which we resolve by God's grace to hold fast This is that which hath been always held and taught by the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church This is the foundation upon which our Religion is built viz. upon the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone And therefore unless they can shake this Foundation unless they will impeach Christ and his Apostles unless they will charge the whole Church of God with the guilt of Heresie all their attempts and batteries levelled against us will be vain and fruitless The Church of England will still stand like a Rock against which those waves may break themselves whilst she remains unbroken by them Thus you see how impossible it is for our Adversaries to make good their charge against the Church of England and if they cannot doe it we may safely conclude they have not done it and if they neither have nor can doe it then is it a foul aspersion by them unjustly cast upon us For which their unjust uncharitable and unchristian censure I pray God forgive them Having thus secured that Post which was most likely to be attacqued by the Enemy I shall now take the boldness to make a short Sally upon them and take an account of their strength by considering some of the most material Arguments which have been offered by their Champions to make good their charge Arg. 1. Pope Nicholas as I find him cited by Bishop Jewel in the defence of his Apology p. 2. makes short work of it and very magisterially doth at once determine the whole matter For saith he Whoso denieth the privilege and supremacy of the See of Rome hath renounced the Faith and is an Heretick De Major Obed. unam Sanctam Dist 22. Omnes Ans To this I answer 1. If the privilege and supremacy of the See of Rome be an Article of Faith we desire to know in which of the three Creeds or in what part of the Bible we may find it for we would not willingly be wanting in our compliance with any Article of Faith. 2. If this be so then the Council of Chalcedon consisting of 630 Bishops and Reverend Fathers gathered together from all parts of the world was a pack of Hereticks for they gave equal privileges to the See of Constantinople with that of Rome 3. If this be so then Pope Gregory the great and I take him to be altogether as infallible as Pope Nicholas was an Heretick for he calleth him who usurps such an arrogant style the forerunner of Antichrist 4. If subjection to the see of Rome be a necessary part in the Definition of Heresie then all the Christians in the world except those of the Roman Communion are Hereticks for all of them as well as we do unanimously oppose the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome Arg. 2. Their Angelical Doctour and Canonized Saint S. Tho. Aquinas thus argueth 22. q. 11.2.3 When a matter is once determined by the Authority of the Catholick Church if any one shall obstinately gainsay such Determination he is to be reputed an Heretick which Authority saith he doth principally reside in the Pope Ans This Argument is founded upon several false Suppositions viz. 1. That the Church of Rome is the Catholick Church which we cannot consent to because we cannot believe that a part is the whole 2. That the Determinations of that Church are obligatory to all other Churches This we cannot agree with him in because Par in parem non habet imperium Equals have no authority over one another 3. That the Authority of the Catholick Church is principally lodged in the Bishop of Rome This we cannot believe because we have no warrant for it either from the Holy Scriptures or from the four first General Councils or from any authentick Antiquity Arg. 3. Protestants are Hereticks because they oppose divers Truths propounded for divine by the visible Church Ans This Argument is also supported by these false Suppositions 1. That to oppose any Truth propounded by the Church is Heresie This we deny We grant indeed that to oppose any Truth howsoever or by whomsoever propounded is an Errour but it cannot be called an Heresie unless it be such a Truth as is an Essential part of the Gospel of Christ 2. That the Doctrines of the Church of Rome which are opposed by Protestants are divine-Truths This we take to be a false Supposition for we do not oppose any Truth much less any divine Truth that is held by them but only such false and new invented Articles as are by them superadded to the Catholick Faith. 3. That whatsoever is propounded by the Church of Rome is propounded by the visible Church This we cannot allow because we know that the Church of Rome is but a part and God knows a corrupted part too of the visible Church Arg. 4. The visible Church is Judge of Controversies and therefore Infallible To oppose her therefore is to oppose God. This Protestants doe and therefore are guilty of Heresie Ans It is here taken for granted 1. That the visible Church is Judge of Controversies 2. That she is Infallible 3. That the Roman Church is this visible Church 4. That to oppose her is to oppose God. All which Suppositions are matters of Dispute between us and yet undetermined and therefore very insufficient grounds to build such a charge upon Arg. 5. Want of Succession of Bishops and Pastours holding always the same Doctrine and of the Forms of Ordaining Bishops and Priests which are in use in the Roman Church is a certain mark of Heresie But Protestants want all these things Therefore c. Ans We deny the Major For 1. Nothing but want of Truth and holding Errour can make or prove a Man or Church to be Heretical 2. Because it is not a Succession of Persons but of Doctrine that can secure a Church from Heresie And to such a Succession there are two things necessary 1. That there be an agreement with the Apostles Doctrine 2. That there be an uninterrupted conveyance of it down to them who challenge it Both which we have Arg. 6. Protestants have forsaken a Church confessedly very ancient and besides which there could be demonstrated no other visible Church of Christ upon earth Therefore c. Ans To this I answer 1. That against God and Truth there lies no prescription and therefore it is great wisedom to forsake ancient Errours for more ancient Truths 2. That there are many other visible Churches of Christ upon earth besides the Roman These are the most material Arguments I have yet met with by which our Adversaries have attempted to make good their charge of Heresie against us and how rotten a foundation these are to build such a mighty Superstructure upon I shall now leave to the impartial Reader to judge And because I design brevity and am unwilling to draw out this discourse to too great a length I shall now hasten to a conclusion The CONCLUSION IN this Discourse I have laid down such a Notion of Heresie as is generally received and owned by our Adversaries themselves and by that have strictly examined the Charge which they bring against us and I hope have made it very plain and manifest That the imputation of Heresie to the Church of England is a soul aspersion and cannot without great injustice be cast upon Her. Which is the only thing I have undertaken to make good in this short Treatise I am heartily sorry that there should be any occasion for a Discourse of this nature I am a great lover of Peace and Truth and do greatly abhor both Schism and Heresie by the former of which the Church's peace is disturbed and her Members crumbled into parties and factions and by the latter of which her Truth is fullied her Doctrine perverted and the whole frame of Religion put out of order And therefore I do earnestly pray as my dear Mother the Church of England hath taught me that all those who have erred and are deceived may be brought into the way of truth and that Unity Peace and Concord may flourish in all Nations I have no pleasure in strife and debates and if I were not commanded to contend earnestly for the Faith which was once delivered to the Saints should be very unwillingly drawn to engage in them But when I meet with a loud and ungrounded clamour branding those who embrace and endeavour to hold fast the holy Catholick Faith with the odious names of Schismaticks and Hereticks I cannot forbear according to my poor ability to stand up in the defence of injured Innocency and abused Truth This is that which I did design and have attempted to doe in both the Parts of this discourse and if our Adversaries be angry with me for it I cannot help it nor am I much concerned at it But if through weakness or inadvertency I have failed in my design or not defended the Church of England so well as I ought and as one more able might have done from those foul Aspersions which have been so unjustly cast upon her I humbly beg her pardon and do freely submit both my self and undertaking to her censure well knowing that she is an indulgent Mother and will put a favourable construction upon what was well meant I shall conclude all with a passionate intreaty and earnest request both to those of the Roman and those of our own Communion that they would all devoutly joyn with me in this humble and hearty prayer to Almighty God From all Sedition privy Conspiracy and Rebellion from all false Doctrine Heresie and Schism from hardness of Heart and contempt of thy Word and Commandment Good Lord deliver us FINIS ADVERTISEMENTS SOme Queries to Protestants Answered And an Explanation of Roman Catholick's Belief in Four Great Points considered 1. Concerning their Church 2. Their Worship 3. Justification 4. Civil Government Also lately printed A Seasonable Prospect for the View and Consideration of Christians Being a brief Representation of the Lives and Conversations of Infidels and Heathens as to Religion and Morality in our Age. Together with some Reflexions thereupon in Relation to us who profess Christianity Written by a Gentleman Both Printed for Luke Meredith at the King 's Head in St. Paul's Church-Yard
have been very dangerous For it is impossible Heb. 6.4 5 6. that they who were once enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost And have tasted of the good word of God and of the powers of the world to come If they fall away that they should be renewed again by repentance seeing they crucifie again to themselves the Son of God and put him to open shame These Instances do plainly discover to us that before conviction though men be in errour yea though it be a dangerous and fundamental errour and industriously propagated by them yet may their case be pityable But when they are better informed or at least have means sufficient for their better information if after this they still remain stubborn and contumacious in their errour and persist in the defence and propagation thereof this their obstinacy will alter the nature of their crime and render their condition very dangerous if not desperate 1 John 3.20 21. For if our heart condemn us God is greater than our heart and knoweth all things But if our heart condemn us not then have we boldness toward God saith the Apostle John. And Blessed is he who condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth Rom. 14.22 saith St. Paul. SECT X. The Church of England acquitted from the guilt of Heresie THIS notion of Heresie which hath been laid down and explained in the foregoing Sections being not only Ours but Theirs also being supported by so great and eminent Authorities as that of St. Aug. of their own Angelical Doctour and canonized Saint St. Tho. Aquinas of their great Martin Navarrus and of the most authentick Authority of their own Church at this day the Council of Trent in its Catechism ad Parochos Our Adversaries can have no colourable pretence to except against it And if it be admitted we are ready to joyn issue with them and contented to stand or fall by it The point in difference between us is briefly this Whether the guilt of Heresie according to this Notion be justly or unjustly charged upon the Church of England by the Church of Rome To acquit the Church of England is my task at present in order whereunto I shall take a review of what hath been said and as briefly as may be apply it to our present case 1. If it cannot be proved that the Church of England doth receive believe or teach any other Doctrine than what hath been received believed and taught by the Catholick Church nor broach any new Opinions thereby to divide the Church for any secular advantage to her self nor obstinately defend any false Opinions Then by St. Austin's rule before quoted she cannot be justly charged with Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be proved against her And therefore according to this Rule she is unjustly taxed with Heresie by the Church of Rome 2. If it cannot be made appear that the Church of England doth corrupt the Faith which was once delivered to the Saints nor teach any Doctrine contrary thereunto nor dissent from any known established Article thereof nor obstinately maintain any such dissent therefrom Then by the rule of their own Angelical Doctour she ought not to be charged with Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be made appear against her Therefore by this Rule she ought not to be charged with Heresie by the Church of Rome 3. If it cannot be made manifest by any publick Act or Record owned as Authentick by the Church of England that she hath renounced or forsaken that Faith into which she was baptized and of which she once made profession nor embraced any false and new Opinions which are contrary thereunto nor doth obstinately believe and maintain any such false and new Opinions Then by the Rule of their Navar. Doctour she cannot be justly charged with the guilt of Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be made manifest against her Therefore by this Rule she is unjustly charged with the guilt of Heresie by the Church of Rome 4. If it cannot be proved that the Church of England either doth or ever did neglect and despise the Authority of the holy Catholick Church or doth embrace and hold any wicked Opinions in despight and defiance of that Authority or with a wilfull and obstinate mind defend and maintain any such wicked Opinions Then by the judgment of the Council of Trent in their Catechism ad Parochos she ought not to be held guilty of Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be proved against her Therefore by the Judgment of that Council she ought not to be held guilty of Heresie 5. If there be not pregnant proof that the Church of England hath embraced some Opinions which are contrary to or at least not agreeable with that Faith and common Christianity which was taught by Christ and his Apostles or hath laid a new foundation i. e. made something to be Religion and an Article of Faith which really is not so being not built upon the Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets or doth openly teach any Fundamental Errours in Religion thereby to seduce and withdraw people from fundamental Truth and Holiness or doth stubbornly maintain and defend a fundamental Errour in Religion against repeated Admonitions and clear Convictions Then can she not if this Notion of Heresie be true be justly burdened with the guilt thereof But there is not nor indeed can be any pregnant proof of any thing of all this against her Therefore according to this Notion of Heresie she cannot be justly charged with the guilt thereof I am well aware that the Minor Proposition in all these will stiffly be denied by our Adversaries they will with great boldness and confidence tell the world that all this and more hath been and still may be proved against the Church of England But God be thanked though this may soon be said it can never be proved That they frequently call us Hereticks and both do and have all along endeavoured to represent us as such to the world we very well know and if they were allowed to be Judges it would go very hard with us we should not be able to acquit our selves at their Bar. But this we think to be a very unreasonable thing that they being Parties should be Judges too and therefore we appeal from them And if they ask whither we do appeal I answer we appeal to the Holy Scriptures to the primitive Fathers and to the four first General Councils But because this may seem to be either too tedious or too troublesome a way of trial I have made choice of one more short and easie I have here laid down a Notion of Heresie which is agreed upon both by them and us and therefore unexceptionable by this we are willing to be tried and by this to stand or fall I do not say in any of these Propositions that
they never charged us with any of these things for that I very well know they both do and have done but I do say that they neither have nor ever can prove any of these things against us And here now were a fit opportunity to examine the particulars of their charge and the validity of them but before I do that it will be requisite to make good our own ground and by giving you some account of these Propositions that either are or will be denied to make it appear that they are not the issue of a rash and inconsiderate zeal but the offspring of deliberate and well digested thoughts And though it be contrary to the Laws and Rules of Disputation to put one upon proving a Negative and therefore I need not doe it yet for once and to gratifie our Adversaries I will endeavour to doe a work of Supererogation To make it appear that none of all these things have been by our Adversaries proved against the Church of England though it would be no very difficult yet would it be a very tedious business For to doe it effectually I should be obliged to examine not only all the particulars of their charge but also the strength or weakness of every Argument which they have at any time brought to make it good which would take up so much time and paper as the designed brevity of this small Treatise cannot allow I shall therefore wave this and instead thereof take a more short and compendious but every way as effectual a course It is acknowledged by all that when an Adversary is pressed with an Absurdity which he cannot escape the Argument is conclusive against him If therefore I can make it appear that it is a thing impossible for our Adversaries according to their own Notion of Heresie to make good their charge against the Church of England I may safely conclude that they have never done it because they could not doe that which is impossible to be done A thing is then said to be impossible either when it is simply and absolutely so in it self or when it is so only upon supposition It is then said to be simply and absolutely impossible when it implies a contradiction or is altogether repugnant to the nature of the thing as for instance That one and the same Body may be in more places than one at one and the same time is a proposition so repugnant and contradictious to the nature of Bodies that he must be wilfully blind who doth not see an impossibility therein A thing may be also said to be impossible upon supposition of an incapacity or insufficiency either in the active or passive power in the Efficient or Matter that is to be wrought upon Though the thing be possible in it self yet if the Agent be not of sufficient power to produce the effect designed it is impossible upon that account As for instance if ten unarmed men should undertake to beat ten thousand well appointed and well disciplined Souldiers in open field it is possible indeed that those ten thousand may be beaten but not by those ten because they have not power sufficient to doe it Again a thing may be said to be impossible upon supposition of an incapacity in the passive power or matter that is to be wrought upon for if the subject matter be wholly incapable of receiving such an impression as the Agent would stamp upon it though there may be no defect in the active power yet in respect of the passive there is an impossibility Let us now apply this to the case in hand The Church of Rome chargeth the Church of England with the guilt of Heresie and the question is Whether they can make good this charge against her I do not question the power of our Adversaries to doe the thing if it were to be done but if it be not to be done then notwithstanding the sufficiency of their power there is an incapacity in the subject they are to work upon which renders their attempt impossible If therefore I do make it appear that it is impossible for them to prove this against us it will be a fair Justification of the Minor Proposition in all the foregoing Arguments and consequently a clear discharge of the Church of England from that foul aspersion so unjustly cast upon her by the Church of Rome Now this I shall endeavour to make good in this manner The Notion of Heresie here laid down I have made appear to be that which is allowed by them as well as us and therefore that must be the Standard we are to be tried by Their work therefore will be to make it manifest that there are some Doctrines received believed and taught by the Church of England which are Errours in the foundation of Religion and those obstinately defended and maintained by her Now the only way to know what Doctrines are received believed and taught by any Church or Society of Christians is to have recourse to the publick Acts and authentick Records of that Church or Society and that is no difficult task for ours are made publick and exposed to the view of all And if they know not what we own as authentick Records I shall here inform them 1. The Holy Scripture is the foundation of our Faith and the Rule of our Religion 2. The 39 Articles agreed upon by the Archbishops and Bishops of both Provinces and the whole Clergy in the Convocation holden at London in the year 1562 which are partly Positive and partly Negative where they declare the Faith and Religion of the Church of England they are positive and where they reject the Additions Alterations and Innovations of the Church of Rome they may be termed Negative 3. The Book of Homilies wherein the Doctrines of our Church briefly declared in the Articles are more largely explained These are the publick Acts and authentick Records wherein the Doctrines of the Church of England are to be found Art. 6. for she publickly declares That all things necessary to Salvation are contained in the Holy Scripture and that whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an Article of the Faith or be thought requisite or necessary to Salvation She also declares Art. 8. That the three Creeds the Nicene Creed Athanasius's Creed and that which is commonly called the Apostles Creed ought thoroughly to be received and believed for they may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture Unless therefore our Adversaries can find Heresie in the Holy Scripture or in the Articles of Faith summarily contained in the three ancient Creeds it will be impossible for them to find it in the Church of England because she doth not receive believe or teach any other Doctrine but what is contained therein or may be proved thereby This is that Faith and common Christianity which we received from Christ and his Apostles and
A VINDICATION OF THE Church of England From the foul Aspersions of Schism and Heresie Unjustly cast upon Her by The Church of Rome In Two Parts After the way which they call Heresie so worship I the God of my Fathers believing all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets Acts 24.14 LONDON Printed by J. H. for Luke Meredith at the King's Head at the West End of St. Paul's Church-Yard MDCLXXXVII IMPRIMATUR Ex Aedib Lambeth Nov. 30. 1686. Guil. Needham RR mo in Christo P. ac D. D. Wilhelmo Archiepisc Cantuar. a Sacr. Domest Advertisements of Books lately Printed BIshop Taylor 's Opuscula The Measures of Friendship With Five Letters to persons changed and tempted to a change in their Religion To which is now added his Moral Demonstration proving that the Religion of J. Christ is from God. Price bound 1 s. Two Treatises The First concerning Reproaching and Censure The Second An Answer to Mr. Serjeant's Sure-Footing To which are annexed Three Sermons Preached upon several Occasions and very usefull for these Times By the late Learned and Reverend William Faulkner D. D. Some Queries to Protestants Answered and an Explanation of the Roman Catholicks Belief in four great Points considered 1. Concerning their Church 2. Their Worship 3. Justification 4. Civil Government Price stitch'd 6 d. The Creed of Pope Pius the Fourth Or a Prospect of Popery taken from that Authentick Record With short Notes A VINDICATION OF THE Church of England c. The INTRODUCTION THere is nothing more frequent among those of the Romish Communion than to charge those of the Reformation with the guilt of Schism and Heresie They blacken us with those odious names of Schismatick and Heretick and though we do publickly declare our abhorrence of those Crimes and disavow both the name and thing yet must we be represented as such and under that Character be exposed to the World. Whether this Charge be just or unjust will appear by the sequel of this Discourse But whethersoever it be certain it is that it is generally taken for granted among them that we are such A late Authour of theirs in answer to this Question Why are you a Catholick having as he thinks charged these Crimes home upon Protestants at length summs up his harangue in these words p. 12. Now it being impossible for Protestants to excuse much less to justifie their manifest Schism to what purpose is it to enter into debate with them about particular points of Doctrine As long as the Charge of Schism subsists uncleared by them and this Schism grounded on pretended dangerous errors in the Catholick Church being Schismaticks they are Hereticks too and so condemned by themselves and consequently not to be hearkned to when they will raise particular Controversies since this one general Controversie determines against them all particular debates And now who would not think that here were a fair end put to all debates between the Church of Rome and us for if we be really Schismaticks and our Schism so manifest that it will admit of no excuse much less of any justification then this Gentleman is in the right that it is to little purpose to enter into debate with us about particular points of Doctrine But if we be not only Schismaticks but Hereticks too then ought we not to be hearkned to in any particular Controversie whatsoever But if this Gentleman should happen to be mistaken in all this and that we are neither Schismaticks nor Hereticks but that our Separation from the Church of Rome is not only excusable but justifiable too being grounded not on pretended but really dangerous errors not in the Catholick Church but in the particular Church of Rome then I hope we may stand upon even ground with them and be admitted to debate the matter in difference between us which if we be as they hitherto have done so I hope they always will find us ready to stand the shock and make good our ground As for the Crimes they charge us with we have as great it may be a greater abhorrence of them than they have let them draw them in the most frightfull shapes imaginable let them expose them under the most black and dismal Character that is possible yet can they not represent them worse than we already think of them So far are we from owning either the name or thing We believe they are most horrible sins so dangerous and destructive that Men are thereby out of the ordinary ways and means of Salvation they tear in pieces the Mystical Body of Christ and are an inlet to all those mischiefs that do or can happen to the Church of God. And after such a Declaration as this can we be thought to believe our selves guilty of them We are thus far agreed that Schism and Heresie are dangerous sins destructive of the peace and order the well-being at least if not the Being of God's Church and such sins as without a true and timely Repentance will unavoidably and eternally ruine those that are guilty of them It will therefore greatly concern all Persons as well Papists as Protestants to clear themselves of these Crimes To wipe off this scandal which is so unjustly thrown upon the Church of England and those in Communion with her is the design of these Papers And to effect this I know no better way than by laying open the nature and true notion of these two Crimes viz. Schism and Heresie and then considering to whom they are applicable This I shall endeavour to doe as briefly and as plainly as I can But because they are different Crimes to avoid confusion I shall consider them apart and in the first place shall begin with that of Schism SECT I. Of Schism in general THE word Schism in its original signification imports no more but only a Division Rent or Breach and is more properly applicable unto things than Persons I could if it were necessary produce several instances out of prophane Authours where it is thus used but waving these I shall at present offer you only one instance in which our Blessed Saviour thus applies the word No Man saith he puts a piece of new Cloth into an old Garment for that which is put in taketh from the Garment 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Rent or Breach is made worse Matt. 9.16 When therefore we meet with this word applied to Persons it is not properly but Metaphorically used importing a Division among them occasioned by misunderstanding diversity of opinions discontent or otherwise Now forasmuch as every Division supposes an Unity and that Unity broken it cannot be applied to single Persons but Persons in Society who live in Communion with one another and are obliged so to doe by some common Ties and Obligations There are two great and eminent Societies in the World viz. the Civil and Ecclesiastical and both these are the Subjects of Schism i. e. they are both liable to have their Unity broken their Peace
be warranted by the Church and to make his words good he produceth great Credentials from the Pope and many other great Men. This great and learned Prelate in his Exposition of the Catholick Faith c. hath these words We acknowledge a Head established by God Sect. 21. p. 50. to conduct his whole Flock in his paths which Head is the Pope as Successour to St. Peter the Prince of the Apostles and that the Papal Chair is the common Centre of all Catholick Unity Sect. 1. p. 2. And in another place he promiseth not to meddle with any thing but the Decrees of the Council of Trent because in them the Church hath given her decision upon these matters now in Agitation Which Council was called by the Pope's Authority only and the true sense of all its Decrees by the Bull of Pope Pius IV. reserved to be explained by him alone So that the great noise of the Catholick Church is at last dwindled into the Roman Catholick which we of the Church of England take to be a contradiction in Terminis the same with a particular Universal for they may as well say that the City of Rome is all the World as that the Church of Rome is the Catholick Church Besides this notion of the Catholick Church virtual is altogether new having no foundation either in the Holy Scriptures or in any Primitive and Authentick Antiquity and therefore we can by no means admit of it This is that Church by which and towards which we are charged with the guilt of the horrible sin of Schism And God be thanked it is no worse for from any Criminal Schism in this case I hope we shall without any great difficulty be able to acquit our selves 2. If we consider a Christian Church as it is particular then are we to understand it of a number of Men professing Christianity formed into a Society under lawfull Governours and governed by such Laws and Rules as are not different from but agreeable to the Laws and Rules of the Catholick Church And if any Man or number of Men who are Members of that Society shall without just cause separate themselves from the Communion thereof he or they so doing are certainly guilty of Schism Nor is every occasion which a capricious humour or discontent may suggest to us to be taken as a sufficient ground of Separation Nay though there be something really amiss or at least we are persuaded that there is so in the Doctrine or Discipline of that Church whereof we are Members yet ought we rather to suspect our own Judgments and suppress our own Sentiments than break the unity and peace thereof In a word unless such a particular Church shall make the terms of her Communion such as cannot be complied with without sin I do not know any other just ground of Separation therefrom Thus have I considered the subject of Schism in its greatest latitude And now let us see how far any thing that may be gathered from hence can affect the Church of England 1. If the Church of England hath made no defection from the Catholick Church diffusive i. e. from the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church which compriseth all Men and all Societies of Men professing Christianity Nor from the Catholick Church representative i. e. the Prelates and Pastours of the Universal Church lawfully assembled in a Council that is truly free and general If she profess no other Doctrine nor exercise any other Discipline than what she hath received from Christ and his Apostles and was constantly profest and exercised by their Successours in the primitive Church If she be willing to submit all matters in difference between Her and any other Sister-Church to be tried by the Holy Scriptures the primitive Fathers and the Decisions of the four first General Councils Then can she not be justly charged with Schism upon that account And that she doth and is willing to doe all this that is here supposed we are ready to make good whenever our Adversaries shall give us the occasion so to doe 2. If their notion of a Church virtually Catholick be altogether new without any foundation either in the Holy Scriptures or in any primitive and authentick Antiquity then the power and privileges which the present Church of Rome challengeth upon that account are mere nullities and consequently the Schism which she chargeth of the Church England with upon that score a mere Chimera which vanisheth of it self If they think to avoid the force of this supposition they must produce some good and authentick Record which as yet hath not been discovered 3. If the Church of Rome be onely a particular Church and no otherwise Catholick than her Neighbours are who profess the same common Christianity If she can have no more power to censure us than we have to censure Her then can she not without great presumption and great injustice charge us with the sin of Schism 'T is true indeed we do not joyn in Communion with her and the reason why we do not I have given in the third Section But it is as true that we hold the Catholick Unity and for the sake of that they themselves will grant that we may lawfully depart from the Unity of any particular Church SECT V. III. Schism is a Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church AS the Act of Schism is Separation and the Subject thereof a Christian Church so the Object in and about which the Separation is made is the Communion of that Church Now there are three great Bonds of Communion viz. Faith Worship and Government and whosoever shall separate either from the Catholick or any particular Church whereof he is a Member in any of these I do not see how he or they so doing can be acquitted from the guilt of Schism unless the corruption in some one or more of these be so great as to render the Communion sinfull to him who knows it SECT VI. I. Of Faith as it is a Bond of Communion BY Faith here I understand the established Doctrine of the Church that common Christianity which we all profess to own and embrace For it is not every Doctrine that is received and taught in any particular Church that is properly the Bond of Communion but such Doctrine as is or ought to be received by all It is plain and our Adversaries themselves will acknowledge it that we may and ought to differ from particular Churches in some Doctrines Otherwise why do they differ from us from the Greek Church and indeed all other Churches besides their own in many things On this score is it that we cannot receive their new Articles of Faith those additions which are made unto and those alterations which are made in the old and common Christianity by their Council of Trent We believe all that is contained in the Holy Scriptures to be infallibly true all that was ever taught by Christ and his Apostles and their Successours
the Primitive Church and in the Canons and Constitutions of the four first General Councils But if by Government we understand the Government of particular Churches then is it lodged in the Pastours and Governours of those Churches and is to be administred by them according to such Laws and Rules as are agreeable to those of the Catholick Church And in this case it can have no influence from one National Church to another for as such they are equal and Equals have no power over one another But whosoever is a Member of any such Church and refuseth all due obedience to the Pastours and Governours thereof doth thereby contract the guilt of Schism Now whether the Church of England or the Church of Rome by the violation of all these Bonds of Communion have disturbed the Peace of the Christian Church broken the Unity of the Universal and of all particular Churches and thereby incurred the guilt of Schism you may take a prospect in this short parallel which I shall now lay before you 1. As for Faith considered as a Bond of Communion What the Church of England believes and what she is ready and willing to comply with I have told you in the 6th Sect. But the Church of Rome not contented therewith added to the sacred Canon some Apocryphal Books which were never before received either into the Jewish or Christian Canon And as if the revealed Will of God were an imperfect Rule she undertakes to supply the defects of it by groundless Traditions She makes new Creeds witness the Trent Creed and that both without the consent of the present and against the Doctrine and Practice of ancient Churches Now which of these hath violated this Bond of Communion Judge ye 2. As for Worship considered as a Bond of Communion I have given you our Sentiments of it and told you wherein it consists in the 7th Sect. Now how far the Church of Rome hath corrupted that pure Worship of God both by her subtractions and additions I shall briefly acquaint you As for Prayer it must be performed in publick in an unknown tongue which the People understand not So that they must not know what they pray for and consequently cannot with any true devotion say Amen It must be offered to Saints and Angels and not immediately to God who glories to be styled a God hearing Prayers and this we take to be an Act of Religious Worship due to the Creatour only but by them paid to Creatures As for the reading of Holy Scriptures if any portion of them be read in publick it must be in Latin a Language not understood by the People and therefore impossible for them to be instructed by it It is true indeed they sometimes interpret some portion of Scripture by preaching in the Vulgar language but then the People must take all they say upon trust they must not without special leave be allowed the Bible in their own Language no not in private lest with the Noble Bereans they should examine whether those things be so or no. As for the Sacraments they have added five that were never instituted by Christ and taken away half of one of those which they cannot but own was of his Institution i. e. they deprive the Laity of the Cup in the Lord's Supper besides those many Superstitions which they have intermix'd and therewith corrupted the pure and primitive Worship of God. Now let any indifferent Person judge whether they or we have violated this Bond of Communion and consequently which of us may be charged with Schism 3 As for Government considered as a Bond of Communion What our thoughts are of it you may see in the beginning of this Sect. Now how far the Church of Rome doth differ not only from us but from the Catholick Church both ancient and modern and from all other particular Churches in this point will appear if we consider That she usurps a Dominion condemned as Antichristian by one of their own Popes disowned by the whole Church at that time and which we at present cannot own without betraying the Liberty of the Church That by virtue of this Usurped Power she imposeth unreasonable and unlawfull conditions of Communion and for non-compliance therewith excommunicates not only the Church of England but as some will tell you three parts of the Christian World besides Now if the Church of Rome by setting up and exercising this Exorbitant Power hath broken this Bond of Communion then who is chargeable with the Schism judge ye SECT IX IV. Schism is a voluntary and causeless Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church THese are the two conditions of Schism it must be voluntary and causeless and from these two conditions it receives its greatest aggravation and becomes a sin of the deepest dye and greatest guilt 1. It must be a Voluntary Separation I call it Voluntary to distinguish sin from punishment Schism from excommunication for though by the latter a man be cast out of the Church and made no member thereof yet strictly speaking he is thereby separated from the Church and doth not separate himself 'T is true that every sin is a voluntary act in the sinner but doth that excuse him or rather doth it not aggravate his guilt If a man be separated from the communion of the Church by some pressing necessity this may be his misfortune and not his fault Or if a man be under a constraint and have a force put upon him if he be frighted with threats and menaces or wheadled with promises and allurements if his fears and hopes those two prevalent passions in man be raised to that height as to darken his understanding and overpower his will these circumstances may extenuate though they cannot altogether excuse his guilt But when a man doeth an evil action not by chance but of choice not by force but by inclination not rashly and inconsiderately but deliberately and advisedly this makes his sin to be exceeding sinfull For thereby the Schismatick puts himself out of the ordinary way and means of salvation divideth the body of Christ despiseth and condemneth the Church of God and breaketh the bond of peace which ought to be kept intire and inviolate And therefore do I make this a Condition of Schism because if we can suppose a Separation from the communion of the Church to be involuntary it will not deserve that name SECT X. II. It must be a Causeless Separation c. THAT Schism in it self is a great and grievous sin and in its consequences extremely mischievous to the Church of God and to the Schismatick himself is agreed on all hands But how much greater must the sin needs be when thereby all this guilt is contracted and all this mischief done without any cause i. e. without any sufficient cause Now a Separation may be considered either as it relates to the Catholick or Particular Churches And then a Separation from the Catholick Church taken in the most comprehensive
sense is not Schism but Apostasie and it will be impossible for any man to find a sufficient reason for that But if it be considered as a separation from the communion of some particular Church then it is implied that possibly there may be such cause given as may justifie the Separation and if so then the guilt of Schism will lie at the door of that Church which gives such cause and not at his or theirs who separate therefrom Now I have already told you that I know no cause which can justifie such a Separation save onely this when a Church makes the terms of her Communion such as cannot be complied withall without sin And in this case methinks it is very plain That it cannot be sin to separate when it is sin to communicate for no Laws of Men can abrogate or dissolve the obligation of the express Laws of God. But if there be no such cause then to break communion with any Christian Church upon any other account will amount to a Causeless Separation and consequently incur the guilt of Schism If therefore the Church of England ever did or now doth forsake the communion of the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church or if she ever did or now doth voluntarily and causelesly break communion with any particular Christian Church then may there be some colour to charge her with the sin of Schism but if none of all this can be made appear against her then ought she to be acquitted of that charge Now whether any such thing can be made out against her or whether the whole charge will not fall heavy upon the Church of Rome will appear in the sequel of this Discourse SECT XI V. Schism is a Separation from the Communion of that Church of which we are Members THis is the last part of our Definition and I add these words of which we are Members because Schism imports a Division of some united and well compacted Body or a making two of that which before was but one On this score is it that we cannot charge Turks Pagans and Jews with Schism because they never were of the Christian Church nor joyned with her in any Religious Society And here the Church will be at a great loss how to fix the guilt of Schism upon the Church of England for if we neither are nor ever of right ought to have been under the Government of that Church then hath she no Jurisdiction over us nor do we owe her any subjection and obedience and consequently cannot be guilty of Schism towards her nor hath she any power to censure us for it We own her to be a Sister-Church and a true though unsound Member of the Catholick Church and so far as she holds the Catholick Faith and Worship we are ready and willing to hold Communion with her But we cannot submit to her Usurpations nor communicate with her in those Errours Abuses Superstitions Additions Subtractions and Alterations by which she hath so grosly corrupted the pure and primitive Faith and Worship of God's Church SECT XII The Church of England acquitted from the Scandal of Schism IF this Definition of Schism be allowed as I see no cause why they should disown it and not applicable to the Church of England then is she unjustly charged with the guilt of Schism by the Church of Rome Now whether it be applicable to the Church of England will appear by taking a review of the several parts of it 1. Schism is a Separation i. e. a breach of Unity or a dividing of some well compacted Body And here we are charged for breaking the Unity and dividing the Body of the Roman Catholick Church as they call it To which I answer if that Church were truly Catholick either in respect of place or Doctrine this charge would lie heavy upon us but being neither we shall be able with less difficulty to answer this Objection It must be acknowledged that the Church of Rome at the time of the Reformation and some long time before that had usurped a certain Power and Dominion over us and had exerted the same in such extravagant impositions as at last became too heavy for us to bear That Church had indeed by a long custome gained such an ascendent over our Fore fathers that she had enslaved their Judgments and obtruded what she pleased upon them she had unawares led them into many Errours in Doctrine many Superstitions in Worship and almost swallowed up their Liberty in Point of Government At length it pleased God to open the Eyes of our Fore-fathers to see the slavery and bondage they were in and how far they were gone from the Unity of the Catholick Church both in Faith in Worship and in Government To retrieve themselves many Efforts were made and great Endeavours used for a Reformation But none of those prevailing they at last bethought themselves of casting off the Roman yoke which by the assistance of the Civil Authority not in tumultuary but in a regular way was effected and when that was done then upon mature deliberation they reform those other abuses which were crept in among them Whether this broke Catholick Unity or no let the World judge If this be a Schism we must own our selves guilty of it but we see no reason to own it to be so yet for in all this we have done nothing but what we are able to justifie before all the World. For even our Adversaries themselves will not deny but that a National Church hath power in it self to reform abuses within it self But it may be they will tell us that we are not a Church but a faction or party made up of Schismaticks and Hereticks broke loose from the Church If this were true we should have little to say for our selves but a bare accusation is no proof They may do well therefore to recollect themselves and consider that before Austin the Monk set his Foot in England there was a Christian Church settled here under lawfull Governours which Church opposed the proceeding of that proud Monk and denyed obedience to the See of Rome for which they severely suffered If notwithstanding all this our Adversaries shall as they frequently do revive that old thred-bare question so often baffled Where was your Church before the Reformation Our answer is ready it was where it is the same for substance now that it was then It is indeed reformed and repaired but not made new There is not one stone of a new foundation laid by us the old Walls stand still only the overcasting of those ancient stones with the untempered Mortar of new inventions displeased us and that we washed off Durand Ration l. 1. What their own Durandus saith of material Churches is very applicable to the Spiritual If the wall be decayed not at once but successively it is judged still the same Church and upon reparation not to be reconsecrated but only reconciled If therefore our Church be the same for
substance now that it was before the Reformation then it is plain that by our Reformation we made no Separation from the Church we only laid aside the corruptions i. e. those unsound and unwholsome additions which the Church of Rome had made to the ancient Structure of Christ's Religion and when those were removed the Church which was by them obscured appeared again in her primitive Lustre and Beauty Now if the Church be the same still it will necessarily follow that we who are of that Church do now hold the same Communion in all the Substantials and Essentials of Religion with all other Christian Churches that we did before For as to all the Essentials of a Church we hold the same Faith the same Worship and the same Government now that we did before the Reformation and which now is and always hath been owned by the Catholick Church in all Ages And if so then can we not possibly be guilty of any Schismatical Separation 2. Schism is a Separation from a Christian Church i. e. from such a Society between which and us there is or ought to be a Religious Union and Conjunction That we cannot upon that score be justly charged with any Schismatical Separation either from the Catholick or any particular Christian Church I hope is sufficiently made out in the 4th Sect. of this Discourse to which I refer the Reader being unwilling either to give him or my self an unnecessary trouble 3. Schism is a Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church in Faith Worship and Government considered as Bonds of Communion And here we are roundly charged by the Church of Rome with a Schismatical Separation from her and a manifest breach of all these great Bonds of Communion But having in the beginning of this Sect. I hope sufficiently vindicated the Church of England from any Schismatical Separation from the Catholick or any other Christian Church in her Reformation and cleared her innocency as to the breach of any of these great Bonds of Communion in the 5th 6th 7th and 8th Sections I shall not need to say any more of it here There is only one thing which as yet I have taken no notice of and with which they often twit us viz. The Derivation of our Orders from them Mr. Harding in his answer to Bishop Jewel's Apology doth mightily triumph in this telling us That a Church cannot subsist without lawfull Pastours and Governours that there can be none such without lawfull Ordination by imposition of hands that we neither have nor ever had any such but from the Church of Rome that those who received that power from her becoming Schismaticks and Hereticks by their Separation from her forfeited that power and could not convey it to others that therefore we have now no such thing as lawfull Priests and Bishops among us without which we cannot be a Church that herein we have broken the great Bond of Communion viz. Government by departing from that Church from which ours had its Being and therefore cannot be excused from the sin of Schism To this B. Jewel hath given a long learned and full answer to which I shall refer the Reader He may find it in the second part of the defence of the Apology of the Church of England Chap. 5. Division 1. But to shew you in how empty and insignificant a show this mighty triumph ends I shall here offer some few things to consideration 1. That the conferring of Orders giveth no Power or Jurisdiction to him or them by whom they are conferred over him or them on whom they are conferred For do we not know that the Bishop of Rome is always consecrated by the Bishop of Hostia and yet I hope they will not say that the Bishop of Hostia is therefore above the Bishop of Rome 2. Let it be granted that we derive our Orders from the Church of Rome not as from the Fountain or Original of Orders but as from the conduct or means of conveyance I would ask this question do they believe their Orders to be good and valid or not If not why do they presume to exercise those high and holy Functions to which they are admitted thereby If they do then our Orders must be good and valid too and we have as good right as they have to that Succession which they so much boast of 3. That the Bishops and Pastours of the Church of England are true and rightfull Successours to those that have been before them being elected consecrated confirmed and admitted in as an effectual a manner as they were If their Predecessours were deceived in any thing they succeed them in Place but not in Errour For though they were indeed their Predecessours in Office yet were they not the Rulers and Standards of their Faith. And it cannot be denyed but that a Succession in Faith and Doctrine is far more considerable than a Succession of Persons and that God be thanked we are able to make good from the pure and uncorrupted Fountain In Doctrine therefore we succeed the Church of Rome as the Day succeedeth the Night as the Light succeedeth Darkness and as Truth succeedeth Errour 4. That those Bishops and Pastours who have once been duly elected consecrated confirmed and admitted in and to those sacred Functions do not by departing from the Errours and Superstitions of any other Church though it be that from which they received their Orders lose the power that was thereby committed to them but are still in a capacity to convey the same unto others 5. That the Bishops and Pastours of the Church of England being legally possessed of having duly exerted and constantly and regularly exercised this power the Orders conferred by them by virtue thereof are to all intents and purposes good and valid and consequently our Church cannot be said to want true and lawfull Pastours and Governours 6. That though the Church of England in her Reformation have cast off the Usurpations and laid aside the corruptions of the Church of Rome yet hath she not thereby broken any Bond of Communion with the Christian Church and therefore cannot justly be charged with the guilt of Schism For whilst she holds fast those three great Bonds of Communion viz. Faith Worship and Government in all the substantial and essential Parts thereof the guilt of that horrid Schism which hath so much bruised and wounded rent and torn the Church of God can never be laid at her door These things I thought good to offer to consideration and when they are seriously and deliberately weighed I do not doubt but that the ingenuous Reader will so well improve them as to satisfie himself and others that all this mighty triumph is no more than a vain and empty show 4. Schism is a voluntary and causeless Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church i. e. When men have full liberty to make their own choice having no force nor constraint put upon their inclinations nor any cause or
false Prophets out of the Holy Scriptures to whom St. Peter compares false Teachers in the time of the Gospel And by this you may easily discern them for if you find any at this day so teaching and so doing as they then taught and did you ought to mark them for false Teachers and such whose business it is to deceive you and privily bring in damnable Heresies But there is once place of Scripture more in which we have a more particular account of the Nature of Heresie and from which we may more plainly learn what it is that makes an Heretick And that is in St. Paul's Epistle to Titus where he gives him this direction Tit. 3.10 11. A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition reject Knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth being condemned of himself In this place St. Paul directs Titus and not onely him but all the Governours of the Church how to deal with Hereticks and instructs both them and us what Heresie is and what it is that makes an Heretick Hereticks are to be dealt with in this manner 1. They are to be admonished i. e. they are by the Governours of the Church to be warned to forsake that or those errours which they have espoused For that they are in an Errour is implyed otherwise there would be no occasion for an admonition 2. That admonition is to be repeated i. e. they are to be admonished a first and second time 3. If they continue obstinate after the first and second admonition they are to be rejected i. e. the Censure of the Church is to pass upon them and they are thereby to be cast out of the Society of Christians and avoided lest others should be infected by them What Heresie is or what it is that makes an Heretick he likewise teacheth us when he describes the Heretical man he here speaks of 1. A man that is an Heretick is one that is subverted i. e. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that is gone astray who hath turned aside from the right path forsaken and corrupted the true faith Thus their own Lyra understands it saying Lyra in loc A man that is an Heretick is one who having received the Catholick Faith doth afterwards corrupt it Gl. Ord. apud Lyr. And with him the ordinary Gloss agreeth telling us he is an Heretick who by the words of the Law opposeth the Law it self and puts his own sense thereupon that by the Authority thereof he may strengthen himself in the naughtiness of his own mind 2. A man that is an Heretick is one that sinneth i. e. one that sinneth knowingly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Int. Gl. Or as the word imports one who is fallen from the way of Truth and hath embraced the way of Errour violently opposing the one and as obstinately defending the other 3. A man that is an Heretick is one that is condemned of himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For that Faith which he once received and owned as true he now opposeth and condemneth as false saith Lyra in Loc. Or because he commendeth Errour and reproacheth Truth saith Gl. Ord. Having thus considered both the importance of the word and the nature of the thing I am treating of I shall now adventure to lay down this short but full and comprehensive Definition of it Heresie is an Errour in the Foundation of Religion openly taught and obstinately defended I call Heresie an Errour in Religion to distinguish it from Philosophical Errours for those according to the strict Ecclesiastical notion of the word cannot fall under that Head. As also to difference it from Schism for though Schism be an Errour yet is it not properly an Errour in the Faith It concerns not the Doctrine but Discipline of the Church i. e. Manners Order and Government I call it an Errour in the Foundation of Religion to distinguish it from Errours in the less considerable parts of Religion For in speculative points such as are matters of Controversie or mere School-niceties relating to times or places or other Circumstances of Religion not being plainly delivered in the word of God nor can be proved thereby Men may safely differ in their opinions without incurring the Guilt of Heresie I say this Errour must be openly taught because though men may be Hereticks by espousing some fundamental Errour and tenaciously holding the same Yet so long as they keep their opinion to themselves and do not endeavour to infect others therewith they are no Hereticks in the Eye of the Church The Church can take no cognizance of their thoughts nor pass any Judgment upon them In this case they stand accountable onely to God and their own Consciences Lastly I say that this Errour must be defended with obstinacy to distinguish it from bare Errour For though a man be as all men are subject to be in an Errour yet if he be willing to be instructed and upon better information to relinquish his Errour he cannot be said to be an Heretick Having thus stated the notion of Heresie I shall now proceed to consider how far it is appliable to the Church of England and for this purpose I shall take the Definition in pieces and consider each part severally 1. Heresie is an Errour in Religion 2. It is an Errour in the foundation of Religion 3. This Fundamental Errour must be openly taught 4. It must be obstinately maintained SECT II. I. Heresie is an Errour in Religion THAT every Heresie is an Errour and an Errour in Religion will be owned by all but that every Errour or every Errour in Religion is Heresie must not be granted for Errour and Heresie are not terms convertible It will be necessary therefore to explain this part of the Definition i. e. to see what it is we stand charged with before we go about to discharge our selves of it By Religion here Jude v. 3. I understand that Faith which was once delivered to the Saints and for the maintenance of which we are commanded earnestly to contend or that common Christianity which we have received from Christ and his Apostles which we all do or ought to profess and defend And by Errour here I understand an Opinion which is contrary to or at least not agreeable with that Faith and common Christianity Every Errour supposeth a Rule and an aberration from that Rule for what is Errour but a wandring out of the right way mistaking one thing for another esteeming that false which is really true or that true which is really false Heresie therefore being an Errour in Religion must be a going astray from that Rule which the Author of our Religion hath given us to walk by Now who is the Author of our Religion but he who is styled the author and finisher of our faith Heb. 12.2 viz. Jesus Christ the righteous And what standing Rule hath he left us to go by John 5.39 2 Tim. 3.14 15 16
Heretick for not to be and not to appear in foro Ecclesiae are the same Heresie then which is so great and heinous a crime an errour so mischievous to the Church of God and of so dangerous consequence to the Heretick himself ought certainly to be very well proved and made mighty clear and manifest before it be charged upon any man or any society of men who profess Christianity For though every Heresie be an Errour yet every Errour is not Heresie It must be an Errour in Religion and in the foundation of Religion too and that fundamental Errour must be divulg'd and openly taught i. e. there must be an endeavour to instill the poison of it into others thereby to seduce and withdraw them from fundamental Truth and Holiness and all this must be own'd stoutly and maintain'd obstinately before it can merit the name of Heresie Till therefore the Church of Rome by plain and undeniable Arguments hath proved all this particularly upon the Church of England she cannot without great rashness and presumption charge her with it A general imputation without particular proofs will amount to no more than a malicious scandal which will betray a great want of true Christian charity in them and the weight thereof will at last fall heavy upon their own heads Alphonsus de Castro de Haer. l. 1. c. 7. p. 79. For as one of their own Doctours saith Those that so rashly pronounce and call every thing Heresie not considering whereof they speak are often stricken with their own dart and fall into the same pit that they themselves had digged for others So far is the Church of England from openly teaching any fundamental errour in Religion that she neither is nor can be proved guilty of any such as is made appear in the preceding Section She teacheth nothing but the pure Word of God nor receiveth any thing as an Article of Faith or necessary to Salvation but what is contained in holy Scripture or may be proved thereby and therefore cannot be justly charged with the guilt of Heresie upon this account SECT V. IV. This fundamental Errour must be obstinately defended and maintained THIS is the last part of the Definition and that which gives spirit and life to all the rest for though we should be guilty of Errour and of Errour in Religion yea though that Errour should be a fundamental one and openly taught by us yet if we be not obstinate therein but upon fair and full conviction are willing to reform our Judgments and relinquish the same we cannot be justly burdened with the guilt of Heresie Such is the modesty of the Ch. of England that she doth not believe much less boast her self to be infallible as the Ch. of Rome unwarrantably doth As the Church of Jerusalem Alexandria and Antioch have erred so she or any other particular Church may err but such is her piety and humility that she is very desirous of and always ready to receive better information and thereupon to reform and amend her Errours She is and ever hath been willing to submit all her Doctrines to be tried by the touchstone of God's Word by the primitive Doctours and Pastours of Christ's Church and by the four first General Councils and therefore without great injustice cannot be thought to be obstinate or contumacious To make a Fundamental Errour become Heresie two things you see are required 1. That Fundamental Errour must be defended 2. It must be defended with obstinacy SECT VI. I. Of Defending a Fundamental Errour TO be guilty of a fundamental Errour in Religion is a great and dangerous crime but to persist in it and undertake the defence of it renders it yet greater and more dangerous for Religion is that upon the due observance of which depends all our happiness here and all our hopes of happiness hereafter and therefore to mistake therein is like an errour in War which is hard to be retrieved but to go on in so doing and set our wits upon the rack to invent arguments to maintain it is to form weapons against our selves with which to batter down all our hopes of future felicity Yet even this may admit of some alleviation for if those who embrace those errours be fully perswaded that they are that Faith which was once delivered to the Saints then are they obliged earnestly to contend for them or if in the defence thereof they do not contend so much for victory as for truth being ready upon better information to relinquish them or if by the misfortune of an ill education or otherwise they be prepossessed therewith and only hold them till they are better instructed not being averse to hearken thereto such an Errour or such a defence of it will not amount to Heresie But God be thanked the Church of England hath no need of any excuse in this case for she receiveth nothing as an Article of Faith but what is contained in holy Scripture nor defends any Doctrine but such as may be proved thereby and therefore it is a manifest injury and malicious scandal in those who charge her with the defence of any fundamental Errour in Religion 'T is true she contends earnestly but it is for the Faith that was once delivered to the Saints She strenuously defends the Religion which she professeth but it is because she hath received it from Christ and his Apostles and because it is well warranted by the Word of God. And if this be Heresie then is she guilty of it if not then is she unjustly charged with it by the Ch. of Rome SECT VII II. Of defending a fundamental Errour with Obstinacy HOW dangerous it is to espouse a fundamental Errour in Religion and how much more dangerous it is to engage in the defence and maintenance of such an errour I have already told you But if that defence be managed with stubbornness and obstinacy it renders the matter not only more dangerous but very desperate Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit Prov. 26.12 there is more hope of a fool than of him saith the wise Solomon If a fool offend it is usually out of ignorance but the sin of the other commonly proceeds from malice a fool sometimes will be counselled but he that is wise in his own conceit shutteth both his eyes and his ears against all advice and instruction And of such St. Hilary saith well They i. e. Hilar. de Trin. l 6. fools forasmuch as they know not the Truth may have their salvation in safety if afterward they believe but all hope of salvation is shut from thee i. e. who art wise in thy own conceit because thou deniest that thing which thou canst not chuse but know This is the case of him who obstinately defends a fundamental errour in Religion and it is this stubbornness and obstinacy that doth complete and perfect his Heresie and by reason whereof he is justly styled an Heretick But to make a man so obstinate