THE Reasoning Apostate: Or MODERN LATITUDE-MAN CONSIDERED, As he opposeth the Authority OF THE KING and CHURCH.  
OCCASIONED By several late TREATISES.  
By John Warly B. D. late Fellow of Clare-Hall in Cambridg.  
LONDON: Printed for T. Basset at the George in Fleetstreet, 1677.   

IMPRIMATUR  
7 March, 1677.  
Geo. Hooper R more. D no. D. Gilb. Cant. Arch. à Sacris Domesticis.   

THE PREFACE.  
WHen I saw the Church and Religion defended only by Reason, I looked on its condition as Deplorable as a forlorn Hope, FOr rational Assertors of Religion, who scorn the Auxiliaries of the Church, though they appear as stout Soldiers, yet they are ill Disciplined, and as Goliath, set up with a natural Fortitude and prodigious Bulk, more fit for a Spectacle than a Fight, more fit for Inquisitive Speculation than Practical Religion; And that which renders Reason thus uncapable of putting an end to Disputes, is this, because there are some Doctrines in obscure places of Scripture, which are like Garrisons on such a Rock which bids Defiance to Reason to Storm it, or Art to surprise it. Arcana (which God alone by the Mediation of the Church) will most fully reveal and deliver to Man.  
It is well known that some obscure Texts of Scripture, as Christ the Author, appear as Incognito till the Church makes the discovery.  
I am not bound to believe that our Saviour gave such Commands to his Apostles, as a Philosopher did to his Scholars, who wrapped up his knowledge in obscure Methods, as a dark Shop to commend the Wares. Yet 'tis certain that some places of Scripture are so hard to be understood, that they deserve to be called Oracles for their Obscurity as much as Truth. Now who shall make discovery of it but those to whom these Oracles of God are committed, and they are the Church.  
I need not trouble the Reader with the Contents of these Papers, but shall only say, that I have endeavoured to give Religion as well as Reason its due, to rob Man of the one is unnatural Injustice, to steal from the other the worst Sacrilege. This made me endeavour to assert the Authority of the Church, especially in this Age in which it seems to be exposed to contempt, and some factious persons looking on it as in a helpless and weak condition, not able to defend itself, much less to protect or assist others, turn the Divine Command into a Scoff and Jeer, whilst in Derision they say, Go tell the Church.   

Names of some Treatises more Obscurely mentioned in the following Considerations.  

N.F. The natural Fanatic.  
Milton, of Civil Power in Ecclesiastical Causes, page 24.  
The Judgement of Non-conformists of the interest of Reason in matters of Religion, p. 26.  
The Advocate of Conscience-Liberty, p. 42.  
The Author of Smyrk, p. 43.  
A Jesuit against one of the Sorbonists, p. 74.  
The Advocate for Conscience-Liberty, p. 92.    


Consideration 1. Of the Defence of the Church of England by some Orthodox-men, in a Method or Style which seems to some too familiar, biting, and severe.  
THough the admirable Defence of the Church of England by some of the Laity (which Name may be fastened on Nobles, as well as Peasants, though a late Author hath undertaken by Chorah's Model to assert each person a Priest; (as it was objected to Luther by a great French Historian) deserved as much Commendation as that ancient practice of drawing the Sword when Christians stood on their guard whilst they made confession of their Faith; and that without imputation of Ambition or Vain glory, have supported the tottering Ark by their rational discourses, and seem as men from Macedonia at St. Paul's Summons to assist the Church; yet some of these endeavouring to take off from the estimation of the authority of the Church, they seem to me to be (as Cassianus says of the secular order of Men in the Roman Church, Sacerdoturientes, a new kind of Grey Friars in the reformed Religion. Neither do other men seem less fatal to the Church who are as Mendicants, at least in their language, endeavouring to win their designs by a cringing Supplication, I beseech you my Fathers, which they could not obtain by Arguments. These men professing a plainess of Speech and Integrity, seem as much suspicious as the Gibeonites to make Leagues with clouted Shoes whilst Poverty pleads their cause. Neither are those altogether excusable who dispute against their Adversaries in a rational way without pressing the Authority of some ancient Fathers; seeing it is possible to show, that the most valuable Arguments which are made use of as a Battery against Atheists are not the mere products of their own inventions, but of others whose names are concealed by them; I know not for what reason except this is it, that they thought Authority would prejudice the humoursome Age, and that Books would be better esteemed as Anonymous, or a New Cabala to the reformed Religion, or because it seems policy in Church as well as Srate (Arcana Ecclesiae as much as Imperii) to conceal the Authors from whom they had their Intelligence or Imformation. This Method makes men start at the citations of ancient Fathers, as the Disciples did at Christ's person walking on the Waters, supposing them as evil Spirits to seduce them.  
But I pass from this to the other branch of this Consideration, which makes me astonished to think how some Orthodox persons have been cavilled with for defending the Church in too severe and bitter Methods, and a charge laid on Prelates, as if they designed the defence of the Church as St. Mallos is guarded with snarling Curs, and those who assert their Authority esteemed as Cock Hector's, who win Battles more by Carlick than Strength, whilst a stinking Breath defeats the Combatant.  
These need not my Vindication (they have done it themselves) but suppose some Excursions not so commendable; let it be considered that it is as impossible for a man to modelize his language so when he disputes with an Adversity as shall not offend him, as it is for a man who fights a Duel, to keep up to all those rules which he prescribed to himself before the engagement. Polemical Arguments are like a Bolt or Shot which contracts Heat by flying. Laws in such cases cannot be observed, and the Disputant cannot be so accurate in his Language as Hortensius in his Cown, as well as Oration, (such a one deserves to be called Smyrk or the Divine in mode) to be in a set accurate form without a wrinkle. He who disputes with Suarez, must make use of his language. Metaphysical Notions which are necessarily mixed in Divine Dispute, cannot be so plainly controverted by Scripture Phrase, which in some cases cannot confute the Adversary any otherwise than the Idiot did Bellarmine, by giving him the Lye. To say all Adversaries must be disputed with by their own weapons; St. Paul warrants it, who draws an Argument from a Poet, when he might have cited the sense out of the first Chapter of Genesis.  
But this perhaps may not seem so pertinent to the present case, for the age is sufficiently wearied out with Distinctions and terms of Art, which like dry Bones knit together, only make a Skeleton, not a man, but that which is censured is the launching out the licentious phrase of Stage.  
'Tis true, this is unworthy of Divine Discourse, and the Priest ought to scorn variety of humour or fancy in his language, as much as the Spaniard doth a fantastic Dress; his language ought to strike so much awe according to the Character given of Job, Though I smiled (says he) they believed me not; though any thing drop which seems not of equal moment with the rest of the Discourse, the weight of the one overpoyseth the levity of the other.  
This may be well supposed; for Gravity and Levity in discourse seem to be as natural and as necessary as they are in bodies: And as no bodies are so dense or thick, but some subtle matter lurks in the Pores; so no discourse so close but it may have its airy matter intermixed and in embodied with it. The grave Writings of the Ancient Fathers are as a Witness of this. I could instance in some, if it were necessary.  
To say all Arguments like, Arrows, to which a Plume is no less necessary than a ponderous Metal, whilst one gives it flight, the other makes the wound. Such necessary Levity at least may be pardonable, but Scurrility is a vice in Morals, much more in Religion. However a sharp and severe way of Arguing must not be omitted, for it is as necessary to the Priest as an Acid humour to the Stomach, without which the meat would not be digested: There is no new Method, Nazianzens' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is an evidence of it, and primitive Fathers sharply check the Gentiles for their folly. Yet all this was without Scurrilous Language, altogether unlike to Luther's railing Method, which occasioned some of the Roman Church to call him and his Disciples Mad Men. However he deserved well of the Church (I presume none will deny) and it may be retorted on those who object it, that some of theirs have fixed odious Names on Protestants, Dogs, Infidels, Magicians, nay worse, as a great Doctor signs their Banishments, in these words, Ut magos publica Authoritate arcemus, civitate pellimus, etc.  
I might cite others to this purpose no less Black-mouthed, but I forbear to do that, and shall only suggest this to the Readers thoughts. As the Church of England, though the first Reformers (if it can be reasonably imagined that its first Reformers, gave any credit to the Objections of some of the Roman Church) were sensible that the Reformation was begun as in a storm of passion and irreverent language, yet disowns not the consequence of it, seeing it as a Tempest cast them on a happy shore, now shall not all sincere Christians do as the first Reformers did; who when they saw Religion, well defended, though in an unbeseeming and boisterous way (For which there is no reason of complaint in this case) would not have Religion suffer for it, for that would have argued as much folly as if a Prince should disown a Victory because gotten by rash and imprudent means, or like casting Joseph into the Pit only out of spite to his Coat, if Religion suffer, because not pleasingly worded. I speak not this as an Abettor of Lucian's scoffs, or a Rabshekah's railing, but only to show how prudence makes use of them. To conclude with a late observation of some Anatomists, who say there is not known a certain use of the Spleen, and that some creatures may live without it. I determine nothing in this case, but only say I am confident there is no use of a Petulant Spleen in Religious Debates.   

Consideration II. Whether belief, which relies and depends on the Authority of the Catholic Church, and as it is encouraged by the Civil Magistrate, may properly be said to be forced, and to proceed from an unwarrantable usurpation of the right of natural reason.  
THe Church hath not been so effectually undermined by any Method as by representing its Authority under the odious names of Tyranny, and calling all obligation to belief unwarrantable Impositions or force. Wherefore it is necessary to examine what is meant by force in its several acceptations, and then assert the Negative of the Question.  
Sometimes it is taken philosophically; for that Power which rests a being beyond its natural inclination or tendency, according to this account of it: the determination of the Will must be accounted violent so far as it is concerned in Religion, and Grace itself is not able to escape the imputation of force: for grace may as well be said to be an enforcing influence on man's nature in his corrupted state, as that power which according to philosophy diverts the natural course of the Elements in bodies, and imprisons them in one mixture, otherwise they would retreat to their own first home. The fire and volatile parts would be always moving towards heaven, and the sluggish parts of earth fettered to their centre. This is demonstrated in another Treatise N. F. viz. that men's thoughts are with as much difficulty composed to a settled and true notion of God and the Soul, as the Elements are commanded to comply in the composition of natural Bodies; Therefore I shall wave this, and consider it in another sense, as it is more directly and boldly complained of, and that is it which relates to the authority of the Church and interest of the Magistrate in matters of Religion, which is looked upon by some as a Battery to destroy all Religion.  
This is the Force generally exclaimed against by the Libertine, which is an unreasonable and an unjust imputation; for if the constant and universal Doctrine of the Church, which hath an obliging influence on Religious minds, must be called force, our Reformation and Separation from the Church of Rome, must be esteemed violent, and consequently illegal. For I cannot apprehend that Separation was justifiable on any better terms; but that the Doctrine of the Reformed Church is agreeable to the Scriptures, with the consent and evidence of Councils and Fathers. Besides, this not only condemns holy Councils and Fathers, being usurpers of Christian Liberty by imposing matters of Faith, but makes the whole Church liable to Error, which was never yet asserted by any sober mind. For though it may be granted that Councils and Fathers, each have been liable to some errors, yet when there is a consent of all, it is an infallible argument of Truth, vid. N. F. The Bishop of Rome is so sensible of this, that his Assertors know not how to invest him with Infallibility till they have entitled him to be the Virtual Church.  
Having considered Force as it relates to the Church, in the next place I cannot but take notice of that, as it concerns the Magistrate or Civil Power. This is the Force which the Libartine most complains of, for that of the Church in its dreadful Censures, is looked on but as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, like a Weapon which hurts not, or Thunder discharged without a Bolt. To evade this power they allege the plantation of the Gospel, not by force of the Magistrate, but by winning persuasion, and to make this appear, cite Christ's words (John 18. v. 36.) If my Kingdom were of this World, then would my Servants fight. This doth not conclude against the authority of Kings in Ecclesiastical Cases, for the design of that in this place, was to take off the opinion which the Jews had of his coming, that his Kingdom was not Spiritual, but Temporal. This Interpretation is given by St. Augustin. Audite ergo Judaei & gentes: audi circumcisio: Audi praeputium: audite omnia regna terrena: non impedio dominationem vestram in hoc mundo, regnum meum non est de hoc mundo August. in loc.  
To this purpose are many Deductions from places of Scripture, which I shall not largely consider by showing how distorted by Faction beyond the intent of them, which I shall only name, and briefly discover the crookedness of the perverse Interpretations; amongst which none seems to be pressed more than that. Let every one be fully persuaded in his own mind, Rom. 14.5. In this place the design of the Apostle is not to deliver up each man to his own private Interpretation or extravagant Fancy, as to command an attention to that which was delivered by him and the rest of the Apostles, which is the greatest Authority. For to suppose each man to rely on his own intrepretation, is to imagine him to contradict that which he advises in another place, That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, Rom. 15.6. For it seems to me to be a Paradox not intelligible, that men may be said to be at unity, with as many different opinions of Christ (which may extend to Fundamentals) as there are Persons. So long as their Faith is terminated in Christ, as Aliquo tertio in which they agree. By the same reason they may conclude that there is a Unity of opinion in Philisophy concerning all Creatures, whether Animate or in Inanimate, because all agree in this general notion of Substance or Animality, and that it is sufficient to know them in Gross, without more distinct knowledge of them. So that Metaphysics and natural Philosophy would be esteemed as useless in Reason, as some Creeds or Decrees of Councils in Religion. But I pass further, I cannot omit an Objection of a great Agent, for Libertinism suggested to the Parliament, in 59 showing the impossibility of the powers interposing in Matters of Religion in some cases; for (says he) the Magistrate must be obeyed for Conscience sake; how therefore can a man be obliged to obey him, when some duty is commanded which his Conscience contradict. To this 'tis enough to say, that the fallacy lies in the word Conscience, which in that place must not signify each man's persuasion or apprehension of the Duty, for if it were so, some men would not be obliged to obey their Prine, and their fancies exempt them from subjection.  
Thus far have endeavoured to assert the right of Princes in matters Ecclesiastical, but I shall not undertake to define particularly in what their power consists, or bond it by limits; 'Tis enough to my design, if I can but stop the mouths of a factious Multitude by breaking and diverting the force of their Current, by showing that these places of Scripture conclude nothing against Prince's power, to be exercised in suppressing Schism and Heresy. Neither shall I be so Dogmatically bold as some late Smyctimnians, who, as Magisterially as others, out of a consistory, declare their opinion of the power of the Supreme Magistrate (as if the title of our King had been distasted by them, because once derived from Rome, Proclaims him only Churchwarden of the Church; Neither shall I wildly follow their Metaphor, nor criticise the Name with which Princes are called by them, for than I must consider the Church as it was once represented by the Ark, so by a Chest with three Keys, the King to have one, the Clergy another, the People or Elders another: Each have their particular Suffrages; so when all agreed it was to be opened; which if it were so, it is to be feared it would be always shut. Neither shall I take notice of another, who ordains the Laity Clergy, and the King himself according to him must be a Clergy Man, else he can have no right or power in the Church, But I cease to go further in this extravagant Tract, and shall rather propose these Considerations.  
Seeing it is certain, or at present may be supposed that a Council and determination of the whole Church, is the most expedite means of ending Controversies. Is it not reasonable that the Magistrate should press the use of them. Add to this that Councils are called by Prince's power (as is confessed by all true Protestants) now is it not reasonable that the Decrees of Councils in order to be put in practice, should be as much the Prince's care, as the Council was when it was called to Ordain them. This considered, will make the Christian not to esteem this Method of searching Truth, as a piece of forced Servitude, for it is no more force to Reason, than Children suffer when they are sent to School. Let not any think themselves injured by this Instance, as Pedantic for the Doctrine of the Gospel, as well as the Law, may be styled a Pedagogy in that sense.  
But here I may expect a check from a late and not Assertor of Libertinism, who blames Constantine, at least pities him, as if he had an oversight for using this means to settle the Church, because it occasioned several bloody Persecutions. This is a weak Battery against the Church, and only deserves to be confuted by the Poet.  
Exitus acta probat; careat successibus opto,  
Quisquis ab eventu facta notanda putat.  
Success is a very bad test of the prudence used in the means, for the one is not to be measured by the other, especially by men who are not able to pass Judgement on the success, which is more intelligible and palpable always, than the means. Thus the Author is mistaken, for the success of that Council cannot be said to be bad because Divine Providence made use of those Persecutions for the more undoubted settling of Faith sealed with so many Martyr's blood. Let this also be considered, that the same would prevail against the Gospel itself, as well as Councils, and Christ himself blamed by this Observer as much as Constantine, because his coming occasioned strife, as he says, Mat. 10.34. I came not to send Peace, but a Sword, as condemn other pious means.  
Another way of asserting Libertinism, is by invalidating the examples of good Kings. Josia, Asa, etc. who had more conference with God, and so their Law more obligatory to the People; but succeeding Kings have no such warrant to do the same.  
This Objection seems valuable, but hath no strength, for if the want of an immediate consultation with God, destroys Authority, or at least weakens it, what will become of other Kings under the Law, who had not such a privilege intimately to converse with God, or at least in so high a degree. To say all, It may as well be concluded that the Pastors of the Church are not obliged to follow the practice of the Apostles, in all actions (some of which Miraculous, others suited to the exigency of the time, the one of which cannot, the other may not be imitated) because none in these days can pretend to the like Inspiration, as deny that Princes may not follow the examples of good Kings under the Law, because later things cannot be so much Secretaries of the Almighty, as they were in that Oeconomy. Thus they have endeavoured to invalidate the examples of the Jewish Kings, persuading them that the constitution of the Mosaical Law and the practice of Moses and the Sanedrim, or the practice of David and Solomon, to oblige no more to Imitation, than the lives of Numa, Lycurgus, or other Lawgivers in Plutarch, or the constitution of Heathenish Priests by the Roman Senate. This is true, if it is understood of those Rites and Laws which were purely Judaical, but otherwise in those which were not only Typical.  
It is further urged, as the first and second Oeconomy differ in many things, and so do the Governors in the several Dispensations; for (says he) all the Jewish Religion was in External Rights, Civil and Religious Acts so interwoven, that it was not easy to say whether the Church were more like a Commonwealth, or the Commonwealth a Church. Then concludes that the Magistrates buisiness was only to compel outward actions, but the Christian Magistrate hath no such task, Christianity consisting in inward acts of the mind. This terrifying Objection may find a check from this consideration, viz. That it is false when it says that all the influence good Kings had on the People, was only to promote outward acts, for that was not only conversant about the Ceremonial, but Instrumental in promoting the Moral Law, which certainly respects the powers of the Mind as much, if not more, than the outward Act. Besides in the ceremonial Acts of Law, and offering of Sacrifice, there was employed an Act of Faith, as well in other persons as Abraham; otherwise their Altars would have been no better than Shambles, and their Priests than Slaughtermen. Hence it appears that King's pressing the outward act, might be said to be instrumental in promoting Faith or inward Piety, in which sense it may be said good Kings, as of Josiah, They made the People to serve the Lord their God, 2 Chron. 34.33. But I must meet with an Objection which may be urged thus, granting that there was acts of Faith required in acts of Sacrifice; yet those being inward acts of the mind, Kings could not command or compel them.  
'Tis true, no earthly King can lay claim to such Spiritual dominion: However Christianity being not such an invisible Religion, but that it exerts itself in several visible acts, as confession of Faith, Communion, etc. which certainly will challenge the Magistrates care in case his aid is wanted; neither will this appear as impertinent to his Office so long as he hath reason to suspect that those whom the Church cannot reduce by her Methods, cannot be as good Subjects as others, when they are declared not to be so good Christians.  
Schism and Heresy, though they do not by necessary consequence imply Rebellion and Schism and Rebellion not always terms convertible, yet they are such as a Prince may suspect, and seem as Vapours under the Earth, which do not always cause Earthquakes, but when they are confined to a natural Prison, and cannot break forth, for as the one doth not always put the Earth in such Convulsions, yet excite fear, so the other may have such influence on a Prince's mind, which though it cannot shake him (for that supposes weakness) yet may create a prudential Caution.   

Consideration III. Of the authority of Reason, as it stands in competition with the Church, and of Schism and Heresy according to the new account of it, and whether reformation or separation from Communion of the Church, can be as sufently and legally justified without an appeal to the constant Doctrine of the Catholic Church, as with it.  
TAking it for granted, that Reason is not the last Object Faith and its principles, the Elements into which it is resolved, as the Reasoner phrases it, it being not able to make a distinct discovery of the nature of God, and unfit Judge of rules of his Worshop. I refer the Reader to another Discourse, N. F. It therefore at present seems only necessary that I assert Ecclesiastical Authority with its due right, above private Judgement of single persons, who so far become the Proselytes of humane Reason in that sense, which a late Author asserted it, as they appeal to nothing but the evidence of their own Reason conducted by its own natural Method, only having the information by reading the Scriptures; and fortifying their Opinions with mere natural Arguments (without any respect to the consent or authority of the Church. Many such Proselytes have appeared in this late Age, and cloaked their Foxish principles with Sheep's clothing of Piety and Tenderness; yet still seem to have a reverence for the Church and its Authority, as appears in late Pamphlets, which nearly looked into, is but as an Ecclesiastical Compliment (if it is not a Solaecism to say so) for rational Authority is not Authority properly called, for whilst men cause other men's Opinions to be tried by the tests of their own judgements, they cancel the authority of other men, and make their own as an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
This consideration minds men of a Stratagem or Plot to subvert the authority of the Church, and establishing their own, which is not by any way more plausible done to an unwary Multitude than by partial citations of Authors, without considering the Coherence, Circumstance, or Scope of the Author, which they cite. If I designed to be large in this discourse, I might show how some undermine the authority of the Church, by sinister and malicious application of Ecclesiastical Story, as the Author of a late Pamphlet by the success of Constantine, would prejudice all Princes against the authority of Councils, and a partial citation of Gregory Nazianzen (afterward to be considered) but I shall not spend time in canvasing that Story and its application, nor show the weakness of Reason in its several particulars, only shall take a prospect of Religion abused by some late partial Citations by which the Church is threatened, Holy Fathers made to speak contrary to their scope, and Religion exposed to each cavilling Adversary.  
Thus Jerome hath been represented by some, an enemy to Episcopacy, as asserted by the Church of England. Thus the Church of England, whilst some of the Roman Church urgeth it with Citations out of the Fathers, which speak the danger of separation from the Catholic Church, they apply it to their own, as if to be Roman and Catholic were all one. Thus a late Author would persuade the Unwary, that the most Puritan Protestants, Mr. Perkins, and many others, do agree with Papists in several points controverted, which they were as far from, as we can imagine they thought the Romish Religion distant from the true. The Fathers themselves are cited against themselves, which minds me of some opposers of the authority of the Church, who make them as a Patronage to their factious Presumptions. Thus Lactantius is cited, the words are these, Lib: de Orig. Error. Cap. 8. having in the former Chapter removed the superstitious Rites and custom of some ancient Fathers who instituted them in Paganism; he infers this, Quare opportet in eâ re maximè, in qua vitae ratio versatur sibi quemque confidere, suoque judicio ac propriis sensibus niti, ad investigandam & perpendendam veritatem, quam credentem alienis erroribus, decipi, tanquam ipsum rationis expertem. Now how injuriously this is affixed as a Preface, to authorise a factious Discourse (as it often is) against the authority of the Church, may appear from the scope and design of the Holy Father in that Chapter, viz. to oppose Heathenish Traditions, Dreams and South say, which began before Christianity had footing in the word. But let it be applied in opposition to the defintions and impositions of the Church, all that can be concluded from the Words in this, he condemns those who in a stupid observation of the Traditions of their Father's More pecudum ducuntur, as he phrases it, an unreasonable implicit Faith, which the Church of England doth not commend to her Sons, but rather opposes its Assertors. To say all, this Holy Author, though an acute Disputant, and of a piercing wit, yet is so far from disdaining Authority, that none more frequent than he in Citations of Heathen Authors, of Poets themselves, to prove the weightiest matters of Religion when he disputed with Infidels, as he was, necessitated to do, as he says, Lib. de falsa Relig. Cap. 5. Sed omittamus sanè testimonia prophetarum, ne minus idonea probatio vidcatur esse ab his quibus omnino non creditur. He though a Father of the Church himself, lib. de justitia c. 4. citys St. Cyprian, arguing against Demetrius by Reason, only because he was not capable of being confuted by any other Method, as appears by the account given in the same Chapter, Nam cum ageret contra hominem veritatis ignarum, dilatis paulisper divinis lectionibus, formare hunc a principio tanquam rudem debuit. This gives me occasion of considering what esteem Reason was in matters of Religion, being esteemed only fit to dispose Infidels for Belief, and to instruct Novices; but in this Age it is so exalted, that it is thought worthy of the highest place of Judicature, to judge of all Controversies, in so much that the Smyctimnian Divines, in their late Papers, declare it to be as the Eye and Religion, as the Light, or the Object. Sic res ingeniosa est esse Christianum, in another sense than formerly, and that which the Author of Smyrk says of Wit, in a Jeer, may be retorted on them, for whilst they make Reason an intrepreter of Scripture, we may ask them too, if their reason is an extraordinary gift of the Holy Ghost.  
To conclude this part of the Consideration, that those who interpret Scripture thus, may not boast themselves Lactantius his Disciples, but rather Proselytes of the authority of Humane Reason, and by this method of making their Reason the only Standard to measure Controversies, seem to appropriate the Preface used in General Councils (at least one) and corrupting, Visum est nobis & Spiritui Sancto by changing the terms to every particular person who is adjusted with equal authority, to say Visum est mihi & Spiritui Sancto, which boldness exceeds Poetical Licence, which seeing extraordinary acts of Providence, attributed it to the Gods whilst they said Sic visum est superis.  
This being premised, I pass to the other part of this consideration, viz. of Schism and Heresy according to the new account of it, and how Reformation is not so justifiable without Appeals to the constant Doctrine of the Church.  
This Assertion must expect to find as furious a return as Water doth when cast on hot Iron. Whilst I affirm that Schism and Heresy are two of the greatest evils of the Church, and affirm (as I think I safely may) that some have abused Religion almost as much by their extenuation of these horrid sins, giving a soft account of them suitable to the humour of the Libertine, as the Schismatic and Heretic by practice: for such Theory makes way for practice whilst they teach men that Schism and Heresy are only terms of Art which the Church hath used to impose on the Christian Scholars what Doctrine it pleases, and that 'tis the terrors of the two Greek words (which have not so dreadful a signification as they say) affrights the poor Christian like thundering and lightning to run to his Litany to pray for deliverance. This slight of subtle men will miss its aim if it is considered that the Church is not only as a Lexicon or Dictionary, to tell the English of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but hath power to inflict its Censures when unjustifiable separations are attempted. This unity of the Church is as much to be endeavoured by the Pastors of it as the being of the Church is, and that is so necessary, that I may say of the Catholic Church in matters of Belief, unum & verum sunt idem, Unity and Truth are undistinguished.  
Now as it is certain that without the Catholic Church there is no Salvation (for it is more than a Parenthesis in our Creed) so is the Unity necessary in order to it. Wherefore all Churches who at any time endeavoured a regular Reformation, made Appeals to some beside their own private interpretation of Holy Scripture, which might be esteemed unreasonable. For if it may be imagined that each man may make interpretation of the Scriptures; it is very difficult, if not impossible for men (especially those who will have communion with none but those of whom they are assured are of the same opinion with them in all things) to maintain so perfect charity with a single person, much less with the whole Church. For suppose two different interpretations of some part of Holy Scripture, viz. This is my Body, and one takes the Body of Christ in the Eucharist to be only figuratively, and the other corporally, and both agree in this, that the Consecrated Bread is rightly called the Body of Christ, and the worthy Communicants receive it. Thus supposing that these words appear in different senses to different persons, how shall one convince the other that he is of the same Faith with him, if he do not express it in the same words and manner of interpretation, (which the Humane Reasoner according to his account of faith esteems not necessary) except he could creep into his Soul to see the thought and the intimate motions of the mind, without which he will not conclude any man can be declared a Heretic, This is an unreasonable and impossible way of discouraging errors in Religion, which will take away all power from the Church except it can keep Court in each man's mind, and see each motion of it. Such private interpretations are like Visions or Apparitions which appear to some persons only when they are alone. Now as no man is obliged to believe the History of such Apparitions no further than the Authority of the persons obliges them to it (I speak not of Holy Visions to the Prophets) so no man will think himself bound to believe any private interpretation of a single person, any further than he is possessed with the authority of the person, except he could enter into his fancy, and borrow the whole Scene as it was represented to the Visor or Seer, which is impossible. Therefore it is necessary that there be an open profession of faith by plain and pertinent words, which are as Ligaments to knit together persons in outward Communion. This minds me of the charge given by Saint Paul to Timothy (2 Tim. 1. v. 13.) of taking care of the form of sound words, Whilst he gives his character of them, that they were sound, he omits not the form of words, which in some cases may so alter the sense, for it seems as necessary to Religion to distinguish the true Religion from the false, as the Philosopher's form of distinguishing one being from another. An Instance in the word so oft repeated in late Pamphlets, is a great evidence of it for when by a Holy Father without superstition or Adoration of words (which Objection some have made against the name Jesus itself, whilst, commended to be bowed at when named) which was preserved for the alteration of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, would destroy the Creed, at least change its sense, the pulling out of an jota being as dangerous as removing a Pin, from a curious piece of Mechanical Art.  
This considered in its consequences, will further appear more reasonable for the idle conjecture of the Humane Reasoner (thoughdrest in a Theological habit) is as much to be suspected as Jesuits Oaths, prompting men to think that equivocation in belief, as well as oaths, is to be tolerated, whilst it is concluded that an open profession of the most obscure Texts of Scripture is sufficient, making each Man's fancy a Comment on the Text, and the rule of Faith.  
The most valuable Objection which comes to my thoughts, at present, is this, That Jesuits equivocate in their Oaths on design; but the other, if they appear such, it is on necessity: let charity believe this and suppose them sincere; yet let it be considered that the Jesuit will plead this, that he uses this art in swearing, only to evade the force of some Obligations which the Magistrate would bind him to, and this he will tell us he doth that he may guard and not violate his conscience, and what can the Libertine say more, (I speak not this to patronise either, rather conclude them both worthy of censure) who refuseth some Creeds, or at least part of them, because they descend to particulars to prevent all Equivocation. To say all, the only difference of the persons practice is this, the one useth his art to impose upon Man, the other on God himself; I cease to start more Objections, but rather pass to that which is granted by all who are not Enthusiasts, viz. that in all Disputes there must be a third to appeal to. When the Heathen is disputed with, reason must be pitched upon as the Umpire, and the Jew appeals to the Prophets, and the Christian to the Scriptures, interpreted by the Catholic Church, without which Tertullian's question may be asked. Quiestis vos? under & quando venistis? ubi tamdiu latuistis? etc. Tertull. de Praescrip. Con. Haer.  
Besides, to make each man's reason judge of Controversy, is to make it both judge and party too, which may be retorted on the Church, which is a party too in deciding the Controversy. Let this be granted, yet the reason is not the same of private persons as a party, and the whole Church, and let the Libertine pitch upon any third Interpreter, wherein the Objection will not return and make it the party. This so generally obtains in most cases, that a man's own mind is not past possibility of having parties, for an interested reason may assert that which true reason will deny; and a man may by habit so frame his mind to tell lies, and believe them himself. But let it be granted that the Church is a party, yet not such as to be suspected. It is a prodigious kind of distrust to think the whole Catholic Church should pass a partial sentence. That Fathers will not design to deceive their Sons in matters of Divinty, is so true, that some have made use of it to prove the existence of God, and shall the ghostly Fathers be esteemed such Monsters, to deceive their Sons in matters of such moment. To say all, that which a Roman Doctor asserted of their Church so peremptorily, may be said of the whole, that it ought to give testimony of itself.  
Before I conclude this Consideration, I cannot but take notice that some who have extenuated Heresy in its name, would also make it impossible that a Heretic should be discovered, because to an obstinate opposing the true Doctrine (in which the nature of Heresy consists) it is required that the intimate motions of men's minds be seen. This is illustrated by an instance from Murder, to which I shall only oppose this, that he may as well conclude it is impossible to discover Murder. Besides, that similitude fails in the main part of it, for a Heretic hath opportunity of recanting, and must be an obstinate Opposer of the Truth three time before he is declared so. Now the Murderer is not capable of such respite or pausing, and opportunity of stifling his fault, or making it rather to be none, except he was capable of committing the act three times (as well as the Heretic opposing truth) which cannot be except a man had three lives.   

Consideration V Of Creeds and Impositions, with some Reflections on the Apostles and other Creeds, and of the extent of Creeds, how necessary for deciding Controversies.  
ALthough there is no absolute necessity employed in the nature of Religion, that there must be Creeds or a symbol of Faith, yet it may be safely concluded they are not superfluous. It is convenient that we have an Enchiridion, and necessary for the well being of the Church, though the substance of the Doctrine may be but as an Index to direct to its fuller Explanation in particulars; and a good mean to preserve the true Faith. Though Christ did not immediately draw up his Doctrine in such Articles, it is past doubt he directed the Church to do it, and that perhaps that he might create reverence to the Pastors of the Church, that they should not be only as Library-keepers, but Authors too in that sense, that a Publisher of an Epitome may be called so, whilst they compose the contents of Scripture in a short abridgement by Divine Direction. It is observed that Christ did some things to create a Reverence to his Evangelists and Apostles, by committing the charge of the publishing of the Gospel in writing, when he himself could as easily have done it, as wrote on the ground with his finger, and shall not his Apostles Successors be esteemed worthy to interpret these holy Writings. To deny them this Authority, and only allow them such a mere Ministerial office, and that to be only understood as if they were only Mercuries, with a hand stretched out with a Scrol for the People to read, it seems rash: And to confine them only to be judge of Circumstantials, is to minorize their Authority, and makes them but Registers to keep the Divine Books. 'Tis true, this is honour enough to be but Doorkeepers; and Saint Paul said the Jews might glory because the Oracles of God were committed unto them, which may not be restrained to the bare letter of the Law, according to each man's apprehension; but in doubtful cases Appeals were to be made to the Sanedrim, which hath no small affinity with the proceed of Councils, though some disputes set them at further distance; besides. I do not remember that Christ taxes in general the Jewish Doctors for Exposition of the Law, but when they either clearly perverted the sense and meaning of the Law, or plainly altered it by sinister Interpretations, making the word of God of none effect. For if all Illustrations of the Law by Jewish Doctors must be laid aside (though we know and avoid the fabulous Interpretation of the Thalmudist, many parts of the Old Testament would not be so plainly understood, even those which relate to the coming of Christ, and the manner of his Kingdom. If it is said that the Jewish Doctors often erred, so their Authority suspicious, if not invalid, the same will be granted (I presume) of Councils and Church, when their Assertions (if it may be supposed) are manifest contradictions to plain Scripture. This Bellarmine confesseth, when he says Councils may not be opposed, Nisi manifestissime constet intollerabilem errorem, Committi lib. 2. the Council. But more of this in its proper place. In this only I shall take notice that the authority of the Church hath been rendered odious to weak minds, whilst some part of it (I do not mean the Catholic) run into extremes in Creeds, as some men in habits or ; sometimes the humour of the Age is such that men affect to appear in the large size of Primitive Ages, others desirous to appear as small as Nature will admit, one time as Giants, another time as Pigmies. This vanity hath crept into the Church, some will only own the Apostls Creed, others not content with those which the Church hath received, but must make it larger by Phylacteries of Decretals.  
The Roman Church will have each Article of the Creed (as Astronomers say of the Planets) each must have its Assecla or Page attend it. They will scarce believe that they ca satisfy the first Article of believing, in case it is not represented by Images, neither will they believe the Communion of the Catholic Church, except Rome may pass for it, and the Resurrection, and day of Judgement not to be explained without Purgatory, some run in another extreme, tream, they will admire nothing so much as the Eunuch's Creed to be imposed on as matters of Christian belief. However they magnify the Creed of the Apostles at the same time, decrying others allowed by the Church of England, which gives just occasion of suspicion, that those very persons who own the Apostles Creed in words, if pressed by the general interpretation of the whole Church, would boggle at that as much as at the Athanasian Creed, for though they commend it (as it justly deserves it) for its plainness of matter, and the phrase (so esteemed by the Fathers) yet it is certain there are doubts in some Articles which are not agreed on, so as to be past dispute, for instance, the Communion of Saints, the belief on the Catholic Church, and the manner of Christ's descending into Hell, not yet agreed on by all parts of the Catholic Church, besides those who will have nothing in other accounts of Religion, but in Scripture phrase, must be content with other Language in this. That word Catholic hath lately been as much controverted, as the threadbear word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which word was so hard to Luther, that he went about to translate it into the Germane Language, and alter the phrase; for which boldness he was justly charged by Tanner the Jesuit; for I am of nazianzens' mind, not to have a word changed, for as he says, One drop of Poison may corrupt a great mass.  
I would not have this which is said of the Creed, as to be said in derogation from its reverence due to it above other Creeds, which are but Comments on it, yet there are two questions I hope may be started without violence done to it. How it appears to be a sum of Fundamentals. This is well Answered by some late Authors, That the Apostles wrote the whole sum of what is to be believed, for if they had omitted any part of it, they might have as well omitted all.  
Then it must be inquired how far this Creed as Apostlical depends on the Church's testimony or authority; on this latter question the present Controversy depends; therefore it must be considered what it is to be called Apostolical. Apostolical is that which is agreeable to the Apostles practice and doctrine. So the title Apostolical is fastened to some Churches and several persons whose piety had, hath alliance to that of the Apostles, but when it is given to any Doctrine as the rule of Faith, Ubique semper, & ab omnibus, obtains in this sense the Apostles Creed cannot be called Apostolical as to all its parts, for all were not received at the same time, as it is observed that St. Austin, Origen, and Tertullian, commenting on the Creed, make no mention of the Articles of the descent into Hell, though 'tis confessed Saint Austin owns it as Catholic in other places. 'Tis true, Rufsinus an ancient Doctor makes mention of that Article, but says the Roman Church did not receive it at that time, but since generally received; I speak not this out of any irreverence or light esteem to the Creed, as an Author I heard of, who wrote a scurrilous and malicious piece against the Creed merely in opposition to another opinion.  
That which I infer from what is said, is only this; All Doctrines if they are not immediately received by the whole Church, not rashly to be rejected. This also I could infer, that seeing it is not certain the Apostles wrote it themselves, but in several Ages it had its Ratification, at least the compellation of Apostolical from the Church, its plain that the authority of the Church, which makes it above other Creeds, and to be the sum total of all that is to be believed, makes it depend on that authority of the Church, which gave it its compellation, which (I hope) though borrowed from the authority of the Church, which since the Apostles time hath been abused, will be no greater a prejudice to discerning minds, than the title of the King, though first derived from the Pope can minorize the honour due to him. This which is said, perhaps may be retorted by an instance in Books of canonical Scripture, by saying we may as well conclude that the Gospel owes its name of Gospel to the Church, and the Law its name of the Law, as conclude that the Creed as to its denomination, or being Apostolical, depends only upon the Church which calls it so.  
This Objection may find an Answer from this consideration, that although the Church is Ministerial, in both holding out a Light to declare unto us that the Gospel is the Gospel, and the Law the Law, as much as it doth evidence that the Creed is the Creed; yet there is this difference, the Books of the Law and Gospel its probable had their compellation or name written by the same Authors that wrote them but the Creed owes its title to the testimony of the Church so far as it is called the Apostles Creed. By this limitation I hope I have prevented another cavil which might conclude, I make the Doctrine of the Creed to depend on the Church, when I only speak of the compellation as being borrowed from the Church, which compellation is the only hinge on which the present Controversy turns, for take away the name (the Apostles Creed) and it can be no more said to be the sum of all Religion, than other Doctrines, or Theses generally received by the Church.  
If it is further urged that all Titles of the canonical Books bear not (without doubt) the Author's names as several Psalms and the Epistle to the Hebrews, because it is not certainly known who were their Authors. This may be granted, yet the case is not the same with the Creed and some parts of the canonical Scripture; for the latter it may be safely said that the Church gave no new Titles to those Books, but delivered them as they found them waitten, or were assured of their Titles by infallible Traditions, but the same cannot so certainly be said of the Apostles Creed. From all that is said it is easy to observe how some men are ready to own the Authority of the Church when serviceable to their designs, and disowns it when it thwarts private Opinions.  
It may be granted that the Apostles Creed is Regula fidei Tutissima, as a Rule though but a foot in length, may discover the crookedness of the greatest quantity, and is useful in thousands of cases, so the Creed may measure and discover though not so accurately, the many Volumious errors in Religion, but not in direct terms but by consequence. To illustrate it by Instances, Christ sums up all the Commandments in one word Love, which, modo implicito, concludes against all Vice, otherwise it could not be an abridgement of the whole Law, this must be granted, but it is rashness to say that this Command alone is able to check all Vices, and conclude against each particular Sin. It is also said of Manna (a fit Emblem of the Creed, always to be kept in the Ark of the Church) that eminently contains all savours to gratify the Taste and Smelling, and the Opal and Iris have a lovely commixture of all colours. Now as a man who would pass an accurate Judgement of a sweet body would not appeal to Manna which hath it mixed with others, but to some particular object of the same kind, and he who would pass judgement on Colours, Yellow, or Blue, etc. will not compare them with that in the Rainbow, but some other Object of the same complexion or tincture; the same may be said of the Articles of Faith, which are severally comprehended in the Creed, yet are not to be an exact measure of their numerous Errors implicitly condemned by it. It hath been doubted by some, whether the principles of Chemists, Salt, Sulphur, etc. are really in the Bodies, or whether they were as matter fitly prepared, and by Extraction made such. I shall not presume to determine any thing in this, but only apply it to the present case, by saying there are the Semina or Principia in the Creed but particular Articles which confute particular Errors, though they have their Foundation from it, yet their whole Superstruction cannot be said to be taken from it.  
It is impossible it should be done, therefore weakness to attempt it, for it argues as much weakness in those men who undertake to assert the Creed the sum of all to be believed, and to confute all Errors, as some when urged by some of the Roman Church, to show how the Sacraments were contained in the Creed, have answered out of Aquinas. 2.2. q. 1. a. 8. Eos Articulos continueri & includi in Articulo fidei quo Credimus unam sanctam Ecclesiam, Sanctorum Communionem, Remissionem peccatorum, that they are contained in the Articles, where we profess a Belief in the Catholic Church, Communion of Saints, remission of Sins. And being urged particularly to show how Baptism was included there, run for Sanctuary to the Athanasian Creed.  
This seems to be a far fetched and an unnatural deduction; for though it may be concluded that the Sacraments are necessarily employed in the Remission of Sins, as he gives his reason, Ibidem, nam per Sacramenta peccata remittuntur, it will conclude the necessity, but says nothing of the nature; wherefore that great Doctor, with all the subtleties of his School-companions, could never extract any thing thence of the nature of them; so if Transubstantiation could not find any other confutation than from those Articles, it would be to little purpose to dispute against it.  
Thus one of our Church, who being urged by a Papist how he shown in the Creed that Doctrine of the Devils forbidding Marriage, was expressed in the Creed, answers that neither meats, nor marrying of any persons could be unlawful, because a Christian believes in God in his Creed to be maker of all thinks good, so not to be forborn, and all his Institutions holy, therefore not to be abstained from by any persons: This seems to me as vain an Attempt, and as far fetched a way of Arguing as those men use, who will undertake to show there is nothing New, but demonstrate all new Philosophy to be taken out of Aristotle. I would not have that which is said so understood, as if I did imagine there were to be Virtuosos in Religion as well as Philosophy, and that this Age made new discoveries of Doctrines as the Astronomers have of the Stars, and that new Creeds in Divinity are as necessary as new Systems of the World. I am not so ignorant to think that Novelty can commend Religion though it may Philosophy, and that for this reason, the one is God's work and command, fully revealed at once after Christ's coming. But the product of Humane Observation suffers nothing in its Reputation by being new. Neither doth Religion suffer, but is rather honoured whilst new Arguments, for they must needs be so at the first springing up of Heresy against new Hersies. This therefore which is said will not minorize or lessen the esteem of the Creed, which the Ancients had of it, for I cannot but own the commendation which Cyril of Jerusalem gave of it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Catech. 4.  
And having before showed the concise and complete Abridgement of it, says, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, compares it to Muster-seed, more fitly and pertinently than the Eunuches is by Smyrk.   

Consideration V Though the Apostles Creed may maintain Charity and Union between members of the Catholic Church, whether it can preserve charity in a particular Church, and in what sense short Professions of Faith so much insisted on by late Reformers, and commended to the Parliament as the full matter of Christian Belief, and in what circumstances they must be, and what persons they are to whom they are sufficient.  
IT may be said of matters of Faith in Religion, as Aristotle distinguishes in Philosophy, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 principles of Doctrine, and that which comes by deduction, the first which are as the grand Ligament or Tie, which knit the parts together, or as a foundation to support a building though the root and other parts of it are demolished. This is enough to denominate the Church a Church, but if there be disagreement in other Doctrines which may endanger Man's Salvation, though not so immediately as those in the Creed, it takes off from the beauty of it, and makes it look as in the former instance, like a Skeleton knit together by the Articles of one Creed, as sinews not agreeing in any other parts, or like a frame or case of a house without a Roof or Ornament. I speak not this as uncharitable to the Catholic Church, but to show how the want of Unity in all Doctrines disguise it. By this Assertion the Catholic Church is not condemned for those Divisions, which destroy not the Internal communion with it (though External may be wanting) but to show Charity beautifies it. Wherefore those who separate themselves from another Church, must have some other reasons of their separation than are in the Apostles Creed, otherwise the Reformation cannot be justifiable, for the Roman Church professeth to believe the fame Creed as a late Author pleads; therefore Separation not altogether founded on that. Wherefore it remains there must be Doctrines which justify Separation from other measures than the Creed, etc. This may unite in the Catholic Church, but not a National or particular Church; for the Church cannot be minced into Individuals without being destroyed, at least breach of Charity, and that for this Reason. God under the Law and Gospel was never since Adam's Innocency worshipped alone. Elias was mistaken when he thought he was left alone, the only votary of the true God. I am sensible of an Objection which may be this; That Luther in the beginning of the Reformation was the only open professor of the Protestant Faith, which being granted (as it need not) must suppose some critical time of Luther's Protestation, in which he had no followers, which with preciseness will conclude that Christ himself Head of the Church, was without any votary at his first birth, except his Mother was one; and there must needs be a certain time when the Apostles were without a Church or Converts: But Religion takes notice of no such Niceties; and as the Common Law takes that to be done immediately, which is done in the same day appointed in some cases, taking no precise notice of the hours; I am sure the Divine Law doth not distinguish such critical moments. But to wave these niceties, it was always the method of Reformers to make profession of their Faith. Thus did the Lutherans in their Augustane confession; for without this, Charity would not have been maintained within themselves: So than what would the Reformation signify if there may be as many, and as dangerous and different Opinions among themselves, as there was between them and the Church of Rome; their Reformation signifies little more than a Change, not for the better, but worse; their dissenting from the Roman Church might be justifiable, but amongst themselves (especially in matters absolutely necessary to be believed) such separation intolerable, for though the Catholic Church like joseph's coat, may have, and be of divers colours and parts, but particular, must be like Christ seamless coat, or to speak the Apostles Language, like minded, and speak the same thing.  
Now this Unity of the Church is not better preserved by any means than by Appeals to several interpretations of places of Scripture (which are ambiguous) by the Councils, Fathers, and Pastors in several Ages. Thus the Champions of the Reformation always owned that Authority as the best means to win Reformation, and the best subsidy to support it. The necessity of this seems to be employed in the Apostles Advice to submission to Pastors, and the Pastors being to give an account for the People's Souls. I know these words may occasion a voluminous Dispute.  
But I shall take them in their plain acceptation, and only desire the Reader to observe that in case this submission to Pastors, is only to circumstances confined, as some will have them, and yet Pastors give an account, it is like a Man who is invested with the power of a Tutor, yet only to take care of his Pupils .  
This must be restrained to places which have a doubtful sense, and the definitions or interpretations, such as the words will bear, for I am not so bold to conclude with some of the Church of Rome, that it hath a power to command a Doctrine, which hath no probable foundation in Scripture (as Doctor Stapleton concludes that some things are to be believed, and the Church propound them as matters of Faith, Etiamsi nullo Scripturarum evidenti aut probabilis testimonio comfirmetur, though he at the same time concludes the Church in its definitions is, Suo modo Divina.  
It fares with the Church in its desiring matters of Faith, as it doth in prospects, for though Telescopes and Perspections help the Sight, yet there must be a rude discovery of the Object by the naked Eye, thus the Milky way is discerned without the help of a Glass to be a bright tract of Heaven, by the Telescope which discovers that troop of small Stars from which it borrows its Lustre. The case is the same between Scripture and the Church (I mean obscure places of it) the one gives an ambiguous Twilight prospect, the other shows it more distinctly.  
Thus I have endeavoured to commend the Church's Authority as a necessary Supplement to the Apostles Creed, or in order to maintain Charity amongst members of particular Churches (for I do not design in this Paper to answer all Objections that the former discourse may be liable to.  
I now pass to the other branch of the Consideration.  
In what sense short professions of Faith so much insisted on by the Reformers, and commended to the Parliament, can be said to be the full matter of Christian Faith, and in what circumstances they must be in to whom they are sufficient. And whether such curtilizing Creeds do not again introduce that implicit Faith, which this Church complaineth of whilst under Papal impositions.  
For further demonstration of the necessity of the extent of the Apostles Creed, by Explanation it seems convenient that I suggest that usual distinction of Fundamentals in respect of their matter, and the persons to whom they are offered as objects of Belief. To the first 'tis enough that I say one Assertion may be a Fundamental though not primarily so, which in respect of another, is but as a corrollary or branch of it, as it is easy to instance in the Apostles Creed. To the second it will be sufficient to say that all Doctrines are not pressed on all persons with the same necessity or upon peril of Salvation, which will plainly appear from the consideration of the Requisites necessary to make such necessity. The first of which is this, viz. A conviction of the mind, that what is proposed as matter of Faith, must be commended to Man by God, for there is no humane dictator can command any matter of Belief to Man merely as Humane. Thus the Apostles themselves doubted of the Resurrection, or at least were not sufficiently convinced of it till matter of fact convinced them of their Masters being God as well as Man.  
Another Requisite, is, that there must be a sufficient proposal of matters of Faith, otherwise it is insignificant to a man, for what is Revelation to him to whom it is proposed, for matter of Faith is like Objects which are in their own nature visible, yet the Eye doth not always actually see them, neither can it in some cases till more conveniently situated or impediments removed. Thus Apollo's ignorance and imperfect Creed, excusable till he was more fully instructed of Saint Paul for the Doctrines of which he doubted before, although as the Sun they always shined, yet as the one cannot be seen till above the Horizon, though it is obvious to other eyes, so other her not assented unto till sufficiently explained. If this seem not opposite, take an Instance more Divine. As none could see the City of Samaria (though it was naturally as visible to other persons) but the Prophet, so none discern Divine Truth till Grace makes the discovery.  
The last is a disposition of men's minds fit to receive such Divine impressions; thus Mad men and Fools are not to be expected Converts to Religion, who are Aliens and Strangers to their own Reason; and in this sense that applauded conclusion of the vanity of holding a Candle, and attempt to make one see whom nature designed for darkness, and to this head the citations out of St. Chrisostom (afterward to be considered) and others must be reduced leaving such Idiots, to the censure of God himself.  
This being promised, I hope I may more fairly conclude against those conclusions which factious heads have drawn from thence, for all that can be inferred from such charitable censures, is only the modest censure of the Church, whilst it respects God's Judicatute; so that those persons who have so formally made address to Authority for toleration of short Creeds, must plead their cause in the same circumstances they thus indulged were, which is impossible, except they can Antedate time and be as the Apostles were then, or men now, who are uncapable of Divine Mysteries, wherefore I may ask those men this Question, whether they speak for themselves, as of the Clergy, or for other persons, if for others (which I presume they will be ready to own as officious Advocates, they bring in the Doctrine of the Author of Humane Reason, the Reasoner supposing it to a sufficient assent to Christian Doctrine if Scripture is commented on by a private invention.  
This part of the consideration (if I design to be tedious, would lead me to examination of the several cavils against Councils as to the quality of persons, etc. and to answer an Objection of Nazianzen, who saith he never saw a happy event of a Council; which words concording to all I have met with, condemns not Councils, but rather is a complaint of the want of free and general Councils, as is obvious to any who considers that Author's drift and design. But I pass from this and other curious cavils by considering that such niceties in Religion are like questions about the Stars, whose Nature and Influence we are sensible of, and can probably demonstrate their Natures, but not in such a way as can answer questions that a roving brain can start, and can show greater probability that they are such, than the extravagant invention can, they are not, but I shall not continue this Digression rather return to the former case.  
This being granted, it must be considered that these persons with their slender stock of Faith, are admitted into the Church as men into an Hospital, and charity rather than Reason, concludes them in a safe state of Salvation. Now is it not unreasonable to propose that as a Model or measure of Faith to all which is only indulged to Mad men and Fools, or at least men of weak capacities, and that on no better ground than that tender one of extensive charity, suitable to which are the accounts of the Church given by the Ancients whilst it is thus described, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a certain number of the Elect in which may be babes in Christ, foolish as well as wise, and compared to the Ark, when there was a universal reception of Creatures, which were clean.  
If these Zealous Petitioners speak for themselves, than that small measure of Faith and narrow capacity, will be an argument against them in the opinion of their own party. But if it is alleged that Rahab had but a small measure of Faith, and yet Sainted by St. Paul (at least) in the catalogue of eminent Believers) and the Centurion with his slender knowledge of Christ had no less commendation from Christ himself. Let it be considered that this is not applicable to Pastors of the Church. What a medley and ill favoured being of a Church would that be in which a Rahab or Convert-Harlot, 2 Centurion or Soldier, should assume a Clerical power. The Records of late times, the odious face of the Church (if it may deserve that compellation of the Church) prevents me in saying more.  
This which is premised will make way for this conclusion. That the exacting of necessary Oaths, Subscription, etc. and other means of Comformity are no otherwise an entrenching on Liberty than the exigency of Christian Society requires, and the Savage may as well complain of Policy, which reduced them from their wild and natural extravagancy, as the Libertine of a Test or trial of his conscience so far as it concerns the Magigistrate.  
This perhaps may appear too Magisterially said, if I do not give the Reader the plea for Liberty, and suggest this as a conclusion.  
Before these considerations are closed, I cannot but add this, That some who disdain all Auxiliaries and Aid from the authority of the Fathers and Councils, seem to press them into service of the Church, when they find any clause that may aid them in their wild and arbitrary Model of Ecclesiastical Government.  
Thus I find Saint Chrisostome among the Ancients, cited as an enemy to the Method which seems to force Religion, and Grotius amongst the latter, which practice seems like that of Interested Politicians, who will let Statutes lie as an old Armoury (fit for service) but not to be used till occasion furbishes them and gives the rusty Iron an edge. That this may not seem gratis dictum. Let the former Author be considered, whose Paternal Indulgence and Instruction to the Priests speaks favourably of weak Christians, his words are these, Lib. 2. de Sacerdot. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
And Grotius his favourable words extend only to the not propagating of Christian Religion by force, not contradicting the use of the Civil Power in settlement or well composing a Church already planted.  
This I presume will be granted, that the Church of England hath endeavoured to reduce refractory men, by all imaginable means, and when that takes not effect the Civil power begged to assist them, which contradicts the sense of the Holy Father, who only designs to show that Clerical power proceeds not in the method of a Temporal Prince; and another citation of Salvian, is to this purpose, whilst he says they are to be tenderly handled, Qui bono animo. Errand; or as a late Author says, Ill Believers. For speaking of the Arrians, he makes this Plea for them, Non Odio sed affectu dei honorare & se Dominum & amare credentes.  
This plea cannot be made in this Age, for it may well be supposed that the Arrians (of whom he speaks) had not the same opportunity of being confirmed in Religion, the Question debated being only confirmed by one Council, but that in dispute now by many. So that Refractory Patrons of factious Zealots may be asked Tertullian's Question, Interea perperam Evangelizabatur tot millia millium perperam tincta, tot opera fidei perperam administrata, tot virtutes, tot Charismata perperam operata, tot Sacerdotia perperam functa, tot denique Martyria perperam Coronata.  
To say all, time which blots out other characters, makes Religion more legible, and Martyr's blood as a Rubric to each clause of the Divine Law so plain, that Man may rnn the course of his Temporal life, and read his title to Heaven.  
But if this unhappy Age gives instances of those which cannot, and desire to be tolerated in their ignorance, their only plea must be their weakness, which in matters of Religion can have no other way of process than Sub forma pauperis (if I may borrow the Lawyer's term) as men of weak apprehension; and the defect of their narrow Faith must be supplied or relieved from Heaven, not Earth, from God (who alone knows how to rate the poverty of Spirit according to its true value) not Man. And such a Toleration (if its term may be allowed as it concerns God himself) must have its complete Ratification, not only from the Princes and Church's Clemency, but God's highest and last Judicature.  
To conclude all, it seems a more pertinent way for such to address themselves to the Divine rather than humane Judicature, and endeavour that God may incline his ear to their Prayers, and increase their Faith rather than attempt to supple and bent the Magistrate to compliance by fervent petitions.   
FINIS.   

Errata.  
REad St. Malo Page 5. r. launching out into p. 8. r. Arguments are like p. 10. r. all error p. 19 r. the design of Christ in this place p. 21. animate or inanimate p. 23. r. before I pass p. 24. r. except some of which that were miraculous p. 32. because latter Kings p. 33. minds me p. 41. footing in the World p. 45. r. three times p. 63. Articles of the Creed such p. 70. r. threadbare word p. 72. r. defining p. 98. Perspectives ibid. and disown p. 80. r. expressed and condemned p. 85. for God under Law and Gospel never since, r. God never since Adam's Innocency was only worshipped but by one Votary, p. 92. r. probabili p. 97. r. complained p. 100 p. 112. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.