A second part of The mixture of scholasticall divinity, with practical, in several tractates: wherein some of the most difficult knots in divinity are untyed, many dark places of Scripture cleared, sundry heresies and errors refuted ... Whereunto are annexed, several letters of the same author, and Dr. Jeremy Taylor, concerning Original Sin. Together with a reply unto Dr. Hammonds vindication of his grounds of uniformity from 1 Cor. 14.40. By Henry Jeanes, minister of Gods Word at Chedzoy in Somersetshire.

Jeanes.

Your ordinary Readers will thinke you Conjure, when they hear you term Baptisme an exorcising of Devils; for they never heard of any Exorcisne in Baptisme, save of the Papists, which our Divines brand for Magical; and whe∣ther this expression might not have been forborn to avoyd all appearance of e∣vill, in complyance with Papists in their use of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, I shall 〈◊〉〈◊〉 deter∣mine, but leave it unto your own prudence to think of. Whereas you say, that the ancient 〈◊〉〈◊〉 were called Exorcists, the reason of this may probably be, because the Catechumeni were exorcised before Baptisme, Aquin. Sum. part. 3. quaest. 71. artic. 2. But I shall not contend about this with you, for fear I should bee thought as very a fool as the Philosopher, who read a Lecture of Warre before Hannihal. There is a passage in Augustine that seemes to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 somewhat what you 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Tom 7 pag. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Ab hac igitur 〈◊〉〈◊〉 tenebrarum, quarum est Diabolus princeps, id est, à 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Diaboli, & angelorum ejus quisquis erui, cum baptizantur, ne∣gaverit parvulos, ipsorum ecclefiae sacramentorum veritate convincitur, &c. In veritate itaque non in salsitate potestas diabolica exorcizatur in parvulis, eique renunciant, quia 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sua non possunt, per 〈◊〉〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 gestantium, ut eruti à potestate 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in reg∣num sui Domini transferantur. Unto this testimony I beleeve it is easie for you to adde many more.

But yet notwithstanding all this, it is very well known, by all that know the difference 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Predicaments, that the Sacrament of Baptisme cannot be

said to be the Exorcising of Devils, the rescuing of a person from the power of Satan, the delivery of him from the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, otherwise than in an improper, tro∣picall, and metonymicall praedication, viz. as it is a sign and seal, and if you will, a moral instrument of the conditionall promise thereof.

But what advantage reap you unto your cause by this? why unto this Exor∣cising of Devils, the rescuing a person from the power of Satan into Gods fami∣ly, the use of the Crosse in Baptisme is exactly symbolical? Your argument (if there be any argument in your words) as I conceive, stands thus: That which is so exactly symbolical unto any thing signed, sealed, conveighed, and exhibited in Baptisme, is so decent, as that the omission thereof would be undecent: but the use of the Crosse in Baptisme is exactly symbolical unto that which is signed, sealed, and conveighed, or exhibited in Baptisme, viz. the Exorcising of Devils, the rescuing a person from the power of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 into Gods Sonship and Family, therefore the use of it is so decent, as that the omission thereof would be undecent; you cannot but expect that the Major will be denled, and 'tis very strange that you leave it destitute of all proof; for you cannot be ignorant if you have read the Non-conformists, whom you oppose, that their great quarrell a∣gainst our Ceremonies, was their symbolicalnesse and mystical signification; their arguments against which you may read at large in the Abridgement, page 41, 42, &c. usque 〈◊〉〈◊〉 49. Ames his Reply to Mortons Generall Def. page 33, 34, &c. usque ad 58. As also in his Triplication to Dr. Burges Disp. about humane Ceremon. page 209, 210. usque ad 336. Parker. Treat. of the Crosse, part 1. page 97, 98, &c. usque ad 112. Didoclave, page 522, 523, &c. usque ad 536.

But, Sir, you may thinke to blow off all the Arguments with a silent scorne and contempt, and this indeed many doe with those arguments which they can∣not answer; but if you will not vouchsafe to read these Authors, if you please to accept of my service, I will abridge the substance of their arguments, and attend your answer unto them.

Then, for the Minor, I have four things to say unto it.

• 1. Baptisme it self is more proper, agreeable, or exactly Symbolical, unto the rescuing of a person from the power of Satan into Gods Sonship and Family, than the signe of the Crosse; and therefore the sign of the Crosse in Baptisme is a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉, like the dimme and smoakie light of a candle in the presence of the clear and glorious light of the Sun at noon-day.
• 2. The Popish Exorcisme and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 are as, if not more, proper, agree∣able, and exactly symbolical, unto the Exorcising of Devils as the use of the Crosse in Baptisme, and they have not been so much abused as it, and may as 〈◊〉〈◊〉 be purged from all Superstition and Idolatry, and therefore you may as well conclude concerning them as the Cross, that they are so decent as that the omis∣sion of them would be undecent.
• 3. I much question whether or no two crosse motions of a finger or a thumb 〈◊〉〈◊〉 so proper, agreeable, and exactly symbolical, unto so high, dreadfull and pro∣found a mystery, as the delivery of us from the power of Satan and darknesse, and the translation of us into the kingdome of the dear Son of God, as you af∣firm; and I shall hardly beleeve you, unlesse you bring other proofs, besides the Hyperbolies of the Fathers.

As for that which in confirmation of the Minor, you quote out of Ter∣tullian:

1. It is urged by some, not onely for the signification, but also for the opera∣tion

and efficacy of the Crosse, and whether you will go so far I cannot tell.

2. Unto it Mr. Whitaker, when urged by Papists for Traditions, gives this an∣swer, Tom. 1. pag. 390. At anima fide contra Satanam munienda est, non cruce. Ve∣teres quidem se 〈◊〉〈◊〉 signo adversus Daemonas munitos esse putârunt, sed hoc ex haeresi 〈◊〉〈◊〉 fluxit.

And 〈◊〉〈◊〉 him Mr. Fuller in his History of the University of Cambridge pag. 125, gives this 〈◊〉〈◊〉 character; He was one so exactly qualified, that the Professors Chair may seem made for him, and he for it, they mutually so fitted each other.

3. I would 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to know, how you like the companion of the Crosse in Tertullian, the holy oile? caro ungitur, saith he, in the words immediately fore∣going, ut anima 〈◊〉〈◊〉: but perhaps you are for the reviving of that, as well as for the using of the Crosse; and some 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not to say, that 'tis as ancient as the Crosse.

One thing more I cannot but remember you of, before I leave this Section, and it is a distinction of mystical signification by the learned and reverend 〈◊〉〈◊〉, the word mystical signification hath two acceptions, saith he, General Def. pag. 52. The one Sacramental, by signification of grace 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by God; the other is onely Moral, by signification of mans duty and obedience towards God. The ceremo∣nies which we defend (saith he) are onely mystical Moral, not Sacramental; and for his disclaiming these, he gives this reason, page 53, 54. A sacramental sign (be∣ing, as sacramental, so likewise 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a seal of Gods promises, as the Apostle* 1.1 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Circumcision) is alwaies founded upon the expresse Covenant of God, therefore none but the Author of the Covenant may institute or appoint any such sign. For who∣soever shall undertake to adde a seal unto the Will and Covenant of any Testator amongst men, is farthwith held Falsarius, and thereby made obnoxious to the Law, and lyable to the grievous judgements of man: How much more 〈◊〉〈◊〉 an Act were it for any to offix any sign, properly Sacramental, unto the Testament of our Lord Jesus? which whoso∣ever shall attempt to do, becommeth guilty of sacrilegious depravation of the blessed My∣steries of Salvation.

Now you make the sign of the Crosse to be that which Morton calls a Sacra∣mental signe; for he describes a Sacramental signe to be that which signifieth Grace conferred by God: & is not the rescuing of a person from the power of Sa∣tan into Gods Sonship and Family (as for your other expression: Baptisme is the Exorcising of Devils, I am not much delighted with the repetition of it) a grace conferred by God? and unto this you say the sign of the Crosse is exactly Symbo∣licall, and therefore a Sacramental sign.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Rom. 4.