of Moses Let the like absolute Obedience be now yielded to the supreme Ecclesiasticall Courts Let their sentence be so conformed to so assented to among Christians for none is obliged to do a thing as the Jewes were by those Judges but is by the same decree obliged to assent and beleeue the doing it lawfull and more is not required XVI PRINCIPLE 16. There can be no more intollerable Vsurpation vpon the Faith of Christians then for any Person or society of men to pretend to an Assistance as infallible in what they propose as was in Christ or his Apostles without giuing an equall degree of euidence that they are so assisted as Christ and his Apostles did viz. by Miracles as great publick and conuincing as theirs were by which I mean such as are wrought by those very persons who challenge this Infallibility and with a design for the conuiction of those who do not belieue it Notwithstanding the Doctors Assertion in this Proposition That a society pretending to Infallibility is obliged to confirm such a pretention by Miracles as great as Christ and his Apostles did yet himself and the Archbishop whom he defends do hold that there is after the Apostles times a body or society Infallible in Fundamentalls viz. such Oecumenicall Councills as are vniuersally accepted by the Catholick Church which Church they say from our Lord's Promise can neuer err in Fundamentalls Now it is certain this society is not equally assisted with miracles as our Lord or his Apostles were Therefore the Doctor may do well to reuiew this Principle 1. But its failings being of no difficult discouery I shall not let it pass vnexamined First then I see no reason that those equally assisted by God in deliuering a Truth must also be enabled by him to giue an equall euidence of such Assistāce where there is not the same necessity of it as there is not when the later deliuer no new thing from the former 2. Again Though none can pretend to be Infallible or actually not erring in what he proposeth but that he must be as infallible as to the truth of that wherein he erreth not as our Lord or his Apostles for one or one persons truth is no more true then any others yet in many other respects the Churches Infallibility is much inferiour to that of the Apostles in that it is 1. Neither for its matter so farr extended the Apostles being affirmed infallible in all they deliuered as well in their Arguments as Conclusions both in their relating things heard from our Lord and things anew inspired by the Holy Ghost whereas the Church-Gouernours are acknowledged infallible only in their Definitions in matters of necessary Faith and not in their receiuing any new matters inspired by God but in faithfully deliuering the Inspirations of the former 2. Neither for the manner are the Church-Gouernours so highly assisted by reason of the other knowledge and euidence they haue of that Doctrine first deliuered by the Apostles and so from them receiued which vnchanged they conuey vnto Posterity Of which degrees of infallibility see Archbishop Lawd pag. 254. and 140. 3. And in the third place hence it follows that Miracles hauing been wrought by the first in confirmation of that Doctrine which both deliuer are not now alike necessary to or reasonably demanded of the second 4. Yet since our Lord and his Apostles time Miracles haue been and are continued in the Church of which see irrefragable testimonies giuen by S. Augustin In that Church I say that pretends Infallibility and only in that Church not any other departed from it pretending thereto And vniuersally to deny the truth of them is to ouerthrow the faith of the most credible Histories But these are done in these later as in former times only when and for what ends God and not man his Instrument pleaseth and many times without such persons precedent knowledge in making his Requests what the Diuine Majesty will effect Neither are the Apostles themselues to be imagined to haue had the Operation of Miracles so in their power as as to do these in any kind when and upon what Persons they pleased or others demanded For such a thing would be of such a force vpon mens wills to compell them into Christianity or to reduce unto the Catholick Church Christians strayed from it as the Diuine Prouidence perhaps for the greater tryall of mens hearts and merit of their Faith hath not ordinarily vsed 5. Lastly Miracles remaining still in this Church though they be not professedly done for conuincing a Dissenter in this or that particular Truth yet do sufficiently testifie in generall a security of saluation in the Communion and Faith of this Church if God only honours with them the Members of this Communion and no others that liue out of it as we see no other Christian society diuided from it that layes claim to them or shews any Records of them or euer did at least such as may be any way equalled either for frequency variety or eminency with those of this Church I mean although so many of these be rejected and layd aside where appears any rationall ground of suspicion That the Doctor and the Archbishop do hold such Generall Councills as haue an vniuersall Acceptation from the Church Catholik diffusiue to be Infallible seems to me clear from the places forecited in them For in those both the Doctor and Archbishop admitt That the Church diffufiue is for euer preserued Infallible in all Fundamentalls or Points absolutely necessary to saluation and this by vertue of the Diuine Promise that the Gates of Hell shall not preuail against her and other Texts And therefore such Councills whose Decrees are admitted by the whole Church diffusiue must be so too I say as to Fundamentalls though as to other Points not fundamentall they affirme these Councills also lyable to errour and fallible because the Church Catholick diffusiue say they is so also Among the Conditions also that render any Generall Councill obligatory they require this for one that they be vniuersally accepted or haue the generall consent of the Christian World such Councills then there may be And then such Lawfull Generall Councils and so approued and consequently obliging the Christian World they confess the first four Generall Councils to haue been To which Councills therefore they profess all Obedience Now wee see what kind of Obedience it was these Councils exacted in the Athanasian Creed accepted by the Church of England which contains the summ of their Decrees viz. no less then assent and belief and submission of judgement and all this vpon penalty of eternall damnation And this if justly required by them inferrs vpon the Doctors arguing their Infallibility For saith he where Councills challenge an internall Assent by vertue of their Decrees or because their Decrees are in themselues infallible there must be first proued an Impossibility of error in them
a Hill in the most extended Vnity of an Externall Communion which no other Christian Society can equall a Candle on a Candlestick a Perpetuall erected Visible Pillar and Monument of Truth frustra Haereticis circumlatrantibus Where also according to the disparity of seuerall mens capacities I suppose nothing more necessary then that this Euidence receiued eyther from all or only some of these Notes to those who haue not ability to examin others be such as that it out-weigh any arguments mouing him to the contrary and the like Euidence to which is thought sufficient to determin vs in other Elections And then this Church thus being found he may be resolued by it concerning the Sence of other Diuine Reuelations more dubious and generally all other Scrupules in Religion to witt so farr as this Church from time to time seeth a necessity of such Resolution and the Diuine Reuelation therein is to her sufficiently clear only if such person not spending so much of his own judgment will afford instead of it a little more of his Obedience III. CONSEQUENCE 3. The less conuincing the Miracles the more doubtfull the Marks the more obscure the Sence of eyther what is called the Catholick Church or declared by it the less reason hath any Christian to belieue vpon the account of any who call themselues by the name of the Catholick Church All this is true vpon supposition that matters stand as the Doctor would pretend but such supposition being groundless he must giue me leaue to inuert his Consequence and say The more conuincing the Miracles if any credit for these may be giuen to Church-History the more euident the Marks euen now giuen by S. Augustin and modern Catholick Writers the more clear and manifest euen to simple persons who with much difficulty in seuerall places comprehend the Sense of controuerted Scripture is the Catholick Church whose Representatiue are the subordinate Councills and whose Gouernors the seuerall Degrees of the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy ascending to the Prime See of S. Peter and the more clear also the Points declared by it viz. in these Councills whose Decrees suppose that of Trent if questioned for their Truth are not for their perspicuity and particularly in the Points of Controuersy they assembled to determin between Protestants and Catholicks the more reason hath any Christian to belieue vpon the account of those who call themselues by the Name and challenge the High Priuiledges which no other Separated Socityes of Christians do of the Catholick Church IV. CONSEQUENCE 4. The more absurd any Opinions are and repugnant to the first Principles of Sense and Reason which any Church obtrudes vpon the Faith of men the greater reason men still haue to reject the pretence of Infallibility in that Church as a grand Imposture The Higher any Points of Faith be and the more remote from Sense and naturall Reason or not comprehensiue by them which such Church as is named before and in the highest capacity of it Generall Councils proposeth to the Faith of Christians the more noble exercise they haue of their Faith whilst they haue an abundant certainty also that such Leaders can misguide them in nothing necessary to Saluation And no reason haue they vpon such improbabilities or contradictions to Sense or naturall Reason to suspect or be jealous of the Churches Infallibility as an Imposture which Church they see through what euer obstacles faithfully adheres to the Diuine Oracles how incredible soeuer to Nature and may be thought because it seems not swayed or hindred by these at all to vse more integrity in her judgment and fidelity to the Diuine Reuelations Yet this is not sayd as if the judgment of our Sences appointed by God the Instruments by hearing or reading them of conueying Faith and his Diuine Reuelations to vs affords not a sufficient Naturall Certainty or Infallibility whereon to ground our belief in all those things subject to our Senses wherein the Diuine Power doth not interpose But only 1. That where the Diuine Power worketh any thing Supernaturally that is contrary to our Senses as it may no doubt here we are not to belieue them And this I think none can deny 2. And next That we are to belieue this Diuine Power doth so so often as Certain Diuine Reuelation tells vs so Though by the same senses if tells us so we belieuing our Senses that it tells vs so when we do not belieue the same Senses for the thing which is contrary to what it tells vs The truth of which Diuine Reuelation we are to learn from Gods Church infallibly assisted in necessary Faith For otherwise Lot and his Daughters were not to credit the Diuine Reuelation supposing that Diuine History then written and extant that the seeming Men who came to Sodome were Angells because this was against their Senses Now here would he argue well who because Lots sight was actually deceiued vpon this Supernaturall accident in taking the Angells to be Men as certainly it was from hence would inferr that the Apostles had no sufficiēt Certainty or ground from their seeing our Lord to belieue him risen from the Dead Or that no Belief could euer be certainly grounded vpon our Senses Nor that Christians haue any certain Foundation of their Faith For a Naturall or Morall Certainty though such as is per potentiam Diuinam fallible and errable and is to be belieued to err where euer we haue Diuine Reuelation for it not else I say a Certainty though not such an one as cannot possibly be false but which according to the Laws of Nature and the common manners and experience of men is not false is sufficient on which to ground such a Faith as God requires of vs in respect of that Certainty which can be deriued from humane Sense or Reason and which serues for an Introductiue to the relyance of this our Faith vpon such Reuelation as is belieued by vs Diuine and which if Diuine we know is not possibly fallible In respect of its relying on which Reuelation an infallible Object and not for an Infallible Certainty as to the Subject it is that this our Faith is denominated a Diuine Faith Now this Naturall or Morall Certainty is thought sufficient for the first Rationall Introductiue and security of our Faith not only by the Doctor in his 27. Principle but also by Catholick Diuines in their Discourses of the Prudentiall Motiues V. CONSEQUENCE 5. To disown what is taught by such a Church is not to question the Veracity of God but so firmly to adhere to that in what he hath reuealed in Scriptures that men dare not out of loue to their souls reject what is so taught To disown what is taught by such a Church as we have here represented it will be to desert what God hath reuealed in the Scriptures the true meaning of which Reuelations when controuerted we are to receiue from it And so men ought not
He that can shew either that the Church of all Ages was to haue this Authority or that it continued in the Church for some Ages and then expired he that can shew either of these things let him for my part I cannot Yet I willingly confess the Iudgment of a Councill though not infallible yet so far Directiue and obliging that without apparent reason to the contrary it may be sin to reject it at least not to afford it an outward submission for Publick Peace sake Now by this way our late English Diuines seem to haue brought the Authority of their Church into a great disreputation and wayning condition and to haue excused yea justified all Sects which haue or shall separate from her For indeed what fault can it be to forsake the Doctrine of a Church whose Teaching none is bound to belieue or obey out of conscience and which quietly suffers yea liberally rewards her sons while they thus disparage her These Principles therefore layd by the Doctor which by aduancing the Clearness of the Rule so as to inferr the vselesness of a Guide do seem to supplant what soeuer Authority of any Church are here weighed in the following Considerations The great importance of which Subject requiring Expressions serious modest and euery way vnlike those made vse of by the Doctor in his Book such haue been studiously endeauoured here without the least resentment of seuerall vnciuill and vnmerited Aspersions which in the sayd Book the Doctor hath cast vpon seuerall among vs and the more moderate any haue bene the more immoderately haue they bene traduced God Almighty inspire into all our hearts a sincere loue of Peace and Truth Amen D r. STILLINGFLEETS PRINCIPLES Giving an Account of the Faith of Protestants CONSIDERED 1. THe Principles c. which Doctor Stilling fleet has thought expedient to expose at the end of his Book to render an Account of the Protestants Faith are sett down in three ranks The first consists of Six Principles agreed on both sides The second contains Thirty Propositions for enquiring into the particular ways which God hath made choyce of for revealing his will to mankind of which Propositions some are also Principles partly agreed on and partly not and some are Deductions from them But we following the generall Title will call them all Principles In the third rank six Corollaries or Inferences are deduced from the fore-going Propositions to the advantage of the cause of Protestants against Catholicks To all which we here offer the following Considerations I. PRINCIPLES Agreed on all sides 1. That there is a God from whom Man and all other Creatures had their beginning 2. That the Notion of God doth imply that he is a Being absolutely perfect and therefore Iustice Goodness Wisdom and Truth must be in him in the highest perfection 3. That Man receaving his Being from God is thereby bound to obey his Will and consequently is liable to punishment in case of disobedience 4. That in order to Mans obeying the will of God it is necessary that he know what it is for which some manifestation of the Will of God is necessary both that Man may know what he hath to do and that God may justly punish him if he do it not 5. What ever God reveals to Man is infallibly true and being intended for the Rule of Mans obedience may be certainly known to be his Will 6. God cannot act contrary to those essentiall Attributes of Iustice Wisdom Goodnesse and Truth in any way which he makes choyce of to make known his Will unto Man by It were impiety to question any of these Principles which are or ought to be presupposed not only to the Christian but all manner of Religions We will therefore proceed to the second Rank consisting of 30. Propositions which we will sett down singly and separatly annexing to each a respective Examination or Consideration II. An Enquiry into the particular ways which God hath made choyce of for the revealing his Will to Mankind I. PRINCIPLE 1. An entire obedience to the will of God being agreed to be the condition of mans happinesse no other way of Revelation is in it self necessary to that end then such whereby Man may know what the will of God is This is granted II. PRINCIPLE 2. Man being fram'd a rationall creature capable of reflecting vpon himself may antecedently to any externall Revelation certainly know the Being of God and his dependence vpon him and those things which are naturally pleasing to him else there could be no such thing as a law of Nature or any Principles of Natural Religion This may be granted III. PRINCIPLE 3. All Supernaturall and externall Revelation must suppose the truth of Naturall Religion for vnlesse we be antecedently certain that there is a God and that we are capable of knowing him it is impossible to be certain that God hath revealed his will to vs by any supernaturall means Let this be granted IV. PRINCIPLE 4. Nothing ought to be admitted for Divine Revelation which ouerthrows the certainty of those Principles which must be antecedently supposed to all Divine Revelation For that were to ouerthrow the means whereby we are to judge concerning the truth of any Divine Revelation Let this also be granted V. PRINCIPLE 5. There can be no other means imagined whereby we are to judg of the truth of Divine Revelation but a Faculty in vs of discerning truth and falshood in matters proposed to our belief which if we do not exercise in judging the truth of Divine Reuelation we must be imposed vpon by euery thing which pretends to be soe Here if the Doctor means That every Christian hath a faculty in him which as to all Revelations what soeuer proposed to him can discern the True and Divine from others that are not so and when a Revelation certainly Divine is capable of several senses can discern the true sense from the false all this exclusively to and independently on the Instruction of Church-authority This Proposition is not true For then none will need as experience shews they do to repayre to any other Teacher to instruct him when a dubious Revelation or when the sense of any Divine Revelation is controuersed which is the true revelation or which the sense of it It is abundantly sufficient that eyther Wee our selues or some others appointed by our Lord to guide vs and more easily discouerable by vs have a Faculty ayded by the Divine assistance to discern Truth and Falshood in those Revelations proposed wherein wee our selues cannot that so particular Christians in their following these Guides may not be imposed vpon by every thing which pretends to be Divine Revelation VI. PRINCIPLE 6. The pretence of Infallibility in any person of Society of men must be judged in the same way that the truth of a Divine Revelation is for that infallibility being challenged by vertue of a
before they can look on themselues as obliged to giue it And therefore He and the Archbishop so farr as any such Councills are fallible allow only an Externall Obedience or silence to them Now for Obedience to these first four Generall Councills in a submission of judgment to them vpon such an Vniuersall Acceptation of them the Doctor in another place thus writes The Church of England looks vpon the keeping the Decrees of the fower first Generall Councills as her Duty and professeth to be guided by the sence of scripture as interpreted by the vnanimous consent of the Fathers and the fowr fist Generall Councills that is shee professeth to take that which such Counciils deliuer for the sence of scripture Not then to admit their Definitions if first they accord with the scripture taken in our own sence So also else where he saith The Church of England doth not admit any thing to be deliuered as the sense of scripture which is contrary to the consent of the Catholick sense of the fowr first Ages that is in their Oecumenicall Councills as he expresseth it in the preceding page And here also he giues the Ground of such submission viz. a strong presumption that nothing contrary to the necessary Articles of Faith should be held by the Catholick Church whose very being depends vpon the belief of those things that are necessary to saluation And when saith he those correspondencies were maintained between the seuerall parts of it that what was refused by one was so by all In another place also speaking in generall of Councills vniuersally accepted he saith That both the Truth of Gods Promises the Goodness of God to his People and his peculiar care of his Church seem highly concerned that such a Councill should not be guilty of any notorious errour Here you see he saith that the Truth of Gods Promises is concerned that these Councills should not fall into any notorious Errour Therefore such Promises are made absolute to some Church-Gouernors after the Apostles And then where the Errour is not intollerable saith the Archbishop at least Obedience of Non-contradiction will be due to all such Councills Now a notorious Errour it must needs be if an Errour in Fundamentalls And such notorious Errour in particular would this be If they should hold themselues when they are not infallible in their Decrees and so should require a Generall Assent such as that in the Athanasian Creed from Christians to them as to Diuine Reuelations and make them DE FIDE thereby in case any Decree be not true obliging all the Members of the Church to an Vnity in errour Thus farr then as to Fundamentall Errours it seems Gods Prouidence secures both such Councills and their subjects And then also for their erring in Non-fundamentalls both He and the Archbishop put this among the RARO CONTINGENTIA The Archbishop also is much in justifying the Catholick Church infallible not only in its Being but Teaching and that must be by its Councills Doctor White saith he had reason to say That the Visible Church had in all Ages taught that vnchanged Faith of Christ in all Points Fundamentall And again It is not possible the Catholick Church that is of any one Age should teach against the word of God in things absolutely necessary to saluation Where the word teach shews that he intends the Gouernors of the Church in euery Age. Likewise in another place If we speak saith he of plain and easy scripture the whole Church cannot at any time be without the knowledge of it And If A. C. meane no more then that the whole Vniuersall Church of Christ cannot vniuersally erre in any one Point of Faith simply necessary to mens saluation be fights against no Aduersary that I know but his own fiction Where it follows But if he mean that the whole Church cannot erre in any one point of Diuine Truth in generall if in these the Church shall presume to determine without her Guide the scripture then perhaps it may be said that the whole Militant Church hath erred in such a Point Here then the first of the whole Church not erring in Fundamentalls as well as the second are spoken of the Church determining And so is that saying of his viz. That though the Mother-Church Prouinciall or National may erre Yet if the Grand mother the whole Vniuersall Church that is in her Generall Councills vniuersally accepted controlling the other Prouincial or National cannot erre in these necessary things all remains safe and all occasions of disobedience that is to the Grand-mothers commands taken from the possibility of the Churches erring namely as to all necessaries are quite taken away Thus he But safe c. it could not be if the Catholick Church the Grand mother as she held so could not also witness all the necessary Truths against such inferiour Councills But how these things will te reconciled with what the Doctor saith else where I know not Let him take care of it as name ly where he writes thus You much mistake when you think we resolue our faith of fundamentalls into the Church as the infallible witness of them For though the Church may be infallible in the belief of all things fundamentall for otherwise it were not a Church if it did not belieue them it doth not follow thence necessarily that the Church must infallibly witness what is fundamentall and what not And again That all infallible assistance makes not an infallible Testimony or makes not the Testimony of those that haue it infallible surely Teaching declaring its consent condemning Doctrins contrary to Fundamentalls is Witnessing or giuing Testimony XVII PRINCIPLE 17. Nothing can be more absurd then to pretend the necessity of such an infallible Commission and Assistance to assure us of the Truth of these Writings and to interpret them and at the same time to proue that Commission from those Writings from which we are told nothing can be certainly deduced such an assistance not being supposed or to pretend that infallibility in a Body of men is not lyable to doubts and disputes as in those Bookes from whence only they deriue their Infallibility I. For the former part of this Principle viz. Nothing can be more absurd then to pretend the necessity of c. If the Doctor in the words at the same time to proue that Commission from these Writings means here to proue such Commission or Assistance only or in the first place from these Writings the truth of Which Writings are first or onely proued from such Commission c. the Absurdity vrged by him I grant 1. As all Articles of Faith are not by all Persons learnt at once so neither by all exactly in the same order as is frequently obserued by Catholick Writers A Christians Faith therefore may begin either at the Infallible Authoriry of scriptures or of the Church and this Infallible Authority of