's natural abilities, see Rom. 9.15,16.

Of Saving Faith.

QUESTION I.

"IS the grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe, to the saving of their souls, the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts?"

Yes; Heb. 10.39. 1 Cor. 4.13. Eph. 1.17,18,19.

Well then, do not the Pelagians err, who maintain, Faith to be a thing natural; who attribute the being thereof to ourselves, and to the strength of our corrupt nature?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Arminians err, who tho' they grant faith to be the gift of God, yet they deny faith to be given according to the precise will of God, for the saving of some men?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, I confute the Pelagians, for Christ says, No man can come to me, that is, believe, unless the Father that hath sent me draw him, John 6.44.

2d, Because the apostle says, For unto you it is given, in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for his sake, Phil. 1.29.

3d, Because that which is natural, is proper to all, but all men have not faith, 2 Thes. 3.2.

4th, Because faith is reckoned up among the fruits of the Spirit, Gal. 5.22.

5th, Because the very desire itself of believing is from God, and not from ourselves, Phil. 2.13.

6th, Because Christ is the author and finisher of our faith, Heb. 12.2.

By what reasons do you confute the Arminians?

1st, Because faith is given to the elect only, and to such as are ordained to life eternal, Titus 1.1. Acts 13.48.

2d, Because he that believes shall be saved, Mark 16.16. John 3.15,16,18,36.

3d, Because God wills precisely the glorifying of all those whom he justifies, Rom. 8.30. But they who have faith are justified, Rom. 5.1.

4th, Because God wills precisely the glorifying of all those, whom he inwardly and efficaciously calleth, Rom. 8.30. But all that believe in him, are powerfully called, 2 Thes. 2.13,14.

5th, Because all the children of God are heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ, Rom. 8.17. But how many soever believe in his name, to them he gave power to become the sons of God, John 1.12.

Quest. II. "Is faith the fruit of Christ's purchase?"

Yes; Titus 3.5,6. Titus 2.14. Ezek. 36.5,26.

Well then, do not the Arminians err, who deny, Faith and other saving graces to be Christ's purchase, or the fruits of his death?

Yes.

Do not likewise others of the same kind err, who granting the gift of believing, not to flow from man's free will, or from any sufficient grace bestowed upon all, maintain, That it flows from God's sovereign good will, thinking fit to bestow that gift upon some whom he hath elected, and not upon others, without respect to the merits of Christ's death?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because if this be all that Christ hath purchased by his death, that God might save fallen man, upon condition he believe, then Christ might attain his end in dying, and yet not one soul be saved by his death.

2d, Because it makes Christ a titular Saviour only, purchasing salvation to all, without any full and certain intention of applying it to any.

3d, Because it is promised to Christ the Mediator, as a satisfaction to him for his sufferings, that not only many, through faith in him, shall be justified, but that certainly, he shall see his seed, and the fruit of his soul, Isa. 55.10.

4th, Because the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost, under which all particular graces may be comprehended are said to be shed on us abundantly, through Jesus Christ, Titus 3.5,6.

5th, Because the Lord hath promised to remove from us the heart of stone, and to give us a new heart; to cleanse us from all our idols, and to wash us with clean water: but these promises are in one bundle with the promises of his pardoning our iniquity, and remembering our sins no more, Ezek. 36.25,26. Jer. 31.33,34.

6th, Because Christ is made unto us wisdom, sanctification, and redemption, no less than righteousness, under which faith, and all saving graces, needful to the working out of our salvation, are comprehended, 1 Cor. 1.30,31.

7th, Because we are said to be blessed with all spiritual blessings in Christ Jesus, Eph. 1.3. which by his merit are communicated to us. And is not faith and saving grace to be accounted among the spiritual blessings?

8th, Because it is not a mere possibility of redemption, but actual redemption, that the saints in heaven praise and extol Christ for, Rev. 5.9,12. An Arminian cannot well sing a part of this song while he thinks in his heart, "He is [no] more beholden to the Lamb for his redemption, than Cain and Judas."

Quest. III. "Doth a Christian, by faith believe whatsoever is revealed in the word, for the authority of God speaking therein?"

Yes; John 4.42. 1 John 5.10. Acts 24.14. 1 Thes. 2.13.

Well then, do the Papists err, who commend and extol implicit faith, and who define faith, rather by ignorance than by knowledge?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God; and therefore there can be no faith without knowledge, Rom. 10.17.

2d, Because all believers are taught of God, Isa. 54.13. John 6.45.

3d, Because Christ says, This is life eternal to know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent, John 17.3.

4th, Because the prophet Isaiah says, By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many, chap. 53.11.

Quest. IV. "Are the principal acts of saving faith, accepting, receiving, and resting upon Christ alone, for justification, sanctification, and eternal life, by virtue of the covenant of grace?

Yes; John 1.12. Acts 14.31. Gal. 2.20. Acts 15.11

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, Faith to be nothing but a naked assent to the truth revealed in the word; it being placed by them in the understanding only?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Socinians err, who put no difference between faith and the obedience of works?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because to believe is to receive Christ, which is an act of the will, John 1.12.

2d, Because faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Or faith is a firm ground, or a firm confidence; that is, which causeth to subsist, or stand firm, the things which are promised by God in Christ, and which therefore are expected by hope, which is not done only by an assent to God's promises in our understanding, but also by trusting to the same in our will. I say, faith is a firm ground of the things which are hoped for, and an argument of things not seen. Or a conviction, in Greek elengchos, for faith representing God's revelation and promise, convinceth and assureth the heart of man, more strongly of the truth of a thing, than any other argument brought from natural reason, can do, Heb. 11.1.

3d, Because we are justified before God by faith, Rom. 5.1. But we are not justified by a bare and naked assent to the truth, otherwise the devils should be justified, James 2.19. Neither are we justified by the Socinians faith, which is every where condemned in Scripture, Rom. 3.20,28. Gal. 2.16. Eph. 2.8,9. Phil. 3.9. Titus 3.4,5.

Of Assurance of Grace and Salvation.

QUESTION I.

"MAY they who truly believe in the Lord Jesus, and love him in sincerity, and endeavour to walk in all good conscience before him; may they, I say, be certainly assured in this life, that they are in a state of grace, and being enabled by the Spirit to know the things which are freely given them of God, may they without extraordinary revelation attain thereunto?"

Yes; 1 John 2.3. 1 John 3.14,18,19,21,24. 1 John 5.13. 1 Cor. 2.12. Heb. 6.11,12. Eph. 3.17,18.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That no man can be sure (namely, sure by divine faith) of God's peculiar favour towards himself, without extraordinary revelation?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the apostle commands us, saying, Brethren, give all diligence to make your calling and election sure, for if you do these things, ye shall never fall; for an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly, into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, 2 Pet. 1.10,11. Heb. 6.11.

2d, Because the apostle commands the Corinthians to examine themselves, whether they be in the faith, 2 Cor. 13.5.

3d, Because the Scriptures propose and set forth sure makes and tokens, by which a believer may be infallibly assured that he is one of the number of Christ's sheep, John 10.4,5,27,28. And that he is one of Christ's disciples; John 13.3,5. Nay, it is the scope of the whole first epistle of John to propose such sure marks to believers, whereby they may know that they have life eternal, 1 John 5.13.

4th, Because the true believer may be persuaded that neither death nor life, nor any other thing, can separate him from the love of Christ, Rom. 8.38,39. Where the apostle not only speaketh of himself, but of them to whom he writes.

5th, Because believers have received the Spirit of adoption whereby they cry Abba Father, and he himself witnesseth with their spirit, that they are the children of God, Rom. 8.15,16.

6th, Because believers have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God, that they might know the things that are freely given to them of God, 1 Cor. 2.12.

Quest. II. "Is this certainty, a bare conjectural, and probable persuasion, grounded upon a fallible hope?"

No.

But is it an infallible assurance of faith?

Yes; Heb. 6.11,17,18,19.

Well then, do not the Papists and Arminians err, who maintain, That the assurance of salvation, is only conjectural, or at the most, only probable, which hath for its foundation, a failing and fading faith?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because assurance is from the testimony of the Holy Spirit witnessing with our spirits, that we are the children of God, Rom. 8.15.

2d, Because this assurance is founded on the promises of God, who cannot lie, Isa. 45.10. John 3.36.

3d, Because believers are sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of their inheritance; but he that receiveth the earnest not only hath right to the possession, but knows assuredly, that he hath that right, and shall be put in the actual possession thereof, Eph. 1.13,14.

4th, Because God willing more abundantly, to shew unto the heirs of promise, the immutability of his council, confirmed it by an oath, that by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have strong consolation, Heb. 6.17,18.

Quest. III. "Is the infallible assurance of faith, founded upon the divine truth of the promises of salvation, and upon the inward evidence of those graces unto which these promises are made?"

Yes; Heb. 6.17,18. 2 Pet. 1.4,5. 1 John 2.3. and 1 John 3.14. 2 Cor. 1.12.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, That none ought or can gather any comfort or assurance of salvation from his own works of holiness; but that a believer ought to lean and rest upon the alone testimony of the Spirit, without any marks or signs; from which testimony he may, say they, be fully assured of the remission of his sins, and of his own salvation?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From the example of the saints, who gathered their comforts from the fruits of faith, and works of holiness, as David did, Psalm 119.6. and as Paul did, 2 Cor. 1.12.

2d, From the reckoning up of marks, which are held out in Scripture, by which believers may be known from unbelievers, as mutual love, John 13.35. Observing and keeping his commandments, 1 John 2.3. doing of righteousness, 1 John 3.14. and loving the brethren.

3d, Because unless faith be proven by marks, true faith cannot be discerned from presumption, neither can assurance, rightly founded, be discerned from a delusion of Satan, 1 John 4.2.

4th, Because reason requires, that from the knowledge of the effect, we should come to the knowledge of the cause, according to that of Matt. 7.16.

5th, Because marks of grace have so much clearness in themselves, that they will even beget in others a judgment according to charity, concerning the election of others, therefore much more in these same very persons, who are able to discern, and know better their own hearts, 1 Thes. 1.3,4.

Quest. IV. "Doth this infallible assurance belong to the essence of faith?"

No.

"May a true believer wait long, and conflict with many difficulties, before he be partaker of it?"

Yes; 1 John 5.13. Isa. 50.10. Mark 9.24. Psalm 88. Psalm 77. to the 12. verse.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, That the assurance of salvation is faith itself? And that faith is nothing else but the echo of the soul answering the Spirit, my sins are forgiven me?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the sealing of the Holy Spirit, which is the earnest of our inheritance, is given to believers after they have believed, Eph. 1.13,14.

2d, Because believers may sometimes not know that they have eternal life, 1 John 5.13. And he that feareth the Lord, obeying the voice of his servant, may walk in darkness, Isa. 50.10.

3d, Because if this assurance which takes away all doubting, as the Antinomians affirm, were of the essence of faith, there should not be any degrees of faith, which is contrary to Mark 9.24. Matt. 8.10. Matt. 15.28.

4th, Because there are evident examples in Scripture from the experience of the saints, as that of faithful Heman, who thus complained, Psalm 88., Why castest thou off my soul? why hidest thou thy face from me? And of faithful Asaph, under very sad exercise, Psalm 77. to the 10th verse.

Quest. V. "Doth this assurance of salvation incline men to looseness?"

No; 1 John 2.1. Rom. 8.1,12. 1 John 3.2,3. 1 John 1.6,7. Rom. 6.1,2. Titus 2.11,12,14. 2 Cor. 7.1.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That the doctrine of assurance of salvation, is of its own nature hurtful to true piety, and inclines men to sin and wickedness?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the apostle Peter argues the contrary way, and infers a far other conclusion, namely, because believers know they are redeemed by the precious blood of Christ, they ought to pass the time of their sojourning here in fear. 1 Pet. 1.17,18,19.

2d, Because the apostle Paul, who was certainly persuaded of his interest in Christ, rejects and abominates that conclusion with indignation and wrath, Rom. 6.1,2.

3d, Because from the promise that God is the Father of believers, the apostle exhorts the Corinthians by consequence, to cleanse themselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, and to perfect holiness in the fear of God, 1 Cor. 7.1.

4th, Because they who are in Christ, to whom there is no condemnation, and are assured of it, walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit, Rom. 8.1,12,38,39.

5th, Because a believer knowing God to be merciful, concludes that God ought to be feared, Psalm 130.4.

6th, Because whosoever hath that hope, (namely, that he shall see Christ, and be made like unto him) he purifies himself, as he is pure, 1 John 3.3.

7th, Because it is evident from the example of those who were persuaded of their salvation, who yet lived piously and holily, as Paul, Rom. 8.38,39. compared with 2 Cor. 11.2. Acts 25.26. Next, we have the example of Abraham, Gen. 17.1. compared with Rom. 4.18-20.

Quest. VI. "Are true believers, who they fall into some special sin which woundeth the conscience, and grieveth the Spirit, destitute of the seed of God, and life of faith?"

No; 1 John 3.9. Luke 22.32.

Well then, do not the Quakers and others err, who maintain, That true believers falling into some special sin, can have nothing of the life of faith, and seed of God in them?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin, for his seed remaineth in him, and he cannot sin, because he is born of God, 1 John 3.9. For his seed remaineth in him; that is, doth not totally perish, but abideth thenceforward, working the fruits of regeneration once begun in them, Phil. 1.6.

2d, Because although Peter fell into that grievous sin of denying his master thrice, yet he still retained that seed of God, and life of faith, and love to Christ; because Christ had said unto him, I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not, Luke 22.32. The like may be said of David, and others of the saints of God, who by falling into some special sins, have wounded the conscience and grieved the Holy Spirit.

Of Repentance.

QUESTION I.

"IS repentance unto life an evangelical grace, the doctrine whereof is to be preached by every minister of the gospel, as well as that of faith in Christ?"

Yes; Ezek. 12.10. Acts 11.18. Luke 24.47. Mark 1.15. Acts 20.21.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, That repentance is not an evangelical grace, and that it ought not to be preached by any minister of the gospel, seeing it leads us away from Christ, and is many ways hurtful and dangerous to us?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because God hath promised in the covenant of grace, that he will pour out upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and supplication, which shall cause Christians under the gospel to repent and mourn for their sins, Zech. 12.10.

2d, Because repentance is numbered among the saving graces, which shall be bestowed and conferred upon converts, under the gospel, and is sometimes put for the whole conversion of a man to God, Acts 11.15-18.

3d, Because the ministers of the gospel ought to instruct those with meekness, who oppose themselves, if God peradventure will give them repentance, to the acknowledging of the truth, 2 Tim. 2.25.

4th, Because repentance from dead works, is among the principles of the doctrine of Christ; and is a foundation which ought to be laid, before the hearers of the gospel can go on unto perfection; I say, laid by the ministers of the gospel, Heb. 6.1.

5th, Because Christ himself appointed repentance, no less to be preached through the world, than remission of sins, Luke 27.47.

6th, Because Christ and his apostles preached repentance, no less than faith, Mark 1.15. Matt. 3.2. Nay, the whole sum of the gospel is placed in preaching faith and repentance, Acts 20.20,21.

Quest. II. "Doth a sinner, namely, by repentance, out of the sight and sense, not only of the danger, but also of the filthiness and odiousness of his sins, as contrary to the holy nature, and righteous law of God, and upon the apprehension of his mercy in Christ to such as are penitent, so grieve for, and hate his sins, as to turn from them all unto God?"

Yes; Ezek. 18.30. Ezek. 36.31. Isa. 30.22. Jer. 31.18,19. Joel 2.12,13. Amos 5.15. Psalm 119.6,59,106.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, We ought not by repentance, to hate our sins, to mourn for them, and turn from them to God, but only to believe, that Christ in our stead and for us hath repented?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because repentance, being a turning from our sins and evils ways, and turning to God; and Christ, being without sin, could not be capable to repent in our stead, 1 Kings 8.35. Heb. 7.26,27. Joel 2.12,13.

2d, Because they that repent, confess their sins, and are grieved for them, Ezra 10.1. Mark 14.72. They hate their sins, 2 Cor. 7.11. They are ashamed and confounded for them, Jer. 31.19.

3d, Because repentance is a sorrow after a godly manner, in the same very persons that repent, wrought by God, by the preaching of the word, 2 Cor. 7.9. Acts 11.18.

4th, Because repentance is called a renting of the heart, Joel 1.12. And they that repent, hate and loath themselves for their abominations, Ezek. 36.31. They are ashamed, and confounded, Jer. 31.19. They are grieved and pricked in their reins, Psalm 73.21.

5th, Because God promising repentance to the people of the Jews being converted to Christ, after their backsliding, says, I will pour out upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and supplication, and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him as one mourneth for his only son, Zech. 12.10. And he shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his first-born. But is any man so foolish as to affirm, that when a man doth mourn for his first-born, he believes only that another man hath mourned in his stead?

6th, Because faith is one thing, and repentance, specially so called, is another thing, Mark 1.15. Acts 20.21. Heb. 11.6. In which places, faith, and repentance are numbered two diverse things. And it is evident likewise, that faith is the cause of repentance, but nothing can be the cause of itself.

Do not likewise the Papists err, who maintain, That we are not by repentance converted from our sins to God; which they only make an inducement, or quality, fitting and disposing us for conversion, and meriting it, which, say they, consists in heart contrition, mouth confession, absolution, and satisfaction. By the first, they have heart sorrow for sin. By the second, they confess their sins to the priest. By the third, which can be no part of repentance, seeing it is not a thing done by the sinner, they are absolved by the priest from their sins. By the fourth, they make satisfaction for former sins, in performing some good work willingly undertaken, or enjoined by the priest after absolution; as fastings, chastising of their own bodies, pilgrimages, and hearing of many masses?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the word of God asserts no meritorious work in us, to go before our conversion. Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, Titus 3.4-6.

2d, Because the only merit of Christ, is the meritorious cause of our conversion, Heb. 9.14. 1 Cor. 6.11.

3d, Because true repentance is the infallible antecedent, and fore-runner of life, 2 Cor. 7.10. Acts 11.18. and they who truly repent have all their sins pardoned, Acts 2.38, 3.19. Nay, repentance is a piece of the exercise of the life of grace here, and worketh unto life and salvation hereafter. But of no foregoing disposition, or qualification previous to repentance, can these forecited places of scripture be understood.

4th, Because repentance, and turning to God, are sometimes put for the same thing: and the prophets, while they study to excite and stir up the people to repentance, they signify it by the word conversion and turning to God, Acts 11.15,16,18,21. Joel 2.12,13. Ezek. 18.31,32.

5th, Because whatsoever goes before our conversion to God, it cannot be of faith, and therefore it must displease God, Rom. 8.8. 14.23. But true repentance is of faith, and God delighteth in it, Jer. 31.18,19,20.

6th, Because in very many places of scripture, repentance is described by a departing from evil, and a turning to God, Isa. 1.16,17. Isa. 55.7. Psalm 34.14. Hos. 6.1.

7th, Because heart contrition, mouth confession, and satisfaction for former sins, which they call penance, as they are explained by the Papists, may be found in hypocritical repentance, as is evident from the example of Judas and Ahab, Matt. 27.4,5,6. 1 Kings 21.27. There may be true evangelical repentance, without confession of the mouth made to a priest, and without penance. If the mouth and heart confess to God only, it is sufficient, unless there be a public scandal committed against the church of God. As for absolution, it can be no part of repentance, for it is not a thing done by a sinner, but, as I said, conferred by the priest.

Quest. III. "Is repentance to be rested on, as any satisfaction for sin, or cause of the pardon thereof?"

No; Ezek. 31.13,32. Ezek. 16.61,62,63.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That repentance is a satisfaction for sins, (viz. an imperfect satisfaction) and that it deserves the mercy of God, and pardon of sin?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ did satisfy the justice of God to the full: and it is blood only that purgeth us from all sin, Isa. 53.4,5,6,8,11. 1 John 1.7.

2d, Because to satisfy for sin, is a part of the priestly office of Christ, which cannot be communicated to any, Heb. 2.17. compared with Heb. 7.23,24.

3d, Because the Lord pardoneth our sins, not for our sake, but for his own sake, Isa. 43.25. Ezek. 36.25,31,32.

4th, Because pardon of sin is an act of the free favour of God, Hos. 14.2. Eph. 1.7. But if it be of the free favour of God, then it is no more of works, and repentance, as a satisfaction for sin, Rom. 11.6.

Quest. IV. "Is there any sin so great that it will bring damnation upon those who truly repent?"

No; Isa. 59.7. Rom. 8.1. Isa. 1.16,18.

Well then, do not the Novatians, Anabaptists, and Puritans, called Kathari, err, who maintain, That if any after baptism, and grace received, fall into grievous sins, offend willingly, there is no pardon remaining for them, even though they should repent? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because God, under the law, appointed daily sacrifices, even for sins that were committed willingly, Num. 28.3. Lev. 6.1-8.

2d, Because God, in the covenant of grace hath promised, that he will not utterly take from them, with whom he is in covenant, his loving kindness; even though they have broken his statutes, and not kept his commandments, Psalm 89.30,31,32.

3d, Because God invites the Galatians and Corinthians, who were guilty of apostasy, and of very man gross scandals, to repentance, from the hope of pardon, Gal. 3.1. and 1.6. and 4.19. 1 Cor. 1.11,12. and 5.1,2,7,8. 2 Cor. 12.21.

4th, Because the apostle John says, even to such as have sinned willingly, after baptism, and grace received, If we truly repent and confess our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, 1 John 1.9. see also, chap. 2.12.

5th, Because David, after murder and adultery, and Peter, after denying of his master, obtained pardon when they repented, 2 Sam. 12.13. John 21.9. Therefore there remaineth pardon to such as, after baptism, and grace received, have fallen, and repented.

Quest. V. "Is every man bound to make private confession of his sins to God, praying for the pardon thereof?"

Yes; Psalm 51.4,5,7,9. Psalm 32.5,6.

Well then, do not the Antinomians, Libertines, and Anabaptists err, who maintain, That those who are once justified, are not any more obliged to confess their sins, to be grieved for them, or to repent of them?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because whosoever doth call upon God the Father, in their prayers, they ought to seek daily remission of sin, Luke 11.2,3,4.

2d, Because God doth commend the serious confession of sins, and grief for them, in justification, and delighteth therein, Jer. 31.18,19,20. Luke 7.44. Isa. 66.2.

3d, Because pardon of those sins, which justified persons shall confess, is promised, Prov. 28.13. Psalm 32.5. 1 John 1.9.

4th, Because such are declared blessed that mourn, Mat. 5.4.

5th, Because in whom the Spirit dwelleth, it worketh in them, being greatly weighed with the burden of their sins, a continual groaning and sorrow for the same, Rom. 7.23,24. Rom. 8.26.

6th, Because true repentance, is a renewing of the image of God lost, at least greatly defaced, by the committing of sin, which in sanctification is not perfected, but only begun, and doth daily increase through the virtue of Christ's death and resurrection, Eph 4.19-24.

7th, From the example of justified persons, as David, Josiah, Peter, and others, who after justification confessed their sins, grieved for them, and begged pardon, 2 Sam. 12.13. Psalm 51. 2 Kings 22.19. Neh. 9. from the beginning, Mark 14.72.

Quest. VI. "Do those who confess their sins privately to God, who pray for the pardon thereof, and forsake them, obtain mercy?"

Yes; Prov. 28.13. 1 John 1.9.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That besides confession of sins made to God, and forsaking of them, an auricular confession, an enumeration of all particular sins committed after baptism, must be made to our own proper priest, as a necessary means for obtaining remission of them?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the Psalmist says, Who can understand his errors, Psalm 19.29. and they being more than the hairs of our head, how can they be mumbled over to a priest? Psalm 40.12.

2d, Because Christ gave an absolution, without an enumeration of every sin, Matt. 9.2. Neither doth he demand an enumeration of all our several sins, tho' we be obliged to reckon, and rehearse all that we are able to remember, Luke 8.48. Luke 18.13,14.

3d, Because there is no command, or example in Scripture, for any man to whisper, and round his sins into the ear of a priest: And therefore, it not being of faith, it is sin, Rom. 14.23.

4th, Because whosoever turneth from his sin to God, and confesseth them, he findeth mercy presently, Ezek. 18.21,28. Prov. 28.13.

Quest. VII. "Ought he who scandalizeth his brother, or the church of Christ, to be willing, by a private or public confession, and sorrow for his sin, to declare his repentance to those who are offended?"

Yes; James 5.16. Luke 17.3,4. Josh 7.19. Psalm 51. 2 Cor. 2.8.

Well then, do not the Novatians err, and others too, who maintain, That those, who have offended their brother, or the church of Christ, are not obliged to declare their repentance to the parties offended; and that those who are offended, ought not to require any such thing, as private or public confession and acknowledgement, but presently they ought to be received, without doing any such thing?

Yes.

And lastly, do not many in these times err, who jeer, and make a mock at all public confessions of sin?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because he that offendeth his brother, ought to return to him saying, I repent, Luke 17.3,4.

2d, Because Christ did even value so much a private man's offence, that he was not to be admitted to the alter with his gift, until he was reconciled to his brother, Matt. 5.24.

3d, Because the incestuous person was not to be received into the communion of the church of Corinth, before he had evidenced his repentance, by satisfying the church, 2 Cor. 2.6.

4th, Because public confession of sin glorifies God, Josh 7.19.

5th, Because those who sin, must be rebuked before all, that others also may fear, 1 Tim. 5.20.

Quest. VIII. "Are those, who are offended, bound to be reconciled to the offending party, by declaring his repentance, and ought they in love to receive him?

Yes; 2 Cor. 2.8.

Well then, do not the Novatians, and Anabaptists err, who maintain, That professors of religion, falling into public scandal, especially in denying the truth in the time of persecution, are no more to be received into the church, even though they repent?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ says, If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him; and if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent, thou shalt forgive him, Luke 17.3,4.

2d, Because for a heathen and publican (that is, one casten out from the communion of the church) he only is to be esteemed, who neglecteth to hear the church, Matt. 18.17.

3d, Because such as have offended the church, after submission to the church's censure, ought to be comforted; the church ought to make their love known to them, and receive them again into communion, lest, haply, their grief and sorrow increasing, they be swallowed up, 2 Cor. 2.7,8.

4th, Because if a man be overtaken in a fault, they who are spiritual, ought to restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering themselves, lest they also be tempted, Gal. 6.1.

5th, Because if men, repenting of their faults committed against their brethren and fellow Christians, be not received into the communion of the church, both they and the church are in hazard, lest Satan, by his devices, gain an advantage of them, 2 Cor. 2.10,11.

6th, Because Miriam, who for her sedition against Moses, was shut out of the camp seven days, was brought in again, Num. 12.15. So was the incestuous person, received into the communion of the church, 2 Cor. 2.8.

Of the Perseverance of the Saints.

QUESTION I.

"CAN they whom God hath accepted in his beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by his Spirit, either totally or finally fall away from the state of grace?"

No.

"Shall they certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved?"

Yes; Phil. 1.6. 2 Pet. 1.10. John 10.28,29. 1 John 3.9. 1 Pet. 1.5,9.

Well then, do not the Papists, Socinians, Arminians, and some ring-leaders among the Quakers err, who maintain, That the saints may totally and finally fall away?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the saints are built upon a rock, and not upon the sand: Therefore when temptations of any kind assault, they can never fail, nor can the gates of hell prevail against them, Matt. 7.24. and 16.16,18.

2d, Because he that hath begun a good work in the saints, will finish it, until the day of Jesus Christ, Phil. 1.6.

3d, Because Paul says, Nothing can separate us from the love of God, Rom. 8.35,38,39.

4th, Because they that fall away, have never had true justifying faith, Luke 8.4-15. 1 John 2.19.

5th, Because it is impossible for the elect to be seduced, Matt. 24.24. I say impossible, not in respect of the will and power of the elect themselves, but in respect of the immutability of God's decree concerning them, and of his purpose of keeping them powerfully against seduction, according to his promises, of which he cannot repent; see John 10.28. Rom. 8.38,39. 1 Pet. 1.5.

6th, Because they that believe in the Son of God have life eternal, 1 John 5.13. John 6.47,54,58. And they have passed from death unto life, and shall never thirst, nor hunger any more, John 6.35.

7th, Because God hath promised in his covenant, that though he chastise his own children for their faults, yet he will never take away his mercy, and loving-kindness from them, Psalm 89.30-34. Jer. 32.38-40.

8th, Because that golden chain, that Paul speaks of, cannot be broken, Rom. 8.30. Whom he did predestinate, them he also called, &c.

9th, Because Christ says, this is the Father's will, which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me, I shall lose nothing, John 6.49.

10th, Because we are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation, ready to be revealed in the last time, 1 Pet. 1.5.

11th, Because he hath prayed for us, that our faith fail not, Luke 22.32. John 17.20.

Quest. II. "Can believers, by reason of their sins and failings, incur God's displeasure, and grieve his holy Spirit; come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts; have their hearts hardened, and their consciences wounded; hurt, and scandalize others; and bring temporal judgments upon themselves?"

Yes; Isa. 64.5,7,9. Eph. 4.30. Psalm 51.8,10,14. Rev. 2.4. Cant. 5.2,3,4,6. Isa. 63.17. Psalm 37.3,4. 2 Sam. 12.14. Psalm 89.31,32. Mark 16.14. 1 Cor. 11.32.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, That the sins of the regenerate do not displease God, and cannot grieve his holy Spirit; and that believers are not chastised in any wise for their sins?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the prophet says, thou art wroth, for we have sinned, Isa. 64.5.

2d, Because it is said, that the thing which David had done, (namely his murder and adultery) displeased the Lord, 2 Sam. 11.27.

3d, Because the scriptures testify, that the sins of believers grieve the Holy Spirit, Eph. 4.30.

4th, Because the saints, by reason of their sins, are deprived of some measure of grace and consolation, Psalm 8.9. Rev. 2.4,5.

5th, Because the Lord hath inflicted temporal punishments upon believers for their faults, Psalm 89.31,32. 2 Sam. 12.11. and 24.15. 1 Cor. 11.30.

Of the Law of God.

QUESTION I.

"DID God give to Adam a law as a covenant of works, by which he bound him, and all his posterity, to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience?"

Yes.

"Did he promise life upon the fulfilling; and did he threaten death upon the breach of it?"

Yes.

"Was Adam endued with power and ability to keep it?"

Yes; Gen. 1.26,27. Gen. 2.7. Rom. 2.14,15. Rom. 5.12,19. Gal. 3.10,12. Eccl. 7.29. Job. 28.28.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, That God made no covenant with Adam in his integrity, in which he promised to him and his posterity life eternal?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From those places of Scripture, where the righteousness of the law is described, Lev. 18.5. Rom. 10.5. Gal. 3.12. Ezek. 20.11,13. Whosoever therefore keepeth my statutes and judgments, saith the Lord, shall live in them. And to whom life is promised for ever, upon their perfect obedience, and continuance in all things written in the book of the law. And from those place, in which death is threatened to them, that in the least transgress the law of God, Deut. 27.26. Gal. 3.10. Ezek. 28.4.

2d, From the words of our Saviour, who spoke to the young man, according to the covenant of works, in which the Lord promised eternal life, to such as shall fulfill the law, Matt. 19.17. Luke 10.28. Observe, that Christ answereth here, according to the question and opinion of this young man, who thought he was able to obtain salvation, by his own good works; and therefore Christ directs him to the law, thereby to bring him to the acknowledgment of his own imperfection, and afterwards to faith in himself.

3d, Because man was created by God, in righteousness, holiness, and immortality, according to the similitude and image of God, Gen. 1.26. Gen. 9.6. Eccl. 7.29. Eph. 4.24. Col. 3.9,10. And received from him the law of nature, naturally engraven upon his heart, Rom. 2.14,15. And besides this law, a positive law was superadded to it, that Adam should not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil: That by obeying the same, he might give a specimen or proof of his obedience to the law of nature, in the perfect obedience whereof, so long as he should continue, he should live for ever. For the Lord threatened death to him only, if he should sin: And death is the wages of sin, which by sin entered into the world, Gen. 2.17. Rom. 6.23. Rom. 5.12,13.

4th, From those places of scripture, in which it is denied that believers, under the covenant of grace, are justified by the law, but by faith, and the righteousness of Christ, manifested in the gospel. For that the law is weak, powerless, or impotent, through the corruption of our nature, to justify us, and give us life, Rom. 3.20,21,28. Gal. 2.16. Gal. 3.10-13. Phil. 3.9. Rom. 8.2,3.

Quest. II. "Do the first four commandments contain our duty to God, and the other six, our duty towards man?"

Yes; Matt. 22.37-40.

Well then, do not the Papists and Lutherans err, who maintain, That three only belong to the first table, and seven to the second: And that, Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, with the foregoing, Thou shalt not have any other gods before me, are but one command. And that, Thou shalt not covet they neighbour's house; Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his man servant, &c. are two distinct commands?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the two first precepts command divers things, the one teacheth us, who is to be worshipped, viz. the true and living God, and no other. The second instructs us how he is to be worshipped, namely, according to his own appointment, and not according to the appointment, and pleasure of men, as by images and such like.

2d, Because it is one and the same concupiscence, which is forbidden in the tenth command, the sum whereof, Thou shalt not covet, is cited by the apostle Paul, Rom. 7.7. and which is summarily expressed in the close of the tenth command, Nor any thing which is thy neighbour's.

3d, If the tenth command ought to be two, because these words, Thou shalt not covet, are twice repeated, then would it follow, there should be as many commands, as there are things desired or forbidden: Because it is evident, that these words, Thou shalt not covet, are to be repeated with every part.

Quest. III. "Are all the ceremonial laws abrogated under the New Testament?"

Yes; Col. 2.14,16. Dan. 9.27. Eph. 2.15,16.

Well then, do not the Judaisers err, who maintain, That all the ceremonial laws remain, in their former strength and vigour, and are obliging to believers under the gospel, and not abrogated or disannulled by Christ?

Yes.

By what reasons are the confuted?

1st, Because Christ hath abolished the law of commandments, contained in ordinances, that he might gather together both Jews and Gentiles, into one new man, Eph. 2.14,15. Col. 2.14. Note, that the apostle here speaks of all believers, both of Jews and Gentiles, as of one man: Because they being all under Christ, the head, as members of one spiritual body, are made up as one renewed man.

2d, Because the apostle says, Let no man judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days: All which are shadows of things to come, but the body is of Christ, Col. 2.16,17. This verse is a conclusion of the apostle's foregoing discourse against ceremonies, and things commanded by the ceremonial law, which by the coming of Christ are abolished. He calls them in ver. 17. a shadow of things to come, but the body, says he, is of Christ; that is, the thing signified, is of Christ: For all the shadows of the Old Testament had respect to Christ and his benefits, by whose coming they also have had an end, John 1.17. Gal. 3.4,5.

3d, Because the apostle says, Believers are dead with Christ, from the rudiments of the world: that is, from the ceremonial commands, as is evident from the context. Why, says he, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances? that is, as if your life and happiness, consisted in these outward wordly principles, but suffer yourselves to be burdened by such teachers, with human institutions and ordinances. The apostle indeed, in these last words, is reasoning against the institutions and ordinances of men; from this medium, which is an argument from the greater to the lesser, if ye be dead with Christ from the ceremonies of the law, instituted in the Old Testament, by God himself, much more are ye free from the institutions and ordinances of men, which are only grounded upon their own good pleasure, Col. 2.20,21. Gal. 4.10,11.

4th, Because the apostle affirms, that the observation, and using of circumcision, cannot consist with true faith in Christ, now after the gospel is fully published. And he exhorts the Galatians to abide in their liberty purchased by Christ, and not to submit themselves to the yoke of Mosaical ceremonies, Gal. 5.1,2.

5th, Because those teachers, who pressed the believing Gentiles, to be circumcised and to observe the law of Moses, I mean, the ceremonial law, were condemned by the council of apostles, Acts. 15.34.

6th, Because ceremonial commands are neither of the law of nature, nor are they enjoined to believers under the gospel, as things moral.

7th, Because these appointed ceremonies, were figures only of things to come, imposed upon the Jews until the time of reformation; but taken away by Christ, Heb. 9.9-12. and 10.9. wherein it is said, He taketh away the first, namely, all sorts of propitiatory offerings which were used in the Old Testament, to settle the second, namely, his obedience to the will of the Father.

8th, Because they were given to the Israelites to foresignify, and represent Christ and his death, and to be marks of difference between them, and the unbelieving nations, Col. 2.17. Eph. 2.14. where it is said, Who hath made both these namely Jews and Gentiles, one; and hath broken down the middle wall of partition, whereby the ceremonial law is understood, which made a difference between the Jews and Gentiles. Now since Christ hath suffered death, and the Gentiles are called, all these ceremonies which did foresignify his death, and made that difference, of necessity cease.

9th, Because the temple of Jerusalem, to which the ceremonies were restricted, is destroyed, and could never since be rebuilded.

Quest IV. "Did the Lord by Moses give to the Jews, as a body politic, sundry judicial laws, which expired together with their state?"

Yes.

"Do they oblige any other now, further than the general equity thereof may require?"

No; Exod. 21. from the first to the last verse. Exod. 22.1, to verse 29. Gen. 49.10. 1 Cor. 9.8-10. 2 Pet. 2.13,14. Matt. 5.17,38,39.

Well then, do not some err, though otherwise orthodox, who maintain, That the whole judicial law of the Jews, is yet alive, and binding all of us, who are Christian Gentiles?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the judicial law was delivered by Moses to the Israelites to be observed, as a body politic, Exod. 21.

2d, Because this law, in many things which are of a particular right, was accommodated to the commonwealth of the Jews, and not to other nations also, Exod. 22.3. Exod. 21.2. Lev. 25.2,3. Deut. 24.1-3. Deut. 25.5-7.

3d, Because in other things, which are not of particular right, it is neither from the law of nature obliging by reason; neither is it pressed upon believers under the gospel to be observed.

4th, Because believers are appointed under the gospel, to obey the civil law, and commands of those under whose government they live, providing they be just, and that for conscience sake, Rom. 13.1,5. 1 Pet. 2.13,14. Titus. 3.1.

Quest. V. "Doth the moral law forever bind, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof, and that not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God who gave it?"

Yes; Rom. 13.8-10. Eph. 6.2. 1 John 2.3,4,7,8. James 2.10,11.

Well then, do not the Antinomians err, who maintain, That believers, under the gospel, are not obliged to the obedience of the moral law?

Yes.

By what means are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ says, He came not to destroy the law, and the prophets; that is, to alter or disannul the doctrine of the law, or of the prophets, Matt. 5.17.

2d, Because he says in the following verse, I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled, Matt. 5.18.

3d, Because whosoever shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; that is, shall not at all be esteemed there, or shall not enter thereunto, ver. 19.

4th, Because that after the apostle Paul hath concluded the justification of believers to be of free grace, he subjoins, Do we then make void the law through faith, God forbid! yea, we establish the law, Rom. 3.31.

5th, Because all the precepts of the moral law belong to the law of nature, naturally engraven upon the hearts of men, which cannot be abrogated, but oblige all men perpetually, and necessarily, from natural reason itself, Rom. 2.15.

6th, Because all the precepts of the moral law are repeated in the gospel, and enjoined to all believers by Christ, Matt. 19.17-20. Rom. 2.13.

7th, Because Paul adjoineth and proposeth to believers under the New Testament, both a command and a promise of the Decalogue, as properly belonging to them, Eph. 6.2,3.

8th, Because the apostle James setteth forth to believers the moral law as the rule of life, which they are obliged to observe, and by breaking of which they are convinced of sins, James 2.8,9,11.

9th, Because whosoever committeth any sin against the moral law, shall never enter into the kingdom of God, 1 Cor. 6.9,10. Gal. 5.21.

10th, Because this tenet of the Antinomians, turns the grace of God into wantonness; overturneth the end of Christian liberty, and of the coming and death of Christ; and paveth a way leading to all impiety, and the indulging of the lusts of the flesh, and fostering the dominion of sin, contrary to these scriptures, Jude 4. 1 John 2.16. 2 Pet. 2.18-20. Rom. 6.14-16. Luke 1.74,75. Titus 2.11,12. 1 Tim. 6.9. Rom. 9.21,23,24.

11th, Because believers ought to study good works, Titus 3.8. to they which are created in Christ, that they should walk in them, Eph. 2.10.

12th, Because Christ will render to every man at his last coming, both to the good and to the bad, according to their works, Rev. 22.12. Matt. 25.34,35,41,42.

Quest. VI. "Are true believers under the law as a covenant of works, to be thereby justified or condemned?"

No; Rom. 6.14. Gal. 2.16, 3.13, 4.4,5. Acts 13.39. Rom. 8.1.

Well then, do not the Papists and Socinians err, who maintain, That believers under the gospel, are justified by their obedience to the law of God, (the law, I say, either moral or evangelical) and condemned for the transgression thereof?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because by the law is the knowledge of sin, Rom. 3.20.

2d, Because for as many as are of the works of the law, are under the curse, Gal. 3.10.

3d, Because there is not a law given, which could have given life to fallen man, Gal. 3.21.

4th, Because Christ is not dead in vain. For if righteousness be by the law, then Christ is dead in vain, that is, without cause, reason, need, or fruit, Gal. 2.21. See John 15.25.

5th, Because it was promised by God, about four hundred and thirty years before the promulgation of the law, that all the nations of the earth should be blessed in the seed of Abraham, Gen. 22.18. Gen. 12.3. with Gal. 3.16-18.

6th, Because Christ is become of no effect to them that are justified by the law, they are fallen from grace, Gal. 5.4.

7th, Because believers ought to wait, through the Spirit for the hope of righteousness by faith, Gal. 5.5.

8th, Because the apostle, tho' a strict observer of the law, counted all his works but loss and dung, that he might be found in Christ, not having his own righteousness which is of the law, but that which is thro' the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith. Phil. 3.8,9.

9th, Because Christ is made of God to believers, righteousness, 1 Cor. 1.30. 2 Cor. 5.21.

10th, Because they that seek not righteousness by faith, but by their works, do not attain it. And contrariwise, they that seek their righteousness by faith, and not by their works do attain to it, Rom. 9.30-32.

11th, Because Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth, Rom. 10.4.

12th, Because the justification of men under the law or covenant of works, is by the law, and by the works of the law; but the justification of men under grace, or covenant of grace, is by faith, Rom. 10.5,6,8,9,10. Gal. 3.11,12. Lev. 18.5. But believers now are not under the law, or the covenant of works, but under grace, or the covenant of grace, Rom. 6.14,15. Gal. 5.18.

13th, Because believers under the New and Old Testament, are saved by the grace of Jesus Christ, and not by the law, whose yoke none were able to bear. That is, none were able perfectly to keep, nor to be justified thereby, Acts 15.10,11.

14th, Because whosoever transgresseth the law in the least, is under the curse of it, Gal. 3.10. Deut. 27.26. and deserveth death, and a curse, Rom. 6.23. Ezek. 18.4,20. But all men, even the regenerate, sin daily, and transgress the law of God, and so are guilty of all, James 1.13. compared with James 2.10. and with 1 John 1.8.

15th, Because good works do not go before justification but follow after it, Titus 1.15. Heb. 11.6. Rom. 14.23. Rom. 3.9,10,23.

16th, Because the righteousness of God, which is by faith in Jesus Christ, is manifested unto all, and upon all [them that believe, being witnessed] by Moses and the prophets. For all the apostles do witness, that whosoever believeth in Jesus Christ, shall have remission of sins, Rom. 3.21,24,25. Acts 10.43.

17th, Because justification is from the free grace of God, Rom. 3.24. Not by the works of the law, otherwise grace should be no more grace; nor work any more work, Rom. 11.6.

18th, Because the good works of believers are unclean, and defiled, Isa. 64.6. Gal. 5.17.

19th, Because it is said by the Spirit of God, the just shall live by faith, Heb. 2.4. Gal. 3.11.

20th, Because it is written, that Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness, Gen. 15.5. Rom. 4.3. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness, Rom. 4.5.

21st, Because believers must not glory in themselves but in God only, Rom. 4.2. Rom. 3.27.

22d, Because by the obedience of one, many shall be made righteous, as was foretold by the prophet, Isa. 53.11. And is asserted by Paul, Rom. 5.17-19.

23d, Because justification by faith, and not works, is expressly taught at large, by the apostle, in that third to the Romans, and third to the Galatians.

Of Christian Liberty, And Liberty of Conscience.

QUESTION I.

"Is God, alone, Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are in any thing contrary to his word, or beside it, in matters of faith or worship?"

Yes.

James 4.12. Acts 4.19. Acts 5.29. Matt. 23.8-10. 2 Cor. 1.24. Matt. 15.6.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who contradict this, both in doctrine (because they teach that the pope of Rome, and bishops in their own dioceses, may, by their own authority, præter Scripturam, besides the word make laws which oblige and bind the conscience, under pain of everlasting death); and in practice, (because they have obtruded, and do obtrude many ecclesiastical rites and ceremonies, as necessary in worship, without any foundation in scripture?)

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because there is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy, James 4.12. Therefore no pope, no prelate, nor any mere man, can be a lawgiver.

2d, Because Christ rejects the commandments of men for the worship of God, Matt. 15.9.

3d, Because the apostles refused to obey the orders of their council, since they were contrary to the commands of God, Acts. 4.19. and 5.29.

4th, Because the Lord threatens to do a marvelous work among his people, because they drew near to him with their mouth, (as the most part of the ceremonial service is but a drawing near to God with the mouth,) but had their hearts removed far from him, Isa. 29.13,14.

5th, Because Christ expressly forbids such subjection and obedience to the commands of men, Matt. 23.9,10. 1 Cor. 7.23.

6th, Because the apostles themselves forbid all will-worship, such as the Papists ceremonies are, Col. 2.18,21-23.

7th, Because the apostle Paul withstood these false brethren, unawares brought in, who cam in privily, to spy out his liberty which he had in Christ Jesus, that they might bring him into bondage, to whom he gave place by subjection, no not for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue; where he lays so much weight upon Christian liberty, that if that were taken away, the truth of the gospel would perish likewise, Gal. 2.4,5.

8th, Because the apostle commands believers to stand fast in their liberty, wherewith Christ hath made them free, and not to be entangled again within the yoke of bondage, Gal. 5.1.

9th, Because ceremonies are superstitious, being a vice opposite to religion in the excess, commanding more in the worship of God, than he requires.

Quest. II. "Is not the requiring of an implicit faith, and an absolute and bind obedience to the church, or any man, a destroying of liberty of conscience, and reason also?"

Yes; Rom. 10.17. and 14.23. Isa. 8.20. Acts 17.11. John 4.22. Hos. 5.11. Rev. 13.12,16,17. Jer. 8.9.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who require an implicit faith to all the decrees and ordinances of their church and pope; and a blind obedience to their commands, without a previous judgment of discretion?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because no man performing any duty out of blind obedience, can be persuaded in his mind of the will of God therein; and so he that doubteth is damned, because it is not of faith, Rom. 14.23.

2d, Because all things must be examined and proved by the rule of the word, Isa. 8.2. 1 John. 4.1,2.

3d, Because the apostle says, Prove all things, and hold fast that which is good, 1 Thes. 5.21.

4th, Because blind obedience makes us the servants of men, which is contrary to 1 Cor. 7.23. And against the command of Christ, forbidding us to call any man Father on earth, Matt. 23.9.

5th, Because absolute obedience is only due to God, whose commands are all most just, himself being the alone lawgiver, James 4.12.

6th, Because every man ought to be ready to render a reason of the hope which is in him, 1 Pet. 3.15. This no man can do, who receives the commands of superiors with an implicit faith.

Quest. III. "Do they who upon pretence of Christian liberty, practice any sin, or cherish any lust, destroy thereby the end of Christian liberty?"

Yes; Gal. 5.13. 1 Pet. 2.16. 2 Pet. 2.19. John 8.34. Luke 1.74,75.

Well then, do not the Libertines err, who maintain, That true Christian liberty, which we ought not to follow and use, is to take away all difference between good and evil; To esteem nothing of sin, nor to be touched with any conscience or sense of it; that every man ought to follow the swing of his own lusts?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Antinomians err, who maintain, almost, the same very tenet and opinion?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because we being called to liberty, ought not to use our liberty for an occasion of the flesh, Gal. 5.13. And that with well doing, we ought to put to silence the ignorance of foolish men, 1 Pet. 2.15.

2d, Because they that follow the liberty of sinning, and promise liberty to others, are truly the servants of corruption: For of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage, 2 Pet. 2.19.

3d, Because the end of that liberty which is purchased by Christ, is, that being delivered out of the hands of our enemies, we might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness, all the days of our life, Luke 1.74,75.

4th, Because whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin, John 8.34.

5th, Because the moral law obligeth believers to perform obedience, out of gratitude and thankfulness; for Christ came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it, Matt. 5.17.

6th, Because whosoever shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven, Matt. 5.19.

Quest. IV. "May such men be lawfully called to an account, and proceeded against by the censures of the church, and by the power of the civil magistrate, who publish such opinions, or maintain such practices, as are contrary to the light of nature, or to the known principles of Christianity, whether concerning faith, worship, or conversation, or to the power of godliness, or such erroneous opinions and practices, as either in their own nature, or in the manner of publishing or maintaining them, are destructive to the external peace and order, which Christ hath established in his church?"

Yes; 1 Cor. 5.1,5,11,13. 2 John 10,11. 1 Tim. 6.3,4. Titus 1.10,11,13. Titus 3.10. 1 Tim. 1.19.20. Matt. 18.15-17. Rev. 2.2,14,15,20. Rev. 3.9.

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, There should be no ecclesiastical censures?

Yes.

Do not others also err, who maintain, That church censure should not be inflicted upon heretics?

Yes.

Do not lastly, the Lutherans, Anabaptists, Arminians, Quakers, and all sorts of heretics and sectaries err, who maintain, under pretest of Christian liberty, That the civil magistrate is not in duty to punish any man with the sword, for errors in doctrine, but that they ought to be tolerated and suffered, provided such persons as own them, do not trouble or molest the common-wealth?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the keys of the kingdom of heaven, are for this end delivered to the ministers of the church, that with censures they may pursue scandalous and offending persons, who will not obey admonition, Matt. 18.15,17,18.

2d, Because an heretic, after the first and second admonition, is to be rejected, avoided, or shunned. That is, let him not remain in the external communion of the church, Titus 3.10.

3d, Because Paul did excommunicate Hymeneus and Alexander, who had made shipwreck of the faith, 1 Tim. 1.19,20.

4th, Because if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed, 2 Thes. 3.14. 1 Tim. 6.4,5. Titus 1.11.

5th, Because Christ approves and commends the pastors of the church of Ephesus, because they could not suffer them that are evil; but had tried them which say they are apostles, and were not, and had found them liars, Rev. 2.2. And Christ, in that same chapter, accuses the pastors of the church of Pergamus and Thyatira, and threateneth them, because they had suffered heretics to be in the church.

The Lutherans, Anabaptists, Arminians, and other sectaries are confuted.

1st, Because it is evident from many examples of godly magistrates, who did extirpate idolatry, and inflict punishment upon idolaters; as did Jacob the patriarch, who purged his family of strange gods, Gen. 35.2-4. Moses likewise took punishment with the sword, upon those who did worship the golden calf, Exod. 32.26-28. We have

2d, The example of Hezekiah, 2 Kings 18.4. Of Josiah, 2 Kings 23. Of Asa, who decreed, that whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel (according to the law of God, Deut 13.9.) should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman, 2 Chron. 15.13. Of Jehosaphat, 2 Chron. 17.6. Of Nehemiah, chap. 13.15,17,35.

3d, Were not good kings reproved, and was it not imputed to them as a fault, that they did not take away the high places? 2 Kings 12.3, 14.4, 15.4. 2 Chron. 15.17. Far more is it a fault to suffer heretics.

4th, It is evident from the office of the magistrate, who is the minister of God against them that do evil, and bears not the sword in vain, Rom. 13.4.

5th, Because it is expressly commanded in Scripture, that punishment be inflicted upon idolaters, even by the nearest relations. If then, the father may kill the Son, may kill the daughter; the husband the wife of his bosom; and if one brother may stone another brother with stones that he die, for being idolaters; much more may the civil magistrate do this, Deut. 13.6-13. Deut. 17.2-7. Lev. 24.10.

6th, Because it is foretold, that under the New Testament, kings shall be nursing fathers to the church, and queens nursing mothers; and that heretics that were about to be hurtful to the church, shall be removed and taken away, Isa. 49.23. Zech. 13.2,3. And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, (that is all idolatry whatsoever, so that the same shall not be so much as named any more among you) and they shall no more be remembered. And I will also cause the prophets, (the false prophets) and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land; (that is, the false teachers who teach impure doctrines, thro' the inspiration of the unclean spirit the devil.) Compare this with 1 John 4.1-3. For confirmation, consider what is foretold by John, Rev. 17.12,16,17. That the kings of the earth shall eat the flesh of the whore, and burn her with fire. All which are foretold, as blessings to be conferred upon the church.

7th, It is evident from the epithets whereby the pernicious and destructive nature of heretics is set forth in scripture. They are called wolves, not sparing the flock, thieves, robbers, troublers of the church, and seducers or beguilers of poor souls. They are like unto a gangrene, or canker in the body. They are as leaven, or sour dough, which leaveneth the whole lump, Acts 20.29. John 10.8. Acts 15.24. Gal. 5.12. 2 Tim. 2.17. Gal. 5.9.

8th, Because Ezra did esteem it a great favour and blessing of God conferred upon the church; for which he thanked God, that had inclined the heart of Artaxerxes to publish a decree for the punishment of those that did not observe the law, whether it be, saith the text, unto death, or to banishment, or to confiscation of goods, or to imprisonment, chap. 7.23,25,28.

9th, Because we ought to pray for kings, and all in authority, that under them we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness, and in honesty, which end cannot be attained unless the civil magistrate bridle and tie up heretics, 1 Tim. 2.2. these words, in all godliness, concern religion, or the first table of the moral law, as the following word, honesty, or civility, hath a respect to the commands of the second table, and the duties which we owe to our neighbour and to one another. For true magistrates are keepers and defenders of both tables of the ten commandments.

10th, Because the toleration of heretics, as we may read of the Anabaptists in Germany, Thomas Muntzer, John of Leyden, and their followers, first by railing against the ministry, as the Quakers do, and by raging against the magistracy, brought both church and state into confusion, put the country into burning flames, wherein themselves at length were consumed to ashes.

Of Religious Worship, and the Sabbath Day.

QUESTION I.

DOTH the light of nature shew that there is a God, who hath lordship and sovereignty over all?

Yes. Rom. 1.20. Acts 17.24. Psalm 119.68. Jer. 10.7. Psalm 31.13.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, That there is no knowledge of God implanted naturally in the minds of men?

Yes.

Do not, secondly, the Vaninians, and many of the Cartesians err, who, under the pretext of maintaining a Godhead, have, in effect, taught men to deny there is a God?

Yes.

Do not, thirdly, some bee-headed men err, who dispute against the being of a Godhead, because they cannot find a demonstration for it, called Dihoti?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things which are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse, Rom. 1.20.

2d, Because the Psalmist saith, The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth his handiwork. That is, they give us matter and occasion to speak and discourse of his omnipotency, wisdom, and goodness, Psalm 19.1-3.

3d, Because the knowledge of the law of nature, is naturally implanted in the minds of all men.

4th, Because in the most wicked and ungodly, there are terrors and tortures of conscience, wherewith, nill they will they, they are haunted and possessed; whence it is evident, that in the minds of all men, there is some lively knowledge of God.

5th, Because men would rather worship a stock or a stone, than they should think there were no God, Acts 17.23.

6th, What a brave order and comeliness shines forth with so much wisdom and power, in the government and preservation of things above and below, that no man can be in doubt but there must be a God who rules and preserves all those things.

7th, Because nothing can be the cause of itself: Because then it should be both the cause and the effect, both before and after itself; therefore all things have their beginning from one first and supreme cause, which is God.

8th, Because the existence of a Godhead may be evinced from the foretelling things to come. Isa. 41.23. and as Cicero says, Si est divination, sunt Dii, if there be a foretelling, there must also be a God that foretelleth.

9th, From the assaults and suggestions of Satan, we find there is a devil. May we not then certainly conclude there is a God? The devil labours by all means to extinguish the light of the gospel, to lead men on in ignorance, error, and profaneness, and to turn them out of the path of holiness. Now, why should Satan thus war against God, his word, and his saints? why should he seek God's dishonour and man's destruction, if there were not a God, a law, and an everlasting life?

10th, Because the mind of a man is not satisfied with the knowledge of all things; nor the will of man with the enjoyment of all things in this world, but still they seek and thirst earnestly after some higher good. There is therefore a sovereign truth, and chief good, which being perfectly known and enjoyed, will give contentment and satisfaction to the soul. In vain should the powers and faculties of the soul be capable of happiness, or of the chief good, if there were not a chief good to be possessed and enjoyed.

11th, From the wonders and miracles which have been wrought, visible and apparent works extraordinarily wrought, not only above the ordinary course of nature, but simply above the power of nature. These effects do convince, that there is an infinite power, which is above, and over-ruleth all things. For every principal and primary cause, is more excellent than the effects thereof.

12th, From the being of man, the curious workmanship of his body in the womb, which is wrought most artificially; namely, with sinews, veins, arteries, muscles, and other parts of the body, even as an embroiderer fitteth, and joineth many parcels, stuff, and dyed work of various colours, very artificially and curiously together, until there cometh forth some goodly portraiture, or other dainty workmanship, Psalm 139.15. Job 10.10. But especially from the being of man's soul, which is immaterial, invisible, rational, immortal, and which cannot be e traduce; from the power of the matter, as the sensitive souls of the brutes, neither doth depend upon the body in many of its operations. These, and all the works which our eye doth see, or the mind doth apprehend, do prove that there is a God, who hath given a being to them, and continueth them therein.

13th, Because, seeing God is the first cause, there cannot be any thing prior to him, by which, as a cause, his existence can be demonstrated.

Quest. II. "Is the acceptable way of worshipping the true God, instituted by himself, and so limited to his own revealed will, that he may not be worshipped according to the imaginations and devices of man, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representation, or any other way not prescribed in the holy Scripture?"

Yes. Deut. 12.32. Matt. 15.9. Acts 17.25. Col. 2.23. Exod. 20.4-6.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who teach, That the images of Christ and the Trinity ought to be worshipped, and that not improperly, but even properly, {132} and per se, with the same sort of worship, wherewith Christ and the blessed Trinity are adored?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Greeks err, who maintain, That the painted images of God may be adored, but not the engraved or carved images of God?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because it is expressly against the second command, Exod. 20.4,5.

2d, Because God is infinite, unmeasurable, incomprehensible, and spiritual; and therefore nothing can represent him, as the prophet well infers, Isa. 40.18,25.

3d, Because every representation of God, by graven images or pictures, is a most disgraceful changing of the glory of the incorruptible God, Rom. 1.23.

4th, Because images and pictures of this kind are lies and vanities, which the Lord abhors and mocks at, with an holy scorn, Isa. 44.9-18.

5th, Because the Lord expressly forbiddeth the Israelites to represent him under any form or shape, for, saith the text, ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake to you in Horeb, out of the midst of the fire, Deut. 4.15-20.

6th, Because though the Israelites worshipped the true God by an image (for Aaron built an altar, and made proclamation, and said to-morrow is a feast to the Lord) yet they are accused of the sin of idolatry, and for that cause severely punished, Exod. 32.21,27,35.

7th, Because Jeroboam, and the ten tribes who worshipped the true God, by the golden calves, set up at Dan and Bethel, (for the worship of false Gods by images, was afterwards brought in by Ahab, who is thereby said to have provoked the Lord more than all the kings of Israel before him, 1 Kings 16.31,32.) are accused for the sin of idolatry, and severely threatened, 1 Kings 12.29,30. and 1 Kings 13.2. which threatening was put in execution by Josiah, 2 Kings 23.15,16,20.

8th, Because the apostle says, We ought not to think that the God-head is like unto gold or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device, Acts 17.29.

Quest. III. "Is religious worship to be given to God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and to him alone?"

Yes.

"Is religious worship to be given to angels, saints, or any other creature?"

No; Matt. 4.10. John 8.49. 2 Chron. 13.14. John 5.23. Col. 2.18. Rev. 19.10. Rom. 1.25.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That not only God, but good angels, and saints departed, being canonized by the Pope, ought to be worshipped and called upon, even after a religious manner; but chiefly the virgin Mary, and that there is a divine power in the relics of saints, which therefore ought to be worshipped?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the Lord our God, and he only, is to be worshipped, Matt. 4.10. Deut. 6.13.

2d, Because the object of invocation and religious adoration is he only who is omnipotent, omniscient, and searcher of the heart. For there is none that knows our necessities and wants, but he that is omniscient, and none can succour and help us, but he that is omnipotent. But angels are not omniscient, Eph. 3.10. 1 Pet. 1.12. Neither are the saints departed omniscient, as is clear from Isa. 63.16. Abraham is ignorant of us.

3d, Because they that are dead, know nothing of our condition, Eccl. 9.5.

4th, Because no man ought to call upon him, in whom he doth not believe, Rom. 10.14. But no man ought to believe in saints, or angels, but in God alone, Isa. 26.4. Jer. 17.5.

5th, Because neither saints alive, nor angels, would suffer adoration and worship to be given to themselves, Acts 10.25. Rev. 22.8,9.

6th, Because the worshipping of angels doth derogate from the honour of Christ, in whom we have boldness, and access, with confidence by the faith of him, Eph. 3.12.

7th, Because the worshipping of saints and angels is like a Polytheismus, the having of many gods. For the Papists attribute to each of the saints and angels, a proper power, as the heathens did of old to their idols and false gods.

Quest. IV. "Is any religious worship given to God, since the fall, without a Mediator?

No.

"Nor in the mediation of any other, but Christ alone?"

No; John 14.6. 1 Tim. 2.5. Eph. 2.18. Col. 3.17.

Well then, doth not the Popish church err, who maintain, That saints departed, but chiefly the virgin Mary, are mediators and intercessors between God and man?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the Scripture affirms expressly, That there is but one mediator between God and man, namely, the man Christ Jesus, 1 Tim. 2.5.

2d, Because no man cometh to the Father, but by Christ, John 14.6. and by him we have access to the Father, Eph. 2.18.

3d, Because the scripture promiseth that they shall be heard, that, in the name of Christ, seek such things as are according to the will of God: But there is no promise in all the word, that they shall be heard that pray to saints or angels, John 14.13,14. 1 John 5.14.

4th, Because the apostle says, Whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, not in the name of saints, Col. 3.17.

5th, Because Christ, who is called the propitiation for our sins, is also called our advocate with the Father, 1 John 2.1,2.

6th, Because mediation is a part of the priestly office of Christ, which is only proper to himself, and which cannot be divided between him and the saints.

7th, Because the saints are not to be called upon, as was proved in the foregoing question.

Quest. V. "Is prayer with thanksgiving, one special part of God's worship, required by God of all men?"

Yes; Phil. 4.6. Psalm 65.2.

Well then, do not the Adamites, and others long since err, who denied, That God was to be called upon. For, say they, God is omniscient, and bestows all things upon us freely without our prayer?

Yes.

Do not likewise some late heretics err, who maintain, That unregenerate men ought not to call upon God?

Yes.

Do not also the Quakers err, who will not move in the commanded duties of prayer and thanksgiving, unless there be some inward call and motion on their Spirit?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because there are extent many universal precepts in the word, by which the duty of prayer is commanded, Phil. 4.6. 1 Thes. 5.17. John 16.24. Matt. 7.7.

2d, Because God is the hearer of prayer, and to him shall all flesh come, Psalm 65.2.

3d, We have the example of David, Psalm 55.17. Of Daniel, chap. 6.10. The examples of those many, who were gathered together, praying in the behalf of the apostle Peter, Acts 12.12. The example of Christ himself, John 17.

4th, Because the apostle Paul bids Simon Magus, who was in the gall of bitterness and bond of iniquity, to repent and call upon God, Acts 8.22. As to the Quakers, what assurance can they have the next hour, or the next day, more than now of the Spirit's moving on their souls? And are we not commanded to pray without ceasing, 1 Thes. 5.17. that is, upon all opportunities, and in all our necessities?

Quest. VI. "If prayer be vocal, ought it to be in a known tongue?"

Yes; 1 Cor. 14.14.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That it is not needful, that public prayers be in a known tongue; but that it is oftentimes expedient, that prayers be performed in a tongue unknown to the common people?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the apostle teaches expressly the contrary, 1 Cor. 14.9,12.

2d, Because prayers celebrated in an unknown tongue, are not for edification, 1 Cor. 14.14.

3d, Because he that occupieth the room of the unlearned (that is, who understands not strange tongues) cannot say, Amen, 1 Cor. 14.16.

4th, Because the Lord's prayer, which is the special rule of all our prayers, was prescribed in a tongue, at that time best known.

Quest. VII. "May we pray for the dead, or those of whom it may be known, that they have sinned the sin unto death?"

No; 2 Sam. 12.21-23. Luke 16.25,26. Rev. 14.13. John 5.16.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, That prayers, alms and masses, ought to be appointed, and made for souls departed, as these which will really profit them?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the dead are either happy; and so they need not our prayers, Rev. 14.13. Or they are damned, and so our prayers cannot profit them: For out of hell there is no redemption, Luke 16.12.

2d, Because we read that David mourned, and fasted for the child, so long as it was alive: But when once the child was removed by death, Wherefore, says he, should I fast? Can I bring him back again? 2 Sam. 12.22,23.

3d, Because all our requests and prayers are either founded upon a precept, or promise of God to hear our prayers. But there is neither a promise that God will hear us, in order to the dead, nor a command to pray for them.

4th, Because we are altogether ignorant of the state and condition of the dead, and therefore we cannot pray for them in faith, Rom. 14.23.

Quest. VIII. "Is the reading of the Scriptures with godly fear, the sound preaching, and comfortable hearing of the word, in obedience to God, with understanding, faith, and reverence; are they, I say, part of the ordinary religious worship?"

Yes.

"Are these, with the due administration of the sacraments, viz. baptism and the Lord's supper, to continue in the church of God, till the end of the world, and the day of Christ?"

Yes; Acts 15.21. Rev. 1.3. 2 Tim. 4.2. Matt. 13.19. James 1.22. Heb. 4.2,3. Isa. 64.2. Acts 10.33.

Well then, do not the Enthusiasts, Libertines, Anabaptists, and other sectaries err, who (under pretext of being inspired by the Holy Ghost that teaches them all things) despite and contemn all reading of the Scripture, and public hearing of the word preached?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Quakers err, who are downright enemies to all the public ordinances, which Christ hath appointed to continue in his church to the end of the world?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because Christ commanded his apostles, and in them all the ministers of the gospel, to whom he hath promised his presence to the end of the world, to teach all nations, and to preach the gospel to every creature, Matt. 28.19. Mark 17.15,16.

2d, Because the public preaching of the word, by a minister sent, and called, and the hearing of it, is a mean ordained, and appointed by God, and according to the ordinary manner, necessary for begetting faith, and therefore needful to salvation, Rom. 10.14,15. 1 Cor. 1.21.

3d, Because God hath promised to his covenanted ones, to bring them to his holy mountain, and make them joyful in his house of prayer, that is in the public meetings of the saints and people, Isa 56.7.

4th, From the example of those believers, Acts 2.42. who continued steadfastly in the apostles doctrine.

5th, Because the word of God is the perfect rule of life and manners, and all spirits are to be tried by it, 1 Tim. 3.15. 1 John 4.1. Isa 8.20. Neither ought we to follow or hear any man, no not an angel, if he teach any thing contrary to the word, or heterodox from it, 2 Thess. 2.2. Gal. 1.8.

6th, Because the word of God is that incorruptible seed, by which we are born again, 1 Pet. 1.23.

7th, Because God forbids expressly separations from public assemblies (I mean so long as the word is truly and purely taught, by those who enter in by the right door, that is Christ, and the way appointed by him in his word, John 10.7,8.) Heb. 10.25.

8th, Because the Lord hath joined together these two, his faithful servants, for teaching his people publicly, and the promise of the Spirit to guide them, and assist them in their work, Matt. 28.20. John 16.16,17,26.

For confutation of the Quakers, two things must be made out; the one, that the office of the ministry is of divine institution.

1st, Because God hath particularly designed some persons to the work of the ministry. For if God appointed some persons to be judges over Israel, then must the office of judging Israel be of divine institution. Christ appointed not only apostles, the seventy disciples, evangelists, prophets, whose call and gifts were extraordinary, but other ordinary pastors and teachers whose spirits were not infallible, whom the Scripture affirms to be as truly by divine institution, as the former, 1 Cor. 12.28. Eph. 4.11.

2d, Because God hath given peculiar names and titles to the persons designed for this office, which he hath not given to other saints. The only wise God will not distinguish, where he himself hath made no distinction or difference. These are called pastors, teachers, such as rule well, stewards of the mysteries of God, preachers, bishops or overseers of the flock, stars in Christ's right hand, angels of the churches. Christ evidently puts a difference between the churches and the angels set over them. Rev. 2.1,8,12,17. Rev. 3.7,14.

3d, Because the Lord hath taken a special care to bestow peculiar gifts and qualifications upon these persons so designed for the ministry; and that for the good of the souls of his people, above what is required in other saints. Would ever the Lord have bestowed such qualifications, if he had not appointed some for such an office? Though gifts, as gifts, do not alone invest into such an office, yet when they are strictly required, they argue that there is an office. They must be apt to teach others, 1 Tim. 3.2. and not only so, but able to teach others, able to convince them that oppose themselves, Titus 1.9. They must be such as study to shew themselves approven unto God, workmen that need not be ashamed, 2 Tim. 2.15. And the apostle, in admiration of the difficulty of this employment, crieth out, Who is sufficient for these things? 2 Cor. 2.16.

4th, Because the Lord requires peculiar duties of his ministers, which he doth not require of believers; therefore, there must be such a distinct office by divine institution. They must take special care of the church of God, 1 Tim. 3.5. 1 Pet. 5.2,3. They are not to neglect the gift which is in them, 1 Tim. 4.14. They are to meditate on these things, and to give themselves wholly to them, 1 Tim. 4.15. Acts 6.2,4. They are to preach the word, to rebuke, to instruct gainsayers, 1 Tim. 4.2. 2 Tim. 2.25. To administer the sacraments, Matt. 28.19. 1 Cor. 11.13. To ordain others for the ministry, by imposition of hands, 1 Tim. 4.14. To watch over the flock, as those that must give an account, Heb. 13.17.

5th, Because Christ requires peculiar distinct duties in the people, in reference to their ministers, therefore the office of the ministry must be of divine institution. They must know and acknowledge those that are over them in the Lord, 1 Thess. 5.12. Highly to esteem them in love for their work's sake, 1 Thess. 5.13. To obey them, to encourage them, Heb. 13.7. To maintain them, Gal. 6.6. To pray for them, 2 Thess. 3.1.

6th, Because God hath made peculiar promises to his ministers, as, Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the world, Matt. 28.20. The promise of special assistance, 2 Cor. 3.5,6. Of protection and defence in all assaults, Rev. 1.20. The promise of the power of the keys, which promise was not limited to the apostles, as apostles, but was given to the apostles, as ministers of the gospel, as is evident from Matt. 18.17,18. The promise of special sympathy with them, Matt. 10.40. Luke 10.16. John 13.10. 1 Thess. 4.8. Now, would ever the Lord have promised to keep up, and maintain that office in his church, which he had not set up and instituted?

The other thing to be made out, is, that the office of the ministry is perpetually necessary.

1st, Because the ordinances are perpetually necessary, by divine institution: Therefore the office of the ministry, to dispense these ordinances, is perpetually necessary, by divine institution. For if God had only appointed the ordinances to continue in his church, then would preaching and administration of the sacraments fail; because that which is every man's work, is usually and effectually no man's work. The Lord doth not immediately administer them himself, neither are angels employed for this work: But he hath committed this service to men, who are stewards, and dispensers of the mysteries of God. It is evident that the preaching of the word shall continue to the end of the world, from Matt. 28.20. Eph. 4.12,13. It is evident of baptism, and the Lord's supper, which are conjoined in the institution of Christ, with ministry of the word. For to whom he gave commission to preach, to them also he gave commission to administer the sacraments. Baptism is an ordinance of the new testament, appointed by God himself. For John was sent to baptize. God was the author, John was only the minister. This was to continue perpetually, as is evident from Christ's promise and his precept, Matt. 28.18-20. The ends for which baptism was ordained were not temporary, but moral, and so perpetual. Do not all Christians now need these means, as the Christians during the time of the apostles? Are not Christians now baptized into his death, buried with him in baptism, that like as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. It is called by the Holy Ghost, a saving ordinance, and is unto believers and their seed in the New Testament, as the ark was to Noah and his family in the old world, who being in the ark, was saved from perishing in the waters, when the rest were drowned: so baptism doth now save us, not only or mainly the outward part of it, the putting away the filth of the flesh, (which is yet an ordinance to further our salvation) but when the Spirit of regeneration effectually concurs, so that we find there is a renewing of the Holy Ghost, and thereby the answer of a good conscience towards God, 1 Pet. 3.21. It is evident, that the sacrament of the Lord's supper is to continue to the end of the world. It was not only appointed for apostles, to whom it was first administered, but unto all believers, both Jews and Gentiles. And not only for that age, but for all generations succeeding; for believers are commanded to shew forth the Lord's death till he come, by eating this bread, and drinking this cup. Therefore, if these ordinances be appointed by God to continue to the end, it follows evidently, that he hath designed the office of the ministry to hold up, and hold forth his ordinances to the end of the world.

2d, Because the promises which Christ hath made to uphold the ministry are perpetual, Matt. 28.20. Go teach and baptize all nations, and lo I am with you to the end of the world. This promise cannot be limited to the particular age, during the lives of the apostles; because the Holy Ghost useth three expressions, to declare the perpetuity of this promise, Aion, that this promise should continue so long as the world continues. Secondly, Synteleia, Heos tes synteleis tu aionos, that this promise shall have no end, till the world be consummate, or bought to a period. Thirdly, Pasas tas Hemeras, all days and successions of times. Not only, Meth hymon hemeras hymon, not only with you, during your own days, but all the days of the gospel, till time shall be no more. And this promise was not made to the apostles, as apostles, not to the apostles, as believers, but to the apostles as ministers and stewards of the mysteries of God.

3d, Because the elect require the office of the ministry perpetually. Our nature is as bad as Jews and Pagans, Eph. 2.3. Our judgment full of darkness and ignorance, 1 Cor. 2.14. Our wills stubborn and rebellious, and so alienated, that we rebel against the light. The delusions of Satan are strong. The multitude of false teachers are very numerous, so that they are ready to seduce the elect themselves, if it were possible.

4th, Because the ends for which Christ hath appointed a ministry are perpetually necessary. The elect must be called and gathered, for there will be some still in every age to be added to the church, of them that shall be saved. There are many sheep, which are not yet brought into his fold: many who belong to the election, who are not yet effectually called, them also will Christ bring, both Jews and Gentiles, that there may be one fold, as there is but one shepherd. Now, God hath revealed no other ordinary way to convert and bring those into his fold, but the ministry of his word; for how shall they believe without a preacher? Therefore if there be some elect continually to be brought into fellowship with Christ, and this end not fully attained till the end of the world, then the ministry assigned to this end, must be perpetually necessary.

Quest. IX. "Is singing of psalms with grace in the heart, a part of the ordinary worship of God?"

Yes; Col. 3.16. Eph. 5.19. James 5.13.

Well then, do not the Quakers, and other sectaries, err, who are against the singing of psalms, or at least tie it only to some certain persons, others being excluded?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From the practice of Christ and his apostles, Matt. 26.30. From the example of Paul and Silas, Acts 16.25. From Moses and the Israelites, Exod. 15.

2d, Because the singing of psalms was commanded under the Old Testament, and that, not as a type of any substance to come, nor for any ceremonial cause. Neither is it abrogated under the New Testament, but confirmed, Psalm 30.4. Psalm 149.1.

3d, From the general and universal commands in the New Testament, Eph. 5.19. Col. 3.16. 1 Cor. 14.15.

4th, Because the apostle James says, Is any man afflicted, let him pray; is any man merry, let him sing psalms, chap. 5.13. The meaning is not, that none should sing but such as are merry; for then none should pray but such as are afflicted.

5th, Because by singing of psalms we glorify God, we make his praise glorious: we edify others with whom we sing as well as we edify ourselves. So the end to be proposed in singing, is teaching and admonishing one another, in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, Col. 3.16. Lastly, We cheer and refresh ourselves by making melody in our hearts to the Lord, Eph. 5.19. Which ariseth, first, from our conscientious going about it as a piece of the worship to God, and in so doing we are accepted in that. Secondly, From its being a part of Scripture, appointed for his praise, whether it agree with our case or not. That being the end wherefore it was designed to be sung, is a sufficient warrant for our joining in the singing thereof.

Quest. X. "Is prayer, or any other part of religious worship now under the gospel, either tied unto, or made more acceptable, by any place, in which it is performed, or towards which it is directed?"

No; John 4.21. Mal. 1.11. 1 Tim. 2.8.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who consecrate churches, and ascribe holiness to them, and to other places far off, where they mumble their preachings, and mutter their prayers?

Yes.

Do not likewise many ignorant persons err, who think their private prayers will be more acceptable to God, being said in the kirk, than in their own private closets?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the Lord says, by the mouth of his prophet, that prayers shall be offered up to him in all places, under the time of the gospel, Mal. 1.11.

2d, Because Christ commands us when we pray to enter into our closet, and the door being shut, to pray to our Father which is in secret, lest we should seem to desire praise and approbation from men: which rite and ceremony of praying publicly, when we should pray privately, Christ clearly condemns, Matt. 6.5,6.

3d, Because Paul wills that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting, 1 Tim. 2.8.

4th, Because Christ says, The hour cometh, when we shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father, John 4.21.

Quest. XI. "Hath God in his word, by a positive, moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all men in all ages, particularly appointed one day in seven, for a Sabbath, to be kept holy unto himself?"

Yes; Exod. 20.8,10,11. Isa. 56.2,4,6,7.

Well then, do not some men err, who maintain, That God hath not under the gospel determined any certain day for his own worship, but only hath commanded that some indefinite time be destined for public worship, which time, say they, is left to be determined by the church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the determining of an ordinary and sufficient time for divine worship, and as a Sabbath belongs to God only, and not to man. For we do not read that any such power or authority is granted to man, either by the law of nature, or Scripture. Is it not a thing of very great moment; Is it likely that the wisdom of God would leave it uncertain? This might accuse the Scripture of imperfection. It is not suitable to the love of God, and his care towards his church. By such men's doctrine, the church universal, and all oecumenic councils, should be guilty of a dreadful sin, which for so many ages have been deficient in their duty. Therefore, it behoveth that there be one day in seven, by virtue of the fourth command, seeing no where else another necessary day is appointed, or prescribed in the word.

2d, Because it is just and equitable, as the adversaries grant, that one day should be set apart for God, who hath freely given us six.

3d, Because in six days God made the heavens and the earth, and rested on the seventh: not out of necessity, but to give us an example to do the like.

4th, Because one day of ten, twenty, or thirty, cannot be thought convenient. Neither is such a thing commanded in any place of Scripture. And would it not argue a neglect of divine worship, and of care of souls, if one day of ten, thirty, or forty, were appointed? Neither can the fourth, fifth, or sixth day be appointed, seeing God hath commanded us to work six days. This would make our yoke more heavy than the Jewish yoke, which adversaries will not grant.

5th, Because it is the principle and chief scope of the fourth command, that one day in seven, in respect of us, be set apart and consecrated to divine worship. Not truly, that some indefinite time be set apart. If this were true, the fourth command should differ substantially from the other precepts of the Decalogue; and so there behoved to be an useless precept, or at least a tautology ought to be committed.

Do not likewise the Anabaptists, Socinians, and Libertines err, with whom we may take in the Quakers, (and other Antisabbatarians, that disown the Sabbath, as being carnal, and a command of the letter,) who teach, That whatever is contained in the fourth command is ceremonial, and so properly, as to the matter and substance which it holds out, abrogated wholly. And therefore, say they, by virtue of this fourth command, there is no day to be set apart for public divine worship?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the fourth command, which appoints one day of seven to be set apart for God, is a positive, and moral command, as to substance; seeing it was given to Adam in his integrity, before ever there was need of any types and ceremonies shadowing forth Christ, Gen. 2.2,3.

2d, Because it was repeated, before the promulgation of the ceremonial law, Exod. 16.23.

3d, Because it was written with God's own hand, and inserted into the midst of the rest of the moral precepts, and was put into the ark of the testimony, with the other nine, which honour was never conferred upon any precept merely ceremonial.

4th, Because all the reasons of this command are entirely moral. He rested after six days, and allowed us six days to work, therefore in all equity we ought to rest after so many days work, and give God a seventh.

5th, Because Christ confirms this command in saying, Pray that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day; where the Lord insinuateth, that as traveling is troublesome to the body in winter, so would it be to the minds of the godly to travel on that day, specially and solemnly set apart for God's worship. Now, if there be no Sabbath to continue after Christ's ascension, or if it were not to be sanctified, there would be no occasion of this grief and trouble, that they behoved to travel on the Sabbath, and durst not tarry till that day were bypast; and so no cause to put up this prayer, which yet by our Lord's exhortation seemeth to infer, that the Sabbath was to be as certain in its time, as the winter. And doubtless this cannot be meant of the Jewish Sabbath; for that was to be abolished shortly. Next, traveling on the Jewish Sabbath was to be no cause of grief unto them, if indeed all days were alike, neither would it be scrupled in such a case by the apostles, to whom he is now speaking.

Quest. XII. "Was this one day in seven, from the beginning of the World, to the Resurrection of Christ, the last day of the week?"

Yes.

"And was it, from the Resurrection of Christ, changed into the first day of the week?"

Yes.

"And is it to be continued, to the end of the World, as the Christian Sabbath?"

Yes; Gen. 2.2,3. 1 Cor. 16.1,2. Acts 20.7. Rev. 1.10. Matt. 5.17,18.

Well then, do not the Sabbatarians err, who maintain, that the Jewish Sabbath, or the seventh day from the creation, is to be observed?

Yes.

Do not others likewise err, who maintain, That the observation of the Lord's day, is only of ecclesiastic and apostolic institution?

Yes.

These authors, you see, do confound, and make two things really distinct, to be but one, namely, ecclesiastic and apostolic institution?

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the fourth command standing, wherein one day of seven is appointed, the numbering is left free to God himself, that the right and power may be reserved to Christ the lawgiver, and to his Spirit, for the change of the day, and to continue the worship prescribed in the fourth command.

2d, From the name itself; for our Sabbath is called the Lord's day, Rev. 1.10, I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day: or on that Lord's day, or Dominick day, or day which is the Lord's; pointing out a day singularly, and a day, which in a peculiar and special manner is called His day; even as the Lord's prayer and the Lord's supper are so called, because appointed by Christ the Lord.

3d, Because God only can abrogate the Lord's day, the adversaries granting so much; therefore he that hath power to rescind, hath power likewise to establish.

4th, Because there is an implicit command, concerning the observation of the Lord's day, 1 Cor. 16.2, As I have, saith Paul, given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye; the first day of the week, let every one of you lay by him. From which place, we may reason thus; that not the seventh but the first day, is the chief solemn day for worship after Christ's resurrection, because the apostles did pitch particularly, and eminently upon that day, and that in divers churches, as the fittest time for expressing their charity. He doth not think it indifferent what day it be done on, nor that all days are alike, but pitched on the first day not in one church only but in many. Next, this command supposeth them to be already acquainted with some special privileges of the first day beyond others, and there must be some peculiar thing in this day, making it fit, for such a purpose, rather than any other day.

5th, Because as the seventh day was instituted in remembrance of the works of creation, so the first day, after the work of redemption was finished, succeeded as most convenient, for collating and comparing both mercies together.

6th, Because Christ, on the first day of the week, appeared most frequently to his disciples, and blessed it with his presence, Matt. 28.9; Acts 1.3; John 20.19,26.

7th, Because on that day the Holy Ghost descended upon the apostles. And on the same day Peter baptized three thousand, Acts 2.1-4,41.

8th, Because the church in the time of the apostles did observe this first day of the week, as holy, Acts 20.7. But the practice of the apostles, approven in Scripture, is equivalent to a divine institution.

9th, Because Christ was seen of his apostles forty days after his resurrection, and spoke to them of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God, during which time he hath taught them all things needful to be known, and among the rest, it is probable, the change of the Sabbath, and the institution of the first day of the week, and that immediately after his resurrection: he hath either immediately by himself instituted that day, or hath inspired his apostles to observe it, from the very same time.

10th, Because the Lord hath remarkably owned this Christian Sabbath, in being remarkably avenged upon the breakers and profaners thereof, as it is clear from several histories.

Quest. XIII. "Is the Sabbath then kept holy unto the Lord, when men, after a due preparation of their hearts, and ordering of their common affairs before-hand, do not only observe an holy rest all the day from their own works, words, and thoughts, about their worldly employments and recreations; but are also taken up the whole time, in the public and private exercises of his own worship, except what is spent in the duties of necessity and mercy?"

Yes; Exod. 16.23,25,26,29,30. Exod. 31.15,16,17. Isa. 58.13; Neh. 13.15,16,18,19,21,22.

Well then, do not some err, who think, That after public worship is ended, the rest of the Lord's day may be spent in ordinary exercises, recreations, and such like other sports as are not unlawful on other days, unless they be forbidden by the church, or common-wealth wherein men live?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the Lord says in the fourth commandment, In it thou shalt not do any work. But ordinary recreations, games, and sports, are our own works.

2d, Because nature itself requires, that we bestow as much of the Sabbath day upon God, who is the Lord of time, and of all things which we have, as we can, and use to bestow upon our own affairs, on other days.

3d, Because the Lord says, If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day, and call the Sabbath a delight, and the holy of the Lord, honourable, and shalt honour him, not doing thy own works, nor finding thy own pleasure, nor speaking thy own words, then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord, and I will cause thee to ride on the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father, for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it, Isa. 58.13,14. See Jer. 17.22; Deut. 5.12,13,15. Numb. 15.32,33,36. And Neh. 13.15-23, In those days saw I in Judah, some treading the wine presses on the Sabbath; and bringing in sheaves, and lading asses, as also wine grapes, and all manner of burdens which they brought into Jerusalem on the Sabbath day, and I testified against them in the day wherein they sold victuals.

Of Lawful Oaths and Vows.

QUESTION I.

IS the name of God that only by which men ought to swear?

Yes. Deut. 6.13.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who in their swearing join with the calling upon the name of God, the calling upon saints departed and their relics?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because swearing is a part of divine worship, which is only due to God, Deut. 6.13. Deut. 10.20. Isa. 65.16.

2nd, Because God only is the judge of hidden and secret truth; and the avenger to take vengeance on them that do not swear in truth. Therefore he only is to be called on as witness of these things which are asserted and promised; which {151} was the practice of the apostle Paul, Rom. 9.1, and 1.9, Phil. 1.8.

3rd, Because God condemns swearing by them that are no gods, Jer. 5.7.

Quest. II. "Is an oath warranted by the word of God, under the New Testament, as well as under the Old, in matters of weight and moment?"

Yes; Heb. 6.16. Isa. 65.16. Gal. 1.20. Rom. 1.9, and 9.1. 2 Cor. 1.18,23, and 11.13, and 12.19. 1 Thes. 5.27. Rev. 10.6.

Well then, do not the Quakers and Anabaptists err, who maintain, That there is no lawful use of an oath under the New Testament?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Papists err, who make it a degree of perfection, to abstain from all oaths?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, From Isa. 61.16, Where it is promised under the time of the gospel, that the nations, to be converted to Christ, shall swear by the name of God, as is clear also from Jer. 4.2.

2nd, Because the calling upon the name of God with due fear and reverence in swearing, is commanded in the third command, as the profanation of his name is forbidden; but Christ came not to abolish the moral law.

3rd, From the approven examples of the saints, which occur in the New Testament, Gal. 1.20. Rom. 1.9. and 2 Cor. 1.13,18. Rev. 10.6.

4th, Because the end of an oath is approven by God, and is in all ages necessary to all men, being the end of all controversy, Heb. 6.16.

5th, Because an oath rightly taken is an act of religion, whereby we glorify God, and adore his attributes. We thereby, first, solemnly acknowledge his being and existence. Secondly, His ubiquity, that he is present in all places, and in all times, and within our hearing, Psalm 139.7. [Thirdly,] His omniscience, that he is the searcher of the heart. The apostle calls him Kardiognostes, Acts 15.8. We acknowledge, fourthly, his truth and veracity: he is a witness brought into the court that cannot lie, nor be imposed upon, as saith the apostle, be not deceived, {152} God is not mocked, Gal. 6.7. Fifthly, His supremacy over all creatures, for verily men swear by the greater, Heb. 6.16. We acknowledge, sixthly, His vindictive justice, as he is a revenger of perjury. Seventhly, we acknowledge his providence, and fatherly care of the concerns of mankind, owning the cause of the righteous.

6th, Because there being an express law for swearing, (viz. rightly, Deut. 10.20) it must either belong to the moral law, to the judicial law, or ceremonial law. The adversaries will not call it a part of the judicial law, which was given to the Jews, as a body politic, which expired together with the state of that people. It is no part of the ceremonial law, for what was purely ceremonial, was purely typical: but the law concerning an oath was not a type of any thing to come. And if it was a type, where will you find its antitype in all the gospel, or the thing represented by it? Therefore, it must be a part of the moral law, Deut. 6.13, Jer. 4.2, and consequently perpetual, which Christ came not to destroy. [Matt. 5.17.] It is confirmed hence, that it was of authentic use, and held sacred among the patriarchs, before the delivery of the Levitical law, as is clear from Abraham the father of the faithful, and Abimelech, Gen. 21.23,24,31. Consider also, that other instance in Abraham, Gen. 24.2,3,9, who would not give his servant an oath rashly, nor exercise his authority to impose upon his conscience. It is evident also from the example of Isaac, who made a covenant, and swore to Abimelech, Gen. 26.28,31. And from the example of Jacob, who made a covenant with, and swore to his uncle Laban, by the fear of his father Isaac, Gen. 31.53; That is, by God, who is called our fear, by reason of the filial awe, and fear, we ought to stand in before him, Isa. 8.13.

7th, Because the reasons and usefulness of oaths are perpetual, and the same to us under the gospel, as they were to them under the law. There is as much need of oaths for ending {153} of strife in this litigious age, as there could be in former times.

8th, Because oaths were once lawful, therefore they are lawful still, unless the adversaries prove them repealed; which they must do, not by stealing out of the Scripture, single words by themselves, making one part contradict another.

9th, Because we need not fear to imitate any thing which is done in heaven. Our Lord has taught us to pray, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. But the angel, (says John, Rev. 10.5,6,) which I saw stand upon the sea, and upon the earth, lifted up his hand to heaven, and swore by him that liveth for ever and ever. That angel calls himself our fellow servant, and of our brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book, Rev. 22.9; And therefore the angels being of the same fraternity with us, do not act under different dispensations from us.

Quest. III. "Is an oath to be taken in the plain and common sense of the words, without equivocation, or mental reservation?"

Yes; Psalm 24.4. Exod. 20.7. Lev. 16.12. Jer. 4.2.

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, That it is lawful in swearing to use words of equivocation?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Papists err, who maintain mental reservation to be lawful in swearing?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because the Scripture requires from all men in their common dealing one with another, in their discourse and conferences, verity and simplicity, Matt. 5.37, Eph. 4.25; Much more are these things required in swearing, wherein God is called to be witness of the truth of these things which are asserted.

2nd, Because the Lord threateneth such as use guile and deceit in their words, Psalm 15.4, and 24.4. Gal. 2.11-13.

3rd, Because the Lord requires in every oath, truth, righteousness, and judgement, {154} Jer. 4.2.

4th, Because equivocations and mental reservations, are against the very end of an approven oath; which is to put an end to all debate and controversy.

5th, Because if equivocations and mental reservations were lawful, in vain should the Lord have made laws against lying; for a lie may be excused by mental reservation.

6th, If equivocation and mental reservations were allowed, they would take away all commerce among men, and would make bonds, contracts, and charter parties, of none effect.

Quest. IV. "Is a religious vow to be made to God alone, and not to any creature?"

Yes; to God alone, Jer. 44.25,26. Psalm 77.11.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, Vows to be made to saints departed, and to Cenobiarchs, that is, to priors of monasteries or abbeys?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because vows are a part of our gratitude and thankfulness due to God only, for his favours and mercies conferred upon us, Psalm 50.14. Psalm 66.13,14.

2nd, Because we are commanded in the word to make our vows to God, and perform them. But no where are we appointed to make our vows to saints departed, Psalm 50.14.

3d, Because God only is the trier and searcher of the heart: And it is he only that knoweth the sincerity of the man's mind that voweth, and is able to punish such as violate, and break their vows, Deut. 23.21.

4th, Because the Lord threateneth those severely, that had vowed to any other gods but to himself alone, and accuses them of a very great sin, Jer. 44.25,26

Quest. V. "Are Popish monastical vows of a perpetual single life, professed poverty, and regular obedience, so far from being degrees of higher perfection, that they are superstitious and sinful snares, in which no Christian may entangle himself?" {155}

Yes; Matt. 19.11,12. 1 Cor. 7.2,9. Eph. 4.28. 1 Pet. 4.2.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, Monastical vows of a perpetual single life, professed poverty, and regular obedience, to be degrees of higher perfection?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

1st, Because a vow of a perpetual single life is unlawful: For no man ought to vow the performance of that which he hath not a promise of strength to perform. But no man hath a promise of perpetual continency, which is necessarily required to a perpetual single life: Nay, Christ says expressly, that the gift of continency is not given to all men, Matt. 19.11.

2nd, Because marriage is honourable among all men, and the bed undefiled, Heb. 13.4.

3d, Because the apostle bids every man take his own wife, for shunning of fornication, 1 Cor. 7.1,2,9.

4th, Because the forbidding of marriage is a doctrine of devils, 1 Tim. 4.1,3.

Next, the vow of professed poverty is unlawful:

1st, Because the Lord did not allow beggars to be among his people of old, Deut. 15.7.

2nd, Because Augur wished that the Lord might not give him poverty, lest he should steal, and take the name of God in vain, Prov. 30.8,9.

3rd, Because the Lord will have every man eat his bread in the sweat of his face, Gen. 3.19.

4th, Because the apostle commands the Thessalonians to work with their own hands, 1 Thess. 4.11.

5th, Because professed poverty hindereth a greater good, viz. our charity, and benevolence towards the poor and indigent members of Christ, which is contrary to the apostle's rule, Eph. 4.28.

The vow of regular obedience is likewise unlawful:

1st, Because it makes us the servants of men, which is contrary to the apostle, Ye are bought with a price, be not ye the servants of men, viz. To do any thing for the service, or obedience of men (superiors) which should be repugnant to the commands {156} of the service of God. Or suffer not yourselves in spiritual things to be brought in bondage by any man, that you should not freely use that which the Lord hath made free to us, 1 Cor. 7.23.

Of the Civil Magistrate

QUESTION I.

HATH GOD armed the Civil Magistrate with the power of the Sword, for the defence, and encouragement of them that are good, and for the punishment of evil doers?

Yes. Rom. 13.1-4; 1 Peter 2.13,14.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, that it is not the duty of the Civil Magistrate, to punish the guilty with death?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because GOD hath expressly commanded, that transgressing Idolaters be put to death; Deut. 17.7; Deut. 19.21. (2) Because, it appertains to the office and duty of the Magistrate, to punish the guilty with death, Rom. 13.4. 1 Pet. 2.14. (3) Because, the capital punishment of evil doers makes others stand in awe, and fear to offend; Deut. 13.11. Deut. 19.20. (4) Because, if the Magistrate shall neglect to inflict due punishment, the Lord himself will be avenged on that Magistrate, 1 Kings 20.42. Num. 25.4. (5) Because, he that smiteth a man so that he die, shall surely be put to death; Exod. 21.12. (6) Because, all that take the sword, shall perish by the sword, Matth. 26.52. Namely, without a lawful call, or order for it. They shall perish, by order and command of the Magistrate, to whom the Lord hath given the sword, for this same very end to punish evil doers with death; Gen. 9.6, Rom. 13.4.

Quest. II. "Is it the duty of the Civil Magistrate, to take order, that all Blasphemies and Heresies be suppressed, all the ordinances of God duly settled, administered, and observed; all abuses in worship and discipline reformed, all Idolaters, Gainsayers, and other obstinate dissenters, being obliged and forced to quit their tenets and opinions, and conform themselves to the true worship and service of God, according to his Law?"

Yes. Isa 49.23; 2 Chron. 15.12,13. 2 Chron. 34.33; 2 Kings 18.4; 2 Kings 23.1-26; Ezra 7.23,25,26,27,28; Lev. 24.16.

Well then, do not the Quakers and other Sectaries err, who judge it Antichristian, and the practice of the Church of Rome, that the Civil and Supreme Magistrate, with the assistance of the Church and her Censures, should by his coactive power, force and oblige all his subjects, to a Reformation of Religion, and to a conformity to the true worship, sound doctrine, and discipline of the Church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because it is foretold by the Prophet Isaiah, that in the days of the Gospel, Kings shall be nursing Fathers and Queens nursing Mothers to the Church of God, chapter 49, verse 23. (2) Because Artaxerxes, who was but a Heathen King, was very careful to make a decree, that whatsoever was commanded by the God of Heaven, should be diligently done for the house of the God of Heaven. And that whosoever would not obey the Law of GOD, and the King, judgment was to be executed speedily upon him, whether by death, banishment, confiscation of goods, or imprisonment. For which singular mercy, Ezra blessed the Lord GOD of his fathers, who had put such a thing in the King's heart, chapter 7.23, 25-28. So did Nebuchadnezzar make a decree, that if any People, Nation, or Language should speak any thing amiss against the GOD of Heaven, they should be cut in pieces, and their houses made a dunghill, Dan. 3.29. The like we read of Darius, who made a Decree, that all men should tremble and fear before the GOD of Daniel, chap. 6, v. 23. (3) From the example of Hezekiah, who removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves, and brake in pieces the brazen Serpent, to which the Israelites did burn incense; 2 Kings 18.4. (4) From the example of Josiah, who made a thorough reformation; and made all Israel to serve the LORD their GOD. The word in the Original importeth, that he in a manner forced, and compelled them to the pure worship, and service of God, as a servant is forced, and compelled to his work. He by his Royal Power, and Authority kept them in order, forbidding Idolatry, and commanding them to serve God no otherwise, than according to his Word; 2 Chron. 34.33, and [the example of Asa in] 2 Chron. 15.12,13. They entered into a Covenant, to seek the Lord of their Fathers, with all their heart, and with all their soul: that whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel should be put to death whether great or small, man or woman. (5) Because, whosoever blasphemed the name of the Lord, was surely put to death; Lev. 24.16. This blaspheming, was a piercing through, or stabbing the name of the Lord, as the original word properly signifies: which may be done not only after this manner, but by maintaining blasphemous errors and heresies. (6) Because, the supreme Magistrate is Custos utriusque Tabulæ, a Keeper of both Tables of the Law of God: as well of the first Table, which relates to Religion, as our duty to God, as of the second which relates to righteousness, and our duty to our neighbour. If then, he may punish evil doers, who offend against the second Table, and force and compel them to obedience, by the sword of justice, which God hath put into his hand, much more may he punish Idolaters, and blasphemers, who offend against the first Table, and force and compel them to obedience: seeing there are many sins against the first Table, which are more heinous, and odious, than the sins against the second Table. And though it be the sinful practice of the Church of Rome, to force men, and women, to be of their Religion, which is superstitious, and Idolatrous, yet it is not so to others, who have the true religion among them. And though our blessed Saviour, and his Apostles, did not use such means for propagating the Gospel, reserving the Glory of conquering of souls, to himself, and the power of his Spirit; yet he has taught nothing to the contrary, but that Kings and Magistrates, whom he has made nursing Fathers to his Church, may according to the laudable examples of the good Kings of Judah, improve their power for Reformation, and maintenance of his own Religion. And though Religion, hath been much advanced by suffering, yet it will not infer, that a Christian Prince has not power to reform his own subjects, or extirpate blasphemers, and Hereticks.

Quest. III. "Is it lawful for a Christian, to accept and execute the office of a Magistrate, when called thereunto?"

Yes. Prov. 8.15,16. Rom. 13.1,2,4.

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, that it is not lawful for Christians to carry the office of a Magistrate?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, there is no power but of God, and the powers, which are, are ordained of GOD; Rom. 13.1. (2) Because, Solomon says, by me (that is by the Lord) Kings reign, and Princes decree justice; Prov. 8.15. (3) Because, the Magistrate exercises and executes God's judgments; Deut. 1.17. (4) Because, the Magistrate receiveth all things from GOD, which are necessary, for the performance of his office; Numb. 11.17. (5) Because, the Lord hath promised, that Magistrates under the Gospel, shall be nursing Fathers to his Church; Isaiah 49.23, And shall make the Whore desolate, naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire; Rev. 17.16.

Quest. IV. "May the Civil Magistrate, now under the New Testament wage war upon just and necessary occasion?"

Yes. Luke 3.14. Matt. 8.9,10. Rev. 17.14,16. Acts 10.1,2.

Well then, do not the Quakers, Anabaptists, and Socinians err, Who maintain, that it is altogether unlawful, now under the New Testament, to wage war?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, GOD appointed, and commanded lawful war; Numb. 31.2. For it is said, the Spirit of the Lord came upon Gideon, when he was to fight the battles of the Lord, against the Midianites, and Amalekites; Judges 6.34. Nay, the Lord himself, prescribeth the manner, and way of making of War; Numb. 10.9. Numb. 31.27. Deut. 20.2. And giveth knowledge, and skill, to his Generals, and Heros, to fight his own battles; Psalm 18.34. Psalm 144.1. All which are in no wise abrogated, and taken away, under the New Testament. (2) Because, the Centurion, that was converted to the Faith, did not lay down his office of a Captain of a hundred; which surely, he would have done, if to war under the New Testament, had been unlawful; Acts 10.1,2,47. The same may be said of the believing Centurion; Matthew 8.8-10. (3) Because, the office of a Soldier, is not reprehended, and reproved, by John the Baptist, but rather approven; Luke 3.14. (4) Because, opposition, and defence, against unjust violence, which often times cannot be done without war, is the very law of nature. (5) Because, it is foretold, that the kings of the Earth, shall make war against the Beast, Rev. 17.14,16.

Quest. V. "May the Civil Magistrate, assume to himself, the Administration of the Word and Sacraments, or the power of the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven?"

No. 2 Chron. 26.18. Matth. 18.17. Matth. 16.19. 1 Cor. 12.28,29. Rom. 10.15. Hebr. 5.4.

Well then, do not the Erastians err, who maintain, that the Civil Magistrate hath in himself all Church power; and so may administer the Sacraments, and preach the Word, and may exercise the power of the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ hath given no such power to Magistrates: as evidentaly appears, from all those places of Scripture, where mention is made of the keys. There is not in them, one syllable of the Civil Magistrate; Matth. 18.17. Matth. 16.19. (2) If the power of the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, agree to the Magistrate, as a Magistrate, then ought it to agree to every Magistrate, though the Magistrate were an Infidel, or a Woman, which is absurd. (3) A Magistrate, as a Magistrate, is not a Minister of the Church, as is evident from all the Catalogues of the Ministers of the Church. For in them you will not find any mention of the Magistrate, Eph. 4.11. Rom. 12.7,8. 1 Cor. 12.8-10. (4) Because, before ever there was a Christian Magistrate in the World, the Church exercised all Acts of Church Jurisdiction, and Government. The Church ordained Ministers and Pastors, 1 Tim. 4.14; And inflicted the Censure of Excommunication, 1 Cor. 5.5; And Relaxed the Penitent from this Censure; Called a Synod, and stigmatized Hereticks, Acts 15. (5) Because, GOD hath put a difference between the Church Government and the Civil, and hath appointed distinct Governours to them, 2 Chron. 19.8-11. (6) Because, God did severely punish Saul and Uzziah for presuming to offer sacrifice, which was proper to the Priests only, 1 Sam. 13.9,10,13. 2 Chron. 26.16,19.

Quest. VI. "Hath the Civil Magistrate power to call Synods, to be present at them, and to provide, that whatsoever is transacted in them be according to the mind of GOD?"

Yes. 2 Chron. 19.8-11, and 2 Chron. chapters 29, 30; Matth. 2.4,5.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that the judgment and care of Religion doth not belong to the civil Magistrate?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the custody and keeping of the divine law, is committed by GOD to the Civil Magistrate; Deut. 17.18. (2) Because, it was foretold, that Kings should be nursing Fathers to the Church, Isaiah 49.23. (3) Because, it is the duty of the Magistrate, to take care, that subjects may lead a quiet and peaceable life, in all godliness, and honesty, 1 Tim. 2.2. (4) From the commendable examples of the good kings of Judah, 2 Chron. 29 & 30 chapters.

Quest. VII. "Doth infidelity, or difference in Religion make void the Magistrate's just and legal authority?"

No.

Doth it free the people from their due obedience to him?

No. 1 Peter 2.13; Rom. 13.1-4; Titus 3.1.

Well then, do not the Papists, Anabaptists, and others err, who maintain, that subjects ought not to suffer a King that's an infidel, or obey that King in his just commands, that differs from them in Religion?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, we are commanded to submit ourselves to every ordinance of man, 1 Peter 2.13; Namely in all that they command us, if it be not contrary to God and his command; otherwise, (according to Acts 4.19,) it is better to obey GOD than man. And it is said, for the Lord's sake, that is, because it is GOD's will to govern us by them. (2) Because, the Christians which were at Rome were commanded by the Apostle to subject themselves to the higher powers, and that without exception of Religion and Piety, and even to that heathen the Roman Emperor, Rom. 13.1.[1] (3) Because, the same Apostle writing to Titus, bids him exhort the Cretians his hearers, to obey Magistrates, what manner of ones soever they be, not only believing ones, but also those, that are unbelieving, as then, they were yet most of them, Titus 3.1. (4) Because, when the Apostle Paul was pursued for his life, and charged with matters criminal, he appealed unto Cæsar, Acts 25.10,11. (5) Because, the Prophet Jeremiah did own the power of Zedekiah, who had turned aside to a false worship, and had despised the oath, which he had made to the King of Babylon, Ezek. 17.16,18. Now hear I pray thee, (says the Prophet) O my Lord the King, let my Supplication I pray thee be accepted before thee; Jerem. 27.20. (6) Because, Christ himself paid tribute to Cæsar, though he was free, being both the Son of GOD by nature, and the Son of David by birth, Matth. 17.26. And he commanded and allowed others to pay, Matth. 22.21. Rom. 13.7. (7) Because, Paul did own and acknowledge the power of King Agrippa; Acts 26.2.[2]

Quest. VIII. "Is it the duty of the people to pray for Magistrates and honour their persons?"

Yes. 1 Tim. 2.1,2, and 1 Peter 2.17.

Well then, do not some err, who deny this?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Samuel at the request of Saul, whom he knew the Lord had rejected, returned again after him, and honoured him before the people, 1 Sam. 15.31. (2) Because, the Lord having appointed Magistrates to administer justice and judgment in his name, is so far pleased to honour them, as to call them Gods, and the Children of the most high, Psalm 82.1,6. (3) Because, the Apostle Peter says, fear God and honour the King, parallel to what Paul says, render to all men their dues; honour to whom honour is due; 1 Peter 2.17, Romans 13.7.

(4) Because, even heathen Magistrates, are called the Lord's anointed, Isaiah 45.1; And the Lord calls Nebuchadnezzar, his servant, Jerem. 27.6. If then such Magistrates ought to be honoured upon that account, much more Christian Magistrates. (5) Because, if we be obliged not to speak evil of dignities, 2 Peter 2.10-11, nor revile the Gods, Exod. 22.28, we are obliged to honour dignities, for where a sin is forbidden, the contrary duty is commanded. (6) Because, God commanded his people the Jews to seek the peace of the City (that is, the welfare and prosperity of Babylon) whither he had caused them to be carried away captives; Jerem. 29.7. (7) Because, the Prophet, the man of God, besought the Lord in behalf of Jeroboam, and prayed for him, a man that had made Apostacy from the true worship of God, and had made Israel to sin, 1 Kings 13.3-6. (8) Because, our blessed Saviour says, render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's, Matth. 22.21. But prayers and supplications are as due to Cæsar as custom and tribute, 1 Tim. 2.1,2. (9) Because, the Apostle commands us to pray for all that are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life; which is the cause wherefore we must pray for Magistrates. For in the Apostle's times, and long after, Magistrates were persecutors of the Church of GOD, and hindered the members of Christ to live in peace and godliness, 1 Tim. 2.1,2. (10) Because, Moses cried unto the Lord in behalf of Pharoah, Exod. 8.12; Abraham prayed unto God for Abimelech, Gen. 20.17; Jacob blessed Pharoah, Gen. 47.7,10. (11) Because, many blessed Martyrs going to death have prayed for their persecuting Magistrates, following the example and command of our blessed Saviour, Luke 23.34, Matth. 5.44.

Quest. IX. "Ought any man at his own hand, or at the instigation of other men, to assassinate or kill a Magistrate, or any private or publick person, under the pretence, they are Hereticks, and Persecutors of the truth?"

No. Exod. 20.13; Prov. 1.10,11.

Well then, do not those men of the Romish-Church err, and others too, who own this dangerous Tenet?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, all sort of murder is expressly forbidden in the sixth command, thou shalt not kill; Exod 20.13. Where there is a clear distinction made by Thou, between a private man and a publick Magistrate, that doth it by divine authority. (2) Because, though Saul was a man rejected of God (1 Sam. 15.26.) yet David says to the Amalekite, how wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thine hand, to destroy the Lord's anointed, 2 Sam. 1.14; see 1 Sam. 24.5; 1 Sam. 26.9. (3) Because, whatever may be alleged from Phinehas his fact, Num. 25.8, from Ehud's fact in stabbing Eglon, Judges 3.21, from Samuel's fact in killing Agag, 1 Sam. 15.33, and from Elijah's fact in killing the Priests of Baal, 1 Kings 18.40, they will not by any means favour private men's assassinations; for certainly Phinehas had a divine motion, as Ehud had, stirring him up, which was evident by the Lord's approving the fact, and rewarding it. Samuel (no doubt) was moved hereunto by an inward motion and instinct of God, and the conduct of his Spirit, as was Elijah; so that their facts, and such like were altogether particular, and cannot be abused by imitation, and followed by every one, as rules, whose calling is not properly to use the sword of justice. (4) Because, it would bring a Mass of confusion, to the utter ruin of all Societies, if every man at his own hand might execute vindictive justice upon offenders, who deserve it, or upon pretence they do deserve it, which is to fight against God, who is the God of order politick, as well as Ecclesiastick, and not of confusion.[3] (5) Because, the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God; James 1.20. (6) Because, it is a contempt of publick laws, and publick order. It is an usurpation of the Magistrate's sword, which God hath put into his hand for punishing and protecting, It is an invasion of God's right and prerogative of executing vengeance, which he hath so expressly reserved to himself; Psalm 94.1, Rom. 12.19, Deut. 32.35, Prov. 25.21,22. (7) Because, Solomon says, my son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not, if they say come with us, let us lay wait for blood, let us lurk privily for the innocent, walk not thou in the way with them. Prov. 1.10,11. (8) Because, a righteous man regardeth the life of his beast, much more ought a righteous man to regard the life of his neighbour; Prov. 12.10. The sin of murder may be many ways aggravated. First, by the quality of the person murdered, whether he be a superiour, as a Magistrate or Minister, or parent, or whether he be of a near relation, as a brother, or near kinsman. Secondly, from the manner, extreme cruelty being used, or sudden and unexpected death, putting a man into eternity in the twinkling of an eye. To which we may add deliberation and premeditate murder, of which Solomon speaks in the forecited place.

Quest. X. "Are Ecclesiastic Persons exempted from due obedience to the Magistrate?"

No. Rom. 13.1; 1 Kings 2.26; Acts 25.9-11; 2 Peter 2.1,10,11; Jude verse 8-11.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that the Clergy (as they call them) and their goods are altogether free, by the Law of God from Secular Powers?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the command of obedience is general, and universal: let every soul be subject; Rom. 13.1. (2) Because, Christ commanded the Pharisees, who were of the Clergy, to render unto Cæsar, the things which are Cæsar's; Matth. 22.21. Nay Christ himself, paid tribute money, to wit, a Stater, in value two shillings, and three pence, which Peter found in the fish's mouth, when he opened it; Matth. 17.27. (3) Because, Paul did acknowledge himself subject to the Magistrate, when he appealed unto Cæsar; Acts 25.11. (4) From the example of the Priests who were subject to their Kings. Did not Abiathar at Solomon's command, go to Anathoth? 1 Kings 2.26.

Quest. XI. "Hath the Pope any Power, or Jurisdiction over Magistrates, in their dominions, or over any of their people?"

No. Rev. 13.15-17; 2 Thes. 2.4.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that the Pope of Rome, as Pope, hath full power by divine right, over the whole World, as well in matters Civil as Ecclesiastical?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ expressly discharges his Disciples from taking to themselves any such power or dominion, Matth. 20.25; Mark 10.42. (2) Because, the Kingdom of Christ is not of this World, John 18.36. Neither ought the Pope's Kingdom to be of this World who calls himself the Vicar of Christ. That is, one who supplieth Christ's room, and taketh pains for him, his Depute here on Earth. (3) Because, when the people would have made Christ a King, he departed again into a mountain himself alone, John 6.15. (4) Because, the Apostle Peter discharged this Dominion; 1 Peter 5.1-3. (5) Because, it's never heard, that any of the Apostles did ever use any civil power, or command; or sat as judges in civil matters, but stood always to be judged, by Civil powers, as is evident from the History of the Acts. (6) Because, GOD hath put a difference, between the Government of the Church, and the Civil Government;[4] and hath given to each, their own proper, and distinct Officers. Neither can the one invade the other without very great sin, 2 Chron. 19.8-11. (7) Because, it is the mark of Antichrist, to exalt himself above all, that is called God, 2 Thes. 2.4.

Footnotes:

1. For an explanation of Romans 13 that presents "powers" as limited by the definition given in that chapter, see the various Covenanter testimonies from 1685 to 1807, and the treatises published to defend Reformed Presbyterian principles against writings of the Associate Presbyterians. For example, William Steven's "Answers to Twelve Queries" published 1794, especially in discussing Query 5, where Romans 13 is presented in harmony with the rest of Scripture, and several authors of various backgrounds are also quoted. Or, for a reference pre-dating such discussions among Presbyterians, see the Magdeburg Confession of 1550, written by Nicolaus Amsdorff, part 2, first argument.

2. On the other hand, we do also have precedents for sometimes regarding providential rulers as having no moral authority or right to be honored as magistrates, in specific circumstances. For example, consider 2 Kings 3.14, Hosea 8.4, Luke 13.32, and the response of the entire Church of Scotland to Oliver Cromwell as a Usurper to whom honor was not due. As we have one type of precedent in Paul's recognition of "king Agrippa," so we also have another type of precedent in Mordecai's refusal to reverence Haman, as a prince promoted "above all the princes that were with him."

3. This reason (as it is worded) serves also to determine the point at which such "assassinations," or at least some of more general concurrence and orderliness, become warrantable slayings or executions: when the criminals and persecutors themselves, possessing the reins of society, and controlling the seats of government, use these things contrary to their purposes, tending by their lawless efforts to bring society into a "mass of confusion" and "utter ruin," the above reason then brings the reverse conclusion. See Alexander Shield's "Hind Let Loose" Head 6 on "extraordinary executing of Judgment, etc." and an article from the January 1860 Reformed Presbyterian magazine (RPCNA) titled, "Was the Bishop's Death Murder?"

4. The distinct institution of Church Government and Civil Government can be found more fully demonstrated by George Gillespie in his book Aaron's Rod Blossoming; or, The Divine Ordinance of Church Government Vindicated, 1646; and by Samuel Rutherford in his book The Divine Right of Church-Government and Excommunication, 1646. Both of these works refute the Church-State blending ideas of the Erastians. It is important for Christians to be aware of the Bible's clear distinction between Church and State, because enemies of the Bible often labor to impugn its authority based on false claims that the Holy Scriptures present us with a system of laws and directions designed and intended for nations where Church and State are a single institution. On the contrary, the Bible assumes a clear distinction between these institutions, and teaches us that both are the Lord's, and required to serve him according to his own good instructions. The Holy Scriptures are useful in every context, and with Paul we readily declare, we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully. (1 Tim. 1.8.)

Of Marriage and Divorce.

Question I.

IS Marriage between one man and one woman?

Yes.

Is it lawful for a man, to have more than one wife, or for a woman, to have more than one husband at the same time?

No. Gen. 2. 24: Matth: 19: 5, 6. Prov: 2: 17:

Well then, do not the Anabaptists, maintain, that it is lawful for a Christian, not only to have more wives at the same time, but as many as he desires?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the having of two wives, or many wives, is contrary to the first institution of Marriage, for the Lord gave to Adam, one wife only; Gen. 2. 24. (2) Be∣cause, the Law of God forbids expressly Bigamy, or two wives; Lev. 18. 18. (3) Be∣cause, the Lord doth find fault sharply, with Polygamy, many wives; Mal. 2. 14, 15. (4) Because, Christ says, he that puts away his wife (except in the case of adultery and marries another, committeth adultery; Matt. 19. 9. But if it were lawful to have at one time, more wives than one, he should not be guilty of adultery in marrying another, whether he put away the former wife or not. (5) Because, bigamy and Polygamy, take away the true peace of a wedded life, as is evident from the examples of Jacob; Gen. 30. And of Elkana; 1 Sam. 1. 6. (6) Because, the invention of Bigamy; was the device of a wicked man Lamech; Gen. 4. 19.

Quest. II. IS it lawful for all sorts of people to marry, who are able with judgement to give their consent?

Yes. Heb. 13. 4. 1 Tim. 4. 3. 1 Cor. 7. 36, 37, 38. Gen. 24. 57, 58.

Well then, doth not the Popish-Church err, that forbids, and discharges marriage to their Church men?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, marriage is honourable among all men, and the bed undefiled; Heb. 13. 4. (2) Because, the Apostle commands, for avoiding fornication, every man to have his own wife, and every woman to have her own husband; 1 Cor. 7. 2. (3) Be∣cause, the Apostle reckons up the forbid∣ding of marriage, among the doctrines of devils; 1 Tim. 4. 3. (4) Because, a Bishop must be the husband of one wife; 1 Tim. 3. 2. 4. Titus 1. 6. (5) Because, the Apostle reckons over the qualifications which are requisite for Bishops wives; 1 Tim. 3. 11.

(6) Because, it can be gathered from Scripture, that some of the Apostles, and other Ministers of the Gospel, have been married persons. Concerning Peter, the matter is evident: Matt. 8. 14. Mark 1. 30. And we read that Philip the Evangelist, had four daughters, all of them Prophetesses; Acts 21. 9. And says not the Apostle, have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well, as other Apostles, and all the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas; 1 Cor. 9. 5.

Quest. III. Ought marriage to be within the degrees of consanguinity, or affinity forbidden in the Word?

No.

Can incestuous marriages ever be made lawful, by any law of man, or consent of parties, so as these Persons, may live together, as man, and wife?

No. 1 Cor, 5. 1. Amos 2. 7. Mark 6. 18. Lev. 18. 24, 25, 26, 27, 28.

Well then, doth not the Popish-Church err, that speaks in the decrees of the Council of Trent, after this manner. If any man affirm, that these degrees only of Consanguinity or Affinity, which are set down in Leviticus, may hinder a contract of Marriage to be made, or may dissolve a marriage contract already made; and that the Church hath not power to dispense with some of these degrees (that is to say to permit incest) or may not make new Laws, and constitute far more forbidden degrees, than are expressed in Leviticus, let him be an Anathema, and accursed?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

Before this be done, take notice, that there are here two heads to be considered.

First, Whether or not we must stand, to the forbidden degrees of Consanguinity and Affinity expressed in Leviticus:

Secondly, Whether, to these degrees set down as forbidden in Leviticus, new degrees may be added by the Church of Rome, which will render a marriage incestuous?

To which we answer, that it is not in the power of any creature to dispense (that is to say, to suffer that to be used, which is for∣bidden by the Law of God) with any of these Laws in Leviticus, which forbid incestuous marriages.

And next, we affirm, neither is it in the power of any creature, to add to these degrees forbidden in Leviticus, any other which are not forbidden,

(1) Because, such a power of dispensing, is not to be found in all the Scripture. (2) Because, the Lord says expressly, what thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it; Deut. 12. 32. But the Lord himself hath made these Laws, and established these Marches so sure, that no Council, no Pope, no Creature, can either dispense with any of them, or add new ones to them. See Leviticus 18. (3) Because, these Laws are of common, and perpetual right; and there∣fore cannot be dispensed with. For the breach of them is reckoned up, amongst the abominations wherewith the Nations about polluted and defiled the land; Lev. 18. 24. 25, 27.

Quest. IV. IS it lawful to marry a second wife, after the first is dead?

Yes.

Is it lawful after divorce to marry another, as if the offending party were dead?

Yes. Matt. 5. 31, 32. Rom. 7. 2. 3. Matt. 19. 9.

Well then, do not the Novatians, the Puritans of old, truely so called: and the Tertulianists err, who absolutely condemned second marriages?

Yes.

This absurd tenet is confuted from Rom. 7. 2, 3. and from 1 Cor. 7. 39.

Do not likewise the Papists err, who deny, that after divorce, second marriages are permitted to Christians?

Yes.

But here by two distinctions they explain their mind.

First, They distinguish between Cohabitation, the Bed, and the Ty.

The first is, the dwelling together of man and woman, in one family.

The second is, the right of giving, and requiring due benevolence.

The third is that, whereby both are made one: whereby the one cannot but be the others while they are both living.

They distinguish next, between persons that are believers, and that are unbelievers. If then both parties, or one of them be unbelievers, they grant that the marriage is valid, both as to Cohabitation, to the marriage bed; and to the Ty, or Bond.

But if both parties be Christians, they think that the marriage may be dissolved, as to bedding together, and Cohabitation, yet the Bond standeth sure, and abideth unloosable: especially, if the marriage be contracted after Baptism: and therefore a second marriage after divorce is unlawful to any of them.

But this is easily confuted?

(1) Because, Christ permitted marriage after divorce; Matt. 5. 31, 32. Matt. 19. 9. Here Christ forbidding a man to put away his wife, and to marry another, in express words, excepts the case of Fornication. Therefore he suffers a man to put away his wife in the case of Fornication, and to marry another. (2) Because, the Apostle says, but if the unbelieving depart, let him depart: for a brother, or sister, is not under bondage in such cases; 1 Cor. 7. 15. Therefore, if a brother or sister, when there is such a wilful and obstinate desertion, be not under bondage, then surely the Bond is dissolved: and all remedies being tryed in vain, for bringing back the obstinate party, I doubt not, but the innocent party may marry another without blame. If this be, then much more may the innocent party marry another, when a Divorce is obtained.

Quest. V. IS nothing but Adultery, or such wilful desertion, as can no way be remedied, by the Church, or Civil Magistrate, a sufficient cause of dissolving the bond of Marriage?

Nothing. Matt. 19. 8, 9. 1 Cor. 7. 15. Matt. 19. 6.

Well then, do not the Enthusiasts, and Familists err, who maintain, that it is free to a man, to put away his wife when he pleaseth?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the God of Israel hatteth putting away; Mal. 2. 16. (2) Because, whosoever putteth away his wife, except in case of Fornication, he causeth her to commit Adultery; Matt. 5, 32. (3) Because, the Apostle says, art thou bound to a wife, seek not to be loosed; 1 Cor. 7. 27.

Do not likewise the Papists err, who maintain that there are other causes of divorce, than adultery and wilful desertion?

Yes.

They first tell us, that marriage contracted, but not consummated, may be dissolved; to wit, by a Monastick Vow of a perpetual single life.

They tell us secondly, that infidelity, and heresy are just causes of divorce. So say the Anabaptists.

And thirdly, they tell us that murder committed upon the hope of getting such a Match, is a sufficient cause of divorce.

That coldness, perpetual impotency, and such like fancies are causes?

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ says, what God hath joined together, let no man put asunder, Matt. 19. 6. But marriage contracted, and ratified, though not consummated, is made by God: therefore it cannot be dissolved by man. Neither ought any man once married, to turn a Monk; for a single life is only fit for those, that have the gift of Continence; for God commands them, that have it not, to marry; 1 Cor. 7. 9. (2) Neither can infidelity, or heresy, be a ground of divorce, as is clear from 1 Cor. 7. 12, 13. If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the woman that hath an husband, that believeth not, if he be pleased, to dwell with her, let her not leave him.

CHAP. XXV. Of the CHURCH.

Question I.

DOTH the Catholic, or Universal Church which is invisible, consist of the whole number of Elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one under Christ, the head thereof?

Yes. Eph. 1. 10, 22, 23. Eph. 5. 23, 27. Col. 1. 18.

Well then, doth not the Popish-Church err, who deny any Catholic invisible Church, consisting of the Elect only, effectually called: who maintain, the Catholick Church, to be absolutely visible, and as visible a Society, as the Rebublic of Venice, or the kingdom of France: and that it consists no less of reprobates, unbelievers, great and manifest sinners, void of all inward and true grace, than of the Elect effectually called?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, we profess to believe, according to the Creed, that there is a Church Universal, namely such a one, as we have now described: but what we believe must be invisible; Heb. 11. 1. (2) Because, the internal form of the Church (namely her effectual calling by the Word and Spirit; 1 Peter 2. 9.) is invisible; 2 Tim. 2. 19. 1 Cor. 2. 11. (3) Because, the glory of the Kings daughter (that is of the Universal Church, as the Adversaries themselves confess) is internal, and therefore hidden and invisible; Psalm 45. 13. (4) Because, the Word tells us, that there is a Church, even the number of those, whom Christ hath loved; for whom he gave himself to the death; whom he hath sanctified, and washed and cleansed, and redeemed, with his own blood, and whom at last, he will glory; Eph. 5. 25, 26, 27. (5) Because, the Scripture tells; that there is a Church, which is the mystical body of Christ (and therefore invisible to the eyes) which by a most mystical, and most marvelous union, is conjoined, and united straitly with him; Eph. 1. 10, 22, 23. (6) Because, the Church Universal, as to its internal forme, is a spiritual house, built of lively stones, in Christ; 1 Peter 2. 5. (7) Because, the members of the Church Universal, considered as to their internal state, and condition, are united, and conjoined together in one body, by one Spirit, and by one Faith; 1 Cor. 12. 13. Eph. 4. 4, 5. (8) Because, the members of the Church Universal, considered the former way, are the lively members of Christ, which he himself doth cherish with a lively, and quickning nourishment; Eph. 5. 29, 30.

Quest. II.

IS the Visible Church, under the New Testament, Catholic and Universal?

Yes. 1 Cor. 1. 2. and 1 Cor. 12. 12, 13. Psal. 2. 8. Rev. 7. 9. Rom. 15. 9, 10, 11, 12.

Well then, do not the Independents err,who maintain, there is no Visible Church, under the New Testament, except what may meet in one place, and may perform all their holy services in a private Church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, in very many places of the New Testament, the word Church (to wit Visible) is so largely taken, that it cannot be restricted, to any particular Congregational Church; Acts 8. 3. Gal. 1. 13. Acts 2. 47. 1 Cor. 10. 32. Eph. 3. 10. 1 Cor. 12. 28. 1 Tim. 3. 15. (2) Because, it hath been foretold, in many places of the Old Testament, that the Catholic Church shall be Visible; Psalm 22. 22, 23, 25, 27, 28. Psalm 72. 8, 9, 10, 11. Psalm 86. 9. Isaiah 2. 2, 3, 4. Zech. 14. 9. (3) Because, the Donation, or the gift of the kingdom (that is of the Church Universal) made by the Father to the Son, is Universal, and of all the World; Psalm 2. 8. Psalm 72. 8. Isaiah 49. 6. Dan. 7. 14. (4) Because, the Gospel of the Kingdom, is Universal; and according to the stile of the Scripture, worketh the visible conversion of the whole world, and therefore the Church visibly converted, and gathered together, is Catholic and Universal; Matth. 26. 13. Mark 14. 9. Col. 1. 16. (5) Because, the Visible Charter,which constitutes the Church is Universal: and therefore since one Charter, constitutes one Politie, or Government, all the Visible particular Churches, which are constitute by that one Cathoic Charter, are one Church Universal; Matth. 28. 19. Eph. 3. 6. (6) Because, if there be Officers of a Church Visible Universal, there must be a Church Visible Universal it self: but the first is true, since the Donation of the Ministry, and the giving of it in a gift, is made to the Catholic Church; 1 Cor. 12, 28. Matth. 28. 19. (7) Because, there is a general outward call, and a general outward covenant into which all Christians enter outwardly, by virtue whereof all of them, are knit, and tied together; Acts 2. 39. (8) Because, that same individual System, and Body of external Laws, proceeding from that same Authority, in which all particular Churches are equally concerned, and by which they are ruled, is Universal; 1 Tim. chap. 3. and Titus 3 chap. (9) Because, that external union of brotherhood, which is amongst all the Visible Christians in the world, is Catholic, and Universal; Acts 15. 23. Acts 24. 14. Gal. 5. 14. (10) Because, the initial Visible seal, admittance, and enrolment, are things Catholic, and ecumenical For he that takes up his freedom in a whole Corporation or Kingdom, is free of the whole, and in every part thereof, and hath right to all the general privileges and immunities thereof. There is a Patent for Baptism Go and baptize all Nations. And by virtue of the Privileges thereof, they that are baptized in any one Church, are accounted visible subjects of Christ's Kingdom, in all places of the Christian world. Matth. 28. 19. (11) Because, all Churches are one Body; Rom. 12. 5. (12) Because, Peter writing to the strangers scattered abroad throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia calleth them all one Flock; 1 Peter 5. 2. (13) Because, all the Churches of the World are one sheepfold; John 10. 16. (14) Because, the Visible Church is one great house; 2 Tim. 2. 20.

Quest. III.

DOTH the Visible Church consist of all those throughout the world that profess the Christian Religion, together with their Children?

Yes. 1 Cor. 1. 2. Psalm 2. 8. 1 Cor. 7. 14.

Well then, do not the Donatists, Anabaptists, and Puritans of old so truly named, err, who affirm the visible Church to consist of those only, that are pious and holy?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Independents err, who think, none ought to be members of the Visible Church, save those, who in the judgement of men very spiritual, and discerning are esteemed true believers, and saints: who have given sufficient proof of their knowledge in the fundamentals of Religion: who have reported in order, and given a good account of the experimental work of their conversion, and effectual calling; who have shewed their conversation in the world, to have been without the omission of any known duty, or commission of any known fault, and that for a considerable length of time.

Yes.

Do not lastly the Quakers err, who think the only visible Church of GOD on earth, to be themselves; and all others not of their profession, and practise, to be unregenerate, and wanting the Spirit?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the visible Church, is compared to a Garner, in which there is not only Wheat, but Chaff mixed with it. To a Field, in which Tares, and Darnel are mixed among the good Corn. To a Net, in which both good Fishes, and bad are taken; Matth. 13. chapter. To a great House, wherein are not only vessels of Gold, and Silver, but of Wood, and of Earth; 2 Tim. 2. 20. (2) Because, Christ will answer some at the last day; who will say to him, Lord, have not we Prophesied in thy name, and in thy name cast out Devils, and have we not eaten and drunken at thy table, I know you not. This evidently shews, that many have been members of the Visible Church, whom Christ will not own at the last day; Matth. 7. 22, 23. (3) From the Parable of the ten Virgins, five whereof were foolish, five wise; Matth. 25. 1. (4) From the Parable of the Banquet, where one was found at the Table, without a Wedding Garment; Matth. 22. 11. (5) Because, many are of the Visible Church, who are not of the invisible Church; 1 John 2. 19. (6) Because the Apostle, calls the Church of Corinth, the Church of Christ, notwithstanding of their gross enormities; 1 Cor. 1. 11. 1 Cor. 3. 3. 1 Cor. 5. 1. 1 Cor. 6. 7. (7) Because, Moses did acknowledge, even those then to be members of the Visible Church, to whom yet he knew, the Lord had not given ears to hear, nor eyes to see, nor a heart to understand, the great and wonderful miracles which he wrought in their sight; Deut. 29. 10, 11, 12, 13. compared with the verses 2, 3, 4. (8) Because, John the Baptist did admit many thousands into the communion of the Visible Church, without making a narrow search of their true grace, and conversion; Matth. 3. (9) Because, the Apostles did instantly, and without the delay of one day, baptise all those that professed the Christian Religion; Acts 2. 38, 41. Acts 8. 12. John 3. 26. (10) Because, the preaching of the Gospel, is appointed by God, as an ordinary mean, no less for the Conversion of men, and women, than for the advancement of those in grace that are converted; Prov. 9▪ 3, 4. 2 Cor. 5. 18, 19. 20, 2 Tim. 2. 24, 25 (11) Because, we are forbidden by the Apostle, to judge the spiritual state and condition of our neighbour; Rom. 14. 4. (12) Because, Christ did acknowledge Judas the thief, and Traitor, as a member of his Visible Church, whom yet he foresaw to be the son of perdition; Matth. 26. 23. (13) Because, Christ had a visible church on earth many hundreds of years before ever there were such cattle as Quakers in the World. Unless they will allege that the primitive Christians and all the Saints, since the Apostles days, have been their Predecessors, and claim kin to them, as the Samaritans did to Jacob, who were truly descended of the heathen; who were brought thither out of Assyria, as the Quakers are descended from the Enthusiasts in Germany, about 160 years since, as Nicolas Strokins, John Matthias, and John of Leyden, notorious Heretics, blasphemers, and bloody Murderers.

But how quite different, the Quakers are to the primitive Christians, and holy men of God then, and since, will evidently appear hence, that they did not contemn these two great ordinances of the Gospel instituted by Christ, to wit, Baptism and the Lords Supper. They had Bishops and Deacons to govern, and instruct them, who were ordained to their functions by prayer and imposition of hands, whom they did not revile, with the ugly names of dumb dogs, and hirelings. These primitive Christians, had not in their assemblies Women-preachers as the Quakers have, which is down right contrary to Paul's injunctions; 1 Cor. 14. 35. Neither were silent meetings ever heard of among the primitive Christians. Nor did they ever out of contempt call churches, places appointed for the public worship of God, Steeple-houses, but resorted to them for performing their devotions, and service to God, as did our blessed Saviour, and his Apostles; John 18. 20. Luke 4. 16. Acts 3. 1. Acts 13. 5.

Do not likewise the Papists and Lutherans err, who will have none members of the visible Church that are unbaptized?

Yes.

Do not lastly the Anabaptists err, who will have no infants members of the visible church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, that God commanded infants, and little ones, should stand before him; should enter into covenant with him; Deut. 29. 10, 11. (2) Because, infants are called the people of God, no less than men and women come to age; Deut. 29. 11, 12, 13. (3) Because, the promise of Grace belongs to children as well as to the parents; Acts 2. 39. (4) If children be not members of the visible church, they must be members of the visible kingdom of the devil, for there can be no midst; Eph. 2. 12, 13. And so there shall be no difference between the children of Believers, and the children of Turks and Pagans. (5) Because, infants under the Old Testament, had right unto the Covenant of Grace; Gen. 17. 7, 12. And children of Believers under the New Testament have lost no right to that covenant of Grace, which children under the Old Testament had; seeing the covenant of Grace, now under the Gospel, is not more strictly, and sparingly administered, than long since under the law; Heb. 8. 6. Rom. 11. 12. (6) Because, infants are commanded to join themselves to Gods ordinances; Joel 2. 16. (7) Because, if Christ, while an infant, was head of the visible church; then infants may be his members. But the first is true, from Isaiah 9. 6. Therefore the second must be true also. (8) Because, they whom the false Apostles would have to be circumcised, after the manner of Moses (and therefore infants) were called Disciples; Acts 15. 10.

Quest. IV.

IS there any ordinary possibility of Salvation out of the Visible Church?

No. Acts 2. 47.

Well then, do not the Enthusiasts, Quakers, and Libertines err, who affirm, that any man, may be a true Christian, and be saved, though he live within no Visible Church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Lord IEHOVAH, in his visible Church (ordinarily) commands the blessing, even life for evermore; Psalm 133. 3. (2) Because, the visible church, is the mother of all Believers; Gal. 4. 26. By Jerusalem which is above, I understand the true Christian Church, which seeketh its salvation; not by the first covenant of the law, namely by the works of the law, but by the second of the Gospel; namely by the merits of Christ, embraced by a true Faith, which hath its original from heaven, by the powerful calling of the Holy Ghost. (3) Because, they that are without the visible church, are without Christ; Eph. 2. 12. (4) Why are men and women joined to the visible church but that they may be saved? Acts 2. 47.

(5) Because, they that are without the visible church, are destitute, of the ordinary means of life and salvation; Psalm 147. 19. 20.

Quest. V.

HATH Christ given to this Catholic-church-visible, the Ministry, Oracles, and Ordinances of God, for the gathering, and perfecting of the Saints in this life, to the end of the World?

Yes.

Shall there be always a church on earth, to worship God according to his will?

Yes. 1 cor. 12. 28. Eph. 4. 11, 12, 13. Mat. 28. 19, 20. Matth. 16. 18. Psalm 72. 17. Psalm 102. 28. Isai. 59. 21.

Well then, do not the Socinians, Anabaptists; and Libertines err, who affirm that the visible Church may fail, and perish out of the world?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Skeptics commonly called Seekers err, who affirm, that the whole universal church, which hath been upon the earth: and all religious worship, all external and outward preaching of the Word, all administration of Sacraments, and the use of all other religious things have perished a little after the Apostles times, and are not to this day restored, until Christ from Heaven, shall send new Apostles with an extraordinary commission, for restoring, and raising up again the visible church?

And that in the mean time, no man hath right or power, to dispense the Word, or administer the Sacraments, or perform any Ecclesiastical duty: and that they who are now called the preachers of the Gospel are not so?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Lord hath promised, that his church shall endure, so long as the ordinances of heaven shall continue; Isaiah 66. 22. (2) Because, Christ hath promised that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against his church; Matth. 16. 18. (3) Because, there is no end to be put to the kingdom of Christ; Luke 1. 33. And therefore no end to his church; Isaiah 9. 7. (4) Because▪ glory will be to him, in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all Ages, world without end Amen; Eph. 3. 21. (5) Because, Christ who hath given power to his Ministers, to teach his church, and to administer the Sacraments, hath promised to be with them to the end of the World; Matth. 28. 19, 20. (6) Because, the Lord hath promised to preserve a people to himself, to the end of the world which he shall rule, and govern, by his Word and Spirit; Isaiah 59. 20, 21. Isaiah. 9. 6, 7. (7) Because, the Lord hath chosen Zion: he hath desired it for his habitation, where he will rest, and dwell for ever; Psalm 132. 13. 14. (8) Because, Christ hath given some to be Pastors, and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints, till we all come into the unity of the Faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God; Eph. 4. 11. And he hath appointed a Ministry to continue even after the Apostles days, as is evident from 1 Tim. 3 chapter. From Titus first chapter, where the Apostle sets down the ordinary qualifications of Ministers, and the Rules for calling them to the Ministry. (9) Because, there is a general Rule set down, for the government, and discipline, of Christ's church: which discipline and order,is to continue in it, to the end of the world; Matth. 1 18. (10) Because, the Lord commands, that we forsake not the assembling of our selves together: and hath promised to bless after a special manner, any that are gathered together in his name, any where, but our assembling for hearing the word of God, is done in the name of Christ; Heb. 10. 25. Matth. 18. 20. Matth. 28. 20. (11) Because, the death of Christ, in the last supper, is to be shewed till he come; 1 Cor. 11. 26. (12) Because, by the Word (even preached Rom. 10. 17.) we are born again; 1 Peter 1. 23. James 1. 18. By Baptism we are ingrafted into Christ; Rom. 6. 3, 4. Gal. 3. 27. In the Lords Supper, we have communion with Christ; 1 Cor. 10. 16. See more to this purpose; chap. 21. Question eight.

Quest. VI.

Hath the Catholic church been sometimes more, sometimes less Visible?

Yes. Rom. 11. 3, 4. Rev. 12. 6, 14.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who affirm, that the church hath been, is, and shall be most gloriously Visible to all the whole world far and nigh?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the church of GOD, in the Prophet Elijah's time was brought to that pass, that he thought none remained but himself; 1 Kings 19. 10. Rom. 11. 2, 3, 4. (2) Because, for a long time Israel was without the true GOD, and without a teaching Priest, and without the Law; 2 Chron. 15. 3. (3) Because, the Lord often complains, that his church and people have forsaken him, have not known him: that the faithful city hath become a harlot, that scarce a man could be found to do justice, and follow truth; all which is inconsistent with that glorious condition of the visible church, which the Papists dream of; Isaiah 1. 3, 4. Jer. 2. 29. Jer. 5. 1. (4) Because, in the time of the ten Persecutions, the visible church was much obscured, and darkened. And after these storms were over, arose the Arians, who did much trouble the church of Christ, as is clear from History. (5) Because, two wings were given to the Woman, that is to the Church of GOD, two wings (I say) of a great Eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, to hid her self; Rev. 12. 14. (6) Because, the Apostle Paul did foretell that general defection, and apostasy of the visible church mentioned; 2 Thes.2, 3. (7) Because, Christ hath foretold, that before his second coming, he shall scarce find Faith on the Earth; Luke 18. 8.

(8) Because, the church of GOD is always liable to trouble, and persecution while it sojourneth in this world. But troubles and persecutions do much obscure the brightness, and splendour of a visible church; Luke 21. 17. John 16. 2. Psalm 129. 1, 2, 3.

Quest. VII.

ARE the purest churches under heaven subject both to mixture and error?

Yes. 1 Cor. 13. 12. Rev. 2. and 3. chapter Rev. 18. 2. Rom. 11. 18, 19, 20, 21, 22.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who affirm, that the church cannot err, neither in matters absolutely necessary, neither in other things, which it proposes to be done and believed by us?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the visible church, under the Old Testament, oftentimes made defection to Idolatry; Exod. 32. 8. Judges 3. 7. (2) Because, as long as we are here, we know but in part; and therefore we are subject, and liable to mistakes; 1 Cor. 13. 9, 12. (3) Because, the seven churches of Asia to which John did writ, are accused of mixture, and errors; Rev. 2. 4, 5. (4) Because, while Christ was on earth, the Disciples dreamed of a worldly kingdom▪ and for a time, even after his resurrection they did believe it; Acts 1. 6. (5) Because, before the day of Christ be at hand, there shall be a falling away of the visible church, from the true Orthodox Faith to Anti-Christianism, which in great part is already come to pass, and more than is to come between this time and his second coming: 2 Thes. 2. 3. Rev. 13. 3. (6) Because, one of the chief differences between the Church Militant, and the Church Triumphant is this, that the one can err, but not the other; 1 Cor. 13. 9, 10, 12. (7) Because, Christ hath foretold, that there shall arise false Christs and false Prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, in so much, if it were possible they shall deceive the very Elect; Matth. 24. 24. (8) Because, when the Son of man cometh, he shall scarce find Faith on the earth; Luke 18. 8. (9) Because, the converted Jews erred, in being zealous for the Law; thinking that the Ceremonial Law, ought yet to be observed, not understanding that the same was abolished by Christ; Acts 21. 20. So did the Galatians err, in admitting circumcision; Gal.1, 6. And the Corinthians, in their abuse of the Lords Supper; 1 Cor. 11. 18.

Quest. VIII.

IS there no other head of the Visible Church, but the Lord Jesus Christ?

No.

Can the Pope of Rome, in any sense be the head thereof?

No. Col. 1. 18. Eph. 1. 22.

Well then, doth not the Popish-Church err, who maintains, that not only Christ, is the universal head of the Church, but that there is another visible head under him, who (say they) is the Pope of Rome, Christs Vicar, or Deputy under him?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, as not many husbands, but one only, is head of the wife, so Christ only is head of the Church; Eph. 5. 23. (2) Because, the Church is espoused to one only namely to Christ; 1 Cor. 11. 3. (3) Because, the Church is the body of Christ only; Eph. 1. 22, 23. (4) Because, among all the Ecclesiastic orders instituted, and appointed by Christ, we do not read of such a creature, as an Universal Vicar▪ of Christ; Eph. 4. 11. (5) Because, the Church is one body only(unless it be a monster) but one body, cannot have two heads; Rom. 12. 4, 5. (6) Because, Christ only, can inspire, or breath in vigor, sense, motion, and spiritual life into his members; Eph. 5. 29, 30. John 6. 48, 50, 51. John 15. 1, 2. (7) Because, there must not be Lordship, and sovereignty among them, that are under Christ their head and Lord; Luke 22. 25. 1 Peter 5. 2, 3.

(8) If the Pope be not so much as a Bishop of a particular Church, he cannot be universal Bishop. The first is true, because he doth not perform the office of a Bishop, which is set down; 1 Tim. 3, 2, Titus 1, 7. 8, 9.

Do not likewise the Erastians, and others as Arminians err, who make the Supreme Magistrate head of the Church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Protestant Religion, as it is contained in the Harmony of Confessions, especially in the Confession of Faith, recorded in the first Parliament of King James the sixth, lately ratified, and confirmed, doth not acknowledge any Supreme Head, or Governor in the Church, neither Angel, Man, Pope, Prince, nor Potentate, save the Lord Christ, from whom alone, all subordinate power and authority is derived, to the officers, of his own Church. (2) Because, if the Supreme Magistrate be a church officer he must derive his power from Christ, and must be a Spiritual, and Ecclesiastic head and Governour, and not a civil only. And if such then Christ hath devolved his own place and office upon him, which is without Scripture proof. (3) Because, if the Supreme Magistrate be head of the church, he must have a right to this Title, either by humane Law, or by a divine warrant. Laws of a Nation, cannot make him head of the church, because such laws cannot make him an Ecclesiastic, and Spiritual officer. There is no divine warrant, or commission from Christ, as is clear from Matth. 18. 17. From the Epistles to Timothy, and Titus. From Ephes. 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7, 8. And from 1 Cor. 11. 28.

Quest. IX.

IS the Pope that Antichrist, that Man of sin, and Son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church of God against Christ, and all that is called God?

Yes. 2 Thes. 2. 3, 4, 8, 9 Rev. 13. 6. Matt. 23. 8, 9, 10.

Though this be denied by the church of Rome, yet the true description of Antichrist agrees to him.

(1) Because, he is not one single man, but an order, and race of men, succeeding to one another, in that same state, and office, which you will see, by comparing; 1 John 4. 3. 2 Thes. 2. 7, 8. together. (2) His coming, is after the manner of Satan; 2 Thes. 2. 9. (3) As to his name, he calls himself a Christian, but in very truth an Adversary to Christ: and by consequence, one that denies Jesus to be the Christ; Rev. 17. 14. Rev. 19. 19. 2 Thes. 2 8. 1 John 2. 23. (4) he sitteth in the Temple of GOD, as GOD; 2 Thes. 2. 4. (5) He ruleth in the great city, and exercises dominion over the Kings of the earth. 6) He deceiveth them, that dwell on the earth, with lying wonders, and miracles; 2 Thes. 2. 9. Rev. 13: 14, 15: (7) He causeth all sorts of Persons to receive his mark, on their right hand, or on their forehead; Rev: 13: 16, 17: (8) To him agrees, what Paul says: and now ye know what with-holdeth (namely the Roman Emperour) that he might be revealed in his time; 2 Thes: 2: 6, 7:

CHAP. XXVI. Of the Communion of Saints.

Question I.

ARE the Saints bound by profession, to maintain an holy fellowship, and communion in the worship of GOD, in performing such other spiritual duties, as tend to their mutual edification?

Ye,. Heb. 10. 24, 25. Acts 2. 42. 46. Isa. 2. 3. 1 Cor. 11. 20.

Well then, did not the Donatists of old, and Separatists now err, who maintain, that Hypocrites and wicked men, do pollute, and defile the worship of God, not only to themselves, but also to others that worship with them: and that therefore, we must separate from Communion in the worship of God, because of them?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Church of the Jews in Christ's time was very corrupt; Matth. 15. 7.Mark 6, 7, 8. And yet both by his practise, and his command, he would not have his hearers to separate from it. For he both observed the feasts, and preached in their Synagogues; John 8. 1. Luke 4. 15. John 10. 22. And he commands his hearers to observe what the Scribes, and Pharisees bad them do; Matth. 23. 2, 3. (2) Because, the Apostle is so far from commanding separation from the Church of Corinth, that he praises their meetings; (1 Cor. 5. 4. 1 Cor. 11. 20. 1 Cor. 14. 23.) notwithstanding of the many gross scandals, which were among them; 1 Cor. 1. 11, 12, 13. 1 Cor. 5. 1, 2. And 1 Cor. 15. 12, 13. (3) Because, the Apostles calls the Galatians, the Church of Christ, brethren, and the children of God, who were yet in some measure removed from GOD, to another Gospel. Nay, says Paul, O foolish, (or senseless) Galatians, who hath bewitched you, (that is, so blinded the eyes of your understanding, that ye cannot see the right truth; as the Juglars bewitch the outward eyes, that men think they see that which they see not) that ye should not obey the truth; Gal. 3. 1. And yet since it was a constitute true Church, it was his judgement, there should be no separation from it, notwithstanding of all the foresaid faults. (4) Because, the Church of Ephesus was a true Church, though they made defection from their first love. So was the Church of Pergamus, though there were in it who held the doctrine of Balaam. So was the Church of Thyatira, notwithstanding that they suffered Isabel, that called her self a prophetess, and taught the servants of Christ to commit Fornication, and to eat things sacrificed to Idols. (5) If we must separate from the Communion of the Church in things lawful, for the faults of others, of for the faults of Ministers, and if their sins pollute the worship of God to others, than, we must not keep communion with any Church: seeing there can hardly be a Church where there are not some hidden Hypocrites. Nay, where there are not some, who are known to be such by the Minister. Yet such are not to be excluded, as Christ himself teaches; Matth. 13. 24. to 31. See the 47. and 48. verses of that same chapter. (6) If the worship be polluted to some, for the faults of others, with whom they worship, then must the Word and Sacraments, have their efficacy and worth from the Persons, that worship, and from the dispensers of them, which is absurd. (7) Because, wicked and evil men, do not pollute the worship to others, but to themselves only; as it appears from the man, that wanted the wedding Garment; Matth. 22. 11. And from those who did eat and drink unworthily at the Lords Table. Such do not eat and drink damnation to others, but to themselves; 1 Cor. 11. 27, 29.▪

Quest. II.

Doth this Communion, which the Saints have with Christ, make them in any wise partakers of the Substance of his God-head, or equal with him in any respect?

No.

Is there a mixture of the Divine Essence, with the Substance of all the Creatures, because the Divine Essence is infinite, and every where present?

No.

Doth every regenerate man, that is united with God, by virtue of this union, become God the maker of Heaven and Earth?

No.

Are all the Acts of a mans will, and all his actions, even his most cursed, and wicked actions, wholly Divine, which to resist, and contradict is rebellion against God?

No. John 1. 14. Col. 1. 18, 19.

Well then, do not the Familists err, who teach, that the Saints are made God, and Christ, by an Essential and Corporal Union with them?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Manicheans err, who blasphemously taught, that the Divine Essence, was mingled with soul and body of every man, and that therefore all his Actions were wholly Divine?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the personal union is given to none, but to Christ only; John 1. 14. The Word was made Flesh, that is, a true man like unto us in all things, yet without sin. (2) Because, in him dwelleth all the fullness of the God-head bodily. Namely by an essential inhabitation of the Son of God in the humane nature, by the uniting of his Divine Nature with the Humane, in the unity of his Person. Bodily, that is Personally, Essentially, and Truly. (3) Because, the union of the Saints with Christ is by Faith, not indeed by a personal Union; Eph. 3. 17. (4). Because, there is no man that sinneth not; 1 John 1. 8, 10. (5) Because, Gods Essence, is most simple, and single, and infinitely above and beyond all creatures; Exod. 3. 14. (6) Because, holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God of Hosts; Isaiah 6. 3. (7) Because, Solomon in his prayer says, behold the heaven of heavens, cannot contain thee, how much less this house which I have built to thy Name; 1 Kings 8. 27. (8) Because, the Prophet Isaiah says, behold the Nations are as a drop of a bucket, and are as the smallest dust of the balance esteemed; chap. 40. 15. (9) Because, the Manichean error, is the outmost stretch of Satan's invention, beyond which he is not able to go. They deserve not confutation, but to be looked upon, as Devils incarnate.

Quest. III.

Doth the Communion of Saints, which they have one with another, take away or infringe the Title, or propriety which each man hath in his own goods, and possessions?

No. Acts 5. 4. Exod. 25. 14. Eph. 5. 28.

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who affirm, that the goods and possessions of the Saints ought to be common?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, in the time of the primitive Church, no man was obliged out of necessity to deliver his goods. Neither did believers loss their right and propriety which they had to them; Acts 5. 4. (2) Because, the eight command, which is of perpetual use to all men, supposeth a distinction, and propriety of Goods. For if all Goods were common, it were impossible to steal. (3) Because, there should be no giving of alms: there should be no Hospitality, which is contrary to the Apostle; Eph. 4. 28. Heb. 13. 2.

CHAP. XXVII. Of the Sacraments.

Question. I.

ARE the Sacraments holy signs and seals of the Covenant of Grace, immediately instituted by GOD, to represent Christ, and his benefits; and to confirm our interest in him?

Yes.

Do the Sacraments put a visible difference, between those that belong unto the Church, and the rest of the World?

Yes.

Do the Sacraments solemnly engage men and women to the service of God in Christ, according to his word?

Yes. Rom. 4. 11. Gen. 17. 7, 10. Matth. 28. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 23. 1 Cor. 10. 16. 1 Cor. 11. 25, 26. Gal. 3. 7. Rom. 15. 8. Exod. 12. 48. Gen. 34. 14. Rom. 6. 3, 4. And 1 Cor. 10. 16, 21.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, with the Anabaptists, who maintain, that the Sacraments, are not seals of the Covenant of Grace, instituted by God, to represent Christ and his benefits: but only bare tokens, and Tests of our Christian profession?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Circumcision is expressly called a sign, and seal of the righteousness of Faith; Rom. 4. 11. Now, if Circumcision was a seal, and sign; why ought not Baptism, and the Lords Supper to be signs, and seals also? (2) Because, the names, and properties of the things signified, are given to the Sacramental signs. Thus Circumcision is called the Covenant; Gen. 17. 10. The bread is called the Body of Christ; Matth. 26. 26. And Baptism is called the washing of regeneration; Titus 3. 5. For no other reasons, but because they represent and confirm things spiritual to Believers. (3) Because, the cup of blessing in the Sacrament, is the communion of the blood of Christ; and the bread is the communion of the body of Christ; 1 Cor. 10. 16. (4) Because, the Sacraments bring into our memories, Christ and his benefits; and therefore, as it were, they set him before our eyes, and so increase and confirm our faith: 1 Cor. 11. 24, 25.

Quest. II.

IS the Grace, which is exhibited in, or by the Sacraments, rightly used; conferred by any power in them?

No. Rom. 2. 28, 29. 1 Peter 3. 21.

Well then, do not the Papists and Lutherans err, who maintain, that the Sacraments of themselves are true, immediate, and effectual causes of our Justification, and give life?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the holy Scripture attributes our Justification to Faith only, as an instrumental cause, and to no other thing; Rom. 1. 17. Rom. 3. 28. Gal. 2. 16. And therefore the Sacraments cannot be the efficient causes of our Justification, and life. (2) Because, the Scripture makes an express difference, between the work of a man dispensing the Sacraments, and the work of the holy Ghost; Matth. 3. 11. (3) Because, signs and seals of Grace cannot confer, and effectual Grace. But the Sacraments, are but signs and seals of Grace; because to signify, and to have virtue, and power to do differ in nature and in kind. (4) Because, many are partakers of the Sacraments, who yet are not partakers of the Grace of GOD, as Simon Magus; Acts 8. 13. Ananias, and Saphira; Acts 5. 4, 9. And how many thousands do eat and drink unworthily, drinking and eating damnation to themselves; 1 Cor. 11. 29. (5) Because, many have been justified, before ever they did partake of a Sacrament, as Abraham; Rom. 4. 11. And Cornelius with his fellows; Acts 10. 46.

Quest. III.

DOTH the efficacy of a Sacrament depend upon the piety or intention of him, that doth administer it?

No. Matth. 3. 11. 1 Cor. 12. 13.

Well then, do not the Donatists, and Anabaptists err, who maintain, that the Sacraments dispensed by a wicked, and graceless Minister are of no virtue, or efficacy?

Yes.

Do not also some others now a days err, who are not far from the same opinion?

Yes.

Do not lastly the Papists err, who maintain, that to the perfection of a Sacrament, the actual intention of the Minister, at least his virtual intention of doing that, which the Church doth, is necessary?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Judas who was a Thief, and a Traitor, did according to the command of Christ baptize, as well as the rest: yet Christ, never called in question his Baptism. (2) Because, the efficacy of the Word, doth not depend upon the piety, goodness, worthiness, or good intention of the Instrument; Phil. 1. 16: Therefore, neither doth the efficacy of a Sacrament depend upon the intention of him, that doth administer it. (3) If the efficacy of Baptism depended upon the good intention of the Minister, then no Christian could be sure, that he is baptized: seeing no man can be sure of, or know the Ministers intention. (4) Because, the operation, and efficacy of the Sacraments, depend upon the operation of the Holy Ghost, and the Word of institution; Matth. 3. 11. 1 Cor. 12, 13. (5) Because, the Papists themselves (which is argumentum ad hominem) cannot be sure, that the bread in the Eucharist is Transubstantiate into the Body of Christ. And therefore in their Adoration, and falling down to the Host, they commit most damnable Idolatry in worshipping that which is neither GOD, nor any divine thing. I say, they cannot be sure, because the Priests intention, may be deficient, while he is consecrating the Bread.

Quest. IV.

ARE there only two Sacraments, ordained by Christ, in the Gospel? I answer two only, namely Baptism, and the Lords Supper.

Matth. 28. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 20, 23.

Well then, do not the Romanists err, who make seven Sacraments, by adding to Baptism, and the Lords Supper, Confirmation, Penance, Extreme Unction, Ordination, and Matrimony?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, no other Sacraments, save Baptism and the Lords Supper are instituted by Christ, in all the holy Scripture. (2) Because, the description, and definition of a Sacrament, as you will find it in the first Question; doth agree only to Baptism, and the Lord, Supper, (3) Because, Christ was a Copartner, and sharer of Baptism, and the Lords Supper, which in his own person, he did sanctify, and by them did testify and profess his communion with his people of the New Testament, but never was a sharer of any of these five Bastard Sacraments.

Quest. V.

MAY Baptism and the Lords Supper, be dispensed by any but by a Minister of the Word, lawfully ordained?

No. Matth. 28. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 20, 23. 1 Cor. 4. 1. Heb. 5. 4.

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, that the Sacraments may be dispensed, and administered by any Believer?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Papists and the Lutherans err, who maintain that it is lawful for Laicks, or Women, to administer the Sacrament of Baptism, in case of necessity?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ gave the power of dispensing the Sacraments to them only, to whom he gave the power of Preaching; Mat. 28. 19. But the power of preaching is not given to all men; Heb. 5. 4. (2) Because, all that ever did dispense the Sacrament of Baptism in the New Testament, were either called ordinarily, or Extraordinarily: as is evident from the examples of John the Baptist, and the disciples of Christ. From the example of Peter; Acts 2. 41. From the example of Philip, Acts 8. 38. From the example of Ananias; Acts 9. 18. From the example of Paul and Silas; Acts 16. 15. 33. (3) Because, it is unlawful for any man, to affix the Kings seal to a Charter, or Letters patent, unless he be a person authorized, and deputed by the King for that use. But the Sacraments are seals, of the Covenant between God and his people; Rom. 4. 11. (4) Because, women are not permitted to speak publicly in the Church: therefore they have no power, to dispense the Sacrament of Baptism; 1 Cor. 14. 34. 1 Tim. 2. 12. (5) Because, the Adversaries grant that it is unlawful to women, or Laicks to administer the Lords Supper: therefore it is as unlawful for them to administer Baptism. No just cause of reason, or disparity can be given. (6) Because, the benefit of regeneration is not tied (as the Adversaries may dream) to the outward Baptism, as is clear and evident from the conversion of the Thief upon the cross. And from 1 Peter 3. 21. Therefore, there is no such necessity of Baptism, as the Papists, and Lutherans do fancy.

Quest. VI.

ARE the Sacraments of the Old Testament, in regard of the spiritual things, thereby signified, and exhibited, the same for substance with those of the New?

Yes. 1 Cor. 10. 1, 2, 3, 4.

Well then, do not the Papists and Lutherans err, who maintain, that the difference between the Sacraments of the Old Testament, and the New, consists in this, that those did delineate and shadow forth Grace; these contain, offer, and confer Grace?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the Apostle (1 Cor. 10. 1, 2, 3.) expressly says, that the Cloud, and the passing thorow the Red-Sea, did signify these same things to the Jews, which Baptism signifies to us. And that the Manna, and the Water from the Rock, did signify the same thing to them; which the Lords Supper signifies to us.

(2) Because, the Sacraments of the Old and New Testament, did seal up the same righteousness of Faith; Rom. 4. 11. (3) Because, the Scripture applied to Believers, under the Old Testament, the Sacraments of the New; 1 Cor. 10. 1, 2, 3. And on the other hand, the Scripture applied the Sacraments of the New Testament, to Believers under the Old; which is not done by reason of the sign, for the signs are diverse and different: therefore it must be done, by reason of the thing signified; and by consequence the Sacraments of the Old Testament must agree in the thing signified with the Sacraments of the New. (4) Because, the Sacraments of both Testaments agree in the Word of Promise; Gen. 17. 7. Acts 2. 38, 39. Rom. 4. 11, 12, 13. Gal. 3. 29.

OF BAPTISM.

Question I. Is the Sacrament of Baptism with Water by Christ's appointment, to be continued in his Church to the end of the World?

Yes. Matth. 28. 19, 20.

Well then, do not the Quakers err, who maintain, that Baptism with Water, is not an Ordinance of Divine institution, and that there is no Gospel precept for it?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, Christ taking his fare-well of his Disciples, gave them this Commission, Go ye therefore and teach all Nations, Baptizing them in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Or according to the Original Word, make all Nations Disciples, by your Doctrine, Baptizing them, in the Name of, c. All which words are spoken with one breath. Whence it is clear, that the same very persons that were commanded to make all Nations Disciples by their Doctrine, were commanded to baptise them. But it was not in their power to administer the Inward Baptism; that is, to baptise with the holy Ghost, and with fire. Men may well administer the Water, or external sign; but it is Christ that bestows the inward Grace, and thing signified; as is clear from Matth. 3. 11. where John the Baptist, says, I indeed baptise you with Water unto Repentance, but he that comes after me, shall baptise you with the holy Ghost, and with fire. If any man had received this power of Baptizing with the Holy Ghost, then surely John should have received it, whom Jesus so highly commends, as, that there was not a greater than he born of women; Matth. 11. 11. And though our Saviour subjoins, he that is least in the kingdom of Heaven, is greater than he, yet they will not infer, that any among the Teachers of the Gospel, had the power of baptism with the holy Ghost, which he had not; but only, that they did shew Christ more clearly, as having most perfectly accomplished whatsoever was requisite to our salvation and did publish this, not only to the Jews, but also to the Gentiles. And so Christ as the Master employed only the Disciples, as his servants to dispense and act ministerially in his service, reserving the blessing of their employments to himself. Now, baptizing with the holy Ghost, is the greatest blessing of the Gospel, and so cannot flow but from Christ himself. (2.) Because, the Disciples of Christ acted only ministerially under him in working of miracles: therefore they could not administer baptism, with the holy Ghost, seeing this is a greater power, than the other. The curing of the soul is a far greater work, than to cure miraculously the body. The work of Conversion, and regeneration, is a work beyond the creating of heaven and earth. There was only here, the introducing of a new Form, but no contrary Form, or quality to be expelled. But in this, the heart of stone must not only be taken away, but a heart of flesh must be given.

That they acted only Ministerially under Christ, it is evident from what Peter says, ye men of Israel, why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power and godliness, we made this man to walk; Acts 3. 12. And the same Peter says, Eneas, Jesus Christ maketh thee whole; Acts 9. 34 See Mark 16. 17. 1Cor. 12. 10. (3.) Because, if this commission, empowered the Apostles to baptise only with the Holy Ghost, and not with water; then they in the exercise of this Commission, would only have baptized men and women with the holy Ghost, and not with water, but the contrary is manifest. ( Acts. 2. 38.) where Peter makes a distinction between being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, and receiving the gift of the holy Ghost: namely the gifts and graces of the holy Spirit, which are common to all believers, and necessary to salvation. (4.) Because, if baptism with the holy Ghost be here meant, then all whom the Apostles did baptize, were baptized with the holy Ghost, which is false: for Ananias and Saphira could not have been Hypocrites, if they had been baptized with the holy Ghost. And Simon was baptized and yet not with the holy Ghost, as appears by Peters answer to him verse 21, 22. of the fifth chapter.

(5.) Because, if Christ's commission carry not a warrant for baptizing with water, whence then had the Apostles a warrant for baptizing with Water? Either they must produce and let us see another commission for it, or else they must acknowledge, that the Apostles did warrantably baptise with Water. But another commission the Quakers cannot shew us from Scripture.

Quest. II. Is dipping of the person (to be baptized) into Water necessary?

No.

Is Baptism rightly administered by pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person?

Yes. Acts 2. 41. Acts 16. 33.

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, Dipping to be an absolute and necessary ceremony in Baptism?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Greek word in the original signifies, as well to pour, and sprinkle water, as it signifies to dip; Mark. 7. 4. Where it is said, and when they come from the mercat, unless they wash, or be Baptized, they eat not. (2.) Because, we read of three thousand baptized in one day, in the streets of Jerusalem,by twelve Apostles at the most, where there was no river to dip them into; Acts 2. 41. And was not Jerusalem, and all Judea, and the region round about Jordan, baptized by John the Baptist himself alone, which could not be done to all and every one by Dipping? Matth. 3. 5, 6. (3.) Were not many baptized in private houses, as we read in the History of the Acts, chapter 10. 47. and 18. 8. with 9. 17. and 16. 33. (4.) Because, Dipping of Infants into water in these cold Countries, would be hurtful and dangerous to them. But GOD will rather have mercy than sacrifice; Matth. 9. 13.

Quest. III. Are the Infants of one, or both believing Parents to be baptized?

Yes. Gen. 17. 7, 9. Gal. 3. 9. 14. Col. 2. 11. 12. Acts 2. 38. 39. Rom. 4. 11, 12.

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain, that no Infants though born of believing Parents ought to be baptized?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, to covenanted ones (of which number the Infants of Believers are no less than their Parents; Acts 2. 38, 39. Acts 3. 25. Rom. 11. 16. Gen. 17. 7, 22.) that seal of the covenant, of which they are capable, is not to be denied; Gen. 17. 7, 10, 11.

(2.) Because, the outward Sacrament of Water, cannot be denied to such, as have received the Spirit of Christ, and to whom the promises of the New Covenant,sealed up in Baptism do belong; Acts 10. 47. Acts 11. 15, 16, 17. But to some Infants of Believers, as well as to others come to Age, the Spirit of Christ hath been given; Jerem. 1. 5. Luke 1. 15. Matth. 19. 14. Mark 10. 13, 14. And to them do the promises belong; Acts 2. 39. (3.) Because the Infants of Believers are members of the Church, which is sanctified and cleansed, with the washing of water by the Word; Eph. 5. 25, 26. Joel 2. 16. Ezek. 16. 20, 21. 1 Cor. 7. 14. (4.) Because, Infants no less than others come to Age, were Baptized, in the Cloud and in the Sea; 1 Cor. 10. 2. (5.) Because, Christ commanded that all Nations should be baptized, a great part whereof were Infants; Gen. 22. 18. Matth. 28. 19. (6.) Because, Christ commanded Baptism to be administered to Disciples, (Infants also are here to be taken in; Acts 15. 10.) Matth. 28. 19. The word in the Original is Matheteusate, Teach, Instruct, or make Disciples all Nations, or make Disciples among all Nations, baptizing them. The signification of this Greek word may be gathered from John 4. 1. where it is said, that the Pharisees had heard, that Jesus made Disciples. So that Matheteuein and Mathetas poiein, are both one thing. (7.) Because, the children of Believers, were by a Divine right circumcised, under the Old Testament: therefore, the children of Believers under the New Testament, ought to be baptized; because the one hath succeeded to the other. That Baptism succeeds to Circumcision, is evident first, because, they both seal up, the same very thing. Next, as Circumcision was the initiating Seal, under the Old Testament, so is Baptism under the New: because the Apostles did administer it so early to the Disciples at the first appearing of their new birth, and interest in the Covenant. Moreover, because by Baptism, we are said to put on Christ; Gal. 3. 27. That they both seal up the same thing, is evident by comparing Rom. 4. 11. with Mar: 1. 4. Acts 2. 28. Where Circumcision is declared to be a seal of the righteousness of Faith, and Baptism is held forth to be a pledge of the remission of sins, as also may be seen; Rom. 4. 6, 7, 8. see Col. 2. 11. 12. Where the Apostle teaches, that our being buried with Christ in Baptism, is our circumcision in Christ; which shews that Baptism hath succeeded to us in the room of Circumcision. (8.) Because, the Apostle says, that the Infants but of one believing Parent are holy; 1 Cor. 7. 14. that is, are comprehended in the outward Covenant of GOD, and have access to the Signs, and Seals of GODS Grace as well as they are, that are born of both believing Parents.

Quest. IV. Are Grace and Salvation so inseparably annexed unto Baptism, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved without it?

No.

Are all that are baptized, undoubtedly regenerated?

No. Acts 8. 13, 23.

Well then, do not the Papists and Lutherans err, who maintain, that Baptism is simply necessary to Salvation; and that all, and those only, who are baptized, are most surely regenerated, in that same very moment of time, wherein Baptism is administered?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Thief upon the Cross, and others were saved, that were never baptized; Luke 23. 43. (2.) Because, persons unbaptised have had saving Faith;Acts 10. 22, 44. (3.) Because, Infants that are predestinated unto life, though they die in their mothers belly, yet they cannot perish; Matth. 18. 14. (4.) Because, some children before their Baptism, have been beloved of GOD, whose love is unchangeable; Rom. 9. 11, 13. Others have been Regenerated by the Holy Ghost; Luke chap: 1. ver: 15. and some have also been comprehended within the Covenant of Grace; Acts 2. 39. (5.) Because, that Baptism, without faith, and the inward operation of the holy Spirit, hath no efficacy to Salvation; Mark 16. 16. 1 Peter 3. 21. (6.) Because, the Baptism of the Spirit, at one time goes before, at another time follows Baptism with water; Acts 10. 37. Matth. 3. 11. (7.) Because, very many that are baptized within the visible Church, are damned; Matth. 7. 13, 14. (8.) Because, in those that are come to age, Faith, and Repentance, are pre-required to Baptism; and therefore before they be baptized, they have the beginning of regeneration; Acts 2. 38. (9.) Because, not all that are baptized are elected; Matth. 20. 16. But all that are elected by GOD, are in time regenerated; 1 Peter 1. 2. (10.) Because, the Holy Ghost, is a most Free Agent, and Worker: and therefore his operation (whence the efficacy of Baptism depends) whereby we are regenerated, is not tied to any one moment of time; John 3. 8. (11.)

Because, Baptism is not a converting, but a confirming Ordinance, even as the Lords Supper is.

The Papists do otherwise contradict the second part, in affirming, that the virtue and efficacy of Baptism (as to the abolishing, and sealing up the remission of more grievous sins and failings, which they call Mortal) doth not extend it self, to the time to come, but to the time past: so that if the person baptized, fall into some deadly and dangerous sin, which wounds the conscience, there is need of another Sacrament, to wit, Penance, whereby the remission of that Mortal sin, as they call it, is sealed up unto him?

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Sacrament of Baptism, after the administration thereof doth not cease to be a Sacrament, of the blood of Christ which purgeth us from all our sins; Mark 1. 4. 1 John 1. 7. (2.) Because, justification by faith (which is sealed up to us by Baptism; Rom. 4. 11. Col. 2. 11, 12.) is for all sins committed before and after baptism; Acts 13. 36. (3.) Because, our Saviour says, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; Mark 16. 16. (4.) Because, not only the beginning of our Salvation, is referred to baptism, but also salvation it self, and eternal life; 1 Peter 3. 21. (5.)

Because, the Scripture bringeth Arguments from the use and remembrance of baptism, by which we that have been baptized, are stirred up to holiness, and newness of life, and to put off the old man, and consequently all those sins, which the Adversaries call Mortal; Rom. 3. 2, 3. Gal. 3. 27. Col. 2. 11. 12.

Quest. V. Is the Sacrament of Baptism, but once to be administered to any person?

Once only; Gal. 3. 27. Titus. 3. 5.

Well then, do not the Marcionites err, who maintain, that men after grosser failings ought to be re-baptized?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Hemerobaptists err, who maintain, that men according to their faults every day, ought every day to be baptised?

Yes.

Do not lastly, the Anabaptists err, who maintain, that children baptized, ought to be rebaptized, when they come to age?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, Baptism is a Sacrament of Admission into the visible Church, and of Regeneration, (which is one only, 1 John 3. 9.) 1 Cor. 12, 13. Tit. 3. 5. Eph. 5. 26. (2.) Because, there is a command for repeating, and frequent using the Lords Supper; 1 Cor. 22. 25, 26. But no Precept, or command for repeating Baptism. (3.) Because, Circumcision (to which succeeded Baptism) was never repeated, as the Passover was. (4.) Because, Baptism is a seal of Adoption; Gal. 3. 26, 27. But whom GOD loveth, and hath once adopted, those he never casteth off afterwards; Rom. 11. 29. (5.) Because, the Apostle says, there is but one Baptism; Eph. 4. 5. namely, not only in number, but also in the administration upon us all; Rom. 6. 3, 4.

OF THE LORDS SUPPER.

Question. I. Is the Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood, called the Lords Supper, an Ordinance of GOD, to be observed in the Church, unto the end of the World?

Yes. 1 Cor. 11. 23, 24, 25, 26. 1 Cor. 10. 16, 17, 21. Matth. 26. Luke 22.

Well then, do not the Quakers err, who maintain, the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to be no Gospel Ordinance, and that there is no Gospel precept, for the administration thereof, until his second coming?

Yes.

They look upon this Ordinance, as a Type only and Figure, or shadow of Christ's Body and Blood, which was commanded for that time, and for some time to come, but not unto his second coming. Thus they abandon that most precious Ordinance of taking and eating the Bread and drinking the Wine, as they do baptism with Water, and all other Ordinances, to the introducing of black Atheism into the World. They pervert the true meaning of the Scripture for the defence of their damnable Tenets, as by this one instance Till he come, which is meant (say they) not of his second coming at the last day, but of his coming to dwell in his disciples and Apostles, as if Christ had not been in them, both before, and after his ascension; even as they deny baptism, in Christ's commission (Matth. 28. 19.) to his Disciples, to be meant of Baptism with Water, because water is not expressed; they deny either wilfully, as their Ring-leaders do, or ignorantly, or by a delusion from the Devil, as the most part do, the most sure and evident Truths in Scripture, pratling and gagling in their discourse, sense, and nonsense, being oftener out of purpose, than in a purpose, skipping from one subject to another, to save themselves from the strength of reason, like subtile Foxes, which when they are beaten from one hole, fly into another. But while they are obstinate, and pertinacious, in maintaining Lies, and Untruths, they ought to be confuted, as the man was, that denied Snow to be white. For it is not so much a blindness of mind, or a weakness of judgement, as many well meaning people are misled by, as a wilful, obstinate resisting of the Truth, as the perverse Jews did, or as, Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses. They that are against commanded Gospel Ordinances, and the Ministers of Christ, whom they look upon as the Priests of Baal,would (if they durst) shake off the very Scripture, and Word of GOD. And it is more than probable, that if they could shun the odium of open Blasphemy, and the hazard of standing Laws against blasphemers, the most part of them would disown the Scriptures, as many of them have done. For what kindness or respect can they have for the Scriptures, but such as men carry to Topicks or common places, whence they draw Arguments to impugn others, or defend themselves with. For they do not look upon the Word as their Rule, seeing (as they dream) they have a Light within them, beyond that more sure Word of Prophesy, which the Apostle Peter prefers to a voice from Heaven. Nay, they have so little veneration for the Scriptures, that they will not suffer them to be called the Word of GOD, contrary to many express places of the Scripture; as John 10. 35. 2 Chr. 36. 22. Psalm 119. 172. Mark 7. 9, 10, 13. 1 Kings 16. 12. 2 Kings 9. 36. Ezra 1. 1. 2 King. 23. 16. Isaiah 28. 13. Ephes. 6. 17. Isaiah 37. 22.

Quest. II. Is Christ offered up to his Father in this Sacrament?

No.

Is there any real sacrifice made at all, for remission of sin, of the Quick or Dead?

No. Heb. 9. 22, 25, 26, 28.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that in this Sacrament there is performed a true and real Sacrifice (commonly called the Mass) wherein Christ under the forms of Bread and Wine, without shedding of blood, is offered unto GOD, by a Priest, and sacrificed for the living, and for the Dead, to obtain remission of sins?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the sacrificing and offering up of Christ, is a part of his own Priesthood; Heb. 9. 14. But the Priesthood of Christ cannot be transferred from himself to any other; Heb. 7. 24. Therefore, no Priest can offer him up under the forms of Bread and Wine unto GOD. (2.) Because, the offering of the Body of Christ, is once for all. It is but one single offering, and cannot be repeated. Heb. 10. 10, 12, 14. (3.) Because, the sacrificing and offering up of Christ, is one only, and of a most perfect Merit, and Efficacy; Heb. 9. 14. Heb. 10. 14. But the repeating of the same Sacrifice, and the multitude of Priests, are a token of an imperfect Sacrifice, Heb. 9. 25, 26. Heb. 10. 10, 11. (4.) If Christ be often offered, he must often die and suffer; Heb. 9. 25, 26. But Christ being now raised from the Dead, cannot any more suffer and die; Rom. 6. 9. (5.) Because, that one and most perfect Sacrifice of Christ, did abrogate and take away all those external Sacrifices, and caused them to cease; Daniel 9. 27. (6.) Because, there can be no propitiatory Sacrifice for sin, without shedding of blood; Heb. 9. 22. Neither doth he die any more, but is now in Heaven to appear in the presence of GOD for us, and to intercede in our behalf; Heb. 1. 3. Heb. 9. 24. Heb. 10. 12. (7.) Because, in every Sacrifice there is required (and really is) a dying, and destruction of the thing sacrificed. But Christ still liveth, Rom. 6. 9. (8.) Because, no man can offer Jesus up to GOD, but Christ himself; Heb. 7. 27. (9.) Because, in all external sacrifices, properly so called, there is necessarily required, a visible external Host, or thing sacrificed, as the Adversaries grant. But the thing which is said to be offered up by the Mass-Priest, namely the Body of Christ, is neither external nor visible here, it being in Heaven and not on Earth with man; Acts 3. 21.

Yes. Mark 14. 23. 1 Cor: 11. 25, 26, 27, 28, 29. Matth. 15. 9.

Well then, doth not the Romish Church Uerr, whose Mass-Priests standing in the Altar, celebrate private Masses, (the People either being absent, or standing idle) who take the Cup to themselveQuest. III. Are private Masses, or the receiving this Sacrament by a Priest, or any other alone; as likewise the denial of the cup to the People; worshipping the Elements, the lifting them up, or carrying them about for adoration, and the reserving them for any pretended Religious use; are all these (I say) contrary to the nature of this Sacrament, and to the institution of Christ?s only, and drink thereof. That administer the Lords Supper privately to sick persons, and Bed-rid; That teach to administer the Communion to Laicks, under both the forms of Bread and Wine, is not only not necessary, but unlawful: Who teach, that for Adorations-cause, the Elements are to be lifted up, and carried about, and reserved for Religious uses?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, Christ did institute the last Supper not for one apart, but for many together; Matth. 26. 27, 28. (2.) Because, Christ in celebrating the last Supper,did not eat and drink himself alone, but the Disciples did also eat and drink with him; Matth. 26. 27, 28. (3.) Because, the Apostle commands the Corinthians, that when they come together to eat, they tarry one for another; 1 Cor. 11. 33. (4.) Because, the Lords Supper is a Sacrament of Brother-hood, and communion of the Saints; 1 Cor. 10. 16, 17. 1 Cor. 11. 33. (5.) Because, in the days of the Apostles, the Disciples and Brethren met together for breaking of bread; Acts 20. 7. (6.) Because, Christ when he had taken bread, and distributed it, is said, to have likewise taken the Cup; 1 Cor: 11. 23, 24, 25, 26, 27. (7.) Because, it is expressly said, and commanded (Christ foreseeing this black error, which is now in their Church) drink ye all of it; Matth: 26. 27. (8.) Because, the common People, which are Communicants, gather more Fruit from both the Forms, than from one only; 1 Cor: 10. 16. and 1 Cor. 11. 26. (9.) Because, the Blood of Christ, the sign whereof is the Wine in the Cup, is not only shed for Apostles, Preachers, and Pastors, but also for Lay-men, and those that are not of the Clergy, as the Popish Church speaks; John 3. 16. (10.) Because, the Apostles and Christians of the Primitive Church, did communicate under both Forms; Mark 14. 22. 23. 1 Cor. 10, 11. chapters. (11.) Because, it is a Villainy to detract and withdraw any thing from Christ's Testament: and therefore the Cup (which is left to us by Legacy; Matth: 26. 27, 28.) is not to be denied to any Communicant; Gal: 3. 15. (12.) Because, Christ did not institute any Adoration of the Elements: therefore this Adoration is to be condemned, as Will-worship; Matth. 15. 9. (13.) Because, the Adoration is founded upon the Corporal presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament, which is blasphemous, seeing Christ now is at the Right Hand of GOD; Heb: 1. 3. (14.) Because, this Popish Adoration of the Elements, is a worshipping of the creature together with the Creator, a most abominable Idolatry; Daniel11. 38. Matth: 23. 16. to verse 23. (15.) Because, if the Elements ought to be adored, because Christ is Sacramentally present in them; then ought believers (in whom Christ dwelleth; John 14. 20.) to be adored, which is absurd. Nay the water of Baptism, ought to be worshipped, seeing the whole Trinity is no less present there, than in the Supper. (16.) The worshipping of the bread, since no man (as the Adversaries confess) is able to know certainly, that the Host is consecrated, is a work done without Faith, therefore a sin; Rom. 14. 23. (17.) Because, Christ commanded the Element of bread to be broken, eaten, and distributed. But no where doth Christ command the bread to be Reserved; 1 Cor. 11. 23, 24. (18.) Because, the bread which is the communion of the body of Christ, is the bread which we break; 1 Cor. 10. 16. (19.) Because, the bread and the wine, are not Sacramental Symbols, but in the very action; 1 Cor. 11. 26. Here it is said, for as often, as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup; but not, as often as ye reserve this bread. (20.) Because, GOD commanded, that nothing should be Reserved, of the Paschal-Lamb (to which bread and wine in the Lords Supper have succeeded) till the morning; Exod. 12. 10. That it might not be put to any other use, whether for Idolatry, or common food.

Quest. IV. Do the outward Elements in this Sacrament, in substance, and nature remain still, truly, and only bread and wine, as they were before?

Yes. Matth. 26. 29. 1 Cor. 11. 26, 27, 28.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that the Bread and Wine, by the power of the words of consecration This is my Body, are truly Transubstantiate into the very body and blood of Christ; nothing remaining but the outward forms, and Accidents of the Bread and wine?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Doctrine of Transubstantiation makes Christ's body every where present, invisible, that cannot be handled, without shape, and figure, without human quantity, which is contrary to Matth. 26. 6. Here Christ is only present in Bethany. And John 20. 27. Thomas toucheth Christ. And according to Acts 3. 21. the Heavens must receive Him; and therefore cannot be everywhere. See Heb. 2. 14, 17. (2.) Because, before and after consecration, the bread is called the communion of the body of Christ: but nothing is said, or can be the communion of its own self; 1 Cor. 10. 16. (3.) Because, after consecration, the Apostle calls not the bread, a Species or form of Bread; 1 Cor. 11. 26, 27, 28. And after consecration, Christ calls the wine the fruit of the vine; Matth. 26. 29. (4.) Because, Christ did institute the Supper to be a memorial of himself until he come again. But a memorial, is not of things corporally present, but of things absent; 1. Cor. 11. 25. (5.) Because, that which is properly broken, is not the body of Christ, but the bread is properly broken, therefore the bread is not the body of Christ, 1 Cor. 10. 16. (6.) Because, Christ went up to heaven bodily, and is to tarry there until the end of the world; Acts 3. 21. (7.) Transubstantiation destroys the very Essence, and being of the Lords Supper. First, It destroys the sign, because it takes away the substance of the bread and wine; the Accidents, and outward Forms only remaining. Secondly, It destroys the thing signified, for it robes and spoils the body of Christ, of its true quantity and dimensions (for according to that infallible Philosophical Maxim, sublatis dimensionibus corporis, tollitur ipsum corpus. That is, by taking away the length, breadth, and thickness of any Physical or Natural body, you destroy consequentially the very essence and being of that body) and introduces instead of one body, many bodies. (8.) Because, Transubstantiation takes away the Sacramental Analogy: and so, when the sign is turned into the thing signified, all similitude between them is gone, and ceaseth. (9.) From this doctrine do follow many great Absurdities inconsistent with Religion, Sense, and Reason. As first, that Christ in the Supper, did both eat and drink himself: that he was wholly in his own mouth: that he had a double and twofold body; one Visible, another Invisible: That a Mouse, or Rat, may eat Christ's Body: That his body being reserved, and laid up into a Cupboard, in a short time may turn into Vermin. Must not Christ's body be in many places at once? Must not his body, and all the parts thereof, his head, hands and feet be in the smallest, and least crumb of the Host? Must not Christ's body, having now that bigness in Heaven, which he had upon Earth, be bigger, than it self; longer, and thicker?

If Christ's Body may be in diverse places at once, why may not a mans body be in diverse places at once? this is granted by the Adversaries) but a man cannot be in diverse places at once.

Can Peter, for example, be both at Edinburgh and London, in the same moment of time? He may then be both a man and not a man, at the same time: he may be a man, because living at Edinburgh; and not a man, because dead at London. May not Peter at Edinburgh go to York, and meet Peter there from London? And what a merry meeting must it be, when Peter shakes hands with Peter, and takes a glass of Wine from him? May not Peter from London be killed there at York,and Peter from Edinburgh be left alive? May not Peter alive be re-produced in a thousand Cities at once, and marry there a thousand wives, and beget in one night a thousand Sons, and Daughters? May not Peter be so many times re-produced, till he make up an hundred thousand fighting men? May not one candle by re-production be made as many; as may give light to the whole Universe? May not one bottle of water be made so many, as may serve an Army of an hundred thousand? May not one Guinea be reproduced as many times as may amount to five and twenty hundred thousand pounds sterling? A brave invention for paying five or six hundred thousand marks of debt: Next, as the Adversaries are engaged to maintain, that one body may be in many places at once, so are they under a necessity to affirm that many bodies may be in one place together, by way of Penetration, for in every crumb of the Host, is Christ's Body. From which position, it follows that a mans body may be contained within a Nutshell. That a Snuff-box may contain Athurs Seat: the hollow of an Ox eye, the whole Globe of the Earth. That a Sparrow may swallow, one by one, the seven Planets, seeing each one of them, may occupy no more bounds, or space, than a grain of barley corn doth: and yet the Sun which is swallowed, will be as big as at present: for Christ's body in the Host, is as big and tall, as when he was on the Cross, as the Adversaries confess. (10.) We never read of a miracle wrought by GOD, but what was evident, and conspicuous to all, and evidently seen to be such. As when Moses his rod was turned into a Serpent, and became a rod again; Exod. 4. 2, 3. Such were the wonders of Egypt. Such was the dividing of the Red Sea: the striking of the Rock: and the flowing out of the waters; Numb. 20. 11. The destruction of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, was evident to all the Israelites; Numb. 16. 31, 32. So were the miracles, which were wrought by the holy Prophets, such were the miracles which Christ and his Apostles wrought. Was not the water most evidently turned into wine; John 2. 7, 8, 9. But after the Words of consecration uttered by the Mass Priest, the bread as to sense, is the same thing it was. The bread hath the same taste, the same smell, that same touch, that same outward form, and figure, that same colour, that same weight. It occupies that same space and bounds, and hath the same quantity in all its dimensions. But the rod was seen a serpent, and the serpent was seen a rod. The water was seen wine: it was known to be wine by the taste, by the smell, by the colour. Christ never wrought such a miracle as the miracle of Transubstantiation. In all his miracles he appealed to our outward Senses. And was it ever heard that Christ wrought miracles without a necessity?

Quest. V. Is the Body and Blood of Christ in this Sacrament corporally, or carnally in, with, or under the bread and wine?

No. 1 Cor. 10. 16.

Well then, do not the Lutherans err, who maintain, that the body and blood of Christ, are corporally in, with, and under the bread and wine: and that (as the Papists also teach) his body and blood, are taken corporally by the mouth, by all Communicants, believers, and unbelievers?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, Christ was sitting with his body at the Table. (2.) Because, he himself did eat of the bread, and drink of the wine. (3.) Because, he took bread from the Table: he took not his own body: he break bread, and did distribute it, he break not his own body: so he took the Cup, and not his own blood. (4.) Because, Christ said, the Cup was the New Testament in his blood: but the Cup is not in, with, and under the Wine. (5.) Because Christ said, the bread was his body, which was broken; the Wine was his blood, which was shed. But neither was his body broken under the bread, nor his blood shed under the Wine, seeing Christ as yet, was not betrayed, crucified, and dead.

In the next place, the end of the Lords Supper is, that we may remember Christ, and declare his death until be come; Luke 22. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 24, 25, 26. Therefore if Christ be now present with his body, in, with, and under the bread, the Sacramental remembrance of Christ, and the declaring of his death, ought to cease.

This Doctrine of Consubstantiation, is contrary to the Articles of our Faith. It is against the Truth and Verity of his Human Nature, which is visible, palpable, and in a certain place circumscriptive. It is against the Article of his ascension: for it makes his body, which is now in Heaven, until the last day, to be in, with, and under a piece of bread. It is against the spiritual communion of the Saints with Christ the Head, which the Lutherans makes by this doctrine a corporal and carnal communion, contrary to 1 Cor.10. 3, 4. Ephes. 1. 22. Ephes. 4. 4. Rom. 8. 9. 1 Cor. 6. 17. 1 John 4. 13. John 15. 5.

It brings with it many and great absurdities; as that the body of Christ, Non habeat partem extra partem; hath not one part of it without another; but as if all the parts of his Body, were in one part, which is contrary to the Nature of a true and real Quantum, which consists essentially in three dimensions, length, breadth, and thickness. It makes in effect his Body to be no body. It brings down the glorious Body of Christ from Heaven, and puts it under the base Elements of this Earth. It makes as many bodies of Christ, as there are pieces of Eucharistic bread. It makes his body to be broken in, with, and under the bread, and bruised with the teeth: It sends his Body down to the stomach, where it is turned into a mans substance, and afterwards thrown out.

Moreover, all true Eating brings life and Salvation; John 6. 50, 51. but eating by the mouth profiteth nothing; John 6. 63. Again, our union with Christ, (and therefore our eating of his Body, from whence ariseth this union) is not corporal but spiritual; Eph. 3. 17. And the Body and Blood of Christ, are meat and drink; not carnal but spiritual; even as the hunger, whereby we long for this meat is spiritual: and the life to which we are nourished, is spiritual, and the nutriment is spiritual. Lastly, according to this Doctrine of Consubstantiation, stiffly maintained by the Lutherans, it follows, that Christ did eat his own body, while he did eat the bread of the first supper. That his Disciples did eat their Lord and Masters Body. That Christ before he was crucified, was dead:That his Disciples were more cruel and inhumane to him than the Jews were that crucified him: That he is often buried within the entrails of wicked men.

Quest. VI. Is the Body and Blood of Christ as really, but spiritually present, to the faith of Believers, in that Ordinance, as the Elements themselves are to the outward senses?

Yes. 1 Cor. 10. 16.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, that the Body and Blood of Christ, in the Sacrament of the Supper, are not really present?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the body of Christ in this Sacrament, is spiritually eaten by Believers; and his blood is spiritually drunken. But a spiritual presence, is a true and real presence; because, it comes and flows from true and real causes, namely from Faith, and the Holy Spirit. (2.) Because, in the right use of this Sacrament, Christ is united to a man by faith, and by the Holy Spirit; 1 Cor. 10. 16. (3.) Because, the body of Christ, in so far as, it was given to the death, and was broken for us on the cross, and in so far, as his blood was shed for the remission of our sins; all these (I say) are the internal matter of this Sacrament;Luke 22. 19. Mat. 26. 28. 1 Cor. 11. 24. (4.) Because, those who eat and drink unworthily, are said, not to discern the Lords body: and therefore to such as eat and drink worthily, the body and blood of Christ must be truly present, according to their spiritual sense, namely Faith; 1 Cor. 11. 24. (5.) Because, length of time doth not hinder, but that Faith may make things past, and things to come spiritually present: and therefore distance of place doth not hinder, but that things most distant, as to place, may be made spiritually and truly present; Heb. 11. 1. John 6. 56. Phil. 3. 10. Heb. 11. 9.

Quest. VII. Are all ignorant and ungodly persons, as they are unfit to enjoy Communion with Christ, unworthy of his Table?

Yes.

Can they without great sin against Christ, while they continue such, partake of these holy Mysteries?

No.

And are not therefore Church-officers to debar those who appear grossly ignorant, and scandalous?

Yes. 1 Cor. 11. 27, 28, 29. and 2 Cor. 6. 14, 15. and 1 Cor. 5. 6, 7, 13. Matth. 7. 6.

Well then, do not some men err, in their Practise, if not in their Opinion, who suffer many ignorant, scandalous, and ungodly persons, to come to the Lords Table?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, ignorant and wicked men eating and drinking unworthily, are guilty of the body and blood of Christ, and so bring judgement upon themselves;Cor. 11. 29. (2.) Because, all were not admitted to eat of the Passover, neither was it for all promiscuously to partake thereof; Numb. 9. 6, 7. and 2 Chron. 23. 19. Ezek. 22. 26. (3.) Because, it was not lawful for any man to come to the Marriage feast that wanted the Wedding garment; Matth. 22. 11. (4.) Because, Pearles are not to be cast before Dogs and Swine: men manifestly ungodly, and wicked; Matth. 7. 6. (5.) Because, they who deserve to be excluded from the Fellowship and Society of Believers, ought not to be admitted to the Sacrament of intimate Communion and Familiarity with GOD: but such are all these who walk inordinately; 2 Cor. 6. 16. (6.) Because, if the Church willingly and wittingly admit such persons, they stir up the wrath of God, against themselves, for suffering Gods Covenant, and his holy Symbols, to be openly profaned; 1 Cor. 11. 30. (7.) Because, the Lord will not suffer such as are manifestly and contumaciously wicked, to take his Covenant in their mouth: and therefore to such persons, the seals, and symbols of his Covenant, ought not to be offered; Psalm 50. 17. (8.) Because, ignorant, profane, and godless persons, ought to be esteemed as Heathens, and Publicans; Matth. 18. 17.

OF CHURCH CENSURES.

Question I. Hath the Lord Jesus as King, and Head of his Church, appointed therein a Government, in the hands of Church-Officers, distinct from the Civil Magistrate?

Yes. Isaiah 9. 6, 7. 1 Tim. 5. 17. 1 Thes 5. 12. Acts 20. 17, 18. Hebr. 13. 7, 17, 24. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Matth. 28. 18, 19, 20.

Well then, do not the Erastians, and others err, who maintain, that in the Holy Scripture there is no particular form of Church Government set down, and appointed by Christ?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Lord Jesus Christ hath delivered to the Ministers of his Church, as to his own Delegates and Ambassadors (and therefore according to his own laws) the whole power of Governing the Church, which he himself received from the Father, to be managed, and put in execution in his own name and authority; John 20. 21. Matth. 28. 19. Acts 1. 2. Eph. 4. 7, 8, 11. (2.) Because, all the substantials of Church Government, under the New Testament, which either concern Ministers, Ordinances, Censures, Synods, Councils, and their power, are proposed, and set down in Scripture, namely in the third Chapter of the first Epistle to Timothy; Acts 15. chapter. And 1 Cor. 14. 26, 40. (3.) Because, the Lord Jesus Christ, hath looked to the good of his Church, no less under the New Testament, than under the Old. Therefore, since the Church under the Old Testament, had a most perfect form of Government prescribed to it: and since there is as great need and necessity of Church order, and discipline, under the New Testament, as was under the Old, it must follow, that there is a Pattern and Form of Church government no less set down, and prescribed under the New Testament, than was under the Old; Heb. 3. 1, 2, 4, 5. Heb. 13. 8. 1 Cor. chap. 5. 1 Tim. 5. 20. And 1 Tim. 1. 20. (4.) The end of the Church Government is spiritual namely the gaining of mens souls to Christ. But nothing that's merely of human authority, can reach this end; Matth. 18. 15, 16, 17. (5.) Because, all the parts of Church Government, are particularly set down in Scripture. As first, those things which concern the key of doctrine, as public prayer, and giving of thanks; 1 Tim. 2. 12. 1 Cor. 14. 14, 15, 16. Singing of Psalms; Eph. 5. 18, 19. Col. 3. 16. Public reading of the Word, Preaching, and Expounding the same; Acts 6. 4. Acts 13. 15, 17. Acts 5. 21. 2 Cor. 3. 14. Matth. 18. 19, 20. 2 Tim. 4. 11. Heb. 6. 1. Gal. 6. 6. Secondly, those parts likewise, which concern the key of Discipline; namely the ordination of Presbyters, with the imposition of the hands of the Presbytery; 1 Tim. 4. 14. and 1 Tim. 5. 22. Titus 1. 5. Acts 14. 21, 23. Thirdly, the Authoritative giving of Judgement, and sentence concerning doctrine; and that according to the Word; Acts 15. 15, 24, 28. Fourthly, Admonition and public Rebuking of those who have offended; Matth. 18. 15, 16, 17. 1 Thes. 5. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 20. Fifthly, The excommunicating of those who are contumacious, and ungodly, and who are convicted of manifest crimes, and scandals; Matth 18. 17. Titus 3. 10. 1 Tim. 1. 20. 1 Cor. 5. 2, 3, 4, 5. Lastly, the receiving again into the fellowship of the Church persons cast out by excommunication, having testified their Repentance; 2 Cor. 2. 6, 7, 8, 9. X2

Do not the same Erastians err, who make no distinction between Church power and the Secular power?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, Christ hath committed the keys of the kingdom of Heaven to the Officers of his Church which are Governors distinct from the civil Magistrate;Matth. 16. 18, 19. Matth. 18. 19. John 20. 21, 22, 23. (2.) Because, Church power, and civil power differ specifically. The church, and the common-wealth are Polities formally, and essentially different. They are not, as such, powers subordinate, at least in a right line, but coordinate; Acts 4. 19, 20. 2 Chron. 26. 18. Next, God the Creator and Governor of the World; is the Efficient of the power of the civil Magistrate; Rom. 13. 1, 2, 4. But God-Christ, our blessed Mediator, and Lord of his church, is the Efficient of the church particularly, and of its Government. The matter (materia ex qua) of the civil Government, is the secular sword: but the matter of the church Government, are the keys of the kingdom of Heaven. The matter of the civil Government (materia in qua) may be a Senate, many people, the Person of one king, of a child, a woman. But the matter of the church government, is not of this kind; Heb. 13. 22. 1. Tim. 3. 15. 1 Cor. 14. 34, 35. The matter of the civil Government (materia circa quam) are men and women, as members of the common-wealth, without, as well as within the church: but as Christians and members of the church, they are not such; 1 Cor. 5. 13. The formal causes of both are distinct; the one inflicts punishments merely spiritual; the other inflicts punishments merely civil. Lastly, the end of this, is the corporal and external good of a society; but the end of that, is the spiritual good of the church and its edification;Matth. 14. 15. 1 Cor. 5. 5. 2 Cor. 10. 8.

Do not likewise the Socinians, Anabaptists, Quakers, many Independents, and others err, who maintain, that the key of Doctrine, or the public preaching of the Word, is proper to any man furnished with suitable gifts, though not called, and sent to that employment?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, no man can believe in Christ of whom he hath not heard, and how shall he hear without a Preacher; and how shall he preach unless he be sent;Rom. 10. 14, 15. (2.) Because, Women may have suitable, and competent gifts for Preaching, and yet they are forbidden to speak in the Church; 1 Tim: 2. 12. (3.) Because, the Scripture blames such, as have run, and yet have not been sent; Jerem. 23. 21, 32. (4.) Because, no man taketh this honour to himself (that is, he ought not to take it) but he that is called of GOD, as was Aaron; Heb. 5. 4. (5.) Because, the Scripture mentioneth, that GOD hath set apart certain peculiar Ministers, for the preaching of the Word; Rom. 1. 1.Ephes: 4. 11. Titus 1. 3. (6.) Because, no man can take the office of a civil Magistrate, or of a Deacon of the church upon him, unless he be called thereunto;Luke 12. 14. Acts 6. 5. 1 Tim. 3. 10. And therefore no man ought to take upon him the public preaching of the Word, unless he be called thereunto likewise. (7.) Because, he that taketh upon him this office, without a call, he usurpeth Authority in the church, seeing Preaching is an Act of Authority; 1 Thes. 5. 12. (8.) Because, the Titles which are given to the Preachers of the Gospel, are names of Office; they are called the Ambassadors of Christ; 2 Cor. 5. 20. Stewards of the Word; Titus 1. 7. The Men of GOD; 1 Tim. 6. 11. and Angels; Rev. 2. 1. (9.) Because, there is not one approven example, in all the Word of GOD, for a gifted brother to Preach without a call; and therefore seeing it is not done in Faith, it must be Sin. Must every Fellow that takes a laxit in his tongue, go up to the Pulpit and ease himself? (10.) Because, there are Precepts and Rules set down in Scripture, for all the Ages of the church, to the end of the world, anent the calling of men to be Ministers of the Gospel; 1 Tim. 3. 2, 3, 6, 7. and 1 Tim. 5. 21, 22.

Do not likewise the Independents, Brunists, and Anabaptists err, who maintain, that the Right and Power of Governing the church, belongs no less to the multitude and community of Believers, than to the Officers of the church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Scripture expressly teaches, that GOD hath committed the Government of his church, and the care of his people, to certain chosen Persons, and not to all, and every one; Ephes. 4. 11. 12, 13. 1 Cor. 12. 28. (2.) Because, if the power of the keys were given to believers, in common; either they are given to them as believers, or as they are gifted by GOD, with gifts, and qualifications above others, for Governing the church, and chosen out of the rest, for performing that office. If the last part be affirmed, it follows, that the power, and right of the keys, is committed not to a community of believers, but to some select persons, which we own, and maintain: but the Independents deny. If the first be asserted, then it follows first, that the care of Governing the church is committed to Women, and children, being believers; and so they must necessarily have the power of seeing, as being eyes, and watch men to the church: the power of hearing, as being the ears of the church: and the body of the church must be deformed; because the whole body is the eye, and the whole body is the ear, and whose many members are made one member; 1 Cor. 12. 12, 13, 14, 15, i6, 17, 18, 19. (2.) It follows, that the power of the keys, it not only given to all, but to Believers only: but it is evident by the example of Judas, and other Reprobates, that many in Christ's name have preached, who were not Believers; Matth. 7. 22, 23. Phil.1. 16, 17, 18. (3.) Because, to whom Christ has given the power of Governing the church; to them also, he hath promised to give gifts, and endowments largely for performing that office; John 20. 21, 22, 23. 1 Cor. 4. 6, 7. Matth. 28. 19, 20. But to a community of Believers, God has never promised a Spirit for the Ministry, nor gifts for that employment. Nor did he ever bestow, or confer any such endowments. (4.) Because, Christ our Mediator, appointed Ecclesiastical Officers and Church Governors, before ever there was a formal church, under the New Testament gathered, and set up; Luke 9. 1. Luke 10. 1, 2, 3. John 20. 21, 22, 23. Matth. 28. 19, 20. This was all done before his death. And before his ascension he did the like; Ephes. 4. 8. 11, 12. Acts 2. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Now it is evident, that there was no formal gathering together of a church, before the Feast of Pentecost; Acts 2. Ecclesiastic Ministers, and Officers were appointed for calling in, and gathering together the Mystical body of Christ, to wit, his Members: therefore it was needful, that Ministers baptizing,ought to be before Persons baptized. That Gatherers of the church ought to be before Persons gathered. That callers and inviters to Christ, ought to be before Persons called and invited. (5.) This Democracy or popular Government, cannot but bring in great confusion, whence many absurdities will follow. As the church of GOD should not be an organic body. That Women who are forbidden to speak in the church, most have the keys of the kingdom of Heaven hanging at their Belt, forsooth. All must govern, and none must be governed. All must attend the government of the church. All must be rendered incapable for going about their particular callings, which God calls them to every day. Therefore seeing this sort of Government, brings so much confusion with it, it is most probable, that it is not of God who is a God of Order, and not of confusion; 1 Cor.14. 33.

Quest. II. Are Church Censures necessary for reclaiming, and gaining of offending brethren; for deterring of others from the like offences; for purging out of that leaven, which might infect the whole lump, for vindicating the honour of Christ; and the holy profession of the Gospel, and for preventing the wrath of GOD, which might justly fall upon the church, if they should suffer his covenant, and the seals thereof to be profaned by notorious and obstinate sinners?

Yes. 1 Tim. 5. 20. 1 Tim. 1. 20. 1 Cor. 11. 27. to the end; Jude 23. verse.

Are the Officers of the church for the better attaining of these ends to proceed by Admonition, by Suspension from the Lords Table, for a season, and by Excommunication from the church according to the nature of the crime or scandalous offence, and demerit of the Person?

Yes. 1 Thes. 5. 12, 1 Cor. 5. 4, 5, 13. Matth. 18. i7 Titus 3. 10.

Well then, do not the Socinians, Anabaptists, Quakers; and other Sectaries err, who deny that any church censures should be inflicted upon offenders?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Erastians err, who maintain, there should be no suspension from the Lords Table or excommunication from the church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the power of the keys, is given to the Ministers of the church, wherewith not only by the preaching of the Word, but also by church censures, they open and shut the kingdom of heaven; as will appear by comparing these places of Scripture together; Matth. 16. 19. Matth. 18. 17. (2.) Because, he that offends publicly, and after Admonition, persists pertinaciously in his sin, should be esteemed as a Publican and Heathen; Matth. 18. 17. (3.) Because, the Apostle says, if any man obey not our Word by this Epistle, note that man, and have no company with him. Note him, that is, either by excommunication, or some other note of church censure; 2 Thess. 3. 14. (4.) Because, the Apostolic church, being moved by the same reasons (which now are) used the power of the keys, and excluded from the Sacrament, men that were manifestly contumacious, and wicked; 1 Cor. 5. 2, 3. And 1 Tim. 1. 20. 2 Thes. 3. 6. 14. (5.) Because, the Apostle says, them that sin (to wit publicly) rebuke before all, that others also may fear; 1Tim. 5. 20. (6.) Consider the various ends of Ecclesiastical censures, as the reclaiming of offending brethren, and the rest of them, which are set down in the Question.

OF SYNODS AND COUNCILS.

Question I. Ought there to be such Assemblies for the Government and further edification of the Church, as are called Synods and Councils?

Yes. Acts 15. 2, 4, 6.

Are the decrees and determinations of Councils, and Synods, if consonant to the Word of GOD, to be received with reverence, and submission, not only for their agreement with the Word, but also for their power, whereby they are made, as being an ordinance of GOD appointed thereunto in his Word?

Yes. Acts 15. 15, 19, 24, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31. Acts 16, 4. Matth. 18. 17, 18, 19, 20.

Well then, do not the Brounists and Independents err, who maintain, that every particular Congregation, or church hath in it self, the full power of church Government for exercising the whole power of the keys, without subordination, or subjection to any Classical or Synodical Meeting: and that Presbyteries, and Synods, have only a power of counselling, advising, and exhorting, but no power of Jurisdiction, to command or enjoin any thing in the Lord, to particular churches or congregations?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Apostolic church referred all weightier matters, which did equally concern many Congregations, to the free suffrages, and votes of the Apostles, Pastors, and select Brethren, and not to the determination of any one particular church, or congregation; Acts 15. 23, 24, 25. Acts 6. 2, 3. (2.) Because, it is evident from Scripture, that there have been many particular churches, and congregations subordinate to one Presbytery. For, in the church of Jerusalem, it is manifest, that there were more than one congregation. First, from the multitude of Believers, who were of a greater number than could be of one Congregation, for hearing the Word, and communicating; Acts 2. 41, 42. Acts 5. 14. Acts 6. 1, 2 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. Acts 21. 20. (2.) From the multitude of Pastors, and Ministers, whose pains and labours many churches required; Acts 1. 12. 13, 14, 26. Acts 2. 1, 14, 37, 42. Acts 4. 31, 34, 35, 37. Acts 6. 2. Acts 8. 14. (3.) From the diversity of Tongues among the Disciples at Jerusalem, which were given, not only for the edification of those that were of that Church; but also for signs and wonders to others, who were without, and not of that Church. (4.) It is manifest from this, that in those days, they had no churches, or meeting houses built, but only met and convened in private houses, and upper rooms.

The same is also true of the church of Antioch, Ephesus, and Corinth, from the Acts of the Apostles; and other places of Scripture. But all these congregations were ruled and governed by one College of Pastors.

(1.) Because, all these particular Congregations, are called but one church; Acts 18. 22. Acts 12, 5. (2.) Because, in that one church, there were church Presbyters, who were called Governors, not of any one particular congregation, but of the church, which was made up of many particular churches; Acts 20. 17. Acts 15. 2. 3. Acts 13. 1, 2, 3. (3.) Because, these Presbyters did meet together for governing the church,and performed Acts of Jurisdiction, which concerned the whole church in common; Acts 11. 30. compared with chapter 4. 35, 37. And Acts 21. 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25. and Acts 13. 1, 2, 3. (4.) Because, there is a particular example of a Synod, which had the power of Jurisdiction, and which consisted, and was made up of members, out of diverse Classical Conventions: For when the Question about circumcision, and the keeping of Moses Law, which troubled the Churches of Syria, Cilicia, Antioch, and Jerusalem, could not be determined in their own particular churches, the matter was referred to a Synod of Apostles and Presbyters, who met at Jerusalem, which decided the controversy, and appointed their decrees to be obligatory, and binding to all these foresaid churches;Acts 15. Acts 16. 4. Acts 21. 25. (5.) Because, the Jewish church, which was a politick body, had in every city Synagogues subordinate to one supreme council,or great Synagogue which was at Jerusalem; Deut. 17. 8, 12. 2 Chron. 19. 8. 11. Exod: 18. 22, 26. Seeing therefore, dangers and difficulties for the preventing, and healing of which, the Lord hath appointed and set up, in that church such a government, may be as great, if not greater in his church, under the New Testament than was then: and seeing the Lord has no less consulted the good of his church now, than he did of old; it follows, that there must be councils, no less under the New Testament than under the old, to which, particular churches ought to be subordinate. (6.) From the Light of Nature, and right Reason: for the Law of Nature directs to a diversity of courts; namely, where there is any Rule or Government in a city or common-wealth, and orders the inferior courts to be subordinate to the Superior, the lesser to the greater, and Appeals to be made from them to the greater. And in bodies both Natural and Politick, the parts ought to be subject to the whole, for the good of both. Besides there are, and will be very many Ecclesiastic affairs which will concern many Congregations equally and alike, which cannot be determined by any one. (2.) Because, the Pastors and Presbyters of particular Congregations will stand in need each one of another's help, and assistance mutually. (3.) Because, cases and difficulties may occur, more entangled, and intricate, than can be settled and composed by the Governors of any one Congregation. (4.) Seeing particular Congregations which lie nigh one to another, ought to shun divisions, and differences, and to live in peace and unity, it follows manifestly, that there ought to be Synods or Councils, consisting of the Presbyters of many particular congregations, which ought to be subordinate, to these Councils, and Synods. (5.) From Christ's own precept, and command, Tell the Church;Matth. 18. 15, 16, 17. For if our blessed Lord appointed, that for a single brothers offence, (he trespassing against GOD, or his brother, for gaining of him, and removing the Scandal) he be brought before the church, it follows by consequence, that the same course ought to be taken, when any one particular Congregation, offends against another, and remains obstinate in their scandalous Opinion, and Practise. For our blessed Lord, hath sufficiently prescribed a Remedy in this place, for removing of all Scandals, and Offences, whether of one brother against another, or of one Congregation against another. Nay, surely, since Christ hath consulted so much the conversion of one brother, that hath sinned, and gone astray; much more will he look to the good, and conversion of a whole Congregation. (6.) Because, any one single congregation, with one Pastor only, hath not the power of Ordination, an instance whereof cannot be given, either from Precept, or Practise, in all the New Testament. Nay, the Ordination of Ministers, in the New Testament, was always performed by a College of Pastors associate together; Acts 6. 6. Acts 13. 1, 2, 3. 1 Tim. 4. 14. (7.) Because, from this doctrine of the Independents these and the like absurdities will follow.

First, that the Prophets must be censured, and judged by way of authority, not by other Prophets, but by the multitude: and vulgar of the Congregation, which is contrary to 1 Cor 14. 32.

(2.) That all the Councils, in the times of the Apostles, which were convocated upon necessary occasions for matters which concerned many churches alike,were but during the time, and extraordinary, and so not obliging succeeding churches, though the occasions, and causes, why these Councils were convocated then, are, and will be to the end of the world. (3.) That private Believers, must be the Bishops of their own Bishops, Watch-men of their own Watch-men. No communion or fellowship among Ecclesiastic Ministers. That single and particular churches, though they have defiled, and pudled themselves, with the most black, and ugly Heresies, with the most abominable faults, and vices, yet are not liable to any Ecclesiastic Censure, but must be referred, to the immediate judgement of Christ, at the last Day. (4.) That a College of Pastors, and Presbyters convened together from several congregations, shall have no more power of the keys of the kingdom of Heaven, than any one particular man, that is able to look to the good of his brother. (5.) That a Pastor, out of his own Congregation, hath no power to administer the Sacraments, or to preach the Word, or exercise any Ministerial Act. From which Absurdities, it follows evidently, that this kind of Church Government labours under a manifest defect of the Means of Propagating the Gospel. (6.) That Christ, hath as many visible bodies, as there are particular congregations. That Men and Women, are to be accounted Members only of a particular congregation, and not of the Church Catholic. And that those who are excommunicated, are only cast out of a particular congregation not out of the Church Universal.

Quest. II. May not the Ministers of the Church of themselves, by virtue of their office, meet in Assemblies, with other fit Persons upon delegation from their Churches, when Magistrates are open enemies to the Christian reign?

Yes. Acts 15. 2, 4, 22, 23, 25.

Well then, do not the Erastians err, who maintain, that the Ministers of the Gospel have no right or power in themselves, or by virtue of their office to meet in a Synod, or Council?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Church of GOD, in the primitive times, had power in themselves, to convocate their own Assemblies, for Worship and Government, not only without, but against the consent of the civil Magistrate, as is evident from the Acts of the Apostles, and Church Histories. (2.) Though the power, and right of meeting in church Assemblies be visible in the constitution, and exercise, yet it is intrinsic and within the church, as well as the power of Preaching.

Quest. III. May Magistrates lawfully call a Synod of Ministers, and other fit persons to consult, and advise with, about matters of Religion?

Yes Isa. 49. 23. 1 Tim. 2. 1, 2. Matth. 2. 4, 5. Prov. 11. 14.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that the civil Magistrate hath no right or power to convocate Synods, or Councils, but that it belongs to the Bishop to convocate Diocesian Synods; To the Metropolitan to convocate Provincial Synods;

To the Primate and Patriarch to convocate National Synods: To the Pope only to convocate and call Eccumenical and general Synods?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, under the Old Testament, Councils, and Synods were appointed and called by godly Kings; 1 Kings 8. 1. 2 Kings 23. 1. 2 Chron. 29. 4. (2.) Because, it is the duty of the civil Magistrate being born within the church, to take care that Peace and Unity be preserved and kept in the Church: that the Truth and Word of GOD, be entirely, and soundly Preached and obeyed: that blasphemies and heresies be kept under and suppressed; that all corruptions in Worship and Discipline be reformed: that all GODS Ordinances be lawfully established, administered, and preserved. And if it should happen, that both Church and State Judicaturies, should make an universal defection from the purity of doctrine and worship received and acknowledged, it is the duty of a godly King, by virtue of his Regal Power, and Authority, to set about a work of Reformation, and to call and command all ranks of People to return to the true Worship and Service of GOD; Isa. 45. 23. Psalm 122. 7, 8, 9. Ezra 7. 23, 25, 26, 27, 28. Levit. 24. 16. Deut. 13. 5, 6, 12. 1 Chron. 13. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. 2 Kings 23. from the first verse to the 26. (3.) From the example of Constantine, that did convocate the first Nicene council: From Thedosius the elder, that did call the first council of Constantinople: From Theodosius the younger, that did call the first council at Ephesus: From Martianus, that did call the Chalcedon council.

Quest. IV. May all Synods or Councils since the Apostles days err?

Yes.

And have not many actually erred?

Yes.

Well then, doth not the Popish Church err, who maintain, that councils confirmed, and solemnized by the Popes authority, cannot err, neither in explaining Doctrines of Faith, nor in delivering Precepts, and Rules of Manners, common to the whole Church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, all the Priests, Levites, and Prophets of the Jewish church, who had the same Promises which the Christian church hath now under the New Testament; ( 1 Cor. 10. 3, 4. 2 Sam. 7. 16. Isaiah 49. 15, 16.) together with the High Priest have sometimes erred, as is clear from the following Scriptures;Isaiah 56. 10, 11. Jerem. 6. 13. Jerem. 14. 14. Hos. 9. 7, 8, 9. Mic. 3. 9. The Lords Prophets that were immediately guided, and inspired by him, must be excepted. (2.) Because, councils under the Old Testament, lawfully called, have often-times erred; 2 Sam. 6. 6. 3. Jer. 26. 7, 8, 9. 1 Kings 22. 6. And under the New Testament; John 9. 35. John 11. 47, 48, 52. Matth. 26, 57, 59, 65, 66. Acts 4. 5, 6, 17, 18. (3.) Because, the Pope cannot shew a proof of infallibility; Rom. 3. 4. (4.) Because, it is foretold in the New Testament, that many Pastors, and Teachers shall become false Prophets, and turn Seducers; and that Antichrist shall sit in the Temple of GOD, shewing himself that he is God; Mat. 24. 11, 24. Acts 20. 29, 30. 2 Peter 2. 1. 2 Thes. 2. 4. (5.) It is most evident, that many councils apporved and authorized by the Pope, have most foully erred, and that some have openly contradicted others.

OF THE STATE OF MEN AFTER DEATH,  AND OF THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD.

Question I. Are the Souls of the Righteous, being made perfect in holiness, received into the highest Heavens where they behold the Face of GOD in Light and Glory?

Yes. Acts 3. 21. Ephes. 4. 10.

Well then, do not the Greeks, Arminians, Anabaptists, and Papists err, who maintain, that the Souls of the Righteous are not presently after death, admitted to enjoy happiness, which consists in seeing of GOD; but are put into some Mansion, though it be not a Heavenly one; yet a place above Hell, where they enjoy, even until the Resurrection, some Heavenly Delight, and Recreation, without seeing of GOD?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Socinians err, who affirm, That the Souls of the Righteous after death, until the Resurrection, are extinguished, and put out, to speak so?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Souls of the Righteous after Death are with Christ in Heaven, and enjoy that blessed Vision; Phil. 1. 23. Acts 3. 2i. Ephes. 4. 10. (2.) Because, the Spirits of Just Men after Death return to GOD, and are received by GOD; Eccles. 12. 7. Acts 7. 59. Note, that Solomon only speaketh of the people of GOD. Yet some understand it of the Souls both of Believers and unbelievers, which are both sentenced by GOD, as supreme Judge, immediately when a man dies, every man to his place, the Souls of Believers to Heaven, of unbelievers to hell. (3.) Because, the Saints departed, together with the Angels, are said to sing perpetually Praises and Thanksgiving before His Throne; Rev. 4. 6, 9, 10, 11. Rev. 5. 8, 9, 10. Rev. 7. 9, 10. (4.) Because, Christ promised, that the Thief should be with him in Paradise, that same very day he died; Luke 23. 43. Paul also calls it the third Heaven; 2 Cor. 12. 2. 4. (5.) Because, the Spirits of just men, are said to be made perfect in holiness and glory, and placed in the Heavenly Jerusalem with the Angels; Heb. 12. 22. 23. (6.) Because, the Apostle says, that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved we have a building of GOD, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens; 2 Cor. 5. 1, 2. (7.) Because, the same Apostle says, therefore we are always confident, knowing that whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord; 2 Cor. 5. 6, 8. (8.) Because, the souls of the righteous after death are comforted, and carried into Abraham's bosom; Luke 16. 22. 25.

Quest. II. Are the souls of the wicked cast into hell, where they remain in torments, and utter darkness reserved to the judgement of the great day?

Yes. Luke 16. 23, 24. Acts 1. 25. Jude 6, 7. verses. 1 Peter 3. 19.

Well then, do not the Greeks, and others err, who maintain, that the souls of the wicked are not adjudged to hells torments, till after the resurrection?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Socinians err, who maintain, that the souls of the wicked shall never be tormented in hell?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the particular judgement of every single man, follows immediately his departure out of this life; Heb. 9 27. (2.) Because, the soul of the rich Glutton, after it departed from his body, was tormented in the flames of Hell; Luke 16. 22. 23. (3.) Because, the souls of wicked men departed go to their own place, that is to hell; Acts 1. 25. (4.) Because, the souls of wicked men, are no less punished in hell, than the Apostate Angels; Jude (5.) Because, the Spirits of those who in the time of Noah were disobedient are said to be in prison; 1 Peter 3. 19. This prison is Hell; Matth. 5. 26, 27.

Quest. III. Doth the Scripture acknowledge any other place than heaven and hell for souls departed from their bodies?

No.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who besides these two places, have devised other four.

First, a place called Limbus patrum, in which the Faithful, who died before Christ's passion, have been shut up, as in a dark prison, under ground; and being without torment, and for the time wanting happiness, have been kept close there until Christ's Resurrection and ascension into heaven.

Secondly, a place called Limbus infantum, in which Infants which die without Baptism, suffer the eternal punishment, not of Sense, but of Loss.

The third is a most pleasant Meadow, in which as in a Royal prison, the Souls that are in it, want happiness, yet suffer no punishment of Sense, except what ariseth from the delay of happiness, but only of Loss.

This place seems to be the Elisian Fields, taken out of the sixth book of Virgils Aeneiods.

The fourth place is called Purgatory, which is a middle place between heaven and hell, in which are the Saints, who have departed from this life, without making satisfaction by temporal punishments, for their venial sins, yet have gone thither for the guilt of their punishment, the fault whereof is pardoned in this life: that when they have satisfied and are well purged from every spot and blemish, they may be admitted to that blessed Vision in seeing GOD for ever.

Do not (I say) the Papists err, who besides heaven and hell maintain other four places, for souls departed?

Yes.

By what reasons do you confute Limbus patrum?

(1.) Because, the Souls of the Faithful that departed before Christ's passion, were made Inhabitants of the same Heavenly Jerusalem, with the Angels; Heb. 12. 22, 23. (2.) Because, the Spirits and Souls of the Faithful that died before Christ suffered, returned to GOD who gave them; Eccl. 3. 21. (3.) Because, the virtue of Christ's sacrifice did no less extend it self to Believers under the Old Testament, than to Believers under the New; Rev. 13. 8. (4.) From the example of Enoch, and of Moses, and Elias, which two before the passion of Christ, were seen upon the mount with him; Gen. 5. 24. 2 Kings 2. 11.Luke 9. 30, 31. Heb. 11. 5.

By what reasons confute you Limbus Infantum:

(1.) Because, the Covenant belongs to the Children of Believers though not baptized; in which Covenant, glory and life eternal are promised; Acts 2. 39. (2.) Because, Christ said, that the Kingdom of Heaven belonged to little children, though not baptized; Matth. 19. 14. (3.) Because, the Infants of the Israelites dying before the eight day, were not shut up in Limbus Infantum, as the Adversaries themselves confess. But the Nature and Essence of Baptism under the New Testament, and the Nature and Essence of Circumcision under the Old, are the same; Col. 2. 11, 12. (4.) All the Arguments which are brought against the absolute necessity of Baptism, do clearly overturn this fiction of Limbus Infantum.

Thirdly, There is no such place, as a most pleasant meadow, in which, as in a Senatorian prison, the Souls that are in it want Felicity; yet suffer no punishment of Sense. This was made evident in the First Question. Lastly, there is no such place as Purgatory. (1.) Because, there is no such thing as Venial sin, as it is explained by the Popish-church, upon which false Foundation, is built this fancy of Purgatory; Rom. 6. 23. (2.) Because, temporal punishments do not extend themselves beyond this life; Rom. 8. 18. 2 Cor. 4. 17, 18. 1 Peter 5. 10. For in this life only, the Godly receive their evil things, as the Wicked receive their good things; Luke 16. 25. (3.) Because, after the fault is pardoned, there remains no punishment to be undergone; Ezek. 18. 22. Psalm 32. 1, 2. Micah 7. 19. Rom. 8. 1, 33. (4.) Because, the Thief upon the Cross, that was converted, did not suffer afterwards any punishment in Purgatory; Luke 23. 43. Neither could his death, and confession upon the Cross, be accounted a perfect satisfaction (as the Adversaries affirm) because he did acknowledge, he had received the due reward of his deeds; Luke 23. 41. He that suffers as a Murderer, or as a Thief, or as an evil doer, his punishment cannot be accounted a satisfaction; 1 Peter 4. 15. (5.) Because, they that die in the Lord, rest from all their labours; Rev. 14. 13. (6.) Because, Christ's satisfaction for the sins of Believers, is most full, compleat, and perfect, and doth not need our imperfect satisfactions, whether for the Fault or the Punishment; Isaiah 53. chapter; Titus 2. 14. 1 John 1. 7. Heb: 10. 14. Col. 1. 20, 21, 22. Neither by our sufferings in Purgatory, in Christ's satisfaction applied to us. First, because our sufferings there cannot be an instrument for applying Christ's Merits to us. For on GODS part, we have the Word, Sacraments, and the Spirit as means, for applying his merits to us. On our part we have Faith. Was it ever heard of in the Word of GOD, that the Lord made use of exquisite torments for applying his Grace? To apply Mercy by the executing of Justice: Is forgiving debt, applied by exacting the debt? Shall pardon be applied to by the punishing of us?

Quest. IV. Will such as are found alive, at the last day not die but be changed?

Yes. 1 Thess. 4. 17. 1 Cor. 15. 51, 52.

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that such as are found alive at the last day shall die?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, Christ is ordained of GOD to be Judge of Quick and Dead; which distinction would be needless, if all truly Died; Act 10. 42. (2.) Because, the Apostle says (as was cited) we shall not all sleep but be changed: which place of Scripture is not to be read, we shall all therefore sleep, as the Papists say, putting in the Greek particle oun, for ou, therefore for not. Because this illative particle oun, cannot agree sufficiently with the Apostles Preface, Behold, I shew you a mystery: This Mystery is not death it self, but a change in place of death, which is a great Mystery indeed. (3.) As the Resurrection of many of the bodies of the Saints, was a preamble of the great Resurrection of our bodies; ( Mat. 27. 52.) So the translating of Enoch, that he might not see death, seems to be a preamble of this change in place of death Heb. 11. 9.

Quest. V. Shall the Dead be raised up, with the self same bodies and none other, although with different qualities, which shall be united again to their Souls for ever?

Yes. Job 19. 26, 27. 1 Cor. 15. 42, 43, 44.

Well then, do not the Socinians, Arminians, Anabaptists, Photinians, and Marcionites err, who maintain, that the same individual body, is not raised up, which we carried about with us here, and laid down in the dust, but another body made of Air, or of some matter more subtile than Air, altogether void of flesh and blood, made a-new by Christ?

Yes.

Do not likewise many of the Quakers err, who maintain also, That the same individual body is not raised again, but that there is a change thereof in substance, as well as in quality?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, it is evident from Scripture, Phil. 3. 21. that there shall be a transforming of those vile bodies at the Resurrection, to be fashioned after the glorious body of Christ; and so not the forming and making of a new one, which is hard to conceive, if the same individual body should not be raised, and if this change here spoken of, be as well in substance, as in quality. (2.) Because, the Apostle says, He that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken your mortal bodies (and therefore not bodies made of Air) by his Spirit, that dwelleth in you; Rom. 8. 11. (3.) The same Apostle says, For this corruption must put on incorruption, and this mortality must put on immortality; 1 Cor. 15. 53. (4.) Because, the Justice of GOD requires, that the same individual bodies shall receive rewards, or punishments, which have done good or evil, while life remained; 2 Cor. 5. 10. Rom. 2. 6. Eph. 6. 8. (5.) Because, the body of Christ, who is the efficient cause of our Resurrection, ( 1 Cor. 15. 4, 12, 13, 16.) rose again that same individual body; Luke 24. 39, 40.

Quest. VI. Shall the bodies of the unjust by the power of Christ, be raised to dishonor?

Yes. Acts 24. 15. John 5. 28. 29. Phil. 3. 21.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain, there shall be no resurrection of the unjust?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Apostle says, We must all appear before the Judgment-seat of Christ, that every man may receive the things done in the body; 2 Cor. 5. 10. (2.) Because, the hour cometh, in the which, all that are in their graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life: and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation: John 5. 28, 29. (3.) Because, the Apostle says, being accused before Tertullus, there shall be a Resurrection of the dead, both of the Just and Unjust; Acts 24. 15. (4.) Because, according to the Enochs Prophesy, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his Saints, to execute Judgement upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them; Jude verses 14, 15. (5.) Because, many of them that sleep in the dust of the Earth, shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame, and everlasting contempt; Daniel 12. 2.

OF THE LAST JUDGEMENT.

Question. Shall the wicked who know not GOD, and obey not the Gospel of Jesus Christ, be cast into everlasting torments, and be punished with everlasting destruction, from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power?

Yes. Matth. 25. 31, to the end; Rom. 9. 22, 23. Acts 3. 19. 2 Thes. 1. 7, 8, 9.

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who defining eternal death to be the extinguishing of the Body and Soul, maintain, that the wicked are to suffer no torment in hell; and that their whole punishment

will be to be deprived of Eternity, or annihilated, that is, both Soul and Body turned into NOTHING?

Yes.

Do not likewise the Origenists, and some Anabaptists err, who think, that not only the wicked, but the Devils themselves, after many torments in hell, shall be received by GOD into favour, and be made blessed and happy?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1.) Because, the Apostle affirms, almost in so many words, that which we have asserted; 2 Thes. 1. 7, 8, 9, 10. (2.) Because, Life Eternal, and Death Eternal, are in Scripture opposed to one another in the same sense; Mat. 25. 46. But Life Eternal in Scripture, is not taken for being simply Eternal, but for being Eternally happy, or to be in a blessed Eternal state and condition; Psalm 133. 3. Therefore, Eternal death must be taken in Scripture not for annihilation, or being turned into Nothing; but for an Eternal wretched and miserable state and condition. (3.) Because, the Scripture says, but the children of the kingdom shall be cast into utter darkness, there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth; Matth. 8. 12, 13. (4.) Because, the Scripture affirms expressly, that the wicked are tormented in hell; Luke 16. 24. Next, there are some degrees of torments there, but there are no degrees in non esse, that is, in not to be. (5.) Because, Abraham says expressly, there can no man pass from the place of torment, to the place of bliss and happiness; Luke 16. 26. (6.) Because, the torments of the wicked are called a Worm that dieth not; a fire that cannot be extinguished. (7.) Because, the Scripture says, that the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever; Rev.14. 11. Rev. 19. 3. (8.) Because, the wicked will be carried into everlasting fire, prepared for the Devil and his angels; Matth. 25. 46. And the same wicked, are to rise again to shame, and everlasting contempt; Daniel 12. 2. And to suffer the vengeance of Everlasting fire; Jude verse 7. And now only is the accepted time, and now is the day of Salvation; 2 Cor. 6. 2.

FINIS.

List of Heresies

An alphabetical list of the proper and patronymic names of the authors of the old and late heresies confuted in the foregoing treatise.

A

Adamites: so called from one Adam, the author of their sect, or from the first man Adam, whose nakedness they imitate in their stoves and conventicles, after the example of Adam and Eve in paradise.

Anthropomorphitans: so called from two Greek  words, Anthropus, a man, and Morphe, a form, figure, or shape, because they maintained that God had a body, and was endued with human Shape.

Arians: from Anus a Lybian by birth, and a presbyter of Alexandria by profession. This heresy brake out under Conistantine, 290 years after Christ, and over ran a great part of the world. It was condemned in the first famous council of Nice, gathered by  Constantine’s appointment, anno 325.

Arminians: so called from James Arminius, divinity reader in Leyden, who, i6og, published and maintained five articles, which have occasioned great trouble to the church of God, being eagerly maintained by his followers, called remonstrants. The live articles are concerning predestination, redemption, God’s grace, freewill, and perseverance.

Anabaptists: so called from re-baptizing, had for their author one Nicholas Storck, who pretended familiarity with God, by an angel promising him a kingdom, if he would reform the church, and destroy the princes that would hinder him.

Antinomians: so called from two Greek words, anti, against, and nomos, the law. They sprung up from one John Agricola, who affirmed, that the moral law was altogether needless, and that Christians were not tied to the observation thereof. This sect sprung up about the year 1535.

Arabians: so named from Arabia, the country where their heresy was broached, and maintained under Philip the emperor, 217 years after Christ.

B

Brounists: so called from their author, Mr. Robert Broun, of Northamptonshire in England, sometime a schoolmaster at Southwark, hold there is no other pure church in the world, but among themselves as did the Donatists of old.

D

Dominicans: one of the popish orders, so called from Dominicus, a Spaniard. They were instituted by pope Innocent III anno 1205 This man with twelve abbots, were appointed to preach down the doctrine of the Albigenees, who by their preaching did same religion with the old Non-conformists in England who were called Puritans.

Donatists: from Donatus, born in Humidia, in Africa who, because Cecilian was preferred bishop before him to the bishopric of Carthage, accused him, and all the bishops which had ordained him, to be Traditores; that is, such as had delivered, up their Bibles to be burned by idolators, under the persecution of Maximius.

E

Epicurians: from one Epicurus, an old heathen philosopher, who placed men’s chief happiness in the pleasure of the mind. He denied providence, and taught the world was made by the concourse of atoms.

Eutychians: so named from Eutyches, an abbot of Constantinople. This man’s heresies were condemned by the fourth general council held at Chalcedon under the emperor Martianus, anno 451.

Erastians: so called from Thomas Erastus, a physician in Heidelberg in Germany, who following this man’s foot steps, having taken away from the church all discipline and government, and put it into the hands of the civil magistrate.

Enthusiasts: so called from the Greek word, Enthusiadso, or Euthusiao, in Latin Fanatico I am inspired, or acted, with a prophetical or divine fury.

F

Franciscans: another popish order, so called from one Francis, an Italian merchant, who before his conversion, as the Papists say, lived a wicked and debauched life. He gathered many disciples, anno 1198, and appointed them to be obedient to Christ and the pope.

Familists: or of the family of love, whose author was one Henry Nicholas, a Hollander. The first founder was one David George of Delst who called himself the true David, that should restore the kingdom to Israel. They maintained many dangerous opinions.

G

Greeks: are those who inhabit Greece, viz. Macedon, Epirus, Bulgaria, Moldavia, &c. They place much of their religion in the worship of the virgin Mary; and of painted, but not carved, images.

H

Hermerobaptists: so called from two Greek words, Hermera, a day, and Baptidso, to baptise, because they maintained, that men and women, according to their faults committed every day, ought every day to be baptised.

J

Jesuits: so called from our blessed Saviour’s name, Jesus, which they falsely assume to themselves. They were instituted anno 1540, by Ignatius Loyola, first a soldier; they are all well bred in philosophy, and school divinity, and in many other arts and sciences, and therefore they are employed as emissaries from the pope and his conclave to advance the popish religion.

Judaisers: so called, because they think that the Jewish ceremonies are still in force, and binding on us who live under the gospel.

I

Independents: so called, because they will have every particular congregation to be ruled by their own laws, without dependency upon any other church.

L

Libertine: from the liberty and freedom they take and hive to others to commit sin. Their first author that whatsoever good or evil we did, was not done by us, but by God’s Spirit in us, and many other blasphemous opinions.

Lutherans: who so call themselves, lyingly and falsely, from Martin Luther, that eminent man of God.

M

Manicheans: from one Manos, a Persian by birth, and a servant by condition. The Manichean sect was the sink of all former heresies.

Macedonians: so called from Macedonus bishop of Constantinople, 312 years after Christ. Their heresy was condemned in the second general council held at Constantinople, by Gratian and Theodosius, anno 380. His followers were called Pneumato machians, fighters against the Holy Spirit, Pneuma, a Spirit, and Machesthai, to fight.

Marcionites: from one Marcion, a Paphlagonian, hear the Euxine sea, who was Cerdon’s scholar, a grand heretic. He maintained Cerdou’a heretics at Rome, about 133 years after Christ.

N

Nestorians: so called from Nestorius, patriarch of Constantinople, who broached his errors under Theodosius the younger, 400 years after Christ. They made Christ to be two persons, as he had two natures. This heresy was condemned by the third general council, held at Ephesus, under Theodosius, the younger, anno 431.

Novatians: so called from Novatus, wito lived under Decius the emperor, 220 years after Christ. He was an African by birth.

0

Origenists: so called from the famous Origen: His errors began to spread about the year of Christ 247 under Aurelian the emperor, and continued about 334 years.

P

Pneumatomachians: See letter M.

Pelagians: from Pelagius, a Briton, as they say, by birth. A monk at Rome, afterwards a presbyter, under Theodosius the younger Puritans, otherwise Kathari, because they esteemed themselves purer and holier than others.

Photinians: from Photinius, born in the lesser Galatia. He began to spread his heresies about the year 323 at Syrmium, where he was bishop under Constantinus the emperor.

Papists are too well known: they are to be found in every page almost of the book.

Q

Quakers: so called, because some times they use to quake and tremble when they prophesy, or when they are in a rapture.

S

Sociniant: so called from one Faustus Socinus, an Italian of Stena, they place all religion in the old condemned heresies, following their matter, a most vile heretic.

Sabellians: so called from Sabellus, an African by birth. His heresies began anno 224.

Separatists: so called, because they withdrew themselves from the Christian communion, and followed others in the worship of God.

Sceptics: commonly called Seekers, maintain, that the whole universal church hath perished a little after the apostles times, and are not to this day restored, until Christ from heaven shall send new apostles for raising up again the church visible.

Sabbatarians: so called, because they observe the Jewish Sabbath, imagining there is no precept or example in the New Testament, for observing the first day of the week.

T

Tritheits, or Tritheotae: so called, because they divided the indivisible essence of the Godhead into three parts; the one they called the Father, the other the Son, the third the Holy Ghost.

Tertullianists: were so called, from that famous lawyer and divine, Tertullian, who lived under Severus the emperor, about 170 years after Christ.

V

Vorstians: from one Vorstus, an old heretic, who taught, that God had a body, and was endued with parts, as the Anthropomorphitans affirmed.

Vaninians: from one Vaninus, a great promoter of Atheism. He was publicly burnt at Tholouse.

-----

MONERGISM BOOKS

Truth's Victory Over Error by David Dickson, Copyright © 2018

All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. By payment of the required fees, you have been granted the non-exclusive, non-transferable right to access and read the text of this e-book on-screen. No part of this text may be reproduced, transmitted, downloaded, decompiled, reverse engineered, or stored in or introduced into any information storage and retrieval system, in any form or by any means, whether electronic or mechanical, now known or hereinafter invented, without the express written permission of Monergism Books.

ePub and .mobi Editions May 2018 Requests for information should be addressed to: Monergism Books, PO Box 491, West Linn, OR 97068

Table of Contents

CHAP I.: Of the Holy Scriptures

CHAP. II. Of God, and of the Holy Trinity

CHAP. III. Of the God's Eternal Decrees

CHAP. IV. Of Creation

CHAP. V. Of Providence

CHAP. VI. Concerning the Fall of Man, of Sin...

CHAP. VII. Of God's Covenant with Man

CHAP. VIII. Of Christ the Mediator

CHAP. IX. Of Free-Will

CHAP. X. Of Effectual Calling

CHAP. XI. Of Justification

CHAP. XII. Of Adoption

CHAP. XIII. Of Sanctification

CHAP. XIV. Of Saving Faith

CHAP. XV. Of Repentance

CHAP. XVI. Of Good Works

CHAP. XVII. Of the Perseverance of the Saints

CHAP. XVIII Of Assurance of Grace & Salvation

CHAP. XIX. Of the Law of God

CHAP. XX. Of Christian Liberty

CHAP. XXI. Of Religious Worship, & the Sabbath Day

CHAP. XXII. Of Lawful Oaths and Vows

CHAP. XXIII. Of the Civil Magistrate.

CHAP. XXIIII. Of Marriage and Divorce

CHAP. XXV. Of the Church.

CHAP. XXVII. Of the Sacraments

CHAP. XXVIII. Of Baptism.

CHAP. XXIX. Of the Lord's Supper.

CHAP XXX. Of Church Censures.

CHAP. XXXI. Of Synods and Councils

CHAP. XXXII. Of the State of Man After Death, And the Resurrection of the Dead

CHAP. XXXIII. Of the Last Judgement.

List Of Heresies