the perpetuity of the Church be imagined to mean a continuance of this exterior Body in the same condition without undergoing any alteration or a constant equal succession of Priests People Sees and Councils This might be admitted if all this exterior body were the true Church of Jesus Christ if that were not mixt with worldlings and wicked men who change the Church as to outward appearances or if it's Ministry were sure to be always intrusted in the hands of good men But the case being otherwise these Promises must be confined to the true Believers and the Church conceived to subsist for ever in this mixture of wicked persons and consequently that it shall subsist sometimes among the publick corruptions of the Ministry to which Almighty God sets bounds as his wisdom sees fit for the preservation of his Children We must not any longer believe a supream visible and speaking authority in the Church to be necessary for putting an end to differences and disputes nor upon this pretence allow Ecclesiastical Assemblies to be infallible or forbid the faithful to examine their determinations This might pass if the Church were I reserved as Civil Societies are by rules of humane policy or if some temporal advantages were the only thing enquired after or if the matters so determined required only an outward compliance as those in Civil Societies do But now that the Church is under a protection infinitely more effectual than all the wisdom of Man now that Salvation is the thing in question and a submission of Conscience the thing required it must be confest that since Divine Revelation ceased there is no further need of any other supreme infallible Authority besides that of the Scripture which is the Churches Law its Oracle and perpetual Rule a Rule plain and clear in what it expresses in all things necessary to be believed plain and clear in its silence with relation to other things not necessary to be believed It must be owned that since God does not call men to Ministerial functions immediately and by himself it may happen that these Functions may generally be exercised by Reprobates and to suppose that such people as these who can challenge no share in God's Promises to his Church are infallible would be the most palpable absurdity in the World We must acknowledg that since it is so uncertain whether the men that make up these Assemblies are themselves really of Jesus Christ's Church it would be not only rash but wicked to receive their Decrees implicitly and submit to them without any Examination at all because this were really to put our Salvation upon the venture which ought to be infinitely dearer to us than any thing in the World and which if once lost can never be made amends for again Lastly we must not upon these pretended Principles take up Prejudices against the Protestant Churches nor tax them with Novelty because they are not united to this visible exterior Body which was before the Reformation or because they do not shew that uniform succession of Sees and Councils and the profession of the same Religion without any alteration at all and every thing as was practised before nor pretend they have subverted a Tribunal necessary for the subsistence of the true Church because they refuse to acknowledg the Church of Rome's Authority and to comply with her determinations These several charges upon us might be tolerably well laid if a man could assert that the Church consists of all this exterior body as it might be asserted if a Civil Society were the matter in question But being that body must be distinguished into two parts the one consisting of good the other of ill men the one of good Corn the other of Tares the Protestant Church cannot be called new if it only oppose this latter part which had gotten possession of all the outward advantages to wit the Ministry the Sees the Churches the Councils the Schools and in one word the Exterior Profession and which had changed and corrupted all these For is there any necessity that a Church should groan under the same oppression in order to being the same with a Church that was before Is there a necessity of lying under the Tares that choak'd and encompassed the Corn in order to being of the Corn And are not men the same Children of Jacob without being among the same strangers among whom that Family hath been The Protestants have not one jot the less really and truly a succession of Sees of Councils and the profession of Religion for not having that part of them which was earthly and unclean I acknowledg they have given quite another aspect and appearance to the House of God by this cleansing but still there is the same Ministry the same Sees the same Assemblies the same Profession not with respect to the corruptions that appeared in them but in regard of the Christian Order which still continued under all this filth and nastiness The vessels of the Temple are still the same only they are washed made clean and restored to their natural use And as for that pretended Tribunal of the Romish Church which the Reformation has subverted it never having any more foundation than what was imaginary and merely humane there is no reason to complain of the Protestants for not submitting to it because they would thereby have done wrong to that of the Scripture which is Jesus Christ's true Tribunal fixed and to continue for ever in the midst of his people But this shewing the many differences between the Church and Civil Societies is not the only method of confuting these Gentlemen's Principles Take which way you will their falsity and weakness is easily discovered and they are likewise attended with this inconvenience that as soon as one of them is overthrown all the rest fall with it Overthrow for instance but that one principle that the true Church must be an exterior visible Body even to the pointing out of the particular persons whereof it is composed and at the same time you overthrow all those definitions they give of it which include bad men as well as good and make reprobates to be no less members than the Elect you overthrow their application of God's Promises to this whole Body you overthrow its perpetuity in this Condition by virtue of those Promises you overthrow the necessity of this pretended external Succession upon which they lay such mighty stress you evacuate the supreme Authority and Infallibility of Church Assemblies and the blind obedience required to their determinations The case is the same with all their other principles particularly which must of necessity either all stand or all fall together I might truly say that you can no where observe a Systeme more effectually destroyed in the several parts of it than this is in the Book now published by me For there is not any one of the propositions that help to make that Systeme but I have confuted it substantially by Arguments that
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
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
Church and not his Fathers or Mothers Mr. Claude returned That this was a thing too evident to be denied that the Fathers and Mothers and those who take the first pains about educating the Child is the first Authority with respect to Religion and that he must at first of all learn from them that there is such a thing as a Catholick Church into which he must enter himself or such a thing as the Scripture which was from God and to which he must yield Obedience That being upon enquiry by what mean the Child can come to believe the Catholick Churches Authority there is a necessity for fixing either upon Inspiration or the Paternal Authority or the Scriptures which informed him concerning it M. de Condom answered That the Childs Faith in the Churches Authority was a Divine Faith because it was the Holy Ghost that wrought it in him Mr. Claude replied That the question was not concerning the efficient Cause which produced this Faith in the Child but concerning the Motive or Argument by which it was produced If M. de Condom's meaning were that the Holy Ghost wrought Faith in this Child without any Argument or Motive at all this were a sort of Enthusiasm and the Holy Ghost does not Influence People at that rate M. de Condom said there were indeed Motives of Credibility Mr. Claude returned hereupon That if he would allow the Child so much time as to examine those Motives of Credibility for the Authority of the Church and perceive their strength He himself would in like manner allow the same Child time to examine the Motives of Credibility for the Authority of Scripture and perceive the strength of them but in this case he must forego his Argument which proceeds upon a Supposition that the Child never yet read the Scripture But is not this true said M. de Condom That in these circumstances the Child either does or does not doubt of the Scriptures being Divine And is it not as true said Mr. Claude That in these Circumstances the Child either does or does not doubt of the Churches Authority For if you take the Child before he have read the Scripture I will look upon him too before he knows what Motives of Credebility there are for the Churches Authority It is your part to answer my Argument and the very same answer you give will serve me against yours But do you as you think fit I however will not scruple to give a direct answer to your way of reasoning The Child then may be lookt upon with Distinction as to three several times either before his Father have ever shewed him the Bible and informed him that this Book came from God or after his Father have told him thus much but before he himself have read it or lastly after that he hath read the Book himself As to the first of these times which is that your Argument looks upon him in it cannot well be said that then he either does or does not doubt for neither the one nor the other is strictly true according to your meaning Not to doubt of any thing signifies to be well assured of it Now before a man can be said to doubt or to be well assured that any thing is so or so he must first have some knowledge of the thing it self I can neither doubt nor be assured that such a Person is King of Spain unless I first have some knowledg of the Person So that your reasoning is by no means good that a Child either does or does not doubt of the Scripture's being Divine For there is a medium between these two to wit such as consists in a state called An Ignorance of pure negation He knows not as yet what the Scripture is nor hath ever heard talk of it To doubt or not doubt whether Scripture be Divine a Man must have some knowledg and form some Idea of the thing But the Child can never form any Idea of a Book he never heard once mentioned At the second point of time when his Father hath showed him the Bible and told him that Book is the Word of God but the Child hath not yet read it himself he believes it to be the Word of God but this he does not by a Divine but humane Faith because his Father hath told him so And this is the case of a Catechumen At the third point of time when he is supposed to have read the Book himself and felt the virtue and efficacy of it he believes it to be God's World but this he does not now by a humane Faith because his Father told him so but by a Divine Faith because he hath found the Divinity and Efficacy of it upon himself and this is the condition of a Believer M. de Condom laid hold of the word Catechumen and said that this was a Christian one already Baptized and actually admitted into Covenant with God Mr. Claude answered that by the word Catechumen he meant nothing else but a Child after Baptism at the time of his being instructed in the first Rudiments of Religion M. de Condom beat again upon almost the same things that had been said before constantly affirming it to be the Churches Authority that the Child received the Scriptures as Divine and that having received them as such from the Church he did afterwards receive the meaning and interpretation of them from thence also Pray Sir tell me said Mr. Claude then when a Child learns at first of all that there is a Catholick Church Is it barely a general Idea which consists in knowing only that there is such a thing as a Catholick Church without knowing where or which it is or does it determine him to that Church whose publick Assemblies he sees For if it be the former of these this as you would make it is a mighty wild and insignificant principle of Faith I know that there is a Catholick Church to whose Authority it is my duty to submit but I cannot tell where that Church is nor which is she this would be but an odd principle of Faith The Child said M. de Condom does certainly determine this Idea to the particular Church whose Assemblies he sees and in which he himself bears a part and does believe that to be the Catholick Church and not barely that there is such a Church Let us imagine then said Mr. Claude a Child born within a Church that is Heretical or Schismatical the Aethiopian Church suppose the first principle of Faith in this Child will be from the Aethiopian Church looking upon that as the Catholick From this Church then and from her Authority according to your Tenet he will receive the Scripture as Divine from her likewise he will receive the meaning and interpretation of Scripture and he must never afterwards believe himself priviledged to examine the determinations of his Aethiopick Church for fear of falling into the inconvenience and absurdity of fancying it impossible for him a private single
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
one and the same Religion without any variation which is exactly what Christ promised Therefore this is not the Church of Jesus Christ This Church hath forsaken the Supreme Authority and Infallibility of the Church of Rome and refused to pay obedience to her decisions on the contrary the hath taken upon her to examine those Decisions and hath done all that in her lay utterly to subvert this Tribunal which is so necessary to the subsistence of the true Church Therefore she is not the Church of Jesus Christ Of these Objections especially hath M. de Meaux made his Book to consist and because this of mine is made publick only with a design to answer that it is not fit I should prevent the reading of it in this Preface nor forestal the judgment men may make of my Answers when they see them at large I shall think it therefore sufficient to say in general by way of preparation That all these pretended Principles which the Gentlemen of the Romish Communion take the freedom to suppose are every one of them false and sophistical and capable of being confuted more ways than one because all built upon a false and vain foundation For in truth what greater vanity can there be than to go about to form an Idea of the Church after the pattern of a Civil Society The Civil Society is a humane contrivance that owes its birth to natural instinct under the Government of a General Providence and is kept up and preserved by Rules of Justice and humane Policy The Church is a Divine and Supernatural work born only of the Blood of the Son of God and animated only by his Spirit His hands have made it and his particular Providence watches over it and preserves it The Laws of the Civil Society do not properly respect any more than the outward man they never make it any part of their End or business to regulate mens hearts or alter the inclinations or inward motions there all within they leave perfectly free and are satisfied with an outward observation which comes within the reach of man's power The Laws of the Church do chiefly regard the inward man their design is to sanctifie the heart and fix themselves especially in the soul which are effects above any power of man and can belong to none but God only The matters in which the Civil Society is imployed are meerly temporal such as we call the Goods of Fortune Honour Trade the Exercise of Arts and Sciences and other things of this kind which may be cognisable by men and brought under their Jurisdiction But the matters in which the Society of the Church is concerned consist in Mysteries conveyed to us by a Supernatural Revelation in Laws imposed upon the Conscience in the internal and external practice of Christian Vertues Now all these things are Heavenly Spiritual unchangeable having no dependance upon the will authority or declaration of men but solely and immediately upon the will of God and his declaring them to be such To make a man a true member of the Civil Society there is no more required than to seem so in the eyes of the world who can pass a judgment only on the outward appearance without being able to dive into the heart To be a member of the Church it is required that a man be so not in the eyes of men only but of God too who aâ— the Scripture expresses it trieth the very hearts and reins and will not be satisfied with a pare outside The design of Civil Societies is that every man may according to his quality and station enjoy the publick Priviledges that his Personal Rights and Properties may be preserved intire that each particular person may live quietly and peaceably under the protection of the whole Body and these are Advantages not out of the power of men to give The end for which the Church is designed is everlasting Salvation a Heavenly Paradise the happiness of a life to come which are all Advantages not within the power of men to confer In the Civil Society private men ought rather to suffer injuries that are put upon them than disturb the peace of the whole Body because such injuries may be endured and yet not approved and besides if they do it the evil is not past all redress for God who protects the innocent and oppressed is able to right them and recompence their losses with interest In the Church it is far otherwise where the Conscience must acquiesce and a quiet submission cannot be given to a lye an error or an unjust thing without approving it and when it is approved the evil is past redress for God will avenge that fault and nothing can make us amends for the loss of our Eternal Salvation Besides that the peace we hereby allow the whole Body is so far from a Blessing that it is the worst of Evils being in truth no better than a War against God I repeat it therefore once again That there is not in the World a greater falsity nor a more sophistical imposture than the framing such a notion of the Church after the model of Civil Societies The case standing thus who does not perceive that all the conclusions from this false supposition fall to the ground and utterly vanish A man must not after this fancy the Church to be a Body merely external nor that all its essence consists in a bare Profession nor that these Definitions given us of it which run upon an outward profession of the same Faith a participation of the same Sacraments a submission to the same Pope without allowing internal Graces any share are good and valid definitions nor that wicked men worldlings and hypocrites are Members of Jesus Christ's true Church All this would do if the question were concerning a Body or contrivance merely humane as the Civil Society is But when we discourse of a thing that is the work and contrivance of God and must bear some proportion to the excellency of its Author we must affirm that Faith Hope and Charity and in one word all the parts of true Regeneration are essential to it and that this consists of the Faithful and Elect only excluding thence the Hypocrites and Reprobate We must not afterwards fancy the Church so be a body or company of men visible at the same rate that Kingdoms and Commonwealths are Liâ—â—an so as to distinguish plainly and without danger of mistake the very persons whereof it is composed This were allowable provided the Church consisted in an outward appearance and bare profession only But we must affirm it to be visible in the midst of dissemblers as honest men are visible when mixt with those that act otherwise or to make use of a Scripture instance as the good Corn is visible tho mingled in the same field with Tares that look like it The Promises of Jesus Christ must no longer be applied to all the exterior Body made up of a mere profession nor must
amount even to a Demonstration Which way can any one maintain that Definition of the Church which goes upon a bare outward profession and makes it consist of bad as well as good men and which Stapleton Bellarmin Cardinal du Perron and some other Controversial Divines look upon as a principal point after having observed what I have written on this subject in the second question of the Letter to my Friend and the Examination of M. de Meaux's ninth Reflection What pretence can men have for carrying on the Churches visibility so far as to a plain particular and constant designation of mens persons that help to make up that Body after having considered what is said to this purpose in my Third Question and in the Examination of M. de Meaux's Eleventh Reflection How can men fancy that Jesus Christ's Promises belong to this exterior Body composed of good and bad men promiscuously after what I have written to this purpose upon the fourth Question and the Examination of the Twelfth Reflection Which way can the External Succession be defended in the sense these Gentlemen understand it after having weighed my answer to the Second Part of M. de Condom 's Discourse and compared it with my Examination of the Eighth and Thirteenth Reflection What can be sâ—â—d in behalf of the Supreme Authority Church Assemblies pretend to and the ready Obedience to them without any trying their decisions which these Gentlemen would make us believe ought to be paid them after having compared the Relation of our Conference with what I have written on the Six first Reflections I must confess the strength of my Reasons may possibly receive some disadvantage from the manner of my delivering them and that it required a more skilful hand than mine which might have spoke with all the elegance and address of my renowned Adversary But yet I dare aver that even in my plain way and in the midst of all my bluntness there will be found enough to satisfy and convince my Readers That the Systeme treated of is upon many accounts quite destroyed both as to the whole and as to each of its parts I am sensible this Systeme is a thing contrived with abundance of cunning and skill that it was never the invention of one single Brain that they have made it look as specious as the thing could possibly bear But all the skill and cunning in the World can never give a thing so great a lustre as Truth and it is plain that That Systeme can never be true which is repugnant to the evidence both of Scripture and Reason I may add too that notwithstanding all the pains taken to contrive it as strong as might be they are forced to leave it with many weaknesses which it was impossible for them to conceal Nay such a Systeme particularly is This which contradicts experience and contradicts it so far too that were the Church of Rome it self for whose advantage it was first establish'd to be tryed by these Principles that compose it she could not make her party good Let us if you please venture an experiment upon that principle which asserts the perpetuity of the same Exterior Body Will you take the confidence to call that of the three first Ages the same Body with the modern Church of Rome where there is not the least tittle to be found of direct Invocation of Saints and Angels in the publick service of the Church where there is not the least addressing to Images and Pictures in their worship where there is no prohibition of the Cup to the Laity nor of the use of Scripture in the vulgar Tongue without leave granted by the Ordinary nor of Praying in a Language which the people do not understand where we find nothing to the contrary but that the Scripture is the only and the sufficient Rule of Faith in all things necessary to Salvation where we meet with no such number of Sacraments as seven no use made of Papal Indulgences no necessity of Auricular Confession no Elevation of the Host that the people may prostrate themselves in adoration to it no Transubstantiation nor Real presence made Doctrines no mention of the Church of Rome's being the Mother and Mistress of all other Churches nor of I know not how many things besides which are of very considerable importance Will you call the Church of Rome as it stands at this day as it looks upon the opinion of the Mâ—llenaries to be erroneous as it prohibits giving the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper to little Children as it believes the beatifick vision of God antecedent to the last Judgment as it forbids the Clergy to Marry will you call this I say the same Exterior Body with the Primitive Church which believed and practised directly the contrary To call this the same Body is like Theseus his Ship which was always called the same Ship tho there was scarce a Plank in it all that had not been changed A Second experiment may be made in that Principle which relates to the Succession in Episcopal Sees as these Gentlemen are pleased to understand it For how can they ever maintain this Succession in the See of Rome which they look upon as the very Original and Centre of Church-Unity while they agree as they do that many of those Popes were intruders against all Law and Custom and consequently false Popes such as Baronius calls Violent seizers of the Apostolick See unlawful Vsurpers of the Papal Name and Chair False Popes which only served to make the times they lived in notorious And now seeing this intrusion continued for almost one whole Age and the call to all Ecclesiastical Functions depends upon the See of Rome what must we think of those which proceeded from these false Popes and those that followed after them How can they make good this Succession in the person of Vigilius who by their own confession was an Usurper of the See over Sylverius and a Schismatick excommunicated he and all his party that adhered to him by Sylverius the rightful Pope Which adherents were not only all the Clergy of Rome but all the Archbishops and Bishops of the Empire excepting only four Bishops that were banisht with Sylverius and joyned with him in signing the sentence of Excommunication Sylverius dyed Vigilius kept the Papacy still and yet the Excommunication was not taken off It is acknowledged to be a just and valid sentence and yet from these excommunicated persons are all the Popes Patriarchs Primates Archbishops and Bishops descended ever since Baronius in the relation of this Accident endeavours all he can to deprive us of the Conclusions we draw from it He tells us therefore that he guesses Vigilius acted a part all that while and that being informed of Sylverius his death he of his own accord resigned the Popedom usurped by him before and at the same time got the Clergy of Rome to chuse him into it again This conjecture he grounds upon four
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
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
not really esseential parts of the Church in Heaven for to this hour I never heard any such thing maintained XII Those who desire to be informed what the Church and its Unity is need only consider what Jesus Christ says in that admirable Prayer related by St. John Neither pray I for these alone his Apostles but for them also which shall believe on me through their word That they may be one as thou Father art in me and I in thee that they also may be one in us The Glory which thou gavest me I have given them that they may be one even as we are one The Churches Unity is formed after the pattern of that between the Father and the Son This is a kind of resemblance a draught of that which hath some of the strokes though not all the liveliness and perfection It is therefore a Real Internal Unity a Unity not of outward Profession only but in some sort of nature and essence a Unity of Regeneration a Unity of the same Faith and the same Righteousness and to restrain this to a meer External Union such as is common to both good and bad men would not only weaken but utterly evacuate the force of Jesus Christ's expression XIII To all that hath been now alledged might be added almost innumerable passages of the Primitive Fathers who whenever they spoke of the Church in its true and genuine sense did always deliver themselves as we do I will here instance in some of them S. Cypr. in his 55 Ep. hath this passage Lord says St. Peter to whom shall we go thou hast the words of eternal life and we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ the Son of the living God Shewing hereby that such as depart from Christ perish through their own default but the Church which believes in him and constantly perseveres in the Truths she hath received does never depart from him and such as continue in the House of God are his Church Such as want the substance and solidity of good corn and are scattered abroad with the breath of the Enemy like chaff with the wind are not of Gods planting With relation to whom it is that St. John in his Epistle says They went out from us but they were not of us for if they had been of us they would no doubt have continued with us In another place having said before that the water mixt with their winc in the Eucharist represented the people as the wine did the Blood of Christ he adds When therefore the water is mixed with the wine in the Chalice the people are united to Jesus Christ and the company of believers joined to him on whom they believe Now this water and wine are so mixt in the Cup that they cannot be parted any more Whence it follows that nothing can separate between Christ and his Church that is the persons that are in the Church constantly and closely adhering to what they have believed nor break off the inviolable love they bear to one another So that wicked men and Hypocrites are not of the Body of the Church seeing an outward profession is not sufficient to make men such St. Jerom says the very same thing The Church of Christ is a glorious Church having neither spot nor wrinkle nor any such thing He therefore that is a sinner and stained with any pollution cannot be said to be of Christ's Church nor in subjection to Christ It may happen indeed that as the Church which had heretofare its spots and wrinkles was after restored to youth and purity so a sinner may come to the Physician for those that be well need not a Physician but those that be sick and so having his maladies healed be made a member of the Church which is Christs Body St. Ambrose explaining those words of the 36 th Psalm Let not the hand of the ungodly cast me down says As the Saints are members of Jesus Christ so wicked men are members of the Devil Let not the hand of the ungodly remove me that is Let not the actions of Sinners tempt me to depart from the way of righteousness for we are apt to slip when we see the prosperity of Sinners and so the hand of Sinners does in some sort shake and loosen us from the root of vertue If wicked men are members of the Devil there little probability that hypocrisie should be able to make them members of Jesus Christ But of all the Fathers there is not any that treats of this Subject with such exactness and perspicuity as St. Austin does a Man might compile a whole Volume of what he hath written about it This Father explaining that of St. Jehn They went out from us but they were not of us They went out from us says he we lament the loss But hear the comfort they were not of us All Hereticks and Schismaticks go out from us That is depart from the Church but were they truly any of outs they would not have departed They were not therefore out members even before they went out and if so then there are many within who tho they have not yet gone out are Antichrists May we dare to essert this Yes why not Let every man consult his own Conscience to know if he be not Anticrist The meaning of Anticrist is contrary to Christ Whence it is clear that none but Antichrists can go out for such as are not contrary to Christ will by no means do so for they continue in the body and are reckoned among the members of Christ The Members are never contrary to one another The intire composition of a body consuis in having all its members and you know what the Apostle says upon this matual agreement of the Members If one member suffer all the members suffer with it and if one be honoured all shall rejoyce with it Now if all the Members suffer in the grief of one and rejoyce at the honour done to one there is nothing that savours of Antichrist in this mutual agreement Those that are within are the body of our Lord Jesus Christ For this body is still in a state of healing and will never enjoy perfect health and sandness till the resurrection of the dead These Antichrists are in the body of Christ like ill humours the voiding of which eases the body Thus when the wicked go out the Church finds refreshment and when the body throws them out she says these noxious humours are gone out of me but they were no part of me that is they were not cut away from my flesh or substance but opprest my stomach while they lay there They are gone from us then but be not troubled at it they were not ours But how do you prove this St. John says If they had been of us they would have continued with us So that you see many people receive the Sacraments with us which yet are not any part of us
Fountain that is the Church of Christ How shall we reconcile this Doctrine with M. de Condom 's who distinguishes between the Church of Christ and the predestinate as between a whole and it's part who counts the reprobates in too and blames us for restraining the Church to the number of God's Elect alone This being a point of consequence and able to determine all our Controversy concerning the Church I hope it may not be tedious to hear what St. Augustin says further upon it After having recited a passage taken out of â—t Cyprian's Epistle to Magnus he goes on thus The words of blessed Cyprian shew that he rightly understood the beauty of God's House in that he declares and proves both by the testimony of the Prophets and the signification of the Sacraments that this House is composed of men living in Peace and unity of Heart So that those envious uncharitable Wretches were not in this House notwithstanding they were baptised And by consequence Christ's Holy Sacrament may be both administred and received by men not in the Church of Christ because as appears by the Testimony of Cyprian none but the peaceable live in this Church It will not serve the turn to say they might baptize while they were hid they were not hidden from St. Paul when he said in his Epistle he rejoyced that Christ was preached even by such whether in pretence or in truth says he Christ is preached and I therein do rejoyce yea and will rejoyce Upon these considerations I do not think it reshness in me to affirm that some are in the House of God so as that they are themselves the very House that which is said to be built upon a Rock called his Dove his only One his beautiful Spouse without spot or wrinkle the inclosed Garden the sealed Fountain the Well of living Water the Orchard with Pomegranates and which HAth received the Keys the power of binding and loosing this House it is whose corrections if any man contemptuously behave himself against he is ordered to be to us as an Heathen and a Publicar Of this it is said Lord I have loved the Beauty of thy House and the place where thine Honour dwelleth He maketh men of one mind in an house I was glad when they said unto me we will go into the House of the Lord. Blessed are they that dwell in thy House they will be alway praising Thee and a world of such like passages This House is called the good seed bringing forth fruit with patience thirty sixty and a hundred fold This House consists of Vessels of gold and of silver of precious stones and incorruptible wood To this House 't is said Bear up one another in love endeavouring to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace And the Holy Temple of God are ye For this consists of the true Believers and holy Servants of God dispersed throughout the Universe and all knit together in a spiritual Unity by the participation of the same Sacraments whether personally known to one another or not As for the rest they are said to be in the House but it is in such a manner that they belong not at all to the building nor have any part of that fellowship which brings forth the fruit of righteousness and peace They are here as the Chaff is among the Corn for we cannot deny that they be contained in the House because St. Paul says In a great house are vessels not only of gold and silver but also of wood and of earth and some to honour and some to dishonour I cannot imagine how St. Augustin'S sight came to differ so mightily from M. de Condam'S If we believe the latter by the Church must be understood a Society composed of good and bad men for he tells you to such a Society only are those passages of Scripture applicable Vpon this rock will I build my Church Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it that he might make it a glorious Church without spot or wrinkle c. If he refuse to hear the Church let him be unto thee as an Heathen c. Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven c. But if St. Augustin be to be believed we must take the Church in a quite different sense for a Society made up of none but righteous persons and true Believers because to such a one and no other do these passages belong In his Opinion the just alone are the House built upon a Rock the Spouse without spot or wrinkle they only have the keys and power of binding and loosing 't is their censures only that men ought not to despise if they would not be looked upon as Heathens and Publicans M. de Condom deduces his Arguments from these passages St. Augustin deduces his from the very same and yet their Conclusions are opposite to one another All that we have left to do then is either to correct St. Augustin by M. de Condom or M. de Condom by St. Augustin and of the two methinks the latter is the more reasonable Upon this ground then I will once more introduce that Father speaking thus We must not suppose that wicked men belong to Christ's body i. e. the Church because they do partake of the Sacraments corporally The Sacraments themselves are holy in such persons but they do but increase their condemnation because they administer and receive them unworthily Now they are not of that Company of Christ's Church which consists of his Members compacted together by bands and joynts and increaseth with the increase of God For this Church is built on a Rock according to that of our Saviour Vpon this rock will I build my Church But those build on the Sand as the same Saviour said Whoso heareth my Words and doth them not I will comapre him to a foolish man that built his house upon the sand Now lest you should fancy that the Church built upon a Rock is in any one particular place or that it is not extended over the whole Earth observe her complaint in the Psalm From the ends of the Earth have I cryed unto thee when my heart was in heaviness Thou hast set me up upon a rock She cries from the ends of the Earth therefore she is not in Africa and no where else she is set up upon a Rock therefore those must not be esteemed of her who build upon the Sand. There is some probability St. Augustin knew what he said and yet you see a passage of Scripture Ephes 4. abused by M. de Condom in favour of his Church made up of a mixture of good and bad men which this Father explains of the Church of the Just only as well as that other of St. Matt. 16. Vpon this Rock will I build my Church He teaches the same Doctrine in his Book concerning the Unity
Believers which we look upon as the true Church of Jesus Christ the other of hypocrites and worldlings who have only the shadow and shell of Faith and Regeneration and consequently do not belong to Jesus Christ's true Church This is the original of all that ambiguity betwixt the Romanists and us M. de Condom according to the principles of Cardinal Bellarmin and Perron and most of the Doctors of his Communion does in this Dispute judge of the true visible Church by that notion of Charity which without making any difference includes bad and good true and false Believers And we judge of the true visible Church by that other termed the notion of Reflection which excludes hypocrites and worldlings and confines it self to true Believers only He supposes without offering any proof for it that there is no other visible Church than this whole Body of Professors and that That of the true Believers is invisible which we deny He proves that the true Church of Christ to whom the promises belong is a visible Church which we grant We must take leave therefore to tell him that he supposes what he should prove and proves what he ought to suppose which must needs entangle the matter in dispute and render it mighty intricate and obscure But what great matter is it you 'l say as to this Dispute whether a man judges of the true visible Church by the notion of Charity or that of Reflection I answer if the matter had concerned only the Duties incumbent on the Church or exhorting and instructing men in those Duties it would signify very little which of these two notions we followed For the duties incumbent on beth good and had are much the same they all hear the same Word partake of the same Sacraments and are all under the same Obligations But the present controversy does not concern the duties and exhortations to them but the investing the Church in some particular rights and priviledges allowed her and applying to her the promises of Jesus Christ So that it highly concerns us in this case not to follow a notion which may lead us into mistakes and give away these priviledges and promises to men that have no manner of right to them It nearly concerns us not to follow a notion which may occasion our falling into errour under pretence of that name the Church There is an absolute necessity of clearing an ambiguity which if not cleared may prejudice our Conscience and put our Salvation upon a hazard Now Sir let us see I beseech you whether of these two notions is rather to be received in this dispute And this will easily appear if we consider That the notion followed by M. de Condom is grosly false in one of its parts as taking for true Believers persons who really are not so and can pretend to truth no further than as it is conformable to this second notion That it is not grounded upon an exact knowledg of its object but merely upon a charitable supposition which if niecly look'd into is not true it self And so there can be no robable argument for allowing evil men and hypocrites a part in Christ's Promises Those false plants which our heavenly father hath not planted Those tares which the Lord hath not sown in his field but the enemy râ—se by night to cast in privily Men not at all concerned in that Idea of the true Church which Scripture gives us and consequently not of it In a word this will easily appear that the notion we follow is the most exact the most certain the most agreeable to the Idea's given in Scripture and the only one that can bear any proportion to the Promises of Jesus Christ and the dignity of the true Church But it may be said Was not M. de Condom in the right to say there was not actually any visible Church but that which he defâ—â—es A Society making profession to believe the Doctrine of Jesus Christ and govern it self by his word And so no other than that which comprehends good and bad true Believers and Hypocrites And was it not fair then to make use of this notion in the Controversy I answer the true Church consisting of true Believers only is not indeed visible by any certain and distinct sight we can have of it so as to affirm positively and personally such or such are of the true Church When we would carry on this distinction to particular men disguise and hypocrisie put a stop to it so that in this sence the true Church will always continue invisible till Jesus Christ come to make a full and perfect separation betwixt his own Corn and the Enemies Tares which shall not be done till the end of the World Thus it is not visible not only immediately by its internal form in mens hearts but even by these external Characters as to certain and distinct visibility because dissimulation and deceit often makes these marks to be doubtful All this I grant But for all this we may and must say that the true Church is visible truly visible in other senses and respects For first of all it cannot be denied that it is visible at least materially as they say because the true Believers that appear visibly in publick Assemblies partake of the same Sacraments and live in the same external Order The faithful do not conceal themselves nor decline the Holy Exercises of Religion but on the contrary frequent them and shew themselves more than other men remembring that of St. Paul Not forsaking the assembling of our selves together Besides It is plain that tho the true Church be mixt with wicked men in the same profession yet is it visible in this very mixture as the wheat is visible tho in the same field with the tares and the good fish in the same net with the bad according to the parables in the Gospel or as true Friends are visible tho mixt with dissemblers and flatterers This mixture indeed hinders us from an exact distinction of persons but still we may with great certainty distinguish and discern two sorts of persons We are not sure which particular men are true Believers and which Hypocrites but we are sure that there are true Belivers as well as Hypocrites and this is enough to prove the Church visible according to the Scriptures and t. Austin's Hypothesis Nay I will go further yet for 't is true that upon some occasions Hypocrites do plainly distinguish themselves from true Believers and upon some other occasions true Believers do plainly make a personal distinction of themselves from Hypocrites For instance when we see men drowned in vices inconsistent with true Faith when we see them throw themselves into Superstitions and Errors that are contrary to the true Doctrine and Worship of God tho they abide still in the same Congregations with others and communicate in the same Sacraments yet this makes a negative distinction so as we may say these are not the true
the Church consisting of true Believers only I reconcile these two by inferring That the Church of true Believers only is a Church made visible by the Exercise of the Ministry M. de Condom tells me St. Paul speaks of a Church visible by the use of the Ministry when he says Christ loved it and cleansed it with the washing of water by the word St. Augustin tells me The Church of true Believers only is spoken of in this passage I can reconcile these two no other way than by concluding that then the Church of true Believers only is a Church visible by the use of the Ministry M. de Condom teaches me that in this passage Thou art Peter and upon this rock will I build my Church Jesus Christ denotes a Church visible by the Exercise of an External Ministry St. Augustin instructs me that it denotes the Church of true Believers How shall these two be made agree but by concluding that the Church of true Believers then is a visible Church exercising an external Ministry If you still desire an Argument of more strongth remember that the visibility attributed to the Church in Scripture cannot possibly be any other than that we assign it For as on the one hand we are taught there that the true Church consists of true Believers only so do we learn there also that true Believers are mixt with wicked men and hypocrites It is there we find the similitudes of Chaff amongst the good Corn of bad Fishes jumbled together with the good of Tares sown among the good Wheat Now whatever we deliver concerning the Churches visibility and invisibility is grounded entirely upon these two principles The second difficulty that may be siarted is whether the visibility we assign to the Church be sufficient to maintain Christian Fellowship to comfort the Faithful and bring them to Salvation I answer that this would not be sufficient indeed to establiâ—h the Church of Romes pretensions such as absolute authority over mens Consciences Infallibility of Councils a blind obedience to their Determinations and this very insufficiency as to that shews us the injustice of such pretensions But I say that in its kind this visibility is sufficient either for the maintenance of external Communion or for the joy and consolation of the Faithful and the bringing them to Salvation In order to that we need only know ourselves to be in Communion with the truly Faithful For tho we know that there is a mixture of ill men among these yet shall we still continue in the external Communion with them out of respect to God's Elect We shall still bear the disorders and offences given by others patiently we shall still receive the same Sacraments and partake of other fruits of the Ministry with comfort as knowing that the efficacy of these acts does not depend upon the wicked but are blessings that belong to the righteous And our not being able to make certain and personal distinctions of men will add to our caution that we suffer not our selves to be surprised into any superstitions and errors that would insinuate themselves under the plausible title of the Church And thus the visibility we allow the Church is abundantly sufficient It might further be demanded whether it can so happen that the Church may at any time lose the visibility of its Assemblies and so become in this respect perfectly invisible I answer that although we acknowledg Almighty God can whenever he pleases utterly disperse the persons of the Faithful and still keep them in this wretched condition by the methods of his own Providence yet we do not think this ever did so happen The Christian Church hath lain under great persecutions but tho they were never so great she hath constantly had some where or other some Assemblies and some exercise of the Ministry publick or private and however her Martyrs and Confessors have all along made her visible so that she cannot be said absolutely ever to have disappeared quite from the sight of men Yet we must own that in this respect there have been several degrees of her visibility that is the Church hath been more or less visible as her Assemblies have been held and her Ministry exercised with more or less freedom We must own too that not any particular Church upon Earth can promise it self a perpetual visibility no nor so much as a perpetual subsistence God removes his Candlestick from the midst of a people at his pleasure and he does it then when he hath no more Elect to call there There have been many instances of this in the World particularly in the Churches of Africa once so beautiful and flourishing but these are only the puttings out of some particular light and do not at all prejudice either the subsistence or visibility of the Christian Church in general The last difficulty to be urged is whether the Church can at any time lose the visibility of its Characters I mean that visibility whereby without descending to personal distinctions we are enabled to conclude that there are true Believers in this mixed Society so far as that we can not judge whether such be there or no I answer It not only may but often hath happened that the Characters by which we should in this respect come to know the true Church have been so mightily obscured that a man could not without much trouble and difficulty affirm that In this particular body it was that God nourished and sustained his true Believers and we shall find hereafter that M. de Condom himself owns enough to establish the truth of this assertion But still tho this be uncontestable as proved to be plain matter of fact we do notwithstanding acknowledg that the Church did never absolutely and entirely lose their visibility in this respect because as was said in answer to the Prejudices we do not think that ever so total an Eclipse happen'd that it could not in some measure be said This is the Society wherein God preserves some true Believers And here I cannot but complain of what M. de Condom does afterwards in his Discourse accuse us of saying that the visible Church sometimes ceases to be They are constrained says he to say that the visible Church sometimes ceases to be upon Earth And in another place This is the Church which your Ministers know not They teach you that this visible and exteriour Church may cease to be upon Earth But this is urging his charge against us too far So far are we from believing the visible Church ceases to be that we do not so much as say it ever absolutely ceases to be visible And yet there would be a mighty difference between saying she ceases to be visible and that she ceases to be at all The Sun the most visible thing in the World is often not visible to our eyes but yet he ceases not to be In the point of Real presence M. de Condom will own that the Body
of Jesus Christ ceases to be visible but he would not be well-pleased for that reason to be taxed with saying he ceases to be there at all But however let M. de Condom put what sense he please upon our words it is certain we acknowledg the Church to be perpetually visible in the meaning I explain'd just now And M. de Condom could never have spent his time to less purpose than in taking such pains to confute an opinion which we never held against him Quest 4. What Church the Promises of Jesus Christ belong to whether that defined by M. de Condom a Society making profession to believe c. or that which we define A Society which making profession to govern it self by Christ's Word does really govern it self by it M. de Condom speaking of us in one place of his Discourse says They have not the Consolation which the Catholicks have to see Jesus Christ's promise visibly accomplisht and maintain'd during so many Ages They cannot shew a Church which has ever been since Jesus Christ came to build it on the Rock and to save his word they are obliged to have recourse to a Church of the Predestinate which neither themselves nor any else can shew After having cleared the perpetual visibility of the Church as you lately saw judg you Sir what ground there is for his sayings we have not the consolation of seeing Jesus Christ's Promise visibly accomplish'd and maintain'd during so many Ages and whether we have not more than it is possible to have according to the Church of Romes principle M. de Condom according to his Principle sees the duration of a Church whose whole essence consists in an outward profession What is there in this more than human We see the duration of a Church whose essence consists in true Faith and Regeneration What is there in this that is not all Divine M. de Condom sees the duration of a Church supported by politick methods by paying a blind obedience to the injunctions of great men and those perhaps Hypocrites too What is there in this more than human We see the duration of a Church preserved in spight of confusion and all the froward malice of men What is there in this less than Divine They cannot says he shew a Church which hath ever been since Jesus Christ came to build it on the Rock Yes we shew this Church built on the Rock for when we shew the Body in which God nourishes and breeds up his true Believers we shew at the same time those true Believers which are his Church built on the Rock tho mixt with such as build on the Sand. When we shew the held where Jesus Christ sowed his good Seed we shew the Wheat tho there be Tares among it But let M. de Condom tell us if he think fit how he can shew us a Church built on the Rock making as he does the essence of the Church to consist entirely in an outward profession If he call this a Church upon the Rock Jesus Christ himself will reply for that such only are built upon a Rock who hear this word and do it whereas all besides are built upon the Sand. To save Christ's Word continues he they are obliged to have recourse to a Church of the Predestinate Does M. de Condom blame us for seeking the accomplishment of Jesus Christ's Promises in the body of his Elect and true Believers Pray where should we look for it else In a croud of Hypocrites and Reprobates that have no Faith no Holiness no Piety but in outward appearance only Such as God never call'd and Jesus Christ shall one day tell he never knew them Is not this of Cardinal Bellarmin's Perron's and M. de Condoms a curious Church to the constituting whereof no inward virtue is necessarily required but merely an outward profession of Faith and communicating in the Sacraments A Church whose Unity the formal essence of it is that of an external Vocation not that of Predestination nor internal Faith nor a Vnion of Souls by the works of Love In a word a Church defined not by believing and governing it self by God's word but by making profession to believe and govern it self by God's VVord Is not this putting a mighty value upon Jesus Christ's Promises to apply them not only to profane and worldly men as well as the Saints and regenerate but to such a Church as would remain entire tho there were no true believers nor righteous men in it and not cease to be the true Church of Christ tho it were composed of Hypocrites and none else Thus far Sir there is no great perspicacity required to discern that the question in hand resolves it self there being little probability that Jesus Christ was so lavish of his Promises But however let us examine the matter a little more closely The first passage M. de Condom presents us with is that of St. Paul Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it that he might cleanse it with the washing of Water by the Word that he might make it a glorious Church having neither spot nor wrinkle nor any such thing but that it might be holy and without blemish And a little after No man hateth his own flesh but nourisheth and cherisheth it even as the Lord the Church For we are members of his body of his flesh and of his bones We see in these words the obligation Jesus Christ put himself under to sanctify his Church to make it a glorious Church without spot or wrinkle holy and without blemish to nourish and cherish it as his own flesh and bones Our business is to know whether this obligation can upon any pretence whatever respect Hypocrites and wicked men And who will be perswaded it does This Church M. do Condom says is glorious because she glorifies God because she declares to all the Earth the Glory of Jesus Christ's Gospel and Cross Now as to the wicked of whom we are here treating there need but this one word be added That they glorify God and the Gospel in hypocrisy and dissimulation but in their hearts deny it Then see what God himself hath spoken as to this matter Vnto the ungodly said God why dost thou preach my laws and takest my Covenant in thy mouth This Church M. de Condom tells us is holy because she always constantly and without varying teaches the Holy Doctrine Add here But as for the wicked if they teach the holy Doctrine this is but with their lips and in shew only then see what St. Paul says They have a form of godliness but deny the power thereof from such turn away This Church according to M. de Condom hath neither spot nor wrinkle because she hath neither any evil Error nor any evil Maxim and because she instructs and contains in her bosom the Elect of God Add But as for sinners They follow Truth and Right only in pretence Then see what
Jesus Christ says of such Many will say unto me in that day Lord have not we prophesied in thy name and in thy name have cast out Devils and in thy name have done many wonderful works Then will I say unto them I never knew you depart from me ye workers of iniquity And can any man after all this allow them a propriety in the Promises of Christ The second passage M. de Condom makes use of is that of Jesus Christ which I will here set down at length Tell the Church but if he neglect to hear the Church let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a Publican verily I say unto you whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven Again I say unto you that if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask it shall be done for them of my father which is in heaven For where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them Jesus Christ M. de Condom says used the word Church to signify this visible Society I agree with him that the Church there signifies a visible Church I say further that it signifies a Church represented by the Pastors by whom it binds and looses by whom it asks the Father I am still of opinion that those excellent Promises of Jesus Christ that God will ratify what they have bound and loosed that he will grant what they ask and that the Lord himself will be in the midst of them are all made to the Church taken in this sense But then I say withal that this visible Church is that of the true Believers only and that Hypocrites have no share at all in it It is to the true Believers alone that this Ministry belongs they are the persons represented by the Pastors they the only people that ask and obtain that are gathered together in Christ's name and in the midst of whem he is And yet it often happens that the Ministers of this Church tho they be in this function and do the business of it are not yet true Members of it themselves It often falls out says St. Augustin by reason of this mixture here upon Earth that people really belonging to Babylon administer the things belonging to Jerusalem All they of whom it is said whatsoever they bid you observe obesereveand do Matt. 23. 3. but do not ye after their works are Citizens of Babylon that rule the Commonwealth of Jerusalem For if they had no charge belonging to Jerusalem why should it be said They sit in Moses seat therefore what they bid you observe that observe and do Again if they were true Citizens of Jerusalem who should reign with Christ for ever What occasion was there for adding But do not ye after their works It is not then to the Ministers that the Promises belong but to the Body they represent and whose Offices they discharge Now this body is the New Jerusalem which shall reign with Christ for ever That is the true Believers M. de Cendom's third passage is this Thou art Peter and upon this rock will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it Jesus Christ says he would shew something illustrious and clear when he said that his Church maugre the opposition of Hell should be always invincible he would I say shew something clear and resplendent which might serve in all Ages for a sensible and palpable assurance of the immutable certainty of his Promises He adds The Church of which Christ speaks is then a confessing Church a Church that publishes the Faith and consequently an exteriour and visible Church He says further That it is a Church to which an exteriour Ministry is given for 't is added I will give unto thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven I answer The Church spoken of in this passage is really a Confessing Church a Church that publishes the Faith a Church to whom Christ hath given an exteriour Ministry a Church that uses the Ministry of the Keys that binds and looses and by Consequence an exteriour and visible Church The Question is whether wicked men let them dissemble never so well and carry never so fair an outside do truly belong to this Church or whether it consist of sincere Believers only 'T is a Church exteriour and visible I acknowledg it but it is also a Church interiour and real otherwise it would differ nothing from a Phantome a cheating apparition 'T is a Confessing Church and publishes the Faith but it is likewise a Church believing in what it confesses and publishes 'T is a Church to which not only St. Peter's Confession must be attributed but also the principle and ground of that Confession Blessed art thou Simon Bar-jona for flesh and blood hath net revealed this unto thee but my Father which is in Heaven And therefore whose Confession proceeds not from Flesh and Blood but from Grace and Divine Illumination 'T is a Church built upon a Rock and not upon the Sand therefore not a Church that Hypocrites are of 'T is a Church built by Jesus Christ a Church therefore of true Believers only because such only are built by Christ 'T is a Church to which this Promise of the Gates of Hell never prevailing against it belongs And can we with any pretence to modesty say that the Gates of Hell do not prevail against the wicked ingulfed in vâ—ce Can we say those admirable words carry no stronger importance than the preservation of a mere exteriour profession But this is a Chruch which hath and exerciseth such a Ministry Who questions it But does this Ministry belong to the wicked and hypocrites No. It belongs only to true Behevers the rest have no part in it only as they sometimes exercise the external Offices without any true right to them or receive them unworthily under the covering of hypocrisy and being intermixt with good Christians But M. de Condom says further Jesus Christ promised something illustrious and clear which might serve in all Ages for a sensible and palpable assurance of the immutable certainty of his Promises These words want a little unfolding If they understand hereby a temporal prosperity a perpetual visibility promised to the Church in pomp and lustre I deny that Christ promised any such thing If they understand an Earthly Dominion a worldly Greatness under the title of Hierarchy I deny still that Christ ever promised any such thing If they understand a constant unblemisht purity in the Ministry in the Matters of Doctrine and Worship of moral Rules and orderly Government This again I deny that Christ ever promised If they understand Believers perseverance in Faith and Holiness so far forth as
perswasion of Charity and Equity for we ought always to presume the best of such Assemblies and hope that God will preside over them and that they will acquit themselves of their duty till experience shews the contrary But all this does not imply so entire a submission as for a Man to deprive himself of all right to examine their Resolutions As to that Act which condemns the Independents it is said he extreamly Just For tho Assemblies do not arrive at an Infallibility yet are not they presently to be utterly abolished 'T is a human Order indeed but yet such an Order as God himself hath settled for the preservation of his Church and to desert it therefore is criminal And yet we do not think it follows from hence that the determinations of the Assemblies exact a blind and implicit Obedience nor that the Synod of Charenton intended any such thing And then for the Synod at Saintefoy's deputing four persons to confer with those of the Ausburg Confession and the full power given them you can make no advantage of it For those Deputies were in the nature of Ambassadors who are sent by the King with full Commission to offer Proposals hold Treaties and agree upon Conclusions or as Plenipotentiaries sent to negotiate a Peace Let their power be never so full or call them Plenipotentiaries as long as you please still this condition is constantly and naturally understood that they do nothing against the interest of the persons that commissioned them and to these their Acts must of necessity return for the obtaining their approbation and ratification without which their Treatings would signify nothing at all And this was the meaning of that full power conferr'd by the Synod upon their Deputies to hear those of the Confession of Ausburg to hearken to their Proposals their Complaints their Offers and in return to make others to them to receive from them Explications of difficulties in Controversy and to give them back theirs nay to come to an agreement with them if they could yet not so as either to become absolute Masters of their Faith or blindly receive whatever they should agree upon For in all affairs of this kind there is naturally implied a Clause of recurring to the Judgment of the persons Commissioning and a necessity of their ratifying them Mr. Claude added besides this Consideration Suppose the true sense of an Act of the Church of Rome were called in Question a Canon of the Council of Trent for instance M. de Condom would think it more reasonable that the sence should be taken from him than Mr. Claude because the Question is put concerning the sense of a Church that M. de Condom is a Member of and therefore in all probability he must understand it better than one of another Church Therefore Sir said he I expect the same Justice from you in taking the sense of these Acts now in Dispute from me provided the sense I put upon them do not disagree with the Doctors of my Communion or be not manifestly false and contradictory to the rest of our Principles Now if the sense I put upon these Acts be not any of these you have not in my opinion any right to refuse it or to frame to your self any other different from it M. de Condom replied saying that he would begin where Mr. Claude left off because that what he had urged just before carried some appearance of Truth and made a quick impression upon the mind but had not really any thing of solid Argument in it That were the matter in hand any Explication of their particular Rites and Ceremonies in Preaching the Word and Administring the Sacraments what Mr. Claude said might be allowed for Truth and in that point he would believe him as a person better acquainted with the matter Nay that he did not go about to debar him the liberty of explaining the sense of those that compiled the Discipline and the forementioned Acts after his own way That he was sensible they denied an entire submission to the Church and such as precludes all Examination But this he would say that the very men who denied this absolute submission in Speculation were forced to own and establish it in their practice That so they contradicted themselves and that this was the thing he pretended to prove and in which he was by no means bound to believe Mr. Claude For if the matter in hand now were to demonstrate any Contradictions in the opinions of the Catholick Church he would not desire that His Explications might be thought of Authority sufficient nor deny Mr. Claude the freedom of making what inferences he thought fit from the Council's own words M. de Condom stopping there Mr. Claude replied That since it was evident that the persons who made those Acts denied any submission was due to the determinations of Church-Assemblies without any Examination at all the advantage was thus far at least on his side that M. de Condom himself had acknowledged His Explanation of those Acts was agreeable with the Principles of the Protestants which made them so that there was more reason for his accepting that sense than for the framing to himself another and such a one as contradicted these Principles That supposing the business in Controversy to be an Act of the Romish Church he should not scruple to admit M. de Condom's explanation provided the words of the Act did not oppose it and in that case he might be allowed to infer a Contradiction That if M. de Condom would proceed thus as to the Acts before urged he should be glad to see what grounds he had for this pretended Contradiction M. de Condom said this would easily be made appear That he would show this Contradiction with relation to their Discipline which on one side ordains That differences in Doctrine should be decided in the Consistory by the Word of God that it was also her meaning that this decision was made by the Word of God in the Provincial Synod as well as the National and yet on the other side if men do not acquiesce in the determination of a Consistory or a Provincial Synod it orders things should continue as they were till a National one be convened in which it says a full and final resolution shall be given by the Word of God and if they submit not to this they shall be cut off from the Church Whence it is evident that the submission required to a National Synod was not founded on the Word of God considered abstractedly as such because both Consistory and Provincial Synod were supposed to determine by the Word of God and yet an Appeal from them was allow'd But that it was founded on the Word of God so far forth as That was explained and interpreted by the last judgment of the Church that is because this is the last and final resolution and consequently upon the Authority of the Assembly considered by it self Now this said he
even of a private Doctor but in as much as both Assemblies and private persons are liable to mistakes a man must not carry on this Judgment of Charity and Humility so far as that he should suffer himself to be blinded by it and when an Assembly or Doctor have really erred not to see it for this would be to stretch things beyond their due bounds For instance said he in the capacity I am in over my Flock it is mens duty to presume favourably of me that I understand the meaning of Scripture better than plain private Persons but for all that they are by no means bound to think me infallible nor fancy it impossible I should ever be mistaken in a point of Doctrine and in such a case a plain private Person is priviledged to think he could understand the Scripture better than I. Private Doctors says Al de Condom are not at all concerned in our Dispute all the World knows private Doctors may err and consequently they can have no title to an absolute obedience The Controversie is concerning the whole Body of an Ecclesiastical Assembly and I expect from you a clear distinct answer to this particular whether you believe single private men can understand the meaning of Scripture better than the whole Body of the Church convened in a Council Mr. Claude replied That he only mentioned private Doctors as an Argument that Christian Humility should not be abused nor made a pretence for men to deny themselves the benefit of their own Eyes that so they might avoid Pride and Presumption For if by M. de Condom's own Confession private Doctors have no right to an absolute Obedience it is neither a proud nor presumptuous Imagination that it may possibly happen we should understand Scripture sometimes better than they tho for the main we are bound to presume in favour of them and that in probability it will be otherwise The case is the same with Assemblies for even these being not Infallible ought not to challenge an absolute Submission and such as God alone hath a just right to That no less a Person than St. Paul hath declared That he had no Dominion over the Corinthians Faith M. de Condom said that quotation was impertinent and desired to know of Mr Claude whether he was not of opinion that an absolute obedience was due to St. Paul The absolute obedience replied Mr. Claude which was due to St. Paul was so to his Divine Doctrines and not his person No more said M de Condom do we pretend that men ought to pay this obedience to the persons of men whereof the Councils consist but to the Holy Ghost by which they are guided according to that profession of the Council at Jerusalem It seemed good unto the Holy Ghost and to us When the Holy Ghost appears in the determinations of Councils as he did in St. Paul's Doctrine and that of the Jerusalem Council then said Mr. Claude this Obedience must be paid never else And this appearance of the Holy Ghost consisteth in the Councils decisions being framed according to the Word of God Still M. de Condom urged that the dispute was not concerning the Word of God but the true meaning of that Word That distinction says Mr. Claude signifies nothing at all because the true meaning of the Word of God and the Word it self are but one and the same thing Then M. de Condom returned to the business of the Independents and urged that according to Mr. Claude's principle there was no remedy for the avoiding Independency nor any prevention that there should not be as many different Religions as Parishes nay as many as there be single persons That the Independents did not cast off Assemblies so far as concerned instruction only they did not allow them in any Authoritative decisions and that in this the Pretended Reformed agreed with them He beat upon this over and over again for a long time together to all which Mr. Claude return'd the same answer he had done before viz. That there was not indeed any humane means of Certainty and Infallibility which could prevent the exorbitant errors of mens minds but there was a certain and infallible Divine one even the Holy Spirit of God imparted to his True Believers That Synods and other Assemblies were means of mighty use and very proper for this purpose and the Independents condemnation was for rejecting these last and not for refusing to Assemblies a full and Absoute Power of determining matters in Controversy That although the Protestants did not allow such Assemblies a supreme and unbounded Authority yet they did allow them as much as the Ministers and Dispensers of God's Word are capable of At this rate said M. de Condom then we shall never have done disputing I ask you therefore once more Sir whether you believe that single and private persons can understand the meaning of God's Word better than the whole Church convened in Council Mr Claude told him he had answered that Question already to wit that it does not usually fall out so and that further 't is our duty to hope the best of an Ecclesiastical Assembly but still it might come to pass that through the prevalency of mens passions and worldly Interests the decisions of such Assemblies might be contrary to Truth You must not run back thus to Interests and Passions said M. de Condom but answer my question in one word by saying either Yes or No. Mens Passions and worldly Interests said Mr. Claude are premised here with a great deal of Reason because these are the main things that occasion erroneous determinations but since you are not willing to hear of them my answer must be with this distinction That God does not suffer it commonly so to be but absolutely speaking it is possible it should be so M. de Condom said that was as much as he desired and that it was the most absurd thing in the World to believe it so much as possible for a single Man and a private person to understand the meaning of Scripture better than the whole Church met together in Council Mr. Claude replied that he was amazed to hear M. de Condom cry out upon That as such a mighty absurdity which resulted merely from the freedom used by God in dispensing his Grace That supposing the Controversy to concern such means of knowledg as are purely humane it would indeed be absurd to say that a single and private person should be wiser than a whole Assembly and that this would be then a principle of pride and presumption But the matter now treated of is the illumination of the Holy Spirit which bloweth where it listeth and God can give it to a private single person and yet not give it to a whole Assembly That of this there was an eminent instance in our Saviours time as he himself said I thank thee O Father Lord of Heaven and Earth for that thou hast bid these things from
the wise and prudent and hast revealed them unto babes That the whole Jewish Church had in their Assemblies declared Jesus Christ a Deceiver That nevertheless this was not only a Church but the one sole Church in the World at that time invested with the Authority of God who had founded nourisht and brought it up till that time That God had taught it by his Prophets and depesited his Holy Oracles there That this Church laid a just claim to a succession of Two thousand years continuance and valued her self upon it That she held formal solemn Assemblies and such as Jesus Christ himself acknowledged They sit says he in Meses seat All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe that observe and do And yet this very Church determin'd the greatest and most heinous Error that ever could be in the World even that Jesus Christ was to be rejected as a wicked man and a Deceiver That we cannot avoid affirming that at that time siâ—gle and private persons might understand the Scripture better than the whole Body of the Church met together and that in allowing M. de Condom's Principle to be true viz. That men ought to yield an absolute obedience to the decisions of Ecclesiastical Assemblies without taking upon them a right to examine what is so decided we do condemn Jesus Christ and as many as then believed in him For according to this principle Jesus Christ ought not any more to have taught the people publickly after the Church had past such decisions against him nor ought the people to have given him their attention any more because they were not suffered to examine those decisions And yet proceeded he Jesus Christ did not forbear Preaching to the people and converting many of them nor did they withdraw their attention not withstanding all the decisions given against him This principle then of a blind and implicit obedience is consequently false and contrary to the conduct of Jesus Christ and his Disciples To preclude this Argument by urging that Jesus Christ wrought such miracles as did evidence his Authority to be Divine is here of no significancy at all For there are two sorts of Miracles the one true the other false the one that men may believe a lye the other to convince them of the truth This distinction was made by God himself in the 13th Chapter of Deuteronomy where he tells the Israelites That if a Prophet give them a sign or a wonder and would perswade them to go after other Gods They must not hearken unto him for the Lord their God proveth them Jesus Christ also hath himself owned the truth of this distinction Now said he if M. de Condom's principle had taken place the people had nothing to do to make this distinction after once the Church had determined that Jesus Christ wrought his Miracles by the help of Beelzebub and not by the Power of God They must not any more according to M. de Condom so much as open their eyes to see these Miracles or suffer the least impression to be made upon themselves by them And by consequence this principle is false and destructive of the Christian Religion Hereupon M. de Condom interrupted Mr. Claude telling him that this Instance of the Jewish Church ought not to have been produced in the present case For said he the Synagogue was to fall thus the Prophets had foretold and therefore the people ought not then to pay such an obedience to their Guides as is now owing to the Church of Christ which must never fail To which Mr. Claude return'd That seeing the Synagogue was to fall it might consequently so fall out that single and private persons should understand the meaning of Scripture better than the whole body of a Church met together in its solemn Assemblies which was the very point in debate and from hence it follows clearly that it was neither pride nor presumption for private people either to believe it possible for them at some time to understand Scripture better than the whole Body of an Assembly nor upon this principle to take their decisions into examination And that this was all he desired Besides said he This Reason could have no manner of influence upon the Jews because the Synagogue were not only not agreed upon it but quite contrary asserting that it should never fail they produced in their own behalf several promises which at first blush seemed to have a great deal of strength 'T is but lost labour to urge in defence of this the Prophets who foretold its fall for the meaning of those Prophesies was the thing then in question and the Synagogue having explained these in a sense that made for them according to M. de Condom's principle it was the people's duty to stick close to that explanation without examining it at all In a word said he this fall of the Synagogue does not make their Assemblies differ at all from those of the Christian Church with relation to the matter now in dispute between us For what Promises soever the Church of Jesus Christ may have that she shall subsist for ever there is not any thing in Scripture gives us assurance that the Assemblies of Councils shall never fail Here M. de Condom took up the Discourse and said That Mr. Claude's Argument concerning the time of the Synagogues fall was the most impertinent thing in the World For at that time it could not be said that there was any visible Authority upon Earth to which men were necessarily obliged to submit because Jesus Christ himself was there that is the very Truth appearing visibly among men to whom God had given testimony from Heaven and who wrought Miracles Do but you proceeded he bring again Jesus Christ Teaching Preaching doing Miracles among us and we shall have no further occasion for the Churches Authority My Argument said Mr. Claude was not only the most pertinent to our present purpose but the clearest and most concluding Argument in the World and I hope you your self will grant it to be so after I have entreated you to consider that the visible Authority of the Son of God was the very point in dispute between the Synagogue and Jesus Christ and that this very point the Synagogue had determined in the negative That the main business was to know whether Jesus Christ were a Deceiver or not whether his Miracles proceeded from God or Beelzebub That Jesus Christ's visible Authority could not decide that question in the peoples minds for no Authority can decide a doubt till it be first received and Jesus Christ's Authority was not as yet received for the main controversy then depending was whether it should be received or rejected So that there remained only the Authority of the Church and this had determined against him According then to M. de Condom's Principles private persons ought consequently to have stuck to that and rejected Jesus Christ M. de Condom called this Argument of Mr. Claude's a Jewish
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