sense we assert the Certainty of Christian Faith to be MORALL not in the later This Principle is granted if importing only that Christians haue or may haue a sufficiently certain and infallible Euidence of the Truth of their Christianity But notwithstanding this Christians may be deficient in a right belief of seuerall necessary Articles of this Christian Faith if destitute of that externall Infallible Guide therein And the perpetuall Diuine Assistance and so Infallibility in Necessaries of this Guide being declared in the scriptures a Catholick hauing once learnt this Point of Faith from it Definitions and Expositions becomes secure and setled in the belief of all those controuerted Articles of his Faith Wherein Others another whilst the scriptures in such Points at least to persons vnlearned or of weaker judgments which are which are the greatest part of Christians are ambiguous in their sence and drawn with much art to seuerall interests XXVIII PRINCIPLE 28. A Christian being thus certain to the highest degree of a firm assent that the scriptures are the Word of God his Faith is thereby resolued into the scriptures as into the rule and measure of what hee is to belieue as it is into the Veracity of God as the ground of belieuing what is therein contained Both Catholicks and Protestants profess to resolue their Faith into the Word of God and Diuine Reuelation or into the scriptures so as is said on Principle 14. and 29. and make Gods Veracity the Ground of their belief of the things therein contained But the former resolue their Faith into this scripture as the sense of it where disputed is deliuered by the Church whose Faith the Apostle commands vs to follow and to whom Christ himself giues testimony as S. Augustin saith As for Protestants they resolue their Faith into this scripture as the sence of it is ultimatly apprehended and vnderstood by their own judgments None here to vse the Doctors words elsewhere vsurping that Royall Prerogrtiue of Heauen in prescribing infallibly in matters question'd suppose in those Points the Doctor named before the Doctrine of the Deity of Iesus Christ or of the Trinity But leauing all to judge and so the Socinians according to the Pandects of the Diuine Lawes because each member of this society is bound to take care of his soul and all things that tend thereto But here the Doctor will permit vs to aske whether euery one is bound to take care of his soul so as vnder the pretence hereof to disobey their Resolutions and Instructions in Faith or Manners whom God hath appointed to take care of and to watch ouer their soules and will require an account of them for it Here therefore let euery one take the safest course and where there is no euident Certainty always make sure to side with the Church XXIX PRINCIPLE 29 No Christian can be obliged vnder any pretence of Infallibility to belieue any thing as a matter of Faith but what was reuealed by God himselfe in that Book wherein he belieues his will to be contained and consequently is bound to reject whatsoeuer is offered to be imposed vpon his Faith which hath no fundation in scripture or is contrary thereto Which rejection is no making NEGATIVE ARTICLES OF FAITH but only applying the generall grounds of Faith to particular instances as I belieue nothing necessary to saluation but what is contained in scripeure Therefore no such particular things which neither are there nor can be deduced thence 1. Here first obserue That what no Christian is obliged to belieue vnder any pretence of Church-Infallibility he is much rather not obliged to belieue vnder any pretence of Church Authority And that the Doctors freeing the Churches subjects here from the former doth so from the later It concerns therefore his superiors to look to it whether their Churches and their owne Authority suffers no detriment particularly from this Principle I mean so as it can be applied to priuate mens practice 2. Next obserue That the Expression What is reuealed by God c. as it is applicable to persons must either mean What such person only thinks belieues or is perswaded to be reuealed c. or what such person certainly knows to be reuealed And the same may be sayd of the later expressions what hath no foundation What is contrary Now as either of these two Additions are made a great alteration is made in the Principle and what in the one Addition is true in the other may be false As for example when a culpable Ignorance belieues something that is enjoyned by this Authority not to be reuealed in Gods Word which indeed is so and so rejects it here such act is not justifiable Very necessary therefore it seems here to make an exact distinction that if the Doctor means it here of the one viz. certain Knowledge it may not be misapplyed by any to the other namely a belief or full perswasion For so men set once vpon examining well in such high mysteries their owne Certainty will I conceiue neuer find just cause to reject what this Church-Authority to which they owe obedience recommends to them vpon Her Certainty But to take Expressions as they lye For the first Part of this Principle thus much is granted That no Christian can be obliged vnder any pretence of Infallibility to belieue any thing as a matter of Faith but what is reuealed by God himselfe in his Word Written or Vnwritten both which the Doctor else where allowes to be of the same Value so it be euident they are his Word Where I adde vnwritten because though it is granted before on Principle 14. that the Word written or Book of scriptures contains all those Points of Faith that are simply necessary to be of all persons belieued for attaining saluation Yet some Articles of a Christians Faith there may be that are not there contained which may be also securely preserued in the Church by Ecclesiasticall Tradition both Written and Vnwritten deriued at first from the Apostolicall as for example this by Protestants confessed That these Bookes of scripture are the Word of God I say thus much is granted For no Church-Infallibility is now pretended but only in declaring what this Word of God deliuers requireth authorizeth and a Catholicks whole Faith is grounded on Diuine Reuelation And where such pretended Infallible Church-Authority enjoyns any thing to be belieued meerly as lawfull it grounds it selfe on this Word of God for the lawfulness of it The Consequence also is granted viz. That a Christian is bound to reject whatsoeuer is offred to be imposed vpon his Faith which hath no foundation in scripture or Gods Word as before explained or is contrary thereto that is which is certainly known to such Christian to be so there being no matter of Faith enjoyned by such Authority but what is pretended to be so founded But then such Christian where not infallibly certain
which it proposeth Yet it signifies much for his hauing a right and sauing Faith in all those matters proposed by this Church which cannot misguide him see the Consideration on the nineteenth Principle which right and sauing Faith children and other illiterate country people in the Catholick Church haue without any such infallible assurance concerning the Proponent as is abundantly declared by Catholick writers In like manner the Protestants also affirme That the Holy scriptures may signify much to the begetting a true and sauing Faith euen in those who cannot from Vniuersall Tradition certainly proue them to be the word of God XXII PRINCIPLE 22. If no particular person be infallible in the assent he giues to matters proposed by others to him then no man can be infallibly sure that the Church is infallible and so the Churches Infallibility can signify nothing to our infallible assurance without an equall infallibility in our selues in the belief of it If no particular person be infallible in the Assent he giues to matters propos'd c. Here Matters is left indefinite If the Doctor means to any matters at all proposed the Proposition and Consequence thereto annexed are true and granted But on the contrary a particular person may be infallible in the assent he giues to some matter proposed viz. to this That the Church is infallible If he means to all matters proposed then it is faulty and denyed For though no particular person be infallible in the assent he giues to all matters proposed by others to him yet may he be so in this the Churches Infallibility And so the Consequence also is voyd and the Churches Infallibility will signify as much as is expected to mens infallible assurance in those matters it proposeth Here then Catholicks affirm That though euery person is not so any person may be and that antecedently to the testimony of scripture at least with a morally-infallible certainty or what euer Certainty that may be called which Vniuersall Tradition can afford assured of this Diuine Reuelation the Churches Infallibility from such Tradition and other Motiues of Credibility as Protestants allow for a sufficiently or morally-infallible and certain means of belieuing the scriptures to be the word of God On which word of God or Diuine Reuelation the seuerall Articles deliuered by it in the sense their own priuate judgment apprehends the Protestant grounds his Faith Again on which word of God or Diuine Reuelation in the sense this Infallible Church interprets the same Articles the Catholick grounds his Faith But as the Protestants except here from being primarily grounded on or proued by the same scriptures this Fundamentall Point of Faith That the scriptures are the true Word of God so they must giue Catholiks also leaue to except here this their Point of Faith the infallibility of the Church from being primarily or as to the first means of Knowing it grounded on or learnt from the testimony of this Infallible Church For this Point may first come to the Belieuers Knowledge either from Tradition or from the Holy scriptures as is explained before in the Considerations on 17. Principle § 28. From the scriptures I say as the sense of them is now learnt not from this Infallible Church but either from their owne sufficient Clearness in this Point or from Tradition Nor are Catholicks necessited in arguing against Protestants who grant the scriptures to be Gods Word to vse any other Testimony then that of these scriptures for a sufficiently clear Proof of Church-Infallibility For I think I may call that a clear Proof euen according to the Doctors common reason of Mankind which by the most of the Christian World is taken to be so notwithstanding that a Party engaged by their Reformation in an apparent contrary interest do contradict it Yet whilst they deny a sufficient Euidence of Church-Infallibility to be found in scripture if they would allow a sufficient Euidence of Church-Authority established to decide Ecclesiasticall Controuersies with Obligation to Externall Obedience by this Authority they would be cast and silenced for the former if a much Major Part may be admitted as it ought to giue Law to the Whole In the Belief and Profession of Which Church-Infallibility and submission of priuate mens judgments to her sentence passed in her synods the Greek Church seems no way varying from the Roman Jeremias the Constantinopolitan Patriarch in his Contest with the Lutheran Protestants is much in this as a sure Retreat for ending Controuersies and establishing Peace For he tells them That those Points which haue been determined or commanded synodically after a Legitimate way of Councills they are receiued by all Faithfull Christians as consonant to the Diuinely-Inspired scriptures And in the Conclusion of that Answer he saith It is not lawfull for vs confiding in our own priuate Explication to vnderstand to obserue or interpret any saying of Diuine scripture any otherwayes then as hath seemed good to those Theologues who haue been approued and receiued by Holy synods directed by Gods spirit least that declining from the right Euangelicall Doctrin the Conceptions of our minds should be carried about hither and thither like a Proteus But some wilt aske How shall those things be reformed How Euen thus by Gods Assistance if we take not into our hands nor giue credit to any things besides those which haue been instituted and ordained by the Holy Apostles and Holy synods He who obserues this limit is our Companion in celebrating Diuine Mysteries he is of the same Communion and Faith with us Again in his Preface to the same answer he saith We will giue our Answer not alledging any thing of our own but from the seauen Oecumenicall synods the last of these is that so much persecuted and befoold by Doctor Stillingfleet in his last Book And from the sentence of Holy Doctors interpreters of Diuinely inspired scriptures whom the Catholick Church hath by an Vnanimous consent receiued since the Holy Ghost hath breathed forth by them and spoken in them such things as shall foreuer remain unmooued as being founded on the Word of God For the Church of Christ is the Pillar and ground of Truth against which the Gates of Hell shall neuer preuail as God has promised Here we see in the East the same Zeale for Councills and for Fathers taken collectiuely as an Infallible Guide as is in the West and the like endeauour to reduce Protestants to the same acknowledgment and humble submission of Judgment XXIII PRINCIPLE 23. The Infallibility of euery particular person being not asserted by those who plead for the Infallibility of a Church and the one rendring the other vseless for if euery person be infallible what needs any Representatiue Church be so too and the infallibility of a Church being of no effect if euery Person be not infallible in the belief of it we are further to enquire what certainty men may haue in matters of Faith supposing no
supernaturall assistance and for that end to assure men what the will of God is the same means must be vsed for the tryall of that as for any other supernaturall way of Gods making known his will to men Here if the Doctor means That by the same way or means as we come to know the truth of other Divine Revelations we may come to know the truth also of this viz the Infallibility in Necessaries of a Society or Church I consent to it But not to this That by all or only the same ways or means by which we may come to know one Divine Revelation we may or must come to know any other or this of Church-Infallibility For some Divine Revelation may come first to our knowledg by Tradition another first by Scripture another by the Church see below Consid. on the 17. Principle VII PRINCIPLE 7. It being in the power of God to make choyce of severall ways of revealing his Will to vs we ought not to dispute from the Attributes of God the necessity of one particular way to the Exclusion of all others but we ought to enquire what way God himself hath chosen and whatever he hath done we are sure cannot be repugnant to Infinit Iustice Wisdom Goodness and Truth This is granted VIII PRINCIPLE 8. Whatever way is capable of certainly conveying the Will of God to vs may be made choyce of by him for the means of making known his will in order to the happiness of mankind so that no Argument can be sufficient a priori to prove that God cannot choose any particular way to reveal his mind by but such which evidently prooues the insufficiency of that means for conueying the Will of God to vs. This likewise is granted IX PRINCIPLE 9. There are severall ways conceaveable by vs how God may make known his Will to vs eyther by immediate voyce from Heaven or inward Inspiration to every particular person or inspiring some to speak personnally to others or assisting them with an infallible spirit in writing such Books which shall contain the Will of God for the benefit of distant persons and future Ages To these seuerall ways by which God reveals his Will the Doctor might have added this one more as a Truth And in case such Writings in some things be not clear to all capacities as the Writings of Moses his law were not nor any Writings though possibly yet hardly can be when written at seuerall times by seueral persons on seuerall and those particular occasions in different styles c. By our Lords giuing a Commission to and leauing a standing Authority in the Successors of these holy Pen-men to expound these their Writings to the people and by affording them for euer such a Divine Assistance as in nothing necessary to misinterpret them X. PRINCIPLE 10. If the Will of God cannot be sufficiently declared to men by Writing it must eyther be because no Writing can be intelligible enough for that end or that it can neuer be known to be written by men infallibly assisted the former is repugnant to common sense for Words are equally capable of being understood spoken or written the later ouerthrows the possibility of the Scriptures being known to be the Word of God This is granted XI PRINCIPLE 11. It is agreed among all Christians that although God in the first Ages of the World did reveal his mind to men immediatly by a Voice of secret inspirations yet afterwards hee did communicate his mind to some immediatly inspired to write his Will in Books to be preserued for the benefit of future Ages and particularly that these Books of the New Testament which we now receaue were so written by the Apostles and Disciples of Iesus-Christ The Doctor declaring how God after the first Ages was pleas'd to communicate his mind by the Writings of Moses c. might and ought to haue added as a Truth That he also left a Iudge in case of any Controuersy arising about the sense of those Writings to whose sentence the people were to stand and do according to it vnder paine of death as the same Writings inform vs. XII PRINCIPLE 12. Such Writings hauing been receiued by the Christian Church of the first Ages as Divine and Infallible and being deliuered down as such to vs by an vniuersall consent of all Ages since they ought to be owned by vs as the certain Rule of Faith whereby we are to judge what the Will of God is in order to our Saluation vnlesse it appear with an euidence equall to that whereby we believe those Books to be the Word of God that they were neuer intended for that end because of their obscurity or imperfection Here these words whereby we are to judge being vnderstood not vniuersally of all Christians but of those to whom amongst Christians this Office of judging in dubious cases is delegated by our Lord Or vnderstood vniuersally that is so farr as the sense of these Scriptures is to all men clear and vndisputable This Proposition is granted XIII PRINCIPLE 13. Although we cannot argue against any particular way of Reuelation from the necessary Attributes of God yet such a way as Writing being made choyce of by him we may justly say that it is repugnant to the nature of the designe and the Wisdome and Goodnesse of God to giue infallible assurance to persons in writing his Will for the benefit of Mankind if those Writings may not be vnderstood by all persons who sincerely endeauour to know the meaning of them in all such things as are necessary for their saluation This Principle is vnsound Because if God who according to the Doctors 7. Principle may reueal his Will in or without Writing after what manner he pleaseth may reveal it in these Writings so as that in many things it may be clear only to some persons more versed in the Scriptures and in the Churches Traditional sense of them and more assisted from aboue according to their employment which Persons he hath appointed to instruct the rest and these to learne it of them in those places or Points wherein to these persons Gods Will is obscure then I say though these Writings be not such as that euery one may attaine the understanding of them by his owne endeavours yet if he may by others namely his Instructors this also consists very well with the Diuine designe with his Wisdome and Goodnesse as also it would had he left no Writings at all but only Teachers to deliuer his Will perpetually to his Church Concerning these Vvritings pretended by the Doctor to be intelligible by all Persons c. I find as it seems to me a contrary Principle aduanced by Doctor Field a person of no small authority in the Church of England in his Preface to the large Volume he thought it necessary to write on the Church Seeing sayth he the Controuersies of Religion that is in
before they can look on themselues as obliged to giue it And therefore He and the Archbishop so farr as any such Councills are fallible allow only an Externall Obedience or silence to them Now for Obedience to these first four Generall Councills in a submission of judgment to them vpon such an Vniuersall Acceptation of them the Doctor in another place thus writes The Church of England looks vpon the keeping the Decrees of the fower first Generall Councills as her Duty and professeth to be guided by the sence of scripture as interpreted by the vnanimous consent of the Fathers and the fowr fist Generall Councills that is shee professeth to take that which such Counciils deliuer for the sence of scripture Not then to admit their Definitions if first they accord with the scripture taken in our own sence So also else where he saith The Church of England doth not admit any thing to be deliuered as the sense of scripture which is contrary to the consent of the Catholick sense of the fowr first Ages that is in their Oecumenicall Councills as he expresseth it in the preceding page And here also he giues the Ground of such submission viz. a strong presumption that nothing contrary to the necessary Articles of Faith should be held by the Catholick Church whose very being depends vpon the belief of those things that are necessary to saluation And when saith he those correspondencies were maintained between the seuerall parts of it that what was refused by one was so by all In another place also speaking in generall of Councills vniuersally accepted he saith That both the Truth of Gods Promises the Goodness of God to his People and his peculiar care of his Church seem highly concerned that such a Councill should not be guilty of any notorious errour Here you see he saith that the Truth of Gods Promises is concerned that these Councills should not fall into any notorious Errour Therefore such Promises are made absolute to some Church-Gouernors after the Apostles And then where the Errour is not intollerable saith the Archbishop at least Obedience of Non-contradiction will be due to all such Councills Now a notorious Errour it must needs be if an Errour in Fundamentalls And such notorious Errour in particular would this be If they should hold themselues when they are not infallible in their Decrees and so should require a Generall Assent such as that in the Athanasian Creed from Christians to them as to Diuine Reuelations and make them DE FIDE thereby in case any Decree be not true obliging all the Members of the Church to an Vnity in errour Thus farr then as to Fundamentall Errours it seems Gods Prouidence secures both such Councills and their subjects And then also for their erring in Non-fundamentalls both He and the Archbishop put this among the RARO CONTINGENTIA The Archbishop also is much in justifying the Catholick Church infallible not only in its Being but Teaching and that must be by its Councills Doctor White saith he had reason to say That the Visible Church had in all Ages taught that vnchanged Faith of Christ in all Points Fundamentall And again It is not possible the Catholick Church that is of any one Age should teach against the word of God in things absolutely necessary to saluation Where the word teach shews that he intends the Gouernors of the Church in euery Age. Likewise in another place If we speak saith he of plain and easy scripture the whole Church cannot at any time be without the knowledge of it And If A. C. meane no more then that the whole Vniuersall Church of Christ cannot vniuersally erre in any one Point of Faith simply necessary to mens saluation be fights against no Aduersary that I know but his own fiction Where it follows But if he mean that the whole Church cannot erre in any one point of Diuine Truth in generall if in these the Church shall presume to determine without her Guide the scripture then perhaps it may be said that the whole Militant Church hath erred in such a Point Here then the first of the whole Church not erring in Fundamentalls as well as the second are spoken of the Church determining And so is that saying of his viz. That though the Mother-Church Prouinciall or National may erre Yet if the Grand mother the whole Vniuersall Church that is in her Generall Councills vniuersally accepted controlling the other Prouincial or National cannot erre in these necessary things all remains safe and all occasions of disobedience that is to the Grand-mothers commands taken from the possibility of the Churches erring namely as to all necessaries are quite taken away Thus he But safe c. it could not be if the Catholick Church the Grand mother as she held so could not also witness all the necessary Truths against such inferiour Councills But how these things will te reconciled with what the Doctor saith else where I know not Let him take care of it as name ly where he writes thus You much mistake when you think we resolue our faith of fundamentalls into the Church as the infallible witness of them For though the Church may be infallible in the belief of all things fundamentall for otherwise it were not a Church if it did not belieue them it doth not follow thence necessarily that the Church must infallibly witness what is fundamentall and what not And again That all infallible assistance makes not an infallible Testimony or makes not the Testimony of those that haue it infallible surely Teaching declaring its consent condemning Doctrins contrary to Fundamentalls is Witnessing or giuing Testimony XVII PRINCIPLE 17. Nothing can be more absurd then to pretend the necessity of such an infallible Commission and Assistance to assure us of the Truth of these Writings and to interpret them and at the same time to proue that Commission from those Writings from which we are told nothing can be certainly deduced such an assistance not being supposed or to pretend that infallibility in a Body of men is not lyable to doubts and disputes as in those Bookes from whence only they deriue their Infallibility I. For the former part of this Principle viz. Nothing can be more absurd then to pretend the necessity of c. If the Doctor in the words at the same time to proue that Commission from these Writings means here to proue such Commission or Assistance only or in the first place from these Writings the truth of Which Writings are first or onely proued from such Commission c. the Absurdity vrged by him I grant 1. As all Articles of Faith are not by all Persons learnt at once so neither by all exactly in the same order as is frequently obserued by Catholick Writers A Christians Faith therefore may begin either at the Infallible Authoriry of scriptures or of the Church and this Infallible Authority of
out of loue to their souls reject what is so taught VI. CONSEQVENCE 6. Though nothing were to be belieued as the Will of God but what is by the Catholick Church declared to be so Yet this doth not at all concerne the Church of Rome which neyther is the Catholick Church nor any sound part or member of it This may suffice to shew the validity of the Principles on which the Faith of Protestants stands and the weakness of those of the Church of Rome From all which it follows that it can be nothing but willfull Ignorance weakness of judgment Strength of prejudice or some sinfull passion which makes any one forsake the Communion of the Church of England to embrace that of the Church of Rome If nothing is to be belieued as the Will of God but what is by the Catholick Church declared to be so and the Declarations of the Catholick Church be taken from her Councills and in Concills dissenting from the more Vniuersall and Generall the constant way of the Churches Judgment this Church Catholick as to such Councills and Courts Ecclesiasticall hath neuer been seuered from the Roman and S. Peters Chair And this may suffice to shew the weakness of those Principles on which the Faith of Protestants stands and the Validity of those of the Church of Rome From which it follows that if there be no willfull Ignorance nor sinfull Passion nor strength of prejudice and secular interest in our Countreymen Yet it must be at least much neglect of examining things which most concerne them and diuerting their thoughts vpon other employments or conuersing with such Authors and Teachers as confirm to them those Opinions in which they were educated and the like that detains them still in a Communion diuided and this not very long since from the Catholick As to the Doctors imputing only to Ignorance sinfull Passion c. that any forsake the Communion of the Church of England It is plain that his former Principles do no more support the Religion of the Church of England then of any other Protestants Sect condemned by it All which Sects for the Doctrines they hold and Controuersies they maintain with others equally appeal to the Clearness of the Infallible Scriptures sufficiently intelligible vnto their sincere endeauours and decline as fallible all other Ecclesiasticall Authority So Wolketius for the Socinians as the Doctor for the Church of England sayth Quae de Fide c. Those things which are to be established touching Faith in Christ are manifest in the Scriptures And Again Deus qui Religionem Christianam c. God hauing determined that Christian Religion shall continue till the end of the world has taken care that there should be always extant such a Mean by which it may be certainly known as farr as is necessary to Saluation But no such Mean is extant except the Holy Scriptures To the same purpose Crellius another Socinian says Hac sententia c. This Doctrin by which Christs Diuinity is denyed is supported by very many and the most euident Testimonies of Holy Scriptures It is needless to cite more From whence is manifest That such Principles as here appear only in the Defence of the Religion established in the Church of England make the same Apology for all those other Protestant parties and most blasphemous Sects disclaimed by it the Doctor in the mean while omitting that by which the former Learned Defenders of his Church vsually haue justified it against them namely the Church of Englands adhering to the Traditionall Exposition and Sense of Scripture receiued from the Primitiue Church This I say he omitted perhaps because it may be thought to relish a little of Church-Infallibility Neyther do the Principles here layd down afford any effectuall way or means in this Church of suppressing or conuicting any Schism Sect or Heresy or reducing them eyther to submission of Judgment or Silence For where both sides contend Scripture clear for themselues the Clearness of such Scripture how great soeuer on one side can be made no Instrument of Conuiction to the other Here therefore all things must be prosecuted further then Scripture to a Dic Ecclesiae Tell the Church and so to a Si autem Ecclesiam non audierit But if he will not hear the Church let him be to thee as a Heathen and Publican If then it is the Churches Authority that must rectify such diuersity of Opinions one would think that this ought to haue been first established instead of leauing euery Fancy to perspicuity of Scripture for the attaining Vnity and Peace in the Points controuerted And the prudent may consider Whether the Authority of the Church of England is not much debilitated and brought into contempt and dayly like to wane more and more by this new-taken-vp way of its Defence Where he thinks himself it's best Aduocat and Defender of its Cause who doth most endeauour to sett forth the Defects and faylings of all such Ecclesiasticall Societies Prelats and Councills and best proues no Scripture-Promises made to them Nay where to the end to euacuate the Infallibility of any Society or Church in necessaries is set vp a Counter-Lay-Infallibility of priuate men if only sincere Endeauourers of Vnderstanding Holy Writt in all the same Necessaries This is done which causeth still more Sects instead of that which if done would cure them namely The Recommending especially to the illiterate and less intelligent common sort of people Humility Obedience Submission of judgment to their Spirituall Pastors and Gouernors whom our Lord hath ordained by due Succession to continue to the end of the world on purpose to expound the Scriptures and out of these to teach them all Necessaries for their Saluation and to heep them stable and fixed from being tossed to and fro with euery wind of Doctrin that Capricious Fancies may imagin there or malicious pretend Informing them that they are to learn of these Pastors the true Sense of Gods Word according to former church-Church-Tradition to follow their Faith and to rest in their Iudgment Lastly not to vsurp their Office and become their owne Guides inasmuch as the same Diuine order that appoints the others to Guide enjoyns them to be Guided And supposing these Guides should err too better it is that all err one Error which is the Error of their Guides for there will be at least some Vnity and Peace in that some Excuse for Inferiors yea also in probability more verisimilitude then that euery one should err a seuerall and his own Error to the vtter ruine uf Peace and a greater deuiation from Truth But whilst these things are so little spoken of it is no great wonder if vnder the protection of such contrary Maximes spread abroad which were first made more current and common by M r Chillingworth forced to it as the last Refuge left to shelter him from Obedience to a just Church-Authority the Broachers of New Sects and