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
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
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
except two Churches for the second Age and more no Bishops distinct from Archbishops but Parochial and I described them at large 2. But though Cyprian and the Carthage Council said Nemo nostrum se dicit Episcopum Episcoporum yet I deny not such as may be called Archbishops Would you but restore Parish Churches or at least make true Discipline a practicable thing I should never quarrel against your Government 3. I still tell you that I am for Councils and that as large when requisite as they can well be made And Pastors there agreeing oblige us to obey their true Authority far before a single Pastor's For it is Authoritas Doctoris and it is Discipuli Obedientia that is due And a Teacher's Authority is founded in his Credibility and that on his Skill Oportet discentem credere And a thousand Historians Philosophers Physitians agreeing oblige me to greater belief than a single one And a Dissenters singularity obligeth me to suspition and suspension of my belief Besides that God bindeth us to do his work in as much Love and Concord as we can And the Canons or Agreements of Councils when Just do determine the Matter of that Concord 4. But that which I still repeat to you is that I deny the being of any such Church as you tell me I must necessarily obey That is one Ruling Ministerial College of Pastors over the whole Christian World I remember no Protestants that own such a thing but you and some such of late Mr. Thorndike and Mr. Dodwell do imply it but they speak not fully out What an unedifying way of Discourse is it for you so Copiously to call out for our Obedience when we only desire you to prove that there is any such Governing College to obey I deny the subject of your Question and you largely prove the Predicate If you would spend many hours to tell me I must obey Gabriel the Angel as the Ruler of this Kingdom I only beg of you to prove that he is such a Ruler and then to tell me how I shall know his Mind will your Exhortation to Obedience profit me VI. Your Copious instances of difficult Texts of Scripture that need a sure Exposition are no Proof to me that Ergo There is a College of all the Bishops on Earth that must be the Expositor I told you the Eunuch Act. 8. was not so resolved of the sence of Isai. 53. It was not the Ancient way A single Teacher may resolve a Doubter by Expository Evidence An agreeing Provincial or National Council may do more without knowing the Mind of all the World And many Texts will be difficult when all the World have done their best VII But you urge that no Scripture is of private Interpretation A. 1. All is not Private Interpretation which is made by Persons Pastors or Councils which are not a College authorized to Rule all the Christian World or Church If it be 1. I confess I never received one Article of my Faith or Exposition of one Text of Scripture aright For I never believed one of them upon the Authoritative-Ruling-Judicial-Vniversal Power of all Bishops on Earth as an authorized College 2. And I know not one Man living then that expoundeth not Scripture by Private Interpretation 3. And I know not that any one these Fifteen hundred Years have not done the same 2. And it is certain that there is no Commentary on the Scripture yet written by the Universal College of Bishops And it 's harder to deliver it down by Memory than by Writing Therefore all Scripture is in this sence of Private Interpretation yea such Councils as are called General have expounded little more than the Articles of the Creed with sad dissention as to their Votes But I confidently think that you follow a wrong Exposition of the Text and that it speaketh not of an Efficient Interpretation but an Objective a Passive and not an Active Q. d. you must not interpret Scripture Prophecies narrowly and privately as if they spake but of such or such a private Person that was but a present typical object of them For holy Men spake as moved by the Spirit which looked farther and meant Christ to come e. g. you know how many Prophecies are meant of David and Solomon proximately and of Christ ultimately And you know what Grotius thinks of the proximate sence of A Virgin shall bring forth a Son And of Isa. 53 c. which yet ultimately by the Holy Ghost is meant of Christ and whether the Prophet himself knew it always many doubt Josias or Jeremy may be meant as types and yet Christ Principal as typified when David saith My God why hast thou forsaken me They pierced my hands and my feet They divided my garments among them and cast lots for my vesture c. and so many Texts cited by St. Matthew these are to have no Private Interpretation as of the private Persons only the first Objects for the Holy Ghost intended them to be Prophecies of Christs when you bring me any Literae formatae from all the Bishops on Earth for another sence the reverence of their Concord will do much to make me forsake this Just so the Papists and too many others distort that 1 Tim. 3.15 which I wonder that I heard not from you when the Text plainly calleth the Church The House of the living God and telleth Timothy how to behave himself in it as a Pillar and Basis of the Truth it is but putting The Pillar for a Pillar and then saying that it is not the title of Timothy but of the Church and so it becometh useful to some mens Opinions Therefore still that which I am more confirmed in by your failing to prove your Affirmative is That there never was instituted and never was existent and is not now existent in the World any one Ecclesiastical Ruling Persona Collectiva Civilis or Governour authorized by Christ to Rule under him all the Christian World that is all the Church by Legislation and Judgment or either of them and to Constitute the Vniversal Church visible as one by relation to that One Governour Especially that all the Bishops on Earth Governing per literas formatas never were nor are such a Power nor yet as Congregate in an Universal Council If such a College of all Bishops on Earth ruling all the Christians on Earth by Consent be the Church which you mean that all must obey that will have Concord I say There is no such Church on Earth nor ever will be before the Day of Judgment After all this sure you cannot mistake the Question 1. It is only of an Ecclesiastical Power by the Word and Keys 2. It is not whether all Bishops ruling by Parts in their several Provinces and keeping Concord in convenient Meetings or Councils may be said to Govern all the Church as all the Magistrates in England Govern all England in Subordination to the King But it is of One Persona Ecclesiastica
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
the Quini Sextum at Trull forbid Adoring by genuflexion on any Lords Day c. And no General Council hath revoked it but above a Thousand Years after it wore out by degrees in most Churches And yet Thousands of Christians are here to be denied Sacramental Communion if they keep these Canons even in the reception of the Eucharist and Hundreds yea Thousands of Christ's Ministers shall be silenced ejected and ruined if they will not Assent and Consent so to use them How many Canons in the Six Councils can I name which do not now bind us § 13. As to the work of Councils and Bishops named by you I. As to our receiving the true Scripture from an Universal Church-Governing Authority 1. Paul's Epistles were received otherwise Yea there is no mention of any part of the New Testament that was not received till such Universal Government required it 2. If I must first know the said Church Authority before I receive the Scripture how shall I know it Not by the Scriptures for that is supposed yet not received If by the Assertors Authority that is to know they have it because they have it which is the Question If by some fore-known Character of Infallibility what is it unless with Knot you come to the Miracles of the present Church I know not what can be said 3. But is not the common Protestant way which you call Chillingworth's much surer 1. VVe first receive the Matter of Fact Historically that such Persons were and wrote such Books and did such Deeds from the Concurrent Testimony of all Credible VVitnesses some Enemies some Hereticks the generality of Lay-Christians Presbyters that in all Churches received and used them and Bishops also as credible entrusted Keepers of these Records As we know the Laws of the Land by Judges Lawyers People and all that make up a full Historical Certainty and not from some fore-known Universal Governing Bishops Judicial Sentence 2. And the Matter of Fact being known by certain Historical Evidence I have so largely shewed how the rest is known in my Reasons of Christian Religion and Life of Faith c. that I will not repeat it Do you think that most or any Christians before they received the Scriptures did first otherwise know that all the Bishops on Earth are by God authorized to be a Supreme Collective Sovereign to the Church and to judge infallibly which are the true Scriptures for all the People and that they are now most of them true Bishops c. Which way are all these things to be known We deny not that Ministers are by Office entrusted to keep expound and preach the S. Scriptures But we use against the Papists herein to distinguish the Authority of a Teacher or Embassador from the Authority of a Judge and the Authority of an Official limited Judge in proprio foro from that of an Universal Judge to all the World Indeed it is commonly granted that it is proper to the Law-makers to judge of the sense of their own Law so as Universally to oblige the Subjects For it is part of Legislation it self the sense of the Law being the very Law Else Judges might make us what Law they please by expounding the Words as they please But the Power of Judicatures is limitedly to expound and apply the Law only to the decision of particular Cases that come before them If the Question be Whether our Statutes were really made by those Kings and Parliaments whose Names they bear And are not altered or corrupted since How shall we be sure By a Natural Certainty from such Concurrent Testimonies as cannot be false viz. 1. The Judges have still judged by them and 2. The Councellors plead them 3. Justices and all Officers execute them 4. All the People hold their Estates and Lives by them and stand to the Determination made according to them 5. The Records attest them And it is not possible were they forged or corrupt but that the Interests of Multitudes would have led them to plead that and appeal from the Corruption And yet none of these named are Supreme Governours of all the Kingdom who thus Historically assure us 4. It may be questioned What is the Law of Nature And it is known much by the Agreement of all Mankind and that is known Historically But neither of them is known by any Humane Soveraign-Authority appointed to Govern all the World And so it is in the present Case The Agreement of all Christians Ministers and People Friends and Adversaries of contrary Opinions and Interests contending against each other about the Rule of their Expositions is a full Historical Evidence of Fact when no considerable Contradiction even of Jews or Heathens is made against it 5. It is notorious 1. That regularly our first Reception both of Creed and Scripture is by Gods appointment to be by Children from their Parents before ever they hear a Preacher Deut. 6. and 11. Thou shalt teach them thy Children lying down and rising up c. And God will bless his appointed Means Timothy learned the Scripture when he was a Child If you say Parents received it first from the Church I answer Our Parents regularly were to receive it as we did even from their Parents and they from theirs and so on to those that had it from the Apostles or first Preachers And all Parents are not a Colledge of Sovereign Rulers of all the World 2. And private Christians by Conference convert many 3. And those that have not their Faith either of these ways usually have it by the teaching of particular Presbyters where they dwell And yet none of these are the Collective-Soveraign to all the Christian World any more than Tutors in Law Physick or Theology are Three and twenty Years ago I read most that you say in a Paris Doctor H. Holden's Analys S. fid who yet though mixt with injurious passages against the S. Scripture acknowledgeth that it is by such an Universal Consent of all Christians Lay and Clergy that we receive the Scriptures that it is a Natural Historical Evidence that the Matter of Fact is resolved into and not of Supernatural Infallibility by Authority 4. And when Vinc-Lirinensis turneth us to quod ab omnibus ubique semper receptum est and the Papists that go with Holden lay most on the Consent of all Christians they never thought that the Laity through all the Christian World are one Universal Collective Soveraign Nor do you think so of all the Consenting Priests while you appropriate this Collective-Soveraignty to the Bishops 6. I would know whether it be only the Scripture or also our Christianity and Creed which must be received as from a Soveraign Church-Power If you say it 's only Scripture why may we not receive the Scripture otherwise if we may otherwise receive our Christianity Creed and Baptism But I doubt not but you will say It is both If so then a Child or Man must know and believe that Christ
Preach meer desperation to all that have not more knowledge than I have who cannot possibly find out a Governing Universal Church nor its Laws though I would willingly find it and obey it Q. 53. Do they not Preach common desperation who say that Schism is a damnable Sin and he is in that guilt who suffers himself to be Excommunicated by Prelates for not obeying them in any unsinful condition of Communion as H. Dodwell speaketh Do not such Carnifices animarum make it necessary to Salvation to know all the unsinful things in the World which a Prelate may impose to be unsinful And is any man on Earth so Skilful How many indifferent things are there which the wisest man may doubt whether they be indifferent Of old it was thought enough to know the few things which God made necessary and now these Tormenting Uniters make it necessary to know the multitude of things indifferent to be such Q. 54. Must we needs know what sense perceiveth by the credit of a General Council or all the Bishops of the World As whether I see the Light or Colours What taste my Meat hath c If not why may I not take Bread to be Bread and Wine to be Wine on the credit of my senses though the Bishops or Council say the contrary Q. 55. Must I have the Authority of a Council or College of Bishops to believe that there is a God and that he is most Great and Wise and Good most Holy Merciful True and Just or to know that there is a Life to come and the Soul Immortal or that men must not hate the Good and love the Evil as such nor live in Murther Theft Adultery Perjury c. Doth not the Law of Nature bind men without a Council of Prelates And can they null that Law by their pretended Soveraignty Q. 56. Must every man have the Sentence of a General Council or College as wide as the Christian World to satisfie him of the truth of Christianity before he is Baptized and made a Christian Q. 57. Must we know what the Council or spacious College saith before we believe the Creed Lord's Prayer and Ten Commandments or did the ancient Christians receive them only on such Authority Did not every Baptizer expect a Profession of the Creed Q. 58. Was not the Bible received before there was a General Council Q. 59. Have not Councils differed about the Canonical Books of Scripture See Bishop Cousins of the Canon Compared with the Council of Trent Q. 60. Must we have new Councils to deliver us again the same Creed and Bible Q. 61. Is it not a reproaching of Christianity to tell the World that after 1691 Years it is not yet fully known what it is but we must have new Councils to tell it us and to make it up Q. 62. Did Councils only receive the old Apostles Creed when they made so many new ones or added so many Articles Q. 63. Was the Primitive Church of the same Species with the present Romish and Imposing Church when he was then a Christian who profest belief of the Creed as the Christian Symbol and to desire according to the Lord's Prayer and Practise according to Christ's Commands And now so many other things are made necessary hereto Q. 64. Do not those men deal falsely who subscribe the 39 Articles of the sufficiency of the Scripture as to all things necessary to Salvation and yet say that it 's necessary to Salvation to obey the Bishop of the place in all unsinful things and consequently to Believe them all to be unsinful Q. 65. Is it by the Divine Authority of a Council or Mundane College of Prelates that we know which are the true Writings of Ignatius Irenaeus Clemens R. Alex. Tertullian Cyprian Hierom Augustin c Or do their Critical Writers send us to the College or Council to know If not why may not the Canon of Scripture be known yea much better by meer Historical Tradition and inherent Evidence Q. 66. Is it not by History and not Church Power that we know what Popes have been at Rome what Councils have been called and what they decreed And may not the same way secure us of the Matter of Fact about the Scripture Q. 67. Hath any Council or College yet Decreed which are the true and current Copies of the Original of the Scripture and which of the various Lections are true If they had agreed but of the vulgar Latin would Sixtus 5th and Clemens 8th have Published Editions so vastly different If they never did it yet when will they do it Q. 68. Did ever Council or College determine which is the truest Translation Q. 69. Did ever Council or College give the Church a Commentary on the Bible Q. 70. Did they ever write a Decision of the multitudes of Controversies about the meaning of several Texts and the multitudes of Doctrines which are yet controverted among Papists themselves and all the World Q. 71. Is it a Satisfaction or a gross Cheat to tell us of a necessary Church Power to Expound Scripture and Judge of Controversies who yet will not do it but leave all unexpounded and undecided Q. 72. Was Gregory Nazianzen a Fool that spake so much of the hurt that Councils do and resolved never to go to more Q. 73. Can I know that Pope or Council have Authority given them by Christ before I believe that Christ is Christ and had Authority himself Q. 74. Can I know that Christ's Promise to Pope Council or Prelate is true before I know that the Promise of Justification Adoption and Salvation are true that is Before I am a Christian Q. 75. Can I believe the Promise of Pardon and Salvation or the Promise made to General Councils or Prelates without knowing the meaning of those Promises And can I believe the Churches Power from God without believing the Promise of it And if I can understand all these Promises without a Council why may I not understand more And how then do I receive all Scripture from a Council Q. 76. Do those that Preach to convert Infidels in Congo China Japan Mexico among Turks c. Preach first the Authority of General Councils or a Mundane College as the Primum credendum upon whose credit Christianity is to be received Hath this been the way to Convert the World Q. 77. If Paul curse an Angel from Heaven if he bring another Gospel and Paul charge Timothy to see that men Preach no other or new Doctrine must there be Councils or a College to make either a new Gospel or a new Doctrine or Universal Law Q. 78. If men were saved without believing the Canons and Decrees of Councils before they were made even by simple Christianity is it not necessary Mercy to let men be so saved still Q. 79. If it be not a new Gospel but mutable Accidents which the Church Laws do determine of what need there an Universal Power or Soveraignty or an Universal Law
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
the King to be a Heretick But Protestants deny that any Council hath a Judicial Power so to judge him though all Men have a Discerning Power to judge with whom they should hold Communion But if our Defenders of a Forreign Power say true then the Universal Judge Pope or Prelates may Judge and Excommunicate Kings who they think deserve it And if so not only Justice but Humanity requireth that such Kings be first heard speak for themselves and answer their Accusers Face to Face And this can seldom be well done by proxy as the Prelates will not Excommunicate the Proxies or Advocates only And must all Emperors and Kings travel no Man knows whither or how far to answer every such accusation and that at the Bar of a Priest that 's Subject to another Prince perhaps his Enemy And if it be at an Universal Council the King of England may be Summoned to America or Constantinople at nearest if they must be indifferently called together XVIII The Church of England is not for Popery but against it But the Doctrine of an Universal Church Soveraign under Christ is Popery by the Confession of Protestants and Papists I. Protestants ordinarily rank the Papists into these sorts differing from each other 1. Those that place the Universal Supream Power in the Pope alone which are most of the Italians that dwell near him 2. Those that place it in a Pope and General Council agreeing which are the greatest number 3. Those that place it in a General Council as above the Pope especially if they disagree 4. Those that place it in the Universal Church real or diffusive See Dr. Challoner in his Crede Ecclesiam Catholicam describing these four sorts of Papists II. And the Papists themselves number all the same differences as you may see in Bellarmine at large Of the first Opinion is Valentia in Thom. To. 3. Disp. 1. p. 7. § 45. and divers others both Jesuits Friars and Seculars And Albert. Pighius hath written an unanswerable Book against the Supremacy of Councils But Bellarmine himself saith of this way Vsque ad hanc diem quaestio superest etiam inter Catholicos Lib. 2. de Concil c. 13. And they that have different Soveraigns have different Churches Of the second Opinion are the greatest number of their Doctors Of the third Opinion for a Councils Supremacy above and against the Pope in case of disagreement were the Councils of Constance and Basil And saith Bellarmine Joh. Gerson Petr. de Alliaco Card. Cameracensis Jacobus Almanius Card. Nicol Cusanus Card. Florentinus Panormitanus Toslatus Abulensis and multitudes more with Oviedo Okam c. and the Parisians and French Church And the Pope and Jesuits will not say that all these are Protestants or none of the Roman Church And the Church of England never took them for any other than Papists XIX The small Book called Deus Rex which is approved by the Church of England may give the Reader satisfaction herein XX. The common strain of the most approved Doctors of the Church in their Licensed Books against the Papists disclaimeth all Forreign Jurisdiction of Pope or Prelates 1. Bishop Jewel I before cited 2. Bishop Bilson is too large to be recited Of Christian Subj p. 229. To Councils saith he such as the Church of Christ was wont by the help of her Religious Princes to call we owe Communion and brotherly Concord so long as they make no breach in Faith and Christian Charity Subjection and Servitude we owe them none See more p. 270 271 272 273 c. of the Errours and Contradictions of General Councils and how the major Vote obligeth us not to follow them And pag. 233. The Title and Authority of A. Bishops and Patriarchs was not ordained by the Commandment of Christ or his Apostles but the Bishops long after when the Church began to be troubled with Dissentions were contented to link themselves together in every Province to suffer one to assemble the rest Pag. 261. The Bishops speaking the Word of God Princes as well as others must yield Obedience But if Bishops pass their Commission and speak beside the Word of God what they list both Prince and People may despise them 3. Dr. Fulke on Eph. 1. § 5. sheweth that the Church hath no Head but Christ and no man can be so much as a Ministerial Head 4. Dr. Reynolds against Hart proveth that none but Christ can be the Head of Government any more than the Head of Influence 5. Dr. Whitaker against Stapleton de sacra Script pag. 128. He sheweth his Ignorance as worthy to sit among the Catechumens that instead of Believing that there is a Catholick Church puts believing what the Catholick saith and believeth sic tu ut novam tuam fidem defendas nâ—vos articulos condis etiam non haeresis sed perfidiae Magisteres I believe that there is a holy Catholick Church but that I must believe all that it believeth and teacheth I believe not Augustine appealed from the Nicene Council to the Scripture We receive not the Baptism of Infants from the Authority of the Church but from the Scripture And pag. 103. he sheweth that Councils have erred and corrected one another and are more uncertain than the Scripture And pag. 50. The Peace of the Church is better secured by referring all to the Scripture than to the Church Pag. 501. The Catholick Church in the Creed is invisible and known only by Faith 6. See Bishop Hall's No Peace with Rome and his Letter to Laud. It is tedious to cite all in Willet Slater Prideaux Abbot Marton Crakenthorp Challoner White and the rest to this purpose It is most notorious that the Church of England was against all Forreign Jurisdiction of Pope or Prelates as over this Land To cite a multitude of such Testimonies would but needlesly swell the Book and weary the Reader Chap. II. The whole Kingdom and Church is sworn against all Forreign Jurisdiction and all alteration of Government in Church and State And ought not to be stigmatized with PERJURY § 1. THat the whole Church and Kingdom is under such Oaths is visible I. The Oath of Supremacy before cited against All Forreign Jurisdiction is put upon all the Land II. The Oath called Et caetera 1640. is against Change of Government and was taken by many III. The Act of Uniformity obligeth the whole Ministry to subscribe against all endeavours to alter the Government IV. The Oxford Act of Confinement sweareth all Nonconformists and more never to endeavour any Alteration of Government in Church or State V. The Vestry Act sweareth all the Parish Vestries to the same VI. The Corporation Act sweareth all the Cities and Corporations of England to the same that is All in Power and Trust as to Government VII The Militia Act sweareth all the Souldiers of the Land to the same So that it is undeniable that all the Kingdom is sworn never to endeavour any Alteration of Government in Church or
Nice 1. Const. 1. Eph. 1. Chalced. Const. 2. de tribus Capitulis Const. 3. against the Monothelites III. You say that These six things are the Governing Acts of this Chief Power 1. To judge which are the true Books of Scripture and the true Copies and Readings 2. To judge what is the sence of the Fundamentals Baptism Creed whose words misunderstood will not save any 3. To judge and declare what is the true Church Government instituted by Christ and his Apostles or delivered by them 4. To judge and declare what are the instituted Ordinances e. g. Confirmation as it is a giving of the Holy Ghost by Imposition of Hands and not only an owning of our Baptismal Covenant which we do in every Sacrament and so of other Ordinances 5. A Judicial Power not of all individual Cases but that those e. g. that hold or do this or that be Excommunicate 6. A Legislative Power to make alterable Canons or Orders of the Church Vniversal This is the sum of all your Explicatory Discourses To which I answer § I. To your proofs that such a Universal Governing Church there is instituted 1. To Isai. 60.12 I say 1. It is not safe stretching dark Prophetical Texts farther than we can prove they are intended The New Testament plainlier tells us the Church State and Power than the Old 2. The Universal Church hath not expounded the Text whether it speak of the state of the Jews after the Captivity or of the State of the Catholick Church now or of the more Blessed State of it at the last when it is more perfected Therefore how are you sure that you have the true sence of it without the Churches Exposition 3. The words indeed are nothing for a Vicarious Soveraign Power Every Political Body is essentiated by the Pars imperans and the Pars subdita Christ is the only essentiating Pars imperans in Supream Power Christ then is the Prime part of the Church The word Church then is not put for Christ alone but for the Society consisting of King and Subjects and sometimes for the Subjects alone It 's oft said that many Nations served the Israelites we say many Countreys were subject to the Romans the Medes Persians Greeks Turks and we do not mean that either the Turkish Roman Persian c. Common Subjects did govern all these Nations nor that their Bashaws Judges Magistrates c. as one Persona Politica in summa potestate ruled them by a Major Vote If the King will say that all the Corporations in Middlesex shall be under London or obey or serve it Who would feign such a sense of it as to say that there must be therefore some Power to rule them by a Vicarious Supremacy beside the ordinary Government or that all the City must Govern by a Major Vote The sense is plain As we all 1. Obey the King as the Universal Constitutive Head 2. And the Judges Justices Mayors as ruling under him per partes in their several Places 3. And we serve all the Kingdom as we serve its common good which is the finis regiminis So other Countries served the Romans Greeks Turks c. And so all Kingdoms should serve the Church or Kingdom of Christ that is 1. Christ as the only Head and Universal Governour 2. All his Officers as particular Governours in their several Limits and Places but none as Rulers of the whole 3. And the bonum Commune or all the Church as the End of Government And how can we feign another sence § 2. To your second Proof I answer 1. The 70 Disciples were Christ's constant Attendants as his Family with whom he was to Eat the Passover 2. We all grant that none have Power to Celebrate the Eucharist or Govern the Church but the Apostles and those to whom the Spirit of Christ in them did Communicate it But we say that they Communicated it to the Order of Presbyters as I thought all had Confessed as some Councils do 3. The Apostles were not appointed as one Supream ruling College to give the Sacrament by their Votes to all the World but each one had Power to do it in his place Nor did they Ordain only as a College by such Vote as Vna persona Politica but each one had Power to do it alone Nor did they write the Scriptures as one Collective Person by Vote but each one had the Spirit and Power to do it as Paul did c. nor did they sit on one Throne or had the promise so to do to Judge the Tribes of Israel as one College by Vote but to sit on twelve Thrones Judging the twelve Tribes as under Christ the only Universal Head and Governour § 3. To your third I answer 1. I answered to that Act. 15. in my last to you 2. Paul and Barnabas had the same Infallible Spirit and had before said the same against the keeping of Moses Law But 1. Recipitur ad modum recipientis No wonder if among those that quarrelled with Paul the Consent of those that had received Christ's Mind from his own Mouth and Spirit did better satisfie the doubtful than one Man's word alone 2. And Christ's Work was to be done in Unity § 4. II. As to the Seat of this Power I answer 1. All the true Bishops of the World Govern the particular Churches as Kings Govern all the Kingdoms of the World under God one Universal Monarch But there is neither one Universal Monarchical Aristocratical or Democratical Soveraign Civil or Ecclesiastical under Christ But each hath his own part § 5. 2. I have shewed the impossibility of our judging of the Major Votes at our distances in most controverted Cases § 6. 3. And I have where I told you proved that there never were must or will be true Universal Councils much less are such the standing Governours of the Church But in Cases of need such as can well do it should come to help each other by Council and Concord without pretending to Universal Governing Power § 7. 4. 1. Who called them to Nice Ephesus Chalcedon Constantinople c. out of the Extra-Imperial Countries 2. Who shall call them now out of the Empire of the Turk Abassia the Mogul Tartary and the rest 3. If calling Men make the Council Universal though they come not is it a Council if none come or how many must it be to ascertain us that it is Universal Hath the Pope the Calling Power or who is it and how proved that they that obey it not may be unexcuseable § 8. 5. I have told you how unable I am to know what the Major part of all Christians or Bishops in the World receive save only by uncertain fame saving that while I know otherwise what is necessary truth I know that they are not the Church that receive it not whoever they be I am a Stranger to Abassia Armenia Georgia India Russia Mexico c. And what if I never knew that there are such