those Churches the Two Creeds are professed true Baptism administred and an undoubted Succession of Bishops from the Apostles How then come They to be excluded from being Parts of the One Catholick and Apostolick Church And if they be not excluded how can the Roman Church assume to it self that glorious Title So that it seems to me as visible as that the Scripture is in Print that the Roman Church neither is nor can be that One Church which Christ left upon Earth And this Principle being removed which ought to be taken for granted since it can never be proved we must unavoidably enter into the Ocean of Particular Disputes And I know no reason any can have to be so afraid of it since we have so sure a Compass as the Holy Scripture to direct our passage But the reason of avoiding particular Disputes is because the evidence is too clear in them that the Church of Rome hath notoriously deviated from this infallible Rule And it is as impossible for a Church which hath erred to be Infallible as for a Church really Infallible to err But if a Church pretend to prove her Infallibility by Texts which are not so clear as those which prove her to have actually erred then we have greater reason to recede from her Errors than to be deceived with such a fallible pretence to Infallibility Well! But it is not left to every phantastical mans head to believe as he pleases but to the Church And is it indeed left to the Church to believe as it pleases But the meaning I suppose is that those who reject the the Authority of the Roman Catholick Church do leave every man to believe according to his own fancy Certainly those of the Church of England cannot be liable to any imputaion of this Nature For our Church receives the three Creeds and embraces the four General Councils and professes to hold nothing contrary to any Universal Tradition of the Church from the Apostles times And we have often offered to put the Controversies between Us and the Church of Rome upon that issue And do not those rather believe as they please who believe the Roman Church to be the Catholick Church without any colour from Scriptures Antiquity or Reason Do not those believe as they please who can believe against the most convincing evidence of their own senses Do not those believe as they please who can reconcile the lawfulness of the Worship of Images with Gods forbidding it the Communion in one kind with Christ's Institution and the praying in an unknown Tongue with the 14 Ch. of the first Epistle to the Corinthians But all these and many other Absurdities may go down by vertue of the Churches Authority to whom it is said Christ left the Power upon Earth to govern us in matters of Faith We do not deny that the Church hath Authority of declaring matters of Faith or else it never could have condemn'd the Antient Heresies But then we must consider the difference between the Universal Church in a General and free Council declaring the sense of Scripture in Articles of Faith generally received in the Christian Church from the Apostles Times as was done when the Nicene Creed was made and a Faction in the Church assuming to it self the Title of Catholick and proceeding by other rules than the first Councils did and imposing new Opinions and Practices as things necessary to the Communion of the Catholick Church And this is the true Point in difference between us and those of the Roman Church about the Churches Authority in matters of Faith since the Council of Trent For we think we have very great reason to complain when a Party in the Church the most corrupt and obnoxious takes upon it self to define many new Doctrines as necessary Points of Faith which have neither Scripture nor Universal Tradition for them It were a very irrational thing we are told to make Laws for a Country and leave it to the Inhabitants to be Interpreters and Iudges of those Laws for then every Man will be his own Iudge and by consequence no such thing as either Right or Wrong But is it not as irrational to allow an Usurper to interpret the Laws to his own advantage against the just Title of the Prince and the true Interest of the People And if it be not Reasonable for any private Person to be his own Iudge why should a publick Invader be so But we hope it will be allowed to the Loyal Inhabitants of a Country so far to interpret the Laws as to be able to understand the Duty they owe to their King and to justifie his Right against all the Pretences of Usurpers And this is as much as we plead for in this case Can we therefore suppose That God Almighty would leave us at those uncertainties as to give us a Rule to go by and leave every Man to be his own Iudge And can we resonably suppose That God Almighty should give as a Rule not capable of being understood by those to whom it was given in order to the great End of it viz. the saving of their Souls For this was the main end of the Rule to direct us in the way to Heaven and not meerly to determine Controversies The Staff which a Man uses may serve to measure things by but the principal design is to walk with it So it is with the Holy Scripture if Controversies arise It is fit to examine and compare them with this Infallible Rule but when that is done to help us in our way to Heaven is that which it was chiefly intended for And no Man can think it of equal consequence to him not to be mistaken and not to be damned In matters of Good and Evil every mans Conscience is his immediate Judge and why not in matters of Truth and Falshood Unless we suppose mens involuntary mistakes to be more dangerous than their wilful sins But after all We do not leave every Man to be his own Iudge any further than it concerns his own Salvation which depends upon his particular Care and Sincerity For to prevent any dangerous Mistakes by the Artifice of Seducers we do allow the Assistance of those Spiritual Guides which God hath appointed in his Church for the better insturcting and governing private Persons We embrace the Ancient Creeds as a summary comprehension of the Articles of Faith and think no Man ought to follow his own particular Fancy against Doctrines so universally received in the Christian Church from the Apostles Times I do ask any Ingenuous Man whether it be not the same thing to follow our own Fancy or to interpret Scripture by it If we allowed no Creeds no Fathers no Councils there might have been some colour for such a Question But do we permit Men to interpret Scripture according to their own Fancy who live in a Church which owns the Doctrine of the Primitive Church more frankly and ingenuously than any Church in the World
Imprimatur Z. Isham R. P. D. Hen. Episc. Lond. Ã Sacris 1685. AN ANSWER TO SOME PAPERS Lately Printed concerning the AUTHORITY OF THE Catholick Church In MATTERS of FAITH and the REFORMATION of the CHURCH of ENGLAND LONDON Printed for Ric. Chiswel at the Rose and Crown in S t Paul's Church-Yard MDCLXXXVI AN Advertisement IF the Papers here answered had not been so publickly dispersed through the Nation a due Respect to the Name they bear would have kept the Author from publishing any Answer to them But because they may now fall into many hands who without some assistance may not readily resolve some difficulties started by them He thought it not unbecoming his duty to God and the King to give a clearer light to the Things contained in them And it can be no reflection on the Authority of a Prince for a private Subject to examine a piece of Coyn as to its just value though it bears His Image and Superscription upon it In matters that concern Faith and Salvation we must prove all things and hold fast that which is good AN ANSWER TO THE First Paper IF all men could believe as they pleased I should not have fail'd of satisfaction in this First Paper the Design of it being to put an end to Particular Disputes to which I am so little a Friend that I could have been glad to have found as much reason in it to convince as I saw there was a fair appearance to deceive But there is a Law in our Minds distinct from that of our Inclinations and out of a just and due regard to That we must examine the most plausible Writings though back'd with the greatest Authority before we yield our Assent unto them If particular Controversies about Matters of Faith could be ended by a Principle as visible as that the Scripture is in Print all men of sence would soon give over Disputing for none who dare believe what they see can call that in Question But what if the Church whose Authority it is said they must submit to will not allow them to believe what they see How then can this be a sufficient reason to perswade them to believe the Church because it is as visible as that the Scripture is in Print unless we must only use our senses to find out the Church and renounce them assoon as we have done it Which is a very bad requital of them and no great Honour to the Church which requires it But with all due submission it is no more visible that the Roman Church is the Catholick Church than it is that a part is the whole and the most corrupt part that one Church which Christ hath here upon Earth It is agreed among all Christians That Christ can have but one Church upon Earth as there is but one Lord one Faith one Baptism And this is that Church we profess to believe in the two Creeds But if those who made those Creeds for our direction had intended the Roman Catholick Church why was it not so expressed How came it to pass that such a limitation of the sense of Christs Catholick Church to the Roman should never be put to Persons to be Baptized in any Age of the Church For I do not find in the Office of Baptism even in the Roman Church that it is required that they believe the Roman Catholick Church or that they deny the validity of Baptism out of the Communion of the Roman Church From whence it is to me as visible as that the Scripture is in Print that the Church of Rome it self doth not believe that it is the one Catholick Church mentioned in the two Creeds For then it must void all Baptism out of its Communion which it hath never yet done And as long as Baptism doth enter Persons into the Catholick Church it is impossible that all who have the true form of Baptism though out of the Communion of the Roman Church should be Members of the Catholick Church and yet the Communion of the Roman and Catholick be all one as it must be if the Roman Church be the Catholick and Apostolick Church professed in the Creeds If we had been so happy to have lived in those Blessed Times when the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul it had been no difficulty to have shewed that one visible Church which Christ had here upon Earth But they must be great strangers to the History of the Church who have not heard of the early and great Divisions in the Communion of it And there was a remarkable difference in the Nature of those Schisms which happened in the Church which being not considered hath been the occasion of great misaplication of the sayings of the Antients about the One Catholick Church Some did so break off Communion with other parts of the Catholick Church as to challenge that Title wholly to themselves as was evident in the case of the Novatians and Donatists for they rebaptiz'd all that embraced their Communion Others were cast out of Communion upon particular differences which were not supposed to be of such a nature as to make them no members of the Catholick Church So the Bishops of Rome excommunicated the Bishops of Asia for not keeping Easter when They did and the Bishops both of Asia and Africa for not allowing the Baptism of Hereticks But is it reasonable to suppose that upon these Differences they shut out all those Holy Bishops and Martyrs from the possibility of Salvation by excluding them from their Communion If not then there may be different Communions among Christians which may still continue Parts of the Catholick Church and consequently no one Member of such a Division ought to assume to it self the Title and Authority of the One Catholick Church But if any One Part doth so though never so great and conspicuos it is guilty of the same Presumption with the Novatians and Donatists and is as much cause of the Schisms which happen thereupon in the Church as they were For a long time before the Reformation there had been great and considerable breaches between the Eastern and Western Churches insomuch that they did renounce each other Communion And in these Differences four Patriarchal Churches joined together against the fifth viz. that of the Bishop of Rome But the Eastern Patriarchs sinking in their Power by the horrible Invasion of the Enemies of the Christian Faith and the Bishops of Rome advancing themselves to so much Authority by the advantages they took from the kindness of some Princes and the Weakness of others They would hear of no other terms of accommodation with the Eastern Churches but by an intire submission to the Pope as Head of the Catholick Church Which all the Churches of the East refused however different among themselves and to this day look on the Pope's Supremacy as an Innovation in the Church and Usurpation on the Rights of the other Patriarchs and Bishops In all
how the Church of Rome came to have this Power of defining Heretical Doctrines or how any Doctrine comes to be Heresie by being contrary to its definitions For Heresie is an obstinate opposing some necessary Article of Faith It must therefore be proved that what the Church of Rome declares doth thereby become a necessary Article of Faith or it is very unreasonable to lay the imputation of Heresie upon us And this can never be maintained without proving that the Church of Rome hath a Power to make Doctrines not necessary before to become necessary by her Definition which is the same thing with making New Articles of Faith But these can never be proved to be such by Universal Tradition which the Church of Rome pretends for all her Articles of Faith Every Man thinks himself as competent a Iudge of Scripture as the very Apostles themselves Doth Every Man among us pretend to an infallible Spirit And yet Every Man owns that the Apostles had it But what is meant by being a Iudge of Scripture If no more be understood then that every Man must use his understanding about it I hope this is no Crime nor Heresie The Scripture must be believed in order to Salvation and therefore it must be understood for how can a Man believe what he understands not the sense or meaning of If he must understand the sense he must be Iudge of the sense so that every Man who is bound to believe the Scripture in order to his Salvation must be Judge of the sense of the Scripture so far as concerns his Salvation But if by being a Iudge of the Scripture be meant giving such a judgment as obliges others to submit to it then among us no particular Man doth pretend to be a competent Iudge of Scripture so as to bind others to rely upon his Authority in expounding Scripture We own the Authority of Guides in the Church and a due submission to them but we do not allow them to be as competent Iudges of Scripture as the very Apostles And 't is no wonder it should be so since that part of the Nation which looks most like a Church dares not bring the true Arguments against the other Sects for fear they should be turned against themselves and confuted by their own Arguments This is directly level'd against the Church of England which is hereby charged with Insincerity or Weakness in dealing with the Dissenters But we must consider the meaning of this charge It is no wonder it should be so i. e. That every Man should think himself as competent a Iudge of Scripture as the very Apostles because the Church of England dares not use the true Arguments against the Sects Whence it appears that this true Argument is the Churches infallible Authority and the Obligation of all Members of the Church to submit their judgments intirely thereto I confess that if the Church of England did pretend to this against the Sectaries they might justly turn it against her because in our Articles though the Churches Authority be asserted yet Infallibility is denyed If there can be no Authority in a Church without Infallibility or there can be no obligation to submit to Authority without it then the Church of England doth not use the best Arguments against Sectaries But if there be no ground for Infallibility if the Church which hath most pretended to it hath been most grosly deceived if the Heads of that Church have been not barely suspected of Heresie but one of them stands condemned for it in Three General Councils own'd by that Church then for all that I can see the Church of England hath wisely disowned the pretence of Infallibility and made use of the best Arguments against Sectaries from a just Authority and the sinfulness and folly of the Sectaries refusing to submit to it The Church of England as 't is called would fain have it thought That they are the Iudges in matters Spiritual yet dare not say positively there is no Appeal from them Is not the Church of England really what it is called I would fain know what it wants to make it as good a Church as any in the Christian World It wants neither Faith if the Creed contain it nor Sacraments and those entire nor Succession of Bishops as certain as Rome it self nor a Liturgy more agreeing to Primitive Worship then is any where else to be found Why then the Church of England as 't is called Well! But what is this Church now blamed for They pretend to be Iudges in matters Spiritual and yet dare not say there is no appeal from them How then Are there no true Judges but such as there lies no Appeal from There lies an Appeal from any Judges in the Kings Courts to the Court of Parliament are They not therefore true Judges in Westminster-Hall There lay an Appeal from Bishops to Metropolitans from them to Patriarchs from Patriarchs to General Councils according to the Antient Polity of the Church Were there therefore no true Judges but General Councils What follows relating to the Churches Authority and every Mans following his own judgment hath been answered already I proceed therefore to what further concerns this matter of Appeal What Country can subsist in Quiet where there is not a Supreme Iudge from whence there can be no Appeal The natural consequence from hence appears to be that every National Church ought to have the Supream Power within it self But how come Appeals to a foreign Jurisdiction to tend to the Peace and Quiet of a Church They have been always complained of in the best Ages of the Church and by the best Men such as S. Cyprian and S. Augustine and the whole African Churches The worst Men began them and the worst Church encouraged them without regard to the Peace of the Christian Church so it increased its own Grandeur by them We have had these hundred Years past the sad effects of denying to the Church that Power in matters Spiritual without an Appeal And our Ancestors for many hundred Years last past found the intolerable Inconveniencies of an Appeal to foreign Jurisdiction Whereby the Nation was exhausted Justice obstructed the Clergy oppressed and the Kings Prerogative greatly diminished But these were slight things in Comparison to what we have felt these hundred Years past for want of it Have not the Kings Courts been open for matters of Law and Justice which have been fill'd with Men of as great Abilities and Integrity since the Reformation as ever they were before Hath not the Appeal to the King in his High Court of Chancery been as much for the King and People as ever the Appeal was to the Court of Rome Have not all the Neighbour Princes been forced for the preserving their own Dignity to set Bounds and Limits to Appeals to Rome and to Orders or Bulls that come from thence How then comes the want of such an Appeal to be thought to produce such sad effects here All