this often hapned I think S. Austin is the chiefe Argument and Authority we have for the Assumption of the Virgin Mary the Baptism of Infants is called a Tradition by Origen alone at first and from Salmeron disput 51. in Rom. him by others The procession of the holy Ghost from the Sonne which is an Article the Greek Church disavowes derives from the Tradition Apostolicall as it is pretended and yet before S. Austin we heare nothing of it very cleerly or certainly for as much as that whole mystery concerning the blessed Spirit was so little explicated in Scripture and so little derived to them by Tradition that till the Councell of Nice you shall hardly find any form of worship or personall addresse of devotion to the holy Spirit as Erasmus observes and I think the contrary will very hardly be verified And for this particular in which I instance whatsoever is in Scripture concerning it is against that which the Church of Rome calls Tradition which makes the Greeks so confident as they are of the point and is an Argument of the vanity of some things which for no greater reason are called Traditions but because one man hath said so and that they can be proved by no better Argument to be true Now in this case wherein Tradition descends upon us with unequall certainty it would be very unequall to require of us an absolute beliefe of every thing not written for feare we be accounted to slight Tradition Apostolicall And since no thing can require our supreme assent but that which is truly Catholike and Apostolike and to such a Tradition is requir'd as Irenaeus sayes the consent of all those Churches which the Apostles planted and where they did preside this topick will be of so little use in judging heresies that besides what is deposited in Scripture it cannot be proved in any thing but in the Canon of Scripture it selfe and as it is now received even in that there is some variety And therefore there is wholy a mistake in this businesse for when the Fathers appeal to Tradition and with much earnestnesse Numb 8. and some clamour they call upon Hereticks to conform to or to be tryed by Tradition it is such a Tradition as delivers the fundamentall points of Christianity which were also recorded in Scripture But because the Canon was not yet perfectly consign'd they call'd to that testimony they had which was the testimony of the Churches Apostolicall whose Bishops and Priests being the Antistites religionis did believe and preach Christian Religion and conserve all its great mysteries according as they had been taught Irenaeus calls this a Tradition Apostolicall Christum accepisse calicem dixisse sanguinem suum esse docuisse novam oblationem novi Testamenti quam Ecclesia per Apostolos accipiens offert per totum mundum And the Fathers in these Ages confute Hereticks by Ecclesiasticall Tradition that is they confront against their impious and blaspemous doctrines that Religion which the Apostles having taught to the Churches where they did preside their Successors did still preach and for a long while together suffered not the enemy to sow tares amongst their wheat And yet these doctrines which they called Traditions were nothing but such fundamentall truths which were in Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Irenaeus in Eusebius observes in the instance of Polycarpus and it is manifest by considering Lib. 5. cap. 20. what heresies they fought against the heresies of Ebion Cerinthus Nicolaitans Valentinians Carpocratians persons that Vid. Irenae l. 3 4. cont haeres denyed the Sonne of God the Unity of the God-head that preached impurity that practised Sorcery and Witch-craft And now that they did rather urge Tradition against them then Scripture was because the publike Doctrine of all the Apostolicall Churches was at first more known and famous then many parts of the Scripture and because some Hereticks denyed S. Lukes Gospel some received none but S. Matthews some rejected all S. Pauls Epistles and it was a long time before the whole Canon was consign'd by universall Testimony some Churches having one part some another Rome her selfe had not all so that in this case the Argument from Tradition was the most famous the most certain and the most prudent And now according to this rule they had more Traditions then we have and Traditions did by degrees lessen as they came to be written and their necessity was lesse as the knowledge of them was ascetained to us by a better Keeper of Divine Truths All that great mysteriousnesse of Christs Priest-hood the unity of his Sacrifice Christs Advocation and Intercession for us in Heaven and many other excellent Doctrines might very well be accounted Traditions before S. Pauls Epistle to the Hebrews was publish'd to all the World but now they are written truths and if they had not possibly we might either have lost them quite or doubted of them as we doe of many other Traditions by reason of the insufficiency of the propounder And therefore it was that S. Peter took order that the Gospel 2 Pet. 1. 13. should be Writ for he had promised that he would doe something which after his decease should have these things in remembrance He knew it was not safe trusting the report of men where the fountain might quickly run dry or be corrupted so insensibly that no cure could be found for it nor any just notice taken of it till it were incurable And indeed there is scarce any thing but what is written in Scripture that can with any confidence of Argument pretend to derive from the Apostles except ritualls and manners of ministration but no doctrines or speculative mysteries are so transmitted to us by so cleer a current that we may see a visible channell and trace it to the Primitive fountaines It is said to be a Tradition Apostolicall that no Priest should baptize without chrism and the command of the Bishop Suppose it were yet we cannot be oblig'd to believe it with much confidence because we have but little proofe for it scarce any thing but the single testimony of S. Hierom. And yet if it were this is but a rituall of which in passing by I shall give that account That Dialog adv Lucifer suppose this and many more ritualls did derive clearly from Tradition Apostolicall which yet but very few doe yet it is hard that any Church should be charged with crime for not observing such ritualls because we see some of them which certainly did derive from the Apostles are expir'd and gone out in a desuetude such as are abstinence from blood and from things strangled the coenobitick life of secular persons the colledge of widowes to worship standing upon the Lords day to give milk and honey to the newly baptized and many more of the like nature now there having been no mark to distinguish the necessity of one from the indifferency of the other they are all
at this day vex Christendome And both speak true The first Ages speak greatest truth but least pertinently The next Ages the Ages of the foure generall Councels spake something not much more pertinently to the present Questions but were not so likely to speak true by reason of their dispositions contrary to the capacity and circumstance of the first Ages and if they speak wisely as Doctors yet not certainly as witnesses of such propositions which the first Ages noted not and yet unlesse they had noted could not possibly be Traditions And therefore either of them will be lesse uselesse as to our present affaires For indeed the Questions which now are the publike trouble were not considered or thought upon for many hundred years and therefore prime Tradition there is none as to our purpose and it will be an insufficient medium to be used or pretended in the determination and to dispute concerning the truth or necessity of Traditions in the Questions of out times is as if Historians disputing about a Question in the English Story should fall on wrangling whether Livie or Plutarch were the best Writers And the earnest disputes about Traditions are to no better purpose For no Church at this day admits the one halfe of those things which certainly by the Fathers were called Traditions Apostolicall and no Testimony of ancient Writers does consign the one halfe of the present Questions to be or not to be Traditions So that they who admit only the Doctrine and Testimony of the first Ages cannot be determined in most of their doubts which now trouble us because their Writings are of matters wholy differing from the present disputes and they which would bring in after Ages to the Authority of a competent judge or witnesse say the same thing for they plainly confesse that the first Ages spake little or nothing to the present Question or at least nothing to their sense of them for therefore they call in aid from the following Ages and make them suppletory and auxiliary to their designs and therefore there are no Traditions to our purposes And they who would willingly have it otherwise yet have taken no course it should be otherwise for they when they had opportunity in the Councels of the last Ages to determine what they had a mind to yet they never nam'd the number nor expressed the particular Traditions which they would faine have the world believe to be Apostolicall But they have kept the bridle in their own hands and made a reserve of their own power that if need be they may make new pretensions or not be put to it to justifie the old by the engagement of a conciliary declaration Lastly We are acquitted by the Testimony of the Primitive Fathers from any other necessity of believing then of Numb 11. such Articles as are recorded in Scripture And this is done by them whose Authority is pretended the greatest Argument for Tradition as appears largely in Irenaeus who disputes professedly for the sufficiency of Scripture against certain Hereticks who L. 3. c. 2. contr haeres affirm some necessary truths not to be written It was an excellent saying of S. Basil and will never be wipt out with all the eloquence of Perron in his Serm. de fide Manifestus est fidei lapsus liquidum superbiae vitium vel respuere aliquid eorum quae Scriptura habet vel inducere quicquam quod scriptum non est And it is but a poore device to say that every particular Tradition is consigned in Scripture by those places which give Authority to Tradition and so the introducing of Tradition is not a super-inducing any thing over or besides Scripture because Tradition is like a Messenger and the Scripture is like his Letters of Credence and therefore Authorizes whatsoever Tradition speaketh For supposing Scripture does consign the Authority of Tradition which it might doe before all the whole Instrument of Scripture it self was consign'd and then afterwards there might be no need of Tradition yet supposing it it will follow that all those Traditions which are truly prime and Apostolicall are to be entertain'd according to the intention of the Deliverers which indeed is so reasonable of it selfe that we need not Scripture to perswade us to it it selfe is authentick as Scripture is if it derives from the same fountain and a word is never the more the Word of God for being written nor the lesse for not being written but it will not follow that whatsoever is pretended to be Tradition is so neither is the credit of the particular instances consign'd in Scripture dolosus versatur in generalibus but that this craft is too palpable And if a generall and indefinite consignation of Tradition be sufficient to warrant every particular that pretends to be Tradition then S. Basil had spoken to no purpose by saying it is Pride Apostasy from the Faith to bring in what is not written For if either any man brings in what is written or what he sayes is delivered then the first being expresse Scripture and the second being consign'd in Scripture no man can be charged with superinducing what is not written he hath his Answer ready And then these are zealous words absolutely to no purpose but if such generall consignation does not warrant every thing that pretends to Tradition but only such as are truly proved to be Apostolicall then Scripture is uselesse as to this particular for such Tradition gives testimony to Scripture and therefore is of it selfe first and more credible for it is credible of it selfe and therefore unlesse S. Basil thought that all the will of God in matters of Faith and Doctrine were written I see not what end nor what sense he could have in these words For no man in the world except Enthusiasts and mad-men ever obtruded a Doctrine upon-the Church but he pretended Scripture for it or Tradition and therefore no man could be pressed by these words no man confuted no man instructed no not Enthusiasts or Montanists For suppose either of them should say that since in Scripture the holy Ghost is promised to abide with the Church for ever to teach whatever they pretend the Spirit in any Age hath taught them is not to super-induce any thing beyond what is written because the truth of the Spirit his veracity and his perpetuall teaching being promised and attested in Scripture Scripture hath just so consign'd all such Revelations as Perron saith it hath all such Traditions But I will trouble my selfe no more with Arguments from any humane Authorities but he that is surprized with the beliefe of such Authorities and will but consider the very many Testimonies of Antiquity to this purpose as of a Orat. ad Nicen PP apud Theodor. l. 1. c. 7. Constantine b In Matth. l. 4. c. 23. in Aggaeum S. Hierom c De bono viduil c. 1. S. Austin d Orat. contr gent. S. Athaenasius e In
and to obey him and to encourage us in both and this is compleated in the Apostles Creed And since contraries are of the same extent heresy is to be judg'd by its proportion and analogy to faith and that is heresy only which is against Faith Now because Faith is not only a precept of Doctrines but of manners and holy life whatsoever is either opposite to an Article of Creed or teaches ill life that 's heresy but all those propositions which are extrinsecall to these two considerations be they true or be they false make not heresy nor the man an Heretick and therefore however hee may be an erring person yet he is to be used accordingly pittied and instructed not condemned or Excommunicated And this is the result of the first ground the consideration of the nature of Faith and heresy SECT III. Of the difficulty and uncertainty of Arguments from Scripture in Questions not simply necessary not literally determined GOd who disposes of all things sweetly and according to the nature and capacity of things and persons had made those Numb 1. only necessary which he had taken care should be sufficiently propounded to all persons of whom he required the explicite beliefe And therefore all the Articles of Faith are cleerely and plainly set down in Scripture and the Gospel is not hid nisi pereuntibus saith S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Damascen and that Orthod fidei lib. 4. c. 18. so manifestly that no man can be ignorant of the foundation of Faith without his own apparent fault And this is acknowledged by all wise and good men and is evident besides the reasonablenesse of the thing in the testimonies of Saints a Super Psal. 88. de util cred c. 6. Austin b Super Isa. c. 19 in Psal. 86. Hierome c Homil. 3. in Thess. Ep. 2. Chrysostome d Serm de confess Fulgentius e Miseel 2. l. 1. tit 46. Hugo de Sancto Victore f In Gen. ap Struch p. 87. Theodoret g C. 6. c. 21. Lactantius h Ad Antioch l. 2. p. 918. Theophilus Antiochenus i Par. 1. q. 1. art 9 Numb 2. Aquinas and the latter Schoole men And God hath done more for many things which are only profitable are also set down so plainly that as S. Austin sayes nemo inde haurire non possit si modò ad hauriendum devotè ac piè accedat ubi supra de util cred c. 6. but of such things there is no Question commenc'd in Christendome and if there were it cannot but be a crime and humane interest that are the Authors of such disputes and therefore these cannot be simple errours but alwayes heresies because the principle of them is a personall sinne But besides these things which are so plainly set down some for doctrine as S. Paul sayes that is for Articles and foundation of Faith some for instruction some for reproofe some for comfort that is in matters practicall and speculative of severall tempers and constitutions there are innumerable places containing in them great mysteries but yet either so enwrapped with a cloud or so darkned with umbrages or heigthened with expressions or so covered with allegories and garments of Rhetorick so profound in the matter or so altered or made intricate in the manner in the clothing and in the dressing that God may seeme to have left them as tryalls of our industry and Arguments of our imperfections and incentives to the longings after heaven and the clearest revelations of eternity and as occasions and opportunities of our mutuall charity and toleration to each other and humility in our selves rather then the repositories of Faith and furniture of Creeds and Articles of beliefe For wherever the word of God is kept whether in Scripture Numb 3. alone or also in Tradition he that considers that the meaning of the one and the truth or certainty of the other are things of great Question will see a necessity in these things which are the subject matter of most of the Questions of Christendome that men should hope to be excused by an implicite faith in God Almighty For when there are in the Explications of Scripture so many Commentaries so many senses and Interpretations so many Volumnes in all Ages and all like mens faces exactly none like another either this difference and inconvenience is absolutely no fault at all or if it be it is excusable by a minde prepar'd to consent in that truth which God intended And this I call an implicite Faith in God which is certainly of as great excellency as an implicite Faith in any man or company of men Because they who doe require an implicite Faith in the Church for Articles lesse necessary and excuse the want of explicite Faith by the implicite doe require an implicite Faith in the Church because they believe that God hath required of them to have a minde prepared to believe whatever the Church sayes which because it is a proposition of no absolute certainty whosoever does in readinesse of minde believe all that God spake does also believe that sufficiently if it be fitting to be believ'd that is if it be true and if God hath said so for he hath the same obedience of understanding in this as in the other But because it is not so certain God hath tyed him in all things to believe that which is called the Church and that it is certain we must believe God in all things and yet neither know all that either God hath revealed or the Church taught it is better to take the certain then the uncertain to believe God rather then men especially since if God hath bound us to believe men our absolute submission to God does involve that and there is no inconvenience in the world this way but that we implicitely believe one Article more viz. the Churches Authority or infallibility which may well be pardoned because it secures our beliefe of all the rest and we are sure if we believe all that God said explicitely or implicitely we also believe the Church implicitely in case we are bound to it but we are not certain that if we believe any company of men whom we call the Church that we therefore obey God and believe what he hath said But however if this will not help us there is no help for us but good fortune or absolute predestination for by choyce and industry no man can secure himselfe that in all the mysteries of Religion taught in Scripture he shall certainly understand and explicitely believe that sense that God intended For to this purpose there are many considerations 1. There are so many thousands of Copies that were writ by persons of severall interests and perswasions such different Numb 4. understandings and tempers such distinct abilities and weaknesses that it is no wonder there is so great variety of readings both in the Old Testament and in the New In the Old
baptized in the name of Jesus because unus Deus unum baptisma and as it is still one Faith which a man confesseth severall times and one Sacrament of the Eucharist though a man often communicates so it might be one baptism though often ministred And the unity of baptism might not be deriv'd from the unity of the ministration but from the unity of the Religion into which they are baptized though baptized a thousand times yet because it was still in the name of the holy Trinity still into the death of Christ it might be unum baptisma Whether S. Cyprian Firmilian and their Collegues had this discourse or no I know not I am sure they might have had much better to have evacuated the force of that Argument although I believe they had the wrong cause in hand But this is it that I say that when a Question is so undetermin'd in Scripture that the Arguments rely only upon such mysticall places whence the best fancies can draw the greatest variety and such which perhaps were never intended by the holy Ghost it were good the rivers did not swell higher then the fountaine and the confidence higher then the Argument and evidence for in this case there could not any thing be so certainly proved as that the disagreeing party should deserve to be condemn'd by a sentence of Excommunication for disbelieving it and yet they were which I wonder at so much the more because they who as it was since judg'd had the right cause had not any sufficient Argument from Scripture not so much as such mysticall Arguments but did fly to the Tradition of the Church in which also I shall afterward shew they had nothing that was absolutely certaine 3. I consider that there are divers places of Scripture containing Numb 6. in them mysteries and Questions of great concernment and yet the fabrick and constitution is such that there is no certain mark to determine whether the sense of them should be literall or figurative I speak not here concerning extrinsecall meanes of determination as traditive Interpretation Councels Fathers Popes and the like I shall consider them afterward in their severall places but here the subject matter being concerning Scripture in its own capacity I say there is nothing in the nature of the thing to determine the sense and meaning but it must be gotten out as it can and that therefore it is unreasonable that what of it selfe is ambiguous should be understood in its own prime sense and intention under the paine of either a sinne or an Anathema I instance in that famous place from whence hath sprung that Question of Transubstantiation Hoc est corpus meum The words are plain and clear apt to be understood in the literall sense and yet this sense is so hard as it does violence to reason and therefore it is the Question whether or no it be not a figurative speech But here what shall we have to determine it What mean soever we take and to what sense soever you will expound it you shall be put to give an account why you expound other places of Scripture in the same case to quite contrary senses For if you expound it literally then besides that it seems to intrench upon the words of our blessed Saviour The words that I speak they are Spirit and they are life that is to be spiritually understood and it is a miserable thing to see what wretched shifts are used to reconcile the literall sense to these words and yet to distinguish it from the Capernaiticall fancy but besides this why are not those other sayings of Christ expounded literally I am a Vine I am the Doore I am a Rock Why doe we flie to a figure in those parallel words This is the Covenant which I make between me and you and yet that Covenant was but the sign of the Covenant and why doe we fly to a figure in a precept as well as in mystery and a proposition If thy right hand offend thee cut it off and yet we have figures enough to save a limb If it be said because reason tells us these are not to be expounded according to the letter This will be no plea for them who retaine the literall exposition of the other instance against all reason against all Philosophy against all sense and against two or three sciences But if you expound these words figuratively besides that you are to contest against a world of prejudices you give your selfe the liberty which if others will use when either they have a reason or a necessity so to doe they may perhaps turn all into Allegory and so may evacuate any precept and elude any Argument Well so it is that very wise men have expounded things * Sic S Hieron In ad â—esâ—entiâ provocatus ardore studio Scriptuarum allegoricè interpretatus sum Abdiam Prophetam cujus historiam nesciebam De sensu Allegorico S. Script dixit Basilius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Allegorically when they should have expounded them literally So did the famous Origen who as S. Hierom reports of him turned Paradise so into an Allegory that he took away quite the truth of the Story and not only Adam was turned out of the Garden but the Garden it selfe out of Paradise Others expound things literally when they should understand them in Allegory so did the Ancient Papias understand Apocal. 20. Christs Millenary raign upon earth and so depressed the hopes of Christianity and their desires to the longing and expectation of temporall pleasures and satisfactions and he was followed by Justin Martyr Irenaeus Tertullian Lactantius and indeed the whole Church generally till S. Austin and S. Hierom's time who first of any whose works are extant did reprove the errour If such great spirits be deceiv'd in finding out what kinde of senses L. 23. de Civit. Dei c 7. praefat â— 19. in Isai. in c. 36. Ezek. be to be given to Scriptures it may well be endur'd that we who sit at their feet may also tread in the steps of them whose feet could not alwayes tread aright 4. I consider that there are some places of Scripture that Numb 7. have the selfe same expressions the same preceptive words the same reason and account in all appearance and yet either must be expounded to quite different senses or else we must renounce the Communion and the charities of a great part of Christendome And yet there is absolutely nothing in the thing or in its circumstances or in its adjuncts that can determine it to different purposes I instance in those great exclusive negatives for the necessity of both Sacraments Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aquâ c. Nisi manducaveritis carnem filii hominis c. a non introibit in regnum coelorum for both these Now then the first is urg'd for the absolute indispensable necessity of baptism even in Infants insomuch that Infants goe to part of Hell if
subjects to kill him Pasce agnos said Christ the third time And pasce is doce and pasce is Impera and pasce is occide Now if others should take the same unreasonablenesse I will not say but the same liberty in expounding Scripture or if it be not licence taken but that the Scripture it selfe is so full and redundant in senses quite contrary what man soever or what company of men soever shall use this principle will certainly finde such rare productions from severall places that either the unreasonablenesse of the thing will discover the errour of the proceeding or else there will be a necessity of permitting a great liberty of judgement where is so infinite variety without limit or mark of necessary determination If the first then because an errour is so obvious and ready to our selves it will be great imprudence or tyranny to be hasty in judging others but if the latter it is it that I contend for for it is most unreasonable when either the thing it selfe ministers variety or that we take licence to our selves in variety of interpretations or proclaime to all the world our great weaknesse by our actually being deceived that we should either prescribe to others magisterially when we are in errour or limit their understandings when the thing it selfe affords liberty and variety SECT IV. Of the difficulty of Expounding Scripture THese considerations are taken from the nature of Scripture it selfe but then if we consider that we have no certain Numb 1. wayes of determining places of difficulty and Question infallibly and certainly but that we must hope to be sav'd in the beliefe of things plaine necessary and fundamentall and our pious endeavour to finde out Gods meaning in such places which he hath left under a cloud for other great ends reserved to his own knowledge we shall see a very great necessity in allowing a liberty in Prophesying without prescribing authoritatively to other mens consciences and becomming Lords and Masters of their Faith Now the meanes of expounding Scripture are either externall or internall For the externall as Church Authority Tradition Fathers Councels and Decrees of Bishops they are of a distinct consideration and follow after in their order But here we will first consider the invalidity and uncertainty of all those meanes of expounding Scripture which are more proper and internall to the nature of the thing The great Masters of Commentaries some whereof have undertaken to know all mysteries have propounded many wayes to expound Scripture which indeed are excellent helps but not infallible assistances both because themselves are but morall instruments which force not truth ex abscondito as also because they are not infallibly used and applyed 1. Sometime the sense is drawn forth by the context and connexion of parts It is well when it can be so But when there is two or three antecedents and subjects spoken of what man or what rule shall ascertain me that I make my reference true by drawing the relation to such an antecedent to which I have a minde to apply it another hath not For in a contexture where one part does not alwayes depend upon another Where things of differing natures intervene and interrupt the first intentions there it is not alwayes very probable to expound Scripture take its meaning by its proportion to the neighbouring words But who desires satisfaction in this may read the observation verified in S. Gregory's moralls upon Job lib. 5. c. 29. and the instances he there brings are excellent proofe that this way of Interpretation does not warrant any man to impose his Expositions upon the beliefe and understanding of other men too confidently and magisterially 2. Another great pretence of medium is the conference of places which Illyricus calls ingens remedium faelicissimam expositionem Numb 2. sanctae scripturae and indeed so it is if well and temperately used but then we are beholding to them that doe so for there is no rule that can constrain them to it for comparing of places is of so indefinite capacity that if there be ambiguity of words variety of sense alteration of circumstances or difference of stile amongst Divine Writers then there is nothing that may be more abused by wilfull people or may more easily deceive the unwary or that may amuse the most intelligent Observer The Anabaptists take advantage enough in this proceeding and indeed so may any one that list and when we pretend against them the necessity of baptizing all by authority of nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aquâ spiritu they have a parallel for it and tell us that Christ will baptize us with the holy Ghost and with fire and that one place expounds the other and because by fire is not meant an Element or any thing that is naturall but an Allegory and figurative expression of the same thing so also by water may be meant the figure signifying the effect or manner of operation of the holy Spirit Fire in one place and water in the other doe but represent to us that Christs baptism is nothing else but the cleansing and purifying us by the holy Ghost But that which I here note as of greatest concernment and which in all reason ought to be an utter overthrow to this topique is an universall abuse of it among those that use it most and when two places seem to have the same expression or if a word have a double signification because in this place it may have such a sense therefore it must because in one of the places the sense is to their purpose they conclude that therefore it must be so in the other too An instance I give in the great Question between the Socinians and the Catholikes If any place be urg'd in which our blessed Saviour is called God they shew you two or three where the word God is taken in a depressed sense for a quasi Deus as when God said to Moses Constitui te Deum Pharaonis and hence they argue because I can shew the word is used for a Deus factus therefore no Argument is sufficient to prove Christ to be Deus verus from the appellative of Deus And might not another argue to the exact contrary and as well urge that Moses is Deus verus because in some places the word Deus is used pro Deo aeterno Both wayes the Argument concludes impiously and unreasonably It is a fallacy à posse ad esse affirmativè because breaking of bread is sometimes used for an Eucharisticall manducation in Scripture therefore I shall not from any testimony of Scripture affirming the first Christians to have broken bread together conclude that they liv'd hospitably and in common society Because it may possibly be eluded therefore it does not signifie any thing And this is the great way of answering all the Arguments that can be brought against any thing that any man hath a mind to defend and any man that reads any controversies
to speak better Latine then his Translatour had done And if it be thus in Translations it is farre worse in Expositions Quia scil Scripturam sacram pro ipsa sui altitudine non uno eodemque sensu omnes accipiunt ut penè quot homines tot illic sententiae erui posse videantur said Vincent Lirinensis in which every man knows In Commonit what innumerable wayes there are of being mistaken God having in things not simply necessary left such a difficulty upon those parts of Scripture which are the subject matters of controversy ad edomandam labore superbiam intellectum à fastidio revocandum as S. Austin gives a reason that all that erre honestly are therefore to be pityed and tolerated because Lib. 2. de doctr Christian. c. 6. it is or may be the condition of every man at one time or other The summe is this Since holy Scripture is the repository Numb 8. of divine truths and the great rule of Faith to which all Sects of Christians doe appeale for probation of their severall opinions and since all agree in the Articles of the Creed as things clearly and plainly set down and as containing all that which is of simple and prime necessity and since on the other side there are in Scripture many other mysteries and matters of Question upon which there is a vaile since there are so many Copies with infinite varieties of reading since a various Interpunction a parenthesis a letter an accent may much alter the sense since some places have divers literall senses many have spirituall mysticall and Allegoricall meanings since there are so many tropes metonymies ironies hyperboles proprieties and improprieties of language whose understanding depends upon such circumstances that it is almost impossible to know its proper Interpretation now that the knowledge of such circumstances and particular stories is irrevocably lost since there are some mysteries which at the best advantage of expression are not easy to be apprehended and whose explication by reason of our imperfections must needs be dark sometimes weak sometimes unintelligle and lastly since those ordinary meanes of expounding Scripture as searching the Originalls conference of places parity of reason and analogy of Faith are all dubious uncertain and very fallible he that is the wisest and by consequence the likelyest to expound truest in all probability of reason will be very farre from confidence because every one of these and many more are like so many degrees of improbability and incertainty all depressing our certainty of finding out truth in such mysteries and amidst so many difficulties And therefore a wise man that considers this would not willingly be prescrib'd to by others and therefore if he also be a just man he will not impose upon others for it is best every man should be left in that liberty from which no man can justly take him unlesse he could secure him from errour So that here also there is a necessity to conserve the liberty of Prophesying and Interpreting Scripture a necessity deriv'd from the consideration of the difficulty of Scripture in Questions controverted and the uncertainty of any internall medium of Interpretation SECT V. Of the insufficiency and uncertainty of Tradition to Expound Scripture or determine Questions IN the next place we must consider those extrinsecall meanes Numb 1. of Interpreting Scripture and determining Questions which they most of all confide in that restraine Prophesying with the greatest Tyranny The first and principall is Tradition which is pretended not only to expound Scripture Necesse enim est Vincent Lirinens in Commonitor propter tantos tam varii erroris anfractus ut Propheticae Apostolicae interpretationis linea secundum Ecclesiastici Catholici sensus normam dirigatur but also to propound Articles upon a distinct stock such Articles whereof there is no mention and proposition in Scripture And in this topick not only the distinct Articles are clear and plain like as the fundamentals of Faith expressed in Scripture but also it pretends to expound Scripture and to determine Questions with so much clarity and certainty as there shall neither be errour nor doubt remaining and therefore no disagreeing is here to be endured And indeed it is most true if Tradition can performe these pretensions and teach us plainly and assure us infallibly of all truths which they require us to believe we can in this case have no reason to disbelieve them and therefore are certainly Hereticks if we doe because without a crime without some humane interest or collaterall design we cannot disbelieve traditive Doctrine or traditive Interpretation if it be infallibly prov'd to us that tradition is an infallible guide But here I first consider that tradition is no repository of Numb 2. Articles of Faith and therefore the not following it is no Argument of heresy for besides that I have shewed Scripture in its plain expresses to be an abundant rule of Faith and manners Tradition is a topick as fallible as any other so fallible that it cannot be sufficient evidence to any man in a matter of Faith or Question of heresy For 1. I find that the Fathers were infinitely deceived in Numb 3. their account and enumeration of Traditions sometimes they did call some Traditions such not which they knew to be so but by Arguments and presumptions they concluded them so Such as was that of S. Austin ca quae universalis tenet Ecclesia nec à Conciliis Epist. 118. ad Ianuar. De bapt contr Donat. lib. 4. c. 24. instituta reperiuntur credibile est ab Apostolorum traditione descendisse Now suppose this rule probable that 's the most yet it is not certaine It might come by custome whose Originall was not knowne but yet could not derive from an Apostolicall principle Now when they conclude of particular Traditions by a generall rule and that generall rule not certain but at the most probable in any thing and certainly false in some things it is wonder if the productions that is their judgements and pretence faile so often And if I should but instance in all the particulars in which Tradition was pretended falsly or uncertainly in the first Ages I should multiply them to a troublesome variety for it was then accounted so glorious a thing to have spoken with the persons of the Apostles that if any man could with any colour pretend to it he might abuse the whole Church and obtrude what he listed under the specious title of Apostolicall Tradition and it is very notorious to every man that will but read and observe the Recognitions or stromata of Clemens Alexandrinus where there is enough of such false wares shewed in every book and pretended to be no lesse then from the Apostles In the first Age after the Apostles Papias pretended he received a Tradition from the Apostles that Christ before the day of Judgement should reign a thousand yeares upon Earth and his Saints with him in
knew not now quite contrary we cannot safely believe them to be Apostolicall unlesse we doe know their beginning to have been from the Apostles For this consisting of probabilities and particulars which put together make up a morall demonstration the Argument which I now urge hath been growing these fifteen hundred years and if anciently there was so much as to evacuate the Authority of Tradition much more is there now absolutely to destroy it when all the particulars which time and infinite variety of humane accidents have been amassing together are now concentred and are united by way of constipation Because every Age and every great change and every heresy and every interest hath increased the difficulty of finding out true Traditions 3. There are very many Traditions which are lost and yet they are concerning matters of as great consequence as most of Numb 5. those Questions for the determination whereof Traditions are pretended It is more then probable that as in Baptism and the Eucharist the very formes of ministration are transmitted to us so also in confirmation and ordination and that there were speciall directions for visitation of the sick and explicite interpretations of those difficult places of S. Paul which S. Peter affirmed to be so difficult that the ignorant doe wrest them to their own damnation and yet no Church hath conserved these or those many more which S. Basil affirms to be so many that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the day would faile him in the very simple enumeration of all Cap. 29. despir Sancto Traditions Ecclesiasticall And if the Church hath fail'd in keeping the great variety of Traditions it will hardly be thought a fault in a private person to neglect Tradition which either the whole Church hath very much neglected inculpably or else the whose Church is very much too blame And who can ascertain us that she hath not entertained some which are no Traditions as well as lost thousands that are That she did entertain some false Traditions I have already prov'd but it is also as probable that some of those which these Ages did propound for Traditions are not so as it is certain that some which the first Ages cald Traditions were nothing lesse 4. There are some opinions which when they began to be publikely received began to be accounted prime Traditions Numb 6. and so became such not by a native title but by adoption and nothing is more usuall then for the Fathers to colour their popular opinion with so great an appellative S. Austin cald the communicating of Infants an Apostolicall Tradition and yet we doe not practise it because we disbelieve the Allegation And that every custome which at first introduction was but a private fancy or singular practise grew afterwards into a publike rite and went for a Tradition after a while continuance appears by Tertullian who seems to justifie it Non enim existimas tu Contra Marcon licitum esse cuicunque fideli constituere quod Deo placere illi visum De coron milit c. 3. 4. fuerit ad disciplinam salutem And againe A quocunque traditore censetur nec authorem respicias sed authoritatem And S. Hierome most plainly Praecepra majorum Apostolicas Tradiones Apud Euseb. l. 5. c. 20. quisque existimat And when Irenaeus had observed that great variety in the keeping of Lent which yet to be a fourty dayes Fast is pretended to descend from Tradition Apostolicall some fasting but one day before Easter some two some fourty and this even long before Irenaeus time he gives this reason Varietas illa jejunii coepit apud Majores nostros qui non accuratè consuetudinem eorum qui vel simplicitate quâdam vel privatâ authoritate in posterum aliquid statuissent observarant ex translatione Christophorsoni And there are yet some points of good concernment which if any man should Question in a high manner they would prove indeterminable by Scripture or sufficient reason and yet I doubt not their confident Defenders would say they are opinions of the Church and quickly pretend a Tradition from the very Apostles and believe themselves so secure that they could not be discovered because the Question never having been disputed gives them occasion to say that which had no beginning known was certainly from the Apostles For why should not Divines doe in the Question of reconfirmation as in that of rebaptization Are not the grounds equall from an indelible character in one as in the other and if it happen such a Question as this after contestation should be determin'd not by any positive decree but by the cession of one part and the authority and reputation of the other does not the next Age stand faire to be abused with a pretence of Tradition in the matter of reconfirmation which never yet came to a serious Question For so it was in the Question of rebaptization for which there was then no more evident Tradition then there is now in the Question of reconfirmation as I proved formerly but yet it was carried upon that Title 5. There is great variety in the probation of Tradition so that whatever is proved to be Tradition is not equally and Numb 7. alike credible for nothing but universall Tradition is of it selfe credible other Traditions in their just proportion as they partake of the degrees of universality Now that a Tradition be universall or which is all one that it be a credible Testimony S. Irenaeus requires that Tradition should derive from all the Lib. 3. c. 4. Churches Apostolicall And therefore according to this rule there was no sufficient medium to determine the Question about Easter because the Eastern and Western Churches had severall Traditions respectively and both pretended from the Apostles Clemens Alexandrinus sayes it was a secret Tradition Li. 1. Stromat from the Apostles that Christ preached but one year But L. 2. c. 39. Irenaeus sayes it did derive from Hereticks and sayes that he Omnes Seniores testantur qui in Asiâ apud Iohannem Discipulum Domini convenerunt id ipsum tradidisse eis Iohannem c. qui alios Apostolos viderunt haec eadem ab ipsis audierunt testantur de ejusmodi relatione by Tradition first from S. John and then from his Disciples received another Tradition that Christ was almost fifty years old when he dyed and so by consequence preached almost twenty years both of them were deceived and so had all that had believed the report of either pretending Tradition Apostolicall Thus the custome in the Latine Church of fasting on Saturday was against that Tradition which the Greeks had from the Apostles and therefore by this division and want of consent which was the true Tradition was so absolutely indeterminable that both must needs lose much of their reputation But how then when not only particular Churches but single persons are all the proofe we have for a Tradition And
Psal. 132. S. Hilary f L. 2. contra heres tom 1. haer 61. S. Epiphanius and divers others all speaking words to the same sense with that saying of S. g 1. Cor. 4. Paul Nemo sentiat super quod scriptum est will see that there is reason that since no man is materially a Heretick but he that erres in a point of Faith and all Faith is sufficienly recorded in Scripture the judgement of Faith and Heresy is to be derived from thence and no man is to be condemned for dissenting in an Article for whose probation Tradition only is pretended only according to the degree of its evidence let every one determine himselfe but of this evidence we must not judge for others for unlesse it be in things of Faith and absolute certainties evidence is a word of relation and so supposes two terms the object and the faculty and it is an imperfect speech to say a thing is evident in it selfe unlesse we speak of first principles or clearest revelations for that may be evident to one that is not so to another by reason of the pregnancy of some apprehensions and the immaturity of others This Discourse hath its intention in Traditions Doctrinall and Rituall that is such Traditions which propose Articles new in materiâ but now if Scripture be the repository of all Divine Truths sufficient for us Tradition must be considered as its instrument to convey its great mysteriousnesse to our understandings it is said there are traditive Interpretations as well as traditive propositions but these have not much distinct consideration in them both because their uncertainty is as great as the other upon the former considerations as also because in very deed there are no such things as traditive Interpretations universall For as for particulars they signifie no more but that they are not sufficient determinations of Questions Theologicall therefore because they are particular contingent and of infinite variety and they are no more Argument then the particular authority of these men whose Commentaries they are and therefore must be considered with them The summe is this Since the Fathers who are the best Numb 12. Witnesses of Traditions yet were infinitely deceived in their account since sometimes they guest at them and conjectured by way of Rule and Discourse and not of their knowledge not by evidence of the thing since many are called Traditions which were not so many are uncertaine whether they were or no yet confidently pretended and this uncertainty which at first was great enough is increased by infinite causes and accidents in the succession of 1600 yeares since the Church hath been either so carelesse or so abused that shee could not or would not preserve Traditions with carefulnesse and truth since it was ordinary for the old Writers to set out their own fancies and the Rites of their Church which had been Ancient under the specious Title of Apostolicall Traditions since some Traditions rely but upon single Testimony at first and yet descending upon others come to be attested by many whose Testimony though conjunct yet in value is but single because it relies upon the first single Relator and so can have no greater authority or certainty then they derive from the single person since the first Ages who were most competent to consign Tradition yet did consign such Traditions as be of a nature wholy discrepant from the present Questions and speak nothing at all or very imperfectly to our purposes and the following Ages are no fit Witnesses of that which was not transmitted to them because they could not know it at all but by such transmission and prior consignation since what at first was a Tradition came afterwards to be written and so ceased its being a Tradition yet the credit of Traditions commenc'd upon the certainty and reputation of those truths first delivered by word afterward consign'd by writing since what was certainly Tradition Apostolicall as many Rituals were are rejected by the Church in severall Ages and are gone out into a desuetude and lastly since beside the no necessity of Traditions there being abundantly enough in Scripture there are many things called Traditions by the Fathers which they themselves either proved by no Authors or by Apocryphall and spurious and Hereticall the matter of Tradition will in very much be so uncertain so false so suspitious so contradictory so improbable so unproved that if a Question be contested and be offered to be proved only by Tradition it will be very hard to impose such a proposition to the beliefe of all men with any imperiousnesse or resolved determination but it will be necessary men should preserve the liberty of believing and prophesying and not part with it upon a worse merchandise and exchange then Esau made for his birth-right SECT VI. Of the uncertainty and insufficiency of Councels Ecclesiasticall to the same purpose BUt since we are all this while in uncertainty it is necessary that we should addresse our selves somewhere where we Numb 1. may rest the soale of our foot And nature Scripture and experience teach the world in matters of Question to submit to some finall sentence For it is not reason that controversies should continue till the erring person shall be willing to condemn himselfe and the Spirit of God hath directed us by that great precedent at Jerusalem to addresse our selves to the Church that in a plenary Councell and Assembly shee may synodically determine Controversies So that if a Generall Councell have determin'd a Question or expounded Scripture we may no more disbelieve the Decree then the Spirit of God himselfe who speaks in them And indeed if all Assemblies of Bishops were like that first and all Bishops were of the same spirit of which the Apostles were I should obey their Decree with the same Religion as I doe them whole preface was Visum est Spiritui Sancto nobis And I doubt not but our blessed Saviour intended that the Assemblies of the Church should be Judges of Controversies and guides of our perswasions in matters of difficulty But he also intended they should proceed according to his will which he had revealed and those precedents which he had made authentick by the immediate assistance of his holy Spirit He hath done his part but we doe not doe ours And if any private person in the simplicity and purity of his soule desires to find out a truth of which he is in search and inquisition if he prayes for wisedome we have a promise he shall be heard and answered liberally and therefore much more when the representatives of the Catholike Church doe meet because every person there hath in individuo a title to the promise and another title as he is a governour and a guide of soules and all of them together have another title in their united capacity especially if in that union they pray and proceed with simplicity and purity so that there is no disputing against the pretence
they had from the Apostles So that not by Divine ordination or immediate commission from Christ but by derivation from the Apostles and therefore in minority and subordination to them the Presbyters did exercise acts of order and jurisdiction in the absence of the Apostles or Bishops or in conjunction consiliary and by way of advice or before the consecration of a Bishop to a particular Church And all this I doubt not but was done by the direction of the Holy Ghost as were all other acts of Apostolicall ministration and particularly the institution of the other order viz. of Deacons This is all that can be proved out of Scripture concerning the commission given in the institution of Presbyters and this I shall afterwards confirme by the practise of the Catholick Church and so vindicate the practises of the present Church from the common prejudices that disturbe us for by this account Episcopacy is not only a Divine institution but the only order that derives immediately from Christ. For the present only I summe up this with that saying of Theodoret speaking of the 72 Disciples In Lucae cap. 10. Palmae sunt isti qui nutriuntur ac erudiuntur ab Apostolis Nam quanquam Christus hos etiam elegit erant tamen duodecem illis inferiores posteà illorum Discipuli sectatores The Apostles are the twelve fountaines and the 72 are the palmes that are nourished by the waters of those fountaines For though Christ also ordain'd the 72 yet they were inferior to the Apostles and afterwards were their followers and Disciples I know no objection to hinder a conclusion only two or three words out of Ignatius are pretended against the maine question viz. to prove that he although a Bishop yet had no Apostolicall authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I doe not command Epist. ad Philadelph this as an Apostle for what am I and what is my Fathers house that I should compare my selfe with them but as your fellow souldier and a Monitor But this answers it selfe if we consider to whom he speakes it Not to his own Church of Antioch for there he might command as an Apostle but to the Philadelphians he might not they were no part of his Diocesse he was not their Apostle and then because he did not equall the Apostles in their commission extraordinary in their personall priviledges and in their universall jurisdiction therefore he might not command the Philadelphians being another Bishops charge but admonish them with the freedome of a Christian Bishop to whom the soules of all faithfull people were deare and precious So that still Episcopacy and Apostolate may be all one in ordinary office this hinders not and I know nothing else pretended and that Antiquity is clearely on this side is the next businesse For hitherto the discourse hath been of the immediate Divine institution of Episcopacy by arguments derived from Scripture I shall only adde two more from Antiquity and so passe on to tradition § 10. So that Bishops are successors in the office of Apostleship according to the generall tenent of Antiquity Apostolicall 1. THE beliefe of the primitive Church is that Bishops are the ordinary successors of the Apostles and Presbyters of the 72 and therefore did believe that Episcopacy is as truly of Divine institution as the Apostolate for the ordinary office both of one and the other is the same thing For this there is abundant testimony Some I shall select enough to give faire evidence of a Catholick tradition S. Irenaeus is very frequent and confident in this Lib. 3. cap. 3. particular Habemus annumerare eos qui ab Apostolis instituti sunt Episcopi in Ecclesiis ET SUCCESSORES EORUM usque ad nos ... Etenim si recondita mysteria scissent Apostoli ... his vel maximè traderent ea quibus etiam ipsas Ecclesias committebant ... quos SUCCESSORES relinquebant SUUM IPSORUM LOCUM MAGISTERII tradentes We can name the men the Apostles made Bishops in their severall Churches appointing them their successors and most certainly those mysterious secrets of Christianity which them selves knew they would deliver to them to whom they committed the Churches and left to be their successors in the same power and authority themselves had Tertullian reckons Corinth Philippi Thessalonica Ephesus and others to be Churches Apostolicall Lib. de praescript c. 36. apud quas ipsae adhuc Cathedrae Apostolorum suis locis praesident Apostolicall they are from their foundation and by their succession for Apostles did found them and Apostles or men of Apostolick authority still doe governe them S. Cyprian Hoc enim vel maximè Frater laboramus laborare debemus ut Vnitatem à Domino Epist. 42. ad Cornelium per Apostolos NOBIS SUCCESSORIBUS traditam quantùm possumus obtinere curemus We must preserve the Vnity commanded us by Christ and delivered by his Apostles to us their Successors To us Cyprian and Cornelius for they only were then in view the one Bishop of Rome the other of Carthage And in his Epistle ad Florentium Pupianum Nec haec jacto Epist. 69. sed dolens profero cum te Iudicem Dei constituas Christi qui dicit ad Apostolos ac per hoc adomnes praepositos qui Apostolis Vicariâ ordinatione succedunt quivos audit me audit c. Christ said to his Apostles and in them to the Governours or Bishops of his Church who succeeded the Apostles as Vicars in their absence he that heareth you heareth mee Famous is that saying of Clarus à Musculâ the Bishop spoken in the Councell of Carthage and repeated by S. Austin Manifesta est sententia Domini Lib. 7. c. 43. de baptis cont Donatist nostri Iesu Christi Apostolos suos mittentis ipsis solis potestatem à patre sibi datam permittentis quibus nos successimus eâdem potestate Ecclesiam Domini gubernantes Nos successimus We succeed the Apostles governing the Church by the same power He spake it in full Councell in an assembly of Bishops and himselfe was a Bishop The Councell of Rome under S. Sylvester speaking of the honour due to Bishops expresses it thus Non oportere quenquam Domini Discipulis id est Apostolorum successoribus detrahere No man must detract from the Disciples of our Lord that is from the Apostles successors S. Hierome speaking against the Montanists for Epist. 54. undervaluing their Bishops shewes the difference of the Catholicks honouring and the Hereticks disadvantaging that sacred order Apud nos saith he Apostolorum locum Episcopi tenent apud eos Episcopus tertius est Bishops with us Catholicks have the place or authority of Apostles but with them Montanists Bishops are not the first but the third state of Men. And upon that of the Psalmist pro Patribus nati sunt tibi filii S. Hierome and diverse others of the Fathers make this glosse Pro Patribus Apostolis
the time was Curate to S. Timothy Epaphroditus for a while attended on S. Paul although he was then Bishop of Philippi and either S. Paul or Epaphroditus appointed one in substitution or the Church was relinquished Philip. 2. v. 25. 26. for he was most certainly non-resident * Thus also we find that S. Ignatius did delegate his power to the Presbyters in his voyage to his Martyrdome Presbyteri pascite gregem qui inter Epist. ad Antioch vos est donec Deus designaverit eum qui principatum in vobis habiturus est Ye Presbyters doe you feed the flock till God shall designe you a Bishop Till then Therefore it was but a delegate power it could not else have expired in the presence of a Superiour * To this purpose is that of the Laodicean Can. 56. Councell Non oportet Presbyteros ante ingressum Episcopi ingredi sedere in tribunalibus nisi fortè aut aegrotet Episcopus aut in peregrinis eum esse constiterit Presbyters must not sit in Consistory without the Bishop unlesse the Bishop be sick or absent So that it seemes what the Bishop does when he is in his Church that may be committed to others in his absence And to this purpose S. Cyprian sent a playne commission to his Presbyters Fretus ergo dilectione religione vestrâ .... his literis hortor Epist. 9. Mando vt vos .... VICE MEA FUN GAMINI circa gerenda ea quae administratio religiosa deposcit I intreat and command you that you doe my office in the administration of the affayres of the Church and another time he put Herculanus and Caldonius two of his Suffragans together with Rogatianus and Numidicus two Priests in substitution for the excommunicating Epist. 38. 39. Faelicissimus and fower more Cùm ego vos pro me VICARIOS miserim So it was just in the case of Hierocles Bishop of Alexandria and haeres 68. Melitius his Surrogate in Epiphanius Videbatur autem Melitius praeminere c vt qui secundum locum habebat post Petrum in Archiepiscopatu velut adjuvandi ejus gratiâ sub ipso existens sub ipso Ecclesiastica curans He did Church offices under and for Hierocles And I could never find any Canon or personall declamatory clause in any Councell or Primitive Father against a Bishop's giving more or lesse of his jurisdiction by way of delegation * Hitherto also may be referr'd that when the goods of all the Church which then were of a perplexe and buisy dispensation were all in the Bishops hand as part of the Episcopall function yet that part of the Bishops office the Bishop by order of the Councell of Chalcedon might delegate to a steward provided he were a Clergy-man and upon this intimation and decree of Chalcedon the Fathers in the Councell of Sevill forbid any lay-men to be stewards for the Church Elegimus vt vnusquisque nostrûm secundùm Chalcedonensium Patrum decreta Concil Hispal cap. 6. ex proprio Clero Oeconomum sibi constituat But the reason extends the Canon further Indecorum est enim laicum VICARIUM esse Episcopi Saeculares in Ecclesiâ judicare VICARS OF BISHOPS the Canon allowes onely forbids lay-men to be Vicars In uno enim eodemque officio non decet dispar professio quod etiam in divinâ lege prohibetur c In one and the same office the law of God forbids to joyne men of disparate vapacities This then would be considered For the Canon pretends Scripture Precepts of Fathers and Tradition of antiquity for it's Sanction * FOR although antiquity approves of Episcopall §. 51. But they were ever Clergy-men for there never was any lay Elders in any Church office heard of in the Church Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 37. delegations of their power to their Vicars yet these Vicars and delegates must be Priests at least Melitius was a Bishop and yet the Chancellor of Hierocles Patriarch of Alexandria So were Herculanus and Caldonius to S. Cyprian But they never delegated to any lay-man any part of their Episcopall power precisely Of their lay-power or the cognisance of secular causes of the people I find one delegation made to some Gentlemen of the Laity by Sylvanus Bishop of Troas when his Clerks grew covetous he cur'd their itch of gold by trusting men of another profession so to shame them into justice and contempt of money * Si quis autem Episcopus posthâc Ecclesiasticam rem aut LAICALI PROCURATIONE administrandam elegerit Concil Hispal ubi suprà .... non solùm a Christo derebus Pauperum judicatur reus sed etià m Concilio manebit obnoxius If any Bishop shall hereafter concredit any Church affayres to LAY ADMINISTRATION he shall be responsive to Christ and in danger of the Councell But the thing was of more ancient constitution For in that Epistle which goes under the Name of S. Clement Epist. ad Iacob Fratr Dom. which is most certainly very ancient whoever was the author of it it is decreed Si qui ex Fratribus negotia habent inter se apud cognitores saeculi non judicentur sed apud Presbyteros Ecclesiae quicquid illud est dirimatur If Christian people have causes of difference and judiciall contestation let it be ended before the PRIESTS For so S. Clement expounds Presbyteros in the same Epistle reckoning it as a part of the sacred Hierarchy * To this or some paralell constitution S. Hierome relates saying that Priests from the beginning were appointed judges of de 7. Ordin Eccles. causes He expounds his meaning to be of such Priests as were also Bishops and they were Iudges ab initio from the beginning saith S. Hierom So that this saying of the Father may no way prejudge the Bishops authority but it excludes the assistance of lay-men from their Consistories Presybter and Episcopus was instead of one word to S. Hierom but they are alwaies Clergy with him and all men else * But for the mayne Question S. Ambrose did represent it to Valentinian the Emperour with Epist. 13. ad Valent. confidence and humility In causâ fidei vel Ecclesiastici alicujus ordinis eum judicare debere qui nec Munere impar sit nec jure dissimilis The whole Epistle is admirable to this purpose Sacerdotes de Sacerdotibus judicare that Clergy-men must onely judge of Clergy-causes and this S. Ambrose there call's judicium Episcopale The Bishops judicature Si tractandum est tractare in Ecclesiâ didici quod Majores feceruntmei Si conferendum de fide Sacerdotum debet esse ista collatio sicut factum est sub Constantino Aug. memoriae Principe So that both matters of Faith and of Ecclesiasticall Order are to be handled in the Church and that by Bishops and that sub Imperatore by permission and authority of the Prince For so it was in Nice under Constantine Thus farre S. Ambrose * S. Athanasius
For others I shall be incurious because the number of them that honour you is the same with them that honour Learning and Piety and they are the best Theatre and the best judges amongst which the world must needs take notice of my ambition to be ascribed by my publike pretence to be what I am in all heartinesse of Devotion and for all the reason of the world My Honour'd Lord Your Lordships most faithfull and most affectionate servant J. TAYLOR The Contents of the Sections SECTION I. OF the Nature of Faith and that its duty is compleated in believing the Articles of the Apostles Creed Pag. 5. SECT II. Of Heresy and the nature of it and that it is to be accounted according to the strict capacity of Christian Faith and not in Opinions speculative nor ever to pious persons pag. 18. SECT III. Of the difficulty and uncertainty of Arguments from Scripture in Questions not simply necessary not literally determined pag. 59. SECT IV. Of the difficulty of Expounding Scripture pag. 73. SECT V. Of the insufficiency and uncertainty of Tradition to expound Scripture or determine Questions pag. 83. SECT VI. Of the uncertainty and insufficiency of Councels Ecclesiasticall to the same purpose pag. 101. SECT VII Of the fallibility of the Pope and the uncertainty of his Expounding Scripture and resolving Questions pag. 125. SECT VIII Of the disability of Fathers or Writers Ecclesiasticall to determine our Questions with certainty and Truth pag. 151. SECT IX Of the incompetency of the Church in its diffusive capacity to be Iudge of Controversies and the impertinency of that pretence of the Spirit pag. 161. SECT X. Of the authority of Reason and that it proceeding upon the best grounds is the best judge pag. 165. SECT XI Of some causes of Errour in the exercise of Reason which are inculpate in themselves pag. 171. SECT XII Of the innocency of Errour in opinion in a pious person pag. 184. SECT XIII Of the deportment to be used towards persons disagreeing and the reasons why they are not to be punished with death c. pag. 189. SECT XIIII Of the practice of Christian Churches towards persons disagreeing and when Persecution first came in pag. 203. SECT XV. How farre the Church or Governours may act to the restraining false or differing opinions pag. 210. SECT XVI Whether it be lawfull for a Prince to give toleration to severall Religions pag. 213. SECT XVII Of compliance with disagreeing persons or weak Consciences in generall pag. 217. SECT XVIII A particular consideration of the Opinions of the Anabaptists pag. 223 SECT XIX That there may be no Toleration of Doctrines inconsistent with piety or the publique good pag. 246. SECT XX. How farre the Religion of the Church of Rome is Tolerable pag. 249. SECT XXI Of the duty of particular Churches in allowing Communion pag. 262. SECT XXII That particular men may communicate with Churches of different perswasions and how farre they may doe it pag. 264. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 OF THE LIBERTY OF PROPHESYING THe infinite variety of Opinions in matters of Religion as they have troubled Christendome with interests factions and partialities so have they caused great divisions of the heart and variety of thoughts and designes amongst pious and prudent men For they all seeing the inconveniences which the dis-union of perswasions and Opinions have produced directly or accidentally have thought themselves obliged to stop this inundation of mischiefes and have made attempts accordingly But it hath hapned to most of them as to a mistaken Physitian who gives excellent physick but mis-applies it and so misses of his cure so have these men their attempts have therefore been ineffectuall for they put their help to a wrong part or they have endeavoured to cure the symptomes and have let the disease alone till it seem'd incurable Some have endeavoured to re-unite these fractions by propounding such a Guide which they were all bound to follow hoping that the Unity of a Guide would have perswaded unity of mindes but who this Guide should be at last became such a Question that it was made part of the fire that was to be quenched so farre was it from extinguishing any part of the flame Others thought of a Rule and this must be the meanes of Union or nothing could doe it But supposing all the World had been agreed of this Rule yet the interpretation of it was so full of variety that this also became part of the disease for which the cure was pretended All men resolv'd upon this that though they yet had not hit upon the right yet some way must be thought upon to reconcile differences in Opinion thinking so long as this variety should last Christ's Kingdome was not advanced and the work of the Gospel went on but slowly Few men in the mean time considered that so long as men had such variety of principles such severall constitutions educations tempers and distempers hopes interests and weaknesses degrees of light and degrees of understanding it was impossible all should be of one minde And what is impossible to be done is not necessary it should be done And therefore although variety of Opinions was impossible to be cured and they who attempted it did like him who claps his shoulder to the ground to stop an earth-quake yet the inconveniences arising from it might possibly be cured not by uniting their beliefes that was to be dispaird of but by curing that which caus'd these mischiefes and accidentall inconveniences of their disagreeings For although these inconveniences which every man sees and feeles were consequent to this diversity of perswasions yet it was but accidentally and by chance in as much as wee see that in many things and they of great concernment men alow to themselves and to each other a liberty of disagreeing and no hurt neither And certainely if diversity of Opinions were of it selfe the cause of mischiefes it would be so ever that is regularly and universally but that we see it is not For there are disputes in Christendome concerning matters of greater concernment then most of those Opinions that distinguish Sects and make factions and yet because men are permitted to differ in those great matters such evills are not consequent to such differences as are to the uncharitable managing of smaller and more inconsiderable Questions It is of greater consequence to believe right in the Question of the validity or invalidity of a death-bed repentance then to believe aright in the Question of Purgatory and the consequences of the Doctrine of Predetermination are of deeper and more materiall consideration then the products of the beliefe of the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of private Masses and yet these great concernments where a liberty of Prophecying in these Questions hath been permitted hath made no distinct Communion no sects of Christians and the others have and so have these too in those places where they have peremptorily been determind on either side Since then if men are
be obliged to believe much more yet this was the one and onely foundation of Faith upon which all persons were to build their hopes of heaven this was therefore necessary to be taught to all because of necessity to be believ'd by all So that although other persons might commit a delinquency in genere morum if they did not know or did not believe much more because they were oblig'd to further disquisitions in order to other ends yet none of these who held the Creed intire could perish for want of necessary faith though possibly he might for supine negligence or affected ignorance or some other fault which had influence upon his opinions and his understanding he having a new supervening obligation ex accidente to know and believe more Neither are we oblig'd to make these Articles more particular and minute then the Creed For since the Apostles and indeed Numb 11. our blessed Lord himselfe promised heaven to them who believd him to be the Christ that was to come into the world and that he who believes in him should be partaker of the resurrection and life eternall he will be as good as his word yet because this Article was very generall and a complexion rather then a single proposition the Apostles and others our Fathers in Christ did make it more explicite and though they have said no more then what lay entire and ready form'd in the bosome of the great Article yet they made their extracts to great purpose and absolute sufficiency and therefore there needs no more deductions or remoter consequences from the first great Article than the Creed of the Apostles For although whatsoever is certainly deduced from any of these Articles made already so explicite is as certainly true and as much to be believed as the Article it selfe because ex veris possunt nil nisi vera sequi yet because it is not certain that our deductions from them are certain and what one calls evident is so obscure to another that he believes it false it is the best and only safe course to rest in that explication the Apostles have made because if any of these Apostolicall deductions were not demonstrable evidently to follow from that great Article to which salvation is promised yet the authority of them who compil'd the Symboll the plaine description of the Articles from the words of Scriptures the evidence of reason demonstrating these to be the whole foundation are sufficient upon great grounds of reason to ascertaine us but if we goe farther besides the easinesse of being deceived we relying upon our own discourses which though they may be true and then binde us to follow them but yet no more then when they only seem truest yet they cannot make the thing certaine to another much lesse necessary in it selfe And since God would not binde us upon paine of sinne and punishment to make deductions our selves much lesse would he binde us to follow another man's Logick as an Article of our Faith I say much lesse another mans for our own integrity for we will certainly be true to our selves and doe our own businesse heartily is as fit and proper to be imployed as another mans ability He cannot secure me that his ability is absolute and the greatest but I can be more certaine that my own purposes and fidelity to my selfe is such And since it is necessary to rest somewhere lest we should run to an infinity it is best to rest there where the Apostles and the Churches Apostolicall rested when not only they who are able to judge but others who are not are equally ascertained of the certainty and of the sufficiency of that explication This I say not that I believe it unlawfull or unsafe for the Numb 12. Church or any of the Antistites religionis or any wise man to extend his own Creed to any thing may certainely follow from any one of the Articles but I say that no such deduction is fit to be prest on others as an Article of Faith and that every deduction which is so made unlesse it be such a thing as is at first evident to all is but sufficient to make a humane Faith nor can it amount to a divine much lesse can be obligatory to binde a person of a differing perswasion to subscribe under paine of loosing his Faith or being a Heretick For it is a demonstration that nothing can be necessary to be believed under paine of damnation but such propositions of which it is certaine that God hath spoken and taught them to us and of which it is certaine that this is their sense and purpose For if the sense be uncertain we can no more be obliged to believe it in a certain sense then we are to believe it at all if it were not certaine that God delivered it But if it be onely certaine that God spake it and not certaine to what sense our Faith of it is to be as indeterminate as its sense and it can be no other in the nature of the thing nor is it consonant to Gods justice to believe of him that he can or will require more And this is of the nature of those propositions which Aristotle calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to which without any further probation all wise men will give assent at its first publication And therfore deductions inevident from the evident and plain letter of Faith are as great recessions from the obligation as they are from the simplicity and certainty of the Article And this I also affirm although the Church of any one denomination or represented in a Councell shall make the deduction or declaration For unlesse Christ had promised his Spirit to protect every particular Church from all errors lesse materiall unlesse he had promised an absolute universall infallibility etiam in minutioribus unlesse super-structures be of the same necessity with the foundation and that Gods Spirit doth not only preserve his Church in the being of a Church but in a certainty of not saying any thing that is lesse certain and that whether they will or no too we may be bound to peace and obedience to silence and to charity but have not a new Article of Faith made and a new proposition though consequent as 't is said from an Article of Faith becomes not therefore a part of the Faith nor of absolute necessity Quid unquam aliud Ecclesia Conciliorum decretis Contra haeres cap 32. eâ—isa est nisi ut quod antea simpliciter credebatur hoc idem postea diligentiùs crederetur said Vincentius Lirinensis whatsoever was of necessary beliefe before is so still and hath a new degree added by reason of a new light or a clear explication but no prositions can be adopted into the foundation The Church hath power to intend our Faith but not to extend it to make our beliefe more evident but not more large and comprehensive For Christ and his Apostles concealed nothing that was necessary to the
impiety It might possibly be that the Bishops did it in tendernesse of their reputation but yet hardly for to punish a person publikely and highly is a certain declaring the person punished guilty of a high crime and then to conceale the fault upon pretence to preserve his reputation leaves every man at liberty to conjecture what he pleaseth who possibly will believe it worse than it is in as much as they think his judges so charitable as therefore to conceale the fault least the publishing of it should be his greatest punishment and the scandall greater then his deprivation * Simplicitèr pateat vitium fortasse pusillum Quod-tegitur majus creditur esse malum Martial However this course if it were just in any was unsafe in all for it might undoe more then it could preserve and therefore is of more danger then it can be of charity It is therefore too probable that the matter was not very faire for in publike sentence the acts ought to be publike but that they rather pretend heresy to bring their ends about shewes how easie it is to impute that crime and how forward they were to doe it And that they might and did then as easily call Heretick as afterward when Vigilius was condemned of heresy for saying there were Antipodes or as the Fryars of late did who suspected Greek and Hebrew of heresy and cald their Professors Hereticks and had like to have put Terence and Demosthenes into the Index Expurgatorius sure enough they raild at them pro concione therefore because they understood them not and had reason to believe they would accidentally be enemies to their reputation among the people By this instance which was a while after the Nicene Councell where the acts of the Church were regular judiciall and orderly Numb 18. we may guesse at the sentences passed upon heresy at such times and in such cases when their processe was more private and their acts more tumultuary their information lesse certaine and therefore their mistakes more easie and frequent And it is remarkable in the case of the heresy of Montanus the scene of whose heresy lay within the first three hundred yeares though it was represented in the Caralogues afterwards and possibly the mistake concerning it is to be put upon the score of Epiphanius by whom Montanus and his Followers were put into the Catalogue of Hereticks for commanding abstinence from meats as if they were unclean and of themselves unlawfull Now the truth was Montanus said no such thing but commanded frequent abstinence enjoyned dry diet and an ascetick Table not for conscience sake but for Discipline and yet because he did this with too much rigour and strictnesse of mandate the Primitive Church mislik'd it in him as being too neere their errour who by a Judaicall superstition abstain'd from meats as from uncleannesse This by the way will much concern them who place too much sanctity in such Rites and Acts of Discipline for it is an eternall Rule and of never failing truth that such abstinences if they be obtruded as Acts of originall immediate duty and sanctity are unlawfull and superstious if they be for Discipline they may be good but of no very great profit it is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which S. Paul sayes profiteth but little and just in the same degree the Primitive Church esteem'd them for they therefore reprehended Montanus for urging such abstinences with too much earnestnesse though but in the way of Discipline for that it was no more Tertullian who was himselfe a Montanist and knew best the opinions of his own Sect testifies and yet Epiphanus reporting the errours of Montanus commends that which Montanus truly and really taught and which the Primitive Church condemn'd in him and therefore represents that heresy to another sense and affixes that to Montanus which Epiphanius beliv'd a heresy and yet which Montanus did not teach And this also among many other things lessens my opinion very much of the integrity or discretion of the old Catalogues of Hereticks and much abates my confidence towards them And now that I have mentioned them casually in passing by I shall give a short account of them for men are much Numb 19. mistaken some in their opinions concerning the truth of them as believing them to be all true some concerning their purpose as thinking them sufficient not only to condemn all those opinions there called hereticall but to be a precedent to all Ages of the Church to be free and forward in calling Heretick But he that considers the Catalogues themselves as they are collected by Epiphanius Philastrius and S. Austin shall finde that many are reckoned for Hereticks for opinions in matters disputable and undetermin'd and of no consequence and that in these Catalogues of Hereticks there are men numbred for Hereticks which by every side respectively are acquitted so that there is no company of men in the world that admit these Catalogues as good Records or sufficient sentences of condemnation For the Churches of the Reformation I am certain they acquit Aërius for denying prayer for the dead and the Eustathians for denying invocation of Saints And I am partly of opinion that the Church of Rome is not willing to call the Collyridians Hereticks for offering a Cake to the Virgin Mary unlesse she also will runne the hazard of the same sentence for offering Candles to her And that they will be glad with S. Austin l. 6. de haeres c. 86. to excuse the * D. Thom. l. contr gent. c. 21. Tertullianists for picturing God in a visible corporall representment And yet these Sects are put in the black book by Epiphanius and S. Austin and Isidore respectively I remember also that the Osseni are cald Hereticks because they refused to worship toward the East and yet in that dissent I finde not the malignity of a heresy nor any thing against an Article of Faith or good manners and it being only in circumstance it were hard if they were otherwise pious men and true believers to send them to Hell for such a trifle The Parermeneutae refused to follow other mens dictates like sheep but would expound Scripture according to the best evidence themselves could finde and yet were called Hereticks whether they expounded true or no. The * Euthym. part 1. tit 21. Epiphan haeres 64. Pauliciani for being offended at crosses the Proclians for saying in a regenerate man all his sinnes were not quite dead but only curbed and asswaged were called Hereticks and so condemned for ought I know for affirming that which all pious men feele in themselves to be too true And he that will consider how numerous the Catalogues are and to what a volumn they are come in their last collections to no lesse then five hundred and twenty for so many heresies and Hereticks are reckoned by Prateolus may think that if a re-trenchment were justly made of truths and all impertinencies and all opinions either
much the more force and efficacy because Numb 25. it began upon great reason and in the first instance with successe good enough For I am much pleased with the enlarging of the Creed which the Councell of Nice made because they enlarged it to my sense but I am not sure that others are satisfied with it While we look upon the Article they did determine we see all things well enough but there are some wise personages consider it in all circumstances and think the Church had been more happy if she had not been in some sense constrain'd to alter the simplicity of her faith and make it more curious and articulate so much that he had need be a subtle man to understand the very words of the new determinations For the first Alexander Bishop of Alexandria in the presence Numb 26. of his Clergy entreats somewhat more curiously of the secret of the mysterious Trinity and Unity so curiously that Socra l. 1. c. 8. Arius who was a Sophister too subtle as it afterward appear'd misunderstood him and thought he intended to bring in the heresy of Sabellius For while he taught the Unity of the Trinity either he did it so inartificially or so intricately that Arius thought he did not distinguish the persons when the Bishop intended only the unity of nature Against this Arius furiously drives and to confute Sabellius and in him as he thought the Bishop distinguishes the natures too and so to secure the Article of the Trinity destroyes the Unity It was the first time the Question was disputed in the world and in such mysterious niceties possibly every wise man may understand something but few can understand all and therefore suspect what they understand not and are furiously zealous for that part of it which they doe perceive Well it hapned in these as alwayes in such cases in things men understand not they are most impetuous and because suspition is a thing infinite in degrees for it hath nothing to determine it a suspitious person is ever most violent for his feares are worse then the thing feared because the thing is limited but his feares are not so that upon this grew contentions on both sides and Lib. 1. c. 6. tumults rayling and reviling each other and then the Laity were drawn into parts and the Meletians abetted the wrong part and the right part fearing to be overborn did any thing that was next at hand to secure it selfe Now then they that lived in that Age that understood the men that saw how quiet the Church was before this stirre how miserably rent now what little benefit from the Question what schisme about it gave other censures of the businesse then we since have done who only look upon the Article determind with truth and approbation of the Church generally since that time But the Epistle of Constantine to Alexander and Arius tells the truth and Cap. 7. chides them both for commencing the Question Alexander for broaching it Arius for taking it up and although this be true that it had been better for the Church it never had begun yet being begun what is to be done in it of this also in that admirable Epistle we have the Emperours judgement I suppose not without the advise and privity of Hosius Bishop of Corduba whom the Emperour lov'd and trusted much and imployed in the delivery of the Letters For first he calls it a certain vain piece of a Question ill begun and more unadvisedly published a Question which no Law or Ecclesiasticall Canon defineth a fruitlesse contention the product of idle braines a matter so nice so obscure so intricate that it was neither to be explicated by the Clergy nor understood by the people a dispute of words a doctrine inexpliable but most dangerous when taught least it introduce discord or blasphemy and therefore the Objector was rash and the answerer unadvised for it concernd not the substance of Faith or the worship of God nor any cheife commandment of Scripture and therefore why should it be the matter of discord For though the matter be grave yet because neither necessary nor explicable the contention is trifling and toyish And therefore as the Philosophers of the same Sect though differing in explication of an opinion yet more love for the unity of their Profession then disagree for the difference of opinion So should Christians believing in the same God retaining the same Faith having the same hopes opposed by the same enemies not fall at variance upon such disputes considering our understandings are not all alike and therefore neither can our opinions in such mysterious Articles so that the matter being of no great importance but vaine and a toy in respect of the excellent blessings of peace and charity it were good that Alexander and Arius should leave contending keep their opinions to themselves ask each other forgivenesse and give mutuall toleration This is the substance of Constantine's letter and it contains in it much reason if he did not undervalue the Question but it seems it was not then thought a Question of Faith but of nicety of dispute they both did believe one God and the holy Trinity Now then that he afterward called the Nicene Councell it was upon occasion of the vilenesse of the men of the Arian part their eternall discord and pertinacious wrangling and to bring peace into the Church that was the necessity and in order to it was the determination of the Article But for the Article it selfe the Letter declares what opinion he had of that and this Letter was by Socrates called a wonderfull exhortation full of grace and sober councels and such as Hosius himself who was the messenger pressed with all earnestnesse with all the skill and Authority he had I know the opinion the world had of the Article afterward is quite differing from this censure given of it before and Numb 27. therefore they have put it into the Creed I suppose to bring the world to unity and to prevent Sedition in this Question and the accidentall blasphemies which were occasioned by their curious talkings of such secret mysteries and by their illiterate resolutions But although the Article was determin'd with an excellent spirit and we all with much reason professe to believe it yet it is another consideration whether or no it might not have been better determin'd if with more simplicity and another yet whether or no since many of the Bishops who did believe this thing yet did not like the nicety and curiosity of expressing it it had not been more agreeable to the practise of the Apostles to have made a determination of the Article by way of Exposition of the Apostles Creed and to have left this in a rescript for record to all posterity and not to have enlarged the Creed with it for since it was an Explication of an Article of the Creed of the Apostles as Sermons are of places of Scripture it was
thought by some that Scripture might with good profit and great truth be expounded and yet the expositions not put into the Canon or goe for Scripture but that left still in the naked Originall simplicity and so much the rather since that Explication was further from the foundation and though most certainly true yet not penn'd by so infallible a spirit as was that of the Apostles and therefore not with so much evidence as certainty And if they had pleased they might have made use of an admirable precedent to this and many other great and good purposes no lesse then of the blessed Apostles whose Symbol they might have imitated with as much simplicity as they did the Expressions of Scripture when they first composed it For it is most considerable that although in reason every clause in the Creed should be clear and so inopportune and unapt to variety of interpretation that there might be no place left for severall senses or variety of Expositions yet when they thought fit to insert some mysteries into the Creed which in Scripture were expressed in so mysterious words that the last and most explicite sense would still be latent yet they who if ever any did understood all the senses and secrets of it thought it not fit to use any words but the words of Scripture particularly in the Articles of Christs descending into Hell and sitting at the right hand of God to shew us that those Creeds are best which keep the very words of Scripture and that Faith is best which hath greatest simplicity and that it is better in all cases humbly to submit then curiously to enquire and pry into the mystery under the cloud and to hazard our Faith by improving our knowledge If the Nicene Fathers had done so too possibly the Church would never have repented it And indeed the experience the Church had afterwards Numb 28. shewed that the Bishops and Priests were not satisfied in all circumstances nor the schism appeased nor the persons agreed nor the Canons accepted nor the Article understood nor any thing right but when they were overborn with Authority which Authority when the scales turned did the same service and promotion to the contrary But it is considerable that it was not the Article or the Numb 29. thing it selfe that troubled the disagreeing persons but the manner of representing it For the five Dissenters Eusebius of Nicomedia Theognis Maris Theonas and Secundus believed Christ to be very God of very God but the clause of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they derided as being perswaded by their Logick that he was neither of the substance of the Father by division as a piece of a lump nor derivation as children from their Parents nor by production as buds from trees and no body could tell them any other way at that time and that made the fire to burn still And that was it I said if the Article had been with more simplicity and lesse nicety determin'd charity would have gain'd more and faith would have lost nothing And we shall finde the wisest of them all for so Eusebius Pamphilus was esteem'd published a Creed or Confession in the Synod and though he and all the rest believed that great mystery of Godlinesle Vide Sozomen lib. 2. c. 18. God manifested in the flesh yet he was not fully satisfied nor so soone of the clause of one substance till he had done a little violence to his own understanding for even when he had subscribed to the clause of one substance he does it with a protestation that heretofore he never had been acquainted nor accustomed himselfe to such speeches And the sense of the word was either so ambiguous or their meaning so uncertain that Andreas Fricius does with some probability dispute that Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 26. the Nicene Fathers by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did meane Patris similitudinem non essentiae unitatem Sylva 4. c. 1. And it was so well undestood by personages disinterested that when Arius and Euzoius had confessed Christ to be Deus verbum without inserting the clause of one substance the Emperour by his Letter approv'd of his Faith and restor'd him to his Countrey and Office and the Communion of the Church And along time after although the Article was believed with Non imprudentèr dixâ—t qui curiosae explicationi hujus mysterii dictum Aristonis Philosophi applicuâ—t Hâ—lleborus niger si crassiùs sumatur purgat senat Quum autum teritur comminuitur suffocat nicety enough yet when they added more words still to the mystery and brought in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saying there were three hypostases in the holy Trinity it was so long before it could be understood that it was believed therefore because they would not oppose their Superiours or disturb the peace of the Church in things which they thought could not be understood in so much that S. Hierom writ to Damasus in these words Discerne si placet obsecro non timebo tres hypostases dicere si jubetis and againe Obtestor beatitudinem tuam per Crucifixum mundi salutem per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Trinitatem ut mihi Epistolis tuis sive tacendarum sive dicendarum hypostaseôn detur authoritas But without all Question the Fathers determin'd the Question Numb 30. with much truth though I cannot say the Arguments upon which they built their Decrees were so good as the conclusion it selfe was certain But that which in this case is considerable is whether or no they did well in putting a curse to the foot of their Decree and the Decree it selfe into the Symbol as if it had been of the same necessity For the curse Eusebius Pamphilus could hardly finde in his heart to subscribe at last he did but with this clause that he subscribed it because the forme of curse did only forbid men to acquaint themselves with forraign speeches and unwritten languages whereby confusion and discord is brought into the Church So that it was not so much a magisteriall high assertion of the Article as an endeavour to secure the peace of the Church And to the same purpose for ought I know the Fathers composed a Form of Confession not as a prescript Rule of Faith to build the hopes of our salvation on but as a tessera of that Communion which by publike Authority was therefore established upon those Articles because the Articles were true though not of prime necessity and because that unity of confession was judg'd as things then stood the best preserver of the unity of minds But I shall observe this that although the Nicene Fathers Numb 31. in that case at that time and in that conjuncture of circumstances did well and yet their approbation is made by after Ages ex post facto yet if this precedent had been followed by all Councels and certainly they had equall power if they had thought it equally reasonable and that they had put
never receive any other Symbol then that which was composd by the Nicene Fathers And however Honorius was condemnd for a Monothelite yet in one of the Epistles which the sixth Synod alledged against him viz. the second he gave them counsell that would have done the Church as much service as the determination of the Article did for he advised them not to be curious in their disputings nor dogmaticall in their determinations about that Question and because the Church was not used to dispute in that Question it were better to preserve the simplicity of Faith then to ensnare mens consciences by a new Article And when the Emperour Constantius was by his Faction engaged in a contrary practise the inconvenience and unreasonablenesse was so great that a prudent Heathen observed and noted it in this character of Constantius Christianam religionem absolutam simplicem N. B. anili superstitione confudit In quâ scrutandâ perplexiùs quam in componendà gratiùs excitavit dissidia quae progressa fusiùs aluit concertatione verborum dum ritum omnem ad suum trahere conatur arbitrium And yet men are more lead by Example then either by Reason or by Precept for in the Councell of Constantinople one Numb 35. Article de novo integro was added viz. I believe one Baptism for the remission of sinnes and then againe they were so confident that that Confession of Faith was so absolutely intire and that no man ever after should neede to adde any thing to the integrity of Faith that the Fathers of the Councell of Ephesus pronounced Anathema to all those that should adde any thing to the Creed of Constantinople And yet for all this the Church of Rome in a Synod at Gentilly added the clause of Filioque to the Article of the procession of the holy Ghost and what they have done since all the world knowes Exempla non consistunt sed quamvis in tenuem recepta tramitem latissimè evagandi sibi faciunt potestatem All men were perswaded that it was most reasonable the limits of Faith should be no more enlarged but yet they enlarged it themselves and bound others from doing it like an intemperate Father who because he knowes he does ill himselfe enjoyns temperance to his Son but continues to be intemperate himselfe But now if I should be questioned concerning the Symbol of Numb 36. Athanasius for we see the Nicene Symbol was the Father of many more some twelve or thirteen Symbols in the space of a hundred years I confesse I cannot see that moderate sentence and gentlenesse of charity in his Preface and Conclusion as there was in the Nicene Creed Nothing there but damnation and perishing everlastingly unlesse the Article of the Trinity be believed as it is there with curiosity and minute particularities explaind Indeed Athanasius had been soundly vexed on one side and much cryed up on the other and therefore it is not so much wonder for him to be so decretory and severe in his censure for nothing could more ascertain his friends to him and dis-repute his enemies then the beliefe of that damnatory Appendix but that does not justifie the thing For the Articles themselves I am most heartily perswaded of the truth of them and yet I dare not say all that are not so are irrevocably damnd because citra hoc Symbolum the Faith of the Apostles Creed is intire and he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved that is he that believeth such a beliefe as is sufficient disposition to be baptized that Faith with the Sacrament is sufficient for heaven Now the Apostles Creed does one why therefore doe not both intitle us to the promise Besides if it were considered concerning Athanasius Creed how many people understand it not how contrary to naturall reason it seems how little the * Vide Hosum de author S. Scrip. l. 3. p. 53. Gordon Huntlaeum Tom. 1. controv 1. de verbo Dei cap. 19. Scripture sayes of those curiosities of Explication and how Tradition was not cleare on his side for the Article it selfe much lesse for those formes and minutes how himselfe is put to make an answer and excuse for the †Vide Gretser Tanner in coloq Ratisbon Eusebium fuisse Arrianum ait Perron lib. 3. cap. 2. contre le Roy Iaques Idem ait Originem negasse Divinitatem filii Spir. S. l. 2. c. 7. de Euchar. contra Duplessis idem cap. 5. observ 4. ait Irenaeum talia dixifle quae qui hodiè diceret pro Arriano reputaretur vide etiam Fisher. in resp ad 9. Quaest. Iacobi Reg. Epiphan in haeres 69. Fathers speaking in favour of the Arrians at least so seemingly that the Arrians appeald to them for tryall and the offer was declind and after all this that the Nicene Creed it selfe went not so farre neither in Article nor Anathema nor Explication it had not been amisse if the finall judgement had been left to Jesus Christ for he is appointed Judge of all the World and he shall Judge the people righteously for he knowes every truth the degree of every necessity and all excuses that doe lessen or take away the nature or malice of a crime all which I think Athanasius though a very good man did not know so well as to warrant such a sentence And put case the heresy there condemnd be damnable as it is damnable enough yet a man may maintain an opinion that is in it selfe damnable and yet he not knowing it so and being invincibly lead into it may goe to heaven his opinion shall burn and himselfe be saved But however I finde no opinions in Scripture cald damnable but what are impious in materiâ practicâ or directly destructive of the Faith or the body of Christianity such of which S. Peter speaks bringing in damnable heresies even denying the Lord that bought them these are the false Prophets who out of covetousnesse make 2 Pet. 2. 1. merchandise of you through cozening words Such as these are truly heresies and such as these are certainly damnable But because there are no degrees either of truth or salshood every true proposition being alike true that an errour is more or lesse damnable is not told us in Scripture but is determind by the man and his manners by circumstance and accidents and therefore the censure in the Preface and end are Arguments of his zeal and strength of his perswasion but they are extrinsecall and accidentall to the Articles and might as well have been spared And indeed to me it seems very hard to put uncharitablenesse into the Creed and so to make it become as an Article of Faith though perhaps this very thing was no Faith of Athanasius who if we may believe Aquinas made this manifestation of Faitth non per modum Symboli sed per modum doctrinae D. Tho. 22 ae q. 1. artic 1. ad â—um that is if I understood him right not with a purpose
of any side shall finde as many instances of this vanity almost as he finds Arguments from Scripture this fault was of old noted by S. Austin for then they had got the trick and he is angry at it neque enim putare debemus De doctri Christian. lib. 3. esse praescriptum ut quod in aliquo loco res aliqua per similitudinem significaverit hoc etiam semper significare credamus 3. Oftentimes Scriptures are pretended to be expounded by Numb 3. a proportion and Analogy of reason And this is as the other if it be well it s well But unlesse there were some intellectus universalis furnished with infallible propositions by referring to which every man might argue infallibly this Logick may deceive as well as any of the rest For it is with reason as with mens tastes although there are some generall principles which are reasonable to all men yet every man is not able to draw out all its consequences nor to understand them when they are drawn forth nor to believe when he does understand them There is a precept of S. Paul directed to the Thessalonians before they were gather'd into a body of a Church 2 Thes. 3. 6. To withdraw from every brother that walketh disorderly But if this precept were now observed I would faine know whether we should not fall into that inconvenience which S. Paul sought to avoyd in giving the same commandement to the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 5. 9. I wrote to you that yee should not company with fornicators And yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world for then yee must goe out of the world And therefore he restrains it to a quitting the society of Christians living ill lives But now that all the world hath been Christians if we should sin in keeping company with vitious Christians must we not also goe out of this world Is not the precept made null because the reason is altered and things are come about and that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are the brethren 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called brethren as S. Pauls phrase is And yet either this never was considered or not yet believed for it is generally taken to be obligatory though I think seldome practised But when we come to expound Scriptures to a certaine sense by Arguments drawn from prudentiall motives then we are in a vast plain without any sufficient guide and we shall have so many senses as there are humane prudences But that which goes further then this is a parity of reason from a plain place of Scripture to an obscure from that which is plainly set down in a Text to another that is more remote from it And thus is that place in S. Matthew forced If thy brother refuse to be amended Dic ecclesiae Hence some of the Roman Doctors argue If Christ commands to tell the Church in case of adultery or private injury then much more in case of heresy Well suppose this to be a good Interpretation Why must I stay here Why may not I also adde by a parity of reason If the Church must be told of heresy much more of treason And why may not I reduce all sinnes to the cognizance of a Church tribunall as some men doe indirectly and Snecanus does heartily and plainly If a mans principles be good and his deductions certain he need not care whether they carry him But when an Authority is intrusted to a person and the extent of his power expressed in his commission it will not be safety to meddle beyond his commission upon confidence of a parity of reason To instance once more When Christ in pasce oves tu es Petrus gave power to the Pope to govern the Church for to that sense the Church of Rome expounds those Authorities by a certain consequence of reason say they he gave all things necessary for exercise of this jurisdiction and therefore in pasce oves he gave him an indirect power over temporalls for that is necessary that he may doe his duty Well having gone thus farre we will goe further upon the parity of reason therefore he hath given the Pope the gift of tongues and he hath given him power to give it for how else shall Xavier convert the Indians He hath given him also power to command the Seas and the winds that they should obey him for this also is very necessary in some cases And so pasce oves is accipe donum linguarum and Impera ventis dispone regum diademata laicorum praedia and influentias caeli too and whatsoever the parity of reason will judge equally necessary in order to pasce ovts when a man does speak reason it is but reason he should be heard but though he may have the good fortune or the great abilities to doe it yet he hath not a certainty no regular infallible assistance no inspiration of Arguments and deductions and if he had yet because it must be reason that must judge of reason unlesse other mens understandings were of the same ayre the same constitution and ability they cannot be prescrib'd unto by another mans reason especially because such reasonings as usually are in explication of particular places of Scripture depend upon minute circumstances and particularities in which it is so easy to be deceived and so hard to speak reason regularly and alwayes that it is the greater wonder if we be not deceived 4. Others pretend to expound Scripture by the analogy of Numb 4. Faith and that is the most sure and infallible way as it is thought But upon stricter survey it is but a Chimera a thing in nubibus which varies like the right hand and left hand of a Pillar and at the best is but like the Coast of a Country to a Traveller out of his way It may bring him to his journeyes end though twenty mile about it may keep him from running into the Sea and from mistaking a river for dry land but whether this little path or the other be the right way it tells not So is the analogy of Faith that is if I understand it right the rule of Faith that is the Creed Now were it not a fine device to goe to expound all the Scripture by the Creed there being in it so many thousand places which have no more relation to any Article in the Creed then they have to Tityre tu patula Indeed if a man resolves to keep the analogy of Faith that is to expound Scripture so as not to doe any violence to any fundamentall Article he shall be sure however he erres yet not to destroy Faith he shall not perish in his Exposition And that was the precept given by S. Paul that all Prophesyings should be estimated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 6. 12. and to this very purpose S. Austin in his Exposition of Genesis by way of Preface sets down the Articles of Faith with this design and protestation of it that if he
sayes nothing against those Articles though he misse the particular sense of the place there is no danger or sinne in his Exposition but how that analogy of Faith should have any other influence in expounding such places in which those Articles of Faith are neither expressed nor involv'd I understand not But then if you extend the analogy of Faith further then that which is proper to the rule of Symbol of Faith then every man expounds Scripture according to the analogy of Faith but what His own Faith which Faith if it be questioned I am no more bound to expound according to the analogy of another mans Faith then he to expound according to the analogy of mine And this is it that is complain'd on of all sides that overvalue their own opinions Scripture seems so clearly to speak what they believe that they wonder all the world does not see it as clear as they doe but they satisfie themselves with saying that it is because they come with prejudice whereas if they had the true beliefe that is theirs they would easily see what they see And this is very true For if they did believe as others believe they would expound Scriptures to their sense but if this be expounding according to the analogy of Faith it signifies no more then this Be you of my mind and then my Arguments will seem concluding and my Authorities and Allegations pressing and pertinent And this will serve on all sides and therefore will doe but little service to the determination of Questions or prescribing to other mens consciences on any side Lastly Consulting the Originals is thought a great matter Numb 5. to Interpretation of Scriptures But this is to small purpose For indeed it will expound the Hebrew and the Greek and rectifie Translations But I know no man that sayes that the Scriptures in Hebrew and Greek are easie and certaine to be understood and that they are hard in Latine and English The difficulty is in the thing however it be expressed the least is in the language If the Originall Languages were our mother tongue Scripture is not much the easier to us and a naturall Greek or a Jew can with no more reason nor authority obtrude his Interpretations upon other mens consciences then a man of another Nation Adde to this that the inspection of the Originall is no more certain way of Interpretation of Scripture now then it was to the Fathers and Primitive Ages of the Church and yet he that observes what infinite variety of Translations of the Bible were in the first Ages of the Church as S. Hierom observes and never a one like another will think that we shall differ as much in our Interpretations as they did and that the medium is as uncertain to us as it was to them and so it is witnesse the great number of late Translations and the infinite number of Commentaries which are too pregnant an Argument that wee neither agree in the understanding of the words nor of the sense The truth is all these wayes of Interpreting of Scripture which of themselves are good helps are made either by design Numb 6. or by our infirmites wayes of intricating and involving Scriptures in greater difficulty because men doe not learn their doctrines from Scripture but come to the understanding of Scripture with preconceptions and idea's of doctrines of their own and then no wonder that Scriptures look like Pictures wherein every man in the roome believes they look on him only and that wheresoever he stands or how often soever he changes his station So that now what was intended for a remedy becomes the promoter of our disease and our meat becomes the matter of sicknesses And the mischiefe is the wit of man cannot find a remedy for it for there is no rule no limit no certain principle by which all men may be guided to a certain and so infallible an Interpretation that he can with any equity prescribe to others to believe his Interpretations in places of controversy or ambiguity A man would think that the memorable Prophesy of Jacob that the Scepter should not depart from Judah till Shiloh come should have been so clear a determination of the time of the Messias that a Jew should never have doubted it to have been verified in Jesus of Nazareth and yet for this so clear vaticination they have no lesse then twenty six Answers S. Paul and S. James seem to speak a little diversly concerning Justification by Faith and Works and yet to my understanding it is very easy to reconcile them but all men are not of my mind for Osiander in his confutation of the book which Melanchton wrote against him observes that there are twenty severall opinions concerning Iustification all drawn from the Scriptures by the men only of the Augustan Confession There are sixteen severall opinions concerning originall sinne and as many definitions of the Sacraments as there are Sects of men that disagree about them And now what help is there for us in the midst of these uncertainties If we follow any one Translation or any one Numb 7. mans Commentary what rule shall we have to chuse the right by or is there any one man that hath translated perfectly or expounded infallibly No Translation challenges such a prerogative as to be authentick but the Vulgar Latine and yet see with what good successe For when it was declared authentick by the Councell of Trent Sixtus put forth a Copy much mended of what it was and tyed all men to follow that but that did not satisfie for Pope Clement reviews and corrects it in many places and still the Decree remaines in a changed subject And secondly that Translation will be very unapt to satisfie in which one of their own men Isidore Clarius a Monk of Brescia found and mended eight thousand faults besides innumerable others which he sayes he pretermitted And then thirdly to shew how little themselves were satisfied with it divers learned men amongst them did new translate the Bible and thought they did God and the Church good service in it So that if you take this for your precedent you are sure to be mistaken infinitely If you take any other the Authors themselves doe not promise you any security If you resolve to follow any one as farre only as you see cause then you only doe wrong or right by chance for you have certainty just proportionable to your own skill to your own infallibility If you resolve to follow any one whether soever he leads we shall oftentimes come thither where we shall see our selves become ridiculous as it happened in the case of Spiridion Bishop of Cyprus who so resolv'd to follow his old book that when an eloquent Bishop who was desired to Preach read his Text Tu autem tolle cubile tuum ambula Spiridion was very angry with him because in his book it was tolle lectum tuum and thought it arrogance in the preacher
temporall felicities and this thing proceeding from so great an Authority as the testimony of Papias drew after it all or most of the Christians in the first three hundred years For besides that the Millenary opinion is expresly taught by Papias Justin Martyr Irenaus Origen Lactantius Severus Victorinus Apollinaris Nepos and divers others famous in their time Justin Martyr in his Dialogue against Tryphon sayes it was the beliefe of all Christians exactly Orthodox 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet there was no such Tradition but a mistake in Papias but I find it nowhere spoke against till Dionysins of Alexandria confuted Nepo's Book and converted Coracion the Egyptian from the opinion Now if a Tradition whose beginning of being called so began with a Scholar of the Apostles for so was Papias and then continued for some Ages upon the meer Authority of so famous a man did yet deceive the Church much more fallible is the pretence when two or three hundred years after it but commences and then by some learned man is first called a Tradition Apostolicall And so it hapned in the case of the Arrian heresy which the Nicene Fathers did confute by objecting a contrary Tradition Apostolicall as Theodoret reports Lib. 1. hist. c. 8. and yet if they had not had better Arguments from Scripture then from Tradition they would have faild much in so good a cause for this very pretence the Arrians themselves made and desired to be tryed by the Fathers of the first three hundred years which was a confutation sufficient to them who pretended Vide Petaâ— in Epiph. her 69. a clear Tradition because it was unimaginable that the Tradition should leap so as not to come from the first to the last by the middle But that this tryall was sometime declined by that excellent man S. Athanasius although at other times confidently and truly pretended it was an Argument the Tradition was not so * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matt. diâ—l ad Tryph. Iud. clear but both sides might with some fairnesse pretend to it And therefore one of the prime Founders of their heresy the Heretick †Euse. l. 5. c. ult Artemon having observed the advantage might be taken by any Sect that would pretend Tradition because the medium was plausible and consisting of so many particulars that it was hard to be redargued pretended a Tradition from the Apostles that Christ was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that the Tradition did descend by a constant succession in the Church of Rome to Pope Victors time inclusively and till Zepherinus had interrupted the series and corrupted the Doctrine which pretence if it had not had some appearance of truth so as possibly to abuse the Church had not been worthy of confutation which yet was with care undertaken by an old Writer out of whom Eusebius transcribes a large passage to reprove the vanity of the pretender But I observe from hence that it was usuall to pretend to Tradition and that it was easier pretended then confuted and I doubt not but oftner done then discovered A great Question arose in Africa concerning the Baptism of Hereticks whether it were valid or no. S. Cyprian and his party appealed to Scripture Stephen Bishop of Rome and his party would be judged by custome and Tradition Ecclesiasticall See how much the nearer the Question was to a determination either that probation was not accounted by S. Cyprian and the Bishops both of Asia and Africk to be a good Argument and sufficient to determine them or there was no certain Tradition against them for unlesse one of these two doe it nothing could excuse them from opposing a known truth unlesse peradventure S. Cyprian Firmilian the Bishops of Galatia Cappadocia and almost two parts of the World were ignorant of such a Tradition for they knew of none such and some of them expresly denyed it And the sixth generall Synod approves of the Canon made in the Councell of Carthage under Cyprian upon this very ground because in praedictorum praesulum locis solum secundum Can. 2. traditam eis consuetudinem servatus est they had a particular Tradition for Rebaptization and therefore there could be no Tradition Universall against it or if there were they knew not of it but much for the contrary and then it would be remembred that a conceal'd Tradition was like a silent Thunder or a Law not promulgated it neither was known nor was obligatory And I shall observe this too that this very Tradition was so obscure and was so obscurely delivered silently proclaimed that S. Austin who disputed against the Donatists upon this very Question was not able to prove it but L. 5. de baptism contr Donat. c. 23. by a consequence which he thought probale and credible as appears in his discourse against the Donatists The Apostles saith S. Austin prescrib'd nothing in this particular But this custome which is contrary to Cyprian ought to be believed to have come from their Tradition as many other things which the Catholike Church observes That 's all the ground and all the reason nay the Church did waver concerning that Question and before the decision of a Councell Cyprian and others might dissent without breach of charity It was plain then there was no clear Tradition Lib. 1. de baptism c. 18. in the Question possibly there might be a custome in some Churches postnate to the times of the Apostles but nothing that was obligatory no Tradition Apostolicall But this was a suppletory device ready at hand when ever they needed it and De peccat original l. 2. c. 40. contra Pelagi Caelest S. Austin confuted the Pelagians in the Question of Originall sinne by the custome of exorcisme and insufflation which S. Austin said came from the Apostles by Tradition which yet was then and is now so impossible to be prov'd that he that shall affirm it shall gaine only the reputation of a bold man and a confident 2. I consider if the report of Traditions in the Primitive Numb 4. times so neare the Ages Apostolicall was so uncertain that they were fain to aym at them by conjectures and grope as in the dark the uncertainty is much encreased since because there are many famous Writers whose works are lost which yet if they had continued they might have been good records to us as Clemens Romanus Egesippus Nepos Coracion Dionysius Areopagite of Alexandria of Corinth Firmilian and many more And since we see pretences have been made without reason in those Ages where they might better have been confuted then now they can it is greater prudence to suspect any later pretences since so many Sects have been so many warres so many corruptions in Authors so many Authors lost so much ignorance hath intervened and so many interests have been served that now the rule is to be altered and whereas it was of old time credible that that was Apostolicall whose beginning they
and promises and authority of Generall Councels For if any one man can hope to be guided by Gods Spirit in the search the pious and impartiall and unprejudicate search of truth then much more may a Generall Councell If no private man can hope for it then truth is not necessary to be found nor we are not oblig'd to search for it or else we are sav'd by chance But if private men can by vertue of a promise upon certain conditions be assured of finding out sufficient truth much more shall a Generall Councell So that I consider thus There are many promises pretended to belong to Generall Assemblies in the Church But I know not any ground nor any pretence that they shall be absolutely assisted without any condition on their own parts and whether they will or no Faith is a vertue as well as charity and therefore consists in liberty and choyce and hath nothing in it of necessity There is no Question but that they are obliged to proceed according to some rule for they expect no assistance by way of Enthusiasme if they should I know no warrant for that neither did any Generall Councell ever offer a Decree which they did not think sufficiently prov'd by Scripture Reason or Tradition as appears in the Acts of the Councels now then if they be tyed to conditions it is their duty to observe them but whether it be certaine that they will observe them that they will doe all their duty that they will not sin even in this particular in the neglect of their duty that 's the consideration So that if any man questions the Title and Authority of Generall Councels and whether or no great promises appertain to them I suppose him to be much mistaken but he also that thinks all of them have proceeded according to rule and reason and that none of them were deceived because possibly they might have been truly directed is a stranger to the History of the Church and to the perpetuall instances and experiments of the faults and failings of humanity It is a famous saying of S. Gregory that he had the foure first Councels in esteem and veneration next to the foure Evangelists I suppose it was because he did believe them to have proceeded according to Rule and to have judged righteous judgement but why had not he the same opinion of other Councels too which were celebrated before his death for he lived after the fifth Generall not because they had not the same Authority for that which is warrant for one is warrant for all but because he was not so confident that they did their duty nor proceeded so without interest as the first foure had done and the following Councels did never get that reputation which all the Catholike Church acknowledged due to the first foure And in the next Order were the three following generalls for the Greeks and Latines did never joyntly acknowledge but seven generalls to have been authentick in any sense because they were in no sense agreed that any more then seven had proceeded regularly and done their duty So that now the Question is not whether Generall Councels have a promise that the holy Ghost will assist them For every private man hath that promise that if he does his duty he shall be assisted sufficiently in order to that end to which he needs assistance and therefore much more shall Generall Councels in order to that end for which they convene and to which they need assistance that is in order to the conservation of the Faith for the doctrinall rules of good life and all that concerns the essentiall duty of a Christian but not in deciding Questions to satisfie contentious or curious or presumptuous spirits But now can the Bishops so conven'd be factious can they be abused with prejudice or transported with interests can they resist the holy Ghost can they extinguish the Spirit can they stop their eares and serve themselves upon the holy Spirit and the pretence of his assistances and cease to serve him upon themselves by captivating their understandings to his dictates and their wills to his precepts Is it necessary they should perform any condition is there any one duty for them to perform in these Assemblies a duty which they have power to doe or not doe If so then they may faile of it and not doe their duty And if the assistance of the holy Spirit be conditionall then we have no more assurance that they are assisted then that they doe their duty and doe not sinne Now let us suppose what this duty is Certainly if the Gospel Numb 2. be hid it is hid to them that are lost and all that come to the knowledge of the truth must come to it by such meanes which are spirituall and holy dispositions in order to a holy and spirituall end They must be shod with the preparation of the Gospel of peace that is they must have peaceable and docible dispositions nothing with them that is violent and resolute to encounter those gentle and sweet assistances and the Rule they are to follow is the Rule which the holy Spirit hath consign'd to the Catholike Church that is the holy Scripture either * Vid. Optat. Milev l. 5. adv Parm. Baldvin in eundem S. August in Psa. 21. Expos. 2. intirely or at least for the greater part of the Rule So that now if the Bishops bee factious and prepossest with perswasions depending upon interest it is certain they may judge amisse and if they recede from the Rule it is certain they doe judge amisse And this I say upon their grounds who most advance the authority of Generall Councels For if a Generall Councell may erre if a Pope confirm it not then most certainly if in any thing it recede from Scripture it does also erre because that they are to expect the Popes confirmation they offer to prove from Scripture now if the Popes confirmation be required by authority of Scripture and that therefore the defaillance of it does evacuate the Authority of the Councell then also are the Councels Decrees invalid if they recede from any other part of Scripture So that Scripture is the Rule they are to follow and a man would have thought it had been needlesse to have proved it but that we are fallen into Ages in which no truth is certaine no reason concluding nor is there any thing that can convince some men For Stapleton with extreme boldnesse against the piety of Christendome against the publike sense of the ancient Relect. centrov 4. q. 1. a. 3 Church and the practise of all pious Assemblies of Bishops affirmes the Decrees of a Councell to be binding etiamsi non confirmetur ne probabili testimonio Scripturarum nay though it be quite extra Scripturam but all wise and good men have ever said that sense which S. Hilary expressed in these words Quae extra Evangelium sunt non defendam This was it which the good Emperour
it upon others And upon this ground how easy it is to elude the pressure of an Argument drawn from the Authority of a Generall Councell is very remarkable in the Question about the Popes or the Councels Superiority which Question although it be defin'd for the Councell against the Pope by five Generall Councels the Councell of Florence of Constance of Basil of Pisa and one of the Lateran's yet the Jesuites to this day account this Question pro non definitâ and have rare pretences for their escape as first It is true a Councell is above a Pope in case there be no Pope or he uncertain which is Bellarmine's answer never considering whether he spake sense or no nor yet remembring that the Councell of Basil deposed Eugenius who was a true Pope and so acknowledg'd Secondly sometimes the Pope did not confirm these Councels that 's their Answer And although it was an exception that the Fathers never thought of when they were pressed with the Authority of the Councell of Ariminum or Syrmium or any other Arrian Convention yet the Councell of Basil was conven'd by Pope Martin V. then in its sixteenth Session declar'd by Eugenius the IV. to be lawfully continued and confirmed expresly in some of its Decrees by Pope Nicholas and so stood till it was at last rejected by Leo X. very many years after but that came too late and with too visible an interest and this Councell did decree fide Catholicâ tenendum Concilium esse supra Papam But if one Pope confirms it and another rejects it as it happened in this case and in many more does it not destroy the competency of the Authority and we see it by this instance that it so serves the turns of men that it is good in some cases that is when it makes for them and invalid when it makes against them Thirdly but it is a little more ridiculous in the case of the Councell of Constance whose Decrees were confirm'd by Martin V. But that this may be no Argument against them Bellarmine tells you he only confirm'd those things quae facta fuerant Conciliaritèr re diligenter examinatâ of which there being no mark nor any certain Rule to judge it it is a device that may evacuate any thing we have a mind to it was not done Conciliaritèr that is not according to our mind for Conciliaritèr is a fine new nothing that may signifie what you please Fourthly but other devices yet more pretty they have As Whether the Councell of Lateran was a Generall Councell or no they know not no nor will not know which is a wise and plaine reservation of their own advantages to make it Generall or not Generall as shall serve their turns Fifthly as for the Councell of Florence they are not sure whether it hath defin'd the Question satis apertè apertè they will grant if you will allow them not satis apertè Sixthly and lastly the Councell of Pisa is neque approbatum neque reprobatum which is the greatest folly of all and most prodigious vanity so that by Bellar. de conc l. 1. c. 8. something or other either they were not conven'd lawfully or they did not proceed Conciliariter or 't is not certain that the Councell was Generall or no or whether the Councell were approbatum or reprobatum or else it is partim confirmatum partim reprobatum or else it is neque approbatum neque reprobatum By one of these wayes or a device like to these all Councels and all Decrees shall be made to signifie nothing and to have no Authority 3. There is no Generall Councell that hath determined Numb 7. that a Generall Councell is infallible No Scripture hath recorded it no Tradition universall hath transmitted to us any such proposition So that we must receive the Authority at a lower rate and upon a lesse probability then the things consigned by that Authority And it is strange that the Decrees of Councels should be esteem'd authentick and infallible and yet it is not infallibly certain that the Councels themselves are infallible because the beliefe of the Councels infallibility is not prov'd to us by any medium but such as may deceive us 4. But the best instance that Councels are some and may all be deceived is the contradiction of one Councell to another Numb 8. for in that case both cannot be true and which of them is true must belong to another judgement which is lesse then the solennity of a Generall Councell and the determination of this matter can be of no greater certainty after it is concluded then when it was propounded as a Question being it is to be determin'd by the same Authority or by a lesse then it selfe But for this allegation we cannot want instances The Councell of Trent allowes picturing of God the Father The Councell of Nice altogether disallowes it The same Nicene Sess. 25. Councell which was the seventh Generall allows of picturing Christ in the form of a Lamb But the sixth Synod by no Act. 2. meanes will endure it as Caranza affirms The Councell of Neocaesarea confirm'd by Leo IV dist 20. de libellis and approv'd Can. 82. by the first Nicene Councell as it is said in the seventh Session of the Councell of Florence forbids second Marriages and imposes Penances on them that are married the second time forbidding Priests to be present at such Marriage Feasts Besides that this is expresly against the Doctrine of S. Paul it is also against the Doctine of the Councell of Laodicea which took off such Cap. 1. Penances and pronounced second Marriages to be free and lawfull Nothing is more discrepant then the third Councell of Carthage and the Councell of Laodicea about assignation of the Canon of Scripture and yet the sixth Generall Synod approves both And I would faine know if all Generall Councels are of the same mind with the Fathers of the Councell of Carthage who reckon into the Canon five Books of Solomon I am sure S. Austin reckoned but three and I think all Christendome L. 17. de cul Dei c. 20. beside are of the same opinion And if we look into the title of the Law de Conciliis called Concordantia discordantiarum we shall find instances enough to confirm that the Decrees of some Councels are contradictory to others and that no wit can reconcile them And whether they did or no that they might disagree and former Councels be corrected by later was the beliefe of the Doctors in those Ages in which the best and most famous Councels were conven'd as appears in that famous saying of S. Austin speaking concerning the rebaptizing of Hereticks and how much the Africans were deceived in that Question he answers the Allegation of the Bishops Letters and those Nationall Councels which confirmed S. Cyprians opinion by saying that they were no finall determination For Episcoporum literae emendari possunt à Conciliis nationalibus L. 2.
fit maxime in Angliâ haec est ratio quia in peccatis concepta fuit sicut caeteri Sancti And the Commissaries of Sixtus V. and Gregory XIII did not expunge these words but left them upon Record not only against a received and more approved opinion of the Jesuites and Franciscans but also in plain defiance of a Decree made by their visible head of the Church who if ever any thing was decreed by a Pope with an intent to oblige all Christendome decreed * Hâc in perpetuum valiturâ constitutione statuimus c. De reliquiis c. Extrav Com. Sixt. 4 cap. 1. this to that purpose So that without taking particular notice of it that egregious sophistry and flattery of the late Writers of the Roman Church is in this instance besides divers others before mentioned clearly made invalid For here the Bishop of Rome not as Numb 16. a private Doctor but as Pope not by declaring his own opinion but with an intent to oblige the Church gave sentence in a Question which the Dominicans will still account pro non determinatâ And every decretall recorded in the Canon Law if it be false in the matter is just such another instance And Alphonsus à Castro sayes it to the same purpose in the instance of Celestine dissolving Marriages for heresy Neque Caelestini error talis fuit qui soli negligentiae imputari debeat ita ut illum errasse dicamus velut privatam personam non ut Papam quoniam hujusmodi Caelestini definitio habetur in antiquis decretalibus in cap. Laudabilem titulo de conversione infidelium quam ego ipse vidi legi lib. 1. adv haeres cap. 4. And therefore 't is a most intolerable folly to pretend that the Pope cannot erre in his Chaire though he may erre in his Closet and may maintaine a false opinion even to his death For besides that it is sottish to think that either he would not have the world of his own opinion as all men naturally would or that if he were set in his Chaire he would determine contrary to himselfe in his study and therefore to represent it as possible they are faine to flie to a Miracle for which they have no colour neither instructions nor insinuation nor warrant nor promise besides that it were impious and unreasonable to depose him for heresy who may so easily even by setting himselfe in his Chaire and reviewing his Theorems be cured it is also against a very great experience For besides the former Allegations it is most notorious that Pope Alexander III in a Councell at Rome of 300 Archbishops and Bishops A. D. 1179. condemn'd Peter Lombard of heresy in a matter of great concernment no lesse then something about the incarnation from which sentence he was after 36 years abiding it absolv'd by Pope Innocent III without repentance or dereliction of the opinion Now if this sentence was not a Cathedrall Dictate as solemn and great as could be expected or as is said to be necessary to oblige all Christendome let the great Hyperaspists of the Roman Church be Judges who tell us that a particular Councell with the Popes confirmation is made Oecumenicall by adoption and is infallible and obliges all Christendome so Bellarmine And therefore he sayes that it is temerarium erroneum proximum haeresi to L. 2. de Concil cap. 5. deny it but whether it be or not it is all one as to my purpose For it is certain that in a particular Councell confirm'd by the Pope if ever then and there the Pope sate himselfe in his Chaire and it is as certain that he sate besides the cushion and determined ridiculously and falsly in this case But this is a device De Pontif. Rom. c. 14. § respondeo In 3. sent d. 24. q. in conl 6. dub 6. in fine for which there is no Scripture no Tradition no one dogmaticall resolute saying of any Father Greek or Latine for above 1000 years after Christ And themselves when they list can acknowledge as much And therefore Bellarmine's saying I perceive is believ'd by them to be true That there are many things in the * Proverbialitèr olim dictuÌ„ erat de Decretalibus Malè cum rebus humanis actum esse ex quo decretis alae accesserunt scil cum Decretales post decretum Gratiani sub nomine Gregorii noni edebantur Decretall Epistles which make not Articles to be de fide And therefore Non est necessariò credendum determinatis per summum Pontificâ—m sayes Almain And this serves their turns in every thing they doe not like and therefore I am resolved it shall serve my turn also for some thing and that is that the matter of the Pope's infallibility is so ridiculous and improbable that they doe not believe it themselves Some of them clearly practised the contrary and although Pope Leo X hath determined the Pope to be above a Councell yet the Sorbon to this day scorn it at the very heart And I might urge upon them that scorn that Almain truly enough by way of Argument alledges It is a wonder that they who affirm the Pope cannot De Authorit Eccles. cap 10. in fine erre in judgement doe not also affirm that he cannot sinne they are like enough to say so sayes he if the vitious lives of the Popes did not make a daily confutation of such flattery Now for my own particular I am as confident and think it as certain that Popes are actually deceived in matters of Christian Doctrine as that they doe prevaricate the lawes of Christian piety And therefore †L. 1. ca. 4. advers haeres edit Paris 1534. In seqq non expurgantur ista verba at idem sensus maner Alphonsus à Castro calls them impudentes Papae assentatores that ascribe to him infallibility in judgement or interpretation of Scripture But if themselves did believe it heartily what excuse is there Numb 11. in the world for the strange uncharitablenesse or supine negligence of the Popes that they doe not set themselves in their Chaire and write infallible Commentaries and determine all Controversies without errour and blast all heresies with the word of their mouth declare what is and what is not de fide that his Disciples and Confidents may agree upon it reconcile the Franciscans and Dominicans and expound all Mysteries for it cannot be imagined but he that was endued with so supreme power in order to so great ends was also fitted with proportionable that is extraordinary personall abilities succeeding and deriv'd upon the persons of all the Popes And then the Doctors of his Church need not trouble themselves with study nor writing explications of Scripture but might wholly attend to practicall devotion and leave all their Scholasticall wranglings the distinguishing opinions of their Orders and they might have a fine Church something like Fairy land or Lucians Kingdome in the Moone But if they say they
cannot doe this when they list but when they are mov'd to it by the Spirit then we are never the nearer for so may the Bishop of Angolesme write infallible Commentaries when the holy Ghost moves him to it for I suppose his motions are not ineffectuall but hee will sufficiently assist us in performing of what he actually moves us to But among so many hundred Decrees which the Popes of Rome have made or confirmed and attested which is all one I would faine know in how many of them did the holy Ghost assist them If they know it let them declare it that it may be certain which of their Decretals are de fide for as yet none of his own Church knowes If they doe not know then neither can we know it from them and then we are as uncertaine as ever and besides the holy Ghost may possibly move him and he by his ignorance of it may neglect so profitable a motion and then his promise of infallible assistance will be to very little purpose because it is with very much fallibility applicable to practise And therefore it is absolutely uselesse to any man or any Church because suppose it settled in Thesi that the Pope is infallible yet whether he will doe his duty and perform those conditions of being assisted which are required of him or whether he be a secret Simoniack for if he be he is ipso facto no Pope or whether he be a Bishop or Priest or a Christian being all uncertain every one of these depending upon the intention and power of the Baptizer or Ordainer which also are fallible because they depend upon the honesty and power of other men we cannot be infallibly certain of any Pope that he is infallible and therefore when our Questions are dermin'd we are never the nearer but may hugge our selves in an imaginary truth the certainty of finding truth out depending upon so many fallible and contingent circumstances And therefore the thing if it were true being so to no purpose it is to be presum'd that God never gave a power so impertinently and from whence no benefit can accrue to the Christian Church for whose use and benefit if at all it must needs have been appointed But I am too long in this impertinency If I were bound Numb 18. to call any man Master upon earth and to believe him upon his own affirmative and authority I would of all men least follow him that pretends he is infallible and cannot prove it For that he cannot prove it makes me as uncertaine as ever and that he pretends to infallibility makes him carelesse of using such meanes which will morally secure those wise persons who knowing their own aptnesse to be deceiv'd use what endeavours they can to secure themselves from errour and so become the better and more probable guides Well! Thus farre we are come Although we are secured in fundamentall points from involuntary errour by the plaine Numb 19. expresse and dogmaticall places of Scripture yet in other things we are not but may be invincibly mistaken because of the obscurity and difficulty in the controverted parts of Scripture by reason of the incertainty of the meanes of its Interpretation since Tradition is of an uncertain reputation and sometimes evidently false Councels are contradictory to each other and therefore certainly are equally deceiv'd many of them and therefore all may and then the Popes of Rome are very likely to mislead us but cannot ascertain us of truth in matter of Question and in this world we believe in part and prophecy in part and this imperfection shall never be done away till we be translated to a more glorious state either we must throw our chances and get truth by accident or predestination or else we must lie safe in a mutuall toleration and private liberty of perswasion unlesse some other Anchor can bee thought upon where wee may fasten our floating Vessels and ride safely SECT VIII Of the disability of Fathers or Writers Ecclesiasticall to determine our Questions with certainty and Truth THere are some that think they can determine all Questions Numb 1. in the world by two or three sayings of the Fathers or by the consent of so many as they will please to call a concurrent Testimony But this consideration will soon be at an end for if the Fathers when they are witnesses of Tradition doe not alwayes speak truth as it hapned in the case of Papias and his numerous Followers for almost three Ages together then is their Testimony more improbable when they dispute or write Commentaries 2. The Fathers of the first Ages spake unitedly concerning Numb 2. divers Questions of secret Theology and yet were afterwards contradicted by one personage of great repution whose credit had so much influence upon the world as to make the contrary opinion become popular why then may not we have the same liberty when so plain an uncertainty is in their perswasions and so great contrariety in their Doctrines But this is evident in the case of absolute predestination which till S. Austine's time no man preached but all taught the contrary and yet the reputation of this one excellent man altered the scene But if he might dissent from so Generall a Doctrine why may not we doe so too it being pretended that he is so excellent a precedent to be followed if we have the same reason he had no more Authority nor dispensation to dissent then any Bishop hath now And therefore S. Austin hath dealt ingeniously and as he took this liberty to himself so he denies it not to others but indeed forces them to preserve their own liberty And Sess. ult therefore when S. Hierom had a great mind to follow the Fathers in a point that he fancyed and the best security he had was Patiaris me cum talibus errare S. Austin would not endure it but answered his reason and neglected the Authority And therefore it had been most unreasonable that we should doe that now though in his behalfe which he towards greater personages for so they were then at that time judg'd to be unreasonable It is a plaine recession from Antiquity which was determin'd by the Councell of Florence piorum animas purgatas c. mox in Caelum recipi intueri clarè ipsum Deum trinum unum sicuti est As who please to try may see it dogmatically resolved to the contrary by a Q. 60. ad Christian. Justin Martyr b Lib. 5. Irenaeus by c Hom. 7. in Levit. Origen d Hom. 39 in 1 Cor. S. Chrysostome e In c. 11. ad Heb. Theodoret f In c. 6. ad Apoc. Arethas Caesariensis g In 16. c. Luc. Euthymius who may answer for the Greek Church and it is plaine that it was the opinion of the Greek Church by that great difficulty the Romans had of bringing the Greeks to subscribe to the Florentine Councell where the
with a menace of death to them that should disobey that all the world might know the meaning and extent of such precepts and that there is a limit beyond which they cannot command and we ought not to obey it came once to that pass that if the Priest had been obeyed in his Conciliary decrees the whole Nation had been bound to beleeve the condemnation of our blessed Saviour to have been just and at another time the Apostles must no more have preached in the name of JEsus But here was manifest error And the case is the same to every man that invincibly and therefore innocently beleeves it so Deo potius quà m hominibus is our rule in such cases For although every man is bound to follow his guide unless he beleeves his guide to mislead him yet when he sees reason against his guide it is best to follow his reason for though in this he may fall into error yet he will escape the sin he may doe violence to truth but never to his own conscience and an honest error is better then an hypocriticall profession of truth or a violent luxation of the understanding since if he retains his honesty and simplicity he cannot erre in a matter of faith or absolute necessity Gods goodness hath secur'd all honest and carefull persons from that for other things he must follow the best guides he can and he cannot be obliged to follow better then God hath given him And there is yet another way pretended of infallible Numb 3. Expositions of Scripture and that is by the Spirit But of this I shall say no more but that it is impertinent as to this question For put case the Spirit is given to some men enabling them to expound infallibly yet because this is but a private assistance and cannot be proved to others this infallible assistance may determine my own assent but shall not inable me to prescribe to others because it were unreasonable I should unless I could prove to him that I have the Spirit and so can secure him from being deceived if he relyes upon me In this case I may say as S. Paul in the case of praying with the Spirit He verily giveth thanks well but the other is not edified So that let this pretence be as true as it will it is sufficient that it cannot be of consideration in this question The result of all is this Since it is not reasonable to limit and prescribe to all mens understandings by any externall rule in the Numb 4. interpretation of difficult places of Scripture which is our rule Since no man nor company of men is secure from error or can secure us that they are free from malice interest and design and since all the wayes by which we usually are taught as Tradition Councels Decretals c. are very uncertain in the matter in their authority in their being legitimate and naturall and many of them certainly false and nothing certain but the divine authority of Scripture in which all that is necessary is plain and much of that that is not necessary is very obscure intricate and involv'd either we must set up our rest onely upon articles of faith and plain places and be incurious of other obscurer revelations which is a duty for persons of private understandings and of no publike function or if we will search further to which in some measure the guides of others are obliged it remains we inquire how men may determine themselves so as to doe their duty to God and not to diserve the Church that every such man may doe what he is bound to in his personall capacity and as he relates to the publike as a publike minister SECT X. Of the authority of Reason and that it proceeding upon best grounds is the best judge HEre then I consider that although no man may be trusted to judge for all others unless this person were infallible and Numb 1. authorized so to doe which no man nor no company of men is yet every man may be trusted to judge for himself I say every man that can judge at all as for others they are to be saved as it pleaseth God but others that can judge at all must either choose their guides who shall judge for them and then they oftentimes doe the wisest and alwayes save themselves a labour but then they choose too or if they be persons of greater understanding then they are to choose for themselves in particular what the others doe in generall and by choosing their guide and for this any man may be better trusted for himselfe then any man can be for another For in this case his own interest is most concerned and ability is not so necessary as honesty which certainly every man will best preserve in his owne case and to himselfe and if he does not it is he that must smart for 't and it is not required of us not to be in errour but that we endeavour to avoid it 2. He that followes his guide so far as his reason goes along with him or which is all one he that followes his owne reason Numb 2. not guided onely by naturall arguments but by divine revelation and all other good meanes hath great advantages over him that gives himselfe wholly to follow any humane guide whatsoever because he followes all their reasons and his own too he follows them till reason leaves them or till it seemes so to him which is all one to his particular for by the confession of all sides an erroneous Conscience binds him when a right guide does not bind him But he that gives himselfe up wholly to a guide is oftentimes I meane if he be a discerning person forc'd to doe violence to his own understanding and to lose all the benefit of his owne discretion that he may reconcile his reason to his guide And of this we see infinite inconveniences in the Church of Rome for we finde persons of great understanding oftentimes so amused with the authority of their Church that it is pity to see them sweat in answering some objections which they know not how to doe but yet beleeve they must because the Church hath said it So that if they reade study pray search records and use all the means of art and industry in the pursuite of truth it is not with a resolution to follow that which shall seem truth to them but to confirm what before they did beleeve and if any argument shall seeme unanswerable against any Article of their Church they are to take it for a temptation not for an illumination and they are to use it accordingly which makes them make the Devill to be the Author of that which Gods Spirit hath assisted them to find in the use of lawfull means and the search of truth And when the Devill of falshood is like to be cast out by Gods Spirit they say that it is through Beelzebub which was one of the worst things
that ever the Pharisees said or did And was it not a plain stifling of the just and reasonable demands made by the Emperour by the Kings of France and Spaine and by the ablest Divines among them which was used in the Councell of Trent when they demanded the restitution of Priests to their liberty of marriage the use of the Chalice the Service in the vulgar Tongue and these things not onely in pursuance of Truth but for other great and good ends even to take away an infinite scandall and a great schisme And yet when they themselves did profess it and all the world knew these reasonable demands were denyed meerly upon a politick consideration yet that these things should be fram'd into articles and decrees of faith and they for ever after bound not onely not to desire the same things but to think the contrary to be divine truths never was Reason made more a slave or more useless Must not all the world say either they must be great hypocrites or doe great violence to their understanding when they not onely cease from their claim but must also beleeve it to be unjust If the use of their reason had not been restrained by the tyrannie imperiousness of their guide what the Emperour and the Kings and their Theologues would have done they can best judge who consider the reasonableness of the demand and the unreasonableness of the denyall But we see many wise men who with their Optandum esset ut Ecclesia licentiam daret c. proclaime to all the world that in some things they consent and doe not consent and doe not heartily beleeve what they are bound publickly to profess and they themselves would cleerly see a difference if a contrary decree should be fram'd by the Church they would with an infinite greater confidence rest themselves in other propositions then what they must beleeve as the case now stands and they would find that the authority of a Church is a prejudice as often as a free and modest use of reason is a temptation 3. God will have no man pressed with anothers inconveniences in matters spirituall and intellectuall no mans salvation to depend Numb 3. upon another and every tooth that eats sowre grapes shall be set on edge for it selfe and for none else and this is remarkable in that saying of God by the Prophet If the Prophet ceases to Ezek. 33. tell my people of their sins and leads them into error the people shall die in their sins and the blood of them I will require at the hands of that Prophet Meaning that God hath so set the Prophets to guide us that we also are to follow them by a voluntary assent by an act of choice and election For although accidentally and occasionally the sheep may perish by the shepherds fault yet that which hath the chiefest influence upon their finall condition is their owne act and election and therefore God hath so appointed guides to us that if we perish it may be accounted upon both our scores upon our own and the guides too which sayes plainly that although we are intrusted to our guides yet we are intrusted to our selves too Our guides must direct us and yet if they faile God hath not so left us to them but he hath given us enough to our selves to discover their failings and our own duties in all things necessary And for other things we must doe as well as we can But it is best to follow our guides if we know nothing better but if we doe it is better to follow the pillar of fire than a pillar of cloud though both possibly may lead to Canaan But then also it is possible that it may be otherwise But I am sure if I doe my own best then if it be best to follow a Guide and if it be also necessary I shall be sure by Gods grace and my own endeavour to get to it But if I without the particular ingagement of my own understanding follow a guide possibly I may be guilty of extream negligence or I may extinguish Gods Spirit or doe violence to my own reason And whether intrusting my self wholly with another be not a laying up my talent in a napkin I am not so well assured I am certain the other is not And since another mans answering for me will not hinder but that I also shall answer for my self as it concerns him to see he does not wilfully misguide me so it concerns me to see that he shall not if I can help it if I cannot it will not be required at my hands whether it be his fault or his invincible error I shall be charg'd with neither 4. This is no other then what is enjoyned as a duty For since Numb 4. God will be justified with a free obedience and there is an obedience of understanding as well as of will and affection it is of great concernment as to be willing to beleeve what ever God sayes so also to enquire diligently whether the will of God be so as is pretended Even our acts of understanding are acts of choice Mat. 15. 10. Joh. 5. 40. 1 Joh. 4. 1. Ephes. 5. 17. Luk. 24. 25. Rom. 3. 11. 1. 28. Apoc. 2. 2. Act. 17. 11. and therefore it is commanded as a duty to search the Scriptures to try the spirits whether they be of God or no of our selves to be able to judge what is right to try all things and to retaine that which is best For he that resolves not to consider resolves not to be carefull whether he have truth or no and therefore hath an affection indifferent to truth or falshood which is all one as if he did choose amiss and since when things are truly propounded and made reasonable and intelligible we cannot but assent and then it is no thanks to us we have no way to give our wills to God in matters of beliefe but by our industry in searching it and examining the grounds upon which the propounders build their dictates And the not doing it is oftentimes a cause that God gives a man over 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into a reprobate and undiscerning mind and understanding 5. And this very thing though men will not understand it is Numb 5. the perpetuall practice of all men in the world that can give a reasonable account of their faith The very Catholike Church it selfe is rationabilis ubique diffusa saith Optatus reasonable as Lib. 3. well as diffused every where For take the Proselites of the Church of Rome even in their greatest submission of understanding they seem to themselves to follow their reason most of all For if you tell them Scripture and Tradition are their rules to follow they will beleeve you when they know a reason for it and if they take you upon your word they have a reason for that too either they beleeve you a learned man or a good man or that you can have
no ends upon them or something that is of an equall height to fit their understandings If you tell them they must beleeve the Church you must tell them why they are bound to it and if you quote Scripture to prove it you must give them leave to judge whether the words alledged speak your sense or no and therefore to dissent if they say no such thing And although all men are not wise and proceed discreetly yet all make their choice some way or other He that chooses to please his fancie takes his choice as much as he that chooses prudently And no man speaks more unreasonably then he that denyes to men the use of their Reason in choice of their Religion For that I may by the way remove the common prejudice Reason and Authority are not things incompetent or repugnant especially when the Authority is infallible and supreme for there is no greater reason in the world then to beleeve such an authority But then we must consider whether every authority that pretends to be such is so indeed And therefore Deus dixit ergo hoc verum est is the greatest demonstration in the world for things of this nature But it is not so in humane dictates and yet reason and humane authority are not enemies For it is a good argument for us to follow such an opinion because it is made sacred by the authority of Councells and Ecclesiasticall Tradition and sometimes it is the best reason we have in a question and then it is to be strictly followed but there may also be at other times a reason greater than it that speaks against it and then the authority must not carry it But then the difference is not between reason and authority but between this reason and that which is greater for authority is a very good reason and is to prevaile unless a stronger comes and disarms it but then it must give place So that in this question by Reason I doe not meane a distinct Topick but a transcendent that runs through all Topicks for Reason like Logick is instrument of all things else and when Revelation and Philosophie and publick Experience and all other grounds of probability or demonstration have supplyed us with matter then Reason does but make use of them that is in plain terms there being so many wayes of arguing so many sects such differing interests such variety of authority so many pretences and so many false beliefes it concernes every wise man to consider which is the best argument which proposition relies upon the truest grounds if this were not his only way why doe men dispute and urge arguments why do they cite Councels Fathers why do they alledge Scripture and Tradition and all this on all sides and to contrary purposes If we must judge then we must use our reason if we must not judge why doe they produce evidence Let them leave disputing and decree propositions magisterially but then we may choose whether we will believe them or no or if they say we must believe them they must prove it and tell us why And all these disputes concerning Tradition Councells Fathers c. are not arguments against or besides reason but contestations and pretences to the best arguments and the most certain satisfaction of our reason But then all these comming into question submit themselves to reason that is to be judged by humane understanding upon the best grounds and information it can receive So that Scripture Tradition Councells and Fathers are the evidence in a question but Reason is the Judge That is we being the persons that are to be perswaded we must see that we be perswaded reasonably and it is unreasonable to assent to a lesser evidence when a greater and cleerer is propounded but of that every man for himselfe is to take cognisance if he be able to judge if he be not he is not bound under the tye of necessity to know any thing of it that that is necessary shall be certainly conveyed to him God that best can will certainly take care for that for if he does not it becomes to be not necessary or if it should still remain necessary and he damned for not knowing it and yet to know it be not in his power then who can help it there can be no further care in this business In other things there being no absolute and prime necessity we are left to our liberty to judge that way that makes best demonstration of our piety and of our love to God and truth not that way that is alwayes the best argument of an excellent understanding for this may be a blessing but the other onely is a duty And now that we are pitch'd upon that way which is most naturall Numb 6. and reasonable in determination of our selves rather then of questions which are often indeterminable since right reason proceeding upon the best grounds it can viz. of divine revelation and humane authority and probability is our guide Stando in humanis and supposing the assistance of Gods Spirit which he never denies them that faile not of their duty in all such things in which he requires truth and certainty it remaines that we consider how it comes to pass that men are so much deceived in the use of their reason and choice of their Religion and that in this account we distinguish those accidents which make error innocent from those which make it become a heresie SECT XI Of some causes of Errour in the exercise of Reason which are inculpate in themselves 1. THen I consider that there are a great many inculpable causes of Errour which are arguments of humane imperfections Numb 1. not convictions of a sinne And 1. the variety of humane understandings is so great that what is plaine and apparent to one is difficult and obscure to another one will observe a consequent from a common principle and another from thence will conclude the quite contrary When S. Peter saw the vision of the sheet let downe with all sorts of beasts in it and a voice saying Surge Petre macta manduca if he had not by a particular assistance beene directed to the meaning of the holy Ghost possibly he might have had other apprehensions of the meaning of that vision for to my selfe it seemes naturally to speake nothing but the abolition of the Mosaicall rites and the restitution of us to that part of Christian liberty which consists in the promiscuous eating of meates and yet besides this there want not some understandings in the world to whom these words seeme to give Saint Peter a power to kill hereticall Princes Me thinkes it is a strange understanding that makes such extractions but Bozius and Baronius did so But men may understand what they please especially when they are to expound Oracles It was an argument of some wit but of singularity of understanding that hapned in the great contestation betweene the Missalls of Saint Ambrose and
bibliotheca capit It is impossible for any industry to consider so many particulars in the infinite numbers of questions as are necessary to be consider'd before we can with certainty determine any And after all the considerations which we can have in a whole age we are not sure not to be deceived The obscurity of some questions the nicety of some articles the intricacy of some revelations the variety of humane understandings the windings of Logicke the tricks of adversaries the subtilty of Sophisters the ingagement of educations personall affections the portentous number of writers the infinity of authorities the vastnesse of some arguments as consisting in enumeration of many particulars the uncertainty of others the severall degrees of probability the difficulties of Scripture the invalidity of probation of tradition the opposition of all exteriour arguments to each other and their open contestation the publicke violence done to authors and records the private arts and supplantings the falsifyings the indefatigable industry of some men to abuse all understandings and all perswasions into their owne opinions these and thousands more even all the difficulty of things and all the weaknesses of man all the arts of the Devill have made it impossible for any man in so great variety of matter not to be deceived No man pretends to it but the Pope and no man is more deceived then he is in that very particular 3. From hence proceeds a danger which is consequent to this proceeding for if we who are so apt to be deceived so insecure Numb 4. in our resolution of questions disputable should persecute a dis-agreeing person we are not sure we doe not fight against God for if his proposition be true and persecuted then because all truth derives from God this proceeding is against God and therefore this is not to be done upon Gamaliel's ground lest peradventure we be found to fight against God of which because we can have no security at least in this case we have all the guilt of a doubtfull or an uncertaine Conscience For if there be no security in the thing as I have largely proved the Conscience in such cases is as uncertaine as the question is and if it be not doubtfull where it is uncertaine it is because the man is not wise but as confident as ignorant the first without reason and the second without excuse And it is very disproportionable for a man to persecute another certainly for a proposition that if he were wise he would know is not certaine at least the other person may innocently be uncertaine of it If he be kill'd he is certainly kill'd but if he be call'd hereticke it is not so certaine that he is an hereticke It were good therefore that proceedings were according to evidence and the rivers not swell over the banks nor a certaine definitive sentence of death pass'd upon such perswasions which cannot certainly be defin'd And this argument is of so much the more force because we see that the greatest persecutions that ever have been were against truth even against Christianity it selfe and it was a prediction of our blessed Saviour that persecution should be the lot of true beleevers and if we compute the experience of suffering Christendome and the prediction that truth should suffer with those few instances of suffering hereticks it is odds but persecution is on the wrong side and that it is errour and heresie that is cruell and tyrannicall especially since the truth of Jesus Christ and of his Religion are so meeke so charitable and so mercifull and we may in this case exactly use the words of S. Paul But as then he that was borne after the flesh persecuted him that was borne after the spirit even so it is now and so it ever will be till Christs second coming Numb 5. 4. Whoever persecutes a disagreeing person armes all the Quo comperto illi in nostram pemiciem licentiore audacia grassabuntur S Aug. epist. ad Dona. Procons Contr. ep Fund ita nunc debeo sustinére tantâ patientiâ vobiscum agere quantâ mecum egerunt proximi mei cum in vestro dogmate rabiosus ac cacus errâ—rem world against himselfe and all pious people of his owne perswasion when the scales of authority return to his adversary and attest his contradictory and then what can he urge for mercy for himselfe or his party that sheweth none to others If he sayes that he is to be spared because he beleeves true but the other was justly persecuted because he was in errour he is ridiculous For he is as confidently beleeved to be a heretick as he beleeves his adversary such and whether he be or no being the thing in question of this he is not to be his owne judge but he that hath authority on his side will be sure to judge against him So that what either side can indifferently make use of it is good that neither would because neither side can with reason sufficient doe it in prejudice of the other If a man will say that every man must take his adventure and if it happens authority to be with him he will persecute his adversaries and if it turnes against him he will bear it as well as he can and hope for a reward of Martyrdome and innocent suffering besides that this is so equall to be said of all sides and besides that this is a way to make an eternall disunion of hearts and charities and that it will make Christendome nothing but a shambles and a perpetuall butchery and as fast as mens wits grow wanton or confident or proud or abused so often there will be new executions and massacres Besides all this it is most unreasonable and unjust as being contrariant to those Lawes of Justice and Charity whereby we are bound with greater zeale to spare and preserve an innocent then to condemne a guilty person and there 's lesse malice and iniquity in sparing the guilty then in condemning the good Because it is in the power of men to remit a guilty person to divine judicature and for divers causes not to use severity but in no case is it lawfull neither hath God at all given to man a power to condemne such persons as cannot be proved other than pious and innocent And therefore it is better if it should so happen that we should spare the innocent person and one that is actually deceiv'd then that upon the turn of the wheele the true believers should be destroyed And this very reason he that had authority sufficient and absolute to make Lawes was pleased to urge as a reasonable inducement Numb 6. for the establishing of that Law which he made for the indemnity of erring persons It was in the parable of the tares mingled with the good seed in Agro dominico the good seed Christ himselfe being the interpreter are the Children of the Kingdome the tares are the children of the wicked one upon this comes
the greatest vanity in the world For when God hath made a Promise pertaining also to our Children for so our Adversaries contend and we also acknowledge in its true sense shall not this Promise this word of God be of sufficient truth certainty and efficacy to cause comfort unlesse we tempt God and require a sign of him May not Christ say to these men as sometime to the Jewes a wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign but no sign shall be given unto it But the truth on 't is this Argument is nothing but a direct quarrelling with God Almighty Now since there is no strength in the Doctrinall part the Numb 23. practise and precedents Apostolicall and Ecclesiasticall will be of lesse concernment if they were true as is pretended because actions Apostolicall are not alwayes Rules for ever it might be fit for them to doe it pro loco tempore as divers others of their Institutions but yet no engagement past thence upon following Ages for it might be convenient at that time in the new spring of Christianity and till they had engag'd a considerable party by that meanes to make them parties against the Gentiles Superstition and by way of pre-occupation to ascertain them to their own sect when they came to be men or for some other reason not trasmitted to us because the Question of fact it selfe is not sufficiently determin'd For the insinuation of that precept of baptizing all Nations of which Children certainly are a part does as little advantage as any of the rest because other parallel expressions of Scripture doe determine and expound themselves to a sence that includes not all persons absolutely but of a capable condition as adorate eum omnes gentes psallite Deo omnes nationes terrae and divers more As for the conjecture concerning the Family of Stephanus Numb 24. at the best it is but a conjecture and besides that it is not prov'd that there were Children in the Family yet if that were granted it followes not that they were baptized because by whole Families in Scripture is meant all persons of reason and age within the Family for it is said of the Ruler at Capernaum Ioh. 4. that he believed and all his house Now you may also suppose that in his house were little Babes that is likely enough and you may suppose that they did believe too before they could understand but that 's not so likely and then the Argument from baptizing of Stephen's houshold may bee allowed just as probable But this is unman-like to build upon such slight aery conjectures But Tradition by all meanes must supply the place of Scripture Numb 25. and there is pretended a Tradition Apostolicall that Infants were baptized But at this we are not much moved For we who rely upon the written Word of God as sufficient to establish all true Religion doe not value the Allegation of Tradions And however the world goes none of the Reformed Churches can pretend this Argument against this opinion because they who reject Tradition when t is against them must not pretend it at all for them But if wee should allow the Topick to be good yet how will it be verified for so farre as it can yet appeare it relies wholly upon the Testimony of Origen for from him Austin had it Now a Tradition Apostolicall if it be not consign'd with a fuller Testimony then of one person whom all after-Ages have condemn'd of many errors will obtain so little reputation amongst those who know that things have upon greater Authority pretended to derive from the Apostles and yet falsly that it will be a great Argument that he is credulons and weak that shall be determin'd by so weak probation in matters of so great concernment And the truth of the businesse is as there was no command of Scripture to oblige Children to the susception of it so the necessity of Paedobaptism was not determin'd in the Church till in the eighth Age after Christ but in the yeare 418 in the Milevitan Councell a Provinciall of Africa there was a Canon made for Paedo-baptism never till then I grant it was practiz'd in Africa before that time and they or some of them thought well of it and though that be no Argument for us to think so yet none of them did ever before pretend it to be necessary none to have been a precept of the Gospel S. Austin was the first that ever preach'd it to be absolutely necessary and it was in his heat and anger against Pelagius who had warm'd and chafed him so in that Question that it made him innovate in other doctrines possibly of more concernment then this And that although this was practised anciently in Africa yet that it was without an opinion of necessity and not often there nor at all in other places we have the Testimony of a learned Paedo-baptist Ludovicus Vives who in his Annotations upon S. Austin De Civit. Dei l. 1. c. 27. affirms Neminem nisi adultum antiquitùs solere baptizari But besides that the Tradition cannot be proved to be Apostolicall we have very good evidence from Antiquity that it Numb 26. was the opinion of the Primitive Church that Infants ought not to be baptiz'd and this is clear in the sixth Canon of the Councell of Neocaesarea The words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sence is this A woman with child may be baptized when she please For her Baptism concernes not the child The reason of the connexion of the parts of that Canon is in the following words because every one in that Confession is to give a demonstration of his own choyce and election Meaning plainly that if the Baptism of the Mother did also passe upon the child it were not fit for a pregnant woman to receive Baptism because in that Sacrament there being a Confession of Faith which Confession supposes understanding and free choyce it is not reasonable the child should be consign'd with such a mystery since it cannot doe any act of choyce or understanding The Canon speaks reason and it intimates a practise which was absolutely universall in the Church of interrogating the Catechumens concerning the Articles of Creed Which is one Argument that either they did not admit Infants to Baptism or that they did prevaricate egregiously in asking Questions of them who themselves knew were not capable of giving answer And to supply their incapacity by the Answer of a Godfather Numb 27. Quid ni necesse est sie legit Franc. Iunius in notis ad Tertul. sponsores eti am periculo ingeri qui ipsi per mortalitatem destituere promissiones suas possint proventu malae indolis falli Tertul lib. de baptis cap. 18. is but the same unreasonablenesse acted with a worse circumstance And there is no sensible account can be given of it for that which some imperfectly murmure concerning stipulations civill perform'd by Tutors in
these times have been called the last times for 1600 years together our expectation of the Great revelation is very neer accomplishing what a Grand innovation of Ecclesiasticall government contrary to the faith practice of Christendome may portend now in these times when we all expect Antichrist to be revealed is worthy of a jealous mans inquiry Secondly Episcopacy 2. if we consider the finall cause was instituted as an obstructive to the diffusion of Schisme and Heresy So in 1. ad Titū S. Hierome In toto orbe decretum est ut unus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur coeteris VT SCHISMATVM SEMINA TOLLERENTUR And therefore if Vnity and division be destructive of each other then Episcopacy is the best deletery in the world for Schisme and so much the rather because they are in eâdem materiâ for Schisme is a division for things either personall or accidentall which are matters most properly the subject of government and there to be tryed there to receive their first and last breath except where they are starv'd to death by a desuetude and Episcopacy is an Unity of person governing and ordering persons and things accidentall and substantiall and therefore a direct confronting of Schisme not only in the intention of the author of it but in the nature of the institution Now then although Schismes alwaies will be and this by divine prediction which clearly showes the necessity of perpetuall Episcopacy and the intention of its perpetuity either by Christ himselfe ordaining it who made the prophecy or by the Apostles and Apostolick men at least who knew the prophecy yet to be sure these divisions and dangers shall be greater about and at the time of the Great Apostacy for then were not the houres turned into minutes an universall ruine should seize all Christendome No flesh should be saved if those daies were not shortned is it not next to an evidence of fact that this multiplication of Schismes must be removendo prohibens and therefore that must be by invalidating Episcopacy ordayn'd as the remedy and obex of Schisme either tying their hands behind them by taking away their coercion or by putting out their eyes by denying them cognisance of causes spirituall or by cutting off their heads and so destroying their order How farre these will lead us I leave to be considered This only Percute pastores atque oves despergentur and I believe it will be verified at the comming of that wicked one I saw all Israel scattered upon the Mountaines as sheep having no sheapheard I am not new in this conception I learn't it of S. Cyprian Christi adversarius Ecclesiae ejus inimicus Epist. 55. ad hoc ECCLESIae PRAEPOSITVM suâ infestatione persequitur ut Gubernatore sublato atrociùs atque violentiùs circà Ecclesiae naufragin grassetur The adversary of Christ and enemy of his Spouse therefore persecutes the Bishop that having taken him away he may without check pride himselfe in the ruines of the Church and a little after speaking of them that are enemies to Bishops he sayes that Antichristi jam propinquantis adventum imitantur their deportment is just after the guise of Antichrist who is shortly to be revealed But be this conjecture vaine or not the thing of it selfe is of deep consideration and the Catholick practise of Christendome for 1500 years is so insupportable a prejudice against the enemies of Episcopacy that they must bring admirable evidence of Scripture or a cleare revelation proved by Miracles or a contrary undoubted tradition Apostolicall for themselves or else hope for no beliefe against the prescribed possession of so many ages But before I begin mee thinks in this contestation ubi potior est conditio possidentis it is a considerable Question what will the Adversaries stake against it For if Episcopacy cannot make its title good they loose the benefit of their prescribed possession If it can I feare they will scarce gain so much as the obedience of the adverse party by it which yet already is their due It is very unequall but so it is ever when Authority is the matter of the Question Authority never gaines by it for although the cause goe on its side yet it looses costs and dammages for it must either by faire condescention to gain the adversaries loose something of it selfe or if it asserts it selfe to the utmost it is but where it was but that seldome or never happens for the very questioning of any authority hoc ipso makes a great intrenchment even to the very skirts of its cloathing But hûc deventumest Now we are in we must goe over FIrst then that wee may build upon a Rock §. 1. Christ did institute a governement in his Church Christ did institute a government to order and rule his Church by his authority according to his lawes and by the assistance of the B. Spirit 1. If this were not true how shall the Church be governed For I hope the adversaries of Episcopacy that are so punctuall to pitch all upon Scripture ground will be sure to produce cleare Scripture for so maine a part of Christianity as is the forme of the Government of Christs Church And if for our private actions and duties Oeconomicall they will pretend a text I suppose it will not be thought possible Scripture should make default in assignation of the publick Government insomuch as all lawes intend the publick and the generall directly the private and the particular by consequence only and comprehension within the generall 2. If Christ himselfe did not take order for a government then we must derive it from humane prudence and emergency of conveniences and concurse of new circumstances and then the Government must often be changed or else time must stand still and things be ever in the same state and possibility Both the consequents are extreamely full of inconvenience For if it be left to humane prudence then either the government of the Church is not in immediate order to the good and benison of soules or if it be that such an institution in such immediate order to eternity should be dependant upon humane prudence it were to trust such a rich commodity in a cock-boat that no wise Pilot will be supposed to doe But if there be often changes in government Ecclesiasticall which was the other consequent in the publike frame I meane and constitution of it either the certain infinity of Schismes will arise or the dangerous issues of publick inconsistence and innovation which in matters of religion is good for nothing but to make men distrust all and come the best that can come there will be so many Church governments as there are humane Prudences For so if I be not mis-informed it is abroad in some townes that have discharged Simler de rep Helvet fol. 148. 172. Episcopacy At S t Galles in Switzerland there the Ministers and Lay-men rule in Common but a Lay-man is president But the
Whence it is evident that then it was the beliefe of Christendome that the holy Ghost was by no ordinary ministery given to faithfull people after Baptisme but only by Apostolicall or Episcopall consignation and imposition of hands What also the faith of Christendome was concerning the Minister of confirmation and that Bishops only could doe it I shall make evident in the descent of this discourse Here the scene lies in Scripture where it is cleare that S. Philip one of the 72. Disciples as antiquity reports him and an Evangelist and a Disciple as Scripture also expresses him could not impose hands for application of the promise of the Father and ministeriall giving of the holy Ghost but the Apostles must goe to doe it and also there is no example in Scripture of any that ever did it but an Apostle and yet this is an ordinary Ministery which de jure ought de facto alwaies was continued in the Church Therefore there must alwaies be an ordinary office of Apostleship in the Church to doe it that is an office above Presbyters for in Scripture they could never doe it and this is it which we call Episcopacy 3. THe Apostles were rulers of the whole § 9. And Superiority of Iurisdiction Church each Apostle respectively of his severall Diocesse when he would fixe his chaire had superintendency over the Presbyters and the people and this by Christs donation the Charter is by the Fathers said to be this Sicut misit me Pater Iohn 20. 21. sic ego mitto vos As my Father hath sent me even so send I you Manifesta enim est sententiae Domini nostri Iesu Christi Apostolos suos mittentis Lib. 7. de baptism Contra Donatist c. 43. vide etiam S. Cyprian de Unit. Eccles. S. Cyrill in Ioh. lib. 12. c. 55. ipsis solis potestatem à Patre sibi datam permittentis quibus nos successimus eâdem potestate Ecclesiam Domini gubernantes said Clarus à Musculâ the Bishop in the Councell of Carthage related by S. Cyprian and S. Austin But however it is evident in Scripture that the Apostles had such superintendency over the inferior Clergy Presbyters I mean and Deacons and a superiority of jurisdiction and therefore it is certain that Christ gave it them for none of the Apostles took this honour but he that was called of God as was Aaron 1. Our blessed Saviour gave to the Apostles plenitudinem potestatis It was sicut misit me Pater c. As my Father sent so I send You my Apostles whom I have chosen This was not said to Presbyters for they had no commission at all given to them by Christ but at their first mission to preach repentance I say no commission at all they were not spoken to they were not present Now then consider Suppose that as Aërius did deny the Divine institution of Bishops over the Presbyters cum grege another as confident as he should deny the Divine institution of Presbyters what proof were there in all the holy Scripture to shew the Divine institution of them as a distinct order from Apostles or Bishops Indeed Christ selected 72. and gave them commission to preach but that commission was temporary and expired before the crucifixion for ought appeares in Scripture If it be said the Apostles did ordaine Presbyters in every City it is true but not sufficient for so they ordained Deacons at Ierusalem and in all established Churches and yet this will not tant ' amount to an immediate Divine institution for Deacons and how can it then for Presbyters If we say a constant Catholick traditive interpretation of Scripture does teach us that Christ did institute the Presbyterate together with Episcopacy and made the Apostles Presbyters as well as Bishops this is true But then 1. We recede from the plain words of Scripture and rely upon tradition which in this question of Episcopacy will be of dangerous consequence to the enimies of it for the same tradition if that be admitted for good probation is for Episcopall preheminence over Presbyters as will appeare in the sequel 2. Though no use be made of this advantage yet to the allegation it will be quickly answered that it can never bee proved from Scripture that Christ made the Apostles Priests first and then Bishops or Apostles but only that Christ gave them severall commissions and parts of the office Apostolicall all which being in one person cannot by force of Scripture prove two orders Truth is if we change the scene of warre and say that the Presbyterate as a distinct order from the ordinary office of Apostleship is not of Divine institution the proof of it would be harder then for the Divine institution of Episcopacy Especially if we consider that in all the enumerations of the parts of Clericall Ephes. 4. 1. Corinth 12. offices there is no enumeration of Presbyters but of Apostles there is and the other members of the induction are of guifts of Christianity or parts of the Apostolate and either must inferre many more orders then the Church ever yet admitted of or none distinct from the Apostolate insomuch as Apostles were Pastors and Teachers and Evangelists and Rulers and had the guift of tongues of healing and of Miracles This thing is of great consideration and this use I will make of it That either Christ made the 72 to be Presbyters and in them instituted the distinct order of Presbyterate as the ancient Church alwaies did believe or else he gave no distinct commission for any such distinct order If the second be admitted then the Presbyterate is not of immediate divine institution but of Apostolicall only as is the Order of Deacons and the whole plenitude of power is in the order Apostolicall alone and the Apostles did constitute Presbyters with a greater portion of their own power as they did Deacons with a lesse But if the first be said then the commission to the 72 Presbyters being only of preaching that we find in Scripture all the rest of their power which now they have is by Apostolicall ordinance and then although the Apostles did admit them in partem sollicitudinis yet they did not admit them in plenitudinem potestatis for then they must have made them Apostles and then there will be no distinction of order neither by Divine nor Apostolicall institution neither I care not which part be chosen one is certain but if either of them be true then since to the Apostles only Christ gave a plenitude of power it followes that either the Presbyters have no power of jurisdiction as affixed to a distinct order and then the Apostles are to rule them by vertue of the order and ordinary commission Apostolicall or if they have jurisdiction they doe derive it à fonte Apostolorum and then the Apostles have superiority of Iurisdiction over Presbyters because Presbyters only have it by delegation Apostolicall And that I say truth besides that
Iohn were and the Elders of the Church of Ierusalem * 4. Suppose this had beene true in the sense that any body please to imagine yet this not being by any divine ordinance that Presbyters should by their Counsell assist in externall regiment of the Church neither by any intimation of Scripture nor by affirmation of S. Hierome it is sufficient to stifle this by that saying of S. Ambrose Postquà m omnibus in Ephes. 4. locis Ecclesiae sunt constitutae officia ordinata alitèr composita res est quà m caperat It might be so at first de facto and yet no need to be so neither then nor after For at first Ephesus had no Bishop of it 's owne nor Crete and there was no need for S. Paul had the supra-vision of them and S. Iohn and other of the Apostles but yet afterwards S. Paul did send Bishops thither for when themselves were to goe away the power must be concredited to another And if they in their absence before the constituting of a Bishop had intrusted the care of the Church with Presbyters yet it was but in dependance on the Apostles and by substitution not by any ordinary power and it ceased at the presence or command of the Apostle or the sending of a Bishop to reside 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epist. ad Antioch So S. Ignatius being absent from his Church upon a businesse of being persecuted he writ to his Presbyters Doe you feed the flock amongst you till God shall shew you who shall be your Ruler viz. My Successor No longer Your commission expires when a Bishop comes * 5. To the conclusion of S. Hieromes discourse viz. That Bishops are not greater then Presbyters by the truth of divine disposition I answer that this is true in this sense Bishops are not by Divine disposition greater then all those which in Scripture are called Presbyters such as were the Elders in the Councell at Ierusalem such as were they of Antioch such as S. Peter and S. Iohn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all and yet all of them were not Bishops in the present sense that is of a fixt and particular Diocesse and Iurisdiction * 2 ly S. Hieromes meaning is also true in this sense Bishops by the truth of the Lords disposition are not greater then Presbyters viz. quoad exercitium actûs that is they are not tyed to exercise jurisdiction solely in their owne persons but may asciscere sibi Presbyteros in commune consilium they may delegate jurisdiction to the Presbyters and that they did not so but kept the exercise of it only in their owne hands in S. Hieromes time this is it which he saith is rather by custome then by Divine dispensation for it was otherwise at first viz. de facto and might be so still there being no law of God against the delegation of power Episcopall * As for the last words in the objection Et in communi debere Ecclesiam regere it is an assumentum of S. Hieromes owne for all his former discourse was of the identity of Names and common regiment de facto not de jure and from a fact to conclude with a Debere is a Non sequitur unlesse this Debere be understood according to the exigence of the former arguments that is THEY OUGHT not by Gods law but in imitation of the practise Apostolicall to wit when things are as they were then when the Presbyters are such as then they were THEY OUGHT for many considerations and in Great cases not by the necessity of a Divine precept * And indeed to doe him right he so explaines himselfe Et in communi debere Ecclesiam regere imitantes Moysen qui cùm haberet in potestate solus praeesse populo Israel septuaginta elegit cum quibus populum judicaret The Presbyters ought to Iudge in common with the Bishop for the Bishops ought to imitate Moses who might have rul'd alone yet was content to take others to him and himselfe only to rule in chiefe Thus S. Hierome would have the Bishops doe but then he acknowledges the right of sole jurisdiction to be in them and therefore though his Councell perhaps might be good then yet it is necessary at no time and was not followed then and to be sure is needlesse now * For the arguments which S. Hierome uses to prove this his intention what ever it is I have and shall else where produce for they yeeld many other considerations then this collection of S. Hierome and prove nothing lesse then the equality of the offices of Episcocy and Presbyterate The same thing is per omnia respondent to the paralell place of a In 1. Tim. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Homil. 11. S. Chrysostome It is needlesse to repeat either the objection or answer * But however this saying of S. Hierome and the paralell of S. Chrysostome is but like an argument against an Evident truth which comes forth upon a desperate service and they are sure to be kill'd by the adverse party or to runne upon their owne Swords For either they are to be understood in the senses above explicated and then they are impertinent or else they contradict evidence of Scripture and Catholike antiquity and so are false and dye within their owne trenches I end this argument of tradition Apostolicall with that saying of S. Hierome in the same place Postquam Vnusquisque eos quos baptizabat suos putabat esse non Christi diceretur in populis Ego sum Pauli Ego Apollo Ego autem Cephae in toto orbe decretum est ut Vnus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur caeteris ut schismatum semina tollerentur That is a publike decree issued out in the Apostles times that in all Churches one should be chosen out of the Clergy and set over them viz. to rule and governe the flock commited to his charge This I say was in the Apostles times even upon the occasion of the Corinthian schisme for then they said I am of Paul and I of Apollo and then it was that he that baptized any Catechumens tooke them for his owne not as Christs disciples So that it was tempore Apostolorum that this decree was made for in the time of the Apostles S. Iames and S. Marke and S. Timothy and S. Titus were made Bishops by S. Hieromes expresse attestation It was also toto orbe decretum so that if it had not beene proved to have beene an immediate Divine institution yet it could not have gone much lesse it being as I have proved and as S. Hierome acknowledges CATHOLIKE and APOSTOLICK * BEe ye followers of me as I am of Christ is an Apostolicall precept We have § 22. And all this hath beene the faith practise of Christendome seene how the Apostles have followed Christ how their tradition is consequent of Divine institution Next let us see how the Church hath followed the Apostles as the Apostles have followed Christ. CATHOLIKE
of the present distemperatures and necessities by my own thoughts by the Questions and Scruples the Sects and names the interests and animosities which at this day and for some years past have exercised and disquieted Christendome Thus farre I discourst my selfe into imployment and having come thus farre I knew not how to get farther for I had heard of a great experience how difficult it was to make Brick without Straw and here I had even seene my design blasted in the bud and I despaired in the Calends of doing what I purposed in the Ides before For I had no Books of my own here nor any in the voisinage and but that I remembred the result of some of those excellent Discourses I had heard your Lordship make when I was so happy as in private to gather up what your temperance and modesty forbids to be publick I had come in praelia inermis and like enough might have far'd accordingly I had this only advantage besides that I have chosen a Subject in which if my own reason does not abuse me I needed no other books or aides then what a man carries with him on horse-back I meane the common principles of Christianity and those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which men use in the transactions of the ordinary occurrences of civill society and upon the strength of them and some other collaterall assistances I have run through it utcunque and the sum of the following Discourses is nothing but the sense of these words of Scripture That since we know in part and prophesy in part 1 Cor. 13. and that now we see through a glasse darkly wee should not despise or contemn persons not so knowing as our selves but him that is weak in the faith Rom. 14. we should receive but not to doubtfull disputations Therefore certainly to charity and not to vexations not to those which are the idle effects of impertinent wranglings And provided they keep close to the foundation which is Faith and Obedience let them build upon this foundation matter more or lesse precious yet if the foundation be intire they shall be saved with or without losse And since we professe our selves servants of so meek a Master and Disciples of so charitable an Institute Let us walk worthy of the vocation wherewith we are called with all lowlinesse and meeknesse with long suffering forbearing Ephes. 4. 2 3. one another in love for this is the best endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit when it is fast tyed in the bond of peace And although it be a duty of Christianity that we all speak the 1 Cor. 1. 10. same thing that there be no divisions among us but that we be perfectly joyned together in the same mind and in the same judgement yet this unity is to bee estimated according to the unity of faith in things necessary in matters of Creed and Articles fundamentall for as for other things it is more to be wished then to be hoped for there are some doubtfull Disputations and in such the Scribe the Rom. 14. Wise the Disputer of this world are most commonly very farre from certainty and many times from truth There are diversity of perswasions in matters adiaphorous as meats and drinks and holy dayes c. and both parties the affirmative and the negative affirm and deny with innocence enough for the observer and he that observes not intend both to God and God is our common Master we all fellow servants and not the judge of each other in matters of conscience or doubtfull Disputation And every man that hath faith must have it to himselfe before God but no man must either in such matters judge his brother or set him at nought but let us follow after the things which make for peace and things wherewith one may edifie another And the way to doe that is not by knowledge but by charity for knowledge puffeth up but 1 Cor. 8. 1. charity edifieth and since there is not in every man the same knowledge but the conscience of some are Vers. 7. weak as my liberty must not be judged of another 1 Cor. 10. 29. mans weak conscience so must not I please my selfe so much in my right opinion but I must also take order that his weak conscience be not offended or despised for no man must seek his own but every man Ibid anothers wealth And although we must contend earnestly for the faith yet above all things we must put on charity which is the bond of perfectnesse And therefore this contention must be with arms fit for the Christian warfare the sword of the Spirit and the shield of Faith and preparation of the Gospel of peace instead of shooes and a helmet of salvation but not with Colos. 3. 14. other armes for a Church-man must not be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a striker for the weapons of our warfare are not carnall but spirituall and the persons that use them ought to be gentle and easy to be intreated and we must give an account of our faith to them that ask us with meeknesse and humility for so is the will of God that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men These and thousands more to the same purpose are the Doctrines of Christianity whose sense and intendment I have prosecuted in the following Discourse being very much displeased that so many opinions and new doctrines are commenc'd among us but more troubled that every man that hath an opinion thinks his own and other mens salvation is concern'd in its maintenance but most of all that men should be persecuted and afflicted for disagreeing in such opinions which they cannot with sufficient grounds obtrude upon others necessarily because they cannot propound them infallibly and because they have no warrant from Scripture so to doe For if I shall tie other men to believe my opinion because I think I have place of Scripture which seems to warrant it to my understanding why may he not serve up another dish to me in the same dresse and exact the same task of me to believe the contradictory And then since all the Hereticks in the world have offered to prove their Articles by the same meanes by which true believers propound theirs it is necessary that some separation either of Doctrine or of persons be clearly made that all pretences may not be admitted nor any just Allegations be rejected and yet that in some other Questions whether they be truly or falsly pretended if not evidently or demonstratively there may be considerations had to the persons of men and to the Laws of charity more then to the triumphing in any opinion or doctrine not simply necessary Now because some doctrines are clearly not necessary and some are absolutely necessary why may not the first separation be made upon this difference and Articles necessary be only urg'd as necessary and the rest left to men indifferently as they
were by the Scripture indeterminately And it were well if men would as much consider themselves as the Doctrines and think that they may as well be deceiv'd by their own weaknesse as perswaded by the Arguments of a Doctrine which other men as wise call inevident For it is a hard case that we shall think all Papists and Anabaptists and Sacramentaries to be fooles and wicked persons certainly among all these Sects there are very many wise men and good men as well as erring and although some zeales are so hot and their eyes so inflamed with their ardors that they doe not think their Adversaries look like other men yet certainly we find by the results of their discourses and the transactions of their affaires of civill society that they are men that speak and make syllogismes and use reason and read Scripture and although they do no more understand all of it then we doe yet they endeavour to understand as much as concerns them even all that they can even all that concerns repentance from dead works and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ And therefore me thinks this also should be another consideration distinguishing the persons for if the persons be Christians in their lives and Christians in their profession if they acknowledge the Eternall Sonne of God for their Master and their Lord and live in all relations as becomes persons making such professions why then should I hate such persons whom God loves and who love God who are partakers of Christ and Christ hath a title to them who dwell in Christ and Christ in them because their understandings have not been brought up like mine have not had the same Masters they have not met with the same books nor the same company or have not the same interest or are not so wise or else are wiser that is for some reason or other which I neither doe understand nor ought to blame have not the same opinions that I have and do not determine their Schoole Questions to the sense of my Sect or interest But now I know before hand that those men who will endure none but their own Sect will make all manner of attemps against these purposes of charity and compliance and say I or doe I what I can will tell all their Proselytes that I preach indifferency of Religion that I say it is no matter how we believe nor what they professe But that they may comply with all Sects and doe violence to their own consciences that they may be sav'd in all Religions and so make way for a colluvies of Heresies and by consequence destroy all Religion Nay they will say worse then all this and but that I am not used to their phrases and formes of declamation I am perswaded I might represent fine Tragedies before hand And this will be such an objection that although I am most confident I shall make apparent to be as false and scandalous as the Objectors themselves are zealous and impatient yet besides that I believe the Objection will come where my answers will not come or not be understood I am also confident that in defiance and incuriousnesse of all that I shall say some men will persist pertinaciously in the accusation and deny my conclusion in despite of mee well but however I will try And first I answer that whatsoever is against the foundation of Faith or contrary to good life and the lawes of obedience or destructive to humane society and the publick and just interests of bodies politick is out of the limits of my Question and does not pretend to complyance or toleration So that I allow no indifferency nor any countenance to those Religions whose principles destroy Government nor to those Religions if there be any such that teach ill life nor doe I think that any thing will now excuse from beliefe of a fundamentall Article except stupidity or sottishnesse and naturall inhability This alone is sufficient answer to this vanity but I have much more to say Secondly The intendment of my Discourse is that permissions should be in Questions speculative indeterminable curious and unnecessary and that men would not make more necessities then God made which indeed are not many The fault I find and seek to remedy is that men are so dogmaticall and resolute in their opinions and impatient of others disagreeings in those things wherein is no sufficient meanes of union and determination but that men should let opinions and problemes keep their own forms and not be obtruded as axiomes nor questions in the vast collection of the systeme of Divinity be adopted into the family of Faith And I think I have reason to desire this Thirdly It is hard to say that he who would not have men put to death or punished corporally for such things for which no humane Authority is sufficient either for cognisance or determination or competent for infliction that he perswades to an indifferency when he referres to another Judicatory which is competent sufficient infallible just and highly severe No man or company of men can judge or punish our thoughts or secret purposes whilest they so remaine and yet it will be unequall to say that he who owns this Doctrine preaches it lawfull for men to think or purpose what they will And so it is in matters of doubtfull disputation such as are the distinguishing Articles of most of the Sects of Christendome So it is in matters intellectuall which are not cognoscible by a secular power in matters spirituall which are to be discerned by spirituall Authority which cannot make corporall inflictions and in Questions indeterminate which are doubtfully propounded or obscurely and therefore may be in utramque partem disputed or believed for God alone must be Judge of these matters who alone is Master of our souls and hath a dominion over humane understanding and he that sayes this does not say that indifferency is perswaded because God alone is Judge of erring persons Fourthly No part of this Discourse teaches or encourages variety of Sects and contradiction in opinions but supposes them already in being and therefore since there are and ever were and ever will be variety of opinions because there is variety of humane understandings and uncertainty in things no man should be too forward in determining all Questions nor so forward in prescribing to others nor invade that liberty which God hath left to us intire by propounding many things obscurely and by exempting our souls and understandings from all power externally compulsory So that the restraint is laid upon mens tyranny but no license given to mens opinions they are not considered in any of the Conclusions but in the premises only as an Argument to exhort to charity So that if I perswade a license of discrediting any thing which God hath commanded us to believe and allow a liberty where God hath not allowed it let it be shewn and let the Objection presse as hard as it can but to say that men are