out of loue to their souls reject what is so taught VI. CONSEQVENCE 6. Though nothing were to be belieued as the Will of God but what is by the Catholick Church declared to be so Yet this doth not at all concerne the Church of Rome which neyther is the Catholick Church nor any sound part or member of it This may suffice to shew the validity of the Principles on which the Faith of Protestants stands and the weakness of those of the Church of Rome From all which it follows that it can be nothing but willfull Ignorance weakness of judgment Strength of prejudice or some sinfull passion which makes any one forsake the Communion of the Church of England to embrace that of the Church of Rome If nothing is to be belieued as the Will of God but what is by the Catholick Church declared to be so and the Declarations of the Catholick Church be taken from her Councills and in Concills dissenting from the more Vniuersall and Generall the constant way of the Churches Judgment this Church Catholick as to such Councills and Courts Ecclesiasticall hath neuer been seuered from the Roman and S. Peters Chair And this may suffice to shew the weakness of those Principles on which the Faith of Protestants stands and the Validity of those of the Church of Rome From which it follows that if there be no willfull Ignorance nor sinfull Passion nor strength of prejudice and secular interest in our Countreymen Yet it must be at least much neglect of examining things which most concerne them and diuerting their thoughts vpon other employments or conuersing with such Authors and Teachers as confirm to them those Opinions in which they were educated and the like that detains them still in a Communion diuided and this not very long since from the Catholick As to the Doctors imputing only to Ignorance sinfull Passion c. that any forsake the Communion of the Church of England It is plain that his former Principles do no more support the Religion of the Church of England then of any other Protestants Sect condemned by it All which Sects for the Doctrines they hold and Controuersies they maintain with others equally appeal to the Clearness of the Infallible Scriptures sufficiently intelligible vnto their sincere endeauours and decline as fallible all other Ecclesiasticall Authority So Wolketius for the Socinians as the Doctor for the Church of England sayth Quae de Fide c. Those things which are to be established touching Faith in Christ are manifest in the Scriptures And Again Deus qui Religionem Christianam c. God hauing determined that Christian Religion shall continue till the end of the world has taken care that there should be always extant such a Mean by which it may be certainly known as farr as is necessary to Saluation But no such Mean is extant except the Holy Scriptures To the same purpose Crellius another Socinian says Hac sententia c. This Doctrin by which Christs Diuinity is denyed is supported by very many and the most euident Testimonies of Holy Scriptures It is needless to cite more From whence is manifest That such Principles as here appear only in the Defence of the Religion established in the Church of England make the same Apology for all those other Protestant parties and most blasphemous Sects disclaimed by it the Doctor in the mean while omitting that by which the former Learned Defenders of his Church vsually haue justified it against them namely the Church of Englands adhering to the Traditionall Exposition and Sense of Scripture receiued from the Primitiue Church This I say he omitted perhaps because it may be thought to relish a little of Church-Infallibility Neyther do the Principles here layd down afford any effectuall way or means in this Church of suppressing or conuicting any Schism Sect or Heresy or reducing them eyther to submission of Judgment or Silence For where both sides contend Scripture clear for themselues the Clearness of such Scripture how great soeuer on one side can be made no Instrument of Conuiction to the other Here therefore all things must be prosecuted further then Scripture to a Dic Ecclesiae Tell the Church and so to a Si autem Ecclesiam non audierit But if he will not hear the Church let him be to thee as a Heathen and Publican If then it is the Churches Authority that must rectify such diuersity of Opinions one would think that this ought to haue been first established instead of leauing euery Fancy to perspicuity of Scripture for the attaining Vnity and Peace in the Points controuerted And the prudent may consider Whether the Authority of the Church of England is not much debilitated and brought into contempt and dayly like to wane more and more by this new-taken-vp way of its Defence Where he thinks himself it's best Aduocat and Defender of its Cause who doth most endeauour to sett forth the Defects and faylings of all such Ecclesiasticall Societies Prelats and Councills and best proues no Scripture-Promises made to them Nay where to the end to euacuate the Infallibility of any Society or Church in necessaries is set vp a Counter-Lay-Infallibility of priuate men if only sincere Endeauourers of Vnderstanding Holy Writt in all the same Necessaries This is done which causeth still more Sects instead of that which if done would cure them namely The Recommending especially to the illiterate and less intelligent common sort of people Humility Obedience Submission of judgment to their Spirituall Pastors and Gouernors whom our Lord hath ordained by due Succession to continue to the end of the world on purpose to expound the Scriptures and out of these to teach them all Necessaries for their Saluation and to heep them stable and fixed from being tossed to and fro with euery wind of Doctrin that Capricious Fancies may imagin there or malicious pretend Informing them that they are to learn of these Pastors the true Sense of Gods Word according to former Church-Tradition to follow their Faith and to rest in their Iudgment Lastly not to vsurp their Office and become their owne Guides inasmuch as the same Diuine order that appoints the others to Guide enjoyns them to be Guided And supposing these Guides should err too better it is that all err one Error which is the Error of their Guides for there will be at least some Vnity and Peace in that some Excuse for Inferiors yea also in probability more verisimilitude then that euery one should err a seuerall and his own Error to the vtter ruine uf Peace and a greater deuiation from Truth But whilst these things are so little spoken of it is no great wonder if vnder the protection of such contrary Maximes spread abroad which were first made more current and common by M r Chillingworth forced to it as the last Refuge left to shelter him from Obedience to a just Church-Authority the Broachers of New Sects and
D R STILLINGFLEETS PRINCIPLES Giving an Account of the FAITH OF PROTESTANTS CONSIDERED BY N. O. MATTH XVIII 17. Si Ecclesiam non audierit sit tibi sicut Ethnicus Publicanus PRINTED AT PARIS By the Widow of Antonie Christian and Charles Guillery M. DC LXXI PERMISSV SVPERIORVM A PREFACE TO the Reader DOctor Stilling fleet hauing lately published a Book entitled A Discourse concerning the Idolatry practised in the Church of Rome c. being a Rejoynder to a reply of an vnknown Catholick Gentleman engaged in some former Controuersy with him at the end of the Same Book hath annexed certain Principles drawn up as he saith to giue an Account of the Protestant-Faith Now as touching the main Book it would be inciuility and injustice in any other to inuade the Right of his worthy Aduersary by vntertaking an Answer thereto To his Aduersaries Answer therefore as the times permitt and to Gods mercy I leaue him if perhaps he may repent and endeavour some satisfaction 1. For his accusing the whole Catholick Church of God both Western and Eastern for the same Practise as to Seuerall of his Idolatries are in both for so many Ages before Luthers time of Idolatry and this Idolatry as gross as that of Heathens Which surely must Vn-church this Great Body and quite divorce this Adulteress from Christ for we cannot but think but the Doctor will maintain the Teaching so manifold an Idolatry in this Church to be Fundamentall Errour 2. For his representing the Highest Deuotions practised from all Antiquity in the same Church Mysticall Theology Contemplation heauenly Inspirations all those Supernaturall Favours and familiar Communications of the Diuine Majesty to purer soules receiued in Prayer and continued still in his Church as also Miracles are and so attested in her Histories but vnknown indeed to strangers and foolishness to Greeks his representing all these I say as ridiculous Fanaticisms and impostures though he knowes that Catholicks account themselues obliged to submitt all these things to the judgment of Superiours a Duty vnknown to Fanaticks And what may we expect next from such who are to many as make ill use of such Books as his but that the frequent Allocutions of Gods Holy Spirit mentioned in Scripture the Visions Reuelations Extasies and Spirituall Vnions of the Saints there our Lords Ego in eis tu in me ut sint consummati in unum and S. Pauls Viuo non ego sed in me Christus will shortly become matter of Drollery and Bouffonry 3. For his making so many of Gods glorious Saints in Heauen quorum causam discernat Deus the subject of his scorn and derision By all which he has fitted his Book for the sport and recreation of the Atheist and Debauched from whose applause with the regret and horrour mean while of all piously disposed he may receive his reward The Reuisall of these not very gratefull Subjects of his Book therefore I leaue to the worthy Gentleman pre-engaged in these Disputes But for the now mentioned Principles separately adjoyned at the end as euery Catholick has an equall Right to apply himself to the examining of them so seeing that from these it is that such bad fruits of forsaking first and then censuring and condemning their Mother the Church doe grow it may with Gods blessing proue a seruice not altogether vnbeneficiall to discouer their weakness especially since by such a discouery his whole preceding Book will be demonstrated vnconcluding against Gods Church And this is here the rather and with greater confidence vndertaken because since it is Impiety to deny in generall that true Christian Faith hath a certain vnmoueable Foundation in case therefore it shall appear that the Foundation here layd by the Doctor is but a meer trembling Quiksand on which a Christian cannot without a dreadfull danger to his soule build his Faith namely An Errability in the Guides of Gods Church and Inerrability in all necessary Doctrins contained in Scripture by Him attributed indefinitely to all sober Christians who without any necessary consulting or depending on such Teachers as haue been instituted by God shall vse their sincere endeauours to find out such Truths this Foundation I say not Scripture but each priuate mans sense of Scripture being ruined it will vnauoydably follow That the only certain way not to be misled will be the submitting our Internall Assent and Belief to Church-authority which those who haue dissented from and refused to stand to before Luthers time haue been always marked with the name of Hereticks Where by Church-authority I mean in generall that Superior and more comprehensiue Body of the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy which in any dissent and division of the Clergy according to the Church Canons ought to be obeyed and which hath hitherto in her supremest and most generally accepted Councills in all Ages from the Beginning required such Submission vnder penalty of Anathema and justly assumed to her self the Title of the onely authenticall Interpreter of Scripture and authoritatiue Teacher of Diuine Verities A Submission this is which no particular Church diuided from this more Vniuersall can with the least pretence of reason challenge from her Subjects since she her self and particularly the Church of England refused the same to all the Authority extant in the world when she separated her self And this being obserued by M r. Chillingworth a schollar herein of the Socinians and by many other Diuines of late vpon whom hls Book hath had too must influence they accordingly are forced to disclaime that Submission which the Church of England formerly had challenged in her Canons and seuerely euen with Ecclesiasticall death punished the refusers vntill they should repent not their Externall Disobedience or Contradiction but their wicked Errour The 39. Articles being declared in the same 5 Canon to haue been by this Church agreed vpon for the auoyding diuersities of Opinions and the establishing of Consent touching true Religion Now that these later Divines do decline such Submission I need goe no further then to Doctor Stillingfleets Rationall Account for proof where the Lord Primat of Ireland is cited thus The Church of England doth not not define any of these Questions speaking of the 39. Articles as necessary to be belieued but only binds her sonnes for Peace sake not to oppose them And again We do not suffer any man to reject the 39. Articles of the Church of England at his pleasure yet neither do we oblige any man to belieue them but only not to contradict them Thus they speake of late and thus M r. Chilling worth hath cleared the way before them in abridging thus the just Authority of the Primitiue Councills The Fathers of the Church saith he in after times might haue just cause to declare their judgment touching the sense of some generall Articles of the Creed But to oblige others to receiue her Declarations under pain of damnation or Anathema what warrant they had I know not
supernaturall assistance and for that end to assure men what the will of God is the same means must be vsed for the tryall of that as for any other supernaturall way of Gods making known his will to men Here if the Doctor means That by the same way or means as we come to know the truth of other Divine Revelations we may come to know the truth also of this viz the Infallibility in Necessaries of a Society or Church I consent to it But not to this That by all or only the same ways or means by which we may come to know one Divine Revelation we may or must come to know any other or this of Church-Infallibility For some Divine Revelation may come first to our knowledg by Tradition another first by Scripture another by the Church see below Consid. on the 17. Principle VII PRINCIPLE 7. It being in the power of God to make choyce of severall ways of revealing his Will to vs we ought not to dispute from the Attributes of God the necessity of one particular way to the Exclusion of all others but we ought to enquire what way God himself hath chosen and whatever he hath done we are sure cannot be repugnant to Infinit Iustice Wisdom Goodness and Truth This is granted VIII PRINCIPLE 8. Whatever way is capable of certainly conveying the Will of God to vs may be made choyce of by him for the means of making known his will in order to the happiness of mankind so that no Argument can be sufficient a priori to prove that God cannot choose any particular way to reveal his mind by but such which evidently prooues the insufficiency of that means for conueying the Will of God to vs. This likewise is granted IX PRINCIPLE 9. There are severall ways conceaveable by vs how God may make known his Will to vs eyther by immediate voyce from Heaven or inward Inspiration to every particular person or inspiring some to speak personnally to others or assisting them with an infallible spirit in writing such Books which shall contain the Will of God for the benefit of distant persons and future Ages To these seuerall ways by which God reveals his Will the Doctor might have added this one more as a Truth And in case such Writings in some things be not clear to all capacities as the Writings of Moses his law were not nor any Writings though possibly yet hardly can be when written at seuerall times by seueral persons on seuerall and those particular occasions in different styles c. By our Lords giuing a Commission to and leauing a standing Authority in the Successors of these holy Pen-men to expound these their Writings to the people and by affording them for euer such a Divine Assistance as in nothing necessary to misinterpret them X. PRINCIPLE 10. If the Will of God cannot be sufficiently declared to men by Writing it must eyther be because no Writing can be intelligible enough for that end or that it can neuer be known to be written by men infallibly assisted the former is repugnant to common sense for Words are equally capable of being understood spoken or written the later ouerthrows the possibility of the Scriptures being known to be the Word of God This is granted XI PRINCIPLE 11. It is agreed among all Christians that although God in the first Ages of the World did reveal his mind to men immediatly by a Voice of secret inspirations yet afterwards hee did communicate his mind to some immediatly inspired to write his Will in Books to be preserued for the benefit of future Ages and particularly that these Books of the New Testament which we now receaue were so written by the Apostles and Disciples of Iesus-Christ The Doctor declaring how God after the first Ages was pleas'd to communicate his mind by the Writings of Moses c. might and ought to haue added as a Truth That he also left a Iudge in case of any Controuersy arising about the sense of those Writings to whose sentence the people were to stand and do according to it vnder paine of death as the same Writings inform vs. XII PRINCIPLE 12. Such Writings hauing been receiued by the Christian Church of the first Ages as Divine and Infallible and being deliuered down as such to vs by an vniuersall consent of all Ages since they ought to be owned by vs as the certain Rule of Faith whereby we are to judge what the Will of God is in order to our Saluation vnlesse it appear with an euidence equall to that whereby we believe those Books to be the Word of God that they were neuer intended for that end because of their obscurity or imperfection Here these words whereby we are to judge being vnderstood not vniuersally of all Christians but of those to whom amongst Christians this Office of judging in dubious cases is delegated by our Lord Or vnderstood vniuersally that is so farr as the sense of these Scriptures is to all men clear and vndisputable This Proposition is granted XIII PRINCIPLE 13. Although we cannot argue against any particular way of Reuelation from the necessary Attributes of God yet such a way as Writing being made choyce of by him we may justly say that it is repugnant to the nature of the designe and the Wisdome and Goodnesse of God to giue infallible assurance to persons in writing his Will for the benefit of Mankind if those Writings may not be vnderstood by all persons who sincerely endeauour to know the meaning of them in all such things as are necessary for their saluation This Principle is vnsound Because if God who according to the Doctors 7. Principle may reueal his Will in or without Writing after what manner he pleaseth may reveal it in these Writings so as that in many things it may be clear only to some persons more versed in the Scriptures and in the Churches Traditional sense of them and more assisted from aboue according to their employment which Persons he hath appointed to instruct the rest and these to learne it of them in those places or Points wherein to these persons Gods Will is obscure then I say though these Writings be not such as that euery one may attaine the understanding of them by his owne endeavours yet if he may by others namely his Instructors this also consists very well with the Diuine designe with his Wisdome and Goodnesse as also it would had he left no Writings at all but only Teachers to deliuer his Will perpetually to his Church Concerning these Vvritings pretended by the Doctor to be intelligible by all Persons c. I find as it seems to me a contrary Principle aduanced by Doctor Field a person of no small authority in the Church of England in his Preface to the large Volume he thought it necessary to write on the Church Seeing sayth he the Controuersies of Religion that is in
of Moses Let the like absolute Obedience be now yielded to the supreme Ecclesiasticall Courts Let their sentence be so conformed to so assented to among Christians for none is obliged to do a thing as the Jewes were by those Judges but is by the same decree obliged to assent and beleeue the doing it lawfull and more is not required XVI PRINCIPLE 16. There can be no more intollerable Vsurpation vpon the Faith of Christians then for any Person or society of men to pretend to an Assistance as infallible in what they propose as was in Christ or his Apostles without giuing an equall degree of euidence that they are so assisted as Christ and his Apostles did viz. by Miracles as great publick and conuincing as theirs were by which I mean such as are wrought by those very persons who challenge this Infallibility and with a design for the conuiction of those who do not belieue it Notwithstanding the Doctors Assertion in this Proposition That a society pretending to Infallibility is obliged to confirm such a pretention by Miracles as great as Christ and his Apostles did yet himself and the Archbishop whom he defends do hold that there is after the Apostles times a body or society Infallible in Fundamentalls viz. such Oecumenicall Councills as are vniuersally accepted by the Catholick Church which Church they say from our Lord's Promise can neuer err in Fundamentalls Now it is certain this society is not equally assisted with miracles as our Lord or his Apostles were Therefore the Doctor may do well to reuiew this Principle 1. But its failings being of no difficult discouery I shall not let it pass vnexamined First then I see no reason that those equally assisted by God in deliuering a Truth must also be enabled by him to giue an equall euidence of such Assistāce where there is not the same necessity of it as there is not when the later deliuer no new thing from the former 2. Again Though none can pretend to be Infallible or actually not erring in what he proposeth but that he must be as infallible as to the truth of that wherein he erreth not as our Lord or his Apostles for one or one persons truth is no more true then any others yet in many other respects the Churches Infallibility is much inferiour to that of the Apostles in that it is 1. Neither for its matter so farr extended the Apostles being affirmed infallible in all they deliuered as well in their Arguments as Conclusions both in their relating things heard from our Lord and things anew inspired by the Holy Ghost whereas the Church-Gouernours are acknowledged infallible only in their Definitions in matters of necessary Faith and not in their receiuing any new matters inspired by God but in faithfully deliuering the Inspirations of the former 2. Neither for the manner are the Church-Gouernours so highly assisted by reason of the other knowledge and euidence they haue of that Doctrine first deliuered by the Apostles and so from them receiued which vnchanged they conuey vnto Posterity Of which degrees of infallibility see Archbishop Lawd pag. 254. and 140. 3. And in the third place hence it follows that Miracles hauing been wrought by the first in confirmation of that Doctrine which both deliuer are not now alike necessary to or reasonably demanded of the second 4. Yet since our Lord and his Apostles time Miracles haue been and are continued in the Church of which see irrefragable testimonies giuen by S. Augustin In that Church I say that pretends Infallibility and only in that Church not any other departed from it pretending thereto And vniuersally to deny the truth of them is to ouerthrow the faith of the most credible Histories But these are done in these later as in former times only when and for what ends God and not man his Instrument pleaseth and many times without such persons precedent knowledge in making his Requests what the Diuine Majesty will effect Neither are the Apostles themselues to be imagined to haue had the Operation of Miracles so in their power as as to do these in any kind when and upon what Persons they pleased or others demanded For such a thing would be of such a force vpon mens wills to compell them into Christianity or to reduce unto the Catholick Church Christians strayed from it as the Diuine Prouidence perhaps for the greater tryall of mens hearts and merit of their Faith hath not ordinarily vsed 5. Lastly Miracles remaining still in this Church though they be not professedly done for conuincing a Dissenter in this or that particular Truth yet do sufficiently testifie in generall a security of saluation in the Communion and Faith of this Church if God only honours with them the Members of this Communion and no others that liue out of it as we see no other Christian society diuided from it that layes claim to them or shews any Records of them or euer did at least such as may be any way equalled either for frequency variety or eminency with those of this Church I mean although so many of these be rejected and layd aside where appears any rationall ground of suspicion That the Doctor and the Archbishop do hold such Generall Councills as haue an vniuersall Acceptation from the Church Catholik diffusiue to be Infallible seems to me clear from the places forecited in them For in those both the Doctor and Archbishop admitt That the Church diffufiue is for euer preserued Infallible in all Fundamentalls or Points absolutely necessary to saluation and this by vertue of the Diuine Promise that the Gates of Hell shall not preuail against her and other Texts And therefore such Councills whose Decrees are admitted by the whole Church diffusiue must be so too I say as to Fundamentalls though as to other Points not fundamentall they affirme these Councills also lyable to errour and fallible because the Church Catholick diffusiue say they is so also Among the Conditions also that render any Generall Councill obligatory they require this for one that they be vniuersally accepted or haue the generall consent of the Christian World such Councills then there may be And then such Lawfull Generall Councils and so approued and consequently obliging the Christian World they confess the first four Generall Councils to haue been To which Councills therefore they profess all Obedience Now wee see what kind of Obedience it was these Councils exacted in the Athanasian Creed accepted by the Church of England which contains the summ of their Decrees viz. no less then assent and belief and submission of judgement and all this vpon penalty of eternall damnation And this if justly required by them inferrs vpon the Doctors arguing their Infallibility For saith he where Councills challenge an internall Assent by vertue of their Decrees or because their Decrees are in themselues infallible there must be first proued an Impossibility of error in them
before they can look on themselues as obliged to giue it And therefore He and the Archbishop so farr as any such Councills are fallible allow only an Externall Obedience or silence to them Now for Obedience to these first four Generall Councills in a submission of judgment to them vpon such an Vniuersall Acceptation of them the Doctor in another place thus writes The Church of England looks vpon the keeping the Decrees of the fower first Generall Councills as her Duty and professeth to be guided by the sence of scripture as interpreted by the vnanimous consent of the Fathers and the fowr fist Generall Councills that is shee professeth to take that which such Counciils deliuer for the sence of scripture Not then to admit their Definitions if first they accord with the scripture taken in our own sence So also else where he saith The Church of England doth not admit any thing to be deliuered as the sense of scripture which is contrary to the consent of the Catholick sense of the fowr first Ages that is in their Oecumenicall Councills as he expresseth it in the preceding page And here also he giues the Ground of such submission viz. a strong presumption that nothing contrary to the necessary Articles of Faith should be held by the Catholick Church whose very being depends vpon the belief of those things that are necessary to saluation And when saith he those correspondencies were maintained between the seuerall parts of it that what was refused by one was so by all In another place also speaking in generall of Councills vniuersally accepted he saith That both the Truth of Gods Promises the Goodness of God to his People and his peculiar care of his Church seem highly concerned that such a Councill should not be guilty of any notorious errour Here you see he saith that the Truth of Gods Promises is concerned that these Councills should not fall into any notorious Errour Therefore such Promises are made absolute to some Church-Gouernors after the Apostles And then where the Errour is not intollerable saith the Archbishop at least Obedience of Non-contradiction will be due to all such Councills Now a notorious Errour it must needs be if an Errour in Fundamentalls And such notorious Errour in particular would this be If they should hold themselues when they are not infallible in their Decrees and so should require a Generall Assent such as that in the Athanasian Creed from Christians to them as to Diuine Reuelations and make them DE FIDE thereby in case any Decree be not true obliging all the Members of the Church to an Vnity in errour Thus farr then as to Fundamentall Errours it seems Gods Prouidence secures both such Councills and their subjects And then also for their erring in Non-fundamentalls both He and the Archbishop put this among the RARO CONTINGENTIA The Archbishop also is much in justifying the Catholick Church infallible not only in its Being but Teaching and that must be by its Councills Doctor White saith he had reason to say That the Visible Church had in all Ages taught that vnchanged Faith of Christ in all Points Fundamentall And again It is not possible the Catholick Church that is of any one Age should teach against the word of God in things absolutely necessary to saluation Where the word teach shews that he intends the Gouernors of the Church in euery Age. Likewise in another place If we speak saith he of plain and easy scripture the whole Church cannot at any time be without the knowledge of it And If A. C. meane no more then that the whole Vniuersall Church of Christ cannot vniuersally erre in any one Point of Faith simply necessary to mens saluation be fights against no Aduersary that I know but his own fiction Where it follows But if he mean that the whole Church cannot erre in any one point of Diuine Truth in generall if in these the Church shall presume to determine without her Guide the scripture then perhaps it may be said that the whole Militant Church hath erred in such a Point Here then the first of the whole Church not erring in Fundamentalls as well as the second are spoken of the Church determining And so is that saying of his viz. That though the Mother-Church Prouinciall or National may erre Yet if the Grand mother the whole Vniuersall Church that is in her Generall Councills vniuersally accepted controlling the other Prouincial or National cannot erre in these necessary things all remains safe and all occasions of disobedience that is to the Grand-mothers commands taken from the possibility of the Churches erring namely as to all necessaries are quite taken away Thus he But safe c. it could not be if the Catholick Church the Grand mother as she held so could not also witness all the necessary Truths against such inferiour Councills But how these things will te reconciled with what the Doctor saith else where I know not Let him take care of it as name ly where he writes thus You much mistake when you think we resolue our faith of fundamentalls into the Church as the infallible witness of them For though the Church may be infallible in the belief of all things fundamentall for otherwise it were not a Church if it did not belieue them it doth not follow thence necessarily that the Church must infallibly witness what is fundamentall and what not And again That all infallible assistance makes not an infallible Testimony or makes not the Testimony of those that haue it infallible surely Teaching declaring its consent condemning Doctrins contrary to Fundamentalls is Witnessing or giuing Testimony XVII PRINCIPLE 17. Nothing can be more absurd then to pretend the necessity of such an infallible Commission and Assistance to assure us of the Truth of these Writings and to interpret them and at the same time to proue that Commission from those Writings from which we are told nothing can be certainly deduced such an assistance not being supposed or to pretend that infallibility in a Body of men is not lyable to doubts and disputes as in those Bookes from whence only they deriue their Infallibility I. For the former part of this Principle viz. Nothing can be more absurd then to pretend the necessity of c. If the Doctor in the words at the same time to proue that Commission from these Writings means here to proue such Commission or Assistance only or in the first place from these Writings the truth of Which Writings are first or onely proued from such Commission c. the Absurdity vrged by him I grant 1. As all Articles of Faith are not by all Persons learnt at once so neither by all exactly in the same order as is frequently obserued by Catholick Writers A Christians Faith therefore may begin either at the Infallible Authoriry of scriptures or of the Church and this Infallible Authority of
against it ought to submit to the judgment of this Authority for the Knowing what things are reuealed in this Word and what are contrary to or not founded in it and to vse the Doctors Expression to be guided by the sense of Scripture as it is interpreted by this Authority Else a mistaken and culpably ignorant belief herein will no way justify his disobedience No more then the Socinians contrary belief justifies him against the Decrees of the Church in those Points which yet he belieues not to be founded in Gods word and rejects as contrary And the Doctor els-where to express and curb such extrauagant and capricious beliefs is glad to call in for the interpreting of Scripture to them the concurrant sense of the Primitiue Church the common Reason of Mankind that supposeth Scripture the Rule of Faith the consent of Wise and learned men And on their side who disbelieue this Authority he calls for no less then Demonstration and this not some improbable Argument miscalled so but which being proposed to any man and vnderstood the mind cannot choose but inwardly assent thereto that is that euery reasonable man vnderstanding the terms assents to But how this and seuerall other things which haue fallen some times from the Doctors pen do consist with these Principles and some other Tenēts of his Or how the true sense of Scripture in all Necessaries is so clear and intelligible to euery sincere endeauourer as that he hath such Demonstration for it as that no rationall man hearing it can dissent from it I cannot vndertake to giue a Satisfactory account Mean while such Protestants as perhaps may cast their eyes on these Papers may do well to consider whether vpon such a Demonstratiue Certainty in the Points controuerted as this it is that they oppose Church-Authority teaching them otherwise Likwise the Common Reason of MankindChristian the Common consent of Wise and learned men named by him before what are they indeed but where all are not vnited in the same judgment the most common Suffrage and testimony of the present Vniversall Church whom also we ought sooner to credit then any other touching what is the concurrent testimony of the Primitiue Church in case this suffers any debate And if as he says Particular persons are not to depart from this judgment of Authority till they haue Demonstration that is their own certainty and Infallibility as to such Point to shew against it then we need not seek for our Lords Patent of the Churches Infallibility for their or our submission to it tell the Opposers of its judgment for the Points they dissent in produce theirs Here then we see the Doctor getts as near to an Internall Infallible or at least Authenticall Proponent as his cause and interest will permitt him Hoping by his requiring Demonstration and introducing Common Reason and Wise and learned men and Primitiue Church to shake his hands of so many Sectarists who molest his owne Churches peace vpon the account of this his Proposition or something like it viz. that no Christian is bound vnder what euer pretence of Church Authority to belieue that which is not reuealed in Gods Word and is bound to reject what euer is offred to be impos'd vpon his Faith that is contrary or hath no ground in Gods Word c. And you must lett them judg of both these For the last part of this 29. Principle That such Rejection is no making Negative Articles of Faith I grant that a rejecting of the imposition of a Belief of such a Positiue Point or the refusing to admitt it as an Article of their Faith which may be done whilst they eyther suspend their judgment concerning it or also acknowledg the truth of it supposed no Diuine Reuelation if this were all the Protestants do is not therefore making the Negatiue of it an Article of their Faith But mean while the rejecting any such Positiue from their Faith as not only vntrue but contrary to the Scripture is making or declaring the Negatiue of it an Article of their Faith because it makes this Negatiue a thing reuealed in Scripture and so a matter of Faith though I do not say an Article necessary to Saluation And therefore perhaps it was that the Doctor in the Reason he annexeth That they only apply the Generall grounds of Faith to particular instances c. mentions indeed such Positiues as are neyther in nor may be deduced from the Scripture but warily omitts such as are pretended contrary to Scripture Now that Protestants declare many of these Positiues they reject contrary to Scripture See for Purgatory Adoration of Images Inuocation of Saints Indulgences in the Article of the Church of England 22. For Works of Supererogation Art 14. For Publick Prayer or Ministery of the Sacraments in a Tongue not vnderstood by the people Art 24. Sacrifice of the Mass. Art 31. Transubstantiation Art 28. And to this Belief of the Negatiues of them as contained in Scripture all the Members of the Church of England or at least the Clergy seem to be by their Canons as strictly obliged though some of their Diuines appear not well satisfied with it vnder these terms To allow and acknowledg all the Articles and so these fore-cited agreable to Gods Word To declare their vnfeigned assent to them and this for establishing Vnity of Opinion and consent as those of the Roman Church are obliged to the Positiues who are no such way obliged by that Church to such a necessary Belief of all her Positiues as that a Person nescient of them cannot be saued or that the explicit knowledg of them is necessary though always in some measure beneficiall it is to Saluation But this indeed is necessary to Saluation that any Subject of the Church knowing them to be determined by her obey her Definitions and not reject or dissent from them Such Disobedience being conceaued a breach of Gods Command And from this if I may be indulged to trangress a little an Answer may be giuen to that Quaere of the Doctors in his Book Roman Idolatry p. 52. which he says he could not hitherto procure from Catholiks though he hath often requested it viz. Why the belieuing of all the Ancient Creeds and leading a good life may not be sufficient to Saluation vnless one be of the Communion of the Church of Rome Where if he will allow me here for auoyding by disputes to change these Words Communion of the Church of Rome into the Communion of the Roman Catholick Church and 2. will giue me leaue to vnderstand a good life here restrained to all other duties of a Christian saue those which respect this Communion else if a good life be generally taken the Doctors supposition must not be allowed Then I answer That such Belieuing and Leading such a life cannot be sufficient for Saluation to so many persons as persist without repentance eyther in a wilfull ignorance of their Obligation to