unhappy as not to apprehend the Mysteries of Religion Doubtless the Reason must needs be this their own Understandings though exercised to their utmost Ability could not inform them better for want of some other and clearer Light And what was their Case would have been ours had not God enlightened and blessed the Christian Church with Divine Revelation But withal this great Blessing of Divine Revelation doth not exclude but require the very utmost Exercise of human Reason for we must employ not only our Eyes or Tongues but our Understandings in reading the Word of God it must be our great Endeavour by the use of all proper means to find out the true Meaning of what we read and when upon good Grounds we are satisfied that the right Sense of such or such a Text is this or that though the Matter therein delivered be above the reach of our Reason yet the same Reason will oblige us to believe it as an undoubted Truth because that God who cannot lie hath so revealed it And this I think is all which humane Reason hath to do in Matters of Faith and Worship unless it be to oblige us to the Practice of what we know and believe To conclude this Subject our Lord saith of himself I am the light of the world the same thing he said to his Apostles too ye are the light of the world so they were not only by their Holy Example but by their Holy Doctrine too Why else doth the Apostle mention the Glorious Light of the Gospel The Light of Reason is but as the Light of a Glow worm the Light of the Law is but as the Light of a Star but the Light of the Gospel is as the Light of the Sun a very glorious Light indeed Now if this be true if Christ himself if the Apostles of Christ if the Gospel of Christ be so many Lights differing in Number had not this Author strangely forgot himself and his Bible when he told the World in his printed Paper that the Reason of Man is the Light nay the only Light which God hath given him to distinguish the true Religion from the false ones and again that God hath given to Men no other Guide but their Reason to bring them to Happiness and yet a third time that the People's common Notions are the Tests and Standards of all Truths If these three Propositions be true or any one of them I do confess that the small Light of my own Reason hath not yet enabled me to discern any difference betwixt the clearest Truths and the grossest Errors And verily the exposing such notorious Falshoods to the view of the World by the help of the Press is a very strong Argument why its Liberty should be restrained But to go on SECT II. THE main Arguments which this Author pleads for an universal Freedom of the Press are drawn from these two Topicks First From the great Usefulness of Printing which hath been so very beneficial to the Christian Church Secondly From several great Inconveniencies which as he saith would follow were the Press once more restrained and limited I. This Author pleads the great Usefulness of Printing as an Argument that the Press should be unlimited To which I answer Two ways 1. By way of Concession we do easily grant that the Invention of Printing hath proved very beneficial to the Christian Church 'T is this which hath diffused the knowledge of useful Arts and Sciences and all sorts of humane Learning 'T is this which hath furnished our Libraries with vast Numbers of excellent Books 'T is this which hath furnished our Churches and our Families with great Store of Bibles and we easily grant what this Author asserts that to this Art of Printing we owe under God the happy and quick Progress of the Reformation But 2. By way of denial we cannot grant that the usefulness of the Press is a good Argument that its Liberty should be unlimited For notwithstanding these great Advantages which both Religon and Learning have reaped from this curious Art of Printing may not it as well as many other things very useful in their own Nature be so abused and perverted as to become Instrumental to the great Detriment of Mankind 'T is an old Rule corruptio optimi pessima the better things are when well used the worse they grow when corrupted The Sword is an excellent Instrument when it defends the guiltless but it proves an unhappy Tool when it murders the Innocent Physick duly administred by a Learned Physician may preserve a Life but being misapplied by an ignorant Mountebank it tends to destroy it 'T is certain that the Art of Printing hath done a great deal of good and we are to bless God for it but withal it is as certain that it hath done and still may do a great deal of Mischief and we are to lament it When the Press tends to promote Religion and Virtue 't is well employed and ought to be encouraged but when the Press tends to promote Vice and Irreligion it ought to be discountenanced and restrained 'T is evident that the Press hath been used to publish a great Numbers of such Papers as tend to debauch the Lives and corrupt the Judgments of Men such are our obscene Poems our profane and wanton Stage-plays where Vice is not only represented but so promoted that we may justly fear that as all their Spectators lose their Time so many of them may lose their Innocence too For since the Hearts of Men are so prone to evil and become so like to tinder apt to take Fire from every little Spark 't is hard to see those Vices which are pleasing to Flesh and Blood represented upon a publick Stage and yet not be infected by them And as these are very like to debauch their Spectator's Morals so are there many other printed Papers as like to corrupt their Reader 's Judgments Such are those many Volumes printed in Defence of Popery and which is worse such are those Books printed in the Defence of Arianism Socinianism and other Heresies justly condemned by the Catholick Church in the first and purest Ages of Christianity 'T is reported that our modern Socinians have already perverted a considerable Number of Men not only by their personal Insinuations but by their printed Papers and 't is very probable that they may yet make many more Proselytes to their dangerous Opinion if the Press be still permitted to publish whatever they think fit to write For their Books contain Arguments so plausible so seemingly strong that they may pass for clear Evidences and Demonstrations amongst the unlearned Multitude who are in no capacity to discover the Fallacies that lie in them Now since the Press may as well do harm as good 't is very reasonable that it should be well regulated to promote that good and prevent that harm 't is very fit that no new Books should be published till they have been first supervised and allowed
one Theodatus Artemon and Beryllus and Sabellius in the Fourth Century by Arius Eunomius and some others And in the same Age the Personality and Divinity of the Holy Ghost was denied by Macedonius and some others who were there branded by a particular Name and called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Oppugners of the Holy Ghost These Heterodox Opinions beginning to spread and disturb the Peace of the Christian Church and some other ill Opinions arising too several General Councils were summoned by several Christian Emperors the Nicene Council by Constantine the Great whose main work was to examine the Opinion of Arius the Council of Constantinople called by Theodosius the First to debate the Opinion of Macedonius the Council of Ephesus called by Theodosius the Second to consider the Opinion of Nestorius and the Council of Chalcedon summoned by the Emperor Martian to consult about the Opinion of Eutyches These Councils consisting of some Hundreds of Bishops having the Glory of God in their Hearts the Settlement of the Church in their Eyes and the Bible in their Hands did after a mature deliberation pronounce the Opinions of these Men to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Gospel and the obstinate defenders of them to be Hereticks And certainly the determinations of these General Councils which were made up of Persons exemplary for their Piety and eminent for their Learning who resolved on nothing without mature Advice and Deliberation are of as great Authority and afford as much Satisfaction in Matters of Religion as any thing of Man can be or do For the Truths of God once taught the World by Christ and his Apostles being unchangeable for ever and our Bibles which are the only Rule to measure Religions by continuing one and the same for ever that which was an Error in those early days must needs be an Error still and that which was a Truth then must needs be a Truth now And if we cannot think of any more proper means for the right understanding of Scripture and the discovery of Truth and Error than the deliberate and unanimous Judgment of so many hundred pious learned and unbiassed Men assembled together then certainly the determinations of those antient Councils are very considerable Evidences for Truth and against Error And the rather because they consisted of such Persons who besides their eminent Piety and Learning had the great Advantage of living nearer the Apostles age and thereby were the better able to inform themselves and us what was certainly believed and done in the very infancy of the Christian Church SECT IX 3. THE Writings of the Antient Fathers those especially that lived within the first six Centuries where-ever they agree and are not since corrupted or maimed by the Frauds and Forgeries of the Roman Church are of singular use in this Matter too That Ignatius Clemens Origen Athanasius Cyril Nazianzene Basil Chrysostom Hierom Austin and many others both in the Eastern and Western Churches were indeed Persons of great Piety and excellent Parts our Socinians without breach of Modesty cannot deny And although some of these great Names in some particular Matters had their peculiar mistakes and shewed themselves to be but Men yet in all Points where we find an unanimous Consent amongst them we are to have so much Veneration for their Authority as not easily to suspect or contradict it True it is if we take these Fathers singly Man by Man where we find any of them alone in their Opinions as Origen in reference to the Punishments of Hell and St. Austin in reference to Infants that die unbaptised we are not in this case much more obliged to accept their Judgment than the Judgment of some single Person yet alive But if we take All the Fathers who lived within six hundred Years after Christ together and in a lump where we find them One in Judgment they are enough to make a wiser Council than any hath been since their time they are enough to inform us what is Error and what is Truth But SECT X. 4. BEcause Learned Men whose Fortunes are Mean cannot purchase and unlearned Men whose Intellectuals are weak cannot read and understand the voluminous Writings of the Fathers we have several Systems of Divinity Confessions of Faith short Abridgments of Christian Religion which are especially to unlearned Persons great helps in this matter too And here methinks those antient Creeds of the Apostles Nice and Athanasius which are so generally received by the Church of God are of great Authority to settle our Judgment in the main and most necessary Points of Faith Besides we have many Choice and Excellent Catechisms composed by Men that were Pious Judicious acquainted with Scriptures well versed in the Primitive Councils and Fathers These short Catechisms compiled by Persons of singular Endowments and approved by the Church are little less than contracted Bibles containing in them whatever Man is obliged to know and delivering enough in easie Terms to inform us in Matters of Practice to secure us from Errors and confirm our Judgments in all the great Points of Faith In short the substance of my Answer to this Argument is this since we have the written Word of God to be our Rule and since this Word in some material Cases according to the different Fancies and Interests of Men hath different Interpretations given concerning its true Sense and Meaning 't is our safest way for our better Satisfaction to betake our selves to the most able faithful and unbiassed Judges and they are the most antient Councils and the Primitive Fathers whose Judgments are declared in our several Creeds in other publick Confessions of Faith and Orthodox Catechisms set forth or approved by the Church of God And since we are very well stored with these excellent Helps I do once more conclude that no Man whether learned or unlearned can need any new Arguments from the Press to confirm his Judgment in Matters of Religion SECT XI 7. THis Author's seventh Allegation against the Restraint of the Press runs thus If it be unlawful to let the Press continue free lest it furnish Men with the Reasons of one Party as well as the other it must be as unlawful to examine those Reasons To this I answer thus We must distinguish between Party and Party between one who is Orthodox and one who is Heretical this distinction being premised I shall resolve this Hypothetical Proposition into these two Categorical ones That it is not lawful for many Orthodox Christians to Examine those Reasons which Hereticks may urge in defence of their ill Opinions And therefore that the Press should not be permitted to furnish such Christians with any such Reasons 'T is notoriously known that there are amongst us vast numbers of Persons who are of weak Judgments not firmly established in their Faith not able to distinguish Truth from Falshood in a fallacious Argument and therefore are apt to be Tossed up and down by every wind of doctrine now for such
might be otherwise he did not like it This Example of Constantine was followed by succeeding Emperors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Justinian we Condemn every Heresie and lest the Books of Hereticks should transmit their ill Opinions to Posterity Theodosius and Valentinian did Command by a Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that their Writings should be cast into the Flames We Read that they were debarred from the common Priviledges of Orthodox Christians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Civil Law and it instances in several particulars 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We decree that Hereticks shall be uncapable of any Publick Imployment whether Military or Civil nor might they be admitted as Witnesses in their Courts of Judicature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let not an Heretick's Testimony be received against an Orthodox Christian nay more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 No Heretick shall Inherit the Estate of his Father In short we find Hereticks Deposed Degraded Banished and sometimes Fined Witness that Law of Theodosius mentioned by the Council of Carthage which Enacted that in some Cases Hereticks should pay as the Canon words it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ten Pounds of Gold Now we do not Write this with any design to encourage the Governours of our Church or State to exercise any Severity towards our sober and peaceable Dissenters who differ from us only in the Circumstantials of our Religion but we mention these things to confirm our present Argument and to shew that our present unlimited Toleration of all Opinions and Practices in Matters of Religion is quite contrary to the Judgment Usages and Laws of the Antient Church who punished such as held and taught Heterodox Opinions and would not be otherwise reclaimed 5. 'T is certain that an unlimited Toleration of all Opinions and Practices in Matters of Religion is directly contrary to the Divine Law to the Will of God revealed in his written Word The Jewish Church was never permitted to teach and do what they pleased about the things of God they were not allowed to serve their Maker as they Listed they were obliged to Sacrifice when where and what they were Commanded It was not left to them as a matter of Choice whether they would Circumcise their Infants or not no the Law was this the Uncircumcised Man child shall be cut off Nor were they left to their own Liberty whether they would come to Jerusalem to eat the Passover or not no the Text saith of good Josiah The King commanded all the people saying keep the Passover We do not find any indulgence in matters of Religion granted to the Jewish Church by Almighty God or any of their good Kings And as there is no such thing to be found in the Law or the Prophets so there is very little or nothing to be met with in the whole Gospel that gives any Countenance to such a Practice the main place which seems to look that way is in the Parable of the Tares of which 't is said Let them grow until the Harvest what means our Lord by this Is it indeed his pleasure that ill Men and ill Opinions should be indulged and countenanced in his Church St. Chrysostom gives us another Interpretation of our Saviour's words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Lord doth here forbid us to kill and slay Hereticks but is there no difference betwixt a Sword and a Rod Is a Bridle and a Halter the same thing The Heretick must not be destroyed but may he not be restrain'd St. Chrysostom answers thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Lord doth not here forbid to curb Hereticks to stop their Mouths to check their boldness dissolve their Conventicles c. as he goeth on Of the same mind was St. Paul who saith Their Mouths must be stopped but how can that be done if there may be no Penal Laws And if an Universal Liberty of Conscience in Opinion and Practice about matters of Religion be indeed agreeable to the Gospel of Christ what meant St. Paul by that demand of his Shall I come to you with a Rod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall I bring a Rod to whip and scourge you So St. Chrysostom And since St. Paul who well knew the Mind of Christ did upon just occasion make use of his Apostolical Rod to punish not only Immoralities in Life but Errors in Judgment too we may thence infer that an unlimited Toleration of all Opinions in Matters of Religion hath no manner of Countenance from the Law of Christ we read that St. Paul made use of this Rod to strike Elymas blind and why he did so that Expression intimates Wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord It was for his opposing the Gospel and that in all probability arose from the Error of his Judgment But the Case is yet more plain in the Example of Hymenaeus and Alexander of whom St. Paul saith I have delivered them to Satan a severe Punishment surè futuri judicii praejudicium 't is a fore stalling the dreadful Judgment of God So Tertullian But why did St. Paul inflict it He gives this Reason Concerning faith they have made shipwrack or as he elsewhere expresseth it They have erred concerning the Truth It was for their ill Opinion about one Article of our Creed These Instances are enough to shew that a Toleration of all Opinions and Practices in Matters of Religion was never thought to be lawful and consequently such an unlimited Liberty of the Press as tends to bring in and spread Errors and Heresies ought not to be allowed And now I shall take my leave of my Reader when I have admonished him that in all this Discourse I plead for the Regulation of the Press as to such Books only as concern Morality Faith and Religious Worship of which our Learned Ecclesiastical Governours are the most proper Judges But as to Policy and State Affairs they fall under the Cognizance of the Civil Magistrate whose Province it is and whose Care it should be to prevent the publishing of all such Pamphlets as tend to promote popular Tumults Sedition Treason and Rebellion And had this been carefully done some Years ago it might have happily prevented those dreadful Confusions under which our Church and State now do and still are too like to groan Farewel FINIS BOOKS printed for Richard Sare at Grays-Inn Gate in Holborn THE Fables of Aesop with Morals and Reflections Fol. Erasmus Colloquies in English Octavo Quevedo's Visions Octavo These Three by Sir Roger L'Estrange The Genuine Epistles of St. Barnabas St. Ignatius St. Clement St. Polycarp the Shepherd of Hermas c. translated and published in English Octavo A Practical Discourse concerning Swearing Octavo The Authority of Christian Princes over Ecclesiastical Synods in Answer to a Letter to a Convocation Man Octavo Sermons upon several Occasions Quarto These
is this There is no medium between Men's judging for themselves and giving up their Judgments to others We grant it but what then His Inference is this If the first be their Duty the Press ought not to be restrained But why not His Reason is again the same because it debars Men from seeing those Allegations by which they are to inform their Judgments That 's his Argument to which I answer thus We must distinguish betwixt Man and Man betwixt such as can judge for themselves and such as cannot where the Scripture is express the Words plain and the Sense easie every Man who hath a competent use of Reason and can read his Bible may judge for himself But when several Interpretations are given of any Texts when Doubts are raised when Arguments are produced to defend both Parts of a Contradiction there is a vast number of Men who are no more able to judge which is true and which is false than a blind Man is to distinguish betwixt a good Colour and a bad one 'T is the great unhappiness of such Persons that in matters of Controversy they cannot rely upon their own weak Reason but must either suspend their Judgments or else give it up to the Conduct of some other Person and who is so fit to be trusted with it as their own Ministers provided they be as every Minister should be Men of Piety and Parts able to satisfie Doubts remove Scruples and convince Gainsayers But if Men give up their Reason to the Clergy this Author who vilifieth our Clergy as much as possible he can gives our People an intimation that by so doing they make us the Lords of their Faith But how doth that follow suppose two Persons are engaged in a doubtful Controversie about an Estate claimed by both these Persons being of themselves unable to determine the Case appeal to the King's Judges but do they thereby make those Judges the Lords of that Estate which is contended for surely no the Judge doth no more than according to Evidence and Law declare to which Person that Estate doth justly belong So it is in our present Case several Parties of Men lay Claim to Truth as theirs and produce Evidences for it Now a Man unable to satisfie himself which side Truth is to be found consults his Minister who by Evidence of Scripture which in this case is the only Law assures his Neighbour the Truth lieth here or there And indeed that the Minister is the most proper Judge in Controversies relating to Religion we cannot doubt if we dare believe the Prophet who saith The Priest's lips should preserve knowledge and they should seek the Law at his mouth for he is the messenger of the Lord of Hosts This Text doth not constitute us nor do we pretend to be Lords of our People's Faith but as the Apostle speaks Helpers to the Truth We do not require any weak Believer's assent to any one Article of Faith whereunto God requires it not though the Church of Rome doth so And how unjustly then without Modesty or Truth doth this Man stigmatize us as Lords of our People's Faith But beside those weak Christians who in controverted Points cannot judge for themselves there are some other of clearer Heads and more improved Understandings that can and for their sakes this Author saith that the Press ought not to be restrained and his Reason is this Because the Restraint of the Press debars them from seeing those Allegations by which they are to confirm their Judgments This Argument in effect hath already been offered once and again and hath as often been replied to but for the greater satisfaction of my Reader I shall again consider and enlarge my Answer to it and this it is Not knowing and intelligent Christian who is well able to judge for himself can want any new Allegations from the Press to confirm his Judgments in any disputed Points of Faith or Worship because we have already sufficient Rules to judge by For 1. We have the Scripture preached in our publick Churches and if we please we may read and consider them in our private Families and Closets And here I do again affirm that all matters of revealed Religion must be examined proved and determined by the written Word of God This is the only sure balance to weigh and touch stone to try all Matters of Faith and Worship To this our Lord sent his hearers Search the Scriptures and again How readest thou And which is remarkable the ignorance of Scripture did he make the only occasion and ground of Error in Points of Faith so he told the Sadducees Ye err but why not knowing the Scriptures by which our Lord himself proved that great Doctrine of the Resurrection which they denied And when our Lord would prove himself to be a greater Person than David he did it by that Text The Lord said unto my Lord c. This course took our blessed Saviour and so did his Apostles too and so must we we must take the Scripture for our Guide in Matters of Religion for that is the only and infallible Rule and unalterable Standard to measure all the Doctrines and Practices which such or such a Church doth teach recommend or require from us But if it shall be again demanded who must be the Judg whether amongst different Interpretations of Holy Writ this or that be the true one whether in controverted Points such or such a Text do certainly warrant such or such a Doctrine as is grounded thereon I answer again 2. We have the united Judgment and Decrees of several Councils those I mean that were convened in the first and purest times before the Superstitions and Idolatries of Rome had crept in by degrees thro' carelesness vice and ignorance and over-spread the Church The grand Controversie now on foot amongst us concerns the Divinity of Christ the Personality and Deity of the Holy Ghost that Christ in the most strict and proper Sense of that Notion is truly God that the Holy Ghost is a Person and a Divine Person we affirm but our Socinians who are the spawn of old Arius make bold to deny To justifie our Doctrine we cite such and such Texts and to establish their Opinions as well as they can they do the same thing as for the Scripture which we produce to prove the Doctrine of the Trinity because humane Reason cannot comprehend it they do either question the Authority of such Texts or else they wrest them to such an intolerable Sense as every sober Man's Reason may justly abhor Now the Question is Who must judge betwixt us and them Who must determine whether the Scripture be on their side or ours I answer That Heterodox Opinion now much contended for which we call Socinian did appear under some other Names very early in the Christian Church In the first Age the Godhead of Christ was denied by the Jews and particularly by Ebion in the Third Century by
to obey one Command as well as another One Command is this prove all things another immediately follows hold fast that which is good Now if one Man obey the first of these Commands only and another obey them both they do not equally do what God requires nor consequently are they equally in the way to Heaven And this is the Case of two Persons who after an equal Examination hold two different Religions the one a True and the other a False one the Obedience of the one is only secundùm quid he obeyeth but this single Command prove all things but the other obeyeth this and that too hold fast that which is good which a False Religion can never be And if so How can two such Persons be in an equal Capacity of Salvation except a wrong way do as directly lead to Heaven as the right one There is another Assertion in the same Paragraph which I cannot pass over without some Reflections upon it and 't is this The perverse holding of Religion i. e. taking it up on trust whether it be true or false is Heresie This definition of Heresie is to me a new one and repugnant to many old ones which I have met with It is true the different Opinions of the old Philosophers whether True or False are indifferently stiled by Epiphanius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Heresies of the Philosophers But in Matters of Religion this word Heresie is very seldom if ever used in any Sense but a bad one the Evangelist mentions the Sect in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Heresie of the Pharisees and the Sadducees an Expression which doth no way commend them Nor did the Jews intend the credit of the Christian Religion when they called it this Sect or as it is in the Original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this Heresie And as for the Pagans many of them had as bad an Opinion of it and stiled it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Atheistical Heresie so Eusebius Sure it is the word is now generally used in an ill Sense and doth necessarily imply nothing else but an unsoundness and tenacity of Opinion about Matters of Religion accordingly the old Canon Law of the Greek Church defines an Heretick thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that is not right in his Judgment The Council of Carthage describes them thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hereticks are they who have wrong apprehensions about the Christian Faith Tertullian defines Heresie thus quodcunque adversùs veritatem sapit whatsoever makes against not the Laws of God but his Truth accordingly an Heretick in the Language of Hesychius is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that chuseth some Opinion besides or against the Truth These Definitions of Ancient Divines inform us what their Thoughts were concerning Heresie namely that it was nothing else but an Opinion held against some Truth But this late Author is of another mind for he tells us That the taking up a Religion on trust though the true one is Heresie and according as Men are more or less partial in examining they are more or less heretical But if this be so then must the Nature and Essence of Truth depend on the bare act of Examination which cannot be because Truth will remain Truth whether it be examined or not the strictest Examination doth not constitute Truth but only makes it evident Indeed he who takes up a true Religion barely upon trust may be to blame but his Fault is not Heresie but Negligence and Disobedience 't is not as Heresie is an Errour in point of Judgment but a Sin in point of Practice 't is not the Violation of a Doctrine but the Transgression of a Command So that whatever Title we may give such a Man we cannot justly brand him with the Name of Heretick But yet our Author from these foregoing Premises infers this as an Epiphonema or granted Conclusion so that 't is not what a Man professeth but how that justifieth or condemns him before God No. Is the what excluded And is the how all Suppose a Man profess the Religion of Mahomet with the greatest Devotion that can be would not the what condemn him or would the how excuse him Suppose a Jew with the highest Reverence should have offered up a Swine instead of a Lamb would not the what the matter of his Sacrifice notwithstanding its exactest manner have rendred it abominable The Truth is God considers both the what and the how the substance of his Worship and its circumstances too and if so Why doth this Man tell us 't is not the what but the how And now being wearied with pursuing this Author through so many impertinent Allegations against the Restraint of the Press I shall take my leave of him when I have propounded two Arguments against that unlimited Liberty of the Press for which he is so zealous an Advocate and and that I fear upon an ill Design and my first Argument is this 1. Since this unlimited Liberty of the Press would certainly be as this Author himself doth not deny an in-let to Schisms Heresies and a great variety of Opinions and Practices in Matters of Religion the allowance of it can never consist with that Command of God contend earnestly for the Faith once delivered to the Saints This Text supposeth that the true Faith or which is all one the true Religion is but one and that for that one we are to Contend and that Earnestly too Now to allow an unlimited Liberty to the Press which will open a wide Gap to introduce false Religions is so far from a contending for the one true Faith that it is indeed a contending against it and therefore such an allowance is a direct breach of this Command 2. Since this unlimited Liberty of the Press would certainly prove an in-let to Schisms Heresies and false Religions the allowance of it would be contradictory to the Judgment and Practice of the universal Church in all Ages It is true the Church of Christ in all Ages had not the use of a Press but if the late Art of Printing without any due Restraint should prove a means to introduce an inundation of Heresies the allowance of such a Liberty and those numerous Errours with which it would be attended would be diametrically opposite to the Judgment and Practice of the Catholick Church from one Generation to another Now the Question which relates to the Case in hand is this How did the Primitive Saints deal with those Men who differed in Opinion from the received Doctrine of the Catholick Church They followed St. Paul's Rule 2 Tim. 2. 25. In meekness instruct those that oppose themselves they did so they used all gentle and rational means to reduce them but when this would not do What course took they then Did they indulge them Did they give them an universal Liberty of Conscience Surely no and to prove this three Things shall be shewed First That an unlimited Toleration