CHAP. I. Of Catechising. Its Name, Ʋse Secular and Religious.

AND the first thing that comes to be spoken of concerning Cate­chising, is its Name. And [...]the rather [...]use to begin here; because that the true notice of the Name, will help us [...]o that of the thing. Now that there [...]s a peculiar Force and Significancy, in Words, and that we cannot thereof be safely ignorant, is but too evident by those many Errours, that have in all Ages risen from meer Verbal Mistakes. And therefore if we could once be so [...]appy as to find out the true Impor­ [...]ance of Words, and to hit upon such an agreement between them and things, [...]s not to cloud in Speech, what is clear in Nature, but plainly to express things as they are in themselves; that then [...]e great cause of Error, in all sorts of Learning, would be removed: For it is an Observation that will not quickly be [...]ntiquated, That the confounding those [...]hings in Language, which in their Na­ture are distinct, and the expressing [Page 6] of different Matters by the same, or Words of near affinity and likeness, hath in all Sciences been a fruitful Mother of Erroneous Apprehensions.

And this is also plain in the Affairs of Religion; in which not only a perverse mistake in old Words, but a liberty of introducing new, has ever proved fatal, and destructive: For out of new words, New Opinions insensibly creep into the Church, and with Age grow too strong for her Discipline: which being foreseen by the Holy Nicene Fathers, it moved them to decree against the use of such Words in matters of Faith, as were not easily to be deduced from, or directly found in Sacred Scripture. And upon the same account Tertullian would not have our Ears accustom'd to New words. Socrat. lib. 1. c. 6. Advers. Haeret. Cap. 16. And for the like reason St. Basil could not be induced to forego one Iota in the old Form, when he was sollicited by the Arians. A cau­tiousness which we may conceive, was wisely made use of by those Reverend Persons, through whose means, by Gods Blessing, we enjoy our Religion in its present Reformation: For we find that they had an especial care not to inno­vate in Words or Forms, when they could [Page 7] with due security retain the old. And [...]o instance in what has nearest affinity with our present Subject, we see that they have stiled that Breviary of Reli­gion, which they compiled, or rather collected out of the best and most an­cient Models of that kind, by the name of Catechism: Which in its general no­tice signifies a familiar and easie Me­thod of instilling the rudiments of any Art, Science or Faculty. Which being done by a frequent repetition of the same thing, Catechising is derived from a Word importing the reciprocation of the Voice, after the manner of an Ec­cho. And in this Sense it is often to be met with in Secular Authors, from whom it was adopted into Religion, and there retains the same Notion and Office. For by Catechising, the Church hath always taught the Fundaments and chief Principles of Religion vivâ voce. And those that were thus taught, the Greek Writers usually call Catechumens, and the Latine Hearers; which might as well respect the manner of their In­struction, as their Fellowship and Com­munion with the Church: in which they went no further than to be admitted to hear the Principles of Christian Faith, made plain unto them. And to Cate­chising, [Page 8] thus understood, there will be no inconvenience to affirm, that St. Paul alluded, Rom. 10.17. the Ear being as properly the Door of Religion, as of a­ny other Science. That Catechising was a way of Instruction, not to be restrain'd to those Catechumens so frequently mentioned in Church History, and the Ancient Canons; but that all Believers did therein Communicate, will be made good in another Place of this Discourse.

But if it be doubted whether this be the native meaning of Catechising, it then follows that we have recourse unto the occasion whence it arose. For if Words are notes of that which the Speaker conceiveth, and Conceptions are Signs representing that which is spoken of; it is necessary that he who would rightly understand Words, should have recourse unto the things whence they come. Now the Church (which is Gods School) hath ever used Catechi­sing as a Term of Art; and we are there­fore to understand it with restraint to such matters as the Church is accustomed thereby to instruct. Following herein the Rule of Thomas, that in Words we must not so much respect their original, ex­act, and precise signification and deri­vation, [Page 9] as whereunto by use of Speech they are applied. 2. 2. q. 92. Art. 1. Now seeing that the Church, which is Gods School, hath still by Catechising taught the first notices of Religion, we may safely cloath it with this Definition: Catechism is a short and easie Instruction, which explains the Mysteries of Faith, and the whole Body of Christian Doctrine, in [...]uch a manner as may be plainly understood [...]y the lowest Capacities. And if there be any thing cloudy in this definition, it will receive sufficient light from what is spoken of in the following Chapter.

CHAP. II. The Age of Catechism. The Institution of Adam's and Abraham's Family. The Schools of the Prophets. The continual use of Catchising among the Jews, parti­cularly after the Erection of Synagogues. Their Benefit thereby.

HAving found that Catechism is but Greek for a peculiar manner of Instruction, and that since it was received into the Church, doth signifie a brief and plain Institution of the first and chief grounds of Religion; we may [Page 10] by the Laws of concluding, infer that Catechising is as ancient as the Princi­ples which are thereby instructed; and these are as old as the first Man. For Religion began when God was Adam's Catechist, and gave and instructed him in that Law; in whose observation con­sisted the main Articles of his continu­ing in a state of excellent Felicity. In which if he had tarried till he had had an Off-spring grown up to a Capacity of a Religious Education, he would, no doubt, have taught them to observe that Law, which his Maker for that end had assigned him. For we need not be scru­pulous to suppose that Adam would have been as careful of his Childrens Instru­ction before the Fall, as he was after it. Some traces of whose care are to be perceived in his Sons Deportment, when they brought their Offerings to Gods Altar as Testimonies of Gratitude and Devotion: Which could not be the effect of meer Natural Instinct, but of Adam's Pious Diligence to bring them up Religiously. And though meer Na­tural Reason may teach Man a Belief and Worship of God, yet to do it with the circumstances of the two first Bre­thren exceeds, its Power.

The Understanding and Practice of [...]ne Primordial Law, of not eating the forbidden Fruit, would have been suffi­cient for Adam and all his Posterity; as having in its Womb (to use Tertullian) all those Moral Precepts which were af­terwards delivered by Moses, Exod. 20. and by our great Law-giver reduced to Two Heads: Love to God; Love to our Neighbour, St. Mark 12.30, 31. For if they had observed the first, they would not have broken Gods Commandment; and if they had done the like to the Se­cond, they would not by yielding to the perswasion of the Serpent, have de­stroyed themselves; but by love to both, have fulfilled the whole Law. As Ter­tullian argues, advers. Judaeos, Cap. 2. That it was needful for Adam's first Issue to be instructed in this Primordial Law, where­in the whole Morality consisted, none I think will gainsay: That Adam (for there was none else to do it) did therein in­struct them, we may conclude, not on­ly from the necessity of the thing, which so Wise a Man as the first could not but perceive; but also from Adams Ju­stice, to make some amends to his Chil­dren in their Education, for what he had damaged them by his own Dis [...]bedience. And if the manner of the Instruct [...]on [Page 12] be demanded, I shall content my self with the Opinion of that Rabbin, who ventured (discoursing him upon this Sub­ject) to derive their [Leback] or pre­sent Catechism from Adam, whom they rationally imagine to have taught his Sons a short and plain Description of the necessary Principles of Holiness and Honesty: which are the Sum of all Catechism.

But that which yet affords us a more evident attestation of Catechising, or de­livering and instructing the Rudiments of Religion, vivâ voce, in the First Ages of the World, is the unquestionable Tra­dition of those Precepts which pass un­der the name of Noah: Into which if we look attentively, they will easily be discerned to have been the Universal Ca­techism of all Mankind, and to contain a compleat Scheme of Duties towards God and the Neighbour.

Now among these Precepts some were greater and more Famous, others of an Inferiour and Obscurer rank. Those of the former condition are here spo­ken of, and usually set down after this manner.

• 1. Against strange Worship or Ido­latry.
• [Page 13]2. Against Blasphemy, or the Cursing of the most Holy Name.
• 3. Against Effusion of Blood, or Mur­der.
• 4. Against Revealing of Nakedness, or Adultery.
• 5. Against Theft and Rapine.
• 6. concerning Civil Justice, and O­dience.
• 7. Against Eating the Limb of a li­ving Creature.

Whereof the two first respect our Demeanour toward God; the next Four belong to the Carriage of one Man to­ward another; and the last forbids all outrageous cruelty to other living Crea­tures.

But how this last should be reckon'd in the number of those Precepts of Na­tural Right, common to the whole Hu­man Race, is not so easily to be appre­hended; especially when 'tis consider'd that it was not heard of till after the Flood, when God said unto Noah, coming out of the Ark, Flesh with the Life, thereof, which is the Blood thereof, shall ye not eat, Gen. 9.4. Where the eating of Flesh is not simply prohibited, but the abscinding and Eating the Limbs of living Creatures. And a late Author gives an Instance hereof in Lambs stones.

The Reasons usually render'd of this Seventh Precept, are the avoidance first of Cruelty; and next, of Commu­nicating in the Customs of Idolatrous Nations: Which at once protest both against its Age and Morality. And up­on this account it is, that learned Per­sons have excluded it the number of Na­tural Precepts, and set it in Noah's Ritu­al of Ceremonies. But there is a ge­neral Agreement among the Jewish Ma­sters, that the first Six Precepts were gi­ven to Adam from the very begin­ning of things, and were the common Law of all Nations under Heaven.

But no such matter can be found concerning the Seventh: Which is so totally passed over in silence by Job: who yet takes notice of all the rest, and justifies his integrity by their ob­servance. And because this perhaps is not obvious to every Reader, it may be no way impertinent, to note the Texts, where the Idumaean makes his profession.

• 1. Against Idolatry, Job 31.26.
• 2. Against Blasphemy, Job 1.5.
• 3. Against Homicide, Chap. 31.29.
• 4. Against Adultery, Chap. 31.9.
• [Page 15]5. Against Theft, Chap. 31.7.
• 6. Against Injustice, Chap. 29.7. &c.

And though these six Precepts, with­out any remote Collection, may be de­duced from the abovesaid Texts; yet in his whole Book, Job has not left the least intimation of the seventh: which could not have escaped the observation of so wise a Prince, if therein a Natu­ral Equity had been concerned. St. Au­gustine, in his Eighteenth Book and Fourtyseventh Chapter of the City of God, affirms that Job was neither Native, Israelite, nor a Proselite adopted by their Law; but born and bred in Idu­maea: And therefore professed not the six Precepts upon the account of a Jewish Tradition, but because they were the common Religion of Mankind.

Before the Law, saith Tertullian, was written in Tables of Stone, there was an unwritten Law, which was given neither in Horeb, nor Sinai, nor in the Desert; but in Paradise. And was na­turally both known and kept by the Fathers; who from the observing of the Equity and Justice of this Natural Law, received Titles of Approbation and Honour; as Noah was called a just man, and Abraham the friend of God: Tertul. c. 2. adversus Judeos.

And that this unwritten Law given in Paradise, was the six Precepts, we may conclude from what Mr. Seldon tells us out of Mosche ben Maimon, who (saith he) peremptorily delivers, that the six Precepts were given to the first Man from the very beginning of the World. And therefore ought rather to bear the name of Adam than of Noah; for the latter can be entitled to them no otherwise, than as in him all Mankind was preser­ved, as in the former they had been begun. In which sense all Nations and Kindreds of Men, were called the Sons or Children of Noah: Among which there was no exteriour Badg of distinction, till God gave Abraham the Sacrament of Circumcision; which did not lessen or abate the extent and power of the six Precepts: for after Circumcision, the Jews as well as the rest of Men stood obliged to their observance. Nor indeed was it possible to be otherwise, seeing that therein was contained the Universal Religion. And at the coming of Moses, these Precepts were so far from being evacuated, that they were confi [...]med, with the addition of others concerning the Sabbath, the Reverence of Parents, and the very thought of defalking other mens Goods. All which [Page 17] make up the Ten words or Decalogue. And that was now Engraven in Tables of Stone, which before was only writ­ten in Tables of Flesh. But the six Precepts were the Catechism of the World from Adam to Noah, who recei­ved the Seventh. In which condition Religion continued till Abraham recei­ved the Precept of Circumcision, upon which came the great distinction of Na­tions in respect of Worship. And now the Jews had eight Precepts for the Rule of Duties, under which they continued until the time that God at Mara gave them a Statute and an Ordinance; and by spaces filled up their Ritual.

But that which most imports the pre­sent Subject, is the manner how the First six Precepts were instructed: Which without doubt was vivâ voce, or by an Oral Institution: for certainly of things unwritten, there can be no other means to instil and propagate their knowledg: For notwithstanding that these Precepts contain'd such an apparent Equity and Right, as could be by none denyed, who therein had once been duly in­formed, yet there was a necessity of competent means to procure this Infor­mation. For let Characters be never so large and evident in themselves, yet [Page 18] the fairest Paper cannot exhibit them, till thereon they be duly placed. And if the Soul of Man be at first as a Book wherein nothing is, and yet every thing may be written; then either Education or Instruction, Use or Discipline must of necessity fill up this blank. And the Rasa Tabula of mans Soul, as it is most susceptive, so is it likewise most con­cerned to be first Engraven with those things which indispensibly respect his Duties toward God and his Neighbour; (the Contents of the six Precepts) And that the Soul cannot be otherwise fur­nished therewith, than by Oral Instituti­on or Catechism, will be granted by all who would not have this Table writ up­on just like those which Moses received in the Mount.

But what in this case may seem but darkly probable in the two Patriarchs of Mankind, is conceived to be clear and evident in the Father of the Faithful. For Authors of no contemptible Credit, collect from that Encomium God gave Abraham, for his foreseen care to in­struct his Children and Household [to keep he way of the Lord, and to do Ju­stice and Judgment] Gen. 18.19. that this manner of instruction is there spo­ken of. For albeit that to do Justice and [Page 19] Judgment is a Principle naturally im­printed upon Mans Soul, in a Character no Mortal Power can efface; yet it was Morally impossible for Abrahams Fami­ly to keep the [way of the Lord:] That is, to be acquainted with the Purport and Condition of that Covenant God had made with Abraham; where there was no Divine Inspiration, nor any Written Word to guide them; unless Abraham by a gentle and easie Method, introduced them into the knowledg of what so intimately concerned them. And not to be scrupulous about words or forms of Speech, it is more than pro­bable, that this Holy Man taught his Family vivâ voce, or familiarly by word of mouth, which is the true and genuine Sense of that whereof we now speak.

But not to place any strength in this Instance, nor in what is observed to this Purpose, either in the Institution of Jehoash by Jehoiada the Priest, nor what Solomon insinuates concerning himself; nor in what the Rabbins assert of the many houses of Catechism that were in Hierusalem; nor in what some write concerning the Schools of the Prophets, how that one part of their employment was to Catechize: not placing, I say, [Page 20] any strength in these Instances, which might be urged, as they have been, in favour of the Antiquity of Catechism; I shall fix upon that which yields both a more obvious and certain Testimony of its Ancientness, namely; That the Jews have continually had, and to this day have the practice of Catechism, by which they introduce their Youth into the knowledg of God, and the Rites of his Worship. 'Tis true, there is some difference in the time when this Institu­tion is begun: For the Ancient Jews be­gan not to Teach their Children the Principles of their Religion, till they were compleat Thirteen years of Age; but the Modern Jews in the Eastern Parts especially, begin much more ear­ly. And this they do, (as Aaròn Benetás a Sabio in Barbary told me) because of their unsettlement, and for fear a sud­den removal should prevent them in this Duty.

It is very remarkable, that no Foot­steps of Catechizing appears in the Service of the Temple; which was in­deed so wholly Ceremonious, that it may be doubted whether ought of Mo­ral Religion (the chief of Catechism) was therein either thought of or design­ed. Indeed after the Erection of Syna­gogues [Page 21] there appear great indications, that this way of instruction was in no vulgar request: But then in fixing the certain time when these Religious Edi­fices were Erected, there is small agree­ment among the Learned. That Syna­gogues were built before the Jews re­turn from Babylon, is very uncertain. But after they were returned, it is plain that their Land was full of these Houses dedicated to Gods publick Service: wherein all parts of Divine Worship (except Sacrificing) were celebrated. And they may be said to have had that Relation to the Temple, which Paro­chial Churches have now to the Cathe­dral. But not to dispute about the An­tiquity and Quality of Jewish Syna­gogues, that which I would observe therein, as most agreeable to the thing in hand, is, That Catechizing was (at feast) a Principal part of that Teaching, which was therein frequented. And to attest this remark, one known Passage [...]ut of Epiphanius, compared with ano­ [...]her in Fl. Josephus, are all the Autho­rities that are thought needful to be pro­duced.

Epiphanius speaking of the Scribes (who were the chief Masters of the Syna­gogues) saith that they were [...] [Page 22] [...], Reporters of the Law; and that they taught [...], a kind of Grammatical knowledg therein. And Josephus writes, that by vertue of this Teaching the Law, the Jews were as ready to answer any Question de­manded of them concerning it, as to their own Name. And the reason he renders of this readiness, is very obser­vable, as to the present Theme, which is this, Because learning the Principles of their Religion as soon as ever they were come to knowledg, they kept them firmly imprinted [...], in their Souls or Minds. And how well the Circumstan­ces of this way of instructing the Law, suits with Catechizing in the most ob­vious Notion, I leave the impartial to judg.

Now that the things thus taught were not barely the meer words of the Law, and their naked Reading (as some have supposed,) may be concluded from the good effect and influence which this in­struction had upon the instructed. For we find that it preserved them in the true Worship of the true God; which was a work too high to be accomplished by such low means, as naming, spelling, joyning Letters and Syllables together, and such other Abcedarian and Grammatical [Page 23] Niceties. And that by this instruction the Jews were preserved in the true Worship of the true God, is excellent­ly observed in this particular, namely, That albeit the Hebrew Nation, before their Captivity, had Prophets to in­struct them in the true Worship of God, yet they were always falling into Idola­try. But when they were returned out of Babylon, though they wanted Pro­phets, yet they kept close, and faithfully adhered to the Worship of the True God. (Though it must not be denyed but that many Corruptions and he­trodox Conceits were therein retained.) And the Reason that hereof is rendered, is, the instruction used in the Syna­gogues: Whereby they were so through­ly grounded in what they professed, and so firmly and early rooted in the Know­ledg and Service of God, that their defection there from was even Morally impossible. But when they wanted this plain way of being thus Catechised, they fell into all those Evils, which are the undeniable Consequences of the want of Catechising, even Diversities of Opinions, Sects, and Divisions.

St. Paul Arguing with the Gnostick, and concluding him excuseless in what he did, useth this Topick: That he had [Page 24] not only the Law in readiness to Teach him otherwise, but had already therein been a Catechumen: But whether we may hence infer, That the Old Syna­gogue had a formal Catechism like the Modern, I shall not temerariously pro­nounce. Yet something to this purpose may be collected from those Commen­taries which pass under the name of St. Ambrose: Where we find the Office of those Doctors mentioned, 1 Cor. 12.28. thus expounded: Illos dicit Docto­res, &c. He calls those Doctors or Teachers, who in the Church instruct­ed Children in Reading and retaining their Lessons, according to the Custom of the Synagogue; for their Tradition hath passed unto us. If you ask me what the Lessons were, which the Do­ctors taught the Children; I answer, The Principles of Religion. If you de­mand the manner how they were Taught; I reply, In a manner sutable to their Capacities. If again you de­mand what that manner was; I return, Catechizing, in the native and com­mon acception of the Word. But if Catechizing should be ill looked upon, as being a Tradition derived from the Jews; then the greatest part of Christi­anity may be had under a jealous aspect [Page 25] upon the same account: for it is most certain, that a large share both of Chri­stian Rites and Doctrines were derived f [...]om Judaism, which was not to be laid desolate by Christianity, but compleated and reformed. The Primitive Christia­nity being (according to Mr. Selden) the [...]awful and Prophetick Off-spring of the Old Judaism.

CHAP. III. Catechising in times of the Apostles. Evi­dences thereof in St. Pauls Epistles. The Contents of their Catechism.

BUt how dim soever the traces of this kind of instruction be in the Jewish Dispensation, yet the Foot-steps thereof are more traceable in the Gospel. Where Catechism is not obscurely inti­mated, if we may rely any thing on the Words and Sentences which therein occur to this purpose.

And in the First place, it cannot be denied, but that in the inspired Epistles we plainly read of two sorts of Christi­ans, namely, such as were newly ad­mitted into the Church, compared by St. Peter to New-born Babes, 1 Pet. 2.2. [Page 26] and such as had been therein a longer time; called by St. Paul the Perfect, in respect of their greater Progress in Chri­stian Religion; or the wisdom which de­scends from above, or which Christ came to Teach and Infuse, St. Jam. 3.17. To the former or these they gave Milk, and instructed them in the easier Points of Religion: But strong Meat was or­dained for the later. Who having been first well Catechised in Christianity, were capable of higher Mysteries. And of this we have a clear illustration in the sixth to the Hebrews, where we first read of the [...], The Do­ctrine, or Discourse, of the beginning of Christ! Or (as we now read it) the Prin­ciples of the Doctrine of Christ: That is, a Catechism which contained a brief Summary of those Principles which were necessary for every Christian to learn, and to be laid as a Foundation meet for the Superstructure of higher Mysteries, and matters of a deeper reach; such as the Priest-hood of Mel­chizedeck, and how he was a Type of Christ, Heb. 7. And of these later St. Paul would not intreat, till he saw the former so faithfully received, belie­ved and practised, as that they might be laid aside for the present.

Now the [...], or Principles wherein Christians were first instructed, are thus reckon'd by the Apostle: First, Repen­tance from dead works: Secondly, Faith towards God: Thirdly, The Do­ctrine of Baptism: Fourthly, Impositi­on of hands, or Confirmation: Fifthly, The Article of the Resurrection from the dead: And Lastly, The certainty of Eternal Judgment. These were the chief and main Points of the Apostles Catechism, the first Principles of the O­racles of God, the Rudiments of Chri­stian Religion, saith our Old Marginal Note, or the Catechism wherein the younger sort of those times were in­structed. And these Articles now men­tioned, or some such like, were (no doubt) that Form of Doctrine, that manner of Catechizing which was deli­vered to the Romans, Rom. 6.17. or as our Margin reads out of the Greek, whereunto ye were deliv [...]red or given up: Where the ordinary Phrase is changed by the Apostle. For albeit to say, To this form of Doctrine you were delive­red, is not so agreeable either to the La­tin or English speech, as, This form of Doctrine which was delivered unto you: Yet the Apostle makes use of the first, to tell us, saith Cajetan, That not so [Page 28] much the form of Religion was deliver­ed to Men, as that Men were delivered to the form of Religion. That so by this means Religion might be known to have Authority and Power over Man, and not Man over Religion. But not to insist upon this; it need not be doubted that this form of Doctrine spoken of by St. Paul, was a Summary of Christiani­ty, or the Catechism used in those early and best times of Christianity, which contained the first Principles of the O­racles of God. By which some under­stand the Creed, as Cyril of Hierusalem in his Catech. 4. styled by him the milky Introduction, in allusion to St. Paul, 1 Cor. 3.2. Heb. 5.12. Others, of the Creed and Lords Prayer, as Bede: Others, the Creed and Decalogue, as Aquinus: O­thers, all those Elements which the Cate­chumens learned, and professed at Bap­tism; whereof the Creed was the Prin­cipal. Which with the Lords Prayer the Clergy was injoyned to Teach the Peo­ple, Concil. Mogunt. cap. 45. And it was a general command of the Church, that those who were to be Baptized, should have a certain time allotted for the learn­ing and rehearsing of the Creed. Which the Eastern Christians always repeated with a clear Voice, when they came to [Page 29] the Holy Communion of Christs Body and Blood: As appears in the Twenty second Canon of the Council of Toledo. But if this seem to restrain Catechising only to such Catechumens as in the Histo­ry and Canons of the Church are fre­quently mentioned; and that this kind of instruction was not used toward those whom by Baptism the Church had al­ready received into her Communion: It then follows, that we shew how Cate­chism was a plain Institution wherein all Believers did Communicate. And in the first place it is manifest out of Oecu­menius (expounding the [...]) That there were some Points of Christian Religion wherein the Novices were Catechised before Baptism, and some after. Those in which they were Catechised before Baptism, were, The necessity of Repentance: to renounce the De­vil and all his works: To believe in God, &c. And those Points which they learned after Baptism, were the Mysteries of our Saviours passion and Priest-hood, his taking our sins on himself, and working our Sal­vation; the Mysteries of our Resurrection, of the last Judgment, and everlasting re­ward, or life. And the Catechism of these was common to all Believers, because necessary.

Secondly, That Catechising belong'd to all within the Church, and was not confined only to the Novices in Religion, and Candidates of Christiani­ty, we may confidently infer from the express words of St. Paul. Gal. 6.6. where he divides the whole Church, to which that Letter was directed, into Catechist and Catechised. Whereby the later can­not be meant only those who were not yet admitted to Holy Baptism, Styled by the Church Canons Catechumens: For then we must conclude that the Ca­techumen and Believer were all one: contrary to Tertullian de Paenit. Cap. 6. de Coronâ Milit. Cap. 2. and all the Fathers: And that there was a Christian Church in Galatia, consisting of Catechumens or Unbaptised Persons, i. e. a Church of Christians without Christians. Which absurd inconveniences cannot be evaded, unless by those Catechised spoken of by the Apostle, we understand such as had received Baptism already, and were still to be instructed in that Religion where­into by that Divine Rite they had been admitted. So that in St. Pauls time Ca­techising in its Native acception was con­tinued even to those who had attained already to so much knowledg in the Principles of Christianity, as render'd [Page 31] them, in the Language of the Ancients, Competentes, or Persons fit for Baptism, and to be admitted to the higher My­steries of Religion. The same Apostle told the Corinthians, that he had fed them with Milk, that is, by the consent of all, with Catechetical Doctrines. And there is no doubt that those Texts in Heb. 5.12. Act. 18.25. Heb. 6.1. are pregnant intimations of this truth. The like may be affirmed of what St. Luke S. Luke 1.4. has recorded concerning the Introduction of the Eloquent Apollos, and his most Ex­cellent Theophilus, into the knowledg of Christ. And what has been said, affords sufficient ground of asserting Catechism to have been in use with the Apostles, and that it descended from the Synagogue. How it was the Practice also of the Primitive Church, is the Subject of the ensuing Chapter.

CHAP. IV. The Apostles Catechists in several Provinces. The Declension and Restauration of Cate­chising. Catechists Styled Exorcists, &c.

BUt if we imagine that the marks of Catechising are less apparent in the New Testament, yet if we look into Ecclesiastical History, we shall there find that the Apostles had their several Provinces wherein they were Catechists. And that by means of constant Cate­chising, many Kingdoms within For­ty years after the Passion received an alteration in their Pagan Ceremonies. Although it must be confessed that it was not long till the Malice and Envy of the Devil and Man brought a decay in this most useful Institution. For in the second Age, we read that Catechi­sing was so far declined, that Origen (living in the Two hundred and thirti­eth of Christ) was honoured with the Title of its Restorer. But where this Restauration of Catechising by Origen was affected, is not so evident. There is a great probability that Judea was the Scene of so good an Action. For we read [Page 33] that he was very kindly received there, after he fled out of Alexandria, upon his falling into disgrace with the Chri­stians of that Country, because in the time of Decius he had offer'd Incense to an Idol, to save his Body (of which his care was not always justifiable) from being defiled by a filthy Ethiopian.

In Alexandria, Origen could not be said to restore Catechising, for it is ex­presly affirmed, that there he succeeded in Cathedrâ Catecheticâ his Master Cle­mens, as Clemens had done his Master Pantenus in the same Chair. And of these two later, we are told, that they made it their Employment to Teach the Grounds of Religion, not by Ser­mons or Homilies, but by Catechism, in such Schoolls and Colledges, as in great likelyhood they themselves had founded for that purpose.

So that we see how in Alexandria (and we may hope that the like was in other Parts) there was a succession of Catechists; who were also called Exor­cists, not only because (as Isidore explains the word) by Prayer in the Name of Je­sus they cast unclean Spirits out of those who were possessed: Nor meerly in re­gard of Exorcising the Pagan Catechu­mens, when they came to be Baptized (as [Page 34] is to be seen at large in Burchardus Unor­matensis) but because that by their dili­gent Catechising the Principles of Chri­stianity, they pulled down Idolatry, and thereby cast Satan out of his Kingdom, and dispossessed him of that Tenor which by Idol-worship he had so long usurped. And the first part of the Vow of Bap­tism, binds the Baptized to renounce Idolatry under the name of Devil. That Exorcising was an Office of good re­pute in the Ancient Church, and not to be invaded by the Laity, is clear out of Tertullian, who in his Book advers. Hae­ret. Cap. 41. tells, how the very Here­tical Women were become so shameless and malepart, that they durst Teach, Dispute, Exorcise, and even Baptise.

Mr. Calvin makes it a probable con­jecture, that the Epistle to the Hebrews was not Penn'd till some time after the Gospel was, and the Church had erected a form of Government, and had Consti­tuted among other things, an Order of Instruction, or Catechism, in which both the Adult Converts, and Children of Believers were to be Taught: And he further adds, that those Principles men­tioned Heb. 6. had respect unto the usual and established form of Catechism. Now if this conjecture be argumentative, and re­ferred [Page 35] to its proper place, there will need no more to prove Catechising to be of Apostolical Institution and Practice.

CHAP. V. The Antiquity of Catechism probable upon the account of its convenience: In respest of the Object; Method of Instruction.

BUt suppose that all which has hither­to been observed be not evident, nay, that nothing of this way of Teach­ing was ever in use with the Primitive Instructors of Christianity, which would be a very uncouth supposal; yet this doth only conclude against the Age, but not the convenience of Catechism. It no way proves that such a way of instru­ction had not been highly rational, to in­troduce ignorant Infidels into the know­ledg of the true Faith. For all those who by ordinary means were to be converted to Christian Religion, were no less ignorant of its Principles, than those Infants who are born within the Church; and therefore to be Catechised therein, was as proper and requisite for them, as for these: For the ignorance of the one, [Page 36] as well as of the other, was to be removed by such means as all discreet Teachers have thought suitable to that end.

Now it is obvious to every Capacity, that no Mans ignorance can be removed by Rhetoricating Harangues, Pompous Dis­courses, profound Researches, &c. But by humble and plain Lessons: Easie and obvious Rules: And such A. b. c. Rudi­ments, as fall under the comprehension of the rude and unlearned; and which are proper to prepare them for higher Lessons. In brief, though the things which are taught be in themselves sub­lime and difficult, yet the manner of Teaching them must be humble and ea­sie. And this way of instruction was (no doubt) pursued by the Primitive Doctors, who did not only prepare by Catechising the ruder Infidel to receive Baptism, but did also by the same course build up and educate those into a more perfect know­ledg of Christianity, whom they had already Baptised. And therefore [...] and [...], to Catechise and Edifie, are with Grammarians terms expressive of each other.

And this makes Catechising highly convenient in respect of the true Method of learning: For therein is observed the natural path of instruction, which ever [Page 37] begins with short and obvious notions, to the end the Learner may not be dis­couraged with a difficult and perplexed entrance. For if the minds of Novices, or young Disciples, should be loaden and puzzled with multitude and variety, or with obscureness and prolixity of Rules, they would be in danger to reject the whole Institution, for the irksome painfulness of its first Grounds. And albeit that all beginnings are attended with Hardships: Yet they ought in all reason to be reduced to as great an easi­ness as their Nature will afford; to the end that they may not dishearten the Undertaker. This we see is the course of all Arts and Sciences, both Liberal and Mechannick, which have their In­troductive and Initiatory Systems, con­taining such easie Elements as being first known, fit the Learner for deeper Do­cuments. And these lower Rudiments hold some resemblance with that lesser size of Vertues, which some Platonists call Purgative, because they are first ta­ken into the Soul to cleanse and prepare her for the reception of Greater. And in Religion it is as requisite as in human Arts, that the first Lessons be framed according to the weak and slender Capa­cities of youngest Beginners.

Now as there is small probability that in Writing he should ever be able to give the true proportion of Words, who ne­ver learned the first draught of Letters: So there is no great assurance, that any one should make any solid and firm Pro­gress in the Mysteries of Christianity, who was never acquainted with the Prin­ciples thereof: or, That those should be able to give any good account of the hope that is in them, who never learn­ed the Articles of Faith, on which their hope is founded.

And this is a Clue that leads us to the right way of grounding Religion: for by what is said, it is easie to perceive, that solid Catechising is to the orderly Structure of Spiritual Knowledge, what a sure Foundation is to any material Fa­brick. And therefore he that would edi­fie himself, or others, in Christianity, without this Ground-work, build but a Visionary Church, or a House upon the Sand. As hath been sadly visible in those Persons who being not founded upon this Rock, have been quickly shaken and blown down with every Wind of Corrupt Doctrine, vented by Men crafty to contrive deceit. It being impossible that those should be sted­fast in such Principles of Religion, [Page 39] wherein they were never rightly and duly instructed.

CHAP. VI. Catechism necessary in respect of the en­crease and advancement of Spiritual Knowledge: To have a distinct Under­standing of things necessary to Salva­tion, &c.

AND not only the sure grounding, but also the regular and solid ad­vance and increase in the Knowledge of Things Divine, makes Catechising a ne­cessary Introductive. For unless by this means we be firmly principled in Chri­stianity, our knowledge therein will be both small and unstable: and as a per­nicious consequent thereof, we shall be­come trifling and affected in that little we know. For it fares in Divinity as Philosophy, wherein a little smattering Knowledge makes Men vain and as­suming, whom a deeper insight therein would render composed and settled. And this has been, and is still, misera­bly apparent in the Ancient and Mo­dern Sectaries, whom a meer conceit of knowledge hath tempted to assume and [Page 40] usurp the Place and Function of Teach­ers, understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm, 1 Tim. 1.7. And indeed their ignorance is the Mother of such assuming Knowledge, as is seen in our great Pretenders to Spiritual Science, who but too exactly prove them­selves descended of those Old Gnosticks, who were so pestilential to the Primitive Church; being notoriously addicted to Blaspheme, rail at, and speak evil of the things they know not; and in a pecu­liar manner are gifted with Malicious­ness, Avarice, Schismaticalness, Rebel­lion, and Contumacy: According to their description in St. Jude 10.11.12, &c. And the want of having been duly acquainted with the true grounds of Re­ligion, is one main reason why they are in that Divine Science such Smatterers and half-witted; whereof there is small hopes ever to have them cured, but by a full Institution in those Elements which are undeniably requisite to sound Know­ledge.

But Catechising is not only necessary upon the account of a regular entrance and encrease of Knowledge in Religi­on, but also to give us a clear intuiti­on of those particular Truths whereof we cannot be ignoran [...] [...]ut with the [Page 41] peril of our eternal Happiness. For not­withstanding that all things necessary to Salvation are clear and plain in Scrip­ture, yet the Scripture it self is so spaci­ous a Field, that even a wary Traveller may therein lose himself. And besides this, the things necessary to be known by us in order to our future Welfare, are in Sacred Writ so often mingled with things that are otherwise, that it exceeds the generality of Capacities to find them out, and rightly to sever. Those that are idle (as the most are in this Study) will not take pains; and those that are ignorant have not the ability to distin­guish, collect, and reduce such necessary Points to their respective Chapters. And yet till such Points be plainly digested into several Heads, many, at least the the illiterate Multitude, will unavoida­bly want a competent Knowledge of what is necessary both to their Tempo­ral and Immortal Happiness. Now that the gathering of these necessary Truths into Sums and Models, is the proper Work of Catchism, is visible in all those Systems which have ever born that Name. And of this Truth, our own Church-Ca­techism yields a sufficient Testimony: In which all things that concern Faith, Practice, Prayer, and Doctrine; are col­lected [Page 42] into such short and plain Sums, that the weakness of no Mans Wit can either hinder altogether the Knowledge, or excuse the utter ignorance of things necessary to Salvation. For whosoever, with a mind free from Prejudice, shall impartially peruse the Church Catechism, he therein may observe all saving Truths, reduced to such short, but full Heads, that the weak are not left to the hazard­ous, nor the slothful to the laborious re-search thereof in Holy Scriptures.

CHAP. VII. Catechising the most sutable means to heal the Distempers of this Church. Seve­veral Propositions to be supposed. A short digression concerning our Disorders.

BUT we will yet suppose that all which hitherto has been delivered, ought to receive no better estimation than meer ordinary Discourse; and that we are to proceed upon a new Ground, and examine the necessity of Catechi­sing in respect of the present Temper and Disposition, or indeed rather Di­stempers and Disorders of this Church and People. And in order unto this, it [Page 43] will not be altogether impertinent and useless, a little to consider what our pre­sent Disorders are.

And in the First Place we cannot but observe, that our Declension both from the Design and Rule of the Gospel, [...]s not conspicuous only in those grand Debauchees, who grow weary of the Name of Christ, or profess it only to disgrace it: But also in those who seem strict and severe in performing all the Formal and Exteriour part of Disciple­ship. Even those I mean, who are zea­lous Hearers of Christs Word, and con­stant Communicants at his Table, not professing Devotion to any other. For even these are content (as occasion serves) to abandon that Purity, Continence, Meekness, Humility, Candor, Merciful­ness, and other instances of a sweet Na­ture, so vehemently urged by our Divine Law-giver, and which are the genuine result of true Christian Principles, for that one Law of sordid Interest, brutal Passion, and churlish Self-preservation, although they cannot but acknowledge, that all these are totally opposite to the true Spirit of Christianity. And besides professed Politicians, there are others who seem to look upon Religion as a meer En­gine of State, and a thing that is as [Page 44] tractable for Battery as Defence. And who, notwithstanding their contrary Pretences, live as if they regarded not what Christ chiefly aimed at by his In­carnation, Death and Resurrection. And how that he gave himself for us (both in his Birth and Death) to redeem us from all iniquity, and to purifie unto himself a peculiar People zealous of Good Works. And that he rose from the dead to bless us, in turning every one of us from our Iniquities. And that the main design of our inspired Chri­stianity, is the entire Reformation of our Lives, and to make us as good as our Profession.

But besides this sort of Nominal Chri­stians there is another, which are so far transported with the opinion of that Union which they fancy already to en­joy with Christ, that they dream to be in present Possession of that Vision which is peculiar to the future State. And they are so dazled with the supposititious Glory of their Spiritual Perfection, that they contemn the means ordained to make them truly perfect, because they fancy they have arrived at it already.

And with these may be joyned all such who are so closely addicted to their own Opinions, that they think it a mat­ter [Page 45] of Conscience, Piety and Religion to oppose and condemn whosoever are not of their Mind and Perswasion. Since whose rise we have been under a sen­sible decay of Charity, and (as a natural consequent thereof) an encrease of wick­edness.

But if these ingross not all the occasi­ons of our Disorders, there is another sort of People who will fill up their measure: Those I mean who pervert the plainest Scriptures to such a meaning, as doth best help to carry on their Designs: And what is yet worse, who make it matter of Conscience to assert that Sense of the Text which they have perversely mista­ [...]en. And this deifying our own Inter­pretations, and tyrannically enforcing [...]hem upon others: This restraining of the Word of God from that Latitude and Generality, and the Understandings of Men from that liberty wherein Christ and his Apostles left them, is, and hath been the only Fountain of all the Schisms of the Church, and that which makes them Immortal: The common Incen­taries of Christendom, and that which [...]ears into pieces, not the Coat, but the [...]owels and Members of Christ: Ridente [...]urcâ, nec dolente Judaeo, Take away these Walls of Separation, and all will [Page 46] quickly be one. Take away the damn­ing of Men for not subscribing to the Words of Men, as the Words of God; require of Christians only to believe Christ, and to call no Man Master but him only. Let those leave claiming In­falibility, who have no Title to it; and let them that in their Words disclaim it, disclaim it likewise in their Actions. In a word, take away tyranny in Opi­nions, by which the Devil withstands the Power of Truth, and restore Christi­ans to their just and full liberty of cap­tivating their Understandings to Scrip­ture only, and as Rivers, whose Pas­sage is not interrupted, run all to the Ocean; so it may well be hoped by Gods Blessing, that Universal Liberty thus moderated, may quickly reduce us to Truth and Unity. These thoughts of Peace may come from the God of Peace, to whose Blessing I recommend them. And that this may not be looked upon for some singularity in my own Perswa­sion, I have transcribed the Words out of Mr. Chillingworth, and he out of a­nother, and enclosed them in a Pa­renthesis.

But taking no delight to travel fur­ther in search of those Distempers which I am unable to remedy; the only com­fort [Page 47] is, that they cannot be looked upon as the Issues of our Religion, nor any way be charg'd upon the Principles we profess. And therefore we must seek elsewhere to lay the Imputation: and I shall go no further than to what I men­tioned in the Introduction, even, the Omission, or Luke-warm use of Cate­chising.

And here in the First place, it cannot be denyed, how that the generality of the People of this Kingdom, have for many Years (at least during the time of our Intestine Wars) either been destitute of all Catechising, or have been Cate­chised only in such Principles, as were good for nothing but to establish the Elder in a cursed Schism and Rebellion, and to infect the Younger with the same Contagion. The sad effects where­of are still visible in the unpeaceable Tenets of some, and in the want of a due understanding of Religion in most. In respect of which, we have need to be taught again, which be the first Prin­ciples of the Oracles of God; being become such as have need of Milk, and not of strong Meat. The greatest part of the common People, being so far un­able to reap any benefit from the hand­ling of abstruser Mysteries in Eloquent [Page 48] and Elaborate Discourses, (which is so studiously pursued by our Junior and Florid Theologues) that they want instru­ction in the plainest parts of Catechisti­cal Doctrines. For notwithstanding that we boast much of our Knowledge of Christ, and that our Proficiency is so great in Religion, that we conceive our selves wiser than our Teachers; yet if the Tree may be judged by its Fruits, we shall be found shamefully ignorant of what we assume to know, and to have little of that Wisdom which de­scends from above, which Christ came to teach and infuse, and which is Pure, Peaceable, Gentle, easie to be entreated, merciful, without Hypocrisie and Wa­vering.

In the Second place, we cannot but with deep Resentments observe, that since the time God turned again our Captivity, and restored this Church to the free use of his Ordinances, Catechi­sing has met but with cold Entertain­ment, even from those by whom it ought to have been most lovingly caressed. For in most places it has been looked upon rather as a Foreigner, than a Na­tive of the Church; and as Fruits of their Mouth, never in Season but for a few Days in Lent: And even then too, [Page 49] the Church-Catechism is generally taught, without any such explanation as is need­ful, in respect of those slender Capaci­ties to whose instruction it is chiefly de­voted.

And if, in the Third place, we con­sider who those are, which on the one hand hinder the progress and settlement of Unity, Peace, and Concord in this Church, by an undutiful froward re­sisting of her Laws: Or, who they are that on the other hand Apostatize and utterly forsake her Communion; it will be found upon due examination, that we have laid the ground of the Disobe­dience of the one, and of the defection of the other, in a want of a timely and diligent Catechising.

And as for the First sort, namely, the disobedient and refractory (who are now known by the very candid Name of Dissenters) they cannot pretend to a more plausible excuse of their Unduti­fulness, than that they were never du­ [...]y Catechised to the contrary. For granting them to be Persons not total­ly forsaken of all Ingenuity and right Reason, we cannot imagine that they should so foully violate their bounden Duties both to God and Man, had they ever been fully taught, or did clearly [Page 50] retain any thing but an imperfect and prejudicate knowledge of those Duties, as they are plainly set down in the Church-Catechism.

And as for the Latter sort, to wit, those who have Apostatized and faln from ours to the Roman Perswasion, they have been so far from having their first Tinctures and Foundation in Re­ligion according to our publick Catechism, that they might say thereof as those in Acts 19.2. did of the Holy Ghost. But we must limit this Observation chiefly to those who had the unhappiness to be born in this Church when she was under the Cross, and wore the Marks of her great Master. And as for those who had been instructed in our Church Cate­chism; yet before they left us, they had so far unlearnt it, as that they had re­tain'd of that System of our Religion, such loose, rambling, and incoherent Notions, as if it were wholly Enthu­siastick, or had been compiled by Persons deeply Hypochondriacal. And for closure of this Paragraph, I shall only add, That none could ever be met with, who for Ends truly Spiritual and Religious, did ever abandon this for the Roman Church, who had been through­ly grounded in her Catechism.

And there will want no Reasons to [...]upport this Assertion, if it be duly con­ [...]idered, how the very Frame and Con­ [...]exture of the Catechism doth obviate and oppose all the main Errors of Po­ [...]ery, as they relate either to Faith or Practice; to Prayer or Doctrine.

And First, he that has been duly Ca­ [...]echised in the Apostles Creed, will not only be armed against a spurious Ex­plication of the Old Articles of our Faith, but also against a needless addi­ [...]ion of New ones. For he will find, that the first Twelve contain such a per­fect Summary of all saving Truths sim­ply necessary to be believed, that those Articles added thereunto by the Coun­cil of Trent, ought to be rejected upon the account of being Superfluous. And [...]t the same time he will find ground enough to explode that Implicite Faith, so much relyed upon in the Romish Church, who considers the necessity of a perso­nal Belief, as it is clearly required in the [...]irst Word of the Creed, which in La­ [...]ine gives name to the whole.

And in the next place, as to those Er­rors of Popery that concern our Pra­ctice, they will be certainly discovered and refuted by a right understanding of the Decalogue, which by all is grant­ed [Page 52] to be a clear and perspicuous Rule of what we are to do both toward God and our Neighbour.

And a Man that is well grounded in the Doctrine of the First Commandment, knows, that he must reserve all Divine Honour, Trust, Devotion to God alone, and that he may bestow no part there­of upon the Creature; and therefore cannot but avoid and abhor those Romish Doctors that would make him a Client to the Saints, and a constant Votary to the Blessed Virgin and his Guardian Spirit. He that is well grounded in the Doctrine of the Second Commandment, will never be induced to believe, that the Image is to be adored with the same Worship that is due to what is worship­ped: He will be wary of admitting a­ny bodily representations of the Holy Trinity: and look jealously upon all the Doctrine of Image worship, which he sees to be vindicated with a few remote and suspicious Distinctions, devised by the Fathers of that Doctrine on pur­pose to maintain its Credit. He that is throughly instructed in the Doctrine of the Third Commandment, and hath thence been taught to tremble at, and reverence the Holy Name of the Almigh­ty, will never be induced to believe, [Page 53] that frequent Cursing and Swearing, if customary, is Venial, or a Sin which is pardonable in its own Nature, and for which the Favour of God cannot be for­feited: That equivocating in Oaths is [...]awful: That our most Solemn Oaths may be dispensed with: That the dread­ful Name of God may be used in the un­warrantable exorcization of the Crea­tures: That Understanding and Devo­tion are not necessarily required to our Invocations upon God. He that has been throughly informed of the mind of its eternal Author in the Fourth Com­mandment, will never give up himself to a Religion that prefers a Mans Day be­fore Gods, or a Saints Day before the Lords: Which would alter the Institution of God himself, as was designed by Pope Silvester, who decreed that Thursday should be kept for the Lords Day. He that hath well learned the Fifth Com­mandment, must do great Violence to his Understanding, before he can chuse to be of a Religion that loves to drink the Blood of princes: That absolves Subjects from their Allegiance to their Lawful Sovereign: That gives Power to a Vicar to depose Princes at Pleasure: That Arms Subjects with Power to mur­ther their King. The like may be [Page 54] said of all the Precepts of the Royal Law of God, which is the most perfect Rule of our Obedience, and which we are Taught to violate, so soon as we have given up our selves to Popery, and to the Service of the Roman Moloch. And though these are Mysteries which the Romish Se­ducers carefully conceal, and sometime zealously inveigh against, while they are compassing easie Proselytes, with whom they deal in the most specious Pretences; yet they have no sooner deluded them to give up their Names to Popery, and thereupon to shake Hands with all liber­ty of judging for themselves, than by de­grees they let them know what is to be done. And if they startle at doing what is commanded them, this is pre­sently censured for a Relick of their Old Heresie, and that there was something wanting in their Conversion, which can­not be supplied, but by acting throughly all the most horrible Injunctions of their New Faith.

And by the same means of being well Catechised in the Lords Prayer, a Man will be able to apprehend and reject the many Errors Popery would impose upon him in that high concern. For thereby he will clearly perceive that Prayer ought be made to God only, and that none to [Page 55] can share with him in that, or any o­ther part of Divine and Religious Wor­ship. And that for this reason he ought not to embrace a Religion which enjoyns him to pray unto Saints and Angels, and that too not only to have them intercede to God for him, but also to help him in his Necessities, and to deliver him both in Bodily and Ghostly Dangers. And that this may not be thought the fault of Rosaries, Hours, and Books of pri­vate Devotions (for which the Church of Rome is accountable, as having con­firmed them by her Authority) it is al­so the Tenor of her publick Service: as is plainly to be seen in the Collects, Hymns, and Litanies of that Breviary which was restored by the Council of Trent, and authorised by several Popes, and which is at this day in uncontrou­lable use through all the Papal Domi­nions.

And we might also observe the like concerning the Doctrine of the Sacra­ments in which whosoever is once ful­ly instructed according to the Catechism of this Church, will quickly discern the Abuses thereinto introduced by Popery. To mention no more than what belongs to the Author of a Sacrament; which our Catechism asserts, and which is an [Page 56] undeniablle Truth, to be only Christ. And therefore all those things are to be excluded the number of Sacra­ments, that are not of his immedi­ate and clear appointment. And that Orders, Penance, Confirmation, Marri­age, Extream Unction (all Romish Sa­craments) are not of Christ's Instituti­on, is easily discernable to Men but slenderly versed in the Holy Bible; and therefore not to be received for the Sa­craments of Christ, but Inventions of those, who teach for Doctrines the Com­mandments of Men. Now by these im­perfect intimations we may safely infer, That those who have had their Foun­dation in Religion surely laid according to the publickly allowed Catechism of this Church, must have other Ends to serve than those of Religion, and drive other projects than Gods Honour, and their own Salvation, who forsake her Communion for that of Rome.

But to return: What ever hath un­happily contributed to our Revolting to the one hand or the other from the E­stablished Religion of this Church, there is none that will deny but that the lack of a plain and solid Catechising has had therein a very large share. And there­fore we may conlude, That the care­ful [Page 57] practice of that, will be a chief means to restore Union and Peace, the Omissi­on whereof hath occasioned the con­trary: And indeed, Catechising seems the only proper way not only to strength­en those that do stand, but to raise up those that are faln; if we consider how ineffectual all other ways have pro­ved, which have been managed to this end. Which now come to be sur­veyed.

CHAP. VIII. The Methods used for our reclaiming, sur­veyed, proving ineffectual, &c.

AND here we need not be told, how Indulgence and Clemency, Acts of Amnesty and Grace, have been so far unable so much as to work us up to a good Humour, that like fresh Pastures to unruly Beasts, they have on­ly served to strengthen us for a sturdier resistance. Nor need we be told of making Converts with the Churches Pa­trimony: for though by this means some may be invited to bear the Ark of God, yet they do it but like the Philistins Kine, who were still lowing after the Calves they [Page 58] had left behind them. It needs not be demonstrated, that our frowardness and opiniastrè are not to be cured by such Methods: But that which I would chiefly take notice of, is, that Disputa­tion and Preaching, which out of an a­greeableness that they are generally thought to bear to our distempers, and the powerfulness of their management, have obtained a Name to be the only proper remedies. But the continuance of the Malady, is a convincing Argu­ment that these are not so proper for this purpose, as is so generally supposed. And give me leave to speak of these two freely; and first of Disputation, which is a meer empyrick prescription in order to heal our present distempers. For though Disputation, as it is managed by the Pen, may have got a great Vogue in the World, yet we can never hope that our Dissenting Judgments should here­by be reconciled, if with due seriousness we consider; First, the manner of their conduct: Secondly, the matter to be disputed: Thirdly, the persons thereby to be wrought upon.

And First, If the conduct of disputes fall under a calm, unprejudiced and reflex­ive review, (as they appear in Print) the Pen-men thereof seem to have intended [Page 59] rather the defamation, than conviction of each other; and to have been of an opinion that men were to be refuted, as Mercury of old was worshipt, by throw­ing dirt and stones in their Face. But we have been taught by miserable experi­ence that the lashing of a Few, hath been subservient to no better end than to exasperate the whole Party: And that our keenest Arguments, if we may judge by the Event, have only served to alarm the Adversary into a better provision for future resistance, and to strengthen their opinion in that part wherein the Attack had discovered it to be the weak­est. But grant (as indeed we must) that the Dissenters (to whom this Pa­ragraph chiefly relates) are not able to stand in Argument before their Oppo­nents; yet we must also grant, that there is a want of Decorum in the Victors carriage, while his Argument loseth its efficacie, through the looseness, luxury, or rigour of its expression. For it is too apparent to conceal, that there are so many unmanly reflections in most of our late Controversies, that discreet and so­ber persons loath the reading of those Pa­ges where they occur. Which gives oc­casion for doubting that such arguings so managed, proceed not from that Spirit of [Page 60] meekness wherewith the overtaken Brother should be restored; nor were designed to procure Unity and Concord among us, seeing that so little of that Charity can therein be discerned, which is the bond of Peace, and sure ground-work of all true Reconcilement. And if the con­duct of our Debates were throughly con­sidered, we might find this Church com­plaining like the Eagle in the Greek Epi­logue, which seeing her Breast wound­ed with a feather'd Dart, cryed out with Tears, Alas! my own kind hath destroy­ed me. But to proceed.

It cannot be doubted, but that some opinions sooner die by being contemn'd, than taken notice of. And I am per­swaded, that this National Church is now troubled with many Opinions which long ere this would have found their own Graves, if they had not been kept alive with opposition. In so much that it may be said of this particular Church, what was of the Catholick, That if she had stopt and damn'd up the Originals and Springs of Controversies, rather than de­termining for one part, to give them as it were a Pipe and Conduit to convey them to Posterity, she had not suffer'd that Inundation of Opinions with which at this day she is over-run. A policy [Page 61] still in practice in the Popish Countries, where those Books of Controversies are scarce to be met with, wherein their Religion is maintained against Reformed Churches. By which means they live free from those Dissentions wherewith their Neighbours are afflicted, to their scandal and ruin: And I hope we may safely imitate their Wisdom, whose Errors we abhor.

But if Controversies were as necessa­ry, as by some they are pretended to be, yet their conduct ought so far to be re­formed, as that at least there be a cessa­tion from hostile Expressions, which have hitherto been of no better use than to exasperate Men into a petulant and peevish vindication of that Name, under which they conceived themselves to be reviled. Next, that the Disputers would not vent and foam out their personal Piques and Animosities under the pre­tence and cloke of asserting Religion and the Church. Lastly, that they would aim at Peace and not Revenge. For how seemly soever the present carriage of Disputes may be accounted in persons of another Character, yet it is very ill-becoming those who are stiled Embassa­dors of Reconcilation, and who ought to express the Emphasis of that Title, in [Page 62] reconciling Mens Wills with their Du­ties, and their Understandings with the Truth; in bringing the wicked to re­pentance, and the malicious to Charity; and to win all to a holy compliance with the design and Rule of the Blessed Au­thor of Christianity; which was, to heighten our Conversation to the most elevated pitch of true Vertue, Peace, and Holiness; and that our Righteous­ness should exceed all theirs that ever went before us.

CHAP. IX. The Just Matter and Subject of Contro­versie in Religion examined. How by Catechising, and not Dispute, we are there­in to be reconciled.

AND not only the present conduct of Disputes render them unsuta­ble Medicines for our Disease; but al­so the things concerning Religion, which can with any Reason be pre­tended to be the matter thereof. Now whatever in Religion can be pretend­ed to be disputable, must either re­spect its Dress and Ornaments, or its Body and essential Parts; the Exteriour Appendages, or the Principles of Religi­on. If the Scruple, or the Dispute be a­bout [Page 63] the Dress, outward Rites, Cir­cumstances, and Fashion of Religion: than no contrivance seems more ratio­nal, or method more probable to assoil and remove it, than a due Catechising and instructing the scrupulous in the indispensible Duties of the Fifth Com­mandment, and to tender him a plain Scheme of the Obligation that lies up­on his Conscience; To honour and obey the King, and all that are put in Authority under him; to submit himself to all his Teachers, Spiritual Pastors and Masters.

How the Supreme Powers have Au­thority in the Externals of Religion.

How in Religion things indifferent in themselves may pass into a Law, which ought to be obeyed, as much as any Laws in indifferent things which relate to the good of the Civil State.

How things of never so low a stature, or indifferent concernment, having once received the Image and Superscription of a Law, ought to be obey'd, both for the sake of God and Conscience.

How it can no way comply with the design of Government, to make good their Institutions by dint of Argument: For if Authority were obliged to satis­fie every medling and capricious Brain, they would have little or no time left [Page 64] to be obeyed, &c. And when indiscre­tion of zeal, or pride of Wit, engage to vindicate every thing that is lawfully commanded, it is to have a better opi­nion of our own, than the Magistrates Prudence; to think our Arguments will be more prevailing than their Com­mands; or that the former were requisite to support the latter, &c.

That these and the like things are proper for Catechism, and thereby the most gently and indiscernably to be in­fused, none I presume will gainsay. For they naturally fall in with those Truths which belong to our duty toward man, of which we must be duly informed, ere we can therein be exact.

If the Dissenter yield an obedient ear to this Instruction, there will be little fear of his continuing scrupulous to o­bey what his Superiors have a just pow­er and right to enjoyn: If he do not hearken, then let him be devoted to the Civil Power, and leave the Magistrates to vindicate their own Authority; and to make that be done for Wrath, which would not for Conscience. And I am tempted to think, that if at the Happy Restauration this way had been pursued, we long ere this had been sensible of its good Effects. And I will add this more­over, [Page 65] That if the Orthodox Clergy, ever since God wonderfully restored them, had devoted the greatest share of their pains to plain Expositions and Paraphrases of the Church-Catechism, they might long before this have gently gained both upon their Opinions and Affections, who (by the indiscretion of other Methods) seem to be now alie­nated beyond retrieve. Conscience of Obedience will answer all the Scruples of Minds disposed to Peace; and for the Turbulent let them be answer'd with Rods and Axes.

The next thing that can be disputed [...]n Religion, besides its dress and exterior adherencies, are its Body, or Principles; such I mean, as are absolutely necessary to Salvation; for we need be sollici­ [...]ous for no more than what will save us. Now these are both few and plain. For as for those numerous places of Scripture, Notices of Oral Tradition, which are da [...]k and difficult, they are no further necessary to be understood in their primitive intention and mean­ing, than that we sincerely believe, that whatsoever God thereby meant and in­tended, is infallibly true.

And things thus truly necessary, are as few as plain: St. Paul has reduced [Page 66] them to Two Articles: To believe that God is, and that he is a Rewarder of all them that come unto him. And to whom only thus much is given, it shall not be damnable that they believe no more. And if this (as it seems to) be the lowest degree of Faith, God will therewith be pleased, if the means be wanting of rising higher. Cornelius in Acts 10. who because of his Alms and Prayers was accepted of God, had not been safe in that State, had he gone no further, after God had sent St. Peter to inform him what he was to do more. The Charities and Devotions performed in the time of his Jewish Proselytism, how far they might have stood him in stead, had he been vouchsafed no farther Illumination, is not the Question; yet if he had staid there, when means of go­ing farther was afforded him, or if he had refused to believe in Christ after a sufficient Revelation, he had then justly incurred the condemnation of loving Darkness more than Light, when Light was come unto him. These instances are usual in this matter, and tell us plain­ly, That as few Articles are of absolute necessity, yet that their number is not the same unto all, some more, some less, as God hath given to every man, all [Page 67] that is necessary for a Man to believe, which for that purpose is sufficiently re­vealed unto him, and which God re­quires him to believe and practise. But there is none can set down how much every man should believe, no more than he can set down how much every man should eat.

But if notwithstanding this paucity and plainness of the Principles of Reli­gion, any should therein be still con­tentious, this Evil is not to be removed by Disputation, but plain Catechising; whereby the Mysteries of Faith, and the Duties of Holy Life are to be explain­ed. For Catechism is a brief and plain Institution appointed for that end; and it takes care that the Principles of Re­ligion be made so easie, that the mean­est capacity may apprehend them; and yet in so concise and short a man­ner, that the weakest Memory may not therefore be surcharged.

CHAP. X. Disptuation unfit for the capacity of the generality of Dissenters: Catechising pro­per, &c. Reasons against Disputes.

IN the last place, it will not a little import the clearing of the present subject, to enquire into the nature of Disputes, and their Capacities who should thereby be wrought upon. As to the former, it will suffice to observe, that Disputation must be guided by Terms and Rules of Art, which when mana­ged with the greatest plainness whereof they are capable, fall short of that ob­viousness and familiarity, which is na­tural to Catechism. And as to the latter, it is very remarkable, 1. That the vul­gar and common People make incom­parably the greater number of Dissen­ters. 2. That the Understandings of such are usually heavy, gross, and dull, as symbolizing with their Callings and Conditions; and by consequent, are un­able to comprehend any profound and learned conclusions. And what is yet more considerable, the greatest part of Dissenters have no clear understanding [Page 69] of the very Errors which a Logical Dispu­tation would confute. The most of them being ignorant of their own Opinions, and of the things against which they have imbib'd a secret and spiteful preju­dice. For it was, and is still the policy of those who seduce the Vulgar into Fa­ction and Schism, not to acquaint them further with the Opinions they were to abet, than to let them see that they were contrary to what they disliked in the Church. Insomuch that the poor Vulgar being deluded into Separation, retain but a very confused and imperfect Notion of what with great impetuousness they strive both for and against. And there­fore it must needs be a very Melancho­ly Enterprise, to go to confute their Er­rors with depth of Argument, who are in a great measure ignorant of the very Errors themselves, and who do not di­stinctly know the opinions whereof they are to be convinced. The case of such people much resembling theirs, whom St. Paul thought to stand in need of Milk, and not of strong Meat; of a Catechism and not a Controversie; and to be taught Christianity from the very beginning. And the same Author being to confute those miscreant Hereticks, who said the Resurrection was already past, and there­upon [Page 70] gave themselves to lewd living; he did it not with the heat and briskness of a Disputant, but with the gravity and moderation of an Apostle: and ha­ving barely and calmly named the wild Opinions, he positively and plainly laid down those Truths that confronted them, 2 Tim. 11.18, 19. And he would have the Gnostick Hereticks to be en­countred with Ecclesiastick Censures or Discipline, and not Disputings, where­of cometh envy, strife, railings, evil sur­mises, 1 Tim. 6.4, 5. Tit. 3.10.

If we were to set down the several Confessions of the Perswasions of all the Christians in the World, they will be found to agree in more than is purely and simply necessary to Salvation. And it may seem very vain to dispute and quarrel about the rest. And therefore the whole business may be resolved into a diligent, sincere, and plain Instruction, how we ought to practise what we all acknowledge to be true; and to fall close to doing those duties which are unque­stionable, and of universal acceptance. To perform what in Baptism we vowed, and live what we profess to believe. To make our selves fit to be justified, and not waste time in controverting all the particulars that are made to relate to [Page 71] Justification. There is a knowledge in Religion which many earnestly pursue, without which thousands have entered into happiness. We need seek for no more therein, than will perform the great work of Salvation, and bring us to the end of our Hope. And all this is ei­ther most assuredly to be had in our own Catechism, or we have been most dange­rously imposed upon.

But before we dismiss this Topick, there are a few things more, chiefly re­lating to the persons to be converted; which methinks ought to give Cate­chising precedency of Controversie in that affair. And the first thing is the long standing of the Errors: For if the person has suck'd them in with his Milk, and been therewith at the first season'd, then there is Education in the case, up­on whose account alone not a few stick close both to truth and falshood: and if their Ancestors have lived and died, and they have been brought up in such a perswasion, it is, and indeed ought to be hard to remove it. One main rea­son why the Pagans were so backward to entertain Christianity, was its enjoyn­ing them to renounce those Institutions wherein they had been educated, and their Fore-fathers had lived, and thought [Page 72] themselves secure and happy. And Try­pho derided Justin Martyr for a man of an easie Perswasion, and too much In­constancy, because he forsook Plato and embraced Christ. And Caecilius in Mi­nutius Felix, would have his Antistes Ve­ritatis, a firm adherent to the Principles which his Ancestors had delivered him. And they whose Pens were so excel­lently employed in confutation of Pa­ganism, have generally complained that their greatest sweat was to pull down the strong hold of Education; it being become the last refuge of Gentilism, out of which they would not be dri­ven: For they resolutely retained what they had received from their Ancestors. For both Jew and Mahumetan are at this day of the same Opinion: For the former makes prescription his Religion; and thinks it enough to out-face all Arguments brought against it, because so many Rabbies live and die therein▪ and the latter has recourse to his Edu­cation, and thinks himself secure in what he doth, because he follows the Footsteps of those many Cenerations that went before him. Indeed, all men are willing to die in the Religion where­in they were born. And Caecilius's Pri­oribus credere goes far with Christians, as [Page 73] well as others; the first seasoning being incomparably more prevailing than any second.

Now, if those evil Opinions are to be removed, in which we have been edu­cated; it can never be so well accom­plished by tearing them down with the strength of Logick, as by instilling such easie Principles, necessary and uncontro­verted points, with simplicity and plain­ness, as of themselves will subvert the Errors of the first Instruction, and be­come the foundation of future Peace and Truth. And no way of teaching can so naturally be hereunto entituled as Catechising. For as to Disputation, it is generally had under a jealous aspect, as being thought subtle and reaching, and intended rather to celebrate a Tri­ [...]mph, than to effect a Conversion; and [...]o advance the Disputer, not the Truth. Besides, it being so apt to mingle and blend with captious Sophisms, and false, but specious ways of proving, that men are ready to account it Imposture, not Conviction, that by such means is ef­fected. And as for Preaching, a new Chapter will manifestly make it appear not to be so proper for this purpose a [...] most imagine. But in Catechising there [...]s such an honest simplicity, clear and [Page 74] plain way of procedure, that none can therein suspect any Sophism or artificial dealing, disguises or shadowings.

In the next place, most men are ei­ther so modest in the apprehension of their own abilities, or so fearful to be ensnared in the great concerns of Reli­gion, that they are unwilling to depend upon their own judgments in those in­stances, especially which they see are most disputed and questioned. And therefore they think it no sufficient Rea­son to forsake an Opinion, because they cannot answer all the Objections, which by the subtle Advocate of a different Perswasion are brought against it. And so long as a man can really believe that there are others who can answer what is objected against his Opinion, he will never quit it, because he cannot answer it himself. For to think an Argument cannot be answered, because not by me, were to think the Lady must be carried by none, because neither A. nor B. can win her; as if there were no more men in the world sufficient for that pur­pose, but they two.

But if Disputation should be able to force men from these refuges, and to cast away the groundles, Opinions they embrace; yet if their Opinions twist [Page 75] with some worldly Interest, and yield any secular advantage; if the Opiniatres can say, By this craft we get our wealth; then great is Diana, and your Argument is answered.

And he who considers how many [...]omporal ends men serve with their O­pinions, will have little hope to con­fute them, at least by a way which is so generally suspected.

If the Opinion please the humour of [...]n eating Avarice, or a swelling Am­bition; and bring either Wealth or Honour.

If it make its Abettors notorious for [...]ingularity, or get them a Vogue of be­ [...]ng more Holy and Religious than their Neighbours.

If it place them in the pretended num­ [...]er of Sufferers and Persecuted.

If it gratifie their Spleen, and give them but a more plausible pretence to be [...]tubborn, refractory, contradicting of Au­ [...]ority, gainsayers of the establish'd Re­gion, &c. then the cure must begin with the Affections and not the Judg­ment; and therefore a Dispute is no sit Prescription. All that by Argument [...]an be effected, before the Passion be duly chastised, will but bring the Opinionist [...]o this: I see and approve the better, [Page 76] but follow the worse; my Passions are too powerful for my Reason.

We might here also add, how Quar­rels in Christian Religion contradict the Errand whereon it was sent into the World, which was for Love and Peace; to reconcile men to God, and among themselves. And if it yield contrary Fruits, they come as the Tares among the Wheat, by the craft and malice of the wicked One. For Strifes and Con­troversies are no more the effects of Re­ligion, than of the Law: Were all men just and honest, we needed not di­sturb the Ashes of a moth eaten Statute; and had we no Self-ends and Interests, no base passions and designs, the itch of Disputation would not disquiet and make us so restless.

Before we close up this Chapter, it will not be much impertinent to ob­serve how Disputation was at first o­pening of the Reformation an excellent Engine to advance it: And we find that the Reformers made importunate suits for publick Audience and Judgment; and the offer of open Disputation greatly as­sured the People of the soundness of their Cause, when they saw they were ready to put it upon publick Tryal. And more may be supposed to have followed [Page 77] the first Essays of the Reformation, out of an Opinion that it was good and true, being defended with such freedom, sim­plicity and assurance, than by the strength of those Arguments which were at first brought to assert it. But then it is to be considered that the Reformers offer'd this kind of tryal to those with whom they began to be at no less di­stance, than with members of a distinct and different Communion; and in pla­ces where they were in hope to gain, but in no danger to lose Proselytes. For they wisely invaded the Adversary in his own Country, and challeng'd him to a Dispute in his own Cities, and in the throng of his Adherents. But up­on how different Terms Disputes can now be managed, either with Dissen­ters or the common Enemy, I leave the truly considerate to determine. But since we are resolved to fight, I could wish our valour were more discreet, than to encounter the Enemy within our own Bowels; to controvert our Religion in the place where it is legally established. A thing not heard of in other Countries, where there is a greater Peace and more outward Religion. But I shall close up this Topick with setting down what is usually observed upon this Subject, viz.

[Page 78]1. That Religion is like neither to get nor save by Disputes. 2. That Di­sputes on this subject may have the ill­luck to make some suspect the truth of all Religion, because it is so much con­troverted. For weaker Heads seeing the Roof totter, are apt to suspect there is no firmness in the foundation; and to conclude nothing is certain, if any thing be question'd. 3. That in so great a mist of Disputes, many may grow halting and luke-warm, and think it their only safety to stand still, or sit down in Neu­trality. 4. That for one sin Disputes have cured, they have begot innumera­ble. 5. That the strength and practice of Religion have been sensibly impaired, since by the distemper'd heats of Mens Spirits it hath been rarified into subtil Controversies. 6. That suspence of Judgment, and exercise of Charity were safer and seemlier for Christian men, than the hot pursuit of those Controver­sies, wherein they that are most fervent to dispute, are not always the most able to determine. But what is more natu­ral to the present purpose, it should seri­ously be considered, That the People are neither to be confuted of their false, nor established in the true Notices of Religi­on, by Doubtful Disputes, but plain Ca­techistical [Page 79] Doctrines. And as to our selves of this Church, seeing there can come nothing of our Contentions, but the mutual waste of the parties contending, till a common Enemy dance in the Ashes of us both; I shall ever wish, and most heartily pray, that the strict com­mands of Peace and Unity, so frequent in the Gospel, may at the last so prevail in this Nation, to the burying and utter oblivion of strife, together with the causes that have either bred or brought it up: That things of small moment ne­ver disjoyn them, whom one God, one Lord, one Faith, one Spirit, one Baptism, bands of so great force, have linked together: That a respective Eye towards things wherewith we should not be disquieted, make us not unable to speak peaceably one to another. Fi­nally, that no strife may ever be heard of again, but who shall hate strife most, and pursue peace with the swiftest paces.

CHAP. XI. Preaching, what it is: the several ways thereof used by the Church. What kind of Preaching among the Old Jews, and Primitive Christians. The Homilies con­sidered.

HAving in the antecedent Chapter discharged Disputes and Contro­versies from being any suitable and pro­per means of reducing the Dissenters of our own Church, or winning the Mem­bers of the Roman: The next thing pre­tending to our healing is Preaching, which I here take to be An open, so­lemn and Authoritative publication of Di­vine Mysteries. And this the Church doth two several ways: 1. As a Witness. 2. As an Expositor.

And first, The Church Preacheth as a Witness, by publick reading the Sa­cred Scriptures, and by relating and te­stifying the Divine Truths which God in the inspired Volumes hath consigned her. And that this is no spurious sense of Preaching, we have him to assure us, who well understood the sense and im­portance both of the Word and Thing. [Page 81] For in Acts 15.21. the reading of Mo­ses in the Synagogues every Sabbath­day, is by St. Paul in the genuine and native signification of the Word, styled Preaching. That this Preaching of Mo­ses, was a naked reading of his Law, we have a whole cloud of Expositors to attest it, besides the clearness of the thing it self. But I cannot be of their judgment who assert, That neither the Ancient nor Modern Jews had any such thing as weekly Preaching upon any part of the Law of Moses, and that up­on this ground solely conclude the prea­ching of Moses to be meer reading. For we find that the Old Jews had divers Men among them, who used to contri­bute their Talents to the Exposition of the Lesson that was read: and these in ordinary course were the Sons or Schol­lars of the Prophets, who were trained up in learning of the Law, and at the age of Thirty received the Title of Do­ctors; and till they obtained the Grace of immediate Inspiration, or the Spirit of Prophesie, they continued to expound the Scriptures (not by Revelation, but) according to that knowledge which the ordinary blessing of God upon their Stu­dies was able to compass. Answerable whereunto (as some think) was that [Page 82] custom among the Christians, mentioned 1 Cor. 14.29. And also those Disciples of the Prophets of the New Testament called Doctors, because they were ad­mitted to teach in the Church. But for mine own part, I rather understand the Word Doctor in St. Paul, of all such Pres­byters as had abilities of Preaching and Teaching the People in their Assemblies. And that Presbyters and Doctors were all one, we may conclude from Tertull. de Prescript. c. 3. Quid ergò si Episcopus, &c. What then if a Bishop, if a Deacon, if a Widow, a Virgin, if a Doctor, if e­ven a Martyr shall fall from the Rule? In this Catalogue of principal Ecclesia­stick Orders, Presbyters must be under­stood by Doctors, unless we will deny them to have any room among the chief Ranks of the Church; which were both false and absurd. And that incestuous person, with an Opinion of whom the Corinthians were puft up, was (as is obser­ved out of Chrysostom and Theoderet) one of their Doctors, that is, one of the Pres­byters of that Church, that exercised the Office of Preaching, and by that means bore a great sway among the People,

But to return to the reading of Moses, which began with the Moral Service of [Page 83] the Synagogue; when we find that the Mosaical Law was distinguished into Divisions answerable to the number of Weeks in the Year, that the whole Law in that space might be read over: corre­spondent to which Lessons out of the Law, there were others out of the Pro­phets: one of which the Holy Jesus took for his Subject at Nazareth, when after the manner of the Jewish Doctors he made his Exposition, St. Luke 4.16. And he did the like, St. Mat. 9.35. where he is said to teach [ [...]] in the Synagogue; which might be done without any pretension to such Autho­rity as was supposed in [...], in Prea­ching; which in the Christian use of the word in the New Testament differs from Teaching. Christ did both, St. Mat. 9.35. He taught the Law, and preacht the Gospel: At Thirty years old he ex­pounded Moses, as a Doctor (before which time the ancient Church made none Presbyters) and at the same time he preacht the Gospel of the Kingdom. But still the matter is plain enough, that the bare reading of Moses in the Syna­gogues, is Preaching in the proper mean­ing: which sort of Preaching is still practised in the appointed Lessons of the Church. The former out of the Old [Page 84] Testament, being derived like many wholesom things from the Synagogue; and the Second Lesson out of the New Testament, which was appointed, as most suppose, by the 16th Canon of the Council of Laodicea, celebrated in the year of Grace 364. Albeit Justin Mar­tyr (who lived in the Second Age) seems to give the Lessons an elder date. For in his second Apology, he tells us, how all those who abide in Cities, and the adjacent Countries, meet in one place, on the day called Sunday; and the [...], the Memoires and Re­cords of the Apostles, together with the [...], the Writings of the Prophets are read unto them, as far as the time and occasion serves: And that the Reader ceasing, the President in a Speech makes an Exhortation that they would imitate those good things which had been read. From which it is evidently to be concluded, that the Church in the first and best Ages of Christianity preacht as a Witness, when she read, and thereby attested the truth of the Holy Scriptures. And all men are in some degree capable thereby to be edified. For there is none understands the Scrip­tures so well, but he may improve by hearing them read in the Church. And [Page 85] if we look into the Efficacy of the Word, it is wonderful that it should be less as it is read, than as it is expounded; seeing that the one is the Word of God as it was inspired by the Holy Ghost, and the other can no farther be so accounted, than as it keeps close to the sense and meaning thereof; which is not so easie, so long as Men are subject to Errors and Mistakes, and have base Ends to serve, and carnal Circumstances to be accom­plished.

2. But because all men ought to have such a knowledge in God's Word as may be sufficient to Salvation: and because all will not attain to so much by bare reading thereof, therefore the Church Preacheth as an Expositor, by discovering and explaining what in Sacred Scripture is mysterious and obscure; and by a seasonable application of those things which are more obvious and evident. And in this sense Preaching is an Office in our own Church, which cannot be too highly magnified, nor too frequent­ly celebrated, if it be agreeable to those Homilies which were intended, not only to supply those who have not the Gift of Preaching, sufficiently to instruct the people committed to their Cure; but also to be a wholsom Rule, by which e­ven [Page 86] those who are able to preach should guide themselves in that publick Mi­nistry.

But if Discourses at this day made in Pulpits ought only so far forth to be ac­counted Preaching, as they are agreea­ble to the Churches Sermons; then all is not Preaching which bears that name, and takes up the Circumstances there­unto allowed.

In the pious Sermons of the Church, we find Principles of Christianity solidly explained, Rules and Motives of honest and holy Life clearly laid down, and Perorations and Perswasions to continue therein, devoutly and charitably dire­cted and applied. I shall not draw this into comparison; but only say, That I hope there is none need think it any di­minution or disparagement to his Parts and Learning, to write after such a Copy. And however the Homilies may be decried through popular Ignorance, Prejudice, and Passion, yet no doubt but they are still necessary upon their first design, which was to help the Inabili­ties of some, to restrain the Indiscretions of others, and to take away those strifes about what is fitting to be preacht, cau­sed by the variety of Mens Judgments, the extravgance of their Fancies, and the Byasses of several Interests.

And as for the Homilies of this Church, they deserve a much better esteem than generally they receive; and would need no elaborate Vindication, if duly con­sidered in their circumstances. For in the first place, they are be to looked up­on as popular Sermons, fitted unto the Capacities and Conditions of the Vul­gar; who being more led by Passion than Reason, have need of such Dis­courses, as will rather regulate their will, than inform their judgment. They stand­ing in more need to have their Hearts and Consciences wrought upon for good Life and Conversation, than their un­derstanding and apprehension with any curious piece of Learning or Science. And that the greatest share of the Church-Homilies deals herein, there will need no other proof than their diligent per­usual.

In the Second place, The Church-Homilies are not to be looked upon as her Dogmatical Resolutions and Positi­ons, but as they contain godly and wholesom Doctrine [Teaching] and necessary for the times when they were composed. For so much we are taught in the 35. Article. And therefore I humbly suppose, that every passage in the Homilies is not to be pressed for the [Page 88] Faith and Doctrine of the Church, but that the whole ought to be considered as confronting the evil Opinions and Manners that at their composing were held and practised: and if ought of ei­ther be remaining, the Homilies may still be needful upon their Primitive account.

In the last place, the very time in which the Homilies were compiled may excuse many a Period therein. For our Ancestors were lately come out of Po­pery, and conversed daily with Persons of that Perswasion; and therefore se­vere dehortations were requisite to pre­serve them from Apostacy into those Practices out of which they had so lately been recovered: which makes it no wonder if Enforcements and Exhor­tations to that purpose, &c. are some­time too hardly stretched. And as for mine own part, I am so far from under­valuing the pious Sermons of the Church, that considering their circumstances, I greatly esteem them for their own Worth, and respect them above any other for their Authority.

And as to those who reject Homilies upon the account that Apochryphal Wri­tings are not to be used in the Church, it may suffice briefly to reply,

[Page 89]1. That Apochryphal Writings were publickly read in the Church in Primi­tive times: as the Epistle of Clemens in that of Corinth.

2. That Hermes (the same whom St. Paul saluted, Rom. 16.14.) his Pastor was publickly read in the Churches, and used by some of the most ancient Wri­ters, and thought highly necessary. Vide Euseb. l. 3. c. 3. What may be said to this purpose of the [...] of Theophilus B. of Antioch, I leave to the judgment of others. Vid. Euseb. l. 4. c. 23.

3. That in the Reformed Churches (not long since) Calvins Sermons upon Job were publickly read, by which means (saith Beza in his Preface to those Sermons) the want of Preachers was supplied.

4. That it is all one to the People, whether the Sermon was made and printed in 1587, or on the last Sunday-Eve; whether it be out of a Book, or ex tempore of the Brain, if thereby they be truly edified. The Council of Vaus appointed the Homilies of the Fathers to be read by the Deacons in those Churches, where the Presbyters through infirmity were absent, Concil. Vassu. c. 4. Vid. Mr. Hooker Eccles. Pol. lib. 5.

[Page 90]5. That there is more security in a Homily than a Lecture; as there is in the Learning, Piety and discretion of many, than a single person. In short: there can be no mischief in the word [Homi­lies] seeing the best Sermons (St. Chry­sostoms) that ever were writ by any but an inspired Pen, bear that Title. Ho­mileticus and Tractator are often used indifferently: and the latter is suffici­ently known to signifie a Preacher, as Tractare to Preach, among the Writers of the Latin Church. And the Expositi­on Augustine made upon St. John is cal­led Tractatus, &c. And the Reason of the Name, was the handling of the Scriptures that had been read; the cu­stom being to Expound or Preach upon such Portions of Scripture as were ap­pointed for the Lessons of the Day; as hath been observed out of Justin Mar­tyr's Second Apology. Something of this has been in use with our own Church, when the Sermon was spent in pressing the intention of the Gospel for such a day unto the people; which is still the custom of the Romanists.

But leaving every one to his own Sen­timent herein, I cannot perceive why in stead of villifying the old Homilies, we should not rather desire a supply of [Page 91] new ones: such as may contain a famili­ar Orthodox instruction in the whole Body of Christian Doctrine, and of all the capital Duties therein required; That thereby an Uniform way of in­struction might be maintained as no unlikely means both to regain and pre­serve Peace and Unity in this Church.

But without further pursuing the no­tion of Preaching, we will here under­stand it in the most trodden and com­mon acception, namely, as A way of instructing the people contradistinct to Cate­chising; and to which it stands in usual comparison as strong meat to Milk. Now that Preaching in this obvious sense is no proper means to recover us of our Dis­sentions, and to beget in us a sober and fixed Judgment in the things of Reli­gion (as it is generally supposed) comes to be made manifest in this following Chapter.

CHAP. XII. Preaching insufficient to restore our Dissenti­ons. Catechising proper for that pur­pose, &c. A Scruple removed.

THat Difference which Divines make of things necessary to Salvation, either as a Means without which it can­not be had at all, or as Commands with­out whose observation those cannot be saved to whom those Commands are gi­ven, might have place here, if we were to speak of Preaching, as by some it is looked upon, for an Instrument without which not one poor Soul can be deli­vered from destruction, nor any Sabbath hallowed either by Priest or People as God requireth. Which was the Opinion of T. C. and is still of his Proselytes. But it belongs not to the purport of this Discourse, to set down how far Preaching (in the common Notice) is necessary as a means of Salvation: For then we must descend to particular Persons, in respect of whom the true value of its necessity must be taken, seeing that none will say it can be alike necessary to the Salvation of all.

There is none shall give more to the worth and necessity of Preaching, and be more frequent therein than my self. But yet I doubt not, but that a man may be sa­ved without it. For if a person who in his Infancy hath received Holy Baptism, at years of Discernment, shall by Catechism be minded of all that he then vowed and promised, and be careful to believe and do them, I see not what such a Per­son wants of being set in a state of Sal­vation, that with equal esteemers can be accounted necessary as a means thereof; tho' he knew no more of Preaching, than they in Act. 19. did of the Holy Ghost.

But let Preaching be a means never so necessary to save our Souls; yet that it is not so sutable and proper to reform and fix our erroneous and inconstant Judg­ments (as is conceived) seems clear and evident upon the force and obviousness of this single instance; namely, That those who have been, and still are the greatest admirers of popular Preaching, and the most eager hearers of many Sermons, and the most restless followers of several Lectu­rers, have notwithstanding all this, been, and are, 1. The most inconstant, 2. The most erroneous in their Opinions.

And first, as for their Giddiness and Unconstancy, there needs no other [Page 94] demonstration thereof, than their rowl­ing from one Opinion to another. For if they have stuck fast to any one, yet that being evil, their adherence there­unto ought not to be accounted Constan­cy, but Perverseness.

Now if we enquire into the cause of this fickleness of judgment so notorious among the zealous Sermonists, and Vul­gar Sectaries, we shall find that it is a want of Catechizing; and that they were never duly instructed in those Pri­mary Principles of Religion, which would have rightly inform'd and estab­lished their Judgments. Through the want whereof, they have proved like unballasted Vessels, liable to be tossed, torn, and blown about with every gust of contrary Doctrine, vented by those who were crafty to deceive; and who have proved themselves to be lineally descended of those great pretenders to Godliness and Knowledg (mention'd in the Inspired and Ecclesiastick Scriptures) and egregiously character'd, for creep­ing into houses, and seducing silly women, who were ever learning, but never able to come to the knowledg of the Truth. Vide Euseb. Eccles. Hist. lib. 2. lib. 3, & 4.

Nor need it create our wonder that such persons are so bad proficients in Re­ligion, [Page 95] seeing they began to learn it at the wrong end, and ran to the Lecture before they had been at the Catechism. And indeed it cannot be imagined that those should make any laudable pro­gress either in Divine or Humane Know­ledg, who in the Rudiments and first grounds thereof, have had either none, or a very slight Education.

And as the most unsatiable Hearers of Sermons have proved wavering and un­constant in their judgments, for want of a timely and through Catechizing; so likewise upon the same ground they have been very erroneous and Opinia­tive. For this want of a plain Institution in the Principles of Truth, hath left them destitute of a proper Test, whereby they might be able to explore and try what is preacht, and to separate the pretious from the vile. Through the want whereof, they as greedily imbibe a false as true Doctrine; and are ready to change their Opinions according to the impression which the affectionate noise of the last Sermon has made upon their Senses.

Nor are they happier in their reading Holy Scriptures, than in hearing of them (thus) preacht. The Un-cate­chized run upon the same Rock in both. [Page 96] For albeit the Divine Word is in it self the pure Fountain of all saving Truths: yet persons not trained up in a compe­tent apprehension of Catechistical Prin­ciples, make it a sink of pernicious Er­rors; sucking Contention from the Breasts of Peace; turning the sincere Milk of Gods Word into the Poyson of Asps, and perverting the Scripture to their own destruction; while they make the Oracles of God not to speak their own, but such a Sense and Language, as may best adjust their Designs and Interests.

And as no malice proves more impla­cable than that which ariseth out of the Ashes of an Apostate love: So no Er­rors are more dangerous than those which proceed from a wrong interpre­ting and application of the Word of Truth. And as those whose fancy has been playing with sounds, think every thing they hear is tunable to their fan­cy: So those whose minds are once in­fected with evil Opinions, think every Text speaks according to the Opinions wherewith they are infected. And it is an Hypothesis will meet with few Adver­saries, That Men who are prejudiced and prepossessed with Errors in Religion, cannot be reduced but by getting them [Page 97] therein rightly principled, which was never yet attempted but by solid and perspicuous Catechizing; it being by this that Men prove in Religion like the House in the Gospel founded upon a Rock, which by no force of storms and winds could be subverted. And there­fore if this ground-work be not surely laid, all superstructures in Religion lie up­on the loose Sand, and are easily washt away by the insinuating suggestions of false Teachers. And what is yet further to be considered, we see the rest of the Building sink with the Foundation: if that be shaken, all will go to ruine. And Christians not well grounded in the Elements of Truth and Holiness, will quickly be perswaded to give themselves up to any wild Opinion, or loose Pra­ctice, and turn Schismatick or Traytor, to the great hazard and confusion both of Church and State.

But if it be objected that Catechizing is a Plaister too narrow for our Sore, because it cannot reach those whose Age, or some other Circumstance, excludes them the number of those for whom this sort of Instruction is appointed, not­withstanding they have no less need thereof than others: To this it will be enough to return the succeeding consi­derations, viz.

[Page 98]1. That the Church obviated this Scruple, when in the last Edition of the Liturgy, she appointed the Catechism to be learned of every person. And in her Fifty ninth Canon enjoyn'd the Clergy to instruct all the ignorant Per­sons of their Parishes in the publick Ca­techism. And that those who bear the heavy load of many years might not decline this way of Institution, they may see it founded in the Apostolical pra­ctice; which was to Catechize the adult; as before was observed.

2. To be duly instructed in the Prin­ciples of Christianity, is a duty incum­bent upon all, who by the Knowledg and Practice thereof hope to be eternally sa­ved. And therefore if the Aged be therein ignorant, they have more rea­son to blush at their ignorance, than to be thus instructed; and with diligence and humility to wait at this Gate of Knowledge, rather than with scorn to disdain it.

3. If the Elder sort have either not been taught at all, or have forgot the chief Heads and Catechetical Funda­mentals of Christianity, they now meet with a fair occasion bo [...]h to learn and call them to mind. For by bei [...]g pre­sent and attentive in hearing the Young­er [Page 99] Catechized, the Ancient (and all) may be brought to know what they do not understand, to remember what they have forgot, and to be inform'd in what they have erred. So that at the same time Catechising will instruct the Igno­rant, remember the Forgetful, and inform the Erroneous: and therefore administer a Physick proper and sutable to our seve­ral Maladies: which cannot be pretend­ed to by those other Methods, that have hitherto been so eagerly pursued.

CHAP. XIII. The Benefits of Catechizing, 1. In respect of the Civil State. 2. The Clergy. 3. The People. The Mischiefs of private Schools. Objections against the constant practice of Catechizing removed.

BUt besides what has been discoursed, there are other good Effects of Ca­techising, which at least may be as so many motives to enforce its practice.

And in the first place, Catechising is in an eminent manner conducive to the Peace and Welfare of the State; because it takes care that the Younger sort, who are the hopes of a Nation, be duly edu­cated [Page 100] in those Principles, on whose pra­ctice the safety and happiness of a State depends. For to sowe in the pure minds of Youth the Seeds of Vertue and Truth, before the Tares of Vice and Error, and the Weeds of the World, have canker'd and spoiled the Soil, is by the consent of all wise men, a point of incompa­rable force and moment for the well or­dering and Government of all kind of Societies, and for making Common­wealths ever flourishing and happy. For by the means of Catechising, the Younger sort will be planted and grow up in a due Conformity and Obedience to the Laws in being; which is undeni­ably a proper expedient to uphold States in the Terms wherein they are, and to free them from the danger of being so easily obvious to alteration and change. For the Opinions, of what nature soe­ver, wherewith we are first season'd, are of double force to any second Perswa­sion and Usages. And this makes the Spanish Nation early and careful in Ca­techising their Children; by which Me­thod (ever since its use) they have not suffer'd the least disturbance and alteration in Church or State. That serious people having largely experienced the Truth of their own saying: No es menos impor­tante [Page 101] el ser de la Doctrina que el de la Na­turaleza. And in confirmation of this remark, it were easie to load the Margin with a numerous Quotation, and the Line with a tedious recital of many ex­cellent Passages out of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, Seneca, Tacitus, Agell, and al­most all the learned Heathen: Plutarch's Education of Children doth abridge them all. But we need not go sharpen our Tools with the Philistines, seeing an Israelite can do it better. For Solomon is plain, That the way to have Men Re­ligious and Honest; to be peaceable both in Church and State; is from their Childhood to train them up (the Mar­gin) to Catechize them, in the Duties that they owe unto both, Prov. 22.6. And the Ecclesiastick and Politick Pa­rents, as well as the Natural, will find great safety in observing the wise advice of Ben Sirach. Bow down his neck while he is young, and beat on the sides while he is a child; lest he wax stubborn, and dis­obedient, and so bring sorrow to thine heart. Ecclus. 30.12. But there needs hereof neither illustration nor enlarge­ment. And therefore we shall close this Period with that excellent Spaniard, Son los afetos en la Ninez como el Veneno, &c. Vices in Youth are as poyson, which [Page 102] if it once take seisure of the Heart, the paleness it introduceth no Physick can remove. Saavedra, Idea de un prin. pol. Christ. p. 8.

Obedience, by a Catholick agree­ment, is the Crown and Pillar, the Glory and Strength of all Government. But this Obedience can never be firm and durable, if it be not founded in Conscience. For according to the in­formation of this, we shall find the ex­presses of the other. And notwithstand­ing that unparallel'd Villanies have been every where acted under the pre [...]ence of Conscience, yet this is so far from ma­king it reasonable to neglect and de­ride Conscience, that it should engage us by all good means to have it so regulated and instructed, that it may be no less serviceable to Peace and Union than it hath been (the pretence) to carry on Dissention and Schism. And we need not doubt but a right Conscience will as powerfully oblige to Peace, as an erroneous instigate to Sedition: And that if Men were once fully Catechised in the Duties of the Second Table, they would no longer be able to resist the Ecclesiastick or Secu­lar Power under the Banner of Con­science.

In the second place, an Unanimous use of Catechising the People in the same things, will not a little redound to the credit of the Clergy. For by this means they will testifie to the World their Har­mony and Consent: That they all teach the same things; and are not, as for lack hereof some imagine, like the Natura­lists two-headed Serpent, pulling con­trary ways, but all looking on the same Objects as the Seraphims on the Mercy-Seat.

And doubtless one end of a Church-Catechism was to preserve an Uniform procedure in teaching the Common grounds of Religion. It being requisite and convenient, that they who profess but one God, one Christ, one Baptism, and one Gospel, should consent and be trained up in one Catechism. The in­convenience arising from the use of di­vers, being observed by Pope Clemens the Eighth, caused him to have a Catechism compiled, which, exclusive of all others, should be taught in all those Countries that call themselves Catholick. Ut sub­latâ modorum docendi varietate, uniforme, facilius (que) instruendi idiotas & simplices de rebus fidei exercitium reddatur; saith the Congregatio Reformationis, which revised and approved it,

And in the Geneva Liturgy, we find their Pastors limited not only to the same Catechism, but also to how much there­of they shall teach every Lords day, with­out any interpolations of their own. A thing which ought carefully to be pro­vided for in our own Church: For if the Clergy be either left to a liberty of using divers Catechisms, or to use the Churches as they please; and under a pretence of the legal Instruction, take a more secure occasion to instil into the minds of the unwary people their own Opinions and Fancies, they may most maliciously deceive the intention of the Church, and for feeding, poyson their Congregations. They will prove false to their trust, and most perniciously con­tradict the name they bear. For the Cler­gy are Catechists in the most important sense of their Office, and are bound by that Title not to sound their own words, but to eccho and repeat what the Church has spoken; not only the Words and Syllables, but the sense and meaning.

But if the Clergy were never so una­nimous and diligent both in the inter­pretation and practice of the Catechism, the benefit thereof will not be so visible, while there are those who unteach in private what is taught at Church. Which [Page 105] is the undermining practice of many of those Petite Schools, wherewith the Na­tion is surcharged and abused. The most whereof being subservient to no better end than to give the Youth an ill season­ing as well in the Rudiments of Religion as Grammar. And albeit the redressing of this mischief has been piously recom­mended by the Sovereign Head of this Church, to Persons proper for that pur­pose; yet it is to be feared that the issue will be rather an Encrease of Licenses, than any Abatement of undue School-Teach­ers, contrary to the 77 and 79. Canons.

Till Israel wanted Smiths of their own, they never went to the Philistins to sharpen their Mattocks. It seems no less a want of Policy than Affection in the Church, while her own Breasts are full to suffer her Children to suck such Nur­ses, as with their Milk will infuse Diso­bedience against her.

The Jesuites usually say, That they never doubt to replant their Religion, where they have once planted a Col­ledge; because this being obtained, they will have opportunity to instruct the Youth (which is an employment they every where labour to engross to their Society) whereby they fear not but in time to eat out the Fathers Principles with [Page 106] those they shall instil into the Son. And the present state of Affairs will easily turn this into no unseasonable Allusion.

But in the last place, the unanimous u­sage of the same Church-Catechism, and the modd'ling, ordering, and directing all publick Instructions according to this Form of Sound Words, will bring no less safety to the People, than Honour to the Clergy. For by this means the peo­ple will be delivered from the fear and peril of hearing contrary Doctrines, and consequently be edified and built up in such an Uniformity both of Belief and Manners, as may at once secure as well their Conversations as Judgments from Ungodliness and Error; which yields a fair probability of closing our present breaches, and preventing future.

And now seeing that the welfare of the State, the credit of the Clergy, and safety of the People do greatly impor­tune and sollicite the practice of Catechi­sing; there is nothing on the Clergies part that can retard it, but what I should be loath to name or imagine. But if it be said in behalf of the Laity, That Ca­techising being a constant repetition of the same thing, will so cloy the people, that they will grow weary of Gods House; to which we see them suffici­ently [Page 107] backward, even when they are there entertained with variety: Then I shall only wish all those of the Holy Fun­ction maturely to consider,

1. How low they have sunk in their esteem with the people, since their Of­fice was so much devoted to please their humours.

2. That they ought not so much to re­spect the Peoples Fancies, as proficiency in Religion; the informing of their judg­ments, and directing their Consciences, and not the humouring of their caprices, ought to be their chief aim and travel.

3. That they cannot deserve the Name of Guides, who are ruled by those whom they should rule: the issue whereof will be no better than that of the blind lead­ing, &c.

4. That if Catechising be a way of Instruction, which will best preserve the Unity and Peace of the Church, and most solidly and securely advance the edification of the people; then there is no need to be sollicitous for any other ends or interests.

5. And as for the constant repetition and audience of the same Truths neces­sary to Salvation (as they are the Con­tents of the Church-Catechism) it may be justified by that old saying [Nunquam [Page 108] satis docetur, quod nunquam satis discitur;] Those Lessons can never be too much taught, which can never be too much learned. For repetition in this case is to make the Catechism, what indeed it is, the Words of the Wise fastned like Nails by the Masters of Assemblies. And though in all the blows of the Hammer the act be the same, yet there is no stroke superfluous, while every one tends to compleat the Work. We may bring the same quarrel against reading Books, and hearing Sermons: for they are but old matter in new words; and if stript of Dress and Disguise, they would easily be discerned to be but so many varied repe­titions. In Religion, if any thing be pretended to be new, we may safely con­clude it is false.

6. But to evacuate the whole Objecti­on, a diligent Catechist will find enough in the Church-Catechism to entertain his Congregation with variety, and to de­light and profit all but itching Ears. For it wants nothing that is requisite to de­fend us in our Journey, or to save us when come to our long home. And those who are therein duely instructed, will find themselves so sufficiently guarded, that no Machinations of Heresie or Schism will be able to batter or undermine [Page 109] them. Indeed the diligent use of Ca­techising will be its best Vindication, and most effectually answer all Objections a­gainst it. And without all Controver­sie, there was never a greater necessity of enforcing what we now treat of, than the conjuncture wherein we live. For we see Satan is let loose, and lays hard at the Souls of Christians; not only by such Opinions as disturb our Peace, but would utterly destroy our Christianity. Insomuch that we have great need to speak to every one, as that famous An­chorite to his Pillars upon the approach of an Earth-quake, Stand fast, for ye shall be shaken: And stand fast we cannot, if we want a sure Foundation in Religion; and this cannot be expected, where it is not laid in a full and timely Cate­chising.

CHAP. XIV. The Church-Catechism to be preferr'd before others, for its Authority, Usefulness, Ac­complishment, Contents, &c.

BUt if after all that hath been or can be said concerning the antiquity and benefits of Catechising in general, or [Page 110] more particularly in regard of its neces­sity and advantages in respect of the pre­sent temperament of our own Nation, it should be disputed what Catechism ought to be of publick use: I shall return, first, that although there are many excellent Catechisms both in our own and Foreign Languages, composed by private persons, out of the consideration of the great e­molument accrewing to the People from this of Teaching; yet there is none which with those of this Communion ought to be of equal esteem with the Catechism of the Church, if we consider, as we ought, its Authority, Usefulness, and Accomplishment.

And in the first place, as for its Au­thority, the Church-Catechism hath no less pre-eminence above others, than the Decrees of Councils above the In­stigations of a private Spirit. For the difference betwixt this and Catechisms penn'd by particular persons, is like that between the Laws and Statutes of the Kingdom, and the advice and judgment of private Subjects.

This is not to cast any imputation or disrespect upon those Catechisms penn'd by grave and learned Divines; which are good in themselves, and useful in their station: but to shew, that the Church-Ca­techism [Page 111] commands of us a peculiar Ve­neration, by reason of its publick Autho­rity.

In the next place, by virtue of its Authority, the Church-Catechism hath an especial Usefulness, in being the com­mon Test by which we may try who are of, or against our Communion. It is likewise an excellent Form of Religion, whereby particular persons may examine their own Opinions and Sentiments, and give an account of their Faith to those who would therein either establish or sub­vert them.

In the last place, the Accomplishment of the Church-Catechism greatly enhaun­seth its Commendation. For if its Con­tents fall under an upright Review, it will merit no less praise than those Com­posures, which are so exact, that they are neither defective nor redundant. For although some have objected its deficien­cy, as not taking any notice of the great Points of Faith, Justification, Sanctifica­tion, &c. It may hereunto be truly an­swer'd, That these Points are rather briefly exprest, than totally omitted; and that it is not the omission, but the short and Orthodox Expression thereof, which is the ground of the Exception. But if the nature of a Catechism were right­ly [Page 112] weighed, it would be no Objection a­gainst the Churches, that some things are therein either more darkly or more succinctly set down. For if every point of Doctrine were in a Catechism dis­cuss'd at length, it would lose and for­feit its Name. But besides all this, it is easie for a Clerk of ordinary Industry and Letters to make all those Points plain and obvious out of the Church-Catechism, whose want is objected against its com­pleatness. And we have no reason to wonder or repine, that the Church hath left something to exercise the labours and abilities of her Clergy.

But to conclude: If we maturely ex­amine the Catechism, we shall find there­in such a natural evenness in the Me­thod and Stile, and such a consistency and soundness in the Matter, as is not in any like composition easily to be matcht. As for the Introduction, it na­turally carries us to all the circumstances of our admission into the Church, shew­ing when, by whom, after what man­ner, and by what means we became Christians. Next, it acquaints us with the great Priviledges, Benefits and Du­ties of Christianity, as also how by so­lemn Vow we stand obliged to perform them. The Question is plain and short; [Page 113] the Answer full and pithy. wnd the Compilers thereof have manifested a singular wisdom and care, in delivering the Rule in the fewest and plainest words. For if they had loaden it with long indicative Periods, they might at once have both puzzl'd the understand­ing, and oppressed the memory of those tender Capacities for whom chiefly it was designed.

If we look into the principal Chapters of the Catechism, the Church therein has followed the Copy of the best and ancientest Catechists: For like them, she hath reduced to four general Heads, all that is truly necessary to Salvation. For retrenching what is but artificially necessary to acquire the Felicity of the future state, all truly necessary thereunto, is reduceable, 1. To Faith, or things to be believed. 2. To Obedi­ence, or things to be done. 3. To Pray­er, or things to be received. 4. To Sa­craments, or things to admit and esta­blish us in the Church.

As for the things we are to believe, they are summ'd in Twelve Articles, bearing the Name of the Apostles Creed, because it was either of their composing, or contains the substance of all which they taught to be necessary for single Be­lief; [Page 114] and was collected by Apostoli­cal Men, out of their Writings, into this Form or Breviary that we now profess.

As for Obedience, the Decalogue is its Rule and Object, which compriseth a pure draught of practical Duties.

Prayer, which makes another Head of the Catechism, is an Auxiliary to the two former; for unless we beg and ob­tain the Divine Assistance, we can nei­ther believe nor obey as we ought.— Know this, that thou art not able to do these things of thy self, nor to walk in the Com­mandments of God without his special Grace, which thou must learn at all times to call for by diligent Prayer. And the most absolute Form and Pattern of this Duty, is that which Christ collected when he reform­ed their Euchologus, out of the Traditions of the Elders, and recommended to his Church, and which bears his Name, The Lords Prayer.

The Sacraments are the fourth Head of Catechism, which God ordained in compliance with Mans infirmities and weakness. For being that those things which concern the Endless Welfare of the Rational Soul, are like it self of Spiritual and Divine Nature, and therefore not ea­sily to be comprehended by those who [Page 115] have their Understanding limited by their Senses; it pleased God to appoint certain Holy Rites called Sacraments; which by outward and visible Signs re­present unto us that inward and Spiritu­al Grace which he bestows upon us; and which are also means whereby we are partakers of that Grace, and Pledges to assure us of that participation.

CHAP. XV. An Account of some Objections usually brought against the Church-Catechism.

IT hath been generally observed, That Zeal, if it be not soberly governed when it striveth against any thing, that either in reality or but appearance, op­poseth Religion, doth usually proceed with so great impetuousness, that Reli­gion it self is in danger. And as it not seldom falls out, That an over-eager de­sire to pluck up Weeds, doth hazard the extirpation of the good Grain; so a si­nister zeal against what is Superstitious, or but so pretended to be, doth often put both the Truth and Practice of Religi­on into suspence and debate. And al­though this is an Observation which [Page 116] might be easily attested through all the Periods of the Church, yet we need not look so far back for Testimony thereof, if we revolve what has happened among our selves within the Annals of our Me­mory. For we have seen the malice of the Detracting Spirit of Faction and Sedition exposing every Institute of the Church to contradiction and reproach; account­ing it Argument enough to abandon e­very thing used by the Church, on which there could any way be fa­sten'd the odious Names of Popish and Superstitious.

And though this might be exemplified through the whole Body of the Churches Liturgy, yet the present Theme obliges me to remark only such Cavils as with greater speciousness are brought against the Catechism. For as for other Ex­ceptions, the smalness of their impor­tance renders very needless to return them any solid answer.

Now the first thing objected against the Catechism, respects its two first Que­stions, which are traduced as superfluous and trifling, as being to no more pur­pose, than to ask what we know already, and to be informed of that which we perfectly understood before: Seeing that usually falls out, that the Catechist is [Page 117] well acquainted with the Catechumens Name, and all the circumstances of its imposition. Now seeing that Catechism s pretended to be an Abridgement, and that all know how it is the proper Duty of Abridgements to leave out no­thing necessary, and [...] nothing un­necessary in; the Ch [...]ch Cate [...]hi [...] [...]all be far from deserv [...] an Abridgement, if its [...] or a­ny thing therein be [...] and Re­dundant.

But this Objection will appear of small force and importance, when it is considered, that the Church in her Ca­techism observes the Method which is natural to Discourses fram'd by Question and Answer; whose entrance is ever some familiar Interrogative agreeable to the matter which is to be discoursed. And seeing that the Church in her Ca­techism designed to instruct the igno­rant and younger sort the Principles of that Religion which they profess, it was very proper to begin her Instruction with an enquiry for that Name in which they first undertook that Pro­fession.

And in this respect our publick Cate­chism is more apposite and genuine, than either the Roman Catechism established by [Page 118] Pope Clement the Eighth, or that of Ge­neva annexed to their Liturgy: for af­ter a long Preamble, the one begins with, Quidnam Doctrina Christiana? The other with, Quelle est la Principale fin de la Vie humaine?

But the entrance of our Church-Ca­techism will be further vindicated from the imputation of levity or superfluousness, when it is rightly considered, That it doth naturally guide the Catechised to the knowledge of what most near­ly imports him: For (as 'twere by the hand) it gently carries him to all the concerning circumstances of his admis­sion into the Church; by whom; at what time; and after what manner, he was made a Member of Christ, or re­ceived into the Congregation of his Flock, and had a Right conferr'd upon him to partake of all the Promises and Priviledges of the New Covenant. Bap­tism being an inauguration into that Re­ligious Society which Christ founded.

And as we read that the People of God have from the beginning had names of special signification (as Adam, Chava, Abram, &c.) whereby they were put in mind of some signal mark of Gods Pro­vidence toward them, and of their bounden duty of being piously thank­ful: [Page 119] So the Catechised, when he is de­manded the Name in which he became a Christian, it minds him of his obliga­tion: 1. To depart from Iniquity, and thereby to walk worthy of that Name by which he is called. 2. To perform what in that Name he vowed and pro­mised. 3. To examine his proficiency in that Religion into which by this name he was first initiate. 4. To ex­press a thankful remembrance of Christs singular favour, that he so far condescend­ed, as to call him after his own Name.

But the Catechumen may upon ano­ther account be first called upon for his name, because it is the badge and cogni­zance of that Holy Religion in which he is to be instructed, and of which he must give an account both to God and his Church, now and at the last. And superseding all other Reasons, those that have been thus briefly intimated, may (at least) assist to clear the first que­stion and answer of the Catechism from the guilt of Trivialness, Vanity and Im­pertinency.

As to what is objected against the Se­cond question and answer, it will be sufficient to reply, That our Church therein is confo mable to the Primitive. For Tertullian (a Father of the Third [Page 120] age) saith positively, That it was the custom of the Church in his time, to ad­m t none to the benefit of the Scriptures, or to any dispensation concerning sacred and divine things, or to the scanning and examination of particular Questions of Religion, who could not first give a clear account of all material circumstances of their Reception into the Ark of Christ's Church. By whom, at what time, and after what manner they were received (which are the Ingredients of the second answer in the Church-Cate­chism) and whether they did stedfastly believe and maintain all those general Principles, wherein there ever was an universal an unanimous agreement a­mong all Christians. And those who could not give an account thereof, were looked upon as such who had no right to the Communion of Christ's Church, and the Priviledges of his Kingdom. This Testimony of the Churches practice is to be seen in Tertullian's Praesc. advers. Haeretic. A piece which was written by him, as I conceive, before the provoca­tions of the Roman Clergy tempted him to turn a Montanist, and to be led away with the Enthusiastick delusions of that Sect. He lived in the third age, and was so high in the esteem of the humble [Page 121] and modest St. Cyprian, that he usually called him his Master. Hierom. in Cat. Script. Eccles. Abraham Buchol. Chro­nolog.

The imposition of the Name being confined to the precise time of Baptism, is by some looked upon as an impertinent Rigor, and tasting highly of Superstiti­on. But they would be of another mind, if without prejudice they would have re­course to the Use of the Church, which hath always given Names to those Chil­dren she admitted into her Fellowship, at the punctual time of their admission▪ And this will be plainly discerned, if we look back unto Circumcision (the first Characteristical Sacrament) for from the time of its Institution, to that of its legal abolishment, the Male recei­ved his name at the Celebration of that truly primitive Initiatory.

Nor doth it any way evacuat this As­sertion, that we read of some who had names before they were circumcised (af­ter that admissory Rite was appointed) as Benoni, Gershom, and the Israelites born in the Wil­derness; Gen. 35.18. Exod. 2. & 4. Josh. 5.2. whom we may suppose not to have want­ed Names, as they did Circumcision. But as touch­ing [Page 122] the Example of Benoni, it affords lit­tle of Objection, seeing that at Circum­cision his Name was changed. And what happen'd concerning Gershom, it was as the instance of the Israelites in the Desart, in this case not at all argu­mentative, because it was extraordinary, and when necessity forced them to di­spence with Law. So that notwith­standing all this, we may conclude that Circumcision was the usual time for the imposition of Names. And the like cu­stom has always been observed at Chri­stian Baptism; the Church thinking it most convenient that the Baptised should at the same time receive his Christian Name, whereat he became a Christian.

But that for which the Church seems least accountable, and which makes the greatest noise, and which is objected with the fairest plausibility, is that which concerns Sureties in Baptism, whose Of­fice is decri'd as unwarrantable, because they undertake what they cannot dis­charge. And the very name (of God­fathers and Godmothers) is spoken a­gainst, as a prophanation of the most Holy Name, being a Transgression of the Third Commandment. And this is an Objection which cannot be better assoiled, than by laying [Page 123] down a clear Scheme of the Antiquity and Reasonableness of Sureties in Bap­tism.

And in the first place the antiquity of Sureties, at and for the reception of Persons into the Church, is indisputa­ble. For if we look into the Jewish Church when she was in her best Puri­ty, we shall find, that ever since the in­stitution of Circumcision there were still some appointed to be present, and hold out the Male to the Mohel to be circum­cised. And the person allotted for this Office, was some special Friend of the Fathers, who is called the Master of the Covenant (but usually in Latin, Initiati­onis Arbiter, Susceptor, Compater,) who at the Door of the Synagogue receives the child from the women, who are permitted to go further; and entring the Synagogue, the Susceptor holds the child till the Hammohel, Circumciser, has taken away the Foreskin. And how this custom was primitively observed a­mong the Jews, and in point of Sure­ties derived to the Christians, may be collected from what Junius has intima­ted upon Esay 8. compared with Saint Luke 1. from the 57 to the 60 Verse.

Now this custom of Sureties in the Jewish Church, need not at all reflect upon the like in the Christian. Be­ing it was in the power of the latter to retain any Rite of the former that was apparently decent, significant, and edi­fying. For if every thing used by the Jew were to be rejected by the Christi­an, then most of our Religion must be cast out of doors. For it was not the design of our great Law-giver to abolish Judaism, but to amend, supply, and heighten it. Besides, we find not that those who were, or are the greatest Impug­ners, and most impetuous gainsayers of Sureties in Baptism, ever did it upon the account that it was a Rag of Judaism.

But how dark and questionable this custom may seem to some in its deriva­tion and pedigree, yet its practice is clearly to be found in the first times of Christianity. As they must needs know who have observed how frequently [...] and [...] occur in the Greek Fathers; and Susceptores, Sponsores, and Fide jussores, in the Latin. And how in both, the words signifie and refer to Undertakers at Baptism. Platina as­cribes the Institution hereof unto Hy­gin, who, saith he, ordain'd, that at the least one Patrimus or Matria should be [Page 125] present at Baptism, and there hold the Infant till he was baptised. Patrimus and Matrima are old Words, which by new imposition denoted those who undertook for the Vertuous and Pious education of the Baptised.

Now if it be granted, that Hygin Bi­shop of Rome was the Author of Godfa­thers and Godmothers, then this custom is of an uncontroulable ancientness; for Hygin lived in the Second Age, and was a Martyr in the 144 of Salvation. And it is generally granted, that this good Bishop took occasion from those Perse­cutions which were heavy upon the Church, to appoint Sureties in Baptism. That in Case the Parents should fall into violent restraint, banishment, or death, there might be some to take care of their childrens instruction in the truth of that Religion into which they were initiate.

But whatever was the first occasi­on or ground of this Suretiship, we are certain that for its great standing in the Church, it may take place among those Primitive Rites, which were in all descending Ages to be retained. And this will appear from the very Nature and Reason of the thing it self. And a custom or Law, though it cannot be elder, yet it may safe­ly [Page 126] be supposed to be as old as its chief Motive and Reason.

Now the nearest Method to prove the reasonableness of this custom of Baptismal Sureties is to examine both what they do for the Child at the in­stant of his Baptism, and what they un­dertake for him for the future.

And as to what the Sureties do for the Child at the time he receives this Sa­crament; Platina tells us, that was no more than to hold it in their arms till it was baptised, and to give it a name ac­cording, or at least not contrary to the Parents Directions. And this is a thing so harmless, that none can have any colour to quarrel or reject it.

And as for what the Sureties under­take in the childs stead for the future, it can merit no just reprehension; seeing it is no more than to be careful that the child be vertuously brought up to lead a Godly and a Christian Life, and be taught such things as are necessary to the attainment of Eternal Happiness: according to the Exhortation of the Office of Publick Baptism. And to the end that this might not be over-bur­thensom to the Sureties, the Church provides that her Curates shall diligent­ly teach whom she has baptised; and [Page 127] so to instruct them, that they may be fit for confirmation. At which time the Sureties are discharged of their Bands, because at Confirmation the Baptised answer and undertake in their own Names, what their Sureties have done in their stead.

But it may still be replied, That the Parents are fittest to engage for their Children, and that so weighty a con­cernment ought not to be transferr'd unto Strangers. I must confess, this was once my own Perswasion; out of which I could not argue my self, till I consider'd: 1. That by the Law both of God and Nature, Parents are obliged to instruct their children in the things of God; and therefore need not to enter into Bonds. 2. That Parents may die before their Children arrive to a ca­pacity of being instructed; or they may be ignorant and unable, or negligent and careless to instruct them. 3. That the Parents may be corrupted with Schism and Heresie, and by reason thereof be altogether unfit to perform this Office. And indeed, if we reflect upon the tem­perament of the Age we live in, the Church may seem never to have had more need of Sureties for their Orthodox instruction, whom she takes into her Com­munion. [Page 128] For so many Parents are infa­tuated with erronious Opinions, that none are more improper to engage for the regular Catechism of their children than themselves. And if there were none of these Reasons herein argumen­tative, yet the thing it self is of so great importance, that the Church hath ever thought it insecure to have none bound but the Parents. And there are, who upon no contemptible account, esteem it very incongruous, that those should present the Child to be washt of that pollution which it derived from them. And upon this score it might be, that the Father was wont not to be admitted to be present at the Baptism of his Child, but stood at the Church-door while the Infant was carried in and bapti­zed.

Zanchius, who was well read in the Writings of the ancient Fathers of the Church, speaking of this custom of Godfathers and Godmothers in his Commentaries upon the Ephesians, as­sures of its antiquity; that it opposeth no period of Holy Writ; that it is an Effect of the Parents love and care to their children thus to make all possible provision for their Religious Institution: That it is beneficial for the Infant in [Page 129] case of the Parents death, and an assi­stance to the Parents if they live: That it is a means to beget and increase mutual kindness among Neighbours; because hereby a spiritual alliance is contracted, which may greatly con­duce to the propagation and main­tenance of Christian charity. And we may add to all this, that not a few children would inevitably be de­barr'd of Holy Baptism, if none but their Parents could be admitted there­unto to present them, and to stipulate in their Names.

But it is in the next place strongly objected against what is vowed by the Sureties in behalf of the Baptized, as also that it looks very contrary to the Nature of a Vow for one to make it in behalf of another. And here not to meddle with the Nature of Vows in General, nor particularly of that of Baptism; it may sufficiently evacuate all Scruples, plainly to consider, that no more is done in this Baptismal Suretiship, than is both done and ap­proved in Secular affairs, in which it is allowed, that Infants act by their Tutors, Proxies and Guardians, and that too in matters of no smaller concernment than Espousals and E­states, [Page 130] &c, and at a time when they are as uncapable to understand and perform what is undertaken in their Names, as here at Baptism. It has also been ever thought both just and reasonable for debtors to procure o­thers to be bound with them for pay­ment of that for which at present they are insufficient. And we may safely suppose that God will be as merciful in such cases as our selves; and that he will as readily accept of Sureties for the Christian Education of an Innocent Infant, as we for an insufficient Debtor.

But for a more evident comprehen­sion of the whole case, I conceive it may be thus stated. At the Font when the Infant is brought to Holy Baptism, the Sureties put on his Per­son, and substitute themselves into his place: They represent his Voice, and answer in his stead. [All which is to be seen in the demands and answers in the administration of Publick Bap­tism of Infants to be used in the Church.] And the Infant engageth under this Personation, That when he comes to years, he will perform the Vow and Promise thus made by his Substitutes. He and they being by [Page 131] interpretation but as one person; and therefore the Infant, when grown up, is as much bound to discharge what at Baptism was promised in his Name, as if he had done it himself. Now by this Substitution the Sureties perform a great act of Charity: for they do that for the child, which by no means he could do for himself; for they get him an early interest in the priviledges of Christianity, which in the ordinary way of procedure, cannot be had without Baptism: and this cannot be had without making the Vow thereof; and it is impossible for the Infant to make this Vow, but by its Proxies; who oblige themselves no further, than to see that the Infant be taught so soon as he shall be able to learn, what a Solemn Vow, Promise, and Profession he has made by his Substitutes, or Sureties.

And by this short account of what the Godfathers and Godmothers do for the Infant in Baptism, it is easie to apprehend, that none need withdraw from this Pious Work, for the supposed Difficulty of its Dis­charge. And therefore those who rightly understand this Suretiship, and [Page 132] yet refuse it, they may be thought ra­ther to want Charity than Power; and that they are unwilling, and not unable to perform it.

Nor doth it less reflect upon their de­portment, who turn this pious Custom into an idle Ceremony, by privately devolving upon the Parents, what they publickly undertook for their children; which doth at once frustrate and contra­dict the intendment of the Ohurch, and delude the Congregation of God's people.

But it may be further objected, That the Vow of Baptism being made by o­thers, renders the Performance and Ob­servation thereof by the Child, a thing of constraint, and not of election: for the baptized, when grown up, doth not follow his own choice, but his Sureties; and allows of what was at Baptism pro­mised in his behalf, not out of willing­ness but pre-engagement; all which is oppposite to the genuine Nature of a Vow.

And in Answer to this Objection, it will be convenient to observe, That the Vow and Promise made by Sureties in Baptism is not absolute; for in an abso­lute sense, no man can undertake for another. But the Vow is conditional; [Page 133] and the Child when come to age, must either own it, or forfeit the benefits of Baptism. And as those who are marri­ed, being Minors, when come to mature years, may chuse whether the Marriage shall be ratified or rescinded: So it is in the power of the Baptized at years of discretion, to acknowledge or renounce the Vow of Baptism. If he allow of, and consent to what at holy Baptism was vowed in his Name (which is still supposed at the making of the Vow,) then he is bound actually to believe and do it. But if he disclaim it (which is in his power) then he disowns all Inte­rest and Priviledge in Christ, with all the benefits of that Society into which by Baptism he became incorporate.

The Catechism teacheth us out of the Creed, to believe, That God the Son hath redeemed all mankind; which cannot be true (say many) because he died only for the Elect. But they would have no reason to impugn the Churches Doctrine in this particular, if those Scriptures were impartially considered by them, Ezek. 18.23, 32. S. Joh. 3.16. Heb. 2.9. Rom. 1.4, 5. S. Joh. 4.42. 1 Tim. 4.10. S. Joh. 1.7. 2 S. Pet. 3.9. whereon this Positi­on is founded. A few of which are here barely quo­ted in the Margin, on [Page 134] purpose to shew the ground of the Churches Doctrine, and to guide those to the Topicks of their confutation, who gainsay this, I believe in God the Son, who hath redeemed me and all mankind. That his death was both sufficient and inten­tional to save all mankind, but is effectu­al and efficacious for none but true Belie­vers, is a distinction which being wisely and soberly understood, would remove that clashing, which some fancy there is, betwixt the Catechism and the Seven­teenth Article of the Church.

Many other Scruples brought against this excellent Catechism, are purposely o­mitted, because they will easily be obvi­ated in its (intended) Exposition. Be­sides, I have bound my self to observe the Laws of an Essay; which I must un­avoidably violate, if I should venture up­on all such Enlargements as the Subject would naturally endure. I had rather be censured for having said too little than too much.