of Moses Let the like absolute Obedience be now yielded to the supreme Ecclesiasticall Courts Let their sentence be so conformed to so assented to among Christians for none is obliged to do a thing as the Jewes were by those Judges but is by the same decree obliged to assent and beleeue the doing it lawfull and more is not required XVI PRINCIPLE 16. There can be no more intollerable Vsurpation vpon the Faith of Christians then for any Person or society of men to pretend to an Assistance as infallible in what they propose as was in Christ or his Apostles without giuing an equall degree of euidence that they are so assisted as Christ and his Apostles did viz. by Miracles as great publick and conuincing as theirs were by which I mean such as are wrought by those very persons who challenge this Infallibility and with a design for the conuiction of those who do not belieue it Notwithstanding the Doctors Assertion in this Proposition That a society pretending to Infallibility is obliged to confirm such a pretention by Miracles as great as Christ and his Apostles did yet himself and the Archbishop whom he defends do hold that there is after the Apostles times a body or society Infallible in Fundamentalls viz. such Oecumenicall Councills as are vniuersally accepted by the Catholick Church which Church they say from our Lord's Promise can neuer err in Fundamentalls Now it is certain this society is not equally assisted with miracles as our Lord or his Apostles were Therefore the Doctor may do well to reuiew this Principle 1. But its failings being of no difficult discouery I shall not let it pass vnexamined First then I see no reason that those equally assisted by God in deliuering a Truth must also be enabled by him to giue an equall euidence of such Assistāce where there is not the same necessity of it as there is not when the later deliuer no new thing from the former 2. Again Though none can pretend to be Infallible or actually not erring in what he proposeth but that he must be as infallible as to the truth of that wherein he erreth not as our Lord or his Apostles for one or one persons truth is no more true then any others yet in many other respects the Churches Infallibility is much inferiour to that of the Apostles in that it is 1. Neither for its matter so farr extended the Apostles being affirmed infallible in all they deliuered as well in their Arguments as Conclusions both in their relating things heard from our Lord and things anew inspired by the Holy Ghost whereas the Church-Gouernours are acknowledged infallible only in their Definitions in matters of necessary Faith and not in their receiuing any new matters inspired by God but in faithfully deliuering the Inspirations of the former 2. Neither for the manner are the Church-Gouernours so highly assisted by reason of the other knowledge and euidence they haue of that Doctrine first deliuered by the Apostles and so from them receiued which vnchanged they conuey vnto Posterity Of which degrees of infallibility see Archbishop Lawd pag. 254. and 140. 3. And in the third place hence it follows that Miracles hauing been wrought by the first in confirmation of that Doctrine which both deliuer are not now alike necessary to or reasonably demanded of the second 4. Yet since our Lord and his Apostles time Miracles haue been and are continued in the Church of which see irrefragable testimonies giuen by S. Augustin In that Church I say that pretends Infallibility and only in that Church not any other departed from it pretending thereto And vniuersally to deny the truth of them is to ouerthrow the faith of the most credible Histories But these are done in these later as in former times only when and for what ends God and not man his Instrument pleaseth and many times without such persons precedent knowledge in making his Requests what the Diuine Majesty will effect Neither are the Apostles themselues to be imagined to haue had the Operation of Miracles so in their power as as to do these in any kind when and upon what Persons they pleased or others demanded For such a thing would be of such a force vpon mens wills to compell them into Christianity or to reduce unto the Catholick Church Christians strayed from it as the Diuine Prouidence perhaps for the greater tryall of mens hearts and merit of their Faith hath not ordinarily vsed 5. Lastly Miracles remaining still in this Church though they be not professedly done for conuincing a Dissenter in this or that particular Truth yet do sufficiently testifie in generall a security of saluation in the Communion and Faith of this Church if God only honours with them the Members of this Communion and no others that liue out of it as we see no other Christian society diuided from it that layes claim to them or shews any Records of them or euer did at least such as may be any way equalled either for frequency variety or eminency with those of this Church I mean although so many of these be rejected and layd aside where appears any rationall ground of suspicion That the Doctor and the Archbishop do hold such Generall Councills as haue an vniuersall Acceptation from the Church Catholik diffusiue to be Infallible seems to me clear from the places forecited in them For in those both the Doctor and Archbishop admitt That the Church diffufiue is for euer preserued Infallible in all Fundamentalls or Points absolutely necessary to saluation and this by vertue of the Diuine Promise that the Gates of Hell shall not preuail against her and other Texts And therefore such Councills whose Decrees are admitted by the whole Church diffusiue must be so too I say as to Fundamentalls though as to other Points not fundamentall they affirme these Councills also lyable to errour and fallible because the Church Catholick diffusiue say they is so also Among the Conditions also that render any Generall Councill obligatory they require this for one that they be vniuersally accepted or haue the generall consent of the Christian World such Councills then there may be And then such Lawfull Generall Councils and so approued and consequently obliging the Christian World they confess the first four Generall Councils to haue been To which Councills therefore they profess all Obedience Now wee see what kind of Obedience it was these Councils exacted in the Athanasian Creed accepted by the Church of England which contains the summ of their Decrees viz. no less then assent and belief and submission of judgement and all this vpon penalty of eternall damnation And this if justly required by them inferrs vpon the Doctors arguing their Infallibility For saith he where Councills challenge an internall Assent by vertue of their Decrees or because their Decrees are in themselues infallible there must be first proued an Impossibility of error in them
a Hill in the most extended Vnity of an Externall Communion which no other Christian Society can equall a Candle on a Candlestick a Perpetuall erected Visible Pillar and Monument of Truth frustra Haereticis circumlatrantibus Where also according to the disparity of seuerall mens capacities I suppose nothing more necessary then that this Euidence receiued eyther from all or only some of these Notes to those who haue not ability to examin others be such as that it out-weigh any arguments mouing him to the contrary and the like Euidence to which is thought sufficient to determin vs in other Elections And then this Church thus being found he may be resolued by it concerning the Sence of other Diuine Reuelations more dubious and generally all other Scrupules in Religion to witt so farr as this Church from time to time seeth a necessity of such Resolution and the Diuine Reuelation therein is to her sufficiently clear only if such person not spending so much of his own judgment will afford instead of it a little more of his Obedience III. CONSEQUENCE 3. The less conuincing the Miracles the more doubtfull the Marks the more obscure the Sence of eyther what is called the Catholick Church or declared by it the less reason hath any Christian to belieue vpon the account of any who call themselues by the name of the Catholick Church All this is true vpon supposition that matters stand as the Doctor would pretend but such supposition being groundless he must giue me leaue to inuert his Consequence and say The more conuincing the Miracles if any credit for these may be giuen to Church-History the more euident the Marks euen now giuen by S. Augustin and modern Catholick Writers the more clear and manifest euen to simple persons who with much difficulty in seuerall places comprehend the Sense of controuerted Scripture is the Catholick Church whose Representatiue are the subordinate Councills and whose Gouernors the seuerall Degrees of the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy ascending to the Prime See of S. Peter and the more clear also the Points declared by it viz. in these Councills whose Decrees suppose that of Trent if questioned for their Truth are not for their perspicuity and particularly in the Points of Controuersy they assembled to determin between Protestants and Catholicks the more reason hath any Christian to belieue vpon the account of those who call themselues by the Name and challenge the High Priuiledges which no other Separated Socityes of Christians do of the Catholick Church IV. CONSEQUENCE 4. The more absurd any Opinions are and repugnant to the first Principles of Sense and Reason which any Church obtrudes vpon the Faith of men the greater reason men still haue to reject the pretence of Infallibility in that Church as a grand Imposture The Higher any Points of Faith be and the more remote from Sense and naturall Reason or not comprehensiue by them which such Church as is named before and in the highest capacity of it Generall Councils proposeth to the Faith of Christians the more noble exercise they haue of their Faith whilst they haue an abundant certainty also that such Leaders can misguide them in nothing necessary to Saluation And no reason haue they vpon such improbabilities or contradictions to Sense or naturall Reason to suspect or be jealous of the Churches Infallibility as an Imposture which Church they see through what euer obstacles faithfully adheres to the Diuine Oracles how incredible soeuer to Nature and may be thought because it seems not swayed or hindred by these at all to vse more integrity in her judgment and fidelity to the Diuine Reuelations Yet this is not sayd as if the judgment of our Sences appointed by God the Instruments by hearing or reading them of conueying Faith and his Diuine Reuelations to vs affords not a sufficient Naturall Certainty or Infallibility whereon to ground our belief in all those things subject to our Senses wherein the Diuine Power doth not interpose But only 1. That where the Diuine Power worketh any thing Supernaturally that is contrary to our Senses as it may no doubt here we are not to belieue them And this I think none can deny 2. And next That we are to belieue this Diuine Power doth so so often as Certain Diuine Reuelation tells vs so Though by the same senses if tells us so we belieuing our Senses that it tells vs so when we do not belieue the same Senses for the thing which is contrary to what it tells vs The truth of which Diuine Reuelation we are to learn from Gods Church infallibly assisted in necessary Faith For otherwise Lot and his Daughters were not to credit the Diuine Reuelation supposing that Diuine History then written and extant that the seeming Men who came to Sodome were Angells because this was against their Senses Now here would he argue well who because Lots sight was actually deceiued vpon this Supernaturall accident in taking the Angells to be Men as certainly it was from hence would inferr that the Apostles had no sufficiēt Certainty or ground from their seeing our Lord to belieue him risen from the Dead Or that no Belief could euer be certainly grounded vpon our Senses Nor that Christians haue any certain Foundation of their Faith For a Naturall or Morall Certainty though such as is per potentiam Diuinam fallible and errable and is to be belieued to err where euer we haue Diuine Reuelation for it not else I say a Certainty though not such an one as cannot possibly be false but which according to the Laws of Nature and the common manners and experience of men is not false is sufficient on which to ground such a Faith as God requires of vs in respect of that Certainty which can be deriued from humane Sense or Reason and which serues for an Introductiue to the relyance of this our Faith vpon such Reuelation as is belieued by vs Diuine and which if Diuine we know is not possibly fallible In respect of its relying on which Reuelation an infallible Object and not for an Infallible Certainty as to the Subject it is that this our Faith is denominated a Diuine Faith Now this Naturall or Morall Certainty is thought sufficient for the first Rationall Introductiue and security of our Faith not only by the Doctor in his 27. Principle but also by Catholick Diuines in their Discourses of the Prudentiall Motiues V. CONSEQUENCE 5. To disown what is taught by such a Church is not to question the Veracity of God but so firmly to adhere to that in what he hath reuealed in Scriptures that men dare not out of loue to their souls reject what is so taught To disown what is taught by such a Church as we have here represented it will be to desert what God hath reuealed in the Scriptures the true meaning of which Reuelations when controuerted we are to receiue from it And so men ought not
He that can shew either that the Church of all Ages was to haue this Authority or that it continued in the Church for some Ages and then expired he that can shew either of these things let him for my part I cannot Yet I willingly confess the Iudgment of a Councill though not infallible yet so far Directiue and obliging that without apparent reason to the contrary it may be sin to reject it at least not to afford it an outward submission for Publick Peace sake Now by this way our late English Diuines seem to haue brought the Authority of their Church into a great disreputation and wayning condition and to haue excused yea justified all Sects which haue or shall separate from her For indeed what fault can it be to forsake the Doctrine of a Church whose Teaching none is bound to belieue or obey out of conscience and which quietly suffers yea liberally rewards her sons while they thus disparage her These Principles therefore layd by the Doctor which by aduancing the Clearness of the Rule so as to inferr the vselesness of a Guide do seem to supplant what soeuer Authority of any Church are here weighed in the following Considerations The great importance of which Subject requiring Expressions serious modest and euery way vnlike those made vse of by the Doctor in his Book such haue been studiously endeauoured here without the least resentment of seuerall vnciuill and vnmerited Aspersions which in the sayd Book the Doctor hath cast vpon seuerall among vs and the more moderate any haue bene the more immoderately haue they bene traduced God Almighty inspire into all our hearts a sincere loue of Peace and Truth Amen D r. STILLINGFLEETS PRINCIPLES Giving an Account of the Faith of Protestants CONSIDERED 1. THe Principles c. which Doctor Stilling fleet has thought expedient to expose at the end of his Book to render an Account of the Protestants Faith are sett down in three ranks The first consists of Six Principles agreed on both sides The second contains Thirty Propositions for enquiring into the particular ways which God hath made choyce of for revealing his will to mankind of which Propositions some are also Principles partly agreed on and partly not and some are Deductions from them But we following the generall Title will call them all Principles In the third rank six Corollaries or Inferences are deduced from the fore-going Propositions to the advantage of the cause of Protestants against Catholicks To all which we here offer the following Considerations I. PRINCIPLES Agreed on all sides 1. That there is a God from whom Man and all other Creatures had their beginning 2. That the Notion of God doth imply that he is a Being absolutely perfect and therefore Iustice Goodness Wisdom and Truth must be in him in the highest perfection 3. That Man receaving his Being from God is thereby bound to obey his Will and consequently is liable to punishment in case of disobedience 4. That in order to Mans obeying the will of God it is necessary that he know what it is for which some manifestation of the Will of God is necessary both that Man may know what he hath to do and that God may justly punish him if he do it not 5. What ever God reveals to Man is infallibly true and being intended for the Rule of Mans obedience may be certainly known to be his Will 6. God cannot act contrary to those essentiall Attributes of Iustice Wisdom Goodnesse and Truth in any way which he makes choyce of to make known his Will unto Man by It were impiety to question any of these Principles which are or ought to be presupposed not only to the Christian but all manner of Religions We will therefore proceed to the second Rank consisting of 30. Propositions which we will sett down singly and separatly annexing to each a respective Examination or Consideration II. An Enquiry into the particular ways which God hath made choyce of for the revealing his Will to Mankind I. PRINCIPLE 1. An entire obedience to the will of God being agreed to be the condition of mans happinesse no other way of Revelation is in it self necessary to that end then such whereby Man may know what the will of God is This is granted II. PRINCIPLE 2. Man being fram'd a rationall creature capable of reflecting vpon himself may antecedently to any externall Revelation certainly know the Being of God and his dependence vpon him and those things which are naturally pleasing to him else there could be no such thing as a law of Nature or any Principles of Natural Religion This may be granted III. PRINCIPLE 3. All Supernaturall and externall Revelation must suppose the truth of Naturall Religion for vnlesse we be antecedently certain that there is a God and that we are capable of knowing him it is impossible to be certain that God hath revealed his will to vs by any supernaturall means Let this be granted IV. PRINCIPLE 4. Nothing ought to be admitted for Divine Revelation which ouerthrows the certainty of those Principles which must be antecedently supposed to all Divine Revelation For that were to ouerthrow the means whereby we are to judge concerning the truth of any Divine Revelation Let this also be granted V. PRINCIPLE 5. There can be no other means imagined whereby we are to judg of the truth of Divine Revelation but a Faculty in vs of discerning truth and falshood in matters proposed to our belief which if we do not exercise in judging the truth of Divine Reuelation we must be imposed vpon by euery thing which pretends to be soe Here if the Doctor means That every Christian hath a faculty in him which as to all Revelations what soeuer proposed to him can discern the True and Divine from others that are not so and when a Revelation certainly Divine is capable of several senses can discern the true sense from the false all this exclusively to and independently on the Instruction of Church-authority This Proposition is not true For then none will need as experience shews they do to repayre to any other Teacher to instruct him when a dubious Revelation or when the sense of any Divine Revelation is controuersed which is the true revelation or which the sense of it It is abundantly sufficient that eyther Wee our selues or some others appointed by our Lord to guide vs and more easily discouerable by vs have a Faculty ayded by the Divine assistance to discern Truth and Falshood in those Revelations proposed wherein wee our selues cannot that so particular Christians in their following these Guides may not be imposed vpon by every thing which pretends to be Divine Revelation VI. PRINCIPLE 6. The pretence of Infallibility in any person of Society of men must be judged in the same way that the truth of a Divine Revelation is for that infallibility being challenged by vertue of a
supernaturall assistance and for that end to assure men what the will of God is the same means must be vsed for the tryall of that as for any other supernaturall way of Gods making known his will to men Here if the Doctor means That by the same way or means as we come to know the truth of other Divine Revelations we may come to know the truth also of this viz the Infallibility in Necessaries of a Society or Church I consent to it But not to this That by all or only the same ways or means by which we may come to know one Divine Revelation we may or must come to know any other or this of Church-Infallibility For some Divine Revelation may come first to our knowledg by Tradition another first by Scripture another by the Church see below Consid. on the 17. Principle VII PRINCIPLE 7. It being in the power of God to make choyce of severall ways of revealing his Will to vs we ought not to dispute from the Attributes of God the necessity of one particular way to the Exclusion of all others but we ought to enquire what way God himself hath chosen and whatever he hath done we are sure cannot be repugnant to Infinit Iustice Wisdom Goodness and Truth This is granted VIII PRINCIPLE 8. Whatever way is capable of certainly conveying the Will of God to vs may be made choyce of by him for the means of making known his will in order to the happiness of mankind so that no Argument can be sufficient a priori to prove that God cannot choose any particular way to reveal his mind by but such which evidently prooues the insufficiency of that means for conueying the Will of God to vs. This likewise is granted IX PRINCIPLE 9. There are severall ways conceaveable by vs how God may make known his Will to vs eyther by immediate voyce from Heaven or inward Inspiration to every particular person or inspiring some to speak personnally to others or assisting them with an infallible spirit in writing such Books which shall contain the Will of God for the benefit of distant persons and future Ages To these seuerall ways by which God reveals his Will the Doctor might have added this one more as a Truth And in case such Writings in some things be not clear to all capacities as the Writings of Moses his law were not nor any Writings though possibly yet hardly can be when written at seuerall times by seueral persons on seuerall and those particular occasions in different styles c. By our Lords giuing a Commission to and leauing a standing Authority in the Successors of these holy Pen-men to expound these their Writings to the people and by affording them for euer such a Divine Assistance as in nothing necessary to misinterpret them X. PRINCIPLE 10. If the Will of God cannot be sufficiently declared to men by Writing it must eyther be because no Writing can be intelligible enough for that end or that it can neuer be known to be written by men infallibly assisted the former is repugnant to common sense for Words are equally capable of being understood spoken or written the later ouerthrows the possibility of the Scriptures being known to be the Word of God This is granted XI PRINCIPLE 11. It is agreed among all Christians that although God in the first Ages of the World did reveal his mind to men immediatly by a Voice of secret inspirations yet afterwards hee did communicate his mind to some immediatly inspired to write his Will in Books to be preserued for the benefit of future Ages and particularly that these Books of the New Testament which we now receaue were so written by the Apostles and Disciples of Iesus-Christ The Doctor declaring how God after the first Ages was pleas'd to communicate his mind by the Writings of Moses c. might and ought to haue added as a Truth That he also left a Iudge in case of any Controuersy arising about the sense of those Writings to whose sentence the people were to stand and do according to it vnder paine of death as the same Writings inform vs. XII PRINCIPLE 12. Such Writings hauing been receiued by the Christian Church of the first Ages as Divine and Infallible and being deliuered down as such to vs by an vniuersall consent of all Ages since they ought to be owned by vs as the certain Rule of Faith whereby we are to judge what the Will of God is in order to our Saluation vnlesse it appear with an euidence equall to that whereby we believe those Books to be the Word of God that they were neuer intended for that end because of their obscurity or imperfection Here these words whereby we are to judge being vnderstood not vniuersally of all Christians but of those to whom amongst Christians this Office of judging in dubious cases is delegated by our Lord Or vnderstood vniuersally that is so farr as the sense of these Scriptures is to all men clear and vndisputable This Proposition is granted XIII PRINCIPLE 13. Although we cannot argue against any particular way of Reuelation from the necessary Attributes of God yet such a way as Writing being made choyce of by him we may justly say that it is repugnant to the nature of the designe and the Wisdome and Goodnesse of God to giue infallible assurance to persons in writing his Will for the benefit of Mankind if those Writings may not be vnderstood by all persons who sincerely endeauour to know the meaning of them in all such things as are necessary for their saluation This Principle is vnsound Because if God who according to the Doctors 7. Principle may reueal his Will in or without Writing after what manner he pleaseth may reveal it in these Writings so as that in many things it may be clear only to some persons more versed in the Scriptures and in the Churches Traditional sense of them and more assisted from aboue according to their employment which Persons he hath appointed to instruct the rest and these to learne it of them in those places or Points wherein to these persons Gods Will is obscure then I say though these Writings be not such as that euery one may attaine the understanding of them by his owne endeavours yet if he may by others namely his Instructors this also consists very well with the Diuine designe with his Wisdome and Goodnesse as also it would had he left no Writings at all but only Teachers to deliuer his Will perpetually to his Church Concerning these Vvritings pretended by the Doctor to be intelligible by all Persons c. I find as it seems to me a contrary Principle aduanced by Doctor Field a person of no small authority in the Church of England in his Preface to the large Volume he thought it necessary to write on the Church Seeing sayth he the Controuersies of Religion that is in
of it not rightly used that they do not discerne in these scriptures this Infallible Guide which saith S. Augustin the scripture without any ambiguity doth demonstrate and which repaired to may demonstrate to them what else is necessary The second Proposition is That there can be no such hazard to any person in belieuing a society of men to be infallible that are not if this society be at least more learned and studied in Diuine matters then himselfe and also ordained by our Lord to be his Instructors in them which Protestants I hope allow true of their own Clergy No such hazard I say as is comparable to that euery one incurrs in mistaking the meaning of scriptures though we suppose he vseth his best other means of vnderstanding them exclusiue to his obeying the Instructions of such a society Witness the vnhappy Socinians and all other grosser sects of late sprung out of Disobedience For whereas in following these Guides such persons may fall into some errours and perhaps some of them great ones in this later way of following their owne fancyes the vnlearned may fall into a thousand and some of these much greater and grosser then any such Christian society or Body of Clergy will euer maintain For God hath made no Promise to preserue in Truth those who desert their Guides nor to reward their diligence who liue in disobedience XIX PRINCIPLE 19. The assistance which God hath promised to those who sincerely desire to know his will may giue them greater assurance of the truth of what is contained in the Bookes of scripture then it is possible for the greatest Infallibility in any other persons to do supposing they haue not such assurance of their Infallibility 1. First obserue that whateuer Diuine assistance is aduanced here against the assurance that can be receiued from Church-Infallibility the same is more against any assurāce that may be had from Church-Authority Thus it happens more then once in these Principles that in too forward a Zeale in demolishing the one the other also is dangerously vndermined 2. The Doctor hath all reason here to suppose him that repairs to and is instructed by an Infallible Guide though not knowing him to be such as well as him who seeks for an assurance of his Faith without one sincerely to desire to know Gods will and vpon this to enjoy his promised Assistance so far as God engageth it And then if the Question be which of these two takes the more prudent course he that consults or he that lays aside this Guide for his assurance of the truth of what is contained in the Bookes of scripture I should think the former Whilst the one relyes on the judgment of such Guide thought wise and learned though not infallible the other on his own On the judgment of which Guide the one hath much more reason to be confident then the other on his own who neglects the advice of the Wise man Ne innitaris prudentiae tuae Lean not on thy own Prudence At least the Doctor must grant the former of the two to be de facto in a much safer condition For it must be acknowledged a great benefit to haue an Infallible Guide to shew us our way though we doe not know him to be Infallible for so we keep still in the right way though belieuing only and not infallible certain that it is so so we walke in Humility and obedience And if God hath directed us for learning our right way to a Guide surely he will take no prudent course who committing himselfe to Gods immediate Assistance shall neglect it and break his commandement in hope of his fauour XX. PRINCIPLE 20. No mans Faith can therefore be infallible meerly because the Proponent is said to be infallible because the nature of Assent doth not depend vpon the objectiue Infallibility of any thing without us but is agreable to the euidence we haue of it in our minds for Assent is not built on the nature of things but their evidence to us This Proposition is granted viz. That no person is infallibly certain of or in his Faith because the Proponent thereof is infallible vnless he also certainly know or haue an infallible evidence that he is infallible Only let it be here remembred That for begetting an infallible assent to the thing proposed it is sufficient if we haue an infalliblé euidence either of the thing proposed or of the Proponent only Because if we are infallibly certain that he cannot ly in such matter who relates it to us we are also hence infallibly certain that what he says is truth XXI PRINCIPLE 21. It is necessary therefore in order to an infallible assent that euery particular person be infallibly assisted in judging of the matters proposed to him to be belieued so that the ground on which a necessity of some Externall Infallible Proponent is asserted must rather make euery particular person infallible if no Diuine Faith can be without an infallible assent and so renders any other Infallibility vseless This Proposition That therefore it is necessary in order to an infallible assent that euery particular person be infallibly assisted in judging of the matters proposed to him to be belieued is not well deduced from the precedent Proposition rightly vnderstood Neither is it true and so the Consequence also faileth viz. so that the Ground on which a necessity of some externall Infallible Proponent is asserted must rather make euery particular person infallible if no Diuine Faith can be without an infallible assent and so renders any other Infallibility useless Because as was now said for the yeilding an Infallible assent to the things proposed it is not necessary that the person haue an infallible euidence of the truth of the things proposed that is from the Internall Principles that proue or demonstrate them But it is enough though the things proposed remain still in themselues obscure to him that he haue an infallible or sufficiently certain Euidence only of the Infallibility of the Externall Proponent The Ground therefore vpon which the necessity of some externall infallible Proponent is asserted for begeting such infallible assent is because the Person hath by no other way any infallible euidence of the things proposed Which if he had then indeed the Proponents Infallibility for such Points is rendred vseless And by this I hope sufficiently appeareth that misarguing that seems to cause a great confusion in the Doctor 's Principles whilst vpon an infallible assent requiring an infallible Euidence layd down in the Twentieth Proposition and Conceded he concludes as necessary to our yielding an infallible assent to all that the Church proposeth an infallible Euidence of the things proposed and then hence inferres the vselessness of such infallible Proponent And here note that though the Churches Infallibility to such a person as is not infallibly assured of it signifies nothing as to his infallible assurance of that
sense we assert the Certainty of Christian Faith to be MORALL not in the later This Principle is granted if importing only that Christians haue or may haue a sufficiently certain and infallible Euidence of the Truth of their Christianity But notwithstanding this Christians may be deficient in a right belief of seuerall necessary Articles of this Christian Faith if destitute of that externall Infallible Guide therein And the perpetuall Diuine Assistance and so Infallibility in Necessaries of this Guide being declared in the scriptures a Catholick hauing once learnt this Point of Faith from it Definitions and Expositions becomes secure and setled in the belief of all those controuerted Articles of his Faith Wherein Others another whilst the scriptures in such Points at least to persons vnlearned or of weaker judgments which are which are the greatest part of Christians are ambiguous in their sence and drawn with much art to seuerall interests XXVIII PRINCIPLE 28. A Christian being thus certain to the highest degree of a firm assent that the scriptures are the Word of God his Faith is thereby resolued into the scriptures as into the rule and measure of what hee is to belieue as it is into the Veracity of God as the ground of belieuing what is therein contained Both Catholicks and Protestants profess to resolue their Faith into the Word of God and Diuine Reuelation or into the scriptures so as is said on Principle 14. and 29. and make Gods Veracity the Ground of their belief of the things therein contained But the former resolue their Faith into this scripture as the sense of it where disputed is deliuered by the Church whose Faith the Apostle commands vs to follow and to whom Christ himself giues testimony as S. Augustin saith As for Protestants they resolue their Faith into this scripture as the sence of it is ultimatly apprehended and vnderstood by their own judgments None here to vse the Doctors words elsewhere vsurping that Royall Prerogrtiue of Heauen in prescribing infallibly in matters question'd suppose in those Points the Doctor named before the Doctrine of the Deity of Iesus Christ or of the Trinity But leauing all to judge and so the Socinians according to the Pandects of the Diuine Lawes because each member of this society is bound to take care of his soul and all things that tend thereto But here the Doctor will permit vs to aske whether euery one is bound to take care of his soul so as vnder the pretence hereof to disobey their Resolutions and Instructions in Faith or Manners whom God hath appointed to take care of and to watch ouer their soules and will require an account of them for it Here therefore let euery one take the safest course and where there is no euident Certainty always make sure to side with the Church XXIX PRINCIPLE 29 No Christian can be obliged vnder any pretence of Infallibility to belieue any thing as a matter of Faith but what was reuealed by God himselfe in that Book wherein he belieues his will to be contained and consequently is bound to reject whatsoeuer is offered to be imposed vpon his Faith which hath no fundation in scripture or is contrary thereto Which rejection is no making NEGATIVE ARTICLES OF FAITH but only applying the generall grounds of Faith to particular instances as I belieue nothing necessary to saluation but what is contained in scripeure Therefore no such particular things which neither are there nor can be deduced thence 1. Here first obserue That what no Christian is obliged to belieue vnder any pretence of Church-Infallibility he is much rather not obliged to belieue vnder any pretence of Church Authority And that the Doctors freeing the Churches subjects here from the former doth so from the later It concerns therefore his superiors to look to it whether their Churches and their owne Authority suffers no detriment particularly from this Principle I mean so as it can be applied to priuate mens practice 2. Next obserue That the Expression What is reuealed by God c. as it is applicable to persons must either mean What such person only thinks belieues or is perswaded to be reuealed c. or what such person certainly knows to be reuealed And the same may be sayd of the later expressions what hath no foundation What is contrary Now as either of these two Additions are made a great alteration is made in the Principle and what in the one Addition is true in the other may be false As for example when a culpable Ignorance belieues something that is enjoyned by this Authority not to be reuealed in Gods Word which indeed is so and so rejects it here such act is not justifiable Very necessary therefore it seems here to make an exact distinction that if the Doctor means it here of the one viz. certain Knowledge it may not be misapplyed by any to the other namely a belief or full perswasion For so men set once vpon examining well in such high mysteries their owne Certainty will I conceiue neuer find just cause to reject what this Church-Authority to which they owe obedience recommends to them vpon Her Certainty But to take Expressions as they lye For the first Part of this Principle thus much is granted That no Christian can be obliged vnder any pretence of Infallibility to belieue any thing as a matter of Faith but what is reuealed by God himselfe in his Word Written or Vnwritten both which the Doctor else where allowes to be of the same Value so it be euident they are his Word Where I adde vnwritten because though it is granted before on Principle 14. that the Word written or Book of scriptures contains all those Points of Faith that are simply necessary to be of all persons belieued for attaining saluation Yet some Articles of a Christians Faith there may be that are not there contained which may be also securely preserued in the Church by Ecclesiasticall Tradition both Written and Vnwritten deriued at first from the Apostolicall as for example this by Protestants confessed That these Bookes of scripture are the Word of God I say thus much is granted For no Church-Infallibility is now pretended but only in declaring what this Word of God deliuers requireth authorizeth and a Catholicks whole Faith is grounded on Diuine Reuelation And where such pretended Infallible Church-Authority enjoyns any thing to be belieued meerly as lawfull it grounds it selfe on this Word of God for the lawfulness of it The Consequence also is granted viz. That a Christian is bound to reject whatsoeuer is offred to be imposed vpon his Faith which hath no foundation in scripture or Gods Word as before explained or is contrary thereto that is which is certainly known to such Christian to be so there being no matter of Faith enjoyned by such Authority but what is pretended to be so founded But then such Christian where not infallibly certain
liue in this Communion or knowing this Obligation persist in a wilfull neglect to re-vnite themselus to it Because all such persons liue in a mortall sin viz. Disobedience to and a willfull Separation from their lawfull and Canonicall Ecclesiasticall Superiors whom our Lord hath sett ouer them And this sin vnrepented of destroys Saluation being the same so heauily condemned by our Sauiour Si non audierit Ecclesiam Now that vnrepented of it is we haue reason to fear so long as they hauing opportunity either neglect to inform their judgment or this being conuinc'd to reform and rectify their practise And this seems a judged Case in the Donatist who pretended some such thing for their security if we will admitt S. Augustins sentiment of it for thus he directs his speech to them Nobiscum estis in Baptismo c. that is You are with vs in Baptism you are with vs in the Symbol or Creed you are with vs in the rest of our Lords Sacraments and I may safely add with regard to some of them at least You are with vs in a good life with the former exception But in the Spirit of Vnity and bound of peace and lastly In the Catholick Church you are not with vs And so he leaues them to the punishment due to those who are out of it and separated from Christ its head To conclude I ask this Counter-Question concerning a Christian liuing for example In the Fift Age of the Church Why the belieuing of the Apostles Creed as those of the first Age did and leading a good life may not be sufficient for Salvation to such a one vnless he continue in the Communion of his lawfull Ecclesiasticall Superiors of his owne Age requiring of him vnder Anathema or penalty of damnation the belief not only of the Symbol of the Apostles but of all the Articles of the Athanasian Creed as in the beginning and Conclusion of that Creed it is clear they did Here what Answer the Doctor shall make to this Question supposing he will not justify such Separatist I cannot imagin but it must fitt his own Here therefore such a Christians business for knowing whether he stands safe as to his Faith and Life in order to Saluation seems to be That he seriously examin Whether those whose Communion he rejects are the true Legall Ecclesiasticall Superiors who are sett ouer him by our Lord and to whom he is enjoyned Obedience and with whom he ought to liue to vse S. Augustins words in the Spirit of Vnity and bound of peace XXX PRINCIPLE 30. There can be no better way to preuent mens mistakes in the sense of Scripture which men being fallible are subject to then the considering the consequence of mistaking in a matter wherein their Saluation is concerned And there can be no sufficient reason giuen why that may not serue in matters of Faith which God himself hath made vse of as the means to keep men from sin in their liues vnless any jmagin that errors in Opinion are farr more dangerous to mens souls then a vicious life is and therefore God is bound to take more care to preuent the one then the other Whereas the Doctor says That the best way to preuent mens mistakes in the sence of Scripture is the considering the consequence of erring in a matter wherein their Saluation is concerned Our dayly sad Experience shews that though our seeing or considering the dangerous consequence of a mistake affords vs how good soeuer yet no certain way to preuent it but our being directed by an Infallible Externall Guide certainly doth And the consideration of such Consequence should hasten euery one to prouide this only certain Remedy I mean in committing himself in such matters of Faith as are much disputed to the Guidance of men more studied and experienced in the Diuine Laws and that are also sett ouer him by our Lord for this very thing to instruct him in them Where in case these Guides shall disagree yet euery Christian may easily know whose judgments among them he ought to follow namely always of that Church-Authority that is the Superior which in most cases is indisputable This Ecclesiasticall Body being placed by the Diuine Prouidence in an exact Subordination As here in England it is not doubted whether we are to pay our Obedience rather to a Nationall Synod then to a Diocesan to the Arch-Bishop or Primat then to an Ordinary Bishop or Presbiter And then He who hath some experience in Church affairs if willing to take such a course cannot but discern what way the Major part of Christendom and its Higher and more comprehensiue Councills that haue hitherto been do guide him And the more simple and ignorant who so can come to know nothing better ought to follow their example As touching the following Clause in this Principle That the same means may serue to keep men from Error in matters of Faith as is vsed by God to keep men from Sin in their liues Hereto I add That here God hath taken care by the same Church-Authority to preserue his Church in Truth and to restrain it from Sin giuing them an equall Commission to teach the ignorant and to correct the Vicious And since their Doctrine directs our manners as well as Faith their infallibility is as necessary for things of practise as of speculation Error in Opinion also may be such as may be much more dangerous to vs then for the present a vicious life supposing our persistance in a right Faith because we haue our Conscience still left vncorrupted to reclame vs in the later but not so in the former And there is more hopes of his recouery who as yet doth ill with a relucting judgment Some erroneous Opinions or other also are the ordinary sources and springs of euill practises and the Doctor cannot but acknowledg this who hath spent a considerable part of the Book to which he hath annexed these Principles vpon pretending to shew how Roman Errors do induce an euill life and destroy Deuotion III. The Doctors Consequences examined I. CONSEQUENCE 1. There is no necessity at all or vse of an Infallible Society of men to assure men of the truth of those things of which they may be certain without and cannot haue any greater assurance supposing such Infallibility to be in them 1. This Consequence here is voyded because the Supposition if applied to Diuine Reuelations and matters of Faith in the former Principles is not prooued 2. But if the whole were granted This concludes the vselesness as well of any Ecclesiasticall Authority to teach men as of an Infallible to assure men of the truth of those things which by vsing only their owne sincere endeauour according to the Doctors pretence Principle 13. they may know without them II. CONSEQUENCE 2. The Infallibility of that Society of men who call themseleus the Catholick Church must be examined by the same Faculties in man the same
extrauagant Fancies in Religion the Contemners of Church-Authority and of the Clergy who first contemned and vilified themselues do dayly in these parts so exceedingly multiply and encrease Sed tu pastor bone reduc in ouile tuum istas oues perditas vt audiant vocem tuam sic fiat vnum ouile vnus Pastor Amen ERRATA PRef p 6. l. 1. his l. his l. 2. must l. much l. 20. d. not P. 35. l. 31. te l. be p. 48. l. 23. incnrs l. incurs p. 78. by disputes l. by-disputes P. 81. l. 12. consideration l. consid P. 99. l. 29. heep l. keep P. 100. l. 14. uf l. of COurteous Reader Because the necessity of making use of a forreign Press hath so multipled the Errata of this small Piece either in Words or Pointing as to render several places of it hardly intelligible You are desired to amend with your Pen at least those grosser faults that are distinguished here with a Star and where else the sense may seem obscure to repair to this Table PREFACE Pag. 21. Marg. read See p. 69. * Ibid. l. 6. r. cannot think Ibid. l. 9. r. be a p. 4. l. 11. r. and unmoveable p. 6. l. 2. r. much BOOK Pag. 1. l. 2. r. Principles Giving p 2. l. 11. Marg. § 1. p. 4. l. 6. Marg. § 2. p. 6. l. 10. Marg. § 3. * l. 17. r. and all l. 25. r. controverted p. 7. l. 13. r. or Society l. 22. Marg. § 4. * p. 9. l. 23. Marg. § 5. p. 11. l. 24. Marg. Deut. 17. 8. 2 Chron. 19. 10. p. 15. l. 28. r. Christian p. 18. l. 20. Marg. Tillots Rule of faith p. 113. Ibid. l. 27. Marg. dele Tillots p. 113. p. 20. l. 30 dele * l. 31. r. sense * p. 21. l. 6. r. repentance of it l. 19. r. present much major part of Christianity professeth l. 20. r. this Scripture * p. 23. l. 13. r. or p. 25. l. 9. r. Iudgments 2 Chr. 19. 10. * p. 32. l. 21. r. any can * p. 33. l. 6. r. taken in her sense * l. 10. r. Catholick Church l. 11. r. that is in l. 13. r. page l. 18. r. salvation And * l. 31. r. Therefore such p. 35. l. 32. r. be * p. 36. l. 13. r. infallible the Infallibility in question Surely l. 15. r. Fundamentals Marg. See Rat. * l. 26. r. not as liable p. 38. l. 2. r. necessary The * p. 39. l. 16 r. too these Successors p. 40. l. 10. r. And the Protestant's allowing l. 28. rendring such their p. 41. l. 4. r. Account * l. 9. Marg. r. Ibid. p. 512. p. 42. l. 16. r. Scripture l. 23. Marg. r. Matt. 18. 17. p. 45. l. 9. r. in some matters * l. 12. r. Council but are not as yet stated such by any clear Decision p. 48. l. 2. r. Guide their l. 16. r. are not if p. 51. l. 8. r. infallibly certain * p. 55. l. 17. r. matter at all * p. 56. l. 20. r. Revelation as to the * p. 57. l. 4. dele their l. 13. r. Consideration * p. 58. l. 7. r. established there to * p. 68. l. 24. r. As for the other the Protestants * p. 70. l. 4. r. as because I p. 73. l. 13. r. so there * l. 21. Marg. See before § 27. * l. 28. r. contrary to it p. 74. l. 20. dele that * p. 75. l. 15. r. External p. 77. l. 4. dele in the * l. 30. r. when knowing * p. 78. l. 1. r. digress l. 2. r. Book of l. 13. r. Church l. 16. r. else p. 79. l. 18. r. and so separated p. 80. l. 13. r. bond of peace * p. 81. l. 6. dele though * p. 86. l. 6. r. she decides * p. 86. l. 11. See below * l. ult r. know these Truths p. 87. l. 12. r. have barked * l. 29. r. as if in p. 89. l. 3. r. Evidences in * l. 22. r. more to be necessary * p. 96. l. 23. r. conversing only with p. 97. l. 6. r. Protestant Sect l. 17. r. Volkelius Marg. r. uno Deo * p. 98. l. 13. r. omitteth p. 100. l. 3. r. Iudgement Lastly l. 28. r. increase Sed * P. 86. l. 11. After the Church r. Nor had St. Augustin any reason to presume as he doth ib. c. 4. that St. Cyprian would have corrected his Opinion concerning this Point or to charge the Donatists with Heresie for dissenting from it after the Determination of such a Council Nor had the Second General Council any just ground to put it in the Creed Credo unum Baptisma in Remissionem peccatorum if such Universal Councils in their Stating Matters of Faith are errable and amendable ERRATA In the Discourse concerning Devotion those of mis-pointing being mostwhat omitted The principal Errata noted with a Star the Reader is desired to Correct with his Pen. Pages line 21. marg read 8. 26. p 6 l. 27 r. became a * p 9 l. 24 r. long-continued * p 10 l. 10 r. thus * l. 16 r. thus * l. 22 r. 2. It p 11 l. 9 r. abscondi p 13 l. 24. marg r. Act. 16. 6 7 9. 20. 22 23. 8. 19. 19. 21. 1 Tim. 1. 18 4 14. p 15 l. 17. r. Hysterical p 18 l. 25 r. this inhabitation p 19 l 5 r. And Phil. 3. p 21 l. 2. r Where * after p 24. â—l 20. marg r. S. Thom. 1. Q. 1 Art 8. l. penult r. 5. But there p 25 l 22 r. Spirit pretends p 26 l. 21 r. See l. 22 r. 2. 6. p 28 l. 2 r. sin especially * p 29 l. 30 r. those * p 30 l. 25 r. and it if p 31 l. 17 r. Counsels * p 32 l. 18 r. leaves us * p 34 l. 27 r. inconsiderable * p 38 l. 5 r. 6. Having * p 39 l. 26 r. also frequently return * p 40 l. 17 r. and rovings about p 41 l. 21 r. thereof Treat 3. p 42 l. 24 r. them happen to fall p 43 l. 1 r. works in us p 45 l. 22 r. left somtimes * l. 32 r. Aâ—olatiomentis p 46 l. 16 r. primary p 48 l 16 r. mundanis * p 50 l. 21 r. Si cui p 51 l. 3 r. Canting p 52 l. 31 r. meae Subleâ— a us * p 53 l. 33 r. utcunque p 55 l. 13 r. peccatis * l. 21 r. quia si l. 34 r. immerito * p 56 l. 17 r. Elsewhere * Fortasse ne * l. 22 r. praecesserat l. 23. r. esse l. 26 r. Sanctuarium Dei si l. 31 r. quidem hic * p 58 l. 16 r. ellae bullienti substraxeris p 61 l. 27 r. cogit nec cogitur * p 62 l. 25 r. unexperienced * p 63 l. 10 r. understand * p 66 l. 21 r. as they are ib. apprehends l. 31 r. Christi And * p 67 l. 4 r. such persons as l. 23 r. virtute * l. 28 r. retractation p 69 l. 22 r. Cand * p 70 l. 17 r. because to