temporall felicities and this thing proceeding from so great an Authority as the testimony of Papias drew after it all or most of the Christians in the first three hundred years For besides that the Millenary opinion is expresly taught by Papias Justin Martyr Irenaus Origen Lactantius Severus Victorinus Apollinaris Nepos and divers others famous in their time Justin Martyr in his Dialogue against Tryphon sayes it was the beliefe of all Christians exactly Orthodox 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet there was no such Tradition but a mistake in Papias but I find it nowhere spoke against till Dionysins of Alexandria confuted Nepo's Book and converted Coracion the Egyptian from the opinion Now if a Tradition whose beginning of being called so began with a Scholar of the Apostles for so was Papias and then continued for some Ages upon the meer Authority of so famous a man did yet deceive the Church much more fallible is the pretence when two or three hundred years after it but commences and then by some learned man is first called a Tradition Apostolicall And so it hapned in the case of the Arrian heresy which the Nicene Fathers did confute by objecting a contrary Tradition Apostolicall as Theodoret reports Lib. 1. hist. c. 8. and yet if they had not had better Arguments from Scripture then from Tradition they would have faild much in so good a cause for this very pretence the Arrians themselves made and desired to be tryed by the Fathers of the first three hundred years which was a confutation sufficient to them who pretended Vide Petaâ— in Epiph. her 69. a clear Tradition because it was unimaginable that the Tradition should leap so as not to come from the first to the last by the middle But that this tryall was sometime declined by that excellent man S. Athanasius although at other times confidently and truly pretended it was an Argument the Tradition was not so * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matt. diâ—l ad Tryph. Iud. clear but both sides might with some fairnesse pretend to it And therefore one of the prime Founders of their heresy the Heretick †Euse. l. 5. c. ult Artemon having observed the advantage might be taken by any Sect that would pretend Tradition because the medium was plausible and consisting of so many particulars that it was hard to be redargued pretended a Tradition from the Apostles that Christ was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that the Tradition did descend by a constant succession in the Church of Rome to Pope Victors time inclusively and till Zepherinus had interrupted the series and corrupted the Doctrine which pretence if it had not had some appearance of truth so as possibly to abuse the Church had not been worthy of confutation which yet was with care undertaken by an old Writer out of whom Eusebius transcribes a large passage to reprove the vanity of the pretender But I observe from hence that it was usuall to pretend to Tradition and that it was easier pretended then confuted and I doubt not but oftner done then discovered A great Question arose in Africa concerning the Baptism of Hereticks whether it were valid or no. S. Cyprian and his party appealed to Scripture Stephen Bishop of Rome and his party would be judged by custome and Tradition Ecclesiasticall See how much the nearer the Question was to a determination either that probation was not accounted by S. Cyprian and the Bishops both of Asia and Africk to be a good Argument and sufficient to determine them or there was no certain Tradition against them for unlesse one of these two doe it nothing could excuse them from opposing a known truth unlesse peradventure S. Cyprian Firmilian the Bishops of Galatia Cappadocia and almost two parts of the World were ignorant of such a Tradition for they knew of none such and some of them expresly denyed it And the sixth generall Synod approves of the Canon made in the Councell of Carthage under Cyprian upon this very ground because in praedictorum praesulum locis solum secundum Can. 2. traditam eis consuetudinem servatus est they had a particular Tradition for Rebaptization and therefore there could be no Tradition Universall against it or if there were they knew not of it but much for the contrary and then it would be remembred that a conceal'd Tradition was like a silent Thunder or a Law not promulgated it neither was known nor was obligatory And I shall observe this too that this very Tradition was so obscure and was so obscurely delivered silently proclaimed that S. Austin who disputed against the Donatists upon this very Question was not able to prove it but L. 5. de baptism contr Donat. c. 23. by a consequence which he thought probale and credible as appears in his discourse against the Donatists The Apostles saith S. Austin prescrib'd nothing in this particular But this custome which is contrary to Cyprian ought to be believed to have come from their Tradition as many other things which the Catholike Church observes That 's all the ground and all the reason nay the Church did waver concerning that Question and before the decision of a Councell Cyprian and others might dissent without breach of charity It was plain then there was no clear Tradition Lib. 1. de baptism c. 18. in the Question possibly there might be a custome in some Churches postnate to the times of the Apostles but nothing that was obligatory no Tradition Apostolicall But this was a suppletory device ready at hand when ever they needed it and De peccat original l. 2. c. 40. contra Pelagi Caelest S. Austin confuted the Pelagians in the Question of Originall sinne by the custome of exorcisme and insufflation which S. Austin said came from the Apostles by Tradition which yet was then and is now so impossible to be prov'd that he that shall affirm it shall gaine only the reputation of a bold man and a confident 2. I consider if the report of Traditions in the Primitive Numb 4. times so neare the Ages Apostolicall was so uncertain that they were fain to aym at them by conjectures and grope as in the dark the uncertainty is much encreased since because there are many famous Writers whose works are lost which yet if they had continued they might have been good records to us as Clemens Romanus Egesippus Nepos Coracion Dionysius Areopagite of Alexandria of Corinth Firmilian and many more And since we see pretences have been made without reason in those Ages where they might better have been confuted then now they can it is greater prudence to suspect any later pretences since so many Sects have been so many warres so many corruptions in Authors so many Authors lost so much ignorance hath intervened and so many interests have been served that now the rule is to be altered and whereas it was of old time credible that that was Apostolicall whose beginning they
this often hapned I think S. Austin is the chiefe Argument and Authority we have for the Assumption of the Virgin Mary the Baptism of Infants is called a Tradition by Origen alone at first and from Salmeron disput 51. in Rom. him by others The procession of the holy Ghost from the Sonne which is an Article the Greek Church disavowes derives from the Tradition Apostolicall as it is pretended and yet before S. Austin we heare nothing of it very cleerly or certainly for as much as that whole mystery concerning the blessed Spirit was so little explicated in Scripture and so little derived to them by Tradition that till the Councell of Nice you shall hardly find any form of worship or personall addresse of devotion to the holy Spirit as Erasmus observes and I think the contrary will very hardly be verified And for this particular in which I instance whatsoever is in Scripture concerning it is against that which the Church of Rome calls Tradition which makes the Greeks so confident as they are of the point and is an Argument of the vanity of some things which for no greater reason are called Traditions but because one man hath said so and that they can be proved by no better Argument to be true Now in this case wherein Tradition descends upon us with unequall certainty it would be very unequall to require of us an absolute beliefe of every thing not written for feare we be accounted to slight Tradition Apostolicall And since no thing can require our supreme assent but that which is truly Catholike and Apostolike and to such a Tradition is requir'd as Irenaeus sayes the consent of all those Churches which the Apostles planted and where they did preside this topick will be of so little use in judging heresies that besides what is deposited in Scripture it cannot be proved in any thing but in the Canon of Scripture it selfe and as it is now received even in that there is some variety And therefore there is wholy a mistake in this businesse for when the Fathers appeal to Tradition and with much earnestnesse Numb 8. and some clamour they call upon Hereticks to conform to or to be tryed by Tradition it is such a Tradition as delivers the fundamentall points of Christianity which were also recorded in Scripture But because the Canon was not yet perfectly consign'd they call'd to that testimony they had which was the testimony of the Churches Apostolicall whose Bishops and Priests being the Antistites religionis did believe and preach Christian Religion and conserve all its great mysteries according as they had been taught Irenaeus calls this a Tradition Apostolicall Christum accepisse calicem dixisse sanguinem suum esse docuisse novam oblationem novi Testamenti quam Ecclesia per Apostolos accipiens offert per totum mundum And the Fathers in these Ages confute Hereticks by Ecclesiasticall Tradition that is they confront against their impious and blaspemous doctrines that Religion which the Apostles having taught to the Churches where they did preside their Successors did still preach and for a long while together suffered not the enemy to sow tares amongst their wheat And yet these doctrines which they called Traditions were nothing but such fundamentall truths which were in Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Irenaeus in Eusebius observes in the instance of Polycarpus and it is manifest by considering Lib. 5. cap. 20. what heresies they fought against the heresies of Ebion Cerinthus Nicolaitans Valentinians Carpocratians persons that Vid. Irenae l. 3 4. cont haeres denyed the Sonne of God the Unity of the God-head that preached impurity that practised Sorcery and Witch-craft And now that they did rather urge Tradition against them then Scripture was because the publike Doctrine of all the Apostolicall Churches was at first more known and famous then many parts of the Scripture and because some Hereticks denyed S. Lukes Gospel some received none but S. Matthews some rejected all S. Pauls Epistles and it was a long time before the whole Canon was consign'd by universall Testimony some Churches having one part some another Rome her selfe had not all so that in this case the Argument from Tradition was the most famous the most certain and the most prudent And now according to this rule they had more Traditions then we have and Traditions did by degrees lessen as they came to be written and their necessity was lesse as the knowledge of them was ascetained to us by a better Keeper of Divine Truths All that great mysteriousnesse of Christs Priest-hood the unity of his Sacrifice Christs Advocation and Intercession for us in Heaven and many other excellent Doctrines might very well be accounted Traditions before S. Pauls Epistle to the Hebrews was publish'd to all the World but now they are written truths and if they had not possibly we might either have lost them quite or doubted of them as we doe of many other Traditions by reason of the insufficiency of the propounder And therefore it was that S. Peter took order that the Gospel 2 Pet. 1. 13. should be Writ for he had promised that he would doe something which after his decease should have these things in remembrance He knew it was not safe trusting the report of men where the fountain might quickly run dry or be corrupted so insensibly that no cure could be found for it nor any just notice taken of it till it were incurable And indeed there is scarce any thing but what is written in Scripture that can with any confidence of Argument pretend to derive from the Apostles except ritualls and manners of ministration but no doctrines or speculative mysteries are so transmitted to us by so cleer a current that we may see a visible channell and trace it to the Primitive fountaines It is said to be a Tradition Apostolicall that no Priest should baptize without chrism and the command of the Bishop Suppose it were yet we cannot be oblig'd to believe it with much confidence because we have but little proofe for it scarce any thing but the single testimony of S. Hierom. And yet if it were this is but a rituall of which in passing by I shall give that account That Dialog adv Lucifer suppose this and many more ritualls did derive clearly from Tradition Apostolicall which yet but very few doe yet it is hard that any Church should be charged with crime for not observing such ritualls because we see some of them which certainly did derive from the Apostles are expir'd and gone out in a desuetude such as are abstinence from blood and from things strangled the coenobitick life of secular persons the colledge of widowes to worship standing upon the Lords day to give milk and honey to the newly baptized and many more of the like nature now there having been no mark to distinguish the necessity of one from the indifferency of the other they are all
to be counted true believers rather then good livers they would rather endeavour to live well then to bee accounted of a right opinion in things beside the Creed For my own particular I cannot but expect that God in his Justice should enlarge the bounds of the Turkish Empire or some other way punish Christians by reason of their pertinacious disputing about things unnecessary undeterminable and unprofitable and for their hating and persecuting their brethren which should be as dear to them as their own lives for not consenting to one anothers follies and senselesse vanities How many volumnes have been writ about Angels about immaculate conception about originall sin when that all that is solid reason or clear Revelation in all these three Articles may be reasonably enough comprized in fourty lines And in these trifles and impertinencies men are curiously busie while they neglect those glorious precepts of Christianity and holy life which are the glories of our Religion and would enable us to a happy eternity My Lord Thus farre my thoughts have carried me and then I thought I had reason to goe further and to examine the proper grounds upon which these perswasions might rely and stand firme in case any body should contest against them For possibly men may be angry at me and my design for I doe all them great displeasure who think no end is then well served when their interest is disserved and but that I have writ so untowardly and heavily that I am not worth a confutation possibly some or other might be writing against me But then I must tell them I am prepared of an answer before hand For I think I have spoken reason in my Book and examined it with all the severity I have and if after all this I be deceiv'd this confirms me in my first opinion and becomes a new Argument to me that I have spoken reason for it furnishes me with a new instance that it is necessary there should bee a mutuall complyance and Toleration because even then when a man thinks he hath most reason to bee confident hee may easily bee deceived For I am sure I have no other design but the prosecution and advantage of truth and I may truly use the words of Gregory Nazianzen Non studemus paci in detrimentum verae doctrinae .... ut facilitatis mansuetudinis famam colligamus But I have writ this because I thought it was necessary and seasonable and charitable and agreeable to the great precepts and design of Christianity consonant to the practise of the Apostles and of the best Ages of the Church most agreeable to Scripture and reason to revelation and the nature of the thing and it is such a Doctrine that if there be variety in humane affaires if the event of things be not settled in a durable consistence but is changeable every one of us all may have need of it I shall only therefore desire that they who will reade it may come to the reading it with as much simplicity of purposes and unmixed desires of truth as I did to the writing it and that no man trouble himselfe with me or my discourse that thinks before hand that his opinion cannot be reasonably altered If he thinks me to be mistaken before he tries let him also think that hee may be mistaken too and that he who judges before he heares is mistaken though he gives a right sentence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aristoph in Pluto Was as good counsell But at a venture I shall leave this sentence of Solomon to his consideration A wise man feareth and departeth from evill but a foole rageth and is confident 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a trick of boyes and bold young fellowes sayes Aristotle but they who either know themselves or things or persons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Peradventure yea peradventure no is very often the wisest determination of a Question For there are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Apostle notes 2 Tim. 2. foolish and unlearned Questions and it were better to stop the current of such fopperies by silence then by disputing them convey them to Posterity And many things there are of more profit which yet are of no more certainty and therefore boldnesse of assertion except it be in matters of Faith and clearest Revelation is an Argument of the vanity of the man never of the truth of the proposition for to such matters the saying of Xenophanes in Varro is pertinent and applicable Hominis est haec opinari Dei scire God only knowes them and we conjecture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And although I be as desirous to know what I should and what I should not as any of my Brethren the Sons of Adam yet I find that the more I search the further I am from being satisfied and make but few discoveries save of my own ignorance and therefore I am desirous to follow the example of a very wise Personage Iulius Agricola of whom Tacitus gave this testimony Retinuit que quod est difficillimum ex scientiâ modum or that I may take my precedent from within the pale of the Church it was the saying of S. Austin Mallem quidem eorum quae à me quaesivisti habere scientiam quam ignorantiam sed quia id nondum potui magis eligo cautam ignorantiam confiteri quam falsam scientiam profiteri And these words doe very much expresse my sense But if there be any man so confident as Luther sometimes was who said that hee could expound all Scripture or so vaine as Eckius who in his Chrysopassus ventur'd upon the highest and most mysterious Question of Predestination ut in eâ juveniles possit calores exercere such persons as these or any that is furious in his opinion will scorn me and my Discourse but I shall not bee much mov'd at it only I shall wish that I had as much knowledge as they think me to want and they as much as they believe themselves to have In the meane time Modesty were better for us both and indeed for all men For when men indeed are knowing amongst other things they are able to separate certainties from uncertainties If they be not knowing it is pity that their ignorance should bee triumphant or discompose the publike peace or private confidence And now my Lord that I have inscrib'd this Book to your Lordship although it be a design of doing honour to my selfe that I have markt it with so honour'd and beloved a Name might possibly need as much excuse as it does pardon but that your Lordship knowes your own for out of your Mines I have digg'd the Minerall only I have stampt it with my own image as you may perceive by the deformities which are in it But your great Name in letters will adde so much value to it as to make it obtaine its pardon amongst all them that know how to value you and all your relatives and dependants by the proportion of relation
at this day vex Christendome And both speak true The first Ages speak greatest truth but least pertinently The next Ages the Ages of the foure generall Councels spake something not much more pertinently to the present Questions but were not so likely to speak true by reason of their dispositions contrary to the capacity and circumstance of the first Ages and if they speak wisely as Doctors yet not certainly as witnesses of such propositions which the first Ages noted not and yet unlesse they had noted could not possibly be Traditions And therefore either of them will be lesse uselesse as to our present affaires For indeed the Questions which now are the publike trouble were not considered or thought upon for many hundred years and therefore prime Tradition there is none as to our purpose and it will be an insufficient medium to be used or pretended in the determination and to dispute concerning the truth or necessity of Traditions in the Questions of out times is as if Historians disputing about a Question in the English Story should fall on wrangling whether Livie or Plutarch were the best Writers And the earnest disputes about Traditions are to no better purpose For no Church at this day admits the one halfe of those things which certainly by the Fathers were called Traditions Apostolicall and no Testimony of ancient Writers does consign the one halfe of the present Questions to be or not to be Traditions So that they who admit only the Doctrine and Testimony of the first Ages cannot be determined in most of their doubts which now trouble us because their Writings are of matters wholy differing from the present disputes and they which would bring in after Ages to the Authority of a competent judge or witnesse say the same thing for they plainly confesse that the first Ages spake little or nothing to the present Question or at least nothing to their sense of them for therefore they call in aid from the following Ages and make them suppletory and auxiliary to their designs and therefore there are no Traditions to our purposes And they who would willingly have it otherwise yet have taken no course it should be otherwise for they when they had opportunity in the Councels of the last Ages to determine what they had a mind to yet they never nam'd the number nor expressed the particular Traditions which they would faine have the world believe to be Apostolicall But they have kept the bridle in their own hands and made a reserve of their own power that if need be they may make new pretensions or not be put to it to justifie the old by the engagement of a conciliary declaration Lastly We are acquitted by the Testimony of the Primitive Fathers from any other necessity of believing then of Numb 11. such Articles as are recorded in Scripture And this is done by them whose Authority is pretended the greatest Argument for Tradition as appears largely in Irenaeus who disputes professedly for the sufficiency of Scripture against certain Hereticks who L. 3. c. 2. contr haeres affirm some necessary truths not to be written It was an excellent saying of S. Basil and will never be wipt out with all the eloquence of Perron in his Serm. de fide Manifestus est fidei lapsus liquidum superbiae vitium vel respuere aliquid eorum quae Scriptura habet vel inducere quicquam quod scriptum non est And it is but a poore device to say that every particular Tradition is consigned in Scripture by those places which give Authority to Tradition and so the introducing of Tradition is not a super-inducing any thing over or besides Scripture because Tradition is like a Messenger and the Scripture is like his Letters of Credence and therefore Authorizes whatsoever Tradition speaketh For supposing Scripture does consign the Authority of Tradition which it might doe before all the whole Instrument of Scripture it self was consign'd and then afterwards there might be no need of Tradition yet supposing it it will follow that all those Traditions which are truly prime and Apostolicall are to be entertain'd according to the intention of the Deliverers which indeed is so reasonable of it selfe that we need not Scripture to perswade us to it it selfe is authentick as Scripture is if it derives from the same fountain and a word is never the more the Word of God for being written nor the lesse for not being written but it will not follow that whatsoever is pretended to be Tradition is so neither is the credit of the particular instances consign'd in Scripture dolosus versatur in generalibus but that this craft is too palpable And if a generall and indefinite consignation of Tradition be sufficient to warrant every particular that pretends to be Tradition then S. Basil had spoken to no purpose by saying it is Pride Apostasy from the Faith to bring in what is not written For if either any man brings in what is written or what he sayes is delivered then the first being expresse Scripture and the second being consign'd in Scripture no man can be charged with superinducing what is not written he hath his Answer ready And then these are zealous words absolutely to no purpose but if such generall consignation does not warrant every thing that pretends to Tradition but only such as are truly proved to be Apostolicall then Scripture is uselesse as to this particular for such Tradition gives testimony to Scripture and therefore is of it selfe first and more credible for it is credible of it selfe and therefore unlesse S. Basil thought that all the will of God in matters of Faith and Doctrine were written I see not what end nor what sense he could have in these words For no man in the world except Enthusiasts and mad-men ever obtruded a Doctrine upon-the Church but he pretended Scripture for it or Tradition and therefore no man could be pressed by these words no man confuted no man instructed no not Enthusiasts or Montanists For suppose either of them should say that since in Scripture the holy Ghost is promised to abide with the Church for ever to teach whatever they pretend the Spirit in any Age hath taught them is not to super-induce any thing beyond what is written because the truth of the Spirit his veracity and his perpetuall teaching being promised and attested in Scripture Scripture hath just so consign'd all such Revelations as Perron saith it hath all such Traditions But I will trouble my selfe no more with Arguments from any humane Authorities but he that is surprized with the beliefe of such Authorities and will but consider the very many Testimonies of Antiquity to this purpose as of a Orat. ad Nicen PP apud Theodor. l. 1. c. 7. Constantine b In Matth. l. 4. c. 23. in Aggaeum S. Hierom c De bono viduil c. 1. S. Austin d Orat. contr gent. S. Athaenasius e In
Faith but especially by the insinuation and consequent De Rom. Pont. l 4. c. 2. § secunda sententia acknowledgement of Bellarmine that for 1000 years together the Fathers knew not of the Doctrine of the Popes infallibility for Nilus Gerson Alemain the Divines of Paris Alphonsus de Castro and Pope Adrian VI persons who liv'd 1400 after Christ affirm that infallibility is not seated in the Popes person that he may erre and sometimes actually hath which is a clear demonstration that the Church knew no such Doctrine as this there had been no Decree nor Tradition nor generall opinion of the Fathers or of any age before them and therefore this opinion which Bellarmine would faine blast if he could yet in his Conclusion he sayes it is not propriè haeretica A device and an expression of his own without sense or precedent But if the Fathers had spoken of it and believed it why may not a disagreeing person as well reject their Authority when it is in behalf of Rome as they of Rome without scruple cast them off when they speak against it For as Bellarmine being pressed with the Authority of Nilus Bishop of Thessalonica and other Fathers he sayes that the Pope acknowledges no Fathers but they are all his children and therefore they cannot depose against him and if that be true why shall we take their Testimonies for him for if Sonnes depose in their Fathers behalfe it is twenty to one but the adverse party will be cast and therefore at the best it is but suspectum Testimonium But indeed this discourse signifies nothing but a perpetuall uncertainty in such topicks and that where a violent prejudice or a concerning interest is engag'd men by not regarding what any man sayes proclaim to all the world that nothing is certain but Divine Authority But I will not take advantage of what Bellarmine sayes nor what Stapleton or any one of them all say for that will bee Numb 13. but to presse upon personall perswasions or to urge a generall Question with a particular defaillance and the Question is never the nearer to an end for if Bellarmine sayes any thing that is not to another mans purpose or perswasion that man will be tryed by his own Argument not by anothers And so would every man doe that loves his liberty as all wise men doe and therefore retain it by open violence or private evasions But to return An Authority from Irenaeus in this Question and on behalf of the Popes infallibility or the Authority of the Sea of Rome Numb 14. or of the necessity of communicating with them is very fallible for besides that there are almost a dozen answers to the words of the Allegation as is to be seen in those that trouble themselves in this Question with the Allegation and answering such Authorities yet if they should make for the affirmative of this Question it is protestatio contra factum For Irenaeus had no such great opinion of Pope Victors infallibity that he believed things in the same degree of necessity that the Pope did for therefore he chides him for Excommunicating the Asian Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all at a blow in the Question concerning Easter day and in a Question of Faith he expresly disagreed from the doctrine of Rome for Irenaeus was of the Millenary opinion and believed it to be a Tradition Apostolicall now if the Church of Rome was of that opinion then why is she not now where is the succession of her doctrine But if she was not of that opinion then and Irenaeus was where was his beliefe of that Churches infallibility The same I urge concerning S. Cyprian who was the head of a Sect in opposition to the Church of Rome in the Question of rebaptization and he and the abettors Firmilian and the other Bishops of Cappadocia and the voisinage spoke harsh words of Stephen and such as become them not to speak to an infallible Doctor and the supreme Head of the Church I will urge none of them to the disadvantage of that Sea but only note the Satyrs of Firmilian against him because it is of good use to shew that it is possible for them in their ill carriage to blast the reputation and efficacy of a great Authority For he sayes that that Church did pretend the Authority of the Apostles cum in multis sacramentis divinae rei à Epist. Firmiliani contr Steph. ad Cyprian Vid. etiam Ep. Cypriani ad Pompeium principio discrepet ab Ecclesia Hierosolymitanâ defamet Petrum Paulum tanquam authores And a little after justè dedignor sayes he apertam manifestam stultitiam Stephani per quam veritas Christianae petrae aboletur which words say plainly that for all the goodly pretence of Apostolicall Authority the Church of Rome did then in many things of Religion disagree from Divine Institution and from the Church of Jerusalem which they had as great esteeme of for Religion sake as of Rome for its principality and that still in pretending to S. Peter and S. Paul they dishonoured those blessed Apostles and destroyed the honour of their pretence by their untoward prevarication which words I confesse passe my skill to reconcile them to an opinion of infallibility and although they were spoken by an angry person yet they declare that in Africa they were not then perswaded as now they were at Rome Nam Cyprian Epist ad Quintum 〈◊〉 nec Petrus quem primum Dominus clegit vendicavit sibi aliquid insolentèr aut arrogantèr assumpsit ut diceret se primatum tenere That was their belief then and how the contrary hath grown up to that heigth where now it is all the world is witnesse And now I shall not need to note concerning S. Hierome that he gave a complement to Damasus that he would not have given to Liberius Qui tecum non colligit spargit For it might be true enough of Damasus who was a good Bishop and a right believer but if Liberius's name had been put instead of Damasus the case had been altered with the name for S. Hierom did believe and write it so that Liberius had subscrib'd to Arrianism And if either he or any of the rest had believ'd the De Script Eccles. in Fortunatiano Pope could not be a Heretick nor his Faith faile but be so good and of so competent Authority as to be a Rule to Christendome Why did they not appeale to the Pope in the Arrian Controversy why was the Bishop of Rome made a Party and a concurrent as other good Bishops were and not a Judge and an Arbitrator in the Question Why did the Fathers prescribe so many Rules and cautions and provisoes for the discovery of heresy Why were the Emperours at so much charge and the Church at so much trouble as to call and convene in Councels respectively to dispute so frequently to write so sedulously to observe all advantages
Court of life and death cannot be an Ecclesiasticall tribunall and then if any man or company of Men should perswade the Church not to inflict her censures upon delinquents in some cases in which shee might lawfully inflict them and pretend to give her another compulsory they take away the Church-consistory and erect a very secular Court dependant on themselves and by consequence to be appeal'd to from themselves and so also to be prohibited as the Lay-Superiour shall see cause for * Whoever therefore should be consenting to any such permutation of power is traditor potestatis quam S. Mater Ecclesia à sponso suo acceperat he betrayes the individuall and inseparable right of holy Church For her censures shee may inflict upon her delinquent children without asking leave Christ is her 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that he is her warrant and security The other is beg'd or borrow'd none of her owne nor of a fit edge to be us'd in her abscissions and coërcions * I end this consideration with that memorable Canon of the Apostles of Can. 39. so frequent use in this Question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let the Bishop have the care or provision for all affaires of the Church and let him dispense them velut Deo contemplante as in the sight of God to whom he must be responsive for all his Diocesse The next Consideration concerning the Bishop's jurisdiction is of what persons he is Iudge And because our Scene lyes herein Church-practice I shall only set downe the doctrine of the Primitive Church in this affaire and leave it under that representation Presbyters and Deacons and inferiour Clerks and the Laity are already involved in the precedent Canons No man there was exempted of whose soule any Bishop had charge And all Christs sheepe heare his voice and the call of his sheap-heard-Ministers * Theodoret tells a story that when the Bishops of the Province were assembled by the command of Valentinian the Emperour for the choice of a Successor to Auxentius in the See of Millayne the Emperour wished them to be carefull in the choice of a Bishop in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret. lib. 4. c. 5. Set such an one in the Archiepiscopall throne that we who rule the Kingdome may sincerely submitt our head unto him viz in matters of spirituall import * And since all power is deriv'd from Christ who is a King and a Priest and a Prophet Christian Kings are Christi Domini and Vicars in his Regall power but Bishops in his Sacerdotall and Propheticall * So that the King hath a Supreme Regall power in causes of the Church ever since his Kingdome became Christian and it consists in all things in which the Priestly office is not precisely by Gods law imployed for regiment and cure of soules and in these also all the externall compulsory and jurisdiction in his owne For when his Subjects became Christian Subjects himselfe also upon the same termes becomes a Christian Ruler and in both capacities he is to rule viz both as Subjects and as Christian Subjects except only in the precise issues of Sacerdotall authority And therefore the Kingdome and the Priesthood are excelled by each other in their severall capacities For superiority is usually expressed in three words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Excellency Impery and Power The King is supreme to the Bishop in Impery The Bishop hath an Excellency viz. of Spirituall Ministration which Christ hath not concredited to the King but in Power both King and Bishop have it distinctly in severall capacity the King in potentiâ gladii the Bishop in potestate clavium The Sword and the Keyes are the emblems of their distinct power Something like this is in the third Epistle of S. Clement translated by Ruffinus Quid enim in praesenti saeculo prophet â gloriosius Pontifice clarius Rege sublimius King and Priest and Prophet are in their severall excellencies the Highest powers under heaven *** In this sense it is easy to understand those expressions often used in Antiquity which might seem to make intrenchment upon the sacrednesse of Royall prerogatives were not both the piety and sense of the Church sufficiently cleare in the issues of her humblest obedience * And this is the sense of S. Ignatius that holy Martyr and Epist. ad Philadelph disciple of the Apostles Diaconi reliquus Clerus unà cum populo Vniverso Militibus Principibus Caesare ipsi Episcopopareant Let the Deacons and all the Clergy and all the people the Souldiers the Princes and Caesar himselfe obey the Bishop * This is it which S. Ambrose said Sublimitas Episcopalis Lib. de dignit Sacerd cap. 2. nullis poterit comparationibus adaequari Si Regum fulgori compares Principum diademati erit inferius c. This also was acknowledged by the great Constantine that most blessed Prince Deus vos constituit Sacerdotes potestatem vobis dedit de nobis quoque judicandi ideo nos à vobis rectè judicamur Vos autem non potest is ab hominibus judicari viz. saecularibus and incausis simplicis religionis So that good Emperour in his oration to Lib. 10. Eccles hist. c. 2. the Nicene Fathers It was a famous contestation that S. Ambrose had with Auxentius the Arian pretending the Emperors command to him to deliver up some certain Churches in his Diocesse to the Arians His answer was that Palaces belong'd to the Emperour but Churches to the Bishop and so they did by all the lawes of Christendome The like was in the case of S. Athanasius and Constantius the Emperour exactly the same per omniae as it is related by Ruffinus * S. Ambrose his sending his Deacon to the Emperour Lib. 10. Eccles hist. cap. 19. to desire him to goe forth of the Cancelli in his Church at Millain showes that then the powers were so distinct that they made no intrenchment upon each other * It was no greater power but a more considerable act and higher exercise the forbidding the communion to Theodosius till he had Theodor. lib. 5 c. 18. by repentance washed out the bloud that stuck upon him ever since the Massacre at Thessalonica It was a wonderfull concurrence of piety in the Emperour and resolution and authority in the Bishop But he was not the first that did it For Philip the Emperour was also guided by the Pastorall rod and the severity of the Bishop De hoc traditum est nobis Euseb lib. 6. cap. 25. quod Christianus fuerit in die Paschae i. e. in ipsis vigiliis cùm interesse voluerit communicare mysteriis ab Episcopo loci non priùs esse permissum nisi confiteretur peccata inter poenitentes staret nec ullo modo sibi copiam mysteriorum futuram nisi priùs per poenitentiam culpas quae de eo ferebantur plurimae deluisset The Bishop of the place would not
Polamo Alexandrinus sic primus philosophatus est ut ait Laërtius in Proëmio unde cognominatus est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what truths we can and a charitable and mutuall permission to others that disagree from us and our opinions I am sure this may satisfie us for it will secure us but I know not any thing else that will and no man can be reasonably perswaded or satisfied in any thing else unlesse he throwes himselfe upon chance or absolute predestination or his own confidence in every one of which it is two to one at least but he may miscarry Thus farre I thought I had reason on my side and I suppose I have made it good upon its proper grounds in the pages following But then if the result be that men must be permitted in their opinions and that Christians must not Persecute Christians I have also as much reason to reprove all those oblique Arts which are not direct Persecutions of mens persons but they are indirect proceedings ungentle and unchristian servants of faction and interest provocations to zeal and animosities and destructive of learning and ingenuity And these are suppressing all the monuments of their Adversaries forcing them to recant and burning their Books For it is a strange industry and an importune diligence that was used by our fore-fathers of all those Heresies which gave them battle and imployment we have absolutely no Record or Monument but what themselves who were Adversaries have transmitted to us and we know that Adversaries especially such who observ'd all opportunities to discredit both the persons and doctrines of the Enemy are not alwayes the best records or witnesses of such transactions We see it now in this very Age in the present distemperatures that parties are no good Registers of the actions of the adverse side And if we cannot be confident of the truth of a story now now I say that it is possible for any man and likely that the interessed adversary will discover the imposture it is farre more unlikely that after Ages should know any other truth but such as serves the ends of the representers I am sure such things were never taught us by Christ and his Apostles and if we were sure that our selves spoke truth or that truth were able to justifie her selfe it were better if to preserve a Doctrine wee did not destroy a Commandement and out of zeale pretending to Christian Religion loose the glories and rewards of ingenuity and Christian simplicity Of the same consideration is mending of Authors not to their own mind but to ours that is to mend them so as to spoile them forbidding the publication of Books in which there is nothing impious or against the publick interest leaving out clauses in Translations disgracing mens persons charging disavowed Doctrins upon men and the persons of the men with the consequents of their Doctrine which they deny either to be true or to be consequent false reporting of Disputations and Conferences burning Books by the hand of the hang-man and all such Arts which shew that we either distrust God for the maintenance of his truth or that we distrust the cause or distrust our selves and our abilities I will say no more of these but only concerning the last I shall transcribe a passage out of Tacitus in the life of Iulius Agricola who gives this account of it Veniam non petissem nisi incursaturus tam saeva infesta virtutibus tempora Legimus cum Aruleno Ruslico Paetus Thrasea Herennio Senecioni Priscus Helvidius laudatt essent capitale fuisse neque in ipsos modo authores sed in libros quoque eorum saevitum delegato Triumviris ministerio ut monumenta clarissimorum ingeniorum in comitio ac foro urerentur scil illo igne vocem populi Rom. libertatem Senatus conscientiam generis humani aboleri arbitrabantur expulsis insuper sapientiae professoribus at que omni bonâ arte in exilium actâ ne quid usquam honestum occurreret It is but an illiterate Policy to think that such indirect and uningenuous proceedings can amongst wise and free-men disgrace the Authors and disrepute their Discourses And I have seen that the price hath been trebled upon a forbidden or a condemn'd Book and some men in policy have got a prohibition that their impression might be the more certainly vendible and the Author himselfe thought considerable The best way is to leave tricks and devices and to fall upon that way which the best Ages of the Church did use With the strength of Argument and Allegations of Scripture and modesty of deportment and meeknesse and charity to the persons of men they converted misbelievers stopped the mouthes of Adversaries asserted truth and discountenanced errour and those other stratagems and Arts of support and maintenance to Doctrines were the issues of hereticall braines the old Catholicks had nothing to secure themselves but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of truth and plaine dealing Eidem minutis dissecant ambagibus Ut quisque linguâ est ne quior Solvunt ligantque quaestionum vincula Per syllogismos plectiles Prudent apotheos hym in infidel Vae captiosis Sycophantarum strophis Vae versipelli astutiae Nodos tenaces recta rumpit regula Infesta discertantibus Idcirco mundi slulta deligit Deus Ut concidant Sophistica And to my understanding it is a plain Art and design of the Devill to make us so in love with our own opinions as to call them Faith and Religion that we may be proud in our understanding and besides that by our zeale in our opinions we grow coole in our piety and practicall duties he also by this earnest contention does directly destroy good life by engagement of Zealots to do any thing rather then be overcome and loose their beloved propositions But I would faine know why is not any vitious habit as bad or worse then a false opinion Why are we so zealous against those we call Hereticks and yet great friends with drunkards and fornicators swearers and intemperate and idle persons Is it because we are commanded by the Apostle to reject a Heretick after two admonitions and not to bid such a one God speed It is a good reason why we should be zealous against such persons provided we mistake them not For those of whom these Apostles speak are such as deny Christ to be come in the flesh such as deny an Article of Creed and in such odious things it is not safe nor charitable to extend the gravamen and punishment beyond the instances the Apostles make or their exact parallels But then also it would be remembred that the Apostles speak as fiercely against communion with fornicators and all disorders practicall as against communion with Hereticks If any man that is called a brother be a Fornicator or Covetous or an Idolater or a Railer or a Drunkard or an Extortioner with such a one no not to eat I am certain that a Drunkard is as contrary to
integrity of Christian Faith or salvation of our souls Christ declared all the will of his Father and the Apostles were Stewards and Dispensers of the same Mysteries and were faithfull in all the house and therefore conceald nothing but taught the whole Doctrine of Christ so they said themselves And indeed if they did not teach all the Doctrine of Faith an Angel or a man might have taught us other things then what they taught without deserving an Anathema but not without deserving a blessing for making up that Faith intire which the Apostles left imperfect Now if they taught all the whole body of Faith either the Church in the following Ages lost part of the Faith and then where was their infallibility and the effect of those glorious promises to which she pretends and hath certain Title for she may as well introduce a falshood as loose a truth it being as much promised to her that the Holy Ghost shall lead her into all truth as that she shall be preserved from all errors as appears Ioh. 16. 13. Or if she retaind all the Faith which Christ and his Apostles consign'd and taught then no Age can by declaring any point make that be an Article of Faith which was not so in all Ages of Christianity before such declaration And indeed if the * Vide Iacob Almain in 3. Sent. d 25. Q. Vnic Dub. 3 Patet ergo quod nulla veritas est Catholica ex approbatione Ecclesiae vei Papae Gabr. Biel. in 3. Sent. Dist 25. q. Unic art 3. Dub. 3. ad finem Church by declaring an Article can make that to be necessary which before was not necessary I doe not see how it can stand with the charity of the Church so to doe especially after so long experience shee hath had that all men will not believe every such decision or explication for by so doing she makes the narrow way to heaven narrower and chalks out one path more to the Devill then he had before and yet the way was broad enough when it was at the narrowest For before differing persons might be saved in diversity of perswasions and now afterthis declaration if they cannot there is no other alteration made but that some shall be damned who before even in the same dispositions and beliefe should have been beatified persons For therefore it is well for the Fathers of the Primitive Church that their errors were not discovered for if they had been contested for that would have been cald discovery enough vel errores emendassent vel ab Ecclesiâ Bellar. de laici◠l. 3. c. 20. §. ad primam confirmationem ejecti fuissent But it is better as it was they went to heaven by that good fortune whereas otherwise they might have gone to the Devill And yet there were some errors particularly that of S. Cyprian that was discovered and he went to heaven 't is thought possibly they might so too for all this pretence But suppose it true yet whether that declaration of an Article of which with safety we either might have doubted or beene ignorant does more good then the damning of those many soules occasionally but yet certainely and fore-knowingly does hurt I leave it to all wise and good men to determine And yet besides this it cannot enter into my thoughts that it can possibly consist with Gods goodnesse to put it into the power of man so palpably and openly to alter the paths and in-lets to heaven and to streighten his mercies unlesse he had furnished these men with an infallible judgement and an infallible prudence and a never failing charity that they should never doe it but with great necessity and with great truth and without ends and humane designes of which I think no Arguments can make us certaine what the Primitive Church hath done in this case I shall afterwards consider and give an account of it but for the present there is no insecurity in ending there where the Apostles ended in building where they built in resting where they left us unlesse the same infallibility which they had had still continued which I think I shall hereafter make evident it did not And therefore those extensions of Creed which were made in the first Ages of the Church although for the matter they were most true yet because it was not certain that they should be so and they might have been otherwise therefore they could not be in the same order of Faith nor in the same degrees of necessity to be believ'd with the Articles Apostolicall and therefore whether they did well or no in laying the same weight upon them or whether they did lay the same weight or no we will afterwards consider But to return I consider that a foundation of Faith cannot alter unlesse a new building be to be made the foundation is Numb 13. the same still and this foundation is no other but that which Christ and his Apostles laid which Doctrine is like himselfe yesterday and to day and the same for ever So that the Articles of necessary beliefe to all which are the only foundation they cannot be severall in severall Ages and to severall persons Nay the sentence declaration of the Church cannot lay this foundation or make any thing of the foundation because the Church cannot lay her own foundation we must suppose her to be a building and that she relies upon the foundation which is therefore supposed to be laid before because she is built upon it or to make it more explicate because a cloud may arise from the Allegory of building and foundation it is plainly thus The Church being a company of men obliged to the duties of Faith and obedience the duty and obligation being of the faculties of will and understanding to adhere to such an object must pre-suppose the object made ready for them for as the object is before the act in order of nature and therefore not to be produc'd or encreased by the faculty which is receptive cannot be active upon its proper object So the object of the Churches Faith is in order of nature before the Church or before the act and habite of Faith and therefore cannot be enlarged by the Church any more then the act of the visive faculty can adde visibility to the object So that if we have found out what foundation Christ and his Apostles did lay that is what body and systeme of Articles simply necessary they taught and requir'd of us to believe we need not we cannot goe any further for foundation we cannot enlarge that systeme or collection Now then although all that they said is true and nothing of it to be doubted or dis-believed yet as all that they said is neither written nor delivered because all was not necessary so we know that of those things which are written some things are as farre off from the foundation as those things which were omitted and therefore although now accidentally they must be beliv'd
quòd aberrarunt quidam from which charity and purity and goodnesse and sincerity because some have wandred deflexerunt ad vaniloquium And immediately after he reckons the oppositions to faith and sound doctrine and instances only in vices that staine the lives of Christians the unjust the uncleane the uncharitable the lyer the perjur'd person si quis alius qui sanae doctrinae adversatur these are the enemies of the true doctrine And therefore S. Peter having given in charge to adde to our vertue patience temperance charity and the like gives this for a reason for if these things be in you and abound yee shall be fruitfull in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. So that knowledge and faith is inter praecepta morum is part of a good life * Quid igitur credulitas vel fides opinor fidelitèr hominem Christo credere id est fidelem Deo esse hoc est fidelitèr Dei mandata servare So Salvian And Saint Paul cals Faith or the forme of sound words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the doctrine that is according to godlinesse 1 Tim. 6. 3. †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That 's our Religion or Faith the whole manner of serving God C. de summâ Trinit fide Cathol And veritati credere and in injustitiâ sibi complacere are by the same Apostle opposed and intimate that piety and faith is all one thing faith must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intire and holy too or it is not right It was the heresy of the Gnosticks that it was no matter how men liv'd so they did but believe aright Which wicked doctrine Tatianus a learned Christian did so detest that he fell into a quite contrary Non est curandum quid quisque credat id tantum curandum est quod quisque faciat And thence came the Sect Excratites Both these heresies sprang from the too nice distinguishing the faith from the piety and good life of a Christian They are both but one duty However they may be distinguished if we speak like Philosophers they cannot be distinguished when we speak like Christians For to believe what God hath commanded is in order to a good life and to live well is the product of that believing and as proper emanation from it as from its proper principle and as heat is from the fire And therefore in Scripture they are used promiscuously in sense and in expression as not only being subjected in the same person but also in the same faculty faith is as truly seated in the will as in the understanding and a good life as meerly derives from the understanding as the will Both of them are matters of choyce and of election neither of them an effect naturall and invincible or necessary antecedently necessaria ut fiant non necessario facta And indeed if we remember that S. Paul reckons heresy amongst the works of the flesh and ranks it with all manner of practicall impieties we shall easily perceive that if a man mingles not a vice with his opinion if he be innocent in his life though deceiv'd in his doctrine his errour is his misery not his crime it makes him an argument of weaknesse and an object of pity but not a person sealed up to ruine and reprobation For as the nature of faith is so is the nature of heresy contraries having the same proportion and commensuration Now Numb 9. faith if it be taken for an act of the understanding meerly is so farre from being that excellent grace that justifies us that it is not good at all in any kinde but in genere naturae and makes the understanding better in it selfe or pleasing to God just as strength doth the arme or beauty the face or health the body these are naturall perfections indeed and so knowledge and a true beliefe is to the understanding But this makes us not at all more acceptable to God for then the unlearned were certainly in a damnable condition and all good Scholars should be saved whereas I am afraid too much of the contrary is true But unlesse Faith be made morall by the mixtures of choyce and charity it is nothing but a naturall perfection not a grace or a vertue and this is demonstrably prov'd in this that by the confession of all men of all interests and perswasions in matters of meer belief invincible ignorance is our excuse if we be deceived which could not be but that neither to believe aright is commendable nor to believe amisse is reprovable but where both one and the other is voluntary and chosen antecedently or consequently by prime election or ex post facto and so comes to be consider'd in morality and is part of a good life or a bad life respectively Just so it is in heresy if it be a design of ambition and making of a Sect so Erasmus expounds S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sectarum * Alieni sunt à veritate qui se obarmant multitudine Chryst. authorem if it be for filthy lucres sake as it was in some that were of the circumcision if it be of pride and love of preheminence as it was in Diotrephes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or out of pevishnesse and indociblenesse of disposition or of a contentious spirit that is that their feet are not shod with the preparation of the Gospel of peace in all these cases the errour is just so damnable as is its principle but therefore damnable not of it selfe but by reason of its adherencie And if any shall say any otherwise it is to say that some men shall be damned when they cannot help it perish without their own fault and be miserable for ever because of their unhappinesse to be deceived through their own simplicity and naturall or accidentall but inculpable infirmity For it cannot stand with the goodnesse of God who does Numb 10. so know our infirmities that he pardons many things in which our wills indeed have the least share but some they have but are overborn with the violence of an impetuous temptation I say it is inconsistent with his goodnesse to condemn those who erre where the error hath nothing of the will in it who therefore cannot repent of their errour because they believe it true who therefore cannot make compensation because they know not that they are tyed to dereliction of it And although all Hereticks are in this condition that is they believe their errous to be true yet there is a vast difference between them who believe so out of simplicity and them who are given over to believe a lie as a punishment or an effect of some other wickednesse or impiety For all have a concomitant assent to the truth of what they believe and no man can at the same time believe what he does not believe but this assent of the understanding in Hereticks is caused not by force of Argument but the Argument is made forcible by something that is
and to obey him and to encourage us in both and this is compleated in the Apostles Creed And since contraries are of the same extent heresy is to be judg'd by its proportion and analogy to faith and that is heresy only which is against Faith Now because Faith is not only a precept of Doctrines but of manners and holy life whatsoever is either opposite to an Article of Creed or teaches ill life that 's heresy but all those propositions which are extrinsecall to these two considerations be they true or be they false make not heresy nor the man an Heretick and therefore however hee may be an erring person yet he is to be used accordingly pittied and instructed not condemned or Excommunicated And this is the result of the first ground the consideration of the nature of Faith and heresy SECT III. Of the difficulty and uncertainty of Arguments from Scripture in Questions not simply necessary not literally determined GOd who disposes of all things sweetly and according to the nature and capacity of things and persons had made those Numb 1. only necessary which he had taken care should be sufficiently propounded to all persons of whom he required the explicite beliefe And therefore all the Articles of Faith are cleerely and plainly set down in Scripture and the Gospel is not hid nisi pereuntibus saith S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Damascen and that Orthod fidei lib. 4. c. 18. so manifestly that no man can be ignorant of the foundation of Faith without his own apparent fault And this is acknowledged by all wise and good men and is evident besides the reasonablenesse of the thing in the testimonies of Saints a Super Psal. 88. de util cred c. 6. Austin b Super Isa. c. 19 in Psal. 86. Hierome c Homil. 3. in Thess. Ep. 2. Chrysostome d Serm de confess Fulgentius e Miseel 2. l. 1. tit 46. Hugo de Sancto Victore f In Gen. ap Struch p. 87. Theodoret g C. 6. c. 21. Lactantius h Ad Antioch l. 2. p. 918. Theophilus Antiochenus i Par. 1. q. 1. art 9 Numb 2. Aquinas and the latter Schoole men And God hath done more for many things which are only profitable are also set down so plainly that as S. Austin sayes nemo inde haurire non possit si modò ad hauriendum devotè ac piè accedat ubi supra de util cred c. 6. but of such things there is no Question commenc'd in Christendome and if there were it cannot but be a crime and humane interest that are the Authors of such disputes and therefore these cannot be simple errours but alwayes heresies because the principle of them is a personall sinne But besides these things which are so plainly set down some for doctrine as S. Paul sayes that is for Articles and foundation of Faith some for instruction some for reproofe some for comfort that is in matters practicall and speculative of severall tempers and constitutions there are innumerable places containing in them great mysteries but yet either so enwrapped with a cloud or so darkned with umbrages or heigthened with expressions or so covered with allegories and garments of Rhetorick so profound in the matter or so altered or made intricate in the manner in the clothing and in the dressing that God may seeme to have left them as tryalls of our industry and Arguments of our imperfections and incentives to the longings after heaven and the clearest revelations of eternity and as occasions and opportunities of our mutuall charity and toleration to each other and humility in our selves rather then the repositories of Faith and furniture of Creeds and Articles of beliefe For wherever the word of God is kept whether in Scripture Numb 3. alone or also in Tradition he that considers that the meaning of the one and the truth or certainty of the other are things of great Question will see a necessity in these things which are the subject matter of most of the Questions of Christendome that men should hope to be excused by an implicite faith in God Almighty For when there are in the Explications of Scripture so many Commentaries so many senses and Interpretations so many Volumnes in all Ages and all like mens faces exactly none like another either this difference and inconvenience is absolutely no fault at all or if it be it is excusable by a minde prepar'd to consent in that truth which God intended And this I call an implicite Faith in God which is certainly of as great excellency as an implicite Faith in any man or company of men Because they who doe require an implicite Faith in the Church for Articles lesse necessary and excuse the want of explicite Faith by the implicite doe require an implicite Faith in the Church because they believe that God hath required of them to have a minde prepared to believe whatever the Church sayes which because it is a proposition of no absolute certainty whosoever does in readinesse of minde believe all that God spake does also believe that sufficiently if it be fitting to be believ'd that is if it be true and if God hath said so for he hath the same obedience of understanding in this as in the other But because it is not so certain God hath tyed him in all things to believe that which is called the Church and that it is certain we must believe God in all things and yet neither know all that either God hath revealed or the Church taught it is better to take the certain then the uncertain to believe God rather then men especially since if God hath bound us to believe men our absolute submission to God does involve that and there is no inconvenience in the world this way but that we implicitely believe one Article more viz. the Churches Authority or infallibility which may well be pardoned because it secures our beliefe of all the rest and we are sure if we believe all that God said explicitely or implicitely we also believe the Church implicitely in case we are bound to it but we are not certain that if we believe any company of men whom we call the Church that we therefore obey God and believe what he hath said But however if this will not help us there is no help for us but good fortune or absolute predestination for by choyce and industry no man can secure himselfe that in all the mysteries of Religion taught in Scripture he shall certainly understand and explicitely believe that sense that God intended For to this purpose there are many considerations 1. There are so many thousands of Copies that were writ by persons of severall interests and perswasions such different Numb 4. understandings and tempers such distinct abilities and weaknesses that it is no wonder there is so great variety of readings both in the Old Testament and in the New In the Old
to speak better Latine then his Translatour had done And if it be thus in Translations it is farre worse in Expositions Quia scil Scripturam sacram pro ipsa sui altitudine non uno eodemque sensu omnes accipiunt ut penè quot homines tot illic sententiae erui posse videantur said Vincent Lirinensis in which every man knows In Commonit what innumerable wayes there are of being mistaken God having in things not simply necessary left such a difficulty upon those parts of Scripture which are the subject matters of controversy ad edomandam labore superbiam intellectum à fastidio revocandum as S. Austin gives a reason that all that erre honestly are therefore to be pityed and tolerated because Lib. 2. de doctr Christian. c. 6. it is or may be the condition of every man at one time or other The summe is this Since holy Scripture is the repository Numb 8. of divine truths and the great rule of Faith to which all Sects of Christians doe appeale for probation of their severall opinions and since all agree in the Articles of the Creed as things clearly and plainly set down and as containing all that which is of simple and prime necessity and since on the other side there are in Scripture many other mysteries and matters of Question upon which there is a vaile since there are so many Copies with infinite varieties of reading since a various Interpunction a parenthesis a letter an accent may much alter the sense since some places have divers literall senses many have spirituall mysticall and Allegoricall meanings since there are so many tropes metonymies ironies hyperboles proprieties and improprieties of language whose understanding depends upon such circumstances that it is almost impossible to know its proper Interpretation now that the knowledge of such circumstances and particular stories is irrevocably lost since there are some mysteries which at the best advantage of expression are not easy to be apprehended and whose explication by reason of our imperfections must needs be dark sometimes weak sometimes unintelligle and lastly since those ordinary meanes of expounding Scripture as searching the Originalls conference of places parity of reason and analogy of Faith are all dubious uncertain and very fallible he that is the wisest and by consequence the likelyest to expound truest in all probability of reason will be very farre from confidence because every one of these and many more are like so many degrees of improbability and incertainty all depressing our certainty of finding out truth in such mysteries and amidst so many difficulties And therefore a wise man that considers this would not willingly be prescrib'd to by others and therefore if he also be a just man he will not impose upon others for it is best every man should be left in that liberty from which no man can justly take him unlesse he could secure him from errour So that here also there is a necessity to conserve the liberty of Prophesying and Interpreting Scripture a necessity deriv'd from the consideration of the difficulty of Scripture in Questions controverted and the uncertainty of any internall medium of Interpretation SECT V. Of the insufficiency and uncertainty of Tradition to Expound Scripture or determine Questions IN the next place we must consider those extrinsecall meanes Numb 1. of Interpreting Scripture and determining Questions which they most of all confide in that restraine Prophesying with the greatest Tyranny The first and principall is Tradition which is pretended not only to expound Scripture Necesse enim est Vincent Lirinens in Commonitor propter tantos tam varii erroris anfractus ut Propheticae Apostolicae interpretationis linea secundum Ecclesiastici Catholici sensus normam dirigatur but also to propound Articles upon a distinct stock such Articles whereof there is no mention and proposition in Scripture And in this topick not only the distinct Articles are clear and plain like as the fundamentals of Faith expressed in Scripture but also it pretends to expound Scripture and to determine Questions with so much clarity and certainty as there shall neither be errour nor doubt remaining and therefore no disagreeing is here to be endured And indeed it is most true if Tradition can performe these pretensions and teach us plainly and assure us infallibly of all truths which they require us to believe we can in this case have no reason to disbelieve them and therefore are certainly Hereticks if we doe because without a crime without some humane interest or collaterall design we cannot disbelieve traditive Doctrine or traditive Interpretation if it be infallibly prov'd to us that tradition is an infallible guide But here I first consider that tradition is no repository of Numb 2. Articles of Faith and therefore the not following it is no Argument of heresy for besides that I have shewed Scripture in its plain expresses to be an abundant rule of Faith and manners Tradition is a topick as fallible as any other so fallible that it cannot be sufficient evidence to any man in a matter of Faith or Question of heresy For 1. I find that the Fathers were infinitely deceived in Numb 3. their account and enumeration of Traditions sometimes they did call some Traditions such not which they knew to be so but by Arguments and presumptions they concluded them so Such as was that of S. Austin ca quae universalis tenet Ecclesia nec à Conciliis Epist. 118. ad Ianuar. De bapt contr Donat. lib. 4. c. 24. instituta reperiuntur credibile est ab Apostolorum traditione descendisse Now suppose this rule probable that 's the most yet it is not certaine It might come by custome whose Originall was not knowne but yet could not derive from an Apostolicall principle Now when they conclude of particular Traditions by a generall rule and that generall rule not certain but at the most probable in any thing and certainly false in some things it is wonder if the productions that is their judgements and pretence faile so often And if I should but instance in all the particulars in which Tradition was pretended falsly or uncertainly in the first Ages I should multiply them to a troublesome variety for it was then accounted so glorious a thing to have spoken with the persons of the Apostles that if any man could with any colour pretend to it he might abuse the whole Church and obtrude what he listed under the specious title of Apostolicall Tradition and it is very notorious to every man that will but read and observe the Recognitions or stromata of Clemens Alexandrinus where there is enough of such false wares shewed in every book and pretended to be no lesse then from the Apostles In the first Age after the Apostles Papias pretended he received a Tradition from the Apostles that Christ before the day of Judgement should reign a thousand yeares upon Earth and his Saints with him in
alike necessary or alike indifferent if the former why does no Church observe them if the later why does the Church of Rome charge upon others the shame of novelty for leaving of some Rites and Ceremonies which by her own practice we are taught to have no obligation in them but to be adiaphorous S. Paul gave order that a Bishop should be the husband of one wife The Church of Rome will not allow so much other Churches allow more The Apostles commanded Christians to Fast on Wednesday and Friday as appeares in their Canons The Church of Rome Fasts Friday and Saturday and not on Wednesday The Apostles had their Agapae or love Feasts we should believe them scandalous They used a kisse of charity in ordinary addresses the Church of Rome keeps it only in their Masse other Churches quite omit it The Apostles permitted Priests and Deacons to live in conjugall Society as appears in the 5. Can. of the Apostles which to them is an Argument who believe them such and yet the Church of Rome by no meanes will endure it nay more Michael Medina gives Testimony that of 84 Canons Apostolicall which Clemens collected De sacr hom continent li 5. c. 105. scarce six or eight are observed by the Latine Church and Peresius gives this account of it In illis contineri multa quae temporum corruptione non plenè observantur aliis pro temporis De Tradit part 3. c. de Author Can. Apost materiae qualitate aut obliteratis aut totius Ecclesiae magisterio abrogatis Now it were good that they which take a liberty to themselves should also allow the same to others So that for one thing or other all Traditions excepting those very few that are absolutely universall will lose all their obligation and become no competent medium to confine mens practises or limit their faiths or determine their perswasions Either for the difficulty of their being prov'd the incompetency of the testimony that transmits them or the indifferency of the thing transmitted all Traditions both rituall and doctrinall are disabled from determining our consciences either to a necessary believing or obeying 6. To which I adde by way of confirmation that there are some things called Traditions and are offered to be proved to Numb 9. us by a Testimony which is either false or not extant Clemens of Alexandria pretended it a Tradition that the Apostles preached to them that dyed in infidelity even after their death and then raised them to life but he proved it only by the Testimony of the Book of Hermes he affirmed it to be a Tradition Apostolicall that the Greeks were saved by their Philosophy but he had no other Authority for it but the Apocryphall Books of Peter and Paul Tertullian and S. Basil pretend it an Apostolicall Tradition to sign in the aire with the sign of the Crosse but this was only consign'd to them in the Gospel of Nicodemus But to instance once for all in the Epistle of Marcellus to the Bishop of Antioch where he affirmes that it is the Canon of the Apostles praeter sententiam Romani Pontificis non posse Conciliae celebrari And yet there is no such Canon extant nor ever was for ought appears in any Record we have and yet the Collection of the Canons is so intire that though it hath something more then what was Apostolicall yet it hath nothing lesse And now that I am casually fallen upon an instance from the Canons of the Apostles I consider that there cannot in the world a greater instance be given how easy it is to be abused in the believing of Traditions For 1. to the first 50. which many did admit for Apostolicall 35 more were added which most men now count spurious all men call dubious and some of them universally condemned by peremptory sentence even by them who are greatest admirers of that Collection as 65. 67. and 8 ⅘ Canons For the first 50 it is evident that there are some things so mixt with them and no mark of difference left that the credit of all is much impared insomuch that Isidor of Sevill sayes they were Apoeryphall made by Hereticks and published under the Apud Gratian. dist 16. c. Canones title Apostolicall but neither the Fathers nor the Church of Rome did give assent to them And yet they have prevail'd so farre amongst some that Damascen is of opinion they should Lib. ◠c. 18 de Orthod fide be received equally with the Canonicall writings of the Apostles One thing only I observe and we shall find it true in most writings whose Authority is urged in Questions of Theology that the Authority of the Tradition is not it which moves the assent but the nature of the thing and because such a Canon is delivered they doe not therefore believe the sanction or proposition so delivered but disbelieve the Tradition if they doe not like the matter and so doe not judge of the matter by the Tradition but of the Tradition by the matter And thus the Church of Rome rejects the 84 or 85 Canon of the Apostles not because it is delivered with lesse Authority then the last 35 are but because it reckons the Canon of Scripture otherwise then it is at Rome Thus also the fifth Canon amongst the first 50 because it approves the marriage of Priests and Deacons does not perswade them to approve of it too but it selfe becomes suspected for approving it So that either they accuse themselves of palpable contempt of the Apostolicall Authority or else that the reputation of such Traditions is kept up to serve their own ends and therefore when they encounter them they are more to be upheld which what else is it but to teach all the world to contemn such pretences and undervalue Traditions and to supply to others a reason why they should doe that which to them that give the occasion is most unreasonable 7. The Testimony of the Ancient Church being the only Numb 10. meanes of proving Tradition and sometimes their dictates and doctrine being the Tradition pretended of necessity to be imitated it is considerable that men in their estimate of it take their rise from severall Ages and differing Testimonies and are not agreed about the competency of their Testimony and the reasons that on each side make them differ are such as make the Authority it selfe the lesse authentick and more repudiable Some will allow only of the three first Ages as being most pure most persecuted and therefore most holy least interested serving fewer designs having fewest factions and therefore more likely to speak the truth for Gods sake and its own as best complying with their great end of acquiring Heaven in recompence of losing their lives Others * Vid. Card. Petron. lettre an Sieur Casaubon say that those Ages being persecuted minded the present Doctrines proportionable to their purposes and constitution of the Ages and make little or nothing of those Questions which
charged with the odious consequences of his opinion Indeed his doctrine is but the person is not if he understands not such things to be consequent to his Doctrine for if he did and then avows them they are his direct opinions he stands as chargeable with them as with his first propositions but if he dis-avowes them he would certainly rather quit his opinion then avow such errours or impieties which are pretended to be consequent to it because every man knows that can be no truth from whence falshood naturally and immediately does derive and he therefore beleeves his first proposition because he beleeves it innocent of such errors as are charg'd upon it directly or consequently So that now since no error neither for its selfe nor its consequents Numb 7. is to be charg'd as criminall upon a pious person since no simple errour is a sin nor does condemne us before the throne of God since he is so pittifull to our crimes that he pardons many de toto integro in all makes abatement for the violence of temptation and the surprizall and invasion of our faculties and therefore much lesse will demand of us an account for our weaknesses and since the strongest understanding cannot pretend to such an immunity and exemption from the condition of men as not to be deceived and confesse its weaknesse it remaines we inquire what deportment is to be used towards persons of a differing perswasion when we are I doe not say doubtfull of a proposition but convinc'd that he that differs from us is in Errour for this was the first intention and the last end of this discourse SECT XIII Of the deportment to be used towards persons disagreeing and the reasons why they are not to be punished with death c. FOr although every man may be deceived yet some are right and may know it too for every man that may erre does Numb 1. not therefore certainly erre and if he erres because he recedes from his rule then if he followes it he may doe right and if ever any man upon just grounds did change his opinion then he was in the right and was sure of it too and although confidence is mistaken for a just perswasion many times yet some men are confident and have reason so to be Now when this happens the question is what deportment they are to use towards persons that disagree from them and by consequence are in error 1. Then no Christian is to be put to death dismembred or otherwise directly persecuted for his opinion which does not Numb 2. teach impiety or blasphemy If it plainly and apparently brings in a crime and himselfe does act it or incourage it then the matter of fact is punishable according to its proportion or malignity as if he preaches treason or sedition his opinion is not his excuse because it brings in a crime and a man is never the lesse traitor because he beleeves it lawful to commit treason a man is a murtherer if he kills his brother unjustly although he thinks he does God good service in it Matters of fact are equally judicable whether the principle of them be from within or from without And if a man could pretend to innocence in being seditious blasphemous or perjur'd by perswading himself it is lawfull there were as great a gate opened to all iniquity as will entertaine all the pretences the designes the impostures and disguises of the world And therefore God hath taken order that all rules concerning matters of fact and good life shall be so cleerely explicated that without the crime of the man he cannot be ignorant of all his practicall duty And therefore the Apostles and primitive Doctors made no scruple of condemning such persons for hereticks that did dogmatize a sinne He that teaches others to sinne is worse then he that commits the crime whether he be tempted by his owne interest or incouraged by the others doctrine It was as bad in Basilides to teach it to be lawfull to renounce Faith and Religion and take all manner of Oathes and Covenants in time of persecution as if himselfe had done so nay it is as much worse as the mischeife is more universall or as a fountaine is greater then a drop of water taken from it He that writes Treason in a booke or preaches Sedition in a Pulpit and perswades it to the people is the greatest Traitor and incendiary and his opinion there is the fountaine of a sinne and therefore could not be entertain'd in his understanding upon weaknesse or inculpable or innocent prejudice he cannot from Scripture or divine revelation have any pretence to colour that so fairely as to seduce either a wise or an honest man If it rest there and goes no further it is not cognoscible and so scapes that way but if it be published and comes à stylo ad Machaeram as Tertullians phrase is then it becomes matter of fact in principle and in perswasion and is just so punishable as is the crime that it perswades such were they of whom S. Paul complaines who brought in damnable doctrines and lusts S. Pauls Gal. 5. Utinam abscindantur is just of them take it in any sense of rigour and severity so it be proportionable to the crime or criminall doctrine Such were those of whom God spake in Deut. 13. If any Prophet tempts to idolatry saying let us goe after other Gods he shall be slaine But these doe not come into this question But the proposition is to be understood concerning questions disputable in materiâ intellectuali which also for all that law of killing such false Prophets were permitted with impunity in the Synagogue as appeares beyond exception in the great divisions and disputes betweene the Pharisees and the Sadduces I deny not but certaine and knowne idolatry or any other sort of practicall impiety with its principiant doctrine may be punished corporally because it is no other but matter of fact but no matter of meere opinion no errors that of themselves are not sins are to be persecuted or punished by death or corporall inflictions This is now to be proved 2. All the former discourse is sufficient argument how easie it is for us in such matters to be deceived So long as Christian Religion Numb 3. was a simple profession of the articles of beliefe and a hearty prosecution of the rules of good life the fewnesse of the articles and the clearnesse of the rule was cause of the seldome prevarication But when divinity is swell'd up to so great a body when the severall questions which the peevishnesse and wantonnesse of sixteene ages have commenc'd are concentred into one and from all these questions something is drawne into the body of Theologie till it hath ascended up to the greatnesse of a mountaine and the summe of Divinity collected by Aquinas makes a volume as great as was that of Livy mock'd at in the Epigramme Quem mea vix totum
prudently constituted are superstitious or impious such persons who are otherwise pious humble and religious are not to be destroyed for such matters which in themselves are not of concernment to salvation and neither are so accidentally to such men and in such cases where they are innocently abused and they erre without purpose and designe And therefore if there be a publike disposition in some persons to dislike Lawes of a certaine quality if it before-seene it is to be considered in lege dicendâ and whatever inconvenience or particular offence is fore-seene is either to be directly avoided in the Law or else a compensation in the excellency of the Law and certaine advantages made to out-weigh their pretensions But in lege jam dictâ because there may be a necessity some persons should have a liberty indulged them it is necessary that the Governours of the Church should be intrusted with a power to consider the particular case and indulge a liberty to the person and grant personall dispensations This I say is to be done at severall times upon particular instance upon singular consideration and new emergencies But that a whole kind of men such a kind to which all men without possibility of being confuted may pretend should at once in the very frame of the Law be permitted to disobey is to nullifie the Law to destroy Discipline and to hallow disobedience it takes away the obliging part of the Law and makes that the thing enacted shall not be enjoyn'd but tolerated onely it destroyes unity and uniformity which to preserve was the very end of such lawes of Discipline it bends the rule to the thing which is to be ruled so that the law obeyes the subject not the subject the law it is to make a law for particulars not upon generall reason and congruity against the prudence and designe of all Lawes in the world and absolutely without the example of any Church in Christendome it prevents no scandall for some will be scandalized at the authority it selfe some at the complying and remisnesse of Discipline and severall men at matters and upon ends contradictory All which cannot some ought not to be complyed withall 6. The summe is this The end of the Lawes of Discipline are in an immediate order to the conservation and ornament of the Numb 8. publique and therefore the Lawes must not so tolerate as by conserving persons to destroy themselves and the publike benefit but if there be cause for it they must be cassated or if there be no sufficient cause the complyings must be so as may best preserve the particulars in conjunction with the publike end which because it is primarily intended is of greatest consideration But the particulars whether of case or person are to be considered occasionally and emergently by the Judges but cannot antecedently and regularly be determined by a Law But this sort of men is of so generall pretence that all Lawes Numb 9. and all Judges may easily be abused by them Those sects which are signified by a Name which have a systeme of Articles a body of profession may be more cleerly determined in their question concerning the lawfulnesse of permitting their professions and assemblies I shall instance in two which are most troublesome and most dislik'd and by an account made of these we may make judgement what may be done towards others whose errors are not apprehended of so great malignity The men I meane are the Anabaptists and the Papists SECT 18. A particular consideration of the opinions of the Anabaptists IN the Anabaptists I consider onely their two capitall opinions the one against the baptisme of infants the other against Numb 1. Magistracy and because they produce different judgements and various effects all their other fancyes which vary as the Moon does may stand or fall in their proportion and likenesse to these And first I consider their denying baptisme to infants although it be a doctrine justly condemned by the most sorts of Numb 2. Christians upon great grounds of reason yet possibly their defence may be so great as to take off much and rebate the edge of their adversaries assault It will be neither unpleasant nor unprofitable to draw a short scheme of plea for each party the result of which possibly may be that though they be deceived yet they have so great excuse on their side that their errour is not impudent or vincible The baptisme of infants rests wholly upon this discourse When God made a covenant with Abraham for himselfe and his posterity into which the Gentiles were reckoned by sprituall Numb 3. adoption he did for the present consigne that covenant with the Sacrament of circumcision The extent of which rite was to all his family from the Major domo to the Proselytus domicilio and to infants of eight dayes old Now the very nature of this covenant being a covenant of faith for its formallity and with all faithfull people for the object and circumcision being a seale of this covenant if ever any rite doe supervene to consigne the same covenant that rite must acknowledge circumcision for its type and precedent And this the Apostle tels us in expresse doctrine Now the nature of types is to give some proportions to its successour the Antitype and they both being seales of the same righteousnesse of faith it will not easily be found where these two seales have any such distinction in their nature or purposes as to appertaine to persons of differing capacity and not equally concerne all and this argument was thought of so much force by some of those excellent men which were Bishops in the primitive church that a good Bishop writ an Epistle to S. Cyprian to know of him whether or no it were lawfull to baptize infants before the eighth day because the type of baptisme was ministred in that circumcision he in his discourse supposing that the first rite was a direction to the second which prevailed with him so farre as to believe it to limit every circumstance And not onely this type but the acts of Christ which were Numb 4. previous to the institution of baptisme did prepare our understanding by such impresses as were sufficient to produce such perswasion in us that Christ intended this ministery for the actuall advantage of infants as well as of persons of understanding For Christ commanded that children should be brought unto him he took them in his armes he imposed hands on them and blessed them and without question did by such acts of favour consigne his love to them and them to a capacity of an eternall participation of it And possibly the invitation which Christ made to all to come to him all them that are heavy laden did in its proportion concerne infants as much as others if they be guilty of Originall sinne and if that sinne be a burthen and presses them to any spirituall danger or inconvenience And it is all the reason of the world
the name of their Pupils is an absolute vanity For what if by positive Constitution of the Romans such solennities of Law are required in all stipulations and by indulgence are permitted in the case of a notable benefit accruing to Minors must God be tyed and Christian Religion transact her mysteries by proportion and complyance with the Law of the Romans I know God might if he would have appointed Godfathers to give Answer in behalfe of the Children and to be fidejussors for them but we cannot find any Authority or ground that he hath and if he had then it is to be supposed he would have given them Commission to have transacted the solennity with better circumstances and given Answers with more truth For the Question is asked of believing in the present And if the Godfathers answer in the name of the child I doe believe it is Lib. de baptis prope finem cap. 18. itaque pro personae cujusque conditione ac dispositione etiam aetate cunctatio baptismi utilior est praecipuè tamen circa parvulos .... Fiant Christiani cum Christum nosse potuerint notorious they speak false and ridiculously for the Infant is not capable of believing and if he were he were also capable of dissenting and how then doe they know his mind And therefore Tertullian gives advice that the Baptism of Infants should bee deferred till they could give an account of their Faith and the same also is the Councell of * Orat. 40 quaest in S. Baptisma Gregory Bishop of Nazianzum although he allowes them to hasten it in case of necessity for though his reason taught him what was fit yet he was overborn with the practise and opinion of his Age which began to beare too violently upon him and yet in another place he makes mention of some to whom Baptism was not adminstred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by reason of Infancy To which if we adde that the Parents of S. Austin S. Hierom and S. Ambrose although they were Christian yet did not baptise their children before they were o years of age it will be very considerable in the example and of great efficacy for destroying the supposed necessity or derivation from the Apostles But however it is against the perpetuall analogy of Christs Numb 28. Doctrine to baptize Infants For besides that Christ never gave any precept to baptize them nor ever himselfe nor his Apostles that appears did baptize any of them All that either he or his Apostles said concerning it requires such previous dispositions to Baptism of which Infants are not capable and these are Faith and Repentance And not to instance in those innumerable places that require Faith before this Sacrament there needs no more but this one saying of our blessed Saviour He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not Mar. 16. shall be damned plainly thus Faith and Baptism in conjunction will bring a man to heaven but if he have not Faith Baptism shall doe him no good So that if Baptism be necessary then so is Faith and much more for want of Faith damnes absolutely it is not said so of the want of Baptism Now if this decretory sentence be to be understood of persons of age and if Children by such an Answer which indeed is reasonable enough be excused from the necessity of Faith the want of which regularly does damne then it is sottish to say the same incapacity of reason and Faith shall not excuse from the actuall susception of Baptism which is lesse necessary and to which Faith and many other acts are necessary predisposions when it is reasonably and humanely received The Conclusion is that Baptism is also to be deferr'd till the time of Faith And whether Infants have Faith or no is a Question to be disputed by persons that care not how much they say nor how little they prove 1. Personall and actuall Faith they have none for they have Numb 29. no acts of understanding and besides how can any man know that they have since he never saw any sign of it neither was he told so by any one that could tell 2. Some say they have imputative Faith but then so let the Sacrament be too that is if they have the Parents Faith or the Churches then so let Baptism be imputed also by derivation from them that as in their Mothers womb and while they hang on their breasts they live upon their Mothers nourishment so they may upon the Baptism of their Parents or their Mother the Church For since Faith is necessary to the susception of Baptism and they themselves confesse it by striving to finde out new kinds of Faith to dawb the matter up such as the Faith is such must be the Sacrament for there is no proportion between an actuall Sacrament and an imputative Faith this being in immediate and necessary order to that And whatsoever can be said to take off from the necessity of actuall Faith all that and much more may be said to excuse from the actuall susception of Baptism 3. The first of these devices was that of Luther and his Scholars the second of Calvin and his and yet there is a third device which the Church of Rome teaches and that is that Infants have habituall Faith But who told them so how can they prove it what Revelation or reason teaches any such thing Are they by this habite so much as disposed to an actuall beliefe without a new master Can an Infant sent into a Mahumetan Province be more confident for Christianity when he comes to be a man then if he had not been baptized Are there any acts precedent concomitant or consequent to this pretended habit This strange invention is absolutely without art without Scripture Reason or Authority But the men are to be excused unlesse there were a better But for all these stratagemes the Argument now alledged against the Baptism of Infants is demonstrative and unanswerable To which also this consideration may be added that if Baptism Numb 30. be necessary to the salvation of Infants upon whom is the imposition laid To whom is the command given to the Parents or to the Children not to the Children for they are not capable of a Law not to the Parents for then God hath put the salvation of innocent Babes into the power of others and Infants may be damn'd for their Fathers carelessnesse or malice It followes that it is not necessary at all to be done to them to whom it cannot be prescrib'd as a Law and in whose behalfe it cannot be reasonably intrusted to others with the appendant necessity and if it be not necessary it is certain it is not reasonable and most certain it is nowhere in termes prescribed and therefore it is to be presumed that it ought to be understood and administred according as other precepts are with reference to the capacity of the subject and the reasonablenesse of the thing
hearty perswasion to the weaknesse of humanity and the difficulty of things for God hath not left those truths which are necessary for conservation of publike societies of men so intricate and obscure but that every one that is honest and desirous to understand his duty will certainly know that no Christian truth destroyes a mans being sociable and a member of the body Politick co-operating to the conservation of the whole as well as of it selfe However if it might happen that men should sincerely erre in such plaine matters of fact for there are fooles enough in the world yet if he hold his peace no man is to persecute or punish him for then it is meare opinion which comes not under Politicall Cognisance that is that Cognisance which onely can punish corporally but if he preaches it he is actually a Traytor or Seditious or Author of Perjury or a destroyer of humane Society respectively to the nature of the Doctrine and the preaching such Doctrines cannot claime the priviledge and immunity of a meare opinion because it is as much matter of fact as any the actions of his disciples and confidents and therefore in such cases is not to be permitted but judg'd according to the nature of the effect it hath or may have upon the actions of men Fifthly But lastly In matters mearly speculative the case is wholly altered because the body Politick which only may lawfully Numb 8. use the sword is not a competent Judge of such matters which have not direct influence upon the body Politick or upon the lives and manners of men as they are parts of a Community not but that Princes or Judges Temporall may have as much ability as others but by reason of the incompetency of the Authority And Gallio spoke wisely when he discoursed thus to the Jewes If it were a matter of wrong or Act. 18. 14. wicked lewdnesse ô ye Jewes reason would that I should hear you But if it be a question of words and names and of your Law look ye to it for I will be no Judge of such matters The man spoke excellent reason for the Cognisnance of these things did appertain to men of the other robe but the Ecclesiasticall power which only is competent to take notice of such questions is not of capacity to use the Temporall sword or corporall inflictions The meare doctrines and opinions of men are things Spirituall and therefore not Cognoscible by a temporall Authority and the Ecclesiasticall Authority which is to take Cognisance is it selfe so Spirituall that it cannot inflict any punishment corporall And it is not enough to say that when the Magistrate restraines Numb 9. the preaching such opinions if any man preaches them he may be punished and then it is not for his opinion but his disobedience that he is punish'd for the temporall power ought not to restraine Prophecyings where the publick peace and interest is not certainly concern'd And therefore it is not sufficient to excuse him whose Law in that case being by an incompetent power made a scruple where there was no sinne And under this consideration come very many Articles of the Church of Rome which are wholly speculative which doe Numb 10. not derive upon practise which begin in the understanding and rest there and have no influence upon life and government but very accidentally and by a great many removes and therefore are to be considered only so farre as to guide men in their perswasions but have no effect upon the persons of men their bodies or their temporall condition I instance in two Prayer for the dead and the Doctrine of Transubstantion these two to be instead of all the rest For the first This Discourse is to suppose it false and we are Numb 11. to direct our proceedings accordingly And therefore I shall not need to urge with how many faire words and gay pretences this Doctrine is set off apt either to conzen or instruct the conscience of the wisest according as it is true or false respectively But we finde sayes the Romanist in the History of the Maccabees that the Jewes did pray and make offerings for the dead which also appeares by other Testimonies and by their forme of prayers still extant which they used in the Captivity it is very considerable that since our blessed Saviour did reprove all the evill Doctrines and Traditions of the Scribes and Pharisees and did argue concerning the dead and the Resurrection against the Sadduces yet he spake no word against this publick practise but left it as he found it which he who came to declare to us all the will of his Father would not have done if it had not been innocent pious and full of charity To which by way of consociation if we adde that S. Paul did pray for Onesiphorus That God would shew him a mercy in that day 2 Tim. 1. 18. that is according to the stile of the New Testament the day of Judgement The result will be that although it be probable that Onesiphorus at that time was dead because in his salutations he salutes his houshold without naming him who was the Major domo against his custome of salutitions in other places Yet besides this the prayer was for such a blessing to him whose demonstration and reception could not be but after death which implies clearly that then there is a need of mercy and by consequence the dead people even to the day of Judgement inclusively are the subject of a misery the object of Gods mercy and therefore fit to be commemorated in the duties of our piety and charity and that we are to recommend their condition to God not only to give them more glory in the reunion but to pitty them to such purposes in which they need which because they are not revealed to us in particular it hinders us not in recommending the persons in particular to Gods mercy but should rather excite our charity and devotion For it being certaine that they have a need of mercy and it being uncertain how great their need is it may concern the prudence of charity to be the more earnest as not knowing the greatnesse of their necessity And if there should be any uncertainty in these Arguments Numb 12. yet its having been the universall practise of the Church of God in all places and in all Ages till within these hundred yeares is a very great inducement for any member of the Church to believe that in the first Traditions of Christianity and the Institutions Apostolicall there was nothing delivered against this practise but very much to insinuate or enjoyn it because the practise of it was at the first and was universall And if any man shall doubt of this he shewes nothing but De corona milit c. 3. de monogam c. 10. that hee is ignorant of the Records of the Church it being plaine in Tertullian and S. * Ep. 66. Cyprian who were the
call So it was in the first accomplishing To all and this for ever for I will send the Holy Ghost unto you and he shall abide with you for ever for it was in subsidium to supply the comforts of his desired presence and must therefore ex vi intentionis be remanent till Christ's comming againe Now then this promise being to be communicated to all and that for ever must either come to us by 1 extraordinary and miraculous mission or by 2 an ordinary Ministery No◠the first for we might as well expect the gift of Miracles If the second as it is most certaine so then the mayne Question is evicted viz that something perpetually necessary was in the power of the Apostles which was not in the power of the inferiour Ministers nor of any but themselves and their Colleagues to wit Ministerium S. Spiritûs or the ordinary office of giving the holy Ghost by imposition of hands For this promise was performed to the Apostles in Pentecost to the rest of the faithfull after Baptisme Quodn nunc in confirmandis Neophyt is manûs impositio tribuit singulis hoc tunc spiritûs sancti descensio in credentium populo donavit Vniversis saith Eusebius Emissenus Now we find no other way of performing it nor Serm. de Penticoste any ordinary conveyance of the Spirit to all people but this and we find that the H. Ghost actually was given this way Therefore the effect to wit the H. Ghost being to continue forever and the promise of Universall concernement this way also of it's communication to wit by Apostolicall imposition of hands is also perpetuum ministerium to be succeeded to and to abide for ever 2 This Ministery of imposition of hands for confirmation of baptized people is so farre from being a temporary Grace and to determine with the persons of the Apostles that it is a fundamentall point of Christianity an essentiall ingredient to it's cōposition S. Paul is my Author Therefore leaving Hebr. 6. 2. the principles of the doctrine of Christ let us goe on unto perfection not laying againe the foundation of Repentance from dead works faith to wards God the doctrine of baptisme and of laying on of hands c. Here is imposition of hands reckoned as part of the foundation and a principle of Christianity in S. Pauls Catechisme Now imposition of hands is used by Name in Scripture but for two Ministrations 1 For ordination 2 for this whatsover it is Imposition of hands for ordination does indeed give the Holy Ghost but not as he is that promise which is called the promise of the Father For the Holy Ghost for ordination was given before the ascension Iohn 20. But the promise of the H. Ghost the comforter the Paraclete I say not the Ordayner or fountaine of Priestly order that was not given till the day of Pentecost and besides it was promis'd to all Christian people and the other was given onely to the Clergy * Adde to this that S. Paul having laid this in the foundation makes his progresse from this to perfection as he calls it that is to higher mysteries and then his discourse is immediately of the Priesthood Evangelicall which is Originally in Christ ministerially in the Clergy so that unlesse we will either confound the termes of his progresse or imagine him to make the Ministery of the Clergy the foundation of Christs Priesthood and not rather contrary it is cleare that by imposition of hands S. Paul meanes not ordination and therefore confirmation there being no other ordinary Ministery of imposition of hands but these two specifyed in Holy Scripture For as for benediction in which Christ used the ceremony and as for healing in which Ananias and the Apostles us'd it the first is clearely no Principle or fundamentall point of Christianity and the Second is confessedly extraordinary therefore the argument is still firme upon it's first principles 3. Lastly the Primitive Church did de facto and beleiv'd themselves to be tyed de jure to use this rite of Confirmation and giving of the Holy Ghost after Baptisme S. Clemens Alexandrinus in Eusebius tells a story lib 3. hist cap. 17. of a young man whom S. Iohn had converted and committed to a Bishop to be brought up in the faith of Christendome Qui saith S. Clement eum baptismi Sacramento illuminavit posteà verò sigillo Domini tanquam perfectâ tutâ ejus animi custodiâ obsignavit The Bishop first baptiz'd him then consign'd him Iustin Martyr saies speaking pro more Quaest. 137. ad Orthod Ecclesiae according to the Custome of the Church that when the mysteries of baptisme were done then the faithfull are consign'd or confirm'd S. Cyprian relates to this story of S. Philip and Epist 73 ad Iubajan the Apostles and gives this account of the whole affayre Et idcircò quia legitimum Ecclesiasticum baptismum consequuti fuerant baptizari eos ultrà non oportebat Sed tantummodò id quod deerat id à Petro Iohanne factum erat ut oratione pro eis habitâ manu impositâ invocaretur infunderetur super eos Spiritus S. Quod nunc quoque apud nos geritur ut qui in Ecclesiâ baptizantur Praeposit is Ecclesiae offerantur ut per nostram orationem ac manûs impositionem Spiritum S. consequantur signaculo Dominico confirmentur S. Peter and S. Iohn by imposing their hands on the Converts of Samaria praying over them and giving them the Holy Ghost made supply to them of what was wanting after Baptisme and this is to this day done in the Church for new baptized people are brought to the Bishops and by imposition of their hands obtaine the Holy Ghost But for this who pleases to be farther satisfied in the Primitive faith of Christendome may see it in the decretall Epistles of Cornelius the Martyr to Faebianus recorded by Eusebius in the * Lib. 6. hist. cap 33. Epistle written to Iulius and Iulianus Bishops under the name of S. Clement in the * in 1. tom Concil Epistle of Vrban P. and Martyr a lib. de baptismo c. 8. in Tertullian in b lib 2. contra lit Petil cap. 104 lib. 15. de Trinit c 26. vide etiam S Hieron contra Luciferianos S. Ambros lib. 2. c. 2. de Sacramentis Epist 3. Eusebij P. M. ad Episc. Tusciae Campon I sidor Hispal de eccles offic lib. 2. c. 26. S. Austen and in S. Cyrill of Ierusalem whose whole third Mistagogique Catechisme is concerning Confirmation This only The Catholicks whose Christian prudence it was in all true respects to disadvantage Hereticks least their poyson should infect like a Pest layd it in Novatus dish as a crime He was baptized in his bed and was not confirmed Vnde nec Spiritum sanctum unquam potuerit promereri therefore he could never receive the gift of the holy Ghost So Cornelius in the forequoted Epistle
certum a true and certaine or indelible character secundùm placitum Patris according to the will of God the Father And this also is the doctrine of S. Ambrose Ideò quanquam melior In 1. Corinth 12. Apostolus aliquando tamen eget Prophetis quià ab uno Deo Patre sunt omnia singulos Episcopos singulis Ecclesiis praeesse decrevit God from whom all good things doe come did decree that every Church should be governed by a Bishop And againe De dignit Sacerd cap. 2. Honorigitur Fratres sublimit as Episcopalis nullis poterit comparationibus adaequari Si Regum fulgori compares c and a little after Quid jam de plebeiâ dixerim multitudine cui non solùm praeferri à Domino meruit sed ut eam quoque jure tueatur patrio praeceptis imperatum est Evangelicis The honour and sublimity of the Bishop is an incomparable preheminence and is by God set over the people and it is commanded by the precept of the holy Gospell that he should guide them by a Fathers right And in the close of his discourse Sic certè à Domino ad B. Petrum dicitur Petre amas me .... repetitum est à Domino tertiò Pasce oves meas Quas oves quem gregem non solùm tunc B. suscepit Petrus sed cum illo nos suscepimus omnes Our blessed Lord committed his sheep to S. Peter to be fed and in him we who have Pastorall or Episcopall authority have received the same authority and commission Thus also divers of the Fathers speaking of the ordination of S. Timothy to be Bishop and of S. Paul's intimation that it was by Prophecy affirme it to be done by order of the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith S. Chrysostome he was ordained by Prophecy Homil. 4. Graec. 5. lat in 1. Tim. 1. cap. In 1. Tit. that is by the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou wert not made Bishop by humane constitution 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so Oecumenius By Divine revelation saith Theodoret. By the command of the Holy Ghost so Theophylact and indeed so S. Paul to the assembly of Elders and Bishops met at Miletus Spiritus S. posuit vos Episcopos Acts 20. the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops to be sure S. Timothy was amongst them and he was a Bishop and so were diverse others there present therefore the order it selfe is a ray streaming from the Divine beauty since a single person was made Bishop by revelation I might multiply authorities in this particular which are very frequent and confident for the Divine institution of Episcopacy in †Hom. 32. in Iohan. Origen in the Councell of Carthage recorded by S. Cyprian in the collection of the * Can. 6. Orientall Canons by Martinus Bracarensis in the Councells of a C. 25. Aquisgrane and b Octauum Can. 7. Toledo and many more The summe is that which was taught by c Epist. 2. S. Sixtus Apostolorum dispositione ordinante Domino Episcopi primitùs sunt constituti The Lord did at first ordaine and the Apostles did so order it and so Bishops at first had their Originall constitution These and all the former who affirme Bishops to be successors of the Apostles by consequence to have the same institution drive all to the same issue and are sufficient to make faith that it was the do-do-doctrine Primitive and Catholick that Episcopacy is a divine institution which Christ Planted in the first founding of Christendome which the Holy Ghost Watered in his first descent on Pentecost and to which we are confident that God will give an increase by a never failing succession unlesse where God removes the Candlestick or which is all one takes away the starre the Angell of light from it that it may be invelop'd in darknesse usque ad consummationem saeculi aperturam tenebrarum The conclusion of all I subjoyne in the words of Venerable Bede before quoted sunt ergo jure Divino Episcopi Lib. 3. in Lucam c. 15. à Presbyter is praelatione distincti Bishops are distinct from Presbyters and Superiour to them by the law of God THE second Basis of Episcopacy is Apostolicall tradition We have seen what Christ did now wee shall see what was done by his Apostles And since they knew their Masters mind so well wee can never better confide in any argument to prove Divine institution of a derivative authority then the practise Apostolicall Apostoli enim Discipuli Lib. 3. cap. 5. veritatis existentes extra omne mendacium sunt non enim communicat mendacium veritati sicut non communicant tenebraeluci sed praesentia alterius § 13. In pursuance of the Divine institution the Apostles did ordaine Bishops in severall Churches excludit alterum saith S. Irenaeus FIrst then the Apostles did presently after the ascension fixe an Apostle or a Bishop in the chayre of Ierusalem For they knew that Ierusalem was shortly to be destroyed they themselves foretold of miseryes and desolations to insue Petrus Paulus praedicunt cladem Hierosolymitanam saith Lactantius l. 4. inst famines and warres and not a stone left upon another was the fate of that Rebellious City by Christs owne prediction which themselves recorded in Scripture And to say they understood not what they writ is to make them Enthusiasts and neither good Doctors nor wise seers But it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the holy Spirit which was promised to lead them into all truth would instruct them in so concerning an issue of publike affaires as was so Great desolation and therefore they began betimes to establish that Church and to fixe it upon it's perpetuall base 2 ly The Church of Ierusalem was to be the president and platforme for other Churches The word of God went forth into all the world beginning first at Ierusalem and therefore also it was more necessary a Bishop should be there plac'd betimes that other Churches might see their governement from whence they receiv'd their doctrine that they might see from what starres their continuall fluxe of light must streame 3 ly The Apostles were actually dispers'd by persecution and this to be sure they look'd for and therefore so implying the necessity of a Bishop to governe in their absence or decession any wayes they ordayn'd S. Iames the first Bishop of Ierusalem there he fixt As S. Iames at Hierusalem his chayre there he liv'd Bishop for 30 yeares and finish'd his course with glorious Martyrdome If this be proov'd we are in a fayre way for practise Apostolicall First let us see all that is said of S. Iames in Scripture that may concerne this affayre Acts. 15. We find S. Iames in the Synod at Ierusalem not disputing but giving finall determination to that Great Qu about Circumcision And when there had beene much disputing Peter rose up and said c He first drave the question to an issue and
enough to furnish both with variety and yet neither to admit meere Presbyters in the present acceptation of the word nor yet the Laity to a decision of the question nor authorizing the decretall For besides the twelve Apostles there were Apostolicall men which were Presbyters and something more as Paul and Barnabas and Silas and Evangelists and Pastors besides which might furnish out the last appellative sufficiently But however without any further trouble it is evident that this word Brethren does not distinguish the Laity from the Clergy Now when they heard this they were pricked in their hearts and said unto PETER and to the rest of the APOSTLES Men and BRETHREN what shall we doe Iudas and Silas who were Apostolicall men are called in Scripture chiefe men among the BRETHREN But this is too known to need a contestation I only insert the saying of Basilius the Emperour in the 8 th Synod De vobis autem Laicis tam qui in dignitatibus quà m qui absolutè versamini quid ampliùs dicam non habeo quà m quòd nullo modo vobis licet de Ecclesiasticis causis sermonem movere neque penitùs resistere integritati Ecclesiae universali Synodo adversari Lay-men saies the Emperour must by no means meddle with causes Ecclesiasticall nor oppose themselves to the Catholick Church or Councells Oecumenicall They must not meddle for these things appertaine to the cognisance of Bishops and their decision * And now after all this what authority is equall to this LEGISLATIVE of the Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Aristotle Lib. 4. polit c. 15. They are all evidences of power and authority to deliberate to determine or judge to make lawes But to make lawes is the greatest power that is imaginable The first may belong fairely enough to Presbyters but I have proved the two latter to be appropriate to Bishops LAstly as if all the acts of jurisdiction and every § 42. imaginable part of power were in the Bishop over And the Bishop had a propriety in the persons of his Clerks the Presbyters subordinate Clergy the Presbyters are said to be Episcoporum Presbyteri the Bishops Presbyters as having a propriety in them and therefore a superiority over them and as the Bishop was a dispenser of those things which were in bonis Ecclesiae so he was of the persons too a Ruler in propriety * S. Hilary in the book which himselfe delivered to Constantine Ecclesiae adhuc saith he per Presbyteros MEOS communionem distribuens I still give the holy Communion to the faithfull people by MY Presbyters And therefore in the third Councell of Carthage a great deliberation was had about requiring a Clerke of his Bishop to be promoted in another Church .... Denique qui unum habuerit numquid debet illi ipse unus Presbyter auferri saith Posthumianus If the Bishop have Can. 45. Concil Carthag 3. but one Presbyter must that one be taken from him Idsequor saith Aurelius ut conveniam Episcopum ejus atque ei inculcem quod ejus Clericus à quâlibet Ecclesiâ postuletur And it was resolved ut Clericum alienum nisi concedente ejus Episcopo No man shall retaine another Bishop's without the consent of the Bishop whose Clerk he is * When Athanasius was abused by the calumny of the hereticks his adversaries and entred to purge himselfe Athanasius ingreditur cum Timotheo Presbytero Eccles. hist. lib. 10. cap. 17. Suo He comes in with Timothy HIS Presbyter and Arsenius cujus brachium dicebatur excisum lector aliquando fuerat Athanasii Arsenius was Athanasius HIS Reader Vbi autem ventum est ad Rumores de poculo fracto à Macario Presbytero Athanasii c. Macarius was another of Athanasius HIS Priests So Theodoret. Peter and Irenaeus were two Lib. 2. cap. 8. more of his Presbyters as himselfe witnesses Paulinianus comes sometimes to visit us saith S. Hierome to Pammachius but not as your Clerke sed Athanas. Epist a◠vitam solitar agentes ejus à quo ordinatur His Clerk who did ordaine him But these things are too known to need a multiplication of instances The summe is this The question was whether or no and how farre the Bishops had Superiority over Presbyters in the Primitive Church Their doctrine and practice have furnished us with these particulars The power of Church goods and the sole dispensation of them and a propriety of persons was reserved to the Bishop For the Clergy and Church possessions were in his power in his administration the Clergy might not travaile without the Bishops leave they might not be preferred in another Diocesse without license of their own Bishop in their own Churches the Bishop had sole power to preferre them and they must undertake the burden of any promotion if he calls them to it without him they might not baptize not consecrate the Eucharist not communicate not reconcile penitents not preach not onely not without his ordination but not without a speciall faculty besides the capacity of their order The Presbyters were bound to obey their Bishops in their sanctions and canonicall impositions even by the decrce of the Apostles themselves and the doctrine of Ignatius and the constitution of S. Clement of the Fathers in the Councell of Arles Ancyra and Toledo and many others The Bishops were declared to be Iudges in ordinary of the Clergy and people of their Diocesse by the concurrent suffrages of almost 2000 holy Fathers assembled in Nice Ephesus Chalcedon in Carthage Antioch Sardis Aquileia Taurinum Agatho and by the Emperour and by the Apostles and all this attested by the constant practice of the Bishops of the Primitive Church inflicting censures upon delinquents and absolving them as they saw cause and by the dogmaticall resolution of the old Catholicks declaring in their attributes and appellatives of the Episcopall function that they have supreme and universall spirituall power viz. in the sense above explicated over all the Clergy and Laity of their Diocesse as that they are higher then all power the image of God the figure of Christ Christs Vicar President of the Church Prince of Priests of authority incomparable unparalell'd power and many more if all this be witnesse enough of the superiority of Episcopall jurisdiction we have their depositions wee may proceed as we see cause for and reduce our Episcopacy to the primitive state for that is truly a reformation id Dominicum quod primum id haereticum quod posterius and then we shall be sure Episcopacy will loose nothing by these unfortunate contestations BUT against the cause it is objected super totam §. 43. Their Iurisdiction was over many congregations or Parishes Materiam that Bishops were not Diocesan but Parochiall and therefore of so confin'd a jurisdiction that perhaps our Village or Citty Priests shall advance their Pulpit as high as the Bishops throne * Well! put case they were not Diocesan but parish Bishops what
not be otherwise In instance first in the Church of France For this See Bodinus who reports of a Norman Gentleman whom his Confessor discovered for having confessed De republ lib. 2. cap. 5. a Treasonable purpose he sometimes had of killing Francis the first of which hee was penitent did his penance craved absolutiō obtain'd it but yet was sentenc'd to the axe by expresse commission from the Histoire de lapaiz King to the Parliament of Paris The like confession was made by the Lord of Haulteville when he was in danger of death which when he had escaped he incurred it with the disadvantage of publike infamy upon the Scaffold I instance not in the case of Barriere it is every where knowne as it is reported partly by Thuanus but more fully by the Authour of Histoire de la paix Nor yet is France singular in the practise of publication of confessed Treason For at Rome there have been examples of the like I meane of those who confessed their purpose of killing the Dominic à Soto memb 3. q 4. concl 2 derat regendi secret Pope who were revealed by their Confessors and accordingly punish'd Thus then the first pretence proves a nullity either our Laws are just in commanding publication of confession in case of Treasō or themselves very culpable in teaching practising it in the same in cases of lesse moment The 2 d is like the first for it is extremly vain to pretend that the seale of confession is founded upon Catholike traditiō Iudg by the sequel The first word I heare of concealing confessions Lib 7. hist. c. 16. is in Sozomen relating how the Greeke Church about the time of Decius the Emperor set over the penitēts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a publike penitentiary Priest who was bound to be Vir bonae conversationis servansque secretum a good man and a keeper of secrets for indeed he was bound to conceale some crimes in particular those which an Adulteresse had confessed I meane concerning her Adultery as appeares in the Canons of S. Basil. But yet this Priest who was so tyed to a religious secrecy did publish many of them in the Congregation Epist. ad Amphil. before the people that they might reprove the delinquent and discountenance the sinne The same story is reported by Cassiodore and Nicephorus from the same Authour The lawfulnesse and practise of publication in some cases is as cleere in Origen If saith he the Physician Homil. 2. in 37. Psal. of thy soule perceives thy sinnes to be such as to need so harsh a remedy as to have them published before the assemblies of the people that others may be admonished thou the better cured he need be very deliberate and skilfull in the application of it Hitherto no such thing as an Vniversall tradition for the pretended inviolable sacramentall seale for Origen plainly and by them confessedly speakes of such sins as first were privately confessed to the Priest how else should hee deliberate of their publication but yet he did so and for all the seale of confession sometimes opened many of them to no fewer witnesses then a whole assembly Thus it was in the Greeke Church both Law and Custome But now if we look into the Latine Church wee shall find that it was taken up from example of the Greeks and some while practis'd that some particular sinnes should be published in the Church before the Congregation as it is confessed in the Councell of Mentz and Cap. 10. 21. l. 19. c. 37. inserted by Burchard into his Decree But when the Lay piety began to coole and the zeale of some Clergy men waxe too hot they would needs heighten this custome of publication of some sinnes to a Law of the publishing of all sinnes This being judg'd to be inconvenient expressed the first decree for the seale of confession in the Latin Church Now see how it is utter'd and it wil sufficiently informe us both of the practise and the opinion which Antiquitie had of the obligation to the seale Illam contra Apostolicam regulam praesumptionem c. that is it was against the Apostolicall ordinance that a Law should enjoyn that the Priest should reveale Decret S. Leonis P. M. Epist 80. ad episc Campan all those sinnes which had beene told him in confession It might be done so it were not requir'd and exacted and yet might be so requir'd so it were not a publication of all Non enim omnium hujusmodi sunt peceata saith S. Leo some sinnes are inconvenient to be published it is not fit the world should know all therefore some they might or else hee had said nothing The reason which he gives makes the businesse somewhat clearer for hee derives it not from any simple necessity of the thing or a Divine Right but least men out of inordinate love to themselves should rather refuse to be wash't then buy their purity with so much shame The whole Epistle hath many things in it excellently to the same purpose I say no more the Doctrine and practise of antiquity is sufficiently evident and that there is nothing lesse then an Vniversall tradition for the seale of confession to be observed in all cases even of sins of the highest malignity Thus these Fathers Confessors are made totally inexcusable by concealing a Treason which was not revealed to them in a formall confession and had been likewise culpable though it had there being as I have showne no such sacrednesse of the Seale as to be inviolable in all cases whatsoever I have now done with the severall considerations of the persons to whom the Question was propounded they were the Fathers Confessors in the day but it was Christ the Lord in my text The Question it selfe followes Shall we command fire to come from heaven and consume them The Question was concerning the fate of a whole Towne of Samaria in our case it was more of the Fate of a whole Kingdome It had been well if such a Question had been silenc'd by a direct negative or as the Iudges of the Areopage used to doe put off ad diem longissimum that they might have expected the answer three ages after De morte hominis nulla est cunctatio longa No demurre had been too long in a case of so much and so royall blood the blood of a King of a Kings Children of a Kings Kingdome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 King and Kingdome should have been made a solemne sacrifice to appease theirsolemndeliberate malice I said deliberate for they were loth to be malicious without good advice and therefore they askt their question worthy of an Oracle even no lesse then Delphick where an evill spirit was the Numen and a Witch the Prophet For the Question was such of which a Christian could not doubt though he had been fearefully scrupulous in his resolutions For whoever question'd the unlawfulnesse of murder of murdering
be obliged to believe much more yet this was the one and onely foundation of Faith upon which all persons were to build their hopes of heaven this was therefore necessary to be taught to all because of necessity to be believ'd by all So that although other persons might commit a delinquency in genere morum if they did not know or did not believe much more because they were oblig'd to further disquisitions in order to other ends yet none of these who held the Creed intire could perish for want of necessary faith though possibly he might for supine negligence or affected ignorance or some other fault which had influence upon his opinions and his understanding he having a new supervening obligation ex accidente to know and believe more Neither are we oblig'd to make these Articles more particular and minute then the Creed For since the Apostles and indeed Numb 11. our blessed Lord himselfe promised heaven to them who believd him to be the Christ that was to come into the world and that he who believes in him should be partaker of the resurrection and life eternall he will be as good as his word yet because this Article was very generall and a complexion rather then a single proposition the Apostles and others our Fathers in Christ did make it more explicite and though they have said no more then what lay entire and ready form'd in the bosome of the great Article yet they made their extracts to great purpose and absolute sufficiency and therefore there needs no more deductions or remoter consequences from the first great Article than the Creed of the Apostles For although whatsoever is certainly deduced from any of these Articles made already so explicite is as certainly true and as much to be believed as the Article it selfe because ex veris possunt nil nisi vera sequi yet because it is not certain that our deductions from them are certain and what one calls evident is so obscure to another that he believes it false it is the best and only safe course to rest in that explication the Apostles have made because if any of these Apostolicall deductions were not demonstrable evidently to follow from that great Article to which salvation is promised yet the authority of them who compil'd the Symboll the plaine description of the Articles from the words of Scriptures the evidence of reason demonstrating these to be the whole foundation are sufficient upon great grounds of reason to ascertaine us but if we goe farther besides the easinesse of being deceived we relying upon our own discourses which though they may be true and then binde us to follow them but yet no more then when they only seem truest yet they cannot make the thing certaine to another much lesse necessary in it selfe And since God would not binde us upon paine of sinne and punishment to make deductions our selves much lesse would he binde us to follow another man's Logick as an Article of our Faith I say much lesse another mans for our own integrity for we will certainly be true to our selves and doe our own businesse heartily is as fit and proper to be imployed as another mans ability He cannot secure me that his ability is absolute and the greatest but I can be more certaine that my own purposes and fidelity to my selfe is such And since it is necessary to rest somewhere lest we should run to an infinity it is best to rest there where the Apostles and the Churches Apostolicall rested when not only they who are able to judge but others who are not are equally ascertained of the certainty and of the sufficiency of that explication This I say not that I believe it unlawfull or unsafe for the Numb 12. Church or any of the Antistites religionis or any wise man to extend his own Creed to any thing may certainely follow from any one of the Articles but I say that no such deduction is fit to be prest on others as an Article of Faith and that every deduction which is so made unlesse it be such a thing as is at first evident to all is but sufficient to make a humane Faith nor can it amount to a divine much lesse can be obligatory to binde a person of a differing perswasion to subscribe under paine of loosing his Faith or being a Heretick For it is a demonstration that nothing can be necessary to be believed under paine of damnation but such propositions of which it is certaine that God hath spoken and taught them to us and of which it is certaine that this is their sense and purpose For if the sense be uncertain we can no more be obliged to believe it in a certain sense then we are to believe it at all if it were not certaine that God delivered it But if it be onely certaine that God spake it and not certaine to what sense our Faith of it is to be as indeterminate as its sense and it can be no other in the nature of the thing nor is it consonant to Gods justice to believe of him that he can or will require more And this is of the nature of those propositions which Aristotle calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to which without any further probation all wise men will give assent at its first publication And therfore deductions inevident from the evident and plain letter of Faith are as great recessions from the obligation as they are from the simplicity and certainty of the Article And this I also affirm although the Church of any one denomination or represented in a Councell shall make the deduction or declaration For unlesse Christ had promised his Spirit to protect every particular Church from all errors lesse materiall unlesse he had promised an absolute universall infallibility etiam in minutioribus unlesse super-structures be of the same necessity with the foundation and that Gods Spirit doth not only preserve his Church in the being of a Church but in a certainty of not saying any thing that is lesse certain and that whether they will or no too we may be bound to peace and obedience to silence and to charity but have not a new Article of Faith made and a new proposition though consequent as 't is said from an Article of Faith becomes not therefore a part of the Faith nor of absolute necessity Quid unquam aliud Ecclesia Conciliorum decretis Contra haeres cap 32. eâ—isa est nisi ut quod antea simpliciter credebatur hoc idem postea diligentiùs crederetur said Vincentius Lirinensis whatsoever was of necessary beliefe before is so still and hath a new degree added by reason of a new light or a clear explication but no prositions can be adopted into the foundation The Church hath power to intend our Faith but not to extend it to make our beliefe more evident but not more large and comprehensive For Christ and his Apostles concealed nothing that was necessary to the
which I have specifyed and they are all I could ever meete with are of peculiar answer For as for Ignatius in his Epistle to the Church of Trallis * Jdem ferè habet in Epist. ad Magnes Smyrnens he calls the Presbytery or company of Priests the Colledge or combination of Apostles But here S. Ignatius as he lifts up the Presbyters to a comparison with Apostles so he also raises the Bishop to the similitude and resemblance with God Episcopus typum Dei Patris omnium gerit Presbyteri verò sunt conjunctus Apostolorum caetus So that although Presbyters grow high yet they doe not overtake the Bishops or Apostles who also in the same proportion grow higher then their first station This then will doe no hurt As for S. Irenaeus he indeed does say that Presbyters succeed the Apostles but what Presbyters he means he tells us even such Presbyters as were also Bishops such as S. Peter and S. Iohn was who call themselves Presbyters his words are these Proptereà Lib. 4. c. 43. eis qui in Ecclesiâ sunt Presbyteris abaudire oportet his qui successionem habent ab Apostolis qui cum Episcopatus successione charisma veritatis certum secundùm placitum Patris acceperunt And a little after Cap. 44. Tales Presbyteros nutrit Ecclesia de quibus Propheta ait dabo Principes tuos in pace Episcopos tuos in Iustitiâ So that he gives testimony for us not against us As for S. Hierome the third man he in the succession to the honour of the Apostolate joynes Presbyters with Bishops and that 's right enough for if the Bishop alone does succeed in plenitudinem potestatis Apostolicae ordinariae as I have proved he does then also it is as true of the Bishop together with his consessus Presbyterorum Epist. 13. Episcopi Presbyteri habeant in exemplum Apostolos Apostolicos viros quorum honorem possidentes habere nitantur meritum those are his words and inforce not so much as may be safely granted for reddendo singula singulis Bishops succeed Apostles and Presbyters Apostolick men and such were many that had not at first any power Apostolicall and that 's all that can be inferred from this place of S. Hierome I know nothing else to stay me or to hinder our assent to those authorities of Scripture I have alleadged and the full voyce of traditive interpretation THE second argument from Antiquity is the § 12. And the institution of Episcopacy as well as of the Apostolate expressed to be Divine by primitive authority Epist. 27. direct testimony of the Fathers for a Divine institution In this S. Cyprian is most plentifull Dominus noster ** Episcopi honorem Ecclesiae suae rationem disponens in Evangelio dicit Petro c Inde per temporum successionum vices Episcoporum ordinatio Ecclesiae ratio decurrit ut Ecclesia super Episcopos constituatur omnis actus Ecclesiae per eosdem Praepositos gubernetur Cùm hoc itaque Divinâ lege fundatum sit c Our Lord did institute in the Gospell the honour of a Bishop Hence comes the ordination of Bishops and the Church is built upon them and every action of the Church is to be governed by them and this is founded upon a Divine law Meminisse autem Diaconi debent quoniam Epist. 65. ad Rogatian Apostolos i. e. Episcopos praepositos Dominus elegit Our Lord hath chosen Apostles that is Bishops and Church-governours And a little after Quod si nos aliquid audere contrà Deum possumus qui Episcopos facit possunt contranos audere Diaconi à quibus fiunt We must not attempt any thing against God who hath instituted Bishops The same Father in his Epistle to Magnus disputes against Novatianus his being a Bishop Novatianus in Ecclesiâ non Epist. 76. est nec Episcopus computari potest qui Evangelicâ Apostolicâ traditione contemptâ nemini succedens à seipso ordinatus est If there was both an Evangelicall and an Apostolick tradition for the successive ordination of Bishops by other Bishops as S. Cyprian affirmes there is by saying Novatianus contemned it then certainly the same Evangelicall power did institute that calling for the modus of whose election it took such particular order S. Ignatius long before him speaking concerning his absent friend Sotion the Deacon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epist ad Magnes He wishes for the good mans company because by the grace of God and according to the law of Iesus Christ he was obedient to the Bishop and his Clergy And a little after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is home enough Ye ought to obey your Bishop and to contradict him in nothing It is a fearefull thing to contradict him For whosoever does so does not mock a visible man but the invisible undeceiveable God For this contumely relates not to man but to God So S. Ignatius which could not be true were it a humane constitution and no Divine ordinance But more full are those words of his in his Epistle to the Ephesians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He that obeyes the Bishop and Clergy obeyes Christ who did constitute and ordaine them This is plain and dogmaticall I would be loath to have two men so famous so Ancient and so resolute speake halfe so much against us But it is a generall resolve and no private opinion Quaest. Vet. N. Testam qu. 97. For S. Austin is confident in the case with a Nemo ignorat Episcopos Salvatorem Ecclesiis instituisse Ipse enim priusquam in coelos ascenderet imponens manum Apostolis ordinavit eos Episcopos No man is so ignorant but he knowes that our blessed Saviour appointed Bishops over Churches for before his ascension into Heaven he ordained the Apostles to be Bishops But long before him Hegesippus going to Rome and by the way calling Euseb. lib. 4. c. 22. in at Corinth and divers other Churches discoursed with their severall Bishops and found them Catholick and Holy and then staid at Rome three successions of Bishops Anicetus Soter and Eleutherius Sed in omnibus ist is ordinationibus vel in caeteris quas per reliquas urbes videram it a omnia habebantur sicut lex antiquitùs tradidit Prophetae indicaverunt ET DOMINUS STATUIT All things in these ordinations or successions were as our Lord had appointed All things therefore both of doctrine and discipline and therefore the ordinations themselves too Further yet and it is worth observing there was never any Bishop of Rome from S. Peter to S. Sylvester that ever writ decretall Epistle now extant and transmitted to us but either professedly or accidentally he said or intimated that the order of Bishops did come from God S. Irenaeus speaking of Bishops successors to the Lib. 4. c. 43. Apostles saith that with their order of Bishoprick they have received charisma veritatis