not we who by force and perswasion and by all manner of Artifices endeavour to draw People from the Unity and Obedience of the Holy Catholick Church unto new Congregations Institutions and Rules of their own framing opposite to and destructive of the former Like the Scribes and Pharisees of old they compass Sea and Land to make one Proselyte and when he is made they make him twofold more the Child of Hell than themselves Matth. 23.15 Qu. 13. Whether Persons so acting are better than Rebels and Usurpers or such as Simon Magus and those that deserted the Apostles to follow him and therefore to be avoided as Persons separated from the flock of Christ Ans That they are no better than such as he hath here named and described we willingly grant and upon that very account is it that we now avoid Communion with the present Church of Rome Thus have I given an Answer and I hope a sufficient one to these Enquiries and that short without entring upon discourses of things not demanded or at least not implyed in those demands and so observed the Method propounded by the Enquirer An Explanation of Roman Catholick's Belief concerning these IV. Points Their Church Worship Justification and Civil Government as it was presented to some Persons of Quality for their particular Satisfaction THese are four great Points and if well and truly explained the Explanation of them may be of very great use but if otherwise if he only guild the Pill that the Patient may be more easily perswaded to swallow it it may prove of dangerous Consequence instead of informing it may debauch the minds and understandings of men Let us therefore look before we leap let us consider well whether this Explainer hath been honest and faithfull in his Explanation before we receive all he saith for Gospel And for your assistance herein I shall set down his own words then animadvert thereupon and when that is done present you with both for your better satisfaction The EXPLAINER 1. We believe the Holy Scriptures to be of Divine Inspiration and Infallible Authority and whatsoever is therein contained we firmly assent unto as to the word of God the Author of all truth But since in the Holy Scriptures there are some things hard to be understood which the ignorant and unstable wrest to their own destruction we therefore profess for the ending of all Controversies in our Religion and setling of Peace in our Consciences to submit our private Judgments to the Judgment of the Church in a free general Council The ANIMADVERTER 1. The Explainer tells us that the Roman Catholicks do believe the Holy Scriptures to be of Divine Inspiration and Infallible Authority c. A very fair and good profession wherein we do heartily joyn with them And is it not a great pity there should be a secret reserve to spoil and overthrow it They believe this but is this all they believe Do they not believe also that some things which before the Church's definition of them might have been innocently disbelieved yet after they are once defined and determined by the Church to be matters of Faith and of equal Authority with any other things delivered by Christ and his Apostles Do they not believe also that some Apocryphal Books are of Divine Inspiration also and of as infallible Authority as the Writings of the Prophets and Apostles Do they not believe Traditions to be the unwritten Word of God to be divinely inspired and of Equal infallible Authority with the written Word If they do then the Explainer hath not been so fair and candid so just and faithfull as he ought to have been in his Explication though he hath told us the truth he hath not told us the whole truth And that they do believe all this though I might easily produce a Cloud of Witnesses and those none of the least admired of their own Authours yet because I design brevity I shall content my self at present with the Evidence and Authority of one of their most magnified Councils which they call both free and general though in truth it was neither and that is the Council of Trent Which Sess 4 8. Apr. de Canon Script takes the Books of Toby Judith Ecclesiasticus Wisdom and Maccabees into the Canon of Scripture though they could not but know that they never were in the Jewish Canon nor ever universally received by the Christian Church and anathematized all those who do not upon this Declaration believe them to be Canonical And the same Council in the same Sess professes to receive and reverence Traditions with no less pious Affection than the Books of the Old and New Testament and that not in matter of Rite and History only but of Faith and Manners also Now what is this but to add to the Scriptures and to accuse them of insufficiency and imperfection And if so then what doth this Explainer do but deceive those Persons of Quality to whom he presents this as the Summ of their Belief But the Explainer goes on and saith since in the Holy Scriptures there are some things hard to be understood which the ignorant and unstable wrest to their own destruction And here I shall by the way only remarque these two things 1. The Apostle indeed saith there are some things hard but not impossible to be understood For if men will use the means if they will apply themselves with an humble and teachable temper of mind diligently to reade the Holy Scriptures if they will seriously meditate on what they reade and earnestly and devoutly pray unto God for the assistance and direction of his Holy Spirit therein the difficulty may be removed and they may be enabled rightly to understand those Scriptures at least so far as is necessary for them to know 2. The Apostle tells us to whom those things are hard to be understood viz. the ignorant and unstable So that the difficulty seems to be not in the things themselves but in the incapacities of men For if men will be ignorant still and not use the means to know better or if they will content themselves with some airy Notions which float and fluctuate in the brain without ever endeavouring to bring them to a consistency not only some but all things in Scripture and even the clearest declarations of the Church may be hard to be understood by them and so they will be as much at a loss in the one as in the other But how much this Text is misunderstood and misapplied a Reverend and Learned Divine of our Church in a Treatise intituled Search the Scriptures hath plainly demonstrated to which I refer the Reader But let us see what Inference he draws from hence Therefore saith he we profess for the ending of all Controversies in our Religion and settling of peace in our Consciences to submit our private Judgments to the Judgment of the Church in a free General Council In which Inference I cannot but remarque these things
sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures to others and it were to be wished that none had failed of their duty therein Qu. 12. Whether all that is mentioned in Scripture be not true according to the sense and meaning so delivered Ans All that is mentioned in Scripture is undoubtedly true according to the true sense and meaning thereof Qu. 13. Whether an obstinate Contradiction of any one truth thus delivered in Scripture though there appear no necessity it should have been mentioned in Scripture be not injurious to that divine Authority and veracity and which unrepented of shall bring damnation Ans An obstinate contradiction of any one plain truth delivered in holy Scripture is certainly a very great injury to divine authority and veracity Qu. 14. When difficulties did arise about the sense of Scriptures or matters of Faith whither the dicision of those controversies was carried and whether the present Church of every Age was not to decide it Ans It was undoubtedly the practice and is most rational that the present Church in every Age should decide such controversies For the Priest's Lips should preserve knowledge and they should enquire the Law at his mouth And no question the Church hath Authority to declare matters of Faith but not to make any new Articles of Faith Qu. 15. Whether every particular person was to have an Authoritative power in this decision or whether it was not universally left to the Heads and Governours of the Church Assembled together Ans Every particular person hath undoubtedly a Judgment of discretion allow'd him in matters of that nature but the Authoritative power of deciding and determining was in the Heads and Governours of the Church Assembled together for that end Qu. 16. Whether such a force of Hopes or Fears could possibly happen at once upon all the Heads of the universal Church Assembled together or after consenting to those that were Assembled as should make them declare that to be a truth revealed by Christ which was not so delivered to them to have been the ever esteemed sense of Scripture or perpetual tradition which was not so Ans Whilst men are men they will be liable to hopes and fears and subject to the power and force of them if therefore we consider the Heads and Governours of the Church as such we cannot allow them an Exemption therefrom and consequently there may be no impossibility in the things propounded We grant that in a General Council lawfully assembled we have great reason to hope for the presence direction and assistance of the Holy Ghost â—…t how far the passions and humours of men may frustrate our Hopes we know not This we certainly know that the Acts of one Council have been made void by another and therefore it is more than probable that one of them did declare something to be a truth revealed by Christ which was not so delivered unto them Qu. 17. Whether the Decisions of such Assemblies or general Councils were not always esteemed obligatory in the Church and whether particular Persons or Churches obstinately gainsaying such Decisions received by a much Major part of the Church diffused were not always esteemed to have incurred those Anathema's pronounced by such Councils Ans If those Assemblies or Councils be truly general we do very much reverence their Authority and think their decisions to be obligatory But we do not think all to be such that are called so As for instance The Council of Trent is by some sort of men looked upon as a general Council and all their Religion almost built upon the Authority thereof and yet the Church of England never received the decisions of that Council nor did the Galican Church for many years and yet neither the one nor the other did for all that esteem themselves to have incurred the Anathema's pronounced by that Council Qu. 18. Whether the universal Church did not in all Ages practice this way of deciding controversies and whether these be not as universal a tradition of this as the practice was universal without interruption Ans Universal practice will amount to an universal Tradition and that this hath been the practice of the Church in all Ages especially in matters of great weight we deny not nor should we oppose the same course now provided the Council were free and general But the Enquirer goes on Some will perhaps say that such Councils cannot Err in fundamentals but may in not fundamentals I ask these Qu. What are fundamentals and what not Ans Those things which are essentially necessary to the being of Religion may properly be called fundamental but those things which only respect order and decency therein and vary according to time and place and are alterable by the Governours of the Church when they see cause these are not fundamental Qu. Whether there be not some things fundamentals to the Church which are not to every particular Ans There may be some things fundamental to the Being of a Church which are not so to every particular member of that Church but whatsoever things are â—…ndamental to the Being of Religion are equally so to the whole Church and every member thereof Qu. Whether an obstinate denyal of what is fundamental or necessary to the universal Church or granting as I may say upon what is fundamental by a particular person be not in time a fundamental Errour especially after an universal declaration of it as truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles Ans This Query as it is here worded is hardly reconcileable to sense but I suppose his meaning is Whether for any particular person obstinately to deny what is fundamental or necessary to the universal Church and declared to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles be not a fundamental Errour To which I answer That every particular Christian ought with all deference to submit his own private Judgment to the publick Judgment of the Church and though it do not appear so plain to him yet he ought rather to suspect his own than that of the Church But if in some things he cannot be satisfied and therein happen to differ from the Church provided he do not thereby break the peace and unity of the Church it will hardly amount to a fundamental Errour But what if it be declared by the Church to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles will not that make it so To this I answer That no declaration of the Church how universal soever it be can make that to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles which really is not so And therefore in that case we must have recourse to their Writings and if it be not either in express words contained therein or by sound consequence drawn therefrom we ought not to comply with it nor is it a fundamental Errour to differ therein Qu. Whether the universal Church assembled in a General Council ought not to be justly esteemed the decider of what is fundamental and what
not Ans When the universal Church by her proper Representatives is lawfully assembled in a Council truly General that Council without all dispute will be a very proper Judge of what is fundamental and what not but this is rather to be prayed than hoped for Qu. Whether an obstinate denial of any one truth delivered by Jesus Christ or his Apostles though the delivery was not absolutely necessary to Salvation may not be called a fundamental errour seeing it brings the rest he delivered in question as also his veracity Ans The denial of any one truth delivered by Jesus Christ or his Apostles is a very great fault and if that denial be obstinately continued in after plain conviction that it is such a truth it is a very dangerous Errour Qu. Whether therefore the denial of any one truth delivered to us by an uninterrupted tradition as taught by Christ and his Apostles would not be a fundamental Errour Ans There is a great difference between a thing delivered as taught and plainly taught by Christ and his Apostles for we meet with many things delivered as taught by them and tradition pretended for them which really and in truth were never taught by them or either of them aed to deny such is so far from being a fundamental Errour that it is no Errour at all There is also a great difference between traditions If by tradition he mean the holy Scriptures we grant that to deny any thing that is plainly and clearly taught therein is a very great Errour But if by tradition he mean such as is meerly humane and not clearly warranted by the Word of God we think we ought to reject such how uninterrupted soever they be for if an Angel from Heaven preach any other Gospel than hath been preached let him he accursed saith St. Paul Qu. And on the other side whether the teaching of any Doctrine onely piously believed but sufficiently known not to have been expresly or by a natural consequence delivered by Christ and his Apostles and which may upon that account be false not having Divine Revelation which alone is infallible for its ground whether I say the teaching such a Doctrine so known as one that was delivered by Christ when they know it was not would not be a fundamental Errour Ans Whosoever teacheth such Doctrines as are mentioned in this Query and in that manner is highly guilty and when the Enquirer shall think fit to be more particular and produce his instances he may expect a more particular answer and perhaps be told at whose door this charge will lie In the mean time this general answer may suffice Qu. Whether Christ having taken care as some grant that his Church should not err in fundamentals hath not consequently taken care that she should not teach any one Doctrine as delivered by Christ and consequently of Faith which was not taught by him and consequently might be an Errour Ans Christ hath taken all care possible to secure his Church from Errour and hath given her his gracious promise to be with her to the end of the World But the Church being composed of men and such as are fallible the security is not promised to particulars Particular persons and particular Churches too we know not only may but have grosly erred The security therefore is only promised to the Universal Church and when he tells us what he means by that he may expect a more direct answer to his Query Qu. Whether those Doctrines or most of them controverted now by Protestants have not been taught and believed in the Church as Doctrines delivered by Christ long before Luther yea and delivered in the most General Councils those Ages would permit and accepted of by the Church diffusive none that we know of dissenting but those condemned in those Councils for Hereticks and whose Heresies expired almost with themselves Ans It is now plain that this Enquirer by the Church and universal Church so often mentioned by him doth all along mean the Church of Rome which we are so far from complying with him in that though we own that Church to be a Member yet we cannot allow it to be a sound Member of the Catholick Church And if by the Decisions and Declarations of the Church he mean the determinations of that Church they are no further obligatory than to her own Members nor many of them to them neither if strictly enquired into As for Luther we do not receive our Religion from him but from Jesus Christ and for any Doctrines now controverted we are content to have the same determined by the Holy Scriptures and the four first General Councils As for the Councils our Enquirer hints at we deny that they were truly General or that all their decisions were ever accepted of by the Church diffusive And he cannot but know that there were many more not only Persons but whole Churches which did dissent from them Qu. Whether there was from the first 400 years till the time of Luther any known body of Pastors and Teachers declaring a dissent in any Age from those Doctrines and opposing those Councils and whether the Greek Churches did not and do to this very day consent with this Western Church in most points now controverted by Protestants Ans This Query is preposterously put for how should any body of Pastors and Teachers in the first 400 years oppose themselves to those Councils which were not then in being nor heard of till many hundred years afterwards But that the Fathers in those first Ages did teach the same Doctrines we now do we appeal to the Records of those times And that those after-Councils by him mentioned were dissenters from those of the first Ages we are contented to be tried by comparing the Acts of both together And that the Greek Church did or now doth agree with the Church of Rome in all or most of those points now in difference between her and us we utterly deny and challenge him to the proof of it Qu. Whether Luther the first Author of Protestancy did not separate himself from the whole visible Church at that time spread over the West contradicting all the Prelates and Pastors then living in the universal practice of that Church and the General Councils received as such by the foregoing Ages Ans As for the names of Protestant and Papist I look upon them as names of distinction not of Religion The Religion we both own is Christian This we do not receive from Luther nor they from Ignatius Loyala St. Francis or any such but both of us from Jesus Christ The only question is Whether they or we hold that Religion in greatest purity 'T is true that Luther in his time did more narrowly look into the corruptions of the Church of Rome declared against them and on that account separated from her Communion and for any thing yet appears may be very well justified in so doing For if any Church shall make terms of her