sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures to others and it were to be wished that none had failed of their duty therein Qu. 12. Whether all that is mentioned in Scripture be not true according to the sense and meaning so delivered Ans All that is mentioned in Scripture is undoubtedly true according to the true sense and meaning thereof Qu. 13. Whether an obstinate Contradiction of any one truth thus delivered in Scripture though there appear no necessity it should have been mentioned in Scripture be not injurious to that divine Authority and veracity and which unrepented of shall bring damnation Ans An obstinate contradiction of any one plain truth delivered in holy Scripture is certainly a very great injury to divine authority and veracity Qu. 14. When difficulties did arise about the sense of Scriptures or matters of Faith whither the dicision of those controversies was carried and whether the present Church of every Age was not to decide it Ans It was undoubtedly the practice and is most rational that the present Church in every Age should decide such controversies For the Priest's Lips should preserve knowledge and they should enquire the Law at his mouth And no question the Church hath Authority to declare matters of Faith but not to make any new Articles of Faith Qu. 15. Whether every particular person was to have an Authoritative power in this decision or whether it was not universally left to the Heads and Governours of the Church Assembled together Ans Every particular person hath undoubtedly a Judgment of discretion allow'd him in matters of that nature but the Authoritative power of deciding and determining was in the Heads and Governours of the Church Assembled together for that end Qu. 16. Whether such a force of Hopes or Fears could possibly happen at once upon all the Heads of the universal Church Assembled together or after consenting to those that were Assembled as should make them declare that to be a truth revealed by Christ which was not so delivered to them to have been the ever esteemed sense of Scripture or perpetual tradition which was not so Ans Whilst men are men they will be liable to hopes and fears and subject to the power and force of them if therefore we consider the Heads and Governours of the Church as such we cannot allow them an Exemption therefrom and consequently there may be no impossibility in the things propounded We grant that in a General Council lawfully assembled we have great reason to hope for the presence direction and assistance of the Holy Ghost â—…t how far the passions and humours of men may frustrate our Hopes we know not This we certainly know that the Acts of one Council have been made void by another and therefore it is more than probable that one of them did declare something to be a truth revealed by Christ which was not so delivered unto them Qu. 17. Whether the Decisions of such Assemblies or general Councils were not always esteemed obligatory in the Church and whether particular Persons or Churches obstinately gainsaying such Decisions received by a much Major part of the Church diffused were not always esteemed to have incurred those Anathema's pronounced by such Councils Ans If those Assemblies or Councils be truly general we do very much reverence their Authority and think their decisions to be obligatory But we do not think all to be such that are called so As for instance The Council of Trent is by some sort of men looked upon as a general Council and all their Religion almost built upon the Authority thereof and yet the Church of England never received the decisions of that Council nor did the Galican Church for many years and yet neither the one nor the other did for all that esteem themselves to have incurred the Anathema's pronounced by that Council Qu. 18. Whether the universal Church did not in all Ages practice this way of deciding controversies and whether these be not as universal a tradition of this as the practice was universal without interruption Ans Universal practice will amount to an universal Tradition and that this hath been the practice of the Church in all Ages especially in matters of great weight we deny not nor should we oppose the same course now provided the Council were free and general But the Enquirer goes on Some will perhaps say that such Councils cannot Err in fundamentals but may in not fundamentals I ask these Qu. What are fundamentals and what not Ans Those things which are essentially necessary to the being of Religion may properly be called fundamental but those things which only respect order and decency therein and vary according to time and place and are alterable by the Governours of the Church when they see cause these are not fundamental Qu. Whether there be not some things fundamentals to the Church which are not to every particular Ans There may be some things fundamental to the Being of a Church which are not so to every particular member of that Church but whatsoever things are â—…ndamental to the Being of Religion are equally so to the whole Church and every member thereof Qu. Whether an obstinate denyal of what is fundamental or necessary to the universal Church or granting as I may say upon what is fundamental by a particular person be not in time a fundamental Errour especially after an universal declaration of it as truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles Ans This Query as it is here worded is hardly reconcileable to sense but I suppose his meaning is Whether for any particular person obstinately to deny what is fundamental or necessary to the universal Church and declared to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles be not a fundamental Errour To which I answer That every particular Christian ought with all deference to submit his own private Judgment to the publick Judgment of the Church and though it do not appear so plain to him yet he ought rather to suspect his own than that of the Church But if in some things he cannot be satisfied and therein happen to differ from the Church provided he do not thereby break the peace and unity of the Church it will hardly amount to a fundamental Errour But what if it be declared by the Church to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles will not that make it so To this I answer That no declaration of the Church how universal soever it be can make that to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles which really is not so And therefore in that case we must have recourse to their Writings and if it be not either in express words contained therein or by sound consequence drawn therefrom we ought not to comply with it nor is it a fundamental Errour to differ therein Qu. Whether the universal Church assembled in a General Council ought not to be justly esteemed the decider of what is fundamental and what
not Ans When the universal Church by her proper Representatives is lawfully assembled in a Council truly General that Council without all dispute will be a very proper Judge of what is fundamental and what not but this is rather to be prayed than hoped for Qu. Whether an obstinate denial of any one truth delivered by Jesus Christ or his Apostles though the delivery was not absolutely necessary to Salvation may not be called a fundamental errour seeing it brings the rest he delivered in question as also his veracity Ans The denial of any one truth delivered by Jesus Christ or his Apostles is a very great fault and if that denial be obstinately continued in after plain conviction that it is such a truth it is a very dangerous Errour Qu. Whether therefore the denial of any one truth delivered to us by an uninterrupted tradition as taught by Christ and his Apostles would not be a fundamental Errour Ans There is a great difference between a thing delivered as taught and plainly taught by Christ and his Apostles for we meet with many things delivered as taught by them and tradition pretended for them which really and in truth were never taught by them or either of them aed to deny such is so far from being a fundamental Errour that it is no Errour at all There is also a great difference between traditions If by tradition he mean the holy Scriptures we grant that to deny any thing that is plainly and clearly taught therein is a very great Errour But if by tradition he mean such as is meerly humane and not clearly warranted by the Word of God we think we ought to reject such how uninterrupted soever they be for if an Angel from Heaven preach any other Gospel than hath been preached let him he accursed saith St. Paul Qu. And on the other side whether the teaching of any Doctrine onely piously believed but sufficiently known not to have been expresly or by a natural consequence delivered by Christ and his Apostles and which may upon that account be false not having Divine Revelation which alone is infallible for its ground whether I say the teaching such a Doctrine so known as one that was delivered by Christ when they know it was not would not be a fundamental Errour Ans Whosoever teacheth such Doctrines as are mentioned in this Query and in that manner is highly guilty and when the Enquirer shall think fit to be more particular and produce his instances he may expect a more particular answer and perhaps be told at whose door this charge will lie In the mean time this general answer may suffice Qu. Whether Christ having taken care as some grant that his Church should not err in fundamentals hath not consequently taken care that she should not teach any one Doctrine as delivered by Christ and consequently of Faith which was not taught by him and consequently might be an Errour Ans Christ hath taken all care possible to secure his Church from Errour and hath given her his gracious promise to be with her to the end of the World But the Church being composed of men and such as are fallible the security is not promised to particulars Particular persons and particular Churches too we know not only may but have grosly erred The security therefore is only promised to the Universal Church and when he tells us what he means by that he may expect a more direct answer to his Query Qu. Whether those Doctrines or most of them controverted now by Protestants have not been taught and believed in the Church as Doctrines delivered by Christ long before Luther yea and delivered in the most General Councils those Ages would permit and accepted of by the Church diffusive none that we know of dissenting but those condemned in those Councils for Hereticks and whose Heresies expired almost with themselves Ans It is now plain that this Enquirer by the Church and universal Church so often mentioned by him doth all along mean the Church of Rome which we are so far from complying with him in that though we own that Church to be a Member yet we cannot allow it to be a sound Member of the Catholick Church And if by the Decisions and Declarations of the Church he mean the determinations of that Church they are no further obligatory than to her own Members nor many of them to them neither if strictly enquired into As for Luther we do not receive our Religion from him but from Jesus Christ and for any Doctrines now controverted we are content to have the same determined by the Holy Scriptures and the four first General Councils As for the Councils our Enquirer hints at we deny that they were truly General or that all their decisions were ever accepted of by the Church diffusive And he cannot but know that there were many more not only Persons but whole Churches which did dissent from them Qu. Whether there was from the first 400 years till the time of Luther any known body of Pastors and Teachers declaring a dissent in any Age from those Doctrines and opposing those Councils and whether the Greek Churches did not and do to this very day consent with this Western Church in most points now controverted by Protestants Ans This Query is preposterously put for how should any body of Pastors and Teachers in the first 400 years oppose themselves to those Councils which were not then in being nor heard of till many hundred years afterwards But that the Fathers in those first Ages did teach the same Doctrines we now do we appeal to the Records of those times And that those after-Councils by him mentioned were dissenters from those of the first Ages we are contented to be tried by comparing the Acts of both together And that the Greek Church did or now doth agree with the Church of Rome in all or most of those points now in difference between her and us we utterly deny and challenge him to the proof of it Qu. Whether Luther the first Author of Protestancy did not separate himself from the whole visible Church at that time spread over the West contradicting all the Prelates and Pastors then living in the universal practice of that Church and the General Councils received as such by the foregoing Ages Ans As for the names of Protestant and Papist I look upon them as names of distinction not of Religion The Religion we both own is Christian This we do not receive from Luther nor they from Ignatius Loyala St. Francis or any such but both of us from Jesus Christ The only question is Whether they or we hold that Religion in greatest purity 'T is true that Luther in his time did more narrowly look into the corruptions of the Church of Rome declared against them and on that account separated from her Communion and for any thing yet appears may be very well justified in so doing For if any Church shall make terms of her
Communion so sinful and dangerous that no man with safety to his Soul can continue in it it will be high time to come out of it Qu. Whether he or Protestants at present do pretend to such Demonstration for those Tenets they hold contrary to the Roman Church the then onely visible Church in the West that no understanding to which it is sufficiently proposed can in the least doubt of it Ans We have such evidence for the Doctrines which we hold and teach in opposition to the Church of Rome as being sufficiently proposed no man can reasonably doubt of And as for those who will scruple without reason notwithstanding the clearest evidence that the nature of the thing will bear we can only pity and pray for them Qu. Or whether they do not rather say that being fallible they may err even in what they think a Demonstration and if they may err perhaps they have erred even in their Reformation Ans We do not pretend to infallibility nor do we think that the claim which the Bishop of Rome makes to it is any more than a groundless pretence only But à posse ad esse non valet consequentia from a bare possibility of erring to argue a certainty that we have erred in every thing we have done is an argument fitter to be offered to Children than Men. Qu. Whether therefore denying these Doctrines thus delivered by the Church in all Ages as Doctrines delivered by Christ and his Apostles upon no better grounds than these perhaps they may be true and perhaps not be not a putting ones self into the danger of erring even in fundamentals Ans We deny no Doctrines delivered by the Church in all Ages as Doctrines delivered by Christ and his Apostles nor do we own any Doctrine upon such weak grounds as perhaps they may be true and perhaps not But we say that the present Church of Rome doth teach such Doctrines as the Doctrines of Christ and his Apostles which were never taught by the Church in all Ages nor delivered by Christ and his Apostles And in these things we oppose our selves against them and think we have great reason so to do having the holy Scriptures and the Primitive Church on our side And whilst we are thus supported we have no fear of erring in fundamentals Queries of Religion or Liberty WHo this Enquirer is as I am at present ignorant so am I not much concern'd to know but I take him to be one who hath conceived a mighty opinion of himself and his performances He thinks that by these Queries he hath struck at the root of Protestancy as he and those of his Perswasion call it i. e. Reformed Christianity that he hath given it a fatal blow a mortal wound and left it groveling in the dust without the least hopes of recovery Like that overgrown uncircumcised Philistine he defieth the Armies of the Living God and calls for a Man to fight with him For in the close of his Queries he maketh this proud and confident challenge If any give answer As if he should have said if any be so bold and daring so over confident and fool-hardy as to undertake an Answer to these Queries It is desired to be Categorical and short without any discourses of things not demanded Now whether this man do not triumph before the Victory or whether those Queries be so unanswerable as he believes them to be is the thing under consideration And because he hath not only given the Challenge but appointed the Weapon I shall neither decline the one nor the other but according to his own method shall undertake his Queries in the same order as he hath propounded them Qu. 1. Whether the Flock and Church of Christ to whom was promised grace and eternal happiness be that company and society of People christened in his Name who by order of Government Rules and Decrees from him and his Apostles were united in Faith Worship Discipline and manner of Life called Religion Ans The Church of Christ is either Militant or Triumphant the one on Earth the other in Heaven of the former of which we are now to speak The Church Militant is either Universal or Particular the former comprehending all and every Member of Christ's Mystical Body wheresoever dispersed upon the face of the whole Earth the latter comprizing only a certain Number of Christians formed into a select Body or Society under certain Laws and Rules not differing from those of the Universal Church Such are all Provincial and National Churches and though none of them may arrogate to themselves the Title of the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church yet none will deny but that they are true Members thereof This I have premised to prevent confusion and misunderstanding for the confounding of these two as it often happens in discourses of this kind hath been the occasion of great mistakes Those of the Romish Perswasion by the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church do usually understand the Church of Rome which though it be a manifest Contradiction being the same with a Particular Universal yet do they run away with it and by that specious and gorgeous Title think to bear down all before them aloud proclaiming that to be the Mother and Mistress of all other Churches This thus premised I shall now be as Categorical and short in my Answer to his Query as he can desire Viz. That the Flock and Church of Christ is a Company or Society of People Christned in his Name who by Order of Government rules and decrees from him and his Apostles are united in Faith Worship Discipline and Manner of Life called Religion Qu. 2. Whether by Separation or Excommunication from that Society and Unity are lost those promises Ans Separation and Excommunication are two things for though every one that is excommunicated be thereby separated from that body of which before he was a member yet a man may be in a state of Separation without being under the doom of Excommunication For Separation may be a voluntary Act whereas Excommunication is a formal and Judicial Sentence delivered by a lawful Judge authorized and appointed by the Church to pronounce the same by virtue whereof the sentenced person is divided from the Body separated from the Society and shut out of the Communion of God's Church The case thus stated my answer to this Query will be as followeth viz. 1. Whosoever upon any pretence whatsoever doth separate himself from the Society and Unity of the One Holy Catholick and Aposstolical Church doth in so doing cast himself out of the paternal care and protection of God For it is a certain and undoubted truth He that hath not the Church for his Mother cannot have God for his Father And consequently can have no pretence to the promises of grace here or eternal happiness hereafter 2. Whosoever without just cause doth separate himself from the Society and Unity of that particular Church of which he is a
in all Ages were in order chosen and Authorized as Pastours and Church Magistrates to preserve teach and promulgate those binding Rules to all Nations Ans That the blessed Jesus out of his abundant care and goodness for the carrying on of that great work which he had begun for the promoting of that holy Religion which he had instituted and the well ordering of that Church which he had founded did appoint certain orders of Men and endow them with gifts which might qualifie them for their several employments we do verily believe For St. Paul tells us God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers after that Miracles then gifts of healing helps governments diversities of tongues 1 Cor. 12.28 And in another place he saith He gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastours and Teachers Eph. 4.11 But that he ever instituted any Officer in the Church by the name of a Church-Magistrate I never read Yet if by his Church-Magistrate he mean no more than St. Paul doth by Governments we shall not quarrel with him about the word And that it was the work of these Officers to preserve those Laws and Rules which he left and to teach and promulgate them to all Nations we readily grant But then what shall we think of those who either add thereto or diminish therefrom who either alter those binding Laws and Rules or make new ones of their own and impose them upon others as if they were of equal Force and Authority with those delivered by Christ and his Apostles I could easily give instances to shew that the Church of Rome is guilty both ways but I am not willing to transgress the method which the Enquirer hath propounded by entring upon discourses of things not demanded Qu. 7. Were they Clergymen or Laymen by whom immediately they were chosen and authorized in those high Functions Ans We do verily believe being well assured by the Holy Scriptures by the Doctrine and practice of the Apostles and primitive Christians and by the usage and custome of the Church of God in all Ages that it onely appertains to Clergymen by the solemn imposition of hands to set apart others to those Sacred Functions and that they have sufficient Power and Authority to authorize them to perform those Holy Offices I never heard this denied by any of the Reformed Religion and therefore this Enquirer might if he had so pleased have spared this Query Qu. 8. Were all Christians in succeeding Ages bound to believe what those succeeding Pastours or Supreme Church-Magistrates taught them as binding Laws of Christ and his Apostles and that the Writings by them collected preserved and delivered in a different Language from the Original were the true Copies of Original Apostolick Writings and that the sentence interpretation and use thereof delivered by them in Supreme Councils for unity and peace and to prevent Schisms and Errours were Rules which all Christians were bound to follow Ans This Query is a Song of three parts to answer all which directly I shall be obliged to take it in pieces and consider the parts severally And though the Answers thereunto would very well admit and do almost necessarily require a long discourse yet I remember the Enquirer hath confined me to a Method which I have promised to observe and therefore in my answers thereunto I shall be as short as possible without entring upon discourses of things not demanded Qu. 1. Were all Christians in succeeding Ages bound to believe what those succeeding Pastors or Supreme Church-Magistrates taught them as binding Laws of Christ and his Apostles Ans Whatever hath been taught as a binding Law of Christ and his Apostles by all the Pastors and Governours of the Church in all Ages at all times and in all places we have no reason to suspect For Christ hath promised to be with his Church to the end of the World Matt. 28.20 And to build it upon a Rock so that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it Matt. 16.18 And by his spirit of truth to guide it into all truth Joh. 16.13 The universal Church therefore being thus secured from errour we have no apprehensions of being deceived thereby But though we owe this deference to the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church and the united Body of the Pastors and Governours thereof yet no particular Church nor any particular Pastor or Governour thereof nor any number of them less than the whole have any reason to claim the same for whilst Men are Men they are and will be fallible and being so they may and oftentimes do err and though the whole Body cannot yet any particular Member may be deceived and therefore we ought not greedily to swallow all that is taught by them but to examine well what they teach before we give our assent thereunto otherwise we may easily be imposed upon Qu. 2. Were all Christians in succeeding Ages bound to believe that the writings collected by those succeeding Pastors or Supreme Church-Magistrates and by them preserved and delivered in a different Language from the Original were the true Copies of Original Apostolick Writings Ans That the Holy Scriptures were faithfully collected and preserved by the Church and that the Copies handed down to us though in a Language different from the Original are true Copies we do not at all doubt For we cannot imagine that the universal Church should conspire together to impose a falshood upon posterity But that these Scriptures are the Word of God we believe not onely upon the Authority of the Church but for several other reasons as this Gent. cannot but know if he have been conversant in our Writings which reasons might here fitly be produced if I were not confined by the Enquirer to a short Method and had promised to observe the same I shall therefore onely add that if by being bound to believe he means that it is a binding Law of Christ and his Apostles that for this reason we should believe those Copies to be true we deny it because we cannot find any such Law delivered by them But if by being bound to believe he onely mean that considering by whom they are handed to us we have no reason to doubt of them we readily comply with him Qu. 3. Were all Christians in succeeding Ages bound to believe that the sentence interpretations and use of those Writings delivered by those Pastors or Supreme Church-Magistrates in Supreme Councils for Unity and Peace and to prevent Schisms and Errours were Rules which all Christians were bound to follow Ans What this Enquirer meaneth by Supreme Church-Magistrates and Supreme Councils is somewhat hard to be understood for to constitute two Supremes in one and the same body will make it look a little monstrous If by the Council being Supreme he mean that is above the Supreme Church-Magistrate i. e. the Pope for I do not doubt but that he intends him all along by that
granted to belong to the Catholick Church yet that can signifie nothing to her till she hath proved her self to be that Catholick Church to which alone those promises confessedly belong Thus you see how candid and faithfull our Explainer hath been in this first Point and now let us examine whether he acquit himself any better in the next The EXPLAINER 2. We humbly believe the Sacred Mystery of the blessed Trinity One Eternal Almighty and Incomprehensible God whom onely we adore and worship as alone having Sovereign Dominion over all things to whom alone 1 Tim. 1.17 we acknowledge as due from Men and Angels all Glory Service and Obedience abhorring from our Hearts as a most detesta bld Sacrilege to give our Creator's Honour to any Creatures whatsoever And therefore we solemnly protest That by the Prayers we address to Angels ane Saints we intend no other than humbly to solicit their assistance before the Throne of God as we desire the Prayers of one another here upon Earth not that we hope any thing from them as Original Authours thereof but from God the Fountain of all Goodness through Jesus Christ our onely Mediator and Redeemer Neither do we believe any divinity or vertue to be in Images for which they ought to be worshipped as the Gentiles did their Idols but we retain them with due and decent respect in our Churches as Instruments which we find by experience do often assist our memories and excite our affections The ANIMADVERTER Our Explainer here in behalf of the Roman Catholicks makes a very good confession of Faith telling us That they humbly believe the sacred mystery of the blessed Trinity One Eternal Almighty and Incomprehensible God whom only they adore and worship as alone having Sovereign Dominion over all things to whom alone 1 Tim. 1.17 they acknowledge as due from Men and Angels all glory service and obedience abhorring from their hearts as a most detestable Sacrilege to give their Creator's honour to any Creatures whatsoever This is true Primitive Christianity good Catholick Divinity without any mixture of Popery and is it not great pity that any thing should be added thereto or mixed therewith to spoil so good a Confession Thus far we can readily and heartily joyn with them but when they superadd Articles of their own such as were never delivered by Christ or his Apostles nor owned by the primitive Catholick Church and set them in equal place with those of Divine Revelation and primitive practice then we cannot keep pace with them but are forced to stay behind and sit down contented with primitive Christianity so that in truth it is not we that leave them but they that leave us and consequently are guilty of the Separation And this is the case here between us and our Explainer For after all this glorious profession of adoring and worshipping the One Eternal Almighty and Incomprehensible God and him only and abhorring the giving of his glory to any Creatures as a most detestable Sacrilege he introduceth Prayers to Saints and Angels and the Worship of or beofre images as things equally necessary to be performed by Christians Now if Prayers and Adoration be acts of religious worship and the Objects to which they are offered be Creatures then it must needs follow that either all Religious Worship is not due to God alone or else that they do give part of his honour to something that is not God It is true indeed that he endeavours to palliate these practices with some pretended qualifications thereby to shift off the weight of this charge which lieth so heavy upon them but they are so thin and threedbare so empty and insignificant and have been so miserably baffled of late especially in the Answer to A Papist Misrepresented and Represented as also in two other little Treatises the one intituled A Discourse concerning Invocation of Saints printed in the year 1684 and the other intituled A Discourse concerning the Object of Religious Worship c. printed 1685 that I cannot but admire at our Explainer's confidence to produce them at this time These Treatises are or upon easie terms may be in every man's hands and there is therein so much said upon this Subject and so much to the purpose as may very well spare me the labour of enlarging thereupon to them therefore I shall refer the Reader for further satisfaction But by these short Remarques which I have made upon this part of our Explainer's Confession it is plain that he hath been no more candid and ingenuous in this than in the former Let us therefore try him in the next The EXPLAINER 3. We firmly believe that no force of Nature or dignity of our best Works can merit our Justification but we are Justified freely by Grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ Rom. 3.24 And though we should by the grace of God persevere unto the end in a godly life and holy obedience to the Commandments yet our hopes of eternal glory are still built upon the mercy of God and the merits of Christ Jesus All other Merits according to our sense of the word signifie no more than Actions done by the assistance of God's Grace to which it hath pleased his goodness to promise a Reward A Doctrine so far from being unsuitable to the sense of the Holy Scriptures that it is their principal design to invite and provoke us to a diligent observance of the Commandments by promising Heaven as a reward of our obedience 1 Tim. 4.8 Rom. 2.6 Rom. 8.13 Hebr. 6.10 Nothing being so frequently repeated in the word of God as his gracious promises to recompence with everlasting glory the Faith and Obedience of his Servants Nor is the bounty of God barely according to our Works but high and plentifull even beyond our Capacities giving full measure heaped up and pressed down and running over into the bosomes of all that love him Luke 6.38 Thus we believe the merit or rewardableness of holy living both which signifie the same thing with us arise not from the self value even of our best actions as they are curs but from the grace and bounty of God And for our selves we sincerely profess when we have done all those things which are commanded us we are unprofitable Servants Luke 17.10 having done nothing but that which was our Duty so that our boasting is not in our selves but all our Glory is in Christ The ANIMADVERTER If this be really the Faith of Roman Catholicks we shall not stick to acknowledge it is ours too and then we shall have no occasion to differ in this point But I am afraid our so near an Agreement is too good news to be true Our Explainer I doubt hath either mistaken or to gain a Proselyte or for some other end which might be serviceable to Holy Church hath very much misrepresented the Doctrine of his own Church in this point For sure I am the Council of Trent which they so much magnifie and
viz. Their sincerity and Loyalty which he would fain insinuate to be the natural Offspring of their Principles and the constant Rule of their Practices These therefore are the things which we are now to take under Consideration and that we may be the more clear therein I shall consider them severally 1. And first as to their pretence of sincerity The Explainer tells us They believe That the Moral Law obliges all men to proceed with faithfulness and sincerity in their mutual Contracts one towards another and therefore their constant profession is that they are most strictly and absolutely bound to the exact and intire performance of their promises made to any Person of what Religion soever And as an Argument to evince the truth hereof he farther tells us that they utterly deny and renounce that false and scandalous position That Faith is not to be kept with Hereticks as most uncharitably imputed to their Practices and most unjustly pinned upon their Religion If this position That Faith is not 〈◊〉 be kept with Hereticks be untruly charged upon them then we must acknowledge that it were uncharitable to impute it to their practices and unjust to pin it upon their Religion but if it appear to be the Doctrine and Practice of their Church then it will undoubtedly overthrow all their pretentions to Faithfulness and Sincerity And that this is really the Doctrine and Practice of their Church we have the suffrage of a whole Council by them styled General viz. the Council of Constance by whom this Doctrine was own'd affirmed and practised And John Huss Hierom of Prague and Savanarola though they had the publick Faith for their safe conduct and return yet in defiance thereof by virtue of this Doctrine they were proceeded against and severely suffered The same thing was also fiercely disputed in the Diet at Worms in the case of Luther And had not Caesar been a better Christian than the Ecclesiasticks and more a Gentleman than his Holyness Luther notwithstanding his Safe Conduct had not returned safely from thence But lest any secular Princes hereafter should either through Scruple of Conscience or in point of honour think themselves obliged to keep their Word and so hinder them of their prey when it is in their hands the Doctrine is now improved and we are told There are two distinct Tribunals and the Ecclesiastical is the Superiour and therefore if a secular Prince gives his Subjects a Safe Conduct he cannot extend it to the superior Tribunal nor by any security given hinder the Bishop or the Pope to exercise their Jurisdiction Becanus in Theol. Scholast This Doctrine is also confidently taught and the practice thereof encouraged by their most eminent Doctors and Casuists Some instances whereof for it would fill a Volume to give you all I shall now present you with for your better satisfaction in this point Cardinal Tolet. de instruct Sacerd. l. 1. c. 13. expresly avows That if a man be bound by the Bond of Fidelity or Oath he shall be freed from that Bond if he to whom he is bound fall into Excommunication and during that Debtors are absolved from the Obligation of paying to the Creditor that debt which is contracted by words And the same Tolet. l. 4. c. 21 22. positively declares That Equivocation upon Oath before a Magistrate is lawfull Thomas à Jesu the Carmelite de covers Gentium dub 4. p. 218. puts this question Whether one that denyeth it when he is asked by an Heretick whether he be a Priest or a Religious man or whether he heard divine Service doth sin against the Confession of Faith To which he answers No. For that is no denying himself to be a Christian or Catholick For it is lawfull to dissemble or hide the Person of a Clergyman or a Religious man without a Lye in words lest a man be betrayed and in danger of his life and for the same cause he may lay by his Habit omit Prayers and because humane Laws for the most part bind not the Subjects Conscience when there is great hazard of life as in this case Azorius hath well taught And Cardinal Tolet. de Instruct Sacerd. l. 8. c. 39. n. 4. thus determines a Case propounded If saith he the times be hard or the Judge unequal a man that cannot sell his Wine at a due price may lawfully make his measures less than is appointed or mingle water with his Wine and sell it for pure so he do not lye and yet if he doth it is no mortal sin nor obligeth him to restitution A man may swear to positive untruths by the Law of directing the Intention saith F. Southwel Tract de Equivocat c. 8. p. 42 43. If a man hath taken an Oath of a thing honest and lawfull and in his power yet if it hinders him from doing a greater good the Pope can dispense with his Oath and take off the obligation saith Canus Bishop of the Canar Relect. de poenitent If a man hath promised to a Woman to marry her and is betrothed to her and hath sworn it yet if he will before the Consummation enter into a Monastery his Oath shall not bind him his promise is null but his second promise that shall stand He that denies this is accursed by the Council of Trent Sess 8. Can. 6. I am weary with transcribing such nauseous stuff and therefore omitting many more I shall only add one instance more Pope Pius V. upon occasion of some Missionaries to be sent into England declared That if they were summon'd before the Judges they might Sophisticè jurare Sophisticè respondere and that they were not bound to answer according to the intention of the Judges but according to some true sense of their own i. e. which was made true by the help of a Mental Reservation Apud G. Abbot de Mendacio c. in praef p. 6 c. By these instances you may perceive that the Doctors and Casuists of the Romish Church are not of our Explainer's opinion which to me is a very great Argument that he hath not dealt so fairly and candidly as he ought to have done in his Explanation It may be he will tell us that these were but private Persons and that the Doctrine of their Church is not to be measured by their private Opinions which if he do I shall readily own That the private Opinions of particular men ought not in reason to be charged upon that Society to which they belong And if so then our Explainer ought not to take it amiss if we do not receive his Explanation as the Doctrine of that Church of which he pretends to be a Member But if the united force of the Council of Constance and that of Trent both which they themselves reckon to be General with the concurrent opinions of so many eminent Doctours and Casuists of their own Church too none of which that we know have ever received the least check for publishing their opinions if these