of Necessity to salvation or not I before cited the words of Albertinus the Jesuite I shall now give you many more and more fully which Frans à Sancta Clara hath gathered to my hands in his Deus Natura Gratia Problem 15. 16. pag. 109 c. And 1. pag. 110. he tells us himself that the Doctors commonly teach that a just and probable ignorance ought to excuse and that it is probable when one hath a probable foundation or ground as a Country-man when he believes that a thing is lawfull drawn by the Testimony of his Parish Priest or Parents or when a man seeing reasons that are probable on both sides doth choose those which seem to him the more probable which yet indeed are against the truth to which he is otherwise well affected in this case he erreth without fault though he err against the truth and so labour of the contrary ignorance Hither is it to be reduced when the Articles of Faith are not propounded in a due manner as by frivolous reasons or by impious men for then to believe were an act of imprudence saith Aquin. 2. 2. q. 1. ar 4. So that if the truth of Scripture be so propounded as to seem most improbable it is no sin to disbelieve it and if such are excused as by a Parent or Parish-Priest are seduced and that have not a due proposal of the Truth then it must follow that the Heathens and Infidels are innocent that never had Christ proposed any way to them and by their Parents have been taught Mahometanism or Paganism But what if I can prove that even the want of a due proposal is a punishment for their sin and that they ought themselves to seek after the truth and that it is long of their own sins that necessary truths do seem improbable to them will sin excuse sin And pag. 111. he telleth us That as to the Ignorance of things necessary as means to salvation the Doctors differ for Soto 4. d. 5. q. 5. l. denatur grat c. 12. And Vega l 6. c. 20. sup Trid. will have no more explicite faith required now in the Law of Grace then in the Law of Nature Yea Vega loco citato and Gab. 2. d. 21. qu. 2. art 3. 3. d. 21. qu. 3. think that in the Law of Nature and in cases in the Law of Grace a man may be saved with only Natural Knowledge and that the habit of faith is not required And Horantius being of the contrary opinion saith that they are men of great name that are against him whose gravity and great and painfull studies moved him not to condemn them of heresie in a doubtfull matter not yet judged O happy Rome that hath a judge that can put an end to all their controversies And yet cannot determine whether it be Necessary to salvation to be a Christian Yea saith S. Clara Alvarez de Auxil disp 56. with others seems to hold that to Justification is not required the knowledge of a supernatural object at all Other say that both to Grace and to Glory an explicite faith in Christ is necessary as Bonavent 3. d. 25. and others Others say that to salvation at least an explicite faith in the Gospel or Christ is required though not to Grace or Justification And this is the commoner in the Schools as Herera declareth and followeth it And for Scotus S. Clara saith I take him to be of that opinion that is not necessary as a Means to Grace or Glory to have an explicite Belief of Christ or the Gospel ut 4. d. 3. q. 4. he seems at large to prove Pag. 113. he adds What is clearer then that at this day the Gospell bindeth not where it is not authentically preached that is that at this day men may be saved without an explicite belief of Christ for in that sence speaks the Doctor concerning the Jews And verily what ever my illustrious Master hold with his Learned Master Herera I think that this was the Opinion of the Doctor Scotus and the common one which also Vega a faithfull Scotist followeth and Faber 4. d. 3. Petigianis 3. d. 25. q. 1. and of the Thomists Bannes 22. q. 2. a. 8. Cano and others And he gathers it to be the mind of the Council of Trent Ses 6. cap. 4. and adds pag. 113. Its effectually proved by the Doctor from Joh. 15. If I had not come and spoke to them they had not had sin I know the Dictors of the contrary opinion answer that such are not cendemned for the sin of Infidelty precisely but for other sins that binder the illumination and special help of God But verily the Doctor there argueth that the Jews might by circumcision be cleansed from Original sin and saved without the Gospel and accordingly he may argue as to all others to whom the Gospel is not authentically promulgate Else his reason would not hold And our most grave Corduba l. 2. qu. Theol. q. 5. subscribes to this opinion saying since the promulgation of the Gospel an Explicite Belief of Christ is necessary except with the invincibly ignorant to whom an implicite sufficeth to the life of grace but whether it suffice to the life of glory is a probleme but it is more probable that here also an implicite sufficeth Page 114. he addeth the consent of Medina re recta in Deum fide lib. 4. cap. ult and of Bradwardine fol. 62. that an Implicite belief of Christ is sufficient to salvation And pag. 115. he saith that this is the way to the end debates of them that think the Article of the Trinity of Christ of the incarnation c. are necessary to salvation though not to Justification and answering them he saith that such are not formally without the Church You see then formally Insidels are in their Church and may be saved in his opinion And pag. 116. after a blow at Vellosillus he citeth also Victoria Relect. 4 de Indis Richard de Med. Villa 3. 25. art 3. qu. 1. and others for this opinion And tells you what his Implicite faith is to believe as the Church believeth And page 118. he answereth from Scotus the Question Whether such persons may hold the contrary error to the truth that they are ignorant of and saith No out of Scotus while it is preached but in some one place till he know it to be believed as a truth by the Church and then he must firmly adhere to it Which the charitable Fryar applieth to England as excusable for not believing some of their Articles And he citeth Petigianis saying If a simple old woman shall hear a false opinion from a false Prophet as that the substance of the bread remains with Christs body in the Eucharist and believe it doth she sin because of this No This were too hard and cruell to affirm Pag. 119. he citeth Angles and agreeth with him that such as have no knowledge of these things to stir them up are
such as comes not from a wilfull neglect of means there no ignorance of the articles of faith is damnable and so no article absolutely necessary so that the question indeed is not Whether men believe or not but Whether they are Unbelievers or Heathens or ignorant persons by a willfull neglect of sufficiently proposed Truth or not So that all that part of the Heathen or Infidell world O how great that have no such proposals of the Gospel may not only be saved but be better and safer then most Christians if not all who certainly are sinfully ignorant of some truth which they ought to know Obj. But say they it will not stand with faith to deny belief to God in any thing sufficiently revealed for he that believeth him in one thing believeth him in all Answ Very true if they know it to be the Word of God And if this be all the Protestants are ready to averre upon their most solemn Oaths that they believe every thing without exception which they know to be a Divine Revelation and no wonder for so doth every man that believes that there is a God and that he is no lyar If this will serve your turn you have no more to say against us your mouths are stopt But may it not stand with faith to be ignorant and that through sinfull neglect of some revealed truth of God or of the meaning of his word If you are so proud as to think that all the justified are perfect and have no sin yet at last consider whether a man that liveth in Heathenism til fourscore years of age and then turns Christian is not afterward ignorant through his former sinfull negligene But dare you say that you have no sinfull ignorance to bewail Will you confess none nor beg pardon or be beholden to Christ to pardon it That they make no point of faith necessary while they seem to make all necssary see but what I have after cited from Frans à S. Clara probl 15 16 17. and abundance more that are mentioned there by him 3. And that by this Protean jugling they make the Church invisible is apparent For what man breathing knoweth the secrets of the souls of others whether they have resisted or not resisted the light and whether they are ignorant of the articles of faith upon sinfull contempt or for want of some due means of faith or internal capacity or opportunity We are as sure that all men are ignorant of some thing that God hath revealed to be known in nature and Scripture as that they are men But now whether any one of these men be free from those aggravations of his ignorance and that in every point upon which the Papists make him an unbeliever is unknown to others When the Faith or Infidelity of men and so their being in the Church or out of it must not be known by the Matter of Faith which they profess but by the secret passages of their hearts their willingness or unwillingness resistance or not resistance and such like the Church then is invisible no man can say which is it nor who is of it He that professeth not the Faith may be a Catholick and he that professeth it for ought they know may be an Infidel as being sinfully yet ignorant of some one truth that is not in his express confession thus by confusion the bulders of Babel marre their work 4. And that the wisest of them say in the main as we say see here in some proofs Bellarm. de Verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 11. In the Christian Doctrine both of Faith and Manners some things are simply necessary to salvation to all as the Knowledge of the Articles of the Apostles Creed of the ten Commandements and of some Sacraments The restore not so necessary that a man cannot be saved without the explicite Knowledge belief and profession of them These things that are simply necessary and are profitable to all the Apostles preached to all Allthings are Written by the Apostles which are Necessary to all and which they openly preacht to all see the place Costerus Echirid c. 1. p. 49. Non inficiamur praecipua illa fidei capita quae omnibus Christianis cognitu sunt ad salutem Necessaria perspicuè satis esse Apostolicis scriptis comprehensa That is We deny not that those Chief Heads of the Faith which are to all Christians necessary to be known to salvation are perspicuously enough comprehended in the Writings of the Apostles Judge by these two to spare the trouble of citing more whether they be not forced after all their Cavils to say as we in distinguishing of Articles of Faith And they cannot be ignorant that the Church hath still had Forms of Profession which were called her Symbols as being the Badge of her Members and did not suspend all upon uncertain conjectures about the frame and temper of the Professors minds But if indeed it be not the want of Necessary Articles of Faith that they accuse us of but the want of willingness or diligence to know the truth let them prove their accusations and let those persons that they prove guilty bear the blame Do they think we would not as willingly know the truth as they and that we do not pray as earnestly for Divine illumination Do we not read their Books I verily think incomparably more then they do ours and are we not willing to confer with the wisest of them that can inform us I have often privately and publickly desired you that if any of them can say more then all these Schoolmen Fryars and Jesuites say which I have read they would let me hear it that I may want no means they can afford me for my fuller information But yet they have not done with us When we prove a succession of our Religion by proving a succession of such as adhered to the Scriptures which are the Doctrine of our Religion an Argument that no Papist under heaven can confute they vainly tell us that All Hereticks pretend to Scripture and therefore that will not prove the point But 1. Doth it follow that Scripture is not a sufficient Rule of our Religion because Hereticks may pretend to it You take the 39 Articles for our Religion and yet may Hereticks that are far from our minds pretend to them It 's the liker to be the Rule because all Hereticks pretend it and would borrow credit from it to their Heresies The Law of the Land is the Rule of our Justice and yet Lawyers and their Clients that are contrary to each other do plead it for their contrary Causes The Creed it self is pretended by Arrians for their Heresie What must we have no Rule or Test or discovery of our Religion which a Heretick can pretend for his impiety What words of God or man are not capable of being misinterpreted If we should give you every day a confession of Faith some Hereticks might pretend to hold the same No wonder then if they
Christianity 14. We desire also to be informed by them what is the use of the Churches Creed and why they have used frequently to make confession of their faith Was it not the whole faith Essential to Christianity which they confest If not then it was not fit to be the badge of the Church or of the Orthodox if yea then it seems those Creeds had in them the essentials distinguished from the rest 15. we would know whether every thing delivered or defined by any General Council be of such necessity to salvation that all must explicitely believe them all that will be saved If so then whether any Papist can be saved seeing they understand them not all If not then sure a distinction must be made 16. And we would know how they can countenance ignorance so much as they do if all things revealed be of equal necessity to salvation 17. And what mean they to distinguish of Implicite and Explicite faith Is it enough to believe as the Church believes and not know what in any particular then it is not de fide or necessary to salvation to believe the resurrection of Christ or of man or the life to come For a man may believe that the Church is in the right and yet not know that it holdeth any of these Is it enough to believe the formal object of faith which with us is Gods veracity without the material Or is it enough to remain Infidels and only believe that the Church are true Believers If you hold to this you make no act of faith but one the believing that the Church that is the Pope or Council are true believers to be of Necessity to salvation But if there be something that is Necessary to be actually that is explicitely believed then must not that be distinguished from the rest and made known 18. Whence is it that you denominate men fideles believers with you Is it from a Positive faith or for not holding the contrary If the latter then Stones and Beasts and Pagans and their Infants may be believers If the former then that Positive faith from whence all believers are denominated must be known 19. Is not that true faith and all that is essential to Christianity which doth consist with saving grace or to use your phrase with true Charity If not then either Infidels and no Christians may have true Charity or else true Charity may be in the unjustified or both If yea which doubtless you will yield then sure men of lower knowledge and faith then Doctors may have true Charity and therefore true faith 20. Lastly I appeal to your own confessions Bellarmine often distinguisheth between the points that all must of Necessity explicitely believe and the rest And Suarez in three parts Thom. Disp 43. Sect. 4. faith of the Article of Christs descending into Hell If by an Article of faith we understand a truth which all the faithfull are bound explicitely to know and believe so I do not think it necessary to reckon this among the Articles of faith because it is not altogether necessary for all men Here you see that Suarez distinguisheth between Articles of Necessity to all and those that are not and that he excepts even the Descent into Hell from this number of Articles Necessary to all I might cite many more of your writers but the thing is well known But perhaps you 'l say that though all that is de fide be not necessary to be believed explicitely by all yet implicitely it must I Ans 1. that which you call Implicite believing is no believing that point but another point yea a point that doth not so much as infer that for it followeth not the Church is infallible therefore Christ descended into Hell 2. And we believe all that is de fide with an Implicite faith as well as you But it is an Implicite Divine faith and not humane For we are sure that All that God saith is true and this Divine veracity is the formal object of our faith And we believe that all that is in Scripture is true and that all that was ever delivered by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost is true Object But all that is de fide is so necessary that it will not stand with salvation to believe the contrary or deny or dis-believe any point of faith Answ 1. That cannot be true For no man can prove that a point may not be denyed and disputed against by a true Believer as long as he is ignorant that it is true and from God the same ignorance that keeps him from knowing it may cause him to deny it and gainsay it 2. Do not your own differing Commentators Schoolmen and Casuists on one side at least dispute voluminously against some Truths of Divine revelation If you change a mans mind from the smallest error by dispute do you take that to be a change of his state from death to life Aenaeas Sylvius thought a General Council was above the Pope but when he came to be Pope Pins the second he thought the Pope above a General Council was this a change from death to life It seems by his Bull of Retractation he thought so but so did not several General Councils was the Catholick Church Representative at the Councill of Basil or Constance or Pisa in a state of death and damnation for believing the Pope to be subject to a General Council or was the Council at Laterane another Representative Catholick Church in a state of death for holding the Contrary Must either Pope John the twenty second or Pope Nicolas be damned because of the contrariety of their Decrees If the Council of Toletane the first ordain that he that hath a Concubine instead of a wife shall not be kept from the Sacrament doth it prove them all in a state of death If Bellarmine confess that the sixth General Council at Constantinople have many errors doth it follow that the Catholick Church representative was in a damnable state If the second Council at Nice maintain the corpercity of Angels and the first Council at the Latarane maintain the contrary doth it follow that one of them was in a state of death I think not though I am sure it proves a General Council fallible when approved by the Pope and therefore Popery a deceit Bellarmine sometime tells us of the change of his own mind And the Retractations of Austin a better man tell us of the change of his mind in many things And yet it followeth not that he was in a state of death and unjustified before Object But all that is de fide is of Necessity to the Salvation of some though not of all Answ 1. If that be granted yet you must grant us leave to distinguish between Points necessary to be believed by all and points that are not thus necessary to all 2. But in what case is it that you mean that other points are of Necessity to some 1. Is it to those some
the fact without the Scripture The Scripture is sufficient to its own use to be Rule of Obedience and Judgement but it is not sufficient to every other use which it was never made for The Law said to Cain Thou shalt not murder But it said not to him Thou hast killed thy brother therefore thou shalt die It was the Judges part to deliver this 3. By this trick they would give a man leave to vent any Blasphemy or do any villany changing but the name But they shall find that the Law intended not bare words but by words to signifie things And if they do the things prohibited or hold the opinions condemned what ever names or words they cloath them with they shall feel the punishment 4. By this they would leave almost nothing provable by the Scripture seeing a Papist or Heretick may put the same into other terms and then call for the Proof of that For example they may ask where God commandeth or instituteth any one of the Sacraments in Scripture And when we tell them where Baptism and the Lords Supper were instituted they may reply that there is no mention of Sacraments and so turn real Controversies into verbal 5. Yea it seems by this they would make all Translations to be of little use And a man might lawfully sin in English because God for bad it only in Hebrew and Greek 6. If this be the way of it let us remember that they must in Reason stand to their own Rules Let them tell us then what Scripture saith that Peter was the Vicar of Christ or the Head of the Catholick Church or the Bishop of Rome or that the Pope is his Successor or that the Pope is the Vice-christ or Universal Bishop Where is there express Scripture for any of this Yea so much as Bellarmines Literal sense 7. And why do not these blind and partial men see that the same course also must be taken with their own Laws And that all their Decretals and Canons are insufficient according to these Rules It 's easie for any Heretick to form up his Error into other words then those condemned by Pope or Council And if you go again to the Pope and get him to condemn those new expressions the men in Mexico may use them long to the detriment of the souls of men before the damnatory sentence be brought to them And when it comes they can again word their Heresie anew The Jansenists in France shew how well the Popes decision of wordy Controversies is understood and doth avail But really if they will hold that no part of the Popes Laws oblige but in the literal sense or that none offend that violate not the Letter they will make a great alteration in their affairs And perphaps any of their subjects may Blaspheme the Pope himself in French Dutch Irish English Slavonian c. because he forbids it only in Latine For if Translations be not Gods Word then they are not the Popes word neither A pretty crochet for a Jesuite It is mendacium and not a Lye that the Pope forbids It is said that a Traytor or Murderer may be hang'd but it is not said that such or such a man shall be hang'd or that he was a traytor or murderer Their common instance is The Scripture no where calls it self the whole word of God nor no where tells us which be Canonical Books c. and yet these are Articles of Faith Answ 1. The Scripture doth call it self the Word of God and signifie its own sufficiency and several Books have particular testimonies to be Canonical 2. Though secondarily so far as Scripture affirmeth its own Divinity it be to be beleived yet Primarily that this is Gods Word and that these are the Books and that they are not corrupted and that they are all c. are points of knowledge antecedent in order of nature to Divine Belief of them There are two great Foundations antecedent to the Matter of Divine Faith The one is Gods veracity that God cannot lie The other is His Revelations that This is Gods Word The first is the Formal Object of Faith The second is a Necessary Medium between the formal object and the subject sine quo non without which there is no possibility of Believing The Material object called the Articles of Faith presuppose both these as points of Knowledge proved to us by their proper evidence And that this is All the Word of God is a meer Consequence from the actual Tradition of this much and no more To give you an undenyable illustration by instance Let us enquire which be the Administring Laws of this Common-wealth And we shall find that 1. The Authority of the Law-givers is none of them for that is in the Constitution before the Administration and it is the formale objectum of every Law which is more noble then the Material object 2. And the Promulgation of these Laws is not it self a Law but a necessary Medium sine quo non to the actual obligation of the Law 3. And that there is no other Laws but these is not a Law but a point known by the non-promulgation of more 4. And that all these Laws are the same that they pretend to be and that they are not changed or depraved since this is not a Law neither but a Truth to be proved by Common Reason from the Evidences that may be brought from Records Practise and abundance more So is it in our Case 1. That God is True and the Soveraign Rector is first a point to be known by evidence the one being the formal object of Faith and the other the formal object of obedience and easily proved by Natural Light before we come to Scripture 2. And that this is Gods Revelation or Promulgation of his Law is a point also first to be proved by Reason not before we see the Book or hear the Word but out of the Book or Doctrine it self propria luce together with the full Historical Evidence and many other reasons which in order of Nature lie before our Obligation fide divina to believe So that this is not Primarily an Article of Faith but somewhat higher as being the Necessary Medium of our believing 3. And that there is no other Law or Faith is not Primarily a Law or Article of Faith but a Truth proved by the Non-Revelation or Promulgation of any other to the world He that will prove us obliged to believe more must prove the valid Promulgation or Revelation of more 4. And that these Books are the same and not corrupted is not directly and primarily an Article of Faith but an Historical verity to be proved as abovesaid And yet secondarily Scripture is a witness to all or most of these and so they are de fide But of this I refer the Reader for fuller satisfaction to my Preface before my second Part of the Saints Rest And thus it is manifest that it is an unreasonable demand of
end the. p. 288. l. 24. for left r. lest p. 297. l. 17. for them r. the. p. 314. r. Paulus 5. p. 356. l. 31. r. hatchets p. 362. l. 28. r. at last p. 365. l. 8. for may r. many l. 33. r. Maldonate p. 397. l. 30. r. the other of l. 32. for parties r. straw p. 409. l. 32. r. in the. l. 36. blot out none p. 422. l. 13. r. presided p. 426. l. 17. blot out of p. 432. l. 33. for had r. had not p. 434. l. 4. for to r. as p. 435. l. 1. r. members p. 433. l. 29. blot out a. p. 452. l. 20. r. But when the. A Key for Catholicks To open the juglings of the Jesuits and satisfie all that are but truly willing to understand whether the cause of the Romane or the Reformed Churches be of God and to leave the Reader utterly unexcusable if after this he will be a Papist CHAP. I. THE thoughts of the divided state of Christians have brought one of the greatest and constantest sadness to my Soul that ever it was acquainted with especially to remember that while we are quarrelling and plotting and writing and fighting against each other so many parts of the world about five of six remain in the Infidelity of Heathenism Judaism or Mahometanism where millions of poor souls do need our help and if all our strength were joyned together for their Illumination and Salvation it would be too little Oh horrible shame to the face of Christendom that the Nations are quietly serving the Devil and the Turk is in possession of so many Countries that once were the Inheritance of Christ and that his Iron yoak is still upon the necks of the persecuted Greeks and that he stands up at our doors in so formidable a posture still ready to devour the rest of the Christian world and yet that instead of combining to resist him and vindicate the cause and people of the Lord we are greedily sucking the blood of one another and tearing in pieces the body of Christ with furious hands and destroying our selves to save the enemy a labour and spending that wit that treasure that labour and that blood to dash our selves in pieces on one another which might be nobly and honestly and happily spent in the cause of God These thoughts provoked me to many an hours consideration How the wounds of the Church might be yet healed And have made it long a principal part of my daily Prayers that the Reconciling Light might shine from Heaven that might in some good measure take up our differences and that God would at last give healing Principles and dispositions unto men especially to Princes and the Pastors of the Church But the more I studied how it might be done the more difficult if not impossible it appear'd and all because of the Romane Tyranny the Vice-Christ or pretended Head of the Church being with them become an essential part of it and the Subjection to him essential to our Christianity it self So that saith Bellarmine de Eccles l. 3. c. 5. No man though he would can be a Subject of Christ that is not subject to the Pope and this with abundance of intolerable corruptions they have fixed by the fancy of their own Infallibility and built upon this foundation a worldly Kingdom and the temporal Riches and Dignity of a numerous Clergy twisting some Princes also into the Interest so that they cannot possibly yield to us in the very principal points of difference unless they will deny the very Essence of their New Christianity and Church and pluck up the foundations which they have so industriously laid and leave men to a suspicion that they are fallible hereafter if they shall confess themselves mistaken in any thing now and unless they will be so admirably self-denying as to let go the temporal advantages which so many thousands of them are interested in And whether so much light may be hoped for in so dark a generation or so much love to God and self-denyal in millions of men so void of self-denyal is easie to conjecture And we cannot in these greatest matters come over to them unless we will flatly betray our Souls and depart from the Unity of the Catholick Church and from the Center of that Unity to unite with another called the Romane Catholick Church in another Center And if we should thus cast away the Truth and Favour of God and sin against our Knowledge and Conscience and so prove men of no Faith or Religion under pretence of desiring a Unity in Faith and Religion yet all would not do the thing intended but we should certainly miss of these very ends which we seek when we had sold the Truth and our Souls to obtain them For there is nothing more certain then that the Christian World will never unite in the Romane Vice-Christ nor agree with them in their Corruptions against plain Scripture Tradition Consent of the ancient Church against the Reason and common sense of Mankind This is not by any wise man to be expected Never did the universal Church or one half of it center to this day in the Romane Soveraignty And why should they hope for that which never yet was done When they had their Primacy of Place to be the Bishop of the first Seat and first of the Patriarcks it made the Pope no more a Soveraign and a Vice-Christ then the King of France is Soveraign to the Duke of Saxony or Bavaria or then the Senior Justice on the Bench is the Soveraign of the rest and yet even this much he never had but from the Romane Empire What claim did he ever lay in his first Usurpations to any Church without those bounds It was the Empire that raised him and the Empire limited his own Usurpations Saith their own Reinerius or whoever else Cont. Waldens Catal. in Biblioth Patr. To. 4. pag 773. The Churches of the Armenians and Aethiopians and Indians and the rest which the Apostles converted are not under the Church of Rome Yea in Gregories days they found the Churches of Brittain and Ireland both strangers and adversaries to their Soveraignty insomuch as they could not procure them to receive their Government nor change so much as the time of Easter for them no nor to have Communion with them at last Anno 614. Laurentius their Arch-Bishop here wrote this Letter with Mellitus and Justus to the Bishops and Abbots in all Scotland that is Ireland While the Sea Apostolick after its manner directed us to preach to the Pagan Nations in these Western parts as in the whole world and we happened to enter this Island called Brittain before we knew them believing that they walked after the manner of the universal Church we reverenced both the Brittains and the Scots in great Reverence of their Sanctity But when we knew the Brittains we thought the Scots were better But we have learnt by Daganus the Bishop in this forementioned Island and by
to Church-worship Catholike faith right reason and sacred Scripture and that henceforth it shall be lawful for no man to preach and teach the contrary Is not this plain Defining Obj. But this was not an approved Council Answ 1. It was owned by Pope Eugenius himself And here once for all I prove that the Council of Basil was approved by the Pope for Pope Felix the fift one of the best Popes that ever Rome had this thousand years approved it in this point not only by accepting their election but in express terms professing firmly to hold the faith of the Councils of Constance and Basil and to keep it inviolate to a tittle and confirm it with his soul and blood promising faithfully to labour to defend the Catholick faith and for the execution and observation of the Decrees of the Councils of Constance and Basil swearing to prosecute the celebration of Generall Councils and confirmation of Elections according to the Decrees of the Holy Council of Basil See Binnius Ses 40. page 87. If they say that Felix was not a true Pope I answer then Martin the fifth chosen by the Councill at Constance was no true Pope and then where is your succession These things are plain and cannot be denyed though unconscionable shifters that argue according to their Wills may find words to be guile the simple 2 It seems then your Catholick Church representative is nothing if one man like it not One more instance How largely hath the Council of Trent dealt about originall sin And yet the foresaid Thomas White ibid. saith thus If the People were taught Original sin is nothing but a Disposition to evil or a natural weakness which unless prevented brings infallibly sin and damnation and that in it self it deserves neither reproach nor punishment as long as it proceeds not to actual sin the heat of vulgar devotion would be cooled c. See here a meer Pelagian issue of all the Determinations about Originall sin which they should swear to believe CHAP. XV. Detect 6. AND by this that hath been said you may see what to think of their glorying in their Unity and accusing our Divisions One of the principal arguments that they prevail by is by telling the people into how many sects we are divided and that the Catholick Church is but one but we are many and here they will tell you of all the names they can reckon up Presbyterians Independants Anabaptists Antinomians Arminians Socinians Quakers and what not And they will tell you that all this Division comes by departing from the Roman Catholick Church every man being left to be of what Religion his fancy leadeth him to for want of an universal Judge of controversies And they will ask you what reason you have among all these Sects to believe one of them rather then another So that they would perswade you that there is no way for Unity but by turning to be Papists that we may be united in the Pope of Rome To all this deceit for it is no better we give them our full answer in these Propositions 1. It is not every kind of unity that is desirable but Unity with truth and honesty and safety It s easier to agree in evil then in good for evil findeth more friendship with corrupted nature and hath more servants in the world The wicked are more agreed and far more in number of one mind then the Godly are The Mahometans are far more agreed and that in a far greater number then the Papists are The Devils have some agreement in their way They are all agreed to hate Christ and his members and to seek night and day whom they may devour It is easier to agree in a Papists work then in ours To ceater carnally in a sinfull and oft a most wicked man to agree in certain forms and ceremonies which flesh and blood is glad to delude themselves with instead of the Life of faith and Love its easie to agree in such a carnal religion To spare the labour and time of study and searching after truth and to cast their souls upon the faith of others even the Pope or a Council this is an easie thing for lazy ungodly men to agree in But to make the Truth our Own and get the Law of Christ written in our own hearts and to live upon it and walk in the light and embrace all those truths that are most against our fleshly inclination and interest this is not so easie for corrupted nature to agree upon 2. Christ hath told us that it is a little flock to whom he gives the Kingdom Luke 12. 32. and that the gate is strait and the way narrow that leads to life and few there be that find it and the gate is wide and the way broad that leads to destruction and many there be that enter at it And therefore it is no great wonder if error and sin have the greater number 3. And yet for all this I dare boldly say that there is a far more excellent Unity and Concord among the true Reformed Catholicks then among the Papists and that they do but cheat poor souls with the falfe pretence of unity And this I shall make appear to you as followeth 1. As I have said before they are utterly divided and disagreed about that very power in which they should unite and which they pretend must agree them in all other things One half of them are for the Soveraignty of a Pope and the other of a General Council and that as a point of faith So that there is no possibility of Union with them that are divided in the very point in which they invite us to Unite with them If the eye be dark how shall the body see If they cannot agree about that power that they say must agree them in all things else what hope of an agreement with them But for our parts we are all agreed that Christ only is the head of the Church and in him we all unite 2. With us they are usually but here and there a stragling person or some few half-witted self-conceited Novices that fall off and disagree from us in any thing that destroyeth salvation But with the Papists Princes are against Princes and Nations against Nations and which is much more General Councils against General Councils even in the Foundation of their faith So that let the General Councils be never so full and learned and justly called yet if they be against the Popes Soveraignty over them the other party call them but Conciliabula false Councils and Conventicles Of how great moment this difference is let the learned Cajetane be a witness who in his Oration in the Council at the Laterane under Leo 10. inveighing against the Councils at Pisa Constance and Basil makes one to be Babel and the other Jerusalem 3. As I proved before the Papists are divided into two several pretended Catholick Churches by making themselves two Soveraigns but so are not we For
faith if Scripture be not And if all be not how shall we know which is But at least tell us Is no one of all those many hundred or thousand Texts which your Commentators differ about any matter of Faith If not then sure you have no Faith If it be then surely the Papists differ among themselves in matters of Faith It is not a few Texts that Lyra's excepter and Burgensis differ about to name no more And of the foresaid Editions of the Bible by Pope Sixtus and Clement see Dr. Jame's Bellum Papale vel Concordia discors CHAP. XVI Detect 7. BY what hath been said you may discern how to deal with them when they would industriously confound the Essentials and the Integral parts of our Faith for this is another of their juglings They cannot endure to hear us distinguish the fundamentals that is the Essentials of our Religion from the rest and therefore they call out to us for a Catalogue of our fundamentals and would perswade us that whatsoever is matter of faith is of Necessity to salvation to be believed and those are damnable Hereticks that deny them and therefore we must not make any such difference See Knot against Chillingworth Their design in this is to perswade people that the world must be wholly of their mind in matters of faith or else they cannot be saved And by this trick they would prove that the Protestants and many other Churches are all Hereticks and therefore have no place in General Councils and are no parts of the Catholick Church But let us consider how judiciously they proceed 1. We must desire the Papists to tell us whether Christianity be any thing or nothing If any thing it hath its Essence and 2. Whether this Essence of Christianity be Knowable or not If not then they cannot know a Christian from another and they cannot know the Church from other Societies If it be knowable then its Essence must needs be knowable 3. And we would be informed by them whether all true Christians in the world are of the same stature or degree of knowledge and explicite belief If they be then there 's no difference between Fathers and Babes Strong and Weak Priest and People and then the Jesuites have no more Knowledge or Faith then the simplest woman of their Church but if there be a difference then 4. We would know whether the Essence of Christianity be varyed according to these degrees If so then there are as many sorts of Christianity in the world as there be degrees of Faith which they have more wit I suppose then to affirm If not then the Essence of Christianity is distinguishable from the Integrity or superadded Degrees which is the thing that we contend for 5. We desire also to know whether the Apostles did not go on to teach their people more after they had made them Christians in a state of salvation And whether the Priests Fryers and Jesuits will give men up and teach them nothing more when they have made them Christians I know they will say There 's more to be taught And if so then the Essentials of Christianity are distinguishable from the Integrals or Degrees 6. And we would know else how they will understand that in Heb. 5. 10 11 12 14. and 6. 1 2. For when for the time ye ought to be Teachers ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the Oracles of God and are become such as have need of milk and not of strong meat For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness for he is a babe But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern good and evil therefore leaving the Principles of the doctrine of Christ let us go on to perfection not laying again the foundation c. Tell us now whether the Apostle do not here distinguish between babes and strong men milk and strong meat the principles or foundation and perfection 7. And we would know of them whether all that is Revealed by God be of absolute Necessity to every mans salvation that do or may hear it If so then no man can be saved that knoweth not all that God hath revealed and then no one in the world can be saved for here we know but in part And their own Commentators differ about the word of God which sheweth that they are imperfect in the Knowledge of its sense And their Pope knows it not or else he is shamefully to blame that will not tell it the world and reconcile his Commentators and Disputers But if all revealed be not of Absolute Necessity then we may have leave to distinguish between points absolutely Necessary and the rest 8. And we would know whether all shall be damned that know not as much as the most Learned and Wise if not then still we may have leave to distinguish 9. Further we demand whether any ignorance or error that is culpable will stand with Charity and Salvation If not then who shall be saved If yea then we may still distinguish the points of Absolute Necessity from the rest 10. We demand also whether the whole holy Scripture be the word of God If so then whether we ought not to believe it all as far as we can understand it And if so whether it be not all de fide matter of Faith If not they must tell us what part of Gods word is to be believed and what not If yea then certainly men may err de fide in points of Faith and yet have Charity and be saved as their disagreeing Commentators Casuists and Schoolmen do 11. We would know whether the matters that their Divines are disagreed in be Revealed by God or things unrevealed If not revealed do they not deserve to be kickt out of the world for troubling the world so with unrevealed things If they be Revealed are they not Revealed to be believed and so are de fide 12. And we would know whether there be not some things Essential to true Obedience and some things not Essential If not then no sinner hath sincere Obedience and can be saved If yea then why may not the same be said of faith 13. Also we would know when they baptize the Adult whether they require any profession of the faith from them or not If not they may as well baptize Infidels or Heathens If they do then what is that profession Is it a profession of every particular truth that God hath revealed to be believed No sure for then none but Doctors must be baptized Nor they neither Or is it a profession of some particular Truths only If of some only why of those more then the rest if they be not the Essentials distinguishable from the rest And do they make men true Christians by baptizing them or not If they do then sure the Baptismal faith must contain all that is Essential to
which is most sufficient and most cleare in it self but for us This we all yield The second way is necessary to sciences diminutely and insufficiently delivered by their authors for their supplement so Aristotle is supplemented by Albertus Magnus c. The third way specially if it be not excessive is tolerable to the well being though it be not necessary The fourth way assertively is to be rejected as Poyson Thus are the authorities to be understood that forbid to add to or diminish from the Scripture Deut. 12 32. Well! by this time you may see that when such doctrine as this for Scripture sufficiency and perfection as the Rule of faith and life admitting no addition as necessary but explication nor any other as tolerable but moderate ampliation which indeed is the same I say when this doctrine past so lately in a Popish General Council you may see that the very Doctrine of Traditions equaled with Scripture or being another word of God necessary to faith and salvation containing what is wanting in Scripture is but lately sprung up in the world And sure the Traditions themselves be not old then when the conceit of them came but lately into the world 4. Well I have done the three first parts of this task but the chief is yet behind which is to shew 1 How little the Papists get by their Argument from Tradition 2. And how â—uch they lose by it even all their cause 1. Two things they very much plead Tradition for the one is their private doctrines and practices in which they disagree from other Christians and here they lose their labour with the judicious 1. Because they give us no sufficient proof that their Tradition is Apostolical 2. Because the dissent of other Churches sheweth that it is not universal with other Reasons before mentioned 2. The other Cause which they plead Tradition for is the Doctrine of Christianity it self And this they do in design to lead men to the Church of Rome as if we must be no Christians unless we are Christians upon the credit of the Pope and his Subjects And here I offer to their Consideration these two things to shew them the vanity of their arguing 1. We do not strive against you in producing any Tradition or Testimony of Antiquity for the Scripture or for Scripture Doctrine we make as much advantage of such just Tradition as you What do such men as White Vane Cressy c. think of when they argue so eagerly for the advantage of Tradition to prove the Scripture and Christian faith Is this any thing against us Nothing at all We accept our Religion from both the hands of Providence that bring it us Scripture and Tradition we abhor the contempt which these partial Disputers cast upon Scripture but we are not therefore so partial our selves as to refuse any collateral or subordinate help for our faith The more Testimonies the better The best of us have need of all the advantages for our faith that we can get When they have extolled the Certainty of Tradition to the highest we gladly joyn with them and accept of any certain Tradition of the mind of God And I advise all that would prove themselves wise defenders of the faith to take heed of rejecting Arguments from Providences or any necessary Testimony of man especially concerning matter of fact or of rejecting true Church History because the Papists over value it under the name of Tradition left such prove guilty of the like partiality and injuriousness to the truth as the Papists are And whereas the Papists imagine that this must lead us to their Church for Tradition I answer that in my next observation which is 2. We go beyond the Papists in arguing for just Tradition of the Christian faith and we make far greater advantage of it then they can do For 1. They argue but from Authoritative Decision by the Pope under the name of Church-Tradition excepting the French party whereas we argue from true History and certain Antiquity and prove what we say Where note 1. That their Tradition is indeed no Tradition for if it must be taken upon the credit of a man as supposed Infallible by supernatural if not miraculous endowment this is not Tradition but Prophesie And if they prove the man to be such a man it s all one to the Church whether he say that This was the Apostles doctrine or This I deliver my self to you from God For if he were so qualified he had the power and credit of a prophet or Apostle himself And therefore they must prove the Pope to be a Prophet before their kind of Tradition can get credit and when they have done that there is no need of it this their honest Dr. Holden was ware of upon which he hath so handsomely canvassed them 2. Note also that such as Dr. Holden Cressy Vane White and other of the French way that plead for Tradition mean a quite other thing then the Jesuited Italian Papist meanes and while they plead for universal Tradition they come nearer to the Protestants then to their Brethren if they did not contradict themselves when they have done by making meer Romish Tradition to be universal 3. Note also that when Papists speak of Tradition confusedly they give us just reason to call them to Define their Tradition and tell us what they mean by it before we dispute with them upon an ambiguous word seeing they are so divided among themselves that one party understands one thing by it and another another thing which we must not suffer these juglers to jumble together and confound 2. Another advantage in which we go beyond the Papists for Tradition is that as we argue not from the meer pretended supernatural Infallibility or Authority of any as they do but from rational Evidence of true Antiquity so we argue not from a sect or party as they do but from the Universal Church As far as the whole Church of Christ is of larger extent and greater credit then the Popish party so far is our Tradition more Credible then theirs And that is especially in three things 1. The Papists are fewer by far then the rest of the Christians in the world And the testimony of many yea of all is more then of a part 2. The Papists above other parties have espoused an interest that leads them to pretend and corrupt Tradition and bend all things to that interest of their own that they may Lord it over all the world But the whole Church can have no such Interest and Partiality 3. And the Papists are but one side and he that will judge rightly must hear the other sides speak too But the Tradition that we make use of is from all sides concurring yea Papists themselves in many points Yea our Tradition reacheth further then the Universal Church for we take in all rational Evidence even of Jews Heathens and Hereticks and Persecutors that bear witness to the matters of fact
Popes and Councils Their own Polidore Virgil de Inven. Rerum p. 410. lib 8. c. 4. calling us a Sect doth give you a just description of us Ita licentia pacta loquendi c. i. e. Having once got leave to speak that sect did marvailously increase in a short time which is called Evangelicall because they affirm that no Law is to be received which belongeth to salvation but what is given by Christ or the Apostles Mark what they confess themselves of our Religion And yet these very men have the face to charge us with Novelty as if Christ and his Apostles were not of sufficient Antiquity for them Our main quarrel with them is for adding new inventions in Religion and their principal business against us is to defend it and yet they call theirs the old Religion and ours the new Our Argument lieth thus That which is most conform to the Doctrine and Practice of Christ and his Apostles is the truly Antient Religion and Church But our Religion and Church is most conform to the doctrine and practice of the Apostles therefore it is the truly antient Religion and Church The Major they will yield For no older Religion is desirable further then as the Law of Nature and Moral Determinations of God are still in force I suppose they will not plead for Judaism For the Minor we lay our cause upon it and are ready to produce our evidence for the Conformity of our Religion and Churches to the doctrine and practice of the Apostles That Religion which is most conform to the Holy Scriture is most conform to the doctrine and practice of Christ and his Apostles But our Religion and Churches is most conform to the holy Scriptures therefore c. They can say nothing against the Major but that the Scripture is Insufficient without Tradition But for that 1. We have no Rule of faith but what is by themselves confessed to be true They acknowledge Scripture to be the true word of God So that the Truth of our Rule is Justified by themselves 2. Let them shew us as good Evidence that their Additional Articles of faith or Laws of life came from the Apostles as we do that the Scriptures came from them and then we shall confess that we come short of them Let them take the Controversies between us point by point and bring their proof and we will bring ours and let that Religion carry it that is Apostolicall But we are sure that by this means they will be proved Novelists For 1. Their Traditions in matter of faith superadded to the Scripture are meer Hereticall or Erroneous forgeries and they can give us no proof that ever they were Apostolicall 2. The Scripture affirmeth its own sufficiency and therefore excludeth their Traditions 3. I shewed you how in their own General Council at Basil the Scripture sufficiency was defended 4. I have shewed you in my Book called the Safe Religion that the ancient Fathers were for the sufficiency of Scripture 5. Their Traditions are the opinions of a dividing sect contrary to the Traditions or doctrine of the present Catholick Church the far greater part of Christians being against them 6. We are able to shew that the time was for some hundred years after Christ when most of their pretended Traditions were unknown or abhorred by the Christian Church and no such things were in being among them 7. And we can prove that the chief points of Controversie mantained against us are not only without Scripture but against it and from thence we have full particular evidence to disprove them If the Scriptures be true as they confess them to be then no Tradition can be Apostolicall or true that is contrary to them For example the Papists Tradition is that the Clergy is exempt from the Magistrates judgement But the holy Scripture saith Let every soul be subject to the higher power Rom. 13. 1 2 3 4 5. The Papists Tradition is for serving God publickly in an unknown tongue But the holy Scripture is fully against it Their Tradition is against Lay mens reading the Scripture in a known tongue without special License from their ordinary But Scripture and all antiquity is against them The like we may say of many other Controversies So that these seven wayes we know their Traditions to be deceitfull because they are 1. Unproved 2. Against the sufficiency of Scripture 3. Against their own former confessions 4. Against the concent of the Fathers 5. Contrary to the judgement of most of the Catholick Church 6. We can prove that once the Church was without them 7. And they are many of them contrary to express Scripture And if Scripture will but shew which of us is neerest the doctrine and practice of the Apostles then the controversie is ended or in a fair way to it For we provoke them to try the cause by Scripture and they deny it we profess it is the Rule and test of our Religion but they appeal to another Rule and test And thus you may see which is the old Religion which will be somewhat fullyer cleared in that which followeth II. And that our Church and Religion hath been continued from the dayes of Christ till now we prove thus 1. From the promise of Christ which cannot be broken Christ hath promised in his word that that Church and Religion which is most conform to the Scripture shall continue to the end But our Church and Religion is most conform to the Scripture therefore Christ hath promised that it shall continue to the end 2. From the event The Christian Religion and Catholick Church hath continued from the dayes of Christ till now But ours is the Christian Religion and Catholick Church therefore ours hath continued from the dayes of Christ till now The Major they will grant the Minor is proved by parts thus 1. That Religion which hath all the Essentials of Christianity and doth not deny or destroy any Essential part of it is the Christian Religion but such is ours therefore c. 2. That Religion which the Apostles were of is the Christian Religion But ours is the same that the Apostles were of therefore c. 3. That Religion which is neerer the Scripture then the Romish Religion is certainly the Christian Religion But so is ours therefore c. 4. They that believe not only all that in particular that is contained in the Ancient Creeds of the Church but also in generall all that is besides in the holy Scripture are of the Christian Religion But thus do the Reformed Churches believe c. 2. And for our Church 1. They that are of that one holy Catholick Church whereof Christ is the head and all true Christians are members are of the true Church For there is but one Catholick Church But so are we therefore c. 2. They that are Sanctified Justified have the love of God in them are members of the true Catholick Church But such are all that are sincere
say that we are wanting and so far wanting that being out of the Church there is no true Holiness among us When in the Preface of my Book against Popery called The Safe Religion I had truly spoken my experience that I had never the happiness to be acquainted with any Papist of a serious spiritual temper and holy life but only some of a Ceremonious formall kind of Religion and but with very few that lived not in some gross sin I was passionately censured by some of the Papists as one that condemned all for some When as 1. I only spoke of my own acquaintance 2. And I added withall that yet I was confident that God had his servants among them though I had not the happiness to know them 3. And is it not a ridiculous business that these same men should be so passionate with me for speaking but the truth concerning the ungodliness of some of them when at the same time they make it an Article of their faith and an essential point of Popery That no one Protestant hath charity or can be saved yea that no Christian in the world is sanctified really and can be saved but a Papist O the partiality of these men 4. Yea when they necessitate us to mention their ungodliness by calling us to it and laying the stress of all our cause upon the point yea laying the very Christian faith it self upon the Holiness of their Church For we must not know that Scripture is Gods word or that Christianity is the true Religion till we first know that the Church of Rome is the true Church that we may receive it on their credit And we must know that they are the true Church by being the only Holy people in the world I must profess that if my faith lay on this foundation I know so much of the falshood of it that I must needs turn infidell and I can no more believe this then I can believe that the snow is not white They confess I thank them for nothing that their common people are bad but yet say they there is some good ones among us Inter haereticos autem nullus est bonus but among the hereticks not one is good So saith Thom. Ã Jesu de convers omn Gent. pag. 531. And saith H. Turbervile Manual p. 84. But I never yet heard of any Protestant Saints in the world O wonderfull perverseness of the hearts of Sectaries O wonderfull Patience of God! Did not this mans heart tremble or smite him to write so horrid so impudent a reproach against so many precious Saints of God Durst he thus attempt to rob the Lord of the fruit of his blood and to vilifie his Jewels and as Rabshakah to reproach the Israel of God to attempt to pluck them out of Christs hand that are given him by his Father and to shut them out of heaven that are redeemed and made heirs by so dear a Price and to spit in their faces whom Christ hath washed with his blood Did he not fear that dreadfull threatning of Christ Mat 18. 6. but who so shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me it were better for him that a milstone were hanged about his neck and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea Though I see so much impiety among the Papists I dare not say I dare not think that God hath not some Holy ones among them It s dangerous condemning those that Christ will Justifie and making his members to be the members of the Devil and abusing so grosly the apple of his eye If I see a man live wickedly I dare say that he is of a wicked life but I dare not say that All are so unless it be among men whose principles I am sure are inconsistent with godliness and I know that they hold those principles practically or prevalently And therefore I must say again that I have been acquainted with some Papists learned and unlearned The unlearned few of them knew what Christianity was nor whether Christ were God or Man Male or Female nor whether ever he was the King Prophet or Priest of the Church nor for what end he dyed nor what faith or repentance is but were infidels under the name of Papists or Catholicks The learned and unlearned live in some gross sin or other either all or neer all that I have been acquainted with The better sort would ordinarily swear by their Lady and by the Mass and sometime greater oaths The rest were some fornicators or adulterers some drunkards or revellers and gamesters or such like And never had I the happiness to be acquainted with one that would speak experimentally and savourily of the work of Grace upon his soul of the life of faith of communion with God and of the life to come but their Religion lay in being the Popes subjects and in fasting on Fridayes and in Lent from some sorts of meat and in saying over so many Ave Maries Pater Nosters or the like and in observing dayes and hours and Cereremonies Yet I again say I fully believe that there be better among them though I am not acquainted with them But if these men that never heard of a Protestant Saint and that conclude there is no one saved but a Papist and build their salvation on this as an Article of their faith had known but those that I have known and yet know they would either have been of another mind or have been left unexcusable in a malicious reproaching of the Saints of the most high I bless the Lord that I can truly say that I know many and many that as far as the heart of another can be known by words and a holy life do live in much communion with God whose souls are daily longing after him and some of them that have vacancy from worldly necessities spending much of their lives upon their knees having had many a special extraordinary return to their importunate requests whose delight is in the Law of the Lord in which they meditate day and night which is lockt up among the Papists Whose hearts smite them for vain words or thoughs or the loss of a few minutes of time that live in exemplary humility meekness and self-denyal bearing wrongs patiently and doing good to as many as they can as the servants of all contemning the Riches and Honours of the world mortifying the flesh and some of them longing to be dissolved and to be with Christ in whom the world never knew either once drunkenness fornication or one rash oath or any other gross sin that I could ever hear of And is it certain that all these shall be damned because they believe not in the Pope Nay is it not certain by Promise that all such shall be saved I must again profess that when the Papists lay their faith and cause on this that their Church is Holy and ours and all other are every man unholy it s almost all one to me
taken or catcht How think you now in the Judgement of Augustine and Gerson whether there have any Novelties been brought into the Church and whether all your Presumptions and burdens and as Gerson calls them halters for souls have come from the Apostles or are your own When all is thus overcome with Novelty do you make any question whether any thing be new It seems that Bernard thought that humane Traditions were too much befriended when he thus describeth the Assemblies that he approveth Epist 91. Such a Council do I delight in in which the Traditions of men are not obstinately defended or superstitiously observed but they do diligently and humbly enquire what is the good and well pleasing and perfect will of God And it seems to me that General Councils by error introduced Novelties when Later Councils were fain to undo what the former had done For so doth blessed Augustine profess they did saying De Baptis cont Donat. lib. 2. cap. 6. And Councils themselves that are gathered through several Regions or Provinces do without any scruple yield to the authority of more plenary Councils that are gathered out of the whole Christian world and those same plenary Councils do often yield or give place the former to the later when by some experiment of matters that which was shut is opened and that which lay hid is known Sure here are alterations made even by General Councils that correct one another And what should hinder the Introduction of Novelty when General Councils do so often err Nay if such Councils be Morally and Interpretatively the whole Church as the Papists say then the whole Church doth err in the reception of some Novelty before they declare it by their decrees If you say that General Councils cannot err nor introduce such Novelties your Champion Bellarmine and many of your own will give you the Lie saith he De Concil lib. 2. cap. 11. Neque potest c. It cannot be answered that those Councils erred because they were not lawfull that is the Arrian and other Heretical General Councils at that at Sirmium Millanie Ariminum Ephesus several at Constantinople dissallowed by the Papists For to most of them there was nothing wanting but the Popes assent Yea the second at Ephesus was altogether like that at Basil For both were called by the Pope in both of them the Popes Legate was present at the beginning from both of them the Popes Legate shortly after went away in both of them the Pope was excommunicated and yet that the Council of Ephesus erred the adversaries will not deny Hence he concludeth that the chief Power Ecclesiastical is not in the Church nor in the Council the Pope being removed formaliter vel suppletivè And what should hinder when there is but one mans vote against it even the Popes but that Novelty and error may enter at any time and when that one man is oft so wicked and Heretical as he is For General Councils are but a meer name and mockery The packing of them shews it the Paucity and nonUniversality of them shews it The Management of their affairs shews it They do nothing since the Papal reign but what the Pope will excepting the condemned Councils They have no Being till he Will nor make any Decrees but what he Will Nor are their Decrees of any further power then he is pleased to give them So that his Will is the sense of the General Council or universal Church I need not turn you for this to Sleidan or Uergerius Bishop of Trent that tell us the Holy Ghost came to that Council in a Cloak-bag from Rome nor to Espensaeus in Tit. 1. pag. 42. seeing Bellarmine speaks it out De Concil lib. 2. cap. 11. saying We must know that the Pope is wont to send Legates instructed concerning the judgement of the Apostolick seat with this Condition that if the Council do consent to the Judgement of the Apostolick seat it shall be formed into a Decree If not the forming of the decree shall be deferred till the Pope of Rome being advised with shall return his answer And saith Bellarmine de Concil lib. 2. cap. 11. In the Council of Basil Ses 2. it was decreed by common consent together with the Popes Legate that a Council is above the Pope which certainly is now judged erroneous And the Council of Lateran and Florence decreed the contrary And Pighius saith Hierarch Eccles l. 6. that the Councils of Constance and Basil went about by a new trick and pernicious example to destroy the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy and instead of it to bring in the Domination of a promiscuous confused popular multitude that is to raise again Babylon it self subjecting to themselves or to the community of the Church which they falsly pretended that they Represent the very Head and Prince of the whole Church and him that is the Vicar of Christ himself in this his Kingdom and this against Order and Nature against the clearest light of Gospel verity against all Authority of Antiquity and against the undoubted Faith and Judgement of the Orthodox Church it self Mark Papists General Councils with the Popes Nuncio may bring in Novelties in faith against the clearest light of the Gospel and the full Consent of Antiquity and yet these Councils affirmed their opinions to be de fide and the contrary to be Heretical and Damnable and contrary to all Antiquity You see then that Novelties are among you in matters of faith And the French to this day are guilty of those Novelties and also charge their Adversaries with Innovation Nay what will you say if General Councils themselves are but Novelties though they are the foundation of the faith of one half of the Papists as the Pope is of the other I say not so but judge whether your Champion Pighius say so Hierarch Eccles lib. 6. cap. 1. fol. 230. where he saith that Concilia universalia non habent Divinam c. General Councils have not a Divine or Supernatural Original but meerly an humane Original and are the Invention of Constantine a Prince profitable indeed sometimes to find out in Controversie which is the Orthodox and Catholick truth though to this they are not necessary seeing its a readyer way to advise with the Apostolick seat How now Sirs Is your Representative Church the foundation of your faith a Novelty of Constantines invention and yet are you in the old way and must we be put to prove you to be Novelists Do you think those Popes did go the Old way of whom Alvarus Pelagius speaks de planctu Eccles art 15. lib. 2. that they succeeded in authority but not in Sanctity intruding themselves procuring bargaining c. building Towers and Palaces in Babylon that is in Rome according to Hierom Some foul innovation sure they were guilty of that so re-edified Babylon So that this is my first proof that you are Novelists from the General Accusations of others and Confessions of your own 2. Another proof
without importunity or constraint And were our Power but answerable to our Desires we would soon put an end to these contentions of the Church without the hurt of any of the Dissenters Yea did there appear but any considerable Hopes of success I should venture to be more large in Proposals to that end But when wiser men of greater interest can do no good and the case appeareth as next to desperate a few words may suffice to satisfie my own conscience and to please my mind with the mention of a Peace and to help some others to right Dispositions and Desires though we have never so little expectation of success And in order to what follows I must first desire every Reader rightly to understand the meaning and design of all that I have hitherto said It is but to be a necessary help to the Discovery of the Truth and the confutation of the contrary errors and the just defence of the doctrine of Christ and of his Churches I solemnly protest that it is none of my design or desire 1. To make any believe that the Difference is wider between us and the Papists then indeed it is Nay I am satisfied that in many doctrinall points it is not so great as commonly it is taken to be by many if not most on both sides as in the points of certainty of Salvation of Pardon of Justification of Works of Faith and in almost all the controversies about Predestination Redemption Free-will the work of Grace c. The Dominicans in sence agree with the Calvinist as they call them and the Jesuites with the Lutherans and Arminians and so in divers other points The divers understanding of words among us and the weakness and passions of Divines and a base fear of the censures of a party hath occasioned may on both sides to feign the differences to be much wider then indeed they are so that when an Alvarez a Bannes a Gibieuf have spoken the same things as the Protestants do they are presently fain to pour out abundance of unworthy slanders against the Protestants for fear of being accounted Protestants themselves And to shew their party how much they differ from us they must feign us to be monsters and to hold that which commonly we abhor And some Protestants are too blame also in some measure in this kind This unchristian dealing will gripe the conscience when once it is awakened Let me be rather numbred with those that are ambitious to seem as Like to all the Churches of Christ and as much to agree with them as honestly and possibly I may what party soever distaste that union and agreement And let my soul abhor the desire of appearing more distant and disagreeing then we are what censures so ever I may incur Our students would not so ordinarily read Aquinas Scotus Ariminensts Durandus c. if there were not in them abundance of precious truth which they esteem How neer doth Dr. Holden come to us in the fundamental point of the Resolution of our faith How neer come to the Scotists to us in sence about the point of Merit and Waldensis and others yet neerer How neer comes Contarenus to us and many more in the point of Justification How neer comes Cardinall Cajetan to us in the Liberty of dissenting from the Fathers in the Exposition of the Scriptures and so doth Waldonate and many another How neer comes Cardinal Cusanus lib. de Concord to us even in the Essential point of difference about the Original and Title that Rome hath to its supremacy How neer comes Gerson to us in the point of Venial and Mortal sin perhaps as neer as we are to our selves How neer come the Dominicans and Jansenians to us in the points of Predestination Grace and Free will For my own part I scarce know a Protestant that my thoughts in these do more concur with then they do with Jansenius that is indeed with Augustine himself There are very few points of the Protestant doctrine which I cannot produce some Papist or other to attest and easily thus be even with Mr. Brerely upon fairer terms then he deals with us 2. I do also protest that it is none of my desire or design to create any unjust Censures of the final state of Papists in any Readers nor to perswade men that they are all damned or that there are no honest godly men among them When I read such writers as Gerson Barbanson Ferus and others I am fully satisfied that there are many among them how many God only knows that truly fear God and are sanctified gracious people with whom I hope to dwell for ever And therefore I think it my Duty not only to forbear unjust Censures of them but also to love them with that entire speciall Christian Love by which Christ would have us known to be his Disciples and to perswade all others to do the like Though still I am constrained to say that in my small acquaintance with them I find no comparison between the English Papists and our Churches in point of Holiness I would they were much better 3. I do also protest that it is not my desire or design to make any innocent Papist to be accounted guilty of the faults of others which he disowns 4. Nor is it any of my desire or design to provoke the Magistrate to any cruelty or injustice towards them nor to lay any penalty on them but what is truly of necessity for the safety of himself and the Common-wealth and a just restraint of them from perverting others and doing mischief to the souls of men as I shall open more at large anon 5. Nor is it any of my desire or design to make the generality of them unjustly more odious with Rulers or People then the measure of their corruptions do deserve Or to hide any of their vertues or deprive them of any honour which is their due This much my conscience witnesseth of my intents though I know the partial will hardly believe it when they feel themselves smart by that Contradiction which they have made necessary for our own defence And this I thought necessary to premise before I lay down the following Proposals that prejudice and passion do not turn away men eyes or cause them to misinterpret them For it is prejudice partiality and faction that hath hitherto frustrated all such Proposals and attempts CHAP. LI. THere are five several Degrees of Peace which lye before us to be attempted between the Roman and Reformed Churches We shall begin with the highest and upon supposition of the failing of our Designs for that come down to the next and so to the Lowest 1. The first Degree of Peace to be Intended and Desired is That we may so far Agree as that we may hold personal Communion in the same Assemblies in the worship of God and live under the same particular Pastors 2. If that cannot be attained the next Degree desirable is That we may hold