not-Fundamental may overspread the Church or at least a great and considerable part of it and why Several Instances of such Errors in the Roman Church Sect. 12. That the Holy Scripture or Written Word of God is the Rule of Faith That Tradition is a necessary means whereby to attain to the certain knowledge thereof That the Multitude or weakest sort of Christians are not able of themselves without the help of others to resolve Faith aright or be rationally assur'd what the Doctrine of Salvation is Sect. 13. The harm that may arise to the Church from the belief of an Error not-Fundamental to be an Article of Faith The true stating of the difference between the Church of England and the Church of Rome The Church of England clear'd from the guilt of Schism and the Roman justly blam'd for being Cause of the separation That the joynt Concurrence of Scripture and Oral Tradition or the practical Delivery of Christs Doctrine was recommended by the Blessed Apostles to the Church the Restauration of which Concurrence 't is humbly conceiv'd would be a firm Foundation for re-uniting dissenting Christians in Matters of Religion and the Continuance of it a lasting Means for perpetuating Christianity in i'ts Ancient native Purity Errata In the Contents Sect. 6. l. 2. read for Reformed Reformation Sect. 8. l. 8. for intelligent intelligible Pag. 9. l. 15. r. but impious p. 17. l. last viz. p. 31. l. 1. r. Canonical Scripture p. 32. l. 12. 13. r. Church diffusive p. 40 l. 16. r. Efforts p. 47. l. 6. r. formerly p. 62. l. 5 6. r. to be perform'd actually p. 72. l. 7. r. so often as p. 82 l. 2. r. as prone as possible p. 91. l. 17. blot out if p 97. l. 10. r. die l. 11. r. sedet p. 99. l. 1. r. de scendit l. 13. r obtemperantibus p. 100. l. 1. r. Act. 4. 12. p. 101. l. 11. r. nascetur p. 106. l. 3. r. descendet p. 112. l. 15. r. in Scripture as l. 16. Traditionist p. 113. l. 5 r. Traditionist p. 121. l. 18. r. ascension p. 122. l. 2. r. ascension p. 126 127 r. of what validity Four are p. 128. l. 3. r. thus l. 14. those p 141. l 15 16. r. in the Creed there set forth l. 18 and that also p. 142. l. 23. r. or it is not p. 143. l. 14. r. Latins l. 19. Lombard p. 144. l. 4 5. r. ineandem nobiscum l. 8. unam eandemque fore sententiam p. 145. l. 1. r. Quaest 36. p. 146. l. 5. r. disertè dicant p. 154. l. 20. r. as an Article p. 158. l. 7. r. superfluous p. 161. l. 9. soever there be p. 162. l. 10. r. and not to be extended p. 170. l. 2. r. in such case p. 171. l. 16. r. spilt p. 179. l. 19. r. what they teach p. 183. l. 4. r. Distinction p. 192. l. 10. r. Lawd p. 195. l. 13. r. Polemical The rest are more obvious literal mistakes in appearences yeild adhear oblid'g Antichrist Writting all be it vulger with some small characters for great and great for small The several Ways of resolving Faith in the Roman and Reformed Churches With the Authors impartial thoughts upon each of them And his own Opinion at length shown wherein the Rule of Faith doth consist Which clears upon rational Grounds the Church of England from criminal Schisme and lays the Cause of the separation upon the Roman SECT I. There is a Rule of Faith instituted by God Three different Opinions among the Learned of the Roman Religion wherein that Rule doth consist SInce it was the Almighties good pleasure to create Man a reasonable Creature it became his Divine Wisdome and Goodness not only to ordain an End convenient for Him with Means likewise available thereto but also to constitute a Way by which he might come to the certain Knowledge of both for in vain would the two former have been instituted without the last when by this alone both the other were to be made known unto Him That therefore there is a Way ordain'd by God whereby to understand aright Mans Chief End and the proper Means available to it remains without dispute Yet such notwithstanding is the difference and disagreement amongst divers men of greatest Wit and Learning about it that through their subtil Arguments and eager Zeal to defend every one his espous'd Opinion not a few sober well minded Christians are brought into a Labyrinth of intricate difficulties and doubts what they ought to beleeve whilst the Controvertists in Religion though in general they acknowledge that the Gospel of Christ published to the World declares wherein Mans Felicity and the Means thereof consist yet are at perpetual discord what the particular Doctrines necessary to the Salvation of Mankind contain'd in that Gospel or Revelation be and that because they cannot agree where the Way which leads to the certain knowledge of Christs Doctrine is to be found or as for brevity 't is phras'd what the Rule of Faith is This gave the occasion of my undertaking the following Inquirie the designe whereof is to endeavour to the utmost of my power the gaining a well-grounded satisfaction in a matter of so great Concern as the Rule of Faith is to be truely known For the compassing of which longing desire of my heart I judge it the best expedient I know of to take an equal and impartial view of the differing Opinions about it that either by comparing them together I may be enabled to make a rational choice of some one before the rest or els to gather from the whole disquisition that satisfaction is not to be expected without a further enquiry to be made wherein the Rule of Christian Faith doth really consist The first difference worthy of notice about the Rule of Faith or the Way which guides and directs to the clear knowledge of Christs Doctrine is concerning the nature of the assurance which it is to afford some affirming that it ought to give infallible certainty whilsts others say that it needs only yield a Moral certitude or such an assurance as is sufficient to remove actual doubting but not which renders it impossible to be deceiv'd in Matters of Faith Those that hold the Rule of Faith to administer infallible certainty of Christian Doctrine are part of them of the Roman and part of the Reformed Church Those who maintain the contrary are only some of the Reformed As to the merit of either opinion I 'le leave the discussion of it to another place and at present shew wherein the Romish Controvertists of which there are three distinct sorts place the Rule of Faith The first sort maintain that A General Council confirm'd by the Pope or as the Proposition is rendred by some The Pope defining in a General Council cannot erre and so make The Definition of a General Council confirm'd by the Pope or The Definition of the Pope in a General Council The Rule of Faith is the same thing
their Sacred Office to use and exercise the same to it 's proper End whereas others generally speaking neither have the like aduantages to understand it as it ought to be nor so great Motives and Obligation to promote the true intendment and design thereof Have not then the People even every particular person of them it might well be ask'd a Judgement of Discretion in the choice and matters of Religion If by Judgement of Discretion be meant That they are to do nothing but what they themselves approve of I readily yield they have But in case they set themselves to oppose their own Judgement to the Judgment of the Clergy in Matters of Faith their Judgment will be found a Judgment of intolerable and pernitious Indiscretion For to make a true discovery of an Error in Faith the Rule of Faith must be well consulted and the Point in question duly apply'd to 't to be try'd by it so that if either the Rule it self be mistaken or the Thing to be regulated by it be not rightly apply'd no Doctrine concerning Faith can rationally be discover'd whether it be an Error or a Truth And 't is ridiculously absurd to think that the vulgar sort consisting of Servants Labourers Mechanicks and others generally busied and spending their days about Temporal affairs should be more sufficient and able to understand the Rule of Faith aright and to apply things doubted of thereto so as truely to determine of their rectitude or obliquity by it then the grave and Learned Prelats with the profound Doctors and others of the more Ancient and Reverend Divines who have spent many of them thirty several of them fourty and some amongst them fifty years or more in the study for the most part of sacred Learning being legally also call'd to the Office of teaching and directing Mankind as Christian by a Mission successively deriv'd from Christ and his Apostles which none besides the Clergy how Learned or Pious soever can justly make claim to Would it not then astonish and work compassion in any man of sobriety to see the ignorant people grossly misled to believe They are able enough of themselves to understand the Scripture in all things necessary to Salvation when as 't is principally for instructing them aright in those very things and keeping them to the due observance of them that they have spiritual Guides and Governours set over them by God and his Holy Church Which yet they are many of them poor souls being strangely infatuated with a conceit of their own endowments so farr from having any regard to that although they dayly see before their eyes That the wise and gracious God in the Oeconomy of his great Family the World has provided and placed several men skill'd in several things some in Civil Government some in Laws some in Physick and others in other Professions all for the Good of the Community in assisting men in those things wherein they are presum'd not to have skill enough to do the best for themselves yet nevertheless they will not understand and discern a necessity of some skilfuller then they themselves be to advise direct and order them in those grand Matters which are of more Weighty and lusting Concern to them then all the things in the whole World besides but in contradiction to the Analogy of Providence seen round about them despiseing those who ought to have the oversight of their Belief and Manners make themselves their own Instructors and Rulers in the Learning and Management of those things wherein if they finally miscarry they are ruin'd to eternity SECT XIII The harme that may arise to the Church from the belief of an Error not-Fundamental to be an Article of Faith The true stating of the difference between the Church of England and the Church of Rome Whether or no the Church of England be justly accus'd of criminal Schism That the joynt Concurrence of Scripture and Oral Tradition or the practical Delivery of Christ Doctrine was recommended by the Apostles to the Church the Restauration of which Concurrence 't is humbly conceiv'd would be a firm Foundation for re-uniting dissenting Christians in Matters of Religion and the Continuance of it a lasting Means for perpetuating Christianity in ' its ancient native Purity I have now only one Scruple more remaining concerning Matters of Faith and it arises from what my self concluded before which was That no Fundamental Error could ever get a setled footing without disturbance but should perpetually meet with opposition from Orthodox Christians so that all necessary Truths shall be continually nourish'd in the Bosom of the visible Church In which if I have said right what harm may it with great appearance of reason be ask'd can be found to accrew upon it if an Error not fundamental chance to creep into the Church and grow by degrees to be held at length an Article of Faith seeing the belief thereof is not in it's self destructive of Salvation I answer there is this great harm in it if no other that in case it at any time come to be discover'd and National Churches be thereupon divided about it one holding it to be an Article of Faith another taking it to be an Erroneous Doctrin there will unavoidably a Schism happen upon it because that Church which thinks it to be an Article of Faith will conceive herself oblig'd to deny Communion to the other which rejects it as an Error and that other which rejects it as an Error must needs judge it to be an heinous Sin to acknowledge and profess that She beleeves a Doctrin to be an Article of Faith which in truth she holds to be an Erroneous Opinion and yet without such acknowledgment and answerable profession she cannot be admitted to Communion with the Church that believes it to be an Article of Faith Upon this very account it is that the Divisions between the Church of Rome and Church of England as to the Doctrinal Part of Religion are continued for I find that the most cautious and wary Vindicators of the English Church from the guilt of Schism which the Romanists incessantly accuse her of allege in excuse for her Separation that the Church of Rome requires as necessary Conditions of her Communion the acknowledgment of some erroneous Doctrins to be Articles of Faith together with a publick profession of them which Doctrins although not damnable in their own nature because not directly repugnant to any Fundamental Truth yet would become damnable to those who judging them to be Errors should acknowledge and profess them contrary to their Judgments to be Articles of Faith To this purpose writes the learned Bishop Montague the renowned Arch-Bishop Laud Doctor Ferne Doctor Hammond the late Lord Primat of Ireland Bishop Bramhal with others whereunto I 'le add one Cantrovertist more of the present time Doctor Stillingfleet of which two last mentioned not to multiply needless quotations about a thing so well known I 'le here transcribe two Passages
It was not saith the learned Primate the erroneous Opinions of the Church of Rome but the obtruding them by Laws upon other Churches which warranted a separation Bishop Bramhals Vindication against Mr. Baxter Pag 101. This is clearly the state of the difference saith Doctor Stillingfleet between the Church of Rome and Church of England The Church of Rome imposeth new Articles of Faith to be believ'd as necessary to Salvation as appears c. But the Church of England makes no Articles of Faith but such as have the Testimony and Approbation of the whole Cbristian World of all Ages and are acknowledg'd to be such by Rome it self and in other things she requires subscription not as Articles of Faith but as inferiour Truths which She expects a submission to in order to her peace and tranquillity Thus the ingenious Doctor in his Rational account of the Grounds of Protestant Religion Pag. 54. The Church of England then by this holding nothing to be an Article of Faith but what Rome it self acknowledges to be so it 's evident That if the Church of England believe all the Articles of Catholick Faith as she professes she doth the Church of Rome does likewise the same and consequently since every Fundamental Truth is an Article of Catholick Faith that she believes all Fundamental Truths no less then the other doth So that the true and real difference between those two Churches is not about Fundamentals but Superstructures which if they be Errors or any of them as I think some of them are prov'd to be in Sect. 11. and if it were necessary others I conceive might be the imposing of them as Articles of Faith by the Romish Church layes the guilt of Schism at her door But that it ever will be granted by the Romanists while they esteem the Living Voice of the Church the Rule of Faith and hold the Council of Trent to be a true Representative of the Church that she proposes any Errors as Articles of Catholick Faith is not to be expected And that they 'l yield to change their pretended Rule of Faith there 's small encouragement yet to hope since 't is true aswell of them as of too many others what the rational Animadverter upon the Pamphlet entituled The naked Truth rightly observes That Political Authors commonly oppose those Passages in their Adversaries Books which are ready to fall of themselves and pass by those which urge and press them harder If it were not too truely so 't would be a matter of great amazement to me That Scripture and Tradition should still be cryed up one against the other and made to look as if they were at enmity when 't is manifestly clear that God at first joyn'd them amicably together in that the Blessed Apostles and Evangelists recommended the Holy Gospel or Revelation of Jesus Christ the Son of God both in Writing and by an Oral Delivery and practical Profession of it to the World designing them no doubt to go hand in hand for Instructing Confirming and Regulating Men in the Belief and Practice of Christianity till the end of all things And therefore till their joynt Concurrence be restor'd to the Church I see not what great Good we can rationally expect by Controversie whereas if due respect and regard were had to both the Issue and Event thereof would as it appears in reason to me be this That nothing father'd on Scripture could be assented to and receiv'd as a Catholick Point of Faith unless there were likewise found a practical Tradition of it in the Church nor any Doctrine be taken and held for a Catholick Tradition but what was evidently seen by the Chief of the Clergy at least to have a real Ground in Holy Writ whence the Christian Religion 't is humbly conceiv'd might be in a certain way whensoever Interest or Passion prevented not to be secur'd from Error and the Church from Schism FINIS
with that which others of them name confirming whilst both place the suppos'd infallibility in the Popes assent which assent those who call it defining think perhaps they make the Proposition more obviously denote that Prelats infallibility as exclusive of all the rest thereby SECT III. The second Opinion amongst the Romanists viz. That a General Council conciliary proceeding is infallible in Matters of Faith taken into consideration and it 's double meaning explain'd the truth of which in one of them only is here brought to the Test the certainty of it in it's other sense being left to be examin'd in other Sections THis Assertion of the Second sort of Romish Controvertists that A General Council conciliarly proceeding cannot erre in Points of Faith may be taken in a two-fold sense either as the words conciliarly proceeding include Tradition which the Traditionists say and then the meaning of it is That A General Council defining according to Tradition or the living voice of the Church cannot erre in which sense the consideration of it belongs to some following Sections Or els as they are intended only to denote the exclusion of all fraudulent and forcible ways us'd to procure the votes of the Prelats so as that the Definition of the Council being left to it's own freedom will be infallibly true although the Means preparative to it were not at all so Against That whatsoever was deliver'd to the primitive Christians by Christ and his Apostles as a Point of Faith hath been perpetually handed down from time to time without interruption till our days as such and it 's assign'd proof the indefectibility of Tradition I shall say nothing here but remit the discourse I intend upon them to another place and at present enquire Whether the present Church of Rome does indeed depend on this Maxim for the certainty of the purity of her Faith That Christs Doctrine was deliver'd to her as descending without interruption from Christ and his Apostles For if it appear upon trial made she doth not then however indefectible Tradition be it may notwithstanding fall out that new Articles of Faith may be introduc'd into the Church upon some other Ground not firm and safe such as the Traditionists will I know grant That the Definition of a General Council not founded on Oral Tradition but on this Presumption That the Bishops effectually proceeding to define are immediatly inspir'd from Heaven is And that the Roman Church does not rely on the mentioned Maxim for the certainty of the purity and uncorruptedness of her Faith I have somthing which seems considerable and of moment to alledge in proof It will not I presume be deny'd That Cardinal Bellarmin and the learned Romish Controvertists more generally taken notice of after him ever since the Reformation till Rushworths Dialogues came to light for all that they made it their business to resolve Faith according to the belief and practice of their Church did not conclude and averr Tradition to be the alone safe Means of conveying Christs Doctrine to the knowledge of succeeding Ages And if such great Lights among the Roman Clergy mistook the Rule of Faith how can we reasonably think that the inferiour Pastors and Laics in their time knew it aright And if they knew it not neither could they rely on it as such For although it were granted which some say that Bellarmin himself and all the learned Clerks of the Roman Church no less then the other Clergy and Lay-men did practically rely on Tradition in as much as they were Orally taught their Religion by the preceding Generation and that again by the next before it and so still backwards one Age of another ever since the very first beginning of Christianity yet unless they also knowingly did it when once they came to make enquiry upon what stedfast Ground the Christian Faith was to be embrac'd they would no longer rest upon the instruction they had when they first in their younger years believ'd if so be upon search made they conceiv'd as it seems the chiefest of them besides many more if not the generality did that the certainty of Faith was not sounded on Oral Tradition their first Instructor in it but on something els Yea I think I shall not mistake the truth if I say that it was not the private opinion of some great Doctors and their followers only but the sense of the Council of Trent it self also That Faith is not resolv'd into Tradition as it 's adequate Rule whilst in consulting the first Decree of the fourth Session of that Council I find two Passages which seem to make it out The former of them is this Sacrosancta Oecumenica Generalis Tridentina Synodus c. perspiciens hanc nempe Christianam veritatem Disciplinam contineri in Libris scriptis sine Scripto Traditionibus quae ex ipsius Christi ore ab Apostolis acceptae aut ab ipsis Apostolis Spiritu Sancto dictante quasi per manus traditae ad nos usque pervenerunt Orthodoxorum Patrum exempla secuta omnes Libros tam veteris quám novi Testamenti cùm utriusque Deus sit Author necnon Traditiones ipsas tum ad Fidem tum ad Mores pertinentes tanquam vel ore tenus a Christo vel à Spiritu Sancto dictatas continuâ successione in Ecclesia Catholica conservatas pari pietatis affectu ac reverentiâ suscipit ac veneratur The latter Passage closeth up the Decree thus Si quis Libros ipsos integros Scripturae scilicet cum omnibus suis partibus prout in Ecclesia Catholica legi consueverunt in veteri vulgata Latina Editione habentur pro Sacris Canonicis non susceperit Traditiones praedictas sciens prudens contempserit anathema sit Omnes itaque intelligant quo ordine via ipsa Synodus post jactum Fidei Fundamentum sit progressura quibus potissimùm Testimoniis ac Praesidiis in confirmandis Dogmatibus instaurandis in Ecclesia Moribus sit usura In both these Passages Scripture and Apostolical Traditions are plainly contradistinguish'd as equally relating some way or other to Christian Faith and Manners And although in the former place they seem to be principally oppos'd as the Written and unwritten Word of God yet not without this apparent intimation also that as the Books or written Words call'd Scripture leade to the sense or Doctrine contain'd in them so likewise the unwritten words wherein Apostolical Traditions are taught guide to the meaning couch'd in them so that as Scripture and Traditions taken in the former sense are held by the Council to be equally the Word of God so are they moreover in the latter sense held to be equally significative and expressive of the Doctrine of Salvation delivered by them But in the latter rehearsed place of the Decree Scripture and Traditions are chiefly to be understood of written and unwritten words directing to the knowledge of the Objects of Faith as appears