true as it is not which you say How shall all Christians know it to be true When such as I with all our searching cannot know it yea are past doubt that it is false It 's like you 'll say It is our obstinacy And so all shall be Schismaticks and condemned with you whom you are pleased to call obstinate for escaping that Ignorance which would better serve your Ends. § 7. Dr. S. But Mr. B. objecteth That the Nestorians Jacobites Abassines c. renounce some of the six Councils yes three of the six They had a personal Veneration for the Persons of Nestorius and Dioscorus and did believe them when they said that the Councils were mistaken in Matter of Fact and Condemned them for Opinions which they did not own and thereupon did reject those Councils But they did not then nor do not at this day reject the Catholick Faith and the Rules of Christian Unity which are contained in the six General Councils So that in effect they own them For the principal thing required is to profess the true Faith and hold the Vnity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace and Righteousness which those Churches do in that they own the Nicene and C. P. Councils and deny not the Doctrine of the other four Answ. Do you think that none of your Readers will see how much you here overthrow or give up your Cause 1. If holding the Unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace and Righteousness will serve while they renounce the Councils as erroneous and tyrannical and holding the same Faith and Doctrine will serve what have you been Pleading for we are for all this as well as you 2. And if the Council may erre in Matter of Fact which may be known by common sence and reason how much more may they erre in matter of right and supernatural Revelation as the Articles of the Church of England say they have done 3. You confess here that Men may reject three or four of your six Councils and yet be no Schismaticks but hold Faith Unity and Peace And are the other two more necessary than all the rest You say They hold the two first Answ. They hold not the Infallibility of Councils nor that they may not be rejected when they erre nor that we may not be discerning Judges when they erre For all this is renounced in their renouncing all save two or three 4. You say They reject not the Rules of Christian Vnity Answ. Therefore they judged not the Decrees of Councils to be that necessary Rule Else the Decrees of those renounced by them would be as necessary as the rest 5. It 's apparent by this that they held the same with those Councils not because of the Authority of those Councils but on other Grounds For it is not possible that they who renounced the Councils should believe the Christian Faith on their Authority They believed it as a Divine Revelation fide Divina and so do we 6. And dare you say that a Man that believeth the same things because they are revealed by God in his Word shall be damned unless he believe them fide humana because a General Council decreed them 7. Did your other Councils add any Decrees to the first If not what need of believing any thing as theirs If yea then receiving the Decrees of the two first is not a receiving the Decrees of the later 8. And on whose Authority did Christians believe the first 300 years before there was any General Council § 8. Dr. S. P. 346. Obj. Did the Catholick Church die or cease after the sixth General Council Answ. The Essence of the Catholick Church doth not consist in the being of a Council Their meeting is but an external means for better declaring the Catholick Faith and holding mutual Correspondence between the several Churches Ans. 1. Still you are constrained to destroy your own Cause You confess then that Councils are no constitutive Governing part of the Church as a Governed Society And if so it hath some other Humane constitutive Regent part or none If none we are so far agreed This is it that we contend for If any other you must come to your Lords College of the diffused Pastors who never made Law never heard a Cause or judged out of Council to this day nor possibly can do 2. What is this that you call an external means of Correspondence Is it a necessary Supream Legislative and Judicial Power or not If it be it must be a constitutive Essential part of the Church as Political For every Politick Society is informed by such And you argued before that Nations must be under such as well as Dioceses under Diocesans If not habetur quaesitum 3. And because your former words assert an Vniversal Soveraignty I wonder how any of common reason can think this necessary to the whole Christian World during the few Years that those two or six first Councils sate and never before nor after Are dead Men our Governors VVill a Power of Governing never exercised serve for a Thousand Years last and 300 before and not for the other 300 Or hath the Church had one Form of Government for 200 or 300 Years and another for all the other 1300 And when you tell us that Kingdoms must be judged as well as single Persons did those first Councils judge all the sinning Kingdoms since If you own no Councils since the first Six all Kingdoms that have sinned these 1000 Years had no such Judges And what Councils or other Church Power save the Popes judged the many Southern and Eastern Countries that revolted Or the Western Nations in their various Changes and Crimes Must we have such an Uuniversal Judge now who never judged any these 1000 Years 4. Your Lord saith at last that they are Mutable Laws which Councils make If so why must we needs obey the six Councils that were 1000 Years ago under another Prince May not 1000 Years time and another King's Government make a Change in the Matter and Reason of the Law If you say it stands till another General Council change it I answer 1. VVhat Council abrogated the 20th Nicene Canon against Kneeling on the Lord's Day in adoration and many such other 2. Then if ever there was a General Council it's Decrees are immutable and so you contradict your selves For it 's certain there never will be a General Council to abrogate what is done till all the VVorld be under one Christian Monarch 5. The Laws of England bind us not now as the Laws of the Kings and Parliaments that are dead that is not by Virtue of their Authority though made by them But as the Laws of the present Legislative Powers who own them and rule by them and can abrogate them when they will And when the Canon-makers are dead 1000 Years ago where now is the Ruling Power whose Laws those are There is no General Council to own them nor ever will be A thousand Years sure
or extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost were then common to most Christians at least as you may see by comparing Gal. 3.2 3. 1 Cor. 12. Act. 8. Rom. 8 9 c. 2. There were but two Messengers more than those that dwelt together and met ordinarily And 1. The Apostles themselves had not such present command of the Spirit as excluded the need of consultation 2. And no doubt but the doubtful Christians abroad did more reverence the consent of all than one alone What therefore they did as consenting inspired infallible persons will not prove a soveraignty in all the Bishops of the World in a Council to decide Controversies by Sentence and Command No doubt but the Assembly at Nimeguen Munster Francfort c. may decide Controversies between Princes but not by soveraignty over each other but by consent To their Subjects it 's reverenced as a consent of Princes but to each others it 's the consent of Equals I have said that Archbishop Vsher said to me That Councils were but for Concord and not for Government the Major Vote of Bishops being no rulers of the Minor nor of the absent Obj. But all Pastors are related to the Vniversal Church Answ. As a Licensed Physitian is related to all the Kingdom that is he may be Physitian to any that desire him How strictly do the Canons forbid Usurpation in other Mens Dioceses The English Ordainers say Take thou Authority to Preach the Word of God and Administer the holy Sacraments where thou shalt thereto be lawfully called A general Ordination maketh none a Governor of other Mens Flocks § 4. Dr. S. The Apostles to give Example how Controversies should be ended in future Ages did not decide it by their infallible Spirit only but proceed in an ordinary Method plainly countenancing the Authority of Councils and intimating to us that all Christian People ought to submit to their Decrees Answ. 1. They did decide it by their Infallible Spirit else they had not fathered all on the Holy Ghost But not only by that Spirit for it was also by their Vnderstandings and their Tongues Even so they did not write the Gospel only by the Spirit but also by their Reason and their Pens But they decided it not without that Spiritual infallible Inspiration which your Councils have not You may as well say when Act. 6.2 the twelve called the Multitude c. that there was a General Council that spake not only by the Spirit And Act. 11.2 Peter pleadeth his Cause before the Apostles and Brethren who were satisfied by his Reasons This was such another General Council But who doubteth but the Apostles had Reason as well as the Spirit and used the gift of the Spirit in the use of Reason and not only in Extasies And therefore Consultation and the Spirits infallible Inspiration may go together 2. We deny not the use of Consultation and the Consent of many as a help to incline mens Minds to Satisfaction But only infallible Men can by infallible Authority decide Controversie sententially And if Pope or Councils have such Infallibility they have done ill that they would use it no better than the Multitude of their Contradictions manifesteth And if they were Infallible the Peoples actual Faith is never the more infallible unless they themselves were infallible also Are all the believers of Popes and Councils themselves infallible or not If yea then are all herein equal to the Pope and Councils If not then the Laity know not but they may be deceived in thinking the Pope and Councils infallible 3. I have truely recited the doleful decision of Controversies which they have made They have raised abundance of Controversies which have torn the Church into pieces as I have fully proved whether Mr. Maurice will or not 4. It would have been a Service to the World indeed if Pope or Councils would to this day after 1500 years Controversie vouchsafe to end them and not tell us that they are appointed to end them and yet will not Why are there still Cart loads of Books of Controversies among Papists and Protestants and all and yet no Council doth decide them Even the Catalogues of Heresies given us by Ephinanius Philastrius Augustine c. are few of them medled with in your six Councils It is the Controversies about the sence of Scripture which is most talkt of which Councils must decide And of the many hundred or thousand Controverted Texts how few have Councils ever Expounded to us How great is their guilt if they are bound to do it and will not 5. But you do but speak darkness and no satisfaction to us to tell us that all Christian people ought to submit to their Decrees till you tell us Whether it be to All their Decrees or but to some and to which and how known The Case may be I About points absolutely necessary to Salvation or points not so necessary II. About points plainly exprest in Scripture or points there darkly exprest I. As for points absolutely necessary sober Papists themselves confess that they are all plainly exprest in Scripture Else it were no perfect Doctrine or Law of God if a Council contradict any Article of the Creed must we receive its Decrees Sure Councils have no power to judge that there is no God no Christ no Scripture no Heaven Nor must we believe them if they should so do And if they have power only to tell us that There is a God a Christ a Heaven Scripture hath told us this already and we need not that a Council tell it us If we believe it as of God it is a Divine Faith if as of Man it is but a Humane Faith 2. But if it be only points not Necessary a Council cannot make that necessary which God made not so And it 's a great wrong to the World to increase the difficulty of Faith and Salvation by making more necessary to it than God hath done II. And whether they are necessary or not if they are plainly exprest in Scripture what need we a Council to say the same again Is not Gods plain words intelligible as well as theirs And must we not believe Gods plain words till a Council repeat them How many things then must we refuse to believe which are plainly exprest in Scripture But if they be things not plainly exprest in Scripture it 's like they are not Necessary to Salvation If they be they are such deductions from plain Scripture as are obvious to a sound understanding or not If yea then every sound understanding may know them Or if Men be ignorant either Councils or single Pastors may teach them But that is by opening the evidence of truth and not by commanding Men to believe it Teaching and not Magisterial determining begeteth rational belief But if they are not such obvious deductions we cannot be sure that Councils rightly collect them But we are sure they have no power to command us believe without giving us convincing proof
is time enough to prove the death of a Power never since exercised were there a Seminal Virtue of Universal Regiment in the diffused Church a Thousand Years Sleep in reason must pass for a Death 6. Yea the diffusive Church hath since disowned the Universal Obligation of those same Councils and doth disown them to this day For it is not near half the Christian VVorld that own them yea none but Papists that I could ever be certified of do receive any such Councils at all as Legislators and Judges to all the Christian World but only as Reverenced Rules of Concord made by Contract And if Constantine Theodosius Martian c. called their Subjects to Councils 1000 Years ago why is our King and Kingdom now any more subject to the Subjects of those Emperors than to them But if you were content to endure us to unite in Christ and take his Laws for our Rule and bond of Peace and stay till the next General Council be against us we desire no more § 9. P. 347. Mr. B. saith It is a doleful thing to think on what account all these Men expect that all Christians Consciences can be satisfied c. D. S. answereth It is a doleful thing indeed to think how they should be satisfied that set up a Pope in every Congregation and follow him in opposition to the Catholick Church and General Councils Mr. B. knows he does this and deludes the poor People c. Answ. 1. If I know it methinks I should know that I know it Which if I do it 's I that am the Impudent Liar If not Somebody is mistaken Qu. Whether a Council of such Bishops be infallible or can make us a better Rule than the Scripture 2. Readers here you see that it is no wonder that these Reverend Fathers renounce Popery You see what a Pope is in their account It is a Minister of a single Church who taketh not their Lordships or Councils to be Law-givers and Judges over all the Earth We poor Protestants took him for a Pope that claimed such an Universal Rule alone or as the President of Councils But these Men take him for a Pope that denieth Popery and pretendeth to no Government beyond his Parish Yea not only so but in our Parishes we oblige none to take up any of their Religion Faith or Duty to God on our commanding Authority but to learn by the Evidence which caused our own Faith to believe by a Faith Divine 3. I have oft said that the Catholick Church is such by Faith and Subjection to Christ which I own and daily Preach But that there never was a General Council of the Christian World nor is there any such thing as a Catholick Church in the Popish sence that is having one Political humane Soveraignty And how did the Man make himself believe that I knowingly opposed that which my whole Writing labours to prove never had a being Reader Lament the Case of the Church on Earth when the most studious Leaders are so dark and rash and bad as either I or these Reverend Fathers are setting the World into ruinating Divisions by words of such a Dialect as is harsh to name § 10. P. 348. Dr. S. pretendeth to some Scripture Proofs viz 1 Cor. 14.32 33. The Spirit of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets For God is not the Author of Confusion but of Peace as in all the Churches of the Saints Answ. Reader Do you think this proveth that the whole Church on Earth is under one humane Soveraignty that hath a Legislative and Judging Power 1. This Text speaketh only of the avoiding Disorder in particular Assemblies by the means which they had present there among them To keep them from speaking two at once and such like Disorders As the Archi-Synagogoi were used to do in the Jews Synagogue And must a Council from all the Earth be gathered to that Assembly to rebuke such Disorder If it must be but to make a General Law to forbid it that 's done already in Scripture and in Nature And must the World meet to do it again 2. Their Dr. Hamond saith that this Text speaketh of the Spirit in each Prophet being subject to himself that is to his own reason and that the Spirit moveth them not to speak irregularly and confusedly And what 's this to the Power of Councils 3. If it were spoken of the other present Prophets what 's this to Men that are no Prophets and that are dead 1000 Years ago Are not present Pastors fitter Moderators of their Assembly than a General Council of dead Men § 11. Next he that so condemneth me as an Opposite citeth my words as granting his Cause yet this reconcileth him not I am not so idle as to write him a Commentary of my own words for I can devise no plainer Only I may tell him that he too quickly forgot that God is not the Author of Confusion and therefore it is not lovely A Law should not be confounded with a Contract or amicable Agreement nor a Soveraign Government with a Peace-making Assembly of Equals nor a possible Council of those within reach with an impossible Council out of all the World Neither the King of France or of England were Subjects to the Assembly at Nimeguen § 12. P. 351. He saith he could give numberless Quotations of Protestants Melanchthon Bucer Calvin Bishop Andrews K. James Spalatensis Casaubon Bishop White Bishop Mountague Archbishop Dr. Hamond Dailee c. Answ. I cannot answer what you can do but what you do But the Reader may know how far to believe you that will but search these few 1. Read what I have cited out of Melanchthon to Bishop Guning or rather his own Epistle of the Conference at Ratisbone and that to King Henry the 8th 2. Read Bucer de Regno Dei and the rest of his Opera Angl. and judge as you see cause 3. I am ashamed to cite any words of Calvin to confute our Drs. intimation 4. Whether Spalatensis was a Protestant I dispute not but read his own words cited by me in my Treatise of Episcopacy and then read him of Councils and judge 5. Bishop Vsher as I have oft said told me himself That Councils are not for Government of the absent or the particular Bishops but for Concord What Mind Dr. Hamond was of I determine not But of the rest you may judge by these The Matter is All Protestants hold that we must Serve God in as much Concord as we can And that the Meeting of Pastors is a means of Concord And that it was the true Christian Faith which the Councils which he nameth owned and we are of the same Faith and therefore they reverence these Councils And they hold that still Concord being much of the Strength and Beauty of the Churches when there is any special reason for it as several Princes assemble by themselves or Messengers at Munster Ratisbone Francfort Nimeguen so Pastors even of several Kingdoms
of the truth For instance The first General National Council determineth that Christ is God of God Light of Light Very God of Very God I believe they meant the truth But these words are so far from making me a new Article of Faith or making the point plainer than Scripture made it that they are to me much darker than many Scripture words That Christ is God even One God with the Father and that he is the Eternal Word and Son the only begotten of the Father the Scripture plainly tells us And that the Person of the Son is of the Father For the Persons being three it is meet to say that one is of the other But God of God and Very God of Very God is of harder understanding and hath tempted mistakers to say it is Godhead of Godhead as if the Essence as well as Persons were many Creeds must be supposed to speak properly And denominations formal are most proper The Tritheites take advantage of this and say It is not said that the Person of the Son is of God the Father but the Godhead as such God of God being twice said say they signifieth two Gods They misinterpret it But the Scripture speaketh plainlier The same I say of Light of Light a Metaphor in a Creed And they that put substare accidentibus into the definition of substance and when they have done say that God hath no accidents do not by the Word substance add any plainness to the Scripture phrase And how little the Council at Constantinople and Chalcedon did to end the Controversies of Prelates and unite the Church by setting Constantinople and Rome in mutual Jealousies and Competition the World knows And what the Councils at Ephesus and Chacedon did to end the Controversies about the Nestorian and Eutychian points or that at C. P. against the Monothelites or that under Justinian de tribus capitulis Mr. Morice and you cannot keep the World from knowing nor yet what all the Councils about Images some for them and some against them have done Are they the only means of ending Controversies 1. Who do end none 2. Who have most increased them 3. Who are the greatest Controversie themselves The World will never be agreed which are to be taken for General Councils Authoritative and which not nor can you give us any thing that hath the shadow of reason to satisfie any impartial Man And no wonder when indeed there never was an Universal Council in the VVorld All true Christians are agreed in all that constituteth Christianity And it is not the Authority of Councils that made them Christians and so agreed them And to dream of ending all Controversies about lesser matters as long as men are so ignorant and imperfect as all are in this VVorld is the part of no Man in his VVits § 5. Page 345. Dr. S. Accordingly the Christian Church has challenged such an Authority and has held such Assemblies as occasion did require and six such have been approved and received generally i◠the Church and no more Ans. In all this matter of fact I think there is not one true word 1. The Christian Church did never challenge such an Authority unless you mean the Papal Church as in Council to have a Legislative and Judicial Soveraignty over the whole Christian VVorld 2. Never such an Assembly was call'd or held as I have fully proved 3. The six you mean we honour and are of the same Faith as they were but how far all the Christian World hath been from receiving them all I have elsewhere shewn and so hath Luther de Conciliis and many Protestants 4. That there were no more approved and received as these were is unproved § 6. Dr. S. As for Mr. B 's exception why we do not own the second of Eph. and second of Nice for General Councils also I answer because they were at the time they were first held and many years after accounted no General Councils and not received for such by the Church And page 346. Mr. B. demandeth how shall any Mans Conscience be satisfied that just these six had a supream c. Ans. By the publick Acts of the Church as we are satisfied of our Acts of Parliament For there are no more generally received and these are Ans. 1. I will not stand here on many previous questions How we shall know that a Council not General binds us not as much as a General if they have as wise Men and as strong Evidence And whether any Council be General which carrieth it but by a Major Vote where a few turn the Scales and the rest dissent But 2. If there be in this decision of this great point one word that should satisfie any Mans Conscience which will not be satisfied with meer noise or the VVriters Authority I confess I cannot find it 1. Either the Decrees of the said Councils are obligatory by their Soveraignty before the diffused Church receiveth them or not If yea then that obligation must be first known yea and it is known and the Council known by those that are nearest before all the Church on Earth can know it If not then it is not the Council but the Receiving-Church which hath the obliging Soveraign power And this is indeed to make Soveraign and Subjects to be the same This is like Mr. Hooker's Principles and many Politicians that the Legislative Power is really in the people by Natural right and it 's no Law which hath not common consent And if so no Man can tell how to date your Church Laws They did not begin to be Laws when the Council made them but when all the Church on Earth consented But we have need of the Decree of a General Council for no Dr. is sufficient to tell us when all the Christian VVorld consenteth for if every Christian must travel all over the VVorld to know it will be a vagrant Church And if he must send he cannot be sure that his Messenger saith true And a thousand Messengers may all differ And who can bear their Charges And if a Council tell us when the VVorld consenteth to former Decrees we must know also the worlds consent to that Decree before we can be sure it 's true And 2. VVhether the Church diffusive give authority to the Decrees or only be the Promulgators whose reception must be our notice it is a contradiction to say I know it first because all the World of Christians receive it For that 's all one as to say Every single Christian knoweth it because all Christians know it first That is All know it before they know it The parts are in the whole 3. Hath God laid the Salvation of all the Millions of Men and Women Learned and Unlearned upon such acquaintance with Cosmography and History as to know what Councils past 1000 years all the Christian World receiveth Or whether the greater part be for them or against them Is there one of a hundred thousand that knoweth it
not too distant may for mutual help and Concord meet in Councils And none should needlesly break their just Agreements because of the general Command of Concord But 1. They hold that these Councils be no representers of all the Christian World 2. Nor have any Universal Jurisdiction 3. Nor any true Governing Power at all over the absent or dissenters but an Agreeing Power 4. And if they pretend any such Power they turn Usurpers 5. And if on pretence of Concord they make Snares or Decree things that are against the Churches Edification Peace or Order or against the Word of God none are bound to stand to such Agreements These being the Judgment of Protestants what do these Men but abuse their words of Reverence to Councils and Submission to their Contracts as if they were for their Universal Soveraign Jurisdiction § 13. And next he saith Whereas Mr. B. doth usher in his Discourse with an intimation that this was only a Doctrine of the Gallican Church he cannot but know that this was the sence of the Church of England in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Reign Answ. 1. I honour the Gallican Papists above the Italian but I am satisfied that both do erre 2. There is a double untruth in Matter of Fact in your words 1. That I cannot but know that which I cannot know or believe 2. That yours was the sence of the Church of England which I have disproved But what is your proof D. S. For the 20th Article saith The Church hath Power to Decree Rites and Ceremonies and Authority in Controversies of Faith and the next Article doth suppose this Authority in General Councils Answ. The Church of England supposeth that Kingdoms should be Christian and the Magistrates and Pastors Power so twisted as that their Conjunction may best make Religion national as it was with the Jews But it never owned a foreign Jurisdiction or the Governing Power of the Subjects of one Kingdom over the Princes and People of another It followeth not that because the Church in England may Decree some Rites here that therefore foreign Churches may command us to use their Rites Our own Church Teachers no doubt have Authority in Controversies of Faith that is to teach us what is the truth and to keep Peace among Disputers but not to bind us to believe any thing against God's Word and therefore not meerly because it 's their Decree Therefore the Article cautelously calls the Church only a Witness and Keeper of holy Writ which we deny not And that besides Scripture they ought not to enforce any thing to be believed for Necessity to Salvation But you would have us believe the Soveraign Universal Jurisdiction of Councils yea and the lawfulness of all your Oaths and Impositions as necessary to escape damning Schism and is not that as necessary to Salvation 2. And one would think there needed no more than the next Articles to confute you which you cite as for you They knew that there had been Imperial General Councils which being gathered and authorized by the Emperors had the same Power in the Empire that National Councils have with us or in other Nations But there 's not a syllable of any Jurisdiction that they have out of the Empire Yea contrary it 's said 1. That they may not be gathered together without the Commandment and Will of Princes And therefore cannot Govern them without their Will nor have any Conciliar Power being no Council And one King cannot command the Subjects of another Indeed if Princes will make themselves Subjects to a Council or Pope who can hinder them 2. They are here declared to be Men not all governed by the Spirit and Word of God and such as may erre and have erred in things pertaining to God Therefore their meer Contracts and Advice are no further to be obeyed than they are governed by the Spirit and Word of God which we are discerning Judges of And it is concluded that things ordained by them as necessary to Salvation have neither Strength nor Authority unless it may be declared that they be taken out of the Holy Scripture So that even their Expositions of the Articles of Faith which you make their chief Work hath no further Authority than it 's declared to be taken out of the Scripture it self nor yet their decision of the sence of controverted Texts And such proof must be received from a single Man § 14. Such another proof he fetcheth from the Statute 1 Eliz. c. 1. Forbidding to judge any thing Heresie but what hath been so judged by Authority of Canonical Scripture or the first four General Councils or any of them or any other General Councils Answ. As if forbidding private Heretication were the same with the Universal Soveraignty of Councils we are of the same Religion with all true Christians in the World and we are for as much Concord with all as we can attain But is Concord and Subjection all one or Contract and Government § 15. The like Inference he raiseth from a Canon 1571. forbidding any new Doctrine not agreeable to the Scripture and such as the Ancient Fathers and Bishops thence gathered Answ. And what 's this to an Universal Church Soveraignty § 16. The Church of England's Sence is better expounded Reform Leg. Eccles. c. 15. Orthodoxorum Patrum etiam authoritatem minime censemus esse contemnendam sunt enim permulta ab illis praeclare utiliter dicta Ut tamen ex eorum sententia de sacris literis judicetur non admittimus Debent enim sacrae literae nobis omnis Christianae doctrinae Regulae esse Judices Quin ipsi Patres tantum sibi deferri recusarunt saepius admonentes Lectorem ut tantisper suas admittat sententias interpretationes quoad cum sacris literis consentire eas animadverterit § 17. D. S. P. 358. Mr. B. saith The doubt is whom you will take for good Christians into your Communion But this can be no doubt when I except only the Jesuited part of the Roman and other Churches Answ. So you take in the Church of Rome which you cannot do without taking in the pretended Soveraignty Essential to it Was not that Church Papal before there were any Jesuites But hold Dr. It 's France that you are first Uniting with and they say that the Jesuites are there the Predominant part And are you against them there § 18. P. 360. He takes it ill that I suppose him to separate from the Church of England I have fully given him here my proof The Church of England took not it self for a part of an Universal humane Political Church But his Church doth and is thereby of another Political Species as a City differeth from a Kingdom I will not tire the Reader with following him any further Vain Contenders necessitate us to be over tedious § 19. I am loth here to answer the rest of his Book against our Nonconformity 1. Because I would not follow them that
decoy and divert Men from the state of our chief Controversie to hide their Design 2. Because it seemeth to me to be of no use He that will not read impartially what we say as well as they will never be cured of his Errours by any thing that we can write And he that will impartially read but my first Plea for Peace Apology and Treatise of Episcopacy and take this Book to be a Satisfactory answer shall never be troubled by my Replyes no more than the distracted § 20. This much I shall presume to say lest he expect some account of his Success upon my self I. That when he tells the Reader at last of my Concessions as if I scarce differed from them save by not giving over Preaching when forbidden they do but shew how charitable and humble they are in their Domination who yet can hardly suffer such Men alive out of Jail much less to preach who come so near them II. That when he tells us that the Presbyterian Cause is given up and yet their Party make the name of Presbyterian odious to them but not to us the Engine of their reproachful malice this seemeth not to me to come from the Spirit of Christ. III. That when this whole Book pretendeth to confute us and scarce once that I find in all the Book truely stateth the case of our difference but still silenceth or falsly representeth the points which we judge sin yea heinous sin such a Deceiving Volume seemeth not to me to beseem a Bishop or his Amanuensis or Chaplain IV. That when he tells us what pitiful proof he hath for the justification of their Silencing and Ruining ways and yet how extream confident he is it maketh me wish Christians to pray yet harder that Christ would save his Church from such Bishops I will now stay but to instance in that which they say the Bishop hath some peculiarity in viz. Our Assent to the Rubrick about the Salvation of dying Baptized Infants Reader I have reason to believe that it is the Bishop as well as Dr. Saywell that speaketh to me And 1. He dealeth more ingenuously than they that on pretence of Assenting to the use say that we are not to Assent to the Truth of this as a Doctrine of Religion He professeth the contrary and that Assent to this is required as well as to the Catechism 2. He seeketh not their Evasion that make not the phrase Vniversal but Indefinite For he knew 1. That in re necessaria which he takes this to be an Indefinite is equal to an Universal And 2. That a quatenus ad omne valet consequentia And the assertion is of Infants quâ Baptized 3. It is a certainty mentioned by Tautology that must be by every Minister professed It is certain by the Word of God that they are undoubtedly saved Here we ask them two things or three 1. VVhether none should be a Minister of Christ who cannot truely profess this undoubted Certainty 2. VVhether almost all the Learned Writers and Ministers of the Reformed Churches should be Silenced that hold the contrary 3. But specially what be the words of God here meant which express this undoubted certainty They confess that God saith Deut. 12.32 Thou shalt not add thereto nor take ought there-from and concludeth the Bible with If any Man add to these things God shall add to him the Plagues that are written in this Book We tell them we dare not venture on such a dreadful Curse This cannot be one of their things indifferent Therefore before we profess our Assent that this is undoubtedly certain by the Word of God they will shew us so much compassion as to tell us where to find that Word of God And after all our intreaty even my own to the Bishop he giveth us by his Chaplain but this one Text of Scripture Gal. 3.27 As many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. Reader is here one word of the certain undoubted Salvation of dying baptized Infants without exception 1. Here is no mention of baptizing Infants and it 's usual with this sort of Men to say That we cannot prove Infant Baptism by Scripture but only by Tradition or the authority of the Church 2. This Text most certainly speaketh of the Adult And will not these Drs. believe St. Peter himself who told Simon when he was Baptized Thou hast no part nor lot in this matter For thy heart is not right in the sight of God Thou art yet in the gall of bitterness and bond of iniquity If they say that Simon had been saved if he had died as soon as he was Baptized and that he fell to that false Heart and gall of bitterness after who will take such Drs words in despight of the evident truth His Friend Grotius more modestly expoundeth Gal. 3.27 Sicut à baptismo vesies sumuntur ita vos Promisistis vos induturos Christum id est victuros secundum Christi regulam Do these Men believe that all Infidels and Hypocrites shall be saved if they die as soon as they are Baptized Or do they think that none such may be and are Baptized The very words before the Text are Ye are all the Children of God by Faith in Christ Jesus And Christ saith He that believeth and is Baptized shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned And yet they bring us no Text for their new Article of Faith but one which will as much prove the Salvation of all dying baptized Hypocrites and Vnbelievers as of all dying Infants As if none came in without the Wedding Garment or such were in a state of Life I must profess that I cannot see should I subscribe this how I could escape the guilt of Heresie being liable to the foresaid Curse and Plagues of adding to the Word of God by saying that Gods Word speaketh this certain and undoubted Salvation of dying Baptized Infants as such without Exception Yet if we would all conform to all their Oaths Covenants and Impositions besides we must all be cast out and forbid to preach the Gospel if we durst not Assent to this one Article Such is the mercy of these Men And all is justified as for sound Doctrine which we are ignorant of and these Masters are the Judges whom we must believe Yet note that though when he got the Church of England to pass this Article he put not in the least Exception and the Canon forbids the refusing Baptism to any Child that is offered to it yet now he limits it to all Children seriously offered by any that have power to educate them in that profession And as it is not the Parent that must be the Promiser nor is suffered to be so much as one of the Godfathers or Sureties for his Child so by this little limitation what a dreadful brand of perfidious Covenanting with God doth he six on our common English Baptism For sure it is not the confident talk
have no right to Salvation presently on their Baptism then it is not lawful to say that the contrary is undoubtedly certain by the Word of God But I confess Mr. D's Proposition is false as I have formerly proved to him And perhaps necessity will force himself to deny it as to Baptism though it overthrow his assertion about Ordination Specially if he be for Laymen and Womens Baptizing as the Papists are in case of danger But the Name of the Church will warrant such Lords to prove all such Declarations Subscriptions Oaths not only sinless but necessary to Order Peace Obedience Ministry and I think to Salvation For they make Schism Damning and such Obedience necessary to escape Schism But he hath one cleanly shift Though the Corporation Declaration be that there is no Obligation from the Covenant on me or any other person and a Man think that some are obliged by it against Schism Popery and Prophaneness and to repent of Sin He saith no Man is forced to take these Declarations Vestry Oaths c. For he may chuse and none constraineth him to be in Corporation trust or a Vestry-man and so a Minister so the Act was to appropriate this sweet Morsel of so Swearing declaring c. to themselves And to themselves let it be appropriated for me And yet when all the Corporations Vestries and Ministry are constituted as they are this is the necessary Unity But Obedience to the Church solveth all I once askt a Convocation man what were the Words of God by which this Article was proved and past in the Convocation and he could not name me any Text that perswaded the Convocation to pass it but told me Dr. P. Guning urged it so hard that they yielded to him without much contradiction I was not willing to believe that the Church of England would pass an Article of Faith against their Judgments to avoid striving with one man when in imposing it they must strive against and silence thousands and condemn most of the Reformed Churches but rather that really they contradicted him not because they thought as he And yet I was loth to think them so uncharitable as to put all Ministers to declare such a thing to be in the Word of God and never tell them where to find it Between both what to think I know not But if really Dr. G. was the Church the reverence of his Name Church shall never make me add to the Word of God or corrupt his Ordinance nor subscribe to his Book or to a Foreign Jurisdiction if he Father it on the Church The main strength of all his condemnations of us and justifications of himself is that They are the Church and our lawful Rulers and we must obey and be Sworn never to endeavour any alteration of Church Government not excepting Church depopulation by large Dioceses nor the use of the Keys by Lay Chancellors And if you ask for the proof of all this and that they are not Vsurpers nor Church-destroyers nor Subverters of Episcopacy it self nor grand Schismaticks you must be content with 1. Ipse dixit and 2. Episcopacy is ancient 3. And the people have neither an Electing or necessary Consenting Vote and yet when not only Mr. Clerkson and I but also Dr. Burnet have fully proved that for twelve hundred or thirteen hundred years the peoples Consent was requisite these great dependents on Antiquity and the Church can wash all off with a torrent of words If the Letters in the Caballa and other History be credible how great a hand had G. Duke of Buckingham in making the Church of England in his days Read but what Heylin saith of Bishop Laud's preferment and the Letters of some Bishops to Buckingham in the Caballa and judge what made the Church of England How basely do they sneak and beg of him for Preferment◠e. g. Theophilus Bishop of Landaffe is a most miserable Man if his Grace help him not to a better Bishoprick Mountagues place at Norwich was of little worth since Henry the Eighth stole the Sheep and scarce for God's sake gave the trotters as he saith in his Letter to Laud. And this was the way So the Church of England is Jure Divino made by the Civil Powers But yet a few words can prove just as he proveth all the rest that the Dean and Chapiter chuse the Bishops and not the King As Heathens made Images of the Gods and thought the Gods did actuate them so men make the Images of Bishops and Councils and some Spirits actuate them whatever they be whether those Noble Lords Knights and Gentlemen that at their death lamented that they lived Atheists and Infidels repented that as Patrons they chose Parish Church men I know not But while these Drs know that many Great Councils have decreed the nullity of those Bishops that got in by Secular help and favour and Damned the Seekers and Accepters of it and yet would perswade the Church that all Gods Word is insufficient for Universal Laws without the addition of Soveraign Councils I will regard them as they deserve and not as they expect Why answer they not my late Book of English Nonconformity The True Sum. Popery is I. The turning a National Univerglity or Catholicism of Councils Church Power into a Terrestrial Universality II. Turning Confederacy and Communion into Political Regency III. Deponing Kings and States from their Sacred office of Supream Government and sole forcible Government of the Church or Persons and things Ecclesiastical the Clergy having only the Power of the Keys Word and Sacraments to work on Conscience without corporal face Chap. XV. The first Letter to Bishop Peter Guning upon his sending me Dr. Saywell's Book My Lord I Thankfully received from you by Dr. Crowther Dr. Saywell's Book and a motion for Conference with him which I yet more thankfully accept I read over the Book presently and think it meet to give you this account of the Success I. 1. I perceive that it doth not concern me nor many if any that I converse with For it is Presbyterians Separatists Quakers and Fanaticks that he accuseth and I am conversant with few such 2. And yet the strein of his Book is such as will make Readers undoubtedly think that by Presbyterians and Nonconformists or Conventiclers he meaneth the same Persons and speaketh of the common Case of the present ejected silenced Ministers Of whom I must again and again say 1. That I have had opportunity by Acquaintance and Report of knowing a great part of the silenced Ministers of England and I know but of few of them that are Presbyterians and Judge most of them to be Episcopal Lawyers and Gentlemen indeed incline to place all the Government in the King and Magistrates 2. That in 1661. when we were Commissioned to endeavour Concord with you not only those named in the Commission but all the Ministers of London were invited by Mr. Calamy and Dr. Reinolds and Mr. 〈◊〉 and Dr. Wallis
this College of Pastors to Rule while General Councils sit or but in the intervals If sedente Concilio which of them is Supream If only between Councils have they a Legislative Power or only the Judicial and Executive If the former where are their Laws to be found that all the Church may know them And I ask all the Questions before askt of the Laws of Councils How shall we know which be Current and necessary and which are not If not then they are no Supream Rulers that have no Legislative Power 2. Who be these Men that make this College we cannot obey them till we know them Are they all the Bishops in the World or but part If but part which part and who and where shall we find them I know you will not say they are the upstart College of Cardinals nor the Roman Clergy only And I never heard of any others besides Councils that pretended to it viz. To be Universal Governours If it be All the Bishops of the World 1. Do they meet to Consent or do they not If they do and must when where how was there ever such a meeting which was no Council No you say It is per literas formatas 2. Are these Literae formatae Legislative Judicial or Executive If none of these they are no Acts of Government And I asked where shall we find them if they are our Laws If they be Judicial and Executive whither is it that the Accusers Accused and Witnesses must come to be heard speak before the Sentence was passed per literas formatas e. g. Theodoret and the rest de tribus Capitulis when it must be judged 1. Whether they wrote such words 2. What the sence was 3. Whether they were Heretical 4. Whether they repented and must we go to all the Bishops in the World one by one for tryal or be judged without being ever heard 3. I cannot imagine what can be here said unless it be that some Bishops first do the thing and then others do per Literas consent But 1. Do some Bishops first make Laws for all the World and then the rest consent or only for their own Churches By what Authority do they the first 2. Or do some Bishops try and judge a Man e. g. in this or that Country and Parish and then all the rest in the World consent that never hear them or hear of them Every Man nor any is not Excommunicated per Literas formatas by all the Bishops in the World or most 3. But it is not the Executive or Judicial Acts that our Question is concerned in but the Rule of Obedience which is a Law As it was never known that Men must not be taken in by Baptism or cast out by Excommunication till all the Bishops on Earth agree to it so no Universal Laws are extant that were made by such Letters 4. And how can this be the Rule and Test of Christianity or Church-membership or Concord when no Christians much less all can possibly know that all or most Bishops have per Literas consented to such obliging Laws 1. How can we prove that ever any went over all the World to them Drake or Candish did it not 2. And that they opened the Case aright to them 3. And that these Laws had the Major Vote 4. And that they are not forged or corrupted since 5. And that these were true Bishops themselves that did it in America Ethiopia Armenia Greece c. out of our reach 6. Yea What possibility is there of any such known Agreement when it 's known that almost all the Christian World is divided into Parties which disagree and censure one another The English Diocesans and Church differeth from the Roman and the most or many of the Reformed The Lutherans from the Calvinists The Papists from us all and from the Greek and the Greek from them and us and all from the Abassines Copties Syrians called Jacobites Nestorians c. and from the Armenians Georgians Circassians Mengrelians Russians c. How shall I and all the Ministers on Earth yea and all Christians know that all these have per Literas formatas made Laws which all must necessarily obey But if it be only the Sound Part that hath this Universal Government how can I and all Men know which and who that is Hearsay of Adversaries report will not tell us and almost all on Earth are condemned or accused by the rest or most or many And we must hear them that dwell at the Antipodes or Jerusalem c. before we judge them so far as to exclude them from the Sacred Power If it be said That it is not the making of New Laws that is done by this Collegium Pastorum all over the world but their Consent to those that Councils made I answer 1. Are they not Valid upon the Councils making them Then Councils have not Legislative Power 2. If it be left impossible to most to know which were true Councils and which are their Valid Laws when the present Assemblies have best opportunity to signifie Consent how impossible will it be to know which Councils and which Laws and in what sense are approved by all the Bishops in the World or by most And that the Votes were faithfully gathered And by whom And that the Major part are the Rulers of the Minors Will. Johnson saith That it is a General Judicial Sentence De Speciebus and not De Individuis that Councils use E. g. We Anathematize all that hold or do this or that But 1. It 's known that they Anathematized many Individuals 2. No Man can be bound by it till it fall upon Individuals Condemning Arrians proveth no Man to be an Arrian Forbidding us to hear Hereticks obligeth none not to hear him that is not proved a Heretick Judgment must be of Individuals before it can be executed He that must obey the Universal Church must be commanded by the Universal Church and must know that they command him and what they command him which is to me and to most impossible 4. William Johnsons and his Parties last Answer is That the People must Believe their own individual Pastors telling them what the Universal Church commandeth And indeed there is no other way practicable But then 1. This is but a trick to make every Pastor the Lord of our Faith and Souls on pretence of obeying the Universal Church And if this be your sense it will amount to this No man is a Christian that believeth not his Pastor telling him what the Vniversal Church commandeth 2. But I find most Teachers are as ignorant as I am who know not such Universal Authority or Laws 3. Archbishop Vsher and many other Bishops thought that General Councils were not for Regiment but Concord And he that believeth no such Governing Power cannot declare it to his Flock nor obey it 4. By this way most Christians shall be bound on pain of Damnation to believe Untruths and things contrary to what others
hath authorized a Vicarious Soveraign Prelacy before he can believe that there is a Christ that had any Authority himself 2. And he must be so good a Casuist as to know what maketh a true Bishop 3. And so well acquainted with all the World as to know what parts of the Earth have true Bishops and what they hold And is this the way of making Christians Perhaps you will say That Parents Tutors and Priests tell them what all the Bishops of the World hold as a Soveraign Judicature I answer 1. If they did Holden confesseth that the Certainty of Faith can be no greater than our Certainty of the Medium And the Child or Hearer that knoweth not that his Parent and Teacher therein saith true can no more know that the Creed or Scripture is true on that account 2. The generality of Protestants believe not an Universal-Governing Soveraign under Christ but deny it Therefore they never Preach any such Medium of Faith And can you prove that those that are brought to Christianity by Protestant Parents Tutors or Preachers are all yet Unchristened or have no true Faith 7. Why should we make Impossibilities necessary while surer and easier Means are obvious It is impossible to Children to the Vulgar to almost all the Priests themselves to know certainly what the Major Vote of Bishops in the whole World now think of this or that Text or Article save only consequently when we first believe the Articles of Faith we next know that he is no true Bishop that denieth them And it is impossible to know that Christ hath authorized a Soveraign Colledge before we believe Christs own Authority and Word But the Protestant Method is obvious viz. To hear Parents Tutors and Preachers as humble Learners To believe them Fide humana first while they teach us to know the Divine Evidence of Certain Credibility in the Creed and Scriptures and when they have taught us that to believe Fide Divinâ by the Light of that Divine Evidence which they have taught us What that is I have opened as aforecited and also in a small Treatise against the Papists called The Certainty of Christianity without Popery in which also I have confuted your way Besides what I have said in the Second Part of The Saints Rest and my More Reasons for the Christian Religion 8. I cannot by all your Words understand how you can have any Faith on your Grounds 1. You that renounce Popery I suppose take not the Popish Prelates for any part of the Soveraign Colledge 2. I perceive that you take not the Southern and Eastern Christians for a part who are called Nestorians Eutychians or Jacobites 3. I find that you take not the Protestant Churches that have no Bishops for any part for the Soveraignty is only in Bishops 4. I find that you take not the Lutheran Churches or any other for a part whose Bishops Succession from the Apostles hath not a Continuance uninterrupted which Rome hath not 5. And me thinks you should not think better of the Greeks than of such Protestants on many accounts which I pass by Where then is that Universal Colledge on whose Judging-Authority you are a Christian Sure you take not our little Island for the Universal Church I would I knew which you take for the Universal Church and how you prove the Inclusion and Exclusion 9. I find not that the Universal Church hath so agreed as you suppose of the Canon of Scripture and the Readings Translations c. Four or five Books were long questioned by many General Councils have not agreed of the Canon Bishop Cousins hath given us the best account of the Reception of the true Canon Provincial Councils have said most of this Even the fullest at Laodicea hath left out the Revâ—lations The Romanists take in the Apocrypha Many Churches have less or more than others What Grotius himself thought of Job and the Canticles I need not tell you Nor how Augustine and most others strove for the Septuagint against Jerome And if the Universal Judicature have decided the many Hundred Doubts about the Various Lections I would you would tell us where to find it for I know not § II. Your second Use of the Soveraign Power is to judge of the Sense of Fundamental Articles of Faith because the Words may be taken in a false Sense 1. This is very cautelously spoken Is it only Fundamentals that they are to expound by Soveraign Judgment How then shall we know the Sense of all the rest of the S. Scriptures And how will this end a Thousand Controversies 2. And why may not the same Means satisfie us about Fundamentals which satisfieth us about the Integrals of Religion Yea we have here far better help The first Christians Catechized and taught the Sense of Baptism before they were Baptized They and their Tutors and Preachers taught the same to their Children and so on Baptism and the Fundamentals have been constantly repeated in all the Churches of the World There are as many Witnesses or Teachers of these as there are Understanding Christians And yet must all needs hear from the Antipodes or know the Sense of a Humane Soveraign of the World before they receive them 3. Can this Supreme Colledge speak the Fundamentals plainlier than God hath done and than the Parish Priest can do Are they necessary to tell us that Christ died rose ascended because Scripture speaketh it not plain enough We know that no Words of Creed or Scripture falsly understood make a true Believer But is not that as true of a Councils Words as of the Creed And are there any Words that Men cannot misunderstand Why hath Filioque continued such a Distraction in the Churches and Councils yet end it not To say nothing of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and other such Have we a necessity of a Soveraign Judicature to be to all Men in stead of a Schoolmaster to tell them what is the meaning of Greek and Hebrew Words And could not one Origen or Jerom tell that better than a General Council of Men that understand not those Tongues I must confess that what understanding of the Words of Creed or Scripture I have received was more from Parents Tutors Teachers and Books than from Soveraign Councils or Colledge of Bishops though Dr. Holden say he is no true Believer and Catholick that believeth an Article of Faith because his Reason findeth it in Scripture and not rather because all the Christian World believeth it There is more skill in Cosmography Arithmetick and History necessary to such a Faith than I have attained or can attain I can tell E. g. by Lexicons and other Books what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth in the Creed better than how all the Bishops in the World interpret it by an Authoritative Sentence § III. Your third Work of this Soveraign Power is Authoritatively to declare what Government of the Church was delivered by the Apostles 1. As I said of Scripture we
Gods 3. Mutable Things are not of Universal Need or Use These By-Laws like those of Corporations are only the Work of particular Churches or Countries E. g. One Translation of Scripture one Metre or Tune of Psalms c. will not fit all the World that have several Languages c. Upon the whole I am more confirmed by longer Considerations 1. That to assert a Soveraign Vicarious Church-Power over all the Christian World is to make a Church which Christ never made 2. And Treasonably to set up an Usurpation of his Prerogative 3. And to plead for that which de facto never was in being 4. And to lay the Ground of heinous Schism and Persecution by prosecuting impossible Terms of Concord and Communion 5. And to make this the necessary Medium of our believing in Christ or knowing his Word and Will is to subvert the Christian Faith and Scripture 6. And as one Pope cannot possibly through Natural Incapacity Govern all the Earth in Religion one Collective and Aristocratical Soveraign of all the Bishops on Earth is so incomparably more uncapable that I wonder that any Considerate Man can believe it Pighius well tells us of the Novelty and Vanity of Heading all the Churches by General Councils 7. And if the French and the Councils of Constance and Basil and Cassander and Grotius and such Papists as set Councils over the Pope had not taken in the Pope as the ordinary Governing Executive Head to Rule by the Councils Laws they had been far more gross and incredible than the Italian Papists who prefer the Pope 8. And that Civil Government may so much easier be exercised by Officials than the Spiritual that a Civil Monarch of all the Earth is far more congruous and possible than a Humane Visible Church-Head under Christ Personal or Collective 9. That if this was the Principle from which you disputed at the Savoy and in the Convocation and from which our late Changes and the silencing of Two Thousand Ministers have been made it 's no wonder that the Effects were such But if ever we be healed it must be by other Terms and Hands R. B. Jan. 12. 1679. This Feb. 13. Being with the Bishop again he disclaimeth the Names of Supreme Summa Potestas Vicaria as Invidious and chuseth the Name of a Ruling Collegium Pastorum Ministerialium who are the Church which is the Mother which all must receive their Faith from and obey and so must know their Consent Chap. XVIII The Fourth Letter to Bishop Guning To the Lord Bishop of Ely Dr. Guning My Lord THough I intended to trouble you no more by Writing yet observing how apt you are to mistake me and because time streightened our Discourse Lest I be mistaken and consequently mis-reported I thus send you the sum of what I said to your last as far as it concerned me I. Whereas you are offended at my Applicatory Conclusion I must still say it that ☞ If these were the Principles upon which our Changes were made by your Endeavour 1661 and 1662. it is no wonder that Two thousand Ministers were Silenced and Cast out And is it more offence to you to hear what you did towards it than to them and their Flocks to suffer it Is this impartiality II. My naming Holden as saying what you say was not invidiously to intimate that you differ not from him in any thing else but to tell you that these thoughts are not new to me and that even a Papist pleading rather Historical Natural-Evidence in Vniversal Tradition than judicial Authority in this is further from the common Papists than you III. You are offended at my comparing Bishops to Kings only in this respect that they both govern only their proper Provinces and neither are Rulers of all the World And your reason is because it intimateth that Bishops rule like Kings Who can Dispute on these terms Did I not in the stating of our Question agree that it is not the Power of the Sword but only Ecclesiastical Power of the Word and Keys that we Dispute of Did I not still profess to you to speak only of this And doth comparing Princes Coactive Government with it only in the extent neither of them being over all the World contradict this or wrong you by unjust intimations IV. You take the words Aristocratical-Supream Vicarious under Christ Legislative to be invidious and you disown them 1. Because they intimate a forcing Power like Princes 2. Because Christ only is Supream But 1. It is not de nomine that we dispute but de re and I understand all this while that we had no other question to debate 2. I desired still nothing more than that you would state your assertion in your own words that I might use no other You tell me your own words are Collegium Pastorum I tell you again that nameth only the subject Matter of the Power where our question is de formâ what is their Power which we must obey You next tell me It is a College of Pastors having a Ministerial Ruling Judicial Power over the Vniversal Church I take up with your own words Only remember that before you asserted a Legislative Power of mutable Laws and now it is but judicial If so then we owe no Obedience to their Laws but to their Sentence according to Christ's Law How then is obeying them the only way of Concord But say you It is but mutable Laws that they make Answ. And are mutable Laws no Laws And is he no Legislator that maketh but mutable Laws Neither King nor Parliament will believe this But you say Canons are not Laws I thank you for that Concession So saith Grotius de Imp. sum Potest If so then they are but either Counsels or Agreements Contracts It is not de nomine that we contend A Law saith Grotius is Regula actionum Moralium More fully A Law is the signification of a Ruler's Will making the Subjects Duty If a Canon be none then Literae formatae are none And where there is no Law there is no Transgression Then no Obedience is due to the Laws of the College of Bishops And then obeying them is not the only way of Concord Authoritas imperantis est objectum formale Obedientiae you disown also the word Pars imperans I take your own Pars Regens which to me is of the same Signification as to Ecclesiastical Power Jus regendi is that which I mean by Authority and Debitum Obediendi by Subjection But I think that indeed authorized Pastors may make proper Laws e. g. At what Places and Hours to meet what Translations Version Metre and such Orders to use but only to their proper Subjects and not to all the Christian World V. You Copiously blame us for denying that Obedience to the Universal Church which we give to every single Pastor and thought that I owned no Power but Parochial I tell you still 1. I maintain that there were in the first Age and perhaps
speak for the clean contrary 4. What if we prove that Christ hath himself given the Church in the Scriptures an account of his own Institution of Church-Form and Government as much as is necessary to its Essence Unity and Salvation and that all altering Compacts contrary to this are diabolical Will Christ damn us for not breaking his Laws and serving the Devil Is it the sin against the Holy Ghost and unpardonable not to despise Christ's Laws and not to obey the Devil 5. What if we prove to him that the very Species of his Prelacy and specially of a Supreme Catholick Jurisdiction is condemned by Christ and Treason against him Are we Traytors for not being Traytors 6. What if we prove to him that according to his very Canons the Pope and Bishops that he damns us for not owning are no Bishops having no true Call and Title to that which they pretend to Will you have yet another of his Self-contradictions P. 7. I cannot but look on it as an Argument that God never intended to oblige Particular Churches to as great a dependence on other Churches as that is wherein he has obliged Subjects to depend on their own Churches because by his contrivance of things it does not follow that Separating Churches must be left as destitute of the ordinary means of Salvation on their separation from other Churches as particular Subjects are on their separation from their own Churches Abating what obligations they have brought on themselves by their own Compacts God has made them equal There is no way of judging who is in the right but by the intrinsick merit of the Cause I really believe that the true original design of those Compacts whereby particular Churches have voluntarily submitted to restrictions of their original Power was ONLY that every particular Church might have her Censures confirmed in all other Churches in reference to those who were originally her own Subjects not to gain a Power over any other Subjects but her own nor to submit to any other Power c. Alas And have Compacts by we know not who brought us all into the snare of the unpardonable sin Though Christ died for the World he saveth none but Consenters And can Men in Asia in Towns whose Names we poor Countreymen never heard of make Laws to Damn all to the Worlds end that obey them not and this without our own Consent To conclude this Gentleman hath yet an easie remedy against all this He doth indeed frequently prove if you will believe him that though you have Faith that works by Love and do all other duty that is in Love to God and Man you cannot be saved without external Communion that is subjection to this humanly compacted Catholick Church so said Pope Nicholas long ago yea and Aeneas Sylvius when Pius 2d that all other Graces and Duties will not save a Man that is not subject to the Bishop of Rome But saith this Man p. 13. They may easily avoid the danger only by returning to the Catholick Vnity Mark Catholick Vnity National Unity will not serve We grant it But what Catholick Vnity is and whether Catholick Councils with a Catholick President that hath an Antecedent Power to call and oblige them without which they are null rebellious and punishable and to whom all Power escheateth in the Intervals of Councils whether I say this be necessary to Catholick Unity or to Antichristian Church Tyranny is the doubt I will conclude this with Dr. Iz. Barrow's Theses p. 255. 1. Patriarchs are an Humane Institution 2. As they were erected by the Power and Prudence of Men so they may be dissolved by the same 3. They were erected by the leave and confirmation of Princes and by the same they may be dejected if great reason do appear 4. The Patriarchate of the Pope beyond his own Province or Diocess doth not subsist upon any Canon of a general Synod 5. He can therefore claim no such Power otherwise than upon his Invasion or Assumption 6. The Primates and Metropolitans of the Western Church cannot be supposed otherwise than by force or one of fear to have submitted to such an Authority as he doth Vsurp 7. It is not really a Patriarchal Power like that granted by the Canons and Princes but another sort of Power which the Pope doth Exercise 8. The most rightful Patriarch holding false Doctrine or imposing unjust Laws or Tyrannically abusing his Power may and ought to be rejected from Communion 9. Such a Patriarch is to be judged by a free Synod if it may be had 10. If such a Synod cannot be had by consent of Princes each Church may free it self from the mischiefs induced by his perverse Doctrine and Practice 11. No Ecclesiastical Power can interpose in the management of any Affairs within the Territory of any Prince without his Concession 12. By the Laws of God and according to ancient Practice Princes may model the Bounds of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction erect Bishopricks enlarge diminish or transfer them as they please 13. Wherefore each Prince having Supream Power in his own Dominion and equal to the Emperors in his may exclude any Foreign Prelate from Jurisdiction in his Territories 14. It is expedient for the publick peace and good that he should do thus 15. Such Prelate according to the Rules of Christianity ought to be content with his doing so 16. Any Prelate Exercising Power in the Dominion of any Prince is eatenus his Subject as the Popes and all Bishops were to the Roman Emperor 17. Those Joints of Ecclesiastical Discipline Established in the Roman Empire by the Confirmation of Emperors were as to necessary continuance dissolved by the dissolution of the Roman Empire 18. The Power of the Pope in the Territories of any Prince did subsist by his Authority and Favour 19. By the same Power as Princes have curbed the Exorbitancy of Papal Power in some Cases of entertaining Legates making Appeals disposing of Benefices c. by the same they might exclude it 20. The practice of Christianity doth not depend on the subsistence of such a form instituted by man As to Mr. Dodwell's fundamental Opinion that the Minister can have no Power which the Ordainer intended not to give him He overthroweth by it all the Reformation and all the English reforming Ministry as derived from the Roman Ordination For it 's certain that the Roman Bishops intended not to give them Power to reform or to Worship God as they have done And the Protestants are against him Saith Dr. Challoner in his Credo Eccles. Cath. p. 95. However the Priest at the Baptizing or the Bishop at the Ordination had another meaning yet the words wherewith they Baptized and Ordained being the words of Christ are to be taken in Christs meaning in as much as he which receiveth from another is to receive it according to the intention of the Principal Giver and not the Instrumental Giver He which confers Baptism and Orders as the Principal Donor
be by an undeniable Miraclâ— And hath God promised to Govern his Church by constant Miracles yea as many Miracles as there be ignorant and wicked Bishops and that through all Generations Q. 33. Doth it not require great Knowledge of History to be sure what Councils there have been and which were Orthodox and which Heretical which valid and which invalid and what they did and which side had the Major Vote And is all this Historical Knowledge necessary to Salvation in Learned and Unlearned Q. 34. Yea Is there one Priest of many that hath such certainty of such History of Councils when Writers so much disagree Q. 35. Seeing Historians are but like other men and all men are lyars or untrusty and it 's notorious that Ignorance Faction Temerity and Partiality if not Malignity hath filled the World with so much false History that except in Matters of Publick uncontradicted Evidence no man well knoweth what to believe How shall all Christians lay their Salvation on so great knowledge of History as is necessary to certainty herein Q. 36. If the belief of Councils or the College of Bishops as wide as the World be fundamentally necessary to Duty Unity or Salvation Is it not necessary that all know what are their Decrees and Laws And how can they know this when Councils and Decrees are so Voluminous and few Priests know them and when the World is yet disagreed what Canons or Laws are obligatory and what not But they contradict and condemn each others Laws Q. 37. If a Lay-man should know but one part of the Councils Decrees about Faith or Obedience will such a defective half Faith and Obedience save him or must he know all Q. 38. If you say that all this Historical Knowledge is not necessary to the Laity but they must believe herein the Priests or Bishop that is over them 1. How is this then a belief of Councils 2. What shall the poor People do that one of many hundred of them never see their Bishop much less ever spake with him 3. And are their Priests infallible herein or not Q. 39. Doth not this by the deceitful noise of the Catholick Church and Councils and a College of Bishops make every Parish Priest's word the very Foundation into which all mens Faith must be resolved And he that saith I believe the Scripture because the Church and Councils propose it or attest it and I believe that the Church and Council say it because the Priest saith it Doth he not say as much as I believe the Scripture Church and Councils upon the bare word of the Priest Q. 40. Is it not hard for the People that know their Priests to be sottish ignorant prophane drunken malicious men to lay all their Salvation on a supposed certainty that these Priests say true Q. 41. If the Parishioners know also that their Priests never read the Councils and confess that he is ignorant of them and know him also to be a common lyar Can they certainly believe the Scripture and the Councils and the Matters of Faith and duty contained in both upon the word of such a Priest Q. 42. Can they that are unlearned and never see a Bishop tell whether the Parish Priest and the Bishop say the same Or whether their Bishop be of the same Mind with the other Bishops and whether the Bishops e. g. of England be of the same Mind with the Bishops of France Spain Italy Germany Denmark Sweden c. and they of the same Mind with the Greeks c. Q. 43. Is it a Divine Faith that is resolved thus into the meer belief of Man yea of an Ignorant Priest or Prelate or but a Humane Q. 44. If we and all men had no other certainty of the Scripture but the word of such a Priest or the Decree of a Council would it be more or less certain to us than now it is Q. 45. Have none of all those Christians a true Divine Faith who are converted by Protestant Preachers who teach them to believe the Scripture upon other Evidence than a Councils word Q. 46. By what Evidence doth a Council know the Scripture to be God's Word Is it only by the Testimony of a former Council If so How did that former Council know it and so the first Council that had none before to testifie it And what use is there for the assertion of the later Council when it 's done already by a former Q. 47. Why doth not one Council determine of all that is necessary to Salvation but leave it still undone But if it be done must new ones be called to the end of the World to say the same thing over again and do that which others had done before them Q. 48. Is not the Law the Rule of Duty and Judgment and must all Christians be Judged at last by the Bishops Canon Law And seeing Sin is a Transgression of the Law and it 's harder to obey a Thousand Laws than a few Are not they the most Mortal Enemies to Christians who make them so many Laws and make Salvation so hard a work Q. 49. Seeing Christ was above three Years teaching his Apostles before he died and after his Resurrection was seen of them fourty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God and being assembled together with them commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem but wait for the Promise of the Father even the Spirit to lead them into all truth and bring all things to their remembrance and their Commission was to teach all Christians to observe whatever Christ commanded Act. 1.3 4. Math. 28.19 20. is it to be believed that yet Christ by himself and his Spirit in these Apostles did not make all the Laws that are Divine and enow for the Universal Church to observe as necessary to Salvation and Universal Concord Q. 50. Is it not enough to Salvation and Church Concord for all the Pastors of the Churches to agree 1. In preserving these Laws and Doctrines of Christ 2. And to teach the People to know and obey them 3. And to defend them against Adversaries and 4. To make them the rule of their Communion by the exercise of the Keys 5. And by their own Authority to determine of variable Circumstances of Worship such as the Place of meeting the time the translation the subject for the day c. Is there besides all this a necessity of Universal Laws for the Salvation and Concord of Believers and of a standing Soveraign Power in Priests Prelates or Patriarchs or Pope to make such Laws Q. 51. Have we not better assurance that the foresaid Apostles taught by Christ and inspired by the Holy Ghost had Authority and Infallibility for this work than we can have that Pope Patriarchs Prelates or Priests have it Q. 52. When some English Prelates and Priests tell us that he is a Schismatick that obeyeth not the Universal Church and that Schism is a damning Sin do they not
that those Popes were true Popes and continued the valid succession and were Governours of all Christian Souls whom General and Provincial Councils condemned as Simonists Hereticks Infidels Atheists or Devils Incarnate and yet that Councils are to be believed as the Proposers of our Faith § 23. VVe must believe that General Councils have Universal Jurisdiction when there are none such nor ever can be nor ever were § 24. VVe must stay for the ending of our controversies till we know that which cannot be known viz. what the Major Vote of all the Bishops on Earth Judge of them or till such Councils end them as caused them their continuance § 25. When we have such Infallible Proof of the Scripture History as we have of the former Kings and Laws of the Land by evidence of Natural certainty we must exchange it for the uncertain determination of Popes and Councils depending on their Authority Knowledge and Honesty And the Infallibility of these who in all their lives else do shew much fallibility And were either Pope or Council Infallible no man that is not Infallible himself in judging of their Infallibility and also in knowing what it is that they propose as de fide is ever the nearer an Infallible Faith § 26. They must make it necessary to us to know that the Greeks the Armenians and all oâ—her Christians who are twice as many as the Papists have some way forfeited their Authority and Credit or else how shall we know that they being the Majority are not to be believed before the Pope and his VVestern Councils § 27. They make more Cosmography and History necessary to Salvation than God made or Vulgar Heads are capable of The name of Rome is not in the Creed It is not necessary to Salvation to know that there is such a place as Rome in the World Much less to know all Countreys on Earth where Christians dwell and which of them are of this Opinion or that and which part hath the major Vote of Bishops and is to be believed If you say They are Nestorians Jacobites Greeks c. the People be not bound to know what any of these names signifie Chap. XII A humble Expostulation to the zealous Antipapists Conformists and Nonconformists whether they are innocent as to promoting Popery THIS is not written to cast on you any contempt or reproach I acknowledge that I take you for the best Ministry that any Nation on earth enjoyeth But it is to try if it may be to promote our common Repentance and to Reform the Nominal mistaken Reformation of those that have sinned by extreams which by the assumed name of Reformation have wronged God and Truth and mens Souls with the greater advantage and success But especially if it may be yet to stop such from a sinful progress that they may not ignorantly set up Popery by crying down the name and persons § I. We have not sufficiently considered how the Popes came to the Greatness that they have attained and how and by whom it is kept up I mean how much the zealous Godly Christians did and do contribute thereto 1. It was the great shame of other Churches by multitudes of Heresies Sects and Contentions that made Rome seem as a Post for those to hold by that had by turning round become so giddy that they could not stand 2. When the best Pastors were persecuted by proud Courtiers erroneous Councils factious Bishops and Arrian Hereticks because Rome had more Concord Quietness and Power they used to seek help from the Bishop of Rome in their necessity and he was ready to take the advantage by helping them to get the reputation of Supremacy So did he by Athanasius and Chrysostom and the Eastern Bishops under Valens and Constantius though Basil complaineth of the Western Bishops for minding them no more The Popes owning of Augustine and Prosper was a great help to him against Pelagius 3. When the Bishops under the Pagans had endured Martyrdom and Torments and Banishments for Christ their godly Flocks when Christianity had conquered thought none so fit for honour and power to govern and protect them as the tryed survivers And who could then be so fit And so it was first the most pious Christians that advanced the Bishops and over-advanced them And specially the Roman Bishops because very many of their Predecessors had been Martyrs and Confessors Tho' we had many able Lay-Magistrates here which Constantine had not quickly yet those that put down Bishops were glad that the Power of Institution and Induction and of Universities and Church Maintenance should be in the hands of Dr. John Owen Dr. T. Goodwin Mr. P. Nye Mr. Bridge Mr. Sydrach Sympson and such other And if the disposing of such advantages for Religion were now committed to Dissenters whom would they sooner chuse for Power therein than their most esteemed Pastors 3. When Emperors Kings and Lords did pill and oppress the poor Commons as in England in the Reign of William the Conqueror W. Rufus c. the Bishops were the only men that by the Power of the Pope were able to controul them and for the honour of their Office oft attempted it And therefore the innocent oppressed People were glad of the Pope's help and theirs to ease their yoke 4. It was the Godly People to promote Christianity and honour the memory of the Martyrs and Saints that bring in the Praying at their Graves and building Altars first and Churches after to retain the honour of their names and that carried and kept their bones and cloaths as honourable Relicts and recited their names in their Service and kept and honoured their Pictures and after prayed to them Much of that Superstition that is now most decried by us was brought by the most religious sort 5. Almost all the Societies of Fryers and Nuns Benedictines Franciscans Dominicans Carthusians Jesuits Oratorians c. have been set up by the most zealously Religious when any fancied a peculiar way of strictness the Bishops being against it they made friends to the Pope to give them his Licence to serve God in their own devised way and to have Government in their own Society without the Bishops controul And the Pope craftily granted it that they might all be his own and maintain his Power which they were necessitated to depend on So Dr. Goodwin and Dr. Owen told King Charles 2. that they desired of him but what the Religious Orders had of the Pope To serve God according to their judgment and hold their Liberty from the King and not to be under the Bishops or Presbytery More such instances I might produce to shew you by what sort of men much of Popery came in but Pride and Worldliness did most § II. I humbly desire it may be thought on whether some have not ignorantly given up the whole Cause to a Foreign Jurisdiction by their Prophetical Exposition of Christ's Epistles to the seven Asian Churches Rev. 2. 3. while they
that Popery called Antichristianity is no worse a thing than these and so honour Popery and deride its Accusers I would these named were all the wrongs that Protestants have done to the Protestant Cause of Reformation and all that they have ignorantly done for Popery But we hope our great Intercessor will procure forgiveness for them that know not what they do But must the Church still suffer so much by its zealous Friends Chap. XIII What is the Duty of all other Christians towards the Papists in order to the Promoting of the Common Interest of Christianity THough I have distinctly answered this Question in the Second Part of my Key for Catholicks I will here answer it again lest I be thought to run into Extreams or encourage the Extreams of others by all that I have here and elsewhere said And as to the chat of Ignorant Faction that will say I contradict my self I will answer it with Contempt and Pity § I. First we must lay deep in our Minds and inculcate on our Hearers the common Fundamental Truths and Duty That Love is the Second great Commandment like to the First That it is the fulfilling of the Law That he that dwells in Love dwells in God and God in him That he that loveth not his Brother whom he hath seen loveth not God whom he never saw That some love belongs to Enemies and much more to Brethren That as much as in us lyeth we must live peaceably with all Men Yea and follow Peace with all men And that these are Duties that nothing can dispense with § II. We must acknowledge and commend all that is good among them and must truly understand in what we are agreed That is They acknowledge all the same Books of Scripture to be the true Word of God which we acknowledge They own all the Articles of the Creed which we own and of the Nicene and Constantinopolitan Creed They own all the Lord's Prayer and all the Ten Commandments saving that they take the Second to be but part of the First and divide the Tenth into two They teach in their Catechisms all the Beatitudes Math. 5. and the Moral Virtues and the Graces of Faith Hope and Love c. And he that practically and sincerely doth all this hath many Promises of Salvation in the Scripture § III. We must not untruly fasten on them any Errour which they hold not nor put a false sence on their words though we may find many Protestants that so charge them nor may we charge that on the Party which is held but by some whom others contradict How far many Protestants herein mistake and rashly wrong them In the Doctrine of Predestination Free-will Grace Merits Justification Redemption Perseverance c. I have freely shewed in my Catholick Theology and End of Doctrinal Controversies And Ludovicus le Blank after others hath excellently opened § IV. We must not take all the Laity to own all that the disputing Clergy write for when they neither understand it nor consent to it § V. As we must distinguish between the Essentials of Popery and their Integrals or other Corruptions so we must not charge any with the first meerly for being guilty of many of the other Else we must call all the Greeks Moscovites Abassines Armenians c. Papists § VI. We must still distinguish between Christs Catholick Church unifyed by his own Headship only and the Papal Church unifyed by a pretended Universal Humane Head Monarchical or Aristocratical And so we must distinguish between a Christian as such and a Papist as such And we must hold Communion with Papists in Christianity though not in Popery And must grant that those that hold Christs Headship and Christianity more firmly and practically than the Pope's Headship and Popery and seeing not the Contradiction would renounce the Papacy if they saw it may be saved § VII To profess utter averseness to all Reconciliation with them and to declare them no Christians but Antichristians that must be the Objects only of our Hostility is to be Adversaries to the first mentioned Fundamentals and to the common interest of Peace and Christianity § VIII We must disclaim their opinion that say that the Church became Antichristian in 300 or 400 or 600 or any time before the Popes claimed Universal Jurisdiction over the Christian World as well as in the Roman Empire And then the Papal revolt did not reach one half the Church § IX We must not impute the Papal or Patriarchal Vices and Pride to the generality of the inferior Bishops though in Councils too many were very Factious For even a Heathen Amm. Marcellinus tells us the great difference by Papal Pride and lower Bishops Humility and Virtue § X. We must not take the Question whether the Pope be Antichrist as more necessary than it is Nor make the Decision an Article of Faith nor lay more of the stress of our difference on it than we ought For we have many far clearer Arguments against them from plainer Scriptures § XI Therefore we must not force the vulgar to Disputes with Papists without cause on forced Expositions and Suppositions that turn the Revelations against Rome Papal as the Babylon and Antichrist there meant when so much may be said and is by some Protestants to make it likely that it is but Rome Pagan that is there meant We must not give their Disputers the advantage of Challenging us before the Vulgar to name one Man for a Thousand Years and more after Christ that expounded the Revelation as we do or that took the Pope to be Antichrist § XII We must not imitate the great Novel Expositors of the Revelation that make the seven Churches to be seven States and Ages of the Universal Church and two of them to be in the World to come after the Conflagration and consequently that if by the Angel of each Church be meant the Bishop either alone or with his Elders as most think old and new Expositors then an Universal Humane Head is of Gods Institution And if that be true then Pâ—pery will be right in its Essentials and we in the wrong We must take heed therefore of the ignorant factious Zeal of over-doers that make men Papists by false opposing them § XIII We must take heed lest we make any one falshood a part of the Protestant Religion and Reformation much less many plain falshoods as too many do For when Papists find any such Untruths they will judge of our Religion in the main by those § XIV We must see that in the Form of our Government and Worship we own not Principles of Confusion and set not up our selves our devised terms of Church Admittance and Communion and thereby seem to justifie such Additions among Papists and others § XV. We must live in Love and Peace and Concord among our selves that our Fractions Sects and Errours and envious Oppositions make us not a scorn and make not Papists think that we are mad and
for such when divers Churches and Countries may have divers such Accidentals and the same Churches may change them as they see cause Q. 80. If it be not Legislation but Judicature that we must have an Universal Judge or Power for what are the Cases that they must Judge Sure it is not whether John or Thomas shall be judged capable of Baptism or of the Lord's Supper or whether he be an Adulterer a Drunkard and impenitent therein and so to be Excommunicate Must all the World come before all the World Shall Millions of Sinners be unjudged till all the Bishops of the World Judge them If it be Persons accused of Heresie Schism or any Sin that must be judged must they not be heard and their witness heard before they can be judged justly But if they Judge not of Persons but of Doctrines whether they be Heresie or not this will make no Alteration or Reformation till it be judged what persons are guilty of such Errors or Heresies And if particular Pastors on the place must judge all such persons is not the Scripture the Rule of Faith a sufficient Rule to judge of Heresie by Q. 81. If it be whole Churches that are to be judged will not a brotherly power of disowning their Communion serve without a Governing Power Had every one a Governing Power to whom the Apostles commanded with such not to eat nor bid them good speed May not Princes renounce Communion with Neighbour Princes and Nations without being their Governour Q. 82. In conclusion doth it not remain that this pretended Universal Soveraignty Monarchical or Aristocratical is the device of the Prince of Pride a Treasonable Usurpation over all Princes disobedience to Christ Luke 22. and Antichristian Usurpation of his Prerogative and a base Captivating of the Souls and Reason of Mankind to a pretended Power which common sense reason and experience fully proveth to be a natural impossibility or that which in practice no Mortal Man or College is capable of Chap. XI A Breviate of the Papists Faith and Church Doctrine both the Monarchical and Aristocratical sort § 1. WE must believe that Christ hath a Church before we believe that he is Christ the Redeemer § 2. VVe must believe that this Church is Infallible or our Governour before we can believe that Jesus is Christ and our Governour § 3. We must believe that Christ Promised Infallibility or Governing Authority to this Church before we can believe that he is Christ. § 4. We must believe that this Promise is true and shall be fulfilled before we believe the Gospel Promise of Pardon and Salvation that is before we are Christians or believe the Scripture § 5. We must believe that the Pope is Christ's Vicegerent or Vicar General or General Councils at least before we can believe that Christ is Christ. § 6. We must believe that the Words of the Apostles were Intelligible else why did they speak but their Writings are not till a General Council make them so by an Exposition § 7. We must believe that it is intelligible which be true Bishops and Councils and what is the meaning of their Voluminous Decrees but it is not intelligible what is the sense of the Scripture till Councils tell us § 8. We must believe that God is the great Deceiver of the World by sense and things sensible e. g. by sense which takes Bread to be Bread and Wine to be Wine § 9. We must believe that all men are Hereticks who deny not their senses and all that believe sense even of all the sound men in the World shall be Damned That is All that believe God speaking by things sensible § 10. We must believe that God who is the great Deceiver of the World even to and by the senses yet hath given a Spirit of Infallibility to those Popes and Prelates in Council who live in worldliness and wickedness § 11. We must believe that an unlearned Pope and Prelates who never understood the Original Tongue but are ignorant men are by Miracle in Council inspired with the gift of right expounding the Scriptures which they never studied or understood before § 12. We must believe that every Priest how ignorant or wicked soever doth by pronouncing the bare words of Consecration work many Miracles turning Bread into no Bread Wine into no Wine making quantity and other Accidents to exist without Substance c. And that he can work such Miracles every hour of the day and if he can but get into a Bakers Shop or Vintners Celler to say Mass may in malice undo the poor men when he will by turning all their Bread and Wine into none § 13. We must believe that the Roman Empire was all the Christian VVorld or that a Council General as to that Empire was General as to all the VVorld And that the Roman Emperor or the Pope called the Bishops of all the VVorld together And that the humane Primate of one Empire was Governour of all the VVorld § 14. VVe must believe that now that Empire is dissolved the Laws then made bind all the Princes and Churches on Earth viz. that a defunct power still ruleth even those that never owed them obedience § 15. VVe must believe that we in England are rightfully under a Foreign Church Jurisdiction contrary to the Oath of Supremacy § 16. VVe must believe that all Temporal Lords must be sworn to extirpate all Protestants and to perform it if able on pain of Excommunication Deposition and Damnation And that if they do not the Pope may execute this penalty of Excommunicating and Deposing them and giving their Dominion to others and may Absolve their Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance Concil Later sub Innoc. 3. Can. 1 2 3. § 17. VVe must Swear never to expound the Scripture but according to the Concordant sense of the Ancient Fathers who never expounded much at all much less ever agreed in any Exposition of them all § 18. VVe must believe that God hath given the Church that is the Pope and Councils a Power to Expound hard Scriptures and to end Controversies and that this is a great Blessing to us VVhen yet neither Pope nor Councils will give us a Commentary on the Bible or exposition of hard Texts nor will determine most of the Controversies that now trouble us § 19. VVe must believe that the Governing part of the Church is to be obeyed and Gods VVord received but by their Proposal when yet it is not known who is the Governing part Pope or Council nor which Councils be true and which but false Conventions nor can they assure us how we may ever come to know it § 20. VVe must believe those Councils to be true and credible which contradict and condemn each other and that both are in the right § 21. VVe must believe both that all Gods VVord in the Sacred Scripture is true and that Councils and Popes say Truth when they contradict it § 22. VVe must believe