triumphant in Heaven that which is now militant on Earth and that which is not yet in the world but shall be in succeeding Ages All these three Churches do really make but one because united together in the eternal purpose of God appointed to know one and the same Word to partake of one and the same Spirit and to inherit one and the same Glory They are but one Family for they have the same Father the same Rights and Priviledges the same Hopes and are called to the same Duties They are but one body under the protection and Guidance of Jesus Christ their only Head who is as the Scripture says The same yesterday to day and for ever And this is our sense of the Church called in the Creed Catholick or Universal The Latitude we here take the Church in hath displeased M. de Condom he says we put a wrong sense upon the Article and to understand it thus is in effect to reject it He is of opinion it should be confined to this part upon Earth which he defines A Society making profession to believe c. But in the first place M. de Condom must allow us to tell him that Saint Augustine however hath taught us to explain the Church in our Creed after this manner That Father indeed went farther than we do for he hath not scrupled to include in this notion the Angels confirmed in Grace Here says he and 't is in his very Exposition of the Creed that he says it we must take the Church whole and entire not only for that part of it upon earth which praises the name of God from the rising of the Sun unto the going down thereof singing to God a new Song since their deliverance from their former Captivity but also for that other part which is in Heaven and never was separated from the Divine presence the Blessed and Holy Angels The Body of Christ says he in another place is the Church not this or that Church but which is diffused over the whole world not that which is made up of men now alive but consisting of those which have been before us and those which shall come after us even to the end of the world For the whole Church being composed of all the Faithful in as much as all the Faithful are the Members of Jesus Christ 〈◊〉 Jesus Christ for its Head and this Head though exalted high in the Heavens does notwithstanding still continue to govern his body M. de Condom must likewise allow us to tell him that the Catechism of the Council of Trent hath given this sense of the Church in our Creed The Church it says and 't is in the very Explication of this Article hath two parts one of which is called Triumphant the other Militant The Triumphant is that illustrious assembly of the Blessed and all those who have vanquished and triumph'd over the World the Flesh and the Devil and who being now delivered from the miseries of this life enjoy everlasting rest and felicity The Church Militant is the company of all the Faithful yet alive upon earth which is therefore called Militant because they are engaged in a perpetual war with these most deadly enemies Satan the World and the Flesh Yet must we not from hence imagine that they are two distinct Churches but as was said two parts of one and the same Church one of which is gone before and already possest of its Heavenly Country The other daily following after till at length being united with our Saviour it shall rest above in Eternal happiness Again We must desire M. de Condom's leave to say that the very Title of Catholick or Vniversal used in the Creed does lead us to this extended notion of the Church This to me seems evident for two reasons First that this Title is given the Church to distinguish it from all false Churches which do neither exist always nor every where but spring up and die away in some particular places and at some certain times as having no sound nor lasting principle Secondly that this Title was to distinguish it from particular Churches which are but members of this great Body collected by Christ and separated from the world that he might sanctifie it to himself Whence it follows that when we say the Vniversal or Catholick Church by this is plainly meant the Church intire and at large without exception or limitation either as to time or place Lastly M. de Condom must allow us to tell him that we are brought to this notion by what follows in the Creed The Communion of Saints which terms explain this of the Catholick Church For the Saints are not only persons now living upon Earth but those also that reign in Heaven and those which shall be to the worlds end and 't is with all these that we are in Communion If the Communion of Saints were to be understood of such only as make profession to believe in Jesus Christ and govern themselves by his word This could be no other than an external Communion by living under the same Ministry and partaking of the same Sacraments which good and bad men enjoy equally And certainly this would fall far short of so great so Majestick an expression and consequently could not deserve a room in our Creed But says M. de Condom in the Creed which was only a bare declaration of faith this term must be taken in its most proper and most natural signification and such as is most used among Christians I own it must be taken in its most proper and most natural sense but even this supplies us with a fresh argument against him it being certain that the most proper and most natural sense is to take the Vniversal Church for the company of all those that are truly the faithful separated from the world by the Word and Holy Spirit of God according to the purpose of his Election from the beginning to the end of all things I acknowledg the word Church when used in a Civil sense as for instance when spoken of the people of Israel does most properly signifie an external and visible company and so far I am of M. de Condom's mind both as to what he urges out of the Acts and from the Septuagint Translation But still I assert that this word when applied to a Christian Society does not properly denote a visible Congregation or an outward profession of the Faith and no more but chiefly an inward calling a spiritual communion and such as that outward is only a consequence of and does depend upon A man must be utterly ignorant of Christianity to deny this truth The Church then is a name for something within and not barely to signifie what passes without so that implying an inward communion when the Title of Vniversal is put to it it must needs mean the whole body of true and faithful Christians By the same reason I affirm this to be its most natural
signification When we say in plain terms the Vniversal Church nothing can be more natural than to understand the whole company of Gods children as opposed to the men of the world and children of this generation Nothing more natural to Faith and especially a Confession of Faith than to interpret a term expressing the object of Faith not in a restrained sense which gives only a partial Idea of the thing nor in an ambiguous sense which gives a confused and doubtful one but in a sense that shall be perspicuous and full As to the common use of the word M. de Condom must pardon me if I say there is a fallacy in his argument For supposing it true which really it is not that all Christians of this and some ages last past had confined the term Vniversal Church to the Church at present upon Earth suppose the pretended Reformed to use M. de Condom's own expression did commonly understand this term so yet still 't is a trick to attempt to adjust the sense of the Creed by that which some latter ages have fixt upon it 'T is just as if I should go about to explain the terms of our language by what will be in vogue two or three hundred years hence For who does not see that the acceptation alters and words are mightily removed from their first and genuine signification What I have alledged from St. Austin and the Trent-Catechism plainly convict M. de Condom of a mistake either in matter of fact or point of right If the matter of fact deposited before be true That all Christians understand by the Church a Society making profession c. He is out in point of right for St. Austin and the Trent-Catechism shew that the Church in our Creed is to be otherwise understood But if this Rule hold that the word in the Creed must be taken in such a sence as is most in use among Christians he errs in matter of fact for St. Austin and the Catechism taking it as we see 't is manifest the Christians of their times did not understand it as M. de Condom does of a Society making profession to believe c. It is questionless more reasonable to say that the term Vniversal Church in our Creed should be interpreted in a way most agreeable to Scripture stile but this very thing quite overthrows M. de Condom's pretensions For the Scripture when speaking of the Church as the Creed does with regard to its Universality does always mean the whole body of the Faithful and not one part only Thus St. Paul hath taken it in that excellent passage God hath given Jesus Christ to be the Head of the Church which is his body the fulness of him that filleth all in all In the fifth Chapter of that Epistle he repeats it no less than six times in the same sense The husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the Church The Church is subject to Christ as the wife is to her husband Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it that he might present it to himself a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle Christ nourisheth and cherisheth the Church This is a great mystery concerning Christ and the Church Thus again Col. 1. Christ is the head of the body the Church who is the beginning the first-born from the dead So lastly Heb. 12. Ye are come to Mount Sion the city of the living God the heavenly Jerusalem and to an innumerable company of Angels to the general assembly and Church of the first-born which are written in Heaven For the Apostle does not mean the Church Triumphant only as M. de Condom would perswade us but the whole body of those whom God hath enrolled in the Book of his Predestination whether already taken up to Glory or such as are already justify'd and sanctified upon Earth but not yet glorify'd or those whom he will call effectually hereafter and justifie in order to their Glorification I conclude this Question with one observation which ought not to give M. de Condom any offence because the greatest demonstration of respect to an adversary is the removing every little objection made by him I observe then that his Argument which contains all this part of his Discourse neither does nor according to the rules of reasoning can conclude any thing at all He would know the meaning of Vniversal Church in our Creed We must take this term says he in the most proper signification and such as is most in use among Christians I grant it Now all Christians as he goes on by the name of Church understand a society c. and for this I desire no other witnesses than the Pretended Reform'd themselves Who does not perceive that this concludes nothing He should have said All Christians understand by the Church Vniversal a society c. and of this I desire no other witnesses c. Thus he should have delivered himself if he would argue regularly All this while M. de Condom's proof all through the sequel of his discourse runs not upon the term in his Proposition The Vniversal Church but on that single term the Church between which there is a wide difference for the Church may well be taken in a sense that the Vniversal Church can by no means admit of Indeed had M. de Condom said All Christians by the Church Vniversal understand a Society making profession c. and of this I desire no other witnesses than the Pretended Reformed themselves we should have answered him That the Pretended Reform'd never understood by the Vniversal Church a Society making profession to believe c. because according to their Tenets the Church Universal rose a great way further than this Society making profession c. So that we should immediately have put a stop to his Argument and he could never have effected what he hoped for from it Quest 2. Whether M. de Condom's be a good and sufficient definition of the Church upon Earth A Society making profession to believe the Doctrine of Jesus Christ and govern it self by his Word By this decision of our first question I think Sir it appears that M. de Condom had no ground for accusing us of taking that Article of our Creed concerning the Vniversal Church in a wrong sense Let us now proceed to the second Enquiry whether M. de Condom have given a good and sufficient definition of the Church upon Earth in calling it A Society making profession to believe the Doctrine of Jesus Christ and govern it self by his Word Now this Question being of such mighty importance that upon the determination oâ— it the whole Controversie betwixt us and the Romaâ—â—â—â—â— touching the Church does entirely depend I was amazed to see 〈◊〉 he did not think fit to clear it either to Mademoiselle de Duras or 〈◊〉 other Proselytes for whom the perusal of this Discourse was 〈◊〉 Methinks when men go
few by preserving the true Faith will also preserve all the Priviledges of Jesus Christs Church All this is exactly what we assert in this case The Abbot of Palermo's opinion was likewise common to many of the Schools Occam a famous Doctor among the Schoolmen of the fourteenth Age hath composed a Dialogue on this Subject where among other questions he discusses these six principal ones 1. Whether a Pope that is Canonically chosen can afterwards turn Heretick 2. Whether the Colledg of Cardinals may fall into Heresie 3. Whether it be possible for the Pope and Cardinals together to fall into it 4. Whether it be so for the Church of Rome and Apostolick See to fall into it 5. Whether a General Council may fall into it 6. Whether even the Body of Christians may fall into it He affirms that as many held the Negative in these Points so there were a great many too that held the affirmative and he gives you the reasons urged by both sides for their several opinions I know very well that he was engaged in that silly quarrel between John the 22 d and the Franciscan Friers which took up almost the whole life of that Pope to know whether the Friers had any proper right to the bread they eat or only the bare use of it and whether Jesus Christ and his Apostles had likewise any proper right to the things they used But this is no argument why such an Authors Testimony should not be unexceptionable when he asserts as matter of fact that the six forementioned questions were disputed pro and con among the Learned men of his time There is likewise a testimony of John Francis Picus Mirandula which flourished in the beginning of the Fifteenth Age which he gives us in his Theoremes concerning the Faith After having said something to their opinion who make either a Pope or a Council Infallible he adds these words Others there are that oppose this opinion by saying that Councils may err and actually bave erred as for instance the Council of Arimini the second Council of Ephesus that of Constantinople concerning Images and that of Aix la Chapelle about the marriage of Virgins that were forced And if these say they have erred others may err as well as they whereupon some hold that such General Councils as the Pope does not preside in by his Authority may err but those where he does cannot To which others return that the Council of Ephesus was lawfully convened that the Pope's Legates presided in it and yet the Faith was subverted there and the regulation of this very matter was it that moved Pope Leo to call the Council of Chalcedon They say further that their pretending to find out remedies for knowing when two Councils clash whether of the two a man ought to hold to is an evident sign that General Councils may err It is certain then that the Doctrine we now assert when we affirm that even the most numerous Assemblies are liable to error that they may consist of such men as shall not be of the true Church and consequently may fall off from their function is neither a new Doctrine nor any opinion we are driven to for the justfying our Reformation but an old Doctrine which the evidence of Truth hath always suggested to sincere and unbiassed men So that if M. de Meaux had but pleased to reflect a little upon this he would not have said as he did That it was a Monster the birth whereof was reserved for the time of the New Reformation It is convenient sometimes to be a little more advised and sparing in passing ones judgment It would questionless be very foul to conclude form what hath been just now said against the absolute Authority and Infallibility of Ecclesiastical Assemblies that we quite cast off all these humane Orders for the external guidance and government of the Church To six any such opinions as this upon us would be the unjustest thing in the world Our Confessions of Faith our Discipline and the Writings of our Authors as well as our constant practice in all places are a vindication of us in this particular beyond all scruple or exception First then we hold the Ministry to be of Divine Institution and consequently become necessary by the necessity of a Command and that tho the use of it is not absolutely necessary by the necessity of the means for the Existence of the Church it is however of such excellent use and advantage in order to the preserving and propagating of the Church that to go about to take it away would be a manifest impiety Secondly We are of opinion that in matters of Discipline relating to the publick such as the manner and form of Religious Assemblies of Administring the Sacraments and others of this kind these should be left to the determination of Ecclesiastical Assemblies and provided they bring in no Rite offensive to the Conscience or contrary to the nature of the Evangelical Worship an absolute obedience is due to them Further yet We allow these Ecclesiastical Assemblies a power of Censuring private persons and proceeding to the last and highest Censure that of Excommunication And although we make no question at all but this power may sometimes be abused by them and unjust sentences pronounced yet we think that out of veneration for the Order a man ought to suffer such to be executed upon him provided this do not engage us in any thing that may wound a good conscience As for matters of Faith Worship and general Rules for ordering mens Manners we are perswaded that these Assemblies continuing the subordination to one another may not only attain to the knowledg of them by the Word of God but that they must and ought to do so for preventing the encrease of error and the preserving Gods truth in its genuine purity It is part of their office and business to restrain the exorbitances of mens minds to help the weak and to the utmost of their power cherish and maintain publick peace in the midst of this Society But because on one hand the persons making these Assemblies are neither inspired nor infallible nor have any power over mens consciences and on the other hand because no body can be sure that they are good men and will discharge their duty faithfully there being so many several sorts of by-respects that influence men when the Spirit of God does not guide them we think it a very faulty indifference and a manifest slighting a man's own salvation to reveive their decisions blindfold and upon trust without any trial or examination of them at all But still though we think this examination highly just and indispensably necessary yet we think withal it is to be used with abundance of caution Besides that it must be undertaken in the fear of God and with a disposition full of modesty and Christian humility besides that we must beg for grace from above and not presume upon our own
the curiosity you have to see what I wrote upon the same subject the next day after our Interview M. de Condom having profest it was not his desire that what past between him and me should be publickly talked of I thought my self under an obligation to confine what I had written to my own Study And this hath been hitherto very punctually observed by me But now since he hath thought fit to give out Copies of his I have reason to believe that in this respect he leaves me perfectly to my liberty and is well satisfied I should do the same thing with mine I have too great an opinion of M. de Condom's Wisdom not to follow his Example in this particular and I promise my self from his Equity that he will not find fault with me for treading in his steps But because he hath been pleased to impart to us that Discourse also which he had with Mademoiselle de Duâ—as in private the day before our Conference you will think it convenient that before I transcribe my Relation I should first make some reflections upon That Were this a discourse of such a nature as common occasions or accidents are used to produce where a man speaks without preparation or design and delivers himself with all the freedom imaginable I confess it were unjust to examine it strictly and by rule But seeing this was composed by M. de Condom with a prospect of obliging Mademoiselle de Duras to change her Religion and which seems a studied piece a Discourse which he hath joyned to the account of our Conference as a considerable part of what past in this matter Lastly a Discourse committed to Writing upon supposal that it may be useful to others and for that purpose made in some measure publick I cannot forbear looking upon it as a work of premeditation and returning some answer to it accordingly Besides that you and I are concerned as to what Mademoiselle de Duras hath done to desire to know whether she had sufficient reasons to forsake your Communion and embrace the Romish and the examination of this Discourse will be a very proper means of clearing that point to us Now it may be reduced to two principal Parts In the first M. de Condom makes it his business to shew that the Catholick or Universal Church which we profess to believe in the Creed is a Church thus defined A Society making profession to believe the Doctrine of Jesus Christ and govern it self by his word Whence he infers That it is a visible Society He pretends also to make it appear that to this Church thus defin'd belong all the promises found in Scripture In the Second He labours to answer an Objection drawn from what happened to the Church of Israel heretofore in which we often see the true Worship of God to have been changed and corrupted and both the People and their Guides to have fallen into Idolatry These two Parts Sir we will prosecute in order and by applying our selves to what is most material in them will endeavour by the assistance of God's Grace to make the Truth so evident as shall remove all difficulties The first Part of M. de Condom's discourse examin'd Instead of granting the Ministers says M. de Condom to believe all the Fundamentals of the Faith we shew that there is one Article of the Creed they believe not which is that of the Universal Church 'T is true they say with the mouth I believe the Catholick or Universal Church as the Arrians Macedonians and Socinians say with the mouth I believe in Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost But as there is reason to accuse them of not believing these Articles because they believe them not as they ought nor according to their true sense so if we shew the Pretended Reformed that they believe not as they ought the Article of the Catholick Church we may truly say that in effect they reject so important an Article of the Creed You must know then what is meant by this expression The Catholick or Universal Church and upon this I lay for my ground That in the Creed which was only a bare declaration of Faith this Term must be taken in its most proper and most natural signification and such as is most used among Christians Now all Christians by the name of the Church understand a Society making profession to believe the Doctrine of Jesus Christ and govern it self by his Word If this Society makes this Profession 't is consequently visible That this is the proper and genuine signification of the word Church such as is known by every one and used in common discourse I desire no other witnesses than the Pretended Reformed themselves The sequel will declare whether the scandal of dealing with that Article of the Universal Church as the Arrians Macedonians and Socinians do would not better agree with the Character of such as follow M. de Condom's Opinion than the Reformed Ministers This we shall presently be able to judge of and to that purpose four Questions must be examined The first is Whether the sense of that Article in our Creed ought to be restrained according to M. de Condom to the Church here on Earth or extended farther Secondly Whether this be a good and sufficient definition of the Church upon Earth A Society making profession to believe the Doctrine of Jesus Christ and govern it self by his word Thirdly Whether this Church upon Earth be visible or invisible or whether it be both considered in a different sense and different respects Fourthly To what Church the Promises of Jesus Christ do belong whether to that defined by M. de Condom or to that which we are about to define These four Questions will include not only all the plausible things M. de Condom hath said in this first part of his Discourse but likewise all the other sophistical Objections that are usually put to us upon this subject Quest 1. Whether the sense of that Article in our Creed ought to be restrained according to M. de Condom to the Church here on Earth or extended farther In order to resolving the first Question you will please Sir to give me leave to explain briefly that Article of our Creed concerning the Catholick or Universal Church and how we understand it that so you may be able to judge whether M. de Condom had reason to accuse us of not taking it in its true sense And this I shall immediately enter upon We think then this being such a profession of Faith as ought to embrace its object entire and in the utmost extent and not in any one part only that by the Vniversal Church must be understood not barely the visible body or company of the Faithful at present upon Earth but that body or company of all the Faithful which have been are or at any time shall be from the beginning to the end of the World Thus the Universal Church is That which is already
about to make Converts they ought 〈…〉 pretence of saving them a little trouble to decline any instructiâ—â—◠〈◊〉 may be necessary for their satisfaction and being perswaded 〈…〉 Church of Rome's pretensions are just should not fear to have the Grounds of them examined but suppose they will be found strong and impregnable How comes it to pass then that M. de Condom was pleased to pass by so fundamental a Question And how could be satisfy himself with barely propounding his definition and saying only that This was what all Christians understand by the name of a Church However I shall be bold to say that this is neither all nor indeed the main part of what Christians do or ought to understand by it and that his definition is defective by at least one half to which therefore I shall oppose another which I assert to be what all Christians ought to understand by the name of Church viz. A Society of such persons as making profession to believe the Doctrine of Jesus Christ do truly and effectually believe it and making profession to govern themselves by his word do really and effectually govern themselves by it Our business now is to know which of these two is a good and lawful definition whether that given us by M. de Condom in agreement with the Doctors of his Communion or this of mine in agreement with all Protestants That is to say we are concerned to know whether the nature and essence of the Church consist barely in externals and appearances or whether something of reality be not required whether Hypocrisy and superficial Cheats can make men true members of the Church or whether something of truth be not necessary also to know whether wicked men worldlings and reprobates provided they make an outward profession and can but dissemble handsomely are real members of Christ's mystical body or whether this priviledge do not belong to those that are truly the Faithful Here lies the pinch of the Question which in my opinion would have resolved it self had but M. de Condom propounded it fairly For methinks 't is very hard to acquiesce so far in his definition But not to insist on this first prejudice let us examine the matter throughly I. The Scripture represents the Church to us as the product and execution of God's eternal decree of Predestination or Election and besides it teaches us that God in electing and predestinating men does it not to a mere outward profession of Faith and Holiness but to an effectual Faith and true Holiness And consequently effectual Faith and Holiness are of the nature and essence of the Church and not an outward profession only The consequence is manifest For the best way to discover the nature and essence of any thing is to take it according to its own Author's first Idea and design supposing that he does not as we are all agreed God does not swerve at all from his design in the execution of it The Church then being God's own work the surest means to discern what that is will be to inform our selves of God's design if we can but find out that Now this we find in the Election Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ says St. Paul in the name of the whole Church who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ According as he hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world And a little after He gathers together in one all things in Christ both which are in heaven and which are in earth even in him In whom we have obtain'd an inheritance being predestinated according to the purpose of him c. To this relates that saying of Christ I pray not for the world but for them which thou hast given me for they are thine Where by opposing the world for which he does not pray to those whom his father had given him 't is plain he understands the Church and his meaning is that the Father hath given them to Jesus Christ because it was his by his purpose of Election This appears further from the words that immediately follow And all mine are thine and thine are mine for this mutual reciprocation of Good between his Father and Him if I may so term it is capable of no other sense but this in the sequel of his discourse My Church are thine Elect and thy Elect are my Church they who are mine as my people are thine as thy Elect my Communion and thy Election have the same measures the same extent and do both comprehend the same persons So that the Election is nothing else but God's design and project of the Church and the constituting of a Church is the putting that design of Election in Execution Blessed says David is the man whom thou chusest and causest to approach unto thee that he may dwell in thy courts These Courts are the Church of God and men enter into them only by vertue of God's Election God hath saved us says the Apostle and called us with an holy calling not according to our works but according to his own purpose and grace which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began We must therefore come to the knowledg of the Church by his Eternal purpose and to know that we must consult his Holy Word He hath chosen us says St. Paul that we should be holy and without blame before him in love Having predestinated us to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself and that we should be to the praise of the glory of his grace He does not say a bare profession of Holiness but a real Holiness he does not say an appearance of adoption but a true adoption he does not say an external conversion but an internal That is such as may illustrate the glory of God God hath predestinated us to a true Faith and not an appearance of Faith to a sincere and substantial Regeneration not to a shadow or colour of it 'T is past a doubt then that a mere outward profession cannot give us a full definition of the Church but true Faith and Regeneration are necessary parts of the Idea we have of it II. The Scripture when speaking of the Church with reference to God gives it such appellations as can by no means be restrain'd to a more profession or allow us to think it can be composed of wicked persons It calls the Church Jerusalem which is above the Heavenly Jerusalem the City of the living God the Holy Hill of Sion the Israel of God A Holy Nation a peculiar people the inheritance of God the habitation of God through the spirit the house of God the temple of God His holy Priesthood His spiritual house His royal Priesthood His purchased possession the people of God Tell me now I pray if the energy of these expressions is not admirably answered by
being reduced to a bare external profession Would God have sent us a new Jerusalem a new Sion a new City from above and make this up of Righteous and Wicked Hypocrites and true Believers indifferently Does not the Apostle understand it so when he says that Jerusalem is free that her children are not in bondage i. e. those who are the Children by promise that they shall not be cast out like Children of the bondwoman but shall be Heirs and that there is the same difference between this and the other Jerusalem that was between the two Wives of Abraham Sarah and Agar Would God make him a new Tabernacle a new House a new Temple and build it of holy and profane materials indifferently St. Peter did not intend it so You says he as lively stones are built up a spiritual house Would God separate to himself a new people a new Israel a new Nation from all other Nations and require from it no more than an outward profession which alone works no regeneration at all To shew that God himself never intended this observe how himself speaks This shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel After those days saith the Lord I will put my law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts and will be their God and they shall be my people We must take notice that all these names above mentioned are derived from the old figures of the Mosaical dispensation this the very reading of them plainly testifies Now this very thing makes directly against M. de Condom's definition For as it is essential to a figure to consist of something External and Corporeal so is it equally essential to the thing figured to consist of something Internal and Spiritual The Church therefore is no longer a Jerusalem an Israel a people linked together by outward bands only this would correspond well enough with the figures of the old Law but it is a people an Israel a Jerusalem united and compacted by the inward hands of the same Faith and the same Sanctification This very term the Church is of it self sufficient to confirm this truth M. de Condom acknowledges the Christians had it from the Jews which is true He says the Jews made use of it to signify the visible Society of God's people the Assembly which makes profession to serve him I agree with him in that too He adds That the Christians have kept it in the same sense I am not of that opinion This word when applied to the figure can signify no more than a visible outward Assembly but when to the thing figured it must of necessity imply something more it must denote an inward community a company not of Bodies only but Souls too for it is not enough that a confession be made with the mouth men must also believe with the heart unto Righteousness III. This will be yet more evident if you reflect on some other applelations given to the Church with relation to Jesus Christ For it is called His flock his sheep his spouse his sister his dove his well-beloved his body a Body whereof He is the head a Body that is his flesh and his bones a house built upon him as upon a Corner-stone the sanctified in Jesus Christ the Children which God hath given him and other expressions like these Now who can ever imagine these glorious Titles should import no more than an outward profession or that profane persons and reprobates can have any share in them It is his flock but what flock Fear not little flock for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom They are his sheep but how My sheep hear my voice and I know them and they follow me And I give unto them eternal life and they shall never perish neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand It is his Spouse and his Sister but in what respect Thou hast ravished my heart my sister my spouse thou hast ravished my heart It is his Dove but why his Dove My dove my undefiled is but one the daughters saw her and blessed her She is his well-beloved but Wherefore his Well-beloved As the lilly among therns so is my beloved among the daughters It is his Body but how his body The edifying of the body of Christ till we all come in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the son of God unto a perfect man unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ He is its Head but what sort of Head From him the whole body fitly joyned together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth maketh increase of the body to the edifying of it self in love It is his flesh and his bones but how these No man ever hateth his own flesh but nourisheth and cherisheth it even as the Lord the Church It is a structure built upon him but how In him all the building fitly framed together groweth into an holy temple in the Lord. They are the sanctified in Jesus Christ but how sanctsied They are such as in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord. They are the Epistle of Jesus Christ but in what regard the Epistle Written not with Ink but with the spirit of the living God not in tables of stone but in fleshy tables of the heart It is his People but what kind of people Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power in the beauties of holiness They are the Children which God hath given him But wherefore were they given him To exhibit them one day saying Behold I and the children which thou hast given me Thou hast given me power over all flesh that I should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given me Can any man after all this grant that the Church should be defined A Society making profession to believe c. or imagine that Hypocrites belong to this mystical Divine Body IV. If we search the Scripture yet further we shall find other Arguments in confirmation of this Truth Among these I reckon the predictions concerning the Church of Christ to be met with in the Prophets Thus it is described by Moses The Lord thy God will circumcise thy heart and the heart of thy seed to love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul that thou mayest live There shall be saith Isaiah a high-way and a way it shall be called the way of holiness the unclean shall not pass over it but it shall be for those the wayfaring men tho fools shall not err therein No lion shall be there nor any ravenous beast shall go up thereon it shall not be found there but the redeemed shall walk there And in another place All thy children shall be taught of the Lord and great shall be the peace of thy children In righteousness
band and that which constitutes the Church we are driven to maintain one of these three things Either that such a profession does confer the spirit of Christ Or without Christ's spirit one may still be his Or that the things which make it to be a Church do not yet make it to be Christ's The first of these would be absurd For what more so than to assert ' That a bare profession of Christianity confers the Spirit of Christ At this rate every Hypocrite is a partaker of that Holy Spirit The second That one without Christ's Spirit may still be his directly contradicts Saint Paul's assertion which positively declares That he who hath not Christ's Spirit is not his And for the third That the things which make it to be a Church do not yet make it to be Christ's it may be M. de Condom may not like this himself I for my part look upon it as a very strange position For can one say that what precisely constitutes the Church does not make it Christ's This is as much as to say that the Church is not his Body nor his Spouse nor his well-beloved nor any of all those things the Scripture calls it In a word 't is to say that it is not considered in this quality any part of his concern If M. de Condom frame to himself such a Church as this let him at least give us leave to enquire why he does afterwards appropriate the promises to it For what right can the Church have to these if as such it be not Christ's nor hath Communion with him These two Propositions are evidently destructive of one another If the Church as such be not Christ's it has no share in his promises if it hath then it is his as a Church Let him chuse which he please if the first our Controversie is at an end for to what purpose should we disspute of a Church which he says is Jesus Christ's and yet is not his nor hath any title to the promises If the second let him not talk any more of a Church considered as such being constituted by a bare outward profession For this not conferring Christ's Spirit cannot make the Church his or if it can St. Paul does not say true when he tells us expresly That if any man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his IX The sundry passages of Scripture concerning Hypocrites who cloak themselves with such an outward profession abundantly prove them not to be of Christ's Church He that saith he is in the light and hateth his brother is in darkness And a little after In this the children of God are manifest and the children of the Devil whosover doth not righteousness is not God neither he that loveth not his brother Again afterwards He that loveth not knoweth not God for God is love St. Jude speaking of these Hypocrites calls them Spots in our feasts of charity clouds without water trees without fruit twice dead plucked up by the Roots Jesus Christ himself says In the last day he will profess unto them he never knew them What colour then have we for making such members of the Church which is Christ's Body But that place of St. John removes all the difficulty They went out from us but they were of us for if they had been of us they would no doubt have continued with us but that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us What a plain difference is here made between being among us and being of us being among us is proper for Hypocrites that are mixed with the Faithful and joyn in the same profession Being with us is sincerely and truly to be of the Church for which something more than an outward profession is requisite X. We read in Scripture of a twofold Call one by the meer Preaching of the Word commonly termed an outward Call the other by the Preaching of the Word and the Holy Spirit both stiled an inward Call Of the first our Saviour speaks when he says Many are called but few chosen Of the second St. Paul Whom he did predestinate them he also cased and whom he called them he also justified Now the Church whose very name implies a Call must needs have been the effect of one of these two just mentioned But if defined by a bare profession it cannot refer to one or other of these nor can it answer the design of either It does not fulfil the end of the first for the Preaching of the Gospel does not call men to a meer Profession of believing Jesus Christ's Doctrine A Hypocrite is so far from complying with this Call that he rejects and mocks at it It does not refer to the second Call because the Spirit which calls with the Word is a Spirit of Regeneration and not bare profession What Call shall we refer it to then I know not any third the Scripture mentions not any and the nature of the thing will not admit of any We can consider God in such a case but according to two different capacities either as a Law-giver commanding exhorting promising and threating or as an absolute disposer of Events and so bringing to pass in us the thing he commands us But whether commanding us or whether working in to he never stops at a bare profession he goes on to the truth of Holiness and Faith his Word enjoyns it his Spirit produces it So that whether soever of these two Calls you suppose the Church to obey it must either proceed to a true Conversion or be no Church for the proper and natural signification of the word is a Called Society but no one ever called it to an outward profession and no more XI I suppose it is a maxim among all Christians That Jesus Christ hath no more Churches than one and that this on Earth together with that in Heaven make but that one thus much we learn from the Trent-Catcchisin it self A sure method then of discovering the true nature and essence of the Church upon Earth would be to search into that in Heaven for it is plain were these of different natures they would be no longer one but two Churches of a several species Thus much I think must be granted and so likewise must the Conclusion I deduce from it viz. That either the nature of the Church Triumphant must exist in a bare profession or that of the Church Militant cannot If the Churches Unity here below be a Unity of Profession an external Unity only and the internal one be but accidental then the Unity of the Church above must be External too and no more and that Internal one resulting from the agreement of hearts and wills no more essential to it than to this below Otherwise as was said before they must be two different Churches Let them be so kind then to clear this Point Whether we must believe that a true Piety true Regeneration and true Holiness are
Argument Mr. Claude returned that this ought not to be called a Jewish Argument because it concluded in favour of Christianity but the contrary principle rather deserved this name because it favoured the Cause and proceedings of the Jews Afterwards Mr. Claude said That if he would have recourse to History it will be no difficult matter to demonstrate that many Councils have fallen into Error and been mistaken in their Determinations Particularly among others the Council of Arimini which condemned the Consubstantiality of the Son that is his Eternal Divinity M. de Condom cried out Whether are you carrying us now Sir To the Council of Arimini When shall we have done if all those Histories must be discust Do not you know that the Council of Arimini was a forced packt Assembly You urge my very argument for me said Mr. Claude which is that a General Council may be packt Here is an instance of one consisting of four hundred Bâ—shops that was so M de Condom answered That those Bishops were compelled by the Emperors Authority who had sent Soldiers among them but afterwards when they were every one returned home they disclaimed what had been done and exprest their remorse for it Mr. Claude replied That many of them it was true did acknowledg they had done amiss but that very acknowledgment of and repentance for a Fault which M. de Condom affirms they shewed is a Confirmation of their committing it and 't is of no great moment to know upon what motives they committed it since it is plain that it was really committed And further every particular man's returning from his Error is a plain Indication that each of them thought himself under no Obligation of acquiescing in what had been determined when they were all met together in Council M. de Condom cried out That there was no necessity of medling with all these Historical Points and that it would divert them too much from the main business There is says he an easier way of deciding the matter The Subject of our Controversy is the first Principle of Faith in particular Persons This in your Opinion is the Holy Scripture in ours the Churches Authority Put the case in a young Child who hath been baptized but hath not yet read the Scripture I would know by what Principle this Child believes the Scripture to be Divine Particularly the Book of Canticles for instance which hath not a word of God in it Now this Child who is a Christian who hath received the Holy Ghost and Faith conveyed into him by Baptism and who is a member of the Church does either doubt of the Scriptures Divine Authority or he does not If he does not doubt then he believes it Divine upon the Churches Authority which is the first Authority he lives under If he does doubt then a man may be a Christian and yet doubt whether the Scripture be true Mr. Claude returned That he could say something to that supposal of M. de Condom That every baptized Child receives the Holy Ghost but was unwilling to stay upon a thing by the by or deviate from the main matter in dispute He would therefore satisfie himself with making a few Reflections upon what M. de Condom urged last The first said he is That the first knowledg of the Catholick Church given by the Holy Spirit to this Child is in all probability given by his Creed where he finds I believe the Holy Catholick Church And yet in the Creed that Article is placed after several other Articles of Doctrine For it begins with God the Father Almighty goes on with the Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost and after these comes in the Catholick Church Now this is a manifest proof that the belief of Doctrines is not wholly derived from the Churches Authority for else the Creed ought to be put together after another method and the first thing said should be I believe the Catholick Church and by the Catholick Church I believe in God the Father and so on My second Reflection said he is That you ought not to take it for granted as you do that the first Authority a Child begins to live under is that of the Catholick Church It being manifest That the first Authority a Child lives under is his Father or Mother or if you please his Nurses and that the Churches cannot take place till afterwards but does in some measure depend upon the other The Consequence whereof is That the first Authority which is the Paternal can as well lead the Child to Scripture as it can to the Church Then Thirdly said he It is the easiest thing in the World to retort your own Argument back upon your self thus The baptized Child either doubts of the Churches Authority or he does not if he does not then he believes it upon the Authority of Scripture for there is no other way for him to believe it with a Divine Faith And consequently it is not the Church that induces men to believe Scripture but Scripture that induces the belief of the Church which is the thing we contend for If he does doubt then there is a Christian that hath received the Holy Spirit and Faith conveyed to him by Baptism and is a Member of the Church and yet is in a state of doubt which is that first Authority whereupon all the rest of his Faith depends Now that the Child cannot with a Divine Faith believe the Churches Authority any other way but by the Authority of Scripture I prove thus If it be not by Scripture that he believes the Church and its Authority then 't is either by way of immediate Inspiration and Enthusiasm or by his Fathers or Mothers or Nurses Authority or by Argument taken from the very nature of the Church This could not be by Enthusiasm because the Holy Ghost does not proceed in such a method Nor by his Fathers or Mothers or Nurses Authority for you discern the inconveniences of advancing such kinds of Authority for the first Principle of Faith Nor can it be by proper Proofs and Arguments taken from the nature of the Church because as you in your Argument suppose the Child not yet to have read the Scripture so do I likewise in mine suppose him not to have considered the nature of the Catholick Church and to know no more of it than barely the Name It remains therefore that the Child either believes the Catholick Church by the Scripture which you will not grant or that he does not believe it at all but doubts of it and so you â—all into the same inconvenience as to the Church which you labour to reduce me to with relation to Scripture It may be said very truly That upon this Pinch a man might discern M. de Condom's Wit was not in the condition it used to be and that his natnral freedom of Argument and Repartee plainly slagg'd He put himself upon maintaining that the first Authority the Child lived under was that of the
person to understand the true meaning of Scripture better than the whole body of the Church Tell me now Sir whether according to this principle this Child be not obliged always to abide within that Heretical or Schismatical Church Tell me what means you will contrive for him to get out of it It is evident then that your principle would serve as well to continue a Jew in his Judaism a Pagan in his Heathenism and a Heretick in his Heresy as an Orthodox Christian in the true Church To this M. de Condom replied that in the perswasion of that Aethiopian Child we must make a difference between that part which proceeded from the Holy Spirit and that which is the effect of prejudice and humane prepossession That the Holy Spirit 's dictate was in general that there was a Catholick Church somewhere or other but his supposal that the Church in which he was born was that Catholick Church proceeded from humane prepossession It is true he did from this Church receive the Scriptures and belived them to be Divine for no other reason but upon its Authority But afterwards as he was reading the Scriptures the Holy Ghost raised in him some scruples about the Church he was born in and by this means he came off from the Heresy and Schism he found himself insnared in Mr. Claude returned that M. de Condom must of necessity either retract his principle or confess what he now alledged to be utterly impossible Because this Aethiopian neither can nor must be allowed to understand the Scriptures any otherwise than in the sense and interpretation of his own Church by whose Authority it is that he believes them to be Divine and from whose hands he receives their meaning so that when he reads Scripture there can never start up any scruples in his mind against the truth of his own Church because he never expounds any Text of Scripture but in agreement with the sense of that Church about it Now if on the other side your meaning be that this person expounds Scripture of his own head and according to his own judgment so taking it in a sense different from that of the Church you at the same time make him forego the principle that you have all this while been contending for and it is not you only that make him forego it but you do besides maintain that the Holy Ghost himself makes him forego it and all those mighty inconveniences you exclaimed against vanish into nothing He added moreover that what M. de Condom said last justified the measures the Protestants had taken in relation to the Church of Rome for altho that had been believed to be the Catholick Church in the time of our Infancy tho we had received the Scriptures from her and believed them to be of Divine Authority yet must we not be blamed for making a difference between that part of this belief which proceeded from the Holy Ghost and that which was the effect of humane Prepossession and Prejudice We cannot be found fault with for having admitted some Scruples against the Truth of this Church as we read the Scriptures and for having upon this accout withdrawn our selves from her Communion M. de Condom said the Cases did still differ in this circumstance That the Ethiopian when he left his own would betake himself to the Catholick Church whereas the Pretended Reformed have not put themselves into any other Communion at all You courted indeed Jeremy's the Patriarch of Constantinople but he would have nothing to do with you The separation was not from our selves said Mr. Claude and that is enough to shew that we have not separated from the true Church If Jeremy the Patriarch of Constantinople would have nothing to do with us as you say that was to his own loss and he did not do as he should have done in it Upon this the Company rose and the Conference which lasted some time longer grew a great deal more confused several things were then spoken of M. de Condom exaggerated much and pretended to draw a parallel between the separation of the Protestants and that of the old Hereticks particularly the Arrians and Macedonians that set up new Churches by themselves Mr. Claude compared the Protestants behaviour to that of Christ's Apostles when they separated from the Jews that as the Apostles relied on Scripture against the Jews who relied upon Ecclesiastical Assemblies and their Authority the Protestants did the same against the Church of Rome He said the Arrians maintained that the Consubstantiality of the Son of God determined by the Nicene Council was a Novel Doctrine and that many other persons had in truth exprest themselves very unadvisedly concerning the Divinity of the Son among others he instanced in Origea Justin Martyr and the Council of Antioch As for Origen M. de Condom said he was a suspected Author and the Council of Antioch said he was an Arrian Council to which Mr. Claude replied that he was much mistaken for that Council was held before Arrius his time and yet rejected the Term Consubstantial As to Justin Martyr How Sir said he a Martyr speak amiss of the Divinity of the Son of God! I will never believe a word on 't You may believe what you think sit Sir said Mr. Claude but for all that the thing is even so Afterwards M. de Condom put himself upon the Invocation of Saints and Prayers for the Dead For the first of these he told them Mr. Daille had allowed it to be Thirteen hundred years old and Mr. Blondell acknowledged the second to be of great Antiquity Mr. Claude replied it was no great wonder if the Church of Rome which had collected and Cononized the Errors and Superstitions of former Ages had picked up some that were of a good old standing But he ought to have said withal that Mr. Daille had made it appear that for Three hundred years together there was not to be found the least footsteps of Invocation of Saints and especially that there was not any manner of ground for it in Scripture That he acknowledged Prayer for the Dead to be one of the oldest superstitions but there was a mighty difference between the practice of the Primitive Christians and the modern devotions of the Romish Church And after all it was an Error contrary to the principles of Scripture M. de Condom betook himself again to the Comparison between the Protestants and Hereticks of old inferring from thence that they and their Church was new and upstart Mr. Claude shewed him that this prejudice was extremely unjust and of very pernicious consequence Unjust because on one hand it placed the advantage on the strongest side and those that have most of their party whereas the Scripture teaches us quite contrary That we must not follow a multitude to do evil For the strongest side are continually taxing others with making a new Body and a new Church Unjust secondly because a false Antiquity may be