not also after this be reasonably deduced that they are so too for all other truths that are so far necessary as that the error contrary to them some way hazards salvation or by some consequence overthroweth any absolutely necessary truth I say may not this also reasonably be concluded for these Reasons 1. Because we find no restriction of our Saviour's promise of assistance only for these absolutely necessary fundamentals and there must be granted need of this his assistance further so long as there is granted further danger 2. Because if we confine the non-failing guidance of these Church-guides only to absolute necessaries this will not extend so far as the points of the three Creeds a very few Articles of which are by the Learned thought Truths absolutely necessary 3. Because those of the Church-Doctors will not consent to an universal inerrability of these Church-guides but restrain it only to some truths whereas the Scriptures make no limitation but do it on such pretences as these 1. Because those wherein they say these may err are by-and unnecessary truths to which the Churches curiosity or weakness may carry her beyond her Rule See Bishop Laud § 21. n. 5. 2ly Because they are unprofitable curiosities and unnecessary subtilities for which the Promise was not made because Deus non abundat in superfluis Because they are such points as may be variously held and disputed without hurt or prejudice to faith See Dr. Potter § 5. p. 150. c. 3ly So then in all dangerous points as well as in absolutely necessary the Divine assistance and the Church-guides infallibility I hope will be still allowed 2ly They say the Church errs not in absolutely Fundamentals because the Word of God in all such points is so plainly and manifestly delivered unto Her that it is not possible that she should universally fall from it or teach against it See Bishop Laud § 21. n. 5 But then there seems also to be good reason why other points dangerous to salvation or undermining fundamentals should be delivered clearly in the same Word of God or if not clearly there is the more reason still that the Churches-guides should be infallibly assisted in these which both are dangerous and the Churches Rule the Scriptures in them obscure See more of this in Ch. Government 2. part § 32. 7. If these Church-guides have at least a Promise to be infallible in Necessaries § 50 this again setting aside now those forementioned texts which enjoin it will infer the obedience of Assent at least to some of their decisions namely those made in Necessaries for who can deny assent to a granted infallible Proponent And if assent must be granted to them in necessaries then as Mr. Chillingworth most acutely observed to all that they shall judge a Necessary If saith he p. 150. the Church be an infallible Director in Fundamentals then must we not only learn fundamentals of Her but also learn of Her what is fundamental and take for fundamental which she believes to be such In performance whereof saith he if I knew any one Church to be infallible I would quickly be of that Church This will hold at least for so many of Christians as will not pretend the skill themselves of separating necessaries and not-necessaries And these Church-guides judging what is necessary especially if they take it in such a larger sence as we have shewed but now that they have reason to presume of our Saviour's assistance therein then perhaps so many of their decisions will receive from them the denomination of Necessary as that we shall not think meet whilst assenting to all these to dissent from them in the rest But however if we yeild assent to all these good reason there is why we should also in all the rest abstracting from matters of fact and matters not Spiritual only putting in this exception unless any happen to be infallibly certain of the contrary to what they decide for whosoever is so I grant cannot yeild assent but how any one should be so debarring new revelations and his having any Divine evidence which the Church-guides have not as well as He I do not see especially when also having proposed to these Church-guides all the reasons and grounds of his infallible certainty yet he hath not made them so § 51 But if any one be so infallibly certain yet I say all the rest of Christians who have not attain'd such certainty have good reason to yeild assent to these Church-Guides also in all their Decisions even touching non-necessaries 1. Seeing that if I may transfer the Apostle's argument 1 Cor. 6. 3. from persons to things these being set over us to regulate our Judgment in the greatest matters how can they be conceiv'd unfit to do it in the lesser 2. Seeing that by our not-yeilding assent to all their Decisions even those also in non-necessaries so long as they have made no distinct partition of these two we may incur a peril of with-drawing our assent in some thing necessary but by assenting to all we are sure to have a right perswasion in all necessaries wherein these Guides have a Warrant not to fail but not so private men undertaking to Guide themselves 3. Seeing that in our erring together with our Guides who are thus also to give an account for our errors Heb. 13.17 so long as it is in non-necessaries our condition is not dangerous but on the other side there may be a great fault in us in denying due obedience tho in small matters 4. Seeing that those who most vindicate the liberty of their own judgments do to make these Guides the more liable to fallibility in non-necessaries plead the Scriptures to be in such points less perspicuous but on the contrary this imperspicuity of them in the Scriptures argues the more need in them of Guides 5. Seeing that private men have reason to presume that the Judment of so many so learned so ancient as these Ecclesiastical Courts use to consist of is where not absolutely infallible yet much to be preferr'd before their own i.e. that of one single person or of a few not so learned not so experienc'd So Children wisely follow their Parents and Scholars their Masters tho fallible Judgments Or putting our selves equal every-way in parts in learning c. to all these yet what help or means have we or what diligence do we use to discern Truth which these do not Consult we former Church and Tradition so do they And since the Writings of the Fathers as well as the Divine are liable to divers constructions and misunderstandings doubtless their exposition of these as well as of the Scriptures is to be preferr'd to private men's Again these present Church-Guides in any opposition or difference from the former Church-Guides having as high an authority as they if we pretend to yeild obedience to the one so we must to the other Consult we the Holy Scriptures and what Scriptures have we which they
honestis or the like licitis I mean lege divina But if we have any doubt concerning this we are to repair from him not to our own judgment but to the Spiritual Magistrates and according as they shall declare the lawfulness or unlawfulness hereof we are to yeild or withdraw our active obedience to the Civil neither can this Civil Magistrate justly punish us for not observing his Laws when pronounc'd by the Ecclesiastical Magistrate opposite to the Divine And in such case we may answer to them as the Apostles who were then the chief Ecclesiastical Judges twice answer'd to the Sanedrim which was then exauthorized that we ought to obey God rather than men But to the Ecclesiastcal Magistrate we owe an obedience advanc'd beyond the former limitation being not only to do what they command if it be lawful or subscribe or swear to what they require if it be true but to believe that to be lawful or unlawful that to be truth or error I say in these Divine matters what they tell us is so without repairing concerning these to any other Judg. We are to yeild the same obedience to these Delegates of Christ our Lord touching Divine Laws as to a Temporal Supreme Legislator concerning his own Laws that are made in things left purely indifferent by the Divine Laws The Commands of which Temporal Legislators in the foresaid matters we are to obey not only when we our selves judg that they do accord with his Laws but also when we doubt of the meaning of his Laws we are to learn their true sense from him to obey him in all his Laws and to know from him what are his Laws For as he or his Delegates have authority to determine Controversies concerning the Secular Laws to put an end to contentions so have I shew'd the Church Magistrates to have to determine Controversies concerning the Divine Laws § 56 Against this so absolute Obedience and Submission of Judgment to the Church-Governors under the Gospel there are several Scriptures urg'd and necessary to be explain'd before we proceed further which Scriptures seem to licence all men lest perhaps they should be misguided to try and that by the same Scriptures their Teachers Doctrines that so if not finding their Doctrine according with these Scriptures they may so far withhold their assent to them For this are urg'd first Joh. 5.39 Search the Scriptures for in them ye think ye have eternal life and they testifiâ— of me 2ly Act. 5 17.1â— These the Bereans were more noble than those in Thessalonica in that they receiv'd the word that Paul preach'd to them with all readiness of mind and search'd the Scriptures daily whether those things were so 3ly 1 Cor. 10.15 I speak as to wise men Judg ye what I say 4ly 1 Joh 4.1 Try the Spirits whether they be of God 5ly 1 Thes 5.21 Prove all things hold fast that which is good 6ly Gal. 1.8 9. Though we or an Angel from Heaven preach any other Gospel to you then that which we have preach'd unto you let him be accursed To which Texts is added the utter uselesness as to Spiritual matters of private Judgment in such an universal submission requir'd to a Judg. § 57 In Answer to these Texts First it is to be noted in general That trial of Doctrines by Scriptures is either of the Doctrines of private Teachers made by the Church-Governors of which trial no question is made Or of the Doctrines of private Teachers made by private men And these also they may try by the Scriptures so that they guide themselves lest our trial be mistaken in the sense of these Scriptures according to the Exposition thereof by the Church i.e. in her General Councils or in the most unanimous consent of those whom our Saviour departing left to be the Guides of the Church and Expositors of the Scriptures And if thus searching we find the Doctrines of our Teachers contrary to the Scriptures so expounded we may and ought to with-draw our belief from them Or this trial 3ly by Scriptures is of the doctrines of the Church i.e. of those doctrines which are deliver'd not by a private Teacher but by a general consent of the Church-guides at least the fullest that we can discover Or by General or other Superior Councils or by the Apostles or by our Saviour himself 1. Now the allowance of such a trial may be understood in two senses 1. Either in this sense Search or try my or our Doctrine by the Scriptures for you will surely find my Doctrine agreeing thereunto if you do search right and as you ought and in this sense the trial by the Scriptures of the Doctrines of the Church nay of the Apostles S. Paul's by the Bereans nay of Christ himself Whether the Old Testament as he urged testified of him is both allowed and recommended for since there is no difference of the teaching of Christ or of S. Paul or of the Church from the teaching of the Scripture the one will never fear but freely appeal to a trial by the other if it be rightly made § 58 2. Or 2ly it may be understood in this sence Search and try my Doctrine by the Scriptures and if you in the search do not perceive it agreeable unto them I declare that you have no reason to believe or that you are excusable in rejecting my Doctrine Now in this sence our Saviour or St. Paul or the other Scriptures never recommended private mens searching or gave any such priviledge to it unless you put this clause that they have searched aright But if you put in this clause then is the searcher after his searching not yet at liberty to disbelieve the Apostles or the Churches doctrine till he is sure first that he hath searched aright I say our Saviour or the Scriptures cannot recommend Searching in such a sence or upon such conditions § 59 1. First because such a Searcher or Tryer by the Scriptures there may be as is prejudiced by passion or interest or miseducation or as searcheth negligently and coldly or as hath not a sufficient capacity to understand the Scriptures he searcheth when perhaps it is in some difficult point wherein they are not so clear as if he should search the text of the Old Testament in the point delivered by St. Paul of the abrogating of Circumcision under the Gospel neither can any body be secure of his dis-engagement from all such letts of using a right judgment in searching § 60 2. Because however the Search or the Searcher prove there are other means and m diums by which is proved to men the truth of such doctrines and by which not bearing witness to a falsity one may discover himself to have made his search of Scripture amiss so often as he thinks it to contradict them Such mediums are Miracles and other mighty operations done by the power of the Holy Ghost upon which our Saviour Jo. 5.36 and elsewhere and S. Paul Rom. â—5
19 2 Cor. 12.12 1 Cor. 2.4 Mark 6.20 required belief and submission to their doctrine and universal Tradition upon which the Church also requireth belief to the Scriptures the same Tradition that delivered the Scriptures delivering also such doctrines and expositions of Scriptures as are found in the Church So that a Pharisee searching and not finding in Scriptures by reason indeed that he searched them not aright such testimony of Jesus being the Messias as was pretended yet ought to have bin convinced and to have believed his doctrines from seeing his miracles and from hence also to have blamed his faulty search So a Berean searching and not finding in Scripture such evidence of S. Panl's doctrine suppose of the abrogation of the Judaical Law by Christ as was pretended yet ought to have believed it from the mighty works he saw done by S. Paul or from the authority he or the Council at Jer salem Act. 15. received from Jesus working Miracles and raised from the Dead as universal Tradition testified And the same may be said for the Churches Doctrines And therefore as there are some Scriptures that bid us search the Scriptures because if we do this aright we shall never find them to disagree from the Doctrines of the Church and beause some doctrines of the Church are also in the Scripture very evident so there are other Scriptures if those who are so ready to search them on other would search them also on this point that bids us hear the Church because our searching of Scriptures is liable sometimes to be mistaken and because in some things the Scriptures may seem difficult In which case God having referred us to the judgment of those whom he hath appointed to be the expounders thereof Deut. 17.8 9 10. Matt. 18.17 Luk. 10.16 cannot remit us again to the same Scriptures to try whether their expositions be right Therefore that Text Gal. 1.8 9. is far from any such meaning If the Church or Churchmen shall teach you any thing contrary to the Scriptures as you understand them let these he Anathema to you but rather it saith this If an Angel or I Apostatizing as some shall Act. 20.30 shall teach any thing contrary to the doctrines ye have received that is from the Church let him c. which makes not against but for the Churches Authority very much § 61 To the former Texts then mentioned § 56. this briefly may be returned To the three first Texts That a search of Scriptures concerning our Lord's or his Apostles doctrines is both allowed and recommended because the Scriptures rightly understood and these doctrines perfectly agree But a dissent from these doctrines if upon a search thought to be disagreeing which the Objectors would infer is not allowed from the reasons formerly given In the fourth Text the Apostle speaks of private Spirits to be tried whether of God by their conformity to the common doctrines of the Scripture and of the Church See 1 Cor. 14.29 32. The 5th includes a general trial as well by the directions and expositions of the Spiritual Guides as dictates of the Scriptures the Rule The 6th is expounded before If an Angel shall teach you any thing contrary to the doctrine you have received from Christ's Ministers or from the Church confirmed with Miracles let him be Anathema § 62 As for those things which are urged for the failing of the visible Church or at least of the major part of the Guides and chief Professors thereof under the Gospel As in the Scriptures die Prophecies of our Saviour Matt. 24.11 12. 24.38 Luke 18.8 compared with 7. Luk. 17 25 26 27 c. 21.35 and of the Apostles 2 Thes 2.3 1 Jo. 2.18 2 Tim. 3.1 1 Cor. 11.19 2 Pet. 2.1 c. Rev. 20. c. 13.20.8 9. and other places speaking of the power of Antichrist and of his sitting in the Church of God and in the Church-story the prevalency of Arrianism In answer to the former the Scriptures It is granted that it seems in these latter times of the world there shall be a great falling away from the faith but that it is from Christianity it self and from the Church as indeed we have already seen all those flourishing Churches of Asia and other Eastern and Southern parts once Christian now over-run by the Doctrine of the Great Prophet of God as he stiled himself Mahomet who sits and triumphs in those same places which were once the chiefest Churches of God and the love of many to Christ waxen cold by the abounding of iniquity and the terrible persections of the Turkish Empire the Image of the former Persecutor the Heathen Roman Empire to which Imago Mahomet's doctrine hath given life and vigor and this decession we have seen and what more shall be seen hereafter God knoweth But this argues not that Truth shall fail in all or the major part of the Doctors who remain still in the Church and profession of Christianity but that the Church it self shall sail of having so great an extent in the world or her Guides of being so many at some times as at others yet at all times sufficiently apparent § 63 Again In answer to the prevalency of Arrianism it seems that in these later times there shall be a falling away too within the profession of Christianity from the faith i.e. from that faith which is orthodox by many dangerous Heresies and Schisms from time to time arising in the Church whilst many formerly members of it shall separate from it 1 Jo. 2.19 but shall always apparently be known by their departure from it but it follows not that any of these Sects within shall ever have so great or so long a growth as to be able to out-number the Body of the Church or the true Teachers Concerning which many are of opinion that the Orthodox Communion in all times shall exceed not Infidels but yet any other Sect especially of one Communion as it is professing Christianity both for the multitude of people and extent of several Nations See Tryal of doctrines § 30 31 c. and particularly concerning Arrianism in 2. Disc conc the Guide in Controversy § 26. As for Antichrist the story of whom hath given occasion of a contrary fancy especially amongst the Reformed I shall elsewhere I think sufficiently clear to you that he shall profess an Antichristianity and oppose the Gospel in general or if at some time such Sect shall out-number the Church it self yet as was said before it shall stand in an external Communion separate from the Church and also formerly expelled by the Church when these did not outnumber it and tho afterwards these shall grow never so numerous yet the remnant of Orthodox Believers how small soever continuing in the same body will not cease to be truly and only Catholick without them neither have these any right or will be permitted to vote in her Councils which Councils to be truly General need to be no larger than the Church
Emperor after 1080 what is establish'd by such a Synod not General is too weak to overthrow any former rights of the Church Neither is Balsamon's a later Greek Writer's authority much to be stood upon in this controversie Neither speaks he home in this point whether the Patriarch is to admit what the Emperor doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after he hath represented to the Emperor that it is against the Canons Thus much of the 12th Canon In the 17th Canon and the 38th in Trullo Here is only upon the Emperor's building a new City or perhaps upon his transferring the Civil right and priviledges of having the seats of Judicature c. from one City in a Province unto another and upon this subjecting some other inferior Cities or Towns call'd Parochia's when being the jurisdiction of an ordinary Bishop see Hammond Schism p. 57. unto it the subjecting also of the Bishops of those Parochiae under that City to the Bishop of that City Where note First that these Canons speak only of the subjecting of Parochial Bishops to new Metropolitans where new Cities are builded and not of altering any thing in the jurisdiction of old which the 12th Canon of the same Council so expresly opposeth Secondly Only of subjecting Parochial Bishops to new Metropolitans not of subjecting Metropolitans to new Patriarchs nor yet to new Primates For 't is most clear that this very Council that made this Canon never dreamt of any power the Emperor had to erect a new Patriarch as I have shew'd before § 43. and much less Leo the Bishop of Rome who confirm'd these Canons yet vehemently opposed the Council seeking to erect Constantinople into a Patriarchy much more would he have opposed the Emperor Thirdly Whatever priviledge the Emperor here receives methinks their ordering that such a thing should be done subsequatur is far from sounding that they yeilded such a thing to belong to the Emperor by right as Dr. Hammond expounds it Schis p. 119. But then if the Emperor hold such priviledge from the Church the Church when they please may resume this power for so himself argues concerning any priviledges which Secular Princes have formerly conceded to the Bishop of Rome and then hear what the 21th Canon of the 8th General Council saith if we will trust later Councils not far distant in time better to understand the concessions of former Definimus neminem prorsus mundi potentium quenquam eorum qui Patriarchalibus sedibus praesunt inhonorare aut movere a proprio throno tentare Sed omni reverentia honore dignos judicare praecipue quidem sanctissimum Papam senioris Romae c. § 45 As for the things mention'd afterward by the Doctor p. 120 c. the power of changing the seat of a Bishop or dividing one Province into many as likewise the presenting of particular persons to several Dignities in the Church which also private Patrons do without claiming any superiority in Church-matters some of which seem of small consequence as to Ecclesiastical affairs Yet are not these things justly transacted by the Prince's sole Authority without the approbation first of Church-Governors But the same things may be acted by the Church alone the Prince gain-saying if he be either Heathen or Heretick which also shews his power when orthodox in the regiment of the Church to be only executive and dependent on the Ecclesiastical Magistrate's No persons are or at least ought to be put into any Church-dignities without the authoritative consent and concurrence of the Clergy who if they reject such persons tho presented by Princes as unorthodox or otherwise unfit they cannot be invested in such Offices Hear what the 8th General Council saith of this matter Can. 22. Sancta universalis Synodus definit neminem Laicorum principum vel potentum semet inserere electioni vel promotioni Patriarchae vel Metropolitae aut cujuslibet Episcopi ne videlicet c. Praesertim cum nullam in talibus potestatem quenquam potestativorum vel caeterorum Laicorum habere conveniat Quisquis autem saecularium principum potentum vel alterius dignitatis Laicae adversus communionem ac consentaneam atque Canonicam electionem Ecclesiastici ordinis agere tentaverit Anathema sit The transplanting of Bishopricks and division of Provinces probably was never order'd by Princes but either first propos'd or assented-to by the Clergy see that instance of Anselm Hammond of Schis p. 122. or upon some more general grant indulgently made to some pious Princes from the chief powers of the Church Tho Historians commonly in relation of such facts mention only the King's power as by whose more apparent and effectual authority such things are put in execution in which things negative arguments that such persons as are not mention'd did not concur especially when they are mention'd to concur in some other acts of the same nature are very fallacious But imagine we once the power of erecting Patriarchies and Primacies and by consequence of the bestowing and transferring the several priviledges thereof solely cast into the hands of a Secular Prince and then this Prince not orthodox a supposition possible and what confusion and mischief must it needs produce in such a body as the Church strictly tyed in Canonical obedidience to such Superiors and submitting to their judgment and decisions in spiritual matters by which the King may sway the controversies in Religion within his own Dominions what way he pleaseth unless we will imagine there shall be no Ecclesiasticks at all of his own perswasions whom he may surrogate into the places of those who gainsay Such were the times of Constantius And by such violent and uncanonical expulsion and intrusion of Prelates the face of Religion was seen changed and re-changed so often here in England within a few years according to the fancies of the present Prince as if there were in her no certain form of truth And the same thing we have seen done before our eyes in our own days The removing inducting deposing promoting Ecclesiastical persons as the Secular power pleaseth being also a changing of the Church's Doctrine as it pleaseth Thus much to what Dr. Hammond hath said Schis p. 120 c. § 46 Lastly Schis p. 125. he makes three instances in the fact of the Kings of Judah in the fact of St. Paul and in the fact of the Christian Emperors tending to this purpose that their authority is supreme in Ecclesiastical causes as well as Civil and therefore may erect Patriarchies His words there are The authority of Kings is supreme in all sorts of causes even those of the Church as well as Civil as appears among the Jewish Kings in Scripture David ordering the courses of the Priests Solomon consecrating the Temple Hezekiah 2 Chron. 29. 2 King 18. and Josiah 2 King 22. ordering many things belonging to it And so St. Paul appeal'd from the judgment of the chief Priests to the Tribunal of Caesar So in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
Truth 's perpetual presence with and assistance of them as I shall now shew you § 41 After therefore those taken away who sate in Moses his chair to guide the people in matters of the law that there are others placed in Christ's Chair to guide God's people in all matters of the Gospel whose judgment and sentence in all their decisions the subjects of the Church ought to follow and obey appeareth 1. from many texts of Scripture See first that text in the Gospel Matt. 18.15 c. answering to that other formerly urged in the law Deut. c. 17. v. 8. c. If thy brother shall trespass against thee i.e. either by way of personal offence or by way of scandal of which our Saviour had bin speaking before v. 6 7. whereby any great offence of our brother against God against his neighbour or himself becomes matter of our cognisance as fellow-members of the same Body and who should be always so charitably affected to him as not to suffer sin upon him Lev. 19.17 go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone c. If he will not hear thee then take with thee two or three more c convent and arraign him as it were before some neighbours If he shall neglect to hear them tell it his fault and neglect unto the Church but if he neglect to hear the Church let him be unto thee as an Heathen and a Publican as a person excommunicated and not to be a companied with Luk. 15.2 Verily I say unto you whatsoever ye before whom such matters are brought shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever ye shall upon such offenders penitence loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven Again I say unto you that if two of you any small assembly shall agree together on earth as touching any thing that they shall resolve on and ask to have it ratified it shall be done for them of my Father For where any such assembly tho but two or three are gathered together in my Name and by my authority delegated to them see 1 Cor. 5.4 2 Cor. 2.10 there am I whom the Father heareth always in the midst of them § 42 In which Scriptures 1. That by Church Tell it unto the Church v. 17. is to be understood Clergy is clear from what follows v. 18. whatsoever ye shall bind c. comp with Mat. 16.19 Jo. 20.23 and from what follows v. 20 comp with Mat. 28.19 20. And 2. That here is meant the Clergy not only that were then in being the Apostles but that should succeed them through all following Ages is clear both from the same occasions of repairing to the Churches Tribunal v. 15. occurring in all ages and from the power of binding and loosing as necessary in one age as another and unquestionably exercised by the Apostles Successors concerning which matter I refer you to what is said before § 36. n. 1 2. and below and Church-Government part 2. § 27. c. 3ly That the Order for telling and the Precept of hearing this Clergy the Church of all Ages is to be understood not only concerning some injuries or wrongs done to us by our brother but concerning other faults and evil manners whereby our brother offends God and the Christian Society whereof he is a member appears from that expression v. 15. If he shall hear thee thou hast gained thy brother not gained thy loss in receiving satisfaction but gained thy Brother in procuring his reformation Again that is to be understood not only concerning trespass of Manners neither but also of Doctrines and Opinions much more as it seems deduceable from the context v. 6 7. mentioning scandals of which false doctrines and opinions are the chiefest and as it seems clear a minori ad majus if others our Brothers trespasses be matter of complaint and of the Churches cognisance much more these any corruption in a matter of faith being generally far more dangerous and pernicious than a corruption in manners See Jo. ◠11 Gal. 5.20 evil deeds heresies c. and Rom. 2.8 the contentious not obeying the truth 2 Pet. 3.16 Wresting Scriptures to their own destruction Tit. 1.11 Rom. 16.17 Act. 15. Subverting mens souls and deceiving the hearts of the simple Jud. 1. perishing in gainsaying And our zeal to God's truth and honour being much to be preferred before that to our own wealth honour or security So is it evident and put out of doubt by many other Scriptures which may be brought in illustration of this 1. In which Scriptures both the members of the Church are warned to mark and avoid such false teachers and doctrines And 2ly The Church-governours are authorized to judge controversies and proceed in their censures against such teachers and such tenents as are contrary to the Doctrines formerly delivered by our Lord and his Apostles And 3ly in which Scriptures also are contained several instances of such judgments and proceedings § 33 See for the first Rom. 16.17 2 Thes 3.14 2 Jo. 10. where we are bidden to mark to note those that obey not those that cause divisions contrary to the Doctrines received from the Apostles to avoid not to have company with not to salute them i. e. to carry our selves toward them as Heathens and Publicans here Matt. 18.18 and to avoid such in like manner as the Corinthians the incestuous person 1 Cor. 5.11 compared with 7.13 that is by Excommunication and Church-censures Whence also was the custom in the Primitive Church of Christians that travelled to carry with them Letters commendatory from the Bishop of the place that so they might be admitted to the prayers and communion in those Churches whither they went scrupulous of joining with any Hereticks See for the 2d Eph. 4.4 5 11 c. There is one Body and one Spirit One Lord one Faith When he ascended up on high he gave gifts unto men And he gave some Apostles c. some Pastors and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministery for the edifying of the Body of Christ till we all come in the unity of the faith unto a perfect man That we henceforth be no more children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the slight of men c. This then is one office of the Churchmen to edify the Church in the unity of the faith and to keep them steddy in its Doctrines that they be not carried about now one way now another and that they be not thus carried about not only before the Gospel or other Books of the N. Testament were written but also after nay also that they be not carried about with several false glosses and misintepretations of these Writings of which very Writings S. Peter saith 2 Pet. 3.16 that some wrested them to their own destruction therefore the members of the Church to submit to their Doctrines and to conform to their Faith that there may be a
sufficient ground of their rejection nor may such Heretical person be restor'd again to the Church's Communion upon his engaging to conceal his Heresie but upon his quitting and renouncing it Since then these Church-Guides have power to excommunicate Hereticks i. e. men for holding false Opinions in matters of Faith i. e. men for their dissent at least after some previous admonitions and reasons sufficient to convince or men for their obstinacy in dissent which obstinacy is not delible but by yeilding assent This I say infers that there is due to these Church-Guides an Obedience of Assent or else these Guides may excommunicate one for not-performing an Obedience which is not due See this more largely prosecuted in Oblig of Judgm § 4. And again consider 1 Tim. 4.11 6.3 5. where the Apostle writes thus to Timothy These things command and teach and if any man do teach otherwise and consenteth not to wholesome words c. from such withdraw thy self Lastly Because at least in Agendis in all those things which by these Ecclesiastical Judges are requir'd to be done we must either yeild the obedience of Assent or we can yeild none at all save that call'd Passive Obedience which is a submitting to the punishment appointed for disobedience for who can oblige to do a thing doth oblige us also to think it lawful to be done else we may never do it If then this Church-Authority may so far in Agendis determine to us what is lawful or unlawful as herein to exact assent from us to her Judgment why may it not in the like manner in Credendis determine to us what is true and false Or what reason can there be that this should be more unerring or more creditable in truths practical than speculative where both equally necessary § 46 These Scriptures already produc'd from § 41. do sufficiently shew an Authority in the Clergy under the Gospel to Judg Controversies and the Obedience due to their Sentence from the people But so also in a second place do all those Scriptures wherein we find the promises made to these Guides of a perpetual assistance to them by the Lord Jesus and by the Holy Ghost and of their never erring or failing in their Judgments Whereby we are render'd secure of their sufficient ability always in Judging and of our own safety in following it See Mat. 28.19 20. 18.20 compar'd with 17.18 Rev. 1.13 16. the perpetual assistance of our Saviour Joh. 14. 16 26. 16. 13. 1 Joh. 2.20 27. 1 Cor. 12.7 8. the perpetual assistance of the Holy Ghost Mat. 16.18 19. Luk. 1.16 1 Tim. 3.15 2 Tim. 2.19 compar'd with 16 17 20 Eph. 4.13 compar'd with 11. their indefectibility The particular contents of which Scriptures set down in the former Treatise § 31. I forbear here to repeat you may be pleased there to review them Upon the expressions of which Scriptures it is there noted 1. That these promises of not failing in Truth are made to the Church or to Christians not hypothetically only as some would have it if they shall not fail to do their duty but absolutely that there shall always continue a Church or a Christianity in being that shall not fail to hold the Truth and do their duty 2. That these promises are made absolutely not only to Christians taken in general some or other of them Sheep or Shepherds Laity or Clergy as some would have it but particularly to the Clergy the Pastors of these Sheep and the Guides of this Church 3. To these not of some of one Age those of the First or Third or Fourth or Second as some would limit but those of all Ages usque ad consummationem saculi § 47 4. To these i. e. not to some or other of them still whom we please to adhere to to some small number of inferior Clergy in some part or other of the world either dispers'd through several or united in one particular Church either departing from or ejected by all the rest of the Clergy of the same or of other Churches in which a few straglers would fain verifie our Saviour's promises when they pronounce all the rest erroneous but to that Clergy which the Church ought to take for her Guide Which Guide when as this Spiritual Court consists not of one but many persons when ever there is any disagreement therein must be the major part and when as there is also an established subordination of these persons and courts must be the superior rather than the inferior persons and the more universal and comprehensive Synods rather than those Synods which are of a less circuit and smaller company otherwise any Heretick if a Clergy-man may be entertained for a guide and whenas our Saviour has enjoined the people to obey their guides yet hath this people no means to know who these are unless when all the Clergy of the Universe are of one opinion Now he that appoints us to follow a Guide in what he shall enjoin us and then leaves us no way when our Guide consists not of one but many persons and two parties of them contradict one another to know which of them is to be our Guide it is all one as if he left us no Guide And he that ties us beside the use of our own judgment to obey and follow some Ecclesiastical person or other only not obliging to the most or major part to a superior more than inferior person or Court revolves our obedience only to our own judgment i.e. to chuse that side which we judge the rightest as we follow the counsel of that friend who we do think speaketh most reason without acknowledging any obedience to his authority and then left to this choice what opinion can we take up so absurd in which we cannot find some Clergy-man or other for a Leader Of these four Observations see what is more largely discoursed in Church-government Par. 2. from § 26. to 29. 5ly From the same texts another thing is clear § 48 That this Guiding Clergy shall for ever be unfailable or infallible either in all truths whatever I mean Theological and Spiritual any way respecting mens salvation which truths they shall think meet to be determined or at least in all such truths as are absolutely necessary to salvation else this Pillar of Truth is cracked and shivered the Keys of Heaven Gates are lost and the gates and power of Hell prevail the assistance of Jesus and of the Holy Spirit ineffectual lastly the Church Name and Thing and Salvation it self perished I mean as to this Clergy if Truth necessary to Salvation be not to be found with them and if the skirts of the Promise of the Holy Spirit teaching them all things cannot be spread so far as to secure them of being taught so much Truth as is but absolutely necessary § 49 But then 6ly These Church-guides to avoid such ill consequences being made the unfailing Repository of all Truth absolutely necessary to Salvation will it
Apostles for all such are law given to the Church c. But alass who must judge when the Ecclesiastical power abolisheth any of matters c for the Pastors of the Church at the same time affirm and will die for it that neither against the Scriptures neither against Traditions of former Church have the transgressed nor do abolish but establish them and as for the people whom should they rather follow in matters of Divinity their Pastors or their Prince God hath given charge to the Clergy over the flock but where hath he committed the charge of the Clergy to the Prince Perhaps the common sence of Christians shall judge But are the Guides of the Church then only void of it and that in their own faculty Common sence of the Christian Laity what if they differ then in their common sence are we not then to follow the major part of them But so also the Reformed are cast the major part of Lay-Christians entertaining the Roman Tenents Again we have given up this right of the Church to the Prince where now shall we stay If one Prince may do the office of a Council and if need be decide matters of Faith for the Clergy why may not the next if need be Ordain for the Bishop or depose that Order obstinate in error Is this a dream are there not also those who claim this But then again if where the Clergy fails the Prince may take our Saviour's Chair and judge then supposing the Prince also through malice or ignorance c may fail too Is there not some Common-wealth that hath been lately under God's judgments in this condition I would gladly know whether an Ecclesiastical power may not review his Acts and reform his Errors and then why not both reform both at the same time according to their differing judgments But God is the God of order not of such confusion Thus much of the 2d thing proposed before § 1. the independency of the Ministers of Christ on any Secular power Now I shall consider the Third § 73 Next as the Ministry of Christ is secured for the perpetual continuance of their Spiritual power and office against all foreign force of Seculars which shall often rise against it by their Spiritual sword toward those Temporal Governors who fear God and by their fortitude being strengthened by Christ both in doing their duty and in suffering patiently toward Secular Governors Infidel or the Heretical so is it secured for ever for the unity of the Faith and of the Profession of it Eph. 4.5 13. against all intestine divisions amongst the Clergy which divisions often shall happen in it but shall never remain of it For it is as true that no Heresy or Schism within as that no Secular power without being only several Gates of Hell shall ever prevail against it § 74 To clear this point we must know that where ever any division happens in the Church and that one Communion which was at first established in a perfect not co but sub-ordination divides into two and each ordain Successors to their party one is to be counted no lawful succession Else since some Teachers there shall be that will differ from the rest and in all sects we may find some Clergy or other for us to follow the Church will have neither any such property as unity of her faith nor will there be any such crime as Schism from it Therefore the Church may and ought for the preservation of her purity and unity to excommunicate exauthorize and separate her self and her children from such as are false Teachers and walk disorderly that she might not be partaker of nor countenance them in nor encourage more to follow their sin according to the frequent commands of Scriptures forequoted see 2 Jo. 10 11. Matt. 18.17 1 Tim. 6.5 Tit. 3.10 1 Cor. 5.13 2 Tim. 2.19 21. compared with 18. Iniquity i.e. errors Gal. 1.8 9. Rev. 2.6 15 16. texts abused by some to justify a separation from the Church it self therefore also none can lawfully communicate both with the true and with an Heretical or Schismatical Church who tho they hold sufficient truth yet are to be refused and avoided for the breach of unity and that without respect to the numbers of the revolted or to the liability of the Church they desert to some nondestructive errors And this practice the Church hath always observed and the persons so disauthorized by it if afterward using their functions were in the Primitive times esteemed guilty of sin and sacriledge and so those also by them ordained And when returning to the Catholick faith as many Arian Bishops did they might not officiate till by a Declaration and reabilitation of the Church they were restored to the exercise of that authority of which they were by her formerly deprived For we must know that tho according to the common Tenent of die Church see Conc. Nice 8. Can. none that is ordained according to the right form of Ordination by a Heretick or Schismatick may be reordained no more than one baptized by such may be rebaptized or the Eucharist consecrated by such reconsecrated but when he recants his Heresy or Schism he being only relicensed by the Church dischargeth his function by vertue of his formerly received Orders Yet who so by Heresy or Schism is once deprived of the right of exercising his function as any one may be cannot confer this right on others but that all these afterwards stand as much suspended from any execution of their offices as himself doth Tho I cannot say but that the Effects of the Sacraments and other offices of their function as well in other things as in Baptism as in Marriages in Penance and Absolution the Eucharist c. are still valid to the simple Receiver who is guiltless of their faults the wickedness of the Minister if truly ordained not hindering the benefits to mankind which Christ hath annext to that Office and which always himself as the principal Agent by their hands confers § 75 To distinguish then true Succession which we are always to adhere and submit to 1. There is no lawful Succession where is no lawful Ordination Nor 2ly any Ordination lawful from or done by those that are condemned or guilty of Schism For to those that are guilty of this tho their former Ordination and the Character as some call that impressed by it is not annulled and blotted out for which cause as I said when such persons were reconciled and readmitted to their functions they were not reordained yet all the authority and right of discharging their function is taken away by the Church and ceaseth and consequently then ceaseth this power of ordaining others See Canon Apost 67.63 Cons. Nice can 19.8 And the same case I suppose it is of those who are condemned tho not guilty and who are excommunicated and thrust out of the Church never so unjustly for they yet desiring the communion denied them shew their approbation
also may lawfully disobey and not do it One would think either the Magistrate ought to be certain that what he commands is right before he may punish any for disobeying his command or the Subject ought to be certain that what he commands is not right before he may disobey it But yet neither is the one or the other held any certain Judg in these matters we speak of Nor yet do these men leave any third person that being so may guide and regulate them But the one lawfully commands and punishes him for that which the other lawfully disobeys Where in effect every one in things Spiritual is finally committed to his own Judgment whilst they leave none at all above others that may so decide what is contrary to God's Law what not as to constrain submission thereto further than their private judgment concurs And the only absolute obligation we have to any of their commands is to non-resistance of the punishment But then suppose one thinks this also namely that we should be bound in all cases even where we are innocent or also truly religious to non-resistance c. to be a thing contrary to Scripture as there want not many of late who have been so perswaded then their commands will oblige such an one in no sense at all and so indeed will be no commands as to such a person for effectus imperii est obligatio Lastly the authority these men do give to the Church is except that which she derives from the Civil power only regimen suasorium or declarativum and so sine obligandi jure But this is making our obedience to her if it may be so call'd at all no more than that we give to any other private man administring as we think good Counsel to us which is sufficiently confuted before Only in all this you may observe That whilst these wary Factors for Truth are afraid to acknowledg such an obedience enjoin'd to the Church as to believe that to be the meaning of the Divine Law or not to be truth or error that she tells them to be so then much less can allow such an obedience to Secular power they in avoiding these two yeild this judgment of what is truth what is not in these matters of highest concernment to be left by God to every one which exposeth the Christian world to far more and grosser errors as daily experience thereof sheweth than would in probability either of the other But yet this pleaseth because thus the staters of the question make themselves also Judges See more of this subject in Ancient Church-Government c. § 72 Christ therefore to avoid such confusion hath establish'd his Church for guiding the World for ever in his truths upon such firm Laws and Canonical Orders that no Civil Authority may be admitted at any time to meddle in stating any Church-affairs against the major part of the Clergy and its Governors And if secular Princes anciently in a Council even when they generally agreed in opinion with the Bishops had in Ecclesiastical affairs no defining but only a consenting suffrage how come they enabled to define any thing in these when they are against the Bishops See St. Ambrose his words l. 2. ep 13. quoted by Dr. Field l. 5. c. 53. when he was cited to be judg'd in a matter of Faith by Valentinian the Emperor which conclude it cannot be without usurpation of that which no way pertaineth to them that Princes should at all meddle with the judging of matters of Faith neither had it been heard of but on the contrary that Bishops might and had judg'd Emperors in matters of Faith Quando saith he speaking to Valentinian audisti clementissime Imperator in causa fidei Laicos de Episcopo judicasse Ita ergo quadam adulatione curvamur ut sacerdotalis juris simus immemores quod Deus donavit mihi hoc ipse aliis putem esse credendum Si docendus est Episcopus a Laicis quid sequetur Laicus ergo disputet Episcopus audiat Episcopus discat a Laico At certe si vel Scripturarum seriem divinarum vel vetera tempora a tractemus Quis est qui abnuat in causa sidei in causa inquam fidei Episcopos solere de Imperatoribus Christianis non Imperatores de Episcopis judicare Pater tuus Valen. sen Imp. vir maturioris aevi dicebat non est meum judicare inter Episcopos See the like in Athanasius Epist ad solitariam vitam agentes Quando unquam judicium Ecclesiae ab Imperatore authoritatem habuit See many more like testimonies collected by Champney De Vocatione Minist c 15. And see the Concessions of Bishop Andrews Resp ad Apol. p. 29 332. And of Calvin no zealous Vindicator of the Church's Authority Inst l. 4. c. 11. § 15. And of many others cited in Church-Government Par. 5. And see more of this matter in Church-Government Par. 1. And if the Church to use some of Mr. Thorndikes words subsisted before any secular power was Christian extended beyond the bounds of any one's Dominion in one visible Society with equal interest in the parts of it through several Dominions endow'd with such power in Spiritual matters as is set down before what Title but Force can any State have whilst this Body continues to exercise its power not only without but against it Dr. Field in Answer saith That such power belongs to the Clergy regularly but may be devolv'd to Princes in cases of necessity In what case i.e. If the Clergy through malice or ignorance fail c. That the Prince having charge over Gods people c. may condemn them falling into gross errors contrary to the common sense of Christians or into Heresie formerly condemn'd l. 5. c. 53. formerly condemn'd For saith he we do not attribute power to a Prince or Civil state to judge of things already resolved on in a general Council no not if they err manifestly and intolerably but only to judge in those matters of faith that are resolved on and that according to former resolutions From which I gather That Princes can define nothing against the Clergy i. e. the more considerable part thereof else there was never any thing so absurd a Prince can propose but that he may find or make some of the Clergy to join with him but protect what is already first defined by the Clergy in a former General Council But if so then his power with hardly extend to the points of Reformation since how few are those Heresies amongst the many points of the Roman Church from which the Reformed have departed which are solemnly condemned some of them they say are defined by General Councils I suppose therefore we must found the Princes Ecclesiastical authority on the other member if the Clergy err against the common sence of Christians or as Mr. Thorndike expresseth it when the Ecclesiastical power abolisheth any of matters already determined by our Lord and his