and conversion from sin and without new obedience to Christ Commandments Which all is so plainly and expresly taught in the undoubted Word of God especially in the Five aforementioned principal Points that every Christian may sufficiently understand them unto his salvation and hath been unanimously professed in the Primitive Apostolike Church But whatsoever is not so clearly and expresly taught in the Word of God as a necessary Article of Faith Love and Obedience towards Christ nor hath been understood and taught out of the same in the Primitive Church That very same though it dependeth from it by a necessary consequence and therefore may be true doctrine and agreeable to Scripture yet it cannot be necessary for them who do not understand it as yet and retain onely the Fundamental doctrine it self the saving faith and love towards Christ at least so long till God enlighteneth and bringeth their understanding to a fuller knowledge of the Truth which they in the fear of God ought daily to search into Whereby we do conclude further that We ought also not to judge one another according to the aforesaid rule of the Apostle in these doctrines Especially when the other may produce Motives and reasons to the contrary and such which are taken not from natural reason but from the Word of God and therefore bindeth not onely his understanding but also his conscience that he cannot receive such doctrines for fear of sinning against God and his Word but must at least doubt of them For in such a case we must say Whosoever doubteth if he eateth if he receiveth them is damned by his own conscience And rather according to the Apostle's exhortation in such controversies of doctrines We must receive him that is weak in faith but not to doubtful disputations Who art thou that judgest another mans servant To his own master he standeth or falleth Let us therefore not judge one another any more but judge this rather that no man put a stumbling-block or offence of conscience in his brothers way CHAP. IV. That the Romane Catholike Church hath no ground to Judge and condemn the Protestant Reformed Evangelical Churches as Heretical HAving laid this ground we may easily and as much as is necessary for every ones conscience unto salvation deliver our Judgement and Opinion concerning the Modern differences and dissentions in matters of Religion which among the Christians that make on all sides profession of the written Word of God contained in the Old and New Testament are fomented and aggravated meerly out of an Unseasonable and Uncharitable judging and condemning with such vehemency and bitternesse yea with such great effusion of blood and lamentable devastation of Countreys that never the like was heard of any other Religion in the world At this present I will make but a short Application to the Three principal divided and dissenting Churches Differences betwixt the Romane Catholikes Lutheran and Reformed Churches which are dispersed in the Occidental Christian World thorowout whole Provinces and Kingdoms As first the said Romane Catholikes or Papists so called who besides the holy Scriptures are grounded upon the traditions of the Church and especially upon the Councel of Trent and generally are altogether subjected and depend on the Pope of Rome as being their Supreme Head and Judge in matters of Religion and Conscience as the Churches in Italy Spain and the greater part in France Germany and Poland Then the Protestant Evangelical Lutherans as they themselves will be called who besides the holy Scripture professe Confessionem Agustanam Saxonicam formulam Concordiae as their Symbolical and Universal Books of doctrine not that they ground principally their Faith and Religion upon them but that they hold the doctrine and opinions of them conformable to Scripture and necessary unto Salvation as in Germany especially in high and lowe Saxony some Churches in Swaben Francony Westphaly Hessen c. and without Germany the Churches in Denmark Sweden and Prussia although there is some difference perceived betwixt them because some have not received hitherto as yet the said formulam Saxonicam and some of them have collected their own peculiar Corpora doctrinae Confessions and Books of Doctrine Thirdly those Evangelical Christian Protestants who because they will not be bound and tied to any man's whether it be Luther's Calvin's Zuinglius or any other's Doctrine or Books and therefore not be named by any man's name but have purged and reformed their Doctrine and Religion from the abuses of Popery onely according to the written Word of God are commonly called Reformed by some Papists they are called Biblists or Scripture-men of which name they need not to be ashamed because they are grounded on and refer themselves wholly to the holy Bible as the Churches in England Scotland Helvetia the United Provinces of the Low-Countreys all the reformed Churches in France with some particular Churches in Germany Poland Hungary c. Which though they have collected and framed also their peculiar Confessions yet not with the intent to binde other Christians consciences even to their word but onely to testifie their Unanimous consent and Uniformitie first and principally in the necessary fundamental Points of salvation out of the manifest Word of God then secondarily in the confutation and rejecting of the erroneous By-doctrines especially those of the Popish Churches which have no ground in the Word of God but are è diametro opposite to it by a necessary consequence And withal to decline and refute all sorts of calumnies and slanders of their Adversaries Wherefore also they by a special Confession of theirs do not reject the Confession of others especially that of Augspourg though there be some difference in words remaining much lesse do presume to condemn other Eastern and Western Churches because of some different opinions or Ceremonies if onely they do agree with them in the fundamental points of doctrine and for the rest withhold themselves from condemning others And even for these very same reasons have I hitherto addicted my self to the Confession of these Reformed Churches and am resolved with Gods assistance to persevere in it even unto death not onely because I acknowledge in the controverted Points the doctrine of these Churches I say Their own doctrine which they themselves Vnanimously professe to be consonant and agreeable to Scripture but especially because besides the Indubitable Universal Fundamental Doctrines and necessary Articles of faith which they with one consent receive they do not maintain or impose upon others any other doctrine as necessary unto salvation which in it self and by Gods command is not but impart and permit to every one the due libertie of Conscience and also do neither deny pervert or mutilate any part or articles of the true Gospel of Christ nor introduce any other By-Gospel or By-articles or judge or condemn others for it Whereas other Churches principally the Papists and partly the Lutherans if they do not quite deny any necessary point of true
as they do the Second Commandment concerning Images will they judge us therefore Should we not have the liberty to teach and to learn the Commandments of God as God himself hath spoken them from heaven and with his own finger graved them in the Two Tables of stone Whereas we tolerate the Omission of the Commandment of Images in them that hold it not absolutely necessary for Children and Ignorants though we cannot approve thereof nor excuse it especially seeing what great Idolatry it hath bred in Popery and that the said Commandment doth extend as well to the Children and Idiots as to the Priests and Levites yea we conceive it to be most necessary for those being naturally bent to Images and Idolatry Also in the differences in Doctrine of Faith that in the holy Communion by eating Sacramentally the blessed bread and wine we believe onely a Spiritual partaking or communion and presence of the Body and Blood of Christ and not a carnal and corporal Neither believe Vbiquity or Omnipresence of Christs Body but the Omnipresent power vertue and raigning of Christ true God and Man even in those places where his Body is not present Nor an Vniversal reconciliation and propitiation by Christs death whereby indifferently all men whether they do believe or not believe repent or not repent have remission of their sins already But whereby principally Repentance and Faith is required from all in general and withal forgivenesse of sins and life in Christ is faithfully offered and promised and consequently really and effectually conferred and given to those onely who effectually believe and repent Nor also an Vniversal Election of all men unto Salvation but onely of the Believers and yet so that they are not elected by and according to their faith or works which God hath foreseen in them before the election much lesse that they should be saved without faith or without good works But so that they are elected out of a meer special grace in Christ even to this end that they through faith might be converted from the bondage of sins to be adopted unto children of God and to good works and made fit for to walk therein and obtain everlasting Salvation Will they for these or other such like points of Controversie in Doctrine for the most part arising from thence judge and condemn us as Hereticks as most of them use to do then they must first prove that their opinions and manner of expressions in those points which they so fiercely insist upon and whereon commonly all the controversie dependeth are not onely agreeable to Truth but also absolutely necessary unto Salvation But we shall sooner prove those not to be warrantable by Scripture then they shall make them good to be necessary seeing we cannot finde any wherein the Word of God the truth much lesse the necessity thereof For what is then that is necessary unto salvation We agree already both in this against the Papists namely that whatsoever is necessary unto salvation is plainly and expresly taught in the holy Scripture but whatsoever are onely bare words of men and Humane Traditions and Doctrines ought and must not be necessary unto salvation though otherwise they are not repugnant to truth Wherefore they must first prove that such opinions and manner of expressions of theirs which they esteem to be necessary are expresly taught in the Scripture and yet so that we also may certainly and undoubtedly conceive them to be grounded thereon as a necessary point of saving Faith and obedience to Christ They will say That they have proved it already sufficiently and abundantly if not by words of the Scripture it self at least by equivalent words and by a necessary consequence drawn out of them And that we therefore onely will not receive and condescend unto it because it is contrary and repugnant to our natural reason As for Example When the Lord speaketh of the Bread Take eat this is my Body they make it to be equivalent as if he had said Eat my Body in and with the bread and that he meant a natural corporal and carnal eating Likewise when the Lord said I am with you till to the end of the world they infer that his Body also is present with us because Jesus Christ or his Godhead is nowhere without his Body or separated from it But although this may seem to them in their Reason to be a clear and plain Exposition or a necessary Consequence yet we examining and comparing not onely our Reason but also the words of Christ himself and not the Five words by themselves alone but all the words of the whole Institution together yea of the whole Scripture we finde the Contrary a great deal clearer and plainer that the words of Christ are not agreeable to their Interpretation nor their Consequence of any validity much lesse of necessity For indeed this is plain and manifest that Christ saying to his disciples Take eat spoke of the bread which he took brake and gave to them and that he meant there a corporal carnal visible and natural eating of the bread And it is also manifest and evident that he spoke of that bread This which I have broken and given This bread which ye take and eat This is my Body which shall be given for you But that this is to be understood after a carnal and corporal manner so that his body who sate with them at Table and reached to them the bread hath been Invisibly in and under the bread and eaten though supernaturally with their carnal mouth is no ways clear and manifest But they themselves and the Papists also notwithstanding they adhere and insist both upon the literal sense yet they cannot agree among themselves in their pretended literal meaning and besides they both must confesse that they are words of peculiar Mysteries which ought to be Mystically and Sacramentally understood Wherefore it is yet more clear and manifest since Spiritual things must be compared with Spiritual 1 Cor. 2.13 that these words also after the na ure and propriety of other Sacraments must have a Spiritual meaning as the Lord himself saith of the eating of his Body and the drinking of his Blood The words that I speak unto you they are Spirit and they are Life Joh. 6 63. As both Papists and Lutherans must acknowledge that in the Lords Supper is principally required a Spiritual eating We have also many pregnant motives which are not onely grounded upon Natural Reason but upon the words of the Institution it self upon the undoubted Articles of the Christian Faith and upon many other manifest places of the Scripture and therefore binde not onely our Vnderstanding but our Consciences that we cannot receive by any means their Interpretation concerning the Invisible body in the bread and the carnal eating thereof which may be common both to the unbelieving and ungodly Hypocrites and also to the believing because it doth more evidently appear to be repugnant to these words of God
grounded upon the Word of God or at least that it should not be necessary unto salvation for us who do not acknowledge and receive it But when he will absolutely have his word parallel with Gods Word even in those points which we cannot but judge to be evidently repugnant to the Word of God and so in stead of Christ will be a Lord over our souls and consciences and of the Universal Christian Church on earth Certainly those can no ways be blamed who not onely give him no credit therein at all but by reason of that proclame him to be the Antichrist Now since we may not grant this power to the Popes at Rome although they had entangled by their perswasion and kept in subjection during many hundred yeers in the Western Church so many Emperours and Kings yea all Doctours Bishops and Prelates how much lesse may we impart it to any other Pastor and Teacher of Gods Church of what name soever And he that should ascribe perhaps to Luther or Calvin Jerome Austin Abuses of mens particular opinions and interpretations amongst the Evangelical c. or to any particular Convocations as to the Authors Formulae Concordiae Sax. as also to whole and National Synods that their own particular Interpretations Consequences Iâ—lations Manner of expressions were as certain and infallible or as necessary unto Salvation as the word of God it self what is it else but to make of Luther of Calvin and the rest so many Popes of such Convocations and Assemblies so many Popish Councels yea to prefer in some manner mens words and opinions before the holy Scripture as if they in some points had expressed themselves better and with more perspicuity and circumspection For my part I confesse that Dr Luther and Calvin have in the principal and most Points though not in all well truely and profitably expounded the Scripture because they have compared and declared for the most part Scripture by Scripture I acknowledge also that the Doctrine of the Confession and Apologie of Augspourg with other Confessions of the Reformed Churches Also the Doctrine of the Synod at Derdrecht is true and agreeable in it self to Scripture in those Articles that have been handled and concluded therein though withal I doubt not but some other Teachers of our Churches have yet expressed themselves better and more perspicuously in some one or other point of the holy Scripture But that we should hold their declarations and particular opinions and expressions as indubitable and necessary unto salvation as the Word of God it self and presently judge and condemn those for Hereticks who do not fully receive them They themselves as much as I know have never yet required it But those who under the name of Lutherans addict themselves to the profession of the Formulae Concordiae Saxonicae when they not onely binde and tie their Ministers to it by a solemn Oath but also us who do not receive in points of Controversies their expositions expressions and inferences contained therein for thorowly agreeable to Scripture what is that then but to judge and condemn us as Hereticks From whence must necessarily follow that their expressions and opinions ought to be as certain and undoubted and as necessary unto salvation as the Word of God it self which indeed would be a plain New Popery They use to accuse us Who are those that make the natural reason to be the foundation and rule of their Faith that we make our Natural Reason the foundation and rule of our Faith Whereas we principally insist thereupon that we ought not to ground any Article of Faith upon humane Reason but meerly upon the plain manifest and undoubted Word of God We make use of our Reason having been enlightned and brought unto the knowledge of Christ as of a requisite means whereby to learn to understand the holy Scripture for without Reason it cannot be understood How far the Reason may be used in matters of Faith That we also ought to infer out of the Scripture whatsoever by a necessary consequence dependeth from it and is agreeable to it as much as we by Gods grace are able to comprehend it or to refute and to reject whatsoever is repugnant to it And that we ought reverently to apply the holy Scripture unto Doctrine Consolation and Admonition yet so that we do not oblige and binde any man in his conscience further to those Interpretations and Inferences we in our understanding derive out of the Scripture then himself together with us is able to understand them to be warrantable by it and the Word of God doth binde thereunto But those who cry up their own Interpretations Inferences and Expressions not onely for True Doctrines but even for Necessary Articles of Faith insomuch that they judge and condemn as Hereticks all others that do not acknowledge them to be agreeable to Scripture They are those who make their Own reason and understanding to be the foundation and rule of their Faith and yet not onely of their own but of other mens Faith and of the Universal Christian Church They are those who make themselves new Popes and Infallible Judges in matters of Religion and Conscience Which honour we cannot give to any man living on earth but to God alone and his undeniable Word contained in the Books of the Old and New Testament as also all the Protestant Churches in whole Europe have Unanimously always against Popery referred themselves thereunto Neverthelesse we do not reject all consequences and interpretations How far we may make use of Consequences and Interpretations in matters of Faith nor all mens expressions though they are not verbally and literally set down in the Scripture as also we do not disapprove the Translation of the Scripture into other Languages We rather confesse that many Inferences and Interpretations may be very good profitable sound and necessary in themselves and that we may many times of necessity use them for the confutation of several Errours But we cannot ascribe further to any mans Interpretations and Consequences an Vniversal necessitie unto salvation for all Christians then we have declared already namely when they are so clear and manifest that they may be understood and received for certain and undeniable of all Christians or of those for whom they shall be necessary especially when they have been acknowledged and taught undoubtedly and with one accord in the true Primitive Church and therefore may be called true Catholike expositions Now those that do not acknowledge our Expositions to be such How far those that dissent are to be tolerated we may not therefore on our part judge and condemn them as Hereticks but we must receive and tolerate them as weak in faith according to the Doctrine of the Apostle Neverthelesse upon this condition that they reciprocally do not enforce upon us and others as necessary their own Interpretations and Inferences to the contrary nor we being willing to forbear and tolerate their
as it hath been said many times heretofore Which we may illustrate with one or two Examples As the first Chapter of John which the Primitive Church whose Writings and Doctrines are descended and conveyed to us whereof no doubt but it hath together with the Books of the Scripture received also from the Apostles themselves the true meaning thereof at least in the principal necessary points of which this si one hath Unanimously and Undoubtedly interpreted of the Son of God who was in the beginning of all things as the Substantial Word with the Father If the Modern Socinians interpret it of the beginning of the Gospel and the humane nature of Christ to the end that they may deny the Article of Christs Godhead we rightly reject such Interpretation not onely as not necessary but as false and heretical not that it is onely contrary to our Interpretation but that it is so manifestly repugnant to the words of Saint John that the Primitive Church hath with one consent taught the contrary Insomuch also that none of the Ancient Arrians or Photinians to our and all Modern Socinians knowledge ever thus understood or expounded it But Socinus was the first man as he himself must confesse that spun this Interpretation out of his own head wherein at first his own brethren have partly contradicted him Yet since that time hath he together with his followers preferred it as if it were the undeniable Word of God it self and a most necessary Interpretation before the words of Saint John and the Uniform meaning of the Primitive Church Which may not be done without great presumption nor if it be obstinately urged without damnable Heresie principally in such a deep important and necessary Article of Faith as it is accounted not onely by us but the true Primitive Church and the word of God it self On the other side if they in such profound and incomprehensible Mysterie did adhere positively and closely without mutilation and contention to the words of the Scripture nor added thereunto their own Interpretations and Inferences of their reasoning beyond and against the Articles of Faith we should then have no cause to judge them so sharply though they would not receive or use all our expositions or humane expressions Likewise when Socinus and his followers do wrest and pervert so many manifest places of the Scripture which speak of Christs death that he died for the propitiation satisfaction and remission of our sins to this sense as if he had not appeased Gods wrath against us or which is as much made satisfaction to appease Gods wrath or purchased propitiation and forgivenesse but that he died meerly to this end that he might by his doctrine and example convert us from our sins to God and to pacifie our hearts towards him And account their own Interpretations as worthy and necessary as Gods Word it self So that they grievously slight and revile the Doctrine concerning the reconcilation of Gods wrath against us and the satisfaction for our sins which neverthelesse is so manifestly and evidently taught by so many testimonies of the Scripture that the Universal Christian Church hath professed it with one accord at all times and ever therefore held Jesus Christ for its onely High-Priest Mediatour and Saviour Insomuch that even the greatest Papists though they supply by way of concomitancy the merits of Christ by the Intercession and merits of other Saints and their own merits and satisfaction the daily Sacrifice of Masse Indulgences Purgatory and such like things yet have not denied the propitiation by Christs merits and satisfaction nor any other Sectary as far as we know nor Pelagius himself hath directly opposed it except onely Socinus and perhaps before him Adailerdus Whereas Socinus himself cannot but acknowledge that the Mediatour of the Old Testament Moses hath in some manner appeased by his intercession as Aaron and some other high-Priests by their Sacrifices Gods wrath against his people of Israel and yet will deny such power and vertue of the propitiation for our sins to the most-perfect Obedience Sacrifice and Intercession of our Mediatour and high-Priest Jesus Christ Who seeth not then that they intend arrogantly to prefer their own singular Interpretations before the manifest Word of God and the unanimous consent of the Universal Christian Church and thereby as much as lies in their power shake and subvert the very foundation of our chief consolation in Jesus Christ The Second Objection against the aforesaid Doctrine In the Second place may be objected against the aforesaid ground of Saving Truth and Unitie that neverthelesse the Primitive Christian Church hath condemned many Sects not onely for not receiving the plain words of the Scripture but also for refusing the Interpretations and words of the Church For example The ancient Arrians in the Councell of Nicen and others Chap. 8. for not receiving the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Consubstantial alledging that such a word was not to be found in the Scripture But we Answer to this That they were not condemned even for this bare word but rather because of their peculiar Arrian phrase and expressions and expositions concerning the created Divinitie of Christ Against whom the Orthodoxall and true-beleeving Church did very earnestly insist upon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which though not in the letter yet it is found in the Scripture more plainly and evidently and more conformably to the unanimous understanding and meaning which the Churches in the first three hundred yeers professed concerning the eternall God-head of Christ not that it was directly necessary unto Salvation but conducible to the confutation of the ambiguous terms and opinions of the Arrians Otherwise there hath been in those times true-beleeving Bishops who though they had rejected the Arrian Heresie concerning the created Divinitie of Christ and yet doubted of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it was not to be found literally in the Scripture were therefore not condemned but tolerated as weak in Faith This very same we may say of all other ancient Sectaries Macedonius Nestorius Eutiches Pelagius which were at all times condemned for their singular new fangled Interpretations out of the word of God according to the unanimous meaning and doctrine of the Churches in the first three or four hundred yeers CHAP. VIII That in the Reformed Churches no new Doctrin as necessary to Salvation is taught IN the third place it will be objected The Third Objection against the aformentioned Doctrine That we our selves defend many doctrines as necessary unto salvation which yet neither in the Scripture were so plainly expressed nor unanimously taught in the Primitive Church I will give but a touch in some few but principall Instances That we deny the free will in man the merits of good works and the Sacrifice of the Masse Which points were with one consent asserted of all ancient Fathers almost That we teach the Justification ex Solâ fide onely by Faith That we hold the
points of their doctrine and Ceremonies to be ereoneous and false and if not directly yet by a necessary consequence repugnant to the word of God and some Articles of faith Neverthelesse if but they who have not the knowledge yet of such consequence account their owne opinions agreeable to Scripture might not impose them or theirs as necessary Articles of faith but let us enjoy therein our liberty of Conscience If they also would leave to our freedome such Ceremonies of theirs as they themselves will have held as free indifferent things and consequently would tolerate and receive us and our teachers as true Christians or at least as weake brethren in faith though we cannot assent to their owne peculiar opinions as some peaceable Divines amongst them Paulus Eberus David Chytraeus Christopherus Donaver Nicolaus Hemmingius and principally Philippus Melanchton besides many others of his Followers yea whole Congregations and Churches especially in the Kingdom of Poland and great Dutchy of Lithuania a great while since have declared themselves Wee should then have no reason at all yea we were rather to be blamed and should be Schismaticks indeed if we of our owne accord should with-draw and separate our selves from them because of such different opinions and Ceremonies Of whom we yet acknowledge and confesse that for the rest if they doe not make their owne opinions to be necessary fundamentall points they retaine with us the true ground of Christs saving Doctrine and are exempted in their Religion from a publick and manifest Idolatrie And for these reasons have our Churches and Divines at all times most faithfully earnestly and zealously sought to procure and settle a Christian reconcilement and Unitie as formerly in Luthers time in the conference at Marpurg An. 1529 in the Concordia at Wittenberg Anno 1536. and in later years the Palatine and others in their Declarations for Ecclesiasticall peace which also were reassumed in the Conference at Leiprig Anno 1631. As likewise at those present times many eminent Divines beyond Sea in England France and Scotland whose opinions and assistance therein as that Reverend and worthy man Mr. Iohn Duray hath solicited with a singular industry and zeale to a peaceable Unitie and Reconcilement faithfully and sincerely wish advise in their publick Writings such an Unanimitie Uniformitie amongst the Churches in Germany Whence it sufficiently appeareth that we for our part are not inclined to judge and to condemne the Lutherans or to continue in the division and separation from them which hath lasted already above a hundred years Againe it is knowne and manifest on the other side that the Lutherans on their part will hearken and condescend not only to no absolute agreement and reconcilement but also to no Christian and brotherly toleration or moderation in this unhappy Ecclesiasticall difference Because the greater part of their Doctors and Divines upom whom also many Lay-men depend especially the vulgar sort though with indiscretion and defend their zeale maintain their different and controverted opinions not only as agreeable with Scripture but impose them also as necessary grounds and principall Articles of Christian faith without which men may not be counted true Christians nor be saved And so in some manner falsifie therwith the ground-work it self by their owne additionall opinions which they lay for a By-ground of salvation And will not let us effectually injoy our Liberty in such ceremonies which they themselves call adiaphora free indifferent things nor consequently receive us or our teachers as fellow-Christians unlesse wee acknowledge and professe with them the Omnipresence of Christs body the carnall eating thereof in the bread and other such like points of doctrine contained in their formula concordiae much lesse admit us to the Ministery but most vehemently condemne us as the worst Hereticks who doe ovorthrow the foundation and exclude us from the Communion of their Churches yea in many places exclude us from civill society from dignities and offices from Senates from priviledges of the Citie from marriages and from honourable burials Moreover they yet daily and most spightfully pervert calumniate and slander the Doctrine of our Church and continually and most unjustly without the least ground against our owne so often reiterated Declarations charge it with dreadfull and abominable Blasphemies which neither Luther himselfe nor other his Ancient followers ever did and for no other reason but that they might pretend so much more cause for to condemne and reject us What is most reprovable in Lutheran Divines And this is that we finde in the said Lutherans most reprovable and damnable not simply the erroneous Doctrine in it selfe but that they make it a necessary fundamentall Doctrine and of their owne particular Opinions make Articles of Faith and that they therefore so uncharitably and un-Christian like judge and condemne us Why the Reformed must separate themselves from the Lutherans Whereby also every one may evidently see that we therefore have not onely good reason but are of necessity constrained to separate our selves in our Religion from those who will by no means tolerate us nor receive us as Christians least we professe and addict our selves against conscience to such Doctrines and acknowledge them as necessary Articles of saving Faith whereof we have not onely no certaine warrant from the word of God but are convinced in our consciences of their repugnancy to it Wherewith we would give a dangerous scandall and offence first to our own Conscience by denying the knowne Truth of God and then to other fellow Christians as well to the true-Beleevers who with us have the knowledge of the Truth that they might by our example proceed against conscience as to the erring that they might be strengthened and confirmed by our example in their errours And here againe we are not those that separate themselves from them but they are those that Separate and reject us and yet not because of the manifest Word of God as they pretend but because of their owne Opinions Interpretations Inferences Formaâ—ls and Expressions Whereby they put a very dangerous stumbling block and occasion to fall both in our and their owne way yea in the way of the Universall Christian Church and though they proceed not against the ground of Faith yet they are against the ground of CHRISTIAN CHARITIE Especially whereas also the Christian Unitie or brotherly toleration which hath been of our side offered to them at severall times both by word of mouth and in writring not onely hitherto hath been utterly refused by them but also by many mis-interpreted to the worst reviled slandered so that the most pernicious Schism and breach of the Church is but grown thereby more dangerous lamentable Which al we ought to beare yet with a Christian Patience committing it to the Soveraigne and highest Judge and therefore not omit to seeke and maintaine the Unitie of spirit in Faith and love with them that are peaceably affected Some Lutheran Divines are
Bread and the Wine in the Supper of the Lord to be bare signes and Seales whereby the Body and Blood of Christ is but Signified and not really given That we defend Absolutum decretum that God freely without any respect of Faith or Unbelief good or evill works of men hath decreed in his eternall Councell to elect and choose some unto Salvation others the greatest part to cast away and reject as Reprobates unto damnation Also That we understand by Christs going down into Hell the hellish paines and torments Christs Soul suffered Lastly that we hold the Pope at Rome to be the great Antichrist Which Articles of Doctrine are neither plainly expressed in the Scripture nor by the Ancient Doctors of the Church The true Doctrine of the Reformed Churches 1. Of Free-will We Answer First that we do not deny the free will in man in that sence and meaning as some and all the Ancient Fathers have taught out of the Scripture For we confesse 1. That the Naturall man hath a Free-will in many Naturall and Temporall Free indifferent matters 2. In Celestiall Spirituall things to many Outward sins either to commit or to avoid them 3. Yea also to many Outward good works 4. That the Regenerate man hath a true Free-will or which is made Free by the grace of God to true Spirituall works which are acceptable to God Yet so that not onely the beginning but also the continuall help and assistance of Gods grace is required unto it 5. This onely we deny That the Naturall unregenerated man hath naturally without the preventing gracious help and operation of the holy Ghost any Freewill to true Spirituall inward works which are acceptable to God as to Saving Faith Charity Hope and consequently to the true Spirituall outward works which arise from those inward Which also the holy Scripture hath unanimously taught against Pelagius That the Naturall man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishnesse unto him neither can be know them 1 Corinthians 2. verse 14. And that we are not sufficient of our selves to think any thing as of our selves but our sufficiency is of God 2 Corinthians 3. verse 5. For it is God which worketh in us both to will and to do of his good pleasure Philipp 2. Verse 13. He that hath begun a good worke in us will also performe it Philippians 1. Verse 6. Without him we can do nothing John 15. Verse 5. For we are by nature the Children of wrath dead in sins Ephesians 2. Verse 5. And he that obeyeth sin is the Servant of Sin Romans 6. Verse 16.20 2 Peter 2. Verse 19. But if the Sonne maketh us free wee shall be free indeed John 8. verse 34.36 And faithfull is he that calleth you who also will doe it 1 Thessalonians 5. verse 24. But if there be besides any other controversie of mans Free-will or Gods gracious help we hold neither theirs nor our particular opinions to be necessary unto Salvation especially for all Christians who oftentimes understand but little or nothing at all of such subtil questions and therefore ought not to judge nor condemne one another Like as amongst the Papists themselves the modern Dominicans and Jesuites cannot agree about these questions nothwithstanding the prohibition made by the Pope not to accuse and condemne one another for errours in Faith 2. Of merits of good works 2. Nor do we deny the merits of good works in that sence as the ancient Fathers use the word Meritum desert or Mereri to deserve viz. That we obtaine thereby temporall and eternall remuneration by grace for Christs sake in vertue of his promise Which we confesse unanimously with them by warrants of the Scripture But we deny onely Meritum de condigno as the Papist School-authors and Divines principally the Jesuites do teach that such in themselves are condigne meritorious works of eternall life so that God is bound to give everlasting life not onely by reason of his truth and mercy for Christs sake but also of right and debt though he had not ingaged himself thereunto by any promise Which condigne meritorious works were never taught either by the Scripture or by the ancient Fathers but are rejected of many Schoole-authors and Divines yea by many moderne Roman Catholicks themselves As the famous Jesuite Vasques confesseth that many Catholickes dissent from us calling us Hereticks but in words but most agree with us in the matter it selfe and condiscend of necessity unto our opinion And the Jesuits themselves are not as yet agreed wherein properly the Efficacy and worthinesse of such Condigne merits of works consisteth Vide Bellarm. de Justific lib. 5. c. 17. Suarez in 3. Thom. Tom. 1. quest 19. art 3. disp 39. Vasq. in lib. 2a. quest 114. disp 214. c. 2. 4. 3. Concerning the Sacrifice of the Masse 3. Of the Masse it is sufficiently evident and manifest that there is nothing plainly and expressly taught and declared thereof either in the Institution of the Lords Supper or in the whole volume of the Scripture And although some or all the Ancient Fathers had taught it yet it could not be received for an Article necessary unto Salvation because they had not taught it out of the word of God and because Faith love and obedience of Christs Commandments and Institution may very well subsist without the Masse But it is certaine that even the Ancient Doctors of the Church never have taught such Sacrifice of the Masse as now a dayes in Popery is professed and held for the Soveraigne Worship and chiefest part of Religion For although they called the Administration of the Lords Supper Missam and that from thence because the Catechumeni those that were not yet Baptized were usually dismissed from it with these words Ite Missa est And although they have attributed the name of Sacrifice to the Holy Communion it selfe yet they did it not in such a sence and meaning that the Priest should offer againe the real and essentiall body of Christ in his hand and mouth and also performe a new Propitiatory Sacrifice both for the quick and dead and for other necessities as for sicke Cattell for good weather as it is taught and expressed in the Councell of Trent Sess 22. c. 2. v. 9. Canon 1.3 But that it is Sacrificium Eucharisticum a Sacrifice of Thanksgiving partly because the faithfull gathered and collected the Bread and Wine upon the Lords Table for the Holy Communion and necessitiy of the poor from whence the Germans retain still the name of Oblateâ— partly because the Holy Communion it selfe is a Commemoration and Representation of the perfect Oblation and Sacrifice of Christ finished upon the Crosse as the principall Roman â—chool authors and Divines themselves do expound it by calling it Sacrificium commemorativum representativum So that we also may say as much not of their Masse but of the Holy Communion as it hath been Instituted by our
particular man or to a Nation though by nature equally corrupted in sins hath shewed more grace towards their repentance and salvation then to another Or Why God hath not predestinated all men unto life or converted and saved them all which according to his Omnipotency he was well able to do And such like things which are not onely curious and unnecessary but vain presumptuous unprofitable question to which we cannot return a better answer then the Apostle did He hath mercy on whom he will have mercy viz. out of meer grace and whom he will he hardneth viz. out of just Judgement But O man who art thou that repliest against God Rom. 9. v. 18 20. O how unsearchable are his judgements and his wayes past finding out Rom. 11. v. 33. But whosoever will not be satisfied with this answer of the Apostle he will have as little cause to condemn thereby us and our Church as to judge the Apostle himself or the ancient Fathers Augustine Prosper Fulgentius and others who have taught this same against Pelagius Or as the Jesuites their Dominican-Friars Or as the Modern Lutherans their own Doctor Luther and some other ancient Lutherans who have taught this very same doctrine and yet partly used harsher expressions then ever was done of our side 7. Of Christs Destension into Hell Seventhly For as much as concerneth the Article of Christs descension into Hell We must first know that this Point hath not been formerly expressed by all Churches in the Universal Symbol or Creed as not onely Ruffinus about four hundred yeers after Christ in Expositione Symboli doth testifie that then this Article was not in use either in the Romish or Eastern Churches but also is omitted by many ancient Fathers and in the Nicene Creed it self From whence it is that some Popish Divines hold this Article not generally necessary for all men unto salvation Si nomine Articuli intelligamus veritatem quam omnes fideles explicitè scire ac credere teneantur Sic non existimo necessarium hunc computare inter Articulos Fidei Quia non est res admodum necessaria singulis hominibus quia ob hanc fortasse causam in Symbolo Nicaeno omittitur Suarez Tom. 2. in 3. part Thom. disp 43. sect 2. Neverthelesse Being it is grounded upon the Scripture specially upon the 16th Psalm and Act. 2. we call it not into question though not onely we amongst our selves but also the ancient Fathers and also the Papists and Lutherans do much differ in their explications where for our part we ought to distinguish betwixt that which by most certain Warrants of Gods Word is undeniable and necessary to beleeve and that which is uncertain and doubtful The Papists commonly interpret it of Limbus Patrum A Lake for the souls of the beleeving Patriarchs and our Forefathers of the Old Testament from whence Christ by his going down thereunto hath loosed and fetched them forth Now suppose that this opinion were true and certain though the ancient Fathers and Doctors of the Church do not agree in it yet it could not be necessary unto our salvation neither would yeeld to us any profit or comfort since it doth onely concern the faithful Patriarchs Much lesse is it necessary for our salvation that Christ is really with his soul descended into the Hell of the damned as some even of the ancient Fathers deemed that he preached to the damned in Hell and delivered some out of it which conjecture simply arose from the misapprehension of the words of the Apostle Peter 1. Pet. 3. v. 19 20. and 4. v. 6. These two opinions now if not as erroneous and false yet as uncertain and doubtful and as not necessary unto salvation laid aside At least thus much is undeniable and undoubted that Christ is descended into Hell virtualiter as Thom. Aqu. and other School-Authors and Divines interpret it which is to say powerfully and effectually where he by his death during three dayes and his ensuing Resurrection hath not onely destroyed the place of Hell for the damned but the Kingdom and power of Hell for the faithful and godly led captivity captive and disabled the Hellish spirits of all power over us But whether even this is meant by the going down to Hell expressed in the Creed is to be doubted of for this reason because the place of the 16th Psalm and 2d of Acts whereon this Article chiefly is grounded speaketh rather of the lowest degree of humiliation from whence he hath been exalted by his Resurrection then of the beginning of his exaltation Likewise it is without Controversie granted that Christ hath suffered for our sins not onely in his Body but also in his Soul unspeakable torments which in the Scripture are called the pains and sorrows of Hell Psalm 18. and 116. 1 Sam. 2.6 So that many of our Divines have extracted this construction and sense out of this Article Yet not so as if Christ had suffered in his Soul the very pains of the damned or any despaire as the Papists by mis-construction of their words do charge them withall but that he in his Soul out of a tender affection towards us suffered as great pains distresse and sorrows for our sins and Gods wrath against us which he took upon him to appease as if they had been his own sins or we our selves should suffer for our sins in Hell Which no wayes can be accounted for a new erroneous and damnable Doctrine being grounded upon so evident Warrants of the Word of God Psalm 22. and 69. and 88. Jes 53. Matth. 26. v. 37 38. and 27. v. 46. Luke 22. v. 44. Heb. 5. v. 7. And accordingly taught not onely by the ancient Fathers but also the Popish School-Divines Medina Suarez Thom. Aquin. in part 3. quaest 49. art 6. And although no Christian can make any scruple of the distresse and pains Christ suffered in his Soul yet a great many of our Divines move here the Question and not without reason Whether this is the very meaning of the Article expressed in the Creed or of the aforementioned places in the 16th Psalm and 2d of Acts because those pains took their end upon the Crosse and therefore are comprehended in the Articles of the Passion and Crucifixion but the loosing from the bonds of Death and Hell whereof David and the Apostle speaketh was fulfilled by his Resurrection Wherefore others understand by this Article The Burial by reason that both the Hebrew Sheol and the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie in the Scripture the Grave or Sepulchre whereof the aforealledged places do speak and that also the Ancients formerly omitted the Article of Christs Burial when this Article was put into the Creed Others interpret it generally of the estate and condition Christs Soul was in during three dayes that like other souls it departed out of this World till the third day and according to the ordinary Phrase of the Scripture was gathered unto his Fathers For