that those Judges were absolutely infallible Now after all let Non-contradiction be all the obedience we when otherwise perswaded ow to the Church and this Non-contradiction be due only from the subjects of a Diocese in respect of the Bishop or Diocesan Synod not from the Bishop or Diocese to superior Synods yet hence it will follow 1. First that the Reformation abroad was unlawful which we followed and that no Minister might then preach against Popish doctrines unles these things had bin first decided by his Bishop which I think is more than many of the reformed will defend 2. Again from this distinguishing of our obedience to the Church according to several things commanded by her methinks this may reasonably be demanded since neither King nor Church can justly punish or anathematize any for not yeilding that obedience to them which God hath not bound men to yeild them Therefore if they are bound to yeild obedience of consent in some points as in fundamentals and only obedience of Non-contradiction in others as in Nonfundamentals when our private judgment therein happeneth to be contrary to the publick methinks I say this may reasonably be demanded That there should be some certain way how both the Church may know when to enjoyn the one and when only the other and how the subject may know also when the one and when the other is due for none can be justly punished in an invincible ignorance of his duty And if this be the rule of their non-obligation to consent namely when the point is not fundamental and when they are also infallibly certain of the contrary there must also be some way for men to know when they are infallibly certain and when they think only that they are so For I should have thought any one might know when he is sure but that I see so many that say they are sure when mistaken and but that I have also found my self afterward mistaken in things of which I once thought my self infallibly sure Another thing methinks Non-contradiction sounds well in speculatives but in practicals what must be done For unles the Church in practicals may bind men tho of a contrary perswasion to consent to what she defines she cannot enjoyn them to do what she commands or to forbear what she forbids because this doing or forbearing necessarily presupposeth consent first to the lawfulnes thereof els the action will be sin Now the Church many times commands and forbids several practices doubtles not-fundamental under Anathema's And indeed might not people in matters practical be tied beyond their own inclinations and opinion to conformity in these the church that is founded by the God of holines and order what a disorderly Society would it be and how full of several impieties To conclude the whole matter since in this division of Christendom one party in general seems many ways to crush the Church'es authority and the other to crush private judgment and since there seem to be some inconveniences on all hands a wise man will chuse that way which seems the more safe which I think is to adhere not to our own but the common judgment of the Church In which there seems to be much humility also and mortification of our rationale in which we are all very strong and also the not hazarding the breach of the great duty of our obedience to the Church which I think had far better be yeilded too much than too little And besides these motives we have seen more evidently the effects of both these tenets upon men in our days and there seems to be no comparison between the mischiefs which too much obedience to the Church hath wrought and those which the following of private judgment hath produced A Postscript IN the former Discours § 2. it is said That our Judgment if it be taken for any degree of private opinion short of infallible certainty ought to be submitted to the judgment of our Ecclesiastical Superiors Where infallible certainty a thing so ordinarily mistaken seems to stand in need of some further explication By infallible certainty therefore I mean either * that which ariseth from demonstrative arguments drawn from the nature of the thing but this is a certainty which consists not with faith for faith walks not by sight or which most concerns our busines * that certainty which ariseth ab authoritate dicentis when we know infallibly both that he saith it who cannot lie and that such is the meaning of what he said els the former of these without the later breeds no certainty 1. Now if you make your proposal thus Supposing that I am infallibly certain of a thing that is contrary to the Church'es judgment whether am I obliged to consent to that judgment c I must answer No by no means For indeed if we speak of interior assent such a thing as this assent cannot be at all unles one can hold two contradictories to be true And 2ly for exterior assent that is professing an assent when you do not assent this you may not do neither for this is hypocrisy and lying which the God of truth always hates and forbids neither hath he tied any man to forsake or renounce tho in profession only an infallibly known truth great or small And therefore from hence as long as you cannot believe that the Church hath any authority to guide you or that her judgment is so good as your own or fit to be followed so long you cannot profess a consent unto her judgment against your own without sinning but whilst you may not do this without sinning you sin again in not believing otherwise For no man may do what he thinks he ought not to do and yet he doth sin in not so doing because he ought to think otherwise When I shew you that you may without sin obey the Church contrary to what your judgment is in the thing which you assent to I do not tell you that you may without sinning obey the Church contrary to this your judgment that you ought not to obey her or when your judgment is that you ought not to obey her Where ever the mouth or hand goes contrary to the heart t is hypocrisie and lying contrary to Christian simplicity and unlawful But if the mouth and hand go with the heart and the heart go not right here also will be sin tho not the same sin 2. Now in the 2d place if you ask me Whether hoc dato that such a book is the word of God rightly translated c you may be infallibly certain of the sence of it in some things This I also grant you may be for hoc dato that the New Testament which we have is the word of God and that God in this word meant to speak so that it should be intelligible to us els it were no revelation of any thing a private man that hears or reads it may be as certain of something
further information from the Church General such as we can have and then we are to follow her judgment when evident and undisputable as many times it is and if we be Presbyters we are also to teach her Doctrines and that in not-fundamentals as well as in fundamentals tho contrary to the commands of some inferior Bishop or Council Nor is this properly our but the Church-Catholick's contradicting such a one and our obeying only her's rather than her inferior's injunctions This discours ariseth from that term Non-fundamentals put in the Quaere when-as mean-while you may observe that this curiosity of knowing precisely what are fundamentals what not presseth only one side namely that which will allow obligation of assent to the Church'es decrees only in some things not in others but it doth not concern the other side at all because they hold assent necessary to all points wherein the Church I mean the supream power in it requires it And so also 1. ancient Councils under pain of Anathema require as in some things non-contradiction so in other things consent with whom Siquis non confitetur c Anathema sit is ordinary without setting down that the point is fundamental as likewise Si quis dixerit only is used by them in other points of greatest consequence which shews that the Church expecting the same obedience to her also in the points we call not-fundamental took not such exact care to deliver them distinctly nor indeed perhaps knows how to sever all points under such a distinction To say therefore that all such points where assent and confession is required are fundamental is gratis said and as easily denied but that all such points are very profitable to salvation I doubt not 2. Again all practical points cannot be said to be fundamental but where ever the Church enjoyns any practical things under Anathema she requires more than Non-contradiction as hath bin noted already for I may not practise a thing when I do not first assent to the lawfulnes thereof In practical things therefore commanded by her to be done I either owe her no obedience at all or els more than Non-contradiction Now the ancient Councils are frequent in these but if God had given her subjects liberty not to practise such things as are enjoyned by her if against their judgment neither hath he given the Church liberty to anathematize them for thus following their conscience For I pray you consider these two Propositions how they can both agree to the Church I know God hath given order that in non-fundamentals no man shall owe me such so much duty as to yeild his assent to me or to practise what I bid him when his judgment is contrarily perswaded but only so much as not to contradict me yet I do require of those same men not only not to contradict but to consent c or els I anathematize them Certainly if in Non-fundamentals a man of a contrary judgment to the Church can be only faulty in contradicting the Church she can excommunicate none such upon any other terms but only if they shall contradict her 3. Again the Scriptures have appointed Pastors Teachers c have bidden us hear the Church he that heareth you heareth me c without limitation to fundamentals sure this obedience to teachers is not fulfilled in reserving my own opinions and in not openly contradicting or confuting theirs Sure that power of teaching exhorting reproving correcting the word of wisdom the word of knowledge given to our Spiritual Governors for the edification of the Church in truths and practices any way profitable to salvation as well as in fundamental are not sufficiently answered on our parts with the obedience of Non-contradiction of them when they shall speak any thing contrary to our sence except it be in fundamentals only i. e. perhaps in two or three points but these Scriptures oblige us to submission of Judgment either to our particular teacher or when he seems to guide us contrary to the word of God or contrary to the rest of the Pastors of the Church to his and our Ecclesiastical Superiors in whose judgment we must acquiesce and consent that we may not be tossed c Eph. 4. 14. compared with 11 as we see they are that take only their own sence of Scriptures See Heb. 13. 7. I Tim. 4. 11. I Tim. 6. 3 4. Where note that consent is not to Scriptures that were not then so common but to the doctrine of Godlines delivered by Timothy If therefore any dissent from an inferior Pastor or Council as he may upon any suspition that such goeth against the Scriptures or the Church'es doctrines he may not therefore acquiesce in his own judgment either concerning the sence of Scriptures or the sence of former times the Fathers but is to repair to his Superiors and to hear the Church then in being in all things wherein he clearly sees her opinion and in which she requires his subscription which Ch. is set for a guide to him on an hill to interpret to him the Scriptures in all controverted matters for if she be worthy to be heard in fundamentals as well agends as credends is she unworthy to be heard in smaller matters And such a Church eminent and conspicuous there always was even in the Arrian times to which Athanasius fled for succour also and with which he joyned himself and always such there will be nor will she ever be hid and who goes with her shall go with the Scriptures and with the Fathers too but whoso will go with them against her shall also lose them and vanish away in his own self-conceit If we now on the other side take into consideration the obedience of Non-contradiction much pressed by the Reformed as in many cases only due yet the limitations which they annex to it are such as leave not the matter clear to what points and from what persons such obedience-only is required as necessary For 1. it is not said by them that all men are bound even to this lesser obedience of Non-contradiction For if this were affirmed that all inferiors whether Pastors Bishops or Councils were obliged to such obedience in respect of their superior Councils it were something but as I think t is affirmed that a National Council may contradict a superior Council and so a Diocesan a National And 1. I ask Why may not then a Pastor contradict his Bishop or the Diocesan Council which the reformed will not so easily allow since this Pastor also is a teacher and an over-seer over God's flock Act. 20. 28 and if private men may so may he be infallibly certain that such a thing is in God's word and that thing too wherein he contradicteth may be very beneficial for salvation Neither is the peace of the Church disturbed more by him teaching contrary to a Diocesan than by a Bishop teaching contrary to a Provincial Synod and as other mens contrary doctrines may consist with their
diversa statuta nutaverint donec plenario totius orbis Concilio quod saluberrime sentiebatur etiam remotis dubitationibus sirmaretur Again 2. l. 4. c. Nec nos ipsi tale aliquid he speaks of the same point auderemus asserere which argues some inevidence in the matter nisi universae Ecclesiae concordissima authoritate firmati cui ipse Cyprianus sine dubio crederet si jam illo tempore quaestionis hujus veritas eliquata declarata per plenarium Concilium solidaretur Yet were the after-opposers anathematized as heretical Again cont Ep. Parmeniani 2. l. 13. c. Haec quidem alia quaestio est Utrum Baptismus ab iis qui nunquam fuerunt Christiani potest dari nec aliquid temere inde affirmandum est sine authoritate tanti Concilii quantum tantae rei sufficit De iis vero qui ab Ecclesiae unitate separati sunt nulla jam quaestio est quin habeant verum Baptisma dare possint Hoc enim in ipsa totius orbis unitate i. e. in the Council of Nice discussum consideratum perfectum atque firmatum est So contr Crescon Gram. 1. l. 33. c. Quamvis hujus rei certe de Scripturis Canonicis non proferatur exemplum earundem tamen Scripturarum etiam in hac re a nobis tenetur veritas cum hoc facimus quod universae jam placuit Ecclesiae quam ipsarum Scripturarum commendat authoritas ut quoniam sacra Scriptura fallere non potest quisquis falli motuit obscuritate hujus quaestionis eandem Ecclesiam de illa consulat quam sine ulla ambiguitate sancta Scriptura demonstrat Obscuritate quaestionis for tho elsewhere de Baptismo cont Don. 5. l. 23. c. he supposeth it an Apostolical Tradition on one side Apostoli quidem nihil exinde praeceperunt sed consuetudo illa quae opponebatur Cypriano ab eorum traditione exordium sumpsisse credenda est sicut sunt multa quae tenet universa Ecclesia ob hoc ab Apostolis praecepta bene creduntur quanquam scripta non reperiantur and tho this custom was by the Bishop of Rome and his party much pressed against Cyprian and his adherents and Agrippinus St. Cyprian's Predecessor is said to be the first that introduced a contrary practice see Aust. de Bapt. 3. l. 12. c. non novam se rem statuisse Beatus Cyprianus ostendit quia sub Agrippino jam coeperat fieri yet it appears that St. Austin did not think all common customs and traditions tho pretended Apostolical before they were approved and warranted by the judgment of the Church in her Councils to be so simply obligatory as that they may not be disputed if seeming opposite to another surer Apostolical Tradition i. e. the Scriptures as St. Cyprian thought this custom was and so answered Steven see Cypr. Ep. ad Pomp. contra Steph. and in this answer is defended by St. Austin see de Bapt. 2. l. 8. c. quia tunc non extiterant c. Noluit vir gravissimus rationes suas etsi non veras quod eum latebat sed tamen non victas veraci quidem sed tamen nondum assertae consuetudini cedere Assertae i. e. by * any Council or cleared not to be * against the Scriptures urged but mistakenly by Cyprian And St. Austin also himself saith the same thing with Cyprian de Bapt. 3. l. 6. c. Quis dubitat veritati manifestatae debere consuetudinem cedere This I have set you down the more fully that you might see the power and authority of General Councils not only in declaring points traditional but in deciding questions some way obscure and doubtful and what submission was due to such points once determined in St. Austin's opinion who yet held former by latter Councils might be amended and consequently their in some things liability to error or doubting And so such points are to be believed in consequence only to another point of necessary faith namely That private men ought in all things at least not demonstrative on the contrary to submit their own to the Church'es judgment as many things written in God's word are necessary to be assented to when known to be there written which are not written there because they are necessarily to be known or believed in consequence to that necessary point of faith that whatever is written in God's word is true And hence also are there two sorts of Hereticks some are such before any Council condemning their Tenent if it happen to be against points de fide clear necessary and universally or eminently traditional so were there presently after the Apostles times many Hereticks before any Council assembling or condemning their opinions others only such after their error condemned by a Council if the points be of less evidence c. These latter rendred Hereticks not from the nature of their Tenent but their obstinacy and opposition to the obligation which the Church'es Authority lays upon them in her determinations Whose publick proposal of such doctrines as divine truths is sufficient for their belief and further embracing the same as such and therefore their further opposition of it is not error but heresy unles they can infallibly demonstrate the contrary In which case if ever any such can happen they are free from wilful opposition or heresie i. e. I mean in their denying their assent to the Church but in public contradicting even those infallibly certain c. may be still faulty else they stand guilty thereof and also of Schism if for such a decision they go on to forsake the Church'es communion So St. Cyprian's followers after a General Council were counted Hereticks tho the matter of this Heresy as also of many others so called from opposition to General Councils seem not to be in themselves of very great importance not so He before it In which opinion namely that the Baptism of Hereticks was ineffectual saith Dr. Potter sect 4. many good Catholick Bishops accorded with him and the Donatists as likewise with the Novatians in another viz. that the Church ought not to absolve some grievous sinners before the Nicene Council So tho since the Decision of the Florentine Council 1439 those who hold animas justorum non visuras Deum nisi post resurrectionem are by the Church of Rome counted Hereticks from opposition c yet those who before that time maintained it amongst whom was Pope John the 22d they acknowledge were free from it See Bell. de Rom. Pontif. 4. l. 14. c. Respondeo Johannem hunc revera sensisse animas non visuras Deum nisi post resurrectionem caeterum hoc sensisse quando adhuc sentire licebat sine periculo haeresis nulla enim adhuc praecesserat Ecclesioe definitio In such sence Scotus saith Transubstantiation was no dogma fidei before the Lateran Council Thus you see tho all divine Revelation and necessary deduction from it is de fide and the object and matter of faith
carried away with every doctrine c. Eph. 4. 11 13 Her authority I say toward all such men is voided because these two the giving private men power thus to judge and then the punishing them if they do not consent or if they declare their dissent do contradict For t is saying to them I grant and teach you that when you shall judge any thing which I enjoyn you to be contrary to God's word as possibly it may be so often it is your duty not to obey me nevertheles for doing this your duty I may justly punish you by Excommunication Or 2ly Is it only to those decisions which she maketh in points of the truth whereof she is actually certain For thus it is pleaded by some That a Church which confesseth that she may err and mislead others and upon this consideration alloweth that private men may lawfully dissent from her may yet be sure that she doth not in such and such definitions contradict Scripture and therefore may according to the power given her by God Matt. 18. excommunicate her children for preaching contrary to or dissenting from her definitions and for violating her truth and her peace and upon this ground may affirm that what she thus binds on earth is bound in heaven as a man that may sleep run mad c may yet be sure that now at this time he is awake and in his wits See much-what the same said by Dr. Hammond concerning General Councils affixing Anathema's to their Decrees Paraenes § 12. p. 158. But this plea seems to ground the Church'es power of excommunicating and consequently her subjects necessity of obeying at least so far as not to contradict her definitions not upon her authority tho she as those Judges Deut. 17. 8. may be in some things liable to error but only upon her certainty of the truth in those things which she enjoyns as it is willingly granted she or any else of some things may be certain enough But then if others obedience depends not upon her determining or commanding but upon her being certain what is said before returns again they must have some means to know not only what she commands but also when she is certain in what she commands or that she commands nothing wherein she is uncertain in which she may be still uncertain even when she saith nay even when she thinks she is certain But there being no means to know this all men again will be left to their liberty The Church of England see before § 3. hath excommunicated all that shall say any thing is erroneous either in her Liturgy or 39. Articles Was she sure that she could not possibly mistake in any of these things which she hath said there if not such her Excommunication of contradicters will be according to this opinion unlawful Deut. 17. 12. it is said The man that will do presumptuously and not hearken unto the Priest even that man shall dye Matt. 18. 17. it is said If he will not hear the Church let him be as an heathen Are these punishments lawfully inflicted only in case that such Priest and Church be certain and infallible in their judgment or that such Priest and Church do not seem to any to mis-interpret the divine law 3ly Is it only to those decisions which she maketh in points fundamental But here the same doubts arise still For I demand Whether are you to judge or she which these are or how many Surely this is very necessary to be known If you grant that she must judge this too for you which or how many be fundamentals as Mr. Chillingworth saith 3. c. 39. § in all reason she must if in fundamentals she be acknowledged your guide and therefore he denies her to be a guide at all then this thing To how many of her decided points you are to consent lies only in her judgment And then I ask Since some Non-fundamentals are plain in Scripture and since in these Non-fundamentals if a private man may be infallibly certain of somethings as they say he may and upon this infallibility of his seems to be grounded all his dissent from the Church for in things tho not fundamental wherein he is not infallibly certain of the contrary I suppose he is also to consent to the Church'es judgment then surely the Church may be so too why should you not be here also tied to take her sentence when she saith that she is infallibly certain of them too as you do take her sentence when she telleth you how many are fundamental And if you are to consent tho it be against your own judgment in the greatest matters what reason is there you should not do it in lesser You will answer because in these greatest matters she cannot err but she may in others My reply is and may not you in others also err much more Is she to guide your judgment in the main and not in less matters Is Scripture be plain in these smaller points for you to guide your self by it is it not so much more in fundamentals why therefore relinquish you your own and adhere to her judgment in these things most plain in Scripture and then take up your own and leave hers in the rest especially when being asked your reason for this your plea is because such points are plain in Scripture But then if our Saviour as this opinion makes him enjoyns only subscription to the Church in fundamentals who sees not that it is as necessary that our Saviour should have told us which points those were els we may assent too much to her in things wherein she may err or too little in the other wherein she cannot err I mean fundamentals and so be certainly damn'd But then since tho the General Church cannot yet a National Church may err in fundamentals also and may apostatize therefore you are here according to that opinion to assume to your self to judge what points are truth and what not even in pretended fundamentals before you yeild any consent to any thing at all call'd fundamental or other which a National Church proposeth and thus a self-opinioned man may easily throw off the yoke of obedience to all the proposals of all except General Councils a thing very unreasonable And as unreasonable is that which some say on the other side That we may not contradict or oppose our Pastor or Bishop in smaller matters but may in the greater when-as indeed in these greater matters there is more reason for our obedience and far more danger if we err in our contradicting Therefore neither in Non-fundamentals nor yet in Fundamentals may we properly contradict them i. e. in opposing our particular judgment upon Scripture to theirs What then must be done you will say since our Pastors and Bishops may err in fundamentals and particular Churches may apostatize Resp. Why both in fundamentals and non-fundamentals also where any considerable doubting ariseth we may repair from them to a
charity to other Churches i. e. with not condemning them to be no Churches so may his Considering these things may not such a one say Whether it is better to obey God than men judge ye 2. Again I ask If the power in the Church of Excommunication of private men binds them not to contradict her why doth not the same power in superior Councils to excommunicate Bishops and to annul the acts of inferior Councils bind such inferior Councils also to Non-contradiction 3. Again the obligation of Non-contradiction of private men to their Bishop or to his Synod in not-fundamentals will signifie little because an Episcopal or a National Synod may err in fundamentals and the judgment of this Synods erring in a fundamental is by the reformed left not to It which will never judg such a thing to be but to its subjects and they may misjudge a point not-fundamental to be fundamental and so may break their due silence neither can there be of this any remedy For none hitherto have contradicted the Church-decisions but they have made that which occasioned their contradicting to be a thing of great consequence Here therefore again in the yeilding of our obedience of Non-contradiction to a Provincial or National Church the Queries concerning Fundamentals will return Who is to determin what are such both for agends and credends which it is extream necessary to know that in such we may be sure to vindicate God's truth against that particular Church wherein we live Is not idolatry an error against a fundamental truth and doth not the Roman Church then err in fundamentals in worshipping bread as the Protestants think they do for Christ So that tenet of the Greek Church à Patre per filium is said to destroy the Trinity and so the Lutheran's Consubstantiation is said by consequence to destroy Christ's Humanity the Trinity and Christ's Humanity fundamental truths In such points and the like therefore none must be tied in obedience to their Bishop or Church-National to a Non-contradiction 2ly In respect of the Church in general the obedience of sole-Non-contradiction is limited by the reformed as we have said before to Non-fundamentals wherein the Church may err whereas in fundamentals wherein this Church cannot err here they also allow an obedience of assent But I ask again Who shall determin both in credends agends which are fundamental And why in these fundamentals especially are we wished in our judgment to conform to the Church'es since these are the points most clear in Scripture and such as without the Church'es direction we cannot mistake And methinks those places of Scripture concerning Tryal of Doctrines which we have learnt to turn against the injunctions of the Church hold as well or more for trying her Doctrines in Fundamentals than in any thing els because the rule by which we try is the most plain in these points Again I ask Are all the necessary consequences of fundamentals to be accounted fundamental If so then who knows how far these points may extend in which we are to consent to and not only not-to-contradict the Church'es decisions 3ly This obedience not of yeilding assent but solely of Non-contradicting is allowed and secured by the reformed only to those persons who upon examination of Scripture and Tradition are certain of the contrary surely then it must extend to very few persons and in very few things for how few are there that are able to compare the Scriptures or search Traditions Therefore the Scripture seems to make rules of our obedience to our present Spiritual Governors as if we were void of writings and not according to the extraordinary skill and learning of some few that are not rulers but according to the general capacity and knowledg of the flock of Christ. 1. Therefore it were well if these men who would not have their own knowledge restrained by authority would yet let the people know That only those who by long studying the Scriptures and Fathers have arrived to infallible certainty are tied only-to Non-contradiction to the Church-decisions but that all the rest to assenting For doth it not make our hearts yet to bleed to see so many thousands of the common people amongst us upon this mistaken priviledge even to disbelieve and not to yeild consent to the Church in fundamentals 2. When this is done how few are there of the learned that can say they are certain without some doubt that what the Church proposeth is false Are not all the rest then who are not infallibly certain to be taught that they must in Non-fundamentals subscribe to the Church-decisions Why labour we then more to free then subjugate mens judgments 3. But then for a private man's being infallibly certain upon which the reformed opinion seems to build much methinks this concession of the Scriptures which he reads to be the infallible word of God is not enough for his certainty almost in any point because there must be a comparing of Scriptures and a not interpreting of some places so that other places contradict and because the sence of the words may be diversly taken tho he were to judge only of one place by it self Besides there are many degrees of seeming certainty and t is hard to know when it is a presumption only and when a true certainty That men are ordinarily deceived in making this judgment is plain because two contradicting one another will often both affirm that they are infallibly certain The thinking ones self infallibly certain mostwhat ariseth from knowing no objections of any difficulty to the contrary which objections as one afterward discovers so his former certainty by degrees abates Hence we see the greatest Scholars many times dubious when the ignorant are either certain or strongly confident Four texts of Scripture that seem plainly to say a thing make one sure as it were and then two texts suggested to him that seem to say the contrary reduce him to doubt and make him begin to deliberate of the sense of the former I speak not this to affirm we are certain in nothing at all but that we have almost always reason to doubt where the same certainty that we have appears not to others But then if private men may be infallibly certain much more may the Church and so many Doctors be so they also all agreeing in their certainty So that all proofs of certainty to be had in divine truths rather strengthen the argument for obedience to the Church And she deals but with us in our own kind if she plead infallibility to require our submission to her even in Non-fundamentals as we do plead infallibility to avoid it As for those objections which the Reformed opinion makes 1. That possibly a National or Provincial Synod may or also hath broached some new mischievous tenet the contrary to which tenet neither the Creeds expresly nor former Councils have decreed into which error therefore my too secure obedience may betray me
I answer That from this judgment of such a Church so often as it is suspected by me I will not retreat to my private judgment but I will appeal to a more general judgment of the present Church which judgment I can either have conjunctim or divisim as it was ordinarily procured in ancient time and by the reformed opinion I shall be secure if I part not from the present Church for in fundamentals she shall in no age err but hold forth to me visibly the truth and if this error be in Non-fundamentals it amounts not as the reformed say to a heresy therefore will I still cleave to her i. e. the present Church and the supremest Authority I can find therein neither will I embrace any sence put upon Scriptures or Fathers against her because she cannot be at least in points of great consequence opposit to them And if that religion as it might have bin had bin conveyed to our days by unwritten Tradition and only so as the Apostle directed in 2 Tim. 2. 2 and that we had had neither New Testament-Scriptures nor writings of Fathers then I must have relied only on the guidance of the present Church neither needed she for this to have bin made more infallible than now she is and doubtles my faith should have bin nevertheles sufficiently grounded i. e. on the word of God still orally delivered by her neither could any have made an argument that my faith was not salvifical for this reason because fidei non potest subesse falsum for she must then in defect of all writings have bin confess'd the pillar and ground of truth and the dispenser or steward of the mysteries of God 1 Cor. 4. 1. the same then must she be still and Nations now as at the first before writings are still converted by her by her preaching before they come to peruse those Scriptures And so are we all also taught our faith first by her neither suffers she diminution in her authority from co-extant Scriptures and Fathers But yet besides that in these Scriptures is ascribed to her great authority any help that is from these writings enjoyed by any other is also by her that no body may boast over her in these advantages 2. It is objected That our faith to be salvifical must be grounded on something that is infallible and therefore only on God's word See this answered at large in the Treatise of Necessary faith § 43. c. Surely the Church groundeth her faith which she recommendeth to us on the Scriptures as well as private men think they do theirs when they leave hers to follow their own judgment And if the Church'es judgment is not neither is their own infallible for which they desert the Church'es But tho it is most true that true faith is always grounded on the word of God which word of God is infallible yet is it not necessary that every one who hath true faith do know that it is infallible or be infallibly certain of it For many have saving faith doubtles that learn this word of God only from a fallible man suppose from their Father or from their Pastor Neither is it necessary that this faith should be received from another person infallible besides God nor that it should be received from a writing at all There may be a strong adherence beyond evidence neither can it be unsufficient if it be so strong as to produce obedience to God's commands 3. T is said That one is for his salvation secure enough where ever these two are Unity of faith with the Church in fundamentals and then Charity toward the Church in the points not-fundamental wherein I disagree from her Charity i. e. not condemning her for them to be no Church c. I answer 1. First such a one must know well what are Fundamentals that perhaps he take not liberty to differ from the Church in any of them The Apostle reckons doctrines of Baptism and of laying on of hands among foundations Heb. 6. 2. if we will make unity in fundamentals so large as he doth I know not how many other points may be brought in And I am perswaded by reading the Catalogues of anciently-accounted Heresies that the Fathers and Primitive times would not have stuck to have pronounced some side highly heretical in those differences between the Reformed and the Catholic Church and even in those differences that are now in this Church of England about Baptism Bishops Ordination c. 2ly Without doubt there may be a larger unity of faith than only in fundamentals unles all points of faith be fundamental and if so then Churches that differ in any point of faith differ in fundamentals 3ly If there may be a larger unity then Spiritual Guides doubtles are set over us to build us up in the unity also of this faith and not only of fundamentals See Heb. 5. 11. c. 6. 1. And therefore why Eph. 4. 11. compared with 13. should be restrained only to fundamentals as it is by some it seems to me strange I cannot think that the Corinthians differed amongst themselves in fundamentals see 1 Cor. 1. 4. c and yet the Apostle is very angry with them for their divisions and exhorts them to be all of one judgment which union of judgment could not be by following the judgment each one of their private reason but of the Apostle and of their orthodox teachers appointed by him See 1 Cor. 1. 10. Rom. 12. 16 18. Rom. 15. 5 6. Phil. 1. 27. Phil. 2. 2 3. 1 Pet. 3. 8. where speaking the same thing and being joyned in the same judgment contending for the faith of the Gospel with one mind glorifying God with one mind and one mouth c. argue an unity required not only of charity but of opinion and judgment and that not only in fundamentals in which as I said all the factious Corinthians or most of them accorded but other beneficial truths which union how could so many judgments undependent of one another attain but by all of them retaining the same doctrine of their Pastor or Pastors 4ly If these points wherein the reformed recede from the authority of superior Councils be not very necessary tho not fundamental how can a separation for them be justified but if necessary why should we say that God requires not an unity of faith in them 5ly Again as faith and charity secure not our salvation if we be guilty of some other vice adultery c so they do not secure it if there be any denial of obedience where t is due especially to the Church disobedience towards whom is in a more special manner disobedience to Christ and to God himself and why may not this then endanger us if God hath provided teachers to keep us in the same judgment and we to the great hurt both of the Church and of our selves too by these divisions will every one follow his own judgment especially since
himself to have made his search of Scripture amiss so often as he thinks it to contradict them Such mediums are †Miracles and other mighty operations done by the power of the H. Ghost upon which our Saviour Jo. 5. 36 and elsewhere and S. Paul Rom. 15. 19. 2 Cor. 12. 12. 1 Cor. 2. 4. Mar. 16. 20. required belief and submission to their doctrine And †Universal Tradition upon which the Church also requireth belief to the Scriptures the same Tradition that delivered the Scriptures delivering also such doctrines and expositions of Scriptures as are found in the Church So that a Pharisee searching and not finding in Scriptures by reason indeed that he searched them not aright such testimony of Jesus his being the Messias as was pretended yet ought to have bin convinced and to have believed his doctrines from seeing his miracles and from hence also to have blamed his faulty search So a Berean searching and not finding in Scripture such evidence of S. Paul's doctrine suppose of the abrogation of the Judaical Law by Christ as was pretended yet ought to have believed it from the mighty works he saw done by S. Paul or from the authority he or the Council at Jerusalem received from Jesus working miracles and raised from the Dead as Universal Tradition testified And the same may be said for the Church'es doctrines And therefore as there are some Scriptures that bid us search the Scriptures because if we do this aright we shall never find them to disagree from the doctrines of the Church and because some doctrines of the Church are also in the Scriptures very evident so there are other Scriptures if those who are so ready to search them on other would search them also on this point that bid us Hear the Church because our searching of Scriptures is liable sometimes to be mistaken and because in some things the Scriptures may seem difficult in which case God having referred us to the judgment of those whom he hath appointed to be the expounders thereof Deut. 17. 8 9 10. Matt. 18. 17. Lu. 10. 16. cannot remit us again to the same Scriptures to try whether their expositions be right Therefore that text Gal. 1. 8 9. is far from any such meaning If the Church or Church-men shall teach you any thing contrary to the Scriptures as you understand them let these be Anathema to you But rather it saith this If an Angel or I apostatizing as some shall Act. 20. 30. shall teach any thing contrary to the doctrines ye have received i. e. from the Church let him c. which makes for the Church'es authority very much The Scriptures then recommending tryal do no way warrant to us a tryal of the publick doctrines of the Church by our private sence upon the Scriptures that so we should adhere to it against them but a tryal of the doctrines of private teachers by the Churches publick sence of the Scriptures that in adhering to it we may be always secure 5ly They question since there are many present divided Churches to the judgment of which of them they shall repair I answer Had this question bin asked an hundred years ago in Luther's time any one could have solved it What any one would have done then let him do now since all grant that the Church which was then Catholick is not changed since in its doctrines or practices only some men are since gone out of it and he may know by this that he is not to follow them because they are gone out if he resolve once to be a follower of the Church'es authority All or most of modern controversies either Councils which the present Church allows have decided or collectively the solution of them may be known by the agreeing tenets of particular Churches and their Bishops even before and without any General Councils Most of the decrees of the Council of Trent tho it should stand for nothing yet we must grant were the general tenets and practice of the present Church of that age and of many ages before that and many Councils also which must be granted at least Patriarchal or Provincial have decided the points now in controversy or many of the most considerable of them and we find no other superior Synod at all contradicting them in those or later times but the same things ratified by the general practice which followed If therefore there was a church Catholick in those days that had or exercised any authority and this I think we confess in our Creed surely such tenets were established by it neither can we acknowledge one Holy and Apostolick Church in those times save only that by whom such things were used and by whom also many of them decreed After that therefore we have once yeilded to conform in our judgment or in not-contradiction to the Church we need not demand and expect for these things a future General Council for we are judged already we learning what is the Church'es judgment sufficiently by the decrees of former Councils Provincial at least which with this universal practice following them are equivalent to General Els many ancient heresies as Pelagianism c remain yet uncondemned in the Church these having bin censured only by Councils Provincial whose judgments afterward were generally approved and by the general practice of that Church which Church we cannot deny to be the same with that which once was the total Catholick and which is also now if we look after the major part of the Church the greatest communion of Christians Such things as these are said and you must tell me what I must reply to them And indeed if Protestants saw no eminent Church to which if all her decisions were made authentical men would presently apply themselves their contention would not be so earnest against our ascribing too much to the Church'es authority But suppose say they that the church present determin things against Scripture and against the former Church Why may not I say I again as well suppose you who think thus of the present Church to mistake Scripture and the former Church your selves and why may I not say again to you suppose that she err in fundamentals where are you that in these do follow her judgment Yes but the fundamentals she directs me in are more plainly set down in Scripture Well then since you may not judg against her in the plain may you in other things less plain But say you our Saviour hath promised in these she shall not err Then you need not fear erring with her in the rest for were truth in the rest so necessary as you pretend God could and would here also have made her an infallible directer And we are to know this that the Church may be faulty in something that she enjoyns and yet he that assents to her judgment not be so but faulty he will be if he do not assent Els what shall we answer to Deut. 17. 11 unles we will say
then before all the people have ascended into Heaven to God and so have sealed for ever to that whole Nation the Confession of his being the Messias and thus with a great access to his Glory on earth have prevented their so great and long Apostacy What meaned he then to appear so sparingly and in corners the doors being shut and not to all the people saith the Apostle but to some few chosen to be witnesses tho he was not here defective in what was sufficient Again could not his Spirit that hath led some have led all into all truth if he had pleased to give it to them in a greater measure How easie had it bin for our Saviour who foresaw that sharp controversie concerning observance of the Ceremonial law by Christians the maintainers of which ceremonies contended only for them because they thought Christ had not abrogated them to have declared himself openly in that point when he was here on earth How easie for him foreseeing the controversies ever since even those so many about his own person those now between the Reformed and the Roman Church to have caused instead of an occasionally-written Epistle such a Creed as the Athanasian or such Articles as those of Trent or of the Augustan Confession or such a methodical clear Catechisme as now several Sects draw up for the instruction of their followers in the principles of their religion to have bin written by his Apostles Will any one say that had such writings bin H. Scripture yet these controversies had not bin prevented or at least not in some greater measure prevented than now they are Or would not brieflier all controversies have bin prevented had our Saviour as plainly said that the Roman Bishop should regulate the faith of his Church for ever as it may be said and is said by others There must be heresies then and therefore it seemed good to the wisdom of the Father that all things should not be done that might but only so much that was sufficient whereby they should be prevented Neither is it a good reasoning This was the best way for taking away all controversy and error in the Church that the Scriptures should plainly so as none may mistake set down all truths necessary to salvation or that there should be a known infallible Judge therefore they do so or therefore there is so because this seemed not best to God for the reasons fore-mentioned and for many other perhaps not known which made the Apostle cry 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 11 33. to take away all controversie and error c no more than it did to prohibit in the world the being of evil I know not whether Tertullian's saying in praescript cont haer concerning this matter be not too bold Ipsas quoque Scripturas sic esse ex Dei voluntate dispositas ut haereticis materiam subministrarent And haereses sine aliquibus occasionibus Scripturarum accidere non poterant But we may make good use of it in being less rash and more circumspect in interpreting especially when we are singular where we may be so easily mistaken 2ly It seems since there is supposed sufficient means for all those who are in the Church to attain to the knowledge of all necessary truth for God and our Saviour have not bin wanting to his Church in necessaries that those who blindly obey such false guides as shall be in the world shall not be free from punishment tho they offend thro ignorance See Matt. 15. 14. Ezek. 33. 8. 3. 18. 3ly There being some doctrines false and danger in being misled by them it seems all doctrines may be tried and that by all persons See Jo. 5. 39 our Saviour bidding them try his Act. 17. 11. the Bereans and Act. 15. 2. the Antiochians trying S. Paul's See to this purpose 1 Jo. 4. 1. 1 Thes. 5. 21. Rev. 2. 2. 1 Cor. 10. 15. 11. 13. And the more trial the better so it be rightly performed whereby we may discover false doctrines and teachers that we may not be seduced by them whereby we may know more of God may confirm our belief of which there are many degrees in what we are taught and may be able to give better account to others of our faith 1 Pet. 3. 15. Col. 3. 16. and whereby truth will always have a great advantage of error For verum vero consonat 4. Now seeing that all Spiritual knowledge cometh first by Revelation from God the trial of any doctrine we doubt of is to be made either by the holy Scriptures written from the beginning by men inspired by the Holy Ghost or by the Interpreters of these Scriptures and those who were ordained by these men that were inspired and who had the form of sound doctrine committed unto them viz. by the Doctors and Pastors of the Church where also the doctrines of some Doctors whose tenets we doubt of are to be tried by the rest of the Doctors of the present times or the doctrines of all the present Doctors to be tried by the writings of the Doctors of former times Trials by the Scriptures were those Act. 17. 11. Jo. 5. 39. 2 Pet. 1. 19. Trials by the Doctors of the Church those Act. 15. 2. Gal. 1. 9. Rom. 16. 17. 2 Thes. 3. 14. 1 Cor. 14. 32. c. 2 Jo. 10. Now these H. Scriptures and Holy Doctors collectively taken to the not-yet-so-far-grounded and illuminated are capable of being tried too The first Scriptures and Teachers by those who lived in the same times were tried by Miracles by those who lived afterward are tried by Tradition the second Scriptures are tried by their accord with the first as also by Miracles the 2d Teachers are tried by their Ordination from the first which Teachers if we find all agreeing in one judgment we need try no further our Saviour having promised his perpetual presence with them and that the gates of Hell shall never prevail against the truth taught by them 5. Now first concerning trial of our Superiors commands and doctrines by Scriptures of which there are many several ways As trying 1. Whether such doctrines or commands be contained or commanded in Scripture 2. Whether the contrary to them be contained or commanded in Scripture Again if the contrary of them be contained there 1. whether as fact only 2 or also as precept 1. Now the first of these trials seems not necessary to be used 1. For it doth not follow that it is unlawful to do or to believe a thing because H. Scripture doth not say or command it Angumentum ab authoritate non valet negative Some things both in doctrine and discipline may possibly descend from the Apostles that are not set down by them in writing and these tho not absolutely necessary which very few points are yet very useful to Salvation Timothy might hear some things from S. Paul more than are set down in his Epistle see 2 Tim. 1. 13.
strangers And tho there shall be Antichrists and falling away from the faith as there was even in the Apostle's times yet that falling away from the faith shall be also from the Church but the Church it self i. e. that whole external communion which was in times before the Church of Christ for I speak not of any one particular place from any of which I conceive one time or other Christianity may be banished or if you will the visible body of the Clergy openly cohering in that external communion shall never go into Apostacy Nor shall the Apostates fall away in but out of the external communion of the former Church and so always be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not in respect of their opinion but decession not in respect of the truth of but their dissent from the Church in what they maintain and shall for ever be known * either by their going out of the former and setting up new communions Jud. 19. Heb. 10. 25. 1 Jo. 2. 19. 2 Tim. 3. 8. Jude 11. opposing those in authority and so Tertullian Praejudicatum est adversus omnes haereses id esse verum quodcunque primum id esse adulteratum quodcunque posterius * or by the former Church thrusting them out which shall never joyn with them But t is to be noted that most of those divisions of the Church if not all which have separated from a former communion are such as have not bin first expelled by the Church and then set up a new communion upon necessity but such as have left it always pretending that there be some tenets or practices in the former Church for which tho she permitting to them all their own opinions they could not communicate with her Now that communion which they tho indulged their own tenets will not return to t is plain that at first they did reject whatever they pretend to the contrary and tho the other Ch. also ejected them for both these well consist And such Apostates also may be known always at their first going out tho not so well afterwards by the smallnes of their number As Arrianism which was the greatest division that ever happened in the Church for 1500 years never prevailed upon all parts of the Church's communion the Western continuing for a major part untainted with it touching which see Ch. Gov. 2. part 40. § c. and in both the Eastern and Western it ever had an external communion of the Catholicks opposit to it and in its first rise was easily discerned by the paucity of that Sect as the beginnings of all heresies are easily known neither are they tho some of them of very speedy growth yet of long continuance See 2 Tim. 3. 1 8 9. Jude 11. Act. 5. 38. Neither had the contrary conceit to wit of the external visible body of the Church her falling away from Christ by which the sheep are to seek for a right shepherd ever got so much strength amongst Christians but from a supposing of Anti-Christ to be in profession a Christian and one of that Church in which it is said he shall sit notwithstanding that others of whom the same thing was said viz. that they shall sit in the Holy place see Matt. 24. 15. Dan. 11. 41. were not in their outward profession members of the Church But this is an opinion as is elsewhere shewed groundless and the going out of Babylon Rev. 18. 4. which is there spoken of place not of former communion as suppose it were said to the Christian Churches that are now in Turky to remove from thence interpreted in this sence is a dangerous principle to breed Schisms and ruin souls in causing mens forsaking of the external communion of the Catholick Church of Christ that is in present being Which Church many think shall be always so conspicuous and set on an hill that it shall in all times out-number any separating Sect both for the multitude of people and extent of Nations And we have found it so till Luther's time the fore-mentioned Arrianism never ruling in the most of Christians who adhered still to the Nicene Creed but in some of the chiefest of the Clergy the Bishops such as were intruded by the Emperor the orthodox Bishops being thrust out and carried away with his inclinations and these chiefly in the Eastern Churches As for the objection of Antichrist's times those who think the Supposition that he shall be a professor of Christianity false will easily grant that the Church then shall be a smaller number in respect of Infidels but not in respect of Hereticks And for that objection Matt. 24. 11 12 13 Luk. 18. 8. we have seen our Saviour's words fulfilled in Mahomet and those seduced by him and in many heretical Sects also and in a more general corruption of manners even amongst the orthodox without any infringement of what is here affirmed See more of this in Success of Clergy § 1. First therefore those within the bounds of the Church that follow blind leaders without all trial are void of excuse Not because they do not quit all leaders absolutely and guide themselves by the Scriptures but because the Church of God i. e. the Pastors and Teachers thereof having our Saviour's promise never so to be blind but that salvation and escaping the pit should be always had in her as it in all times hath bin both in the Jewish and since in the Christian Church there are at all times other leaders who are illuminated with God's Spirit and whose light not put under a bushel but set on a candlestick shines before them whom they may securely follow So that the people are never left nakedly to the Scriptures or to the Law without orthodox Teachers and Guides therein or without an external communion lawful and safe to be adhered to nor such Teachers left without manifest testimony to all that will look after it that they are sent from God and that their communion is the true Church either by their shewing miracles and other signs of their mission or by their succession to and consent with the former Church which shewed miracles and by all other Sects tho perhaps at length out-numbring them yet discerned always to be few at first and to go out from them So under the Law the whole Order of God's Priests never fell so away at any time neither before nor in nor after the Babylonish captivity till the coming of Christ according to the promise Gen. 49. 10. and our Saviour's testimony Lu. 16. 16. Jo. 4. 22. Matt. 23. 2. but that there was always a remnant of them by the former marks to be easily discerned from the Apostatizers serving the Lord with a true worship and having a flock amongst the people obedient to them And at Christ's coming when Satan was let loose to deceive the Sanedrim and infatuate all the former chief Ecclesiastical Governors God gave all the people sufficient testimony by miracles
mystery of to attribute too great a virtue to give too great a reverence to the Holy Sacraments c. 3. You are to peruse their writings and books not of controversy but of devotion and instructions for the practice of holy living In which you shall find certainly what fruit their doctrines bear and what strength and virtue they contain in them and a great difference between them in their operations upon the affections a much fainter and more languishing heat from the one than from the other as indeed what fervent motives to piety could one raise from such foundations as have bin above-mentioned Some teaching as it were from Experience the other from Art some full of wit the others of zeal the one more enlarging the other straitning the way to heaven some laying light the other more heavy burdens but more full of hope and present consolations more punctual and particular in their directions as from those who have first tried the way wherein they direct others more high in their aim carrying men to these heights which the other imagin impossible to attain It remains that you observe which do inflame you to more sanctity and purity of life and to them adhere for there is the power there is the Spirit of Christ. And commonly the purer the Church the more with these writings doth she abound as others do with controversy and questions as error is ever unsettled laying foundations always learning but never coming to the perfect knowledge of the truth whilst one controversie still gendreth another after the busines is committed wholly to our reason 2 Tim. 2. 23 16. 3. 7 1 Tim. 1. 4. 4. Lastly after their books and precepts peruse their lives and practices by reading the stories of the pretended holy men of all sides and those the nearest to the present age wherein the relations are more certain of which stories those Churches that afford very few t is to be suspected that where little is said there is likewise little done that may be talked of In which compared you shall find a plain difference in their strictnes according to their doctrines and a transcendency in their virtues according to their principles some much more mortified and weaned from the world and accordingly more enlightened and honoured of God than the other in each of them their doctrines perfectly designed and copied out And here in perusing their lives as their rules and doctrines t is wisdom to adhere to those by whom you most profit And since we find in the Church which the Reformation forsook frequent relations concerning holy men therein as having frequent extasies and revelations doing many miracles foretelling things future exercising most rigid abstinences and penances every day confessing and communicating c and find not in the Churches reformed any one holy man at all of whom the like things are told by them in the histories of their lives methinks it follows either that all those writers of Saints lives in the Church reformed-from have bin most intolerable liars and this in all ages as well those before as those since the reformation began for in those ages we find the like stories or else that this Church is much more favoured of God than that of the reformed is But if those writers of lives have bin all such intolerable liars t is a wonder in so frequent a fault that no Protestants at all should fall into the same but all be so strict observers of truth that none of them should at any time for the advancing of the reputation of their religion make the same fictions But from their universal silence herein may it not rather be guessed that such things as are writ in these lives involving the testimony and knowledg of so many nominated persons living in the same time and place where such facts are alledged cannot be so easily forged and counterfeited as some would perswade Not that I affirm that there is any Church or Religion wherein you may not find some persons that are virtuous in their conversation and exemplary in their lives For many excellent men also have there bin amongst the Philosophers and in the heathenish religions walking only in the light of nature much more therefore may some such be found in any Christian Sect whatever who enjoy besides that of Nature the light of Scriptures But yet in that Church where the doctrines are purest and tend most to holines certainly will be found a much greater number of holy men and Saints than in any other and these also of a greater purity and perfection and consequently more honoured also with singular favors from heaven not unlike to those of primitive times To these three ways of Trials of Doctrines c me thinks upon the weighing of our Saviour's promise That the Gospel and the doctrine of his Kingdom should be published to all Nations may be added a fourth not unconsiderable And this is diligently to observe in the many divisions of faith and diversity of opinions that are in Christianity what profession of faith doubtles sometimes attested by miracles if histories deceive us not that was or is to which usually the heathen nations have bin and are now converted and of what perswasions and communion those men are whom God hath made his instruments of their christianity For we cannot rationally think tho it may so happen to some few particulars as the Goths are said to have bin at first converted by Arrian Bishops under an Arrian Emperor yet so that God's mercy soon promoted them into the faith of the Church Catholick we cannot rationally think I say that for the general the good God having promised to the nations bread would give them a stone having promised them the revelation of his truth would plant amongst them instead thereof a manifold idolatry as worshipping of dead men and of bread as God c as some would perswade us and would not give them the waters of life to drink of unless these poisoned with such errors as from which the external communion of all true believers ought to separate And if considering the promises of God Rom. 11. c. at the time of the conversion hereafter of the Jews to Christianity no wise man would doubt to conform to their external communion why should we not also chuse rather as more safe to be of the external communion and faith in which the Nations generally both who have bin and are converted to the faith have bin and are initiated and that upon the same promise Matt. 24. 14. Mar. 13. 10. as the Jews hereafter shall be Now to these I will add only one thing more That the most part of the Northern world have received at least the publick plantation and profession of the Christian faith in or since the times of Gregory the Great as the Ecclesiastical histories plainly shew In whose time we know what were the publick doctrines in most of the modern controversies and by whom
to the utmost corners of the world newly embracing whole nations into her bosom If lastly in all other opposit Churches there be found inward dissensions and contrariety change of opinions uncertainty of resolutions with robbing of Churches rebelling against governors much more experienced since this Author's death in the late Presbyterian wars confusion of Orders invading of Episcopacy c. whereas contrariwise in this Ch. the unity undivided the resolutions unalterable the most heavenly order reaching from the height of all power to the very lowest of all subjection all with admirable harmony beauty and undefective correspondence bending the same way to the effecting of the same work do promise no other than continuance increase and victory let no man doubt to submit himself to this glorious Spouse of God c. This then being accorded to be the true Church of God it followeth that she be reverently obeyed in all things without further disquisition she having the warrant that he that heareth her heareth Christ and whosoever heareth her not hath no better place with God than a publican or pagan And what folly were it to receive the Scriptures upon credit of her authority the authority of that Church that was before Luther's times and not to receive the interpretation of them upon her authority also and credit And if God should not alway protect his Church from error i. e. dangerous to or destructive of salvation and yet peremptorily command men always to obey her then had he made but very slender provision for the salvation of mankind which conceit concerning God whose care of us even in all things touching this transitory life is so plain and eminent were ungrateful and impious And hard were the case and mean had his regard bin of the vulgar people whose wants and difficulties in this life will not permit whose capacity will not suffice to sound the deep and hidden mysteries of Divinity and to search out the truths of intricate controversies if there were not others whose authority they might safely rely on Blessed therefore are they who believe and have not seen the merit of whose religious humility and obedience doth exceed perhaps in honour and acceptance before God the subtil and profound knowledge of many others This is the main course of their perswading at this day c. FINIS Concerning SALVATION possible to be had in a SCHISMATICAL COMMUNION AND Concerning the danger of living in and the necessity of departing from a KNOWN-SCHISMATICAL COMMUNION CONTENTS Tho it be conceded 1. FIrst That the Catholick Church contains in it not many opposit but only one external Communion § 2. 2ly That there is no salvation out of the communion i. e. internal of the Church Catholick 3. Yet Salvation must be allowed to some that are out of the external communion of the Ch. Catholick 4ly That of those who live out of the Catholick and in a schismatical external Communion there are several sorts 1. Those who make such separation who are not salvable without repentance 2. Those who follow such leaders and continue the division upon the same motives and passions not salvable without repentance 3. Those who follow such leaders in simplicity of heart and out of their condition considered invincible ignorance Such seem to be in a salvable condition tho incurring great disadvantages for their salvation § 7. 4. Those who convinced of Schism in such a Church yet rejoyn not themselves to the external communion of the Ch. Catholick tho consenting in all things with her Hindered 1. Either by some respects meerly temporal Such faulty but how highly is hard to determin 2. Or by some considerations and designs meerly spiritual Such less faulty than the other yet seem not wholly justifiable 1. †Whether they continue still in a communion schismatical § 9. n. 1. Which communion seems forbidden both 1. By the Scriptures 2. And by the Injunctions of the Church Catholick § 10. To which all owe obedience § 11. 2. Or †whether they communicate with no Church at all who seem of the two the less unjustifiable § 13. yet not wholly excusable § 14. 5. Those who 1. much doubting the Church they live in to be schismatical yet are not fully convinced thereof Or 2. convinced defer their intended reconcilement till an expected opportunity § 17. That several circumstances considered both these may or may not be culpable A Query What is to be done if the Ch. Catholick require some conformity to doctrines or practices against his conscience or particular judgment who seeks her Communion § 19. Several propositions tending to the solution of this Query § 20. Bishop of Chalcedon in Protest plain Confess 2. c. If Protestants allow not saving Faith Church and Salvation to such as sinfully err in Not-fundamentals sufficiently proposed they shew no more charity to erring Christians than Catholicks do For we allow all to have saving faith to be in the Church in the way of salvation for so much as belongs to faith who hold the fundamental points and invincibly err in not-fundamentals because neither are these sufficiently proposed to them nor they in fault that they are not so proposed 13. c. If they grant not Salvation to such Papists as they count vincibly ignorant of Roman errors but only to such as are invincibly ignorant of them then they have no more charity than we For we grant Church saving Faith and Salvation to such Protestants as are invincibly ignorant of their errors Id. in Survey of L. Derry 8. c. 3. §. in answer to Bishop Bramhal's objecting the Pope's excommunicating of such Churches Neither doth the Roman Church excommunicate all the Christians of Affrick Asia Greece and Russia but only such as vincibly or sinfully err such as are formal or obstinate hereticks or schismaticks For Excommunication is only against obstinacy Si Ecclesiam non audierit sit tibi sicut Ethnicus Publicanus In these Churches there are innumerable who are but credentes haereticis schismaticis because the Catholick faith was never sufficiently preached to them and these the Pope doth not excommunicate Nor doth he exclude formal Hereticks or Schismaticks but Juridically declareth them to be excluded For by their Heresies or Schisms they had already excluded themselves or juridically confirmeth their exclusion begun by themselves S. Aug. Confess 8. l. 2. c. Legebat Victorinus Doctor tot Nobilium Senatorum c sanctam Scripturam omnesque Christianas scripturas investigabat studiosissime perscrutabatur dicebat Simpliciano non palam sed secretius familiarius Noveris me jam esse Christianum Et respondebat ille Non credam nec deputabo inter Christianos nisi in Ecclesia Christi te videro Ille autem irridebat eum dicens Ergo parietes faciunt Christianos Et hoc saepe dicebat Jam se esse Christianum Et Simplicianus illud saepe respondebat saepe ab illo parictum irrisio repetebatur Amicos enim suos
and not to transgress it Now if the Church hath in a lawful Council excommunicated and anathematized such congregations surely this is a sufficient prohibition to all those who will retain any relation to her to have no fellowship at least as to the publick prayers and sacraments with them For Excommunication being an expelling of such from being members any longer of the Church's communion a fortiori is a prohibiting any who pretends to be a son of the Church from becomming a member of their communion If we may not give the holy Sacrament to them where they submit to us much less may we receive it from them where we submit to them If she will not suffer us to be mingled with them in her society much less in theirs If when they happen to come single to us we must avoid them much more may we not where they are gathered in a body repair to them If we may not joyn with them where there is also other good and orthodox society much less where we have none but theirs Now not to examin here what later Excommunications of any particular hereticks or schismaticks have bin of which every one that professeth himself a son of the Church is carefully to inform himself I wil set down some ancient Canons c for any thing I know still in force expresly prohibiting such society Concil Laodicenum held by the orthodox in the times of the reigning of Arrianism before the 2d General Council approved by the 6th Constantinopolitan Council Conc. in Trullo where as it is decreed Non oportet cum Paganis festa celebrare 39. Can. and Non oportet a Judaeis azyma accipere 38. Can. so Non oportet cum haereticis vel schismaticis orare Can. 33. and Non oportet haereticorum benedictiones accipere Can. 32. Conc. Carthag 4tum Anno D. 436. a little after S. Austin's death Can. 72. Cum haereticis nec orandum nec psallendum Can. 73. Qui communicaverit vel oraverit cum excommunicato sive Clericus sive Laicus excommunicetur Here may be considered also * the cautious and scrupulous practice of the primitive times in their letters commendatory called Epistolae formatae which because of the Church's careful avoiding of all mixture with sectaries were procured by those who had occasion to travel from one Church to another without which testimony they could not be admitted to their prayers c. And also * the strict separation of the Catholicks that was made from that potent division of the Arrian sect who tho in many of their Councils they required subscription of no positive heresy but only omission in the Creed of some truth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 see what is said hereof in Church-government 2d part § 40. c. yet were the orthodox tho much persecuted by the secular powers and tho by the banishment of their Pastors in some places destitute of the Sacraments strictly prohibited to come at the Arrian assemblies tho these having the same Sacraments with them and possession of the Cathedrals and other Churches and chose rather to relinquish their Temples to pray at home to live without the Sacraments nay to be without these in their sicknes and at their death than to receive them from the Arrians See Athanas. Epist. Synodica in Alexand. Concil Ep. ad ubique orthoxos Hilarii lib. contra Arrian Basil. Ep. 293. to some Egyptian Bishops Thus much of the Church's injunctions Now such a one as intends to have any relation and interest in her must know that besides our agreement in the faith and our being in full charity with the Church Catholick as being a body consisting of our fellow-members and brethren in Christ there is also a duty of obedience to be yeilded to all the injunctions and commands of the governors thereof as of our Spiritual Fathers in Christ which none that hopes to enjoy the priviledges of a son unless so far as he is by these dispensed with may without sin and great danger to himself on his own head disown and omit For what is this but as if a son should come and say to his temporal Father from whom he hath formerly run away that he embraceth him with all inward affection is sorry for any fault formerly committed will love and honour and do all the good he can for him but that he must excuse him if that for some reasons he doth not submit to or practise his commands except only that this our disobedience to spiritual Superiors is so much the more inexcusable for that all their commands are directed to the benefit of their children so that by omitting them out of this pretence of benefiting others such a one forgoes very much profit to himself None then can be a Son to the Church unless he render himself subject to her laws as well as affectionate to her practices Now of her laws the yoke of which if he reverence and bend to in some things he must not shake off in others non-communicating with Sectarists seems to be one and very considerable In which if some dispensations for good ends may be given by her yet none can be given by her for so far as the Scriptures have restrained us yet till such grant obtained from her he stands obliged to her commands Which grant from her if there were no other motive this is enough to obstruct that it is liable to be made use of instead of zeal to convert souls to many unworthy ends of serving our temporal interests and protecting a spiritual cowardise an avoiding of the cross and a not confessing of our Saviour before men contrary to Matt. 10. 27 32 37 38 39. See before § 8. n. 1. But laying aside this command of separating himself from schismaticks if he will be counted a Son he is to live conformably to all her other injunctions Now some and not a few of these are such as involve an outward communion with the Church And also many other of her injunctions see below § 14. which do not involve it if strictly observed by him wil quickly render him uncapable of any disguise to what party he belongs and bring the same jealousies and temporal inconveniences upon him which follow a publick reconciliation and which to avoid he yet stays out of the Church only with this difference that he shall incur likewise the odious aspersion of hypycrisie and dissimulation with which an open professor cannot be reproached And indeed setting aside any Church-command of such separation yet-a dissimulation or compliance tho it proceed not to the practising any thing in the matter of God's worship against our conscience yet that ventures so far as to use that sacred ceremony which is taken to be the greatest tessera and symbol of communion and by which all the world publish and distinguish their religions with those from whom he so much dissenteth and disalloweth I say a dissimulation that proceedeth so far seems to be
professed and that it is not such that the same degree of belief or assent must necessarily be given to all For no Romanist will say that nothing is stated or defined in General Councils or in that of Trent but only points de fide extra quam see Notes of Infallibility § 9. nor yet will say this of those 12. heads mentioned in the Bull of which this is a part Baptismum sine sacrilegio reiterari non posse but if this be an articulus fidei extra quam nemo salvus then is Cyprian whom they acknowledge a Saint damned And some Anathema's may be shewed in latter Councils against such other points as were affirmed by some of the Fathers See Conc. Trid. 24. Sess. 7. c. the contrary whereof was held by S. Ambrose and 21. Sess. 4. c. compared with S. Austin's known opinion But if it be said that after the determination of a Council t is fides extra quam c not before then is the matter sufficiently explained that the damnation lies not in the great moment of our erring in such a point or in the matter of the tenet but in our opposition of and division from the Church's judgment to whom we are commanded obedience and submission after we know that she hath determined it See Dr. Hammond Of Fundamentals 9 and 10. c. of our obligation to the additionals to the Apostles Creed made in the Nicene and Athanasian Creed very appliable as I conceive to the additions of other General Councils And again 2ly from hence it will follow that the clause Catholica fides extra quam nemo salvus esse potest must not be distributively applied to all that is mentioned before it for no Romanist will affirm this of all the decrees of Councils whatever nor yet of these twelve and the several branches of them which are before expressed nor perhaps of all the Articles whatever of the Apostles Creed But * must 1. either be understood collectively not that every thing that is contained in such decrees is absolutely sides Catholica extra quam nemo salvus but that all the fides extra quam c is involved and contained in or amongst those decrees whilst mean-while this phrase extra quam chiefly referreth to the ancient Creed placed in the beginning of this Bull. To which see a like phrase applied in the 3d. Session of the Council Tridentine Principium illud in quo omnes qui fidem Christi profitentur necessario conveniunt ac fundamentum firmum unicum contra quod portae inferi c. Where observe that this word unicum seems contrary to the extra quam here if taken distributively So if it were said of the Scriptures or of the will of God declared in them These are the Holy Scriptures or This is the will of God without the knowledge of which Scriptures or Will there is no salvation Yet would it not follow that without the knowledge of every part and particle of such Will or Scripture no salvation could be attained but that without the knowledg of some part at least thereof For if only some part thereof be necessary to salvation it verifies sufficiently the expression extra quam there is no salvation Or else * by extra quam must be meant only this That in opposing of such faith and sacred decrees of General Councils or of the Church when made known to them to be such none can be saved because such men must needs be guilty of Schism and Heresie and do remain out of the Church's communion But whatever the meaning thereof be this it cannot be even in the sence of the Roman Doctors That all the decrees of General Councils or of that of Trent or that perhaps any at all of that beyond the Apostles Creed much less all the branches of those twelve points named in the Bull to all which the Bishop subscribes or perhaps that all the Apostles Creed is necessary explicitly to be known or professed or else that such person cannot attain salvation See more of this Church-gov 4. part § â— Thus much concerning what Subscription is required in the Roman Church of those who have curam animarum by which perhaps it will appear not to bear such a rigid sence as many construe it in And as for all others the Council hath only these words 25. Sess. Supâ—rest nunc ut Principes omnes in Domino moncat ad operam suam it a praestandam ut quae ab ea i. e. Ecclesia decreta sunt ab haereticis depravari aut violari non permittant sed ab his omnibus devote recipiantur fideliter observentur To these I will set you down what F. a S. Clara saith in his system Fidei 24. c. 6. § Addo quod in modo reducendi errores expedit aliquando nonexigere ejurationem haereseos ad hoc ut in Ecclesiasticam communionem admittantur Sectarii ut olim Johannes Antiochenus fecit cum Nestorii fautoribus eo scil animo ut melius Ecclesiarum paci consuleret ut notarunt aliqui posteriores scriptores Et certe non solemus ad erroris ejurationem noviter conversos cogere sed displicentiam ejus reliquorum peccatorum concomitantium cum proposito de futuro persistendi in fide communione Ecclesiae ut juris sacramentalis est exigimus Alia quae potius forum fori quam poli spectant de industria utplurimum omittemus ne ut facile fit absterreantur And perhaps an orthodox Church may use such gentlenes towards novices with very good effect for those considerations of S. Austin's mentioned before this discours because Cum docilis factus fuerit tum demum disces quant a ratione c. and nos falsis rumoribus c. therefore it seems they entred before they knew certainly all such rumors to be false But here perhaps this scruple may be urged That tho a new convert be admitted into such a Church and communion without any universal subscription to all the doctrines thereof yet is he by such communicating with her reasonably supposed to acknowledge these and so the untruths if any be thereof especially those the belief of which is strictly enjoyned under Anathema and so gives the same scandal as if he had subscribed them which scandal ought to be avoided by the simplicity and sincerity of a Christian. To which I answer That from this commun cating with a Church wherein are some errors one cannot therefore rationally be supposed to hold all the errors thereof tho the holding of them be enjoyned under Anathema's Neither is any just scandal given by him as that he should rationally seem to do so for communion neither makes me accessary to the sins nor errors nor unjust censures of all those I communicate with especially where I have no power to redress them Neither can I from my submittance in things wherein I think I ought to those whom I account by Christ appointed my Spiritual Fathers