effects I suppose the Church of England does allow the help of the Elders of the Church useful to the sick and therefore has provided that none lack this assistance but inasmuch as the Promises relating to these effects are different the Promise to one effect being perpetual and common to the Church in all ages to the other temporary whilst God empowered it to work such effects the Church which thinks she can only ground her Faith upon God's promises does still retain and declare her power in the cure of sin having a continued promise of God's grace to go along with its Ministry in effecting of it but not being assured nor having any promise to assure it that its Ministry shall be effectual to the recovery of bodily health it dares not warrant it to her children and therefore does not think fit to use the Ceremony of anointing the sick with oyl which was then used as a sign effective of their recovery Not that she is not ready to pray for this on their behalf grounding herself upon the general promise God has pride to hear the Prayers of his Church but not having any sure word of promise to ground a firm Faith upon as to the absolute recovery of the sick and it being the Prayer of Faith to which the Apostle here attributes this recovery as Faith indeed and that special and extraordinary was always necessary to all miraculous effects she therefore thinks she cannot use that sign which was then applied to the sick to assure him of his recovery by that power which God was then pleased to give for the working such cures That this Reason is not inconsiderable the Church of Rome herself is forced to allow and thereupon is greatly perplexed to find out a Reason why the first of these effects the Forgiveness Cat. Trid. sub Titulo Extrem Vnct. qua praep of Sins being provided for by the Sacrament of Penance there should be another Sacrament provided for this purpose To solve which she has invented a Distinction not to be found in the Apostles words I am sure that the Grace of this Sacrament is to extinguish our Venial Sins the other being chiefly provided for the forgiveness of Deadly Sins No less is she perplexed as to the other for seeing de facto that the Ministry of the Church does not take effect to the bodily recovery and withal knowing it necessary that all who come to a Sacrament ought to come with a Faith that they shall receive the Benefit tendred by it she orders that the Priest shall labour to perswade Ibid. the Sick to offer himself to this Unction with no less a Faith than those tendred themselves who were miraculously cured by the Apostles That if the Sick reap not so much Benefit Ibid. by it at this time as of old this must not be ascribed to any defect in the Sacrament but we are to believe it so happens for this cause rather that Faith is weaker in the greatest part of those that are anointed with this sacred Oyl or in those that administer it the Gospel telling us that our Lord did not many mighty works in his own Country because of their Vnbelief And yet for all this at last she is forced to confess the true Reason That Miracles do not seem so necessary now since Christianity has taken so wide and deep a root as they were in the beginning of the Church Which Reason as it shews that we ought not to expect the like effects now as then does likewise fully justifie the practice of the Church of England in not using Vnction to warrant the recovery of the Sick tho' she be ready to assist them with her Prayers which may be hoped effectual in an ordinary way to all that is consistent with the Divine Will Marriage Whereas our Blessed Saviour was pleased to reduce this State of Marriage to its first Institution and to make the Bond of it insoluble we do believe it the Concern yea the Duty of the Church to see that its Members joyned together in this holy State do preserve this Bond inviolable And the preserving it thus requiring as all other Christian Duties the assistance of God's Grace our Church thinks herself obliged as to see to the Marriages that shall be contracted between its Members so to implore a Blessing on them at their entrance into that State begging the Assistance of the Divine Grace to enable them to live as Christians ought in the State of Wedlock And whereas the Apostle has thought fit to represent to us the near Conjunction and inseparable Union of Christ with his Church by that near and inseparable Union which this State supposes we forget not the Thanks we owe our blessed Lord who is thus pleased to unite himself to his Church nor the Concern that lies on us the Members of it to preserve an Vnion with him inviolable But we cannot think that because the State of Matrimony is a Sign of that Mystical Union between Christ and his Church having some analogy with it that therefore the entrance into this State has the promise of any Grace to joyn or preserve us in that Union with Christ and his Church and for that reason we exclude it from the Sacraments of Christ's Church as these are Signs effective of Grace Order We allow the Necessity of ordaining Ministers for the Service of Christ's Church and acknowledge not only the Ceremony of Imposition of hands in that Action to be of Apostolical Institution but also that there is a Promise of Grace annex'd to enable persons so ordain'd to act according to their several Functions and that with effect to those Ends which their Ministries serve in the Church of Christ But we admit it not properly a Sacrament as I said before because the Grace promised does peculiarly relate to their Office and the Benefit of the Church not particularly to the Salvation of him that receives it Neither do we allow the Grace here promised to belong to any but those Orders that we find from the Beginning in the Church of Christ viz. Bishops Priests and Deacons SECT X. Of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist NOW we are come to the great Points that are in dispute about the Eucharist wherein M. Condom has greatly enlarged himself as confident of the Victory Here in the first place he tells us The Real Presence of the Body and Blood of our Saviour is established by the Words of the Institution which they understand literally and therefore are not to give Reasons for so doing but expect Reasons why they should not We should take this Gentleman off a great Advantage which he presumes himself to have if we should deny theirs to be the Literal Sense and plead ours to be it and oblige them to give Reasons for their imposing a new construction upon them However leaving that in question for a time I must at present examine the Reasons he gives to
and superstition brought in Thus they pretend their Decree for the Worship of Saints and Relicks and the use of Images according to the Tradition or received Practice of the Catholick Church in the first times and consent of Fathers and Decrees of Councils when yet M. Condom contents himself with Tradition but from the fourth Century if we would allow it him And so the Gentlemen do well to plead that we should receive a Doctrine as coming from the Apostles when it is universally received without possibility of shewing its beginning by all Christian Churches thereby to obtrude that which had no beginning in it for three hundred years Thus they Decree Indulgences to have been in use in the Church in the most ancient times when yet they could not but be sensible that the use of them was perverted to a quite different purpose from its antient end and notwithstanding their desire that they might be restored to ancient Custom yet we know the Novel is still the modern practice Thus for Purgatory the Council commands that sound Doctrine be taught concerning it from the ancient Fathers when no such thing appears either anciently or universally in the Church And yet at another time that which Christ himself hath taught and was delivered both to and from the Apostles shall not serve to make it necessary Thereupon it Decrees Sess 21. cap. 1. That though Christ instituted the Sacrament under both kinds and delivered it in both to his Apostles yet this does not bind all men to receive it in both Now then for these men to press Traditions on us when they will neither let us know what nor how many they are nor prescribe any bounds to them nor six any certain Rules to discern them by nor be obliged themselves to stand by them and under that pretence to come now fifteen hundred years after the Apostles and impose on us the single Tradition of one Church nay not only her ancient and original Traditions but Novelties foisted in to maintain her corruptions and these as we pretend repugnant to Scripture and ancient Tradition And all this to decline an indifferent Tryal by Scripture under pretence that all necessary Truths cannot be found therein without recourse to Tradition if putting on I say so fair a disguise to so fraudulent a purpose they urge this Argument that the Apostles delivered things by word of mouth which ought to be received as of any force to oblige us to receive all which they have the confidence to tell us comes from them What is it but a vain endeavour to impose on the World as if all men had lost common sense and understanding SECT XVIII Of the Authority of the Church UPon this subject M. Condom writes after so rambling and confused a manner that I must first be at the trouble to pick out what he designs to prove before the solidity of his Arguments can be examined His aim then I take to be couched in those words pag. 45. wherein he concludes from the Article of our Creed concerning the Holy Catholick Church That they oblige themselves to acknowledge an infallible and perpetual verity in the Universal Church Now herein he has neither expresly told us what this Universal Church is whether the Church of Rome alone or all other Christian Churches with it nor whether he means the Church collective the whole body of Christians or representative the Bishops in Council or the Pope where some fix this Infallibility But whereas he afterwards confounds the Catholick Church with the Trent Council which by her Decrees if we believe him has tied herself up that she cannot make herself Mistress of our Faith I conceive I may without offence determine that the verity he intends to prove is that there is an Infallibility resting somewhere in the Catholick Church of Rome To which if he would oblige us to consent it had been but reasonable to have sixt this Infallibility in something certain though at present I will not stand upon it but consider his Discourse which begins thus The Church being established by God to be the Guardian of Scripture and Tradition we receive the Canonical Scripture from her and let our Adversaries say what they will we doubt not but it is her Authority that principally determines them to Reverence as Divine Books Which first sentence is a manifest contradiction it being absolutely impossible that that which is established by God to be the Guardian of Scripture and the Traditor of it to others should be the Authority that makes it Scripture which it is before it is put into its Guardianship and certainly its being Scripture or a Writing of Divine Inspiration is that which makes them principally reverenced as Divine Books not that which tells us that they are so But then he gives us instances of Three Books especially which he conceives received upon that authority The Canticle of Canticles St. James and St. Jude Where in the first place the Gentleman does ill to joyn these together as believed or to be believed upon the same grounds the Canticle of Cantiles being long before the Christian Church the others since Therefore I must answer him distinctly Supposing then that which common sence is able to inform us that this Book called The Song of Songs is more antient than the Church of Christ and that the Church never had as she has never pretended to have any express Revelation whether this Book was written by inspiration from God as we believe the Law and the Prophets beside the credit upon which it received it from the Synagogue it 's certain that the only thing questionable is whether it was received by the Synagogue as divinely inspired if it appears to have been so received it is not any authority of the Christian Church that has made it Scripture and if the Church had pretended it Scripture without evidence of its being received from them or particular Revelation shewn in the case it would have been never the more a Divine Book nor any man obliged to receive it as such And I marvel the Gentleman should be carried so far by the spirit of Contradiction and desire to bear down his Christian brethren as to set up a Principle that betrays our common Christianity by giving notice to the World that those Scriptures of the Old Testament whereby the Church pretends to convince the Jews of the necessity of becoming Christians are not to be received for the Word of God but upon the authority of her own Decrees Then for the Epistle of James rejected by Luther and St. Jude by others nothing can be more manifest to any that will but take the pains to consider it that the Writings of the Apostles were first kept by and entrusted in the hands of those Churches to which they were sent as the Epistles to Corinth Rome Ephesus c. It is therefore reasonable to conceive those Writings so dispersed when collected into one body and submitted to by
the whole Church were submitted to upon the certain testimony of those parts of it wherein they had been kept those which had not so evident a testimony being laid aside and received only according to the evidence that appeared of their being Divine Inspirations Nevertheless when they come to be received from the hands of such particular Churches who knew themselves to have had them from Authors known to be divinely inspired there might be some expressions in them which might appear not altogether so agreeable with our common Christianity when they came first to know them which from the beginning they had not And this was certainly the case of Luther in refusing St. James's Epistle notwithstanding the scorns cast upon him for it as of Erasmus in questioning the Epistle to the Hebrews But yet there is always means of redressing such a mistake either in any part of the Church or in any particular member of it so long as there remains means to certifie them from what hand they have been received and how derived from persons in whom the Church was assured the holy Ghost spoke but to set up the Churches bare Authority for this is indeed what our Adversaries desire but what destroys all the nature of the holy Scriptures and makes them to be believed for another reason than this that they are the Dictates of the holy Ghost But in fine he tells us It can only be from this authority that we receive the whole body of the Scripture which all Christians accept as divine before their reading of it has made them sensible of the Spirit of God in it But that there is some little difference between those that are educated in the Christian Church and others that turn Christians at years of understanding he might even as well have said whether the Spirit of God be in it or not in it For if the authority of the Church be that which principally determines them to reverence as Divine Books and upon that authority a man be obliged to receive the whole body of Scripture before he know the Spirit of God to be in it he shall upon the same grounds be obliged still to hold the same whether he find it there or not I am sorry that he thinks all Christians so blind as himself that they build their belief of the Scriptures on no firmer a foundation than he seems to do and am therefore obliged to shew him the ground whereon I build my own belief concerning them When therefore I first seek whereon to ground this belief I enquire after the Testimony not the Authority of the Church i. e. of all those that make profession of Christianity whose consent I look after concerning the Scriptures and when I have found what Writings they agree upon and admit for such the next enquiry is upon what grounds they submit unto them as such and this I find to be their having received them from former Ages successively together with their Christianity then must I trace this successive reception of them from one time to another till I come to those who first received them and there I find the reason upon which they submitted to them to be the evident proofs which the Writers of them had given to shew themselves inspired by God and commissioned to teach his will to the obedience of which they ought to give up themselves whereupon they who had seen God bearing them witness with divers Miracles and Gifts of the Holy Ghost became obliged as to obey their Doctrine so to acknowledge their Writings for the Word of God they being Records of those miraculous Actions which they saw wrought and of those Truths which were taught and proved to be the Will of God And here the very same Motives cause my belief of the Scriptures which caused those first Christians to receive them and submit unto them so that the same reason that moves me to be a Christian resolves me to believe the Scripture But if a man shall ask me since I believe the Scriptures only upon the works done by those Holy Writers which testifie them to have had his Spirit how I am assured that those works were really done I am not afraid to confess my Belief of this to rely on the Credit of God's People all Ages of Christ's Church which have born testimony of it successively so that I submit not my Faith to any Authority that can command it but I see it reasonable to allow my Belief to the Credit of the Church as so many men of common Sense attesting the Truth of those Reasons which the Gospel tenders why they ought to believe Neither is my Faith in either of these Respects a humane Faith but the work of Gods Spirit for as it is that Spirit only which after I have seen the Motives to Christianity inclines me to believe and become a Christian so it is the same Spirit which having shewn me the Evidence that the Scriptures were written by the Messengers of God that works in me an acknowledgment of and submission to them as the Word of God He goes on Being inseparably bound as we are to the holy Authority of the Church by means of the Scriptures which we receive from her hands we learn Tradition also from her and by means of Tradition we learn the true Sense of the Scripture upon which account the Church professes she tells us nothing from herself and that she invents nothing new in her Doctrines she does nothing but declare the divine Revelation according to the interior direction of the Holy Ghost which is given to her as a Teacher I profess all the Skill I have cannot make this hang together If by his first words he means we are so inseparably bound to the Authority of the Church by receiving the Scriptures from her that we ought thereupon to receive all that shall be commanded by that Authority I that have shewn we do not believe the Scriptures upon her Authority as a Church but upon her Testimony witnessing the Motives of Faith as a number of men that would not conspire to testifie an Untruth can never own it to have an Authority of itself to command our Faith Indeed as we receive the Scriptures upon her Testimony we learn from the Scriptures that she has an Authority but such an Authority as perhaps will not content M. Condom which being derived from the Scriptures can never have power to act against them and being established only for the Maintenance of Christianity which was before it can never have power to make that a part of Christianity which was not so before the Church was in being Then again though we learn Tradition from her and that Tradition be useful to interpret the Sense of the Scriptures yet we receive not any Tradition upon her Authority as making them Traditions of the Apostles but upon her Testimony shewing that she has received them from them and again those Traditions she does deliver ought not certainly
determine them beyond the Sentiments of private men and whatever that shall have determined to be given to God as Signs and Acknowledgments of the Worship due unto him alone I cannot see how it can be lawful for any upon private Sentiments to direct to another signification especially in actions of Religious Worship since by so doing they not only scandalize and give offence to all those who have appropriated and determined those external Characters to express this Acknowledgment they make to God but do interpretatively also rob God of his Honour whilst they appear to men to give those Expressions of Honour to others which the rest of the World have determined to this peculiar purpose of expressing their Acknowledgments of that Honour which is God's incommunicable Right Nor will it avail much to say such Tokens may be and are used for Civil Purposes in the Honour of Superiors or the like for the only reason why they may be so is because they are so and to that determined by consent and practice as universal as that which has appropriated them to Religious Worship so that hereby Offence is neither given nor taken because all consent neither can it interpretatively tend to the diminution of God's Honour because all men know them to express a different intent which cannot be so distinctly known when they are used in the way of Religious Worship of which God only is by the whole World look'd on as the proper Object M. Condom goes on saying The Church of Rome teaches us that all Religious Worship ought to terminate in God as its necessary end But we say it ought to be given only to him as its necessary and immediate object and upon this point moves the principal difficulty Again he says That if the Honour which he renders to the blessed Virgin and to the Saints may in some sense be called Religious it is for its necessary relation to God But we say if in any sense it be Religious That they have chosen a wrong object and that the Honour of the Virgin and the Saints has no such necessary relation to God's Honour as can oblige us to give them any Religious Worship That therefore if they have made the Honour of these necessary to God's Honour it is without warrant that likewise if in their own intentions they direct the Honour given to these to terminate in God as its necessary end it is not enough to justifie them that they intend and direct that to him which he has not required especially if this has or may tend to the diminution of that which he does require But in our way to the particulars we meet an observation which M. Condom makes as very useful for his purpose viz. That those of the Reformation oblig'd by the strength of truth begin to acknowledg that the custom of Praying to Saints and Honouring their Relicks was established even in the Fourth Age of the Church That it was established is more than any acknowledg that I know of that something of this nature was in use at that time has been ever acknowledged But if he obliged by the strength of truth will acknowledg it not to have been in use before we shall not envy him the best advantages he can make of it M. Daille says he grants thus much in his Book against the Tradition of the Latin Church about the object of Religious Worship and accuses St. Basil Ambrose Hierome Chrysostome Augustin and especially Nazianzen of having altered in this point the Doctrine of the foregoing Ages He cannot expect that we should judg of M. Daille's accusations of these famous Men unless he had produced the particulars wherein I presume M. Daille has vindicated himself But it would be a great wonder to me if any Man that has read that Learned Word of M. D. should not be convinced that no such custom nor any thing like it was established in the Three first Ages of the Church which he proves by Arguments insoluble First from their constant Universal Declaration that God alone is to be Worshipped and Adored which he evidences by one instance as remarkable as any the Church affords the Argument of Athanasius against Arrius in which cause the whole Church was engaged that Adoration is peculiar to God alone whereby he proved that Christ is God because otherwise he could not be Worshipped as he has always been of the Christian World Lib. 1. cap. 2. from a concession as Universal that no Created Being is to be Worshipped or Adored particularly evidenced from the remarkable Disputations of Origen against Colsus c. 4. from the imputation of Atheism charged on Christians by the Heathen for rejecting their multitude of Deities which they never vindicated but by this answer That they Worshipped the true and only God cap. 12. for that the Jews who were most jealous of Images and the Adoration of any but one God are never sound to have objected against the Christians the Worship of any such or of any other but one God the Case of the Trinity excepted c. But when he tells us M. Daille does at last grant its being in use in the fourth Age he should have told told us likewise what more is proved in the same place cap. 17. how its shewn to have found a constant opposition in those beginnings and e're since ascending from the times of Luther up to that Age sometimes before him by the Valdenses in Bohemia in the Year 1512. by the Taborites the same sort of People Anno 1430. by Wickliffe and his Followers in England 1372. That Images were opposed by Leo Isaurus and several other Emperors with the consent of all the Eastern Churches in the eighth Century and in the sixth by Severus whose Fact in breaking Images though Gregory of Rome did not approve yet he consented in this that by all means we were to avoid the Worship of them That in the beginning of the fifth Age not only Images were opposed by Epiphanius but the Worship of the Dead by his sharp reproof of the Collyridians Women that offered Cakes to the Virgin Mary That even in St. Augustin himself it appears that the Honour then in use at least by the Churches approbation was quite different from what is now pretended who says of the Saints Honorandi propter imitationem non adorandi propter Religionem This I have taken liberty to transcribe that we may know the reason upon which M. Daille grants its growing into use in the fourth Age and challenges it to evidence by this opposition which he shews it to have found in its first beginning and all succeeding times that it could not be in use in those first Ages which are silent in it and that it was but then beginning when it met with its first opposition When he presses M. Daille with the improbability of his knowing the sentiments of former Ages better than they who immediately succeeded them As it s not allowable that he that
sufferings the other the effect of the Holy Ghost which is shed on us nor is it necessary that what the Apostle adds of our being justified by his grace should be understood of the grace of the Holy Ghost shed on us for the renewing of our minds but rather of that kindness and love of our Saviour to save us and of that mercy according to which he saves us without the works of our own righteousness We believe indeed our sins not only to be covered but also entirely washed away by the blood of Jesus Christ and the grace of Regeneration but we do not think fit to confound Justification which signifies the Remission of sins and Renovation which destroys sin within us one with another nor to think the latter which is effected but in part in this life to be meritorious of the former and should think we did too much lessen the merit of his blood if by allowing the effect of it to what it ought to be allowed the working Sanctification in us we should not consider it also to that other effect of wholly meriting for us the pardon of our sins Whereas he argues at last That the Righteousness which is in us is truly such and that even before God had not I reason to say as before that their making Justification to consist in the infusion of Righteousness gave too great appearance for men to think they claimed Remission of sins as due in some measure to their own Righteousness when M. Condom can thus plead for the truth and reality of it and for its being a righteousness and that before God But to give him an answer It is not by us denied to be a Righteousness in the sight of God any further than to this effect that it is not a righteousness that renders us void of sin nor that can in the least merit for us the remission of sins nor that can abide if he should try it with rigour or be extream to mark what is amiss therein When he comes at last to acknowledge it too true That the flesh rebels against the spirit and that in many things we offend all so that though our Justice be truly such yet it is not perfect Justice because of the Combate of Concupiscence so that we are obliged to confess with St. Augustin That our Justice in this life consists rather in the Remission of sin than in the Perfection of virtues Though I could wish he had express'd himself in all the words of St. Augustin in that place That our Righteousness though truly such in the end it aims at and is referred unto true goodness yet is such in this life that it consists rather in the Remission of sin than in the Perfection of virtues for hereby every work though good as aiming at a good end is acknowledged imperfect in that it attains not to it yet I am glad to find him profess so much of truth and could wish his Church had made the like declaration but it seems rather to speak the contrary when it condemns him that shall say the Just sins though only venially in every work Can. 25. which I see not how it could condemn if it held our Righteousness not to be Perfect Righteousness by reason of the Combate of Concupiscence for how can that which is not perfect Righteousness justifie its self in respect of God's Law and if not to say it is a venial offence against it because not arriving to that absolute perfection required by it is as little as can be said SECT VII Of the Merit of Good Works AS to the Merit of Good Works it 's true as he says their Church teaches That eternal life ought to be proposed both as a grace which is mercifully promised through Christ and as a recompence which is faithfully rendred to our good works and merits in vertue of this promise But whereas he adds That least humane pride should flatter it self in an opinion of presumptuous merit it also teaches that all the price and value of a Christians works proceed from sanctifying grace though it has express'd something of this nature yet he seeks greatly to impose upon us when he tells us it teaches it for the end he speaks of the prevention of presumptuous merit for the Council really adds this as a reason why eternal life ought to be proposed as a recompence of our merits Its words are these For whereas Christ infuses constantly the power of his grace Concil Trid. Sess 6. cap. 16. into the justified which power does always precede accompany and follow the works they do and without which they would upon no account be pleasing to or meritorious with God we are to believe nothing more wanting to the justified to the end they may be looked on as having fully by their works which are wrought in God satisfied the Divine Law with respect to the present life and to have truly merited that eternal life which they shall receive in it's time if they depart the present in a state of grace It goes on So that hereby neither our own Righteousness is set up as properly our own nor is the Righteousness of God passed by or rejected but the same is said to be our Righteousness because it is in us and we are justified by it and the same is also Gods because infused by him for the merit of Christ. When therefore the Council proceeds thus to shew wherein the price and value of good works consists it does it not intending to take men from a confidence in the merit of their works but with an intent to shew the grounds whereon it supposes this considence may be built and what it adds to shew that they set not up their own righteousness refusing God's does clearly evidence they place our Justification in the Righteousness that is within us though they acknowledge its infusion to be of God from whence it follows by a plain connexion that they profess a real merit and intrinsick value in a Christian's works although they confess wrought by grace that they are meritorious on that account alone It 's true the Council adds what M. Condom after and desires to be read with care Although Holy Writ esteems good works so much that Christ himself promises a glass of cold water shall not lose its reward yet God forbid a Christian should glory in himself and not in our Lord whose bounty is so great to all men that he will have those gifts which he bestows upon them to be their merits But still it does not deny them to be merits though it owns them first as the gifts of God nor does it any where resolve us what it means by this forbidding a Christian to glory in himself and not in our Lord if understood according to the rest it can only signifie that a Christian should not glory in any thing as done by his own power but should acknowledge it wrought by the help of grace and if no more
be obeyed Now what answer would a man give to this Certainly That the Laws of God are to be obeyed before those of men that the Christian Religion though it obliges to obey God is not destructive of Government because it commands Obedience to the Higher Powers that therefore no good Christian can or will make a pretence of Conscience to the prejudice of the Peace where there is not an absolute necessity and that he will submit even where he cannot obey If this be all the answer that can be given as it is all that ever I understood to be given in this case yet still there is a possibility left for ill men to use a pretence of Religion to disturb the Peace and still the like possibility will be left and consequently the Objection remain in as much force as that Possibility gives it so long as there is a difference possible between the Laws of God and those of our Superiors and no man will have us I hope to avoid this inconvenience to acknowledge no other God than our Superiours I say therefore thirdly That as every man has a judgment of discretion to chuse his own Religion so every Christian has the like judgment to consider whether what he submits to the belief of be consistent with his Christianity That having undertaken to be a Christian he is thereby obliged to the Authority of the Church in all cases wherein Christianity requires submission to that Authority that this having appointed means by which and set her bounds within which and established ends for which she is to determine things concerning Christian Truth he is obliged to give her Obedience whilst she provides in all things for that Christianity that she ought to maintain But if he shall perceive her in any thing to have acted beyond her Power or against the interest of Christian Religion he will consider also how necessary it is that a man mistake not in a thing wherein Christianity is so greatly concerned as it is in the Churches Peace and will thereupon seek all due and possible means of Information and if it still appear that the Church requires his Obedience where his Conscience will not give him leave to pay it he will endeavour by all the ways of Peace and Meekness to prevail with his Governours to remove the burthen and will not make a breach but where he cannot comply and hold his Christianity And whilst both Governours and Governed shall thus both regard the Laws of him that is the God of all the one taking faithful care to provide in all things for the maintenance and encrease of the Christianity the Church is entrusted to preserve the other studying in all things the Will of God and giving thanks to him for so great a help as is the Ministry of his Church and gladly entertaining what is by her shewn to be his Will from those Holy Writings wherein he has revealed it What can be more conducing to the establishment of all Christian Truth and Peace 'T is true there still lies a possibility for men upon pretence of Conscience to disturb all our Peace but the same there is of abusing the greatest grace of God And no man that will not set up his own wisdom above that of God can hope or presume though every man be bound to wish and endeavour a final end of all Controversies in Religion the Apostle having told us 1 1 Cor. 11. 19. that there must be Heresies and our blessed Lord 2 Luke 17. that Offences will come though he denounces a woe to them through whom they come Nor ought this any more to be cast as a Reflection upon those who as much as is possible and as much as in them lies labour after peace only resolving to hold the Truth that through the wickedness of some they cannot accomplish what they so earnestly pray for and endeavour after than it ought upon our Christian Religion that it is destructive of Civil Government because some have abused it as a pretence to subvert and disturb it No man certainly dares think our Saviour to be ever less the Prince of Peace or ever the less sincerely desirous of it when he left it as his peculiar Legacy to his Disciples for that out of a foresight of the unhappy Divisions of the Christian World he tells us 3 Matth. 10. 34. That he came not to send Peace on earth but a sword to set the father against the son and the son against the father All that M. Condom objects from the Actions of the Gallican Synods falls within these two Objections which I have answered I shall not therefore lengthen this Tract by a particular application there being nothing of moment but what may without difficulty be solved by one or both of these answers which I have given to that therein which seemed to be of force against the Doctrine of the Church of England in this point whose cause it is that I have undertaken SECT XX. Of the Authority of the Pope WHereas M. Condom asserts the Popes Authority from the Primacy invested by our Lord in St. Peter and the acknowledgment of this Primacy by the Holy Councils and Fathers in the Pope as St. Peter's Successor I need only deny that which he asserts without proof and am not obliged to evidence by any proofs that he has no such Authority 'till I am shewn what obedience is claimed by or given to him and his title and right thereto Their Profession of Faith is thus I acknowledg the Holy Profess Fidei Pii Quarti Catholick and Apostolick Church of Rome to be the Mother and Mistriss of all Churches And I vow and swear true Obedience to the Bishop of Rome the Successor of Peter Prince of the Apostles and Vicar of Jesus Christ This Supremacy the Church of England denies him to have any title to a Hom. for Whitsunday Part 2. as touching that they will be termed Universal Bishops and Heads of all Christian Churches through the World we have the Judgment of Gregory expresly against them who writing to Mauritius the Emperor condemned John Bishop of Constantinople in that behalf calling him The Prince of Pride Lucifer ' s Successor c. and again b Hom. against Rebellion Part 5. The Bishop of Rome being by the order of God's Word none other than the Bishop of that one See and Diocess and never yet well able to govern the same did by intolerable ambition challenge not only to be Head of all the Church dispersed through the World but also to be Lord over all Kingdoms of the World Although he is pleased to wave those things that are disputed in the Schools concerning this extravagant Power and Authority of the Pope as not being Articles of the Catholick Faith I must tell him it would have removed great jealousies if as he has declared them not Articles of the Catholick Faith so he had owned them to be false For as the