carried away with every doctrine c. Eph. 4. 11 13 Her authority I say toward all such men is voided because these two the giving private men power thus to judge and then the punishing them if they do not consent or if they declare their dissent do contradict For t is saying to them I grant and teach you that when you shall judge any thing which I enjoyn you to be contrary to God's word as possibly it may be so often it is your duty not to obey me nevertheles for doing this your duty I may justly punish you by Excommunication Or 2ly Is it only to those decisions which she maketh in points of the truth whereof she is actually certain For thus it is pleaded by some That a Church which confesseth that she may err and mislead others and upon this consideration alloweth that private men may lawfully dissent from her may yet be sure that she doth not in such and such definitions contradict Scripture and therefore may according to the power given her by God Matt. 18. excommunicate her children for preaching contrary to or dissenting from her definitions and for violating her truth and her peace and upon this ground may affirm that what she thus binds on earth is bound in heaven as a man that may sleep run mad c may yet be sure that now at this time he is awake and in his wits See much-what the same said by Dr. Hammond concerning General Councils affixing Anathema's to their Decrees Paraenes § 12. p. 158. But this plea seems to ground the Church'es power of excommunicating and consequently her subjects necessity of obeying at least so far as not to contradict her definitions not upon her authority tho she as those Judges Deut. 17. 8. may be in some things liable to error but only upon her certainty of the truth in those things which she enjoyns as it is willingly granted she or any else of some things may be certain enough But then if others obedience depends not upon her determining or commanding but upon her being certain what is said before returns again they must have some means to know not only what she commands but also when she is certain in what she commands or that she commands nothing wherein she is uncertain in which she may be still uncertain even when she saith nay even when she thinks she is certain But there being no means to know this all men again will be left to their liberty The Church of England see before § 3. hath excommunicated all that shall say any thing is erroneous either in her Liturgy or 39. Articles Was she sure that she could not possibly mistake in any of these things which she hath said there if not such her Excommunication of contradicters will be according to this opinion unlawful Deut. 17. 12. it is said The man that will do presumptuously and not hearken unto the Priest even that man shall dye Matt. 18. 17. it is said If he will not hear the Church let him be as an heathen Are these punishments lawfully inflicted only in case that such Priest and Church be certain and infallible in their judgment or that such Priest and Church do not seem to any to mis-interpret the divine law 3ly Is it only to those decisions which she maketh in points fundamental But here the same doubts arise still For I demand Whether are you to judge or she which these are or how many Surely this is very necessary to be known If you grant that she must judge this too for you which or how many be fundamentals as Mr. Chillingworth saith 3. c. 39. § in all reason she must if in fundamentals she be acknowledged your guide and therefore he denies her to be a guide at all then this thing To how many of her decided points you are to consent lies only in her judgment And then I ask Since some Non-fundamentals are plain in Scripture and since in these Non-fundamentals if a private man may be infallibly certain of somethings as they say he may and upon this infallibility of his seems to be grounded all his dissent from the Church for in things tho not fundamental wherein he is not infallibly certain of the contrary I suppose he is also to consent to the Church'es judgment then surely the Church may be so too why should you not be here also tied to take her sentence when she saith that she is infallibly certain of them too as you do take her sentence when she telleth you how many are fundamental And if you are to consent tho it be against your own judgment in the greatest matters what reason is there you should not do it in lesser You will answer because in these greatest matters she cannot err but she may in others My reply is and may not you in others also err much more Is she to guide your judgment in the main and not in less matters Is Scripture be plain in these smaller points for you to guide your self by it is it not so much more in fundamentals why therefore relinquish you your own and adhere to her judgment in these things most plain in Scripture and then take up your own and leave hers in the rest especially when being asked your reason for this your plea is because such points are plain in Scripture But then if our Saviour as this opinion makes him enjoyns only subscription to the Church in fundamentals who sees not that it is as necessary that our Saviour should have told us which points those were els we may assent too much to her in things wherein she may err or too little in the other wherein she cannot err I mean fundamentals and so be certainly damn'd But then since tho the General Church cannot yet a National Church may err in fundamentals also and may apostatize therefore you are here according to that opinion to assume to your self to judge what points are truth and what not even in pretended fundamentals before you yeild any consent to any thing at all call'd fundamental or other which a National Church proposeth and thus a self-opinioned man may easily throw off the yoke of obedience to all the proposals of all except General Councils a thing very unreasonable And as unreasonable is that which some say on the other side That we may not contradict or oppose our Pastor or Bishop in smaller matters but may in the greater when-as indeed in these greater matters there is more reason for our obedience and far more danger if we err in our contradicting Therefore neither in Non-fundamentals nor yet in Fundamentals may we properly contradict them i. e. in opposing our particular judgment upon Scripture to theirs What then must be done you will say since our Pastors and Bishops may err in fundamentals and particular Churches may apostatize Resp. Why both in fundamentals and non-fundamentals also where any considerable doubting ariseth we may repair from them to a
charity to other Churches i. e. with not condemning them to be no Churches so may his Considering these things may not such a one say Whether it is better to obey God than men judge ye 2. Again I ask If the power in the Church of Excommunication of private men binds them not to contradict her why doth not the same power in superior Councils to excommunicate Bishops and to annul the acts of inferior Councils bind such inferior Councils also to Non-contradiction 3. Again the obligation of Non-contradiction of private men to their Bishop or to his Synod in not-fundamentals will signifie little because an Episcopal or a National Synod may err in fundamentals and the judgment of this Synods erring in a fundamental is by the reformed left not to It which will never judg such a thing to be but to its subjects and they may misjudge a point not-fundamental to be fundamental and so may break their due silence neither can there be of this any remedy For none hitherto have contradicted the Church-decisions but they have made that which occasioned their contradicting to be a thing of great consequence Here therefore again in the yeilding of our obedience of Non-contradiction to a Provincial or National Church the Queries concerning Fundamentals will return Who is to determin what are such both for agends and credends which it is extream necessary to know that in such we may be sure to vindicate God's truth against that particular Church wherein we live Is not idolatry an error against a fundamental truth and doth not the Roman Church then err in fundamentals in worshipping bread as the Protestants think they do for Christ So that tenet of the Greek Church à Patre per filium is said to destroy the Trinity and so the Lutheran's Consubstantiation is said by consequence to destroy Christ's Humanity the Trinity and Christ's Humanity fundamental truths In such points and the like therefore none must be tied in obedience to their Bishop or Church-National to a Non-contradiction 2ly In respect of the Church in general the obedience of sole-Non-contradiction is limited by the reformed as we have said before to Non-fundamentals wherein the Church may err whereas in fundamentals wherein this Church cannot err here they also allow an obedience of assent But I ask again Who shall determin both in credends agends which are fundamental And why in these fundamentals especially are we wished in our judgment to conform to the Church'es since these are the points most clear in Scripture and such as without the Church'es direction we cannot mistake And methinks those places of Scripture concerning Tryal of Doctrines which we have learnt to turn against the injunctions of the Church hold as well or more for trying her Doctrines in Fundamentals than in any thing els because the rule by which we try is the most plain in these points Again I ask Are all the necessary consequences of fundamentals to be accounted fundamental If so then who knows how far these points may extend in which we are to consent to and not only not-to-contradict the Church'es decisions 3ly This obedience not of yeilding assent but solely of Non-contradicting is allowed and secured by the reformed only to those persons who upon examination of Scripture and Tradition are certain of the contrary surely then it must extend to very few persons and in very few things for how few are there that are able to compare the Scriptures or search Traditions Therefore the Scripture seems to make rules of our obedience to our present Spiritual Governors as if we were void of writings and not according to the extraordinary skill and learning of some few that are not rulers but according to the general capacity and knowledg of the flock of Christ. 1. Therefore it were well if these men who would not have their own knowledge restrained by authority would yet let the people know That only those who by long studying the Scriptures and Fathers have arrived to infallible certainty are tied only-to Non-contradiction to the Church-decisions but that all the rest to assenting For doth it not make our hearts yet to bleed to see so many thousands of the common people amongst us upon this mistaken priviledge even to disbelieve and not to yeild consent to the Church in fundamentals 2. When this is done how few are there of the learned that can say they are certain without some doubt that what the Church proposeth is false Are not all the rest then who are not infallibly certain to be taught that they must in Non-fundamentals subscribe to the Church-decisions Why labour we then more to free then subjugate mens judgments 3. But then for a private man's being infallibly certain upon which the reformed opinion seems to build much methinks this concession of the Scriptures which he reads to be the infallible word of God is not enough for his certainty almost in any point because there must be a comparing of Scriptures and a not interpreting of some places so that other places contradict and because the sence of the words may be diversly taken tho he were to judge only of one place by it self Besides there are many degrees of seeming certainty and t is hard to know when it is a presumption only and when a true certainty That men are ordinarily deceived in making this judgment is plain because two contradicting one another will often both affirm that they are infallibly certain The thinking ones self infallibly certain mostwhat ariseth from knowing no objections of any difficulty to the contrary which objections as one afterward discovers so his former certainty by degrees abates Hence we see the greatest Scholars many times dubious when the ignorant are either certain or strongly confident Four texts of Scripture that seem plainly to say a thing make one sure as it were and then two texts suggested to him that seem to say the contrary reduce him to doubt and make him begin to deliberate of the sense of the former I speak not this to affirm we are certain in nothing at all but that we have almost always reason to doubt where the same certainty that we have appears not to others But then if private men may be infallibly certain much more may the Church and so many Doctors be so they also all agreeing in their certainty So that all proofs of certainty to be had in divine truths rather strengthen the argument for obedience to the Church And she deals but with us in our own kind if she plead infallibility to require our submission to her even in Non-fundamentals as we do plead infallibility to avoid it As for those objections which the Reformed opinion makes 1. That possibly a National or Provincial Synod may or also hath broached some new mischievous tenet the contrary to which tenet neither the Creeds expresly nor former Councils have decreed into which error therefore my too secure obedience may betray me
I answer That from this judgment of such a Church so often as it is suspected by me I will not retreat to my private judgment but I will appeal to a more general judgment of the present Church which judgment I can either have conjunctim or divisim as it was ordinarily procured in ancient time and by the reformed opinion I shall be secure if I part not from the present Church for in fundamentals she shall in no age err but hold forth to me visibly the truth and if this error be in Non-fundamentals it amounts not as the reformed say to a heresy therefore will I still cleave to her i. e. the present Church and the supremest Authority I can find therein neither will I embrace any sence put upon Scriptures or Fathers against her because she cannot be at least in points of great consequence opposit to them And if that religion as it might have bin had bin conveyed to our days by unwritten Tradition and only so as the Apostle directed in 2 Tim. 2. 2 and that we had had neither New Testament-Scriptures nor writings of Fathers then I must have relied only on the guidance of the present Church neither needed she for this to have bin made more infallible than now she is and doubtles my faith should have bin nevertheles sufficiently grounded i. e. on the word of God still orally delivered by her neither could any have made an argument that my faith was not salvifical for this reason because fidei non potest subesse falsum for she must then in defect of all writings have bin confess'd the pillar and ground of truth and the dispenser or steward of the mysteries of God 1 Cor. 4. 1. the same then must she be still and Nations now as at the first before writings are still converted by her by her preaching before they come to peruse those Scriptures And so are we all also taught our faith first by her neither suffers she diminution in her authority from co-extant Scriptures and Fathers But yet besides that in these Scriptures is ascribed to her great authority any help that is from these writings enjoyed by any other is also by her that no body may boast over her in these advantages 2. It is objected That our faith to be salvifical must be grounded on something that is infallible and therefore only on God's word See this answered at large in the Treatise of Necessary faith § 43. c. Surely the Church groundeth her faith which she recommendeth to us on the Scriptures as well as private men think they do theirs when they leave hers to follow their own judgment And if the Church'es judgment is not neither is their own infallible for which they desert the Church'es But tho it is most true that true faith is always grounded on the word of God which word of God is infallible yet is it not necessary that every one who hath true faith do know that it is infallible or be infallibly certain of it For many have saving faith doubtles that learn this word of God only from a fallible man suppose from their Father or from their Pastor Neither is it necessary that this faith should be received from another person infallible besides God nor that it should be received from a writing at all There may be a strong adherence beyond evidence neither can it be unsufficient if it be so strong as to produce obedience to God's commands 3. T is said That one is for his salvation secure enough where ever these two are Unity of faith with the Church in fundamentals and then Charity toward the Church in the points not-fundamental wherein I disagree from her Charity i. e. not condemning her for them to be no Church c. I answer 1. First such a one must know well what are Fundamentals that perhaps he take not liberty to differ from the Church in any of them The Apostle reckons doctrines of Baptism and of laying on of hands among foundations Heb. 6. 2. if we will make unity in fundamentals so large as he doth I know not how many other points may be brought in And I am perswaded by reading the Catalogues of anciently-accounted Heresies that the Fathers and Primitive times would not have stuck to have pronounced some side highly heretical in those differences between the Reformed and the Catholic Church and even in those differences that are now in this Church of England about Baptism Bishops Ordination c. 2ly Without doubt there may be a larger unity of faith than only in fundamentals unles all points of faith be fundamental and if so then Churches that differ in any point of faith differ in fundamentals 3ly If there may be a larger unity then Spiritual Guides doubtles are set over us to build us up in the unity also of this faith and not only of fundamentals See Heb. 5. 11. c. 6. 1. And therefore why Eph. 4. 11. compared with 13. should be restrained only to fundamentals as it is by some it seems to me strange I cannot think that the Corinthians differed amongst themselves in fundamentals see 1 Cor. 1. 4. c and yet the Apostle is very angry with them for their divisions and exhorts them to be all of one judgment which union of judgment could not be by following the judgment each one of their private reason but of the Apostle and of their orthodox teachers appointed by him See 1 Cor. 1. 10. Rom. 12. 16 18. Rom. 15. 5 6. Phil. 1. 27. Phil. 2. 2 3. 1 Pet. 3. 8. where speaking the same thing and being joyned in the same judgment contending for the faith of the Gospel with one mind glorifying God with one mind and one mouth c. argue an unity required not only of charity but of opinion and judgment and that not only in fundamentals in which as I said all the factious Corinthians or most of them accorded but other beneficial truths which union how could so many judgments undependent of one another attain but by all of them retaining the same doctrine of their Pastor or Pastors 4ly If these points wherein the reformed recede from the authority of superior Councils be not very necessary tho not fundamental how can a separation for them be justified but if necessary why should we say that God requires not an unity of faith in them 5ly Again as faith and charity secure not our salvation if we be guilty of some other vice adultery c so they do not secure it if there be any denial of obedience where t is due especially to the Church disobedience towards whom is in a more special manner disobedience to Christ and to God himself and why may not this then endanger us if God hath provided teachers to keep us in the same judgment and we to the great hurt both of the Church and of our selves too by these divisions will every one follow his own judgment especially since
believed by us to have bin heavenly inspired and the undoubted word of God and hence the settling of the Canon was no small sollicitude of the Primitive Church a point this of no small consequence for the attaining of Salvation to be believed yet not absolutely necessary since one may be saved without knowing the Scriptures and many were so before these writings * Nothing concerning Ecclesiastical Orders Ordinations Sacraments the Church'es absolving sinners inflicting censures prescribing publick Liturgies points fundamental and so called some of them at least Heb. 6. 2. in respect of the essence and government and unity of the Church tho not in respect of the Salvation of some member thereof Yet why not necessary to every person therein as having reference one way or other to their particular good * Nothing express concerning the obedience due to the Church and her Governours else why do so many deny it who confess the Creed and in it the Catholick Church and yet this a very necessary fundamental also in respect of Christian duties for ignorance whereof whilst especially they will not believe the Church in attesting her own authority how many deprive themselves of the help of her excellent rules not to name here the Evangelical Counsels of Celibacy and emptying our selves of our superfluous wealth recommended to us by her and her many injunctions sovereignly tending to the advancing of piety and bettering of manners which we will suppose here not to be contained in Scripture as frequent confession of sins to the Priest frequent Fasts hours of Prayer Communions which who knows not of how much moment they are for the abstaining from sin acquisition of Christian virtues and so consequently for our Salvation Now the obligation to know and believe these and such like Necessaries of this 2d sort varies according to several persons and conditions and according to the more or less evident proposal of them In this dispute as Dr. Potter acknowledgeth Char. mistak § 7. p. 242. of necessary and fundamental truths both truths and persons must be wisely distinguished The truth may be necessary in one sense that is not so in another and fundamental to some persons in certain respects which is not so to some others 1. * More points ought to be known and believed by one than by another according as more are made manifest to one than another by the Scriptures by the decision of the Church or any other way Where note that before the Church's determination of some points of faith one may have an obligation to believe them when another hath not if before this they be evidenced to him when not to another what I mean by evidence see before § 3. by what means or author soever it be he receives this evidence And after such evidence he that opposeth it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and heretical in God's sight even before that he happens to be declared so by the Church'es censure and is made yet more perversly erroneous after her definitions and such obstinate error again is more or less dangerous besides the sin of obstinacy as the matter of the error is of more influence toward our Salvation whilst mean-while others not having the like evidence of them are yet free to dissent or disbelieve them but then after the Church'es definition those also upon this stronger evidence shall I call it or authority will become obliged to assent to them Again * more points ought to be known and believed by one than by another according as one hath more opportunity than another by studying the Scriptures the Church'es exposition thereof and her decrees to find out and discover such truths Art thou a Master in Israel saith our Saviour and knowest not these things See Heb. 5. 12. There are those who are not excused in acquiescing in the tenents of their particular education but who are bound to examine the general traditions and doctrines of the Church the ancient Fathers Ecclesiastical Histories c. Again others there are of another condition who are not so far obliged And in the former sort if they either depart from the foresaid doctrines themselves or continue a separation first made by others it will be a damnable Schism when perhaps the simplicity of the vulgar their followers will remain excused if the error be not in a point absolutely fundamental or will be much lightlier punished Luk. 12. 48. Which common people we must leave to God's secret mercies in the same manner as we do all those others who have not believed because they have not heard which Heathens also I charitably think shall not suffer for want of that Faith of which they had no Teacher as that Faith mentioned Jo. 3. 36. but for want of that the sound of which hath come to all the world in all times mentioned Heb. 11. 6. compared Rom. 1. 20 21. Thus many truths are necessary to be known by the Pastors and the Learned that are not so by the illiterate people And in respect of some vulgar I conceive that form Quisquis non confitetur or non credit Anathema sit concerning the Creeds drawn up against several hereticks by the four first General Councils is not to be understood to be of force against a pure nescience of some Articles thereof for there are many subtilties exceeding vulgar capacities and which they need not distinctly know but against an opposition of them or denial or non-confession of these points when they come to know the Church hath established them and condemned the contrary for thus to oppose the Church is not to be ignorant of them but heretical in them Tho t is not necessary to Salvation that either they should know the Church hath determined such a thing or that such a thing is a divine truth if such knowledg be beyond the compass of their moral endeavors sutable to their capacity and their vocation in the search of divine truth See this matter more largely discussed in the Disc. of Infallibility § 15. Nay if the Learned also should I say not be ignorant of but err in some point of such moment that by consequence such error destroys some chief principle of our faith yet this being supposed and granted possible that having used their just endeavor in the search of the truth they are by no sufficient proposal convinced of it and that mean-while they contend for the principle with the same or more pertinacity than for it with a resolution to desert it if once appearing to them any way repugnant to the other such an error will no way hazard Salvation Upon such Supposition Tho the Lutheran is conceived from his new fancied Ubiquity by consequence to destroy the verity of Christ's Humanity Again the Calvinist is conceived from God's eternal predetermination of all our actions c. by consequence to destroy God's Holiness and Justice in making him the Author of all sin points highly fundamental yet are not these holding
4ly observe concerning these derivative articles that since the deductions which may be made from such as are express and tradititional are almost infinite tho we cannot deny that all of them even to the least are still de fide or matters pertaining to faith for how can the premises be so and not the conclusion yet all not necessary to be believed or matters pertaining to necessary and required Faith. For so neither is every thing that is plainly set down in the Scripture necessary to be believed tho it is all matter of faith being made known to us that it is there written as the Cardinal saith de verbo Dei 4. l. 12. c. Necessario creduntur quia scripta sunt yet not ideo scripta sunt quia necessario credenda erant such as are many things historical there A pure nescience or also a blamelesly-ignorant contradiction of such things hurts no man's faith so we deny them not to be truth when we happen to know they are Scripture but that we should also know them to be Scripture there lies no tye upon us So is it with these Deductions which if in themselves as some points are they were necessary to salvation to be believed they would have bin so always not only after the Church hath made them but before But so they are not for then former generations perhaps not knowing some of them at least would be deficient in requisite faith A pure nescience of them therefore in the simplicity of which they are neither affirmed nor denyed or also when denyed not knowing the contrary determination of Scripture or Church hurts none but only a peremptory denial of them or the asserting and maintaining of an error contrary unto them or destructive to that former express traditional Article of Faith from which they are drawn and this when we have a sufficient information from Scripture or the Church to know that it is so which we have always after t is known to us that a Council hath determined against it and many times may have so before And hence it is that also after the decision of the Church still to many not the pure nescience or contradiction of such a point but the opposing it and asserting the contrary when we know it to be proposed by her is pernicious In Dr. Holden's Phrase de Resolutione fid 1. l. 4. c. lectio 2. Cum quis sciens vidensque universam esse Ecclesiae sententiam illam tamen pertinaciter obstinate denegaverit aut etiam oppositum sustinuerit c. But concerning the unwittingly affirmers of the contrary to some decision of a Council thus Estius in 3. sent 23. dist 13. § Diligenter distinguendum est inter eos qui retenta generali promptitudine credendi quicquid Ecclesia Catholica credit per ignor antiam tamen in quibusdam fidei dogmatibus errant propterea quod nondum iis satis declaratum sit illa Ecclesiam credere eos qui post manifestatam sufficienter Ecclesiae doctrinam adhuc ab ea vel contrarium asserendo vel certe dubitando dissentire eligunt quod Hoereticorum est proprium Fidem illi in universali atque in habitu ut loquuntur totam atque integram retinent dum quicquid Ecclesia credendum tradit suscipere se ex animo profitentur De quorum numero fuit Cyprianus c. Where also we see that the Church doth not lay on all men an obligation of knowing whatever she defines in matters of faith but of not contradicting or doubting of them when made known to any 5ly Neither is it necessary for the Church to make or propose any such deductive Articles suppose such as those in the Nicene or Athanasian Creed nor perhaps ought she to charge the faith of Christians with them but only where some error ariseth contrary to and undermining some former received Article or practice whereby her Sons to the damage of their Christianity are in danger of infection But any such errors spreading the Church doth not her duty if she neglect to promulgate the truths opposite to them See before § 14. For tho the explicit knowledge of such truths is not necessary yet this is necessary to the believing such fundamental and prime Articles of faith as God requires that one together with them do not believe and affirm any thing contrary to and destructive of them after he may have sufficient assurance that it is so and this he may have so often as the Church states it so So I suppose the pure nescience of some deductive Article contained in the Athanasian Creed condemns none but the maintaining of the contradictory error thereto after such light given him by the Church which light she is bound continually to hold forth to her children so oft as any mists of false opinions begin to overcast the clearness of the former faith 6ly But in the last place note from what hath bin said that tho no points become de side because the Church defines them but are either so before or never can be so at all yet some of those points which were always de fide objects of faith or dogmata fidei so Scotus said Transubstantiation was no dogma fidei till the Lateran Council meaning by it dogmata credenda i. e. which men were then tied to assent to may become creditu necessaria for all points de fide or appertaining to faith are not necessaria creditu after the Church'es determining of them which were not so before Creditu necessaria not in themselves or affirmatively as if they ought to be explicitly known as some other points de side must with reference to attaining salvation but only so as not to be denied or opposed or the contradictory to them maintained whenever they are first known to us to be declared by the Church whom we are to presume never to divulge such truths but upon necessary occasions pressing Her to it and this out of the obedience and submission of judgment which we owe to her Decrees And of this submission due to Councils even when they determine points not of clear Tradition but some-way formerly dubious we have a pattern in the busines of Rebaptization which tho formerly not so evident before the decision of the Church Scripture seeming to favour one side and Ecclesiastical custom the other so that Provincial Councils varied in their judgment of it some pro some con nor they heretical that affirmed it yet decided once submission of judgment was unquestionably by St. Austin reckoned as due from all and they Hereticks who after this opposed See for this S. Austin de Baptism cont Don. 1. l. 7. c. Quaestionis hujus obscuritas he speaks concerning Rebaptization prioribus Ecclesiae temporibus ante schisma Donati magnos viros magna charitate praeditos Patres Episcopos ita inter se compulit salva pace disceptare atque fluctuare ut diu Conciliorum in suis quibusque regionibus
further information from the Church General such as we can have and then we are to follow her judgment when evident and undisputable as many times it is and if we be Presbyters we are also to teach her Doctrines and that in not-fundamentals as well as in fundamentals tho contrary to the commands of some inferior Bishop or Council Nor is this properly our but the Church-Catholick's contradicting such a one and our obeying only her's rather than her inferior's injunctions This discours ariseth from that term Non-fundamentals put in the Quaere when-as mean-while you may observe that this curiosity of knowing precisely what are fundamentals what not presseth only one side namely that which will allow obligation of assent to the Church'es decrees only in some things not in others but it doth not concern the other side at all because they hold assent necessary to all points wherein the Church I mean the supream power in it requires it And so also 1. ancient Councils under pain of Anathema require as in some things non-contradiction so in other things consent with whom Siquis non confitetur c Anathema sit is ordinary without setting down that the point is fundamental as likewise Si quis dixerit only is used by them in other points of greatest consequence which shews that the Church expecting the same obedience to her also in the points we call not-fundamental took not such exact care to deliver them distinctly nor indeed perhaps knows how to sever all points under such a distinction To say therefore that all such points where assent and confession is required are fundamental is gratis said and as easily denied but that all such points are very profitable to salvation I doubt not 2. Again all practical points cannot be said to be fundamental but where ever the Church enjoyns any practical things under Anathema she requires more than Non-contradiction as hath bin noted already for I may not practise a thing when I do not first assent to the lawfulnes thereof In practical things therefore commanded by her to be done I either owe her no obedience at all or els more than Non-contradiction Now the ancient Councils are frequent in these but if God had given her subjects liberty not to practise such things as are enjoyned by her if against their judgment neither hath he given the Church liberty to anathematize them for thus following their conscience For I pray you consider these two Propositions how they can both agree to the Church I know God hath given order that in non-fundamentals no man shall owe me such so much duty as to yeild his assent to me or to practise what I bid him when his judgment is contrarily perswaded but only so much as not to contradict me yet I do require of those same men not only not to contradict but to consent c or els I anathematize them Certainly if in Non-fundamentals a man of a contrary judgment to the Church can be only faulty in contradicting the Church she can excommunicate none such upon any other terms but only if they shall contradict her 3. Again the Scriptures have appointed Pastors Teachers c have bidden us hear the Church he that heareth you heareth me c without limitation to fundamentals sure this obedience to teachers is not fulfilled in reserving my own opinions and in not openly contradicting or confuting theirs Sure that power of teaching exhorting reproving correcting the word of wisdom the word of knowledge given to our Spiritual Governors for the edification of the Church in truths and practices any way profitable to salvation as well as in fundamental are not sufficiently answered on our parts with the obedience of Non-contradiction of them when they shall speak any thing contrary to our sence except it be in fundamentals only i. e. perhaps in two or three points but these Scriptures oblige us to submission of Judgment either to our particular teacher or when he seems to guide us contrary to the word of God or contrary to the rest of the Pastors of the Church to his and our Ecclesiastical Superiors in whose judgment we must acquiesce and consent that we may not be tossed c Eph. 4. 14. compared with 11 as we see they are that take only their own sence of Scriptures See Heb. 13. 7. I Tim. 4. 11. I Tim. 6. 3 4. Where note that consent is not to Scriptures that were not then so common but to the doctrine of Godlines delivered by Timothy If therefore any dissent from an inferior Pastor or Council as he may upon any suspition that such goeth against the Scriptures or the Church'es doctrines he may not therefore acquiesce in his own judgment either concerning the sence of Scriptures or the sence of former times the Fathers but is to repair to his Superiors and to hear the Church then in being in all things wherein he clearly sees her opinion and in which she requires his subscription which Ch. is set for a guide to him on an hill to interpret to him the Scriptures in all controverted matters for if she be worthy to be heard in fundamentals as well agends as credends is she unworthy to be heard in smaller matters And such a Church eminent and conspicuous there always was even in the Arrian times to which Athanasius fled for succour also and with which he joyned himself and always such there will be nor will she ever be hid and who goes with her shall go with the Scriptures and with the Fathers too but whoso will go with them against her shall also lose them and vanish away in his own self-conceit If we now on the other side take into consideration the obedience of Non-contradiction much pressed by the Reformed as in many cases only due yet the limitations which they annex to it are such as leave not the matter clear to what points and from what persons such obedience-only is required as necessary For 1. it is not said by them that all men are bound even to this lesser obedience of Non-contradiction For if this were affirmed that all inferiors whether Pastors Bishops or Councils were obliged to such obedience in respect of their superior Councils it were something but as I think t is affirmed that a National Council may contradict a superior Council and so a Diocesan a National And 1. I ask Why may not then a Pastor contradict his Bishop or the Diocesan Council which the reformed will not so easily allow since this Pastor also is a teacher and an over-seer over God's flock Act. 20. 28 and if private men may so may he be infallibly certain that such a thing is in God's word and that thing too wherein he contradicteth may be very beneficial for salvation Neither is the peace of the Church disturbed more by him teaching contrary to a Diocesan than by a Bishop teaching contrary to a Provincial Synod and as other mens contrary doctrines may consist with their
I can my Conceptions no way swerving that I know of from any general Decree or Tenent of the Church Catholick And First concerning the former of these What or how much Faith is necessary to Christians for the attaining of salvation 1. Faith as it respects Religion or things Divine in general seems to be an assent to the Truth Goodness c of any thing that is God's Word or Divine Revelation And all truths whatsoever revealed by God even every part and parcel of God's word are the object and so many points or articles of our Faith i. e. are not to be denied but believed and assented to immediately when ever we know them or when ever they are sufficiently proposed to us that we might know them to be God's word Amongst these therefore all precepts of Manners are also matters of Faith in as much as they must first be assented to and believed by us to be God's commands lawful good holy just and most fit to be obeyed or else we cannot as we ought obey them And he that should practise them misbelieving them either to be things evil or things in themselves indifferent in the first way would sin in the second would perform a service utterly unacceptable by reason of an error in his faith See Rom. 14. 23. Surely every one of the fundamental rules of good life and action is to be believed to come from God and therefore virtually includes an Article of Faith. Again all necessary deductions and consequents of any part of God's word or of any point or article of faith are also so many points or articles of faith See Discourse of Infallibility § 12. So that the articles of faith taken absolutely are almost infinite for whatever is or necessarily follows that which is divine revelation may equally be believed and so is an object of faith and when it is believed is a point of faith Consequently also all controversies concerning the sense of any part of Scripture are concerning matter of faith taken in this general sense even those concerning Grace and Free-will as well as those about the Blessed Trinity 2. Next concerning the necessity of believing all such points of faith We must say in the first place That it is fundamental and necessary to our salvation That every part of God's word fundamental or not fundamental it matters not supposing that we exercise any operation of our understanding about it be not dissented from but be believed or assented to when we once know and are convinced that it is God's word Else we knowing that it is God's word and not believing or assenting-to it to be truth must plainly make or believe God in some thing to say false which if perhaps it be possible is the greatest heresy subverting the very first principle of faith that God is Truth and so necessarily excludeth from heaven And here also first concerning our knowing a thing to be God's word it must be said That we know or at least ought to know a thing so to be whensoever either so much proof of it is proposed to us by what means soever it comes as actually sways our understanding to give assent to it for which assent it is not necessary that there be demonstration or proof infallible but only generally such probability as turns the ballance of our judgment and out-weighs what may be said for the contrary for where so much evidence is either none can truly deny his assent or cannot without sin deny it or else when so much proof of it is proposed to us as consideration being had of several capacities according to which more things are necessary to be known to some stronger than to some others weaker would certainly sway our understanding if the mind were truly humble and docile and divested of all unmortified passions as addiction to some worldly interest covetousness ambition affectation of vain-glory self-conceit of our own wit and former judgment and of all faultily contracted prejudice and blindness by our education c. which unremovedfirst do obstruct and hinder it from being perswaded In which obstructions of our knowledge in things so necessary there are many several degrees of malignity which it will not be amiss to point at For 1. it is always a greater sin caeteris paribus i. e. the matter of the error being alike obstinately to maintain a known error and to profess a thing against conscience convinced than to have the conscience unconvinced by reason of some lust that hinders it because there is more ignorance of my fault in this latter and ignorance always aliquatenus excuseth another fault even when it cannot excuse it self 2ly In holding the same error not against conscience tho from some culpable cause some may be in very much some in very little fault according to many circumstances which none can exactly weigh to censure them of capacity condition obligation to such duties accidental information c. varying in several persons 3ly The sinfulness of the same man's erring in two things tho both equally unknown to him and neither held against conscience may be very different for the grosser and more pertinacious that their error is the more faulty in it is the erroneous Both 1. because the necessary truth opposed to such error hath more evidence either from Scriptures or from Ecclesiastical exposition thereof which exposition in the greatest matters we must grant either never or seldom errs and to whose direction all single persons are referred whence any ones ignorance in these is much more faulty and wilful And 2ly because such an error is the occasion of some miscarriage in manners so that tho formally he sinned no more in this than in his other errors yet consequentially he sins more in many other things by reason of it than he doth in truth mistaken in some smaller matter And hence 4ly it follows that an error doing great mischief to manners or to the purity of the Faith on which tho this foundation doth not always appear to support them good manners are built can hardly be held without a very guilty ignorance because such points are by God's providence and the Church'es care to all men sufficiently proposed Indeed it is so hard a thing for a man to divest and strip himself of all irregular passion and especially from prejudice contracted by education that an error in some things of less moment even out of some faulty cause is very often incident to men good and honest But when our passion shall grow so high and our interest so violent as to darken the light of truth in matters of moment especially if recommended to us by authority and as it were openly shining in our face in such case there is but little difference between our * denying a thing to be God's word when known to be so and by our own default * not knowing it to be so between knowingly gainsaying truth and wilfully being blind between shutting
some there are and those as well within as without the Church much more doubtful obscure and questionable than others For 1. both truths committed to Tradition may fail in successive times vel per omnimodam cessationem vel ex eo quod oppositum introducatur viz. where Tradition is not come to a convenient and due pitch of universality as is granted by the strongest abettors of Tradition See Dr. Hold. Resol Fid. 1. lib. 8. cap. And 2. the unfailing Tradition of successive times may be defective in its first original's being false or els in its having many falsities in its current thro posterity superadded to and mingled with the truth as persons are interested or fanciful As Gentilism did superadd many things to the ground-work of religion received from the Jew and writings of the Old Testament For falsum poterit quodammodo caeteris paribus aeque certo ac verum per traditionem communicari els lies cannot be commonly believed But many such we know were credited amongst the Heathen concerning their Gods and are amongst the Mahometans concerning their Prophet and so it may happen that as undoubting an assent may be given to these as is to the truth for ignorance many times doubts less of a thing than knowledg doth But yet this we contend that it will never be so rational And indeed many disparities there are between the credibility of Heathenish or Mahometan and of Christian Tradition * Such as are in Heathenism these †1. that except some foundations of religion borrowed from the Jews and so free from error there is no constancy or agreeance in the tradition thereof but t is varying according to each city or country whereby any one of them much fails of universality and contradictory Tradition destroys it self And 2ly that †as we have said that falsities under the notion of falsities may be conveyed by Tradition so many of the absurd stories of Heathenism seem not to be believed even by the most or wisest of those who propagated them therefore are their Poets their Divines out of whom chiefly such tradition is learned And * Such as are in Mahometanism these †It s spreading 1. * by the force of the Sword contrary to the nature of Tradition and 2ly * by its plausibility and compliance with carnal lusts both great corrupters of the truth of Tradition whereas Christianity flowing down to all ages in opposition to both these by how much it was less pleasing or less protected seems to be strengthned in all times with so much greater evidence of truth and testimony irresistible †It s wanting that universality which Christianity possesseth never having had so large a circuit the Western part of the world having always bin a stranger to it and the growth of it now for many ages being stopped and it decreasing in the world and this great falshood by little and little giving place as is seen in the Eastern Countreys to its elder the Truth I say these and many other disparities there are but besides these the main thing whereby all such Traditions are convinced of falshood lies in this that they came into the world still later than that of the Truth and so are known to be false by their contradiction to it so that Truth against them may always plead prescription * So Heathenism was younger than the Tradition of God's word in the Old Testament and so indeed than the Gospel which also was contained in the Old Testament and taught from the beginning see Rom. 3. 21 23. So that I may say Heathenism was the Antichristianism of the former Ages springing up after the tradition of God's true worship Again * so Mahometanism was later than the tradition of the New Testament being the Antichristianism of the last times but lest the world I mean that part of it to whom it pleased God to divulge the truth by false traditions should be deceived God hath always provided true Tradition to pre-occupate Faith and to anticipate and antidate error Therefore tho we yeild to the truth also of Mahometan tradition in some things as that there was such a one as Mahomet a Law-giver a Conqueror c. yet we know that Tradition that he received his writings from the Angel Gabriel c. to be false because contrary to that divine Tradition which besides many other advantages ought from its antiquity to be preferred God having given to Truth the Eldership of Falshood And on the same grounds may we reject that Heathen-tradition in the Acts of the Image of Diana falling from God c. III. And thus much be granted concerning the certainty which Faith may receive from the external motives or proponents the Scriptures Church and Tradition 3ly Concerning the illumination adherence certitude which this Faith that ordinarily first cometh by hearing receives from the inward operation of God's Spirit 1. First let it be granted that the interior working of the Holy Spirit opening the heart is always required besides the outward means for the conception of all saving Faith that we cannot exercise any act thereof without particular grace and motion of the Holy Ghost that it is the infused Gift of God as well as other graces of hope and charity see Jo. 6. 29 44 45 64 65. Matt. 11. 25 26. 16. 17. Act. 13. 48. 16. 14 15. Rom. 12. 3. 1 Cor. 12. 3 9. 2 Cor. 3. 3. Gal. 5. 22 23. Eph. 1. 17. c. 2. 8. 6. 23. See Ben. Spir. p. Whence Faith is said to be supernatural as in respect * of its object things above the comprehension of reason and * of it s ultimate ground it builds upon which is divine revelation so * of its act being caused by the Spirit All the acts of faith being in some kind supernatural for such a degree of adherence as they have both because the relater or proponent thereof is many times not at least known to be infallible and because the object thereof many times tho there be all certainty from the relater is capable of much doubt and vacillancy from its supernaturalness and seeming-repugnancy to reason Therefore we see our first Father or at least his wife see 1 Tim. 2. 14. failed in not believing the words spoken by God himself to him and the Disciples when rationally believing our Saviour to be the Son of God and all he said to be truth and seeing his miracles yet desired the increase of their faith and were in it many times not a little shaken thro the contrariety or transcendency which it had to sense or reason And it is reckoned to Abraham as strong faith that he believed the word of God himself in things contrary to nature See Rom. 4. 18 19 20. which Sarah his wife flagg'd in See Gen. 18. 12. 2 King. 7. 2. Thus Faith to make it vigorous and lively comes necessarily to be a work of the Spirit either in regard of the sublimity of its object or
in which we may easily be deceived Ergo That it is true This for the Spirit In the next place to come to consider Whether all to have true and saving faith must be rationally assured thereof from the to-them-known Church-tradition And here we will grant as t is said before 1. That there is in Tradition sufficient ground for such assurance as is necessary and that it is a medium for necessary points of faith free from error 2. That the saith of very many hath this rational assurance and that any or most by some reasonable diligence may attain it for necessary points from the traditionary doctrine and practice which they may see and hear dispersed thro the Church for doubtles our careful Saviour hath provided a rational means sufficient for producing a full perswasion of faith in all sorts of men there where his Gospel is preached and this means all men for the ascertaining of their faith as much as may be are bound to seek after all their life according to their condition c. 3. That the Church-decrees may be certainly known and are easily understood and more easily in many things than the Scriptures namely where these happen to be doubtful to us and doubtful they are or should be where ever Church-tradition expounds them otherwise than we and hence that this point being supposed that the Church is infallible those who believing her to be so do rely upon her judgment have for the most part a stronger perswasion and those knowing her to be so have a more rational assurance of the truth of their faith in all other points than only relying on the perspicuity of Scriptures because the former persons faith rests on a double ground the saying of Scripture and the sense of the Church interpreting it And thus one adhering to the tradition and doctrines of the Church hath more warrant for his Faith than a single Scripturist 4. That those who hold Church-tradition fallible can have no other way an infallible evidence whereby they can demonstrate the truth of their faith But all these granted yet such a degree and measure of certainty or assurance as that of Tradition or Church-infallibility is seems not to be necessary to make faith salvifical or defect of such a motive sufficient to void it and render it no true divine and acceptable faith but an humane opinion and perswasion as some contend But saving faith may be begotten where the proponent of the word of God or of divine revelation mediate or immediate is not or at least is not known to be which is all one with the former to the believer's certainty infallible and it sufficeth to it that what one believes is the word of God and that he believe it in some degree or other predominant to unbelief to be so And this I think may be shewn in many instances and by many reasons 1. For first some at least of those primitive converts of the Apostles questionles endued with true faith yet believed before any certainty of the infallibity of their teachers or before or without seeing their miracles tho these also seen afforded to some no certainty who thought that such might be done by the Devil's power see Matt. 12. 24. Deut. 13. 1. meerly by the powerful operation of God's Spirit So the Eunuch to be a true believer needed no more than the bare exposition and relation of S. Philip So Cornelius and his friends some words of St. Peter The Jaylor and Lydia of S. Paul strangers and formerly altogether unknown to them the Holy Ghost presently unlocking their hearts and finishing the work For so the three thousand converted by S. Peter in one day supposing he at that time wraught miracles yet t is not probable that all these were spectators of them or yet auditors of his doctrine from his own mouth but believed only the relations of others persons fallible who stood near him The Bereans why examined they the Apostles doctrines if they knew or esteemed him infallible The Believers at Antioch zealous of the law why contested they with St. Paul and those of Jerusalem with S. Peter Act. 11. 2. if acknowledging them infallible Or the weaker brethren tho of the number of true Believers why doubted they long time of some meats unclean contrary to the Apostle's instruction T is true that whoever believes that which another relates must ipso facto believe the relater in that thing not to be deceived but yet he who in any other one thing doth not believe him doth not believe him to be infallible And granting that all the primitive Christians assented to the infallibility of the Hierosolymitan Council yet many points of their faith were learned not from the Council but private Doctors whom I have shewed that some of them accounted not infallible nor yet was their faith nullified thereby 2. Believers no way heretical or schismatical but submitting unto the Church in all things and believing her and her traditions to be infallible c and consequently whose faith is allowed by the most rigid exactors of certainty to be most safe and secure yet if things be well examined all of them cannot be said to have an infallible means or motive or proponent of their faith I mean so many as are neither able to search the H. Scriptures nor the Tradition of former times nor universal present Tradition nor yet the Catechisms and common writings of the Church neither for other points nor yet for this That the Church or the Tradition they rely upon is infallible But being young as many undoubtedly are made faithful Christians when children or illiterate necessitated to handy-labour quiescent in one place or perhaps inhabiting deserts and solitudes c do receive the doctrine of their faith believing and yeilding obedience thereto only from their Parents or the Curate of the place or from their bare reading or hearing read some portion of Scripture recommended to them for but not proved at all to them to be the word of God. Believing indeed what is truth and obeying it but having no more external argument or assurance thereof than another suppose educated in an erroneous Church and taking the false Tradition thereof for Apostolical hath of his error Now private teachers even within the Church may first possibly by their negligence be themselves ignorant or rationally uncertain of what they teach and a Catholic Priest be able to give no better account for his religion than the Protestant both inheriting their tenents from their next Ancestors For Error once begun is propagated afterward by Tradition as well as Truth Or 2ly being rationally certain of the truth yet may he wilfully for filthy lucre for fear for lasciviousnes c see 1 Thes. 2. 3 5 6. 2 Pet. 2. 14. misguide his disciples Or 3. lastly teaching only the truth which he perfectly knows yet is this his certainty tho something to the truth of the others faith nothing to their
certitude thereof as long as they are not certain that he is not deceived Neither doth any ones believing the Church to be infallible ascertain him of the truth of his faith if he believe this her infallibility only upon the relation of his Pastor for so he hath no more certainty of the Church'es infallibility than he hath of the truth of such a relation which we have shewed is liable to error And then again it is much to be noted that one believing only and not being certain of the Church'es infallibility tho he immediately received all his doctrines from her self yet this could produce no certainty of the truth of what he receives it being no good consequence I believe such a one is infallible therefore I am certain what he saith is true But lastly let one be certain of this one point That the Church or her tradition is infallible which how many are there that cannot clearly prove and then from this known let him have infallible certainty at once of all other points whatsoever that are delivered by her or it yet supposing any to learn what are these her doctrines not from her self but from his private Curate which doubtles many true believers within the Church'es communion do his faith cannot plead any certainty this way For there is some distance between my knowing the Churche's tradition to be infallible and knowing in every point what is her tradition That which is said by Mr. Knot against Chill p. 64 and 358. in this point That a fallible motive applying divine revelation by God's supernatural concours may produce an infallible act of faith is granted But then this act of faith is infallible not from the proponent but God's Spirit in respect of which as is shewed before all saving is also infallible faith but not therefore known always to the believer to be infallible See before § 38. Again that which is said by Dr. Holden Resol fidei 1. l. 2. ◠That their faith who depend on their Pastors instructions is tutissima ipsique in rebus fidei securi modo sint membra illius Ecclesiae quae veritatem omnem revelatam amplectitur docet cujusque pastores rectores medii istius quo sibi divina haec doctrina applicatur veram rationalem habuerint certitudinem is also granted but it seems to affirm only sufficient safety in their faith without their certainty of the truth thereof Now as those of one side cannot plead their faith certain and infallible from their hearing and believing their private Pastor so neither may those of another side from their reading and believing and resolving their faith into the Holy Scriptures For since not so much the Letter of Scripture as the Sense is the infallible word and revelation of God and the letter many times is capable not only when in expression ambiguous of divers senses but also when most seemingly-plain of another sense than they import because of the consonancy they are to have with some other Scriptures lest God's word be made to contradict Hence is one man's Bible where thus ambiguous as fallible a proponent to him in respect of the possibility of his mis-intepreting it as another man's Pastor in respect of his possibility of erring And indeed the former interpreting Scripture to himself seems to be less infallible in his faith than the other learning of his Pastor expounding it because he is more likely to mistake the sense thereof than the other els why is he appointed for his teacher whose faith he is to follow Heb. 13. 7 tho I affirm a sufficient and saving faith may be and is attained by either means hearing ones Pastor or reading the Scripture 3. Since all saving faith in us is the effect of the Spirit why may not our faith be so without any precedent rational certainty thereof According as it seems before granted That God's supernatural concours may advance an act of faith relying on a fallible motive into a belief infallible why may not this Spirit shew its strength then in the weaknes of external proposal But if we suppose it a partial cause and add to it for the production of faith not only some external proponent which that there is ordinarily is granted but this infallible and known also to be so Then to say nothing of the instances given before of the contrary nor to urge here why such an infallible proponent sometimes at least namely where the matter of our belief is as in many things it is most conformable to reason should not be a sufficient cause to beget saving faith without the supernatural concours of God's Spirit and what needs that to be also spiritually which is rationally discerned I ask what do we mean by a stronger and a weaker faith so often mentioned in Scripture Do we mean several degrees thereof the least of which is certain No. For we find doubt nay some degree of unbelief and that of the same thing sometime mixed with true faith See Mar. 9. 24. Mat. 14. 31. Which unbelief or doubt that it never happens in respect of the truth of the relation but always only in the supernaturalnes of the object I think none can rationally affirm See Luk. 24. 11. Only if there be not so much of assent as to turn the scale of our judgment then will it not be faith but either pure doubt or further unbelief Faith therefore as it comes both from the outward hearing of God's word and the several proofs thereof and also by the inward operation of the Spirit so is it capable of many degrees both from the several evidence of those proofs and also from the several influence of the Spirit God giving more external evidence to one than to another as to those who see miracles or who read and compare Scriptures and Councils than to those who only hearken to their Pastor and upon the same evidence made to many God giving a stronger adherence to such a truth to one than to another either * from the energy of the Spirit thro which many can die for Christ that cannot well dispute for him or also * from a natural more passionate temper or * from hiding from them contrary verisimilities and * from ignorance of the weapons of error c. So the unlearned many times believe and adhere to a truth more strongly thro ignorance of any arguments to the contrary than the learned do to the same thro reason assaulted with many doubts and a small argument to a weak understanding begets a more firm credence than a stronger to the learned So a true believer may be less confident thro a rational perswasion in his faith than another thro the violence of a misguiding lust in his falshood nay he may have less reason or proofs tho there be more for the one than this man hath for the other and yet his faith vivifical and acceptable and oftimes there is the greatest glory and merit in it when
applies a divine revelation which really exists in such case I may believe by a true infallible assent of Christian faith The reason of this seems clear because altho a truth which I know only by probable assent is not certain to me yet in it self it is most immoveable and certain in regard that while a thing is it cannot but be for that time for which it is c. Thus he The sum of which is That the infallibility of many mens faith is not from any external Proponent but only from God's concourse See Dr. Hold. 1. l. 2. c. p. 36 37. de resol fid saying the like 2. Again in the 2d place it may be inferred * That receiving of the Articles of his Creed from the Church'es proposal is not necessary to true faith or * That one may truly believe some who doth not believe all the points of faith which the Church proposeth or any for or upon her proposal or lastly * That one may truly and savingly believe an article of faith who is not certain of the divine revelation thereof I willingly grant here 1. first That he who believes aright any divine truth must believe that it is revealed by God or that God hath said it and That he that denies any one thing which he believes is revealed by God can believe no other thing at all as he ought that is as from divine revelation he must believe all such or none at all aright 2. Since a rational certain knowledge of divine revelation as of the Scriptures or also of the Sense thereof where doubtful is only receivedd from the Church and her Tradition I accord that none can rationally or so infallibly believe any things to be revealed by God but such as he knows to be proposed to him by the Church or Tradition to be such either immediately in her exposition of obscure Scriptures or mediately in her delivering to him the Canon of Scripture and therefore that who denies this authority in some points suppose in those points where this authority is granted by him to be of equal force hath no rational ground or certainty of his faith in any other of those points according to the Schools Qui inhaeret doctrinae Ecclesiae tanquam infallibili regulae i. e. in omnibus quae proponit omnibus assentit quae Ecclesia docet i. e. quae scit Ecclesiam docere alioqui si de his quae Ecclesia docet tenet quae vult quae non vult non tenet non inhaeret infallibili doctrinae Ecclesiae sed propriae voluntati But note that every one who doth not inhaerere doctrinae Ecclesiae tanquam infallibili may not therefore be said inhaerere propriae voluntati because he may hold such tenents not quia vult but * for some other reason abstract from the Church'es authority as Protestants do * for the evidence of Tradition in this point That Scripture is God's word So those who rejected some parts or books of Scripture because containing something opposite to their opinions could not ground any certainty of their faith upon the rest because that Scripture they refused came recommended to them by as much and the same authority as that they accepted But these Concessions destroy not the former proposition because for the former concession it is one thing to believe such a truth to be divine revelation another to be rationally assured thereof the first we grant is the second I think we have proved not to be necessary to all true faith For the second tho he who certainly knows not Church-tradition cannot have a rational or discursive certainty in his faith abstracting here from what internal certainty one may have from the Spirit nor upon that principle can believe one thing unless he believe all the rest that have the like Tradition with it yet he may without such a certainty or such a ground truly believe as I think is before-proved And hence it follows that one may truly believe some other points of faith who doth not believe this point in particular That the Church or Universal Tradition is infallible Thus much * of the non-necessity of infallible certainty in every believer to render his faith true divine and salvifical * and of the erring in some one article it s not necessarily destroying the true faith of all the rest But to conclude this Discourse Three things mean-while are acknowledged and confessed 1. First that he that truly and divinely believes all the rest of the Articles of our Faith and erreth only in one Article that is absolutely necessary to salvation such error may be said to destroy his whole faith in some sense that is in rendring his faith in other points tho not false yet non-salvifical to him 2. Again he that disbelieveth and opposeth the propositions of the Church known to him to be so in some point not absolutely necessary I mean to be explicitely believed for attaining salvation as some points there are so necessary tho this error doth not null the body of his beleife yet this opposition in that error is by the common doctrine of the Church accounted so great a crime as that unrepented of it renders his true faith being destitute of due obedience and charity unprofitable for his salvation which I thought fit here to mind you of that none may presume salvation from the truth of his faith in all necessaries as long as he stands tho in some as he accounts smaller points after sufficient proposal in opposition and disobedience to the Church i. e. to his supreme Governour and Guide in all Ecclesiastical and Spiritual matters See before § 50. 3. And lastly if this Article of Faith That the Church'es authority is either absolutely infallible in all things she proposeth to be believed or at least so supreme that none may in any wise dissent from her determination can be proved one of the points of faith absolutely necessary to salvation to be by every Christian believed then since there can be no disobedience and non-conformity to the Church but that it is grounded on the dissbelief of this Article it must follow That every one that opposeth the Church is also from his disbelief of this Article excluded from salvation FINIS OF INFALLIBILITY CONTENTS PART 1. COncerning the Infallibility of the Church how far this is to be allowed § 1 2. 1. Infallibility of the Church in necessaries granted both by Roman and Protestant writers § 3. Where How far points necessary are to be extended § 4. That the Church not private men is to define what points be necessary § 6. If these points be necessary at all to be defined and exactly distinguished from all other her Proposals § 7. 2. Infallibility of the Church in matters of Universal Tradition tho they were not necessary conceded likewise by all § 8. 3. Infallibility Universal in whatever the Church proposeth and delivereth is not affirmed by the Roman writers §
9. But only †in those points which she proposeth tanquam de fide or creditu necessaria § 10. Where Concerning the several senses wherein Points are affirmed or denied to be de Fide. § 11. That as only so all divine Revelations or necessary deductions from them are de Fide i. e. the objects and matter of Faith. 12 13. And That the Church can make nothing to be de fide i. e. to be divine Revelation c which was not so always from the Apostolick times § 12. That all divine Revelation or necessary deductions therefrom are not de fide i. e. creditu necessaria § 15. That the Church lawfully may and hath a necessity to make de novo upon rising errors such Points de fide i. e. creditu necessaria which formerly were not so § 16 17. Or as some other of the Catholick writers usually express it only †in Points clearly traditional § 18. Whether and by what marks those Points which are proposed by the Church tanquam de fide or creditu necessaria or which are proposed as constantly traditional are clearly distinguished by her from her other Proposals § 27. Anathema no certain Index thereof § 29. PART 2. Concerning Obedience and submission of private Judgment whether due to the Church supposed not in all her decisions infallible § 30. 1. That no submission of our judgment is due to the Proposal of the Church where we are infallibly certain of the contrary § 33. 2. That no submission is due to an inferiour Person or Court in matters whereof I have doubt when I have a Superiour to repair to for resolution § 34. 3. That submission of judgment is due to the supreme Ecclesiastical Court in any doubting whatever that is short of infallible certainty § 35. Submission of judgment proved 1. From Scripture § 37. 2. From Reason § 38. Where Several Objections and Scruples are resolved § 39. 3. From the testimony of learned Protestants § 44. 4. From the testimony of learned Catholicks § 51. Conclusion § 54. OF INFALLIBILITY PART 1. IT remains that I give you an account touching the other two Queries proposed The First concerning the Infallibilty of the Church Whether this is at all or how far to be allowed The Second concerning Obedience and Submission of private Judgment Whether this be due to the Church supposed not in all her decisions infallible Two Points as they are stated on the one side or the other either leaving us in much anxiety and doubt or in the moveal of this swelled with much pride and self-conceit or leaving us in much tranquillity and peace accompanied with much humility and self-denial Points as they are stated one way seeming much to advance the tender care of the divine Providence over his Church and to plant obedience and unanimity among Christians or as stated another way seeming to proclaim great danger in discovering truth to call for humane wit prudence sagacity and caution and to bequeath Christianity to perpetual strife wars and dissentions And therefore it concerns you to be the more vigilant that affection carry you not on more than reason to the assenting to any Conclusions made in this Discours To take in hand the former of these Concerning the true measure of the extent of the infallibity of the Church by Church I mean the lawful General Representative thereof of which see Church-Government 2. Part § 4. and 24. in the beginning I must confess that I know nothing expresly determined by Councils except what is said Conc. Trident. 4. Sess. Praeterea ad câ—ercenda petulantia ingenia decernit ut nemo suae prudentiae innixus in rebus fidei morum ad aedisicationem doctrinae Christianae pertinentium sacram Scripturam ad suos sensus contorquens contra eum sensum quem tenuit tenet Sancta Mater Ecclesia cujus est judicare de vero sensu interpretatione Scripturarum S. aut etiam contra unanimem consensum Patrum ipsam Scripturam sacram interpretari audeat Neither is there any mention found of the word Infallibility in the Decrees of Trent or any other received Council or yet in the Fathers as F. Veron in his Rule of Faith 4. c. hath observed and therefore saith he let us leave this term to the Schoolmen who know how to use it soberly and content our selves with the terms of the Councils The best is as the exact limits of this Church-infallibility seem no where by the Church to be punctually fixed so they do not in respect of yeilding obedience to the Church seem necessary at all to be known except to such a one as will not submit his judgment to any authority less than infallible of which more anon 1. First it is granted as by all the Catholicks so by the most learned of the Protestants see them quoted in Church-Government 2. Part. § 29. That the Church or the lawful General Representative thereof is infallible in its directions concerning necessaries to Salvation whether in points of pure faith or of practice and manners tho I yeild Mr. Chillingworth denies this see the discussing of his opinion in Church-Government 2. Part. § 26 -3 Part. § 76. without which doing I think he could not have made a thorow Answer to Mr. Knot nor could he have denied those other points which seem to be consequents of this as namely That we must know from the Church also the distinction of Necessaries from others Or must assent to Her in all she proposeth as Necessary That the Defence of any Doctrine the contrary whereof is proposed as necessary against the determination of the Church or lawful General Council is Heresy as being always after such sufficient proposal obstinate That any separation from the external communion of all the visible Church is Schism as being always in her professing and practising all necessaries causless Which Propositions the defence of his cause seems to me to have forced him to disclaim and so also this ground of them That the Church is an infallible Guide in Fundamentals or Necessaries And this infallibility the Church is said to have either from the constant assistance of God's Spirit according to our Saviour's promise at least for such points or also from the Evidence of Tradition much pleaded by some later Catholick Writers But since here by Necessaries may be understood either Doctrines c absolutely necessary to be known explicitely for salvation and that to every one that shall attain salvation for to some perhaps more are required than to others according to their several capacity and means of revelation see Necessary Faith § 10. 11. 16. which may be perhaps only some part of the Creed or else by Necessaries may be understood all other doctrines and rules that are very profitable and conducing thereto The Church being granted by both sides an infallible Guide and Director in Necessaries 1. First it seems most
diversa statuta nutaverint donec plenario totius orbis Concilio quod saluberrime sentiebatur etiam remotis dubitationibus sirmaretur Again 2. l. 4. c. Nec nos ipsi tale aliquid he speaks of the same point auderemus asserere which argues some inevidence in the matter nisi universae Ecclesiae concordissima authoritate firmati cui ipse Cyprianus sine dubio crederet si jam illo tempore quaestionis hujus veritas eliquata declarata per plenarium Concilium solidaretur Yet were the after-opposers anathematized as heretical Again cont Ep. Parmeniani 2. l. 13. c. Haec quidem alia quaestio est Utrum Baptismus ab iis qui nunquam fuerunt Christiani potest dari nec aliquid temere inde affirmandum est sine authoritate tanti Concilii quantum tantae rei sufficit De iis vero qui ab Ecclesiae unitate separati sunt nulla jam quaestio est quin habeant verum Baptisma dare possint Hoc enim in ipsa totius orbis unitate i. e. in the Council of Nice discussum consideratum perfectum atque firmatum est So contr Crescon Gram. 1. l. 33. c. Quamvis hujus rei certe de Scripturis Canonicis non proferatur exemplum earundem tamen Scripturarum etiam in hac re a nobis tenetur veritas cum hoc facimus quod universae jam placuit Ecclesiae quam ipsarum Scripturarum commendat authoritas ut quoniam sacra Scriptura fallere non potest quisquis falli motuit obscuritate hujus quaestionis eandem Ecclesiam de illa consulat quam sine ulla ambiguitate sancta Scriptura demonstrat Obscuritate quaestionis for tho elsewhere de Baptismo cont Don. 5. l. 23. c. he supposeth it an Apostolical Tradition on one side Apostoli quidem nihil exinde praeceperunt sed consuetudo illa quae opponebatur Cypriano ab eorum traditione exordium sumpsisse credenda est sicut sunt multa quae tenet universa Ecclesia ob hoc ab Apostolis praecepta bene creduntur quanquam scripta non reperiantur and tho this custom was by the Bishop of Rome and his party much pressed against Cyprian and his adherents and Agrippinus St. Cyprian's Predecessor is said to be the first that introduced a contrary practice see Aust. de Bapt. 3. l. 12. c. non novam se rem statuisse Beatus Cyprianus ostendit quia sub Agrippino jam coeperat fieri yet it appears that St. Austin did not think all common customs and traditions tho pretended Apostolical before they were approved and warranted by the judgment of the Church in her Councils to be so simply obligatory as that they may not be disputed if seeming opposite to another surer Apostolical Tradition i. e. the Scriptures as St. Cyprian thought this custom was and so answered Steven see Cypr. Ep. ad Pomp. contra Steph. and in this answer is defended by St. Austin see de Bapt. 2. l. 8. c. quia tunc non extiterant c. Noluit vir gravissimus rationes suas etsi non veras quod eum latebat sed tamen non victas veraci quidem sed tamen nondum assertae consuetudini cedere Assertae i. e. by * any Council or cleared not to be * against the Scriptures urged but mistakenly by Cyprian And St. Austin also himself saith the same thing with Cyprian de Bapt. 3. l. 6. c. Quis dubitat veritati manifestatae debere consuetudinem cedere This I have set you down the more fully that you might see the power and authority of General Councils not only in declaring points traditional but in deciding questions some way obscure and doubtful and what submission was due to such points once determined in St. Austin's opinion who yet held former by latter Councils might be amended and consequently their in some things liability to error or doubting And so such points are to be believed in consequence only to another point of necessary faith namely That private men ought in all things at least not demonstrative on the contrary to submit their own to the Church'es judgment as many things written in God's word are necessary to be assented to when known to be there written which are not written there because they are necessarily to be known or believed in consequence to that necessary point of faith that whatever is written in God's word is true And hence also are there two sorts of Hereticks some are such before any Council condemning their Tenent if it happen to be against points de fide clear necessary and universally or eminently traditional so were there presently after the Apostles times many Hereticks before any Council assembling or condemning their opinions others only such after their error condemned by a Council if the points be of less evidence c. These latter rendred Hereticks not from the nature of their Tenent but their obstinacy and opposition to the obligation which the Church'es Authority lays upon them in her determinations Whose publick proposal of such doctrines as divine truths is sufficient for their belief and further embracing the same as such and therefore their further opposition of it is not error but heresy unles they can infallibly demonstrate the contrary In which case if ever any such can happen they are free from wilful opposition or heresie i. e. I mean in their denying their assent to the Church but in public contradicting even those infallibly certain c. may be still faulty else they stand guilty thereof and also of Schism if for such a decision they go on to forsake the Church'es communion So St. Cyprian's followers after a General Council were counted Hereticks tho the matter of this Heresy as also of many others so called from opposition to General Councils seem not to be in themselves of very great importance not so He before it In which opinion namely that the Baptism of Hereticks was ineffectual saith Dr. Potter sect 4. many good Catholick Bishops accorded with him and the Donatists as likewise with the Novatians in another viz. that the Church ought not to absolve some grievous sinners before the Nicene Council So tho since the Decision of the Florentine Council 1439 those who hold animas justorum non visuras Deum nisi post resurrectionem are by the Church of Rome counted Hereticks from opposition c yet those who before that time maintained it amongst whom was Pope John the 22d they acknowledge were free from it See Bell. de Rom. Pontif. 4. l. 14. c. Respondeo Johannem hunc revera sensisse animas non visuras Deum nisi post resurrectionem caeterum hoc sensisse quando adhuc sentire licebat sine periculo haeresis nulla enim adhuc praecesserat Ecclesioe definitio In such sence Scotus saith Transubstantiation was no dogma fidei before the Lateran Council Thus you see tho all divine Revelation and necessary deduction from it is de fide and the object and matter of faith
plenary Tradition or undeniable deduction therefrom it being agreed that all her proposals or decrees are not such A Quaere very necessary to be resolved for those if any such there be who affix obedience of assent only to infallibility and this infallibility again only to such decrees but a Quaere for all others me-thinks not of so much concernment I find the marks of such distinction set down in Bell. de Conc. 2. l. 12. c. thus Quando autem decretum proponatur tanquam de fide facile cognoscitur ex verbis Concilii semper enim dicere solent 1. Se explicare fidem Catholicam 2. vel Haereticos habendos qui contrarium sentiunt vel quod est communissimum dicunt Anathema ab Ecclesia excludunt eos qui contrarium sentiunt What then what if it be only Anathema iis qui contrarium dicunt aut docent Quando autem nihil horum dicunt non est certum rem esse de side Thus Bellarmin But note here that Bellarmin tells us not plainly whether something in Councils is proposed tanquam de side without any Anathema set to it only he doubtingly saith non est certum and those others again who build the Church'es inerrability on Tradition and the evident Consequences thereof tel us not whether some of those Decisions that are enjoyned with Anathema's are not sometimes some of those secondary consequences more doubtful ad quas colligendas studium aliquod scientia requiritur or which are made by the judgment and learning of the Bishops considering texts of Scripture the doctrines of ancient Fathers and modern Doctors c. As indeed t is likely some of them are Anathema's being added so frequently even in smaller matters and in the newest controversies And perhaps it can hardly be shewn by these writers that every Proposition in a General Council that hath an Anathema affixed to it is traditional to such a degree of evidence since some Traditions are much more universal and evident than some others that it amounts to infallibility not from the assistance of the holy Spirit but from the clearnes of Tradition In this distinction therefore of points de fide or necessary credends wherein the Church is infallible exactly from others I think these Authors cannot speak out so clearly because tho some points are of much more certainty and also of much higher concernment than others yet Councils seem not so punctual in severing them by a diversity of expression unless in very few perhaps a thing not possible to be done by them see § 3. See Dr. Holden 1. l. 8. c. acknowledging some such thing In tradenda doctrina Christiana nunquam audivimus Ecclesiam articulorum revelatorum divinarum institutionum catalogum exhibuisse vel composuisse quo separatim cognosci possint hujusmodi sidei divinae dogmata ab omnibus aliis quae vel Ecclesiasticae sint institutionis vel quae centae revelationi divinae haud immediate innitantur atque ideo omnia simul confuse indistincte semper docuisse tradidisse Yet the same Councils may and do require subscription and obedience to all their definitions as they being the supreme and unappealable Judge * authorized by Christ for the peace and unity of the Church to give the law to all men * abundantly assisted by the Spirit of Truth for all Necessaries even the obscurest and most unacquainted doctrines if you can once prove them necessary and besides this if in some other matters of less concernment they be liable to error yet how much less they than private men And therefore their submission of judgment to these remains still most rational as well as obligatory The chief note which I find for the distinction of these points de fide wherein the Church is infallible from other determinations or proposals is the affixing of Anathema's which are the same with Excommunication But 1. first several of these Anathema's if we do rely on their form may require not internal assent as looking meerly at faith but non-contradiction as looking perhaps in some points more at peace many running only si quis dixerit c Anathema sit But if it be said that the Anathema's only that are set upon a Si quis sentiat or credat are the Index of such points de fide for necessary credends then will very few decrees of Councils pass for such for example not above four or five of all those made in the Council of Trent I mean as to this particular Index of Credends viz. Anathema and doubtles many more of the decisions of Councils are contended to be such credends than those that can shew this mark of Anathema fixed expresly to dissentients of which see more in Church-Government 4. Part. § 79. Again this injunction of Non-contradiction or of keeping silence tho it be * such as opposeth the saying that the contrary to the Church'es determination is a truth or that the Church erreth in any such decision much more an open departing for such unnecessary matter for the Church errs in no necessaries from her communion yet perhaps it is not * such as opposeth the making or humbly proposing of any doubt thereof at least in a second convening of the same Authority See I pray you in the denouncing of her Anathema's the great warines of the Council of Trent in 24. sess 7. c. Si quis dixerit Ecclesiam errare cum docuit propter adulterium c Anathema sit noted by Soave in his History of it p. 755. Engl. Ed. to be done because she would not censure * some of the Greek Church who held the contrary opinion as likewise * some of the Fathers as S. Ambrose And surely this Council's affixing Anathema's sometimes to so many Lutheran errors some doubtles of smaller moment as they were gather'd here and there by some persons appointed to that purpose out of Luther's writings because they were opposite to the common doctrines of the Church shews that her Anathema sometimes eyed more the petulancy and contradicting spirit of the Author than the importance of the Tenet and was sent forth more to secure her peace than her faith What should hinder I pray since some questions possibly may arise in the Church undecidable clearly by Tradition and since no doubt of all questions now agitated among the Schoolmen or other Catholicks one side is not traditional for then how could so many Catholicks oppose a thing of such evidence again since it is the Church'es duty to provide for peace and unity among her children as well as faith and truth and lastly since sharp and vehement contests may arise in such new controversies to the great disturbance thereof what should hinder I say that the Church in such cases may not impose silence on both parties or secondly using her best search and going upon such Scriptures and reasons as perhaps some side urgeth declare her judgment and that under some penalty on the opposers and gainsayers
thereof or require submission of their judgment also to her not as she declares her judgment infallible but only as it is definitive and unappealable else her orders are no more than good counsel On the gainsayers c. not as subverters of some necessary faith but as troublers for an unnecessary if truth of the Church'es peace and rebels to her authority whom Christ hath commanded to hear not only how far they list or in their private judgment see cause And if she may impose some penalty then why not anathematize or excommunicate This Anathematizing even Protestants do not so far charge as a trespass of charity or a sign of rigor upon the Church of Rome or her Councils but that they allow that those who turbulently or pertinaciously speak against the Doctrines of the Church in smaller points may be anathematized for it See Dr. Fern in his Preface to Consider of present Concernment c. We acknowledge that he who shall pertinaciously turbulently speak and teach against the doctrines of the Church in points of less moment may deserve to be anathematized or put out of the Church for such a one tho he denies not the faith yet makes a breach of charity whereby he goes out of the Church against which he so sets himself Thus he of pertinacious and turbulent contradiction but then modest contradiction he allows Was Luther's and Calvin's modest Are not Anathema's used by her against Schismatical as well as Heretical spirits May not she excommunicate as well disturbers of her peace as subverters of her faith How come Schismaticks then thrown out of the Church Doth she not use Anathema's or Excommunications in matters of Fact wherein she is confest to be liable to error If in decisions not traditional c we are bound to yeild obedience as I shall shew anon what reason have we why the Church may not anathematize for these points those who contradict and disobey But if she may then Anathema for any thing we know is joyned to some point not traditional nor in which the Church is infallible 2. To put this matter more out of doubt why have Provincial Councils granted fallible used anathematizing than which nothing more frequent toward those under their Jurisdiction If any say they use Anathema's indeed but not to be in force I say not after they be contradicted which we grant but till they be confirmed by a General Council then why may they and have they bin put in practice before they were by any such Council confirmed Nay to what purpose such Council convened since it hath no power of excommunicating the resisters and since when a General Council sits that sufficiently obligeth before it sits the other obligeth not 3. Again many Heresies as the Pelagian c. by Provincial Councils have bin censured and supprest but who may judg heresies i. e. errors against points of faith may pronounce Anathema's Judicium non infallibile tamen sufficit ad excommunicandum debent privati homines acquiescere ejusmodijudicio donec non judicaverit aliter Apostolica Sedes vel Concilium Universale si secus egerint merito excommunicantur saith Bell. de Concil 2. l. 10. c. Judicio in points of Doctrine too for as for matter of fact he will allow the same liability to error may be in particular which in General Councils Thus much touching your first Quaere concerning the Infallibility of the Church Now I come to your second concerning Obedience due to the Church and submission of private judgment Where I think this will be made clear unto you That to what point soever the Church'es infallibility be enlarged yet this the Universal-Infallibility of this Supreme Judge of Controversies is not a necessary ground or the only rule of the duty of obedience thereto neither of the obedience of Non-contradiction nor yet that of Assent but that there may be and is just obligation of obedience I mean that of submission of judgment i. e. to believe what it delivereth to a fallible Authority i. e. one that may command us perhaps to believe sometimes what is an untruth And if this be a truth I conceive it may be of some good consequence For first so those also may be rationally induced to yeild obedience to the Church who now think themselves to be clearly freed from it unles it can first be shewed them that the Church is infallible in all her Propositions neither will they then suppose themselves so easily discharged by shewing the contradictions of General Councils in some few matters perhaps from their obedience in all other points wherein these agree or which some defining none other have reversed and the Church hath received in her general practice or also wherein they find even a later Council contradicting a former For if as St. Austin saith later Synods may amend and correct the former they ought also in what they amend them to be submitted-to non obstante the contradiction of the former Secondly so those who have not opportunity of consulting the highest Tribunal may not think their duty cancell'd excepting where they are certain to other their Superiors and Spiritual Guides because fallible or suborordinate nor will oppose so frequently to them not the Dictates of an higher Court but of their private judgment When-as certainly this submission of our judgment and reason to a Superior tho fallible authority is a duty most acceptable to God and which tho much unpractised by and I am afraid quite unknown to many Sectaries amongst Protestants yet hath bin always most religiously observed elsewhere in the Church of God by those who have bin most eminent in piety nothing conducing more to the preservation of truth unity of minds peace security and serenity of a man's conscience and lastly to true humility mortification and self-denial there being no mortification nor self-denial like this and therefore perhaps so many refuse it because there is nothing so much our self as our judgment And again the contrary thereof as it is the fruit of pride and self-conceit so having bin always the promoter of error and mother of distraction and confusion I cannot here but set down two or three words of Mr. Hooker 2. l. 7. sect This opinion saith he which T. Cartwright maintain'd against Councils c that an argument of authority of Man is in matters divine nothing worth being once inserted into the minds of the vulgar sort what it may grow into * God knoweth I may add * we have seen Now to shew this Truth 1. first I must grant to you That God hath obliged no man to believe a known-to-him error or to believe an error quatenus error for this I think is a contradiction in terminis to believe that to be a truth which he knows I do not say which he thinks or doubts is not a truth the same may be said of obligation to the doing or practice of any thing certainly known to one to be
such a matter but to the judgment or directions of your father or master for your reason that is considering another argument of the prudence and experience of his father or master c or of the command which God hath given him to obey them teacheth you that you subject or you unskilled should yeild to their judgment Thus may not one truly say For this reason I think such a thing is so but for such a reason again I think it is not so Els how come any to doubt Now when one sort of these reasons is a natura rei such as his own brain suggests to him and the other ab authoritate and this ab authoritate sways and is the more powerful with him then may he be said to side with authority against his private opinion or judgment But then here by private opinion or judgment is meant not simply that which is so i. e. as he now assents to authority for two contrary judgments or opinions swaying him none can have but that which abstracting from authority c from other reasons his opinion or judgment would be professed to be should any one demand it But indeed whilst against such reasons he yeilds to authority and yeild he may where-ever such reasons are conjectural or less than certain his private judgment simply considered is the same with the publick judgment of that authority and such a one suppose a Catholic that is perswaded that he ought to assent to all the Church shall decree should he notwithstanding against this follow his own private reason or reasons which may be many times contrary to such decree as also they are sometimes to divine mysteries may rightly be said in this doing to go against his judgment or conscience But if a man cannot submit his judgment against his private opinion then cannot a Council justly oblige any to believe any thing tho never so necessary and clear a point unless they know first that his private reason is not against it for they may not oblige him to impossibilities But how often is this done by them even the four first generally allowed and that under Anathema And St. Austin also writ a Treatise De Utilitate Credendi he means of believing the Authority of that Church which was found first to be the Church Catholick from seeing the great benefit that came by this captivating our reason to authority by which act of believing he observed Epist. 48. men not unfrequently came at length to be assured also by true reason of those things which first they believed only from authority Quamdiu intelligere sincera non possumus authoritate quidem decipi miserum est sed certe miserius non moveri Si enim Dei Providentia non praesidet rebus humanis nihil est de religione satagendum Sin vero c. non est desperandum ab eodem ipso Deo authoritatem aliquam constitutam qua velut gradu incerto innitentes attollamur in Deum Haec autem authoritas seposita ratione quam sinceram intelligere ut saepe diximus difficillimum stultis est dupliciter nos movet partim miraculis partim sequentium multitudine De Util. Cred. 16. c. This he writ to a Manichean endeavouring to perswade him in religione turpe non esse credere antequam scire Thus much of the possibility of thinking or believing a judicial determination right when it seems in our private opinion as explain'd above not so But note here that I do not extend our yeilding assent to authority against private reasons in all matters when-ever this assent is given to a necessary belief in all such things that what they say is absolutely just and right but this our assent is capable of less degrees as a belief that what they say is more likely or probable to be so or also that it is more safe for me to err with them as long as I am not by any private reason infallibly certain that they err but have reason to think they do not err than to oppose their authority perhaps with the retaining of a truth but to me uncertain Thus much of Mr. Hooker's testimony and the justification thereof against Mr. Chillingworth's exposition See also Dr. Potter speaking the same thing much-what with Mr. Hooker sect 4. p. 105. where after he hath said It is not lawful for a private man to oppose his judgment to the publick he adds He may offer his contrary opinion to be consider'd of c. but if he will factiously advance his own conceits conceits I suppose he means that which seems reason and the sence of Scripture to him yet of which he is not infallibly certain Advance i. e. against the contrary determinations of the Church and despise the Church so far as to cast off her communion he may be justly condemned for a Schismatic for casting off her communion yea and an Heretic also i. e. for advancing his own conceits in some degree and in foro exteriori tho his opinion were true and much more if it be false Heretick in some degree and in foro exteriori Sure Dr. Potter saith he is this because he allows him some-way faulty in factiously advancing his own conceits against the Church and then I ask why is he not an heretic or if that name may not be so used guilty of an equal crime in foro interiori too For what great difference is there between him that having no sufficient reason for it obstinately defends against the Church'es determination that which happens but is not to him certainly known or by him proved to be a truth and him that obstinately defends an error Those reasons which such a one hath but short of certainty I grant afford him some but not a sufficient excuse of his opposition This for Protestants Next for Catholicks that they also allow a submission of judgment to an Authority fallible See what Bellarmin who holds that particular Councils are fallible yet saith concerning submission of judgment to these errable de Concil 2. l. 10. c. Etsi hoc judicium non sit prorsus infallibile tamen sufficit ad excommunicandum And tamen debent privati homines acquiescere ejusmodi judicio si secus egerint merito excommunicantur donec non judicaverit aliter Apostolica Sedes vel Concilium Universale Therefore if these have formerly decreed nothing contrary we are to submit to it until they shall Again There is no reason of non-acquiescing to such a sentence but only the contrary judgment of a superior Court therefore if the Court be supreme there is no reason at all Again Quod Concilium particulare facit argumentum adeo probabile ut temerarium sit ei non acquiescere planum est and before he saith ex communi sententia Catholicorum asserimus quia si aliquot sancti Patres casu in eandem sententiam convenientes faciunt argumentum probabile quanto magis 50 aut 60 Episcopi simul convenientes
invocato Spiritu Sancto aliquid communi consensu statuentes Faciunt argumentum probabile therefore by acquiescence here is not meant only a passive submission to their censure nor yet that of silence only and non-contradiction which in any things of practice sufficeth not for unles one do what they command he cannot be said to acquiesce in their sentence neither may any exteriorly act that to the lawfulnes whereof he doth not inwardly assent See Dr. Holden who holding that in some doctrines of less moment a general Council may possibly err yet exacts obedience notwithstanding to those Decrees we think such de resol fid 1. l. 9. c. Veruntamen quando a Conciliis Generalibus ad evitandum schisma pacem in Ecclesia conservandam definitae fuerint hujusce naturae conditionis veritates he speaks of those in which there is not certitudo ab omni erroris periculo immunis eorum decretis obediendum esse novit unusquisque Ecclesiae Catholicae vere Filius He goes on Quaeret hic forsitan aliquis curiosius an liceat hujusmodi decreta interno saltem mentis actu in dubium revocare Cui respondeo Quod imprudentis superbientis animi indicium esset haec dubitatio aut saltem hujusce dubitationis publica significatio Ad quid enim valet supremi tribunalis judicium c. si cuilibet subdito aeque liberum foret post ultimum denunciatum litis judicium ac antea oppositum censere publice praedicare An discipulus supra magistrum nonne unicuique in sua arte credendum c. See the like in S. Clara's Systema Fid. 20. c. And thus Mr. Cressy c. 33. Such Decisions many Catholicks conceive are not in so eminent a manner the necessary objects of Christian faith because not delivered as of Universal tradition But however an extreme temerity it would be in any particular man to make any doubt of the truth of them and unpardonable disobedience to reject them now in matters of practice not to obey in doing them is to reject them If in such decisions an error should happen since it c it were far better such an error should pass till as St. Austin saith some later Council amended it than that unity should be dissolved for an unnecessary truth Lastly t is commonly said that in a point controverted and not yet determined by any Council a man's private judgment ought to be swayed by the stream or major part of Catholick writers yet are not these fallible The same thing is ordinarily said of submitting our judgment to the Fathers in all things wherein we find the most of them to agree yet are not they liable to error But those of the Church of Rome that submit their judgment to a General Council and cannot prove it to be infallible as doubtless some of the simpler sort cannot do not so many submit to a Council for any thing they know fallible and yet they should offend if do otherwise For such submissions not the pretence of infallibility but the dictates of common Prudence are used and thought suffici Thus much of the Duty of obedience to all the decrees of General Councils tho these Councils be some way fallible wherein I have spoken of the obligation and rationalness of assent to their doctrines in case of our uncertainty of the contrary to be truths But remember that here I do not undertake to determin whether the Church thinking it fit perhaps to leave to her subjects in points of less consequence and such as are speculative more liberty of enjoying their own judgment so that only they disturb not her peace nor make faction hath only in some points of evident and universal tradition and more necessary consequence and practice required the submission of judgment and profession of assent and belief c under the peril of Anathema * where perhaps she expresseth her self in such terms as these Si quis non confitetur non profitetur constanter tenendum firma fide credendum nemo salva fide dubitare debet c And again whether in many other points of less necessity and not so common tradition tho perhaps certain deduction from those which are so she hath for only the preserving of her peace required the obedience and submission only of Non-contradiction and silence or Non-profession of the contrary under Anathema likewise * where she expresseth her self Si quis dixerit the most usual form in her Anathema's without any firmiter tenendum affixed to the contrary truth I meddle not to decide whether in the prohibition of the affirming an error the Church'es intention doth not always involve the profession of the contrary truth or whether all her Anathema's are not set only to points necessary to be believed but some to points fit not to be contradicted some Anathema's for consent some for peace and silence Again I attempt not to resolve here whether under the former of these the requiring of assent she means an internal plenary act of faith which perhaps is not in every man's power at all times faith having a great latitude of strength or weaknes according to the repugnancies of some verisimilities of the contrary running in a man's mind not fully settled and convinced and many times some mixture of unbelief Lord I believe help thou mine unbelief or else whether she means only a submissive endeavour and willingnes to believe and assent to her propositions In these things I can determin nothing neither if I have before argued that we may rationally yeild in such points more than the least of these submissions therefore will I deny that the Church may or doth require only the less as I cannot on the other side affirm that she hath not required the more But surely no more duty needs be paid to avoid her Anathema's than she chargeth us with tho she claim not all her due nor is more if so much necessary to salvation to be believed than she exacteth of us to be believed To conclude this discourse 1. Infallibility of the Church in all necessaries be they clear revelations and points traditional or consequential consequential clearly or not clearly deducted from the former provided that they be necessary to attain salvation for to be known or believed or practised by all Christians is not denied being had either by evidence of Tradition or assistance of the Spirit from the promise of our Saviour who fails not to guide the Church in all such truths for ever that she may in these also for ever securely guide others 2ly likewise at least for the most of these truths namely such as are of universal tradition or natural and immediate consequences thereof not only certitudo objecti but subjecti is granted not only that de facto the Church cannot err in them but that she knows she doth not err in them For it follows not that if the Church may err in something and not know that she
errs therefore she cannot know or be sure but that she errs in every thing unles first it be shewed that she knows all things from an equal evidence But 3ly these two not hindring infallibility general in all things which the Church shall propose or decide unles it can be proved that all hitherto passed in the General Councils is only necessaries or that she can determin nothing unnecessary to salvation I see not that it is nor any need that it should be affirmed neither from our Saviour's promise which we have no reason to extend beyond necessaries neither from the force of those reasons which are well urged by some to prove General Councils infallible in necessaries but are faulty if any will apply them to an infallibility General The chief of which reasons I think are these The 1. A Generali Concilio appellari non potest which is granted unde apertissime sequitur non errare Nam alioquin iniquissimum esset cogere Christianos ut non appellent ab eo judicio quod erroneum esse potuit R. The argument is good for points de fide necessaria but no further for by this reason the same Councils could not err in judging particular causes and matters of fact for from a General Council in these also is no appeal unless in infinitum to the same court Again some points there are in Non-necessaries wherein General Councils are granted liable to error by those Authors who urge this argument for infallibility as is shewed before § 9. But yet there can no appeal be made from them and peremptory obedience is required to be yeilded to them in these Lastly supposing that no court were infallible yet unappealable some must be that contests and strifes may have an end As also it is no less in temporal courts for temporal causes tho these courts fallible Therefore from unappealablenes doth not follow infalliblenes 2. The Second Haeretici sunt excommunicandi omnes qui non acquiescunt Conciliis plenariis haec Concilia dicunt Anathema contradicentibus but Anathema's and Excommunications for contrary opinions proceed only from the Council's infallibility R. Not always from infallibility for such things are done by Councils less than General and therefore fallible and lawfully see Bell. 2. l. 10. c. done by plenary Councils in cases wherein fallible Anathema's always where lawfully used argue in some authority in others a duty of submission to it and are lawfully used for any thing I know by particular as well as general Councils and against the Schismatical for smaller matters or opinions disturbing the peace of the Church after dubious things determined as well as against the Heretical for necessary and certain points of faith denied As for applying the word Heretick to those who oppose things established in General Councils it is granted that such Council is infallible in all fundamental or absolutely necessary truths If therefore it be affirmed that it never defines any points but such it is granted to be infallible in whatever it defines and this proof thereof taken from the opposers thereof their being called Hereticks may be spared But if we suppose that a General Council may define or determin some points which are not such then the word Heretic must be a little better examined before any thing for infallibility of Councils can be proved from it For either he is said to be an Heretic who knowingly opposeth any definition whatever of a Council proposed under Anathema c. tho it be not in a fundamental or necessary point of faith but if thus then we cannot argue the Council infallible in every thing because he that opposeth her in any thing is accounted an Heretic Or he is an heretic only who opposeth such a Council not in any but such definitions as are made in matters of necessary faith But if thus then we must know Conciliary Definitions exactly which are such which are not before we can know whether the opposer thereof be an heretic neither can we prove the Council Universally infallible because he who opposeth it thus in some points is heretical 3. The 3d. If the Church be not infallible in all that she proposeth none could have any certainty of his faith which faith he must receive and learn from the Church R. Yes he that believeth the Church in all she saith will still have a certainty I mean for the certitudo objecti and will be free from error in all necessary faith which is sufficient if the Church be in the proposal of all necessary points of faith infallible which is affirmed But as for certitudo subjecti i. e. his being certain that in all such points he is free from error which concerns not this place I refer you to those fuller Notes about it Concerning the necessary ground of Saving Faith. 4. But fourthly tho Universal infallibility c may perhaps not be made good by these or any other reasons yet I think by what I have said it appears That none may from this not proved or his proving the contrary think himself discharged of his obedience which is due upon other grounds sufficient without this namely 1. * upon her Supremacy and unappealablenes whom Christ hath commanded him to hear and repair to as his guide and governor under pain of being treated as a Heathen and Publican was amongst the Jews and 2. * upon her Infallibility in all necessaries by which there is no danger to him for any error or mis-practice wherein she may mislead him neither will God for such error call him to account but let him certainly expect this if deserting his guide he doth mislead himself and 3. * besides these upon the dictate of common and natural prudence according to which none may justly withdraw his belief and submission of judgment to those of the greatest skill and integrity in the things wherein he wants instruction meerly upon this pretence that every man may possibly err or lie to him Suppose he thinks that he is infallibly certain in some thing that that which she teacheth him is false yet thus will his obedience be still obliged and kept entire for †most points as with which at least he may not dispence for any lesser scruples and doubtings but apparent counter-demonstrations but perhaps for †all points if he please to examin his own knowledg who goes upon no evidence which the Church also hath not and be not willing to mistake seeming for true certainty from which commonly the most ignorant are appearingly most certain Again suppose he discover General Councils to contradict in any point which yet if it be must needs be in a point not necessary yet may he not therefore totally withdraw his obedience save only to those things wherein they contradict nor perhaps in these neither for according to St. Austin's rule of Councils differing the last obligeth him by which the former may be amended amended therefore also contradicted But then
in things wherein he finds all or many of them unanimously agreeing or being established by some not contradicted or amended by any other succeeding but by the General practice of particular Churches conformed to these he may presume to be truths from their accord as the other falsities from their variance and therefore by no means may plead a release from the one by shewing the other FINIS CONCERNING The OBLIGATION of not professing or acting against our JUDGMENT or CONSCIENCE AND Whether the obedience of Non-contradiction only or also of Assent be due to the Decrees OF COUNCILS CONTENTS IN what sence it may be lawful to believe or do a thing against our own Judgment § 2. Concerning the Church'es lawful Authority to excommunicate dissenters in non-fundamentals § 4. As likewise to decide which Points are fundamental which not § 7. Several exceptions against obedience only of non-contradiction for Non-fundamentals And that at least all those not infallibly certain of the contrary are bound in Non-fundamentals to an obedience of Assent and therefore the most are so bound § 11. Replies to several Objections § 12. The 1. First concerning an inferior Councils decreeing some new dangerous error which no former Council superior hath condemned 2d Concerning faith salvisical that it must be infallible 3d. Concerning union of Charity sufficient § 14. 4th Concerning trying of doctrines necessary § 15. 5th Concerning what Church'es determinations when several contradict one another we are to adhere to § 16. A Post-script 2d Paper Concerning infallible Certainty § 19. 1. Infallible Certainty excusing all submission of judgment to others 2. Infallible Certainty to be had in some points Of the difficulty of knowing when one is infallibly certain 3. Infallible Certainty at least not pretendable against any General contrary judgment of the Church An instance in the Controversy about giving the Communion in one kind only § 27. 4. The greatest probability short of infallible Certainty not excusing our dissenting from the judgment of the Church An explication of Rom. 14. 23. Conference at Hampton-Court p. 72 73. Mr. Knewstub's 2d quest Lastly if the Church have that power also i. e. to ad significant Signs as the Cross in Baptism c. yet the greatest scruple to their conscience was How far such an ordinance of the Church was to bind them without impeaching their Christian liberty The King in his Answer hath these words I will have one doctrine and one discipline one Religion in substance and in ceremony and therefore I charge you never to speak more to that point How far you are bound to obey when the Church hath ordained it A LETTER concerning the obligation of not professing or acting against our Judgment or Conscience SIR YOU ask my Opinion 1. Whether we are bound to the obedience only of Non-contradiction or also of assent to the Decrees of acknowledged lawful General Councils in Non-fundamentals wherein such Councils are supposed by you errable supposing that such Councils require our assent therein And 2ly Whether one is or can be bound to assent when these their Decrees are contrary to his own private judgment and Whether one may go against his conscience in any thing Answ. I answer on which subject I desire you also to peruse what is said in the Discours of Infallibility § That if you take judgment here for infallible certainty which see more largely explained below § 19. c. I can soon resolve it negatively That you are not nor cannot be so bound Of which see more below § 20. But if you mean by your private judgment opinion short of infallibility i. e. some reasons that you have either drawn from the natures of things on from the sence you make of divine revelation to think that a thing is thus or so contrary to that general judgment 1. First this question seems * decided on the affirmative part viz. that you may go against your private judgment in mens ordinary practice In secular affairs do not we commonly upon receiving the advice of an experienced friend both believe him to be in the right and do a thing contrary to our own judgment i. e. contrary to those reasons which our selves have not to do it Is not Abraham said to believe a thing seeming contrary to his own reason Rom. 4. 17 18. And so the man in the Gospel Mar. 9. 24 Yet I know you will not say that they went in this against their conscience What is the meaning of that ordinary saying These and these reasons I have for my opinion but I submit to the Church Is it only I submit my judgment in regard of the publishing of it So Dr. Fern comments upon it 2. Treat 1. c. numb 1◠But thus the phrase seems very improper for this is a submission of our speech or silence but not of our judgment at all and is a submission which may well be professed also in things wherein our judgment is utterly unchangeable namely in things whereof we are infallibly certain 2. Again * decided by the concessions of several Protestants which seem to yeild the very same thing See Dr. Fern ib. n. 13. where he alloweth that in matters of opinion and credibility or of discipline and rites till we have sufficient evidence or demonstration of truth to the contrary our conformity i. e. of judgment which he expresseth afterward by submitting our belief and our practice remains secure Secure saith he till we have sufficient evidence c. But sufficient evidence we have not in opposition to the Church in things where possibly we may be mistaken and we may be mistaken in any thing whereof we are not certain ergo sufficient evidence in such cases is only certainty Likewise Dr. Hammond Reply to Cath. Gentl. 2. c. 3. s. 18. n. when the person is not competent to search grounds I add or not so competent as those to whose definition he is required to submit his assent alloweth a bare yeilding to the judgment of Superiors and a deeming it better to adhere to them than to attribute any thing to his own judgment a believing so far as not to disbelieve them Which he saith may rationally be yeilded to a Church or the governors of it without deeming them inerrable And in Schism 2. c. 10. s. he saith A meek Son of the Church of Christ will certainly be content to sacrifice a great deal for the making of this purchase i. e. of enjoying the communion of the Church and when the fundamentals of the faith and superstructures of Christian practice are not concerned in the concessions he will chearfully express his readiness to submit or deposit his own judgment in reverence and deference to his Superiors in the Church where his lot is fallen Where surely this submitting and depositing our own judgment implies something more than the concealment of it only since the concealment of our judgment being the least degree of obedience we can
give to our Superiors will be due to them in some of those definitions made by them in fundamentals of faith and Christian practice which points he excepts here from submittance or deposition of our judgment See likewise which especially I recommend to your reading what Mr. Hooker as writing not against Catholicks but Puritans copiously saith in behalf of submission of judgment to the Church even when thwarting our private opinion in his Preface 6. § and in 2. l. 7. § near the end which you may find more fully set down and Mr. Chillingworth's Comment upon it in Answ. to Mr. Knot who pressed him with it discussed in the discours of Infallibility § 45 46. c. In the Preface speaking upon Deut. 17. 8. c he hath these words God was not ignorant that the Priests and Judges whose sentence in matters of controvesie he ordained should stand both might and oftentimes would be deceived in their judgment Howbeit better it was in the eye of his understanding that sometimes an erroneous sentence definitive should prevail till the same authority perceiving such oversight might afterwards correct and reverse it than that strifes should have respit to grow and not come speedily unto some end And there he answers that Objection That men must do nothing against conscience saying Neither wish we that men should do any thing which in their hearts they are perswaded they ought not to do but we say this perswasion ought to be fully settled in their hearts that in litigious and controverted causes of such quality the will of God is to have them to do whatsoever the sentence of judicial and final Decision shall determin yea tho it seem in their private opinion to swerve utterly from that which is right as no doubt many times the sentence among the Jews did unto one or other part contending and yet in this case God did then allow them to do that which in their private judgment it seemed yea and perhaps truly seemed that the law did disallow Thus judicious Hooker And see what Dr. Jackson saith to the same purpose below § 29 30. Thus the reformed seem to allow in some things a submission of private judgment to the Church a submission not only of concealing it but of renouncing and deserting it in believing and hearkning to the Church rather than to it Now the Church doth never exact that you should profess or subscribe * that your own reason or private judgment caused from some evidence in the thing suggests or assures to you such a thing to be truth but * that you believe her in such a thing more than your own reasons to the contrary or * that you confess her judgment better than your own and so are content to be swayed by it in such a thing For if you heartily believe that the Church'es judgment is likely to be better than yours or that she is authorized by her judgment to guide yours it necessarily follows that in obeying her you do according to your judgment one way tho contrary to it in another way For your final judgment upon the points is this that tho you see reasons ex parte rei most or all contrary to what she defines yet that her judgment is better than yours or ought to guide yours and upon this you against your own judgment or reasons assent unto hers Note here that by the Church'es judgment I mean the ultimatest judgment and the highest court thereof that we can have So that when your Pastor teacheth any thing which is contrary to your private judgment you are not obliged to assent to him if another Ecclesiastical judgment superior be contrary to his For the decision of the Superior to whom in any doubting you may repair voids that of an inferior unto you and so voids also his Excommunications and Ecclesiastical censures and if the superior man or Council tell you one thing and the inferior another you are to hear the Church in the superior not in the inferior Neither can that of the Apostle Rom. 14. 23. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin which text see further explained below § 31. be applied to any for so doing because who so doth thus submit doth this out of faith namely this faith that the Church is wiser than he or that he is obliged to obey her expositions of Scripture directions counsels c when contrary to his own It is not only possible then but usual for one to believe a thing against his own reason or judgment or conscience if you will take these in such a sence i. e. against the reasons drawn a parte rei which he hath for disbelieving it but it is not possible for one to believe a thing against his reason or judgment or conscience in general or against some other reason taken ab authoritate which he hath still for believing it For certainly * when a fool believes a wise man against some conceit he had of his own or * when Roman-Catholicks consent to the Church in something doubtles wherein some of them may see reasons for the contrary and no reason perhaps for it save that ab authoritate viz. the Church'es determination and command or * when an Israelite submitted to holding or doing a thing which the Judges decided Deut. 17. 11 12. none of these may be said to do thus without or against reason because perhaps their private judgment is not convinced in the thing for they have that reason still for going against their other reason that the others whom they follow are wiser than they or also a 2d reason that the others are by God appointed to guide their judgment and opinion in such things and that they are commanded by God to consent to what ever those shall decide 3ly This thing seems decided by the allowed practice of the Church in excommunicating at least for such matters as she esteemeth necessary and fundamental those who dissent from her judgment For if in any thing at all if at least in fundamentals in which some say she cannot err the Church may excommunicate dissenters hence it follows both that it is possible and that a man ought in some things to consent to the Church even against his own judgment unless we will affirm that no man in such points as suppose in fundamentals can possibly have another judgment than hers But so there would never have bin any man erroneous or heretical in a point fundamental I say ought to consent For if God hath given power to the Church I mean the highest court thereof of punishing by excommunication all those who do not consent to some decision which she maketh then all ought to consent to such decision whether it be right or wrong to his seeming arguments or reasons whose consent is required for every one ought to do that for the not doing of which God appoints him to be punished besides that he who consents not to the Church'es judgment
therein clearly delivered as for example that Jesus is the Lord or that he died in some sence or other as hoc dato that he is the Lord he may be certain that he is the Lord or as he may be certain of identicals And as I think one may be certain of this so I do not think that ever there was any heretick that allowed the Scriptures i. e. as we have them that ever denied any such thing in general terms for this would be to affirm contradictories both true Again since the Ch. may be infallibly certain of something in the Scriptures from the evidence of revelation why a private man may not be so too I see no reason since the Church consisteth only of so many particular men and the reasons appearing to the Church may also be clear to him Tho here I must put some difference because as there is a certainty arising from clearnes of revelation so there is another from illumination of the H. Spirit see Jo. 16. 13. which illumination is promised to the Councils of the Church but not so to particulars and for this it is I think well said that the conclusions of such Councils may from the superintendence of God's Spirit over them be orthodox when the reasons upon which they are grounded may be fallible or not proving such conclusions A private man then in some things may be infallibly certain but since he also may be mistaken not only in * very plain Scriptures by †not comparing them with other places that say something contrary to the sence which they seem to him to bear †by education in such mis-interpretations and many other thousand ways as we have much experienced of late in the Socinians and our English Sectarists both great Scripturists but also * in thinking himself infallibly certain of something there when he is not which conceit many times ariseth not from the places incapability of any doubt but from his not being then acquainted with any objections against his sence of it The chiefest signs that I know by which any one may gather that he is infallibly certain indeed when it is in any point that is controverted are these two and they are such as will litle nurse him in his opinion of infallible certainty 1. The first is that no other man or at least not the major part of men having the use of reason understanding our terms and granting all the suppositions which we do doth contradict or frame any objections against our tenet The 2d That all having use of reason c or the most that were formerly of another perswasion to whom we propose all our grounds become certain of the same thing also I say the most because it is not here altogether as it is in Mathematicks the demonstrations whereof never any that see them contradict Now that you may not think these marks of certainty too rigid see the same proposed by the Reformed against the Puritans whom they think too rashly to pretend certainty in heterodox opinions See Hook. Eccl. Pol. preface 6. sect and Bishop Laud § 33. Consid. 5. n. 1. Therefore thinking one's self certain and his not having any doubt at all of the truth of the thing he holds is no sure note of certainty For potest non subesse dubium where yet subest falsum from the ignorance of those texts or arguments which prove the contrary of what he holds And tho there may be no doubt from contrary arguments yet is the greatest reason that can be to doubt from a publick contrary judgment where the much major part of such as I have opportunity to know their opinion these having all the same evidences as my self dissent from me Now against these indications of certainty proposed by us it may be and is said That passion self-conceit pride love of contention and especially contrary education and custom in error may blind some mens judgment so as not to discern the plainest things But mark first that this is said ordinarily by a man that is singular against the contrary judgment of the Church of God. Thou that judgest another judgest thou not thy self What can be a better argument for the Church than her former customs which thou accusest to mislead her present judgment Who are liker to be clear of passion those that submit to anothers judgment or those that adhere to their own Lastly from this it will follow that we also to be infallibly certain of a truth must be infallibly certain we are not misled by passion or education in an error as well as that others may be so and this surely is very hard to know In dissent from our Pastors saith Dr. Jackson we cannot but doubt whether we have learnt as we should the precepts of Christian modesty whether learnt to deny our selves and our affections to reverence him as God's Minister taking no offence at his person whether we have abandoned all such delights and desires as are the usual grounds of false perswasion And in another place he grants that to the disobedient and those who hate the light even plain Scriptures are difficult If we cannot be resolved in these then must we doubt whether we will or no whether our doubt and scruple be of faith and conscience or of humor What Dr. Jackson saith here of doubt I may say of certainty since many also are deceived in thinking themselves certain when they are not that till we are certain that we are void of such passion we cannot be certain that we are certain c. Again t is said That in points which we must needs grant to be most certainly plain to any rational man yet some hereticks have bin of a contrary judgment as t is instanced in the Manichees and in some frantick people of late acknowledging no obligation to the practice of Christian vertues c. I answer this comes about for the most part at least by their denying some principles which others argue upon The Manichees acknowledged divine Scriptures but not such as we have them but said that our Scriptures were miserably corrupted Our Sectarists of late acknowledge our Scriptures but say they were writ for and belong only to new beginners in Christianity not to the perfect c. So likewise those that vary in their conclusions t is notable to see how much they vary also in their suppositions Some in Scripture hold those to be counsels only which others take for absolute commands some suppose those precepts temporary as I think we must needs confess that Act. 15. to be which others will needs have to be eternal some will have the practices set down in Scripture to oblige as well as peremptory precepts others not c. And upon these various grounds which others grant not every one builds from those grounds most infallible conclusions which all the world if they yeilded to his principles would also with him assert Mean-while he looking at the plainnes
of his deductions and seldom examining the soundnes of some ground which he irrationally takes for granted becomes infallibly certain as he thinks of what is indeed an error and many times a gross one But it may be said again that where we can shew none of these differences in principles yet there have bin hereticks that have gone against tenets even in fundamentals of which tenets we must needs grant that any man may be infallibly certain as the Arrians Socinians Nestorians Eutychians c. To you I may speak my opinion In all these and many more which being chief foundations we usually also call most manifest truths yet the most of Christians E will not say all are very much beholden to the determinations of the Church from time to time by which they are kept fixed and not shaken in them And you see how the contrary tenets grow upon the sharpest men of reason where the authority of the Church is laid aside Certainly to name some of them the omnipresence of God not in his power but substance his certain foreknowledge of not only what may but also what shall be yet so as not to destroy mans free election Christ's non-inferiority as touching the God-head to the Father and all those particulars about the Trinity Person Natures and Wills of Christ can hardly be said to be so plain in Scripture to every one that grants it to be Scripture that all men without the Church'es guidance and education in such a faith c would have bin infallibly certain of them 2. But to let these pass and suppose in private men what infallible certainty you please of them or also of many other divine truths yet in the 3d. place I do not see how from the former instances we can proceed to make any use of this plea of infallible certainty against the judgment of the Church of many former ages for the controversies now on foot between the Reformed and the Catholic Church against whom this infallible certainty is chiefly made use of One of the most seemingly gross and unreasonable points on their side I suppose is Communion in one kind only which hath this prejudice also accompanying it that it was practised by the Church Catholick in the publick ordinary Church-communions only in some latter times before the Reformation Yet I think that none will offer to affirm that he is I say not much perswaded but infallibly certain of the unlawfulnes of such a practice when he hath seriously considered these things which I shall briefly name unto him * That many practices in Scripture are alterable by the Church and some precepts there only temporary not perpetual as Act. 15. 20. and Jam. 5. 14. as some will have it * That the Church hath altered many other things not only without our complaining thereof but with our imitating her Nay further * That some learned Protestants number the communicating the people in both kinds not amongst things strictly commanded in Scripture but amongst Apostolical Traditions only See Montag Origin Eccles. p. 396. Ubi jubentur in Scripturis Infantes baptizari aut in Coena Domini sub utraque specie communicantes participare And Bishop White on the Sabbath p. 97. Genuine Traditions derived from the Apostolical times are received and honoured by us Such as are these which follow The Historical Tradition concerning the number and dignity of Canonical Books of Scripture The Baptism of Infants Perpetual Virginity of the B. Virgin Observation of the Lord's Day The Service of the Church in a known tongue The delivering of the H. Communion to the people in both kinds When he hath considered * the practice of the primitive times even in the Eastern Churches also of giving it in one kind to sick men to Seamen to Travellers to the absents upon necessary occasions from church to those also who came to church to carry home with them that they might there reserve it in readines and communicate themselves therewith when they thought fit on those days when there was no publick communion or they hindred from it by distance danger as in times of persecution or necessary secular busines that which they carried home with them being only of one species viz. that of the bread And * these things tho so done to avoid some inconvenience I suppose the spilling and the not-keeping of the wine as also it is now yet so done without any absolute necessity for the sick can take wine sooner than bread and it might be conveyed from vessels without spilling and those vessels also be first consecrated and might also be possibly preserved in a close bottle for some long time When he hath considered * the ancient practice of giving the Communion sometimes to Infants newly born and baptized to whom this Sacrament was thought also necessary only in one kind namely that of the wine When one considers * the ancient custom likewise in time of Lent in the Greek Church for all days save Saterdays and Sundays because saith Balsamon Deo sacrificium offerre they accounted to be festum diem agere in the Latin Church for Good-Friday to communicate expraesanctisicatis i. e. on what was consecrated on another day and reserved till then which Symbol reserved was only that of the bread * The great cautiousnes of the former times against the too frequent casualties of spilling that precious blood which could not be gathered up again as the bread might in their receiving it in some places sucked up through a pipe in others by intinction and dipping only or sopping the bread in the wine a custom also used at this day in some of the Greek and Eastern Churches Again whereas one of our greatest complaints in this matter is an imperfect communion and robbing the people as it were of the chief part of their redemption yet when he hath considered * their never questioning the compleatnes of such Communions who thus received it in one kind which it most concerned people going out of the world and some of them perhaps then first communicated for their last viaticum to have most perfect Where note also †1. First * that the sufficiency of such a communion was so constantly believed that the use of the Cup also in publick communions was upon many abuses committed about it by little and litle in a manner generally laid aside in the ordinary practice some hundreds of years before any determination passed in any Council concerning it and * that that decree made first in the Conc. Constant. 13. sess was only to warrant and justify the Church'es former custom against those Petrus Dresdensis the Hussites and others who then began to inveigh against it saying hanc consuetudinem observare esse sacrilegum illicitum as likewise against that custom to communicate men fasting and hence began to change it and to communicate after Supper and in both kinds And 2ly †* That some of the Reformed also
acknowledge totum Christum to be contained in and exhibited to us by any one species and by the least particle thereof See Confessio Wirtenberg Chamier de Eucharist 9. t. 8. c. our Saviour's boby and blood and soul and Deity suffering now no separation See a further proof of the things said above in the discours on this subject And lastly if he hath considered a case not much unlike i. e. the communicating of Infants wherein if the Protestants had retained a contrary custom to the rest of the present Church perhaps they might have accused the Church for changing it not with less evidence than they do in this For first the Scripture saith plainly as of Baptism he that is not born again of water so of the Eucharist he that eateth not my flesh c shall not inherit eternal life 2ly And then the Primitive times according to these precepts practised it 3ly No more knowledge and preparation is required to the Lord's Supper than to Baptism for examining ones self and repenting is required to Baptism as well as to the Eucharist therefore if such things are not required of children for the one so neither are they for the other And I could press the like in Extream Unction which suppose that we had retained and the Roman Church left off as it is contrary how easily could we have charged them for abrogating a plain Apostolical precept Jam. 5. 14 And the same may be urged concerning the great act of humility washing one anothers feet before the Communion for which after that our Saviour himself had first begun the practice thereof there seems to be a plain precept Jo. 13. 14. And so the Church'es changing the celebration of the Lord's Supper into a morning exercise and that it should be received fasting was not done without some mens scrupling it See Januarius his consulting S. Austin about this Epist. 118. c. But if we can alledge in this matter the desuetude of former Church to be a sufficient rule and warrant to us for omitting of it then why may not the same plea of the Church'es desuetude be as well by some others enlarged to some other points wherein Scripture is urged against them I say therefore if such cases as these be well considered together with the understanding and the holines of these men who after our reasons given them are not convinced by such an evidence as we pretend methinks for one to say notwithstanding all this not that he is much perswaded but that he is absolutely infallibly certain of the unlawfulnes of such a practice would not consist with that Christian humility which we ought to have and to which only God gives true knowledge nor with that charge of the Apostle not to be wise in our own conceits Whereas it is noted that the more eminent in sanctity any one hath bin the more eminent obeyer and defender not opposer hath he bin of the Church'es authority A like instance might be made in that mainly opposed doctrine of Transubstantiation where as long as a possibility thereof is granted as it is by many of the Reformed and such a declaration is found in Scripture as this Hoc est Corpus meum the most literal and proper sence whereof that can be tho the most heightning this mystery is Transubstantiation of the Elements See Treat of Euchar. § 28. n. 2. and as long as this Scripture is not found contradicted by any other Scriptures but that with less force the literal expression of them may be brought to comply with it than the literal expression of it to comply with them we also adding to these the final determination of the Church long before Protestancy thought on after so long and subtle disputes for about 300 years from the 2d Nicene Council till the days of Berengarius and after so curious an examination on all sides of Primitive Tradition by Paschasius Bertram and others 800 years ago I do not see where a man can ground an absolute infallible certainty against it T is a dangerous case to disobey where we see others of great judgment and integrity yeilding obedience with alacrity saith Dr. Jackson And indeed I cannot but approve of that constitution of Ignatius and think him a too much self-conceited man who when he hath I say not to the Church but suppose only to three or four whom he knew wise and learned and uninterested men shewed his reasons and they have weighed them and concluded against his former opinion would not quietly acquiesce in their contrary judgments supposing no superior judgment to have prejudiced them and this especially in a point not fundamental Tho I know not how it is that when we plead our security in our dissent from the Church'es judgment we presently say that the point we differ from her in is not fundamental and that unity of faith in those fundamentals is sufficient but again when we plead the necessity of using our own judgment and not trusting or relying on any other mans we presently represent the same Not-fundamental truths as of great consequence and say the blind meaning the Church which may perhaps err in such things leading the blind both may fall into the ditch and that that ditch also is damnation I cannot conceive therefore how any man can assure himself in any thing that is not of fact or sence but that is only a deduction from Scripture and Tradition contrary to the judgment I say not of his private Pastor but of the supremest Court of the present Church that he is infallibly certain of any thing small or great Small I say as well as great for from the Church'es being liable in some things to error doth not follow any likelihood of his being infallibly certain in those things of the contrary truth but rather otherwise because t is a sign that such things are not clearly revealed and that they being dark to her will be so much more to him To confirm which add these two 1. That in Fundamentals this thing is granted That none can be certain of the contrary to what the Church defines and then that how many points are fundamental is to him uncertain 2. That amongst many tenets of the Church this is one That private men are bound in all things to yeild their consent to the Church'es decisions where they are required so to do This tenet is plain in the practice of General Councils which Councils as well for Non-fundamentals as Fundamentals and for things of practice as well as of belief have anathematized the not only contradicters but Dissenters and Non-conformists Now then unles any one be infallibly certain of the contrary to what the Church determins and that this is no fundamental point also his judgment against hers cannot be infallible in any point whatsoever where she requires submission of his judgment In prosecution of which submission of our judgment in Non-fundamentals also it is to be noted that if our submission
to the Church in fundamentals were performed from any such obedience as we confess is by the command of God's word due to her determinations then the texts which may be urged to oblige us to obedience in these points would oblige us also in others for these texts are without any limitation of our obedience to fundamentals only But indeed our not so much assenting to her as consenting with her in fundamentals seems to proceed from other motives than obedience as from this that our Saviour hath promised that the Church for fundamentals at least shall not err and from a second that all fundamentals are most plain in Scripture and therefore as they cannot be hid to us so neither can they to her and therefore in fundamentals we must necessarily both agree in which agreeing we obey not her but together with her the Scriptures Mr. Chillingworth well saw this And hence those who withdraw one of these motives as those amongst the reformed who say Christ's promise before-mentioned is only conditional i. e. if the Clergy shall do their duty or who say that Christ's promise is more general i. e. made to Christianity but not to the Clergy thereof or to any General Council those I say make nothing to dissent from any Council or any Church that can authoritatively declare her opinion To conclude this Query I do not see then how any man can be or at least can know that he is infallibly certain of any point wherein the Church'es judgment is contrary to his 4. Now next if you be not infallibly certain then tho you have never so great probability that is short of certainty for your private opinion yet I think and I think the Reformed Divines conclude that you are notwithstanding to consent to the contrary determination of the Church or Council Els if only probabilities may serve to counterpoise the Church'es or Council's authority when or where will these be wanting You have seen Mr. Hookers and Bishop Laud's and Bishop White 's opinion in Church-gov 2. part § 36. Infallib § 45. And Dr. Jackson on the Creed 2. l. 1. § 6. c. I find saying thus Our disobedience is unwarrantable unles we can truly derive some formal contradiction or opposition between the injunction of Superiors and express law of the most high And elsewhere he saith Every doubt or scruple that the Church'es edicts are directly or formally contrary to God's law is not sufficient to deny obedience And again In doubts saith he and I say all is but more or less doubt until we be certain it will abundantly suffice to make sincere protestation in the sight of God or before the Magistrate if need require that we undertake not such actions upon any private liking of the things enjoyned but only upon sincere respect of performing obedience to Superiors c. And elsewhere We may not put the Superior to prove what he commands but he is to be obeyed till we can prove the contrary Again We can no more obey than love God whom we have not seen but by obeying our Superiors whom we have seen True Spiritual obedience will bind us rather to like well of the things commanded for Authorities sake than to disobey Authority for the private dislike of the things commanded Again If Pastors are only to be obeyed when bringing evidence out of Scripture what obedience perform we to them more than to any other man whomsoever for whosoever shews the express undoubted command of God it must be obeyed of all If we thus only bound to obey then I am not more bound to obey any other man than he bound to obey or believe me the flock no more bound to obey the Pastor than the Pastor them and so the donation of Spiritual Authority when Christ ascended on high were a donation of meer titles You see how we plead for obedience against our own Non-conformists yet for the former Church we support our selves against her authority with having infallible certainty But the Non-conformists cease not to plead this certainty also against us But indeed this he saith here is most reasonable For if you do not submit to the Church'es judgment when you have greater probability to the contrary you never submit to her judgment at all for when ever you have not greater probability to the contrary you have either greater probability of what she saith or are in a pure equilibration and in either of these you do nothing with or for which you would not and may not also do without her Well then we may not exact of the Church that she should prove nor may not only then yeild obedience i. e consent and conformity when she doth prove to us that that is truth which she commands us to believe and that that is lawful which she commands us to do But it is our duty to obey if our selves have not infallible certainty and proof that such things are untrue or unlawful It is not enough to license us to withdraw our obedience or assent to her that she may possibly err in what she commands us unless also we know that we cannot err our selves for the power of giving our assent requires not infallible knowledge that the thing we assent to first is true but only a not knowing infallibly that it is false It is not enough that we are not certain that she erreth not not enough that we have some scruples some reasons and arguments whereby it seems to us that she erreth but only certain infallibility that she doth err this indeed excuseth our non-obedience Els our Spiritual Superiors are in the place of God and of Christ to us and we are to shew to them whom we do see and hear the humble obedience we are ready in all things to render to God whom we do not see nor hear and as we are to shew our love to God in our Neighbour so are we to shew our obedience to him in his Substitutes 1 Thes. 4. 8. compared with 2. And it is not only lawful but a great virtue in us since the contrary is most-what an effect of self-conceit and arrogancy of wisdom and knowledge as to suppress the seeming suggestions of reason and sence about natural things which suggestions are against the revelations of God and divine truths so to captivate our understandings also and crush the suggestions of any singular interpretations and sences about these divine revelations which are against I say not every private teacher but the common exposition of the Church Were then all those which are the Church's decrees acknowledged and 2ly our infallible certainty so much pretended by us so strictly examined that weak probabilities be not accepted by us in stead thereof how few would the points be in which upon our concessions we could oppose the H. Church But again were all those people that had not in these few points that infallible certainty which the others learned have as one may be certain of a thing
in obliging them to that of the Church 3ly It is granted that as our judgment is taken in this 2d sence namely for the private reasons and evidences we have of a subject in it self secluding from authority in some things we are allowed to use and follow it or to follow such reasons But we cannot collect from hence that we are permitted by God or have equal reason to follow it I mean our private opinion or reason in every thing unless it be proved 1. That all things are equally easie to be discovered by it and 2ly That there is no divine command for our yeilding obedience in some things to anothers judgment If any one should advise one to find out some reputed wise and experienced person in such affairs to consult with about something wherein himself knoweth little and such a one found wholly to rely on his directions and judgment therein answered he well that should say If I may rely on my own judgment in seeking out such a person why may I not as well rely on it for the matter about which I seek to him which only is well answered if these two be equally easie or difficult So the Reformed granting that we are to use our own private reason for discovering what books are the true word of God yet will not allow us having found such books to be his word to use our own private reason to examin by it whether what we find delivered to us therein be truth or no or when ever any thing therein seems I say not is against our reason as a Trinity of Persons in an Unity of Essence then to follow our reason in expounding it otherwise then it appears but now we are to lay aside the arguing of our reason and to believe all these Scriptures proposed after that by our reason we have found them to have divine authority So supposing that some Church were infallible it will not follow that if one may use his judgment in finding her he may afterward also use his judgment against her or any her decrees 4ly If you ask therefore in what things we may use and follow our private reason and opinion I answer in all things wherein God or right reason hath not submitted us to the judgment of another We may use it therefore in the discovery and search whether there be any such Judge at all appointed by God over us in Spiritual matters and what person or court it is to whose judgment he hath subjected us And in order to this we may use it in the finding out which of the several religions that are in the world is the true and which in the several divisions and sects that are in the true i. e. where some truth is by all retained is the Catholick and whether that particular Church wherein we were bred hath any way departed from it So in the finding out which Councils in some doubt concerning them are legitimate and truly General to whose acts we are to render up the submission of our judgment and which is the right and genuine sence where any ambiguity of their decrees in finding them out I say by the judgment and testimony which we find the present Church of our own days or that part thereof which seems to our private reason the Catholick to give thereof In this search that Proposition of Dr. La is very true Intellectus cujusque practicus judicare debet utrum is qui pro Judice haberi velit sit utique verus legitimus an media quae adducuntur ad hoc probandum fidei faciende sufficiant But such a Judge by our private reason being found to be and found who it is we may not for the things once judged and decided by him use or follow our own private reason any further but are now to quit it and our judgment having once discovered that such is appointed our Judge in such matters in this excludes it self and this Resignation we make of our judgment is also an act of our judgment In this manner the Apostle exhorts elsewhere not to trust every teacher but to try their doctrines whether agreeing with those of the Apostles i. e. with those of the appointed Governors of the Church and elsewhere that doctrine which they find the Church-governors to have delivered to them to stand constant and stedfast in it See Col. 2. 7 8. 2 Thes. 2 15. compared with 1. 1. Tit. 1. 9. Eph. 4. 11. compared with 14. Jude 3. 4. But you will say What if upon using my private reason I find not that there is any Judge or Law-giver in Spiritual matters cannot I then in all such matters use my private reason and follow the dictates thereof without sinning No if your reason in such search was faulty for as I said vitiously contracted ignorance never excuseth omission of duty 5ly As it is our duty where any cause of doubt diligently with our best reason to seek out the true Spiritual Guides and then having found to submit our judgment and reason as readily unto them so it seems much more easie to find out the Church which is to be our guide and to decide things to us than to find out the truth of all those things she decides more easie to find out who are those Spiritual Magistrates and Substitutes of our Saviour left to govern and guide his Church until his second coming lights not put under a bushel but set on high upon a candlestick to give light to all and a corporation and city set on an hill to be seen of all or amongst several sects and divisions to find out which is the Catholick communion from which all the rest in their several times have gone forth at the first very few in number v. Trial of Doctrines § 32. than by our own guidance and steering entring every one as a rasa tabula upon search of truth amongst the many subtleties of contrary pretences of contrary traditions in Antiquity to find out what is orthodox in all those points which points wean-while after so many hot contentions and wavering of opinion and mis-quoted Authors the Guide we neglect in her several Councils hath prudently fixed that we might no more like children be tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the sleight of men and cunning craftiness whereby they lie in wait to deceive What wise work have the Socinians made and what strange truths have they discovered by waving the authority of Councils and laying hold of private reason to conduct them and be their judge assisted with plain Scripture after that they had made quest after some other Judge and could find none sufficiently infallible for their turn Who have bin so much so dangerously deceived as these wise and wary men who would trust none but the infallible 6ly Against that which is usually said that the words of Scripture are as plain and intelligible as the decrees of a Council and therefore our private
reason or judgment may make use of the one for its guide as well as the other and when there seems contradiction against the other it seems much more easie by our private understandings to apprehend the Councils decision than to apprehend the sence of Scripture in such points as the Council decides and many may learn for example the orthodox tenets concerning the Trinity out of the Athanasian Creed that could not learn them out of Scripture without mistaking in some of them For tho it is true that a text of Scripture may be as plain as any decrees of a Council and that as we may judge what is the sence and meaning of such a decree so we may also of such a place of Scripture yet it may be presum'd that none of these plain Scriptures will ever be found opposite to the decree of such Council for if the place be so plain and intelligible to us surely so it would have bin to so learned and numerous a Council as well as to a private judgment Again what is said in Scripture concording with the decrees of Councils yet it may be presum'd is not there every way considering the counterpoise of other Scripture-texts so plainly said Else such Conciliary decisions are vain and we must likewise say that all expositions comments catechismes are no plainer than the text and to those who read Scriptures useles For words are only multiplied without necessity where what is said before is as plain as what is said after and the authority of the first infallible Thus if the Council remained as ambiguous as the Scripture supposing the Church infallible yet those who followed her sentence could receive no more satisfaction to their doubts than they had before and the sence of the Conciliary definitions might be disputed as much as of Scripture and both sides who subscribe to the Scriptures would also subscribe to them which we ordinarily see refused FINIS Concerning Obedience to ECCLESIASTICAL GOVERNORS and Tryal of DOCTRINES CONTENTS SUfficient Truth always to be found in the Church § 1. Yet false Doctors must be And their followers not safe § 2. Doctors therefore may be tried § 3. Several ways of Trial § 4. 1. By the H. Scriptures § 5. Where 1. Concerning Trials of Doctrines and Commands wherein Scriptures are silent § 6. 2. Concerning Doctrines and Commands where the Scripture seems to us doubtful § 12. 3. Concerning Doctrines c. to which Scriptures seem to us contrary § 13. 1. Where we must proceed to use a second Trial of Doctrines by the Doctors of the Church § 14. And beware of depending on our own judgment made upon the Scriptures § 14. That there is always some external Communion of Christianity or other not erring in knowledge necessary § 18. We necessarily to follow the judgment of the Church'es teachers where universally agreeing § 19. n. 1. Where divided 1. We to follow either side rather than our own judgment opposite to both § 20. 2. Of the two to follow those whom the other acknowledge to have the judgment or practice of former times on their side § 21. Where this judgment or practice is pleaded by both we to search and to follow that which we find so by our experience § 22. That this thing is not hard to be found § 23. The Fathers being not for the main either repugnant to one another or ambiguous or impertinent Where Of certain Cautions in making judgment of the tenets of the Ancients § 23. And some Church also in all ages being like the former § 30. And Heresy still either going or being thrust out of this Church § 32. And its beginning discerned by its paucity So that discreet Trial cannot mistake § 33. Who can search no further They to adhere to the judgment of the Christian Church wherein they live rather than to their own judgment against it § 36. 3. Trial of Doctrine and Doctors by the Holines those produce and these practise § 37. Where more Truth more Holiness § 38. And where more Holiness more Truth § 39. Where more Error more Vice and è converso § 40. In Churches therefore we to compare 1. the strictness or liberty of their doctrines discipline c. § 41. 2. Their abounding or deficiency in doctrines tending to Perfection § 42. 3. Their writings of Devotion § 46. 4. The Lives of their Saints or Holy men § 47. 4. Trial of Doctrines by the Conversion of Nations § 49. Concerning Obedience to Ecclesiastical Governors and Trial of Doctrines THat God by his Great Apostle Jesus Christ sent the clear light of all the mystery of our salvation into the world and that Christ hath and will continue it so much as is sufficient to us by his Substitutes in the same office unto the end thereof so that we need not remain in darknes but by our own default hath bin shewed you elsewhere in Sav. Ben. p. 12. c. and Succession of Clergy p. 1. But yet 1. it seems that notwithstanding these Substitutes there shall be some false teachers and as we hitherto see not all his other enemies so neither all error put under our Saviours feet as not sin so neither ignorance yet quite vanquished 1 Cor. 13. 12. because it so seemed good unto him for whom are all things as to permit evil always to make good arise more gloriously out of it so to permit error always 2 Pet. 2. 1. the more to illustrate truth and to make the followers of truth as well as of righteousnes by these oppositions more approved for their adherence to God and capable of greater reward it being far more glorious more acceptable to have discerned held defended the truth where there was a possibility a facility a pattern an opposition of error See for this 1 Cor. 11. 19. Matt. 10. 34 35. 17. 15. Act. 20. 29. 1 Tim. 4. 1. 2 Tim. 2. 20. compared with 16. c. 1 Jo. 2. 18. Luk. 2. 34. Jo. 9. 39. Rom. 9. 32. This is shewed also by experience even when there were infallible teachers there were also false ones mingled a contending for the law at Antioch Nicolaitanisme at Ephesus Rev. 2. 15 Divisions about their teachers at Corinth Circumcision at Galatia opposers of the Resurrection deniers of Christ's true Incarnation Hymeneus Diotrephes c. Else could not God at the beginning have published his truth to all Nations as well as to Abraham or spread the Gospel at first over all the world Could not our Saviour have laid the chief foundation of the Gospel so firm and evident that the whole Nation of the Jews together with the chief Priests and Pharisees and Herod and Pilat should have bin convinced thereof by their own sences in shewing himself with his wounded side and pierced hands and feet publickly at that grand Festival as formerly he had done in the Temple and in the Streets in their Palaces and Courts and
then before all the people have ascended into Heaven to God and so have sealed for ever to that whole Nation the Confession of his being the Messias and thus with a great access to his Glory on earth have prevented their so great and long Apostacy What meaned he then to appear so sparingly and in corners the doors being shut and not to all the people saith the Apostle but to some few chosen to be witnesses tho he was not here defective in what was sufficient Again could not his Spirit that hath led some have led all into all truth if he had pleased to give it to them in a greater measure How easie had it bin for our Saviour who foresaw that sharp controversie concerning observance of the Ceremonial law by Christians the maintainers of which ceremonies contended only for them because they thought Christ had not abrogated them to have declared himself openly in that point when he was here on earth How easie for him foreseeing the controversies ever since even those so many about his own person those now between the Reformed and the Roman Church to have caused instead of an occasionally-written Epistle such a Creed as the Athanasian or such Articles as those of Trent or of the Augustan Confession or such a methodical clear Catechisme as now several Sects draw up for the instruction of their followers in the principles of their religion to have bin written by his Apostles Will any one say that had such writings bin H. Scripture yet these controversies had not bin prevented or at least not in some greater measure prevented than now they are Or would not brieflier all controversies have bin prevented had our Saviour as plainly said that the Roman Bishop should regulate the faith of his Church for ever as it may be said and is said by others There must be heresies then and therefore it seemed good to the wisdom of the Father that all things should not be done that might but only so much that was sufficient whereby they should be prevented Neither is it a good reasoning This was the best way for taking away all controversy and error in the Church that the Scriptures should plainly so as none may mistake set down all truths necessary to salvation or that there should be a known infallible Judge therefore they do so or therefore there is so because this seemed not best to God for the reasons fore-mentioned and for many other perhaps not known which made the Apostle cry 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 11 33. to take away all controversie and error c no more than it did to prohibit in the world the being of evil I know not whether Tertullian's saying in praescript cont haer concerning this matter be not too bold Ipsas quoque Scripturas sic esse ex Dei voluntate dispositas ut haereticis materiam subministrarent And haereses sine aliquibus occasionibus Scripturarum accidere non poterant But we may make good use of it in being less rash and more circumspect in interpreting especially when we are singular where we may be so easily mistaken 2ly It seems since there is supposed sufficient means for all those who are in the Church to attain to the knowledge of all necessary truth for God and our Saviour have not bin wanting to his Church in necessaries that those who blindly obey such false guides as shall be in the world shall not be free from punishment tho they offend thro ignorance See Matt. 15. 14. Ezek. 33. 8. 3. 18. 3ly There being some doctrines false and danger in being misled by them it seems all doctrines may be tried and that by all persons See Jo. 5. 39 our Saviour bidding them try his Act. 17. 11. the Bereans and Act. 15. 2. the Antiochians trying S. Paul's See to this purpose 1 Jo. 4. 1. 1 Thes. 5. 21. Rev. 2. 2. 1 Cor. 10. 15. 11. 13. And the more trial the better so it be rightly performed whereby we may discover false doctrines and teachers that we may not be seduced by them whereby we may know more of God may confirm our belief of which there are many degrees in what we are taught and may be able to give better account to others of our faith 1 Pet. 3. 15. Col. 3. 16. and whereby truth will always have a great advantage of error For verum vero consonat 4. Now seeing that all Spiritual knowledge cometh first by Revelation from God the trial of any doctrine we doubt of is to be made either by the holy Scriptures written from the beginning by men inspired by the Holy Ghost or by the Interpreters of these Scriptures and those who were ordained by these men that were inspired and who had the form of sound doctrine committed unto them viz. by the Doctors and Pastors of the Church where also the doctrines of some Doctors whose tenets we doubt of are to be tried by the rest of the Doctors of the present times or the doctrines of all the present Doctors to be tried by the writings of the Doctors of former times Trials by the Scriptures were those Act. 17. 11. Jo. 5. 39. 2 Pet. 1. 19. Trials by the Doctors of the Church those Act. 15. 2. Gal. 1. 9. Rom. 16. 17. 2 Thes. 3. 14. 1 Cor. 14. 32. c. 2 Jo. 10. Now these H. Scriptures and Holy Doctors collectively taken to the not-yet-so-far-grounded and illuminated are capable of being tried too The first Scriptures and Teachers by those who lived in the same times were tried by Miracles by those who lived afterward are tried by Tradition the second Scriptures are tried by their accord with the first as also by Miracles the 2d Teachers are tried by their Ordination from the first which Teachers if we find all agreeing in one judgment we need try no further our Saviour having promised his perpetual presence with them and that the gates of Hell shall never prevail against the truth taught by them 5. Now first concerning trial of our Superiors commands and doctrines by Scriptures of which there are many several ways As trying 1. Whether such doctrines or commands be contained or commanded in Scripture 2. Whether the contrary to them be contained or commanded in Scripture Again if the contrary of them be contained there 1. whether as fact only 2 or also as precept 1. Now the first of these trials seems not necessary to be used 1. For it doth not follow that it is unlawful to do or to believe a thing because H. Scripture doth not say or command it Angumentum ab authoritate non valet negative Some things both in doctrine and discipline may possibly descend from the Apostles that are not set down by them in writing and these tho not absolutely necessary which very few points are yet very useful to Salvation Timothy might hear some things from S. Paul more than are set down in his Epistle see 2 Tim. 1. 13.
they should not be tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine by the steight of men till they may all come in the unity of the doctrine of faith to the fulness of Christ Jesus Eph. 4. 11. Heb. 13. 7 9. Neither may we say that so also we quit only our own reason to accept another man's for as we are guided by their authority so are they guided not by their own reason only but by former authority till we ascend to the first founders of Christian religion See Ecclus. 8. 9. To the judgment therefore of such visible Doctors and Teachers of the Church we ought to repair to some or other of these nay to some or other external communion of them For the promises of perpetual assistance c are not made to the Church at random or in obscurity and unknown viz. that some man or other on earth either of the Clergy or if not of the Laity shall be an orthodox Christian so far as to be capable of salvation till the end of the world but * to those to whom our Saviour also committed the Keys to whom indeed t is most necessary they being the Shepherds and the rest the flock committed always to their guidance See Matt. 16. 18. compared with 19. 28. 20. compared with 19. 18. 20. compared with 18. * to such a Church †as people might know and repair and make their complaints to Matt. 18. 17. †as is a light of the world set on a Candlestick and shining before men a city set upon a hill that cannot be hid Matt. 5. 14 15 16. never was nor never shall be hid of the perpetual being of which we make confession of our faith in the Apostolical Creed the holy Catholick Church and yet plainer in the Nicene one Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church which who so understands not of an external visible profession and communion as theirs then was may retain the words but not the sence and faith of that Council See this matter more largely discoursed in Succession of Clergy § 2. c. and in Church-government 2. part § 25 26. First therefore in this humble repair to their Judgment where we find all these Doctors of Christianity disagreeing from what we take to be Scripture which holds also in the determinations of any Christian Church whatever so long as we can come to know no other or no better see § 36. we ought in such a case to relinquish our judgment and submit to theirs who also have the same light of Scripture as we and in humility we ought to think more ability to judge of it and who likewise have the promise of indefectibility in truths necessary to salvation Therefore here also the more high and weighty the point is the more firmly ought we to adhere to them trusting to the protection of our Saviour the Head of the Church that in these points especially they shall not all so conjoyned be mistaken And again in smaller points since there is less danger in our erring in them and the more guilt still the smaller they are in our making a schism from or division in the Church for them more humility exercised in obeying no truth of consequence vindicated by contention wisdom perhaps would think it fit to subscribe to the same Guides For as the Apostle said in another case If they are sit to judge the greatest are they not so to judge the smallest matters 1 Cor. 6. 2. And if any thing herein may be indulged to singularity of opinion t is only so far as to make known the reasons that move us to it to the Church or some few therein whom we count men of learning and integrity and void of passion and after this to submit to whatever they who now together with us apprehend all the reasons which sway us shall determin The contrary to which can be only the fruit of self-conceit or obstinacy This if they unanimously deliver any thing to us which we think against Scripture and much more yet ought we to submit to any order of their's tho we do not find it in Scripture if we find nothing in Scripture against it without calling such their sanctions Will-worship and Superstition making sure to use the same charity to the Church which we are obliged-in to private men in whom nihil est damnandum quod ulla ratione bonum esse queat Neither is this assenting to them against our own reason or judgment as we call it going against conscience which conscience is nothing but our judgment and that we call judgment many times nothing but our own and that a slight opinion In not following of which opinion or judgment we are faulty only then where we have no wiser person caeteris paribus nor no established law to guide and direct it Nor is it going against our reason when as nothing is more reasonable than to go against some of our own particular reasonings when we have another stronger reason to the contrary that is the submitting of it to such an authority nothing being more ordinary than for arguments from a Reason to give place to those from an Authority upon which Authority also and not upon Reason is grounded our Faith. See Submiss of Judgment § 2. c. But let me add this for our further contentment that he who not only demands of the Church but takes pains also as all ought to be informed by the Church concerning the proof and evidence of what she requires him to believe shall seldom or never be put to believe that what she saith is truth only from her authority because she saith it but also from his own judgment because she manifests it Obj. But doth not an erring conscience then bind us to follow it tho it be so or may I sometime do a thing which I think unlawful upon another's judgment without sinning Answ. He that is perswaded in conscience that tho he thinks such a thing unlawful yet he ought rather to follow a wiser man's judgment than his own whose judgment saith t is not unlawful cannot absolutely say he is perswaded that it is unlawful And he who thinking such a thing is more likely in reason yet thinketh likewise that he ought rather to obey the Church's judgment than his own reason if he here follows his conscience that is in respect of his own reason he goeth against his conscience as I call it in respect of the submission he thinks he ows to anothers judgment For whilst his judgment prefers another man's judgment before his own this man in following the others must needs also be said to follow his own judgment and consequently his conscience Now he that is not thus perswaded of the duty of submission of his judgment c to wiser men or men authorized to guide his judgment t is true that he sins in doing against his own opinion or conscience so long as he is not so perswaded but then he ought
strangers And tho there shall be Antichrists and falling away from the faith as there was even in the Apostle's times yet that falling away from the faith shall be also from the Church but the Church it self i. e. that whole external communion which was in times before the Church of Christ for I speak not of any one particular place from any of which I conceive one time or other Christianity may be banished or if you will the visible body of the Clergy openly cohering in that external communion shall never go into Apostacy Nor shall the Apostates fall away in but out of the external communion of the former Church and so always be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not in respect of their opinion but decession not in respect of the truth of but their dissent from the Church in what they maintain and shall for ever be known * either by their going out of the former and setting up new communions Jud. 19. Heb. 10. 25. 1 Jo. 2. 19. 2 Tim. 3. 8. Jude 11. opposing those in authority and so Tertullian Praejudicatum est adversus omnes haereses id esse verum quodcunque primum id esse adulteratum quodcunque posterius * or by the former Church thrusting them out which shall never joyn with them But t is to be noted that most of those divisions of the Church if not all which have separated from a former communion are such as have not bin first expelled by the Church and then set up a new communion upon necessity but such as have left it always pretending that there be some tenets or practices in the former Church for which tho she permitting to them all their own opinions they could not communicate with her Now that communion which they tho indulged their own tenets will not return to t is plain that at first they did reject whatever they pretend to the contrary and tho the other Ch. also ejected them for both these well consist And such Apostates also may be known always at their first going out tho not so well afterwards by the smallnes of their number As Arrianism which was the greatest division that ever happened in the Church for 1500 years never prevailed upon all parts of the Church's communion the Western continuing for a major part untainted with it touching which see Ch. Gov. 2. part 40. § c. and in both the Eastern and Western it ever had an external communion of the Catholicks opposit to it and in its first rise was easily discerned by the paucity of that Sect as the beginnings of all heresies are easily known neither are they tho some of them of very speedy growth yet of long continuance See 2 Tim. 3. 1 8 9. Jude 11. Act. 5. 38. Neither had the contrary conceit to wit of the external visible body of the Church her falling away from Christ by which the sheep are to seek for a right shepherd ever got so much strength amongst Christians but from a supposing of Anti-Christ to be in profession a Christian and one of that Church in which it is said he shall sit notwithstanding that others of whom the same thing was said viz. that they shall sit in the Holy place see Matt. 24. 15. Dan. 11. 41. were not in their outward profession members of the Church But this is an opinion as is elsewhere shewed groundless and the going out of Babylon Rev. 18. 4. which is there spoken of place not of former communion as suppose it were said to the Christian Churches that are now in Turky to remove from thence interpreted in this sence is a dangerous principle to breed Schisms and ruin souls in causing mens forsaking of the external communion of the Catholick Church of Christ that is in present being Which Church many think shall be always so conspicuous and set on an hill that it shall in all times out-number any separating Sect both for the multitude of people and extent of Nations And we have found it so till Luther's time the fore-mentioned Arrianism never ruling in the most of Christians who adhered still to the Nicene Creed but in some of the chiefest of the Clergy the Bishops such as were intruded by the Emperor the orthodox Bishops being thrust out and carried away with his inclinations and these chiefly in the Eastern Churches As for the objection of Antichrist's times those who think the Supposition that he shall be a professor of Christianity false will easily grant that the Church then shall be a smaller number in respect of Infidels but not in respect of Hereticks And for that objection Matt. 24. 11 12 13 Luk. 18. 8. we have seen our Saviour's words fulfilled in Mahomet and those seduced by him and in many heretical Sects also and in a more general corruption of manners even amongst the orthodox without any infringement of what is here affirmed See more of this in Success of Clergy § 1. First therefore those within the bounds of the Church that follow blind leaders without all trial are void of excuse Not because they do not quit all leaders absolutely and guide themselves by the Scriptures but because the Church of God i. e. the Pastors and Teachers thereof having our Saviour's promise never so to be blind but that salvation and escaping the pit should be always had in her as it in all times hath bin both in the Jewish and since in the Christian Church there are at all times other leaders who are illuminated with God's Spirit and whose light not put under a bushel but set on a candlestick shines before them whom they may securely follow So that the people are never left nakedly to the Scriptures or to the Law without orthodox Teachers and Guides therein or without an external communion lawful and safe to be adhered to nor such Teachers left without manifest testimony to all that will look after it that they are sent from God and that their communion is the true Church either by their shewing miracles and other signs of their mission or by their succession to and consent with the former Church which shewed miracles and by all other Sects tho perhaps at length out-numbring them yet discerned always to be few at first and to go out from them So under the Law the whole Order of God's Priests never fell so away at any time neither before nor in nor after the Babylonish captivity till the coming of Christ according to the promise Gen. 49. 10. and our Saviour's testimony Lu. 16. 16. Jo. 4. 22. Matt. 23. 2. but that there was always a remnant of them by the former marks to be easily discerned from the Apostatizers serving the Lord with a true worship and having a flock amongst the people obedient to them And at Christ's coming when Satan was let loose to deceive the Sanedrim and infatuate all the former chief Ecclesiastical Governors God gave all the people sufficient testimony by miracles
unrepented of before death must needs as other sins do exclude all such out of heaven and tho the Excommunications of the Church have also here a dreadful power whereby he is deprived of her prayers also and receives her curse yet in such a Church by the great light of Scripture therein retained there may be and ordinarily is so much truth asserted as joyned with christian obedience is sufficient for his salvation who is guiltless in these crimes Neither are the Church-Excommunications further powerful in their censure than others are guilty of the offence But yet such a one must know 1. First that he becomes guilty of Schism not only by not forsaking a known error or a byhim-counted unlawful communion but by where there is any remedy for it a purposed ignorance and carelesnes of further knowing truth where he hath reason to be jealous and sees a breach made in the Church of Christ. 2ly This misfortune happens to those not guilty of the Heresie or Schism of the Church wherein they live that the matter of the Heresie or Schism most times being in doctrines or practices if not necessary yet very beneficial for attaining Salvation that I say either by erroneous doctrines taught in such Church's or many profitable doctrines not taught or looser discipline practised there they run a much greater hazard of their Salvation See Dr. Potter sect 4. p. 115. Yet blessed be God for those whom he hath so far enlightned as to abide without obstinacy in their errors in any christian Society for we may presume that thence also many go to heaven and these not only hearers but perhaps some teachers also if not with their doctrines destroying the foundation Jesus Christ nor acting against conscience nor wilfully negligent to inform it as I fear many of them be See Ch. gov 3. part § 84. Besides trial of Doctrines by Scriptures and by the Doctors of the Church there is also a 3d. way of trial both of the Doctrines and Doctors and Churches which is much recommended by our Saviour Matt. 7. 15. c. and by his Apostles 1 Tim. 4. 7. 6. 3. 2 Tim. 2. 16. Tit. 1. 1. Jam. 3. 17. and that trial is as their doctrines tend more unto holines of life and as this fruit is more or less produced by them For tho this holines is by all doctrines equally pretended yet is it not by all doctrines equally advanced For many ill consequences there are following some doctrines more than others which tho they are disavowed and shaken off in the expositions of the teachers yet do they still adhere to them in the peoples practice As there are other doctrines which whereas perhaps as some mis-understood them they seem pernicious yet we find the followers thereof excelling in holines where the doctrine seems to commend and induce ignorance very studious and knowing where the doctrine seems to nourish boasting presumption and pride very humble and contrite in spirit whom when we find and that frequently walking just contrary to what we suppose their doctrines we are to imagin their doctrines not to be what we suppose the practice of the Church being the best expounder generally of her opinions But were it otherwise yet I conceive far better it were to have faulty doctrines mis-understood so as to produce holines than even those that are good mis-understood so as to produce profanenes and impiety Again there are fewer divine truths acknowledged in one Church perhaps than in another and so obedience less perfect and in a Church where there are no false doctrines affirmatively and positively taught yet perhaps many true ones areo mitted or also rejected such as are exceeding beneficial to produce sanctity Now 1. first this is certain that no lye abounds so much to the producing of holines as truth doth and the more true and orthodox any Church is and the more truths of God are embraced by her and none of his counsels rejected the more purity is in her For the whole design of our Saviour's coming into the world of the moulding of all the doctrines of the Law and of the Gospel these and not others was the advancing by them her sanctification So that I may say had there bin an error that could more have advanced it than these truths truth had bin error and that error had bin made truth Where then more of these divine rules are known and observed there will flourish more holines And therefore we may reflect Where more holines is found there probably are these better known and taught because where they are most taught there in all likelihood also they are most observed Therefore since all acknowledge the excellent sanctity and purity of the primitive times they must likewise grant that Church more orthodox which more closely retains their doctrines their discipline c. And it is an astonishment to me to see that those who so much admire the one yet so freely cut off and reject the other that effected it and now where practised do still effect it which they might by this know to have caused it for that where all other doctrines are put and these which used anciently are now cast aside in some Church's abrogated there such sanctity grows not nor is the brick made at all where the straw is denied How is it then that the fruit is so much commended and yet the root that bears it called superstition will-worship tyrannical abridgment of christian liberty * the equalling of things indifferent and of mens traditions so are all things called which in their conceit are not strictly commanded in Scripture notwithstanding all the holy examples which they may find in these Scriptures thereof and that the commands of God are made thereby not of none but of much more effect with the commandements of God * the placing salvation in mens devices and in the practising of their own inventions Again besides this that where more divine truths for I speak not here of other knowledge which many times proves a great enemy to piety are revealed there generally must be more holines because all divine truths tend to it see Psal. 119. 104 128. and ordinarily where the judgment is very much illuminated the affections cannot but follow it and the more light the soul hath in it the less likely it is to miss its way t is yet further to be observed that holines where ever we find it if not begotten by yet quickly begets truth that the passions brought into order do readily admit that heavenly light which less or more enlighteneth every one that cometh into the world The H. Ghost is a fire Matt. 3. 11. so that wheresoever the Spiritual light thereof is there is heat also and much more e contra And the mortification of lusts soon brings in orthodoxnes of opinion when the inclinations of the soul are so well regulated as truth is rather for at least not against them So that in that Church
where most holines is is also most truth either causing or else caused by it See for this those many promises * of illuminating the Saints Jo. 7. 17. Psal. 111. 10. 2 Pet. 1. 9. Eph. 3. 17 18. Phil. 1. 9. 2 Cor. 3. 16 17. Psal. 25. 12. Jo. 8. 12. Jo. 14. 21 23. Jo. 15. 2. Wisd. 1. 2 3 4. Rom. 12. 2. Psal. 37. 23 30. Prov. 2. 7. Matt. 11. 25. 1 Cor. 2. 11. c 16. Psal. 119. 100. Jo. 14. 15 16. Act. 16. 14. 10. 34 35 44 compared with 2. 15. 8 9. Jam. 4. 8 10. Matt. 25. 29. and * of granting it the Spirit unto prayer and devotions Luk. 11. 13. 1 Cor. 2. 7. 1 Cor. 3. 3. compared with Col. 1. Jam. 1. 5. 1 King. 3. 9. 11. For true knowledge not only of understanding divine truths revealed but of understanding the revelation also of them I mean the Scriptures cometh more from the operation of God's Spirit than the discourse of Reason Jam. 1. 5. 1 Kin. 3. 9 11. tho this Spirit is working with Reason See Act. 16. 14. Luk. 24. 32. Heb. 4. 2. Eph. 1. 17. 1 Cor. 2. 14. And the same connexion that is found between truth and holines is also between vice and error or blindnes they also mutually producing one another For †whether we say that the passions run counter to the judgment so they will soon vitiate it especially in things tho very reasonable yet not plainly evident as matters of faith are and by hindering any light that may descend into it they will make it study things only in their defence suffer it to consider no arguments that make against them and over-aw it with fear lest any truth should oppose the satisfaction of them Facilè deos non esse credit cui deos esse non expedit and so vice begets error Or †whether we say that the affections follow judgment so error and blindnes here will soon cause in ordinacy there the unholy are always some way or other blind See 1 Jo. 2. 4. 2 Tim. 3. 5. 1 Cor. 8. 2 3. 2. 14. Hos. 4. 11. Rom. 8. 5 6 7. 1 Cor. 3. 3. compared with the first Jo. 3. 19 20. 5. 44. 1 Tim. 1. 19. 6. Tit. 1. 11. Lu. 16. 14. Phil. 3. 19. 2 Thess. 2. 12. 2 Tim. 2. 19. compared with 18. Our Saviour accused the blind Pharisees of many vices especially of ambition and covetousnes who therefore placed religion more in ceremonies washing fasting c than in justice and judgment Lu. 11. 42. And the Apostles noted the false teachers much guilty in their lives both of sensuality lust and gluttony and of covetousnes and vain glory by which their doctrines became such as pleased men such as tended to liberty and licentiousnes See 2 Pet. 2. 3 18 19. and were contrary to mortification and the cross Phil. 3. 18 19. See 2 Pet. 2. cap. and Epistle of Jude Men of corupt minds 1 Tim. 6. 5. Lovers of their own selves 2 Tim. 3. 2. Self-willed or self-pleasers 2 Pet. 2. 10. Loving to have the Preeminence 3 Jo. 9. Their spirit proud 1 Tim 6. 4. contentious Jam. 3. 17. Tit. 3. 9. 1 Tim. 6 5. ever learning and never able to come to any certainty 2 Tim. 3. 7. Separating Jud. 19. Heb. 10. 25. Nor can such teachers unholy themselves by the truths they teach propagate holines easily in others For tho many truths are taught by the most erroneous yet are they truths not such as more immediately tend to holines or not to those parts of holines wherein himself is deficient else if their doctrines could have had any effect in the auditor they would have had so in the teacher which as long as they have not and that he wanteth experience and the practick the theory is nothing worth but like him that reads a lecture of war and never was Soldier Or if they be such as tend more to holines yet they are but a few with the omission of many other that are mainly conducing to the production of piety so that the effect follows not a partial cause or if they be sufficient yet are they ineffectual and unperswasive whilst he speaks them from the brain and not from the heart from the memory not from the affections and whilst they are unaccompanied with the power of the Spirit Jude 19. 2 Cor. 3. 6. the Spirit applying what they say See Luk. 18. 34. compared with Act. 16. 14. which ordinarily doth not cooperate in the word with such a ministery see 1 Cor. 4. 19 20 the ministery tho not for necessary Sacraments yet for many other things becoming much less effectual when in the possession of a wicked person endued with a lawful mission yet void of the sanctifying Spirit Certainly it much matters whether we be recommended to God and God's grace recommended to us by the prayers and teaching of an holy or of a wicked man. S. Cyprian saith Oportet eos ad sacerdotium deligi quos a Domino constat audiri quoting Hos. 9. 4. Jo. 9. 34. And S. Hierom saith the like quoting Lev. 21. 17. And Gelasius Quomodo coelestis Spiritus invocatus adveniet si sacerdos qui eum adesse deprecatur criminosis plenâ—is actionibus reprobatur And very much every where is said in the Prophets of the mischiefs descending on the people from the superintendence of a vitious Clergy Whereas the holy man speaks with power the Spirit both in and from him working upon the people God imparting it unto his auditors as Moses's unto the Elders See Matt. 10. 20. Act. 6. 10. and also * from God cooperating with him 1 Cor. 7. 9. God both hearing his prayers and intercessions Jam. 5. 16. Job 33. 23. and also blessing his labours more than other mens Now what hath bin said of particular persons is to be understood the same of Churches being a collective body made up of particulars in all of which Churches tho there are some men holy and in the best of Churches many bad yet where more light and truth there doubtles are the more good and the fewer wicked and so è converso 1. To try then what Church is such 1. You are to observe and weigh well †their Teachers and Divines who are educated and prepared for their office in speculations and controversies more and who more in mortifications who strive rather to rectifie the peoples manners and who rather to inform the peoples understandings †their doctrines their discipline their ceremonies which Church gives stricter education to her children whose doctrines tend more to liberty whose discipline is more remiss whose ceremonies are more reverent and by all manner of ways helpful to devotion For the severest religion is the best and Spiritual comforts are in it to such a degree possessed as worldly consolations are by it retrenched and where-ever more liberty there less holines For liberty is 1. First both the most used pretence of false
teachers and is absolutely the aptest instrument for bringing in vices and making men in stead of being free from servants to their lusts See 2 Pet. 18 19. And we know what was the art of Jeroboam 1 Kin. 2. 28. It is too much for you c. Which thing wise Bacon also hath observed Nova secta ita se tantum late diffundit si portam luxuriae voluptatibus aperiat authoritati repugnet And 2ly when such pretence of liberty is not used for these things as doubtles many times it is not by the Doctors yet where there is no express restraint made of it it is almost irremediably abused to these ill ends by the people I mean to licentiousnes and satisfying of lusts to an occasion for the slesh Gal. 5. 13. to a cloak for wickednes and particularly as that place imports disobedience to authority 1 Pet. 2. 16. Therefore S. Paul much mistaken to be a patron of it Gal. 5. 1. tho he so much vindicated it in one thing against Jewish ceremonies and against these in one case that is when required as necessary to salvation for else himself many times conformed to them yet in the free using of all things lawful unto us c no man opposed liberty more than he nor practised it less See Rom. 14. cap. 1 Cor. 8. 9. cap. 1 Cor. 6. 12. He would teach for nothing and work at his trade would not eat and drink would not carry about a wife would keep under his body so as that he might not be brought under the power of any thing so as not to be able to abstain from it nay would not eat a bit of flesh as long as he lived if not himself but another should but receive any hurt by it And so no man more strict in his orders than he see 1 Cor. 14. cap. 11. 2 16. 4. 17. and in requiring obedience in all things For indeed however we slight small helps maxima pendent ex minimis 2. In Churches therefore in prosecution of this search we are to observe †not only whether they retain all truths absolutely necessary to be known to attain salvation for I think both the soberest of the Roman Church grant this to the Reformed and of the Reformed grant this to the Roman and both of them grant that the Scriptures plainly set them down †nor only whether their doctrines are not untrue or their commands not unlawful or either of these contrary to antiquity but also whether these Churches be not deficient in or also oppose many truths and practices delivered by Antiquity and taught and enjoyned elsewhere which neither are absolutely necessary to mens salvation nor yet absolutely indifferent but things very profitable and much conducing to it Where note that it is a great wrong to the perfection of Christianity if any should rank all points not absolutely necessary to salvation amongst things purely indifferent and of free use and wherein we may take our liberty of opinion or practice Those points which receive no excuse of impossibility nor no exception of time place or persons for the believing or practising of them are very few perhaps one Sacrament Baptism one Article of the Creed the belieiving in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour And yet those points without which the Church nor Christian religion cannot subsist and which those who have sufficient revelation are not to oppose or neglect to practice under some peril of their damnation are many We are therefore to observe in a Church whether these are not some way deficient whether as all vice is disallowed by her so all those means are recommended by her whereby vice may be destroyed and contrarily whether not some but all virtue and all the perfection thereof be proposed and pressed whether Christian virtues be recommended by her in the whole latitude of their efficacy and use or only in some part thereof As if something by her be pressed only as a duty of obedience to a command when as it is a special means also to procure some benefit As should she recommend alms only as a duty when as it is also a special means to appease God's wrath and to procure thro Christ remission of sin So should she recommend works only as a fruit of true faith when as they are a necessary condition of salvation since men will much sooner do these pressed to them in one sence than only in the other As many would sooner give some alms to appease God's wrath for some sin that afflicts the conscience than only not to commit the breach of a precept Again whether not only the precepts but all the higher counsels of the Gospel are held forth to her children For we must know that as under the Law none of all the Sacrifices were more grateful to God than the free-will-offerings i. e. when they willingly did more than God exacted from them in and conformably to those ways wherein he was pleased then to be worshipped by them So under the Gospel there is an acceptable free-willworship answering to that legal i. e. when one doth something for the measure time place and other circumstances of those holy duties wherein God is pleased to be served by us not in any thing else that is besides and unconformable unto them more than the Gospel hath prescribed Yet so that he who mean-while omits to do the like sinneth not against any command And this acceptable free-will-worship consists * either in an higher degree of performing some duty than is required under penalty of sin as praying seven times a day with David giving half his goods to the poor with Zacheus or yet more with the widow Lu. 21. 4. * or in using some means truly conducing to better performance of such duty more than is required or than we are confined to by any command As abstaining from some things lawfully used to help us the easilier to avoid some vice or excell in the practice of some duty as †when one liveth single useth course apparrel plain and spare diet chuseth an Ecclesiastical vocation more duly to wait on God more to subdue lust more to help the poor c. and †when one restraineth his liberty with Vows Provided always that this free-will-offering which is not required be always undertaken for the better doing of something commanded and required and be only a circumstance as it were of something that is in it self duty and be such as God hath recommended tho not enjoyned and Saints of God before us have practised Now since such things may lawfully be done upon our own undertaking much more are they not to be refused upon the Church's injunction which always with the command fails not to express a profitable end concerning which it is the duty of our humility to submit-unto and not question her judgment See more of this in Dr. Hammond's excellent note upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Coloss. 2. We are therefore well to
mystery of to attribute too great a virtue to give too great a reverence to the Holy Sacraments c. 3. You are to peruse their writings and books not of controversy but of devotion and instructions for the practice of holy living In which you shall find certainly what fruit their doctrines bear and what strength and virtue they contain in them and a great difference between them in their operations upon the affections a much fainter and more languishing heat from the one than from the other as indeed what fervent motives to piety could one raise from such foundations as have bin above-mentioned Some teaching as it were from Experience the other from Art some full of wit the others of zeal the one more enlarging the other straitning the way to heaven some laying light the other more heavy burdens but more full of hope and present consolations more punctual and particular in their directions as from those who have first tried the way wherein they direct others more high in their aim carrying men to these heights which the other imagin impossible to attain It remains that you observe which do inflame you to more sanctity and purity of life and to them adhere for there is the power there is the Spirit of Christ. And commonly the purer the Church the more with these writings doth she abound as others do with controversy and questions as error is ever unsettled laying foundations always learning but never coming to the perfect knowledge of the truth whilst one controversie still gendreth another after the busines is committed wholly to our reason 2 Tim. 2. 23 16. 3. 7 1 Tim. 1. 4. 4. Lastly after their books and precepts peruse their lives and practices by reading the stories of the pretended holy men of all sides and those the nearest to the present age wherein the relations are more certain of which stories those Churches that afford very few t is to be suspected that where little is said there is likewise little done that may be talked of In which compared you shall find a plain difference in their strictnes according to their doctrines and a transcendency in their virtues according to their principles some much more mortified and weaned from the world and accordingly more enlightened and honoured of God than the other in each of them their doctrines perfectly designed and copied out And here in perusing their lives as their rules and doctrines t is wisdom to adhere to those by whom you most profit And since we find in the Church which the Reformation forsook frequent relations concerning holy men therein as having frequent extasies and revelations doing many miracles foretelling things future exercising most rigid abstinences and penances every day confessing and communicating c and find not in the Churches reformed any one holy man at all of whom the like things are told by them in the histories of their lives methinks it follows either that all those writers of Saints lives in the Church reformed-from have bin most intolerable liars and this in all ages as well those before as those since the reformation began for in those ages we find the like stories or else that this Church is much more favoured of God than that of the reformed is But if those writers of lives have bin all such intolerable liars t is a wonder in so frequent a fault that no Protestants at all should fall into the same but all be so strict observers of truth that none of them should at any time for the advancing of the reputation of their religion make the same fictions But from their universal silence herein may it not rather be guessed that such things as are writ in these lives involving the testimony and knowledg of so many nominated persons living in the same time and place where such facts are alledged cannot be so easily forged and counterfeited as some would perswade Not that I affirm that there is any Church or Religion wherein you may not find some persons that are virtuous in their conversation and exemplary in their lives For many excellent men also have there bin amongst the Philosophers and in the heathenish religions walking only in the light of nature much more therefore may some such be found in any Christian Sect whatever who enjoy besides that of Nature the light of Scriptures But yet in that Church where the doctrines are purest and tend most to holines certainly will be found a much greater number of holy men and Saints than in any other and these also of a greater purity and perfection and consequently more honoured also with singular favors from heaven not unlike to those of primitive times To these three ways of Trials of Doctrines c me thinks upon the weighing of our Saviour's promise That the Gospel and the doctrine of his Kingdom should be published to all Nations may be added a fourth not unconsiderable And this is diligently to observe in the many divisions of faith and diversity of opinions that are in Christianity what profession of faith doubtles sometimes attested by miracles if histories deceive us not that was or is to which usually the heathen nations have bin and are now converted and of what perswasions and communion those men are whom God hath made his instruments of their christianity For we cannot rationally think tho it may so happen to some few particulars as the Goths are said to have bin at first converted by Arrian Bishops under an Arrian Emperor yet so that God's mercy soon promoted them into the faith of the Church Catholick we cannot rationally think I say that for the general the good God having promised to the nations bread would give them a stone having promised them the revelation of his truth would plant amongst them instead thereof a manifold idolatry as worshipping of dead men and of bread as God c as some would perswade us and would not give them the waters of life to drink of unless these poisoned with such errors as from which the external communion of all true believers ought to separate And if considering the promises of God Rom. 11. c. at the time of the conversion hereafter of the Jews to Christianity no wise man would doubt to conform to their external communion why should we not also chuse rather as more safe to be of the external communion and faith in which the Nations generally both who have bin and are converted to the faith have bin and are initiated and that upon the same promise Matt. 24. 14. Mar. 13. 10. as the Jews hereafter shall be Now to these I will add only one thing more That the most part of the Northern world have received at least the publick plantation and profession of the Christian faith in or since the times of Gregory the Great as the Ecclesiastical histories plainly shew In whose time we know what were the publick doctrines in most of the modern controversies and by whom
verebatur offendere superbos daemonicolas quorum graviter ruituras in se inimicitias arbitrabatur Sed posteaquam legendo inhiando hausit firmitatem timuitque negari a Christo coram Angelis sanctis si eum timeret coram hominibus confiteri reusque sibi magni criminis apparuit erubescendo de Sacramentis humilitatis Verbi Tui non erubescendo de sacris sacrilegis superborum daemoniorum depuduit vanitati erubuit veritati subitoque inopinatus ait Simpliciano Eamus in Ecclesiam Christianus volo fieri c. mirante Roma gaudente Ecclesia Superbi videbant irascebantur dentibus suis stridebant tabescebant Servo autem tuo Domine Deus erat spes ejus non respiciebat in vanitates insanias mendaces S. Aug. de ordine 2. l. 9. c. Cum docilis factus fuerit tum demum discit quanta ratione praedita sint ea ipsa quae secutus est ante rationem quid sit ipsa ratio quae post authoritatis cunabula firmus idoneus jam sequitur Grot. Votum pro pace Preface Facile vidi id voluisse Christum ut omnes qui ab ipso nominari per ipsum beatitudinis compotes fieri vellent unum essent inter se sicut ipse cum Patre unum est Jo. 17. 11. 21 22 23. Neque vero unum animo tantum sed ea communione quae conspici potest maxime conspicitur in regiminis vinculo in sacramentorum participatione Est enim Ecclesia aut esse debet corpus quoddam Rom. 12. 5 12 c. 27. Eph. 1. 23. 2. 16. 4. 4. 5. 30. Coloss. 1. 18. 2. 17 19. Quod corpus Christus caput ei a Deo datus per varias junctur as praefecturarum compaginari voluit Eph. 4. 11 12 16. in hoc singulos baptizari ut unum corpus fierent 1 Cor. 12 13. de uno consecrato pane vesci ut sic magis magisque coalescerent unum se corpus esse testarentur 1 Cor. 10. 17. Note that in this Discours by Schismatical I mean in that sort of Schism which is a separating from lawful Ecclesiastical Superiors And that Churches not only private persons may be thus schismatical see Dr. Hammond Of Schism 3. c. § 10 21. and what is said in Ecclesiastical Government 2. and 3 parts Of the danger of SCHISM SIR COncerning the hainousnes and danger of Schism I have read over those quotations you directed me to in Mr. Cressy's Motives c. 46. but cannot consent to what he there sect 5. compared with the former quotations deduceth from them i. e. that no man if living in a Communion or Church schismatical tho he hath no influence upon the beginnings of the separation tho he judge charitably of the Church which others have separated from and approacheth as near to it in his belief as that which is truth in his opinion will permit him can be saved Unless 1. first this be true also which he indeed seems to affirm 47. c. 2. § that the true Church cannot be hidden from the eyes of any man who doth not willingly shut them That any ones opinion that such a thing as he or his church holds is truth I add or that that Church wherein they are baptized and educated is the true Church of what condition age calling capacity soever he be must needs proceed in him from some corrupt passion as S. Austin instanceth in two such passions which chiefly make ones error an heresy qui alicujus temporalis commodi or qui gloriae principatusque sui gratia falsas novas opiniones vel gignit vel sequitur and from ignorance not invincible but obstinate and affected Now I hardly think any one will affirm this of every man whatsoever that is born and educated in a Communion schismatical Tho indeed I believe that this may be truly said of very many especially the learned who notwithstanding think themselves very free from it For the necessity which is ordinarily pleaded of following or not-doing contrary to our conscience freeth not us from being guilty of Schism in doing after it no more than it could free a Donatist c if there be any defect from negligence interest passion c in the information of it See Notes of Necessary Faith § 6. And see Archbishop Lawd Conf. 37. sect 6. n. where he saith That an error and that in points Not-fundamental may be damnable to some men tho they hold it not against their conscience If they neither seek the means to know the truth nor accept truth when it is known especially being men able to judge Now I conceive in most learned that abide in a Schismatical communion such a fault there is Namely either †much negligence and this either in not reading the controversies of religion at all or in their reading the tenets of their adversaries only in their own writers or in their taking and arguing against the extremities of some private mens opinions for the Catholick doctrines of that Church from which their Ancestors have departed Or if they deficient in none of these 2ly †much interest and passion and addiction to worldly conveniences or honors therefore S. Paul and S. Jude observe much carnality in Schism 1 Cor. 3. 3 4. Jude 19 which passion unknown to them restrains the free liberty of their judgments Hence the ignorant people in a Schismatical Church may well be saved whilst the learned thereof in their uncharitablenes to and opposition of the true Church perish Or 2ly unless this be true that where invincible ignorance is and no actual breach of charity at all yet the pure want and privation of external unity or communion with the Church without any their default damns such men tho mean-while they do receive all the benefit of the Sacraments well know and believe all the necessary Articles belonging to faith and manners and conform in their lives thereunto even in strict obedience to their Ecclesiastical Superiors of that Church which they live in and which they only know Now this I think as unreasonable an assertion as the former See § 6 7 8. Now to consider the quotations in Mr. Cressy and what may be said in this point you must give me leave not to shuffle all together but to distribute the matter into many Propositions that we may see which of them are disputable which not 1. Let it be granted for the present that the Church cannot have in it many opposit external communions but only one so that he that enjoys not that one external communion is rightly said to be out of the communion of the Church i. e. out of the external communion thereof Only here note that one may elsewhere out of this external communion of this only true Catholick Church be partaker of the Sacraments and those the true Sacraments for none deny that the administration of true Sacraments may be in a Church Schismatical
such are blameable in the same degree or that all such whether less or more deniers of Christ shall at the great day be denied of him and certainly incur eternal damnation Nicodemus Joseph of Arimathea and others being to some degree guilty of this and perhaps I may add to them Naaman the Syrian yet not excluded from all mercy nay to some degree who is not so Yet who thus deny him in some kind may be such as confess him in many other as also Joseph and Nicodemus did See Jo. 19. 38 39. Jo 7. 50 51. 2 Kin 5. 17. Neither may I make the return of such a one as lives in a communion less Christian yet where Christ is professed and the true Sacraments received to the Church as necessary and his staying out as desperate as of one relinquishing heathenism suppose Victorinus or the like Austin Confess 8. l. 2. c. But doubtles such a one convinced and for motives meerly temporal staying out must needs be in a very great fault and how great we know not and on the other side he oversees an opportunity put into his hands of honouring and serving Christ through difficulties and crosses the action of his reconciliation being so much more worthy and heroical by how much the obstacles are greater Or 2ly such as are hindred c for some consideration and design meerly Spiritual as for the procuring a reunion upon a better understanding of the Church's tenets of Churches divided from It as also some reformation of some manners in the Church Catholick by which others were scandalized the best mediators of such busines being thought to be such persons as are not openly engaged on the contrary side Such seems to have bin the project of Grotius Militier if the design were not rather to reduce all Christian Churches to some union and middle complexion by every Church's relinquishing their several errors and faults i. e. such as seemed to these men to be so in every one upon some Council of them all to be assembled to compound differences In which project they seem to suppose either no Church truly Catholick and the only orthodox communion distinct from the rest as Schismatical or that they see truth clearer than she that is the Catholick and that she is not sufficiently able from time to time assisted by the Holy Ghost to correct what may be amiss within her self without the directions of others who stand without Now this to me tasts of too much arrogance and self-conceit of their own judgments in comparison of hers and also supposeth the Church Catholick fallen into deeper corruptions than can well stand with God's providence and care over her and his promises to her Or for the gaining at least from amongst Schismaticks of many more particular souls with whom in such disguise they may converse and act more freely c mean-while being real factors for the Church and themselves forbearing in some way to confess Christ only to procure a further confession of him and staying themselves without the Church-door only that they may invite the more to come in In which thing they seem to have much encouragement from the Apostle who also caught men with an innocent guil who upon occasion used ceremonies of Legal vows shaving the head purifying offering sacrifices for the persons purified Act. 21. 23. Circumcision it self Act. 16. 3. tho it in some cases and for some ends unlawful and mischievous becoming all things to all men even himself as it were without law yet under the law to Christ that he might gain the more 1 Cor. 9. 19 20 21. Now for such tho I much less dare damn them than the former 8. § 1. n. for their want of the external communion of the Church yet can I no way justifie such their doing For charity must be so wise as to begin at home and we ought not any way to neglect our own souls to gain other mens Now such a one is supposed either to continue still in the external communion of a Schismatical Church or else to communicate with no Church at all If he continue still in the communion of a Church Schismatical First 1. it may be such perhaps as hath not the right use of the Sacraments in it or also is defective in some of them and in many other doctrines and comforts wholsom discipline and strict orders of the administration of which almost no Soul is so perfect but that it will have much need 2. But 2ly Suppose no want of any such thing in it yet what if all such communion be utterly absolutely forbidden For if so then this is undoubted of that we may not do the least thing that is absolutely prohibited or unlawful that all the good in the world may come thereof Now such a communion seems forbidden both by many passages of Scriptures and by commands of the Church 1. First for the Scriptures See 2 Thess. 3. 14. 1 Cor. 10. 20 21. Rom. 16. 17. 1 Cor. 16. 22. 1 Cor. 5. 9 11. compared with 6. 2 Cor. 6. 14 15 17 c. 2 Jo. 10 11. Matt. 18. 17. Tit. 3. 10. Eph. 5. 7 11. some of which texts contain a strict injunction for not keeping company or conversing with wicked livers and more especially with the infidel heretical schismatical more pernicious than wicked livers even in things indifferent as eating with them c. Which injunction of the Apostle seems to be made in imitation of the former law of the Jews forbearing eating or companying with the idolatrous Gentile According to which we read that S. Austin's mother forbare sitting at table or eating with her Son when addicted to Manichean opinions S. August Confess 3. l. 11. c. Which Apostolical injunction concerning converse in things indifferent I conceive always in force 1. first where it may probably serve to do some good to those we separate from as to make them ashamed c. and that is most likely where the heretical or debauched c are few in number in comparison of the orthodox and pious Or 2ly to do some good to our selves by separating from them as when we are in danger of infection from them or also of partaking God's judgments with them But other cases I grant there may be where such Separation is not obligatory As 1. first when probably more good may come to them by our converse if there be no prohibition thereof by the Church as where the accompanying of them is used by the more confirmed in virtuous habits some way to help those who are not found yet altogether incorrigible See for this Matt. 9. 12. 2. Again when such Separation may bring more hurt to our selves to the Church c than the benefit is we can reasonably hope from it As where the most are perverted the upright few in number where much hindrance or sometimes also mischief may come to the one by it and no shame or amendment to the other Quando
thereof especially for what concerns the publick and solemn worship of God. Consider the Article of our Creed of which Creed we pretend a constant and publick confession that we believe one Church Catholick and Apostolical i. e. one external visible communion upon earth that always is and shall be such but how is this sufficiently attested and professed by any who forbears to joyn himself openly unto it Such denying of the body of Christ before men seems to be next to the crime of denying before men the Head himself But chiefly there where this Church the Spouse of Christ happens to be under any disgrace or persecution our taking up the cross with her may be much more acceptable to God than the conversion of souls and the doxology of confessing him and her beyond our other best service See particularly that command of the Apostle Heb. 10. 25. Now if it be said that some of these texts fore-named are not to be understood as strict precepts always for avoiding sin but counsels only for attaining perfection yet thus also every generous Christian will think them prescribed for his practice Again consider that as both many Divine and Ecclesiastical commands from which I see no just authority any one hath to exempt himself at pleasure cannot be observed in our adherences to another communion so neither can they in our absence from the true Church For how then do we observe the publick intercessions commanded 1 Tim. 2. 1. publick teaching and exhortations c recommended by the Apostle Heb. 10. 25. 1 Cor. 14. 23 24. Col. 3. 16. frequenting of the Sacraments 1 Cor. 11. 17 24. Confession and Absolution as need requires For the necessity of which Christ hath substituted some officers to be made use of from time to time for heinous sins committed after Baptism in his stead Jo. 20. 21 23. as likewise to guide and govern in all Spiritual matters those who pretend to be his sheep to withdraw our selves from whom is to withdraw our selves from Christ in a subordination to whom all must live Eph. 4. 5 11 12. Heb. 13. 17. and God tolerates no Anarchical persons in religion Add to this the benefits of the publick prayers and intercessions and oblations of the Church which such a one acknowledging himself a member thereof seems to his great loss to be deprived of As for that internal communion with the Church which some excluded from the external may nevertheless enjoy or the security in the actual want of participation of the Sacraments that such may have they seem no way appliable to such a person as this who is not by force hindred of her communion but invited to it voluntarily depriveth himself tho the reasons he hath in the doing thereof seem to himself never so plausible To partake the Sacraments in voto signifies nothing where de facto we may have them and de facto refuse them and where in case of necessity votum signifies something yet t is probable that to such a one necessitated the actual reception of them would have bin more beneficial could he have obtained it There seems to be no small danger in a silly sheep's staying out of the fold when invited and offered to be taken in and that without leave of the shepheard tho upon a to-himself seeming good design But yet supposing such leave indulged to any I see not at last what advantage can be made thereof but that all the scandals all the jealousies all the secular inconveniences or also disappointments of Spiritual designs that can happen to one actually reconciled to the orthodox communion will happen to one after absenting himself wholly from a false From which sequestring himself the ordinary jealousie that useth to be in religion will conclude that he who is not with them especially where many secular advantages accompany it is against them And whereas our conjunction with the true Church may be done with much privacy this desertion of theirs is the thing most liable to discovery Lastly since he that now is of no external communion at all was before a member of an unlawful one and perhaps there not only seduced but also a seducer of others or at least culpable of many misbehaviors toward the Church so much the more cause he hath with what speed he can to fly into the bosom thereof both because so he may procure his own safety and pardon and by an open subscription to truth and unity make an amends for his former error and division if he have bin any way consenting thereto and also because the truth c will receive a greater testimony and honour from one that publickly converts to it after educated first in error than from many that from the benefit of their first institution and breeding continue in it to some of whom a right opinion may be rather their good fortune than their choice The summe of all is The case of one's stay after such full conviction in the external communion where he is or of his staying out of the other who stretcheth forth her arms to receive him tho upon never so pious pretences is doubtful his reconciliation safe therefore this rather to be chosen and as for the good he hoped to produce God is able and either will otherwise by lawful means effect it or is not willing it should be effected and mean-while will rather accept of our obedience than of much sacrifice Note that in this discours I speak of a Church certainly Schismatical and of men after all convenient means of information diligently used fully convinced thereof and amongst these chiefly of such as in purposing some good ends to themselves intend to continue always or for any long space of time either in their former communion or out of the orthodox not of such as convicted are removing all impediments as fast as they can to unite themselves to the Church But 1. first concerning Churches schismatical I apprehend not Schism to be of such a latitude as that there cannot be any difference especially between Churches wherein are divers Apostolical Successions suppose the Eastern and Western the Grecian and Asian and the Roman Church before a General Council hath decided it without such a crime of Schism and violated unity of the Church on one side that all good men therein are presently obliged to render themselves of the opposit communion And 2ly concerning conviction I think men ought to take heed of being any way hasty which may proceed from a natural ficklenes of mind and over-valuation of things not tried to desert that Church wherein God's providence hath given them their education and which hath taught them the word of God and first made them Christian and which as t is said in the Law concerning possession Quia prior est tempore potior est jure i. e. caeteris paribus to desert the Church I say without much conference with the learned much weighing of reasons much study of Theological
controversy even tho their condition be not that of a Scholar delayed and mature considerations long prayer lest if in such change they should happen to light on what is worse and to forsake truth and embrace error they should besides the hurt which may come to their soul otherwise be in a far worse condition than any others of the same erroneous communion are by reason of the disobedience they have shewed to their mother from whom they sucked the true milk of the Gospel and of the ungratitude to God by whose providence they were placed in such a light Especially men ought to have a greater jealousy of their mistaking if they perhaps find themselves invited to the change of their Religion from any worldly advantages or contentments of the flesh profits honour pleasure for our affections ordinarily yet very insensibly corrupt our judgments But for what is said here by me that it ought to be done after full conviction of a communion Schismatical I think all men as taking every one their own to be the orthodox and others to be sectaries are but too ready to maintain this point That all factious communions once discovered are to be forsaken and the true understanding by it their own once found out to be adhered to not only by internal affection but external profession And this counsel constantly shall a tottering Romanist receive from a Protestant and so è contra 5. The 5th sort are those who being educated in a Church Schismatical and prejudiced with many formerly received opinions are not yet fully convinced that it is so but yet are already in a great jealousie thereof and in a serious quest of a further discovery of truth c Or again who being fully convinced of and being in perfect charity with the Church and having also already in voto the external communion thereof yet whilst wanting and rationally expecting a better opportunity for their reconciliation to the Church Catholick defer it for some time till this may happen As many cases for such delation may be supposed As if one have reasonable hopes shortly of a Toleration and upon a present reconcilement is likely to be plundered c. Or if one have some treatment with kindred or friends about the same matter and is in hopes by a further discours to carry them with him which intercourse by his sudden separation he probably foresees will be stopped and his admonitions rendred fruitless Or if one happen to be in a Service and cannot till such a time leave his Master or in an imployment which such a declaring of himself requires that he should and yet which he cannot but with much temporal inconvenience immediatly quit as that of S. Austen's was Conf. 9. l. 2. c. Or if one be in a place where declaring presently his restraint or life is endangered and therefore he stays till he may remove himself to a place of more security as doubtles t is lawful to seek our safety by flight Or if he have a design of publishing something tending to the advancement of Truth which opportunity in appearance will be for ever lost in such a place if he suddenly discovers his intentions Many such cases may be put and if none of these be reasonable to produce any delay yet it follows not but that there may be some others that are so Now for such men as these 1. First those seem not to sin in suspending their reconcilement and in continuing their former communion who are not as yet fully convinced But yet concerning full conviction note that after such diligence delay inquisition used as is mentioned before § 16. it seems not necessary to it that every objection and difficulty that can be made against any practice or tenet of the Church we conform to be first fully satisfied which perhaps will never be and so neither will be any ones deserting his native Sect however erroneous but only that for the most part of things in contest full satisfaction is received For if in all other things we are swayed by the over-ballancing of reason any way notwithstanding that some weight also remain still on the other side why should we neglect it in this Since t is as much nay more ordinary to be born in a wrong than in a right religion we may justly I conceive relinquish our former profession for that which if we were of no profession we should sooner make choice of especially since we may be more confident of our reason rightly used in such a matter if our new perswasions procure to us no secular honor or advantage but rather the contrary loss and disgrace as also if the principles thereof produce in us any singular reformation of life See Trial of Doct. § 45. 2ly For the fully convinced tho it seems prohibited by God's word that such any longer abide in their former communion see 9. § 1. n. yet 1. first they seem not to sin or do ill in not reconciling themselves outwardly to the Church upon the very first possibility they have to do it if that they have a reasonable cause of delay and especially if some Spiritual advantage be considered in it and if that they have probability of health and likelihood to attain to the time and opportunity they wait for I do not say that they may not do better sometimes in a suddenner return but that they sin not always in the delay Which if they did the same will hold for Baptism and for many other Christian duties which often are deferred and we think not unlawfully for some time after possibility of doing them for the want of some conveniency Yet I cannot conceive that there can be a reasonable cause to the fully convinced of any long delay see before § 8. c. no more than there can be such of long delaying Baptism because initiation or reconciliation to the Church are things of the highest concernment But 2ly Suppose they sin in such dilation and procrastination yet I see no ground why any one should affirm tho we grant none dying a Schismatick in the sence § 5. can be saved that such dying without or before actual reconciliation are certainly damned which since it cannot be justly said of such others tho remaining perpetually within a Schismatical Church as are named § 7. much less can it of these that are in their way and progress homewards Again by the same reason must all those be damned named in the 2d § if they had any possibility of sooner performing that of which they are by death prevented because also these as well as those have a votum of what they want and heartily repent of their delay if it were any way offensive to God. As for the motives of delay mentioned above 1. First if this once be granted That upon a full conviction we are presently to abandon such schismatical communion many of them seem to be voided because such a retreat from our former
communion cannot be concealed or if it can then may also our conjunction to a new society nay this much more easie to be hid than the other So that I suppose few cases will happen for which after the one done the other should be deferred 2ly If such cases should be put for a heathens deferring Christianity I think many of them cannot justly be allowed See 1 Cor. 7. 20 21. many converts professing Christianity when servants and probably some of them having infidel masters And I think every one is obliged to a more speedy return as the defection wherein he lives is more impious and perillous and opposit to true religion tho he must pass thro many temporal misfortunes to make this escape They saith the Apostle of the teachers complying out of fear of suffering from the Jews Gal. 6. 12 14. constrain you to be circumcised only lest they i. e. if they did not observe the Jewish customs should suffer persecution for the cross of Christ. But God forbid that I should glory save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ by whom I am crucified unto the world And happy he who embraceth and rejoiceth in all occasions given him of bearing this cross and suffering chearfully the loss of means friends good name employments and whatsoever is here gain unto us for Christ's sake and the profession of a good conscience My brethren count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations Jam. 1. 2. because if we here suffer with him we shall also hereafter reign with him And that here we might suffer with him he came not to send peace but a sword and that a man's enemies should be those of his own houshold even father and mother and he that loveth any of these more than him is not worthy of him and he that taketh not up his cross and followeth after him is not worthy of him and he that confesseth him not before men him will he deny before his Father and his holy Angels in heaven In this discours it hath bin all along supposed That the Church is ready to entertain and invites this person convicted of Schism to return into her bosom So that all the aversnes hath bin on his side But now what if such Church admits entrance to none but upon their subscription to all her doctrines and engaging conformity to all her discipline and publick practices And then for some points of her publick doctrines or practice what if it be against the conscience of such a one to subscribe or conform to them Ought he not then to continue still in his former communion tho thought by him Schismatical or at least to be content to live out of her communion whom he thinks to be the Church Catholick To this having many Queries involved in it I have many things to say 1. No man may do any thing at any time against his conscience or which he is perswaded without doubting he ought not to do therefore if it be absolutely against his conscience to subscribe any thing whether truth it be or whether it be error he ought not to do it But let none please himself too much in this liberty for tho he shall thus in refusing to subscribe escape the sin of lying and hypocrisie yet if his conscience happen not to be rightly informed he may remain nevertheless guilty of schism and heresy See Dr. Ham. of Schism 2. c. 8. § where he saith That if the doctrines proposed as a condition of her communion by the Church be indeed agreeable to truth but yet be really apprehended by him to whom they are proposed to be false and disagreeable tho it be in this case hard to affirm that a man may lawfully thus subscribe contrary to his present perswasion yet it being certain that he who thus errs is obliged to use all probable means to reform and deposit such his error as long as he remains in it he is so far guilty of sin as he wants the excuse of invincible ignorance and being obliged to charity and peace as far as it is possible and in him lies he cannot be freed from offending against that obligation to preserving peace and charity if he do not communicate with those the condition of whose communion contains nothing really erroneous or sinful and therefore such a man tho acting according to his present perswasion is or may be in several respects criminous And afterward he saith Which way soever such man turns he is sure to sin the worst and most unhappy kind of strait he remains in error and schism on the one side i. e. in not subscribing and by flying from that he advanceth to lying and hypocrisie on the other So then one following his present perswasion may be notwithstanding guilty of Schism in refusing the Church's communion 2. Subscription to the contradictory of what I am infallibly certain is truth or conformity to any thing which I am infallibly certain is unlawful may not be made for this must needs be contrary to ones conscience 3ly Upon exclusion out of the Church in these or any other cases one may not therefore anew joyn himself to or longer continue in any communion he grants schismatical but is rather to forego the external administration of the Word and Sacraments and enjoy no external communion at all See 13. § 4ly No Church there is tho pretending never so much indulgence but that requires subscription from some persons at least to her publick Constitutions and Articles even tho such Church confesseth her self in these liable to error And the Church of England in particular in her 5th Canon excommunicates any who shall say that any of her Constitutions are contrary to the word of God and that is who shall say that any of them concerning divine matters is false or erroneous or not true See more of this in Submission of Judgment 5. § higher than which no Church can easily go And therefore if such subscription should be strictly required one revolted from the Roman Church and coming to render himself of her communion shall find as difficult an entrance thereinto as we complain is into theirs 5ly It is considerable That such Subscriptions in the Church Catholick are only required to the Decrees of her General Councils not to the tenets of private Doctors 6ly The Church Catholick as we imagin this Convert supposeth that Church in whose communion he desires to be in these her decrees for all points necessary to salvation is granted see in Ancient Church-gov 2. part § and Infallibility § 3. to be infallible and so in these can require Subscription to no error 7ly For as much as respects other points meerly speculative and not of like necessity to be believed or known if Subscription be required of us only for acquiescing to and not gain-saying them as certainly to many of her proposals and that under pain of anathema she requires no more the disturbers of her peace in smaller
or God's word §. 21. Concessions 1. Concerning the object of Faith that this is only God's Word §. 22. 2. Concerning the act of faith and the certainty which it may receive from the external motives of Scriptures Church Tradition §. 23. That the authority of Scriptures and Church is learn'd from universal Tradition §. 24. §. 25. Concessions concerning Tradition 1. That there is sufficient assurance in Tradition whether â—â—fallible or no to ground a firm faith upon §. 26. §. 27. §. 28. 2. That Tradition may have a sufficient certainty tho notabsolutely un versal §. 29. 3. That no one age of the Ch. is mistaken in delivering any eminent Tradition §. 30. 4. Thaâ— the testimony of the present age is sufficient to inform us therein §. 31. 5. That Tradition of the Ch. is easier to be understood in some things expounded by her than the Scriptures §. 32. 6. That the Ch. is a sufficiently certain Guide to us in doctrines proposed by her as Traditionary §. 33. Digression That all traditions carry not equal certainty §. 34. Where concerning the Church'es and the Heathen and Mahometan Traditions §. 35. 3 Concerning the certainty which Faith may receive from the inward operation of God's Spirit Concessions concerning the Spirit 1. That it is always required besides outward mean. §. 36. 1. That all Faith wrought by the Spâ—rit is infallible §. 37. 3. That sometimes the Spirit produceth evidence beyond science c. §. 38. 4. Thâ—t from these concessions it follows not that all who sâ—vingly believe have or must have aninfallible or such sufficient certainty as may possibly be had of what they believe §. 39. Nâ—iâ—ther from the evidences * of Scriptures §. 40. Nor * of the Spirit §. 41. Nor * of Church-Tradition §. 42. §. 43. For these following Reasons §. 44. §. 45. §. 46. §. 47. §. 48. §. 49. §. 50. §. 51. Necessary Inferences upon the former reasons §. 52. §. 53. §. 54. §. ◠§. 2. Concerning the Infallibility of the Church how far this is to be allowed §. 3. 1 Infallibility of the Church in Necessaries granted both by Catholic and Protestant writers §. 4. Where How for Points necessary are to be extended §. 5. §. 6. That the Church not private men is to define what Points be necessary §. 7. If these points be necessary at all to be defin'd and exactly distinguished from all other her proposals §. 8. 2. Infallibility of the Ch. in matters of universal tradition tho they were not necessary conceded likewise by all §. 9. 3. Infallibility universal in whatever the Ch. proposeth delivereth is not affirmed by Catholic writers §. 10. But only in those points which she proposeth tanquam de side or creditu necessaria §. 11. Where conc the several sences wherein points are affirmed or dâ—nied to be de fide §. 12. That as only so all divine revelations or necessary deductions from them are de Fide. i. e. the oâ—jects and matâ—ters of Faith. And that the Ch. can make nothing to be de Fide i. e. to be divine Revelation c. which was not so always from the Apostolick times §. 13. §. 15. That all divine revelation or necessary deductions therefrom are not de Fide i. e. creditu necessaria §. 16. And that the Church lawfully may and hath a necessity to make de novo upon rising errors such points de fide i. e. creditu necessaria which formerly were not so §. 17. §. 18. Or as some other of the Catholick writers usually express iâ— only in points clearly traditional §. 19. §. 20. §. 21. §. 22. §. 23. §. 24. §. 25. §. 26. §. 27. Whether and by what marks those points which are proposed by the Church tanquam de side or creditu necessaria or which are proposed as constantly traditional are clearly distinguished by her from her other proposal §. 28. §. 29. Anathema no certain Index thereof PART II. §. 30. Concerning obedience and submission of private judgment whether due to the Ch. supposed not in all her decisions infallible §. 31. §. 32. §. 33. â—â— That no submission of Our judgment is due to the proposal of the Church where we are infailibly certain of the contrary §. 34. 2. That no submission is due to an inferior person or court in matters whereof I have doubt when I have a Superior to repair to for resolution §. 35. 3. That submission of judgment is due to the supreme Ecclesiastical Court in any doubting whatever short of infallible certainty §. 36. §. 37. Submission of judgment proved 1. From Scripture §. 38. 2. From Reason §. 39. Several objections and scruples resolved §. 40. §. 41. §. 42. §. 43. §. 44. 3. From the testimony of learned Protestants § 45. §. 46. §. 47. §. 48. §. 49. §. 50. §. 51. 4. From the testimony of learned Catholicks §. 52. §. 53. §. 54. Conclusion §. 55. §. 56. §. 57. §. 58. §. 59. §. 60. §. 1. §. 2. n. 1. In what sence it may be lawful to believe or do a thing against our own judgment §. 2. n. 2. §. 2. n. 3. §. 4. 11. 2. §. 3. §. 4. Concerning the church'es lawful authority to excommunicate dissenters in non fundamentals §. 5. §. 6. §. 7. As likewise to decide which points are fundamental which not §. 8. 2 Tim. 4â— 1 Cor. 12. 7 8. §. 9. Several exceptions against obedience of non-contradiction only for non-fundamentals §. 10. §. 11. And that all at least not infallibly certain of the contrary are bound in non fundamentals to anobedience of assent Therefore the most are so bound §. 12. Replies to several Objections 1. Concerning an inferior Council's decreeing some new dangerous error which no former Council superior hath condemned §. 13. 2. Concerning faith salvifical that it is to be infallible §. 14. 3. Concerning union of Charity sufficient §. 15. 4. Concerning tryal of Doctrines necessary §. 16. 5. Concerning what Churches determinations when several contradict one another we are to adhere to §. 17 §. 18. Conclusion §. 19. Concerning infallible certainty §. 201 1. Infallible certainty excusing all submission of judgment to anyother §. 21. Infallible certainty to be had in some things §. 22. Of the difficulty of knowing when one is infallibly certain §. 23. §. 24. §. 25. §. 26. 3. The plea of infallible certainty at least not usable against any general contrary judgment of the Church §. 27. An instance in the controversy about giving the Communion in one kind only AEn Sylv bâ—st Bohem 35. c. §. 28. §. 29. 4. The greatest probability short of infallible cer tainty not excusing one dissenting from the judgment of the Church §. 30. §. 31. An explication of Rom. 14. 23. §. 1. Sufficient truth alway to be found in the Church Yet false Doctors must be 1 Cor. 11. 19. §.
2. And their followers not safe §. 3. Doctrines therefore may be tried §. 4. Several ways of Trial. §. 5. 1. By Scrip tures §. 6. Concerning trial of Doctrines and Commands which are not also enjoyned in Scripture §. 7. §. 8. §. 9. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. §. 10. 1. §. 11. 2. §. 12. Of Doctrines and commands where the Scriptures seem to us doubtful §. 13. Of doctrines c where the Scriptures seem to us contrary §. 14. Here we must use a 2d Trial by the Doctors of the Ch. And beware of depending on our own judgment upon the Scriptures 1. §. 15. 2. §. 16. 3. §. 17 4. Heb. â—â—◠§. 18. Always some external Communion or other not erring in knowledge necessary §. 19. n. 1. We necessarily to follow their Judgment where universally agreeing §. 19. 11. 2. §. 20. Where divided to follow either side rather than our own judgment opposite to both §. 21. Of the two to follow those whom the other acknowledg to have the practice of former times for them §. 22. Where this pleaded by both to search and follow that we find so by our experience §. 23. That this is not hard to find Of Fathers being not for the main repugnant ambiguous or impertinent §. 23. Certain Cautions concerning making judgment of the Tenets of the Fathers §. 25. §. 26. §. 27. §. 28. §. 29. §. 30. Some Church in all ages like the former §. 31. §. 32. Heresy still either going or being thrust out of it And in its beginning discerned by its paucity of followers §. 33. So that difence trial cannot mistake Lu. 22. 53. §. 34. See Submiss of judgm §. 15. §. 35. §. 36. Who can search no further to adhere to the judgment of the Christian Church they live in rather than their own against it §. 37. II. Trial of doctrines and Doctors by the holiness these produc◠〈◊〉 they practise §. 38. For where morâ— truth more holiness §. 39. And where more holines more truth §. 40. Where more error more vice and e converso §. 41. §. 42. n. 1. 1. In churches therefore to compare the strictnes or liberty of their Doctrines Discipline c. §. 42. n. 2. 2. Their abounding or deficiency in doctrines tending to perfection c. §. 43. §. 44. §. 45. §. 46. 3. Theâ—r writings of Devotion §. 47. 4. Thâ— lâ—ves of theâ—r Saints §. 48. §. 49. IVth Trial of Doctrines by the conversion of Nations §. 50. Conclusion §. 1. §. 2. Upon confession 1. that the Ch. Catholick contains not in it many oppositâ—â—â— but only one external Communion §. 3. â— That there is no salvation to any who are out of the internal communion of the Ch. Catholick §. 4. 3. Yet that salvation must be allowed to same who are out of the Ch. Catholicks external communion 4. Several sorts of those who live in an external communion Schismatical §. 5. 1. Those who make such separation not salvable without repentance §. 6. 2. Those who follow such leaders and continue the division upon the same motives and passions not salvable without repentance §. 7. 3. Those who follow such leaders in simplicity of heart and out of their condition considered invincible ignorance such in a salvable state tho suffering great disadvantages §. 8. n. 1. 4. Those who convinced of schism in such a Church yet rejoyn not themselves to the external communion of the Ch. Catholick tho consenting in all things with her Hindered 1. either by somerespects meerly temporal Such faulty but how highly I cannot pronounce §. 8. n. 2. Or by some considration and design mâ—eâ—y Spiâ—itual Such less fauâ—ty than the other yet â—em â—â—â— wholly justifiable §. 9. n. 1. Whether they continue still in a communion schismatical Which communion seems forbidden them 1. Both by the Scriptures §. 9. 11. 2. §. 9. n. 3. §. 9. n. 4. §. 10. 2. And by the injunctions of the Ch. Catholick §. II. To which such owe obedience §. 12. §. 13. Or whether they communicate with no Church at all who seem of the two the less unjustifiable §. 14. Yet are not wholly excusable §. 15. §. 16. §. 17. 5. Those who 1. much doubting the Church they live in to be schismatical yet are not fully convinced thereof or 2. who convinced yet deser their intended reconcilement till an expected opportunity That several circumstances considered both these may or may not be culpable §. 18. §. 19. A Query What is to be done if the Ch. catholick require some conformity to doctrines or practices against his conscience or particular judgment who seeks her communion §. 20. Several propositions tending to the solution of this Queâ—◠§. 21.