QUEST What to judge of Creeds and Confessions Here a needfull question comes to be solved as What are we to judge of the Creeds confessions declaratios formes of faith synodal-conclusions both of the Antient and Moderne Kirk for since they containe the summe of credenda agenda petenda speranda that is of what we are to beleeve to do to aske and to hope for which are the Synopsis of all Christian duties the Question is If these are to be looked upon as fundamentalls or grounds of Answ Faith and trueth To answere this aright let us avoide these two extreams 1. None of these are so to be looked upon as Scripture or of equall authority to it It was an idol and idle word that of GREGORY to exequat the first foure generall Councells to the foure Evangelists 2. Avoid that other 1. of the vile Swenkfeldian who in disputing as they reject the Scriptures so also all Church determinations pretending though falsely that they are opposite to Christian liberty 3. That of the ARMINIAN Who though they admitt the reading of such Confessions and declarations yet they will not ascribe the least authority to them The pure Antient Kirk and our Orthodox present kirks oppose both these and have published very needfull and worthy vses of these formes as 1. They are looked upon as the Expositions of the true Catholick Faith 2. As strong barres both to hold out and to remove heresies 3. As a ready Catechisme containing the grounds of both what we are to beleeve what to do 4. They are a singular Meane to beget preserve a good understanding between kirks and to foment Peace unitie and concord amongst them as by the harmonious Confessions of the Reformed Churches is now seen as when that which indeed is an Orthodox ground is received and the Heterodox tenet is rejected That axiom of Lyrin was much esteemed Quod semper quod ubique quod ab omnibus creditum est which ever and everie-where and by all is beleeved In Ignaetius his Epistles it is often remarked and inculcated That whosoever will not joine to the abridged doctrines of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee is corrupted III. Vindication But passing this I next offer to vindicate this place from the false inferences of the Rhemists Bellarmine Becan Tirinus Valent Gretzer If the Church bee the ground of trueth then all Christians may should at last acquiesce to its determinations 1 Ob. answered so safely resolve their faith into it at last To which I answere first by denying the Consequent because the Churches Authority is not the formall cause of our assent to divine trueths as shal be shewen in the Answere to the third Objection 2. Giving but not granting what is in the illation yet I deny that to appertain to the present Roman Church which is the maine aime of these Sophisters 3. I propose to them this question which they force us to startle which is What is that Christian Society into which all credible Objects are vltimately resolved into Is it the Antient Catholick Kirk or is it the lawfull oecumenick Councells or is it the concurrent judgement of the Antient Fathers or is it the present RomaÌ„ Kirk To these the late Jesuits answer far otherwise theÌ„ the Moderate Schoolmen did I shall succinctly repeat some of their most absurd answers to this I meane of the Iesuits Bellarm. lib. 4. de P. R. chap. 1. affirmes every successour of Peter to be the rock and foundation of trueth Gretzer lib. 3. cap. 10. defens by the Church wee interpret the Pope D. Bann 2. secundae The authority of the universall Kirk that of the Pope are the same The Cannon Law lib. 6. Extravag tit 14. The Rescripts of the Pope are Canonicall scripture D. John Whyte in his way c. Digress 16. p. 36. collects out of their Writers this to be their judgment 1. say they The Catholick Church is the Rule to be followed in all points as the rule infallible 2. The Roman and the Catholick Faith are all one 3. By the Kirk we mean her Head saieth Valentia tom 3. d. 1. p. 24. so that this Catholick Church wherof they so much brag is no other but the Pope Now this Valentia finding the bed to be shorter then that he can stretch himself upon it as wee have Isai 28. 20. down right maintains that neither Antient Councells nor the antient Kirk nor old Decretalls nor the present Roman Kirk but the Pope is that whereunto at last we must resolve our faith of which rule to resolve unto he saieth Analys fidei lib. 8. cap. 7. Stante hac regula rationali animata infallibili omnes fidei articuli ultimatè resolvuntur in ipsam tanquaÌ„ in rationem formalem So that according to this new doctrine of the Roman Kirk Alexander VII now Pope is that ground of trueth whereon all are to lean so that the Pope now as D. Clerk wittily observes is growen so bigg that hee is both Head and whole Body yea the whole Church both holy Father and holy Mother both Husband and Wife nay the Pope is God as one Felinus Sandeus blasphemes This compendious way that they are fallen upon puts me in minde of a like foolish conceit one S. Cornaeus a late Iesuit hath fallen on who to reject Bellarmins 15 notes of the kirk falls only upon one as sufficient to confirme truths confute errours which is the Miracles of the RomaÌ„ Church Now to shew the folly of Valentia such flatterers heare what to the contrar says J. Picê° in concl It may happen that the Pope the vicariaÌ„ head be sick and as the naturall head sends down noxious humours into the body so also this Vicarian corrupt doctrines into its body But Puteanus a late Iesuite is now more plain and bold in his CoÌ„m on 2. 2. q. 1. a. 6. That the present Pope to wit Paul V. is Christ his true vicar successour is not not absolutely belonging to faith for this Proposition presupposeth two other Propositions 1. That Paul the V. is baptised 2. That Paul V. was Canonically elected to be pope but so it it that none of these two Propositions belongs to the Catholick faith thus he out of which I forme this syllogisme Whatsoever Alexand. 7. hath defined that is infallible the ground of trueth but he hath defined this or that Here grant that the Proposition wer true which yet is most false yet its AssumptioÌ„ can be no more then probable For how can he be certain that this Pope was lawfully ordained or at all baptised Of these there is no more then humane assent grounded upon probable conjectures or what certainty is there to all and every one subject to him that he hath published this or that definition Of these and the like is no divine certantie It is excellently well proven by S. V. LYND That in the Roman Church which they so farre extoll above Scripture
there is neither safety nor certanty whether we understand the Essentiall or the Representative or the Virtuall or the Consistoriall Church nor that Individuall Church barbarously so called which wants both personall and true doctrinall succession see his Via devia p. 513. and 452. And whereas Fisher and some others account it more safe to resolve into the Councell of Trent now I say this can be of no credit at all because this Councell was neither lawfully called nor was it free nor was it generally received by the Romanists themselves see Innoc. Gentill on it and Sess 12. see Chemnitii examen see Calvini Antidotum see the History of the Councell of Trent lib. 4. p. 319. see Whyts 3 Conf with Fisher Since the Nicen Creed hath I beleeve in the Church Therefore Ob. 2. primarly properly it is the pillar and ground of trueth wherupon Stapleton hath this assertion against WHITAKER I beleeve whatsoever the Church beleeveth lib. 1. cap. 9. and this indeed is the true ground of their circular argueing or the COLLIARRS faith and of that brutish assertion of Cajetan That the obedience of a Brute is the most perfect obedience of any But to speake to what is alleadged of the Nicen symbol I answere 1. That preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not at all in that Creed it is a false quotation of the Rhemists like many more 2. In the Symbol of Constantinople we reade it indeed and our Divines clearly shew that it was spuriously foysted in there 3. Make it to bee the reall composure of that second generall Councell yet Drusius that great Critick makes it to maintain no more then I beleeve the Church But 4. August Tom. 10. p. 311. de expos Symboli is of a farre better sounder judgement when he said there because the Church is not God therefore wee beleeve not into it or in it Faith its credere as to the Trinitie sayes hee is considere but Faiths credere as to the rest or secundarie objects of faith it is but agnoscere August knew nothing of that late Iesuit-opinion I may beleeve in the Kirk as I beleeve in the Virgin Mary neither of these is true Though all the superstructures of this Church were most true yet all its decisions are to be tryed and examined That even in Augustins judgement to whom Protestants appeale Ob. 3. so often The Church is the ground of trueth when contra epistolam fundamenti he sayes I would not have beleeved the Gospell unlesse the authority of the Church had moved mee Now to cleare August and to satisfie as farre as may bee the Papist I answer 1. If it be well considered against whom and for what August disputes there which both our Divines have shewen and Papists knew well enough this testimony can make nothing either against us or for them 2. Some schoolmen as Scotus Gabriel Canus judge that Augustine is to be understood of acquisite historicall faith and not of infused 3. Others of them thinke that Augustin there is speaking of the Authority of that Church which the Apostles governed not of the succeeding Church But passing them I answer by this distinction of the meane of Distinguish between by which and for which the principall cause It is well marked by Baron Apod Cathol p. 628. h. 9. q. 4. That wee ought to use these two Prepositions warily Per and Propter that is by which and for which I beleeve The first imports the vse of means without which faith is not ordinarly produced but this other relats to the principall ground and formall cause of our assent And so I apply the Churches testification is a meane to beleeve the Gospell but the principall ground of my assent to its trueths is because God hath revealed Distinguish between the Morall proofe the Divine proofe it I make it yet more cleare by distinguishing between a Morall proofe and a Divine proofe the Testimony of the Church is a morall proofe motive or inductive of Faith but the Authority of the Holy Ghost speaking in the scriptures is that Divine proofe causing assent whereunto at last I resolve Altisiedorensis thus explains it It is with the beleever ordinarly as it was with the Samaritans Ioh. 4. 42. that is after her discovery to them by the light of grace they perceive the Divine Majesty Wisdome efficacie and trueth of Christs doctrine and resolve into them and as when a faithfull Preacher delivers Apostolick doctrine though by his preaching wee receive these trueths yet we resolve not our faith principally and finally into his Authority who preaches to us but into that divine truth that is preached by him Heare the same learned Baron yet clearing this As the principall effective cause of our assent is the Holy Ghost by inward illumination of the minde and effectuall moving of the will so the word of God it selfe revealed by its innate light vertue and Majesty manifesting its Divinity is the principall objective cause or ground of our assent to the trueths of the Gospell And after him D. Owen anent the divine Originall of Script p. 33. The sole bottome and foundation or formall reason of our assent to the Scriptures as Gods Word and submitting our hearts and consciences to these Scriptures is the Authority of God the supream Lord of all the first and only absolute trueth speaking in and by the the pen-men of the Scriptures evidenced singly in and by the Scriptures c. As for the innate Arguments in the scriptures that is The Power and Majesty of the Word the simplicity of the style the ingyring light the consonancie in it and in the Writters of it the divine trueths contained in it c. These and many the like shew what a ground it is to faith in so much that the Antient Kirk Traditor libri was judged Abnegator fidei But the Papists by attributing so much to church-Church-Authority and detracting so much from the divine-Divine-Authority of the Scriptures and not resting in them have fallen into a miserable and an unextricable Circle STAPLETON maintaining in his Triplicatio fol. 188. That the last ground of Faith is the Authority of the Kirk Then the question is By what authority beleeve ye that the Kirk hath divine-Divine-Authority His answere is The Scriptures say so Question againe By what beleeve ye this Answers hee The Church sayes so Marke the words of one H. Holden an Englishman and Parisian Doctor lib. 1. cap. 9. Div. anel fidei as they are cited by R. Baxter in his safe Religion p. 284. confessing the trueth of the cōmon labyrinth circular shift in which Divines cōmonly wont to be involved For when they asked how they know then Scripture to be the revealed Word of God They answere by the assertion of the Vnversall censenting Church And if they be againe asked how they know that this unanimous assertion of the Catholick Kirk is free from errour or infallible They answere by
as an Embleme of a judgement so Gen. 19. 26. 4. For Strengthning and supporting great buildings so Judg. 16. 29. 5. Wee reade I. king 7. 21. that Solomon erected two pillars in the Temple porch called Jachin and Boaz interpreted by the seventy Interp. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Direction and Protection or as others Light and Integrity They were as the Vrim and the Thummim purity of Doctrine and sanctity of life a sound faith and pure living a sound head and charitable hands sound precepts good 6. practise by the which God directeth establisheth his Church 6. Amongst the Romans were Pillars erected to Conquerours after warres for Triumph so in Foro there were new Obelisks and in Campo Martio such pillars and high statues But the pillar 7. here mentioned is not a Materiall but a Metaphoricall not a reall but a figurative not an Architectonicall but Politicall not simply but comparatively so that is in respect of men locking leaning to it As to the question first to bee answered to wit What is the 2ly What Church is this pillar Church that is this Pillar I Ans first in generall 1. Each true Church is this Pillar yea each individuall Believer is a pillar in a sound sense as Revel 3. 12. But secondly If the Quaere bee to which this attribution chiefly and primarly belongs that is whether firstly to the Catholick or to the particular Churches Then I answere thus That since the Catholick Church is first in Divine Intention and in Institution and in Priviledges and in Authority and so in Dignity and Perfection yea and since the Federall Promises are first made to the Church Catholick as is well proven by J. Hudson Hence it is that I affirme that the Notion the denomination the qualifications of a pillar do all belong primarly to the Church Catholick It is well said of Jerome even to this very point Orbis major est urbe This is a cleare trueth every affection applicable or rightly applyed to the Catholick is not straight and still to be applyed to each particular as to be infallible or to be The Mother of us all it were incompetent to apply this to each particular though both these in act not erring are this Pillar yet with more and lesse yet with subordination yet as of the higher and of the lower degree Which I the rather insist upon to refute that new conceit of Independents who hold no kirk to be a Pillar of truth but their particular Congregations This is just as the Papists say No true kirk but that of Rome and as the Donatists before them said No true kirk but in Africa but both are mistaken not knowing the true affections of II. Why to be a pillar is attributed to the church the true Catholick Visible Church Now to cleare the second That is Why this Title is given to the Church I shall first negativè shew in what sense the Church is not a Pillar then positive shew in what sense it is a Pillar As to the first that is well cleared by D. Feeld lib. 4. cap. 4 of the Church 1. IT is not the Pillar of trueth as if divine trueths for their entitie and beeing did depend on the Church nay sayes 1. In what sense it is not the pillar of truth CHRYSOST well The Church depends on these trueths 2. Nor is it a Pillar as if our faith depended on Church-Authority To which purpose Irenaeus sayes well lib. 3. cap. 1. Inst. The Apostolick writes are the Pillars of our faith and cap. 2. the Gospell is the Pillar of trueth and not mens Authority The Church is not the authour or procreant cause of our faith 3. Nor is the Church a Pillar as if God could no other wayes reveale supernaturall trueths but by its Ministry as by necessity invincible No These have been revealed both by Himselfe immediatly to this or that private man and by Angels 4. Nor is it as if the Kirk were in no sense subject to ignorance or the least errour in its decisions and so to appeale to it as the supreame infallible Judge to whose discretion appertaineth the differencing between 2. In what sense it is the pillar of trueth trueth and falsehood Yet I affirme the Church to be a Pillar of trueth with Calvin Beza Davenant Chamier c. 1. As Custos it is a keeper to which divine saving needfull revealed trueths are concredited To which purpose heare what these three Fathers say to this point Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 4. The Apostles laid up in the Church as in a rich treasure all trueth and she keeps the Apostles faith preaching Tertullian The Kirk keeps the scriptures which are Christs heirship Lactant. lib. 6 Instiâ— The Catholick Church onely keeps the true worship of God it onely is the fountaine of trueth if any enter not into it or go out of it he is a stranger to salvation without are errours fancies and lies 2. As Tutana as a defendresse that is supporting and maintaining it as CHRYSOST Hom. 11. on Tim. explicats this well when he sayes The Kirk by its Ministry and preaching supports and upholds the trueth as it were on its shoulders 3. As PRâ—CO as an Herauld proclaiming promulgating professing it and bearing witnesse to it which no society on earth doth or can do but the Church 4. As REGISTRATRIX a Recorder transmitting it to posterity successively so it is a Thesaurer a Tutrix an Herauld a Notar keeping defending proclaiming recording divine trueths which moved Ravanella rightly to say That In Ecclesia prostant Veritates Catholicae And as Aug. said before him lib 3. cap. 6. contra DONAT Every Kirk should leade men to the faith But yet to make the justnesse of this predication more cleare I say That as of old the Egyptians and the Romanes and in ordinary Magistrats now erect Pillars posts to the which they affixe their Edicts Lawes Wills or to which of old were joined their Tabulae pensiles in the which Proclaimations carrying their minds are expressed notified and insinuated so the Kirk to Written Trueths it is not they but it demonstrats them even as the Pillars or broads affixed to them are not the LAW' 's in recto so it is with the Kirk according to that saying of the same CHRYSOST Trueth establisheth the Kirk and not the Kirk the Trueth HAMMOND in his Notes to this well explains this The vsefulnesse of a pillar is from the basis on which it stands else it will down If the basis be so set that it sinke not the pillar being firmely fastened on it and standing upright it is able to beare a vast weight of building upon it and so these two though severall in themselves as contiguous not continuat yet joining together and so as it were consolidated together in one they do as one not severally support what is laid on it so that as said is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉