it by their practice When he impowered an Archpriest to govern them the Seculars would not receive him And when he would have placed a Bishop over them the Regulars would not receive him So the Seculars and Regulars as it were with one consent have given us their Judgment in the Case and that by no Indeliberate Act on either hand for they contended about it a great part of the last Age. And therefore unless their Principles are altered since the same Right which they exercised in not submitting to a Government they may exercise as well in not receiving a Council though the Pope should presume to impose it And that the Council of it self has no power to oblige them it appears in that judged case of the Egyptian Church The Bishops whereof would not subscribe to a Decree of the Fourth General Council because they had then no Archbishop to give them an Authority for it This was allowed to be a Reasonable excuse though the Decree which they were to have subscribed was in a matter of Faith I suppose they of the Roman Communion here in England have had the same Reason ever since the Reformation They have had no lawful Primate nor no declared Bishops all this while And during this imperfect state of their Church if there had been a General Council and any of their Clergy had been there they might have been excused from subscribing though in matters of Faith What difference there is in the Case makes wholly on our side For there is a wide difference indeed between Subscribing and Receiving The first is only the declaring ones own personal assent to the Decrees of any Council the other is to give them the force of Laws in the National Church And if according to that Canon the Bishops where they are in a Council are not bound to subscribe without their Primate how much less can any National Church be Obliged to receive things for Law without her Bishops Nay more how can she Lawfully receive them Especially such a Church as owns there is no Jurisdiction without Bishops She cannot do it without a Synod of Bishops according to the ancient Canons And therefore the English Church of Roman Catholics is so far from being bound to receive the Trent Council that in her present condition she could not Lawfully receive it I say still according to the ancient Canons which ought to be of some force with them of the Roman Communion But let them do as they please The case is plain that the Reformed Church of England ought not to receive it if she can prove her charge that that Council has innovated in the Christian Faith or rather unless that Council can discharge her self of it by proving that what we call her New Faith is not new but received from Catholick Tradition We think we are sure they cannot bring this Tradition for those Doctrines which are laid as Foundations for all the rest in that Council namely their making unwritten Tradition to be of Divine Authority and therefore equal with the holy Scriptures their bringing those which we call the Apocryphal Books into the Canon of Scripture their making the Vulgar Latine Translation Authentick in all matters of Faith and good life For these and all the rest of their Doctrines of Faith as they are called in the Roman Church which we call Innovations and Errors We are not afraid to refer our selves to Catholic Tradition If they of the Roman side would submit to it as well there would be no difference between us in matters of Faith whatsoever there might be in Opinion And therefore they would have no cause in their own private judgment to conclude us for Heretics much less would they find us condemned for such by any competent Judicature If they think otherwise than we do in this matter the reason must be because they do not mean what we do by Catholic Tradition It is plain that too many of that Church have a wrong notion of it taking that for Catholic Tradition which is only presumed to be so by a Party in these latter Ages For though they call themselves the Catholic Church and perhaps really take themselves to be no other yet they are but a handful to the body of Christians especially considered in our notion of Catholic which as we take it extends to all the Christians of all Ages We plainly profess to take the Catholic Tradition in that sense of Vincentius Lyrinensis and before him of Tertullian in his Prescriptions who make this to be the Standard of all Doctrines of Faith quod semper quod ubique quod ab omnibus First that which has gone for Christian Faith in all Ages from the beginning of Christianity Secondly which has been taken for such by the whole diffusive Church comprehending all those particular Churches which have not been Canonically condemned either of Schism or Heresie And lastly that which has not only been the Faith of some persons though contradicted by others but that which has been the constant belief of the generality in all those Christian Churches To bring our differences to this standard betwixt us I conceive that first they of the Roman Communion will not find such evidence for their Articles of Faith as they think of in the Primitive Records I say such evidence as will make it appear that they were of Faith antecedently to the Definitions of Councils They will find that those Councils which first defined them to be of Faith were not such against which we have no just exception nor that their Definitions have been generally received throughout the diffusive Catholic Church For the Primitive Records I suppose they of the Roman Church that have read them will scarce pretend to shew how they convey all those Articles to us as of Faith And where they fail to shew this of any Article they must excuse us if we cannot allow it to be a Catholic Tradition Much more when we shew from those Records that there are strong presumptions to the contrary Whereof not to trouble my Reader with more instances I have given some proof in that which Bellarmine calls Caput Fidei namely in that Doctrine of the Popes Supremacy over all Christians For the Councils by which their new Articles have been defined the most they can rationally pretend to by their Definitions is to deliver the sense of the present diffusive Church Which they are presumed to do when they have power to represent it or when their Decrees are received in all parts of it and not otherwise But how few of their General Councils can pretend to either of these Conditions It appears that the Eldest of them could not I mean the Second Council of Nice which first imposed the worship of Images For about thirty years before there was an Eastern Council held at Constantinople which Condemned that very thing And not ten years after there was a Western Council at Francford which
Religion even themselves being Judges For they had all or most of them taken it before some of them had taken it many times over two or three of them had writ in defence of it nay were at the first composing of it But there was a greater difference than either of these if the Bishops then turned out by Queen Elizabeth had been most of them Canonically deprived under King Edward VI and were never since Canonically restored which may deserve a further Consideration The mean while it is certain that this Act outed not two hundred more of all the Clergy in this Kingdom And their places being filled with such as had been banished in Queen Maries days it is not hard to judge how all things else to be done in Church matters might pass any Obstruction as they did afterwards in full Convocation 3. As to Doctrinal things it was generally observed in those times by the Advantage of Ecclesiastical learning that in those many former Ages which wanted it many errors and some very gross ones had crept into the Church And those errors having the Papacy on their side for Reasons which I have already shewn had so far prevailed that they were growing to be Articles of Faith Many of them were already defined so and more were like to be by the Council of Trent Therefore now the Church of England being free from the Yoke of the Papacy and having an Absolute Power to act for her self thought fit to use the Right of a National Church that is to Reform her self by declaring against those errors and to rid Christianity from them here in England without taking upon her to prescribe to other Churches And withal she thought it needful to set such bounds to the Reformation that men might not by their heats against Popery be transported so far as to run into contrary errors For these causes that famous Summary of Christian Doctrines which we call the XXXIX Artielés was drawn up and approved by Convocation The Compiling and Publishing of these Articles was properly the Act of the Church of England And these Articles being many of them opposed to those Doctrines which the Roman Church holds to be of Faith and being either in Terminis or at least in the sense of them the same which their Trent Council hath branded with Heresie it is therefore evident that upon the account of these Doctrines neither the Queen nor Church of England can be justly charged with Schism unless the Doctrines themselves are first proved to be Heretical as they are judged by those decrees of the Trent Council For the trial of these Doctrines they will not allow our Church that resort which she would make immediately to the Scriptures And we cannot go along with the Roman Church whither she would have us that is to the Council of Trent or which is all one to the judgment of their present Church Therefore there is no possible way to end disputes but by some known equal Standard between us And that can be no other than Catholic Tradition Which they of the Roman side cannot well decline for it is that from which the Council of Trent has pretended to receive all her Doctrines Nor have we any cause to decline it for the Primitive Fathers who were the Original Conveighers of this Tradition did profess to know no other Faith than what was contained in the Scriptures Why we cannot stand to the judgment of the Council of Trent for the trial of our Doctrines we have all the same Reasons that they have in the French Church why they reject it in matters of Discipline That is if they deny it to have the Authority of a General Council the English though of their Communion may as well deny it to have Infallibility Nay much more this than the other For we may give to whom we please an Authority over us but we cannot give Infallibility to any but to them to whom God has promised it that is if to any Council to such a one as represents the whole diffusive Church And we have one reason more than the French have and which signifies more than all theirs to shew that though they did yet we ought not to look upon this as such a Council For the French Church was represented at Trent in some sort though they were not at all satisfied with it but Ours neither was Represented nor could be as I have shewn neither after nor before the Reformation And though as it is said the French have since received the Doctrinal Decrees of that Council that is they have allowed them to be Antecedently true in those Terms in which the Council defined them though not a whit the more true for having been defined in that Council ours cannot pretend that here in England it ever had so much as that lowest Degree of Reception Before the Reformation of which we now speak that is before the beginning of Queen Elizabeths reign the Council of Trent had sate not much more than half its Sessions And though it was quoted with respect by the Synod of London in Queen Marys days yet it does not appear that there was then any Formal Reception of the Council Nor if there had been could that have obliged aftercomers to receive whatsoever should pass afterward in that Council Thus much I think ought to be considered by them if there be any that hold themselves obliged by that Synod But much less would it have signified to our Reformers who did not hold themselves obliged by that Synod For beside that they differed in point of Faith they had other Canonical Objections against it That it was composed of Bishops who had been Deprived as was said in King Edwards days and had not been duly Restored since for ought that appears And it was Headed by the Popes Legate in that Quality as representing Him against whom they had an Appeal yet in force Now to him that considers the Case in these Circumstances it cannot seem reasonable that King Edwards Bishops should have thought themselves obliged by the Synodical Act of them that sate there in their Injury or that they who adhered to their Appeal from the Pope should be concluded by any thing that passed under his Legate Since the Reformation it cannot be imagined that the Council of Trent should be received here in England by any other than by them of the Roman Communion And whether they have Received it or no they best know But if they have it must be their own voluntary Act for no power whatsoever could oblige them to receive it If any could it must be either the Council it self or the Pope by his Universal Authority But for the Popes Power they understand themselves so well that they know he cannot oblige them to the reception of a Council For he cannot bring them under what Government he pleases I say not without their own Consent as they have judged and shewed
condemned this Nicene Council for imposing it Neither of these Councils can be said to have been less Orthodox than that Council was in any point but that which they opposed And their very Opposing it shews that at those times it was not the sense either of the Eastern or of the Western Church When that Council obtained in the Eastern Church yet still it was opposed by the Western and however there also the practice crept in yet that Council has never been received in the Western Church as hath been lately proved by a most learned Writer Nor has Image-worship been defined by any other Council that could be said to Represent both the Eastern and Western Church In all Ages since the Councils which have defined any Articles have been but Western Councils at best For though some Greek Bishops were present at one or two of them yet what they consented to was never ratified by the Greek Church And for these Western Councils to give them their due it was not so much their fault if they lead us into Error as it is ours if we follow them in it For he that reads them and knows the History of their times will not chuse them for Guides if he has any care of that trust which God has given him of himself He cannot but see that bating the three last of those Councils which have not that Authority in the French Church nor with some other of that Communion all the rest were held in times of such palpable Ignorance that when they went amiss they could not well see how to do otherwise Their Bishops could not but be generally unqualified to judge of matters of Faith For they had a great want of good Books and of the Languages in which they were written I speak of those Books that are now chiefly used in all Questions of Faith as well by their as by our Writers And sure they that had them not to use could not but be miserably to seek in all those parts of knowledge which are Absolutely necessary for any one that should judge of those matters Namely those without which they could not Ordinarily know neither the true sense of holy Scripture nor the Judgments of Councils and Fathers nor the Practice of the Primitive Church We find by the best of their Writers in those times that they were so much to seek in those most needful things that not a Colledge in either of our Universities can be said without scandal to know no more in them than one of those Councils If instead of those last we bate four other of their Councils which are disowned by the Papalins for reasons which have been already given all the rest were in such Bondage to the Papacy that they had not the power to do otherwise than they did Their Bishops by Pope Hildebrand's device were all sworn to maintain the Royalties of St. Peter whereof one was that the Popes Faith could not fail And being assured of that as men should be of things which they swear their wisest course when matters of Faith came before them was to trust the Pope's Judgment and pass every thing as he brought it to their hands This way therefore they took and it saved them the trouble of Examination and Debate and such like Conciliary proceedings It may be worth the observing that in Seven General Councils which they reckon from the time of Pope Hildebrand downward among the many Doctrines which they are said to have Defined there is not one that appears to have cost them any more but the Hearing The Pope had them brought and read before the Council as if that was enough to make them their Acts as well as His. And this was the constant course till the Papacy was weakened by a long and scandalous Schism Then those Councils which made themselves superiour to the Pope thought fit to use their Own Judgment such as it was and they proceeded Conciliarly as Councils had done in former times Which way being more for the credit of their Definitions it was continued in those Councils which restored the Pope to his Supremacy with this difference only that whereas those Seven Councils above-mentioned passed all things in the Lump which the Pope or his Ministers brought before them the Councils since have passed them Piecemeal with some shew of using their own Judgment in every particular though in truth with so entire a resignation to the Pope that nothing could ever pass against his Interest or his will even when they seemed most to endeavour it So that in all these Councils whatsoever has passed in determining Doctrines of Faith is in truth no more than a Papal Decree though it bears the name and perhaps has some shew of a Councils Definition Lastly for the Judgment of the Diffusive Church we are not ignorant that many of the things thus imposed of which we can find no mention in Antiquity and which we know were first started long after the beginnings of Christianity yet have been received as well by Greeks as by the Latines in latter Ages But not to say by what means they obtained it we cannot forget what Ages those were in which these things came to gain such an Authority among Christians They were such as learned men of the Roman Communion who are acquainted with the Writers of those times I say as well with the Greek as Latine Writers do not at all reverence their Judgments apart whatsoever they think of them together in Councils And according to the Rule prescribed by those Fathers it will not pass for the Judgment of the Catholic diffusive Church though both Greeks and Latines agree in it and have done so for some Ages together There must be semper as well as ubique and ab omnibus Though the two last conditions may suffice to make us think any Doctrine to be true or at least the Error in it not to be Damnable yet to make us believe it is a Doctrine of Faith there must be semper likewise without which it is no Catholic Tradition It is surely a great Affront to the Catholic Church and to the great Author and finisher of her Faith that as if that Faith once delivered were Insufficient there must be new things added to it from time to time by a Succession of men that take upon them to be his Vicars without making out any colourable title to that Office And though we find no such things in the Ancient Records of his Church though we see these are framed to support the new Authority of those Vicars and though we know how they abused the Ignorance and Tameness of many Ages yet because in those Ages these things were generally received and have mellowed some time since in the Faith of them that knew no better they are pleased to use this as an Argument not only why others must be concluded and bound for ever to sit down by their Judgment who had little and
used none but why they must also receive all things else that are imposed in like manner under pretence that this is now the Judgment of the Diffusive Church But the case is much worse these new things being imposed on the Church with a pretence of Infallibility Which Infallibility being a word of good sound some that are no Papalins but hold with them in some Doctrines which they cannot well prove otherwise strike in with them at this though the sound is all that they agree in For whereas the Papalins mean an Infallibility of Judgment and place it in the Virtual Church these mean only an Infallibility of Tradition and that they place in the Diffusive Church They would persuade us that it is a Demonstrable thing that those things that are believed as of Faith in this Age could never be otherwise They may as well Demonstrate that a Tale does not mend with often telling or that no change can be made by insensible degrees But the Authors of this being Censured at Rome for it we have no more to say to them tiâ—l they make it appear that they are of the Roman Church in spite of her Censures For our dispute is at present with them of the Roman Church who pretend that this Infallibility is in theirs that is the Virtual Church They say that she has it by virtue of Divine Assistance which being either without or above means it is all one as if they said she has a New Revelation And one would think that they intended no other who founded their Definitions on Miracles Now if they can prove that any such Assistance was promised to the Virtual Church and if they can prove that they are the Church to which those promises were made or if they can prove their Credentials to be the same that Christ gave to his Apostles then we must grant that we are out in denying this Infallibility Otherwise they must grant that their virtual Church might be mistaken And if she might we have reason to think that she was so in these matters And if it is but colourably said that she was mistaken in matters of so very great moment there is reason to think that those matters are fit for a Review To which the Greeks may submit and so may all other Christians that differ among themselves but they of the Roman Church cannot while they keep up their claim to Infallibility If we must as the Roman Court will have it be called Heretics for not submitting to new Revelation we cannot help it Nor need we much trouble our selves For we know we are no Hereticks by any Law Divine or Humane except those which this new Power has made to fence in its new Doctrines And we know they cannot with any colour of Reason from Catholic Tradition think us Heretics themselves while we hold to the Positive Doctrines of our Church So that when they are pleased to give us this Title we can take their meaning to be only this They declare us to be as indeed we are the Enemies of that Monarchy to which they would enthral the whole Church of Christ They do as good as tell us what we are to expect for this if ever for our sins God should suffer us to fall into their hands They would have their people hate us the mean while and avoid all communication with us for fear they should come to know how we are wronged in this matter This appears to be the sense and design of the Interested men And yet we doubt not there are many others among them who either have no such Interest or who will not give themselves to be led by it We have reason to believe this partly from what we observe at this present and much more from what we read of former times Of all Nations that continue in the Roman Communion the more any have flourished in Learning and Civility the more free they have kept themselves from all that which is properly Popery while the more Ignorant and therefore more Superstitious Nations are so fond of it that for want of this they will scarce allow the other to be Catholics But for Protestants whom the other can endure to live among them though perhaps in no desirable condition These will not allow them to live in their Country unless that may be called Living when men are buried alive in the Inquisition So it may be observed among Persons of that Communion The most busie and imposing the most fierce and untreatable Bigots are commonly they that scarce understand their own Prayers Learned men either have not those heats or else govern them better Unless they be such as are engaged to the Papacy by preferment or by the hopes of it or by the Vows of their Orders or perhaps such as having forsaken our Church will not allow us to Question either their Wisdom or their Honesty in it We are not ordinarily to expect so much as common Civility from such men But they that have no particular Quarrel against us and are otherwise of a Candid and Ingenuous temper especially when they have Learning with it as not a few have and would to God there were more in the Roman Church These men being not averse from inquiring into Truth nor from receiving it when it is brought before them if they do not see how they can prove us Heretics and that their Proof is as strong and clear as the Charge is heavy they will not think it a sufficient Reason to call us so because others have done it Nor will they think fit to debar us the common Right of all Christians that is to be heard what we can say for our selves And that either before a competent Judicature if it may be had or if that cannot be yet at least by all them that will judge of us I know no reason to doubt that if all of them knew but so much of our Church as has been said and if they considered it with that Impartiality which we ought to expect from such men it would work some good effect in no small number of them in that Communion And that effect would appear upon such a Review as I have mentioned I mean that we should have Right done us in a free General Council if the Pope would permit it to be held in our Age or rather if all Christian Princes would agree to call it themselves and not wait for His time which will be never But though he will not suffer this Reason to be done us abroad where it should be in a Common Assembly of Christians yet he cannot hinder us from having it at home at least in the private Judgment of them that do not fear his Censures I have shewn that this is like to be the fruit of a Discrimination It will try who they are And for them chiefly I intended this Digression In which I have been the more large because I think it no Digression but rather the best
who fulfil the design of the Imposers in owning such men for Saints can rationally avoid the owning of their Principles And if the doing these things obliges any to own these Principles it has the same force throughout their whole Diffusive Church It is not so easie to answer the force of these Arguments as it is to produce Instances on the contrary of them that have written against this Doctrine especially in France where it is said to be disowned by a National Church But their Writings and her Declarations will stand us in no stead upon their Principles who expresly except the Case of Heresie as Cardinal Perron says they all did and instances in the most eminent of them who defended the rights of Princes against Popes before the Reformation For I think it will not be doubted that all the Writers of that Communion even those of the Gallican Church not excepted look upon us as Heretics But besides the French Church has been so far from disowning this Doctrine that they have Publicly declared for it and that no longer since than in our Fathers days It cannot yet be forgotten how the body of their Clergy as representing the Gallican Church by the mouth of their Speaker Cardinal Perron declared themselves in that famous Harangue which was printed there with Royal priviledge and sent over hither to King Iames that he might not be ignorant of their sense in this matter And they declared it not only to be the present sense of their Church but the same that it had constantly been from the first opening of her Divinity Schools till Calvins time They shew too much desire to have the French Church on their side that confront these great Testimonies with Acts of State or Declarations of Universities or with Writings of Private men When they cannot but know that according to their Principles neither Private men nor Parliaments nor Universities can pretend to be the Gallican Church in any case where they differ from the Ecclesiastics But whereas Cardinal Perron there says that all they who writ for the Rights of Princes against the Pope in those times before the Reformation did nevertheless hold that the Pope might depose any Prince that should be guilty of Heresie Though I do not engage to make good his Assertion in the utmost extent of it because it is hard to know the mind of every Writer in that Controversie yet I think it is not hard to shew as many Kings who have declared their Judgment on his side as there can be produced of those Writers to the contrary And it is no small proof of the Authority of any Doctrine when it is acknowledged by them who would have been most obliged by their Interest to have denied it if their Consciences would have given them leave For examples of this we cannot go higher than to the Emperour Henry IV. whos 's very troublesom times gave occasion to Hildebrand to bring this Doctrine first into the world And it is very observable that in the Infancy of it he that was so unfortunate to be made the first Instance of the cursed effects of this Doctrine though he denied the Popes power over him in all other respects yet he owned it in this of Heresie which is worth all the rest put together Perhaps he thought it did not concern him at first so much as he found it did afterwards For having granted that the Pope might depose him in case of Heresie it was enough Then the Pope knew what he had to do It was only to make a new Heresie of something which he would not or could not deny and then how easie was it to take away his Crown as being forfeited by his own Confession Another example of this we have in the Emperour Frederic II. Who being in no very good terms with the Pope thought to get into favour by shewing his zeal against Heresie And he shewed it sufficiently by giving the force of a Temporal Law to that Canon of their General Council of Lateran by which every Heretic is made to forfeit his Estate as well they that have no chief Lord over them as others of Inferiour rank and condition In Consequence of this when the Pope saw occasion to take away his Crown and wanted only some good colour for it among other crimes with which he charged him this was one that he was guilty of Heresie which appeared as the Pope was pleased to say by no doubtful and light but by evident Arguments for that it was manifest enough that he had run into many Perjuries These are the very words of the Sentence By which also it sufficiently appears that not only Error in Doctrine but even Vice or Misgovernment may suffice to make a Heretic when a Prince's being so will forfeit his Crown to the Pope But as Humane Nature is and in a Fortune so liable to temptation how hard a thing it is for any Prince to escape this charge while the Pope is allowed to be Judge as well who is guilty of the Fact as what Fact shall amount to a Heresie For he may as groundlesly judge one guilty of Perjury as he did in that Instance judge that guilt to be Heresie And yet both these Judgments so inseparably belong to the same Jurisdiction that they who grant him either of them ought in reason to grant him both as we have shewn they do according to the Principles of the Roman Church And whereas it is alleaged that some National Councils have declared for the Independent right of Kings though none ever did so but they are branded for it at least in all the later Editions of the Councils yet of these it is observable that they never supposed the Case of Heresie in which there is no Reason to doubt that they went with the stream of the Roman Church It is more observable that bating that Case the rights of Princes against the Pope were scarce ever maintained by any Council of any Nation or Province but those who were under the Aw of Princes And even of them very many have recanted as soon as they found themselves at liberty to do it and that Conscientiously as we have reason to believe But on the other side the most Conscientious Persons of that Communion have stood their ground in the most disadvantagious Circumstances They have stuck to it and maintained it and never recanted their Doctrine howsoever they might have some remorse at some of those horrid Practices into which they were led by it Now by the Principles of that Communion whatsoever has been the sense of their Church can never cease to be so on further trial but must be the Churches Doctrine for ever They who defend Infallibility of Judgment cannot avoid this Nor they who hold Infallibility of Tradition Since they teach that whatsoever has once prevailed and that Universally over all Churches and specially over all Conscientious Persons could never prevail so unless
it had been delivered from the beginning But of this Doctrine it has been proved that it was in the Church before those Councils above mentioned and was either declared or supposed by those General Councils therefore it must have been from Catholic Tradition And therefore according to their Principles it ought not to be called to a review much less be disbelieved or disputed by any in this present Age whatsoever advantage it may have above those former Ages in point of Learning and Monuments for the discerning of Catholic Tradition What has been said is sufficient to make it appear that all they of the Roman Church by the Principles of their Communion are obliged to maintain these Doctrines of Popery Whence it will follow that as long as they are true to those Principles we cannot be secure that they will not practise those Doctrines Therefore all the reason we can have to believe that they will do us no hurt if they are truly conscientious persons is only this that we may hope they do not yet know their Churches sense in this matter At present they do not see the repugnancy between their Duty to Princes and the Principles of their Communion But this will only secure us so long as they do not see it and that may be a very little while For as the proofs of this Inconsistency are great and notorious so they are ready to be objected to them by their Adversaries in their own Communion And therefore we can have little security of them if we can have none any longer than while we may suppose them likely to continue in this Ignorance So that the only solid and lasting reason that we have or can have to hope well of the Loyalty of any such Consciencious Persons among them must be the assurance that we have of their firmer adherence to their Duty to King and Country than to the Principles of their Communion Of these Persons we may be secured whilest they are ignorant of that Inconsistence because if they are truly such as we take them to be they cannot but think themselves bound in Conscience to deal fairly and uprightly with us And when the Papalins who will still be practising upon them shall have brought them to discern that Inconsistency the effect of it may be better than they intend For we have reason to hope that such Persons will be so far from quitting their Duty for their Communion that they may be rather induced to leave their Communion when they shall be convinced that it is not possible to maintain it without complying with those Doctrines which they have in so great detestation And these hopes of the good effect of this Countenance to them above others and of the consequent jealousie of those others of their own Communion may be a farther encouragement to zealous Protestants to fhew them this countenance Not only in regard of the security which such as these may give to the State but also in regard of the hopes that in process of these disputes among themselves they may at last by the wisdom of God be won over to the Protestant Communion And concerning these Persons for whom the favour of the Laws is desired we have reason to believe that many of them do really adhere more firmly to the sense of their duty to their Country than to that of continuing in the Roman Communion Many of them are such as have given good proof of it already of which Instances might be produced if it were necessary But to wave all Historical inquiries in this place If the State desire satisfaction herein it may be had by the form which shall be tendred to them By which they may profess that they do in Conscience believe themselves more obliged to pay their duty to their Prince and Country than to stand to the Authoritative Decision of any Judge whatsoever that is owned in the Church of that Communion The second thing objected against that discrimination here proposed is this which were considerable enough of it self but much more being added to the other It is said that we can have no assurance of any engagement they make to us they have so many ways to elude the force of it what by Equivocation and Mental Reservation what by Popes Dispensations by their Doctrine of Probability and the rest There are so many of them that considered one after another they look like a contrivance to destroy all Faith among men For when we think our selves assured by their Promise and especially when confirmed with an Oath yet by Equivocation that Oath in their sense shall signifie quite otherwise than was meant by them that made or imposed it If they do not Equivocate yet they may have some mental Reservation saying inwardly not or something else that quite alters the meaning of what is spoken And if they Swear without either of these tricks yet they may believe the Pope can dispense with that Oath or he can absolve them when they have taken it And though the Pope should not do this yet their Church hath given them the President of breaking Faith with known Heretics And if they make Conscience of that yet it may be some Doctors opinion that there is something unlawful in this Oath which though they did not discover before and therefore took it yet having discovered this after they may think themselves not obliged by it And though they should not be of this Doctors opinion yet that extrinsic probability of this Doctors Authority may be enough to sway them against their own convictions to the contrary The Probability that there is of their holding all these opinions as having been held by Doctors of Reputation among them and none of them ever censured for it by the Church though she hath taken all possible care to censure all such opinions as may be any way contrary either to her Judgment or Interest this presumption is sufficient to persuade private persons that their Church though perhaps she may not believe them true yet believeth them not hurtful or dangerous to her Children And if a Doctrine hath no danger in it though it prove to be false yet the security of it is inducement enough for men to practise it These Principles will the rather hold because according to their other Principles they are taught to relie on the Judgment of their Church in matters of belief even where they cannot do it without renouncing their own Judgment And in this Objection it is very considerable that it is not so easie as it was in the former to distinguish who they are that do indeed hold these dangerous Principles Only we have reason to suspect all them that keep to that Communion upon Principles of Conscience For they must think themselves bound in Conscience to hold these Principles to be practicable because they are so according to the Principles of their Communion And they who are once suspected upon prudent grounds can neither