did this come to be a Point of Salvation And for the Practice of it she saith the Bishops told her they did it daily Whether they did it or not or in what sense they did it we cannot now be better informed But we are sure this could be no Argument for her to leave the Communion of our Church because she was told by these Bishops they did it and continued in the Communion of it 4. Lastly As to the Infallibility of the Church If this as applied to the Roman Church could be any where found in Scripture we should then indeed be to blame not to submit to all the Definitions of it But where is this to be found Yes Christ hath promised to be with his Church to the end of the World Not with his Church but with his Apostles And if it be restrained to them then the end of the World is no more than always But suppose it be understood of the Successors of the Apostles were there none but at Rome How comes this Promise to be limited to the Church of Rome and the Bishops of Antioch and Alexandria and all the other Eastern Churches where the Bishops as certainly succeeded the Apostles as at Rome it self not to enjoy the equal Benefit of this Promise But they who can find the Infallibility of the Church of Rome in Scripture need not despair of finding whatever they have a Mind to there But from this Promise she concludes That our Saviour would not permit the Church to give the Laity the Communion in One kind if it were not lawful so to do Now in my Opinion the Argument is stronger the other way The Church of Rome forbids the doing of that which Christ enjoyned therefore it cannot be Infallible since the Command of Christ is so much plainer than the Promise of Infallibility to the Church of Rome But from all these things laid together I can see no imaginable Reason of any force to conclude that she could not think it possible to save her Soul otherwise than by embracing the Communion of the Church of Rome And the Publick will receive this Advantage by these Papers that thereby it appears how very little is to be said by Persons of the greatest Capacity as well as Place either against the Church of England or for the Church of Rome FINIS An Advertisement Of Books Printed for Richard Chiswell THe History of the Reformation of the Church of England By GILBERT BVRNET D. D. in two Volumes Folio The Moderation of the Church of England in her Reformation in Avoiding all undue Compliances with Popery and other sorts of Phanaticisms c. By TIMOTHY PVLLER D. D. Octavo A Dissertation concerning the Government of the Ancient Church more particularly of the Encroachments of the Bishops of Rome upon other Sees By WILLIAM CAVE D. D. Octavo An Answer to Mr. Serjeants Sure Footing in Christianity concerning the Rule of Faith With some other Discourses By WILLIAM FALKNER D. D. 40. A Vindication of the Ordinations of the Church of England in Answer to a Paper written by one of the Church of Rome to prove the Nullity of our Orders By GILBERT BVRNET D. D. Octavo The History of the Gunpowder Treason collected from Approved Authors as well Popish as Protestant With a Vindication of the said History and of the Proceedings and Matters relating thereunto from the Exceptions which have been made against it And more especially of late Years by the Author of the Catholick Apology and others 40. A Relation of the Barbarous and Bloody Massacre of about an hundred thousand Protestants begun at Paris and carried on over all France in the Year 1572. Collected out of Mezcray Thuanus and other Approved Authors 40. The APOLOGY of the Church of England and an Epistle to one Signior Scipio a Venetian Gentleman concerning the Council of Trent Written both in Latin by the Right Reverend Father in God IOHN IEWEL Lord Bishop of Sarisbury Made English by a Person of Quality To which is added The Life of the said Bishop Collected and Written by the same Hand Octavo A LETTER writ by the last Assembly General of the Clergy of France to the Protestants inviting them to return to their Communion Together with the Methods proposed by them for their Conviction Translated into English and Examined by GILB BVRNET D. D. 80. The Life of WILLIAM BEDEL D. D. Bishop of Kilmore in Ireland Together with Certain Letters which passed betwixt him and Iames Waddesworth a late Pensioner of the Holy Inquisition in Sevil in Matter of Religion concerning the General Motives to the Roman Obedience 40. The Decree made at ROME the Second of March 1679. condemning some Opinions of the Iesuits and other Casuists Quarto A Discourse concerning the Necessity of Reformation with respect to the Errors and Corruptions of the Church of Rome Quarto First Part. The Second Part of the same Discourse shewing the Vanity of the Pretended Reformation of the Council of Trent and of R. H's Vindication of it in his Fifth Discourse concerning the Guide to Controversies 40. In the Press and will be published in few days A Discourse concerning the Celebration of Divine Service in an Unknown Tongue Quarto A PAPIST not Misrepresented by PROTESTANTS Being a Reply to the Reflections upon the Answer to A Papist Misrepresented and Represented Quarto An Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England in the several Articles proposed by the late BISHOP of CONDOM in his Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholick Church Quarto A CATECHISM explaining the Doctrine and Practices of the Church of Rome With an Answer thereunto By a Protestant of the Church of England Octavo In the Press * Morley Bp of Winchester * Preface to his Treatise P. 5. †Letter to her Royal Highness from the Bp of Winton P. 3 4. Blandford Pag. 14. Sheldon A. B. of Canterb Blanford Bp of Worcester Blandford Bishop of Worcester Preface p. 2. p. 4.
Imprimatur Z. Isham R. P. D. Hen. Episc. Lond. Ã Sacris 1685. AN ANSWER TO SOME PAPERS Lately Printed concerning the AUTHORITY OF THE Catholick Church In MATTERS of FAITH and the REFORMATION of the CHURCH of ENGLAND LONDON Printed for Ric. Chiswel at the Rose and Crown in S t Paul's Church-Yard MDCLXXXVI AN Advertisement IF the Papers here answered had not been so publickly dispersed through the Nation a due Respect to the Name they bear would have kept the Author from publishing any Answer to them But because they may now fall into many hands who without some assistance may not readily resolve some difficulties started by them He thought it not unbecoming his duty to God and the King to give a clearer light to the Things contained in them And it can be no reflection on the Authority of a Prince for a private Subject to examine a piece of Coyn as to its just value though it bears His Image and Superscription upon it In matters that concern Faith and Salvation we must prove all things and hold fast that which is good AN ANSWER TO THE First Paper IF all men could believe as they pleased I should not have fail'd of satisfaction in this First Paper the Design of it being to put an end to Particular Disputes to which I am so little a Friend that I could have been glad to have found as much reason in it to convince as I saw there was a fair appearance to deceive But there is a Law in our Minds distinct from that of our Inclinations and out of a just and due regard to That we must examine the most plausible Writings though back'd with the greatest Authority before we yield our Assent unto them If particular Controversies about Matters of Faith could be ended by a Principle as visible as that the Scripture is in Print all men of sence would soon give over Disputing for none who dare believe what they see can call that in Question But what if the Church whose Authority it is said they must submit to will not allow them to believe what they see How then can this be a sufficient reason to perswade them to believe the Church because it is as visible as that the Scripture is in Print unless we must only use our senses to find out the Church and renounce them assoon as we have done it Which is a very bad requital of them and no great Honour to the Church which requires it But with all due submission it is no more visible that the Roman Church is the Catholick Church than it is that a part is the whole and the most corrupt part that one Church which Christ hath here upon Earth It is agreed among all Christians That Christ can have but one Church upon Earth as there is but one Lord one Faith one Baptism And this is that Church we profess to believe in the two Creeds But if those who made those Creeds for our direction had intended the Roman Catholick Church why was it not so expressed How came it to pass that such a limitation of the sense of Christs Catholick Church to the Roman should never be put to Persons to be Baptized in any Age of the Church For I do not find in the Office of Baptism even in the Roman Church that it is required that they believe the Roman Catholick Church or that they deny the validity of Baptism out of the Communion of the Roman Church From whence it is to me as visible as that the Scripture is in Print that the Church of Rome it self doth not believe that it is the one Catholick Church mentioned in the two Creeds For then it must void all Baptism out of its Communion which it hath never yet done And as long as Baptism doth enter Persons into the Catholick Church it is impossible that all who have the true form of Baptism though out of the Communion of the Roman Church should be Members of the Catholick Church and yet the Communion of the Roman and Catholick be all one as it must be if the Roman Church be the Catholick and Apostolick Church professed in the Creeds If we had been so happy to have lived in those Blessed Times when the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul it had been no difficulty to have shewed that one visible Church which Christ had here upon Earth But they must be great strangers to the History of the Church who have not heard of the early and great Divisions in the Communion of it And there was a remarkable difference in the Nature of those Schisms which happened in the Church which being not considered hath been the occasion of great misaplication of the sayings of the Antients about the One Catholick Church Some did so break off Communion with other parts of the Catholick Church as to challenge that Title wholly to themselves as was evident in the case of the Novatians and Donatists for they rebaptiz'd all that embraced their Communion Others were cast out of Communion upon particular differences which were not supposed to be of such a nature as to make them no members of the Catholick Church So the Bishops of Rome excommunicated the Bishops of Asia for not keeping Easter when They did and the Bishops both of Asia and Africa for not allowing the Baptism of Hereticks But is it reasonable to suppose that upon these Differences they shut out all those Holy Bishops and Martyrs from the possibility of Salvation by excluding them from their Communion If not then there may be different Communions among Christians which may still continue Parts of the Catholick Church and consequently no one Member of such a Division ought to assume to it self the Title and Authority of the One Catholick Church But if any One Part doth so though never so great and conspicuos it is guilty of the same Presumption with the Novatians and Donatists and is as much cause of the Schisms which happen thereupon in the Church as they were For a long time before the Reformation there had been great and considerable breaches between the Eastern and Western Churches insomuch that they did renounce each other Communion And in these Differences four Patriarchal Churches joined together against the fifth viz. that of the Bishop of Rome But the Eastern Patriarchs sinking in their Power by the horrible Invasion of the Enemies of the Christian Faith and the Bishops of Rome advancing themselves to so much Authority by the advantages they took from the kindness of some Princes and the Weakness of others They would hear of no other terms of accommodation with the Eastern Churches but by an intire submission to the Pope as Head of the Catholick Church Which all the Churches of the East refused however different among themselves and to this day look on the Pope's Supremacy as an Innovation in the Church and Usurpation on the Rights of the other Patriarchs and Bishops In all
those Churches the Two Creeds are professed true Baptism administred and an undoubted Succession of Bishops from the Apostles How then come They to be excluded from being Parts of the One Catholick and Apostolick Church And if they be not excluded how can the Roman Church assume to it self that glorious Title So that it seems to me as visible as that the Scripture is in Print that the Roman Church neither is nor can be that One Church which Christ left upon Earth And this Principle being removed which ought to be taken for granted since it can never be proved we must unavoidably enter into the Ocean of Particular Disputes And I know no reason any can have to be so afraid of it since we have so sure a Compass as the Holy Scripture to direct our passage But the reason of avoiding particular Disputes is because the evidence is too clear in them that the Church of Rome hath notoriously deviated from this infallible Rule And it is as impossible for a Church which hath erred to be Infallible as for a Church really Infallible to err But if a Church pretend to prove her Infallibility by Texts which are not so clear as those which prove her to have actually erred then we have greater reason to recede from her Errors than to be deceived with such a fallible pretence to Infallibility Well! But it is not left to every phantastical mans head to believe as he pleases but to the Church And is it indeed left to the Church to believe as it pleases But the meaning I suppose is that those who reject the the Authority of the Roman Catholick Church do leave every man to believe according to his own fancy Certainly those of the Church of England cannot be liable to any imputaion of this Nature For our Church receives the three Creeds and embraces the four General Councils and professes to hold nothing contrary to any Universal Tradition of the Church from the Apostles times And we have often offered to put the Controversies between Us and the Church of Rome upon that issue And do not those rather believe as they please who believe the Roman Church to be the Catholick Church without any colour from Scriptures Antiquity or Reason Do not those believe as they please who can believe against the most convincing evidence of their own senses Do not those believe as they please who can reconcile the lawfulness of the Worship of Images with Gods forbidding it the Communion in one kind with Christ's Institution and the praying in an unknown Tongue with the 14 Ch. of the first Epistle to the Corinthians But all these and many other Absurdities may go down by vertue of the Churches Authority to whom it is said Christ left the Power upon Earth to govern us in matters of Faith We do not deny that the Church hath Authority of declaring matters of Faith or else it never could have condemn'd the Antient Heresies But then we must consider the difference between the Universal Church in a General and free Council declaring the sense of Scripture in Articles of Faith generally received in the Christian Church from the Apostles Times as was done when the Nicene Creed was made and a Faction in the Church assuming to it self the Title of Catholick and proceeding by other rules than the first Councils did and imposing new Opinions and Practices as things necessary to the Communion of the Catholick Church And this is the true Point in difference between us and those of the Roman Church about the Churches Authority in matters of Faith since the Council of Trent For we think we have very great reason to complain when a Party in the Church the most corrupt and obnoxious takes upon it self to define many new Doctrines as necessary Points of Faith which have neither Scripture nor Universal Tradition for them It were a very irrational thing we are told to make Laws for a Country and leave it to the Inhabitants to be Interpreters and Iudges of those Laws for then every Man will be his own Iudge and by consequence no such thing as either Right or Wrong But is it not as irrational to allow an Usurper to interpret the Laws to his own advantage against the just Title of the Prince and the true Interest of the People And if it be not Reasonable for any private Person to be his own Iudge why should a publick Invader be so But we hope it will be allowed to the Loyal Inhabitants of a Country so far to interpret the Laws as to be able to understand the Duty they owe to their King and to justifie his Right against all the Pretences of Usurpers And this is as much as we plead for in this case Can we therefore suppose That God Almighty would leave us at those uncertainties as to give us a Rule to go by and leave every Man to be his own Iudge And can we resonably suppose That God Almighty should give as a Rule not capable of being understood by those to whom it was given in order to the great End of it viz. the saving of their Souls For this was the main end of the Rule to direct us in the way to Heaven and not meerly to determine Controversies The Staff which a Man uses may serve to measure things by but the principal design is to walk with it So it is with the Holy Scripture if Controversies arise It is fit to examine and compare them with this Infallible Rule but when that is done to help us in our way to Heaven is that which it was chiefly intended for And no Man can think it of equal consequence to him not to be mistaken and not to be damned In matters of Good and Evil every mans Conscience is his immediate Judge and why not in matters of Truth and Falshood Unless we suppose mens involuntary mistakes to be more dangerous than their wilful sins But after all We do not leave every Man to be his own Iudge any further than it concerns his own Salvation which depends upon his particular Care and Sincerity For to prevent any dangerous Mistakes by the Artifice of Seducers we do allow the Assistance of those Spiritual Guides which God hath appointed in his Church for the better insturcting and governing private Persons We embrace the Ancient Creeds as a summary comprehension of the Articles of Faith and think no Man ought to follow his own particular Fancy against Doctrines so universally received in the Christian Church from the Apostles Times I do ask any Ingenuous Man whether it be not the same thing to follow our own Fancy or to interpret Scripture by it If we allowed no Creeds no Fathers no Councils there might have been some colour for such a Question But do we permit Men to interpret Scripture according to their own Fancy who live in a Church which owns the Doctrine of the Primitive Church more frankly and ingenuously than any Church in the World
Church to give Testimony to a matter of Fact and another to assume the Power of making Books Canonical which were not so This latter no Church in the World hath and therefore can never lose it The former is only Matter of Testimony and all parts of the Church are concerned in it and it depends as other Matters of Fact do on the Skill and Fidelity of the Reporters And by what Autority Men separate themselves from that Church What Church The Catholick and Apostolick We own no Separation from that but we are dis-joyned from the Communion of the Roman Church that we may keep up the stricter Union with the truly Catholick and Apostolick Church And this is no Separating our selves but being cast out by an Usurping Faction in the Church because we would not submit to the unreasonable Conditions of Communion imposed by it the chief whereof is owning all the Usurpation which hath by degrees been brought into it To make this plain by an Example Suppose a prosperous Usurper in this Kingdom had gained a considerable Interest in it and challenged a Title to the whole and therefore required of all the Kings Subjects within his Power to own him to be Rightful King Upon this many of them are forced to withdraw because they will not own his Title Is this an act of Rebellion and not rather of true Loyalty Schism in the Church is like Rebellion in the State The Pope declares himself Head of the Catholick Church and hath formed himself a kind of Spiritual Kingdom in the West although the other parts of the Christian World declare against it as an Usurpation However he goes on and makes the owning his Power a necessary Condition of being of his Communion This many of the Western Parts as well as Eastern disown and reject and therefore are excluded Communion with that Church whereof he is owned to be the Head The Question now is Who gives the Occasion to this Separation whether the Pope by requiring the owning his Usurpation or We by declaring against it Now if the Conditions he requires be unjust and unreasonable if his Autority he challenges over the Catholick Church be a meer Usurpation for which we have not only the Consent of the other Parts of the Christian World but of Scripture and the Ancient Church then we are not to be condemned for such a Separation which was unavoidable if we would not comply with the Pope's Usurpation And upon this Foot the Controversie about Schism stands between Us and the Church of Rome The only Pretence I ever heard of was because the Church hath fail'd in wresting and interpreting the Scripture contrary to the true sense and meaning of it and that they have imposed Articles of Faith upon us which are not to be warranted by Gods Word I do desire to know who is to be Iudge of that whether the whole Church the Succession whereof hath continued to this day without interruption or particular Men who have raised Schisms for their own advantage The whole force of this Paragraph depends upon a Supposition which is taken for granted but will never be yielded by Us and we are sure can never be proved by those of the Church of Rome viz. That in the new imposed Articles the whole Church in a continued Succession hath been of the same judgment with them and only some few Particular Men in these last Ages have opposed them Whereas the great thing we insist upon next to the Holy Scripture is that they can never prove the Points in diference by an Universal Tradition from the Apostles Times either as to the Papal Supremacy or the other Articles defined by the Council of Trent VVe do not take upon our selves to contradict the Universal sense of the Christian Church from the Apostles Times in any one Point But the true Reason of the proceeding of the Church of England was this VVhile the Popes Authority was here received and obeyed there was no liberty of searching into abuses or the ways of Reforming them But when Men were encouraged to look into the Scripture and Fathers and Councils they soon found the state of things in the Church extreamly altered from what they ought to have been or had been in the Primitive Church But they saw no possibility of Redress as long as the Popes Autority was so absolute and inviolable This therefore in the first place they set themselves to the accurate Examination of and the Result was that they could find it neither in the Scriptures nor Fathers nor Councils nor owned by the Eastern Churches And therefore they concluded it ought to be laid aside as an Usurpation Our Church being by this means set free even with the consent of Those who joyned with the Church of Rome in other things a greater liberty was then used in examining particular Doctrines and Practices which had crept into the Church by degrees when Ignorance and Barbarism prevail'd and having finish'd this enquiry Articles of Religion were drawn up wherein the sense of our Church was delivered agreeable to Scripture and Antiquity though different from the Modern Church of Rome and these Articles are not the private sense of particular Men but the Publick Standard whereby the World may judge what we believe and practise and therefore these are the sense of our Church and not the opinions or fancies of particular Men. And those who call the retrenching the Popes exorbitant Power by the name of Schism must by parity of reason call the casting off an Usurper Rebellion But certainly those who consider the mighty advantages and priviledges of the Clergy in the Church of Rome can never reasonably suspect any of that Order should hope to better themselves by the Reformation And if we judge of Mens actings by their Interest one of the most surprising considerations at this day is that the Clergy should be against and Princes for the Church of Rome AN ANSWER TO THE Second Paper IT is a sad thing to consider what a world of Heresies are crept into this Nation But is it not a strange thing to consider that no distinction is here put between the Religion by Law established and the Parties disowned by it and dissenting from it And yet many of these though justly liable to the charge of Schism embrace no Heresies against the Four or Six first General Councils But if the Dissenters were guilty of never so many Heresies how comes the Church of England to bear the blame of them when the weakning its Power and Authority was the occasion of such an overflowing of Schisms and Heresies among us And it is indeed a sad thing to consider how many Ways and Means have been used by all Parties to introduce and keep up Schisms and Divisions amongst us and then how the Church of England is blamed for not being able to suppress them But if all Doctrines opposite to the Church of Rome be accounted Heresies then we desire to be informed
how the Church of Rome came to have this Power of defining Heretical Doctrines or how any Doctrine comes to be Heresie by being contrary to its definitions For Heresie is an obstinate opposing some necessary Article of Faith It must therefore be proved that what the Church of Rome declares doth thereby become a necessary Article of Faith or it is very unreasonable to lay the imputation of Heresie upon us And this can never be maintained without proving that the Church of Rome hath a Power to make Doctrines not necessary before to become necessary by her Definition which is the same thing with making New Articles of Faith But these can never be proved to be such by Universal Tradition which the Church of Rome pretends for all her Articles of Faith Every Man thinks himself as competent a Iudge of Scripture as the very Apostles themselves Doth Every Man among us pretend to an infallible Spirit And yet Every Man owns that the Apostles had it But what is meant by being a Iudge of Scripture If no more be understood then that every Man must use his understanding about it I hope this is no Crime nor Heresie The Scripture must be believed in order to Salvation and therefore it must be understood for how can a Man believe what he understands not the sense or meaning of If he must understand the sense he must be Iudge of the sense so that every Man who is bound to believe the Scripture in order to his Salvation must be Judge of the sense of the Scripture so far as concerns his Salvation But if by being a Iudge of the Scripture be meant giving such a judgment as obliges others to submit to it then among us no particular Man doth pretend to be a competent Iudge of Scripture so as to bind others to rely upon his Authority in expounding Scripture We own the Authority of Guides in the Church and a due submission to them but we do not allow them to be as competent Iudges of Scripture as the very Apostles And 't is no wonder it should be so since that part of the Nation which looks most like a Church dares not bring the true Arguments against the other Sects for fear they should be turned against themselves and confuted by their own Arguments This is directly level'd against the Church of England which is hereby charged with Insincerity or Weakness in dealing with the Dissenters But we must consider the meaning of this charge It is no wonder it should be so i. e. That every Man should think himself as competent a Iudge of Scripture as the very Apostles because the Church of England dares not use the true Arguments against the Sects Whence it appears that this true Argument is the Churches infallible Authority and the Obligation of all Members of the Church to submit their judgments intirely thereto I confess that if the Church of England did pretend to this against the Sectaries they might justly turn it against her because in our Articles though the Churches Authority be asserted yet Infallibility is denyed If there can be no Authority in a Church without Infallibility or there can be no obligation to submit to Authority without it then the Church of England doth not use the best Arguments against Sectaries But if there be no ground for Infallibility if the Church which hath most pretended to it hath been most grosly deceived if the Heads of that Church have been not barely suspected of Heresie but one of them stands condemned for it in Three General Councils own'd by that Church then for all that I can see the Church of England hath wisely disowned the pretence of Infallibility and made use of the best Arguments against Sectaries from a just Authority and the sinfulness and folly of the Sectaries refusing to submit to it The Church of England as 't is called would fain have it thought That they are the Iudges in matters Spiritual yet dare not say positively there is no Appeal from them Is not the Church of England really what it is called I would fain know what it wants to make it as good a Church as any in the Christian World It wants neither Faith if the Creed contain it nor Sacraments and those entire nor Succession of Bishops as certain as Rome it self nor a Liturgy more agreeing to Primitive Worship then is any where else to be found Why then the Church of England as 't is called Well! But what is this Church now blamed for They pretend to be Iudges in matters Spiritual and yet dare not say there is no appeal from them How then Are there no true Judges but such as there lies no Appeal from There lies an Appeal from any Judges in the Kings Courts to the Court of Parliament are They not therefore true Judges in Westminster-Hall There lay an Appeal from Bishops to Metropolitans from them to Patriarchs from Patriarchs to General Councils according to the Antient Polity of the Church Were there therefore no true Judges but General Councils What follows relating to the Churches Authority and every Mans following his own judgment hath been answered already I proceed therefore to what further concerns this matter of Appeal What Country can subsist in Quiet where there is not a Supreme Iudge from whence there can be no Appeal The natural consequence from hence appears to be that every National Church ought to have the Supream Power within it self But how come Appeals to a foreign Jurisdiction to tend to the Peace and Quiet of a Church They have been always complained of in the best Ages of the Church and by the best Men such as S. Cyprian and S. Augustine and the whole African Churches The worst Men began them and the worst Church encouraged them without regard to the Peace of the Christian Church so it increased its own Grandeur by them We have had these hundred Years past the sad effects of denying to the Church that Power in matters Spiritual without an Appeal And our Ancestors for many hundred Years last past found the intolerable Inconveniencies of an Appeal to foreign Jurisdiction Whereby the Nation was exhausted Justice obstructed the Clergy oppressed and the Kings Prerogative greatly diminished But these were slight things in Comparison to what we have felt these hundred Years past for want of it Have not the Kings Courts been open for matters of Law and Justice which have been fill'd with Men of as great Abilities and Integrity since the Reformation as ever they were before Hath not the Appeal to the King in his High Court of Chancery been as much for the King and People as ever the Appeal was to the Court of Rome Have not all the Neighbour Princes been forced for the preserving their own Dignity to set Bounds and Limits to Appeals to Rome and to Orders or Bulls that come from thence How then comes the want of such an Appeal to be thought to produce such sad effects here All
Christendom groans under the sad effects of them and it is a very self-denying humour for those to be most sensible of the want of them who would really suffer the most by them Can there be any Iustice done where the Offenders are their own Iudges and equal Interpreters of the Law with those that are appointed to Admister Iustice And is there any likelihood Justice should be better done in another Country by another Authority and proceeding by such Rules which in the last resort are but the Arbitrary will of a Stranger And must such a one pretending to a Power he hath no right to be Iudge in his own Cause when he is the greatest Offender himself But how is this applied to the Protestants in England This is our Case here in England in matters Spiritual for the Protestants are not of the Church of England as 't is the true Church from whence there can be no Appeal but because the Discipline of that Church is conformable at present to their fancies which as soon as it shall contradict or vary from they are ready to embrace or joyn with the next Congregation of People whose Discipline or Worship agrees with the Opinion of that Time The sense of this Period is not so clear but that one may easily mistake about it That which is aimed at is that we of the Church of England have no tie upon us but that of our own judgments and when that changes we may join with Independents or Presbyterians as we do now with the Church of England And what security can be greater than that of our Judgments If it be said to be nothing but fancy and no true Iudgment we must beg leave to say that we dare Appeal to the World whether we have not made it appear that it is not fancy but Iudgment which hath made us firm to the Church of England Might it not as well have been said that the Protestants of the Church of England adhered to the Crown in the Times of Rebellion out of Fancy and not out of Iudgment And that if their Fancy changed they might as well have joined with the Rebels Will not this way of Reasoning hold as strongly against those of the Church of Rome For why do any adhere to that but because it is agreeable to their Judgment so to do What evidence can they give that it is Iudgment in them and only Fancy in us If Reason must be that which puts the difference we do not question but to make ours appear to be Iudgment and theirs Fancy For what is an infallible Iudge which Christ never appointed but Fancy What is their unwritten Word as a Rule of Faith to be equally received with the Scriptures but Fancy What is giving honour to God by the Worship of Images but Fancy What is making Mediators of Intercession besides the Mediator of Redemption but Fancy What is the Doctrine of Concomitancy to make amends for half the Sacrament but Fancy What is the substantial Change of the Elements into the Body of Christ but Fancy for both Senses and Reason are against it What is the deliverance of Souls out of Purgatory by Masses for the Dead but meer Fancy But I forbear giving any more Instances So that according to this Doctrine there is no other Church nor Interpreter of Scripture but that which lies in every Man 's giddy Brain Let Mens Brains be as giddy as they are said to be for all that I can see they are the best faculties they can make use of for the understanding of Scripture or any thing else And is there any Infallible Church upon Earth which must not be beholding to Mens giddy Brains for believing it And it may be never the less giddy for doing it For God-sake why do any Men take the Church of Rome to be Infallible Is it not because their Understandings tell them they ought so to do So that by this consequence there is no Infallible Church but what lies in every Mans giddy Brain I desire to know therefore of every serious Considerer of these things whether the great Work of our Salvation ought to depend on such a Sandy Foundation as this I thank God I have seriously considered this matter and must declare that I find no Christian Church built on a more sandy Foundation than that which pretends to be setled upon a Rock I mean so far as it imposes the new Faith of Trent as a necessary Condition of Salvation Had we no other reason to embrace Christianity than such as they offer for these New Doctrines I am much afraid Christianity it self to all inquisitive Men would be thought to have but a Sandy Foundation But what is this Sandy Foundation we build upon Every Man 's private judgment in Religion No understanding Man builds upon his own Judgment but no Man of understanding can believe without it For I appeal to any ingenious Man whether he doth not as much build upon his own Judgment who chuseth the Church as he that chuseth Scripture for his Rule And he that chuseth the Church hath many more Difficulties to conquer than the other hath For the Church can never be a Rule without the Scriptures but the Scriptures may without the Church And it is no such easy matter to find the Churches Infallibility in the Scripture But suppose that be found he hath yet a harder Point to get over viz. How the Promises relating to the Church in general came to be appropriated to the Church of Rome Which a Man must have an admirable Faculty at discerning who can find it out either in Scripture or the Records of the Ancient Church The places of Scripture which are brought about Christ's being with his Church to the end of the World about the Power to forgive Sins about the Clergy being God's Labourers Husbandry Building having the Mind of Christ do as effectually prove Infallibility of the Church of England as the Church of Rome for I cannot discern the least inclination in any of them to favour one against the other And pray consider on the other side that those who resist the Truth and will not submit to his Church draw their Arguments from Implications and far-fetch'd Interpretations at the same time that they deny plain and positive Words which is so great a Disingenuity that 't is not almost to be thought that they can believe themselves This is a very heavy Charge To resist the Truth to deny plain and positive Words of Scripture to be guilty of great Disingenuity so as not to believe our selves are faults of so high a nature as must argue not only a bad Cause but a very bad Mind And God forbid that those of the Church of England should ever be found guilty of these things But to come to Particulars Is it resisting Truth or arguing from Implications and denying plain and positive Words of Scripture to say We must not worship Images We must make God alone the
Object of Holy Worship We must give the Eucharist in both kinds according to Christ's express Institution We must understand our Prayers when St. Paul's words are so clear about it So far at least we have plain and positive Words of Scripture on our side And for Implications and far fetch'd Interpretations commend me to the Pope's Bulls especially when they have a mind to prove their Authority from Scripture which they can do from In the beginning to the end of the Apocalypse But that which seems to be aimed at here is This is my Body wherein the words seem to be plain and positive on their side and our sense to be from Implications or far-fetched Interpretations To which I Answer That there are Expressions in Scripture as plain and positive as this which none think themselves bound to understand in their literal sense For then we must all believe that God hath Eyes and Ears a Face Hands and Feet as firmly as that the Bread was then turned into Christ's Body when he spake those words And I would know whether the Christian Church rejecting the Doctrine of Those who made God to be like to Man was not chargeable with the same resisting the Truth and denying plain and positive Words of Scripture as we are And yet I hope the Christian Church did then believe it self Suppose any should assert That the Rock in the Wilderness was really changed into Christ's Body would not he have the very same Things to say against those who denied it For are not the Words as plain and as positive That Rock was Christ But Sacramental Expressions by the consent of the Christian Church and the very Neture of the Things are of a different sense from Logical Propositions And if this had been intended in the plain and literal sense St. Paul would never have as plainly and positively called it Bread after Consecration nor the Cup be said to be the New Testament in his Blood The Conclusion is Is there any other Foundation of the Protestant Church but that if the Civil Magistrate pleases he may call such of the Clergy as he thinks fit for his turn at that time and turn the Church either to Presbytery or Independency or indeed what he pleases This was the way of our pretended Reformation here in England And by the same Rule and Authority it may be altered into as many Shapes and Forms as there are Fancies in Mens Heads This looks like a very unkind Requital to the Church of England for her Zeal in asserting the Magistrate's Power against a Foreign Jurisdiction to infer from thence that the Magistrate may change the Religion here which way he pleases But although we attribute the Supream Iurisdiction to the King yet we do not question but there are inviolable Rights of the Church which ought to be preserved against the Fancies of some and the Usurpations of others We do by no means make our Religion mutable according to the Magistrate's pleasure For the Rule of our Religion is unalterable being the Holy Scripture but the Exercise of it is under the regulation of the Laws of the Land And as we have cause to be thankful to God when Kings are Nursing Fathers to our Church so we shall never cease to pray for their continuing so and that in all things we may behave our selves towards them as becomes good Christians and Loyal Subjects AN ANSWER TO THE Third Paper THE Third Paper is said to be written by a Great Lady for the satisfaction of her Friends as to the Reasons of Her leaving the Communion of the Church of England and making her self a Member of the Roman Catholick Church If she had written nothing concerning it none could have been a competent Judg of those Reasons or Motives she had for it but her self but since she was pleased to write this Paper to satisfy her Friends and it is thought fit to be published for general Satisfaction all Readers have a right to judg of the strength of them and those of the Church of England an Obligation to vindicate the Honour of it so far as it may be thought to suffer by them I am sensible how nice and tender a thing it is to meddle in a Matter wherein the Memory of so Great a Lady is so nearly concern'd and wherein such Circumstances are mentioned which cannot fully be cleared the Parties themselves having been many Years dead But I shall endeavour to keep within due bounds and consider this Paper with respect to the main Design of it and take notice of other Particulars so far as they are subservient to it The way of her Satisfaction must needs appear very extraordinary for towards the Conclusion she confesses She was not able nor would she enter into Disputes with any Body Now where the Difference between the two Churches lies wholly in Matters of Dispute how any one could be truly satisfied as to the Grounds of leaving one Church and going to the other without entring into matter of Dispute with any body is hard to understand If Persons be resolved before-hand what to do and therefore will hear nothing said against it there is no such way as to declare they will enter into no Dispute about it But what Satisfaction is to be had in this manner of proceeding How could one bred up in the Church of England and so well instructed in the Doctrines of it ever satisfy her self in forsaking the Communion of it without enquiring into and comparing the Doctrines and Practices of both Churches It is possible for Persons of Learning who will take the pains of examining things themselves to do that without entring into Disputes with any Body but this was not to be presumed of a Person of her Condition For many things must fall in her way which she could neither have the leisure to examine nor the Capacity to judg of without the Assistance of such who have made it their business to search into them Had she no Divines of the Church of England about her to have proposed her Scruples to None able and willing to give her their utmost Assistance in a Matter of such Importance before she took up a Resolution of forsaking our Church This cannot be imagined considering not only her great Quality but that just esteem they had for her whilst she continued so zealous and devout in the Communion of our Church But we have more than this to say One of the Bishops who had nearest Relation to her for many Years and who owns in Print That he bred her up in the Principles of the Church of England was both able and willing to have removed any Doubts and Scruples with respect to our Church if she would have been pleased to have communicated them to him And however she endeavoured to conceal her Scruples he tells her in his Letter to her which he since printed for his own vindication That he had heard much Discourse concerning her
wavering in Religion and that he had acquainted her Highness with it the Lent before the Date of this Paper and was so much concerned at it that he obtained a Promise from her That if any Writing were put into her Hands by those of the the Church of Rome that she would send it either to him or to the then Bishop of Oxford whom he left in Attendance upon her After which he saith She was many Days with him at Farnham in all which time she spake not one word to him of any Doubt she had about her Religion And yet this Paper bears Date Aug. 20. that Year wherein she declares her self changed in her Religion So that it is evident she did not make use of the ordinary Means for her own Satisfaction at least as to those Bishops who had known her longest But she saith That she spoke severally to two of the best Bishops we have in England who both told her there were many things in the Roman Church which it were much to be wished we had kept As Confession which was no doubt commanded of God that Praying for the Dead was one of the Ancient Things in Christianity that for their parts they did it daily though they would not own it And afterwards pressing one of them very much upon the other Points he told her That if he had been bred a Catholick he would not change his Religion but that being of another Church wherein he was sure were all things necessary to Salvation he thought it very ill to give that Scandal as to leave that Church wherein he received his Baptism Which Discourses she said did but add more to the desire she had to be a Catholick This I confess seems to be to the purpose if there were not some Circumstances and Expressions very much mistaken in the Representation of it But yet suppose the utmost to be allow'd there could be no Argument from hence drawn for leaving the Communion of our Church if this Bishop's Authority or Example did signify any thing with her For supposing he did say That if he had been bred in the Communion of the Church of Rome he would not change his Religion Yet he added That being of another Church wherein were all things necessary to Salvation he thought it very ill to give that Scandal as to leave that Church wherein he had received his Baptism Now why should not the last words have greater force to have kept her in the Communion of our Church than the former to have drawn her from it For why should any Person forsake the Communion of our Church unless it appears necessary to Salvation so to do And yet this yielding Bishop did affirm that all things necessary to Salvation were certainly in our Church and that it was an ill thing to leave it How could this add to her desire of leaving our Church unless there were some other Motive to draw her thither and then such small Inducements would serve to inflame such a Desire But it is evident from her own words afterwards that these Concessions of the Bishop could have no Influence upon her for she declares and calls God to witness that she would never have changed her Religion if she had thought it possible to save her Soul otherwise Now what could the Bishop's words signify towards her Turning when he declares just contrary viz. not only that it was possible for her to be saved without turning but that he was sure we had all things necessary to Salvation and that it was a very ill thing to leave our Church There must therefore have been some more secret Reason which encreased her Desire to be a Catholick after these Discourses unless the Advantage were taken from the Bishop's calling the Church of Rome the Catholick Religion If he had been bred a Catholick he would not have chang'd his Religion But if we take these words so strictly he must have contradicted himself for how could he he sure we had all things necessary to Salvation if we were out of the Catholick Church Was a Bishop of our Church and one of the best Bishops of our Church as she said so weak as to yield That he was sure all things necessary to Salvation were to be had out of the Communion of the Catholick Church But again there is an inconsistency in his saying That he thought it very ill to leave our Church which no Man of common sense would have said if he had believed the Roman Church to be the Catholick exclusive of all others that do not join in Communion with it The utmost then that can be made of all this is That there was a certain Bishop of this Church who held both Churches to be so far Parts of the Catholick Church that there was no necessity of going from one Church to another But if he asserted that he must overthrow the necessity of the Reformation and consequently not believe our Articles and Homiles and so could not be any true Member of the Church of England But the late Bishop of Winchester hath made a shorter Answer to all this For he first doubts Whether there ever were any such Bishops who made such Answers And afterwards he affirms That he believes there never was in Rerum Naturâ such a Discourse as is pretended to have been between this Great Person and two of the most Learned Bishops of England But God be thanked the Cause of our Church doth not depend upon the singular Opinion of one or two Bishops in it wherein they appareently recede from the establish'd Doctrine of it And I am sure those of the Church of Rome take it ill from us to be charged with the Opinion of Particular Divines against the known Sentiments of their Church Therefore supposing the Matter of Fact true it ought not to have moved her to any Inclination to leave the Church of England But after all She protests in the Presence of Almighty God that no Person Man or Woman directly or indirectly ever said any thing to her since she came into England or used the least Endeavour to make her change her Religion and that it is a Blessing she wholly ows to Almighty God So that the Bishops are acquitted from having any hand in it by her own words and as far as we can understand her meaning she thought her self converted by immediate Divine Illumination We had thought the pretence to a private Spirit had not been at this time allowed in the Church of Rome But I observe that many things are allowed to bring Persons to the Church of Rome which they will not permit in those who go from it As the use of Reason in the Choice of a Church the Judgment of Sense and here that which they would severely condemn in others as a Private Spirit or Enthusiasm will pass well enough if it doth but lead one to their Communion Any Motive or Method is good enough