Layman that can not tell him what is in the Councils or by a Priest that never read the Councils and whether the variety of natural capacities bodily temperaments education and course of Life before do not make as great variety of proportions to be necessary to the sufficiency of this Proposal And what mortal man can truly take the measure of them And how then can any man be Certain what those points are which are necessary for him to believe X. Those things are uncertain which depend upon an uncertain Author or Authority For instance the Roman faith dependeth on the exposition of the Scriptures by the consent of the Fathers and on the Tradition of the Church and the decrees of an authorized Council And here is in all this little but uncertainties 1. It is utterly uncertain who are to be taken for Fathers and who not Whether Origen Tatianus Arnobius Lactantius Tertullian and many such be Fathers or not Whether such a man as Theophilus Alexandrinus or Chrysostom was the Father when they condemned each other Whether such as are justly suspected of Heresy as Eusebius or such as the Romanists have cast suspicions on as Lucifer Calaritanus called a Heretick Socrates Sozomens falsly called Novatians Hilary Arelatensis Condemned by the Pope Leo and Claud. Turovens Rupertus Tuitiens and such others When the ancients renounced each others Communion as Martin did by Ithacius and Idacius and their Synod when they describe one another as stark Knaves as Socrates doth Theophil Alexandrin and Sulpitius Severus doth Ithacius which of them were the Fathers 2. How shall we know certainly which are the true uncorrupted writings of these Fathers among so many forgeries and spurious Scripts 3. How shall it be known what exposition the Fathers consented on when not one of a multitude and but few in all have commented on any considerable parts of the Scripture and those few so much often differ 4. When in the Doctrine of the Trinity it self Petavius largely proveth that most of the writers of the three first Centuries after the Apostles were unsound and others confess the same about the Millennium the corporeity of Angels and of the Soul and divers other things doth their consent bind us to believe them If not how shall we know in what to believe their consent according to this Rule 2. And as to the Church they are utterly disagreed among themselves what that Church is which hath this authority 1. Whether the Pope alone 2. Or the Pope with a Provincial Council 3. Or the Pope with a General Council 4. Or a General Council without the Pope 5. Or the universality of Pastors 6. Or the universality of the people with them 3. And for a Council 1. There is no certainty what number of Bishops and what consent of the Comprovincial Clergy is necessary to make them the true representatives of any Church 2. And more uncertain in what Council the Bishops had such consent 3. And uncertain whether the Popes approbation be necessary The great Councils of Constance and Basil determining the contrary 4. And uncertain which were truly approved 5. And most certain that there never was any General Council in the world unless you will call the Apostles a General Council but only General Councils of the Clergy of one Empire with now and then a stragling Neighbour even as we have General Assemblies and Convocations in this Kingdom And who can be certain of that faith which dependeth upon all or any of these uncertainties XI That must needs be an uncertainty which dependeth on the unknown thoughts of another man. For instance with the Papists the Priests intention which is the secret of his heart is necessary to the being of Baptism and Transubstantiation And so no man can be certain whether he or any other man be baptized or not Nor whether it be Bread or Christs Body which he eateth We confess that it is necessary to the being of a Sacrament that the Minister do seem or profess to intend it as a Sacrament But if the reality of his intent be necessary to the being of it no man can be certain that ever he had a Sacrament XII It is a hard thing to be certain on either side in those controversies which have multitudes and in a manner equal strength of Learned Judicious Well-studyed Godly Impartial men for each part I deny not but one clear-headed man may be certain of that which a multitude are uncertain of and oppose him in But it must not be ordinary men but some rare illuminated person that must get above a probability unto a Certainty of that which such a company as aforesaid are of a contrary mind in XIII There is great uncertainty in matters of private impulse When a man hath nothing to prove a thing to be Gods will but an inward perswasion or impulse in his own Breast let it never so vehemently incline him to think it true it 's hard to be sure of it For we know not how far Satan or our own distempered Phantasies may go And most by far that pretend to this do prove deceived That which must be certain must be somewhat equal to Prophetical Inspiration Which indeed is its own Evidence But what that is no man can formally conceive but he that hath had it Therefore we are bid to Try the Spirits XIV It is a hard thing to gather certainties of Doctrinal conclusion from Gods Providences alone Providential changes have their great use as they are the fulfilling or execution of the word But they that will take them instead of the Scripture do usually run into such mistakes as are rectifyed to their cost by some contrary work of Providence ere long These times have fully taught us this XV. It is hard to gather Doctrinal certainties from Godly mens Experiences alone Even our Experimental Philosophers and Physicians find that an experiment that hits oft-times quite misseth afterwards on other Subjects and they know not why A course of effects may oft come from unknown causes And it 's no rare thing for the common Prejudices Selfconceitedness or corruption of the weaker and greater number of good people which needeth great repentance and a cure to be mistaken for the Communis Sensus Fidelium the Inclination and Experience of the Godly Especially when consent or the honour of their Leaders or Themselves hath engaged them in it In my time the common sense of the strictest sort was against long hair and taking Tobacco and other such things which now their common practice is for In one Countrey the common consent of the strictest party is for Arminianism In another they are zealously against it In Poland where the Socinians are for sitting at the Sacrament the Godly are generally against it In other places they are for it In Poland and Bohemia where they had holy humble perswading Bishops the generality of the Godly were for that Episcopacy as were all the ancient Churches even the Novatians
By doing thus the Church notoriously declared that they took not all the Scripture to be equally necessary to be understood but that the Govenant of Grace and the Catechism explaining it is the Gospel it self that is the Essence of it and of the Christian Religion and that all the rest of the Scriptures contain but partly the Integrals and partly the Accidents of that Religion He is the wisest man that knoweth Most and Best and every man should know as much of the Scriptures as he can But if you knew all the rest without this the Covenant of Grace and its explication it would not make you Christians or save you But if you know this truly without all the rest it will. The whole Scripture is of great use and benefit to the Church It is like the body of a man which hath its Head and Heart and Stomach c. And hath also Fingers and Toes and flesh yea Nails and Hair. And yet the Brain and Heart it self fare the better for the rest and would not be so well Seated separate from them Though a man may be a man that loseth even a Leg or Arm. So is it here But it is the Covenant that is our Christianity and the duly Baptized are Christians whatever else they do not understand These are the things that all must know and daily live upon The Creed is but the Exposition of the three Articles of the Baptismal Covenant I believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost Though the Jews that had been bred up to a preparing knowledge were quickly baptized by the Apostles upon their Conversion Acts 2. Yet no man can imagine that either the Apostles or other Ministers did use to admit the Ignorant Gentiles into the Covenant of God without opening the meaning of it to them or Baptize them as Christians without teaching them what Christianity is Therefore Reason and the whole Churches subsequent Custom assure us that the Apostles used to expound the three great Articles to their Catechumens And thence it is called The Apostles Creed Marcus Bishop of Ephesus told them in the Florentine Council as you may see Sgyropilus that we have none of the Apostles Creed And Vossius de Symbolis besides many others hath many Arguments to prove that this so called was not formally made by the Apostles Bishop Usher hath opened the changes that have been in it Sandford and Parker have largely de Descensu shewed how it came in as an Exposition of the Baptismal Articles Others stifly maintain that the Apostles made it But the case seemeth plain The Apostles used to call the Baptized to the profession of the same Articles which Paul hath in 1. Cor. 15.1 2 3 c. and varied not the matter All this was but more particularly to profess Faith in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost Two or three further Expository Articles are put into the Creed since Otherwise it is the same which the Apostles used not in the very syllables or forms of words but in the same sense and the words indeed being left free but seldom much altered because of the danger of altering the matter Of all the Antientest Writers not one repeateth the Creed in the same words that we have it nor any two of them in the same with one another Irenaeus once Tertullian twice hath it all in various words but the same sense That of Marcellus in Epiphanius cometh nearest ours called the Apostles and is almost it Afterward in Ruffinus and others we have more of it Yet no doubt but the Western Churches at least used it with little variation still The Nicene Creed is called by some Antients the Apostles Creed too And both were so for both are the same in sense and substance For it is not the very words that are truly fathered on the Apostles About 30â— years a go Mr. Ashwel having published a Book for the Necessity and Honour of the Creed I wrote in the Postscript to my Reformed Pastor Ed. 2. a Corrective of some passages in which he seemeth to say too much for it or at least to depress the Scripture too much in comparison of it But long experience now telleth me that I have more need to acquaint men with the Reasons and Necessity of the Creed Seeing I find a great part of ignorant Religious people much to slight the use of it and say It is not Scripture but the work of man Especially taking offence at the harsh translatiâ—n of that Article He descended into Hell. which from the beginning it 's like was not in It is the Kernel of the Scripture and it is that for which the rest of the Scripture is given us even to afford us sufficient help to understand and consent to the Covenant of Grace that our Belief our Desires and our Practice may be conformed principally to these Summaries It is not every Child or Woman that could have gathered the Essential Articles by themselves out of the whole Scripture if it had not been done to their hands Nor that could have rightly methodized the Rule of our desires or gathered the just heads of natural duty if Christ had not done the first in the Lords Prayer and God the second in the Decalogue Obj. But I believe these only because the Matter of the Creed and the words also of the other two are in the Scripture and not on any other Authority Ans If you speak of the Authority of the Author which giveth them their truth it is neither Scripture nor Tradition but God for whose Authority we must believe both Scripture and them But if you speak of the Authority of the Deliverers and the Evidence of the Delivery be it known to you 1. That the Creed Lords Prayer Decalogue and the Baptismal Covenant have been delivered down to the Church from the Apostles by a distinct Tradition besides the Scripture Tradition Even to all the Christians one by one that were Baptized and admitted to the Lords Table and to every particular Church So that there was not a Christian or Church that was not even Constituted by them 2. Be it known to you that the Church was long in possession of them before it had the Scriptures of the New Testament It 's supposed to be about eight years after Christ's Ascension before Matthew wrote the first Book of the New Testament and near the year of our Lord one hundred before the Revelation was written And do you think that there were no Christians or Churches all that while Or that there was no Baptism Or no Profession of the Christian Faith in distinct Articles No Knowledge of the Lords Prayer and Commandements No Gospel daily preached and practised What did the Church-assemblies think you do all those years No doubt those that had Inspiration used it by extraordinary gifts But that was not all Those that had not did preach the Substance of the Christian Religion contained in these forms and did Pray and Praise God
censuimus Is it possible that all the Clergy and Nobles of the Roman Kingdom can be so Ignorant of their own and other mens Ignorance as to take all the Decrees of the huge Volumes of their Councils for Certain Truths Either they were certain in their Evidence of Truth before they decreed them or not If they were so 1. How came the debates in the Councils about them to be so hard and so many to be dissenters as in many of them there were I know where Arrians or other Hereticks make up much of the Council it is no wonder But are the Certainties of Faith so uncertain to Catholick Bishops that a great part of them know not Certain Truths till the majority of Votes have told them they are certain Have the poor Dissenting-Bishops in Council nothing of certainty on which their own and all the poor peoples Faith and Salvation must depend but only this that they are over-voted As if the dissenters in the Council of Trent should say We thought beforehand the contrary had been true But now the Italian Bishops being so numerous as to over-vote us we will lay our own and all mens Salvation on it that we were deceived though we have no other reason to think so O noble Faith and Certainty It 's possible one or two or three poor silly Prelates may turn the Scales and make up a majority though as Learned men as Jansenius Cusanus or Gerson were on the other side And if the Jansenists Articles were Condemned or Cusanus his Antipapal Doctrine lib. de Concordia or Gersons for the Supremacy of Councils and de Auferibilitate Papae they must presently believe that they were certainly deceived But what 's become then of the contrary evidence which appeared before to these dissenters As suppose it were in the Council of Basil about the Immaculate conception of Mary or the Question whether the Authority of the Pope or Council be greatest decided there and at Constance and whereof at Trent the Emperor and the French were of one opinion and the Pope of another Was it evidently true before which is made false after by a Majority of Votes 2. And if all these Decreed things were Evident Truths before the said Decrees why have we not those Antecedent Evidences presented to us to convince us 2. But if they were not Evident Truths before what made those Prelates conclude them for Truths Did they know them to be such without Evidence This is grosser than a presumptuous mans believing that he shall be saved because he believeth it or their Doctrine that teach men to believe the thing is true that Christ died for them that thereby they may make it true As if the object must come after the act For then these Prelates do decree that to be true which before was false for ex-natura rei one party had evidence of its falshood that so they might make it true by decreeing that it is so A man might Lawfully have believed his own and other mens senses that Bread is Bread till the Council at Lateran sub Innoc. 3. decreed Transubstantiation And O what a change did that Council make All Christ's Miracles were not comparable to it if its Decrees be true From that day to this we must renounce sense and yet believe we must believe that by constant Miracles all Christians senses are deceived And so that this is the difference between Christians and Infidels and Heathens that our Religion deceiveth all mens senses even Heathens and all if they see our Sacrament and their Religion deceiveth no mans senses saith the grave Author of the History of the Trent Council Ed. Engl. p. 473. A better Mystery was never found than to use Religion to make men insensible And what is the Omnipotent Power that doth this such a Convention as that of Trent while with our Worcester Pate and Olaus Magnus they made up a great while two and forty things called Bishops And after such a pack of beardless Boys and ignorant Fellows created by and enslaved to the Pope as Dudithius Quinqueccles one of the Council describeth to the Emperour and which Bishop Jewel in his Letter to Seign Scipio saith he took for no Council called by no just Authority c. where were neither the Patriarchs of Constantinople Alexandria or Antioch nor Abassines nor Graecians Armenians Persians Egyptians Moors Syrians Indians nor Muscovites nor Protestants pag. 143 144. For saith he after pag. 489. Now-a-days merciful God! the intent or scope of Councils is not to discover truth or to confute falshood For these latter Ages this hath been the only endeavour of the Popes to establish the Roman Tyranny to set Wars on foot to set Christian Princes together by the Ears to raise Money to be cast into some few Bellies for Gluttony and Lust And this hath been the only cause or course of Councils for some Ages last past So here And can the Vote of a few such Fellows oblige all the World to renounce all their senses who were never obliged to it before And all this consisteth in PRETENDED FAITH and KNOWLEDGE when men must take on them to know what they do not know and make Decrees and Canons and Doctrines suited to their conjectures or rather to their carnal Interests and then most injuriously Father them on God on Christ and the Apostles II. And as the number of Forgeries and Inventions detecteth this publick Plague so doth the number of Persons that are guilty of it How many such superfluities the Abassines in their oft Baptizings and other trifles and the Armenians Syrians Georgians Jacobites Maronites the Russians c. Are guilty of the describers of their Rites and Religion tell us Some would have the State of the Church in Gregory â—sts days to be the model of our Reformation that Pope whom Authors usually call the last of the good ones and the first of the bad ones But is there either Necessity or Certainty in all the superfluities which the Churches then had and which that Great Prelates Writings themselves contain Or were there not abundance of such things then used as things Indifferent of which see Socrates and Sozomene in the Chapters of Easter and must all their Indifferents be now made necessary to the Churches Concord and Communion and all their uncertainties become certainties to us some will have the present Greek Church to be the Standard But alas poor men how many of these uncertainties crudities and superfluities are cherished among them by the unavoidable Ignorance which is caused by their oppressions To say no more of Rome O that the Reformed Churches themselves had been more innocent But how few of them unite on the terms of simple Christianity and Certainties Had not Luther after all his Zeal for Reformation retained some of this Leven he could better have endured the dissent of Zuinglius Carolostadius and Oecolampadius about the Sacrament And if his Followers had not kept up the same superfluities