not Ans When the universal Church by her proper Representatives is lawfully assembled in a Council truly General that Council without all dispute will be a very proper Judge of what is fundamental and what not but this is rather to be prayed than hoped for Qu. Whether an obstinate denial of any one truth delivered by Jesus Christ or his Apostles though the delivery was not absolutely necessary to Salvation may not be called a fundamental errour seeing it brings the rest he delivered in question as also his veracity Ans The denial of any one truth delivered by Jesus Christ or his Apostles is a very great fault and if that denial be obstinately continued in after plain conviction that it is such a truth it is a very dangerous Errour Qu. Whether therefore the denial of any one truth delivered to us by an uninterrupted tradition as taught by Christ and his Apostles would not be a fundamental Errour Ans There is a great difference between a thing delivered as taught and plainly taught by Christ and his Apostles for we meet with many things delivered as taught by them and tradition pretended for them which really and in truth were never taught by them or either of them aed to deny such is so far from being a fundamental Errour that it is no Errour at all There is also a great difference between traditions If by tradition he mean the holy Scriptures we grant that to deny any thing that is plainly and clearly taught therein is a very great Errour But if by tradition he mean such as is meerly humane and not clearly warranted by the Word of God we think we ought to reject such how uninterrupted soever they be for if an Angel from Heaven preach any other Gospel than hath been preached let him he accursed saith St. Paul Qu. And on the other side whether the teaching of any Doctrine onely piously believed but sufficiently known not to have been expresly or by a natural consequence delivered by Christ and his Apostles and which may upon that account be false not having Divine Revelation which alone is infallible for its ground whether I say the teaching such a Doctrine so known as one that was delivered by Christ when they know it was not would not be a fundamental Errour Ans Whosoever teacheth such Doctrines as are mentioned in this Query and in that manner is highly guilty and when the Enquirer shall think fit to be more particular and produce his instances he may expect a more particular answer and perhaps be told at whose door this charge will lie In the mean time this general answer may suffice Qu. Whether Christ having taken care as some grant that his Church should not err in fundamentals hath not consequently taken care that she should not teach any one Doctrine as delivered by Christ and consequently of Faith which was not taught by him and consequently might be an Errour Ans Christ hath taken all care possible to secure his Church from Errour and hath given her his gracious promise to be with her to the end of the World But the Church being composed of men and such as are fallible the security is not promised to particulars Particular persons and particular Churches too we know not only may but have grosly erred The security therefore is only promised to the Universal Church and when he tells us what he means by that he may expect a more direct answer to his Query Qu. Whether those Doctrines or most of them controverted now by Protestants have not been taught and believed in the Church as Doctrines delivered by Christ long before Luther yea and delivered in the most General Councils those Ages would permit and accepted of by the Church diffusive none that we know of dissenting but those condemned in those Councils for Hereticks and whose Heresies expired almost with themselves Ans It is now plain that this Enquirer by the Church and universal Church so often mentioned by him doth all along mean the Church of Rome which we are so far from complying with him in that though we own that Church to be a Member yet we cannot allow it to be a sound Member of the Catholick Church And if by the Decisions and Declarations of the Church he mean the determinations of that Church they are no further obligatory than to her own Members nor many of them to them neither if strictly enquired into As for Luther we do not receive our Religion from him but from Jesus Christ and for any Doctrines now controverted we are content to have the same determined by the Holy Scriptures and the four first General Councils As for the Councils our Enquirer hints at we deny that they were truly General or that all their decisions were ever accepted of by the Church diffusive And he cannot but know that there were many more not only Persons but whole Churches which did dissent from them Qu. Whether there was from the first 400 years till the time of Luther any known body of Pastors and Teachers declaring a dissent in any Age from those Doctrines and opposing those Councils and whether the Greek Churches did not and do to this very day consent with this Western Church in most points now controverted by Protestants Ans This Query is preposterously put for how should any body of Pastors and Teachers in the first 400 years oppose themselves to those Councils which were not then in being nor heard of till many hundred years afterwards But that the Fathers in those first Ages did teach the same Doctrines we now do we appeal to the Records of those times And that those after-Councils by him mentioned were dissenters from those of the first Ages we are contented to be tried by comparing the Acts of both together And that the Greek Church did or now doth agree with the Church of Rome in all or most of those points now in difference between her and us we utterly deny and challenge him to the proof of it Qu. Whether Luther the first Author of Protestancy did not separate himself from the whole visible Church at that time spread over the West contradicting all the Prelates and Pastors then living in the universal practice of that Church and the General Councils received as such by the foregoing Ages Ans As for the names of Protestant and Papist I look upon them as names of distinction not of Religion The Religion we both own is Christian This we do not receive from Luther nor they from Ignatius Loyala St. Francis or any such but both of us from Jesus Christ The only question is Whether they or we hold that Religion in greatest purity 'T is true that Luther in his time did more narrowly look into the corruptions of the Church of Rome declared against them and on that account separated from her Communion and for any thing yet appears may be very well justified in so doing For if any Church shall make terms of her
sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures to others and it were to be wished that none had failed of their duty therein Qu. 12. Whether all that is mentioned in Scripture be not true according to the sense and meaning so delivered Ans All that is mentioned in Scripture is undoubtedly true according to the true sense and meaning thereof Qu. 13. Whether an obstinate Contradiction of any one truth thus delivered in Scripture though there appear no necessity it should have been mentioned in Scripture be not injurious to that divine Authority and veracity and which unrepented of shall bring damnation Ans An obstinate contradiction of any one plain truth delivered in holy Scripture is certainly a very great injury to divine authority and veracity Qu. 14. When difficulties did arise about the sense of Scriptures or matters of Faith whither the dicision of those controversies was carried and whether the present Church of every Age was not to decide it Ans It was undoubtedly the practice and is most rational that the present Church in every Age should decide such controversies For the Priest's Lips should preserve knowledge and they should enquire the Law at his mouth And no question the Church hath Authority to declare matters of Faith but not to make any new Articles of Faith Qu. 15. Whether every particular person was to have an Authoritative power in this decision or whether it was not universally left to the Heads and Governours of the Church Assembled together Ans Every particular person hath undoubtedly a Judgment of discretion allow'd him in matters of that nature but the Authoritative power of deciding and determining was in the Heads and Governours of the Church Assembled together for that end Qu. 16. Whether such a force of Hopes or Fears could possibly happen at once upon all the Heads of the universal Church Assembled together or after consenting to those that were Assembled as should make them declare that to be a truth revealed by Christ which was not so delivered to them to have been the ever esteemed sense of Scripture or perpetual tradition which was not so Ans Whilst men are men they will be liable to hopes and fears and subject to the power and force of them if therefore we consider the Heads and Governours of the Church as such we cannot allow them an Exemption therefrom and consequently there may be no impossibility in the things propounded We grant that in a General Council lawfully assembled we have great reason to hope for the presence direction and assistance of the Holy Ghost â—…t how far the passions and humours of men may frustrate our Hopes we know not This we certainly know that the Acts of one Council have been made void by another and therefore it is more than probable that one of them did declare something to be a truth revealed by Christ which was not so delivered unto them Qu. 17. Whether the Decisions of such Assemblies or general Councils were not always esteemed obligatory in the Church and whether particular Persons or Churches obstinately gainsaying such Decisions received by a much Major part of the Church diffused were not always esteemed to have incurred those Anathema's pronounced by such Councils Ans If those Assemblies or Councils be truly general we do very much reverence their Authority and think their decisions to be obligatory But we do not think all to be such that are called so As for instance The Council of Trent is by some sort of men looked upon as a general Council and all their Religion almost built upon the Authority thereof and yet the Church of England never received the decisions of that Council nor did the Galican Church for many years and yet neither the one nor the other did for all that esteem themselves to have incurred the Anathema's pronounced by that Council Qu. 18. Whether the universal Church did not in all Ages practice this way of deciding controversies and whether these be not as universal a tradition of this as the practice was universal without interruption Ans Universal practice will amount to an universal Tradition and that this hath been the practice of the Church in all Ages especially in matters of great weight we deny not nor should we oppose the same course now provided the Council were free and general But the Enquirer goes on Some will perhaps say that such Councils cannot Err in fundamentals but may in not fundamentals I ask these Qu. What are fundamentals and what not Ans Those things which are essentially necessary to the being of Religion may properly be called fundamental but those things which only respect order and decency therein and vary according to time and place and are alterable by the Governours of the Church when they see cause these are not fundamental Qu. Whether there be not some things fundamentals to the Church which are not to every particular Ans There may be some things fundamental to the Being of a Church which are not so to every particular member of that Church but whatsoever things are â—…ndamental to the Being of Religion are equally so to the whole Church and every member thereof Qu. Whether an obstinate denyal of what is fundamental or necessary to the universal Church or granting as I may say upon what is fundamental by a particular person be not in time a fundamental Errour especially after an universal declaration of it as truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles Ans This Query as it is here worded is hardly reconcileable to sense but I suppose his meaning is Whether for any particular person obstinately to deny what is fundamental or necessary to the universal Church and declared to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles be not a fundamental Errour To which I answer That every particular Christian ought with all deference to submit his own private Judgment to the publick Judgment of the Church and though it do not appear so plain to him yet he ought rather to suspect his own than that of the Church But if in some things he cannot be satisfied and therein happen to differ from the Church provided he do not thereby break the peace and unity of the Church it will hardly amount to a fundamental Errour But what if it be declared by the Church to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles will not that make it so To this I answer That no declaration of the Church how universal soever it be can make that to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles which really is not so And therefore in that case we must have recourse to their Writings and if it be not either in express words contained therein or by sound consequence drawn therefrom we ought not to comply with it nor is it a fundamental Errour to differ therein Qu. Whether the universal Church assembled in a General Council ought not to be justly esteemed the decider of what is fundamental and what
granted to belong to the Catholick Church yet that can signifie nothing to her till she hath proved her self to be that Catholick Church to which alone those promises confessedly belong Thus you see how candid and faithfull our Explainer hath been in this first Point and now let us examine whether he acquit himself any better in the next The EXPLAINER 2. We humbly believe the Sacred Mystery of the blessed Trinity One Eternal Almighty and Incomprehensible God whom onely we adore and worship as alone having Sovereign Dominion over all things to whom alone 1 Tim. 1.17 we acknowledge as due from Men and Angels all Glory Service and Obedience abhorring from our Hearts as a most detesta bld Sacrilege to give our Creator's Honour to any Creatures whatsoever And therefore we solemnly protest That by the Prayers we address to Angels ane Saints we intend no other than humbly to solicit their assistance before the Throne of God as we desire the Prayers of one another here upon Earth not that we hope any thing from them as Original Authours thereof but from God the Fountain of all Goodness through Jesus Christ our onely Mediator and Redeemer Neither do we believe any divinity or vertue to be in Images for which they ought to be worshipped as the Gentiles did their Idols but we retain them with due and decent respect in our Churches as Instruments which we find by experience do often assist our memories and excite our affections The ANIMADVERTER Our Explainer here in behalf of the Roman Catholicks makes a very good confession of Faith telling us That they humbly believe the sacred mystery of the blessed Trinity One Eternal Almighty and Incomprehensible God whom only they adore and worship as alone having Sovereign Dominion over all things to whom alone 1 Tim. 1.17 they acknowledge as due from Men and Angels all glory service and obedience abhorring from their hearts as a most detestable Sacrilege to give their Creator's honour to any Creatures whatsoever This is true Primitive Christianity good Catholick Divinity without any mixture of Popery and is it not great pity that any thing should be added thereto or mixed therewith to spoil so good a Confession Thus far we can readily and heartily joyn with them but when they superadd Articles of their own such as were never delivered by Christ or his Apostles nor owned by the primitive Catholick Church and set them in equal place with those of Divine Revelation and primitive practice then we cannot keep pace with them but are forced to stay behind and sit down contented with primitive Christianity so that in truth it is not we that leave them but they that leave us and consequently are guilty of the Separation And this is the case here between us and our Explainer For after all this glorious profession of adoring and worshipping the One Eternal Almighty and Incomprehensible God and him only and abhorring the giving of his glory to any Creatures as a most detestable Sacrilege he introduceth Prayers to Saints and Angels and the Worship of or beofre images as things equally necessary to be performed by Christians Now if Prayers and Adoration be acts of religious worship and the Objects to which they are offered be Creatures then it must needs follow that either all Religious Worship is not due to God alone or else that they do give part of his honour to something that is not God It is true indeed that he endeavours to palliate these practices with some pretended qualifications thereby to shift off the weight of this charge which lieth so heavy upon them but they are so thin and threedbare so empty and insignificant and have been so miserably baffled of late especially in the Answer to A Papist Misrepresented and Represented as also in two other little Treatises the one intituled A Discourse concerning Invocation of Saints printed in the year 1684 and the other intituled A Discourse concerning the Object of Religious Worship c. printed 1685 that I cannot but admire at our Explainer's confidence to produce them at this time These Treatises are or upon easie terms may be in every man's hands and there is therein so much said upon this Subject and so much to the purpose as may very well spare me the labour of enlarging thereupon to them therefore I shall refer the Reader for further satisfaction But by these short Remarques which I have made upon this part of our Explainer's Confession it is plain that he hath been no more candid and ingenuous in this than in the former Let us therefore try him in the next The EXPLAINER 3. We firmly believe that no force of Nature or dignity of our best Works can merit our Justification but we are Justified freely by Grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ Rom. 3.24 And though we should by the grace of God persevere unto the end in a godly life and holy obedience to the Commandments yet our hopes of eternal glory are still built upon the mercy of God and the merits of Christ Jesus All other Merits according to our sense of the word signifie no more than Actions done by the assistance of God's Grace to which it hath pleased his goodness to promise a Reward A Doctrine so far from being unsuitable to the sense of the Holy Scriptures that it is their principal design to invite and provoke us to a diligent observance of the Commandments by promising Heaven as a reward of our obedience 1 Tim. 4.8 Rom. 2.6 Rom. 8.13 Hebr. 6.10 Nothing being so frequently repeated in the word of God as his gracious promises to recompence with everlasting glory the Faith and Obedience of his Servants Nor is the bounty of God barely according to our Works but high and plentifull even beyond our Capacities giving full measure heaped up and pressed down and running over into the bosomes of all that love him Luke 6.38 Thus we believe the merit or rewardableness of holy living both which signifie the same thing with us arise not from the self value even of our best actions as they are curs but from the grace and bounty of God And for our selves we sincerely profess when we have done all those things which are commanded us we are unprofitable Servants Luke 17.10 having done nothing but that which was our Duty so that our boasting is not in our selves but all our Glory is in Christ The ANIMADVERTER If this be really the Faith of Roman Catholicks we shall not stick to acknowledge it is ours too and then we shall have no occasion to differ in this point But I am afraid our so near an Agreement is too good news to be true Our Explainer I doubt hath either mistaken or to gain a Proselyte or for some other end which might be serviceable to Holy Church hath very much misrepresented the Doctrine of his own Church in this point For sure I am the Council of Trent which they so much magnifie and