the Succession of the Church of England till the Reformation and I pray how came we to lose our Succession then Did the Reformation of those Abuses and Corruptions which had crept into the Church unchurch us Just as much as a man ceases to be the same man when he is cured of some mortal Disease Did not the Church of England consist of the same Persons before the Reformation and after A great many indeed disowned the Reformation but were not at all those Persons who were so active and zealous in the Reformation formerly of the Roman Communion And did they lose their Succession too when they became Reformers When a Church consists of the same Bishops Priests and People which she had before though she have not all the same that she had when she retains the same ancient Catholick and Apostolick Faith which she did before only renounces some Errors and Innovations which she owned before how does this forfeit her Succession The Church of England is the very same Church now since the Reformation which she was before and therefore has the very same Succession though not the same Errors to this day that ever she had and that I think is as good a Succession as the Church of Rome has There are but two things to be considered in the case of Succession Either a Succession of Church Officers or a Succession of the Faith and Doctrines of the Church 1. As for a Succession of Church Officers we have the same that the Church of Rome has Those English Bishops who embraced the Reformation received their Orders in the Communion of the Church of Rome and therefore they had as good Orders as any are in the Church of Rome and these were the Persons who Consecrated other Bishops and so in Succession to this day For as for the story of the Nags-head Ordination that is so transparent a Forgery invented many years after to reproach the Reformation that I presume no sober Roman Catholick will insist on it But we are Hereticks and Schismaticks and this forseits our Orders and our Succession together But 1. This charge ought first to be proved against us that we are Hereticks and Schismaticks we deny and abhor both the name and thing and if we be not Hereticks and Schismaticks as we are sure we are not and as the Church of Rome can never prove us to be then according to their own Confession our Orders must be good 2. However be we Hereticks or Schismaticks or whatever they please to call us how does this destroy our Orders and Succession The Catholick Church would not allow in former Ages that Heresie or Schism destroyed the validity of Orders St. Jerome disputes against this at large in his Book Contra Luciferianos And St. Austin allows the Donatists Bishops to have valid Orders though they were Schismaticsk and therefore that the Sacraments administred by them were valid And indeed if Heresie will destroy Orders and Succession the Church of Rome will be as much to seek for their Orders and Succession as we are which by their own Confession have had several Heretical Popes and no body knows how many Bishops Ordained by them 2. As for Succession of Doctrine which is as considerable to the full as Succession of Orders the great Articles of our Faith are not only plainly contained in Scripture but have been delivered down to us through all ages of the Church by an uninterrupted Succession The Church of Rome her self in her greatest Degeneracy did own all that we do in pure matters of Faith When we reformed the Church we did not make a new Religion but only separated the old Faith from new and corrupt Additions and therefore the quarrel of the Church of Rome with us is not that we believe any thing which they do not believe but that we do not believe all that they would have us The Doctrine of the Church of England is truly Primitive and Catholick taught by Christ and his Apostles owned by the Primitive Church and excepting the Dispute between the Latin and Greek Church about the Filioque or the Holy Spirits proceeding from the Father and the Son received by all Catholick Churches to this day which is as compleat and perfect Succession as any Doctrine can have therefore when the Church of Rome asks us Where was our Religion before Luther we tell them it was all the World over all Catholick Churches believed what we do though we do not believe all that they do they themselves did and do to this Day own our Creeds and Articles of Faith excepting such of them as are directly opposed to their Innovations So that we are on a sure Foundation our Faith has been received in the Catholick Church in all Ages But now the Church of Rome cannot shew such a Succession for her new Doctrines and Articles of Faith which were unknown to the Primitive Church for many Ages which were rejected by many flourishing Churches since the first appearance of them which never had a quiet possession in her own Communion and were never formed into Articles of Faith till the packt Conventicle of Trent This I think is a sufficient Answer to this Paper and it pities me to see so many well-meaning Persons abused with such transparent Sophistry FINIS Books Printed for FINCHAM GARDINER A Continuation and Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Stilling fleet 's Unreasonableness of Separation in Answer to Mr. Baxter and Mr. Lâ—b c. Considerations of present use considering the Danger Resulting from the Change of our Church-Government 1. A Perswasive to Communion with the Church of England 2. A Resolution of some Cases of Conscience which Respect Church Communion 3. The Case of Indifferent things used in the Worship of God Proposed and Stated by considering these Questions c. 4. A Discourse about Edification 5. The Resolution of this Case of Conscience Whether the Church of England's Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it unlawful to hold Communion with the Church of England 6. A Letter to Anonymus in Answer to his Three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about church-Church-Communion 7. Certain Cases of Conscience Resolved concerning the Lawfulness of joyning with Forms of Prayer in Publick Worship In two Parts 8. The Case of mixt Communion Whether it be Lawful to separate from a Church upon the Account of promiscuous Congregations and Mixt Communions 9. An Answer to the Dissenters Objections against the Common Prayers and some other parts of Divine Service Prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England 10. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament Stated and Resolved c. The first Part. 11. Certain Cases of Conscience c. The Second Part. 12. A Discourse of Profiting by Sermons and of going to hear where men think they can profit most 13. A serious Exhortation with some Important Advices Relating to the late Cases about Conformity Recommended to the Present Dissenters from the Church of England 14. An Argument for Union c. 15. The Case of Kneeling c. The Second Part. 1. A Discourse about the charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion before Luther 2. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is meant by it and what Tradition is to be Received and what Tradition is to be Rejected 3. The Difference of the Case between the Separation of Protestants from the Church of Rome and the Separation of Dissenters from the Church of England
THE PROTESTANT RESOLUTION OF FAITH Being an Answer to Three Questions I. How far we must depend on the Authority of the Church for the true sense of Scripture II. Whether a visible Succession from Christ to this day makes a Church which has this Succession an infallible Interpreter of Scripture and whether no Church which has not this Succession can teach the true sense of Scripture III. Whether the Church of England can make out such a visible Succession LONDON Printed for F. Gardiner at the White-horse in Ludgate-street 1683. THE PREFACE TO THE READER THese Papers which are here presented to thee were writ for the use of a private Person and by the Advice of some Friends are now made Publick We find how busie the Romish Emissaries are to corrupt our People and think our selves equally concerned to Antidote them against Popery and Fanaticism Two extreams equally dangerous to the Government of Church and State in these Kingdoms both in their Principles and Practices and both of them very great Corruptions of the Christian Religion and very dangerous to mens Souls Some of our Clergy have already been so charitable to our Dissenters as to warn them of their danger and by the Strength and Evidence of Scripture and Reason to Convince them of their mistakes and I pray God forgive those men and turn their Hearts who will not contribute so much to their own Conviction and Satisfaction as diligently and impartially to read and consider what is so charitably offered to them Ignorance and mistake may excuse men who have no opportunities of knowing better but such willful and resolved Ignorance which bars up mens minds against all means of better Information will as soon damn them as sins against knowledge And now it might justly be thought want of Charity to those of the Roman Communion should we take no care at all of them nay want of Charity to those of our own Communion and to Dissenters themselves who are daily assaulted by the busie Factors for Rome For the Disputes against the Church of Rome as well as against Dissenters are for the most part too Learned and too Voluminous for the instruction of ordinary People and therefore some short and plain Discourses about the principal Matters in dispute between us is the most effectual way we can take to confirm men in their Religion and preserve them from the crafty Insinuations of such as lie in wait to deceive Some few Attempts which have been already made of that kind give me some hope that several other Tracts will follow that the ruine of the Church of England if God shall please ever to permit such a thing whether by Popery or Fanaticism may not be charged upon our neglect to instruct People better Some Persons it seems whose Talent lies more in censuring what others do than in doing any good themselves are pleased to put some sinister Constructions on this Design as it is impossible to design any thing so well but men of ill minds who know not what it means to do good for goods sake shall be able to find some bad name for it Some guess that we now write against Popery only to play an after-Game and to regain the Favour and good Opinion of Dissenters which we have lost by writing against them But I know not that any man has lost their Favour by it nor that any man values their Favour for any other reason than to have the greater advantage of doing them good If so good a work as confuting the Errors of the Church of Rome will give the Dissenters such a good Opinion of us as to make them more impartially consider what has been writ to perswade them to Communion with the Church of England I know no reason any man has to be ashamed to own it though it were part of his design but whether it is or not is more than I know I dare undertake for those Persons I am acquainted with that they neither value the favour nor fear the displeasure either of Fanaticks or Papists but yet heartily desire to do good to them both But there is a more mischievous suggestion than this that the design of such Papers is only to raise a new cry and noise about Popery and to alarm the People and disturb the Government with new Fears and Jealousies Truly if I thought this would be the effect of it I would burn my Papers presently for I am sure the Church of England will get nothing by a Tumultuary and Clamorous Zeal against the Church of Rome and I had much rather suffer under Popery than contribute any thing towards raising a Popular Fury to keep it out We profess our selves as irreconcileable Enemies to Popery as we are to Fanaticism and desire that all the World may know it but we will never Rebell nor countenance any Rebellion against our lawful Soveraign to keep out either we leave such Principles and Practices to Papists and Fanaticks But when we find our People Assaulted by the Agents of Rome and do not think our selves secure from Popish Designs we think it our Duty to give them the best instructions we can to preserve them from such Errors as we believe will destroy their Souls and cannot but wonder that any men who are as much concerned to take care of Souls as we are should think this a needless or a scandalous undertaking I wish such men would speak out and tell us plainly what they think of Popery themselves If they think this Design not well managed by those who undertake it it would more become them to commend the Design and do it better themselves I know no man but would very gladly be excused as having other work enough to imploy his time but yet I had rather spend my vacant minutes this way than in censuring the good that other men do while I do none my self The Words of the Paper which was sent to me are these IT is my Opinion that the infinite Goodness of our Legislator has left to us a means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures which is the Church Now I judge this Church must be known to be the true Church by its continual visible Succession from Christ till our Days But I doubt whether or no the Protestant Church can make out this continual visible Succession and desire to be informed ANSWER THAT Christ has left a means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures I readily grant or else it had been to no purpose to have left us the Scriptures But the latter Clause is very ambiguous for the meaning may either be that we may understand by the Scriptures which is the Church or that the Church is the means whereby we must understand the true sense and meaning of the Scripture The first is a true Protestant Principle and therefore I presume not intended by this Objector For how we should know that there is any Church without
meaning to it 5. And if we cannot understand the Scriptures till the Church Expounds them to us how shall we know which is the Church and that this Church is such an infallible Interpreter of Scriptures The Church is to be known only by the Scriptures and the Scriptures are to be understood only by the Church if we will know the Church we must first understand the Scriptures and if we will understand the Scriptures we must first know the Church and when both must be known first or we can know neither it is impossible in this way either to understand the Scriptures or find out the Church For suppose the Church does expound Scripture by Inspiration how shall we be assured that it does so Must we believe every Man or every Church which pretends to Inspiration This is a contradiction to the Apostles Rule not to believe every Spirit but to try the Spirits How then shall they be tried I know but two ways either by Miracles or by Scripture Miracles are now ceas'd unless we will believe some fabulous Legends which all wise men in the Church of Rome are ashamed of and if there were real Miracles wrought they are of no Authority against a standing Rule of Faith which the Apostle calls a more sure word of Prophesie If then we must judge of these pretences to Revelation by the Scriptures which is the only way now left then there is a way of understanding the Scriptures without this Revelation for if we must understand the Scriptures by Revelation and Revelation by the Scriptures we are got into a new Circle and can understand neither Obj. But do we not see how many Schisms and Heresies have been occasioned by suffering every one to Expound Scripture for himself How many Divisions and Sub-divisions are there among Protestants who agree in little else besides their opposition to Popery And is it possible to cure this without an infallible Interpreter of Scriptures Is it not a Contradiction to common Experience to say that the sense of Scripture is plain and certain when so few men can agree what it is Ans. 1. Yes we do see this and lament it and are beholden to the Church of Rome and her Emissaries in a great measure for it But yet we know thus it has been in all Ages of the Christian Church as well as now and we take the same way to confute these Heresies and to preserve the Purity of the Faith and the Unity of the Church which the Primitive Fathers did by appealing to Scripture and the Doctrine and Practice of the Catholick Church which is the best way any Church can take when there is no infallible Judge of Controversies And if the Primitive Church had known any such infallible Judge they would certainly have appealed to him at one time or other and it had been impossible that any Errors or Heresies should for any long time together have disturbed the Church but we hear nothing of him for many hundred years after Christ but the ancient Fathers took the same way to confute the Heresies of their days which we do now which is a good probable Argument that they knew no better And the present Divisions of the Christian Church are no greater Argument against us than the Ancient Heresies were against the Primitive Church or than the Protestant Heresies as they are pleased to call them are against the Church of Rome For what advantage has the Church of Rome upon this account above any other profession of Christians Those who are of the same Communion are of the same Mind Thus it is among us and it is no better among them for we are no more of their mind than they are of ours nay notwithstanding all their pretences to infallibility most of the Disputes which divide the Protestant Churches are as fairly disputed among themselves witness the famous Controversie between the Jansenists and Molinists which their infallible Judge never thought fit to determine to this day They live indeed in the Communion of the same Church notwithstanding these Disputes because it is a very dangerous thing to leave it but they are more beholden to the Inquisition than to infallibility for this Unity 2. How do these Divisions and Heresies which disturb the Church prove that no man can be certain of his Religion If we can certainly know what the sense of Scripture is notwithstanding there are many different Opinions about it then the diversity of Opinions is no Argument against us if we cannot be certain of any thing which others deny dispute or doubt of then how can any Papist be certain that his Church is infallible For all the rest of the Christian Church deny this and scorn their Pretensions to it I may indeed safely acquiesce in the Determinations of an infallible Judge whom I am infallibly assured to be infallible how many contrary Opinions soever there are in the World But when infallibility it self is the matter of the dispute and I have no infallible way to know whether there be any such thing or where this infallibility is seated if diversity of Opinions be an Argument against the certainty of any thing which I am not and cannot be infallibly assured of then it is a certain demonstration against infallibility it self Unless we will take the Church of Romes word for her own infallibility we cannot have the Decision of an infallible Judge in this matter for she will allow no other infallible Judge but her self and yet this is so absurd a way that it supposes that we believe and that we dis-believe the same thing at the same time For unless we before-hand believe the Church to be infallible her saying so is no infallible proof that she is infallible and yet the very demand of a proof supposes that we are not certain of it that we doubt of it or dis-believe it When we ask the Church whether she be infallible it supposes that we are not certain of it otherwise we should need no proof and when we believe the Church to be infallible because she says so it supposes that we did before-hand believe that she is infallible otherwise her saying so is no proof The greatest Champions for the Church of Rome never pretended that they could produce any infallible proofs which is the true Church Cardinal Bellarmine attempts no more than to alledge some Motives of Credibility to make the thing probable and to incline men to believe it and yet it is impossible we can be more certain of the Infallibility of the Church than we are that it is a true Church and if a Papist have only some motives of Credibility to believe the Church of Rome to be a true Church he can have no greater probabilities that it is an infallible Church Now not to take notice what a tottering Foundation some high probabilities though they amounted to a moral assurance is for the belief of Infallibility which is to put more in the Conclusion than
Faith of the Primitive Church in these matters And therefore the great Advocates for the Church of Rome are forc'd to take the same course in confuting Heresies as they call them that we do They alledge the Authority of Scripture the Authority of Fathers and Councils to justifie their Innovations and here we willingly joyn issue with them and are ready to prove that Scripture and all true Antiquity is on our side and this has been often and unanswerably proved by the Learned Patrons of the Reformation But there are some very material things to be observed from hence for our present purpose For either they think this a good way to prove what they intend and to convince Gain-sayers by the Authority of Scripture and Primitive Antiquity or they do not If they do not think this a good way to what purpose are there so many Volumes of Controversie written Why do they produce Scripture and Fathers and Councils to justifie the Usurpations of their Church and those new Additions they have made to the Christian Faith and Worship If this be not a good way to Convince a Heretick why do they give themselves and us such an impertinent trouble If this be a good way then we are in a good way already we take that very way for our satisfaction which by their own Confession and Practice is a very proper means for the Conviction of Hereticks and to discover the Truth and after the most diligent inquiries we can make we are satisfied that the Truth is on our side If the Authority of Scripture signifie any thing in this matter then it seems Hereticks who reject the Authority of an Infallible Judge may understand Scripture without an Infallible Interpreter by the Exercise of Reason and Judgment in studying of them otherwise why do they pretend to expound Scripture to us and to Convince us by Reason and Argument what the true sense of Scripture is If the Authority of the Primitive Church and first Christian Writers be considerable as they acknowledge it is by their appeals to them then at least the present Pope or Church is not the sole infallible Judge of Controversies unless they will say that we must not judge of the Doctrine or Practice of the Primitive Church by ancient Records and then Baronius his Annals are worth nothing but by the Judgment and Practice of the present Church The sum is this There is great reason to suspect that the Church of Rome her self does not believe her own Infallibility no more than we Protestants do for if she does she ought not to suffer her Doctors to dispute with Hereticks from any other Topick but her own Authority when they vie Reasons and Arguments with us and dispute from Scripture and Antiquity they appeal from the infallibility of the present Church to every mans private Reason and Judgment as much as any Protestant does and if the Articles of the Christian Faith may be establish'd by Scripture and Antiquity without an infallible Judge as they suppose they may be by their frequent attempts to do it this plainly overthrows the necessity of an infallible Judge In a word not to take notice now how weak and groundless this pretence of Infallibility is it is evident that it is a very useless Doctrine for those who believe the Churches Infallibility have no greater assurance of their Faith than we have who do not believe it and those who do not believe the Churches Infallibility can never be Confuted by it So that it can neither establish any mans Faith nor confute any Heresies that is it is of no use at all The Church of England Reverences the Authority of the Primitive Church as the best witness of the Apostolical Faith and Practice but yet resolves her Faith at last into the Authority of the Scriptures She receives nothing for an Article of Faith which she does not find plainly enough taught in Scripture but it is a great confirmation of her interpretation of Scripture that the Primitive Church owned the same Doctrines which she does and she looks upon it as a just prejudice against any Expositions of Scripture if they contradict the common Faith of the first Christians and therefore when the words of Scripture are fairly capable of different senses she chuses that sense which is most agreeable with the Catholick Faith and practice of the Primitive Church but should any Doctrines be imposed upon her as Articles of Faith which are no where to be found in Scripture or which are plainly contrary to it as the new Trent Creed is whatever pretence there be for the Antiquity of such Doctrines she utterly rejects them she will not put out her own Eyes to follow any other Guide and thanks be to God she needs not reject any truly Catholick Doctrine in this way We still retain the Faith of the Primitive Church and are greatly confirmed in it from that admirable consent there is between the Scriptures as Expounded by us and that Faith which was anciently owned and received by all Christians Having thus shewn in what sense the Church is the Interpreter of Scripture I proceed now to the Second thing contained in this Paper That this Church must be known to be the true Church by its continual visible Succession from Christ till our days Now these few words contain a great many and very great mistakes The subject of the Inquiry is how we may find out such a Church whose word we may safely take for the true sense and meaning of Scripture Now 1. The Author of this Paper whether ignorantly or designedly I know not alters the state of the Question and instead of a Church which is an unerring and infallible Interpreter of Scripture which would be very well worth finding he tells us how we may know a true Church now I take a true Church and an infallible Interpreter of Scripture to be very different things A Church may be guilty of Schism and Heresie and yet may be a true Church though not a sound Orthodox and Catholick Church for a true Church is such a Church as has all things necessary and essential to the Being and Constitution of a Church this a Church may have and superadd other things which are destructive of the Christian Faith and very dangerous and fatal mistakes as we believe and are able to prove the Church of Rome has done and yet we acknowledge her a true Church because she retains the true Christian Faith though miserably Corrupted by Additions of her own as a man is a true man though he be sick of a mortal Disease Now if a true Church may corrupt the Christian Faith we have no reason to rely on the Authority of every true Church for the true sense and meaning of Scripture 2. Let us suppose that by a true Church he means an Infallible Church whose Authority we may safely rely on in Expounding Scriptures this Church he says is to be known by a continual visible