D R STILLINGFLEETS PRINCIPLES, Giving an Account of the FAITH OF PROTESTANTS, CONSIDERED BY N. O.  MATTH. XVIII. 17. Si Ecclesiam non audierit, sit tibi sicut Ethnicus & Publicanus. 
PRINTED AT PARIS, By the Widow of Antony Christian, and Charles Guillery.  
M. DC. LXXI. PERMISSV SUPERIORUM.   

A PREFACE TO the Reader.  
DOctor Stilling fleet having lately published a Book entitled, A Discourse concerning the Idolatry practised in the Church of Rome, etc. (being a rejoinder to a reply of an unknown Catholic Gentleman engaged in some former Controversy with him) at the end of the Same Book hath annexed 
Rom. Idol. p. 557.  certain Principles, drawn up, as he saith, to give an Account of the Protestant-Faith.  
Now as touching the main Book, it would be incivility and injustice in any other to invade the Right of his worthy Adversary by, untertaking an Answer thereto. To his Adversaries Answer therefore, as the times permit, and to God's mercy I leave him: if perhaps he may repent, and endeavour some satisfaction 1. For his accusing the whole Catholic Church of God, both Western 
1.  and Eastern (for the same Practice as to Several of his Idolatries are in both) for so many Ages before Luther's time of Idolatry, and this Idolatry as gross as that of Heathens: Which 
Ib p. 69. 134. etc. 142. 159. 161.  surely must Vnchurch this Great Body, and quite divorce this Adulteress from Christ (for we cannot but think but the Doctor will maintain the Teaching so manifold an Idolatry in this Church to 
2.  be Fundamental Error) 2. For his representing the Highest Devotions practised from all Antiquity in the same Church, Mystical Theology, Contemplation, heavenly Inspirations, all those Supernatural Favours and familiar Communications of the Divine Majesty to purer souls received in Prayer, and continued still in his Church (as also Miracles are, and so attested in her Histories) but unknown indeed to strangers, and foolishness to Greeks, his representing all these I say, as ridiculous Fanaticisms, and impostures: though he knows that Catholics account themselves obliged to submit all these things to the judgement of Superiors: a Duty unknown to fanatics. And what may we expect next from such (who are to many) as make ill use of such Books as his, but that the frequent Allocutions of Gods Holy Spirit mentioned in Scripture, the Visions, Revelations Ecstasies and Spiritual Unions of the Saints there, our Lords, Ego in eyes, & tu in me, ut sint consummati in unum; and S. Paul's, Vivo, non ego, sed in me Christus, will shortly become matter of Drollery and Bouffonry? 3. For his making 
3.  so many of God's glorious Saints in Heaven [quorum causam discernat Deus] the subject of his scorn and derision. By all which he has fitted his Book for the sport and recreation of the Atheist and Debauched; from whose applause, with the regret and horror mean while of all piously disposed, he may receive his reward.  
The Revisall of these, not very grateful, Subjects of his Book, therefore I leave to the worthy Gentleman pre-engaged in these Disputes. But for the now mentioned Principles separately adjoined at the end, as every Catholic has an equal Right to apply himself to the examining of them; so seeing that from these it is that such bad fruits, of forsaking first, and then censuring and condemning their Mother the Church, do grow, it may, with God's blessing, prove a service not altogether unbeneficiall, to discover their weakness: especially since by such a discovery his whole preceding Book will be demonstrated vnconcluding against God's Church.  
And this is here the rather, and with greater confidence undertaken, because, since it is Impiety to deny in general that true Christian Faith hath a certain, unmoveable Foundation; in case therefore it shall appear that the Foundation here laid by the Doctor is but a mere trembling Quiksand on which a Christian cannot without a dreadful danger to his soul build his Faith, namely, An Errability in the Guides of God's Church, and (Inerrability in all necessary Doctrines contained in Scripture by Him attributed indefinitely to all sober Christians, who without any necessary consulting or depending on such Teachers as have been instituted by God shall use their sincere endeavours to find out such Truths] this Foundation, I say (not Scripture, but each private man's sense of Scripture) being ruined, it will avoidable follow, That the only certain way not to be misled, will be the submitting our Internal Assent and Belief to Church-authority which those who have dissented from, and refused to stand to before Luther's time have been always marked with the name of Heretics.  
Where by Church-authority, I mean in general that Superior and more comprehensive Body of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy; which in any dissent and division of the Clergy, according to the Church Canons ought to be obeyed; and which hath hitherto in her supremest and most generally accepted Councils in all Ages from the Beginning required such Submission under penalty of Anathema, and justly assumed to herself the Title of the only authentical Interpreter of Scripture, and authoritative Teacher of Divine Verities.  
A Submission this is, which no particular Church divided from this more Universal can with the least pretence of reason challenge from her Subjects, since she herself (and particularly the Church of England) refused the same to all the Authority extant in the world when she separated herself.  
And this being observed by Mr. Chillingworth (a scholar, herein, of the Socinians) and by many other Divines of late upon whom hls Book hath had too must influence, they accordingly are forced to disclaim that Submission 
Synod. A. D. 1603. c. 4. 5. 36. etc. Stat. 13.  which the Church of England formerly had challenged in her Canons, and severely, even with Ecclesiastical death, 
Elizab. c. 12.  punished the refusers until they should repent (not their external Disobedience or Contradiction, but) their wicked Error. The 39 Articles being declared in the same 5, Canon to have been by this Church agreed upon for the avoiding diversities of Opinions, and the establishing of Consent touching true Religion.  
Now that these later Divines do decline such Submission, I need go no further then to Doctor Stillingfleets Rational Account for proof, where the Lord Primate of Ireland is cited thus, The 
Ration. Account. P. 55.  Church of England doth not not define any of these Questions (speaking of the 39 Articles) as necessary to be believed, but only binds her sons for Peace sake not to oppose them. And again, We do not suffer any man to reject the 39 Articles of the Church of England at his pleasure yet neither do we oblige any man to believe them, but only not to contradict them. Thus they speak of late, and thus Mr. Chilling worth hath cleared the way before them, in abridging thus the just Authority of the Primitive 
Chillingw p. 200.  Councils, The Fathers of the Church (saith he) in after times might have just cause to declare their judgement touching the sense of some general Articles of the Creed. But to oblige others to receive her Declarations under pain of damnation (or Anathema) what warrant they had I know not. He that can show, either that the Church of all Ages was to have this Authority; or that it continued in the Church for some Ages, and then expired; he that can show either of these things, let him: for my part I cannot. Yet I willingly confess the judgement of a Council though not infallible yet so far Directive and obliging, that without apparent reason to the contrary it may be sin to reject it, at least not to afford it an outward submission for Public Peace sake.  
Now by this way our late English Divines seem to have brought the Authority of their Church into a great disreputation and wayning condition, and to have excused, yea justified all Sects which have, or shall separate from her. For indeed what fault can it be to forsake the Doctrine of a Church, whose Teaching none is bound to believe or obey out of conscience? and which quietly suffers, yea liberally rewards her sons, while they thus disparage her?  
These Principles therefore laid by the Doctor, which, by advancing the Clearness of the Rule so as to infer the uselessness of a Guide, do seem to supplant what soever Authority of any Church, are here weighed in the following Considerations. The great importance of which Subject requiring Expressions serious, modest, and every way unlike those made use of by the Doctor in his Book, such have been studiously endeavoured here, without the least resentment of several uncivil and unmerited Aspersions which in the said Book the Doctor hath cast upon several among us: and the more moderate any have been the more immoderately have they been traduced. God Almighty inspire into all our hearts a sincere love of Peace and Truth.  
Amen.   

Dr. STILLINGFLEETS PRINCIPLES.  
Giving an Account of the Faith of Protestants, CONSIDERED.  
1. THe Principles, etc. which Doctor Stilling fleet, has thought expedient to expose at the end of his Book, to render an Account of the Protestants Faith; are set down in three ranks. The first consists of Six Principles, agreed on both sides. The second contains Thirty Propositions for enquiring into the particular ways which God hath made choice of for revealing his will to mankind: of which Propositions some are also Principles, partly agreed on, and partly not; and some are Deductions, from them: But we, following the general Title, will call them all, Principles. In the third rank, six Corollaries or Inferences are deduced from the foregoing Propositions, to the advantage of the cause of Protestants against Catholics. To all which, we here offer the following Considerations.  

I.  

PRINCIPLES. Agreed on all sides.  
1. That there is a God, from whom 
Principl.  Man and all other Creatures had their beginning.  
2. That the Notion of God doth imply, that he is a Being absolutely perfect; and therefore justice, Goodness, Wisdom and Truth, must be in him in the highest perfection.  
3. That Man receiving his Being from God, is thereby bound to obey his Will, and consequently is liable to punishment, in case of disobedience.  
4. That in order to Man's obeying the will of God, it is necessary that he know what it is; for which some manifestation of the Will of God is necessary: both that Man may know what he hath to do, and that God may justly punish him, if he do it not.  
5. What ever God reveals to Man, is infallibly true, and being intended for the Rule of Man's obedience, may be certainly known to be his Will.  
6. God cannot act contrary to those essential Attributes of justice, Wisdom, Goodness and Truth in any way which he makes choice of, to make known his Will unto Man by.   
It were impiety to question any of 
Consideration.  these Principles, which are, or aught to be presupposed not only to the Christian, but all manner of Religions. We will therefore proceed to the second Rank, consisting of 30. Propositions; which we will set down singly and separately, annexing to each a respective Examination, or Consideration.   

II.  
An Enquiry into the particular ways which God hath made choice of for the revealing his Will to Mankind.  

I. PRINCIPLE.  
1. An entire obedience to the will of 
1. Princ.  God, being agreed to be the condition of man's happiness; no other way of Revelation is in itself necessary to that end, than such whereby Man may know what the will of God is.  
This is granted. 
Consid.    

II. PRINCIPLE.  
2. Man being framed a rational creature, 
2. Princ.  capable of reflecting upon himself, may antecedently to any external Revelation, certainly know the Being of God, and his dependence upon him, and those things which are naturally pleasing to him; else there could be no such thing as a law of Nature, or any Principles of Natural Religion.  
This may be granted.   

III. PRINCIPLE. 
Consid.   
3. All Supernatural and external Revelation, 
3. Princ.  must suppose the truth of Natural Religion; for unless we be antecedently certain that there is a God, and that we are capable of knowing him, it is impossible to be certain that God hath revealed his will to us by any supernatural means.  
Let this be granted. 
Consid.    

IV. PRINCIPLE.  
4. Nothing ought to be admitted for Divine 
4. Princ.  Revelation, which overthrows the certainty of those Principles which must be antecedently supposed to all Divine Revelation: For that were to overthrow the means whereby we are to judge concerning the truth of any Divine Revelation.  
Let this also be granted. 
Consid▪    

V. PRINCIPLE.  
5. There can be no other means imagined, 
5. Princ.  whereby we are to judge of the truth of Divine Revelation, but a Faculty in us of discerning truth and falsehood in matters proposed to our belief; which if we do not exercise in judging the truth of Divine Revelation, we must be imposed upon by every thing which pretends to be so.  
Here, if the Doctor means, That 
Consid.  every Christian hath a faculty in him, which, as to all Revelations what soever proposed to him, can discern the True and Divine, from others that are not so; and when a Revelation, certainly Divine, is capable of several senses, can discern the true sense from the false, all this exclusively to, and independently on, the Instruction of Church-authority: This Proposition is not true. For than none will need (as experience shows they do) to repair to any other Teacher to instruct him, when a dubious Revelation, or when the sense of any Divine Revelation, is controversed, which is the true revelation or which the sense of it.  
It is abundantly sufficient, that either 
Additional.  We ourselves, or some others appointed by our Lord to guide us, and more easily discoverable by us, have a Faculty, aided by the Divine assistance, to discern Truth and Falsehood in those Revelations proposed, wherein we ourselves cannot; that so particular Christians in their following these Guides, may not be imposed upon by every thing which pretends to be Divine Revelation.   

VI PRINCIPLE.  
6. The pretence of Infallibility in any 
6. Princ▪  person of Society of men, must be judged in the same way, that the truth of a Divine Revelation is; for that infallibility being challenged by virtue of a supernatural assistance, and for that end to assure men what the will of God is, the same means must be used for the trial of that, as for any other supernatural way of Gods making known his will to men.  
Here, if the Doctor means, That by 
Consid.  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 knowledge 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 
7. Princ.  choice of several ways of revealing his Will to us, 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 inquire what way God himself hath chosen: and whatever he hath done, we are sure cannot be repugnant to Infinite justice, Wisdom, Goodness, and Truth.  
This is granted. 
Consid.    

VIII. PRINCIPLE.  
8. Whatever way is capable of certainly 
8. Princ.  conveying the Will of God to us, may be made choice 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 proves the insufficiency of that means for conveying the Will of God to us.  
This likewise is granted. 
Consid.    

IX. PRINCIPLE.  
9 There are several ways conceaveable 
9 Princ.  by us, how God may make known his Will to us; either by immediate voice 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 several ways by which 
Consid.  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 several times, by several persons, on several and those particular occasions, in different styles, etc.) By our Lords giving a Commission to, and leaving a standing Authority in the Successors of these holy Penmen to expound these their Writings to the people, and by affording them for ever such a Divine Assistance, as in nothing necessary to misinterpret them.   

X. PRINCIPLE.  
10. If the Will of God cannot be sufficiently 
10. Princ.  declared to men by Writing, it must either be because no Writing can be intelligible enough for that end, or that it can never 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 overthrows 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, 
11. Princ.  that although God in the first Ages of the World did reveal his mind to men immediately by a Voice of secret inspirations, yet afterwards, he did communicate his mind to some immediately inspired to write his Will in Books to be preserved for the benefit of future Ages, and particularly that these Books of the New Testament which we now receive were so written by the Apostles and Disciples of jesus-christ.  
The Doctor declaring how God after 
§. 6. Consid.  the first Ages was pleased to communicate his mind by the Writings (of Moses &c.) might and ought to have added as a Truth, That he also left a judge in case of any Controversy arising about the sense of those Writings, to whose sentence the people were to stand, and do according to it under pain of death, as the same Writings inform us.   

XII. PRINCIPLE.  
12. Such Writings having been received 
12. Princ.  by the Christian Church of the first Ages as Divine and Infallible, and being delivered down as such to us by an universal consent of all Ages since, they ought to be owned by us as the certain Rule of Faith, whereby we are to judge what the Will of God is in order to our Salvation, unless it appear with an evidence equal to that whereby we believe those Books to be the Word of God, that they were never intended for that end, because of their obscurity or imperfection.  
Here, these words (whereby we are 
§. 7. Consid.  to judge) being understood not universally, of all Christians, but of those to whom amongst Christians, this Office of judging in dubious cases, is delegated by our Lord: Or understood universally, that is, so far as the sense of these Scriptures is to all men clear and undisputable, This Proposition is granted.   

XIII. PRINCIPLE.  
13. Although we cannot argue against 
13. Princ.  any particular way of Revelation from the necessary Attributes of God, yet such a way as Writing being made choice of by him we may justly say, that it is repugnant to the nature of the design, and the Wisdom and Goodness of God to give infallible assurance to persons in writing his Will, for the benefit of Mankind, if those Writings may not be understood by all persons who sincerely endeavour to know the meaning of them in all such things as are necessary for their salvation.  
This Principle is unsound. Because 
§. 8. Consid.  if God (who according to the Doctors 7. Principle, may reveal 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 above according to their employment, which Persons he hath appointed to instruct the rest, and these to learn 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 every one may attain the understanding of them by his own endeavours, yet if he may by others, namely, his Instructors, this also consists very well with the Divine design, with his Wisdom and Goodness, as also it would, had he left no Writings at all, but only Teachers to deliver his Will perpetually to his Church.  
Concerning these Write pretended by 
§. 9  the Doctor to be intelligible by all Persons, etc. I find as it seems to me, a contrary Principle advanced 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 (saith he) the Controversies of Religion (that is, in things of great consequence, as he says afterwards) in our times are grown in number so many, and in matter so intricate, that few have time and leisure, fewer strength of understanding to examine them; What remaineth for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence, but diligently to search out which amongst all the Societies of the world is that blessed Company of Holy Ones, that Household of Faith▪ that Spouse of Christ and Church of the living God, which is ihe Pillar and ground of Truth, that so he may embrace her Communion, follow her Directions, and rest in her judgement? Thus doctor Field; who in his last words (rest in her judgement) speaks home enough, and discovers the only efficacious way of curing Sects. And see also whether this doth not confront the Doctors 29. Principle, Church-Infallibility there being changed into Church-Auctority, and the Principle being applied to private men's Practice.  
And what need is there of Bishops, 
§. 10.  Presbyters, or any Ecclesiastical Pastors among Protestants, as to the Office of teaching or expounding these Writings, if these in all necessaries are clear to all Persons who sincerely endeavour to know the meaning of them, I mean, exclusively to their repairing to these Pastors for the learning of it?  
And doth not the Doctor here to evacuate the infallibility of the Church's Governors introduce an infallibility or Inerrabillity of every particular Christian in all points necessary, if such Christians will, that is, if only he shall sincerely endeavour to know the meaning of them?  
And moreover of the sincerity of this his endeavour also I suppose the Doctor will allow any one may be certain (else how can the mind of a poor illiterate Countryman be at rest, who can neither trust to the Faith of his Guides, nor the sufficiency of his own industry) For surely this sincere, is not all possible, endeavour; such as is learning the Languages, perusing Commentators, etc. But as Mr Chillingworth 
Chilling. p. 19  (who anchored his whole Religion upon it) states this Point, namely, such a measure thereof, as humane Prudence and ordinary Discretion, (their abilities and opportunities, and all other things considered) shall advise. And thus, such a clearness in necessaries must the Scriptures have as suits with the very lowest capacities. Such a Clearness, I say, even to all Articles of the Athanasian Creed, if these be esteemed Necessaries; and even as to the Consubstantiality of the Son with God the Father. In which notwithstanding the whole Body of Socinians dares to oppose all Antiquity, upon pretence of clear Scripture to the contrary.  
But then the Doctor is desired to consider, 
§. 11.  That if every Christian may become thus Infallible in Necessaries from 1. a clear Rule, 2. a due Industry used, 3. and a certainty that it is so used; May not the Church-governors still much rather be allowed infallible, and so retain still their infallible Guide-ship; and the People also, the more clear the Rule of Faith is proved to be, the more securely be referred to their direction? And have we not all reason to presume that the chief Guides of the Church (even a General Council of them, or if it be but a major part of this Council, 'tis sufficient) in their consults concerning a Point necessary to salvation delivered in Scripture, use at least so much endeavour (for more needs not) as a plain Rustic doth, to understand the meaning of it; and also the like sincerity? For what they define for others, they define for themselves also, and their Salvation is as much concerned, as any other man's is, in their mistakes.  
And next: Why may not these Governors, upon such certainty of a sincere endeavour and clearness of the Rule, take upon them to define these Points, and enjoin an assent to, and belief of them to their Subjects; especially since it is affirmed, that all those, from whom they require such Obedience, if they please to use a sincere endeavour, may be certain thereof, as well as they? And are we not here again arrived at Church-Infallibility, if not from extraordinary Divine assistance, yet from the clearness of the Rule? Only we must suppose such sincere endeavour in the Church, as the Doctor allows may be in every private man. And thus does not his conditional Infallibility of particular persons in necessaries, the condition being so easy, necessarily infer a Moral Impossibility of the Churches erring in them? Which ought the rather to be admitted by them: Since some of their Divines, to make this their Problem the more justifiable, that the Scriptures in all necessaries are clear to all persons▪, think it a safe way in the next place to contract these necessaries to the Apostles Creed.  
But after all, supposing these Governors 
Tillots p. 113.  in stating some Points fallible enough: I cannot hence gather any just relaxation of their Subjects submission of their judgement to them, upon pretence of clearness, because such Fallibility 
§. 12.  of their Superiors in some Points can, reasonably, be supposed to arise from nothing else, but some obscurity in the Rule, which must be greater still to their Subjects: and then, what more fitting and ordinary, then in matters of consequence to follow a prudent and experienced, though fallible, persons Direction, rather than our own?  
Lastly, suppose this granted, That the Scriptures 
§. 13.  may be understood by all persons, in all things necessary (and so an infallible Guide useless;) yet I see not what advantage the Doctor can make of this Principle for the Protestant Religion. For since the sense of Scripture is now de facto debated between Catholics and Protestants about so many necessary Points of Faith, the Doctor cannot with truth or charity affirm the sense of these Scriptures clear to be understood on the Protestants side to all those who sincerely endeavour to know their meaning, where the Major part of Christendom understands their meaning contrary, as he must grant they do in all those he accounts the common Errors both of the Greek and Roman Church: (a large Catalogue of which may be found in many Protestant Authors) And will he charge all these as defective in a sincere endeavour? But rather such sincere endeavour being indifferently allowed to all parties, he ought to pronounce the sense of Scripture to be clear, if on any, on that side as the Major part doth apprehend it: Which certainly is not the Protestant.  
For Example: How can the Doctor rationally maintain this Text Hoc est Corpus meum, so often repeated with out any variation of the Terms, to bear a sense clear on the Protestants side; that is, That the Eucharist is not in a literal or Proper sense the Body of Christ; when as they are understood in a literal sense by much the Major part of the Christian world, not only the Western but Eastern Churches also (as Monsieur Claude 
Claud. in his last. Reply. l. 111. c. 13.  concedes to his worthy Adversary Monsieur Arnaud) to which also may be added half the Body of the Protestants, namely, all the Lutherans. Now all these have used their senses, and weighed the arguments drawn from them, as well as Protestants.  
But if the Doctor put this Text so much controverted among Obscure Scriptures (which therefore not containing any Point necessary to salvation, salvation is not endangered by it) if a Christian should err or be mistaken in their sense, then how comes this great Body of Christians merely by the mistake of its sense in thinking that our Lord meaneth as the words sound, that the Eucharist is his very proper Body, and so in adoring (as they ought, should it be so) how come they, I say, to commit such gross Idolatry, as the Doctor in his Book chargeth them with, and so all without repentance, miscarry in their Salvation?  
And if from a Major part of the present Church interpreting Scripture an Appeal be made to a Major part of the Ancient Church, pretended to interpret them on the Protestants side; neither will this relieve the Doctor, because since this also (on what side Antiquity stands) is a thing in Controversy, for deciding of it we are to presume here likewise that a sincere endeavour being allowed to all Parties to understand the sense of the former Church, this also stands on that side as the Major part apprehends it. Now the present Catholic Church (being a Major part) professes to follow the sense of the Ancient in interpreting Scripture.   

XIV, PRINCIPLE.  
14. To suppose the books so written to 
14. Princ.  be imperfect, that is, that any things necessary to be heleeved or practised are not contained in them, is either to charge the first Author of them with fraud, and not delivering his whole mind; or the writers with insincerity in not setting it down; and the whole Christian Church of the first Ages with folly, in believing the fullness and perfection of the scriptures in order to salvation.  
The two inferences made here by 
Consid. §. 14.  the Doctor are faulty. For 1. Neither can the first Author of scripture be charged with fraud, if he have delivered part of his mind only by writing, and part some other way: as the Doctor (Prop. 7. 8. 9) acknowledges he might: unless it be manifest that he hath obliged himself by a Promise of delivering his whole mind by writing, which is not showed. 2. Neither can the Writers of scripture be charged with insincerity, if, so much as they were inspired with to set down and register there, they have done it.  
Meanwhile as touching the Perfection of 
§. 15.  Holy scriptures, Catholics now, as the Holy Fathers anciently, do grant, that they contain all Points of Faith which are simply necessary to be of all Persons believed for attaining salvation. And of this Doctor Field may be a Witness, who saith, For matters of 
Field of the Church p. 377.  Faith, we may conclude according to the judgement of the best and most learned of our Adversaries themselves, that there is nothing to be believed, which is not either expressly contained in scripture, or at least by necessary consequence from thence, and by other things evident in the Light of Nature, or in the matter of Fact, to be concluded.   

XV. PRINCIPLE.  
15. These Writings being owned as containing 
15. Princ.  in them the whole Will of God so plainly revealed, that no sober enquirer can miss of what is necessary for salvation; there can be no necessity supposed of any infallible society of men either to attest and explain these Writings among Christians, any more than there was for some Ages before Christ of such a Body of men among the jews, to attest and explain to them the Writings of Moses or the Prophets.  
The Consequence here is good, viz. 
Consid▪ §. 16▪  That supposing the Will of God is so clearly revealed in these Writings, that no sober Enquirer can miss of knowing what is necessary to salvation, there can be then no necessity of any Infallible society. But the supposition of such a clearness, fails, as the 13. Prosiosition, on which it is grounded, doth. It fails, I say, in the sense the Doctor delivers it, who refers his sober enquirer only to the Writings themselves for information in all Necessaries, Without consulting his spiritual Pastors for the right explication of them. Nor doth the Doctor's Language any where run thus, That the will of God is so plainly revealed in these Writings (for then he should say so obscurely rather) that no sober man, not who repairs to the Writings, but who inquires of, and learns from his spiritual Pastors the right sense of them, shall miss, etc.  
But if the supposition in the Doctor's sense 
§. 17.  be allowed for true, there seems to follow something more than the Doctor deduceth, and which perhaps he would not admit: viz. the nonnecessity of any society at all, fallible or infallible, to explain these Writings, as to Necessaries (all Christians being herein clearly taught from God in these scriptures, or this their Rule) unless perhaps these Teachers may be said to be left by our Lord for others to supersede their endeavours; or for instructing them in non-necessaries.  
As touching that which the Doctor 
§. 18.  in the clause of this Princ. speaks, of Moses and the Prophets: certain it is, that Moses his Writings and the Law were not penned with such Clarity, But that Doubts and Controversies 
2. Chron. XIX. X.  might arise concerning the sense of it: so we find mention made of doubts, between Law and Commandment, statutes and judgements: And 2. such Doubts arising, their address was to be made to the supreme judges appointed for deciding them. 3. Whatever their sentence 
Deuteron XVII. X. XI. XII.  was, according to the sentence of the Law that these should teach them, and according to the judgement that they should tell, and inform them, they were to do: and that upon pain of death.  
To do, I say, according to such sentence; 
§. 19  not only when they were to undergo some mulct, or punishment imposed by these Judges for a fault; but when they were enjoined the observance of some Law formerly misunderstood by them and so broken and disobeyed. This seems clear enough from the words of the Text: for who can reasonably interpret them thus, Thou shalt not decline from the sentence which they shall show thee, to the right hand or to the left, (vers. 11.) that is, Thou shalt not decline in not paying the mulct in which they shall fine thee, or not undergoing the corporal punishment they shall inflict on thee: Thou shalt observe to do according to all that they shall inform thee, and according to the sentence of the Law that they shall teach thee (vers. 10.) that is, thou shalt suffer what they impose, but not obey what they enjoin. Again they were to do according to such sentence, upon pain of death, not then only, when the Litigants do acknowledge their sentence to be (juxta Legem Dei) conformable to God's Law (for then what sentence of the judge would stand good?) but so often as the Judge should declare it to be conformable to God's Law: And when will a Judge declare his sentence to be otherwise?  
Lastly, not to debate here the Infallibility of these supreme Judges as to all necessaries in the Law of Moses, Let the like absolute Obedience be now yielded to the supreme Ecclesiastical Courts; Let their sentence be so conformed to, so assented to among Christians, for none is obliged to do a thing (as the Jews were by those Judges) but is, by the same decree, obliged to assent and believe the doing it lawful, and more is not required.   

XVI. PRINCIPLE.  
16. There can be no more intolerable 
16. Princ.  Usurpation upon the Faith of Christians, then for any Person or society of men to pretend to an Assistance, as infallible in what they propose as was in Christ or his Apostles, without giving an equal degree of evidence that they are so assisted, as Christ and his Apostles did, viz. by Miracles as great, public and convincing as theirs were: by which I mean, such, as are wrought by those very persons who challenge this Infallibility, and with a design for the conviction of those who do not believe it.  
Notwithstanding the Doctor's Assertion 
Consid. §. 20.  in this Proposition, That a society 
see. Ap. Laud. p. 139. 140  pretending to Infallibility is obliged to confirm such a pretention by Miracles as 
compared with p. 160. 195 258. 346  great as Christ and his Apostles did: yet himself and the Archbishop whom he 
see also Rational  defends, do hold that there is after the Apostles times a body or society Infallible 
Acc. p. 53 59 537.  in Fundamentals, viz. such Ecumenical Councils as are universally accepted by the Catholic Church; which Church, they say, from our Lord's Promise, can never err in Fundamentals. Now it is certain this society is not equally assisted with miracles, as our Lord or his Apostles were. Therefore the Doctor may do well to review this Principle.  
1. But its failings being of no difficult 
§. 21.  discovery, I shall not let it pass unexamined. First, than I see no reason, that those equally assisted by God in delivering a Truth, must also be enabled by him to give an equal evidence of such Assistance, where there is not the same necessity of it; as there is not, when the later deliver no new thing from the former.  
2. Again, Though none can pretend 
§. 22.  to be Infallible, or actually not erring in what he proposeth, but that he must be as infallible, as to the truth of that wherein he erreth not, as our Lord, or his Apostles; for one, or one persons truth, is no more true than any others: yet in many other respects the Church's Infallibility is much inferior to that of the Apostles; in that it is. 1. Neither for its matter so far extended, the Apostles being affirmed infallible in all they delivered, as well in their Arguments as Conclusions, both in their relating things heard from our Lord, and things anew inspired by the Holy Ghost: whereas the Church-governors are acknowledged infallible only in their Definitions in matters of necessary Faith; and, not in their receiving any new matters inspired by God, but in faithfully delivering the Inspirations of the former. 2. Neither for the manner are the Church-governors so highly assisted, by reason of the other knowledge and evidence they have of that Doctrine, first delivered by the Apostles, and so from them received, which unchanged they convey unto Posterity. Of which degrees of infallibility see Archbishop Lawd pag. 254. and 140.  
3. And in the third place, hence it 
§. 23.  follows, that Miracles having been wrought by the first in confirmation of that Doctrine which both deliver, are not now alike necessary to, or reasonably demanded of the second.  
4. Yet, since our Lord and his Apostles 
Aug. de Civit. Dei 22. book. 8. Chapt.  time, Miracles have been, and are continued in the Church: of which see irrefragable testimonies given by S. Augustin: In that Church, I say, that pretends Infallibility; and only in that Church, not any other, departed from it, pretending thereto: And universally to deny the truth of them is to overthrow the faith of the most credible Histories. But these are done in these later, as in former, times, only when, and for what ends God, and not man his Instrument, pleaseth, and many times without such persons precedent knowledge, in making his Requests, what the Divine Majesty will effect. Neither are the Apostles themselves to be imagined to have had the Operation of Miracles so in their power, as as to do these in any kind, when, and upon what Persons they pleased, or others demanded. For such a thing would be of such a force upon men's wills to compel them into Christianity, or to reduce unto the Catholic Church Christians strayed from it, as the Divine Providence, perhaps for the greater trial of men's hearts, and merit of their Faith, hath not ordinarily used.  
5. Lastly, Miracles remaining still in this Church, though they be not professedly done for convincing a Dissenter in this or that particular Truth, yet do sufficiently testify in general a security of salvation in the Communion and Faith of this Church, if God only honours with them the Members of this Communion, and no others that live out of it: as we see no other Christian society divided from it that lays claim to them, or shows any Records of them, or ever did: at least such as may be any way equalled, either for frequency, variety, or eminency with those of this Church; I mean, although so many of these be rejected and laid aside, where appears any rational ground of suspicion.  
That the Doctor and the Archbishop do 
§. 24.  hold such General Councils as have an universal Acceptation from the Church Catholik diffusive, to be Infallible, seems to me clear from the places forecited in them. For in those both the Doctor and Archbishop admit, That the Church diffufive is for ever preserved Infallible in all Fundamentals, or Points absolutely necessary to salvation; and this by virtue of the Divine Promise, that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against her, and other Texts: And therefore such Councils whose Decrees are admitted by the whole Church diffusive, must be so too. I say, as to Fundamentals, though as to other Points not fundamental they affirm these Councils also liable to error and fallible, because the Church Catholic diffusive (say they) is so also.  
Among the Conditions also that render any General Council obligatory they require 
See. Rat. Account. p. 536.  this for one, that they be universally accepted, or have the general consent of the Christian World. such Councils then there may be. And then, such Lawful General Councils, and so approved, and consequently obliging the Christian World, they confess the first four General Councils to have been; To which Councils therefore they profess all Obedience.  
Now we see what kind of Obedience it was these Councils exacted, in the Athanasian Creed, accepted by the Church of England, which contains the sum of their Decrees, viz. no less than assent and belief and submission of judgement, and all this upon penalty of eternal damnation. And this, if justly required by them, infers, upon the Doctors 
See Rat. Account. p. 50. 6.  arguing, their Infallibility. For (saith he, where Councils challenge an internal Assent by virtue of their Decrees (or, because their Decrees are in themselves infallible) there must be first proved an Impossibility of error in them, before they can look on themselves as obliged to give it. And therefore He and the Archbishop, so far as any such 
Ib. p. 539.  Councils, are fallible, allow only an external Obedience, or silence, to them.  
Now for Obedience to these first four General 
§. 25.  Councils in a submission of judgement to them, upon such an Universal Acceptation of them, the Doctor in another place thus writes, The Church of England looks upon the keeping the Decrees of the four first General Councils as her Duty: and professeth to be guided by the sense of scripture as interpreted by the unanimous consent of the Fathers, and the fowr fist General Councils: that is, she professeth to take that which such Counciils deliver, for the sense of scripture: Not then, to admit their Definitions, if first they accord with the scripture taken in our own sense. So also else where he saith, The Church 
Ib. p. 59  of England doth not admit any thing to be delivered as the sense of scripture which is contrary to the consent of the Catholic sense of the fowr first Ages (that is) in their Ecumenical Councils, as he expresseth it in the preceding page. And here also he gives the Ground of such submission, viz. a strong presumption, that nothing contrary to the necessary Articles of Faith should be held by the Catholic Church, whose very being depends upon the belief of those things that are necessary to salvation. And when (saith he) those correspondencies were maintained between the several parts of it, that what was refused by one, was so by all. In another place also speaking in general of Councils universally accepted, he saith, That both the Truth of God's Promises, the Goodness of God to his People, and his peculiar care of 
Ib. p. 537.  his Church seem highly concerned, that such a Council should not be guilty of any notorious error.  
Here you see he saith, that the Truth of God's Promises is concerned that these Councils should not fall into any notorious Error; Therefore (such Promises are made absolute to some Church-governors after the Apostles.) 
Ap. Lawd, p. 227.  And then, where the Error is not intolerable, (saith the Archbishop) at least Obedience of Noncontradiction will be due to all such Councils. Now a notorious Error it must needs be, if an Error in Fundamentals. And such notorious Error in particular would this be, If they should hold themselves (when they are not) infallible in their Decrees, and so should require a General Assent (such as that in the Athanasian Creed) from Christians to them, as to Divine Revelations, and make them DE FIDE, thereby, in case any Decree be not true, obliging all the Members of the Church to an Unity in error. Thus far then, as to Fundamental Errors, it seems God's Providence secures both such Councils, and their subjects: And then also for their erring in Non-fundamentalls, both He and the Archbishop put this among the 
Rat. Account. p. 535. §. 26.  RARO CONTINGENTIA.  
The Archbishop also is much in justifying the Catholic Church infallible not only in 
Ap. Lawd. §. 37. p. 318.  its Being, but Teaching, and that must be by its Councils. Doctor White, saith he, had reason to say, That the Visible Church had in all Ages taught that unchanged Faith of Christ in all Points Fundamental. And again It is 
Ib. §. 21. p. 140.  not possible the Catholic Church (that is, of any one Age) should teach against the word of God in things absolutely necessary to salvation. Where the word (teach) shows, that he intends the Governors of the Church in every Age. Likewise in another place, If we speak (saith he) of plain and easy scripture, 
Ib. 25. n. 4  the whole Church cannot at any time be without the knowledge of it. And, If A. C. mean no 
Ib.  more, then that the whole Universal Church of Christ cannot universally err in any one Point of Faith simply necessary to men's salvation, be fights against no Adversary that I know, but his own fiction. Where it follows, 
Ib.  But if he mean that the whole Church cannot err in any one point of Divine Truth in general, if in these the Church shall presume to determine without her Guide, the scripture, than 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 Fundamentals, as well as the second, are spoken of the Church determining. 
Ib. p. 258.  And so is that saying of his, viz. That though the Mother-Church Provincial or National, may err, Yet if the Grand mother, the whole Universal Church (that is, in her General Councils universally accepted controlling the other Provincial or National) cannot err in these necessary things, all remains safe; and all occasions of disobedience (that is, to the Grandmothers commands) taken from the possibility of the Churches erring. (namely, as to all necessaries) are quite taken away. Thus he. But safe, etc. it could not be, if the Catholic Church, the Grand mother, as she held, so could not also witness, all the necessary Truths against such inferior Councils.  
But how these things will te reconciled 
Rational Account p. 154.  with what the Doctor saith else where I know not: Let him take care of it: as name lie where he writes thus: You much mistake, when you think we resolve our faith of fundamentals into the Church as the infallible witness of them. For though the Church may be infallible in the belief of all things fundamental (for otherwise it were not a Church if it did not believe them) it doth not follow thence necessarily, that the Church must infallibly witness what is fundamental and what 
p. 252. The infallibility in Question.  not. And again That all infallible assistance makes not an infallible Testimony, or makes not the Testimony of those that have it infallible 
see Ration. Account p. 58. 59  surely Teaching, declaring its consent, condemning Doctrines contrary to Fundamentals, is Witnessing, or giving Testimony.   

XVII. PRINCIPLE.  
17. Nothing can be more absurd then to 
17. Princ.  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 prove 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 liable to doubts and disputes, as in those Books from whence only they derive their Infallibility.  
I. For the former part of this Principle 
Consid. §. 27.  (viz. Nothing can be more absurd then to pretend the necessity of, etc.) If the Doctor in the words (at the same time to prove that Commission from these Writings) means here, to prove such Commission or Assistance only, or in the first place from these Writings, the truth of Which Writings are first or only proved from such Commission, etc. the Absurdity urged by him I grant.  
1. As all Articles of Faith are not by all 
§. 28.  Persons learned at once, so neither by all, exactly in the same order, as is frequently observed by Catholic Writers. A Christians Faith therefore may begin either at the Infallible Authoriry of scriptures, or of the Church; and this Infallible Authority of either of these be learned from Tradition; and that of the other from it, viz. 1. either the Infallible Authority of the scriptures from that of the Church, the Church testifying so much of the scriptures: Or 2. that of the Church from the scriptures: Or 3. Also, the Infallibility of either of these may be rightly proved from its own testimony. For whoever is proved, or granted, once infallible in what he saith, the consequence is clear (without any Circle, or Petitio Principii, or identical arguing) that whatever he doth witness of himself is true. I say all these Consequences are natural and necessary. 1. The Testimony being granted evident that the one bears to the other, or either to its self: and 2. the infallibility of one of these, either of the scripture, or of the Church, being, first, learned not from its own, or the others testimony, but from Tradition.  
2. When a Catholic then first receives an 
§ 29.  assurance of the Truth, or Canon of scripture from the Infallibility of the Church, or its Governors, he may learn first this supernatural Divine assistance and Infallibility of these Governors (which is made known by Divine Revelation to those first persons who communicate it to posterity) from Tradition descending from age to age, in such manner, as the Protestant saith, he learneth his Canon of scripture from Tradition. To which tradition also may be committed by our Lord, or his Apostles, whatever is to scripture.  
3. Neither may we think, that this Divine Assistance or infallibility of these Guides 
§. 30.  of the Church in necessaries, should either not have been, or not have been a thing well known to, or believed in the Church by this (to use the Doctor's terms) Derivative and perpetuated sensation of Tradition, if there had been no Divine Writings: for so the Christian 
see Ration. Account p. 2●…5. it. p 204. 208. 209 And the places 〈◊〉 cited out of the Archbishop. Ib. p. 108.  religion Without such writings would have been no rational and well grounded, no stable and certain Religion, which surely the Doctor will not affirm. And this that is said here of the Churches Infallible Authority, may be also of other necessary Articles of the Christian faith. For, as the Doctor saith, It is evident from the Nature of the thing, that the Writing of a Divine Revolation is not necessary for the ground and reason of Faith, as to that Revelation. Because men may believe a Divine Revelation without it, as is evident in the Patriarches and Christian Beleivers before the Doctrine written.  
4. Such Infallibility in necessaries then 
§. 31.  being so settled in the Governors and Pastors of the Church, (the Apostles and those others ordained by them, by whom the World was converted) as that had there been no scriptures, it should not have failed: for so the Church would have failed too. The successors cannot be imagined to become disenabled, or deprived of it, because the Apostles afterwards wrote what they taught; but rather by such Writings more secured in it: Because the Belief of this Infallibility of these successors receives a second evidence from the Testimony thereof also found in these Writings. Thus both written, and unwritten, Tradition-Apostolicall attesting it.  
5. Now that these Governors of the Church 
§. 32.  (who having an apparent succession, their Testimony must have been unquestionably believed by Christians in what they taught, in case there had been no scripture) always reputed and held themselves Divinely assisted, and infallible for all necessaries, and that this was the Traditive Faith of the Church (grounded on our Lords Promise) in all ages, sufficiently appears by their inserting from time to time (as they thought fit) their Decisions in the Creeds and by their Anathematising Dissenters, & the Churches styling them Heretics. For no Authority (if we believe the Doctor) but 
Ib. p. 506.  that which proves itself Infallible, and therefore which is Infallible, can justly require our internal Assent, or submission of judgement. And Protestants allowing only an external obedience, or silence, due to Councils Fallible, infers that Councils Fallible can justly require no more: and consequently that such Councils are Infallible as do justly require more; as did the fowr first Councils, with the voluntary acknowledgement also and submission of their subjects to such an Authority assumed by them. We find indeed subordinate Councils also stating sometimes matters of Faith, censuring Heretics, and requiring assent to their Decrees; but still with Relation to the same Infallibility residing in the General Body of Church▪ Governors, and their concurrence therein: They not passing such Acts without consulting the Tradition and judgement of other Churches, and especially of the Apostolic see: and a general acceptation rendering their Decisions authentic and valid.  
2. For the latter part of this Principle [Nothing is more absurd, then to pretend that Infallibility in a Body of men, is not as liable to doubts and disputes, as in those Books from whence only they derive their Infallibility.] If the Doctor means here (as in his Rational Account, that the sentence of a Body of men Infallible is, he saith not, in some things liable to some Doubts; but as liable to Doubts and Disputes, as the Infallible scriptures (for there he maintains, That the Decrees of Councils are as liable to many Interpretations, as any other Writings. And again, If the scriptures cannot put an End to Controversies on that account, how can General Councils do it, when their Decrees are as liable to a private sense and wrong Interpretation, as the scriptures are, Nay more, etc.) I say, if this be his sense, then, not to compare Absurdities here, Is not this all one as if he said, That a Preacher or Commentator can, or doth speak or write nothing plainer, than the Text? Nor the Judge give a sentence any more intelligible, than the Law? That Councils can, or have decided nothing clearer, than the thing that is in Controversy? And so, no Party is cast by them, since it appears not, for whom they declare? And that the Decree of the Council of Trent, as to Transubstantiation remains still as disputable, as the Text, Hoc est Corpus meum? But then, how comes it to pass, that Protestants, when the Definitions of later Councils are urged against them, do not contest them as dubious, but reject them, as erroneous?  
From the same misarguing the Doctor elsewhere 
§. 34. Ib. p. 101  concludes, That the argument of the Unity (in Opinion) of the Roman Party, because they are ready to submit their judgement to the Determination of the Church, will hold as well (or better) for the Unity of Protestants, as theirs; because all men are willing to submit their judgements to scriptures, which is on all sides agreed to be Infallible. Thus Herald Now to consider it. Moses his Law prescribed by God for an Infallible Rule, yet had judges 
Deuter. 17.  appointed, when Doubts and Contentions happened about the meaning of it, to explain the sense: Our saviour, accordingly in the Gospel, when any one had a Controversy 
Math.  against another, (which Controversy perhaps might be Heresy, or his Brother's teaching something contrary to the Rule of Faith) ordered, upon such Person his not being otherwise reclaimed, that in the last place the matter should be brought to the Hearing of the Church, and such Person, if not hearing the Church, to be excommunicated▪ Now I ask, to what end either of these, if such persons be no nearer to Unity of Opinion, or conviction and ending their Disputes by submitting their judgements to the sentence of these judges, or this Church, then before they were in the same submission of theirs to the Rule. Infallibility alone ends not Controversies, but clearness; Clearness in the Point controverted: Which if the scripture hath, how comes Controversy about it? and Controversies between so great Parties, Churches, Nations? In this sense of scripture catholics dissenting, repair to the Decision of the Church (which if any way obscure is capable of being made by it afterward more intelligible) submit to its judgement, and so become united in Opinion in all those Points the Church decides: wherein Protestants rejoice in their Liberty still to disagree. United in Opinion, I say; true or false, here matters not: We speak here of Union, not of Truth. But now, when the sense of scripture is the like matter of Controversy between two sects of Protestants, as frequently it is, What Course do they take for Unity of Opinion? Repair they again to the scriptures they controvert? But these can never decide which of the several senses they take them in, is the true. Repair they to synods? So the Arminians and Antiarminians did? Then surely this they do, because that Unity (provided there be a submission of judgement to both) is attainable by the sentence of the synod or Church, which is not by that of the scripture. Which is the thing here denied by the Doctor.  
And hence it proceeds, that Catholics must 
§. 35.  be much more united in Opinion or judgement, than Protestants; in as much as they all own submission of judgement to so many Councils, which the other reject; These not accepting the Decrees of above fowr or siue of those Councils, whilst the Catholics admit of fowr (or suppose, three) times so many, and namely of one, the Council of Trent; of which Soave affirms, That in all the Councils 
Hist. of the Counc. of Trent. p. 228.  held in the Church from the Apostles times until then, there were never so many Articles decided as in only one session of it. And Protestants aggravate the Tyranny of the Church of Rome in tying all her subjects unanimously to believe, and that as necessary to salvation so many Points of Faith, wherein the Protestants leave to all men liberty of Opinion. And moreover, as for those Differences that remain still, or shall arise hereafter, they are also conclusive among them by the same way of Councils, upon the acknowledged obligation of a common submission of their judgements. I say not, all their differences whatsoever are conclusive (which causeth some wonder in the Doctor, that this thing 
Roman Idolatry. p. 7 449. 453.  is not done in an Infallible Church) but so many of them wherein the Church finds on any side sufficient evidence of Tradition; or, for the gravity of the matter; a Necessity of Decision: The same Divine Providence that preserves his Church perpetually Infallible in all things necessary to be determined, disposing also, that for all such necessaries, there shall be a sufficient evidence of Tradition, either of the Conclusion itself, or its Principles.  
But as for several other matters of Divine 
§ 36.  Reuclation, where what is to be held as de fide is not sufficiently yet cleared, either by reason of the sense of scripture, or of the sense of some Conciliary Decree still disputed among Catholics, in matters that are called indeed, by the one or other Party, de fide, as they variously apprehend this sense of scripture, or Council; No such agreement, I say, in matters of Faith thus taken, is at all pretended: And their accord in the rest sufficiently transcends that of Protestants. But even these also are capable of the same settlement, when the Church shall pass a new sentence concerning them.  
Here then may be resumed that Expression 
Tillots. in Rule of Faith. p. 92. 93.  selected by Doctor Tillotson to make sport with, viz. That in this their Faith (namely, as to Points thereof determined by the Church) it is impossible that Catholics should differ one from another, and that there should be any Schism among them. The Reason is plain, because in all such Points they unanimously Submit their judgement to their Mother the Church: or if any doth not, he ceaseth to be a Catholic. Whereas Protestants not acknowledging any necessary Obligation of such Submission to any Superiors among them, it is impossible that debates and Schisms should be avoided by them.   

XVIII. PRINCIPLE.  
18. There can be no hazard to any person 
18. Princ.  in mistaking the meaning of any particular place in those Books, supposing he use the best means for understanding them, comparable to that which every one runs who believes any person or society of men to be infallible who are not: For in this later he runs avoidable into one great error, and by that may be led into a thousand: but in the former God hath promised either he shall not err, or he shall not be damned for it.  
God hath made no such Promise concerning 
Consid. §. 37.  any one, who useth his best endeanours for understanding scripture, that either he shall not err, or not be damned for it, if such endeavour be understood exclusively to his consulting and embracing the expositions of the Church: which if the Doctor includes, than Catholics also affirm, that in necessaries such persons cannot mistake. Neither can such Promise be pretended necessary, since God hath referred all, in the dubious sense of his scriptures, to the Directions and Doctrine of his Ministers, their spiritual Guides, whom he 
Ephes. 4. 11. 13. 14  hath set over them, to bring them in the Unity of the Faith to a perfect man, and that they may not be tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of Doctrine by the sleight of those that lie in wait to deceive. And, without which Guide, S. Peter observes that in his time some persons (for any thing we know, diligent enough, yet) through want of learning, and the instability of adhering to their Guides, being unlearned, saith he, and unstable, 
2. Peter. 3. 16.  wrested some places of scripture, hard to be understood, to their own destruction: Therefore these scriptures are also, in some great and important Points, hard to be understood.  
Now therefore let the Doctor give 
§. 38.  me leave to put these two other Propositions in the other scale to counterpoise his. The first, That a Person in believing any society of men to be Infallible that are so, hath a security incomparably beyond that of another Person who is supposed to use the best other means, his condition is capable of, to understand the scriptures, and so follows his own judgement: the capacity of most Christians being very little, abstracting from the Directions of a Guide their mean condition void of learning, or leisure, and it being a thing uncertain also, when they have used a due endeavour; And this a prejudice of it not rightly used, that they do not discern in these scriptures this Infallible Guide, which (saith S. Augustin) the scripture without any ambiguity doth demonstrate; and which 
Contra Crescon lib. 1. c. 33.  repaired to, may demonstrate to them what else is necessary.  
The second Proposition is, That there 
§. 39  can be no such hazard to any person in believing a society of men to be infallible, that are not. if this society be at least more learned and studied in Divine matters than himself, and also ordained by our Lord to be his Instructors in them (which Protestants, I hope, allow true of their own Clergy:) No such hazard, I say, as is comparable to that every one incurs in mistaking the meaning of scriptures, though we suppose he useth his best other means of understanding them, exclusive to his obeying the Instructions of such a society. [Witness the unhappy Socinians, and all other grosser sects of late sprung out of Disobedience.] For whereas, in following these Guides, such persons may fall into some errors, and perhaps some of them great ones; in this later way of following their own fancies the unlearned may fall into a thousand, and some of these much greater and grosser, than any such Christian society or Body of Clergy will ever maintain. For God hath made no Promise to preserve in Truth those who desert their Guides; nor to reward their diligence, who live in disobedience.   

XIX. PRINCIPLE.  
19 The assistance which God hath promised 
19 Princ.  to those who sincerely desire to know his will, may give them greater assurance of the truth of what is contained in the Books of scripture, than it is possible for the greatest Infallibility in any other persons to do, supposing they have not such assurance of their Infallibility.  
1. First observe, that whatever Divine 
Consrd. §. 40.  assistance is advanced here against the assurance that can be received from Church-Infallibility, the same is more against any assurance that may be had from Church-Authority. Thus it happens more than once in these Principles, that in too forward a Zeal in demolishing the one, the other also is dangerously undermined.  
2. The Doctor hath all reason here 
§. 41.  to suppose, him that repairs to, and is instructed by an Infallible Guide, though not knowing him to be such, as well as him, who seeks for an assurance of his Faith, without one, sincerely to desire to know Gods will, and upon this to enjoy his promised Assistance, so far as God engageth it. And then if the Question be, which of these two takes the more prudent course, he that consults, or he that lays aside this Guide, for his assurance of the truth of what is contained in the Books of scripture; I should think, the former. Whilst the one relies on the judgement of such Guide thought wise and learned, though not infallible; the other on his own: On the judgement of which Guide the one hath much more reason to be confident, than the other on his own, who neglects the advice of the Wise man [Ne innitaris 
Prov. 3. 5.  prudentiae tuae] Lean not on thy own Prudence. At least the Doctor must grant the former (of the two) to be de facto in a much safer condition. For it must be acknowledged a great benefit to have an Infallible Guide to show us our way, though we do not know him to be Infallible: for so we keep still in the right way, though believing only, and not infallible certain, that it is so; so we walk in Humility and obedience. And if God hath directed us, for learning our right way, to a Guide, surely he will take no prudent course, who committing himself to God's immediate Assistance, shall neglect it; and break his commandment in hope of his favour.   

XX. PRINCIPLE.  
20. No man's Faith can therefore be 
20. Princ.  infallible merely because the Proponent is said to be infallible: because the nature of Assent doth not depend upon the objective Infallibility of any thing without us, but is agreeable to the evidence we have of it in our minds: for Assent is not built on the nature of things, but their evidence to us.  
This Proposition is granted, viz. That 
Consid. §. 42.  no person is infallibly certain of, or in his Faith, because the Proponent thereof is infallible, unless he also certainly know, or have an infallible evidence that he is infallible.  
Only let it be here remembered, That, for begetting an infallible assent to the thing proposed, it is sufficient if we have an infalliblé evidence either of the thing proposed, or of the Proponent only: Because if we are infallibly certain that he cannot lie in such matter who relates it to us, we are also hence infallibly certain, that what he says is truth.   

XXI. PRINCIPLE.  
21. It is necessary therefore in order to 
21. Princ.  an infallible assent, that every particular person be infallibly assisted in judging of the matters proposed to him to be believed: so that the ground on which a necessity of some external Infallible Proponent is asserted, must rather make every particular person infallible, if no Divine Faith can be without an infallible assent; and so renders any other Infallibility useless.  
This Proposition, That therefore it is 
Consid. §. 43.  necessary, in order to an infallible assent, that every particular person be infallibly assisted in judging of the matters proposed to him to be believed, is not well deduced from the precedent Proposition rightly understood: Neither is it true: and so the Consequence also faileth, viz. [so that the Ground on which a necessity of some external Infallible Proponent is asserted, must rather make every particular person infallible, if no Divine Faith can be without an infallible assent; and so renders any other Infallibility useless.] Because (as was now said) for the yielding an Infallible assent to the things proposed, it is not necessary that the person have an infallible evidence of the truth of the things proposed, that is, from the Internal Principles that prove, or demonstrate them: But it is enough (though the things proposed remain still in themselves obscure to him) that he have an infallible, or sufficiently certain Evidence only of the Infallibility of the external Proponent. The Ground therefore upon which the necessity of some external infallible Proponent is asserted for begeting such infallible assent is, because the Person hath by no other way any infallible evidence of the things proposed: Which if he had, than indeed the Proponents Infallibility, for such Points, is rendered useless.  
And by this, I hope, sufficiently appeareth 
§. 44.  that misarguing that seems to cause a great confusion in the Doctor's Principles: whilst, upon an infallible assent requiring an infallible Evidence (laid down in the Twentieth Proposition, and Conceded) he concludes as necessary to our yielding an infallible assent to all that the Church proposeth, an infallible Evidence of the things proposed; and then, hence infers the uselessness of such infallible Proponent.  
And here note, that though the Church's Infallibility to such a person as is not infallibly assured of it, signifies nothing as to his infallible assurance of that which it proposeth; Yet it signifies much for his having a right and saving Faith in all those matters proposed 
See suarez de Fide Dispu-. 4. §. 5. n. 7. 8 9 Lugo de virtute Fidei Disp p. 1. §. 12. Vasquez. 1. 2. Disput. 120. n. 15. Esti. in 3. sent. d. 25. §. 13. south wall Analys. Fidei Disp. 3. c. 8.  by this Church, which cannot misguide him, (see the Consideration on the nineteenth Principle) which right and saving Faith children and other illiterate country people in the Catholic Church have, without any such infallible assurance concerning the Proponent (as is abundantly declared by Catholic writers) In like manner the Protestants also affirm, That the Holy scriptures may signify much to the begetting a true and saving Faith even in those who cannot from Universal Tradition certainly prove them to be the word of God.   

XXII. PRINCIPLE.  
22. If no particular person be infallible 
22 Prine.  in the assent he gives to matters proposed by others to him, than no man can be infallibly sure that the Church is infallible: and so the Church's Infallibility can signify nothing to our infallible assurance without an equal infallibility in ourselves in the belief of it.  
[If no particular person be infallible in 
Consid. §. 46.  the Assent he gives to matters proposed, etc.] 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 gives to some matter proposed, viz. to this, That the Church is infallible. If he means, to all matters proposed, than it is faulty and denied: For though no particular person be infallible in the assent he gives to all matters proposed by others to him, yet may he be so in this, the Church's Infallibility. And so the Consequence also is void; and the Church's Infallibility will signify as much as is expected to men's infallible assurance in those matters it proposeth.  
Here then Catholics affirm, That though every 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 ever Certainty that may be called which Universal Tradition can afford) assured of this Divine Revelation, the Church's Infallibility, from such Tradition and other Motives of Credibility as Protestants allow for a sufficiently, or morally-infallible and certain means of believing the scriptures to be the word of God. On which word of God, or Divine Revelation the several Articles delivered by it, in the sense their own private judgement apprehends the Protestant grounds his Faith: Again on which word of God, or Divine Revelation, in the sense this Infallible Church interprets the same Articles the Catholic grounds his Faith.  
But as the Protestants except here from being primarily grounded on, or proved by the same scriptures, this Fundamental Point of Faith, That the scriptures are the true Word of God; so they must give catholics also leave 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 learned from the testimony of this Infallible Church. For this Point may first come to the Believers 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 learned, not from this Infallible Church, but either from their own sufficient Clearness in this Point, or from Tradition.  
Nor are Catholics necessited in arguing against Protestants (who grant the scriptures to be God's Word) to use 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, even according to the Doctor's 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 Evidence of Church-Infallibility to be found in scripture, if they would allow a sufficient Evidence of Church-Authority established to decide Ecclesiastical Controversies with Obligation to external 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 give Law to the Whole.  
In the Belief and Profession of Which Church-Infallibility, and submission of private men's judgements, 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 Protestant's, is much in this, as a sure Retreat for ending Controversies, and establishing Peace. For he tells them, That those Points which 
Resp. 1. cap. de Abusibus.  have been determined or commanded synodically after a Legitimate way of Councils, they are received by all Faithful Christians as consonant to the Divinely-inspired scriptures. And in the Conclusion of that Answer, he saith, It is not lawful for us confiding in our own private Explication, to understand, to observe or interpret any saying of Divine scripture any otherways then as hath seemed good to those Theologues who have been approved and received by Holy synods directed by God's spirit; lest that declining from the right evangelical Doctrine, the Conceptions of our minds should be carried about hither and thither like a Proteus. But some wilt ask, How shall those things be reform? How? Even thus by God's Assistance, if we take not into our hands, nor give credit to any things besides those which have been instituted and ordained by the Holy Apostles and Holy synods. He who observes this limit, is our Companion in celebrating Divine Mysteries, he is of the same Communion and Faith with us. Again in his Preface to the same answer he saith, We will give our Answer, not alleging 
Act. 〈◊〉. l. w●rt. p. 56  any thing of our own, but from the seven Ecumenical 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 Doctor's 
Rome Idol. p. 78. etc.  interpreters of Divinely inspired scriptures, whom the Catholic Church hath by an unanimous consent received: since the Holy Ghost hath breathed forth by them and spoken in them such things as shall forever remain unmooved, 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 never prevail, as God has promised. Here we see in the East the same Zeal for Councils and for Fathers (taken collectively) as an Infallible Guide, as is in the West, and the like endeavour to reduce Protestants to the same acknowledgement and humble submission of Judgement.   

XXIII. PRINCIPLE.  
23. The Infallibility of every particular 
23. Princ.  person being not asserted by those who plead for the Infallibility of a Church, and the one rendering the other useless (for if every person be infallible, what needs any Representative Church be so too) and the infallibility of a Church being of no effect if every Person be not infallible in the belief of it, we are further to inquire what certainty men may have in matters of Faith, supposing no external Proponent to be infallible.  
The Observations made upon the three 
Consid. §. 47.  immediately foregoing Propositions (the matter of which is repeated in this) do show that they no way serve him for the use he would here make of them.  
The sense of which Propositions, as far as they have any truth in them, may be returned upon him, thus: since the Infallibility of any particular person, as to the assent he either doth, or may give to this Point of the Church's Infallibility is asserted by those who plead for the Infallibility of a Church: And since such infallibility of a particular person as to this point, doth not therefore render at all the Infallibility of a Church useless to him, viz. as to his learning still from her all those other Points of Faith of which he hath no infallible knowledge or certainty otherways, (in which therefore he not being infallible, that he may not err in them, it is necessary that the representative Church be so:) And so since the Infallibility of the Church is still of most important effect, both to those who have and to those who as yet have not any infallible certainty of this her Infallibility, toguide both these in a true, right and saving Faith, as to those Points where of they have no certainty: Therefore there needs no Enquiry after a further Certainty for that our Faith, in which we have one already from this Infallible Proponent, the Church.   

XXIV. PRINCIPLE.  
24. There are different degrees of Certainty 
24. Princ.  to be attained according to the different degrees of Evidence and measure of Divine Assistance; but every Christian by the use of his reason, and common helps of Grace may attain to so great a degree of Certainty, from the convincing arguments, of the Christian Religion and authority of the scriptures, that on the same grounds on which men doubt of the truth of them they may as well doubt of the truth of those things which they judge to be most evident to sense or reason.  
Here, if the Doctor means, That 
Consid. §. 48.  every Christian by the use of his Reason and common helps of Grace (that is, as he hath expressed it already Principle 13. and 18. by his perusing the scriptures, and sincerely endeavouring to know their meaning, exclusuely to his necessary repair to any external infallible Guide or Proponent, as he pretends in Principle 13. 15. 23.) may attain to so great a degree of certainty, as to all necessary Points of Faith, ONLY from the convincing arguments, of the Verity of the Christian Religion and Authority of scriptures, as that such a person may as little doubt of them, as of the things most evident to sense or Reason; This Principle is denied.  
And for the reason of this denial I refer 
§. 49. Rat. Acct p. 58.  to what is said before to Principle 13. and 18. And I appeal also to what Doctor Stillingfleet himself elsewhere tells us in his Rational Account, It seems reasonable, (saith he,) that because Art and subtlety may be used by such, who seek to pervert the Catholic Doctrine, and to wrest the plain places of scripture which deliver it, so far from their proper meaning, that very few ordinary capacities may be able to clear themselves of such Mists as are cast before their eyes, the sense of the Catholic Church in succeeding times may be a very useful way for us to embrace the true sense of scripture, especially in the great Articles of the Christian Faith: as for instance, in the Doctrine of the Deity of Christ, or the Trinity, etc.  
Now should not the Doctor, instead of saying, the sense of the Catholich Church in succceding Ages may be a very useful way for us, have said, is very necessary for us, if his cause would permit him? And will not the Socinian thank him for this his mitigation?  
But if, according to this Principle, every Christian without this external Guide can (not in some perhaps, but) in all these Points of Faith attain such certainty as he hath in things most evident to sense or Reason, how doth he stand in need of consulting, or conforming to the sense of the Primitive Catholic Church?   

XXV. PRINCIPLE.  
25. No man who firmly assents to any 
25. Princ.  thing as true can at the same time entertain any suspicion of the falsehood of it, for that were to make him certain and uncertain of the same thing: It is therefore absurd to say, that those who are certain of what they believe, may at the same time not know but that it may be false: which is an apparent contradiction and overthrows any faculty in us of judging of truth or falsehood.  
1. This Principle is evident; and 
Consid. §. 50.  granted. But such certainty is not applicable to the belief of every Christian as to all Points of Faith, if he be supposed not assisted by any external Infallible Guide.  
2. It is true also, that a full and firm Assent, free from doubting (as where no Reasons offer themselves to persuade us to the contrary) may be yielded to a thing as true, which is really false, and at the same time no suspicion be entertained of the falsehood of it.   

XXVI. PRINCIPLE.  
26. Whatever necessarily proves a thing 
26. Princ.  to be true, doth at the same time prove it impossible to be false; because it is impossible the same thing should be true and false at the same time. Therefore they who assent firmly to the Doctrine of the Gospel as true, do thereby declare their Belief of the Impossibility of the falsehood of it.  
This Proposition is granted. But one 
Consid. §. 51.  who assents firmly in general to the whole Doctrine of the Gospel, what ever it be, as true, and so to the impossibility of the falsehood of it, or any part of it, doth not therefore, being unasisted by any external Guide, know what this Doctrine is in every such Point of Faith, where the sense of the Letter of this Gospel is controverted and (to use the Apostles Phrase) hard to be understood, and that in matters too hazarding damnation, if mistaken.  
Therefore me thinks the Doctor should here allow thus much at least; That all those, who after their perusing the scriptures think themselves not certain of its sense, are obliged (notwithstanding the silence of these Protestant Principles herein) to repair to the Direction of these external Guides, and these too not taken at adventure, and to follow their Faith. Now such non-pretenders to Certainty, according to the Doctor's trial of it set down below in Consid. on Princ. 29. I suppose are the greatest part of Protestants.   

XXVII. PRINCIPLE.  
27. The nature of Certainty doth receive 
27. Princ.  several names, either according to the nature of the Proof, or the degrees of the Assent. Thus MORAL certainty may be so called, either as it is opposed to MATHEMATICAL Evidence, but implying a firm assent upon the highest Evidence that Moral things can receive: Or as it is opposed to a higher degree of certainty in the same kind. so MORAL Certainty implies only greater Probabilities of one side, than the other. In the former sense we assert the Certainty of Christian Faith to be MORAL: not in the later.  
This Principle is granted, if importing 
Consid. §. 52.  only, that Christians have, or may have a sufficiently certain and infallible Evidence of the Truth of their Christianity.  
But notwithstanding this, Christians may be deficient in a right belief of several necessary Articles of this Christian Faith, if destitute of that external Infallible Guide therein. And the perpetual Divine Assistance, and so, Infallibility in Necessaries of this Guide being declared in the scriptures, a Catholic having once learned this Point of Faith, from it▪ Definitions and Expositions becomes secure and settled in the belief of all those controverted Articles of his Faith; Wherein Others, another; whilst the scriptures in such Points (at least to persons unlearned, or of weaker judgements, which are which are the greatest part of Christians) are ambiguous in their sense, and drawn with much art to several interests.   

XXVIII. PRINCIPLE.  
28. A Christian being thus certain to 
28 Princ.  the highest degree of a firm assent that the scriptures are the Word of God, his Faith is thereby resolved into the scriptures as into the rule and measure of what he is to believe, as it is into the Veracity of God, as the ground of believing what is therein contained.  
Both Catholics and Protestants 
Consid. §. 53.  profess to resolve their Faith into the Word of God and Divine Revelation (or into the scriptures, so, as is said on Principle 14. and 29.) and make God's Veracity the Ground of their belief of the things therein contained.  
But the former resolve their Faith into this scripture, as the sense of it, where disputed, is delivered by the Church, whose Faith the Apostle commands us to follow and to whom Christ himself gives testimony, as S. Augustin 
Hebr. 13. 7.  saith. As for Protestants, they resolve their 
De Vnit. 19  Faith into this scripture, as the sense of it is ultimately apprehended and understood by their own judgements: None here, to use the Doctor's words elsewhere, usurping that Royal Prerogrtive of Heaven, in prescribing 
Rational. Account. p. 133. 16. p. 58.  infallibly in matters questioned (suppose in those Points the Doctor named before, the Doctrine of the Deity of jesus Christ, or of the Trinity:) But leaving all to judge (and so the Socinians) according to the Pandects of the Divine Laws: 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 us to ask whether every one is bound to take care of his soul, so, as under the pretence hereof to disobey their Resolutions and Instructions in Faith or Manners, whom God hath appointed to take care of and to watch over 
Hebr. 13. 17.  their souls, and will require an account of them for it. Here therefore let every one take the safest course; and, where there is no evident Certainty, always make sure to side with the Church.   

XXIX. PRINCIPLE.  
29 No Christian can be obliged, under 
29. Princ.  any pretence of Infallibility, to believe any thing as a matter of Faith, but what was revealed by God himself in that Book wherein he believes his will to be contained; and consequently is bound to reject whatsoever is offered to be imposed upon his Faith, which hath no foundation in scripture, or is contrary thereto: Which rejection is no making NEGATIVE ARTICLES OF FAITH, but only applying the general grounds of Faith to particular instances, as, I believe nothing necessary to salvation but what is contained in scripeure; Therefore no such particular things, which neither are there, nor can be deduced thence.  
1. Here first observe, That what no 
Consid. §. 54.  Christian is obliged to believe under any pretence of Church-Infallibility, he is (much rather) not obliged to believe under any pretence of Church- Authority: And that the Doctors freeing the Church's subjects here from the former, doth so from the later. It concerns therefore his superiors to look to it whether their Churches and their own Authority suffers no detriment particularly from this Principle, I mean, so as it can be applied to private men's practice.  
2. Next observe, That the Expression 
§. 55.  (What is revealed by God, etc.) as it is applicable to persons, must either mean, What such person only thinks, believes, or is persuaded to be revealed etc. or, what such person certainly knows to be revealed: And the same may be said 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 believes something that is enjoined by this Authority not to be revealed in God's 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 persuasion. For so, men set once upon examining well in such high mysteries their own Certainty, will, I conceive, never find just cause to reject what this Church-Authority, to which they owe obedience, recommends to them upon Her Certainty.  
But to take Expressions as they lie. 
§. 56.  For the first Part of this Principle, thus much is granted, That no Christian can be obliged, under any pretence of Infallibility, to believe any thing as a matter of Faith, but what is revealed by God himself in his Word, Written or Unwritten, 
Rat. Account p. 162. 208. 210  both which the Doctor else where allows to be of the same Value, so it be evident they are his Word. Where I add unwritten 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 believed for attaining salvation; Yet some Articles of a Christians Faith there may be that are not there contained, which may be also securely preserved in the Church by Ecclesiastical Tradition, both Written and Unwritten, derived at first from the Apostolical; as for example, this by Protestants confessed, That these Books 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 delivers, requireth, authorizeth; and a Catholics whole Faith is grounded on Divine Revelation: And, where such pretended Infallible Church-Authority enjoins any thing to be believed merely as lawful, it grounds itself on this Word of God, for the lawfulness of it.  
The Consequence also is granted, 
§. 57  viz. That a Christian is bound to reject whatsoever is offered to be imposed upon his Faith, which hath no foundation in scripture, or God's 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 enjoined by such Authority, but what is pretended to be so founded.  
But then, such Christian, where not infallibly 
§. 58.  certain against it, aught to submit to the judgement of this Authority for the Knowing what things are revealed in this Word, and what are contrary to, or not founded in it, and (to use the Doctor's Expression) to be guided by the sense of Scripture, as it is interpreted by this Authority. Else a mistaken and culpably ignorant belief herein, will no way justify his disobedience. No more than the Socinians contrary belief justifies him against the Decrees of the Church in those Points which yet he believes not to be founded in God's word, and rejects as contrary. 
§ 59 Rational. Acc. p. 539.   
And the Doctor elsewhere to express and curb such extravagant and capricious beliefs, is glad to call in, for the interpreting of Scripture to them, the concurrant sense of the Primitive Church, the common Reason of Mankind (that supposeth Scripture the Rule of Faith) the consent of Wise and learned men. And on their side who disbelieve this Authority, he calls for no less than Demonstration; and this not some improbable Argument miscalled so, but which being proposed to any man and understood, the mind cannot choose but inwardly assent thereto, that is, that every reasonable man understanding the terms, assents to. (But how this, and several other things which have fallen some times from the Doctor's pen, do consist with these Principles, and some other Tenants of his; Or how the true sense of Scripture in all Necessaries, is so clear and intelligible to every sincere endeavourer as that he hath such Demonstration, for it, as that no rational man hearing it, can descent from it, I cannot undertake to give a Satisfactory account. Mean while, such Protestants as perhaps may cast their eyes on these Papers, may do well to consider, whether upon such a Demonstrative Certainty in the Points controverted as this, it is that they oppose Church-Authority, teaching them otherwise.  
Likewise, the Common Reason of MankindChristian, the Common consent of Wise and learned men named by him before, what are they indeed, but, where all are not united in the same judgement, the most common Suffrage and testimony of the present Universal Church; whom also we ought sooner to credit then any other, touching what is the concurrent testimony of the Primitive Church, in case this suffers any debate. And if, as he says, Particular persons are not to depart from this judgement of Authority till they have Demonstration, that is, their own certainty and Infallibility, as to such Point, to show against it; then we need not seek for our Lord's Patent of the Church's Infallibility for their, or our submission to it, tell the Opposers of its judgement, for the Points they descent in, produce theirs.  
Here than we see the Doctor gets as near to an Internal Infallible, or at least Authentical Proponent, as his cause and interest will permit him: Hoping by his requiring Demonstration, and introducing Common Reason, and Wise and learned men, and Primitive Church, to shake his hands of so many Sectarists, who molest his own Church's peace upon the account of this his Proposition, or something like it, viz. that no Christian is bound, under what ever pretence of Church Authority, to believe that which is not revealed in God's Word; and is bound to reject what ever is offered to be imposed upon his Faith, that is contrary, or hath no ground in God's Word, etc. And you must let them judge of both these.  
For the last part of this 29. Principle 
§. 60.  (That such Rejection is no making Negative Articles of Faith) I grant, that a rejecting of the imposition of a Belief of such a Positive Point, or the refusing to admit it as an Article of their Faith (which may be done whilst they either suspend their judgement concerning it, or also acknowledge the truth of it, supposed no Divine Revelation) if this were all the Protestants do, is not therefore making the Negative of it an Article of their Faith. But mean while, the rejecting any such Positive from their Faith, as not only untrue, but contrary to the Scripture, is making or declaring the Negative of it an Article of their Faith; because it makes this Negative a thing revealed in Scripture, and so a matter of Faith, (though I do not say, an Article necessary to Salvation.) And therefore perhaps it was, that the Doctor in the Reason he annexeth (That they only apply the General grounds of Faith to particular instances, etc.) mentions indeed such Positives as are neither in, nor may be deduced from the Scripture, but warily omitts such as are pretended contrary to Scripture.  
Now that Protestants declare many of 
§. 61▪  these Positives they reject, contrary to Scripture; See for Purgatory, Adoration of Images, Invocation of Saints, Indulgences, in the Article of the Church of England 22. For Works of Supererogation Art. 14. For Public Prayer or Ministry of the Sacraments in a Tongue not understood by the people Art. 24. Sacrifice of the Mass. Art. 31. Transubstantiation. Art, 28. And to this Belief of the Negatives of them as contained in Scripture, all the Members of the Church of England, or at least the Clergy, seem to be by their Canons as strictly obliged (though some of their Divines appear not well satisfied with it) under these terms, To 
See Synod 1603. Can. 36. and can. 5. Stat. 13 Eliz. c. 12 and Title of the Act.  allow and acknowledge all the Articles (and so these forecited,) agreeable to God's Word. To declare their unfeigned assent to them: and this for establishing Unity of Opinion and consent, as those of the Roman Church are obliged to the Positives: who are no such way obliged by that Church to such a necessary Belief of all her Positives, as that a Person nescient of them cannot be saved, or that the explicit knowledge of them is necessary (though always in some measure beneficial it is) to Salvation. But this indeed is necessary to Salvation, that any Subject of the Church knowing them to be determined by her, obey her Definitions, and not reject or descent from them: Such Disobedience being conceived a breach of God's Command.  
And from this (if I may be indulged to 
§. 62.  transgress a little) an Answer may be given to 
Roman. Idol. p. 52.  that Quaere of the Doctors in his Book Roman Idolatry. p. 52. which he says he could not hitherto procure from Catholics, though he hath often requested it, viz. Why the believing of all the Ancient Creeds, and leading a good life may not be sufficient to Salvation, unless one be of the Communion of the Church of Rome? Where if he will allow me here, for avoiding by disputes, to change these Words (Communion of the Church of Rome) into (the Communion of the Roman Catholic Church; and 2. will give me leave to understand a good life here, restrained to all other duties of a Christian, save those which respect this Communion, else if a good life be generally taken, the Doctor's supposition must not be allowed:) Then I answer, That such Believing and Leading such a life, cannot be sufficient for Salvation, to so many persons as persist, without repentance, either in a wilful ignorance of their Obligation to live in this Communion, or knowing this Obligation, persist in a wilful neglect to reunite themselves to it. Because all such persons live in a mortal sin, viz. Disobedience to, and a wilful Separation from their lawful and Canonical Ecclesiastical Superiors, whom our Lord hath set over them. And this sin unrepented of, destroys Salvation, being the same so heavily condemned by our Saviour (Si non audierit Ecclesiam.) Now that unrepented of it is, we have reason to fear, so long as they having opportunity, either neglect to inform their judgement, or this being convinced, to reform and rectify their practice.  
And this seems a judged Case in the Donatist (who pretended some such thing for their 
Aug. Ep. 48.  security) if we will admit S. Augustins' sentiment of it: for thus he directs his speech to them? Nobiscum estis in Baptismo, etc. that is, You are with us in Baptism, you are with us in the Symbol, or Creed, you are with us in the rest of our Lords Sacraments (and I may safely add with regard to some of them at least, You are with us in a good life, with the former exception) But in the Spirit of Unity and bound of peace, and lastly, In the Catholic Church you are not with us: And so he leaves them to the punishment due to those who are out of it, and separated from Christ its head.  
To conclude, I ask this Counterquestion concerning a Christian living, for example, In the fifth Age of the Church, Why the believing of the Apostles Creed (as those of the first Age did) and leading a good life, may not be sufficient for Salvation to such a one, unless he continue in the Communion of his lawful Ecclesiastical Superiors of his own Age, requiring of him under Anathema, or penalty of damnation the belief not only of the Symbol of the Apostles, but of all the Articles of the Athanasian Creed (as in the beginning and Conclusion of that Creed it is clear they did▪ Here, what Answer the Doctor shall make to this Question (supposing he will not justify such Separatist) I cannot imagine but it must fit his own.  
Here therefore such a Christians business for knowing whether he stands safe as to his Faith and Life in order to Salvation, seems to be, That he seriously examine, Whether those whose Communion he rejects, are the true Legal Ecclesiastical Superiors who are set over him by our Lord, and to whom he is enjoined Obedience, and with whom he ought to live (to use S. Augustins' words) in the Spirit of Unity and bound of peace.   

XXX. PRINCIPLE.  
30. There can be no better way to prevent 
30. Princ.  men's mistakes in the sense of Scripture (which men being fallible are subject to) than the considering the consequence of mistaking in a matter wherein their Salvation is concerned: And there can be no sufficient reason given why that may not serve in matters of Faith which God himself hath made use of as the means to keep men from sin in their lives: unless any jmagin, that errors in Opinion are far more dangerous to men's souls, than a vicious life is, and therefore God is bound to take more care to prevent the one than the other.  
Whereas the Doctor says, That the 
Consid. §. 63.  best way to prevent men's mistakes in the sense of Scripture is the considering the consequence of erring in a matter wherein their Salvation is concerned: Our daily sad Experience shows, that though our seeing or considering the dangerous consequence of a mistake affords us, how good soever, yet no certain way to prevent it; but our being directed by an Infallible external Guide, certainly doth. And the consideration of such Consequence, should hasten every one to provide this only certain Remedy, I mean, in committing himself in such matters of Faith as are much disputed, to the Guidance of men more studied and experienced in the Divine Laws; and that are also set over him by our Lord for this very thing to instruct him in them.  
Where in case these Guides shall disagree, yet every Christian may easily know whose judgements among them he ought to follow: namely, always of that Church-Authority that is the Superior, which in most cases is indisputable; This Ecclesiastical Body being placed by the Divine Providence in an exact Subordination. As here in England it is not doubted whether we are to pay our Obedience rather to a national Synod then to a Diocesan; to the Archbishop or Primate, then to an Ordinary Bishop or Presbyter; And then, He who hath some experience in Church affairs, if willing to take such a course, cannot but discern what way the Major part of Christendom, and its Higher and more comprehensive Councils that have hitherto been, do guide him. And the more simple and ignorant, who so can come to know nothing better, aught to follow their example.  
As touching the following Clause in 
§. 64.  this Principle, That the same means may serve to keep men from Error in matters of Faith, as is used by God to keep men from Sin in their lives. Hereto I add, That here God hath taken care by the same Church-Authority to preserve his Church in Truth, and to restrain it from Sin: giving them an equal Commission to teach the ignorant, and to correct the Vicious. And since their Doctrine directs our manners as well as Faith, their infallibility is as necessary for things of practice, as of speculation.  
Error in Opinion also may be such, 
§. 65.  as may be much more dangerous to us, then for the present a vicious life, supposing our persistance in a right Faith; because we have our Conscience still left uncorrupted to reclaim us in the later, but not so in the former: And there is more hopes of his recovery, who as yet doth ill with a relucting judgement. Some erroneous Opinions or other also are the ordinary sources and springs of evil practices; and the Doctor cannot but acknowledge this, who hath spent a considerable part of the Book, to which he hath annexed these Principles, upon pretending to show, how Roman Errors do induce an evil life, and destroy Devotion.    

III.  
The Doctor's Consequences, examined.  

I. CONSEQUENCE.  
1. There is no necessity at all, or use of 
1. Conseq.  an Infallible Society of men to assure men of the truth of those things of which they may be certain without, and cannot have any greater assurance, supposing such Infallibility to be in them.  
1. This Consequence here is voided, 
Consid. §. 66.  because the Supposition, if applied to Divine Revelations and matters of Faith, in the former Principles is not proved.  
2. But if the whole were granted, This concludes the uselessness as well of any Ecclesiastical Authority to teach men, as of an Infallible, to assure men of the truth of those things, which, by using only their own sincere endeavour (according to the Doctor's pretence, Principle 13.) they may know without them.   

II. CONSEQUENCE.  
2. The Infallibility of that Society of 
2. Conseq.  men who call themseleus the Catholic Church, must be examined by the same Faculties in man, the same Rules of trial, the same Motives by which the Infallibility of any Divine revelation is.  
This Consequence, couched only in general terms, is granted in the same manner as the 6. Principle is, changing (must) here into (may.)  
But then of many things examined and discovered by the same way or means, some are much more easily by every one examined and discovered then some others, as the Evidence for them in this means are greater. So Holy Scriptures believed such from Universal Tradition, may be much clearer in some Articles of our Faith, then in others: And some Divine Revelations may be so obscurely expressed there, or involved only in their Principles, as that some weak capacities cannot discern them, which yet in the same Scriptures may discover the Authority of the Church and its promised Divine Assistance and Infallibility in necessaries, and so from thence learn those other. Of which Church and its Infallibility clear in Scriptures, for all necessaries, and for deciding other Points more obscure therein, thus writes S. Augustin in his Dispute with the Donatists 
August. contra Crescon. l. 1. c. 33  concerning the obscure Point of Rebaptization: Quoniam sacra Scriptura fallere non potest, etc. Since the Holy Scripture cannot deceive (us) let whosoever is in fear of being deceived by the obscurity of this Question, consult the same Church about it, which Church the Holy Scripture doth without all ambiguity demonstrate. And before, Earumdem Scripturarum 
Ibid.  etiam in hac re a nobis tenetur veritas, cum, etc. That is, The truth of the Holy Scriptures is held by us in this matter (or Point of Rebaptization) when we do that which has pleased the Universal Church, (that is which had been stated concerning that Point by the Church) which the Authority of the Scriptures themselves does commend; that since, etc. Thus writes S. Augustin. All which is false and said to no purpose, if the Scripture be not clear in this, That this Church can determine nothing in such important Contests contrary to the verity of the Scriptures, and that we ought to give credit to what he decides; for than it would not be true what he says, The truth of the same Scriptures in this matter is held by us: and, He who is in fear to be deceived by the obscurity of this Question, is no way relieved in following the sentence of the Church.  
Now if it be further asked, Amongst those 
§. 67.  several Modern opposite Communions, which do equally invite men into their Society by the Name of the Church, Which of them is so Divinely attested; there are beside the Description made of it in Scripture, not applicable to other pretended Churches, and frequently urged by the same Father against the Donatists, There are, I say, sufficiently certain rational Evidences and Marks thereof left to Christians, whereby the sober Enquirer after it, cannot be mistaken.  
I mean not here those Marks of the true Church (though true Marks also) the quest of which men are set upon by Protestants, viz. True Doctrine, and a right administration 
See. Rat. Account. p. 7.  of the Sacraments, A Quest or Trial that can never be made an end of, being a task to know all the Truths in Christianity first, before we can know the Church: When as the Enquirer seeks after the Church, which as S. Augustin saith, the Scripture demonstrates, that by it he may come to know the Truths. But I mean those other Marks mentioned by S. Augustin in the Book he wrote of the Benefit of believing the Church, viz. Sequentium multitudo, etc. The multitude of 
Aug. cont. Epist Fundam. c. 4.  her followers, the Consent of Nations, her Antiquity, etc. Which Church hath descended (visibly) from Christ himself by his Apostles 
Id. de Vtil. creden. c. 11. 14. 16. 17  unto us, and from us will descend to posterity, etc. And which by the Confession of Mankind from the Apostolic See by succession of Bishops hath obtained the supreme top of Authority, whilst Heretics on all sides barked against her in vain, and were still condemned partly by the judgement even of the common people, partly by the (venerable) gravity of Councils, and partly also by the Majesty of Miracles, (that is, by Miracles done in this 
Aug. de Ciu. D. l. xxii. c. 8.  Church after the Apostles times; of several of which, S. Augustin himself was an eye-witness, 
Confess. l. 9 c. 7.  and of some an instrument. 
Possid. in vita Aug. ●. 29.   
The same Father repeats much-what the same in another Book of his, De Vnitate Ecclesiae against the Donatists, a Sect in afric. 
Id. de Vnit. Eccle. c. 25.  Non est obscura Quaestio, etc. It is no obscure Question, says he, (viz. which is the true Church) in which those may deceive you, who according to our Lord's prediction shall come and say, Behold here is Christ, behold he is there, behold he is in the Desert, as in a place where the multitude is not great. (The time was, when the Reformation were constrained to use the like phrases, and also to apply to themselves that Text, Fear not little Flock) But you have a Church (described in in the Scripture) to be spread through all Regions, and to grow still (in Conversion of Nations) till the harvest: You have a City concerning which he that was the Founder of it, said, A City built on a Hill cannot be hid. This is the Church therefore, not in some corner of the earth; but every where most known. Now I hope none will think fit to apply these Scriptures more to S. Augustins' time then to any other, or to the present: For, by the same reason, the Donatists might here have counter-applied them to some other, and not to S. Augustins' times.  
Much what the same is iterated again by this Father (and three Testimonies, I hope, will establish this matter) where he tells the Manicheans what retained him in the bosom of that Church from which they stood separated, Vt omittam Sapientiam, etc. that is, That I may omit that Wisdom, (viz. the Mark of true Doctrine) which you do not 
Idem cont. Ep. Fund. c. 4.  believe to be in the Catholic Church; there are many other things which most justly keep me in her bosom. The consent of peoples and Nations keeps me there. Authority begun by Miracles, confirmed by Antiquity keeps me there. The Succession of Pastors, from the Seat itself of S. Peter (to whom our Lord after his Resurrection recommended his Sheep to be fed by him) unto the present Bishop, keeps me there. And lastly, the very Name of Catholic heeps me there, etc. Here are S. Augustins Marks to find our the Church from which men were to learn the Truth, whilst proposed to several persons and Sects, always the same.  
And these are the Evidences in Tradition, and in those other commonly called Motives of Credibility, which in themselves seem not justly questionable, that will afford a sufficient Certainty to every Sober Enquirer, whereby he may try and discern that present Church, to which now also, if in S. Augustins' time, Christ affords a testimony: and which lieth not in Corners, nor starts up after some Ages, and vanishes again, but is fixed ab Apostolica Sede per successiones Episcoporum; a City set on a Hill in the most extended Unity of an external Communion, which no other Christian Society can equal; a Candle on a Candlestick; a Perpetual, erected, Visible Pillar and Monument of Truth, frustra Haereticis circumlatrantibus. Where also according to the disparity of several men's capacities, I suppose nothing more necessary than that this Evidence received either from all, or only some of these Notes (to those who have not ability to examine others) be such as that it outweigh any arguments moving him to the contrary; and the like Evidence to which is thought sufficient to determine us in other Elections. And then this Church thus being found, he may be resolved by it concerning the Sense of other Divine Revelations more dubious, and generally all other Scrupules in Religion: to wit, so far as this Church from time to time seeth a necessity of such Resolution, and the Divine Revelation therein is to her sufficiently clear; only if such person, not spending so much of his own judgement, will afford, instead of it, a little more of his Obedience.   

III. CONSEQUENCE.  
3. The less convincing the Miracles, the 
3. Conseq.  more doubtful the Marks, the more obscure the Sense of either what is called the Catholic Church, or declared by it, the less reason hath any Christian to believe upon the account of any who call themselves by the name of the Catholic Church.  
All this is true, upon supposition that 
Consid. §. 68  matters stand as the Doctor would pretend: but such supposition being groundless, he must give me leave to invert his Consequence, and say: The more convincing the Miracles (if any credit for these may be given to Church-History) the more evident the Marks (even now given by S. Augustin and modern Catholic Writers;) the more clear and manifest (even to simple persons, who with much difficulty in several places comprehend the Sense of controverted Scripture) is the Catholic Church, (whose Representative are the subordinate Councils, and whose Governors the several Degrees of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, ascending to the Prime See of S. Peter;) and the more clear also the Points declared by it, (viz. in these Councils, whose Decrees (suppose that of Trent) if questioned for their Truth, are not for their perspicuity, and particularly in the Points of Controversy they assembled to determine between Protestants and Catholics;) the more reason hath any Christian to believe upon the account of those who call themselves by the Name, and challenge the High Privileges (which no other Separated Socityes of Christians do) of the Catholic Church.   

IV. CONSEQUENCE.  
4. The more absurd any Opinions are, 
4. Conseq.  and repugnant to the first Principles of Sense and Reason which any Church obtrudes upon the Faith of men; the greater reason men still have to reject the pretence of Infallibility in that Church, as a grand Imposture.  
The Higher any Points of Faith be, and 
Consid. §. 69.  the more remote from Sense and natural Reason, or, not comprehensive by them, which such Church as is named before, (and in the highest capacity of it, General Councils) proposeth to the Faith of Christians, the more noble exercise they have of their Faith, whilst they have an abundant certainty also that such Leaders can misguide them in nothing necessary to Salvation. And no reason have they, upon such improbabilities or contradictions to Sense or natural Reason, to suspect or be jealous of the Church's Infallibility as an Imposture; which Church they see, through what ever obstacles, faithfully adheres to the Divine Oracles, how incredible soever to Nature; and may be thought, because it seems not swayed or hindered by these at all, to use more integrity in her judgement, and fidelity to the Divine Revelations.  
Yet this is not said, as if the judgement of 
§. 70.  our Senses, appointed by God the Instruments (by hearing or reading them) of conveying Faith and his Divine Revelations to us, affords not a sufficient Natural Certainty or Infallibility, whereon to ground our belief in all those things subject to our Senses, wherein the Divine Power doth not interpose: But only. 1. That where the Divine Power worketh any thing Supernaturally, that is, contrary to our Senses, (as it may no doubt) here we are not to believe them: And this, I think, none can deny: 2. And next, That we are to believe this Divine Power doth so, so often as Certain Divine Revelation tells us so, Though by the same senses if tells us so, we believing our Senses, that it tells us so, when we do not believe the same Senses for the thing which is contrary to what it tells us; The truth of which Divine Revelation we are to learn from God's Church, infallibly assisted in necessary Faith.  
For otherwise Lot and his Daughters were 
See Stilling.  not to credit the Divine Revelation (supposing 
Roman. Idol. p. 540.  that Divine History then written and extant) that the seeming Men who came to 
It. Rat. Account p. 117. 567.  Sodom were Angels, because this was against their Senses. Now here, would he argue well, who because Lot's sight was actually 
Tillatson. p. 275.  deceived upon this Supernatural accident, in taking the Angels to be Men, as certainly it was, from hence would infer, that the Apostles had no sufficient Certainty or ground, from their seeing our Lord, to believe him risen from the Dead? Or that no Belief could ever be certainly grounded upon our Senses? Nor that Christians have any certain Foundation of their Faith?  
For a Natural or Moral Certainty, though such as is per potentiam Divinam fallible and errable, and is to be believed to err where ever we have Divine Revelation for it, not else, I say, a Certainty (though not such an one as cannot possibly be false, but which according to the Laws of Nature and the common manners and experience of men is not false) is sufficient on which to ground such a Faith as God requires of us, in respect of that Certainty which can be derived from humane Sense or Reason, and which serves for an Introductive to the reliance of this our Faith upon such Revelation as is believed by us Divine; and which if Divine, we know is not possibly fallible; In respect of its relying on which Revelation, an infallible Object, and not for an Infallible Certainty, as to the Subject, it is, that this our Faith is denominated a Divine Faith. Now this Natural or Moral Certainty, is thought sufficient for the first Rational Introductive and security of our Faith, not only by the Doctor in his 27. Principle, but also by Catholic Divines in their Discourses of the prudential Motives.   

V. CONSEQUENCE.  
5. To disown what is taught by such a 
5. Conseq.  Church, is not to question the Veracity of God, but so firmly to adhere to that, in what he hath revealed in Scriptures, that men dare not, out of love to their souls, reject what is so taught.  
To disown what is taught by such a 
Consid. §. 71.  Church, as we have here represented it, will be to desert what God hath revealed in the Scriptures; the true meaning of which Revelations, when controverted, we are to receive from it. And so men ought not, out of love to their souls, reject what is so taught.   

VI CONSEQVENCE.  
6. Though nothing were to be believed as the 
6. Conseq.  Will of God, but what is by the Catholic Church declared to be so: Yet this doth not at all concern the Church of Rome, which neither is the Catholic Church, nor any sound part or member of it. This may suffice to show 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 wilful Ignorance, weakness of judgement, Strength of prejudice, or some sinful 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 believed as the Will 
Consid. §. 72.  of God, but what is by the Catholic Church declared to be so: and the Declarations of the Catholic Church be taken from her Councils; and, in Concills dissenting, from the more Universal and General, (the constant way of the Church's Judgement,) this Church Catholic, as to such Councils and Courts Ecclesiastical hath never been severed from the Roman and S. Peter's Chair.  
And this may suffice to show 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 wilful Ignorance, nor sinful Passion, nor strength of prejudice and secular interest in our Countrymen, Yet it must be at least much neglect of examining things which most concern them, and diverting their thoughts upon other employments, or conversing 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 divided, and this not very long since, from the Catholic.  
As to the Doctors imputing only to 
§. 73.  Ignorance, sinful Passion, etc. 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 Controversies they maintain with others, equally appeal to the Clearness of the Infallible Scriptures, sufficiently intelligible unto their sincere endeavours, and decline, as fallible, all other Ecclesiastical Authority.  
So Wolketius for the Socinians (as the Doctor 
§. 74. Volket. de vera  for the Church of England) saith, Quae de Fide, etc. Those things which are to be 
Relig. l. 5. c. 7.  established touching Faith in Christ, are manifest in the Scriptures. And Again, Deus qui Religionem Christianam, etc. God having 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 far as is necessary to Salvation, But no such Mean is extant, except the Holy Scriptures. To the same purpose Crellius another Socinian, says, Hac sententia, etc. This Doctrine (by which 
Crell. l. de uno Dei Patre. in Praefat.  Christ's Divinity is denied) is supported by very many, and the most evident, 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 usually have justified it against them, namely, the Church of England's adhering to the Traditional Exposition and Sense of Scripture received from the Primitive Church: This, I say, he omitted, perhaps because it may be thought to relish a little of Church-Infallibility.  
Neither do the Principles here laid down, afford any effectual way or means in this Church of suppressing or convicting any Schism, Sect, or Heresy, or reducing them either to submission of Judgement, or Silence. For where both sides contend Scripture clear for themselves; the Clearness of such Scripture, how great soever on one side, can be made no Instrument of Conviction to the other. Here therefore all things must be prosecuted further than 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. 
§. 7.   
If then it is the Church's Authority that must rectify such diversity of Opinions, one would think that this aught to have been first established, instead of leaving every Fancy to perspicuity of Scripture for the attaining Unity and Peace in the Points controverted. And the prudent may consider, Whether the Authority of the Church of England is not much debilitated and brought into contempt, and daily like to wane more and more by this new-taken-up way of its Defence; Where he thinks himself its best Advocate and Defender of its Cause, who doth most endeavour to set forth the Defects and failings of all such Ecclesiastical Societies, Prelates, and Councils, and best proves no Scripture-Promises made to them. Nay where, to the end to evacuate the Infallibility of any Society or Church in necessaries, is set up a Counter-Lay-Infallibility of private men, if only sincere Endeavourers of Understanding Holy Writ, 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 judgement to their Spiritual Pastors and Governors, 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 Salvation, and to heep them stable and fixed from being tossed to and fro with every wind of Doctrine, that Capricious Fancies may imagine there, or malicious pretend: Informing them, that they are to learn of these Pastors, the true Sense of God's Word according to former Church-Tradition, to follow their Faith and to rest in their judgement. Lastly, not to usurp their Office, and become their own Guides: inasmuch as the same Divine order that appoints the others to Guide, enjoins 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 Unity and Peace in that, some Excuse for Inferiors; yea also, in probability more verisimilitude; then that every one should err a several, and his own, Error, to the utter ruin of Peace, and a greater deviation from Truth.  
But whilst these things are so little spoken of, it is no great wonder if under the protection of such contrary Maxims spread abroad, which were first made more current and common by Mr 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 extravagant Fancies in Religion, the Contemners of Church-Authority and of the Clergy, (who first contemned and vilified themselves) do daily in these parts so exceedingly multiply and increase) Sed tu, pastor bone, reduc in ovile tuum istas oves perditas, ut audiant vocem tuam: & sic fiat unum ovile & unus Pastor.  
Amen.     


ERRATA.  
PRef p, 6. l. 1. his. l. his. l. 2. must. l. much. l. 20. d. not. P. 35. l. 31. te. l. be. p. 48. l. 23. incnrs. l. incurs. p. 78. by disputes. l. by-disputes. P. 81. l. 12. consideration. l. consid. P. 99 l. 29. heep. l. keep. P. 100 l. 14. of. l. of.   

COurteous Reader, Because the necessity of making use of a foreign Press hath so multipled the Errata of this small Piece either in Words, or Pointing, as to render several places of it hardly intelligible, You are desired to amend with your Pen, at least, those grosser faults that are distinguished here with a Star; and, where else the sense may seem obscure, to repair to this Table.  

PREFACE.  
Pag. 21. Marg. read See p. 69. * Ibid. l. 6. r. cannot think Ibid. l. 9 r. be a  
p. 4. l. 11. r. and unmoveable  
p. 6. l. 2. r. much   

BOOK.  
Pag. 1. l. 2. r. Principles, Giving  
p, 2. l. 11. Marg. §. 1.  
p. 4. l. 6. Marg. §. 2.  
p. 6. l. 10. Marg. §. 3. * l. 17. r. and all l. 25. r. controverted  
p. 7. l. 13. r. or Society l. 22. Marg. §. 4.  
* p. 9 l. 23. Marg. §. 5.  
p. 11. l. 24. Marg. Deut. 17. 8. 2 Chron. 19 10.  
p. 15. l. 28. r. Christian  
p. 18. l. 20. Marg. Tillots. Rule of faith p. 113. Ibid. l. 27. Marg. deal Tillots. p. 113.  
p. 20. l. 30 deal,) * l. 31. r. sense)  
* p. 21. l. 6. r. repentance of it, l. 19 r. present much major part of Christianity, professeth l. 20. r. this Scripture  
* p. 23. l. 13. r. or  
p. 25. l. 9 r. judgements. 2 Chr. 19 10.  
* p. 32. l. 21. r. any can  
* p. 33. l. 6. r. taken in her sense * l. 10. r. Catholic Church l. 11. r. [that is, in l. 13. r. page,] l. 18. r. salvation, And, * l. 31. r. (Therefore such  
p. 35. l. 32. r. be  
* p. 36. l. 13. r. infallible [the Infallibility in question.] Surely, l. 15. r. Fundamentals, & Marg. See Rat. * l. 26. r. not as liable  
p. 38. l. 2. r. necessary, The  
* p. 39 l. 16 r. too, these Successors  
p. 40. l. 10. r. And the Protestant's allowing l. 28. rendering such their  
p. 41. l. 4. r. Account) * l. 9 Marg. r. Ibid. p. 512.  
p. 42. l. 16. r. Scripture, l. 23. Marg. r. Matt. 18. 17.  
p. 45. l. 9 r. in some matters * l. 12. r. Council, but are not as yet stated such by any clear Decision  
p. 48. l. 2. r. Guide: their l. 16. r. are not, if  
p. 51. l. 8. r. infallibly certain  
* p. 55. l. 17. r. matter at all  
* p. 56. l. 20. r. Revelation, as to the  
* p. 57 l. 4. deal, their l. 13. r. Consideration  
* p. 58. l. 7. r. established there, to  
* p. 68 l. 24. r. As for the other, the Protestants,  
protestants p. 70. l. 4. r. as, because I  
p. 73. l. 13. r. so): there * l. 21. Marg. See before §. 27. * l. 28. r. contrary to it  
p. 74. l. 20. deal, that  
* p. 75. l. 15. r. External  
p. 77. l. 4. deal, in the * l. 30. r. when knowing  
* p. 78. l. 1. r. digress l. 2. r. Book of l. 13. r. Church] l. 16. r. (else  
p. 79. l. 18. r. and so separated  
p. 80. l. 13. r. bond of peace.  
* p. 81. l. 6. deal, though  
* p. 86. l. 6. r. she decides  
* p. 86. l. 11. See below * l. ult. r. know these Truth's  
p. 87. l. 12. r. have barked * l. 29. r. as if in  
p. 89. l. 3. r. Evidences, in * l. 22. r. more to be necessary  
* p. 96. l. 23. r. conversing only with  
p. 97. l. 6. r. Protestant Sect l. 17. r. Volkelius Marg. r. uno Deo  
* p. 98. l. 13. r. omitteth  
p. 100 l. 3. r. judgement; Lastly l. 28. r. increase. Sed  
* P. 86. l. 11. After the Church, r. Nor had St. Augustin any reason to presume (as he doth ib. c. 4. ) that St. Cyprian would have corrected his Opinion concerning this Point; or to charge the Donatists with Heresy for dissenting from it, after the Determination of such a Council: Nor had the Second General Council any just ground to put it in the Creed [Credo unum Baptisma in Remissionem peccatorum] if such Universal Councils in their Stating Matters of Faith, are errable and amendable.    

ERRATA  
In the Discourse concerning Devotion: (those of mispointing being mostwhat omitted.)  
The principal Errata (noted with a Star) the Reader is desired to Correct with his Pen.  

Pages. line 21. marg. read 8. 26.  
p 6 l. 27 r. became a  
* p 9 l. 24 r. long-continued  
* p 10 l. 10 r. thus * l. 16 r. thus * l. 22 r. 2. It  
p 11 l. 9 r. abscondi  
p 13 l. 24. marg. r. Act. 16. 6, 7, 9- 20. 22, 23.- 8. 19- 19 21. 1 Tim. 1. 18- 4 14.-  
p 15 l. 17. r. Hysterical—  
p 18 l. 25 r. this inhabitation  
p 19 l 5 r. And, Phil. 3.  
p 21 l. 2. r Where, * after  
p 24. ●l. 20. marg. r. S. Thom. 1. Q. 1 Art. 8. l. penult. r. 5. But there  
p 25 l 22 r. Spirit, pretends  
p 26 l. 21 r. (See l. 22 r. 2. 6.)  
p 28 l. 2 r. sin, especially  
* p 29 l. 30 r. those  
* p 30 l. 25 r. and it, if  
p 31 l. 17 r. Counsels  
* p 32 l. 18 r. leaves us  
* p 34 l. 27 r. inconsiderable  
* p 38 l. 5 r. 6. Having  
* p 39 l. 26 r. also frequently return  
* p 40 l. 17 r. and rovings about  
p 41 l. 21 r. thereof. Treat 3.  
p 42 l. 24 r. them happen to fall  
p 43 l. 1 r. works in us  
p 45 l. 22 r. left sometimes * l. 32 r. A●olatiomentis  
p 46 l. 16 r. primary  
p 48 l 16 r. mundanis)  
* p 50 l. 21 r. Si cui  
p 51 l. 3 r. Canting  
p 52 l. 31 r. meae— Suble● a us  
* p 53 l. 33 r. utcunque  
p 55 l. 13 r. peccatis * l. 21 r. quia, si l. 34 r. immerito  
* p 56 l. 17 r. Elsewhere, *— Fortasse ne * l. 22 r. praecesserat l. 23. r. esse l. 26 r. Sanctuarium Dei, si l. 31 r. quidem hic  
* p 58 l. 16 r. ellae bullienti substraxeris,  
p 61 l. 27 r. cogit, nec cogitur  
* p 62 l. 25 r. unexperienced  
* p 63 l. 10 r. understand  
* p 66 l. 21 r. as they are— ib. apprehends l. 31 r. Christi, And  
* p 67 l. 4 r. such persons, as l. 23 r. virtute * l. 28 r. retractation  
p 69 l. 22 r. Cand  
* p 70 l. 17 r. because, to any  
p 74 l. 29 r. lest I should incur his censure  
* p 75 l. 2 r. cited §. 13 l. 13 r. ipse  
* p 76 l. 25 r. lumen  
p 77 l. 5 r. phantasms l. 33 r. (for, now,  
p 78 l. 1 r. Contemplation) l. 5 r. when our * l. 27 r. stamp them * l. 32 r. li●que  
* p 79 l. 16 r. contemplatur l. 21 r.— Sponsa l. 22 r. ipsam l. 32 r. Beginners: and  
p 80 l. 1 r. the other, l. 7 r. before §. 25.  
p 81 l. 8 marg. r. See §. 32. etc.  
* p 82 l. 1 r. laudable  
* p 83 l. 4 r. Deiforme Fund  
p 84 l. 3 r. 1 Cor. 13. 12.  
p 86 l. 13 r. by— intentions * l. 32 r. tuumque spiritum  
* p 95 l. 21 r. to God.  
* p 97 l. 12 r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * l. 30 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
* p 98 l. 9 r. passage of his.  
* p 99 l. 3. marg. r. §. 49. & 51  
* p. 100 l. 20. r. gestures,  
* p 102 l. 28 r. (which they  
* p 104 l. 28 r. before §. 14.  
* p 106 l. 2 r. lawfulness of which is l. 15 r. in two lawful  
p 109 l. 8 r. impulses of the  
p 110 l. 33 r. praying for his  
p 111 l. 21. r. himself to de— deal, indifferent  
p 112. l. 7 r. before §. 20. etc.  
p 113 l. 15 r. those who are judged    

ERRATA  
In the Discourse concerning Repentance and Indulgences.  

PAge 43. line 7. read Third, the  
p. 48 l. 10. r. fragilitatem  
* page 78 l. 19 read the Calf l. 31. r. purgandum  
p. 83. l. 27. r. superfluas Indulgentias l. 29. r. inanes, &  
* p. 123. l. 14. r. to Father them.