A55299:217
An answer to the discourse of Mr. William Sherlock, touching the knowledge of Christ,…
An answer to the discourse of Mr. William Sherlock, touching the knowledge of Christ, and our union and communion with him by Edward Polhill ..., Esquire.
London: printed for Ben. Foster, 1675
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Christ hath left the visible and external conduct of his Church to Bishops and Pastors: Very well,1 But the internal Sceptre and Rule over hearts, is in his own hand only; and therefore the Papists, who make the Bishop of Rome Head of the Church, secundum exteriorem gubernationem, are yet so modest as to leave Christ to be the only Head, secundum interiorem insluxum. Our union to Christ is an internal, spiritual ⟨p. 198⟩one, made by the Spirit and Faith, such as cannot consist in any thing external; such as subjection to Ecclesiastical Governors, who have the visible conduct, is. Hence the Reverend Usher tells us, Without that quickening Spirit, 2no external communion with Christ or his Church, can make a man a true member of his mystical body; this being a most sure principle, that he which hath not the Spirit of Christ, is none of his. Rom. 8.9. A wicked man may be subject to Ecclesiastical Government; yet while such, is not, cannot be a member of Christ, or his mystical body; Bellarmine himself was so struck with the evidence of this truth, that he confessed, That wicked men, are but membra mortua & arida, quae solum adhaerent reliquis externâ conjunctione, non de Eeclesiâ nisi secundum apparentiam exteriorem, & putativè, non verè; that is, they are no members at all, which makes it clear, that our union to Christ stands not in subjection to Ecclesiastical Governors, and what (for such a thing is possible) if the Ecclesiastical Governor be a wicked man himself? Is it imaginable, that the union of one wicked man to another, should produce an union to Christ? ⟨p. 199⟩Or what if such a case should fall out, as once did, when under the Emperor Basiliscus, 3no less than five hundred Bishops condemned the Council of Chalcedon? It would be very hard in such a dismal lapse, to say, that all the Christians under them, had without any default in themselves, lost their union with Christ; and yet we must say so, unless we allow that union to be made and supported by the internal bonds of the Spirit and Faith.