on.

They who were, by the Cenfures of the Church deprived of the privileges of the true Commu nion, were thereby fuppofed to be delivered over to Satan. This was a plain confequence of the Doctrines of thofe times concerning the benefits of the myftical Communion which were given to those who were received into the vi fible Communion, and were withdrawn from them who were deprived of that Communion which was visible. Among thofe Benefits, one great one was the protection of good Spirits, who were fent out to minifter for them whe Should be Heirs of Salvation, Heb. i. 14. Thefe Heirs of Salvation were only the Members of the true Peculium and the Orthodox CommuniAnd therefore whoever loft his interest in that Body, muft confequently lofe his Title to the protection of good Spirits, and be expo. fed defenceless to the infeftations of evil ones. The cafe is the fame, whether they cut themfelves off from the privileged Body, or, whether they fuffer themselves judicially to be cut off by them whom God has intrufted with a right of governing that fame Body. But, as to Acts of Rebellion against the visible Governoars of the Body, the cafe was clearer. Our Savi our had faid: He that defpifeth you, defpifeth me: and he that defpifeth me, defpifeth him that fent me, S. Luke x. 16. Why fo, but to let Subjects know that he would refent all Af fronts to his vifible Reprefentatives on Earth as offered to himself, and would fhew his Refentments by fignal Punishments, as he had done in the cafe of Mofes and Aaron. Thus therefore, Meetings maintained in oppofition to the vifible Bishops must be interpreted, as kept up in defiance of the invifible Bishop of our Souls, 1 Pet. ii. 25. As God is faid to be

the

ཨ།

he Head of Chrift, and Chrift to be the Head f the Man, fo none could fo properly reprefent em as the fingle Perfon who was the Head f the visible Body upon Earth. Such was the shop of Ferufalem, the firft and Head-Apoftie, hilft the Apoftolical College retained a Catho ck Furifdiction over all the Churches on arth, or the fingle Bishops of the feveral City Furifditions, when they all fucceeded to the Rights of the Bishop of Jerufalem. Thus thereore the Adverfaries of the Bishops were to be aken for the Adverfaries to God and Chrift, nd therefore as abettors of their Capital Ad erfary, who is called Satan or Belial, in the Language of the Old Testament. The word alge here ufed by this Apoftolical Perfon, may poffibly have been Military in its original fenfe. So in Plautus, and the other elder Authors of the Latin Tongue, Soldiers are called Latrones, and their Military ftipend Tev, if Varr. Ling, L. we may believe Varro. If this Etymology be lib. vi. true, the word Latro muft have been originally Greek, and derived from fome of the Greek Colonies in Italy or Sicily, and yet later than the Military ftipends of the place where it was firft ufed. But I doubt whether that notion of λalgeid was used in the time of Ignatius. I chufe therefore rather to infift on this account of this Reasoning of Ignatius, that Meetings of Subjects without the Governours leave, for AFfairs proper for the Government, efpecially if fecret, have always, by the Law of Nations, been interpreted in favour of the Enemy. So Separate Meetings were understood by Petreius Bell. Civ. lib.i. in Cafar, where, among other things, Petreius c. 76. adjures his Soldiers that they fhould have no Separate Counfels: Neq; fibi feparatim à reliquis confilium capturos. In the cafe I am now

concerned

t

1

concerned for, these feparate Meetings for ligion, were for that very end for which Government of the Church was princìpally ftituted, and therefore juftly fufpicious of affection to the Government already Sett and of driving on designs in favour of the co mon Enemy. God is the God of Peace, Ra xv. 33. xvi. 20. God has called us to Pe I Cor. vii. 15. Thence may be gathered, w is the Author of Divifion; and who it is th calls to Divifion of any kind, whether of Her fie or Schifm, and whofe Suggeftions wa complied with, by them who were the Auther of fuch clancular Intrigues. It could be no ther but God's publick Enemy, whofe defign were fo contrary to that Society which God ha been pleased to receive into his own Patre nage. It looked like correfpondence with that Enemy, (how little foever fuch correfpondence was defigned) to do thofe things which Corre Spondents with the Enemy were ufually im ployed in for weakening the good understand ing of their own Body, and thereby giving the Enemy all the advantage he might hope for by dealing with their oron Body, not in their full ftrength, but weakened by infidious Friends and inteftine Divifions. And, if the promoting fuch Divifions was a Stratagem of the Enemy, it would indeed be a Service performed to the Enemy, and juftly fo interpreted, to affift him in fuch pernitious Projects, which it had been impoffible for him to accomplish without fuch treacherous Affiftants. Common Sins indeed are committed, by confenting to the Devil's Temptations without any defign of Hoftility. But Herefies and Schifms promote the Devil's hoftile Stratagems, not only against private Perfons, but also against the whole Body. Thus,

by

the Reafonings even of that Apoftolical Age, which Ignatius had received his ChriftianiMarriages even with Schifmaticks would ne under that higher imputation of the Atle, of promoting a concord between Chrift 1 Belial.

the true reafon

ed after his re

But, why will not this reafoning affect Mar- §. XXXIX.
ges before, as well as thofe that are con- Though we
tracted after the profeffion of Christianity? could not give
hy may not a Believing Confort, marrying why a Convert
e who is not of the fellowship of the Faith, fan&tifies a
rive a Holiness to their common Seed as well Marriage be-
a Believing Convert does? Before I anfwer fore Converfi-
is, I defire the Reader to remember, that ha- on, but an ori-
ginal Chrifti-
ng proved both thefe Refolutions to have an does not fan-
een the fenfe both of the Jews and Chrifti- &ifie the Mar-
ns of the Apoftle's Age, it muft follow, that riage contract-
bey, not we, must be refponfible for the rea-
ceiving Chri-
ons of them. The Refolutions themselves may, ftianity, that
ay must be true, though distance of time fhould would not hin-
have obliterated the Memory of the Reafons of der but that
them. Befides, the Reafons of many pofitive both thefe De-
cifions may be
Laws are commonly fuch as do not prove the very true.
thing commanded necessary, antecedently to
the fanction of the Legislator. Nay, they are
often fuch as would not neceffarily oblige all
that knew them to be of the fame mind, if
there had not been an Authority that might
over-rule private Opinions, and oblige particu
lar Perfons to acquiefce in Practice, how dif
ferent foever they might have been otherwise
in their Opinions, if they had not the Legifla-
tor's infallible Wisdom to direct them. This

I
warn, that the evidence of the main Cause
may not be judged of by the evidence of what
we have to fay concerning the reafons of their
fo different decifions of these two Cafes. These
Reafons may, at this diftance, be obfcure and

difficult,

S. XL. Tertullian's

as

to the fanétifi

for the fake of⋅

the Believer.

difficult, however unquestionable the Decif themselves may be. That advantage they g by having been decided by a competent Aut rity, that thenceforward the Authority it is reckoned on as the principal Reafon of ferving them without recourfe to the Refo that were regarded by the Authority in de ding them. Such recourfe, if depended on a Rule of Practice, would indeed have ma the Authority perfectly infignificant.

To proceed therefore to the difficulty, th account Tertullian gives of it, is this: Q account of this matrimonio Gentili à fide deprehendentur,prop explained, a terea non inquinantur, quia cum ipfis alii qu cation of the fanctificantur, fine dubio ifti, qui ante nuptia unbelieving fanctificati funt, fi extranea carni commifcer Confort, and tur, fantificare eam non poffunt, in qua Common Seed, funt deprehenfi. Dei autem gratia illud fan the believing ficat, quod invenit. Ita quod fanctificari n Confort, at the potuit, immundum eft: quod immundum ef time of the cum fancto non habet partem, nifi ut de fuo in converfion of quinet & occidat, Ad Uxor. L. ii. c. 2. W ever at the time of their Belief are found in Marriage with a Gentile, are therefore not de filed, becaufe their Conforts alfo are Sandfel with them. Thence alfo it follows, This the precedent words require for the completing of the fenfe,] That they who are fanctified before their Marriage, if they be mingled with firangs Flesh, [The Phrafe is taken partly from the mingling the Seed in Ezra, and the frang Flefb in S. Fude. The extranea caro is the Fle of an Alien from the Commonwealth of Ifrael Eph. ii. 12.] cannot undoubtedly fanctifie the in which they were not found. But the grace of God fandlifies what it finds. What therefore could not be fantlified, is ftill unclean: What is unclean has no fhare with what is holy,

un.

Lefs