sense we assert the Certainty of Christian Faith to be MORALL not in the later This Principle is granted if importing only that Christians haue or may haue a sufficiently certain and infallible Euidence of the Truth of their Christianity But notwithstanding this Christians may be deficient in a right belief of seuerall necessary Articles of this Christian Faith if destitute of that externall Infallible Guide therein And the perpetuall Diuine Assistance and so Infallibility in Necessaries of this Guide being declared in the scriptures a Catholick hauing once learnt this Point of Faith from it Definitions and Expositions becomes secure and setled in the belief of all those controuerted Articles of his Faith Wherein Others another whilst the scriptures in such Points at least to persons vnlearned or of weaker judgments which are which are the greatest part of Christians are ambiguous in their sence and drawn with much art to seuerall interests XXVIII PRINCIPLE 28. A Christian being thus certain to the highest degree of a firm assent that the scriptures are the Word of God his Faith is thereby resolued into the scriptures as into the rule and measure of what hee is to belieue as it is into the Veracity of God as the ground of belieuing what is therein contained Both Catholicks and Protestants profess to resolue their Faith into the Word of God and Diuine Reuelation or into the scriptures so as is said on Principle 14. and 29. and make Gods Veracity the Ground of their belief of the things therein contained But the former resolue their Faith into this scripture as the sense of it where disputed is deliuered by the Church whose Faith the Apostle commands vs to follow and to whom Christ himself giues testimony as S. Augustin saith As for Protestants they resolue their Faith into this scripture as the sence of it is ultimatly apprehended and vnderstood by their own judgments None here to vse the Doctors words elsewhere vsurping that Royall Prerogrtiue of Heauen in prescribing infallibly in matters question'd suppose in those Points the Doctor named before the Doctrine of the Deity of Iesus Christ or of the Trinity But leauing all to judge and so the Socinians according to the Pandects of the Diuine Lawes because each member of this society is bound to take care of his soul and all things that tend thereto But here the Doctor will permit vs to aske whether euery one is bound to take care of his soul so as vnder the pretence hereof to disobey their Resolutions and Instructions in Faith or Manners whom God hath appointed to take care of and to watch ouer their soules and will require an account of them for it Here therefore let euery one take the safest course and where there is no euident Certainty always make sure to side with the Church XXIX PRINCIPLE 29 No Christian can be obliged vnder any pretence of Infallibility to belieue any thing as a matter of Faith but what was reuealed by God himselfe in that Book wherein he belieues his will to be contained and consequently is bound to reject whatsoeuer is offered to be imposed vpon his Faith which hath no fundation in scripture or is contrary thereto Which rejection is no making NEGATIVE ARTICLES OF FAITH but only applying the generall grounds of Faith to particular instances as I belieue nothing necessary to saluation but what is contained in scripeure Therefore no such particular things which neither are there nor can be deduced thence 1. Here first obserue That what no Christian is obliged to belieue vnder any pretence of Church-Infallibility he is much rather not obliged to belieue vnder any pretence of Church Authority And that the Doctors freeing the Churches subjects here from the former doth so from the later It concerns therefore his superiors to look to it whether their Churches and their owne Authority suffers no detriment particularly from this Principle I mean so as it can be applied to priuate mens practice 2. Next obserue That the Expression What is reuealed by God c. as it is applicable to persons must either mean What such person only thinks belieues or is perswaded to be reuealed c. or what such person certainly knows to be reuealed And the same may be sayd of the later expressions what hath no foundation What is contrary Now as either of these two Additions are made a great alteration is made in the Principle and what in the one Addition is true in the other may be false As for example when a culpable Ignorance belieues something that is enjoyned by this Authority not to be reuealed in Gods Word which indeed is so and so rejects it here such act is not justifiable Very necessary therefore it seems here to make an exact distinction that if the Doctor means it here of the one viz. certain Knowledge it may not be misapplyed by any to the other namely a belief or full perswasion For so men set once vpon examining well in such high mysteries their owne Certainty will I conceiue neuer find just cause to reject what this Church-Authority to which they owe obedience recommends to them vpon Her Certainty But to take Expressions as they lye For the first Part of this Principle thus much is granted That no Christian can be obliged vnder any pretence of Infallibility to belieue any thing as a matter of Faith but what is reuealed by God himselfe in his Word Written or Vnwritten both which the Doctor else where allowes to be of the same Value so it be euident they are his Word Where I adde vnwritten because though it is granted before on Principle 14. that the Word written or Book of scriptures contains all those Points of Faith that are simply necessary to be of all persons belieued for attaining saluation Yet some Articles of a Christians Faith there may be that are not there contained which may be also securely preserued in the Church by Ecclesiasticall Tradition both Written and Vnwritten deriued at first from the Apostolicall as for example this by Protestants confessed That these Bookes of scripture are the Word of God I say thus much is granted For no Church-Infallibility is now pretended but only in declaring what this Word of God deliuers requireth authorizeth and a Catholicks whole Faith is grounded on Diuine Reuelation And where such pretended Infallible Church-Authority enjoyns any thing to be belieued meerly as lawfull it grounds it selfe on this Word of God for the lawfulness of it The Consequence also is granted viz. That a Christian is bound to reject whatsoeuer is offred to be imposed vpon his Faith which hath no foundation in scripture or Gods Word as before explained or is contrary thereto that is which is certainly known to such Christian to be so there being no matter of Faith enjoyned by such Authority but what is pretended to be so founded But then such Christian where not infallibly certain
which it proposeth Yet it signifies much for his hauing a right and sauing Faith in all those matters proposed by this Church which cannot misguide him see the Consideration on the nineteenth Principle which right and sauing Faith children and other illiterate country people in the Catholick Church haue without any such infallible assurance concerning the Proponent as is abundantly declared by Catholick writers In like manner the Protestants also affirme That the Holy scriptures may signify much to the begetting a true and sauing Faith euen in those who cannot from Vniuersall Tradition certainly proue them to be the word of God XXII PRINCIPLE 22. If no particular person be infallible in the assent he giues to matters proposed by others to him then no man can be infallibly sure that the Church is infallible and so the Churches Infallibility can signify nothing to our infallible assurance without an equall infallibility in our selues in the belief of it If no particular person be infallible in the Assent he giues to matters propos'd c. Here Matters is left indefinite If the Doctor means to any matters at all proposed the Proposition and Consequence thereto annexed are true and granted But on the contrary a particular person may be infallible in the assent he giues to some matter proposed viz. to this That the Church is infallible If he means to all matters proposed then it is faulty and denyed For though no particular person be infallible in the assent he giues to all matters proposed by others to him yet may he be so in this the Churches Infallibility And so the Consequence also is voyd and the Churches Infallibility will signify as much as is expected to mens infallible assurance in those matters it proposeth Here then Catholicks affirm That though euery person is not so any person may be and that antecedently to the testimony of scripture at least with a morally-infallible certainty or what euer Certainty that may be called which Vniuersall Tradition can afford assured of this Diuine Reuelation the Churches Infallibility from such Tradition and other Motiues of Credibility as Protestants allow for a sufficiently or morally-infallible and certain means of belieuing the scriptures to be the word of God On which word of God or Diuine Reuelation the seuerall Articles deliuered by it in the sense their own priuate judgment apprehends the Protestant grounds his Faith Again on which word of God or Diuine Reuelation in the sense this Infallible Church interprets the same Articles the Catholick grounds his Faith But as the Protestants except here from being primarily grounded on or proued by the same scriptures this Fundamentall Point of Faith That the scriptures are the true Word of God so they must giue Catholiks also leaue to except here this their Point of Faith the infallibility of the Church from being primarily or as to the first means of Knowing it grounded on or learnt from the testimony of this Infallible Church For this Point may first come to the Belieuers Knowledge either from Tradition or from the Holy scriptures as is explained before in the Considerations on 17. Principle § 28. From the scriptures I say as the sense of them is now learnt not from this Infallible Church but either from their owne sufficient Clearness in this Point or from Tradition Nor are Catholicks necessited in arguing against Protestants who grant the scriptures to be Gods Word to vse any other Testimony then that of these scriptures for a sufficiently clear Proof of Church-Infallibility For I think I may call that a clear Proof euen according to the Doctors common reason of Mankind which by the most of the Christian World is taken to be so notwithstanding that a Party engaged by their Reformation in an apparent contrary interest do contradict it Yet whilst they deny a sufficient Euidence of Church-Infallibility to be found in scripture if they would allow a sufficient Euidence of Church-Authority established to decide Ecclesiasticall Controuersies with Obligation to Externall Obedience by this Authority they would be cast and silenced for the former if a much Major Part may be admitted as it ought to giue Law to the Whole In the Belief and Profession of Which Church-Infallibility and submission of priuate mens judgments to her sentence passed in her synods the Greek Church seems no way varying from the Roman Jeremias the Constantinopolitan Patriarch in his Contest with the Lutheran Protestants is much in this as a sure Retreat for ending Controuersies and establishing Peace For he tells them That those Points which haue been determined or commanded synodically after a Legitimate way of Councills they are receiued by all Faithfull Christians as consonant to the Diuinely-Inspired scriptures And in the Conclusion of that Answer he saith It is not lawfull for vs confiding in our own priuate Explication to vnderstand to obserue or interpret any saying of Diuine scripture any otherwayes then as hath seemed good to those Theologues who haue been approued and receiued by Holy synods directed by Gods spirit least that declining from the right Euangelicall Doctrin the Conceptions of our minds should be carried about hither and thither like a Proteus But some wilt aske How shall those things be reformed How Euen thus by Gods Assistance if we take not into our hands nor giue credit to any things besides those which haue been instituted and ordained by the Holy Apostles and Holy synods He who obserues this limit is our Companion in celebrating Diuine Mysteries he is of the same Communion and Faith with us Again in his Preface to the same answer he saith We will giue our Answer not alledging any thing of our own but from the seauen Oecumenicall synods the last of these is that so much persecuted and befoold by Doctor Stillingfleet in his last Book And from the sentence of Holy Doctors interpreters of Diuinely inspired scriptures whom the Catholick Church hath by an Vnanimous consent receiued since the Holy Ghost hath breathed forth by them and spoken in them such things as shall foreuer remain unmooued as being founded on the Word of God For the Church of Christ is the Pillar and ground of Truth against which the Gates of Hell shall neuer preuail as God has promised Here we see in the East the same Zeale for Councills and for Fathers taken collectiuely as an Infallible Guide as is in the West and the like endeauour to reduce Protestants to the same acknowledgment and humble submission of Judgment XXIII PRINCIPLE 23. The Infallibility of euery particular person being not asserted by those who plead for the Infallibility of a Church and the one rendring the other vseless for if euery person be infallible what needs any Representatiue Church be so too and the infallibility of a Church being of no effect if euery Person be not infallible in the belief of it we are further to enquire what certainty men may haue in matters of Faith supposing no
against it ought to submit to the judgment of this Authority for the Knowing what things are reuealed in this Word and what are contrary to or not founded in it and to vse the Doctors Expression to be guided by the sense of Scripture as it is interpreted by this Authority Else a mistaken and culpably ignorant belief herein will no way justify his disobedience No more then the Socinians contrary belief justifies him against the Decrees of the Church in those Points which yet he belieues not to be founded in Gods word and rejects as contrary And the Doctor els-where to express and curb such extrauagant and capricious beliefs is glad to call in for the interpreting of Scripture to them the concurrant sense of the Primitiue Church the common Reason of Mankind that supposeth Scripture the Rule of Faith the consent of Wise and learned men And on their side who disbelieue this Authority he calls for no less then Demonstration and this not some improbable Argument miscalled so but which being proposed to any man and vnderstood the mind cannot choose but inwardly assent thereto that is that euery reasonable man vnderstanding the terms assents to But how this and seuerall other things which haue fallen some times from the Doctors pen do consist with these Principles and some other Tenēts of his Or how the true sense of Scripture in all Necessaries is so clear and intelligible to euery sincere endeauourer as that he hath such Demonstration for it as that no rationall man hearing it can dissent from it I cannot vndertake to giue a Satisfactory account Mean while such Protestants as perhaps may cast their eyes on these Papers may do well to consider whether vpon such a Demonstratiue Certainty in the Points controuerted as this it is that they oppose Church-Authority teaching them otherwise Likwise the Common Reason of MankindChristian the Common consent of Wise and learned men named by him before what are they indeed but where all are not vnited in the same judgment the most common Suffrage and testimony of the present Vniversall Church whom also we ought sooner to credit then any other touching what is the concurrent testimony of the Primitiue Church in case this suffers any debate And if as he says Particular persons are not to depart from this judgment of Authority till they haue Demonstration that is their own certainty and Infallibility as to such Point to shew against it then we need not seek for our Lords Patent of the Churches Infallibility for their or our submission to it tell the Opposers of its judgment for the Points they dissent in produce theirs Here then we see the Doctor getts as near to an Internall Infallible or at least Authenticall Proponent as his cause and interest will permitt him Hoping by his requiring Demonstration and introducing Common Reason and Wise and learned men and Primitiue Church to shake his hands of so many Sectarists who molest his owne Churches peace vpon the account of this his Proposition or something like it viz. that no Christian is bound vnder what euer pretence of Church Authority to belieue that which is not reuealed in Gods Word and is bound to reject what euer is offred to be impos'd vpon his Faith that is contrary or hath no ground in Gods Word c. And you must lett them judg of both these For the last part of this 29. Principle That such Rejection is no making Negative Articles of Faith I grant that a rejecting of the imposition of a Belief of such a Positiue Point or the refusing to admitt it as an Article of their Faith which may be done whilst they eyther suspend their judgment concerning it or also acknowledg the truth of it supposed no Diuine Reuelation if this were all the Protestants do is not therefore making the Negatiue of it an Article of their Faith But mean while the rejecting any such Positiue from their Faith as not only vntrue but contrary to the Scripture is making or declaring the Negatiue of it an Article of their Faith because it makes this Negatiue a thing reuealed in Scripture and so a matter of Faith though I do not say an Article necessary to Saluation And therefore perhaps it was that the Doctor in the Reason he annexeth That they only apply the Generall grounds of Faith to particular instances c. mentions indeed such Positiues as are neyther in nor may be deduced from the Scripture but warily omitts such as are pretended contrary to Scripture Now that Protestants declare many of these Positiues they reject contrary to Scripture See for Purgatory Adoration of Images Inuocation of Saints Indulgences in the Article of the Church of England 22. For Works of Supererogation Art 14. For Publick Prayer or Ministery of the Sacraments in a Tongue not vnderstood by the people Art 24. Sacrifice of the Mass. Art 31. Transubstantiation Art 28. And to this Belief of the Negatiues of them as contained in Scripture all the Members of the Church of England or at least the Clergy seem to be by their Canons as strictly obliged though some of their Diuines appear not well satisfied with it vnder these terms To allow and acknowledg all the Articles and so these fore-cited agreable to Gods Word To declare their vnfeigned assent to them and this for establishing Vnity of Opinion and consent as those of the Roman Church are obliged to the Positiues who are no such way obliged by that Church to such a necessary Belief of all her Positiues as that a Person nescient of them cannot be saued or that the explicit knowledg of them is necessary though always in some measure beneficiall it is to Saluation But this indeed is necessary to Saluation that any Subject of the Church knowing them to be determined by her obey her Definitions and not reject or dissent from them Such Disobedience being conceaued a breach of Gods Command And from this if I may be indulged to trangress a little an Answer may be giuen to that Quaere of the Doctors in his Book Roman Idolatry p. 52. which he says he could not hitherto procure from Catholiks though he hath often requested it viz. Why the belieuing of all the Ancient Creeds and leading a good life may not be sufficient to Saluation vnless one be of the Communion of the Church of Rome Where if he will allow me here for auoyding by disputes to change these Words Communion of the Church of Rome into the Communion of the Roman Catholick Church and 2. will giue me leaue to vnderstand a good life here restrained to all other duties of a Christian saue those which respect this Communion else if a good life be generally taken the Doctors supposition must not be allowed Then I answer That such Belieuing and Leading such a life cannot be sufficient for Saluation to so many persons as persist without repentance eyther in a wilfull ignorance of their Obligation to
arguments drawn from them as well as Protestants But if the Doctor put this Text so much controuerted among Obscure Scriptures which therefore not containing any Point necessary to saluation saluation is not endangered by it if a Christian should err or be mistaken in their sense then how comes this great Body of Christians meerly by the mistake of its sence in thinking that our Lord meaneth as the words sound that the Eucharist is his very proper Body and so in adoring as they ought should it be so how come they I say to committ such grosse Idolatry as the Doctor in his Book chargeth them with and so all without repentence miscarry in their Saluation And if from a Major part of the present Church interpreting Scripture an Appeal be made to a Major part of the Ancient Church pretended to interpret them on the Protestants side neither will this relieue the Doctor because since this also on what side Antiquity stands is a thing in Controuersy for deciding of it we are to presume here likewise that a sincere endeauour being allowd to all Parties to vnderstand the sense of the former Church this also stands on that side as the Major part apprehends it Now the present Catholick Church being a Major part professes to follow the sence of the Ancient in interpreting Scripture XIV PRINCIPLE 14. To suppose the bookes so written to be imperfect that is that any things necessary to be heleeued or practised are not contained in them is either to charge the first Author of them with fraud and not deliuering his whole mind or the writers with insincerity in not setting it downe and the whole Christian Church of the first Ages with folly in belieuing the fullnesse and perfection of the scriptures in order to saluation The two inferences made here by the Doctor are faulty For 1. Neither can the first Author of scripture be charged with fraud if he haue deliuered part of his mind only by writing and part some other way as the Doctour Prop. 7. 8. 9. acknowledges he might vnless it be manifest that he hath obliged himselfe by a Promise of delivering his whole mind by writing which is not shewed 2. Neither can the Writers of scripture be charged with insincerity if so much as they were inspired with to set downe and register there they haue done it Meanwhile as touching the Perfection of Holy scriptures Catholiks now as the Holy Fathers anciently do grant that they contain all Points of Faith which are simply necessary to be of all Persons belieued for attaining saluation And of this Doctor Field may be a Witness who saith For matters of Faith we may conclude according to the judgment of the best and most learned of our Adversaries themselues that there is nothing to be belieued which is not either expresly contained in scripture or at least by necessary consequence from thence and by other things euident in the Light of Nature or in the matter of Fact to be concluded XV. PRINCIPLE 15. These Writings being owned as containing in them the whole Will of God so plainly reuealed that no sober enquirer can misse of what is necessary for saluation there can be no necessity supposed of any infallible society of men either to attest and explain these Writings among Christians any more then there was for some Ages before Christ of such a Body of men among the Iewes to attest and explain to them the Writings of Moses or the Prophets The Consequence here is good viz. That supposing the Will of God is so clearly reuealed in these Writings that no sober Enquirer can misse of knowing what is necessary to saluation there can be then no necessity of any Infallible society But the supposition of such a clearenesse fayles as the 13. Prosiosition on which it is grounded doth It failes I say in the sense the Doctor deliuers it who referrs his sober enquirer only to the Writings themselues for information in all Necessaries Without consulting his spirituall Pastours for the right explication of them Nor doth the Doctors Language any where run thus That the will of God is so plainly revealed in these Writings for then he should say so obscurely rather that no sober man not who repairs to the Writings but who enquires of and learns from his spirituall Pastours the right sence of them shall miss c. But if the supposition in the Doctors sence be allowed for true there seems to follow something more then the Doctor deduceth and which perhaps he would not admit viz. the non-necessity of any society at all fallible or infallible to explain these Writings as to Necessaries all Christians being herein clearly taught from God in these scriptures or this their Rule vnless perhaps these Teachers may be said to be left by our Lord for others to supersede their endeauours or for instructing them in non-necessaries As touching that which the Doctor in the clause of this Princ. speaks of Moses and the Prophets certain it is that Moses his Writings and the Law were not penned with such Clarity But that Doubts and Controuersies might arise concerning the sence of it so we find mention made of doubts between Law and Commandement statutes and Iudgments And 2. such Doubts arising their address was to be made to the supreme Iudges appointed for deciding them 3. Whateuer their sentence was according to the sentence of the Law that these should teach them and according to the judgment that they should tell and inform them they were to do and that vpon pain of death To do I say according to such sentence not only when they were to vndergo some mulct or punishment imposed by these Judges for a fault but when they were enjoyned the obseruance of some Law formerly misunderstood by them and so broken and disobeyed This seems clear enough from the words of the Text for who can reasonably interpret them thus Thou shalt not decline from the sentence which they shall shew thee to the right hand or to the left vers 11. that is Thou shalt not decline in not paying the mulct in which they shall fine thee or not vndergoing the corporall punishment they shall inflict on thee Thou shalt obserue to do according to all that they shall informe thee and according to the sentence of the Law that they shall teach thee vers 10. that is thou shalt suffer what they impose but not obey what they enjoyn Again they were to do according to such sentence vpon pain of death not then only when the Litigants do aknowledge their sentence to be juxta Legem Dei conformable to Gods Law for then what sentence of the Iudge would stand good but so often as the Judge should declare it to be conformable to Gods Law And when will a Judge declare his sentence to bee otherwise Lastly not to debate here the Infallibility of these supreme Judges as to all necessaries in the Law
either of these be learnt from Tradition and that of the other from it viz. 1. either the Infallible Authority of the scriptures from that of the Church the Church testifying so much of the scriptures Or 2. that of the Church from the scriptures Or 3. Also the Infallibility of either of these may be rightly proued from its own testimony For whoeuer is proued or granted once infallible in what he saith the consequence is clear without any Circle or Petitio Principii or identicall arguing that whateuer he doth witness of himselfe is true I say all these Consequences are naturall and necessary 1. The Testimony being granted euident that the one bears to the other or either to its selfe and 2. the infallibility of one of these either of the scripture or of the Church being first learnt not from its own or the others testimony but from Tradition 2. When a Catholick then first receiues an assurance of the Truth or Canon of scripture from the Infallibility of the Church or its Gouernors he may learne first this supernaturall Diuine assistance and Infallibility of these Gouernors which is made known by Diuine Reuelation to those first persons who communicate it to posterity from Tradition descending from age to age in such manner as the Protestant saith he learneth his Canon of scripture from Tradition To which tradition also may be committed by our Lord or his Apostles whateuer is to scripture 3. Neither may we think that this Diuine Assistance or infallibility of these Guides of the Church in necessaries should either not haue been or not haue been a thing well known to or belieued in the Church by this to use the Doctors terms Deriuatiue and perpetuated sensation of Tradition if there had been no Diuine Writings for soe the Christian religion Without such writings would haue been no rationall and well grounded no stable and certain Religion which surely the Doctor will not affirme And this that is said here of the Churches Infallible Authority may be also of other necessary Articles of the Christian faith For as the Doctor saith It is euident from the Nature of the thing that the Writing of a Diuine Reuolation is not necessary for the ground and reason of Faith as to that Reuelation Because men may belieue a Diuine Reuelation without it as is euident in the Patriarchs and Christian Beleiuers before the Doctrine written 4. Such Infallibility in necessaries then being so settled in the Gouernors and Pastors of the Church the Apostles and those others ordained by them by whom the World was conuerted as that had there been no scriptures it should not haue failed for so the Church would haue failed too The successors cannot be imagined to become disenabled or depriued of it because the Apostles afterwards wrote what they taught but rather by such Writings more secured in it Because the Belief of this Infallibility of these successors receiues a second euidence from the Testimony thereof also found in these Writings Thus both written and vnwritten Tradition-Apostolicall attesting it 5. Now that these Gouernors of the Church who hauing an apparent succession their Testimony must haue been vnquestionably belieued by Christians in what they taught in case there had been no scripture alwayes reputed and held themselues Diuinely assisted and infallible for all necessaries and that this was the Traditiue Faith of the Church grounded on our Lords Promise in all ages sufficiently appears by their inserting from time to time as they thought fitt their Decisions in the Creeds and by their Anathematizing Dissenters the Churches stiling them Hereticks For no Authority if we belieue the Doctor but that wich proues it selfe Infallible and therefore which is Infallible can justly require our internall Assent or submission of Iudgment And Protestants allowing only an externall obedience or silence due to Councills Fallible inferrs that Councills Fallible can justly require no more and consequently that such Councills are Infallible as do justly require more as did the fowr first Councills with the voluntary acknowledgment also and submission of their subjects to such an Authority assumed by them We find indeed subordinate Councills also stating sometimes matters of Faith censuring Heretiks and requiring assent to their Decrees but still with Relation to the same Infallibility residing in the Generall Body of Church Gouernors and their concurrence therein They not passing such Acts without consulting the Tradition and Iudgment of other Churches and especially of the Apostolick see and a generall acceptation rendring their Decisions authentick and valid 2. For the latter part of this Principle Nothing is more absurd then to pretend that Infallibility in a Body of men is not as lyable to doubts and disputes as in those Bookes from whence only they deriue their Infallibility If the Doctor means here as in his Rationall Account that the sentence of a Body of men Infallible is he saith not in some things lyable to some Doubts but as lyable to Doubts and Disputes as the Infallible scriptures for there he maintains That the Decrees of Councills are as lyable to many Interpretations as any other Writings And again If the scriptures cannot put an End to Controuersies on that account how can Generall Councills do it when their Decrees are as lyable to a priuate sense and wrong Interpretation as the scriptures are Nay more c. I say if this be his sense then not to compare Absurdities here Is not this all one as if he said That a Preacher or Commentator can or doth speak or write nothing plainer then the Text Nor the Judge giue a sentence any more intelligible then the Law That Councills can or haue decided nothing clearer then the thing that is in Controuersy And so no Party is cast by them since it appears not for whom they declare And that the Decree of the Councill of Trent as to Transubstantiation remains still as disputable as the Text Hoc est Corpus meum But then how comes it to pass that Protestants when the Definitions of later Councills are urged against them do not contest them as dubious but reject them as erroneous From the same misarguing the Doctor elsewhere concludes That the argument of the Vnity in Opinion of the Roman Party because they are ready to submit their Iudgment to the Determination of the Church will hold as well or better for the Vnity of Protestants as theirs because all men are willing to submit their Iudgments to scriptures which is on all sides agreed to be Infallible Thus He. Now to consider it Moses his Law prescribed by God for an Infallible Rule yet had Iudges appointed when Doubts and Contentions hapned about the meaning of it to explain the sense Our sauiour accordingly in the Ghospell when any one had a Controuersy against another which Controuersy perhaps might be Heresy or his Brothers teaching something contrary to the Rule of Faith ordered vpon such Person his not being
otherwise reclaimed that in the last place the matter should be brought to the Hearing of the Church and such Person if not hearing the Church to be excommunicated Now I ask to what end either of these if such persons be no nearer to Vnity of Opinion or conuiction and ending their Disputes by submitting their judgments to the sentence of these Iudges or this Church then before they were in the same submission of theirs to the Rule Infallibility alone ends not Controuersies but clearness Clearness in the Point controuerted Which if the scripture hath how comes Controuersy about it and Controuersies between so great Parties Churches Nations In this sense of scripture Catholiks dissenting repair to the Decision of the Church w ch if any way obscure is capable of being made by it afterward more intelligible submit to its Iudgment and so become vnited in Opinion in all those Points the Church decides wherein Protestants rejoyce in their Liberty still to disagree Vnited in Opinion I say true or false here matters not We speak here of Vnion not of Truth But now when the sense of scripture is the like matter of Controuersy between two sects of Protestants as frequently it is What Course do they take for Vnity of Opinion Repair they again to the scriptures they controvert But these can neuer decide which of the seuerall senses they take them in is the true Repair they to synods So the Arminians and Antiarminians did Then surely this they do because that Vnity prouided there be a submission of Iudgment to both is attainable by the sentence of the synod or Church which is not by that of the scripture Which is the thing here denyed by the Doctor And hence it proceeds that Catholicks must be much more vnited in Opinion or Iudgment then Protestants in as much as they all owne submission of Iudgment to so many Councills which the other reject These not accepting the Decrees of aboue fowr or siue of those Councills whilst the Catholiks admit of fowr or suppose three times so many and namely of one the Councill of Trent of which Soaue affirms That in all the Councills held in the Church from the Apostles times vntill then there were neuer so many Articles decided as in only one session of it And Protestants aggrauate the Tyranny of the Church of Rome in tying all her subjects vnanimously to belieue and that as necessary to saluation so many Points of Faith wherein the Protestants leaue to all men liberty of Opinion And moreouer as for those Differences that remain still or shall arise hereafter they are also conclusiue among them by the same way of Councills vpon the acknowledged obligation of a common submission of their judgments I say not all their differences whatsoeuer are conclusiue which causeth some wonder in the Doctor that this thing is not done in an Infallible Church but so many of them wherein the Church finds on any side sufficient euidence of Tradition or for the grauity of the matter a Necessity of Decision The same Diuine Prouidence that preserues his Church perpetually Infallible in all things necessary to be determined disposing also that for all such necessaries there shall be a sufficient euidence of Tradition either of the Conclusion it selfe or its Principles But as for seuerall other matters of Diuine Reuclation where what is to be held as de fide is not sufficiently yet cleared either by reason of the sense of scripture or of the sense of some Conciliary Decree still disputed among Catholicks in matters that are called indeed by the one or other Party de fide as they variously apprehend this sense of scripture or Councill No such agreement I say in matters of Faith thus taken is at all pretended And their accord in the rest sufficiently transcends that of Protestants But euen these also are capable of the same settlement when the Church shall pass a new sentence concerning them Here then may be resumed that Expression selected by Doctor Tillotson to make sport with viz. That in this their Faith namely as to Points thereof determined by the Church it is impossible that Catholiks should differ one from another and that there should be any Schism among them The Reason is plain because in all such Points they vnanimously Submit their judgment to their Mother the Church or if any doth not he ceaseth to be a Catholick Whereas Protestants not acknowledging any necessary Obligation of such Submission to any Superiours among them it is impossible that debates and Schisms should be auoyded by them XVIII PRINCIPLE 18. There can be no hazard to any person in mistaking the meaning of any particular place in those Bookes supposing he use the best means for understanding them comparable to that which euery one runs who belieues any person or society of men to be infallible who are not For in this later he runs vnauoydably into one great errour and by that may be led into a thousand but in the former God hath promised either he shall not erre or he shall not be damned for it God hath made no such Promise concerning any one who vseth his best endeanours for vnderstanding scripture that either he shall not erre or not be damned for it if such endeauour be vnderstood exclusiuely to his consulting and embracing the expositions of the Church which if the Doctor includes then Catholicks also affirme that in necessaries such persons cannot mistake Neither can such Promise be pretended necessary since God hath referred all in the dubious sense of his scriptures to the Directions and Doctrine of his Ministers their spirituall Guides whom he hath set ouer them to bring them in the Vnity of the Faith to a perfect man and that they may not be tossed to and fro and carryed about with euery wind of Doctrine by the sleight of those that lye in wait to deceiue And without which Guide S. Peter obserues that in his time some persons for any thing we know diligent enough yet through want of learning and the instability of adhering to their Guides being unlearned saith he and vnstable wrested some places of scripture hard to be vnderstood to their own destruction Therefore these scriptures are also in some great and important Points hard to be vnderstood Now therefore let the Doctor giue me leaue to put these two other Propositions in the other scale to counterpoise his The first That a Person in belieuing any society of men to be Infallible that are so hath a security incomparably beyond that of another Person who is supposed to use the best other means his condition is capable of to understand the scriptures and so follows his own judgment the capacity of most Christians being very little abstracting from the Directions of a Guide their mean condition voyd of learning or leasure and it being a thing vncertain also when they haue vsed a due endeauour And this a prejudice
Rules of tryall the same Motiues by which the Infallibility of any Diuine reuelation is This Consequence couched only in generall terms is granted in the same manner as the 6. Principle is changing must here into may But then of many things examined and discouered by the same way or means some are much more easily by euery one examined and discouered then some others as the Euidence for them in this means are greater So Holy Scriptures belieued such from Vniuersall Tradition may be much clearer in some Articles of our Faith then in others And some Diuine Reuelations may be so obscurely expressed there or inuolued only in their Principles as that some weak capacities cannot discern them which yet in the same Scriptures may discouer the Authority of the Church and its promised Diuine Assistance and Infallibility in necessaries and so from thence learn those other Of which Church and its Infallibility clear in Scriptures for all necessaries and for deciding other Points more obscure therein thus writes S. Augustin in his Dispute with the Donatists concerning the obscure Point of Rebaptization Quoniam sacra Scriptura fallere non potest c. Since the Holy Scripture cannot deceiue vs let whosoeuer is in fear of being deceiued by the obscurity of this Question consult the same Church about it which Church the Holy Scripture doth without all ambiguity demonstrate And before Earumdem Scripturarum etiam in hac re a nobis tenetur veritas cum c. That is The truth of the Holy Scriptures is held by vs in this matter or Point of Rebaptization when we do that which has pleased the Vniuersall Church that is which had been stated concerning that Point by the Church which the Authority of the Scriptures themselues does commend that since c. Thus writes S. Augustin All which is false and sayd to no purpose if the Scripture be not clear in this That this Church can determine nothing in such important Contests contrary to the verity of the Scriptures and that we ought to giue credit to what he decides for then it would not be true what he says The truth of the same Scriptures in this matter is held by vs and He who is in fear to be deceiued by the obscurity of this Question is no way relieued in following the sentence of the Church Now if it be further asked Amongst those seuerall Modern opposit Communions which do equally inuite men into their Society by the Name of the Church Which of them is so Diuinely attested there are beside the Description made of it in Scripture not applicable to other pretended Churches and frequently vrged by the same Father against the Donatists There are I say sufficiently certain rationall Euidences and Marks thereof left to Christians whereby the sober Enquirer after it cannot be mistaken I mean not here those Marks of the true Church though true Marks also the quest of which men are sett vpon by Protestants viz. True Doctrine and a right administration of the Sacraments A Quest or Tryall that can neuer be made an end of being a task to know all the Truths in Christianity first before we can know the Church When as the Enquirer seeks after the Church which as S. Augustin sayth the Scripture demonstrates that by it he may come to know the Truths But I mean those other Marks mention'd by S. Augustin in the Book he wrote of the Benefit of belieuing the Church viz. Sequentium multitudo c. The multitude of her followers the Consent of Nations her Antiquity c. Which Church hath descended visibly from Christ himself by his Apostles vnto vs and from vs will descend to posterity c. And which by the Confession of Mankind from the Apostolick See by succession of Bishops hath obtained the supreme top of Authority whilst Hereticks on all sides barked against her in vain and were still condemned partly by the judgment euen of the common people partly by the venerable grauity of Councills and partly also by the Majesty of Miracles that is by Miracles done in this Church after the Apostles times of seuerall of which S. Augustin himself was an eye-witness and of some an instrument The same Father repeats much-what the same in another Book of his De Vnitate Ecclesiae against the Donatists a Sect in Africk Non est obscura Quaestio c. It is no obscure Question says he viz. which is the true Church in which those may deceiue you who according to our Lords prediction shall come and say Behold here is Christ behold he is there behold he is in the Desart as in a place where the multitude is not great The time was when the Reformation were constrained to vse the like phrases and also to apply to themselues that Text Fear not little Flock But you haue a Church described in in the Scripture to be spredd through all Regions and to grow still in Conuersion of Nations till the haruest You haue a City concerning which he that was the Founder of it sayd A City built on a Hill cannot be hid This is the Church therefore not in some corner of the earth but euery where most known Now I hope none will think fitt to apply these Scriptures more to S. Augustins time then to any other or to the present For by the same reason the Donatists might here haue counter-applied them to some other and not to S. Augustins times Much what the same is iterated again by this Father and three Testimonies I hope will establish this matter where he tells the Manicheans what retained him in the bosome of that Church from which they stood separated Vt omittam Sapientiam c. that is That I may omitt that Wisdome viz. the Mark of true Doctrine which you do not belieue to be in the Catholick Church there are many other things which most justly keep me in her bosome The consent of peoples and Nations keeps me there Authority begun by Miracles confirmed by Antiquity keeps me there The Succession of Pastors from the Seat it self of S. Peter to whom our Lord after his Resurrection recommended his Sheep to be fedd by him vnto the present Bishop keeps me there And lastly the very Name of Catholick heeps me there c. Here are S. Augustins Marks to find our the Church from which men were to learn the Truth whilst proposed to seuerall persons and Sects always the same And these are the Euidences in Tradition and in those other commonly call'd Motiues of Credibility which in themselues seeme not justly questionable that will afford a sufficient Certainty to euery Sober Enquirer whereby he may try and discern that present Church to which now also if in S. Augustins time Christ affords a testimony and which lyeth not in Corners nor starts vp after some Ages and vanishes again but is fixed ab Apostolica Sede per successiones Episcoporum a City sett on