UNIVEKi CAUIPO*.. 3* Ml nfltjjtx THE WORKS wn. 0F W. CHILLINGWORTH, M.A. CONTAINING HIS BOOK, ENTITLED THE RELIGION OF PROTESTANTS A SAFE WAY TO SALVATION, TOGETHER WITH HIS SERMONS, LETTERS, DISCOURSES, CONTROVERSIES, &c. &c. FIRST AMERICAN, FROM THE TWELFTH ENGLISH EDITION, COMPLETE IN ONE VOLUME. WITH LIFE BY BIRCH. Rex arbitrator, rerum absolute necessariarum ad salutem non magnum esse numerum. Quare existimat ejus Majes- tas, nullum ad ineundam concordiam breviorem viam fore, quam si diligenter separentur necessaria a non necessariis, el ut in necessariis conveniat, omnis opera insumatur : In non necessiriis libertati Christiana? locus detur. Simpliciler necessaria Rex appellal, quae vel expresse verbum Dei prsecipit credenda faciendave, vel ex verbo Dei necessaria consequentia vetus Ecclesia elicuit. — Si ad decidendas hodiernas Controversias base distinctio adhiberetur, et jus divinum a positivo seu Ecclesiaslico candide separaretur; non videtur de iis quae sunt absolute necessaria, iDter pio« et moderatos viros, longa aut acr'13 contentio futura. Nam et pauca ilia sunt, ut modo dicebamus, et fere ex aequo omnibus probantur, qui se Christianos dici postulant. Atque istam distinclionem Sereniss. Rex tanti putat esse momenti ad miuuendas Controversias, qua: hodie Ecclesiam dei tantopere exercent, ut omnium pacis studiosorum jndicet officium esse, diligentissime banc explicare, docere, urgere. ISAAC. CASAUBON, in Epist. ad Card. PERRON. Regis JACOBI nomine serif la. PHILADELPHIA: PUBLISHED BY REV. R. DAVIS, SOLD BY HOOKER AND AGNEW, CHESNUT AND FIFTH STREETS. MDCCCXLI. Stereotyped by J. Fagan Philadelphia. TO THE MOST HIGH AND MIGHTY PRINCE CHARLES, By the Grace of God, King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, Sfc. <$fc. May it please yotjr most Excellent Majesty, I present with all humility, to your most sacred hands, a defence of that cause, which is, and ought to be, infinitely dearer to you, than all the world ; not doubting but upon this Dedication I shall be censured for a double bold- ness : both for undertaking so great a work, so far beyond my weak abilities; and again, for presenting it to such a patron, whose judgment I ought to fear more than any adversary. But, for the first, it is a satisfaction to myself, and may be to others, that I was not drawn to it out of any vain opinion of myself, (whose personal defects are the only thing which I presume to know) but undertook it in obedience to him who said, tu conversus con- firma fratres, not to St. Peter only, but to all men : being encouraged also to it by the goodness of the cause, which is able to make a weak man strong. To the belief hereof I was not led partially, or by chance, as many are, by the prejudice and prepossession of their country, education, and such like inducements ; which, if they lead to truth in one place, per- haps lead to error in a hundred ; but having with the greatest equality and indifferency, made inquiry and search into the grounds on both sides, I was willing to impart to others that satisfaction which was given to myself. For my inscribing to it your Majesty's sacred name, I should labour much in my excuse of it from high presumption, had it not some appearance of title to your Majesty's patronage and protection, as being a defence of that book, which by special order from your Majesty was written some years since, chiefly for the general good, but peradventure not without some aim at the recovery of one of your meanest subjects from a dangerous devia- tion ; and so due unto your Majesty, as the fruit of your own high humility and most royal charity. Besides, it is in a manner nothing else but a pursuance of, and a superstruction upon, that blessed doctrine, wherewith I have adorned and armed the frontispiece of my book, which was so earnestly recommended by your royal father, of happy memory, to all the lovers of truth and peace :, that is, to all that were like himself, as the only hopeful means of healing the breaches of Christendom, whereof the enemy of souls makes such pestilent advantage. The lustre of this bless- ed doctrine I have here endeavoured to uncloud and unveil, and to free it from those mists and fumes which have been raised to obscure it, by one of that order, which envenoms even poison itself, and makes the Roman religion much more malignant and turbulent than otherwise it would be : whose very rule and doctrine obliges them to make all men, as much as lies in them, subjects unto kings, and servants unto Christ, no farther than it shall please the pope. So that whether your Majesty be considered, either as a pious son towards your royal father, King James, or as a ten- der-hearted and compassionate son towards your distressed mother, the catholic church, or as a king of your subjects, or as a servant unto Christ, this work (to which I can give no other commendation, but that it was intended to do you service in all these capacities) may pretend, not unrea- sonably, to your gracious acceptance. Lastly, being a defence of that a 2 P) IV DEDICATION. whole church and religion you profess, it could not be so proper to any patron as to the great defender of it ; which style your Majesty hath ever so exactly made good, both in securing it from all dangers, and in vindi- cating it (by the well-ordering and rectifying this church) from all the foul aspersions both of domestic and foreign enemies, of which they can have no ground, but their own want of judgment, or want of charity. But it is an argument of a despairing and lost cause, to support itself with these impetuous outcries and clamours, the faint refuges of those that want bet- ter arguments; like that Stoic in Lucian, that cried, '& xatapa-tt ! "O damned villain !" when he could say nothing else. Neither is it credible the wiser sort of them should believe this their own horrid assertion, that a God of goodness should damn to eternal torments those that love him and love truth, for errors which they fall into through human frailty ! but this they must say, otherwise their only great argument from their damn- ing us, and our not being so peremptory in damning them, because we hope unaffected ignorance may excuse them, would be lost : and, there- fore, they are engaged to act on this tragical part, to fright the simple and ignorant, as we do little children, by telling them that bites, which we would not have them meddle with. And truly that herein they do but act a part, and know themselves to do so, and deal with us here, as they do with the King of Spain at Rome, whom they accurse and excommunicate for fashion-sake on Maundy Thursday, for detaining part of St. Peter's patrimony, and absolve him without satisfaction on Good Friday : me- thinks their faltering and inconstancy herein makes it very apparent : for though, for the most part, they speak nothing but thunder and lightning to us, and damn us all without mercy or exception ; yet sometimes, to serve other purposes, they can be content to speak to us in a milder strain, and tell us, as my adversary does more than once, that they allow pro- testants as much charity as protestants allow them. Neither is this the only contradiction which I have discovered in this uncharitable work ; but have showed that, by forgetting himself, and retracting most of the prin- cipal grounds he builds upon, he hath saved me the labour of a confuta- tion ; which yet I have not in any place found any such labour or dif- ficulty, but that it was undertakable by a man of very mean, that is, of my abilities. And the reason is, because it is truth I plead for ; which is so strong an argument for itself, that it needs only light to discover it; whereas it concerns falsehood and error to use disguise and shadowings, and all the fetches of art and sophistry ; and, therefore, it stands in need of abler men to give that a colour at least which hath no real body to subsist by. If my endeavours in this kind may contribute any thing to' this discovery, and the making plain that truth (which my charity per- suades me the most part of them disaffect, only because it hath not been well represented to them) I have the fruit of my labour, and my wish, who desire to live to no other end, than to do service to God's church, and your most sacred Majesty, in the quality of Your Majesty's Most faithful subject, And most humble and devoted Servant, W. Chijllingworth. January, 1638. CONTENTS. The Life of the Author i x The Preface to the Author of Charity Maintained : with an Answer to his Pamphlet, intituled a Direction to N. N 17 The Author of Charity Maintained, his Preface to the Reader 40 The Answer to the Preface 48 THE FIRST PART. Chapter I. — The state of the question ; with a summary of the reasons for which, amongst men of different religions, one side only can be saved G8 Answer I. — Shewing, that the adversary grants the former question, and proposeth a new one : and that there is no reason why, among men of different opinions and communions, one side only can be saved 74 Chapter II. — What is that means, whereby the revealed truths of God are conveyed to our understanding, and which must determine controversies in faith and religion 87 Answer II. — Concerning the means whereby the revealed truths of God are con- veyed to our understanding ; and which must determine controversies in faith and religion 105 Chapter III. — That the distinction of points fundamental and not fundamental, is neither pertinent nor true in our present controversy : and that the catholic visible church cannot err in either kind of the said points 174 Answer III. — Wherein is maintained, that the distinction between points funda- mental and not fundamental, is in this present controversy good and pertinent : and that the catholic church may err in the latter kind of the said points .... 192 Chapter IV. — To say that the Creed contains all points necessarily to be believed, is neither pertinent to the question in hand, nor in itself true 249 Answer IV. — Wherein is showed, that the Creed contains all necessary points of mere belief 264 Chapter V. — That Luther, Calvin, their associates, and all who began or continue the separation from the external communion of the Roman church, are guilty of the proper and formal sin of schism 307 Answer V. — The separation of protestants from the Roman church, being upon just and necessary causes, is not any way guilty of schism 345 Chapter VI. — That Luther and the rest of protestants have added heresy unto schism 405 Answer VI. — That protestants are not heretics 438 Chapter VII. — In regard of the precept of charity towards one's self, protestants are in a state of sin, as long as they remain separated from the Roman church 487 Answer VII. — That protestants are not bound by the charity which they owe to themselves to re-unite themselves to the Roman church 495 Conclusion 517 Apostolical Institution of Episcopacy demonstrated 522 Reasons against popery, in a Letter from Mr. Chillingworth to Mr. Lewgar .... 525 SERMONS. I. This know also, &c. 2 Tim. iii. 1—5 529 II. The fool hath said in his heart, &c. Psa. xiv. 1 548 III. Same subject continued 566 IV. Let him deny himself. Luke ix. 23 580 V. Who is he that condemneth, itc. Rom. viii. 34 595 VI. Make to yourselves friends, &c. Luke xvi. 9 614 VII. And if I have defrauded, &c. Luke xix. 8 631 VIII. For we through the Spirit, &c. GaL v. 5 o46 IX. God is faithful, &c. 1 Cor. x. 13 671 NINE ADDITIONAL DISCOURSES 686 I. A Conference betwixt Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Lewgar.— II. A Discourse against the Infallibility of the Roman Church, with an Answer, &c. — III. A Conference concerning the Infallibility of the Roman Church, &c. — IV. An Argu- ment against the Church's Infallibility. — V. An Argument drawn from the doc- trine of the Millenaries against Infallibility. — VI. A Letter relating to the same subject. — VII. An Argument against Infallibility taken from the contradictions in the doctrine of Transubstantiation. — VIII. An Account of what moved the Author to turn Papist. — IX. A Discourse against Tradition. 1 * (5) The annexed subscription to the thirty-nine articles of religion of the church of England, added to Mr. Chillingworth's known reputation for veracity and christian sincerity, is an abundant evidence, that, upon motives of conscience only, he joined as heartily with our church in dis- owning the unitarian principles, as in condemning the errors of the church of Rome. Extract from the register of the church of Salisbury. I, William Chillingworth, clerk, M. A. to be admitted to the chan- cellorship of the cathedral church of Sarum, &c. do willingly and heartily subscribe these articles, and every thing contained in them, and do give my consent thereto. William Chillingworth. RECOMMENDATIONS. Archbishop Tillotson styles our author " incomparable, and the glory of his age and nation." Mr. Locke recommends the reading of his Religion of Protestants, in several of his works, particularly in a piece " Concerning Reading and Study for a Gentleman," wherein, after setting forth the great importance of perspicuity, in the art of speaking, he says — " There must also be right reasoning, without which, perspicuity serves but to expose the speaker. And for attaining this, I should propose the constant reading of Chillingworth, who by his example will teach both perspicuity, and the way of right reasoning better than any book that I know ; and therefore will deserve to be read upon that account over and over again ; not to say any thing of his argument." Gibbon, the historian, alluding to Chillingworth, on his recantation from popery, says — " His new creed was built on the principle, that the Bible is our sole judge, and private reason our sole interpreter, and he most ably maintains this principle in the ' Religion of a Protestant,' a book which, after startling the doctors at Oxford, is still esteemed the most solid defence of the Reformation. The learning, the virtue, and merits of the author, entitled him to fair preferment." " Those who are desirous of acquiring a thorough knowledge of the doctrines, government, laws, and present state of the church of England, will do well to read especially Chillingworth's admirable book already mentioned, I mean ' The Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation.' " — Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, Notes, Vol. V. (6) THE LIFE OF MR.CHILLINGWORTH. Mr. William Chillingworth was son of William Chiliingworth, citizen, and afterwards mayor of Oxford, and was born in St. Martin's parish in that city, in October, 1602, and on the last of that month received baptism there. 3 William Laud, afterwards archbishop of Can- terbury, and then fellow of St. John's College, and master of arts," was his godfather. He became a scholar of Trinity College, under the tuition of Mr. Robert Skinner, on the 2d of June, 1618, being then about two years standing in the university. 11 June the 28th, 1620, he took the degree of bachelor of arts; 6 and March the 16th, 1623-4, that of mas- ter ; f and June the 10th, 1628, became fellow of his college. 5 " He was then," says Mr. Wood, h "observed to 'be no drudge to his study; but, beino- a man of great parts, would do much in a little time when he settled to it." He did not confine his studies to divinity, but applied him- self with great success to mathematics ; and, what shows the extent of his genius, he was esteemed likewise a good poet, in which capacity he is mentioned by Sir John Suckling, in his Sessions of the Poets.' His inti- mate friends were Sir Lucius Cary, afterwards Lord Viscount Falkland ; Mr. John Hales, of Eton, &c, but more particularly Mr. Gilbert Sheldon, who succeeded Dr. Juxon in the see of Canterbury . k The study and con- versation of the university scholars at that time turned chiefly upon the controversies between the church of England and that of Rome; the great liberty, which had been allowed the popish missionaries in the end of the reign of King James I. being continued under King Charles I. upon the account of his marriage with Henrietta, daughter to Henry IV. of France. 1 There was among them a famous Jesuit, who went under the name of John Fisher, though his true name was John Perse, or Percey,"' and was very busy in making converts, particularly at Oxford ; and, attacking Mr. Chillingworth upon the necessity of an infallible living judge in matters of faith, the latter forsook the communion of the church of England, and with an incredible satisfaction of mind embraced the Romish religion, 11 and soon after wrote the following letter to his friend Mr. Gilbert Sheldon. 6 Wood, Athen. Oxon. vol. ii. col. 40, 2d edit. Lond. 1721. b Diary of Archbishop Laud, published by Mr. H. Wharton, p. 1, 2. c Wood, ubi supra, col. 42. d Id. col. 40. • Id. Fasti Oxon. vol. i. col. 215. ' Id. ibid. col. 226. 6 Wood, Athen. Oxon. vol. ii. col. 40. h Ibid. 1 Fragmenta aurea. A Collection of all the incomparable Pieces written by Sir John Suckling, p. 7, edit. London, 1646. "Des Maizeaux's Historical and Critical Account of the Life and Writings of Wil- liam Chillingworth, p. 3, edit. London, 1725, in octavo. 1 Id. ibid. m See Bibliotheca Scriptorum Societatis Jesu : A Nathaniele Sotvello ejusdem Socie- tatis Presbytero, p. 487, 488. Edit. Romae, 1676. " Wood, Athen. Oxon. vol. ii. col. 40. ° Des Maizeaux, ubi supra, p. 7. Vlll LITE, OF CHILLINGWORTH. " Good Mr. Sheldon. — Partly mine own necessities and fears, and partly charity to some others, have drawn me out of London into the country. One particular cause, and not the least, was the news of your sickness, which had I found it had continued with you with any danger, no danger of my own should have kept me from you. I am very glad to hear of your recovery, but sorry that your occasions do draw you so suddenly to London. But, I pray, leave a direction with Charles Green, where you may be spoke with, and how I may send to you ; and you shall very shortly hear further from me. Meanwhile let me entreat you to consider most seriously of these two quarries : " 1. Whether it be not evident from scripture, and fathers, and reason ; from the goodness of God and the necessity of mankind, that there must be some one church infallible in matters of faith ? " 2. Whether there be any society of men in the world, besides the church of Rome, that either can, upon good warrant, or indeed at all, challenge to itself the privilege of infallibility in matter of faith 1 " When you have applied your most attentive consideration upon these questions, I do assure myself your resolution will be affirmative in the first, and negative in the second. And then the conclusion will be, that you will approve and follow the way, wherein I have had the happiness to enter before you ; and should think it infinitely increased, if it would please God to draw you after. I rest your assured friend, &c." Mr. Fisher, in order to secure his conquest, persuaded Mr. Chillingworth to go over to the college of the Jesuits at Doway ; and the latter was desired to set down in writing the motives or reasons, which had engaged him to embrace the Romish religion. But Dr. William Laud, then bishop of London, hearing of this affair, and being extremely concerned at it, wrote to him ; and Mr. Chillingworth's answer expressing a great deal of moderation, candour, and impartiality, that prelate continued to corre- spond with him, pressing him with several arguments against the doctrine and practice of the Romanists. This set Mr. Chillingworth upon a new inquiry, which had the desired effect. But' the place where he was, not being suitable to the state of a' free impartial inquirer, he resolved to come back to England, and left Doway in 1631, after a short stay there. 1 Upon his return to England he was received with great kindness and affection by Bishop Laud, who approved of his design of retiring to Oxford, (of which that prelate was then chancellor,) in order to complete the important work, in which he was engaged, a free inquiry into religion. At last, after a thorough examination, the protestant principles appearing to him the most agreeable to the holy scripture and reason, he declared for them ; and about the year 1634, wrote a confutation of the motives, which had induced him to go over to the church of Rome. This paper is now lost. It is true, we have a paper of his on the same subject, first published in 1687, in the additional discourses of Mr. Chillingworth ; but it seems to be written upon some other occasion, probably at the desire of some of his friends. b As in his forsaking the church of England, as well as in his return to it, he was solely influenced by a sincere love of truth, so he constantly persevered in that excellent temper of mind ; and even after his return to protestantism, he made no scruple to examine the grounds of it, as appears "Des Maizeaux, ubi supra, p. 9. See likewise The History of the Troubles and Trial of William Laud, &c, published by Mr. H. Wharton, p. 227 ; and Wood, Athen Oxon. vol. ii. col. 40. "Id. ibid, p. 13— 17. LIFE OF CHILLINGWORTH. IX by a letter of his to Dr. Sheldon, containing some scruples he had about leaving the church of Rome and returning to the church of England. These scruples, which he freely declared to his friends, seem to be the occasion of a groundless report, that he had turned papist a second time, and then protestant again.* His returning to the protestant religion making a great deal of noise, he was engaged in several disputes with those of the Romish religion, and particularly with Mr. John Lewgar, Mr. John Floyd, a Jesuit, who went under the name of Daniel, or Dan a Jesu, b and Mr. White, author of the Dialogues published under the name of Rushworth ; with whom, at the desire of Lord George Digby, afterwards earl of Bristol, he had a conference at the lodgings of Sir Kenelm Digby, a late convert to the church of Rome. c But in 1635, he was engaged in a work which gave him a far greater opportunity to confute the principles of that church, and to vindicate the protestant religion, upon the following occasion. A Jesuit, who went by the name of Edward Knott, though his true name was Matthias Wilson, d had published in 1630, in 8vo. a little book, called Charity Mistaken, with the want whereof Catholics are unjustly charged, for affirming, as they do with grief, that Protestancy unrepented destroys Salvation. This was answered by Dr. Christopher Potter, provost of Queen's College, in Oxford ; and his answer came out in 1633, with this title : Want of Charity justly charged on all such Romanists, as dare (without truth or modesty) affirm, that Protestancy destroyeth Salvation. In answer to a late popish pamphlet, intituled, Charity Mistaken, &c. The Jesuit replied in 1634, under this title: Mercy and Truth, or Charity maintained by Catholics. By way of reply upon an answer lately framed by Dr. Potter to a treatise, which had formerly proved, that Charity was mistaken by Protestants; with the want whereof Catholics are unjustly charged for affirming, that Protestancy unrepented destroys Salvation. Divided into two parts. Mr. Chillingworth undertaking to answer that reply, and Mr. Knott being informed of his design, resolved to prejudice the public both against our author and his book, in a libel, entitled, A Direction to be observed by N. N. if he mean to proceed in answering the book, entitled, Mercy and Truth, or Charity maintained by Catholics, &c. printed in 1636, in 8vo. pag. 42. Permissu superiorum. — In this piece he represents Mr. Chillingworth as a socinian ; whose answer was very near finished in the beginning of the year 1637 ; and, having been examined, at Archbishop Laud's request, by Dr. John Prideaux, after- wards bishop of Worcester, Dr. Richard Baylie, vice-chancellor of the university of Oxford, and Dr. Samuel Fell, Lady Margaret's professor of divinity, it was published with their approbation in the latter end of that year, with this title : The Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation ; or, an answer to a book, entitled, Mercy and Truth, or Charity maintain- ed by Catholics. Which pretends to prove the contrary. By William Chillingworth, Master of Arts of the university of Oxford. — This book was received with a general applause ; and, what perhaps never happen- ed to any other controversial work of that bulk, two editions were pub- lished within less than five months. On the other hand, Mr. Knott, seeing that he had not been able to deter our author from publishing his answer, tried once more to prejudice the public against it ; wherein he ■ Id. ibid, p. 18, and remark [F.] " Id. ibid, p. 39, 40. c Id. p. 40 — 43, and Letters between the Lord George Digby, and Sir Kenelm Digby, Knt. concerning religion, p. 64, 85, edit. London, 1651. " Bibliotheca Patrum Societatis Jesu, p. ] 85. X LIFE OP CHILLINGWORTH. was seconded by some Jesuits : for in 1638, Mr. Knott published a pamphlet, entitled, Christianity Maintained ; or, a discovery of sundry Doctrines tending to the overthrow of the Christian Religion, contained in the answer to a book, intituled, Mercy and Truth ; or, Charity main- tained by Catholics : printed at St. Omers, in 4to. pag. 86. In this piece* he promises a larger volume in answer to Mr. Chillingworth. To this pamphlet is subjoined a little piece under the title of Motives Maintained ; or, a Reply unto Mr. Chillingworth's answer to his own Motives of his Conversion to the Catholic Religion. The next pamphlet against our author' was likewise printed at St. Omers in 1638, in 4to. pag. 193, with this title : The Church conquerant over Human Wit ; or, the Church's authority demonstrated by Mr. William Chillingworth, (the Proctor for wit against her) his perpetual Contradictions in his book, intituled, The Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation. The author was a Jesuit, called John Floyd, who, in 1639, published likewise another piece, in 4to. pag. 104, entitled, The Total Sum ; or, no danger of Damnation unto Roman Catholics for any errors in Faith ; nor any hope of Salva- tion for any Sectary whatsoever, that doth knowingly oppose the doctrine of the Roman Church. This is proved by the Confessions and Saying of Mr. Chillingworth's book. The third pamphlet, which appeared against Mr. Chillingworth, was printed in 1639, most probably at St. Omers, in 4to. pag. 158, and entitled, The Judgment of an University- man concerning Mr. William Chillingworth's late Pamphlet,,in answer to Charity Maintained. It was written by Mr. AVilliam Lacy, a Jesuit. To this piece is subjoined another, entitled, Heautomachia. Mr. Chilling- worth against Himself, pag. 46. It hath no title-page, nor preface, being the sequel of the other, and printed at the same time. The style is also the same. In 1652, nine years after our author's death, Mr. Knott pub- lished a large answer to him, entitled, Infidelity Unmasked ; or, the Con- futation of a book published by Mr. William Chillingworth, under this title, The Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation : printed at Ghent, in 4to. pag. 949, besides the preface and index. While Mr. Chillingworth was employed in the excellent work above- mentioned, he wrote a letter to one of his friends, who had desired to know, what judgment might be made of arianism from the sense of antiquity. It is without date ; and, the cover being lost, it doth not appear to whom it was written. The original is in the library, of the Royal Society, and is as follows : " Dear Harry, — I am very sorry it was my ill fortune not to see thee, the day that I went out of Oxford ; otherwise I should have thanked thee very heartily for the favour thou didst the night before, especially for Mr. Coventry's company and discourse, whose excellent wit I do very much admire; and had I so much interest in him as you have, I should desire him often (though I hope I need not) to remember what our Saviour says, ' To whom much is given, of them much shall be required.' " Mr. Taylor did much confirm my opinion of his sufficiency ; but let me tell you in your ear, methinks he wants much of the ethical part of a discourser, and slights too much many times the arguments of those he discourses with. But this is a fault he would quickly leave, if he had a friend that would discreetly tell him of it. If you or Mr. Coventry would tell him, that you heard one, that knows him, magnify him exceedingly for other things, but censure him for this, you might do him a very friendly office ; and my writing to you thus much gives you ground enough to say "Preface, p. 11. LIFE OP CH1LLINGWORTH. xi so truly. But you must not give the least suspicion, that I am the man, and therefore not do it yet a good while. " When Dr. Sheldon comes to Oxford, I will be there again, and then will be very ready to do any service in the business you imparted to me. " I was mistaken in my directing you to Eusebius for the matter you wot of. You shall find it in a witness much farther from exception herein than Eusebius, even Athanasius himself, the greatest adversary of that doctrine, and Hilary, who was his second. See the first in Ep. de Syno- dis Arim. et Seleuc. p. 917. D. torn. i. edit. Paris, 1627. See the second de Synodis, fol. 97. In the first you shall find, that the eighty fathers, which condemned Samosatenus, affirmed expressly, that the Son is not of the same essence of the Father ; which is to contradict formally the council of Nice, which decreed the Son co-essential to the Father. In the second you shall find these words to the same purpose, Octoginta Episcopi olim respuerunt to Homousion. See also, if you please, Justin, cont. Tryph. p. 283, 356, 357. Tertuil. against Praxeas, c. 9. Nova- tian de Trinit. in fine, who is joined with Tertullian. Athanas. Ep. de Fide Dion. Alex. t. i. p. 551. Basil, t. ii. p. 802, 803, edit. Paris, 1618. See St. Jerome, Apol. 2, cont. Ruffinum, t. ii. p. 329, Paris, 1579. See Petavius upon Epiph. his Panar. ad Hse. 69, quae est. Arii, p. 285 ; and consider how well he clears Lucian the martyr from arianism, and what he there confesses of all the ancient fathers. " If you could understand French, I would refer to Perron, p. 633, of his reply to King James, where you should find these words : ' If a man should demand of an arian, if he would submit to the judgment of the church of the ages precedent to that of Constantine and Marcian, he would make no difficulty of it, but would press himself, that the contro- versy might be decided by that little which remains to us of the authors of that time. For an arian would find in Irenreus, Tertullian, and others, which remain of those ages, that the Son is the instrument of the Father ; that the Father commanded the Son in the works of creation ; that the Father and the Son are aliud et aliud ; which things he that should now hold, now when the language of the church is more examined, would be esteemed a very arian.' " If you read Bellarmine touching this matter, you should find, that he is troubled exceedingly to find any tolerable glosses for the speeches of the fathers before the council of Nice, which are against him ; and yet he conceals the strongest of them ; and, to counterpoise them, cites authors that have indeed ancient names, but such, whom he himself has stigmatized for spurious, or doubtful, in his book De Script. Eccles. " Were I at leisure, and had a little longer time, I could refer you to some, that acknowledge Origen's judgment to be also against them in this matter. And Fishar, in his answer to Dr. White's nine questions, 8 has a place almost parallel to that above cited out of Perron. " In a word, whosoever shall freely and impartially consider of this thing, and how on the other side the ancient fathers' weapons against the arians are in a manner only places of scripture (and those now for the most part discarded as impertinent and unconcluding), and how in the argument drawn from the authority of the ancient fathers, they are almost always defendants, and scarce ever opponents ; he shall not choose but confess, or at least be very inclinable to believe, that the doctrine of Arius is either a truth, or at least no damnable heresy. •P. 106, 107. Xll LIFE OF CHILLINGWORTH. " But the carrier stays for my letter, and I have now no more time than to add, that I am thy very true and loving friend, &c. "See Facundus Hermianensis, lib. 10, c. 15. Remember always the words of our Saviour, ' If you will do the will of my Father, you shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God.' " If you can, send me Mr. Digges's speech. I pray thee go to Dr. Littleton, and desire him to send me all that he has of Vorstius : for in the epistles of his, which I borrowed of him, he refers me to some other books of his, which I shall have especial occasion to use, especially his book against Pistorius, the Jesuit." In the year 1635, Sir Thomas Coventry, lord keeper of the great seal, offering Mr. Chillingvvorth some preferment, he refused to accept it, on account of his scruples with regard to the subscription to the thirty-nine articles of the church of England;* and wrote a letter upon this subject to Dr. Sheldon. Mr. Des Maizeaux observes, 11 that he had two transcripts of it, one of which (that hath a postscript) was communicated to him by Dr. White Kennet, lord bishop of Peterborough ; to which, and to the copy of the other letter of Mr. Chillingworth, upon his going over to the Romish religion, his lordship had subjoined the following memorandum : " To the copies of these two letters to Mr. Gilbert Sheldon and Dr. Shel- don, Mr. Wharton, who procured the transcripts, gave this attestation under his own hand — Ex autographis Uteris penes Danielem Sheldon Armigerum, archiepiscopi nepotem. It is dated from Tew, c Sept. 21, 1635, and directed — To the right worshipful and his much honoured friend Dr. Sheldon, and is as follows : — " Good Dr. Sheldon, — I do here send you news, as unto my best friend, of a great and happy victory, which at length, with extreme dif- ficulty, 1 have scarcely obtained over the only enemy that can hurt me, that is, myself. " Sir, so it is, that though I am in debt to yourself and others of my friends above twenty pounds more than I know how to pay ; though I am in want of many conveniences ; though in danger of falling into a chronical infirmity of my body ; though in another thing, which you perhaps guess at what it is, but I will not tell you, which would make more joyful of preferment than all these things (if I could come honestly by it) ; though money comes to me from my father's purse like blood from his veins, or from his heart ; though I am very sensible, that I have been too long already an unprofitable burden to my Lord, and must not still continue so ; though my refusing preferment may perhaps (which fear, I assure you, does much afflict me) be injurious to my friends and intimate acquaintance, and prejudicial to them in the way of theirs ; though conscience of my own good intention and desire suggests unto me many flattering hopes of great possibility of doing God and his church service, if I had the preferment, which I may fairly hope for; though I may justly fear, that by refusing those preferments, which I sought for, [ shall gain the reputation of weakness and levity, and incur their displea- sure, whose good opinion of me, next to God's favour, and my own good opinion of myself, I do esteem and desire above all things : though all these, and many other terribiles visuformce, have represented themselves to my imagination in the most hideous manner that may be ; yet I am at length firmly and immoveably resolved, if I can have no preferment without subscription, that I neither can, nor will have any. ■ Des Maizeaux, ubi supra, p. 58, &c. " P. 86. c In Oxfordshire, the seat of Lucius, Lord Viscount Falkland. LIFE OF CHILLIKGWORTH. xiii " For this resolution I have but one reason against a thousand tempta- tions to the contrary ; but it is sv fieya, against which if all the little rea- sons in the world were put in the balance, they would be lighter than vanity. In brief, this it is : as long as I keep that modest and humble assurance of God's love and favour, which I now enjoy, and wherein I hope I shall be daily more and more confirmed ; so long, in despite of all the world, I may, and shall, and will be happy. But if I once lose this, though all the world should conspire to make me happy, I shall and must be extremely miserable. Now this inestimable jewel, if I subscribe (with- out such a declaration as will make the subscription no subscription,) I shall wittingly, and willingly, and deliberately throw away. For though I am very well persuaded of you and my other friends, who do so with a full persuasion, that you may do it lawfully ; yet the case stands so with me, and I can see no remedy but for ever it will do so, that if I subscribe, I subscribe my own damnation. For though I do verily believe the church of England a true member of the church ; that she wants nothing neces- sary to salvation, and holds nothing repugnant to it ; and had thought, that to think so had sufficiently qualified me for a subscription ; yet now I plainly see, if I will not juggle with my conscience, and play with God Almighty, I must forbear. " For, to say nothing of other things, which I have so well considered, as not to be in a state to sign them, and yet not so well as to declare my- self against them ; two points there are, wherein I am fully resolved, and therefore care not who knows my mind. One is, that to say, the fourth commandment is a law of God appertaining to christians is false and unlawful. The other, that the damning sentences in St. Athanasius's creed (as we are made to subscribe it) are most false, and also in a high degree presumptuous and schismatical. And therefore I can neither sub- scribe, that these things are agreeable to the word of God, seeing I believe they are certainly repugnant to it ; nor that the whole Common Prayer is lawful to be used, seeing I believe these parts of it certainly unlawful ; nor promise, that I myself will use it, seeing I never intend either to read these things, which I have now excepted against, or to say amen to them. " I shall not need to entreat you, not to be offended with me for this my most honest, and (as I verily believe) most wise resolution ; hoping rather, you will do your endeavour, that I may neither be honest at so dear a rate, as the loss of preferment, nor buy preferment at so much dearer a rate, the loss of honesty. " I *hink myself happy, that it pleased God, when I was resolved to venture upon a subscription, without full assurance of the lawfulness of it, to cast in my way two unexpected impediments to divert me from accomplishing my resolution. For I profess unto you, since I entertained it, I have never enjoyed quiet day nor night, till now that I have rid my- self of it again. And I plainly perceive, that if I had swallowed this pill, howsoever gilded over with glosses and reservations, and wrapt up in conserves of good intentions and purposes ; yet it would never have agreed nor stayed with me, but I would have cast it up again, and with it whatsoever preferment I should have gained with it as the wages of unrighteousness ; which would have been a great injury to you and to my lord keeper. Whereas now res est Integra ; and he will not lose the gift of any preferment by bestowing it on me, nor have any engagement to Mr. Andrews for me. " But however this would have succeeded, in case I had then subscrib- ed, I thank God, I am now so resolved, that I will never do that while I 2 XIV LIFE OF CHILLINGWORTH. am living and in health, which I would not do, if I were dying ; and this I am sure I would not do. I would never do any thing for preferment, which I would not do but for preferment ; and this, I am sure, I should not do. I will never undervalue the happiness, which God's love brings to me with it, as to put it to the least adventure in the world, for the gain- ing of any worldly happiness. I remember very well, qucerite primum regnum Dei, et ccetera omnia adjicientur tibi : and therefore whenever I make such a preposterous choice, I will give you leave to think I am out of my wits, or do not believe in God, or at least am so unreasonable, as to do a thing, in hope I shall be sorry for it afterwards, and wish it undone. " It cannot be avoided, but my lord of Canterbury must come to know this my resolution ; and, I think, the sooner the better. Let me entreat you to acquaint him with it (if you think it expedient) ; and let me hear from you as soon as possibly you can. But when you write, I pray remember, that my foregoing preferment (in this state wherein I am) is grief enough to me ; and do not you add to it, by being angry with me for doing that, which I must do, or be miserable. " I am your most loving and true servant, &c. " So much of my defence of Dr. Potter as I have done, I intend to review and perfect before I proceed ; and, if it shall be thought fit, to publish it, annexing a discourse to this effect, that if*this be answered, all the rest is so, which by the strict dependence of that which follows on that which goes before, I shall be able very easily to demonstrate." Dr. Sheldon's answer to this letter of Mr. Chillingworth has not yet been discovered ; but by a paper containing the heads or hints of another answer of his to our author, it appears, that there passed several letters between them on that subject ; some, for greater secresy, written in a third person. For Mr. Chillingworth being intent upon a full inquiry into the sense of the articles, every new examination afforded him new scruples. Dr. Sheldon's paper is as follows : — " God forbid I should persuade any to do against his conscience : be it in itself good or bad, it must be a sin to lie. " It was in a third person ; else I would not have told you what I did. " I must deal plainly with you ; I am much afraid it will ruin you here, and not advantage you at the last day. " I put not the title of conscience upon an humour of contradiction. " According] if not against, for it is according to scripture, that the church hath power to establish ceremony or doctrine, if occasion require, not against the scripture. " The end of these general forms of peace, if capable of any construc- tion, lies against the papists. " No evangelical counsels, as the papists, such as presuppose a fulfill- ing of the law, and going beyond it, to satisfy and merit for us, that is according to scripture. In this sense the article condemns them. Con- sider it well. " No such offering of Christ in the scripture, where you will find it once afford for all : in that manner they did it, against whom the article was framed ; taken with all aggravating circumstances of corporal pre- sence, as if another satisfaction for sin : the consequences, which may be drawn from transubstantiation, amount to little less than blasphemy. " Works done by bare nature are not meritorious de congruo : nature of sin they must have, if sin be in them ; and so it is, for malem ex qualibet causa. Unless a downright pelagian, you may give it a fair, and safe, and true interpretation. LIFE OP CHILLINGWORTH. XV " Upon these reasons, I presume, did that reverend prelate Andrews, and that learned Mountague subscribe, when they publicly taught evan- gelical counsels in their writings. What you have sent to me in a third person, &c. Be not forward, nor possessed with a spirit of contradic- tion. Thus you may " However, at last Mr. Chillingworth surmounted his scruples ; and, being promoted to the chancellorship of the church of Sarum, July 20th, 1638, with the prebend of Brixworth, in Northamptonshire, annexed to it, he complied with the usual subscription. About the same time he was appointed master of Wigstan's hospital in Leicester; " both which," says Mr. Wood, 3 "and perhaps other prefer- ments, he kept to his dying day." In 1640, he was deputed by the chap- ter of Salisbury for their proctor in convocation. In 1642, he was put into the roll with some others by his majesty to be created doctor of divinity ; but he came not to take that degree, nor was he diplomated. b At the siege of Gloucester, begun August 10, 1643, he was in the king's army before that city ; and observing, that they wanted materials to carry on the siege, he suggested the making of some engines after the manner of the Roman testudines cum pluteis, in order to storm the place. c That siege being raised by the earl of Essex, and the war continuing with great vigour on each side, the king appointed the lord Hopton general of his troops in the west, who forced Arundel castle, in Sussex, to surren- der : but that castle was retaken by Sir William Waller, and Mr. Chilling- worth, among the rest, made prisoner of war ; who, out of respect to my lord Hopton, " had accompanied him in that march, and being indisposed by the terrible coldness of the season, chose to repose himself in that garrison, till the weather should mend." d Mr. Chillingworth's illness increased to such a degree, that not being able to go to London with the garrison, he was conveyed to Chichester ; which favour he obtained at the request of his great adversary, Mr. Francis Cheynell, a bigoted presbyterian divine, who accidentally met him in Arundel castle, and fre- quently visited him at Chichester till he died. He has given us an account of our author's sickness, and his own behaviour towards him, in a book printed at London, 1644, in 4to. entitled, Chillingworthi Novis- sima ; or, the Sickness, Heresy, Death, and Burial of William Chilling- worth, (in his own phrase) Clerk of Oxford, and in the Conceit of his fellow-Soldiers, the Queen's arch Engineer and grand Intelligencer. Set forth in a Letter to his eminent and learned friends: a Relation of his Apprehension at Arundel ; a Discovery of his Errors in a brief Cate- chism ; and a short Oration at the Burial of his Heretical Book. By Francis Cheynell, late Fellow of Merton College. Published by Au- thority. — Mr. Chillingworth died about January 30, 1643-4, and was interred in the cathedral of Chichester. a Athen. Oxon. vol. ii. col. 42. b Id. Fasti Oxon. vol. ii. col. 30. c Rushworth, Histor. Collect, vol. ii. part. 3, ad ann. 1643, torn. iv. p. 288, 289. d Clarendon, History of the Rebellion, B. viii. torn. iv. p. 472, 473. THE RELIGION OF PROTESTANTS, SAFE WAY TO SALVATION. THE PREFACE TO THE AUTHOR OP "CHARITY MAINTAINED:" WITH AN ANSWER TO HIS PAMPHLET, INTITULED, A " DIRECTION TO N. N." Sir, — Upon the first news of the publication of your book, I used all diligence with speed to procure it ; and came with such a mind to the reading of it, as St. Austin, before he was a settled catholic, brought to his conference with Faustus, the Manichee. For, as he thought, that if any thing more than ordinary might be said in defence of the Manichean doctrine, Faustus was the man from whom it was to be expected : so my persuasion concerning you was, Si Pergama dextra defendi possunt, certe hac defensa videbo. For I conceived, that among the champions of the Roman church, the English in reason must be the best, or equal to the best, as being by most expert masters trained up purposely for this war, and perpetually practised in it. Among the English, I saw the Jesuits would yield the first place to none; and men so wise in their generation as the Jesuits were, if they had any Achilles among them, I presumed, would make choice of him for this service. And besides, I had good assurance that in the framing of this building, though you were the only architect, yet you wanted not the assistance of many diligent hands to bring you in choice materials towards it ; nor of many careful and watchful eyes to correct the errors of your work, if any should chance to escape you. Great reason therefore had I to expect great matters from you, and that your book should have in it the spirit and elixir of all that can be said in defence of your church and doctrine ; and to assure myself, that if my resolution not to believe it, were not built upon the rock of evident grounds and reasons, but only upon some sandy and deceitful appearances, now the wind and storm and floods were coming, which would undoubtedly overthrow it. 2. Neither truly were you more willing to effect such an altera- tion in me, than I was to have it effected. For my desire is to go B 2 * (17) 18 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained ." the right way to eternal happiness. But whether this way lie on the right hand, or the left, or straight forward ; whether it be by following a living guide, or by seeking my direction in a book, or by hearkening to the secret whisper of some private spirit, to me it is indifferent. And he that is otherwise affected, and hath not a traveller's indifference, which Epictetus requires in all that would find the truth, but much desires, in respect of his ease, or pleasure, or profit, or advancement, or satisfaction of friends, or any human consideration, that one way should be true rather than another ; it is odds but he will take his desire that it should be so, for an assu- rance that it is so. But I, for my part, unless I deceive myself, was, and still am so affected, as I have made profession, not willing, I confess, to take any thing upon trust, and to believe it without asking myself why, no, nor able to command myself (were I never so willing) to follow, like a sheep, every shepherd that should take upon him to guide me ; or every flock, that should chance to go before me : but most apt and most willing to be led by reason to any way, or from it, and always submitting all other reasons to this one, God hath said so, therefore it is true. Nor yet was I so unreasonable, as to expect mathematical demonstrations from you in matters plainly incapable of them, such as are to be believed, and, if we speak properly, cannot be known ; such there- fore I expected not. For, as he is an unreasonable master, who requires a stronger assent to his conclusions than his arguments deserve ; so I conceive him a froward and undisciplined scholar, who desires stronger arguments for a conclusion than the matter will bear. But, had you represented to my understanding such reasons of your doctrine, as, being weighed in an even balance, held by an even hand, with those on the other side, would have turned the scale, and have made your religion more credible than the contrary ; certainly I should have despised the shame of one more alteration, and with both mine arms, and with all my heart, most readily have embraced it ; such was my expectation from you, and such my preparation, which I brought with me to the reading of your book. 3. Would you know now what the event was, what effect was wrought in me, by the perusal and consideration of it ? To deal truly and ingenuously with you, I fell somewhat in my good opinion, both of your sufficiency and sincerity ; but was exceed- ingly confirmed in my ill opinion of the cause maintained by you. I found every where snares that might entrap, and colours that might deceive the simple ; but nothing that might persuade, and very little that might move an understanding man, and one that can discern between discourse and sophistry : in short, I was verily persuaded that I plainly saw, and could make it appear to all dis- passionate and unprejudicate judges, that a vein of sophistry and calumny did run clean through it from the beginning to the end. And letting some friends understand so much, I suffered myself to be persuaded by them, that it would not be either unproper for me, or unacceptable to God, nor peradventure altogether unser- viceable to his church, nor justly offensive to you (if you indeed with an Answer to his " Direction to N. N." 19 were a lover of truth, and not a maintainer of a faction), if setting aside the second part, which was in a manner wholly employed in particular disputes, repetitions and references, and in wranglings with Dr. Potter about the sense of some supernumerary quotations, and whereon the main question no way depends ; I would make a fair and ingenuous answer to the first, wherein the substance of the present controversy is confessedly contained ; and which, if it were clearly answered, no man would desire any other answer to the second. This therefore I undertook with a full resolution to be an adversary to your errors, but a friend and servant to your person : and so much the more a friend to your person, by how much the severer and more rigid adversary I was to your errors. 4. In this work my conscience bears me witness, that I have, ac- cording to your advice, " proceeded always with this consideration, that I am to give a most strict account of every line, and word, that passeth under my pen :" and therefore have been precisely careful, for the matter of my book, to defend truth only, and only by truth : and then scrupulously fearful of scandalizing you or any man with the manner of handling it. From this rule, sure I am, I have not willingly swerved in either part of it : and, that I might not do it ignorantly, I have not only myself examined mine own work (perhaps with more severity than I have done yours, as con- ceiving it a base and unchristian thing to go about to satisfy others with what I myself am not fully satisfied) but have also made it pass the fiery trial of the exact censures of many understanding judges, always heartily wishing that you yourself had been of the quorum. But they who did undergo this burthen, as they wanted not a sufficiency to discover any heterodox doctrine, so I am sure, they have been very careful to let nothing slip dissonant from truth, or from the authorised doctrine of the church of England; and therefore whatsoever causeless and groundless jealousy any man may entertain concerning my person, yet my book, I presume, in reason and common equity should be free from them ; wherein I hope that little or nothing hath escaped so many eyes, which being weighed in the balance of the sanctuary, will be found too light: and in this hope I am much confirmed, by your strange carriage of yourself in this whole business. For though, by some crooked and sinister arts, you have got my answer into your hands now a year since and upwards, as I have been assured by some that profess to know it, and those of your own party ; though you could not want every day fair opportunities of sending to me, and acquainting me with any exceptions, which you conceived, might be justly taken to it, or any part of it (than which nothing could have been more welcome to me) ; yet hitherto you have not been pleased to acquaint me with any one ; nay more, though you have been at sundry times, and by several ways, entreated and so- licited, nay pressed and importuned by me, to join with me in a pri- vate discussion of the controversy between us, before the publication of my answer (because I was extremely unwilling to publish any thing which had not passed all manner of trials; as desiring, not that I, or my side, but that truth might overcome, on which side b2 20 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained ;" soever it was) though I have protested to you, and set it under my hand (which protestation by God's help I would have made good) if you or any other, who would undertake your cause, would give me a fair meeting, and choose out of your whole book any one ar- gument whereof you was most confident, and by which you would be content the rest should be judged of, and make it appear, that I had not, or could not answer it, that 1 would desist from the work which I had undertaken, and answer none at all : though by all the arts which possibly I could devise, I have provoked you t such a trial ; and in particular, by assuring you, that if you refuse- it, the world should be informed of your tergiversation ; notwith- standing all this, you have perpetually and obstinately declined it ; which to my understanding is a very evident sign, that there is not any truth in your cause, nor (which is impossible there should be) strength in your arguments ; especially considering what our Saviour hath told us, "Every one that doth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved : but he that doth truth, cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest that they are wrought in God." 5. In the mean while, though you despaired of compassing your desire this honest way ; yet you have not omitted to tempt me, by base and unworthy considerations, to desert the cause which I had undertaken ; letting me understand from you, by an acquaint- ance common to us both, how, that " in case my work should come to light, my inconstancy in religion (so you miscall my constancy in following that way to heaven, which for the present seems to me the most probable) should be to my great shame painted to the life; that my own writings should be produced against myself; that I should be urged to answer my own motives against protest- antism ; and that such things should be published to the world touching my belief (for my painter I must expect should have great skill in perspective) of the doctrine of the Trinity, the deity of our Saviour, and all supernatural verities, as should endanger all my benefices, present and future : that this warning was given me not out of fear of what I could say (for that catholics, if they might wish any ill would beg the publication of my book, for respects obvious enough) ; but out of a mere charitable desire of my good and reputation : and that all this was said upon a sup- position that I was answering or had a mind to answer Charity Maintained ; if not, no harm was done." To which courteous premonition, as I remember, I desired the gentleman, who dealt between us, to return this answer, or to this effect : That I believed the doctrine of the Trinity, the deity of our Saviour, and all other supernatural verities revealed in scripture, as truly and as heartily as yourself, or any man ; and therefore herein your charity was very much mistaken ; but much more, and more uncharitably, in conceiv- ing me a man that was to be wrought upon with these terribiles visit forma, those carnal and base fears which you presented to me ; which were very proper motives for the devil and his instruments to tempt poor-spirited men out of the way of conscience and honesty, but very incongruous, either for teachers of truth to with an answer to his "Direction to N. N." 21 make use of, or for lovers of truth (in which company I had been long agone matriculated) to hearken to with any regard. But if you were indeed desirous, that I should not answer Charity Maintained, one way there was, and but one, whereby you might obtain your desire; and that was, by letting me know when and where I might attend you ; and by a fair conference, to be written down on both sides, convincing mine understanding (who was resolved not to be a recusant if I were convicted) that any one part of it, any one. argu- ment in it, which was of moment and consequence, and whereon the cause depends, was indeed unanswerable. This was the effect of my answer, which I am well assured was delivered : but reply from you I received none but this, that you would have no con- ference with me but in print: and soon after finding me of proof against all these batteries, and thereby (I fear) very much enraged, you took up the resolution of the furious goddess in the poet, madded with the unsuccessfulness of her malice, Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo ! 6. For certainly those indign contumelies, that mass of porten- tous and execrable calumnies, wherewith in your pamphlet of Directions to N. N. you have loaded not only my person in par- ticular, but all the learned and moderate divines of the church of England, and all protestants in general ; nay all wise men of all religions but your own, could not proceed from any other fountain. 7. To begin with the last : you stick not, in the beginning of your first chapter, to fasten the imputation of atheism and irreligion upon all wise and gallant men that are not of your own religion. In which uncharitable and unchristian judgment, void of all colour or shadow of probability, I know yet by experience, that very many of the bigots of your faction are partakers with you. God forbid I should think the like of you ! Yet, if I should say that in your religion there want not some temptations unto, and some principles of irreligion and atheism, I am sure I could make my assertion much more probable than you have done, or can make this horrible imputation. 8. For to pass by, first, that which experience justifies, that where and when your religion hath most absolutely commanded, there and then atheism hath most abounded. To say nothing, secondly, of your notorious and confessed forging of so many false miracles, and so many lying legends, which is not unlikely to make suspicious men to question the truth of all ; nor to object to you, hirdly, the abundance of your weak and silly ceremonies and ridiculous observances in your religion ; which, in all probability, cannot but beget secret contempt and scorn of it in wise and con- sidering men ; and, consequently, atheism and impiety, if they have this persuasion settled in them (which is too rife among you, and which you account a piece of wisdom and gallantry) that if they be not of your religion, they were as good be of none at all : nor to trouble you, fourthly, with this, that a great part of your doctrine, especially in the points contested, makes apparently for the tem- poral ends of the teachers of it ; which yet I fear, is a great scandal to many beaux esprits among you : only I should desire you to con- 22 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained :" sider, attentively, when you conclude so often from the differences of protestants, that they have no certainty of any part of their religion, no not of those points wherein they agree; whether you do not that, which so magisterially you direct me not to do, that is, proceed "a de- structive way, and object arguments against your adversaries, which tend to the overthrow of all religion ?" And whether, as you argue thus, " protestants differ in many things, therefore they have no cer- tainty of any thing :" So an atheist or sceptic may not conclude as well, christians and the professors of all religions differ in many things, therefore they have no certainty in any thing. Again, I should desire you to tell me ingenuously, whether it be not too pro- bable, that your portentous doctrine of transubstantiation, joined with your forementioned persuasion of, " No papists, no christians," hath brought a great many others, as well as himself, to Averroes his resolution, quandoquidem christiani adorantquod comedunt,sit anima mea cumphilosophis? Whether your requiring men, upon only pro- bable and prudential motives, to yield a most certain assent unto things in human reason impossible ; and telling them, as you do too often, that they were as good not believe at all, as believe with any lower degree of faith, be not a likely way to make considering men scorn your religion (and consequently all, if they know no other) as requiring things contradictory, and impossible to be performed ? Lastly, whether your pretence, that there is no good ground to be- lieve scripture, but your church's infallibility, joined with your pretending no ground for this but some texts of scripture, be not a fair way to make them that understand themselves, believe neither church nor scripture 1 9. Your calumnies against protestants in general are set down in these words, chap. ii. § 2. " The very doctrine of protestants, if it be followed closely, and with coherence to itself, must of necessity induce socinianism. This I say confidently ; and evi- dently prove, by instancing in one error, which may well be termed the capital, and mother-heresy, from which all other must follow at ease ; I mean their heresy in affirming, that the perpetual visible church of Christ, descended by a never-interrupted succession from our Saviour to this day, is not infallible in all that it proposeth to be believed as revealed truths. For if the infallibility of such a public authority be once impeached, what remains, but that every man is given over to his own wit and discourse ? And talk not here of holy scripture : for if the true church may err, in defining what scriptures be canonical, or in delivering the sense and mean- ing thereof; we are still devolved, either upon the private spirit (a foolery now exploded out of England, which, finally leaving every man to his own conceits, ends in socinianism) or else upon natural wit and judgment, for examining and determining what scriptures contain true or false doctrine, and, in that respect, ought to be re- ceived or rejected. And indeed, take away the authority of God's church, no man can be assured, that any one book, or parcel of scripture was written by divine inspiration ; or that all the con- tents are infallibly true ; which are the direct errors of socinians. If it were but for this reason alone, no man, who regards the eternal with an Answer to his " Direction to N. N." 23 salvation of his soul, would live or die in protestancy, from which so vast absurdities as these of the socinians must inevitably follow. And it ought to be an unspeakable comfort to all us catholics, while we consider, that none can deny the infallible authority of our church, but jointly he must be left to his own wit and ways; must abandon all infused faith, and true religion, if he do but understand himself right." In all which discourse, the only true word you speak is, " This I say confidently :" as for " proving evidently," that I believe you reserved for some other opportunity : for the present, 1 am sure you have been very sparing of it. 10. You say, indeed, confidently enough, that " the denial of the church's infallibility is the mother-heresy, from which all other must follow at ease." Which is so far from being a necessary truth, as you make it, that it is indeed a manifest falsehood. Neither is it possible for the wit of man, by any good, or so much as probable consequence, from the denial of the church's infallibility, to deduce any one of the ancient heresies, or any one error of the socinians, which are the heresies here entreated of. For who would not laugh at him that should argue thus ; neither the church of Rome, nor any other church is infallible ; ergo, the doctrine of Arius, Pelagius, Eutyches, Nestorius, Photinus, Manichaeus, was true doctrine ? On the other side it may be truly said, and justified by very good and effectual reason, that he that affirms with you, the pope's in- fallibility, puts himself into his hands and power, to be led by him, at his ease and pleasure, into all heresy, and even to hell itself; and cannot with reason say (so long as he is constant to his grounds) Domine, cur itafacis? but must believe white to be black and black to be white ; virtue to be vice, and vice to be virtue ; nay (which is an horrible, but a most certain truth) Christ to be antichrist, and antichrist to be Christ, if it be possible for the pope to say so: which, I say, and will maintain, however you daub and disguise it, is indeed to make men apostatize from Christ to his pretended vicar, but real enemy. For that name and no better (if we may speak truth without offence) I presume he deserves, who, under pretence of interpreting the law of Christ (which authority, with- out any word of express warrant, he has taken upon himself) doth in many parts evacuate and dissolve it : so dethroning Christ from his dominion over men's consciences, and instead of Christ, setting up himself; inasmuch as he that requires, that his interpretations of any law should be obeyed as true and genuine, seem they to men's understandings never so dissonant and discordant from it (as the bishop of Rome does) requires indeed, that his interpretations should be the laws ; and he that is firmly prepared in mind to believe and receive all such interpretations without judging of them, and though to his private judgment they seem unreasonable, is indeed congruously disposed to hold adultery a venial sin, and fornication no sin, whensoever the pope and his adherents shall so declare. And whatsoever he may plead yet either wittingly or ignorantly, he makes the law and the law-maker both stales, and obeys only the interpreter. As if I should pretend that I should submit to the laws of the king of England, but should indeed re- 24 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained :" solve to obey them in that sense which the king of France should put upon them, whatsoever it were ; I presume every understanding man would say, that I did indeed obey the king of France, and not the king of England. If I should pretend to believe the bible, but that I would understand it according to the sense which the chief mufti should put upon it ; who would not say, that I were a christian in pretence only, but indeed a mahometan ? 11. Nor will it be to purpose for you to pretend, that the precepts of Christ are so plain, that it cannot be feared that any pope should ever go about to dissolve them, and pretend to be a christian: for, not to say that you now pretend the contrary ; to wit, " that the law of Christ is obscure even in things necessary to be believed and done ;" and by saying so, have made a fair way for any foul inter- pretation of any part of it : certainly, that which the church of Rome hath already done in this kind, is an evident argument, that (if once she had this power unquestioned, and made expedite and ready for use, by being contracted to the pope) she may do what she pleaseth with it. Who that had lived in the primitive church, would not have thought it as utterly improbable, that ever they should have brought in the worship of images, and picturing of God as now it is that they should legitimate fornication 1 Why may we not think, they may in time take away the whole communion from the laity, as well as they have taken away half of it ? Why may we not think, that any text and any sense may not be ac- corded as well as the whole fourteenth chapter of the" first Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians is reconciled to the Latin -service ? How is it possible any thing should be plainer forbidden than the worship of angels, in the Epistle to the Colossians ? than the teach- ing for doctrines men's commands in the gospel of St. Mark 1 And therefore seeing we see these things done, which hardly any man would have believed that had not seen them, why should we not fear, that this unlimited power may not be used hereafter with as little moderation, seeing devices have been invented how men may worship images without idolatry, and kill innocent men, under pretence of heresy, without murder 1 Who knows not, that some tricks may not be hereafter devised, by which lying with other men's wives shall be no adultery, taking away other men's goods no theft ? I conclude, therefore, that if Solomon himself were here, and were to determine the difference, which is more likely to be mother of all heresy, the denial of the church's, or the affirming of the pope's infallibility, that he would certainly say, " This is the mother, give her the child." 12. You say again confidently, that " if this infallibility be once impeached, every man is given over to his own wit and discourse :" which, if you mean discourse not guiding itself by scripture, but only by principles of nature, or perhaps by prejudices and popular errors, and drawing consequences, not by rule, but chance, is by no means true. If you mean by discourse, right reason grounded on divine revelation and common notions written by God in the hearts of all men, and deducing according to the never-failing rules of logic, consequent deductions from them ; if this be it which with an Answer to his "Direction to N. N." 25 you mean by discourse, it is very meet and reasonable and neces- sary, that men, as in all their actions, so especially in that of the greatest importance, the choice of their way to happiness, should be left unto it ; and he that follows this in all his opinions and actions, and does not only seem to do so, follows always God ; whereas he that followeth a company of men, may oft-times follow a company of beasts : And in saying this, I say no more than St. John to all christians in these words ; " Dearly beloved, believe not every spirit; but try the spirits, whether they be of God or no." And the rule he gives them to make this trial by, is to consider whether they " confess Jesus to be the Christ ;" that is, the guide of their faith, and lord of their actions ; not, whether they acknowledge the pope to be his vicar : I say no more than St. Paul, in exhorting all christians " to try all things, and hold fast that which is good :" than St. Peter, in commanding all christians " to be ready to give a reason of the hope that is in them :" than our Saviour himself, in forewarning all his followers, that " if they blindly follow blind guides, both leaders and followers should fall into the ditch:" and again, in saying even to the people, " yea, and why of your- selves judge ye not what is right?" And though by passion, or precipitation, or prejudice, by want of reason, or not using what they have, men may be, and are oftentimes, led into error and mis- chief; yet, that they cannot be misguided by discourse, truly so called, such as I have described, you yourself have given them security. For what is discourse, but drawing conclusions out of premises by good consequence? Now, the principles which we have settled, to wit, the scriptures, are on all sides agreed to be infallibly true. And you have told us in the fourth chapter of this pamphlet, that "from truth no man can, by good consequence, infer falsehood :" therefore, by discourse no man can possibly be led to error ; but if he err in his conclusions, he must of necessity either err in his principles (which here cannot have place) or com- mit some error in his discourse; that is indeed, not discourse, but seem to do so. 13. You say, thirdly, with sufficient confidence, " that if the true church may err in defining what scriptures be canonical, or in the delivering the sense thereof, then we must follow either the private spirit, or else natural wit and judgment; and by them examine what scriptures contain true or false doctrine, and in that respect ought to be received or rejected." All which is apparently untrue ; neither can any proof of it be pretended. For though the present church may possibly err in her judgment touching this matter, yet have we other directions in it besides the private spirit and the examination of the contents (which latter way may conclude the negative very strongly, to wit, that such or such a book can- not come from God, because it contains irreconcilable contradic- tions ; but the affirmative it cannot conclude, because the contents of a book may be all true, and yet the book not written by divine inspiration) ; other directions therefore I say we have besides either of these three, and that is the testimony of the primitive christians. 3 26 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained :" 14. You say, fourthly, with convenient boldness, that " this infallible authority of your church being denied, no man can be assured, that any parcel of scripture was written by divine in- spiration :" which is an untruth, for which no proof is pretended ; and besides, void of modesty, and full of impiety : the first, be- cause the experience of innumerable christians is against it, who are sufficiently assured, that the scripture is divinely inspired, and yet deny the infallible authority of your church, or any other : the second, because if I cannot have ground to be assured of the divine authority of scripture, unless I first believe your church infallible, then 1 can have no ground at all to believe it ; because there is no ground, nor can any be pretended, why I should believe your church infallible, unless I first believe the scripture divine. 15. Fifthly and lastly, you say with confidence in abundance, that " none can deny the infallible authority of your church, but he must abandon all infused faith and true religion, if he do but understand himself :" which is to say, agreeable to what you had said before, and what out of the abundance of your heart you speak very often, that all christians besides you, are open fools, or concealed atheists. All this you say with notable confidence (as the manner of sophisters is to place their confidence of prevailing in their confident manner of speaking) ; but then for the evidence you promised to maintain this confidence, that is quite vanished and become invisible. 16. Had I a mind to recriminate now, and to charge papists (as you do protestants) that they lead men to socinianism, I could certainly make a much fairer shew of evidence than you have done : for I would not tell you, you deny the infallibility of the church of England ; ergo, you lead to socinianism, which yet is alto- gether as good an argument as this ; protestants deny the infallibility of the Roman church ; ergo, they induce socinianism : nor would I resume my former argument, and urge you, that by holding the pope's infallibility, you submit yourself to that capital and mother- heresy, by advantage whereof, he may lead you at ease to believe virtue vice, and vice virtue ; to believe antichristianity christianism, and Christianity antichristianism : he may lead you to socinianism, to turcism, nay, to the devil himself if he have a mind to it : but I would shew you, that divers ways the doctors of your church do the principal and proper work of the socinians for them, un- dermining the doctrine of the Trinity, by denying it to be sup- ported by those pillars of the faith, which alone are fit and able to support it, I mean scripture, and the consent of the ancient doctors. 17. For scripture, your men deny very plainly and frequently, that this doctrine can be proved by it. See, if you please, this plainly taught, and urged very earnestly by Cardinal Hosius, De Author. Sac. 1. 3. p. 53. By Gordonius Huntlaeus, torn. 1. controv. 1. De verbo Dei, c. 19. By Gretserus and Tannerus, in Colloquio Ratisbon ; and also by Vega, Possevin, Wickus, and others. 18. And then for the consent of the ancients: that that also delivers it not ; by whom are we taught, but by papists only ? with an Answer to his " Direction to N. N." 27 Who is it that makes known to all the world, that Eusebius, that great searcher and devourer of the christian libraries, was an arian ? Is it not your great Achilles, Cardinal Perron, in his third book and second chapter of his reply to King James 1 Who is it that informs us, that Origen (who never was questioned for any error in this matter in or near his time) "denied the divinity of the Son and the Holy Ghost ?" Is it not the same great cardinal, in his book of the Eucharist against M. du Plessis, 1.2. c. 7? Who is it that pretends, that " Irenasus hath said those things, which he that should now hold, would be esteemed an arian V' Is it not the same person in his reply to King James, in the fifth chapter of his fourth ob- servation ? And doth he not in the same place peach Tertullian also, and in a manner give him away to the arians ? And pro- nounce generally of the fathers before the Council of Nice, that " arians would gladly be tried by them ?" And are not your fellow Jesuits also, even the prime men of your order, prevari- cators in this point as well as others ? Doth not your friend Mr. Fisher, or Mr. Floyd, in his book of the nine questions proposed to him by King James, speak dangerously to the same purpose, in his discourse of the resolution of faith, towards the end ? Giv- ing us to understand, " that the new reformed arians bring very many testimonies of the ancient fathers, to prove, that in this point they did contradict themselves, and were contrary one to another : which places whosoever shall read, will clearly see, that to com- mon people they are unanswerable, yea, that common people are not capable of the answers that learned men yield unto such ob- scure passages." And hath not your great antiquary Petavius, in his notes upon Epiphanius, in Haer. 69. been very liberal to the adversaries of the doctrine of the Trinity, and in a manner given them for patrons and advocates, first Justin Martyr, and then almost all the fathers before the Council of Nice ; whose speeches, he says, touching this point, cum orthodoxce jidei reguld minime con- sentiunt ? Hereunto I might add, that the dominicans and Jesuits between them in another matter of great importance, viz. God's prescience of future contingents, give the socinians the premises out of which their conclusion doth unavoidably follow : for the dominicans maintain on the one side, that God can foresee nothing but what he decrees : the Jesuits on the other side, that he doth not decree all things : and from hence the socinians conclude (as it is obvious for them to do) that he doth not foresee all things. Lastly, I might adjoin this, that you agree with one consent, and settle for a rule unquestionable, that no part of religion can be repugnant to reason ; whereunto you in particular subscribe unawares in saying, "From truth no man can by good consequence infer falsehood;" which is to say, in effect, that reason can never lead any man to error. And after you have done so, you proclaim to all the world (as you in this pamphlet do very frequently) that, " if men follow their reason and discourse," they will (if they understand them- selves) be led to socinianism. And thus you see with what probable matter I might furnish out and justify my accusation, if I should charge you with leading men to socinianism : yet do I not con- 28 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained :" ceive that I have ground enough for this odious imputation. And much less should you have charged protestants with it, whom you confess to abhor and detest it, and who fight against it, not with the broken reeds, and out of the paper fortresses of an imaginary infallibility, which were only to make sport for their adversaries; but with the sword of the Spirit, the word of God : of which we may say most truly, what David said of Goliah's sword, offered him by Abimelech, JVon est sicut iste, " There is none comparable to it." 19. Thus protestants in general I hope are sufficiently vindi- ated from your calumny. I proceed now to do the same service for the divines of England ; whom you question, first, in point of learning and sufficiency, and then in point of conscience and honesty, as prevaricating in the religion which they profess, and inclining to popery. Their learning (you say) consists only in " some superficial talent of preaching, languages, and elocution ; and not in any deep knowledge of philosophy, especially of meta- physics; and much less of that most solid, profitable, subtle, and (0 rem ridiculam, Cato, et jocosam !) succinct method of school-divinity." Wherein you have discovered in yourself the true genius and spirit of detraction. For taking advantage from that wherein envy itself cannot deny but they are very eminent, and which requires great sufficiency of substantial learning, you disparage them as insufficient in all things else. As if, forsooth, because they dispute not eternally, Utrum chimera bombinans in vacuo, possit comedere secundas intentiones ? " Whether a million of angels may not sit upon a needle's point?" Because they fill not their brains with notions that signify nothing, to the utter extermination of all reason and common sense, and spend not an age in weaving and unweaving subtil cobwebs, fitter to catch flies than souls, therefore they have no deep knowledge in the acroamatical part of learning. But I have too much honoured the poorness of this detraction, to take notice of it. 20. The other part of your accusation strikes deeper, and is more considerable : and that tells us, that " protestantism waxeth weary of itself; that the professors of it, they especially of greatest worth, learning, and authority, love temper and modera- tion ; and are at this time more resolved where to fasten, than at the infancy of their church : that their churches begin to look with a new face : their walls to speak a new language : their doctrine to be altered in many things, for which their progenitors forsook the then visible church of Christ ; for example, the pope not antichrist : prayer for the dead : limbus patrum : pictures : that the church hath authority in determining controversies of faith, and to interpret scripture : about free-will, predestination, univer- sal grace : that all our works are not sins : merit of good works : inherent justice ; faith alone doth not justify : charity to be pre- ferred before knowledge : traditions : commandments possible to be kept : That their thirty-nine articles are patient, nay ambitious of some sense wherein they may seem catholic ; that to allege the necessity of wife and children in these days, is but a weak plea with an answer to Ins " Direction to N. N." 29 for a married minister to compass a benefice : that Calvinism is at length accounted heresy, and little less than treason : that men in talk and writing use willingly the once fearful names of priests and altars: that they are now put in mind, that for exposition of scripture, they are by canon bound to follow the fathers ; which if they do with sincerity, it is easy to tell what doom will pass against protestants, seeing, by the confessions of protestants, the fathers are on the papist's side, which the anwerer to some so clearly de- monstrated, that they remained convinced :" in fine, as the Sama ritans saw in the disciples' countenances, that they meant to go tc Jerusalem, so you pretend that it is even legible in the foreheads of these men, that they are even going, nay, making haste to Rome. Which scurrilous libel, void of all truth, discretion and honesty, what effect it may have wrought, what credit it may have gained with credulous papists (who dream what they desire, and believe their own dreams) or with ill-affected, jealous, and weak protestants, I cannot tell : but one thing I dare boldly say, that you yourself did never believe it. 21. For did you indeed conceive, or had any probable hope, that such men as you describe, men of worth, of learning, and authority too, were friends and favourers of your religion, and inclinable to your party ; can any man imagine, that you would proclaim it, and bid the world take heed of them? Sic notus Ulysses ? Do we know the Jesuits no better than so ? What, are they turned prevaricators against their own faction ? Are they likely men to betray and expose their own agents and instruments, and to awaken the eyes of jealousy, and to raise the clamour of the people against them 1 Certainly, your zeal to the see of Rome, testified by your fourth vow of special obedience to the pope, pro- per to your order, and your cunning carriage of all affairs for the greater advantage and advancement of that see, are clear demon- strations, that if you had thought thus, you would never have said so. The truth is, they that can run to extremes in opposition against you ; they that pull down your infallibility, and set up their own ; they that declaim against your tyranny, and exercise it themselves over others, are the adversaries that give you greatest advantage, and such as you love to deal with : whereas upon men of temper and moderation, such as will oppose nothing because you maintain it, but will draw as near to you, that they may draw you to them, as the truth will suffer them ; such as require of christians to be- lieve only in Christ, and will damn no man nor doctrine without express and certain warrant from God's word ; upon such as these you know not how to fasten : but if you chance to have conference with any such (which yet as much as possible you can you avoid and decline) you are very speedily put to silence, and see the inde- fensible weakness of your cause laid open to all men. And this I verily believe, is the true reason, that you thus rave and rage against them ; as foreseeing your time of prevailing, or even of subsisting, would be short, if other adversaries gave you no more advantage than they do. 22. In which persuasion also I am much confirmed by considera- 3* 30 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained :" tion of the silliness and poorness of those suggestions, and partly of the apparent vanity and falsehood of them, which you offer in justification of this wicked calumny. For what, if our devotion towards God out of a desire, that he should be worshipped as in spirit and in truth in the first place, so also in the beauty of holi- ness ? What if out of fear that too much simplicity and naked- ness in the public service of God, may beget in the ordinary sort of men a dull and stupid irreverence ; and out of hope, that the out- ward state and glory of it, being well-disposed, and wisely moderated, may engender, quicken, increase, and nourish the inward reverence, respect and devotion, which is due unto God's sovereign majesty and power? What if out of a persuasion and desire that papists may be won over to us the sooner, by the removing of this scandal out of their way ; and out of an holy jealousy, that the weaker sort of protestants might be the easier seduced to them by the magni- ficence and pomp of their church-service, in case it were not re- moved ? I say, what if out of these considerations, the governors of our church, more of late than formerly, have set themselves to adorn and beautify the places where God's honour dwells, and to make them as heaven-like as they can with earthly ornaments? Is this a sign, that they are warping towards popery? Is this devo- tion in the church of England an argument that she is coming over to the church of Rome ? Sir Edwin Sands, I presume, every man will grant, had no inclination that way; yet he, forty years since, highly commended this part of devotion in papists, and makes no scruple of proposing it to the imitation of protestants ; little think- ing, that they who would follow his counsel, and endeavour to take away this disparagement of protestants, and this glorying of papists, should have been censured for it, as making way, and in- clining to popery. His* words to this purpose are excellent words ; and because they shew plainly, that what is now practised was ap- proved by zealous protestants so long ago, I will here set them down. 23. " This one thing I cannot but highly commend in that sort and order ; they spare nothing which cost can perform in enriching or skill in adorning the temple of God, or to set out his service, with the greatest pomp and magnificence that can be devised. And although, for the most part, much baseness and childishness is predominant in the masters and contrivers of their ceremonies, yet this outward state and glory, being well disposed, doth engen- der, quicken, increase, and nourish the inward reverence, respect and devotion which is due unto sovereign majesty and power. And although I am not ignorant that many men, well reputed, have embraced the thrifty opinion of that disciple, who thought all to be wasted that was bestowed upon Christ in that sort, and that it were much better bestowed on the poor (yet with an eye perhaps that themselves would be his quarter-almoners) ; not- withstanding, I must confess, it will never sink into my heart, that in proportion of reason, the allowance for furnishing out of the * Survey of religion, init. with an Answer to nis "Direction to N. N." 31 service of God should be measured by the scant and strict rule of mere necessity (a proportion so low, that nature to other most bountiful, in matter of necessity hath not failed, no not the most ignoble creatures of the world) ; and that for ourselves, no measure of heaping, but the most we can get ; no rule of expense, but to the utmost pomp we list : or that God himself had so enriched the lower parts of the world with such wonderful varieties of beauty and glory, that they might serve only to the pampering of mortal man in his pride ; and that in the service of the high Creator, Lord and Giver (the outward glory of whose higher palace may appear by the very lamps that we see so far off burning gloriously in it), only the simpler, baser, cheaper, less noble, less beautiful, less glorious things should be employed : especially seeing, as in princes' courts, so in the service of God also, this outward state and glory, being well disposed doth (as I have said) engender, quicken, increase and nourish the inward reverence, respect, and devotion which is due to so sovereign majesty and power; which those whom the use thereof cannot persuade into, would easily, by the want of it, be brought to confess. For which cause I crave leave to be excused by them herein, if in zeal to the common Lord of all, I choose rather to commend the virtue of an enemy, than to flatter the vice and imbecility of a friend." And so much for this matter. 24. Again ; what if the names of priests and altars, so frequent in the ancient fathers, though not now in the popish sense, be now resumed and more commonly used in England than of late times they were ; that so the colourable argument of their confor- mity, which is but nominal, with the ancient church, and our in- conformity, which the governors of the church would not have so much as nominal, may be taken away from them ; and the church of England may be put in a state, in this regard more justifiable against the Roman than formerly it was, being hereby enabled to say to papists (whensoever these names are objected) we also use the names of priests and altars, and yet believe neither the corpo- ral presence, nor any proper and propitiatory sacrifice ? 25. What if protestants be now put in mind, that for exposition of scripture, they are bound by a canon to follow the ancient fathers ; which whosoever doth with sincerity, it is utterly im- possible he should be a papist? and it is most falsely said by you, that you know, that to some protestants I clearly demonstrated, or ever so much as undertook, or went about to demonstrate the con- trary. What if the centurists be censured somewhat roundly by a protestant divine, for affirming, that the keeping of the Lord's-day was a thing indifferent for two hundred years? Is there in all this, or any part of it, any kind of proof of this scandalous calumny ? certainly, if you can make no better arguments than these, and have so little judgment as to think these any, you have great reason to decline conferences, and Signor Con to prohibit you from writing books any more. 26. As for the points of doctrine, wherein you pretend that these divines begin of late to falter, and to comply with the church of Rome ; upon a due examination of particulars, it will presently ap- 32 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained :" pear ; first, that part of them always have been, and now are, held constantly one way by them, as the authority of the church in determining controversies of faith, though not the infallibility of it: that there is inherent justice, though so imperfect, that it can- not justify : that there are traditions, though none necessary : that charity is to be preferred before knowledge : that good works are not properly meritorious: and, lastly, that faith alone justifies, though that faith justifies not which is alone; and, secondly, for the remainder, that they every one of them have been accidently, without breach of charity, disputed among protestants ; such, for example, were the questions about the pope's being the antichrist ; the lawfulness of some kind of prayers for the dead : the estate of the fathers' souls before Christ's ascension : free-will, predestina- tion, universal grace : the possibility of keeping God's command- ments: the use of pictures in the church : wherein that there hath been anciently diversity of opinion amongst protestants, it is jus- tified to my hand by a witness with you, beyond exception, even your great friend Mr. Breerly, " whose care, exactness, and fidelity (you say in your preface) is so extraordinary great." Consult him therefore, tract 3. sect. 7. of his apology, and in the 9, 10, 11, 14, 24, 26, 27, 37, subdivisions of that section, you shall see, as in a mirror, yourself proved an egregious calumniator, for charging pro- testants with innovation, and clinging to popery ; under pretence, forsooth, that their doctrine begins of late to be altered in these points. Whereas Mr. Breerly will inform you, they have been anciently, and even from the beginning of the reformation, contro- verted amongst them, though perhaps the stream and current of their doctors run one way, and only some brook or rivulet of them the others. 27. And thus my friends, I suppose, are clearly vindicated from your scandals and calumnies. It remains now, in the last place, I bring myself fairly off from your foul aspersions, that so my person may not be (as indeed howsoever it should not be) any disadvan- tage or disparagement to the cause, nor any scandal to weak christians. 28. Your injuries then to me (no way deserved by me, but by dif- fering in opinion from you, wherein yet you surely differ from me as much as I from you) are especially three. For, first, upon hearsay, and refusing to give me opportunity of begetting in 3 r ou a better understanding of me, you charge me with a great number of false and impious doctrines, which I will not name in particular, because I will not assist you so far in the spreading of my own undeserved defamation : but whosoever teaches or holds them, let him be anathema ! The sum of them all cast up by yourself, in your first chapter, is this; "Nothing ought or can certainly be believed, far- ther than it may be proved by evidence of natural reason" (where I conceive, natural reason is opposed to supernatural revelation) ; and whosoever holds so, "let him be anathema!" And moreover to clear myself once for all from all imputations of this nature, which charge me injuriously with denial of supernatural verities, I pro- fess, sincerely, that I believe all those books of scripture which the with an Answer to his "Direction to N. N." 33 church of England accounts canonical, to be the infallible word of God. I believe all things evidently contained in them ; all things evidently, or even probably deducible from them : I acknow- ledge all that to be heresy, which by the act of parliamentprzmo of Queen Elizabeth is declared to be so, and only to be so: and though in such points which may be held diversly of divers men salva fidei compage, I would not take any man's liberty from him, and humbly beseech all men, that they would not take mine from me ; yet thus much I can say (which I hope will satisfy any man of reason) that whatsoever hath been held necessary to salvation, either by the catholic church of all ages, or by the consent of fathers, measured by Vincentius Lyrinensis his rule, or is held necessary, either by the catholic church of this age, or by the consent of protestants, or even by the church of England, that, against the socinians, and all others whatsoever, I do verily believe and embrace. 29. Another great and manifest injury you have done me, in charging me to have forsaken your religion, " because it conduced not to my temporal ends," and suited not with my desires and designs ; which certainly is an horrible crime, and whereof if you could convince me, by just and strong presumptions, I should then acknowledge myself to deserve that opinion, which you would fain induce your credents unto, that I changed not your religion for any other, but for none at all. But of this great fault my con- science acquits me, and God, who only knows the hearts of all men, knows that I am innocent : neither doubt I, but all they who know me, and amongst them many persons of place and quality, will say they have reason in this matter to be my compurgators. And for you, though you are very affirmative in your accusation^yet you neither do, nor can produce any proof or presumption for it ; but forgetting yourself (as it is God's will oft-times that slanderers should do) have let fall some passages, which being well weighed will make considering men apt to believe, that you did not believe your- self. For how is it possible you should believe that I deserted your religion for ends, and against the light of my conscience, out of a desire of preferment ; and yet, out of scruple of conscience, should refuse (which also you impute to me) to subscribe the thirty-nine articles, that is, refuse to enter at the only common door, which here in England leads to preferment? Again, how incredible is it, that you should believe that I forsook the profession of your religion, as not suiting with my desires and designs, which yet reconciles the enjoying of the pleasures and profits of sin here, with the hope of happiness hereafter, and proposes as great hope of temporal advancements to the capable servants of it, as any, nay more than any religion in the world ; and, instead of this, should choose soci- nianism, a doctrine, which howsoever erroneous in explicating the mysteries of religion, and allowing greater liberty of opinion in speculative matters, than any other company of christians doth, or they should do ; yet certainly, which you, 1 am sure, will pretend and maintain to explicate the laws of Christ with more rigour, and less indulgence and condescendence to the desires of flesh and blood than your doctrine doth : and, besides, such a doctrine, by which c 34 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained ." no man, in his right mind, can hope for any honour and preferment, either in this church or state, or any other : all which clearly de- monstrates, that this foul and false aspersion, which you have cast upon me, proceeds from no other fountain, but a heart abounding with gall and bitterness of uncharitableness, and blinded with malice towards me; or else from a perverse zeal to your superstition, which secretly suggests this persuasion to you ; that for the catholi cause nothing is unlawful, but that you may make use of such in direct and crooked arts as these to blast my reputation, and to possess men's minds with disaffection k> my person ; lest otherwise peradventure, they might with some indifference hear reason from me. God, I hope, which bringeth light out of darkness, will turn your counsels to foolishness, and give all good men grace to perceive, how weak and ruinous that religion must be, which needs support- ance from such tricks and devices : so I call them, because they deserve no better name. For what are all these personal matters which hitherto you spoke of, to the business in hand ? If it could be proved that Cardinal Bellarmine was indeed a Jew, or that Cardinal Perron was an atheist; yet I presume you would not accept of this for an answer to all their writings in defence of your religion. Let then my actions, intentions, and opinions be what they will, yet I hope, truth is nevertheless truth, nor reason ever the less reason, because I speak it. And therefore the christian reader know- ing that his salvation or damnation depends upon his impartial and sincere judgment of these things, will guard himself, I hope, from these impostures, and regard not the person, but the cause and the reasons of it ; not who speaks, but what is spoken : which is all the favour I desire of him, as knowing, that I am desirous not to persuade him, unless it be truth whereunto I persuade him. 30. The third and last part of my accusation was, that I answer out of " principles which protestants themselves will profess to detest :" which indeed were to the purpose, if it could be justified. But besides that it is confuted by my whole book, and made ridic- ulous by the approbations premised unto it; it is very easy for me out of your own mouth and words to prove it a most injurious calumny. For what one conclusion is there in the whole fabric of my discourse, that is not naturally deducible out of this one prin- ciple, that all things necessary to salvation are contained in the scripture ? Or, what one conclusion almost of importance is there in your book, which is not by this one clearly confutable ? 31. Grant this, and it will presently follow, in opposition to your first conclusion, and the argument of your first chapter, that amongs men of different opinions, touching the obscure and controverted questions of religion, such as may with probability be disputed on both sides (and such are the disputes of protestants) good men and lovers of truth on all sides may be saved : because all necessary things being supposed evident concerning them, with men so quali- fied, there will be no difference : there being no more certain sign, that a point is not evident, than that honest and understanding and indifferent men, and such as give themselves liberty of judgment after a mature consideration of the matter, differ about it. with an Answer to his "Direction to N. N." 35 32. Grant this, and it will appear, secondly, that the means whereby the revealed truths of God are conveyed to our understand- ing, and which are to determine all controversies in faith necessary to be determined, may be, for any thing you have said to the con- trary, not a church, but the scripture ; which contradicts the doc- trine of your second chapter. 33. Grant this, and the distinction of points fundamental and not fundamental, will appear very good and pertinent. For those truths will be fundamental, which are evidently delivered in scrip- ture, and commanded to be preached to all men ; those not funda- mental, which are obscure. And nothing will hinder but that the catholic church may err in the latter kind of the said points ; be- cause truths not necessary to the salvation, cannot be necessary to the being of a church ; and because it is not absolutely necessary that God should assist his church any farther than to bring her to salvation ; neither will there be any necessity at all of any infallible guide, either to consign unwritten traditions, or to declare the ob- scurities of the faith : not for the former end, because this principle being granted true, nothing unwritten can be necessary to be con- signed ; nor for the latter, because nothing that is obscure can be necessary to be understood, or not mistaken. And so the discourse of your whole third chapter will presently vanish. 34. Fourthly, for the creeds containing the fundamentals of sim- ple belief, though I see not how it may be deduced from this prin- ciple ; yet the granting of this, plainly renders the whole dispute touching the creed unnecessary. For if all necessary things of all sorts whether of simple belief or practice, be confessed to be clearly contained in scripture, what imports it, whether those of one sort be contained in the creed ? 35. Fifthly, let this be granted, and the immediate corollary in opposition to your fifth chapter, will be and must be, that not pro- testants for rejecting, but the church of Rome, for imposing upon the faith of christians, doctrines unwritten and unnecessary, and for disturbing the church's peace, and dividing unity for such mat- ters, is in a high degree presumptuous and schismatical. 36. Grant this, sixthly, and it will follow unavoidably, that pro- testants cannot possibly be heretics, seeing they believe all things evidently contained in scripture, which are supposed to be all that is necessary to be believed: and so your sixth chapter is clearly confuted. 37. Grant this, lastly, and it will be undoubtedly consequent, in contradiction of your seventh chapter, that no man can show more charity to himself than by continuing a protestant ; seeing protes- tants are supposed to believe, and therefore may accordingly prac- tise, at least by their religion are not hindered from practising and performing all things necessary to salvation. 38. So that the position of this one principle is the direct over- throw of your whole book ; and therefore I needed not, nor indeed have I made use of any other. Now this principle, which is not only the corner-stone, or chief pillar, but even the basis, and the adequate foundation of my answer; and which, while it stands c2 36 The Preface to the Author of" Charity Maintained ;" firm and immoveable, cannot but be the supporter of my book, and the certain ruin of yours, is so far from being, according to your pretence, detested by all protestants, that all protestants whatsoever, as you may see in their harmony of confessions, una- nimously profess and maintain it. And you yourself, Chap. VI. § 30, plainly confess as much, in saying, " The whole edifice of the faith of protestants is settled on these two principles : These par ticular books are canonical scripture ; and the sense and meaning of them is plain and evident, at least, in all points necessary t salvation." 39. And thus your venom against me is in a manner spent, saving only that there remain two little impertinencies, whereby you would disable me from being a fit advocate for the cause of pro- testants. The first, because I refuse to subscribe the articles of the church of England : the second, because I have set down in writing, motives which sometime induced me to forsake protest- antism, and hitherto have not answered them. 40. By the former of which objections, it would seem, that either you conceive the thirty-nine articles the common doctrine of all protestants; and if they be, why have you so often upbraided them with their many and great differences 1 or else, that it is the peculiar defence of the church of England, and not the common cause of all protestants, which is here undertaken by me ; which are certainly very gross mistakes. And yet why he who makes scruple of subscribing the truth of one or two propositions, may not yet be fit enough to maintain, that those who do subscribe them are in a saveable condition, I do not understand. Now though I hold not the doctrine of all protestants absolutely true (which with reason cannot be required of me, while they hold contradictions), yet I hold it free from all impiety, and from all error destructive of salvation, or in itself damnable : and this I think in reason may sufficiently qualify me for a maintainer of this assertion, that pro- testancy destroys not salvation. For the church of England, I am persuaded, that the constant doctrine of it is so pure and orthodox, that whosoever believes it, and lives according to it, undoubtedly he shall be saved ; and that there is no error in it, which may necessitate or warrant any man to disturb the peace, or renounce the communion of it. This in my opinion is all intended by sub- scription ; and thus much, if you conceive me not ready to sub- scribe, your charity I assure you is much mistaken. 41. Your other objection against me is yet more impertinen and frivolous than the former ; unless perhaps it be a just excep tion against a physician that himself was sometimes in", and re- covered himself from that disease which he undertakes to cure; or against a guide in a way, that at first, before he had experience himself, mistook it, and afterwards found his error and amended it. That noble writer, Michael de Montaigne, was surely of a far different mind ; for he will hardly allow any physician competent, but only for such diseases as himself had passed through : and a far greater than Montaigne, .even he that said, Tu convetsus confirma fratres, gives us sufficiently to understand, that they which have themselves been in such a state as to need conversion, with an Answer to his " Direction to N. N." 37 are not thereby made incapable of, but rather engaged and obliged unto, and qualified for this charitable function. 42. Neither am I guilty of that strange and preposterous zeal (as you esteem it) which you impute to me ; for having been so long careless, in removing this scandal against protestants, and an- swering my own motives, and yet now showing such fervour in writing against others. For neither are they other motives, but the very same for the most part with those that abused me, against which this book, which I now publish, is in a manner wholly em- ployed : and besides, though you Jesuits take upon you to have such large and universal intelligence of all state affairs and matters of importance ; yet I hope such a contemptible matter, as an answer of mine to a little piece of paper, may very probably have been written and escaped your observation. The truth is, I made an answer to them three years since and better, which perhaps might have been published, but for two reasons; one, because the motives were never public until you made them so; the other, because I was loth to proclaim to all the world so much weak ness as I shewed, in suffering myself to be abused by such silly sophisms: all which proceeds upon mistakes and false supposi- tions, which unadvisedly I took for granted ; as when I have set down the motives in order by subsequent answers to them, I shall quickly demonstrate, and so make an end. 43. The motives then were these. 1. Because perpetual visible profession, which could never be wanting to the religion of Christ, or any part of it, is apparently wanting to protestant religion, so far as concerns the points in contestation. 2. Because Luther and his followers, separating from the church of Rome, separated also from all churches, pure and impure, true or false, then being in the world ; upon which ground I conclude that either God's promises did fail of performance, if there were then no church in the world, which held all things necessary, and nothing repugnant to salvation : or else, that Luther and his sec- taries, separating from all churches then in the world, and so from the true, if there were any true, were damnable schismatics. 3. Because, if any credit may be given to as creditable records as any are extant, the doctrine of catholics hath been frequently confirmed, and the opposite doctrine of protestants confounded, with supernatural and divine miracles. 4. Because many points of protestant doctrine, are the damned opinions of heretics, condemned by the primitive church. 5. Because the prophecies of the Old Testament, touching the conversion of kings and nations to the true religion of Christ, have been accomplished in and by the catholic Roman religion, and the professors of it ; and not by protestant religion, and the professors of it. 6. Because the doctrine of the church of Rome is conformable, and the doctrine of protestants contrary to the doctrine ol the fathers of the primitive church, even by the confession of pro- testants themselves; I mean, those fathers who lived within the 4 38 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained :" compass of the first 600 years ; to whom protestants themselves do very frequently and very confidently appeal. 7. Because the first pretended reformers had neither extraor- dinary commission from God, nor ordinary mission from the church, to preach protestant doctrine. 8. Because Luther, to preach against the mass (which contains the most material points now in controversy), was persuaded by reasons suggested to him by the devil himself, disputing with him. So himself professeth, in his book de missa privata ; that all men might take heed of following him, who professeth himself to follow the devil. 9. Because the protestant cause is now, and hath been from the beginning, maintained with gross falsifications and calumnies; whereof their prime controversy writers are notoriously, and in high degree, guilty. 13. Because by denying all human authority, either of pope, or council, or church, to determine controversies of faith, they have abolished all possible means of suppressing heresy, or restoring the unity to the church. These are the motives. Now my answers to them follow briefly and in order. 44. To the first : God hath neither decreed nor foretold, that his true doctrine should de facto be always visibly professed, without any mixture of falsehood. To the second : God hath neither decreed nor foretold, that there shall be always a visible company of men free from all error in itself damnable. Neither is it always of necessity schismatical to separate from the external communion of a church, though wanting nothing necessary : for if this church, supposed to want nothing necessary, require me to profess against my conscience, that I believe some error, though never so small and innocent, which I do not believe, and will not allow me her communion but upon this condition ; in this case the church for requiring this con- dition is schismatical, and not I for separating from the church. To the third : If any credit may be given to records, far more creditable than these, the doctrine of protestants, that is, the bible, hath been confirmed, and the doctrine of papists, which is in many points plainly opposite to it, confounded, with superna- tural and divine miracles, which, for number and glory, outshine popish pretended miracles, as much as the sun doth an ignis fatuus ; those 1 mean, which were wrought by our Saviour Christ and his apostles. Now this book, by the confession of all sides, confirmed by innumerable miracles, foretels me plainly, that in after ages great signs and wonders shall be wrought in confirmation of false doctrine ; and that I am not to believe any doctrine, which seems to my understanding repugnant to the first, though an angel from heaven should teach it ; which was certainly as great a miracle as any that was ever wrought in attestation of any part of the doctrine of the church of Rome. But, that true doctrine should in all ages have the testimony of miracles, that I am no where taught ; so that I have more reason to suspect, and be afraid of with an Answer to his " Direction to N. N." 39 pretended miracles, as signs of false doctrine, than much to regard them as certain arguments of the truth. Besides, setting aside the bible, and the tradition of it, there is as good story for miracles wrought by those who lived and died in opposition to the doctrine of the Roman church (as by S. Cyprian, Colmannus, Columbanus, Aidanus, and others), as there is for those that are pretended to be wrought by the members of that church. Lastly, it seems to me no strange thing, that God in his justice should permit some true miracles to be wrought to delude them, who have forged so many as apparently the professors of the Roman church have, to abuse the world. To the fourth : all those were not heretics,* which, by Phila- strius, Epiphanius, or St. Austin, were put into the catalogue of heretics. To the fifth ; kings and nations have been and may be converted by men of contrary religions. To the sixth : the doctrine of papists is confessed by papists, con- trary to the fathers in many points. To the seventh : the pastors of a church cannot but have authority from it to preach against the abuses of it, whether in doctrine or practice, if there be any in it : neither can any christian want an ordinary commission from God to do a necessary work of charity after a peaceable manner, when there is nobody else that can or will do it. In extraordinary cases, extraordinary courses are not to be disallowed. If some christian layman should come into a country of infidels, and had ability to persuade them to Chris- tianity, who would say he might not use it for want of commis- sion? To the eighth : Luther's conference with the devil might be, for aught I know, nothing but a melancholy dream. If it were real, the devil might persuade Luther from the mass, hoping, by doing so, to keep him to it : or that others would make his dissuasion from it an argument for it, (as we see papists do) and be afraid of following Luther, as confessing himself to have been persuaded by the devil. To the ninth : iliacos intra muros peccatur et extra. Papists are more guilty of this fault than protestants. Even this very author in this very pamphlet hath not so many leaves as falsifications and calumnies. To the tenth : let all men believe the scripture, and that only, and endeavour to believe it in the true sense and require no more of others, and they shall find this not only a better, but the only means to suppress heresy, and restore unity. For he that believes the scripture sincerely, and endeavours to believe it in the true sense, cannot possibly be an heretic. And if no more than this were re- quired of any man, to make him capable of the church's communion, then all men so qualified, though they were different in opinion, yet, notwithstanding any such difference, must be of necessity one in communion. * See this acknowledged by Bellar. de Script. Eccles. in Philastrio. By Petavius Animad. in Epiph. de incript. operis. By St. Austin, Lib. de Hser. 80. 40 THE AUTHOR OF CHARITY MAINTAINED, HIS PREFACE TO THE READER. " Give me leave (good reader) to inform thee, by way of preface, of three points : the first concerns D. Potter's Answer to Charity Mistaken. The second relates to this reply of mine. And the third contains some premonitions, or prescriptions, in case D. Pot- ter, or any in his behalf, think fit to rejoin. " 2. For the first point, concerning D. Potter's Answer, I say in general, reserving particulars to their proper places, that in his whole book he hath not so much as once truly and really fallen upon the point in question; which was, whether both catholics and protestants can be saved in their several professions 1 And there- fore Charity Mistaken, judiciously pressing those particulars, where- in the difficulty doth precisely consist, proves in general, that there is but one true church ; that all christians are obliged to hearken to her ; that she must be ever visible, and infallible ; that to sepa- rate one's self from her communion is schism ; and to dissent from her doctrine is heresy, though it be in points never so few, or never so small in their own nature; and therefore, that the distinction of points fundamental, and not fundamental, is wholly vain, as it is applied by protestants. These (I say) and some other general grounds, Charity Mistaken handles ; and out of them doth clearly evince, that any the least difference in faith cannot stand with salva- tion on both sides. And therefore since it is apparent that catholics and protestants disagree in very many points of faith, they both cannot hope to be saved without repentance : and consequently, as we hold that protestancy unrepented destroys salvation, so must they also believe, that we cannot be saved, if they judge their own religion to be true, and ours to be false. And whosoever disguiseth this truth, is an enemy to souls, which he deceives with ungrounded false hope of salvation in different faiths and religions. And this Charity Mistaken performed exactly, according to that which appears to have been his design, which was not to descend to particular disputes, as D. Potter affectedly does; namely, whe- ther or no the Roman church be the only church of Christ ; and much less, whether general councils be infallible : whether the pope may err in his decrees common to the whole church : whe- ther he be above a general council : whether all points of faith be contained in scripture : whether faith be resolved into the au- thority of the church, as into its last formal object and motive : and least of all did he discourse of images, communion under both kinds, public service in an unknown tongue, seven sacra- ments, sacrifice of the mass, indulgencies, and Index Expurga- torius. All which, and divers other articles, D. Potter (as I said) draws by violence into his book : and he might as well have brought in Pope Joan, or antichrist, or the Jews who are permitted to live The Preface to the Reader. 41 in Ptome ; which are common themes for men that want better matter, as D. Potter was forced to fetch in the aforesaid con- troversies, that so he might dazzle the eyes, and distract the mind of the reader, and hinder him from perceiving, that in his whole answer he uttereth nothing to the purpose and point in question ; which if he had followed closely, I dare well say, he might have dis- patched his whole book in two or three sheets of paper. But the truth is, he was loth to affirm plainly, that generally both catholics and protestants may be saved. And yet seeing it to be most evi- dent, that protestants cannot pretend to have any true church before Luther, except the Roman, and such as agreed with her and consequently, that they cannot hope for salvation, if they deny it to us ; he thought best to avoid this difficulty by confusion of language, and to fill up his book with points, which make nothing to the purpose : wherein he is less excusable, because he must grant, that those very particulars to which he digresseth, are not fundamental errors, though it should be granted that they be errors, which indeed are catholic verities: for since they be not funda- mental, nor destructive of salvation, what imports it, whether we hold them or no, for as much as concerns our possibility to be saved ? " 3. In one thing only he will perhaps seem to have touched the point in question ; to wit, in his distinction of points fundamental, and not fundamental ; because some may think, that a difference in points which are not fundamental, breaks not the unity of faith, and hinders not the hope of salvation in persons so disagree- ing. And yet, in this very distinction, he never speaks to the purpose indeed, but only says, that there are some points so funda- mental, as that all are obliged to know and believe them ex- plicitly ; but never tells us, whether there be any other points of faith, which a man may deny or disbelieve, though they be suf- ficiently presented to his understanding as truths revealed or tes- tified by Almighty God ; which was the only thing in question. For if it be damnable, as certainly it is, to deny or disbelieve any one truth witnessed by Almighty God, though the thing be not in itself of any great consequence or moment ; and since of two dis- agreeing in matters of faith, one must necessarily deny some such truth ; it clearly follows, that amongst men of different faiths, or religions, one only can be saved, though their difference consist of divers, or but even one point, which is not in its own nature funda- mental, as 1 declare at large in divers places of my first part. So that it is clear, D. Potter even in this his last refuge and distinc- tion, never comes to the point in question ; to say nothing, that he himself doth quite overthrow it, and plainly contradict his whole design, as I show in the third chapter of my first part. " 4. And as for D. Potter's manner of handling those very points, which are utterly beside the purpose, it consists only in bringing vulgar mean objections, which have been answered a thousand times : yea, and some of them are clearly answered even in Charity Mistaken ; but he takes no knowledge at all of any such answers, and much less does he apply himself to confute them. He 4 * 42 The Preface to the Reader. allegeth also authors with so great corruption and fraud as I would not have believed, if I had not found it by clear and frequent experience. In his second edition he has indeed left out one or two gross corruptions, amongst many others no less notorious : having, as it seems, been warned by some friends, that the)'' could not stand with his credit : but even in this his second edition he retracts them not at all, nor declares that he was mistaken in the first ; and so his reader of the first edition shall ever be deceived by him, though withal he read the second. For preventing of which inconvenience, I have thought it necessary to take notice of them, and discover them in my Reply. " 5. And for conclusion of this point I will only sav, that D. Potter might have well spared his pains, if he had ingenuously acknowledged where the whole substance, yea, and sometimes the very words and phrases of his book, may be found in a far briefer manner, namely, in a sermon of D. Usher's, preached before our late sovereign lord King James, the 20th of June, 1024, at Wan- stead ; containing a declaration of the universality of the church of Christ, and the unity of faith professed therein : which sermon having been roundly and wittily confuted by a catholic divine, under the name of Paul us Veridicus, within the compass of about four sheets of paper, D. Potter's answer to Charity Mistaken was in effect confuted before it appeared. And this may suffice for a general censure of his answer to Charity Mistaken. " 0. For the second, touching my reply ; if you wonder at the bulk thereof, compared either with Charity Mistaken, or D. Potter's answer ; I desire you to consider well of what now I am about to say, and then I hope you will see that I was cast upon a mere necessity of not being so short as otherwise might peradventure be desired. Charity Mistaken is short, I grant, and yet very full and large, for as much as concerned his design, which you see was not to treat of particular controversies in religion, no not so much as to debate whether or no the Roman Church be the only true church of Christ, which indeed would have required a large volume, as I have under- stood there was one then coming forth, if it had not been prevented by the treatise of Charity Mistaken, which seemed to make the other intended work a little less seasonable at that time. But Charity Mistaken proves only in general out of some universal principles, well backed and made good by choice and solid autho- rities, that of two disagreeing in points of faith, one only without repentance can be saved ; which aim exacted no great bulk. And as for D. Potter's answer, even that also is not so short as it may seem. For if his marginal notes, printed in a small letter, were transferred into the text, the book would appear to be of some bulk : though indeed it might have been very short, if he had kept himself to the point treated by Charity Mistaken, as shall be declared anon. But contrarily, because the question debated betwixt Charity Mis- taken and D. Potter, is a point of the highest consequence that can be imagined; and in regard, that there is not a more pernicious heresy, or rather indeed ground of atheism, than a persuasion, that men of different religions may be saved, if otherwise, forsooth, they The Preface to the Reader. 43 lead a kind of civil and moral life: I conceive, that my chief endea- vour was not to be employed in answering D. Potter; but that it was necessary to handle the question itself somewhat at large, and not only to prove in general, that both protestants and catholics can- not be saved ; but to show also, that salvation cannot be hoped for out of the catholic Roman church ; and yet withal, not to omit to answer all the particulars of D. Potter's book, which may anv ways import. To this end I thought it fit to divide my reply into two parts ; in the former whereof the main question is handled by a continued discourse, without stepping aside to confute the parti- culars of D. Potter's answer ; though yet so, as that even in this first part, I omit not to answer such passages of his, as I find directly in my way, and naturally belong to the points whereof I treat; and in the second part, I answer D. Potter's treatise, section by section, as they lie in order. I here therefore entreat the reader, that if he heartily desires satisfaction in this so important question, he do not content himself with that which I say to D. Potter in my second part, but that he take the first before him, either all, or at least so much as may serve most to his purpose of being satisfied in those doubts which press him most. For which purpose, I have caused a table of the chapters of the first part, together with their titles and arguments, to be prefixed before my reply. " 7. This was then a chief reason why I could not be very short : but yet there wanted not also divers other causes of the same effect. For there are so several kinds of protestants through the difference of tenets which they hold, as that if a man convince but one kind of them, the rest will conceive themselves to be as truly unsatisfied and even unspoken to, as if nothing had been said therein at all. As for example : some hold a necessity of a perpetual visible church, and some hold no such necessity. Some of them hold it necessary to be able to prove it distinct from ours ; and others, that their business is dispatched, when they have proved ours to have been always visible : for then they will conceive, that theirs hath been so : and the like may be truly said of very many other particulars. Besides, it is D. Potter's fashion (wherein as he is very far from being the first, so I pray God he prove the last of that humour) to touch in a word many trivial old objections, which if they be not all answered, it will and must serve the turn, to make the ignorant sort of men believe and brag, as if some main unan- swerable matter had been subtilly and purposely omitted : and every body knows, that some objection may be very plausibly made in few words, the clear and solid answer whereof will require more leaves of paper than one. And, in particular, D. Potter doth couch his corruption of authors within the compass of a few lines, and with so great confusedness and fraud, that it requires much time, pains and paper, to open them so distinctly, as that they may appear to every man's eye. It was also necessary to show what D. Potter omits in Charity Mistaken, and the importance of what is omitted, and sometimes to set down the very words themselves that are omitted ; all which could not but add to the quantity of my reply. And as for the quality thereof, I desire thee (good reader) 44 The Preface to the Reader. to believe, that whereas nothing is more necessary than books for answering of books ; yet I was so ill furnished in this kind, that I was forced to omit the examination of divers authors cited by D. Potter, merely upon necessity ; though I did very well perceive by most apparent circumstances, that I must probably have been sure enough to find them plainly misalleged, and much wronged : and for the few which are examined, there hath not wanted some diffi culty to do it. For the times are not for all men alike ; and D. Totter hath much advantage therein. But truth is truth, and will ever be able to justify itself in the midst of all difficulties which may occur. As for me, when 1 allege protestant writers as well domestical as foreign, I willingly and thankfully acknowledge myself obliged for divers of them, to the author of the book inti- tuled, The Protestant's Apology for the Roman Church, who calls himself John Brerely ; whose care, exactness, and fidelity, is so ex- traordinary great, as that he doth not only cite the books, but the editions also, with the place and time of their printing, yea, and often the very page and line, where the words are to be had. And if you happen not to find what he cites, yet suspend your judgment till you have read the corrections placed at the end of this book, though it be also true, that after all diligence and faithfulness on his behalf, it was not in his power to amend all the faults of the prints : in which prints we have difficulty enough, for many evident reasons, which must needs occur to any prudent man. " 8. And forasmuch as concerns the manner of my reply, I have procured to do it without all bitterness or gall of invective words, both forasmuch as may import either protestants in general, or D. Potter's person in particular ; unless, for example, he will call it bitterness for me to term a gross impertinency a slight, or a cor- ruption, by those very names, without which I do not know how to express the things : and yet therein I can truly affirm, that I have studied how to deliver them in the most moderate way, to the end I might give as little offence as possible I could, without betraying the cause. And if any unfit phrase may peradventure have escaped my pen (as I hope none hath) it was beside and against my intention ; though I must needs profess, that D. Potter gives so many and so just occasions of being round with him, as that perhaps some will judge me to have been rather remiss than moderate. But since in the very title of my reply, I profess to maintain charitv, I conceive the excess will be more excusable amongst all kinds of men, if it fall to be in mildness, than if it had appeared in too much zeal. And if D. Potter have a mind to charge me with ignorance, or any thing of that nature, I can and will ease him of that labour, by acknowledging in myself as many and more personal defects than he can heap upon me. Truth only, and sincerity I so much value and profess, as that he shall never be able to prove the contrary in any one least passage or particle against me. " 9. In the third and last place, I have thought fit to express my- self thus. If D. Potter or any other resolve to answer my reply, I desire that he would observe some things which may tend to his The Preface to the Reader. 45 own reputation, the saving of my unnecessary pains, and especially to the greater advantage of truth. I wish then that he would be careful to consider wherein the point of every difficulty consists, and not impertinently to shoot at rovers, and" affectedly mistake one thing for another. As for example, to what purpose (foras- much as concerns the question between D. Potter and Charitv Mistaken) doth he so often and seriously labour to prove, that faith is not resolved into the authority of the church, as into the formal object and motive thereof? Or that all points of faith are contained in scripture? Or that the church cannot make new articles of faith ? Or that the church of Rome, as it signifies that particular church or diocese, is not all one with the universal church ? Or that the pope as a private doctor may err ? With many other such points as will easily appear in their proper places. It will also be necessary for him not to put certain doctrines upon us, from which he knows we disclaim as much as himself. "10. I must in like manner entreat him not to recite my reasons and discourses by halves, but to set them down faithfully and en- tirely, forasmuch as in very deed concerns the whole substance of the thing in question ; because the want sometime of one word, may chance to make void, or lessen the force of the whole argu- ment. And I am the more solicitous about giving this particular caveat, because I find how ill he hath complied with the promise which he made in his preface to the reader, not to omit without answer any one thing of moment in all the discourse of Charity Mistaken. Neither will this course be a cause that his rejoinder grow too large, but it will be occasion of brevity to him, and free me also from the pains of setting down all the words which he omits, and himself of demonstrating, that what he omitted was not material. Nay, I will assure him, that if he keep himself to the point of every difficulty, and not weary the reader, and overcharge his margin with unnecessary quotations of authors in Greek and Latin, and sometimes also in Italian and French, together with proverbs, sentences of poets, and such grammatical stuff; nor affect to cite a multitude of our catholic school-divines to no purpose at all; his book will not exceed a competent size, nor will any man in reason be offended with that length which is regu- lated by necessity. Again, before he come to set down his answer, or propose his arguments, let him consider very well what may be replied, and whether his own objections may not be retorted against himself, as the reader will perceive to have happened often to his disadvantage in my reply against him. But especially I expect, and truth itself exacts at his hand, that he speak clearly and dis- tinctly, and not seek to walk in darkness, so to delude and deceive his reader, now saying, and then denying, and always speaking with such ambiguity, as that his greatest care may seem to con- sist in a certain art to find a shift, as his occasions might chance either now or hereafter to require, and as he might fall out to be urged by diversity of several arguments. And to the end it may appear that I deal plainly, as I would have him also do, I desire that he declare himself concerning these points. " 11. First, whether our Saviour Christ have not always had, and 46 The Preface to the Reader. be not ever to have, a visible true church on earth 1 And whether the contrary doctrine be not a damnable heresy ? " 12. Secondly, what visible church there was before Luther, disagreeing from the Roman church, and agreeing with the pre- tended church of protestants. " 13. Thirdly, since he will be forced to grant, that there can be assigned no visible true church of Christ, distinct from the church of Rome, and such churches as agreed with her when Luther first appeared: whether it doth not follow, that she hath not erred fundamentally 1 Because every such error destroys the nature and being of the church, and so our Saviour Christ should have had no visible church on earth. " 14. Fourthly, if the Roman church did not fall into any funda- mental error, let him tell us how it can be damnable to live in her communion, or to maintain errors which are known and confessed not to be fundamental or damnable. " 15. Fifthly, if her errors were not damnable, nor did exclude salvation, how can they be excused from schism, who forsook her communion upon pretence of errors which were not damnable ? " 16. Sixthly, if D. Potter have a mind to say, that her errors are damnable, or fundamental, let him do us so much charity, as to tell us in particular, what those fundamental errors be. But he must still remember (and myself must be excused for repeating it) that if he say, the Roman church erred fundamentally, he will not be able to shew, that Christ our Lord had any visible church on earth when Luther appeared : and let him tell us, how protestants had, or can have, any church which was universal, and extended herself to all ages, if once he grant that the Roman church ceased to be the true church of Christ ; and consequently, how they can hope for salvation, if they deny it to us. " 17. Seventhly, whether any one error maintained against any one truth, though never so small in itself, yet sufficiently pro- pounded as testified or revealed by Almighty God, do not destroy the nature and unity of faith, or at least is not a grievous offence excluding salvation ? " 18. Eighthly, if this be so, how can lutherans, calvinists, zwing- lians, and all the rest of disagreeing protestants, hope for salvation, since it is manifest, that some of them must needs err against some such truth as is testified by Almighty God, either fundamental, or at least not fundamental ? " 19. Ninthly, we constantly urge, and require to have a par- ticular catalogue of such points as he calls fundamental : a cata- logue, I say, in particular, and not only some general definition or description, wherein protestants may perhaps agree, though we see that they differ, when they come to assign what points in particular be fundamental ; and yet upon such a particular catalogue much depends: as, for example, in particular, whether or no a man doth not err in some points fundamental or necessary to salvation 1 and whether or no lutherans, calvinists, and the rest, do disagree in fundamentals ? which if they do, the same heaven cannot receive them all. "20. Tenthly, and lastly, I desire that in answering to these The Preface to the Reader. 47 points he would let us know distinctly, what is the doctrine of the protestant English church concerning them, and what he utters only as his own private opinion. "21. These are the questions, which, for the present, I find it fit and necessary for me to ask of D. Potter, or any other who will defend his cause, or impugn ours. And it will be in vain to speak vainly, and to tell me, that a fool may ask more questions in an hour, than a wise man can answer in a year ; with such idle pro- verbs as that : for I ask but such questions as for which he gives occasion in his book, and where he declares not himself, but after so ambiguous and confused a manner, as that truth itself can scarce tell how to convince him so, but that with ignorant and ill judging men, he will seem to have somewhat left to say for him- self, though papists (as he calls them) and puritans should press him contrary ways at the same time : and these questions concern things also of high importance, as whereupon the knowledge of God's church, and true religion, and consequently salvation of the soul depends. And now, because he shall not tax me with being like those men in the gospel, whom our blessed Lord and Saviour charged with laying heavy burdens upon other men's shoulders, who yet would not touch them with their finger; I oblige myself to answer upon any demand of his, both to all these questions", if he find that I have not done it already, and to any other, concerning matter of faith that he shall ask. And I will tell him very plainly, what is catholic doctrine, and what is not ; that is, what is defined, or what is not defined, and rests but in discussion amongst divines. " 22. And it will be here expected, that he perform these things as a man who professeth learning should do ; not flying from ques- tions which concern things as they are considered in their own na- ture, to accidental or rare circumstances of ignorance, incapacity, want of means to be instructed, erroneous conscience, and the like ; which being very various and different, cannot be well compre- hended under any general rule. But in delivering general doctrines, we must consider things as they be ex natura rei, or per se loquendo, (as divines speak) that is, acccording to their natures, if all cir- cumstances concur proportionable thereunto. As for example, some may for a time have invincible ignorance even of some fundamental article of faith, through want of capacity, instruction, or the like ; and so not offend either in such ignorance or error ; and yet we must absolutely say, that error in any one fundamental point is damnable; because so it is, if we consider things in themselves, abstracting from accidental circumstances in particular persons : as contrarily, if some man judge some act of virtue, or some indifferent action to be a sin, in him it is a sin indeed, by reason of his erroneous conscience ; and yet we ought not to say absolutely, that virtuous or indifferent actions are sins; and in all sciences we must distin- guish the general rules from their particular exceptions. And therefore when, for example, he answers to our demand, whether we hold that catholics may be saved, or whether their pretended errors be fundamental and damnable ? he is not to change the state of the question, and have recourse to ignorance, and the like ; but to 48 The Answer to the Preface. answer concerning the errors being considered what they are apt to be in themselves, and as they are neither increased or diminished by accidental circumstances. " 23. And the like I say of all the other points, to which I once again desire an answer without any of these or the like ambiguous terms, in some sort, in some sense, in some degree, which may be explicated afterward, as strictly or largely as may best serve his turn ; but let him tell us roundly and particularly in what sort, in what sense, in what degree he understands those, and the like obscure mincing phrases. If he proceed solidly after this manner, and not by way of mere words, more like a preacher to a vulgar auditory, than like a learned man with a pen in his hand; thy patience shall be less abused, and truth will also receive more right. And since we have already laid the grounds of the question, much may be said hereafter in few words, if (as I said) he keep close to the real point of every difficulty, without wandering into imper- tinent disputes, or multiplying vulgar and thread-bare objections and arguments, or labouring to prove what no man denies, or making a vain ostentation, by citing a number of schoolmen, which every puny brought up in schools is able to do ; and if he cite his authors with such sincerity, as no time need be spent in opening his corruptions; and finally, if he set himself at work with this consideration, that we are to give a most strict account to a most just and impartial judge, of every period, line, and word that passeth under our pen. For if at the latter day we shall be ar- raigned for every idle word which is spoken, so much more will that be done for every idle word which is written, as the delibera- tion wherewith it passeth makes a man guilty of more malice; and as the importance of the matter which is treated of in books concerning true faith and religion, without which no soul can be saved, makes a man's errors more material, than they would be if the question were but of toys." THE ANSWER TO THE PREFACE. Ad. 1. and 2 §. If beginnings be ominous (as they say they are) D. Potter hath cause to look for great store of uningenuous dealing from you ; the very first words you speak of him, viz. that he hath not so much as once truly and really fallen upon the point in ques- tion, being a most unjust and immodest imputation. 2. For first; the point in question, was not that which you pre- tend, whether both papists and protestants can be saved in their several professions ? but whether you may without ur.charitable- ness affirm, that protestancy unrepented destroys salvation ? And that this is the very question, is most apparent and unques- tionable, both from the title of Charity Mistaken, and from the arguments of the three first chapters of it, and from the title of your own reply. And therefore if D. Potter had joined issue 77/ e Answer to the Preface. 49 with his adversary only thus far ; and, not meddling at all with papists, but leaving them to stand or to fall to their own master, had proved protestants living and dying so, capable of salvation, I cannot see how it could justly be charged upon him, that he had not once truly and really fallen upon the point in question. Nei- ther may it be said, that your question here, and mine, are in effect the same, seeing it is very possible, that the true answer to the one might have been affirmative, and to the other negative. For there is no incongruity, but it may be true, that you and we cannot both be saved ; and yet as true, that without uncharitableness you cannot pronounce us damned. For, all ungrounded and unwar- rantable sentencing men to damnation, is either in a propriety of speech uncharitable, or else (which for my purpose is all one) it is that which protestants mean, when they say, papists for damning them are uncharitable. And therefore, though the author of C. M. had proved as strongly as he hath done weakly, that one heaven could not receive protestants and papists both ; yet cer- tainly, it was very hastily and unwarrantably, and therefore un- charitably, concluded, that protestants were the part that was to be excluded. As, though Jews and Christians cannot both be saved, yet a Jew cannot, justly, and therefore not charitably, pronounce a christian damned. 3. But, then, secondly, to show your dealing with him very injurious; I say, he doth speak to this very question very largely, and very effectually ; as by confronting his work and Charity M. together, will presently appear. Charity M. proves, you say in general, " that there is but one church." D. Potter tells him, " his labour is lost in proving the unity of the catholic church, whereof there is no doubt or controversy :" and here I hope, you will grant, he answers right and to purpose. C. M. proves (you say) secondly, " that all christians are obliged to hearken to the church." D. Pot- ter answers, " It is true : yet not absolutely in all things, but only when she commands those things which God doth not countermand." And this also, I hope, is to his purpose, though not to yours. C. M. proves, you say, thirdly, " that the church must be ever visi- ble and infallible." For her visibility, D. Potter denies it not; and as for infallibility, he grants it in fundamentals, but not in superstructures. C. M. proves, you say, fourthly, " that to separate one's self from the church's communion is schism." D. Potter grants it, with this exception, unless there be necessary cause to do so ; unless the conditions of her communion be apparently unlawful. C. M. proves, you say, lastly, " that to dissent from her doctrine is heresy though it be in points never so few, and never so small ; and therefore that the distinction of points fundamental and un- fundamental, as it is applied by protestants, is wholly vain." This D. Potter denies; shows the reasons brought for it weak and unconcluding ; proves the contrary, by reasons unanswerable : and therefore, that " the distinction of points into fundamental and not fundamental, as it is applied by protestants, is very good." Upon these grounds you say, C. M. clearly evinces, " that any least difference in faith cannot stand with salvation ; and therefore see- d 5 50 The Answer to the Preface. ing catholics and protestants disagree in very many points of faith, they both cannot hope to be saved without repentance ;" you must mean, without an explicit and particular repentance, and dere- liction of their errors; for so C. M. hath declared himself, p. 14, where he hath these words; " We may safely say, that a man who lives in protestancy, and is so far from repenting it, as that he will not so much as acknowledge it to be a sin, though he be suf- ficiently informed thereof," &c. From whence it is evident, that in his judgment there can be no repentance of an error, without acknowledging it to be a sin. And to this D. Potter justly opposes; that " both sides, by the confession of both sides, agree in more points than are simply and indispensably necessary to salvation, and differ only in such as are not precisely necessary : that it is very possible a man may die in error, and yet die with repentance, as for all his sins of ignorance, so, in that number, for the errors in which he dies ; with a repentance though not explicit and par- ticular, which is not simply required, yet explicit and general, which is sufficient : so that he cannot but hope, considering the goodness of God, that the truths retained on both sides, especially those of the necessity of repentance from dead works and faith in Jesus Christ, if they be put in practice, may be an antidote against the errors held on either side ; to such he means, and says, as being diligent in seeking truth, and desirous to find it, yet miss of it through human frailty and die in error." If you will but attentively consider and compare the undertaking of C. M. and D. Potter's performance in all these points, I hope, you will be so ingenuous as to acknowledge, that you have injured him much, in imputing tergiversation to him, and pretending, that through his whole book he hath not once truly and really fallen upon the point in question. Neither may you or C. M. conclude him from nence (as covertly you do) an enemy to souls, by deceiving them with ungrounded false hopes of salvation ; seeing the hope of sal- vation cannot be ungrounded, which requires and supposes belief and practice of all things absolutely necessary unto salvation, and repentance of those sins and errors which we fall into by human frailty : nor a friend to indifferency in religion, seeing he gives them only hope of pardon of errors who are desirous, and, accor- ding to the proportion of their opportunities and abilities, indus- trious to find the truth ; or at least truly repentant, that they have not been so. Which doctrine is very fit to excite men to a con- stant and impartial search of truth, and very far from teaching them, that it is indifferent what religion they are of; and, without all controversy, very honourable to the goodness of God, with which how it can consist, not to be satisfied with his servants' true endeavours to know his will, and to do it, without full and exact performance, I leave it to you and all good men to judge. 4. As little justice methinks you show, in quarrelling with him for descending to the particular disputes here mentioned by you. For to say nothing, that many of these questions are immediately and directly pertinent to the business in hand, as the 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and all of them fall in of themselves into the stream of his dis- Tlie Answer to the Preface. 51 course, and are not drawn in by him, and besides, are touched for the most part, rather than handled ; to say nothing of all this, you know right well, if he conclude you erroneous in any one of all these, be it but in the communion in one kind, or the language of your service, the infallibility of your church is evidently over- thrown : and this being done, I hope there will be " no such neces- sity of hearkening to her in all things : it will be very possible to separate from her communion in some things, without schism ; and from her doctrine, so far as it is erroneous, without heresy ; then all that she proposes will not be, eo ipso, fundamental, be- cause she proposes it ;" and so presently all Charity Mistaken will vanish into smoke, and clouds, and nothing. 5. You say he was loth to affirm plainly, that generally both catholics and protestants may be saved : which yet is manifest he doth affirm plainly of protestants throughout his book; and of erring papists, that "have sincerely sought the truth, and failed of it, and die with a general repentance," pp. 77, 78. And yet you deceive yourself, if you conceive he had any other necessity to do so, but only that he thought it true. For we may and do pretend that before Luther there were many true churches besides the Ro man, which agreed not with her : in particular, the Greek church So that what you say is evidently true, is indeed evidently false Besides, if he had any necessity to make use of you in this matter he needed not for this end to say, that now in your church salva> tion may be had, but only that before Luther's time it might be Then when your means of knowing the truth were not so great and when your ignorance might be more invincible, and therefore more excusable. So that you may see, if you please, it is not for ends, but for the love of truth, that we are thus charitable to you. 6. Neither is it material, that these particulars he speaks against are not fundamental errors ; for though they be not de- structive of salvation, yet the conviction of them may be, and is, destructive enough of his adversary's assertion ; and if you be the man I take you for, you will not deny they are so. For certainly, no consequence can be more palpable than this: the church of Rome doth err in this or that, therefore it is not infallible. And this, perhaps, you perceived yourself, and therefore demanded not since they be not fundamental, what imports it whether we hold them or no, simply ; but, forasmuch as concerns our possi- bility to be saved. As if we were not bound by the love of God and the love of truth to be zealous in the defence of all truths, that are any way profitable, though not simply necessary to salva- tion ! Or, as if any good man could satisfy his conscience without being so affected and resolved ! Our Saviour himself having as- sured us, that* " he that shall break one of his least commandments (some whereof you pretend are concerning venial sins, and conse- quently the keeping of them not necessary to salvation) and shall so teach men, shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven." 7. But then it imports very much, though not for the possibility that you may be saved, yet for the probability that you will be so. * Matt. v. 19. D2 52 Tlie Answer to the Preface. Because the holding of these errors, though it did not merit, might yet occasion damnation : as the doctrine of indulgences may take away the fear of purgatory, and the doctrine of purga- tory the fear of hell ; as you do well know it does too frequently. So that though a godly man might be saved with these errors, yet by means of them, many are made vicious, and so damned. By them, I say, though not for them. No godly layman, who is verily persuaded that there is neither impiety nor superstition in the use of your Latin service, shall be damned, I hope, for being present at it; yet the want of that devotion, which the frequent hearing the offices understood, might happily beget in them, the want of that instruction and edification which it might afford them, may very probably hinder the salvation of many which might otherwise have been saved. Besides, though the matter of an error may be only something profitable, not necessary, yet the neglect of it may be a damnable sin ; as not to regard venial sins is in the doctrine of your schools mortal. Lastly, as venial sins, you say, dispose men to mortal ; so the erring from some profitable, though lesser truth, may dispose a man to error in greater matters. As for example, the belief of the pope's infal- libility is, I hope, not unpardonably damnable to every one that holds it ; yet if it be a falsehood (as most certainly it is) it puts a man into a very congruous disposition to believe antichrist, if he should chance to get into that see. 8. Ad. § 3. " In his distinctions of points fundamental and not fundamental, he may seem," you say, " to have touched the point, but does not so indeed : because, though he says, there are some points so fundamental, as that all are obliged to believe them ex- plicitly ; yet he tells you not whether a man may disbelieve any other points of faith, which are sufficiently presented to his un- derstanding, as truths revealed by Almighty God." Touching which matter of sufficient proposal, I beseech you to come out of the clouds, and tell us roundly and plainly, what you mean by " points of faith sufficiently propounded to a man's understanding, as truths revealed by God." Perhaps you mean such as the per- son to whom they are proposed, understands sufficiently to be truths revealed by God. But how then can .he possibly choose but believe them? Or how is it not an apparent contradiction, that a man should disbelieve what himself understands to be a truth ; or any christian what he understands or but believes to be testified by God? D. Potter might well think it superfluous to tell you this is damnable ; because indeed it is impossible. And yet one may very well think, by your saying as you do hereafter, " that the impiety of heresy consists in calling God's truth in ques- tion," that this should be your meaning. Or do you esteem all those things sufficiently presented to his understanding as divine truths, which by you, or any other man, or any company of men whatsoever, are declared to him to be so? I hope you will not say so ; for this were to oblige a man to believe all the churches, and all the men in the world, whensoever they pretended to pro- pose divine revelations. D. Potter, I assure you from him, would The Answer to the Preface. 53 never have told you this neither. Or do you mean by sufficiently propounded as divine truths, all that your church propounds for such ? That you may not neither ; for the question between us is this: whether your church's proposition be a sufficient proposi- tion ? And therefore to suppose this, is to suppose the question ; which you know in reasoning is always a fault. Or lastly, do you mean (for I know not else what possibly you can mean) by suffi- ciently presented to his understanding as revealed by God ; that which, all things considered, is so proposed to him, that he might and should and would believe it to be true and revealed by God, were it not for some voluntary and avoidable fault of his own that interposeth itself between his understanding and the truth pre- sented to it ; this is the best construction that I can make of your words ; and if you speak of truths thus proposed and rejected, let it be as damnable as you please, to deny or disbelieve them. But then I cannot but be amazed to hear you say, that D. Potter never tells you whether there be any other points of faith, besides those which we are bound to believe explicitly, which a man may deny or disbelieve, though they be sufficiently presented to his understanding as truths revealed or testified by Almighty God; seeing the light itself is not more clear than D. Potter's declara- tion of himself for the negative in this question, pp. 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250 of his book, where he treats at large of this very argument, beginning his discourse thus. " It seems funda- mental to the faith, and for the salvation of every member of the church, that he acknowledge and believe all such points of faith, as whereof he may be convinced that they belong to the doctrine of Jesus Christ. To this conviction he requires three things: clear revelation, sufficient proposition, and capacity and under- standing in the hearer. For want of clear revelation, he frees the church before Christ, and the disciples of Christ, from any dam- nable error, though they believed not these things, which he that should now deny were no christian. To sufficient proposition, he requires two things: 1. That the points be perspicuously laid open in themselves. 2. So forcibly, as may serve to remove rea- sonable doubts to the contrary, and satisfy a teachable mind con- cerning it, against the principles in which he hath been bred to the contrary. This proposition, he says, is not limited to the pope or church, but extended to all means whatsoever, by which a man may be convinced in conscience, that the matter proposed is divine revelation ; which he professes to be done sufficiently, not only when his conscience doth expressly bear witness to the truth ; but when it would do so, if it were not choked, and blinded by some unruly and unmortified lust in the will : the difference being not great between him that is wilfully blind, and him that knowingly gainsayeth the truth. The third thing he re- quires, is capacity and ability to apprehend the proposal, and the reasons of it : the want whereof excuseth fools and madmen, &c. But where there is no such impediment, and the will of God is sufficiently propounded, there (saith he) he that opposeth is con- vinced of error ; and he who is thus convinced is an heretic ; and 5* 54 The Answer to the Preface. heresy is a work of the flesh, which excludeth from salvation (he means without repentance). And hence it followeth, that it is fundamental to a christian's faith, and necessary for his salvation, that he believes all revealed truths of God, whereof he may he convinced that they are from God." This is the conclusion of D. Potter's discourse ; many passages whereof you take notice of in your subsequent disputations, and make your advantage of them. And therefore I cannot but say again, that it amazeth me to hear you say, that he declines this question, and never tells you whe- ther or no there be any other points of faith, which being suffi- ciently propounded as divine revelations, may be denied and dis- believed. He tells you plainly there are none such; and there- fore you cannot say that he tells you not whether there be any such. Again, it is almost as strange to me, why you should say this was the only thing in question, whether a man may deny or disbelieve any point of faith, sufficiently presented to his under- standing as a truth revealed by God. For to say, that any thing is a thing in question, methinks, at the first hearing of the words, imports, that it is by some affirmed, and denied by others. Now you affirm, I grant ; but what protestant ever denied, that it was a sin to give God the lie ? which is the first and most obvious sense of these words. Or, which of them ever doubted, that to dis- believe is then a fault, when the matter is so proposed to a man, that he might and should, and were it not for his own fault, would believe it? Certainly, he that questions either of these, justly deserves to have his wits called in question. Produce any one protestant that ever did so, and I will give you leave to say* it is the only thing in question. But then I must tell you, that your ensuing argument, viz. To deny a truth witnessed by God is damnable, but of two that disagree, one must of necessity deny some such truth, therefore one only can be saved, is built upon a ground clean different from this postulate. For though it be al- ways a fault to deny what either I do know, or should know, to be testified by God ; yet that, which by a cleanly conveyance you put in the place hereof, to deny a truth witnessed by God simply, without the circumstance of being known or sufficiently proposed, is so far from being certainly damnable, that it may be many times done without any the least fault at all. As if God should testify something to a man in the Indies, I that had no assurance of this testification should not be obliged to believe it. For in such cases the rule of the law hath place, idem est non esse et non apparere ; not to be at all, and not to appear to me, is to me all one. " If I had not come and spoken unto you," saith our Saviour, "you had had no sin." 10. As little necessity is there for that which follows: that of two disagreeing in a matter of faith, one must deny some such truth. Whether by [such] you understand testified at all by God ; or, testified or sufficiently propounded. For it is very possible the matter in controversy may be such a thing where God hath not at all declared himself, or not so fully and clearly, as to oblige all men to hold one way ; and yet be so overvalued The Answer to the Preface. 55 by the parties in variance, as to be esteemed a matter of faith, and one of those things of which our Saviour says, " he that be- lieveth not shall be damned." Who sees not, that it is possible two churches may excommunicate and damn each other for keep- ing Christmas ten days sooner or later ; as well as Victor, excom- municated the churches of Asia for differing from him about Easter-day ? And yet I believe you will confess, that God had not then declared himself about Easter, nor hath now about Christmas. Anciently some good catholic bishops excommu- nicated and damned others for holding there were antipodes ; and in this question I would fain know on which side was the sufficient proposal. The contra-remonstrants differ from the re- monstrants about the point of predetermination as a matter of faith ; I would know in this thing also, which way God hath declared himself : whether for predetermination, or against it. Stephen, bishop of Rome, held it as a matter of faith and apos- tolic tradition, that heretics gave true baptism : others there were, and they as good catholics as he, that held that this was neither matter of faith, nor matter of truth. Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus, held the doctrine of the millenaries as a matter of faith : and though Justin Martyr deny it, yet you, I hope, will affirm, that some good Christians held the contrary. St. Augustin, I am sure, held the communicating of infants as much apostolic tradition, as the baptizing of them : whether the bishop and the church of Rome of his time, held so too, or held otherwise, I desire you to determine- But, sure I am, the church of Rome at this present holds the contrary. The same St. Augustin held it no matter of faith, that the bishops of Rome were judges of appeals from all parts of the church catholic, no not in major causes and major persons : whether the bishop or church of Rome did then hold the contrary, do you resolve me ; but now I am resolved, that they do so. In all these differences, the point in question is esteemed and proposed by one side at least as a matter of faith, and by the other rejected, as not so : and either this is to disagree in matters of faith, or you will have no means to show that we do disagree. Now then to show you how weak and sandy the foundation is, on which the whole fabric both of your book and church depends, answer me briefly to this dilemma : either in these oppositions, one of the opposite parts erred damnably, and denied God's truth sufficiently propounded, or they did not. If they did, then they which do deny God's truth sufficiently pro- pounded, may go to heaven ; and then you are rash and uncha- ritable in excluding us, though we were guilty of this fault. If not, then there is no such necessity, that of two disagreeing about a matter of faith, one should deny God's truth sufficiently pro- pounded. And so the major and minor of your argument are proved false. Yet though they were as true as gospel, and as evident as mathematical principles, the conclusion (so impertinent is it to the premises) might still be false. For that which natu- rally issues from these propositions is not, therefore one only can be saved : but, therefore one of them does something that is 56 The Answer to the Preface. damnable. But with what logic, or what charity you can infer either as the immediate production of the former premises, or as a corollary from this conclusion, therefore one only can be saved, I do not understand ; unless you will pretend, that this con- sequence is good ; such a one doth something damnable, therefore he shall certainly be damned : which whether it be not to over- throw the article of our faith, which promises remission of sins upon repentance ; and consequently to ruin the gospel of Christ, I leave it to the pope and cardinals to determine. For if against this it be alleged, that no man can repent of the sin wherein he dies; this much I have already stopped, by showing, that if it be a sin of igno- rance, this is no way incongruous. 11. Ad. § 4. You proceed in slighting and disgracing your ad- versary, pretending his objections are mean and vulgar, and such as have been answered a thousand times. But if your cause were good, these arts would be needless. For though some of his ob- jections have been often shifted, by men* that make a profession of devising shifts and evasions to save themselves and their religion from the pressure of truth, by men that are resolved they will say something, though they can say nothing to purpose ; yet I doubt not to make it appear, that neither by others have they been truly and really satisfied ; and that the best answer you can give them, is to call them mean and vulgar objections. 12. Ad. § 5. But his pains might have been spared ; for the sub- stance of his discourse is in a sermon of Dr. Usher's, and confuted four years ago by Paulus Veridicus. It seems then, the substance of your reply is in Paulus Veridicus, and so your pains also might well have been spared. But had there been no necessity to help and piece out your confuting his arguments with disgracing his person (which yet you cannot do) you would have considered, that to them who compare D. Potter's book, and the archbishop's sermon, this aspersion will presently appear a poor detraction, not to be answered, but scorned. To say nothing, that in D. Potter, being to answer a book by express command from royal authority, to leave any thing material unsaid, because it had been said before, especially being spoken at large, and without any relation to the discourse which he was to answer, had been a ridiculous vanity, and fond prevarication. 13. Ad. § 6. In your sixth parag. I let all pass saving only this, " that a persuasion, that men of different religions (you must mean, or else you speak not to the point, christians of divers opinions and communions) may be saved, is a most pernicious heresy, and even a ground of atheism." What strange extractions chemistry can make I know not ; but sure I am, he that by reason would infer this conclusion, that there is no God ; from this ground, that God will save men in different religions, must have a higher strain * I mean the divines of Doway ; whose profession we have in your Belgic Expurga- torius, p. 12, in ccnsura Bertrami in these words : " Seeing in other ancient catholics, we tolerate, extenuate, and excuse very many errors, and devising some shift, often deny them, and put upon them a convenient sense when they are objected to us in dis- putations and conflicts with our adversaries ; we see no reason why Bertram may not deserve the same equity." The Answer to the Preface. 57 in logic, than you or I have hitherto made shew of. In my appre- hension, the other part of the contradiction, that there is a God, should much rather follow from it. And whether contradictions will flow from the same fountain, let the learned judge. Perhaps you will say, you intended not to deliver here a positive and measured truth, and which you expected to be called to account for; but only a high and tragical expression of your just detesta- tion of the wicked doctrine against which you write. If you mean so, I let it pass ; only I am to advertise the less wary reader, that passionate expressions, and vehement asseverations are no argu- ments, unless it be of the weakness of the cause that is defended by them, or the man that defends it. And to remember you of what Boethius says of some such things as these, Kabila mens est, hcec ubi regnant. For my part, I am not now in a passion ; neither will I speak one word, which I think I cannot justify to the full : And I say, and will maintain, that to say, that christians of different opinions and communions (such I mean, who hold all those things that are simply necessary to salvation) may not obtain par- don for the errors wherein they die ignorantly, by a general re- pentance, is so far from being a ground of atheism, that to say the contrary, is to cross in diameter a main article of our creed, and to overthrow the gospel of Christ. 14. § 7 & 8. To the two next paragraphs, I have but two words to say. The one is, that I know no protestants that hold it neces- sary to be able to prove a perpetual visible church distinct from yours. Some perhaps undertake to do so, as a matter of courtesy ; out I believe you will be much to seek for any one that holds it necessary. For though you say, that Christ hath promised there shall be a perpetual visible church ; yet you yourselves do not pre- tend, that he hath promised there shall be histories and records always extant of the professors of it in all ages ; nor that he hath any where enjoined us to read those histories, that we may be able to show them. 15. The other is, that Brerely's great exactness, which you magnify so, and amplify, is no very certain demonstration of his fidelity. A romance may be told with as much variety of circum- stances, as a true story. 16. Ad. 9 & 10 §. Your desires that I would in this rejoinder, avoid impertinencies : not impose doctrines upon you which you disclaim : set down the substance of your reasons faithfully and entirely : not weary the reader with unnecessary quotations : object nothing to you which I can answer myself, or which may be re- turned upon myself : And lastly (which you repeat again at the end of your preface), speak as clearly and distinctly and univocally as possibly I can, are all very reasonable, and shall be by me most punctualiy and fully satisfied. Only I have reason to complain, that you give us rules only, and not good example in keeping them. For in some of these things I shall have frequent occasion to show, that medice, cura teipsum, may very justly be said unto you ; espe- cially for objecting what might very easily have been answered by you, and may be very justly returned upon you. 58 The Answer to the Preface. 17. To your ensuing demands, though some of them be very captious and ensnaring ; yet I will give you as clear and plain and ingenuous answers as possibly I can. 18. Ad. 11. §. To the first then, about the perpetuity of the visible church ; my answer is : That I believe our Saviour, ever since his ascension, hath had in some place or other a visible true church on earth; I mean a company of men, that professed at least so much truth as was absolutely necessary for their salvation. And I believe, that there will be somewhere or other such a church to the world's end. But the contrary doctrine, I do at no hand believe to be a damnable heresy. 19. Ad. § 12. To the second, what visible church there was be- fore Luther, disagreeing from the Roman ? I answer, that before Luther there were many visible churches, in many things dis- agreeing from the Roman. But not that the whole catholic church disagreed from her, because she herself was a part of the whole, though much corrupted. And to undertake to name a catholic church disagreeing from her, is to make her no part of it, which we do not, nor need not pretend. And for men agreeing with pro- testants in all points, we will then produce them, when you shall either prove it necessary to be done, which you know we absolutely deny ; or when you shall produce a perpetual succession of pro- fessors, which in all points have agreed with you, and disagreed from you in nothing. But this my promise, to deal plainly with you, I conceive, and so intended it to be, very like his, who under- took to drink up the sea, upon condition, that he to whom the pro- mise was made, should first stop the rivers from running in. For this unreasonable request which you make to us, is to yourselves so impossible, that in the next age after the apostles, you will never be able to name a man, whom you can prove to have agreed with you in all things, nay, (if you speak of such, whose works are ex- tant, and unquestioned) whom we cannot prove to have disagreed from you in many things. Which I am so certain of, that I will venture my credit and my life upon it. 20. Ad. § 13. To the third, whether, seeing there cannot be assigned any visible true church distinct from the Roman, it fol- lows not that she erred not fundamentally ? I say, in our sense of the word fundamental, it does follow. For if it be true, that there was then no church distinct from the Roman, then it must be, either because there was no church at all, which we deny ; or because the Roman church was the whole church, which we also deny ; or, because she was a part of the whole, which we grant. And if she were a true part of the church, then she retained those truths which were simply necessary to salvation, and held no errors which were inevitably and unpardonably destructive of it. For this is precisely necessary to constitute any man or any church a member of the church catholic. In our sense therefore of the word fundamental, I hope she erred not fundamentally ; but in your sense of the word, I fear she did ; that is, she held some- thing to be divine revelation, which was not ; something not to be, •which was. The Answer to the Preface. 59 21. Ad. § 14. To the fourth, how could it he damnable to maintain her errors, if they were not fundamental ? I answer : 1. Though it were not damnable, yet if it were a fault, it was not to be done. For a venial sin with you is not damnable ; yet you say, it is not to be committed for the procuring any good : non est faciendum malum vel minimum, ut eveniat bonum vel maximum. It is damnable to maintain an error against conscience, though the error in itself, and to him that believes it, be not damnable. Nay, the profession not only of an error, but even of a truth, if not be- lieved, when you think on it again, I believe you will confess to be a mortal sin ; unless you will say, hypocrisy and simulation in religion is not so. 3. Though we say, the errors of the Roman church were not destructive of salvation, but pardonable even to them that died in them, upon a general repentance ; yet we deny not, but in themselves they were damnable. Nay, the very saying they were pardonable, implies they need pardon, and therefore in themselves were damnable : damnable meritoriously, though not effectually. As a poison may be deadly in itself, and yet not kill him, that together with the poison takes an antidote : or as felony may deserve death, and yet not bring it on him that obtains the king's pardon. 22. Ad. § 15. To the fifth, how can they be excused from schism, who forsook her communion upon pretence of errors which were not damnable ? I answer, all that we forsake in you, is only the belief and practice, and profession of your errors. Hereupon you cast us out of your communion : and then with a strange and contradictious and ridiculous hypocrisy, complain that we forsake it. As if a man should thrust his friend out of doors, and then be offended at his departure. But for us not to forsake the belief of your errors, having discovered them to be errors, was impossible; and therefore to do so, could not be damnable, believing them to be errors. Not to forsake the practice and pro- fession of them, had been damnable hypocrisy ; supposing that (which you vainly run away with, and take for granted) those errors in themselves were not damnable. Now to do so, and, as matters now stand, not to forsake your communion, is apparently contradictious ; seeing the condition of your communion is, that we must profess to believe all your doctrines not only not to be damnable errors (which will not content you) but also to be cer- tain and necessary and revealed truths. So that to demand, why we forsook your communion upon pretence of errors which are not damnable, is, in effect, to demand why we forsook it upon our forsaking it? For to pretend that there are errors in your church, though not damnable, is ipso facto, to forsake your communion, and to do that which both in your account, and as you think, in God's account, puts him that does so out of your communion. So that either you must free your church from requiring the belief of any error whatsoever, damnable and not damnable; or whether you will or no, you must free us from schism : for schism there cannot be, in leaving your communion, unless we were obliged to continue in it. Man cannot be obliged by man, but to what either formally or virtually he is obliged by God ; for, all just 60 The Answer to the Preface. power is from God. God, the eternal truth, neither can nor will oblige us to believe any the least and the most innocent falsehood to be a divine truth, that is, to err. not to profess a known error, which is to lie. So that if you require the belief of any error among the conditions of your communion, our obligation to com- municate with you ceaseth, and so the imputation of schism to us vanisheth into nothing; but lies heavy upon you for making our separation from you just and necessary, by requiring unnecessary and unlawful conditions of your communion. Hereafter therefore, entreat you, let not your demand be, how could we forsake your communion without schism, seeing you erred not damnably ? But, how could we do so without schism, seeing you erred not at all : which if either you do prove, or we cannot disprove it, we will (I at least will for my part) return to your communion, or subscribe myself schismatic. In the mean time, fjtivwfAsv wtfirsp I'rffJtSV. 23. Yet notwithstanding all your errors, we do not renounce your communion totally and absolutely, but only leave communicating with you in the practice and profession of your errors. The trial whereof will be to propose some form of worshipping God, taken wholly out of scripture; and herein if we refuse to join with you, then, and not till then, may you justly say, we have utterly and absolutely abandoned your communion. 24. Ad. § 16. Your sixth demand I have already satisfied in my answers to the second and the fourth ; and in my reply Ad. § 2, toward the end. And though you say, your repeating must be excused, yet 1 dare not be so confident, and therefore forbear it. 25. Ad. § 17. To the seventh, whether error against any one truth sufficiently propounded as testified by God, destroy not the nature and unity of faith, or, at least, is not a grievous offence excluding salvation ? I answer, if you propose, as you seem to do, the proposition so sufficient, that the party to whom it is made is convinced that it is from God ; so that the denial of it involves also with it the denial of God's veracity, any such error destroys both faith and salvation. But if the proposal be only so sufficient, not, that the party to whom it is made is convinced, but only that he should, and but for his own fault, would have been convinced of the divine verity of the doctrine proposed ; the crime then is not so great ; for the belief of God's veracity may still consist with such an error. Yet a fault I confess it is, and (without repentance) damnable, if, all circumstances considered, the proposal be suffi- cient. But then I must tell you, that the proposal of the present Roman church is only pretended to be sufficient for this purpose, but is not so; especially all the rays of the divinity, which they pretend to shine so conspicuously in her proposals, being so darkened and even extinguished with a cloud of contradiction, from scripture, reason, and the ancient church. 26. Ad. § 18. To the eighth, how of disagreeing protestants, both parts may hope for salvation, seeing some of them must needs err against some truth testified by God 1 I answer, the most dis- agreeing protestants that are, yet thus far agree; 1. That those The Answer to the Preface. 61 books of scripture, which were never doubted of in the church, are the undoubted word of God, and a perfect rule of faith. 2. That the sense of them, which God intended, whatsoever it is, is certainly true; so that they believe implicitly even those very truths against which they err ; and, why an implicit faith in Christ and his word, should not suffice as well as an implicit faith in your church ; I have desired to be resolved by many of your side, but never could. 3. That they are to use their best endeavours to believe the scripture in the true sense, and to live according to it. This if they perform (as I hope many on all sides do) truly and sincerely, it is impossible but that they should be- lieve aright in all things necessary to salvation; that is, in all those things which appertain to the covenant between God and man in Christ; for so much is not only plainly, but frequently, contained in scripture. And believing aright touching the cove- nant, if they for their parts perform the condition required of them, which is sincere obedience, why should they not expect that God will perform his promise, and give them salvation 1 For, as for other things which lie without the covenant, and are therefore less necessary, if by reason of the seeming conflict which is often- times between scripture and reason, and authority on the one side ; and scripture, reason and authority on the other ; if by reason of the varieties, tempers, abilities, educations and unavoidable prejudices, whereby men's understandings are variously formed and fashioned, they do embrace several opinions, whereof some must be erroneous; to say, that God will damn them for such errors, who are lovers of him, and lovers of truth, is to rob man of his comfort, and God of his goodness ; it is to make man des- perate, and God a tyrant. But they deny truths testified by God, and therefore shall be damned. Yes, if they knew them to be thus testified by him, and yet would deny them ; that were to give God the lie, and questionless damnable. But if you should deny a truth which God had testified, but only to a man in the Indies (as I said before) and this testification you had never heard of, or at least had no sufficient reason to believe that God had so testified, would you not think it a hard case to be damned for such a denial 1 Yet consider, I pray, a little more attentively the difference between them, and you will presently acknowledge, the question between them is not at any time, or in any thing, whether God says true or no ; or, whether he says this or no : but, supposing he says this, and says true, whether he means this or no. As for example ; between lutherans, calvinists, and zuing- lians, it is agreed that Christ spake these words, " This is my body ;" and that, whatsoever he meant in saying so is true : but what he meant, and how he is to be understood, that is the question. So that though some of them deny a truth by God intended, yet you can with no reason or justice accuse them of denying the truth of God's testimony, unless you can plainly show, that God hath declared, and that plainly and clearly, what was his meaning in these words : I say plainly and clearly, for he that speaks obscurely and ambiguously, and no where declares him- self plainly, sure he hath no reason to be much offended if he 62 Tlie Answer to the Preface. be mistaken. When therefore you can show, that in this and all other their controversies, God hath interposed his testi- mony on one side or other ; so that either they do see it, and will not; or, were it not for their own voluntary and avoidable fault, might and should see it, and do not ; let all such errors be as damnable as you please to make them. In the meanwhile, if they suffer themselves neither to be betrayed into their errors, nor kept in them by any sin of their will ; if they do their best endeavour to free themselves from all errors, and yet fail of it through human frailty; so well am I persuaded of the. - goodness of God, that if in me alone should meet a confluence of all such errors of all the protestants in the world, that were thus quali- fied, I should not be so much afraid of them all, as I should be to ask pardon for them. For, whereas that which you affright us with, of calling God's veracity in question, is but a panic fear, a fault that no man thus qualified is or can be guilty of; to ask pardon of simple and purely involuntary errors is tacitly to imply, that God is angry with us for them, and that were to impute to him the strange tyranny of requiring brick, when he gives no straw ; of expecting to gather, where he strewed not ; to reap, where he sowed not; of being offended with us for not doing what he knows we cannot do. This I say upon a supposition, that they do their best endeavours to know God's will and do it ; which he that denies to be possible, knows not what he says ; for he says in effect, that men cannot do what they can do ; for to do what a man can do, is to do his best endeavour. But because this supposition, though certainly possible, is very rare and ad- mirable; I say, secondly, that I am verily persuaded, that God will not impute errors to them as sins, who use such a measure of industry in finding truth, as human prudence and ordinary discretion (their abilities and opportunities, their distractions and hindrances, and all other things considered) shall advise them into, in a matter of such consequence. But if herein also we fail, then our errors begin to be malignant, and justly imputable, as offences against God, and that love of his truth which he re- quires in us. You will say then, that for those erring protestants, which are in this case, which evidently are far the greater part, they sin damnably in erring, and therefore there is little hope of their salvation. To which I answer, that the consequence of this reason is somewhat strong against a protestant ; but much weak- ened by coming out of the mouth of a papist. For all sins with you are not damnable ; and therefore protestant errors might be sins, and yet not damnable. But yet out of courtesy to you, we will remove this rub out of your way ; and for the present suppose them mortal sins : And is there then no hope of salvation for him that commits them ? Not, you will say, if he die in them without repentance ; and such protestants you speak of, who without re- pentance die in their errors. Yea, but what if they die in their errors with repentance ? Then I hope you will have charity enough to think they may be saved. Charity Mistaken* takes it * In the place above quoted. The Answe?- to the Preface. 63 indeed for granted, that this supposition is destructive of itself; and that it is impossible and incongruous, that a man should re- pent of those errors wherein he dies ; or die in those whereof he repents. But it was wisely done of him to take it for granted ; for most certainly, he could not have spoken one word of sense for the confirmation of it. For seeing protestants believe, as well as you, God's infinite and most admirable perfections in himself, more than most worthy of all possible love : seeing they believe, as well as you, his infinite goodness to them, in creating them of nothing ; in creating them according to his own image ; in creat- ing all things for their use and benefit ; in streaming down his favours on them every moment of their lives; in designing them, if they serve him, to infinite and eternal happiness ; in redeeming them, " not with corruptible things," but the precious blood of his beloved Son ; seeing they believe, as well as you, his infinite good- ness and patience towards them, in expecting their conversion, in wooing, alluring, leading, and by all means which his wisdom can suggest unto him, and man's nature is capable of, drawing them to repentance and salvation : seeing they believe these things as well as you, and, for aught you know, consider them as much as you (and if they do not, it is not their religion, but they that are to blame) what can hinder, but that the consider- ation of God's most infinite goodness to them, and their own almost infinite wickedness against him, God's Spirit co-operating with them, may raise them to a true and sincere and cordial love of God? And seeing sorrow for having injured or offended the person beloved, or when we fear we may have offended him, is the most natural effect of true love ; what can hinder but that love which hath ofttimes constrained them to lay down their lives for God (which our Saviour assures us is the noblest sacri- fice we can offer) may produce in them an universal sorrow for all their sins, both which they know they have committed, and which they fear they may have ? In which number, their being negligent, or not dispassionate, or not unprejudicate enough in seeking the truth, and the effect thereof, their errors, if they be sins, cannot be compromised. In a word, what should hinder, but that the prayer — Delicto, sua quis intelligit ? " Who can under- stand his faults? Lord, cleanse thou me from my secret sins," may be heard and accepted by God, as well from a protestant that dies in some errors, as from a papist that dies in some other sins of ignorance, which perhaps he might more easily have discovered to be sins, than a protestant could his errors to be errors ? As well from a protestant, that held some error, which (as he conceived) God's word, and his reason (which is also in some sort God's word) led him unto; as from a dominican, who perhaps took up his opinion upon trust, not because he had reason to believe it true, but because it was the opinion of his order; for the same man, if he had light upon another order, would, in all probability, have been of the other opinion : For what else is the cause, that generally all the dominicans are of one opinion, and all the Jesuits of the other ? I say, from a dominican who took up his opinion upon trust ; and that such an opinion (if we believe the writers 64 The Answer to the Preface. of your order) as, if it be granted true, were it not a point-matter what opinions any man held, or what actions any man did ; for the best would be as bad as the worst, and the worst as good as the best. And yet such is the partiality of your hypocrisy, that, of disagreeing papists, neither shall deny the truth testified by God, but both may hope for salvation : But of disagreeing pro- testants (though they differ in the same thing) one side must deny God's testimony, and be incapable of salvation. That a domi- nican through culpable negligence, living and dying in his error, may repent of it, though he knows it not ; or be saved, though he do not : but if a protestant do the very same thing, in the very same point, and die in his error, his case is desperate. The sum of all that hath been said to this demand, is this : 1. That no erring protestant denies any truth testified by God, under this formality, as testified by him ; nor which they know or believe to be testified by him. And therefore it is an horrible calumny in you to say, they call God's veracity in question : For God's undoubted and unquestioned vera- city is to them the ground why they do hold all they do hold : neither do they hold any opinion so stiffly, but they will forego it rather than this one, that all which God says is true. 2. God hath not so clearly and plainly declared himself in most of these things which are in controversy between protestants, but that an honest man, whose heart is right to God, and one that is a true lover of God, and of his truth, may, by reason of the conflict of contrary reasons on both sides, very easily, and therefore excusably mistake, and embrace error for truth, and reject truth for error. 3. If any protestant or papist be betrayed into, or kept in any error, by any sin of his will (as it is to be feared many millions are) such error is, as the cause of it, sinful and damnable ; yet not exclusive of all hope of salvation, but pardonable if discovered, upon a par- ticular explicit repentance ; if not discovered, upon a general and implicit repentance for all sins, known and unknown : in which number all sinful errors must of necessity be contained. 27. Ad. § 19. To the ninth, wherein you are so urgent for a particular catalogue of fundamentals: I answer almost in your own words, that we also constantly urge and require to have a particular catalogue of your fundamentals, wherein they be written verities, or unwritten traditions, or church definitions, all which, you say, integrate the material object of your faith : in a word, of all such points as are defined and sufficiently proposed ; so that whosoever denies, or doubts of any of them, is certainly in the state of damnation. A catalogue I say in particular of the pro- posals; and not only some general definition, or description, under which you lurk deceitfully, of what and what only is suf- ficiently proposed : wherein yet you do not very well agree.* For many of you hold the pope's proposal ex cathedra, to be sufficient and obliging ; some a council without a pope ; some, of neither of them severally, but only both together ; some not this neither * This great diversity of opinions among you, touching this matter, if any man doubt of it, let him read Franciscus Piscus Mirandula in 1. Theorem, in Exposit. Theor. quarti ; and Th. Waldensis, torn. 3. De Sacramentalibus Doct. 3, fol. 5, and he shall be fully satisfied that I have done you no injury. The Answer to the Preface. Go in matter of manners, which Bellarmine acknowledges, and tells us, it is all one in effect, as if they denied it sufficient in matter of faith ; some not in matter of faith neither think this proposal infallible, without the acceptation of the church universal : some deny the infallibility of the present church ; and only make the tradition of all ages the infallible propounder : yet if vou were agreed, what and what only, is the infallible propounder, this would not satisfy us ; nor yet to say, that all is fundamental which is propounded sufficiently by him. For though agreeing in this, yet you might still disagree whether such or such a doctrine were propounded or not : or, if propounded, whether sufficiently, or only unsufficiently. And it is so known a thing, that in many points you do so, that I assure myself you will not deny it. Therefore we constantly urge and require a particular and per- fect inventory of all those divine revelations, which, you say, are sufficiently propounded ; and that, such an one to which all of your church will subscribe, as neither redundant nor deficient: which when you give in with one hand, you shall receive a par- ticular catalogue of such points as I call fundamental, with the other. Neither may you think me unreasonable in this demand, seeing upon such a particular catalogue of your sufficient propo- sals as much depends, as upon a particular catalogue of our fun- damentals. As for example, whether or no a man do not err in some point defined and sufficiently proposed : and whether or no those that differ among you, differ in fundamentals ; which if they do, one heaven (by your own rule) cannot receive them all. Per haps you will here complain, that this is not to satisfy your demand, but to avoid it, and to put you off, as the Areopagites did hard causes, ad diem longissimum, and bid you come again an hundred years hence. To deal truly, I did so intend it should be. Neither can you say, my dealing with you is injurious, seeing I require nothing of you, but that, what you require of others, you should show it possible to be done, and just and necessary to be required. For, for my part, I have great reason to suspect, it is neither the one nor the other. For whereas the verities which are delivered in scripture, may be very fitly divided into such as were written because they were necessary to be believed; (of which rank are those only which constitute and make up the covenant between God and man in Christ ;) and then such as are necessary to be helieved not in themselves, but only by accident, because they were written ; of which rank are manv matters of historv, of prophecy, of mystery, of policy, of economy, and such like, which are evidently not intrinsical to the covenant : now to sever exactly and punctually these verities one from the other, what is necessary in itself, and antecedently to the writing, from what is but only profitable in itself, and necessary only because written, is a busi- ness of extreme difficulty, and extreme little necessity. For, first, he that will go about to distinguish, especially in the story of our Saviour, what was written because it was profitable, from what was written because necessary, shall find an intricate piece of business of it, and almost impossible that he should be certain he E 6* 66 The Answer to the Preface. hath done it, when he hath done it. And then it is apparently unnecessary to go about it, seeing he that believes all, certainly believes all that is necessary ; and he that doth not believe all (I mean all the undoubted parts of the undoubted books of scripture) can hardly believe any, neither have we reason to believe he doth so. So that, that protestants give you not a catalogue of funda- mentals, it is not from tergiversation (as you suspect, who for want of charity to them always suspect the worst) but from wisdom and necessity : for they may very easily err in doing it ; because, though all which is necessary, be plain in scripture ; yet all which is plain, is not therefore written because it was necessary. For what greater necessity was there, that I should know St. Paul left his cloak at Troas, than those worlds of miracles which our Saviour did, which were never written ? And when they had done it, it had been to no purpose; there being, as matters now stand, as great necessity of believing those truths of scripture which are not fundamental, as those that are. You see, then, what reason we have to decline this hard labour, which you, a rigid taskmaster, have here put upon us. Yet instead of giving you a catalogue of fundamentals, with which I dare say you are resolved, before it come, never to be satisfied ; I will say that to you, which, if you please, may do you as much service ; and this it is ; that it is suf- ficient for any man's salvation, that he believe the scripture ; that he endeavour to believe it in the true sense of it, as far as concerns his duty ; and that he conform his life unto it either by obedience or repentance. He that does so (and all protestants according to the dictamen of their religion should do so) may be secure that he cannot err fundamentally. And they that do so, cannot differ in fundamentals. So that, notwithstanding their differences, and your presumption, the same heaven may receive them all. 28. Ad. § 20. Your tenth and last request is, to know distinctly what is the doctrine of the protestant English church, in these points; and what my private opinion. Which shall be satisfied when the church of England hath expressed herself in them ; or when you have told us what is the doctrine of your church in the question of predetermination, or the immaculate conception. 29. Ad. § 21 and 22. These answers, I hope, in the judgment of indifferent men, are satisfactory to your questions, though not to you ; for I have either answered them, or given you a reason why I have not. Neither, for aught I can see, have I flitted from things considered in their own nature, to accidental or rare circum- stances ; but told you my opinion plainly what I thought of your errors in themselves; and what as they were qualified or ma- lignified with good or bad circumstances. Though I must tell you truly, that I see no reason, the question being of the damnableness of error, why you should esteem ignorance, incapacity, want of means to be instructed, accidental and rare circumstances : as if knowledge, capacity, having means of instruction concerning the truth of your religion, or ours, were not as rare and unusual in the adverse part of either, as ignorance, incapacity, and want of means of instruction : especially how erroneous conscience can be The Answer to the Preface. 67 a rare thing in those that err ; or how unerring conscience is not much more rare, I am not able to apprehend. So that to consider men of different religions (the subject of this controversy) in their own nature, and without circumstances, must be to consider them, neither as ignorant, nor as knowing ; neither as having, nor as wanting means of instruction ; neither as with capacity, nor with- out it ; neither with erroneous, nor yet with unerring conscience. And then what judgment can you pronounce of them, all the goodness and badness of an action depending on the circumstances ? Ought not a judge, being to give sentence of an action, to consider all the circumstances of it? Or is it possible he should judge rightly, that doth not so 1 Neither is it to purpose, that circum- stances being various, cannot be well comprehended under any general rule : for though under any general rule they cannot, yet under many general rules they may be comprehended. The ques- tion here is, you say, whether men of different religions may be saved 1 Now the subject of this question is an ambiguous term, and may be determined and invested with diverse and contrary circumstances; and, accordingly, contrary judgments are to be given of it. And who can then be offended with D. Potter for distinguishing before he defines (the want whereof is the chief thing that makes defining dangerous) ; who can find fault with him for saying, " if, through want of means of instruction, incapacity, invincible or probable ignorance, a man die in error, he may be saved. But if he be negligent in seeking the truth, unwilling to find it, either doth see it, and will not, or might see it, and will not, that his case is dangerous, and without repentance desperate." This is all that D. Potter says, neither rashly damning all that are of a different opinion from him, nor securing any that are in mat- ter of religion sinfully, that is willingly erroneous. The author of this reply (I will abide by it) says the very same thing ; neither can I see what adversary he hath in the main question but his own shadow ; and, yet, I know not out of what frowardness, finds fault with D. Potter for affirming that which himself affirms : and to cloud the matter, whereas the question is, whether men by igno- rance, dying in error, may be saved, would have them considered neither as erring, nor ignorant. And when the question is, whe- ther the errors of the papists be damnable 1 to which we answer, that to them that do or might know them to be errors, they are damnable ; to them that do not, they are not : he tells us that this is to change the state of the question ; whereas indeed it is to state the question, and free it from ambiguity before you answer it ; and to have recourse to accidental circumstances : as if igno- rance were accidental to error, or as if a man could be considered as in error, and not be considered as in ignorance of the truth from which he errs ! Certainly, error against a truth must needs pre- suppose a nescience of it ; unless you will say, that a man may at once resolve for a truth, and resolve against it; assent to it, and dissent from it ; know it to be true, and believe it not to be true. Whether knowledge and opinion touching the same thing may e2 t>8 Charity maintained by Catholics. stand together, is made a question in the schools: but he that would question whether knowing a thing, and doubting of it, much more, whether knowing it to be true, and believing it to be false, may stand together, deserves, without question, no other answer but laughter. Now if error and knowledge cannot consist, then error and ignorance must be inseparable. He then that pro- fesseth your errors may well be considered either as knowing or as ignorant. But him that does err indeed, you can no more con- ceive without ignorance, than long without quantity, virtuous with- out quality, a man and not a living creature, to have gone ten miles and not to have gone five, to speak sense and not to speak. For as the latter in all these is implied in the former, so is igno- rance of a truth supposed in error against it. Yet such a man, though not conceivable without ignorance simply, may be very well considered either as with, or without voluntary and sinful ignorance. And he that will give a wise answer to this question, whether a papist dying a papist may be saved, according to God's ordinary proceeding, must distinguish him according to these seve- ral considerations, and say, he may be saved ; if his ignorance were either invincible, or at least unaffected, and probable ; if otherwise, without repentance he cannot. To the rest of this preface I have nothing to say, saving what hath been said, but this ; that it is no just exception to an argu- ment, to call it vulgar and threadbare : truth can neither be too common nor superannuated, nor reason ever worn out. Let your answers be solid and pertinent, and we will never find fault with them for being old or common. CHARITY MAINTAINED BY CATHOLICS. PART I.— CHAPTER I. The state of the question ; with a summary of the reasons for which, amongst men of different religions, one side only can be saved. " Never is malice more indiscreet, than when it chargeth others with imputation of that, to which itself becomes more liable, even by that very act of accusing others. For though guiltiness be the effect of some error, yet usually it begets a kind of modera- tion, so far forth, as not to let men cast such aspersions upon others, as most apparently reflect upon themselves. Thus cannot the poet endure that Gracchus,* who was a factious and unquiet man, should be inveighing against sedition : and the Roman orator rebukes philosophers, who, to wax glorious, superscribed their * " Quis tulerit Gracchum," &c. Charity maintained by Catholics. 69 names upon those very books, which they intituled, Of the Con- tempt of Glory. What then shall we say of D. Potter, who in the title and text of his whole book, doth so tragically charge want of charity on all such Romanists as dare affirm, that protestancy de- stroyeth salvation ; while he himself is in act of pronouncing the like heavy doom against Roman catholics 1 For, not satisfied with much uncivil language, in affirming the Roman church* manv ways to have played the harlot, and in that regard deserved a bill of divorce from Christ, and detestation of christians; in styling her that proudf and curst dame of Rome, which takes upon her to revel in the house of God ; in talking of an idol J to be wor- shipped at Rome ; he comes at length to thunder out his fearful sentence against her : « for that§ mass of errors (saith he) in judg- ment and practice, which is proper to her, and wherein she differs from us, we judge a reconciliation impossible, and to us (who are convicted in conscience of her corruptions) damnable.' And in another place he saith: 'for us who|| are convinced in conscience, that she errs in many things, a necessity lies upon us, even under pain of damnation, to forsake her in those errors. By the acer- bity of which censure, he doth not only make himself guilty of that which he judgeth to be an heinous offence in others, but freeth us from all colour of crime by this his unadvised recrimination. For, if Roman catholics be likewise convicted in conscience of the errors of protestants, they may, and must, in conformity to the doctor's own rule, judge a reconciliation with them to be also damnable. And that, all the want of charity, so deeply charged on us, dissolves itself into this poor wonder, Roman catholics believe in their conscience, that the religion they profess is true, and the contra rv false. " 2. Nevertheless, we earnestly desire, and take care, that our doctrine may not be defamed by misinterpretation. Far be it from us, by way of insultation, to apply it against protestants, otherwise than as they are comprehended under the generality of those, who are divided from the only one true church of Christ our Lord, within the communion whereof he hath confined salva- tion. Neither do we understand, why our most dear countrymen should be offended, if the universality be particularized under the name of protestants, first given^I to certain lutherans, who pro- testing that they would stand out against the imperial decrees, in defence of the confession exhibited at Augsburgh, were termed pro- testants, in regard of such their protesting : which Confessio Au- gustana, disclaiming from, and being disclaimed by calvinists and zuinglians, our naming or exemplifying a general doctrine under the particular name of protestantism, ought not in any particular manner to be odious in England. " Moreover our meaning is not, as misinformed persons may con- ceive, that we give protestants over to reprobation ; that we offer no prayers in hope of their salvation ; that we hold their case des- * Page 11. t Page 4, Edit. 1. |] Page 81. t Ibid. § Page 20. T Sleidan, I. 6, fol. 84. 70 Charity maintained by Catholics. perate ; God forbid ! We hope, we pray for, their conversion ; and sometimes we find happy effects of our charitable desires. Neither is our censure immediately directed to particular persons. The tri- bunal of particular judgments is God's alone. When any man, es- teemed a protestant, leaveth to live in this world, we do not instantly with precipitation avouch that he is lodged in hell. For we are not always acquainted with what sufficiency or means he was furnished for instruction ; we do not penetrate his capacity to understand his catechist ; we have no revelation what light may have cleared his errors, or contrition retracted his sins, in the last moment before his death. In such particular cases, we wish more appa- rent signs of salvation, but do not give any dogmatical sentence of perdition. How grievous sins, disobedience, schism, and heresy are, is well known. But to discern how far the natural malignity of those great offences might be checked by ignorance, or by some such lessening circumstance, is the office rather of prudence than of faith. " 4. Thus we allow protestants as much charity, as D. Potter spares us, for whom in the words above mentioned, and elsewhere, he* makes ignorance the best hope of salvation. Much less comfort can we expect from the fierce doctrine of those chief pro- testants, who teach, that for many ages before Luther, Christ had no visible church upon earth. Not these men alone, or such as they, but even the thirty-nine articles, to which the English protestant clergy subscribes, censure our belief so deeply, that ignorance can scarce, or rather not at all, excuse us from damna- tion. Our doctrine of transubstantiation, is affirmed to be repug- nant to the plain words off scripture; our masses to be blasphemousj fables, with much more to be seen in the articles themselves. In a certain confession of the christian faith, at the end of their books of psalms collected into metre, and printed cum privilegio regis regali, they call us idolaters and limbs of antichrist ; and having set down a catalogue of our doctrines, they conclude that for them we shall after the general resurrection be damned to un- quenchable fire. " 5. But yet, lest any man should flatter himself with our cha- ritable mitigations, and thereby wax careless in search of the true church, we desire him to read the conclusion of the second part, where this matter is more explained. " 6. And because we cannot determine what judgment may be esteemed rash, or prudent, except by weighing the reasons upon which it is grounded, we will here, under one aspect, present a summary of those principles, from which we infer, that protes- tancy in itself unrepented, destroys salvation; intending after- wards to prove the truth of every one of the grounds, till, by a concatenation of sequels, we fall upon the conclusion, for which we are charged with want of charity. "7. Now this is our gradation of reasons: almighty God having ordained mankind to a supernatural end of eternal felicity, hath, * See page 39. t Art. xxviii. X Art xxxi. Charity maintained by Catholics. 7 1 in his holy providence, settled competent and convenient means whereby that end may be attained. The universal grand origin of all such means, is the incarnation and death of our blessed Saviour, whereby he merited internal grace for us ; and founded an external visible church, provided and stored with all those helps, which might be necessary for salvation. From hence it followeth, that in this church, among other advantages, there must be some effectual means to beget and conserve faith, to maintain unity, to discover and condemn heresies, to appease and reduce schisms, and to determine all controversies in religion For without such means the church should not be furnished with helps sufficient to salvation, nor God afford sufficient means to attain that end to which himself ordained mankind. This means to decide controversies in faith and religion (whether it should be the holy scripture, or whatsoever else) must be endued with an universal infallibility, in whatsoever it propoundeth for a divine truth ; that is, as revealed, spoken, or testified by almighty God, whether the matter of its nature be great or small. For, if it were subject to error in any one thing, we could not in any other yield it infallible assent ; because we might with good reason doubt whether it chanced not to err in that particular. " 8. Thus far all must agree to what we have said, unless they have a mind to reduce faith to opinion. And even out of these grounds alone, without further proceeding, it undeniably follows, that of two men dissenting in matters of faith, great or small, few or many, the one cannot be saved without repentance, unless ignorance accidentally may in some particular person plead excuse. For, in that case of contrary belief, one must of necessity be held to oppose God's word or revelation sufficiently represented to his understanding by an infallible propounder ; which opposition to the testimony of God is undoubtedly a damnable sin, whether other- wise, the thing so testified, be in itself great or small. And thus we have already made good what was promised in the argument of this chapter, that amongst men of different religions, one only is capable of being saved. " 9. Nevertheless, to the end that men may know in particular what is the said infallible means upon which we are to rely in all things concerning faith, and accordingly may be able to judge in what safety or danger, more or less, they live ; and because D. Potter descendeth to divers particulars about scriptures and the church, &c. we will go forward, and prove, that although scripture be in itself most sacred, infallible, and divine, yet it alone cannot be to us a rule, or judge, fit and able to end all doubts and debates emergent in matters of religion; but that there must be some ex- ternal, visible, public, living judge, to whom all sorts of persons, both learned and unlearned, may without danger of error have re- course; and in whose judgment they may rest for the interpreting and propounding of God's word or revelation. And this living judge we will most evidently prove to be no other, but that holy catholic, apostolic, and visible church, which our Saviour purchased with the effusion of his most precious blood. 72 Charity maintained by Catholics. " 10. If once therefore it be granted, that the church is that means which God hath left for the deciding all controversies in faith, it manifestly will follow, that she must be infallible in all her determinations, whether the matters of themselves be great or small; because, as we said above, it must be agreed on all sides, that if that means which God hath left to determine controversies were not infallible in all things proposed by it, it could not settle in our minds a firm and infallible belief of any one. "11. From this universal infallibility of God's church, it fol- loweth, that whosoever wittingly denieth any one point proposed by her, as revealed by God, is injurious to his divine majesty, as if he could either deceive, or be deceived in what he testifieth. The averring whereof were not only a fundamental error, but would overthrow the very foundation of all fundamental points ; and therefore, without repentance, could not possibly stand with salvation. " 12. Out of these grounds we will shew, that although the distinction of points fundamental and not fundamental be good and useful, as it is delivered and applied by catholic divines, to teach what principal articles of faith christians are obliged expli- citly to believe ; yet, that it is impertinent to the present purpose of excusing any man from grievous sin, who knowingly disbe- lieves, that is, believes the contrary of that which God's church proposeth as divine truth. For it is one thing, not to know explicitly something testified by God ; and another, positively to oppose what we know he hath testified. The former may often be excused from sin, but never the latter, which only is the case in question. " 13. In the same manner shall be demonstrated, that to allege the creed, as containing all articles of faith, necessary to be ex- plicitly believed, is not pertinent to free from sin the voluntary denial of any other point known to be defined by God's church. And this were sufficient to overthrow all that D. Potter allegeth concerning the creed ; though yet, by way of supererogation, we will prove, that there are divers important matters of faith which are not mentioned at all in the creed. " 14. From the aforesaid main principle, that God hath always had, and always will have on earth, a church visible, within whose communion salvation must be hoped ; and infallible, whose definitions we ought to believe; we will prove, that Luther, Calvin, and all other who continue the division in communion, or faith, from that visible church, which at and before Luther's appearance, was spread over the world, cannot be excused from schism and heresy, although they opposed her faith but in one only point ; whereas it is manifest, they dissent from her in many and weighty matters, concerning as well belief, as practice. " 15. To these reasons drawn from the virtue of faith, we will add one other taken from charitas propria, the virtue of charity, as it obligeth us not to expose our soul to hazard of perdition, when we can put ourselves in a way much more secure, as we will prove that of the Roman catholics to be. Charity maintained by Catholics. 73 "16. We are then to prove these points: first, that the infal- lible means to determine controversies in matters of faith, is the visible church of Christ. Secondly, that the distinction of points fundamental, and not fundamental, maketh nothing to our present question. Thirdly, that to say the creed contains all fundamental points of faith, is neither pertinent nor true. Fourthly, that both Luther, and all they who, after him, persist in division from the communion and faith of the Roman church, cannot be excused from schism. Fifthly, nor from heresy. Sixthly and lastly, that in re- gard of the precept of charity towards one's self, protestants be in a state of sin, as long as they remain divided from the Roman church. And these six points shall be several arguments for so many ensuin°- chapters. " 17. Only I will here observe, that it seemeth very strange, that protestants should charge us so deeply with want of charity, for only teaching that both they and we cannot be saved, seeing themselves must affirm the like of whosoever opposeth any least point delivered in scripture, which they hold to be the sole rule of faith. Out of which ground they must be enforced, to let all our former inferences pass for good. For, is it not a grievous sin, to deny any one truth contained in holy writ ? Is there in such denial any distinction between points fundamental, and not fun- damental, sufficient to excuse from heresy ? Is it not impertinent to allege the creed containing all fundamental points of faith, as if, believing it alone, we were at liberty to deny all other points of scripture ? In a word, according to protestants, oppose not scripture, there is no error against faith ; oppose it in any least point, the error, if scripture be sufficiently proposed (which pro- position is also required before a man can be obliged to believe even fundamental points) must be damnable. What is this, but to say with us, of persons contrary in whatsoever point of belief, one party only can be saved? And D. Potter must not take it ill, if catholics believe they may be saved in that religion for which they suffer. And if by occasion of this doctrine, men will still be charging us with want of charity, and be resolved to take scandal where none is given, we must comfort ourselves with that grave and true saying of St. Gregory, ' If scandal* be taken from declar- ing a truth, it is better to permit scandal, than forsake the truth/ But the solid grounds of our assertion, and the sincerity of our in- tention, in uttering what we think, yields us confidence, that alL will hold for most reasonable the saying of Pope Gelasius to Anas- tasius the emperor, ' Far be it from the Roman emperor, that he should hold it for a wrong to have truth declared to him !' Let us therefore begin with that point which is the first that can be controverted betwixt protestants and us, forasmuch as concerns the present question, and is contained in the argument of the next ensuing chapter " * St. Greg. Horn. 7, in Ezek. 7 74 THE ANSWER TO THE FIRST CHAPTER. Showing that the Adversary grants the former Question, and pro- posetfi a new one ; and that there is no reason, why, among men of different opinions and communions, one side only can be saved. Ad. § 1. Your first onset is very violent. D. Potter is charged with malice and indiscretion for being uncharitable to you, while he is accusing you of uncharitableness. Verily, a great fault and folly, if the accusation be just: if unjust, a great calumny. Let us see then how you make good your charge. The effect of your discourse, if I mistake not, is this: D. Potter chargeth the Roman church with many and great errors; judgeth reconcilia- tion between her doctrine and ours, impossible; and that for them, who were convicted in conscience of her errors, not to for- sake her in them, or to be reconciled unto her, is damnable : therefore, if Roman catholics be convicted in conscience of the errors of protestants, they may and must judge a reconciliation with them damnable ; and consequently to judge so is no more uncharitable in them, than it is in the doctor to judge as he doth. All this I grant, nor would any protestant accuse you of want of charity if you went no further ; if you judged the religion of protestants damnable to them only who profess it, being con- victed in conscience that it is erroneous. For if a man judge some act of virtue to be a sin, in him it is a sin indeed. So you have taught us, p. 19. So if you be convinced, or rather, to speak properly, persuaded in conscience, that our religion is erroneous, the profession of it, though itself most true, to you would be damnable. This therefore I subscribe very willingly, and withal, that if you said no more, D. Potter and myself should not be to papists only, but even to protestants as uncha- ritable as you are. For I shall always profess and glory in this uncharitableness of judging hypocrisy a damnable sin. Let hypo- crites then and dissemblers on both sides pass. It is not towards them, but good christians ; not to protestant professors but be- lievers that we require your charity. What think you of those that believe so verily the truth of our religion, that they are resolved to die in it, and, if occasion were, to die for it ? What charity have you for them ? What think ye of those that in the days of our fathers laid down their lives for it ? Are you content that they should be saved, or do you hope they may be so ? Will you grant, that, notwithstanding their errors, there is good hope they might die with repentance 1 And if they did so, certainly they are saved. If you will do so, this controversy is ended. No man will hereafter charge you with want of charity. This is as much as either we give you, or expect of you, while you re- main in your religion. But then you must leave abusing silly people, with telling them, as your fashion is, that protestants con- fess papists may be saved, but papists confess not so much of Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. 75 protestants ; therefore yours is the safer way, and in wisdom and charity to our own souls we are bound to follow it. For, grant- ing this, you grant as much hope of salvation to protestants, as protestants do to you. If you will not, but will still affirm, as Charity Mistaken doth, that protestants, not dissemblers, but believers, without a particular repentance of their religion cannot be saved ; this, I say, is a want of charity, into the society whereof D. Potter cannot be drawn but with palpable and trans- parent sophistry. For, I pray sir, what dependence is there be- tween these propositions : we that hold protestant religion false should be damned if we should profess it ; therefore, they also shall be damned that hold it true ? Just as if you should conclude, be- cause "he that doubts is damned if he eat;" therefore, he that doth not doubt, is damned also if he eat. And therefore, though your religion to us, and ours to you, if professed against conscience, would be damnable ; yet may it well be uncharitable to define it shall be so, to them that profess either this or that according to conscience. This recrimination, therefore, upon D. Potter, where- with you begin, is a plain fallacy ; and I fear your proceedings will be answerable to these beginnings. 2. Ad. § 2. In this paragraph, protestants are thus far comforted, that they are not sent to hell without company, which the poet tells us is the miserable comfort of miserable men. Then we in England are requested not to be offended with the name of protestants, which is a favour I shall easily grant, if by it be understood those that protest, not against imperial edicts, but against the corruptions of the church of Rome. 3. Ad. § 3, 4, 5, 6. That you give us not over to reprobation, that you pray and hope for our salvation ; if it be a charity, it is such a one as is common to Turks, and Jews, and pagans with us. But that which follows is extraordinary, neither do I know any man that requires more of you than there you pretend to. For there you tell us, that when any man esteemed a protestant dies, vou do not instantly avouch that he is lodged in hell. Where the word esteemed is ambiguous ; for it may signify esteemed truly, and esteemed falsely. He may be esteemed a protestant that is so ; and he may be esteemed a protestant that is not so ; and therefore I should have had just occasion to have laid to your charge the transgression of your own chief prescription, which you say truth exacts at our hands, that is, to speak clearly and distinctly, and not to walk in darkness; but that your following words, to my understanding, declare sufficiently that you speak of both sorts ; for there you tell us, that the reasons why you damn not any man that dies with the esteem of a protestant, are, 1. because you are not always acquainted with what sufficiency of means he was furnished for instruction ; you must mean touching the falsehood of his own religion,' and the truth of yours, which reason is proper to those that are protestants in truth, and not only in estimation. 2. Because you do not penetrate his capacity to understand his catechist, which is also peculiar to those who, for want of capacity (as you conceive) 76 Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. remain protestants indeed, and are not only so accounted. 3. Be- cause you have no revelation what light might clear his errors, which belongs to those which were esteemed protestants, but indeed were not so. 4. Because you have no revelation what contrition might have retracted his sins, which reason being distinct from the former, and divided from it by the disjunctive particle, or, insinu- ates unto us, that though no light did clear the errors of a dying protestant ; yet contrition might, for aught you know, retract his sins, which appropriates this reason also to protestants truly so esteemed. I wish, with all my heart, that in obedience to your own prescription, you had expressed yourself in this matter more fully and plainly. Yet that which you say doth plainly enough afford us these corollaries : i. That whatsoever protestant wanteth capacity, or having it, wanteth sufficient means of instruction to convince his con- science of the falsehood of his own, and the truth of the Roman religion, by the confession of his most rigid adver- saries, may be saved, notwithstanding any error in his religion, ii. That nothing hinders, but that a protestant, dying a pro- testant, may die with contrition for all his sins, iii. That if he do die with contrition, he may and shall be saved. 4. All those acknowledgments we have from you while you are, as you say, stating, but, as I conceive, granting the very point in question ; which was, as I have already proved out of C. M., whether, without uncharitableness, you may pronounce, that pro- testants dying in the belief of their religion, and without particular repentance and dereliction of it, cannot possibly be saved. Which C. M. affirms universally, and without any of your limitations. But this presumption of his you thus qualify, by saying, that this sentence cannot be pronounced truly, and therefore sure not cha- ritably ; neither of those protestants that want means sufficient to instruct and convince them of the truth of your religion, and the falsehood of their own ; nor of those, who, though they have neglected the means they might have had, died with contrition, that is, with a sorrow for all their sins, proceeding from the love of God. So that, according to your doctrine, it shall remain upon such only as either were, or, but for their own fault, might have been, sufficiently convinced of the truth of your religion, and the falsehood of their own, and yet die in it without contrition. Which doctrine if you would stand to, and not pull down and pull back with one hand what you give and build with the other, this controversy were ended ; and I should willingly acknowledge that which follows in your fourth paragraph, that you allow protestants as much charity, as D. Potter allows you. But then 1 must en- treat you to alter the argument of this chapter, and not to go about to give us reasons, why amongst men of different religions, one side only can be saved absolutely ; which your reasons drive at. But you must temper the crudeness of your assertion, by saying, one side only can be saved, unless want of conviction, or else repentance, excuse the other. Besides, you must not only Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. 77 abstain from damning any protestant in particular, but, from affirming in general, that protestants dying in their religion cannot be saved : for you must always remember to add this cau- tion, unless they were excusably ignorant of the falsehood of it, or died with contrition. And then, considering that you cannot know, whether or no, all things considered, they were convinced sufficiently of the truth of your religion, and the falsehood of their own, you are obliged by charity to judge the best, and hope they are not. Considering again, that, notwithstanding their errors, they may die with contrition, and that it is no way improbable that they do so, and the contrary you cannot be certain of, you are bound in charity to judge and hope they do so. Considering, thirdly and lastly, that if they die not with contrition, yet it is very probable they may die with attrition ; and that this pretence of yours, that contrition will serve without actual confession, but attrition will not, is but a nicety or fancy, or rather, to give it the true name, a device of your own, to serve ends and purposes — God having nowhere declared himself, but that wheresoever he will accept of that repentance, which you are pleased to call con- trition, he will accept of that which you call attrition : for, though he like best the bright flaming holocaust of love, yet he rejects not, he quencheth not, the smoking flax of that repentance (if it be true and effectual) which proceeds from hope and fear. These things, I say, considered (unless you will have the charity of your doctrine rise up in judgment against your uncharitable practice) you must not only not be peremptory, in damning protestants, but you must hope well of their salvation ; and, out of this hope, you must do for them as well as others, those, as you conceive, charitable offices, of praying, giving alms, and offering sacrifice, which usually you do, for those of whose salvation you are well and charitably persuaded (for I believe, you will never conceive so well of protestants, as to assure yourselves they go directly to heaven). These things when you do, I shall believe you think as charitably as you speak ; but until then, as he said in the comedy, quid verba audiam, cum facta videam ? so may I say to you, quid verba audiam, cum facta non videam ? To what purpose should you give us charitable words, which presently you retract again, by denying us your charitable actions ? And as these things you must do, if you will stand to and make good this pretended cha- rity, so must I tell you again and again, that one thing you must not do ; I mean, you must not affright poor people out of their religion, with telling them, that by the confession of both sides, your way is safe, but in your judgment, ours undoubtedly damnable ; seeing neither you deny salvation to protestants dying with repentance, nor we promise it to you, if ye die with- out it. For to deal plainly with you, I know no protestant that hath any other hope of your salvation, but upon these grounds, that unaffected ignorance may excuse you, or true repentance obtain pardon for you ; neither do the heavy censures, which protestants (you say) pass upon your errors, any way hinder, but 78 Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. they may hope as well of you, upon repentance, as I do. For the fierce doctrine, which God knows who teacheth, that Christ for many ages before Luther had no visible church upon earth, will be mild enough, if you conceive them to mean (as perhaps they do) by no visible church, none pure and free from corruptions, which in your judgment is all one with no church. But the truth is, the f , corruption of the church, and the destruction of it, is not all one. 'For, if a particular man or church may (as you confess they may) hold some particular errors, and yet be a member of the church universal ; why may not the church hold some universal error, and yet be still the church ? especially seeing, you say, it is nothing but opposing the doctrine of the church that makes an error damnable, and it is impossible, that the church should oppose the church — I mean, that the present church should oppose itself. And then for the English protestants, though they censure your errors deeply, yet, by your favour, with their deepest censure it may well consist, that invincible ignorance may excuse you from damnation for them. For you yourself confess, that ignorance may excuse errors, even in fundamental articles of faith : so that a man so erring shall not offend at all in such his ignorance or error : — they are your own ■words. Pref. § 22. And again, with their heaviest censures it may well consist, that your errors, though in themselves damnable, yet may prove not damning to you, if you die with true repentance for all your sins, known and unknown. 5. Thus much charity therefore, if you stand to what you have said, is interchangeably granted by each side to the other, that neither religion is so fatally destructive, but that by ignorance or repentance salvation may be had on both sides : though with a difference that keeps papists still on the more uncharitable side. For whereas we conceive a lower degree of repentance, (that which they call attrition) if it be true, and effectual, and convert the heart of the penitent, will serve in them : they pretend (even this author which is most charitable towards us) that without con- trition there is no hope for us. But, though protestants may not obtain this purchase at so easy a rate as papists ; yet (even papists being judges) they may obtain it: and, though there is no entrance for them but at the only door of contrition, yet they may enter ; heaven is not inaccessible to them. Their errors are no such im- penetrable isthmuses between them and salvation, but that contri- tion may make a way through them. All their schism and heresy ' is no such fatal poison, but that, if a man join with it the antidote of a general repentance, he may die in it, and live for ever. Thus much then being acknowledged, I appeal to any indifferent reader, whether C. M. be not by his hyperaspist forsaken in the plain field, and the point in question granted to D. Potter, viz. that protestancy, even without a particular repentance, is not destructive of salvation. So that all the controversy remaining now, is not simply, whether protestancy unrepented destroys sal- vation ? as it was at first proposed, but, whether protestancy in Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. 79 itself (that is, abstracting from ignorance and contrition) destroys salvation? So that, as a foolish fellow who gave a knight the lie desiring withal leave of him to set his knighthood aside, was answered by him, that he would not suffer any thing to be set aside that belonged unto him : so might we justly take it amiss, that conceiving as you do, ignorance and repentance such neces- sary things for us, you are not more willing to consider us with them, than without them. For my part, such is my charity to you, that considering what great necessity you have, as much as any christian society in the world, that these sanctuaries of igno- rance and repentance should always stand open, I can very hardly persuade myself so much, as in my most secret consideration to divest you of these so needful qualifications : but whensoever your errors, superstitions, and impieties come into my mind, (and, be- sides the general bonds of humanity and Christianity, my own particular obligations to many of you, such and so great, that you cannot perish without a part of myself,) my only comfort is, amidst these agonies, that the doctrine and practice too of re- pentance, is yet remaining in your church : and that, though you put on a face of confidence of your innocence in point of doctrine, yet you will be glad to stand in the eye of mercy as well as your fellows, and not be so stout, as to refuse either God's pardon or the king's. 6. But, for the present, protestancy is called to the bar, and though not sentenced by you to death without mercy, yet ar- raigned of so much natural malignity (if not corrected by igno- rance or contrition) as to be in itself destructive of salvation. Which controversy I am content to dispute with you, tying my- self to follow the rules prescribed by you in your preface. Only I am to remember you, that the adding of this limitation [in itself] hath made this a new question ; and that this is not the conclusion for which you were charged with want of charity : but that, whereas, according to the grounds of your own religion, pro- testants may die in their supposed errors, either with excusable ignorance, or with contrition ; and if they do so, may be saved, you are still peremptory in pronouncing them damned. Which position, supposing your doctrine true, and ours false ; as it is far from charity (whose essential character it is, to judge and hope the best), so I believe that I shall clearly evince this new, but more moderate, assertion of yours to be far from verity, and that it is popery, and not protestancy, which in itself destroys salvation. 7. Ad. § 7 & 8. In your gradation I shall rise so far with you as to grant, that Christ founded a visible church, stored with all helps necessary to salvation, particularly with sufficient means to beget and conserve faith, to maintain unity, and compose schisms, to discover and condemn heresies, and to determine all contro- versies in religion, which were necessary to be determined. For all these purposes he gave at the beginning (as we may see in the Epistle to the Ephesians) apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and doctors ; who by word of mouth taught their contemporaries, 80 Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. and by writings (wrote indeed by some, but approved by all of them) taught their christian posterity to the world's end, how all these ends, and that which is the end of all these ends, salvation, is to be achieved. And these means the providence of God hath still preserved, and so preserved, that they are sufficient for all these intents. I say, sufficient, though through the malice of men, not always effectual ; for that the same means may be suf- ficient for the compassing an end, and not effectual, you must not deny, who hold, that God gives to all men sufficient means of salvation, and yet that all are not saved. I said also, sufficient to determine all controversies which were necessary to be deter- mined. For, if some controversies may for many ages be unde- termined, and yet in the meanwhile men be saved ; why should, or how can the church's being furnished with effectual means to determine all controversies in religion, be necessary to salvation ; the end itself to which these means are ordained, being, as ex- perience shows, not necessary ? Plain sense will teach every man, that the necessity of the means must always be measured by, and can never exceed, the necessity of the end. As if eating be ne- cessary, only that I may live ; then certainly, if I have no neces- sity to live, I have no necessity to eat : if I have no need to be at London, I have no need of a horse to carry me thither : If I have no need to fly, I have no need of wings. Answer me then I pray directly, and categorically ; is it necessary that all con- troversies in religion should be determined? or, is it not? If it be, why is the question of predetermination, of the immaculate conception, of the pope's indirect power in temporalities, so long- undetermined ? If not, what is it but hypocrisy to pretend such great necessity of such effectual means for the achieving that end, which is itself not necessary ? Christians therefore have, and shall have, means sufficient (though not always effectual) to determine, not all controversies, but all necessary to be determined. I pro- ceed on farther with you, and grant that this means to decide controversies in faith and religion, must be endued with an uni- versal infallibility in whatsoever it propoundeth for a divine truth. For if it may be false in any one thing of this nature, in any thing which God requires men to believe, we can yield unto it but a wavering and fearful assent in any thing. These grounds there- fore I grant very readily, and give you free leave to make your best advantage of them. And yet, to deal truly, I do not per- ceive how from the denial of any of them it would follow, that faith is opinion ; or, from the granting them, that it is not so. But, for my part, whatsoever clamour you have raised against me, I think no otherwise of the nature of faith, I mean historical faith, than generally both protestants and papists do; for, I con- ceive it an assent to divine revelations upon the authority of the revealer ; which though in many things it differ from opinion (as commonly the word opinion is understood) yet in some things, I doubt not but you will confess, that it agrees with it. At first, that as opinion is an assent, so is faith also. Secondly, that as opinion, so faith, is always built upon less evidence than that of sense or Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. 81 science ; which assertion you not only grant, but mainly contend for, in your sixth chapter. Thirdly and lastly, that as opinion, so faith, admits degrees; and that, as there may be a strong and weak opi- nion, so there may be a strong and weak faith. These things if you will grant (as sure if you be in your right mind you will not deny any of them) I am well contented that this ill-sounding word, opinion, should be discarded, and that among the intellectual habits you should seek out some other genus for faith. For I will never contend with any man about words, who grants my meaning. 8. But though the essence of faith exclude not all weakness and imperfection, yet may it be inquired, whether any certainty of faith, under the highest degree, may be sufficient to please God, and attain salvation? Whereunto I answer, that though men are unreasonable, God requires not any thing but reason : they will not be pleased without a down-weight ; but God is contented if the scale be turned : they pretend that heavenly things cannot be seen to any purpose, but by the mid-day light ; but God will be satisfied, if we receive any degree of light which makes us leave the " works of darkness, and walk as children of the light :" they exact a certainty of faith above that of sense or science ; God desires only that we believe the conclusion, as much as the premises deserve, that the strength of our faith be equal or proportionable to the credibility of the motives to it. Now, though I have and ought to have, an absolute certainty of this thesis — all which God reveals for truth, is true — being a pro- position, that may be demonstrated, or rather so evident to any one that understands it, that it needs it not ; yet of this hypothesis — that all the articles of our faith were revealed by God — we cannot ordinarily have any rational and acquired certainty, more than moral, founded upon these considerations : first, that the good- ness of the precepts of Christianity, and the greatness of the pro- mises of it, show it, of all other religions, most likely to come from the Fountain of goodness. And then, that a constant, famous, and very general tradition, so credible, that no wise man doubts of any other which hath but the fortieth part of the credi- bility of this; such and so credible a tradition tells us, that God himself hath set his hand and seal to the truth of this doctrine, by doing great, and glorious, and frequent miracles in confirma- tion of it. Now our faith is an assent to this conclusion, that the doctrine of Christianity is true ; which being deduced from the former thesis, which is metaphysically certain, and from the former hypothesis, whereof we can have but a moral certainty, we cannot possibly by natural means be more certain of it than of the weaker of the premises; as a river will not rise higher than the fountain from which it flows. For the conclusion always follows the worser part, if there be any worse ; and must be ne- gative, particular, contingent, or but morally certain, if any of the propositions, from whence it is derived, be so: neither can we be certain of it in the highest degree, unless we be thus cer- tain of all the principles whereon it is grounded. As a man can- not go or stand strongly, if either of his legs be weak. Or, as a F 82 Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. building cannot be stable, if any one of the necessary pillars thereof be infirm and instable. Or, as if a message be brought me from a man of absolute credit with me, but by a messenger that is not so, my confidence of the truth of the relation cannot but be rebated and lessened by my diffidence in the relator. 9. let all this I say not, as if I doubted that the Spirit of God, being implored by devout and humble prayer and sincere obe- dience, may and will by degrees advance his servants higher, and give them a certainty of adherence, beyond their certainty of evi- dence. But what God gives as a reward to believers, is one thing ; and what he requires of all men as their duty, is another ; and what he will accept of, out of grace and favour, is yet another. To those that believe, and live according to their faith, he gives by degrees the spirit of obsignation and confirmation, which makes them know (though how they know not) what they did but believe : and to be as fully and resolutely assured of the gospel of Christ, as those which heard it from Christ himself with their ears, which saw it with their eyes, which looked upon it, and whose hands handled the word of life. He requires all, that their faith should* be, as I have said, proportionable to the motives and reasons enforcing to it ; he will accept of the weakest and lowest degree of faith, if it be living and effectual unto true obedience. For he it is that " will not quench the smoking flax, nor break the bruised reed." He did not reject the prayer of that distressed man that cried unto him, " Lord, 1 believe ; Lord, help mine unbelief." He commands us to receive them that are weak in faith, and thereby declares that he receives them. And as nothing avails with him, but faith which worketh by love ; so any faith, if it be but as a grain of mustard-seed, if it work by love, shall certainly avail with him, and be accepted of him. Some experience makes me fear, that the faith of considering and discoursing men, is like to be cracked with too much straining : and that being possessed with this false principle, that it is in vain to believe the gospel of Christ, with such a kind or degree of assent, as they yield to other matters of tradition ; and finding, that their faith of it is to them undiscernable, from the belief they give to the truth of other stories, are in danger not to believe at all, thinking, not at all as good as to no purpose ; or else, though indeed they do believe it, yet to think they do not', and to cast themselves into wretched agonies and perplexities, as fearing they have not that, without which it is impossible to please God, and obtain eternal happiness. Consideration of this advantage, which the devil probably may make of this fancy, made me willing to insist somewhat largely on the refutation of it. 10. I return now thither from whence I have digressed, and assure you, concerning the grounds afore-laid, which were, that there is a rule of faith whereby controversies may be decided, which are necessary to be decided ; and that this rule is univer- sally infallible, that notwithstanding any opinion I hold, touching faith, or any things else, I may, and do believe them, as firmly as you pretend to do. And therefore you may build on in God's Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. 83 name ; for, by God's help, I shall always embrace whatsoever structure is naturally and rationally laid upon them, whatsoever conclusion may, to my understanding be evidently deduced from them. You say, out of them it undeniably follows, that, of two disagreeing in matter of faith, the one cannot be saved, but by repentance or ignorance ; I answer, by distinction of those terms, two dissenting in a matter of faith : for it may be either in a thing which is indeed a matter of faith in the strictest sense, that is, something, the belief whereof God requires under pain of damnation ; and so the conclusion is true, though the consequence of it from your former premises either is none at all, or so obscure that I can hardly discern it. Or it may be, as it often falls out concerning a thing, which being indeed no matter of faith, is yet overvalued by the parties at variance, and esteemed to be so ; and in this sense it is neither consequent, nor true. The untruth of it I have already declared in my examination of your preface : the inconsequence of it is of itself evident ; for who ever heard of a wilder collection than this 1 " God hath provided means sufficient to decide all controversies in religion necessary to be decided : " This means is universally infallible : " Therefore of two that differ in any thing, which they esteem a matter of faith, one cannot be saved." He that can find any connexion between these propositions, I believe will be able to find good coherence between the deaf plaintiff's accusation in the Greek epigram, and the deaf defend- ant's answer, and the deaf judge's sentence ; and to contrive them all into a formal categorical syllogism. 11. Indeed, if the matter in agitation were plainly decided by this infallible means of deciding controversies, and the parties in variance knew it to be so, and yet would stand out in their dis- sension ; this were, in one of them, direct opposition to the testi- mony of God, and undoubtedly a damnable sin. But if you take the liberty to suppose what you please, you may very easily con- clude what you list. For, who is so foolish as to grant you these unreasonable postulates, that every emergent controversy of faith is plainly decided by the means of decision which God hath ap- pointed ; and that, of the parties litigant, one is always such a convicted recusant as you pretend? Certainly, if you say so, having no better warrant than you have, or can have for it, this is more proper and formal uncharitableness, than ever was charged upon you. Methinks, with much more reason and much more charity, you might suppose that many of these controversies, which are now disputed among christians (all which profess themselves lovers of Christ, and truly desirous to know his will and do it) are either not decidable by that means which God has provided, and so not necessary to be decided: or, if they be, yet not so plainly and evidently, as to oblige all men to hold one way : or, lastly, if decidable, and evidently decided, yet you may hope, that the erring party, by reason of some veil before his eyes, some excusable ignorance or unavoidable prejudice, doth not see f2 84 Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. the question to be decided against him, and so opposeth not that which he doth not know to be the word of God, but only that which you know to be so, and which he might know, were he void of prejudice ; which is a fault I confess, but a fault which is incident even to good and honest men very often ; and not of such a gigantic disposition as you make it, to fly directly upon God Al- mighty, and to give him the lie to his face. 12. Ad. §9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. In all this long dis- course you only tell us what you will do, but do nothing. Many positions there are, but proofs of them you offer none, but reserv them to the chapters following ; and there, in their proper places, they shall be examined. The sum of all your assumpts collected by yourself, § 16, is this: That the infallible means of determining controversies is the visible church. That the distinction of points fundamental and not fundamental, maketh nothing to the present question. That to say the creed containeth all fundamentals, is neither pertinent nor true. That whosoever persist in division from the communion and faith of the Roman church, are guilty of schism and heresy. That in regard of the precept of charity towards one's self, protestants are in a state of sin, while they remain divided from the Roman church. To all these assertions I will content myself for the present to oppose this one, that not one of them all is true. Only I may not omit to tell you, that if the first of them were as true as the pope himself desires it should be, yet the corollary, which you deduce from it, would be utterly inconsequent, — that whosoever denies any point proposed by the church, is injurious to God's divine majesty ; as if he could deceive, or be deceived. For though your church were indeed as infallible a propounder of divine truths as it pretends to be, yet, if it appeared not to me to be so, I might very well believe God most true, and your church most false. As, though the gospel of St. Matthew be the word of God ; yet, if I neither knew it to be so, nor believed it, I might believe in God, and yet think that gospel a fable. Hereafter, therefore, I must entreat you to remember, that our being guilty of this impiety, depends not only upon your being, but upon our knowing that you are so. Neither must you argue thus ; the church of Rome is the infallible propounder of divine verities, therefore he that opposeth her calls God's truth in question: but thus rather, the church of Rome is so, and protestants know it to be so ; therefore in opposing her, they impute to God, that either he deceives them, or is deceived himself. For as I may deny something which you upon your knowledge have affirmed, and yet never disparage your honesty, if I never knew that you affirmed it ; so I may be undoubtedly certain of God's omniscience, and veracity, and yet doubt of some thing which he hath revealed ; provided, I do not know, nor believe, that he hath revealed it. So, that though your church be the appointed witness of God's revelations, Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. 85 yet until you know that we know she is so, you cannot without foul calumny impute to us, that we charge God hlasphemously with deceiving, or being deceived. You will say, perhaps, that this is directly consequent from our doctrine, that the church may err, which is directed by God in all her proposals. True, if we knew it to be directed by him, otherwise not; much less if we believe, and know the contrary. But then, if it were consequent from our opinion, have you so little charity, as to say, that men are justly chargeable with all the consequences of their opinions? Such consequences, I mean, as they do not own, but disclaim ; and if there were a necessity of doing either, would much rather forsake their opinion, than embrace these consequences? What opinion is there that draws after it such a train of portentous blasphemies, as that of the dominicans by the judgment of the best writers of your own order ? And will you say now, that the dominicans are justly chargeable with all those blasphemies ? If not, seeing our case (take it at the worst) is but the same, why should not your judgment of us be the same ? I appeal to all those protestants that have gone over to your side — whether, when they were most averse from it, they did ever deny or doubt of God's omniscience or veracity ; whether they did ever believe, or were taught, that God did deceive them, or was deceived him- self? Nay, I provoke to you yourself, and desire you to deal truly, and to tell us, whether you do in your heart believe, that we do indeed not believe the eternal veracity of the eternal verity ? And, if you judge so strangely of us, having no better ground for it than you have or can have, we shall not neeo any farther proof of your uncharitableness towards us, this being the extremity of true uncharitableness. If not, then I hope, having no other ground but this (which sure is none at all) to pronounce us damnable heretics, you will cease to do so ; and hereafter (as if your ground be true, you may do with more truth and charity) collect thus — they only err damnably, who oppose what they know God hath testified: but protestants sure do not oppose what they know God hath testified, at least we cannot with charity say they do : therefore they either do not err damnably, or with charity we cannot say they do so. 13. Ad. § 17. Protestants (you say) according to their own grounds must hold, that of persons contrary in whatsoever point of belief one part only can be saved, therefore it is strangely done of them to charge papists with want of charity for holding the same. The consequence I acknowledge, but wonder much what it should be that lays upon protestants any necessity to do so ! You tell us, it is their holding scripture the sole rule of faith : for this, you say, obligeth them to pronounce them damned, that oppose any least point delivered in scripture. This I grant, if they oppose it after sufficient declaration, so that either they know it to be contained in scripture, or have no just probable, reason, and which may move an honest man to doubt, whether or no it be there contained. For to oppose in the first case, in a man that believes the scripture to be the word of God, is to give 8 86 Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. God the lie. To oppose in the second, is to be obstinate against reason; and therefore a sin, though not so great as the former. But then this is nothing to the purpose of the necessity of damning all those that are of contrary belief; and that for these reasons. First, because the contrary belief may be touching a point not at all mentioned in scripture ; and such points, though indeed they be not matters of faith, yet by men in variance are often overvalued and esteemed to be so. So that, though it were damnable to oppose any point contained in scripture, yet persons of contrary belief (as Victor and Poly crates, St. Cyprian and Stephen) might both be saved, because their contrary belief was not touching any point contained in scripture. Secondly, because the contrary belief may be about the sense of some place of scrip- ture which is ambiguous, and with probability capable of divers senses ; and in such cases it is no marvel, and sure no sin if several men go several ways. Thirdly, because the contrary belief may be concerning points wherein scripture may, with so great probability, be alleged on both sides, (which is a sure note of a point not necessary,) that men of honest and upright hearts, true lovers of God and of truth, such as desire above all things to know God's will and to do it, may, without any fault at all, some go one way and some another, and some (and those as good men as either of the former) suspend their judgment, and expect some Elias to solve doubts, and reconcile repugnances. Now in all such questions, one side or other (whichsoever it is) holds that which indeed is opposite to the sense of the scripture which God in- tended ; for it is impossible that God should intend contradictions. But then this intended sense is not so fully declared, but that they which oppose it, may verily believe that they indeed maintain it, and have great show of reason to induce them to believe so ; and therefore are not to be damned, as men opposing that which they either know to be a truth delivered in scripture, or have no proba- ble reason to believe the contrary ; but rather, in charity to be acquitted and absolved, as men who endeavour to find the truth, but fail of it through human frailty. This ground being laid, the answer to your ensuing interrogato- ries, which you conceive impossible, is very obvious and easy. 14. To the first,' whether it be not in any man a grievous sin to deny any one truth contained in holy writ ? I answer, yes, if he knew it to be so, or have no probable reason to doubt of it; other- wise not. 15. To the second : whether there be in such denial any dis- tinction between fundamental and not fundamental, sufficient to excuse from heresy? I answer, yes, there is 'such a distinction. But the reason is, because these points, either in themselves, or by accident, are fundamental, which are evidently contained in scripture, to him that knows them to be so : those not funda- . mental, which are there-hence deducible, but probably only, not evidently. 16. To the third : whether it be not impertinent, to allege the creed, as containing all fundamental points of faith, as if be- Charity maintained by Catholics. 87 lieving it alone we were at liberty to deny all other points of scrip- ture ? I answers it was never alleged to any such purpose ; but only as a sufficient, or rather more than a sufficient summary of those points of faith which were of necessity to be believed actually and explicitly ; and that only of such which were merely and purely ere* denda and not agenda. 17. To the fourth, drawn as a corollary from the former : whether this be not to say, that, of persons contrary in belief, one part only can be saved 1 I answer, by no means : for they may differ about points not contained in scripture : they may diffei about the sense of some ambiguous text of scripture : they may differ about some doctrines, for and against which scriptures may be alleged with so great probability, as may justly excuse either part from heresy, and a self-condemning obstinacy. And, there- fore, though D. Potter do not take it ill, that you believe your selves may be saved in your religion, yet notwithstanding all that hath yet been pretended to the contrary, he may justly condemn you, and that out of your own principles, of uncharitable pre- sumption for affirming, as you do, that no man can be saved out of it. CHAPTER II. What is that means, whereby the revealed truths of God are conveyed to our understanding, and which must determine controversies in faith and religion ? " Of our estimation, respect, and reverence to holy scripture, even protestants themselves do in fact give testimony, while they possess it from us, and take it upon the integrity of our custody. No cause imaginable could avert our will from giving the function of supreme and sole judge to holy writ, if both the thing were not impos- sible in itself, and if both reason and experience did not convince our understanding, that, by this assertion, contentions are in- creased, and not ended. We acknowledge holy scripture to be a most perfect rule, forasmuch as a writing can be a rule : we only deny, that it excludes either divine tradition, though it be un- written, or an external judge to keep, to propose, to interpret it in a true, orthodox, and catholic sense. Every single book, every chapter, yea, everv period of holy scripture is infallibly true, and wants no due perfection. But must we therefore infer, that all other books of scripture are to be excluded, lest, by addition of them, we may seem to derogate from the perfection of the former T When the first books of the Old and New Testament were written, they did not exclude unwritten traditions, nor the authority of the church to decide controversies : and who hath then so altered their nature, and filled them with such jealousies, as that now they cannot agree for fear of mutual disparagement ? What greater wrong is it for the written word to be compartner now with the unwritten, than for the unwritten, which was once alone, to be after- ward joined with the written X Who ever heard, that, to commend 88 Charity maintained by Catholics. the fidelity of a keeper, were to disauthorize the thing committed to his custody ? or that, to extol the integrity and knowledge, and to avouch the necessity of a. judge in suits of law, were to deny perfection in the law ? Are there not in commonwealths, besides the laws, written arid" unwritten customs, judges appointed to declare both the one, and the other, as several occasions may require ? " 2. That, the scripture alone cannot be judge in controversies of . faith, wp. gather it very clearly, from the quality of a writing in general ; from the nature of holy writ in particular, which must be believed as true, and infallible ; from the editions and transla- tions of it ; from the difficulty to understand it without hazard of error ; from the inconveniences that must follow upon the ascrib- ing of sole judicature to it; and, finally, from the confessions of our adversaries. And, on the other side, all these difficulties ceas- ing, and all other qualities requisite to a judge concurring in the visible church of Christ our Lord, we must conclude, that she it is to whom, in doubts concerning faith and religion, all christians ought to have recourse. " 3. The name, notion, nature, and properties of a judge cannot in common reason agree to any mere writing, which, be it other- wise in its kind, never so highly qualified with sanctity and infal- libility, yet it must ever be, as all writings are, deaf, dumb, and inanimate. By a judge, all wise men understand a person endued with life and reason, able to hear, to examine, to declare his mind to the disagreeing parties, in such sort, as that each one may know whether the sentence be in favour of his cause, or against his pretence ; and he must be appliable, and able to do all this, as the diversity of controversies, persons, occasions, and circumstances may require. There is a great and plain distinction between a judge and a rule : for, as in a kingdom, the judge has his rule to follow, which are the received laws and customs; so are they not fit or able to declare, or be judges to themselves ; but that office must belong to a living judge. The holy scripture may be, and is a rule, but cannot be a judge, because it being always the same, cannot declare itself any onetime, or upon any one occasion, more particu- larly than upon any other ; and let it be read over an hundred times, it will be still the same, and no more fit alone to terminate controversies in faith, than the law would be to end suits, if it were given over to the fancy and gloss of every single man. "4. This difference betwixt a judge and a rule, D. Potter per- ceived, when, more than once having styled the scripture a judge, by way of correcting that term, he adds, or rather a rule ; because he knew that an inanimate writing could not be a judge. From hence also it was, that though protestants in their beginning affirmed scripture alone to be the judge of controversies ; yet, upon a more advised reflection, they changed the phrase, and said, that not scripture, but the Holy Ghost speaking in scripture, is judge in controversies. A difference without a disparity. The Holy Ghost speaking only in scripture, is no more intelligible to us, than the scripture in which he speaks: as a man speaking only in Latin, Charily maintained, by Catholics. 89 can be no better understood than the tongue wherein he speaketh. And therefore, to say a judge is necessary for deciding controver- sies about the meaning of scripture, is as much as to say, he is necessary to decide what the Holy Ghost speaks in scripture. And it were a conceit equally foolish and pernicious, if one should seek to take away all judges in the kingdom upon this nicety, that albeit laws cannot be judges, yet the law-maker speaking in the law, may perform that office, as if the law-maker speaking in the law, were with more perspicuity understood than the law whereby he speaketh. " 5. But though some writing were granted to have a privilege to declare itself upon supposition that it were maintained in being, and preserved entire from corruptions ; yet it is manifest, that no writing can conserve itself, nor can complain, or denounce the fal- sifier of it ; and therefore it stands in need of some watchful and not-erring eye to guard it, by means of whose assured vigilancy, we may undoubtedly receive it sincere and pure. " 6. And, suppose it could defend itself from corruption, how could it assure us, that itself were canonical, and of infallible verity, by saying so ? Of this very affirmation, there will remain the same question still ; how it can prove itself to be infallibly true ? Neither can there ever be an end of the like multiplied demands, till we rest in the external authority of some person or persons bearing witness to the world, that such or such a book is scripture ; and yet upon this point, according to protestants, all other contro- versies in faith depend. " 7. That scripture cannot assure us that itself is canonical scrip- ture, is acknowledged by some protestants in express words, and by all of them in deeds. Mr. Hooker, whom D. Potter ranketh* among men of great learning and judgment, saith, ' Of thingsf necessary, the very chiefest is to know what books we are to esteem holy ; which point is confessed impossible for the scripture itself to teach.' And this he proveth by the same argument, which we lately used, saying thus, 'It is not J the word of God which doth, or possibly can assure us, that we do well to think it is his word. For, if any one book of scripture did give testimony of all, yet still that scripture, which giveth testimony to the rest, would require another scripture to give credit unto it. Neither could we come to any pause whereon to rest, unless, besides scripture, there were something which might assure us,' &c. And this he acknowledges to be the§ church. By the way, if, of things necessary the very chiefest cannot possibly be taught by scripture, as this man of so great learning and judgment affirmeth, and demonstratively proveth, how can the protestant clergy of England subscribe to their sixth article? wherein it is said of the scripture, whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salva- tion; and concerning their belief and profession of this article, they are * Page 131. + In his first book of Eccles. Polit. sect. 14, p. 68. X Ibid. 1. 2, sect. 4, p. 102. § L. 3, sect. 8, p. 1, 146, et alibi. 8* 90 Charity maintained by Catholics. particularly examined when they are ordained priests and bishops. With Hooker, his defendant Covel doth punctually agree. Whitaker likewise confesseth, that the question about canonical scriptures, is defined to us, not by ' testimony of the private spirit, which (saith he) being private and secret, is* unfit to teach and refel others; but (as he acknowledgeth) by thef ecclesiastical tradition : an argu- ment (saith he) whereby may be argued, and convinced, what books be canonical, and what be not.' Luther saith, ' this J indeed the church hath, that she can discern the word of God from the word of men :' as Augustine confesseth, that he believed the gospel, being moved by the authority of the church, which did preach this to be the gospel. Fulk teacheth, that the ' church § hath judgment to discern true writings from counterfeit, and the word of God from the writing of men ; and that this judgment she hath not of herself, but of the Holy Ghost.' And to the end that you may not be igno- rant from what church you must receive scriptures, hear your first patriarch Luther speaking against them, who (as he saith) brought in anabaptism, that so they might despite the pope. ' Verily, (saith he) these || men build upon a weak foundation : for by this means they ought to deny the whole scripture, and the office of preach- ing : for all these we have from the pope ; otherwise we must go make a new scripture.' " 8. But now in deeds they all make good, that without the church's authority no certainty can be had what scripture is ca- nonical, while they cannot agree in assigning the canon of the holy scripture. Of the epistle of St. James, Luther hath these words : '•The IT epistle of James is contentious, swelling, dry, strawy, and unworthy of an apostolical spirit.' Which censure of Luther, 1111- ricus acknowledgeth and maintaineth. Kemnitius teacheth, that the second epistle** of Peter, the second and third of John, the epistle to the Hebrews, the epistle of James, the epistle of Jude, and the apocalypse of John, are apocryphal, as not having sufficient testi- mony ft °f tne i r authority, and therefore that nothing in contro- versy can be proved out of these JJ books. The same is taught by divers other lutherans : and, if some other amongst them be of a contrary opinion since Luther's time, I wonder what new infallible ground they can allege, why they leave their master, and so many of his prime scholars. I know no better ground, than because they may with as much freedom abandon him, as he was bold to alter that canon of scripture, which he found received in God's church. " 9. What books of scripture the protestants of England hold for canonical, is not easy to affirm. In their sixth article, they say, ' in the name of the holy scripture, we do understand those canonical books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the church.' What mean they by these words, that by the * Adv. Stap. 1. 2, c. 6, p. 270, 357. || Ep. con. Anab. ad duos Paroch. torn. t Ibid. 1. 2, c. 4, p. 300. ii. Ger. Witt. t L. de Cap. Bab. Tom. ii. Witt. f. t Praef. in Epist. Jac. in ed. Jen. 88. ** In Enchirid. p. 65. § In his Answer to a counterfeit Catho- tt In Exam. Cone. Trid. par. 1, p. 55. lie. p. 5. Xt Ibid. Charity maintained by Catholics. 91 church's consent they are assured what scriptures be canonical ? This were to make the church judge, and not scriptures alone. Do they only understand the agreement of the church to be a probable inducement ? Probability is no sufficient ground for an infallible assent of faith. By this rule (of whose authority was never any doubt in the church) the whole book of Esther must quit the canon, because some in the church have excluded it from the canon,* as Melito Asianus,f Athanasius, and J Gregory Nazianzen. And Luther (if protestants will be content that he be in the church) saith, ' The Jews§ place the book of Esther in the canon; which yet, if I might be judge, doth rather deserve to be put out of the canon.' And of Ecclesiastes he saith, ' This (| book is not full ; there are in it many abrupt things: he wants boots and spurs, that is, he hath no perfect sentence, he rides upon a long reed, like me when I was in the monastery.' And much more is to be read in him whoU saith further, that the said book was not written by Solomon, but by Syrach in the time of the Maccabees, and that it is like to the Talmud (the Jews' Bible) out of many books heaped into one work, perhaps out of the library of King Ptolemeus. And further he saith, that ** he does not believe all to have been done, that there is set down. And he teacheth theff book of Job to be as it were an argument for a fable (or comedy) to set before us an example of patience. And heJJ delivers this general censure of the prophets' books, ' the sermons of no prophet were written whole and perfect ; but their disciples and auditors snatched now one sentence and then another, and so put them all into one book, and by this means the bible was conserved.' If this were so, the book of the prophets, being not written by themselves, but promiscuously and casually by their disciples, will soon be called in question. Are not these errors of Luther fundamental ? and yet, if protestants deny the in- fallibility of the church, upon what certain ground can they dis- prove these lutheran and luciferian blasphemies? O godly reformer of the Roman church ! But to return to our English canon of scrip- ture. In the New Testament, by the abovementioned rule (of whose authority was never any doubt in the church) divers books of the New Testament must be discanonized, to wit, all those of which some ancients have doubted, and those which divers lutherans have of late denied. It is worth the observation, how the beforementioned sixth article doth specify by name all the books of the Old Testament which they hold for canonical ; but those of the New, without naming any one, they shuffle over with this generality — ' all the books of the New Testament, as they are com- monly received, we do receive and account them canonical.' The mystery is easy to be unfolded. If they had descended to particulars, * Apud. Euseb. 1. iv. Hist. c. 26. IT In Ger. colloq. Lutheri ab Aurifabro t In Synops. ed. Fran. tit. de lib. Vet. et Nov. Test. f. t In Carm. de Genuinis Scrip. 379. § Li. de serv. arb. con. eras. torn. ii. ** lb. tit. de Patriarch, et Proph. fol. Wit. fol. 471. 282. || In lat. serm. conviv. Fran, in 8 impr. tt Tit. de lib. Vet. et Nov. Test, anno 1571. tt Fol. 380. 92 Charity maintained by Catholics. they must have contradicted some of their chiefest brethren. ' As they are commonly received,' &c. I ask, by whom ? By the church of Rome ? Then by the same reason they must receive divers books of the Old Testament, which they reject. By lutherans? Then with lutherans they may deny some books of the New Testament. If it be the greater, or less number of voices, that must cry up or down the canon of scripture, our Roman canon will prevail: and among protestants the certainty of their faith must be re- duced to an uncertain controversy of fact, whether the number of those who reject, or of those others who receive such and such scriptures, be greater; their faith must alter according to years and days. When Luther first appeared, he and his disciples were the greater number of that new church; and so this claim (of being ' commonly received') stood for them, till Zuinglius and Calvin grew to some equal, or greater number than that of the lutherans, and then this rule of ' commonly received' will canonize their canon against the lutherans. I would gladly know, why, in the former part of their article, they say both of the Old and New Testament : ' In the name of the holy scripture, we do un- derstand those canonical books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the church :' and in the latter part, speaking again of the New Testament, they give a far different rule, saying, ' All the books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we receive and account them ca- nonical.' This, I say, is a rule much different from the former (of whose authority was never any doubt in the church) ; for some books might be said to be ' commonly received,' although they were sometime doubted of by some. If to be ' commonly received,' pass for a good rule to know the canon of the New Testament, why not of the Old ? Above all we desire to know, upon what infallible ground in some books they agree with us against Luther, and divers principal lutherans, and in others jump with Luther against us? But seeing they disagree among themselves, it is evident, that they have no certain rule to know the canon of scripture, in assign- ing whereof some of them must of necessity err; because of con- tradictory propositions, both cannot be true. " 10. Moreover, the letters, syllables, words, phrase, or matter contained in holy scripture, have no necessary, or natural connec- tion with divine revelation or inspiration : and, therefore, by seeing, reading, or understanding them, we cannot infer, that they pro- ceed from God, or be confirmed by divine authority; as, because creatures involve a necessary relation, connexion, and dependence upon their Creator, philosophers may, by the light of natural rea- son, demonstrate the existence of one prime Cause of all things. In holy writ there are innumerable truths not surpassing the sphere of human wit, which are, or may be delivered by pagan writers, in the self-same words and phrases as they are in scrip- ture. And as for some truths peculiar to christians (for example, the mystery of the blessed Trinity, &c.) the only setting them down in writing is not enough to be assured, that such a writing is the undoubted word of God ; otherwise some sayings of Plato, Tris- Charity maintained, by Catholics. 93 megistus, Sibyls, Ovid, &c. must be esteemed canonical scripture, because they fall upon some truths proper to christian religion. The internal light and inspiration, which directed and moved the authors of canonical scripture, is a hidden quality infused into their understanding and will, and hath no such particular sensible influence into the external writing, that in it we can discover, or from it demonstrate any such secret light and inspiration : and therefore to be assured, that such a writing is divine, we cannot know from itself alone, but by some other extrinsical authority. " 11. And here we appeal to any man of judgment, whether it be not a vain brag of some protestants, to tell us that thev wot full well what is scripture, by the light of scripture itself, or (as D. Potter words it) ' by* that glorious beam of divine light, which shines therein ;' even as our eye distinguished light from dark- ness, without any other help than light itself; and as our ear knows a voice, by the voice itself alone. But this vanity is re- futed by what we said even now, that the external scripture hath no apparent or necessary connexion with divine inspiration or revelation. Will D. Potter hold all his brethren for blind men, for not seeing that glorious beam of divine light which shines in scripture, about which they cannot agree ? Corporal light may be discerned by itself alone, as being evident, proportionate, and connatural to our faculty of seeing. The scripture is divine, and inspired by God, is a truth exceeding the natural capacity and compass of man's understanding, to us obscure, and to be believed by divine faith, which according to the apostle, is, argumentum\ non apparentium ; an argument or conviction of things not evi- dent ; and therefore no wonder if scripture do not manifest itself by itself alone, but must require some other means for applying it to our understanding. Nevertheless, their own similitudes and instances make against themselves : for, suppose a man had never read or heard of sun or moon, fire, candle, &c, and should be brought to behold a light, yet in such sort as that the agent or cause efficient from which it proceeded, were kept hidden from him ; could such a one, by beholding the light, certainly know, whether it were produced by the sun, or moon, &c? Or, if one heard a voice, and had never known the speaker, could he know from whom in particular that voice proceeded ? They, who look upon scripture, may well see that some one wrote it; but that it was written by divine inspiration, how shall they know 1 Nay, they cannot so much as know who wrote it, unless they first know the writer, and what hand he writes ; as likewise I cannot know whose voice it is which I hear, unless I first both know the per- son who speaks, and with what voice he useth to speak : and yet even all this supposed, I may perhaps be deceived. For there may be voices so alike, and hands counterfeited, that men may be deceived by them, as birds were by the grapes of that skilful painter. Now since protestants affirm, knowledge concerning God as our supernatural end, must be taken from scripture, they cannot in scripture alone discern, that it is his voice or writing, * Page 141. tHeb. xi.v. 1. 94 Charity maintained by Catholics. because they cannot know from whom a writing or voice proceeds, unless first they know the person who speaketh or writeth : nay, I say more ; by scripture alone they cannot so much as know, that any person doth in it, or by it, speak any thing at all ; because one may write without intent to signify, or affirm any thing, but only to set down, or, as it were, paint such characters, syllables, and words, as men are wont to set copies, not caring what the signification of the words import ; or as one transcribes a writing, which himself understands not ; or when one writes what another dictates; and in other such cases, wherein it is clear, that the writer speaks or signifies nothing in such his writing ; and there- fore by it we cannot hear, or understand his voice. With what certainty then can any man affirm, that by scripture itself they can see, that the writers did intend to signify any thing at all ; that they were apostles, or other canonical authors; that they wrote their own sense, and not what was dictated by some other man ; and finally and especially, that they wrote by the infallible direction of the Holy Ghost 1 " 12. But let us be liberal, and for the present suppose [not grant] that scripture is like to corporal light, by itself alone able to determine, and move our understanding to assent; yet the similitude proves against themselves. For light is not visible, except to such as have eyes, which are not made by the light, but must be pre-supposed as produced by some other cause. And therefore to hold the similitude, scripture can be clear only to those who are endued with the eye of faith ; or, as D. Potter above cited saith, to all that 'have* eyes to discern the shining beams thereof;' that is, to the believer, as immediately after he speaketh. Faith then must not originally proceed from scrip- ture, but it is to be pre-supposed, before we can see the light thereof; and consequently there must be some other means pre- cedent to scripture, to beget faith, which can be no other than the church. " 13. Others affirm, that they know canonical scriptures to be such, by the title of the books. But how shall we know such inscriptions or titles to be infallibly true 1 From this their answer our argument is strengthened, because divers apocryphal writings have appeared under the titles and names of sacred authors, as the gospel of Thomas, mentioned by St. Augustine,f the gospel of Peter, which -the Nazarenes did use, as TheodoreJ witnesseth, with which Sera-phon, a catholic bishop, was for some time de- ceived, as may be read in Eusebius,§ who also speaketh of the apocalypse of Peter.|| The like may be said of the gospels of Bar- nabas, Bartholomew, and other such writings specified by Pope Gelasius.TI Protestants reject likewise some part of Esther and Daniel, which bear the same titles with the rest of those books, as also both we and they hold for apocryphal the third and fourth books which go under the name of Esdras, and yet both of us receive his first and second book ; wherefore titles are not suffi- *Page 141. tCon. Adimantum, c. 11. tL. ii. Heretic. Fr.b. §Lib. 6, c 10. 11 Lib. 6, c. 11. U Dist. Can. Saucta Romana. Charity maintained by Catholics. 95 cient assurances what books be canonical ; which D. Covel* acknowledged in these words: 'It is not the word of God, which doth, or possibly can assure us, that we do well to think it is the word of God ; the first outward motion leading men so to esteem of the scripture, is the authority of God's church, which teacheth us to receive Mark's gospel, who was not an apostle ; and to refuse the gospel of Thomas, who was an apostle ; and to retain Luke's gospel, who saw not Christ, and to reject the gospel of Nicode- mus, who saw him.' " 14. Another answer, or rather objection, they are wont to bring ; that the scripture being a principle, needs no proof among christians. So D. Potter.-j- But this is either a plain begging of the question, or manifestly untrue, and is directly against their own doctrine and practice. If they mean, that scripture is one of those principles, which being the first, and most known in all sciences, cannot be demonstrated by other principles, they suppose that which is in question, whether there be not some principle (for example the church), whereby we may come to the know- ledge of scripture. If they intend, that scripture is a principle, but not the first, and most known in Christianity, then scripture may be proved. For principles, that are not the first, nor known of themselves, may, and ought to be proved, before we can yield assent either to them, or to other verities depending on them. It is repugnant to their own doctrine and practice, inasmuch as they were wont to affirm, that one part of scripture may be known to be canonical, and may be interpreted by another. And since every scripture is a principle sufficient upon which to ground divine faith, they must grant that one principle may, and some- times must, be proved by another. Yea, this their answer upon due ponderation, falls out to prove what we affirm. For, since all principles cannot be proved, we must (that our labour may not be endless) come at length to rest in some principle, which may not require any other proof: such is tradition, which involves an evidence of fact; and from hand to hand, and age to age, bring- ing up to the times and persons of the apostles, and our Saviour himself, cometh to be confirmed by all those miracles and other arguments, whereby they convinced their doctrine to be true. Wherefore the ancient fathers avouch that we must receive the sacred canon upon the credit of God's church. St. AthanasiusJ saith, that only four gospels are to be received, because the canons of the holy and catholic church have so determined. The third council of Carthage§ having set down the books of holy scripture, gives the reason, because, ' we have received from our fathers, that those are to be read in the church.' St. Augustine|| speaking of the Acts of the Apostles, saith, * to which book I must give credit, if I give credit to the gospel, because the catholic church doth alike recommend to me both these books.' And in the same place he hath also these words : ' I would not believe the gospel, unless the authority of the catholic church did move me.' A saying so * In his Defence, art. 4, p. 31. t Page 234. t In Synops. § Can. 47. II Cont. ep. Fundam. c. 5. 96 Charity maintained by Catholics. plain, that Zuinglius is forced to cry out, * Here* I implore your equity to speak freely, whether the saying of Augustine seems not over bold, or else unadvisedly to have fallen from him.' " 15. But suppose they were assured what hooks were canoni- cal, this will little avail them, unless they be likewise certain in what language they remain uncorrupted, or what translations be true. Calvinf acknowledgeth corruption in the Hebrew text; which if it be taken without points, is so ambiguous, that scarcely any one chapter, yea period, can be securely understood without the help of some translation : if with points, these were, after St. Hierom's time, invented by the perfidious Jews, who either by ignorance might mistake, or upon malice force the text to favour their impieties. And that the Hebrew text still retains much ambiguity, is apparent by the disagreeing translations of novel- ists; which also proves the Greek, for the New Testament, not to be void of doubtfulness, as CalvinJ confesseth it to be cor- rupted. And although both the Hebrew and Greek were pure, what doth this help, if only scripture be the rule of faith, and so very few be able to examine the text in these languages? All then must be reduced to the certainty of translations into other tongues, wherein no private man having any promise or assurance of infallibility, protestants, who rely upon scripture alone, will find no certain ground for their faith ; as accordingly Whitaker§ affirmeth ; ' those who understand not the Hebrew and Greek, do err often, and unavoidably.' " 16. Now concerning the translations of protestants, it will be sufficient to set down what the laborious, exact, and judicious au- thor of the Protestant's Apology, &c. dedicated to our late King James, of famous memory, hath to this|| purpose. ' To omit (saith he) particulars, whose recital would be infinite, and to touch this point but generally only, the translation of the New Testament by Luther is condemned by Andreas Osiander, Kechermannus, and Zuinglius, who saith hereof to Luther, thou dost corrupt the word of God, thou art seen to be a manifest and common corrupter of the holy scriptures : how much are we ashamed of thee, who have hitherto esteemed thee beyond all measure, and now prove thee to be such a man ? And in like manner doth Luther reject the translations of the Zuinglians, terming them in matter of divinity, fools, asses, antichrists, deceivers, and of ass-like understanding. Insomuch, that when Froschoverus, the zuinglian printer of Zurich, sent him a bible translated by the divines there, Luther would not receive the same ; but sending it back, rejected it, as the protestant writers Hospinianus and Lavatherus witness. The translation set forth by Oecolampadius, and the divines of Basil, is reproved by Beza, who affirmeth that the Basil translation is in many places wicked, and altogether differing from the mind of the Holy Ghost. The translation of Castalio is condemned by Beza, as being sacrilegious, wicked, and ethnical. As concerning * Tom. i. fol. 135. t Instit. c. 6, sect. 11. X Ibid. c. 7, sect. 12. §Lib. de sancta Scriptura, p. 523. || Tract. 1, sect. 10, subd. 4, joined with tract. 2, c. 2, sect. 10, subd. 2. Charity maintained, by Catholics. 07 Calvin's translation, that learned protestant writer Carolus Moli- naeus saith thereof, Calvin in his Harmony maketh the text of the gospel to leap up and down; he useth violence to the letter of the gospel ; and, besides this, addeth to the text. As touching Beza's translation (to omit the dislike had thereof by Selneccerus, the German protestant of the university of Jena) the aforesaid Molinaeus saith of him, de facto mutat textum, he actually changeth the text, and giveth farther sundry instances of his corruptions : as also Castalio, that learned calvinist, and most learned in the tongues, reprehendeth Beza in a whole book of this matter, and saith, that to note all his errors in translation would require a great volume. And M. Parker saith, As for the Geneva bibles, it is to be wished, that either they may be purged from those ma- nifold errors, which are both in the text, and in the margent, or else utterly prohibited. AH which confirmeth your majesty's grave and learned censure, in your thinking the Geneva transla- tion to be worst of all ; and that in the marginal notes annexed to the Geneva translation, some are very partial, untrue, seditious, &c. Lastly, concerning the English translation, the Puritans say, Our translation of the Psalms, comprised in our Book of Com- mon Prayer, doth in addition, subtraction, and alteration, differ from the truth of the Hebrew in two hundred places at least : insomuch as they do therefore profess to rest doubtful whether a man with a safe conscience may subscribe thereunto. And Mr. Carlisle saith of the English translators, that they have depraved the sense, obscured the truth, and deceived the ignorant : that in many places they do detort the scriptures from the right sense : and that they show themselves to love darkness more than light, falsehood more than truth. And the ministers of Lincoln diocese give their public testimony, terming the English translation, a translation that taketh away from the text; that addeth to the text ; and that sometime to the changing or obscuring of the meaning of the Holy Ghost. Not without cause, therefore, did your majesty affirm, that you could never see a bible well trans- lated into English.' Thus far the author of the Protestant Apo- logy, &c. And I cannot forbear to mention in particular, that famous corruption of Luther, who in the text, where it is said, (Rom. iii. 28,) ' We account a man to be justified by faith, without the works of the law,' in favour of justification by faith alone, translateth 'justified by faith alone.' As likewise the fal- sification of Zuinglius is no less notorious, who, in the gospels of St. Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and in St. Paul, in place of, ' This is my body, this is my blood,' translates, ' This signifies my body, this signifies my blood.' And here, let protestants consider duly of these points: salvation cannot be hoped for without true faith: faith according to them, relies upon scripture alone : scripture must be delivered to most of them, by the translations : transla- tions depend on the skill and honesty of men, in whom nothing is more certain than a most certain possibility to err ; and no greater evidence of truth, than that it is evident some of them embrace falsehood, by reason of their contrary translations. What then g 9 98 Charity maintained by Catholics. remaineth, but that truth, faith, salvation, and all must in them rely upon a fallible and uncertain ground ? How many poor souls are lamentably seduced, while from preaching ministers they ad- mire a multitude of texts of divine scripture, but are indeed the false translations and corruptions of erring men ! Let them, therefore, if they will be assured of true scriptures, fly to the al- ways visible catholic church, against which the gates of hell can never so far prevail, as that she shall be permitted to deceive the/ christian world with false scriptures. And Luther himself, by unfortunate experience, was at length forced to confess thus much, saying, ' If the world* last longer, it will be again necessary to receive the decrees of councils, and to have recourse to them, by reason of divers interpretations of scripture which now reign.' On the contrary side, the translation approved by the Roman church is commended even by our adversaries; and D. Covel in particular saith, that it was used in the church, one thousandf three hundred years ago, and doubteth not to prefer thatj trans- lation before others. Insomuch, that whereas the English trans- lations be many, and among themselves disagreeing, he con- cludeth, that of all those the approved translation, authorized by the church of England, is that which cometh nearest to the vul- gar, and is commonly called the Bishops' Bible. So that the truth of that translation which we use, must be the rule to judge of the goodness of their bibles ; and therefore they are obliged to maintain our translations, if it were but for their own sake. " 17. But doth indeed the source of their manifold uncertainties stop here? No, the chiefest difficulty remains, concerning the true meaning of scripture ; for attaining whereof, if protestants had any certainty, they could not disagree so hugely as they do. Hence Mr. Hooker saith, ' We are§ right sure of this, that nature, scripture, and experience, have all taught the world to seek for the ending contentions, by submitting itself unto some judicial and definitive sentence, whereunto neither part that contendeth may, under any pretence, refuse to stand.' Doctor Field's words are remarkable to this purpose ; ' Seeing (saith he) the controver- sies|| of religion in our times are grown in number so many, and in nature 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 dili- gently to search out, which among all the societies in 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 the pillar and ground of truth, that so they may embrace her communion, follow her directions, and rest in her judgment? " 18. And now, that the true interpretation of scripture ought to be received from the church, it is also proved by what we have already demonstrated, that she it is who must declare what books * Lib. con. Zuing. de verit. corp. Christ, in Eucha. t In his answer unto M. John Burges, p. 94. X Ibid. § In his Preface to his Books of Eccl. Policy, sect. 6, p. 26. II In his Treatise of the Church, in his Epistle Dedicatory to the L. Archbishop. Charity maintained, by Catholics. 99 be true scripture ; wherein if she be assisted by the Holy Ghost, why should we not believe her to be infallibly directed concern- ing the true meaning of them ? Let protestants, therefore, either bring some proof out of scripture, that the church is guided by the Holy Ghost in discerning true scripture, and not in delivering the true sense thereof: or else give us leave to apply against them the argument which St. Augustine opposed to his Mani- cheans in these words : ' I would not believe* the gospel, unless the authority of the church did move me. Them, therefore, whom I obeyed, saying, believe the gospel, why should I not obey, saying to me, do not believe Manicheus (Luther, Calvin, &c.) choose what thou pleasest. If thou shalt say, believe the catholics; they warn me not to give any credit to you. If, there- fore, I believe them, I cannot believe thee. If you say, do not believe the catholics, thou shalt not do well in forcing me to the faith of Manicheus, because, by the preaching of catholics, I be- lieved the gospel itself. If you say, you did well to believe them [catholics] commending the gospel, but you did not well to be- lieve them, discommending Manicheus ; dost thou think me so very foolish, that without any reason at all, I should believe what thou wilt, and not believe what thou wilt not V And do not pro- testants perfectly resemble these men, to whom St. Augustine spake, when they will have men to believe the Roman church de- livering scripture, but not to believe her condemning Luther and the rest? Against whom, when they first opposed themselves to the Roman church, St. Augustine may have seemed to have spoken no less prophetically, than doctrinally, when he said, ' Why should I not mostf diligently inquire what Christ com- manded of them before all others, by whose authority I was moved to believe that Christ commanded any good thing ? Canst thou better declare to me what he said, whom I would not have thought to have been, or to be, if the belief thereof had been re- commended by thee to me ? This, therefore, I believed by fame, strengthened with celebrity, consent, antiquity. Rut every one may see that you, so few, so turbulent, so new, can produce no- thing deserving authority. What madness is this ! Believe them [catholics] that we ought to believe Christ; but learn of us what Christ said. Why, I beseech thee? Surely, if they [catholics] were not at all, and could not teach me any thing, I would more easily persuade myself that I were not to believe Christ, than that I should learn any thing concerning him from any other than them by whom I believed him.' If, therefore, we receive the knowledge of Christ and scriptures from the church, from her also we take his doctrine, and the interpretation thereof. " 19. But besides all this, the scripture cannot be judge of controversies ; who ought to be such, as that to him not only the learned, or veterans, but also the unlearned and novices, may have recourse : for these being capable of salvation, and endued with faith of the same nature with that of the learned, there must be some universal judge, which the ignorant may understand, * Con. Ep. Fund, cap. 5. t Lib. de Util. Cre. cap. 14. G2 100 Charity maintained by Catholics. and to whom the greatest clerks must submit. Such is the church, and the scripture is not such. " 20. Now, the inconveniences which follow by referring all con- troversies to scripture alone, are very clear : for by this principle, all is finally in very deed and truth reduced to the internal private spirit, because there is really no middle way betwixt a public ex- ternal, and a private internal voice ; and whosoever refuseth the one, must of necessity adhere to the other. "21. This tenet also of protestants, by taking the office of ju- dicature from the church, comes to confer it upon every particular man, who, being driven from submission to the church, cannot be blamed if he trust himself as far as any other, his conscience dic- tating, that wittingly he means not to cozen himself, as others maliciously may do. Which inference is so manifest, that it hath extorted from divers protestants the open confession of so vast an absurdity. Hear Luther : ' The governors of* churches and pastors of Christ's sheep, have indeed power to teach, but the sheep ought to give judgment, whether they propound the voice of Christ, or of aliens.' Lubbertus saith, ' As we havef demonstrated that all public judges may be deceived in interpret- ing ; so we affirm, that they may err in judging. 'All faithful men are private judges, and they also have power to judge of doctrines and interpretations.' Whitaker, even of the unlearned saith,J ' They ought to have recourse unto the more learned : but in the mean time we must be careful not to attribute to them over much, but so that still we retain our own freedom.' Bilson also afiirmeth, that ' the people§ must be discerners and judges of that which is taught.' This same pernicious doctrine is delivered by Brentius, Zanchius, Cartwright, and others exactly cited by || Breerely, and nothing is more common in every protestant's mouth, than that he admits of fathers, councils, church, &c. as far as they agree with scripture : which upon the matter is himself. H Thus heresy ever falls upon extremes ; it pretends to have scripture alone for judge of controversies ; and in the mean time sets up as many judges, as there are men and women in the christian world. What good statesmen would they be, who should ideate or fancy such a commonwealth, as these men have framed" to themselves a church ! They verify what St. Augustine ob- jecteth against certain heretics : ' You see that you go about to overthrow all authority of scripture, and that every man's mind may be to himself a rule, what he is to allow, or disallow, in every scripture.' " 22. Moreover, what confusion to the church, what danger to the commonwealth, this denial of the authority of the church may bring, I leave to the consideration of any judicious, indifferent man. I will only set down some words of D. Potter, who, speaking of the proposition of revealed truths, sufficient to prove him that gainsay eth them to be an heretic, saith thus : ' This * Tom. 2. Wittem. fol. 375. § In his true Difference, part 2. t In lib. de Principiis Christian. Dogm. I. 6, c. 3. || Tract. 2, cap. 1, sect. 1. t De Sacra Scriptura, 529. IT Lib. 32, Cont. Faust. Charity maintained by Catholics. 101 proposition* of revealed truths, is not by infallible determination of pope or church ; (pope and church being excluded, let us hear what more secure rule he will prescribe ;) but by whatsoever means a man may be convinced in conscience of divine reve- lation. If a preacher do clear any point of faith to his hearers; if a private christian do make it appear to his neighbour, that any conclusion, or point of faith is delivered by divine revela- tion of God's word; if a man himself (without any teacher) bv reading of the scriptures, or hearing them read, be convinced of the truth of any such conclusion ; this is a sufficient proposition to prove him that gainsayeth any such proof, to be an heretic, an obstinate opposer of the faith.' Behold, what goodly safe pro- pounders of faith arise in place of God's universal visible church, which must yield to a single preacher, a neighbour, a man himself if he can read, or at least have ears to hear scripture read ! Verily I do not see but that every well-governed civil commonwealth ought to concur towards the exterminating of this doctrine, whereby the interpretation of scripture is taken from the church, and conferred upon every man, who, whatsoever is pretended to the contrary, may be a passionate, seditious creature. " 23. Moreover, there was no scripture, or written word for about two thousand years from Adam to Moses, whom all acknow- ledge to have been the first author of canonical scripture ; and again, for about two thousand years more, from Moses to Christ our Lord, holy scripture was only among the people of Israel ; and yet there were gentiles endued in those days with divine faith, as appeareth in Job, and his friends. Wherefore, during so many ages, the church alone was the decider of controversies, and in- structor of the faithful. Neither did the word written by Moses deprive that church of her former infallibility, or other qualities requisite for a judge ; yea, D. Potter acknowledgeth, that besides the law, there was a living judge in the Jewish church, endued with an absolutely infallible direction in cases of moment ; as all points belonging to divine faith are. Now, the church of Christ our Lord was before the scriptures of the New Testament, which were not written instantly, nor all at one time, but successively upon several occasions ; and some after the decease of most of the apostles : and, after they were written, they were not presently known to all churches : and of some there was a doubt in the church for some ages after our Saviour. Shall we then say, that according as the church by little and little received holy scripture, she was, by the like degrees, divested of her possessed infallibility and power to decide controversies in religion 1 That some churches had one judge of controversies, and others another 1 That with months, or years, as new ca- nonical scripture grew to be published, the church altered her whole rule of faith, or judge of controversies? After the apos- tles' time, and after the writing of scriptures, heresies would be sure to rise, requiring in God's church, for their discovery and condemnation, infallibility, either to write new canonical scrip- * Page 247. 9* 102 Charity maintained by Catholics. ture, as was done in the apostles' time by occasion of emergent heresies ; or infallibility to interpret scriptures already writ- ten, or without scripture, by divine unwritten traditions, a«d assistance of the Holy Ghost to determine all controversies ; as Tertullian saith, ' The soul * is before the letter ; and speech before books; and sense before style.' Certainly such addition of scripture, with derogation, or subtraction from the former power and infallibility of the church, would have brought to the world division in matters of faith, and the church had rather lost than gained by holy scripture (which ought to be far from our tongues and thoughts) ; it being manifest, that for decision of controversies, infallibility settled in a living judge, is incomparably more useful and fit, than if it were conceived as inherent in some inanimate writing. Is there such repugnance betwixt infallibility in the church, and existence of scripture, that the production of the one must be the destruction of the other? Must the church wax dry, by giving to her children the milk of sacred writ? No, no: her infallibility was, and is, derived from an inexhausted fountain. If protestants will have the scripture alone for their judge, let them first produce some scripture affirm- ing, that by the entering thereof, infallibility went out of the church. D. Potter may remember what himself teacheth ; that the church is still endued with infallibility in points fundamental ; and, consequently, that infallibility in the church doth well agree with the truth, the sanctity, yea, with the sufficiency of scripture, for all matters necessary to salvation. I would therefore gladly know, out of what text he imagineth, that the church, by the coming of scripture, was deprived of infallibility in some points, and not in others? He affirmeth, that the Jewish synagogue retained infallibility in herself, notwithstanding the writing of the Old Testament : and will he so unworthily and unjustly de- prive the church of Christ of infallibility by reason of the New Testament? Especially, if we consider, that in the Old Testa- ment, laws, ceremonies, rites, punishments, judgments, sacra- ments, sacrifices, &c. were more particularly and minutely delivered to the Jews, than in the New Testament is done ; our Saviour leaving the determination or declaration of particulars to his spouse the church, which therefore stands in need of infalli- bility more than the Jewish synagogue. D. Potter f against this argument, drawn from the power and infallibility of the syna- gogue, objects, that we might as well infer, that christians must have one sovereign prince over all, because the Jews had one chief judge. But the disparity is very clear : the synagogue was a type and figure of the church of Christ ; not so their civil government of christian commonwealths or kingdoms : the church succeeded to the synagogue, but not christian princes to Jewish magistrates : and the church is compared to a house, or a family; J to an army§, to a body ||, to a kingdom^, &c, all which require one master, one general, one head, one magistrate, * De Test. Anim. cap. 5. X Heb. xiii. || 1 Cor. x. Eph. iv. t Page 24. § Cant. ii. T Matt. xii. Charity maintained by Catholics. 103 one spiritual king ; as our Messed Saviour with fiet unum ovile, joined* unus pastor ; one sheepfold, one pastor: but all distinct kingdoms, or commonwealths, are not one army, family, &c. And, finally, it is necessary to salvation, that all have recourse to one church ; but for temporal weal, there is no need that all submit or depend upon one temporal prince, kingdom, or com- monwealth : and therefore our Saviour hath left to his whole church, as being one, one law, one scripture, the same sacraments, &.c. Whereas kingdoms have their several laws, different govern- ments, diversity of powers, magistracy, &c. And so this objection returneth upon D. Potter. For as in the one community of the Jews, there was one power and judge, to end debates, and resolve difficulties; so in the church of Christ, which is one, there must be some one authority to decide all controversies in religion. " 24. This discourse is excellently proved by ancient St. Ire- naeusf in these words : ' What if the apostles had not left scrip- tures, ought we not to have followed the order of tradition, which they delivered to those to whom they committed the churches? To which order many nations yield assent, who believe in Christ, having salvation written in their hearts by the Spirit of God, with- out letters or ink, and diligently keeping ancient tradition. It is easy to receive the truth from God's church, seeing the apostles have most fully deposited in her, as in a rich store-house, all things belonging to truth. For what ? If there should arise any conten- tion of some small question, ought we not to have recourse to the most ancient churches, and from them to receive what is certain and clear concerning the present question V " 25. Besides all this, the doctrine of protestants is destructive of itself: for either they have certain and infallible means, not to err in interpreting scripture, or they have not : if not, then the scripture (to them) cannot be a sufficient ground for infallible faith, nor a mere judge in controversies. If they have certain in- fallible means, and so cannot err in their interpretations of scrip- tures, then they are able with infallibility to hear, examine, and determine all controversies of faith ; and so they may be, and are judges of controversies, although they use the scriptures as a rule. And thus, against their own doctrine, they constitute another judge of controversies, beside scripture alone. " 26. Lastly, I ask D. Potter, whether this assertion (scripture alone is judge of all controversies in faith) be a fundamental point of faith, or no? He must be well advised, before he say, that it is a fundamental point : for he will have against him as many protestants as teach, that by scripture alone it is impossible to know what books be scripture, which yet, to protestants, is the most necessary and chief point of all other. D. Covel expressly saith, ' Doubtless J it is a tolerable opinion in the church of Rome, if they go no further, as some of them do not (he should have said, as none of them do), to affirm, that the scriptures are holy and divine in themselves, but so esteemed by us, for the authority * loan. c. x. t Lib. 5, c. 4. t In his defence of Mr. Hooker's books, Art. 4, p. 31. 104 Charity maintained by Catholics. of the church.' He will likewise oppose himself to those his brethren, who grant, that controversies cannot be ended, without' some external living authority, as we noted before. Besides, how can it be in us a fundamental error to say, the scripture alone is not judge of controversies, seeing (notwithstanding this our belief) we use for interpreting of scripture, all the means which they pre- scribe ; as prayer, conferring of places, consulting the originals, &c, and to these add the instruction, and authority of God's church, which even by his confession cannot err damnably, and may afford us more help, than can be expected from the industry, learning, or wit of any private person : and finally, D. Potter grants, that the church of Rome doth not maintain any fundamental error against faith ; and consequently, he cannot affirm, that our doctrine, in this present controversy, is damnable. If he answer, that their tenet, about the scriptures being the only judge of controversies, is not a fundamental point of faith ; then, as he teacheth, that the universal church may err in points not fundamental ; so, I hope, he will not deny, but particular churches, and private men, are much more obnoxious to error in such points ; and in particular in this, that scripture alone is judge of controversies : and so, the very principle upon which their whole faith is grounded, remains to them uncertain. And, on the other side, for the self-same reason, they are not certain, but that the church is judge of controversies; which if she be, then their case is lamentable, who in general deny her this authority, and in particular controversies oppose her defi- nitions. Besides, among public conclusions defended in Oxford in the year 1633, to the questions, ' Whether the church have autho- rity to determine controversies in faith ;' and, ' to interpret holy scripture V the answer to both is affirmative. " 27. Since, then, the visible church of Christ our Lord, is that infallible means whereby the revealed truths of Almighty God are conveyed to our understanding ; it followeth, that to oppose her definitions is to resist God himself; which blessed St. Augustine plainly affirmeth, when, speaking of the controversy about re- baptization of such as were baptized by heretics, he saith, ' This* is neither openly nor evidently read, neither by you nor by me ; yet if there were any wise man of whom our Saviour had given testimony, and that he should be consulted in this question, we should make no doubt to perform what he should say, lest we might seem to gainsay not him so much as Christ, by whose testimony he was recommended. Now Christ beareth witness to his church.' And a little after, ' Whosoever refuseth to follow the practice of the church, doth resist our Saviour himself, who by his testimony recommends the church.' I conclude therefore with this argu- ment ; whosoever resisteth that means which infallibly proposeth to us God's word or revelation, commits a sin, which, unrepented, excludes salvation : but whosoever resisteth Christ's visible church, doth resist that means which infallibly proposeth to us God's word or revelation : therefore whosoever resisteth Christ's visible church, * De Unit. Eccles. c. 22. Scripture the only Rule whereby to judge of Controversies. 105 commits a sin, which, unrepented, excludes salvation. Now, what visible church was extant, when Luther began his pretended reformation, whether it were the Roman, or protestant church ; and whether he, and other protestants, do not oppose that visible church, which was spread over the world, before, and in Luther's time, is easy to be determined, and importeth every one most seriously to ponder, as a thing whereon eternal salvation depend- eth. And because our adversaries do here most insist upon the distinction of points fundamental, and not fundamental ; and in particular teach, that the church may err in points not funda- mental, it will be necessary to examine the truth and weight of this evasion, which shall be done in the next chapter." AN ANSWER TO THE SECOND CHAPTER. Concerning the means whereby the revealed truths of God are con- veyed to our understanding ; and which must determine contro- versies in faith and religion. Ad. § 1. He that would usurp an absolute lordship and tyranny over any people, need not put himself to the trouble and difficulty of abrogating and disannulling the laws, made to maintain the common liberty ; for he may frustrate their intent, and compass his own design as well, if he can get the power and authority to interpret them as he pleases, and add to them what he pleases, and to have his interpretations and additions stand for laws : if he can rule his people by his laws, and his laws by his lawyers. So the church of Rome, to establish her tyranny over men's conscien- ces, needed not either to abolish or corrupt the holy scriptures, the pillars and supporters of christian liberty : (which in regard of the numerous multitudes of copies dispersed through all places, translated into almost all languages, guarded with all solicitous care and industry, had been an impossible attempt :) but the more expedite way, and therefore more likely to be successful, was, to gain the opinion and esteem of the public and authorized inter- preter of them, and the authority of adding to them what doc- trine she pleased, under the title of traditions or definitions. For by this means, she might both serve herself of all those clauses of scripture, which might be drawn to cast a favourable countenance upon her ambitious pretences, which in case the scripture had been abolished she could not have done ; and yet be secure enough of having either her power limited, or her corruptions and abuses reformed by them ; this being once settled in the minds of men, that unwritten doctrines, if proposed by her, were to be received with equal reverence to those that were written ; and that the sense of scripture was not that which seemed to men's reason and understanding to be so, but that which the church of Rome should declare to be so, seemed it never so unreasonable and incongruous. The matter being once thus ordered, and the holy scriptures being 106 Scripture the only Rule made in effect not your directors and judges (no farther than you please) but your servants and instruments, always pressed and in readiness to advance your designs, and disabled wholly with minds so qualified to prejudice or impeach them ; it is safe for you to put a crown on their head, and a reed in their hands, and to bow before them, and cry, "Hail, King of the Jews!" to pretend a great deal of esteem, and respect, and reverence to them, as here you do. But to little purpose is verbal reverence without entire sub- " mission and sincere obedience ; and, as our Saviour said of some, so the scripture, could it speak, I believe would say to you, " Why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not that which I command you?" Cast away the vain and arrogant pretence of infallibility, which makes your errors incurable. Leave picturing God, and worship- ping him by pictures. " Teach not for doctrine the commandments of men." Debar not the laity of the testament of Christ's blood. Let your public prayers and psalms, and hymns, be in such lan- guage as is for the edification of the assistants. Take not from the clergy that liberty of marriage which Christ hath left them. Bo not impose upon men that humility of worshipping angels which St. Paul condemns. Teach no more proper sacrifices of Christ but one. Acknowledge them that die in Christ to be blessed, and " to rest from their labours." Acknowledge the sacra- ment after consecration, to be bread and wine, as well as Christ's body and blood. Acknowledge the gift of continency without marriage, not to be given to all. Let not the weapons of your warfare be carnal, such as are massacres, treasons, persecutions, and, in a word, all means either violent or fraudulent : these and other things, which the scripture commands you, do, and then we shall willingly give you such testimony as you deserve ; but, till you do so, to talk of estimation, respect and reverence to the scrip- ture, is nothing else but talk. 2. For neither is that true which you pretend, that we possess the scripture from you, or take it upon the integrity of your cus- tody ; but upon universal tradition, of which you are but a little part. Neither, if it were true that protestants acknowledge the integrity of it to have been guarded by your alone custody, were this any argument of your reverence towards them. For, first, you might preserve them entire, not for want of will, but of power to corrupt them, as it is a hard thing to poison the sea. And then, having prevailed so far with men, as either not to look at all into them, or but only through such spectacles as you should please to make for them, and to see nothing in them, though as clear as the sun, if it any way made against you ; you might keep them entire, without any thought or care to conform your doctrine to them, or reform it by them (which were indeed to reverence the scriptures) ; but, out of a persuasion, that you could qualify them well enough with your glosses and interpretations, and make them sufficiently conformable to your present doctrine, at least in their judgment, who were prepossessed with this persuasion, that your church was to judge of the sense of scripture, not to be judged by it. whereby to judge of Controversies. 107 3. For, whereas you say, no cause imaginable could avert your will, from giving the function of supreme and sole judge to holy writ ; but that the thing is impossible, and that by this means controversies are increased and not ended ; you mean perhaps — that you can or will imagine no other cause but these. But sure there is little reason you should measure other men's imaginations by your own, who perhaps may be so clouded and vailed with prejudice, that you cannot, or will not, see that which is most manifest. For what indifferent and unprejudicate man may not easily conceive another cause which (I do not say does, but cer- tainly) may pervert your wills, and avert your understandings from submitting your religion and church to a trial by scripture ? I mean the great, and apparent, and unavoidable danger which by this means you would fall into, of losing the opinion which men have of your infallibility, and consequently your power and autho- rity over men's consciences, and all that depends upon it. So that though Diana of the Ephesians be cried up, yet it may be feared that with a great many among you (though I censure or judge no man) the other cause which wrought upon Demetrius and the craftsmen, may have with you also the more effectual, though more secret influence ; and that is, that by this craft we have our living; by this craft, I mean, of keeping your proselytes from an indifferent trial of your religion by scripture, and making them yield up and captivate their judgment unto yours. Yet had you only said de facto, that no other cause did avert your own will from this, but only these which you pretend out of charity, I should have believed you. But seeing you speak not of yourself, but of all of your side, whose hearts you cannot know ; and pro- fess not only, that there is no other cause, but that no other is imaginable, I could not let this pass without a censure. As for the impossibility of scriptures being the sole judge of controver- sies, that is the sole rule for men to judge them by (for we mean nothing else) you only affirm it without proof, as if the thing were evident of itself; and therefore I, conceiving the contrary to be more evident, might well content myself to deny it without refu- tation : yet I cannot but desire you to tell me, if scripture cannot be the judge of any controversy, how shall that touching the church and the notes of it be determined ? And if it be the sole judge of this one, why may it not of others? Why not of all? those only excepted, wherein the scripture itself is the subject of the question, which cannot be determined but by natural reason, the only principle, beside scripture, which is common to Christians. 4. Then for the imputation -of increasing contentions and not ending them, scripture is innocent of it ; as also this opinion, that controversies are to be decided by scripture. For if men did really and sincerely submit their judgments to scripture, and that only, and would require no more of any man but to do so, it were impossible but that all controversies touching things necessary and very profitable should be ended ; and if others were continued or increased, it were no matter. 5. In the next words we have direct boy's play, a thing given with one hand, and taken away with the other ; an acknowledg- 108 Scripture the only Rule ment made in one line, and retracted in the next. We acknow- ledge (say you) scripture to be a perfect rule, forasmuch as a writing can be a rule ; only we deny that it excludes unwritten tradition. As if you should have said, we acknowledge it to be as perfect a rule as writing can be ; only we deny it to be as per- fect a rule as a writing may be. Either therefore you must re- voke your acknowledgment, or retract your retraction of it ; for both cannot possibly stand together. For if you will stand to what you have granted, that scripture is as perfect a rule of faith as a writing can be ; you must then grant it both so complete, that it needs no addition, and so evident, that it needs no inter- pretation : for both these properties are requisite to a perfect rule, and a writing is capable of both these properties. 6. That both these properties are requisite to a perfect rule, it is apparent ; because that is not perfect in any kind which wants some parts belonging to its integrity ; as he is not a per- fect man that wants any part appertaining to the integrity of a man ; and therefore that which wants any accession to make it a perfect rule, of itself is not a perfect rule. And then, the end of a rule is to regulate and direct. Now every instrument is more or less perfect in its kind, as it is more or less fit to attain the end for which it is ordained : but nothing obscure or unevident, while it is so, is fit to regulate and direct them to whom it is so : there- fore, it is requisite also to a rule (so far as it is a rule) to be evi- dent; otherwise indeed it is no rule, because it cannot serve for direction. I conclude, therefore, that both these properties are required to a perfect rule ; both to be so complete as to need no addition ; and to be so evident as to need no interpretation. 7. Now that a writing is capable of both these perfections, it is so plain, that I am even ashamed to prove it. For he that denies it, must say, that something may be spoken which cannot be written. For if such a complete and evident rule of faith may be delivered by word of mouth, as you pretend it may, and is ; and whatsoever is delivered by word of mouth, may also be written ; then such a complete and evident rule of faith may also be written. If you will have more light added to the sun, answer me then to these questions : whether your church can set down in writing all these, which she pretends to be divine unwritten traditions, and add them to the verities already written ? And whether she can set us down such interpretations of all obscurities in the faith as shall need no farther interpretations ? If she cannot, then she hath not that power, which you pretend she hath, of being an infallible teacher of all divine verities, and an infallible interpreter of obscu- rities in the faith : for she cannot teach us all divine verities, if she cannot write them down ; neither is that an interpretation which needs again to be interpreted. If she can, let her do it, and then we shall have a writing, not only capable of, but actually endowed with, both these perfections, of being both so complete as to need no addition, and so evident as to need no interpretation. Lastly, whatsoever your church can do or not do, no man can, without blasphemy, deny that Christ Jesus, if he had pleased, could have writ us a rule of faith so plain and perfect, as that it should have whereby to judge of Controversies. 109 wanted neither any part to make up its integrity, nor any clear- ness to make it sufficiently intelligible. And if Christ could have done this, then the thing might have been done ; a writing there might have been, endowed with both these properties. Thus there- fore I conclude ; a writing may be so perfect a rule, as to need neither addition nor interpretation : but the scripture you acknow- ledge a perfect rule, forasmuch as a writing can be a rule, there- fore it needs neither addition nor interpretation. 8. You will say, that though a writing be never so perfect a rule of faith, yet it must be beholden to tradition to give it this testi- mony, that it is a rule of faith, and the word of God. I answer, first, there is no absolute necessity of this, for God might, if he thought good, give it the attestation of perpetual miracles. Secondly, that it is one thing to be a perfect rule of faith, another to be proved so unto us. And thus though a writing could not be proved to us to be a perfect rule of faith, by its own saying so, for nothing is proved true by being said or written in a book, but only by tradition, which is a thing credible of itself: yet it may be so in itself, and contain all the material objects, all the par- ticular articles of our faith, without any dependence upon tra- dition ; even this also not excepted, that this writing doth contain the rule of faith. Now when protestants affirm against papists, that scripture is a perfect rule of faith, their meaning is not, that by scripture all things absolutely may be proved, which are to be believed : for it can never be proved by scripture to a gainsayer, that there is a God, or that the book called scripture is the word of God ; for he that will deny these assertions when they are spoken, will believe them never a whit the more, because you can shew them written: but their meaning is, that the scripture, to them which pre-suppose it divine and a rule of faith, as papists and protestants do, contains all the material objects of faith, is a com- plete and total, and not only an imperfect and a partial rule. 9. But every book and chapter, and text of scripture is infal- lible, and wants no due perfection, and yet excludes not the addition of other books of scripture : therefore the perfection of the whole scripture excludes not the addition of unwritten tradition. I answer : every text of scripture, though it hath the perfection belonging to a text of scripture, yet it hath not the perfection requisite to a perfect rule of faith ; and that only is the perfection which is the subject of our discourse. So that this is to abuse your reader with the ambiguity of the word perfect. In effect, as if you should say, a text of scripture may be a perfect text, though there be others beside it ; therefore the whole scrip- ture may be a perfect rule of faith, though there be other parts of this rule, besides the scripture, and though the scripture be but a part of it. 10. The next argument to the same purpose is, for sophistry, cousin-german to the former. When the first books of scripture were written, they did not exclude unwritten traditions : there- fore now also, that all the books of scripture are written, tradi- tions are not excluded. The sense of which argument (if it have any) must be this : when only a part of the scripture was written, 10 110 Scripture the only Rule then a part of the divine doctrine was unwritten ; therefore now, when all the scripture is written, yet some part of the divine doc- trine is yet unwritten. If you say, your conclusion is not that it is so, but without disparagement to scripture, may be so; with- out disparagement to the truth of scripture, I grant it; but with- out disparagement to the scripture's being a perfect rule, I deny it. And now the question is not of the truth, but the perfection of it, which are very different things, though you would fain con- found them. For scripture might very well be all true, though it contain not all necessary divine truth. But unless it do so, it cannot be a perfect rule of faith ; for that which wants any thing is not perfect. For, I hope you do not imagine, that we conceive any antipathy between God's word written and unwritten, but that both might very well stand together. All that we say is this, that we have reason to believe that God, de facto, hath ordered the matter so, that all the gospel of Christ, the whole covenant between God and man, is now written. Whereas if he had pleased, he might have so disposed it, that part might have been written, and part unwritten ; but then he would have taken order, to whom we should have had recourse for that part of it which was not written ; which seeing he hath not done (as the progress shall demonstrate) it is evident he hath left no part of it un- written. We know no man therefore that says, it were any injury to the written word to be joined with the unwritten, if there were any wherewith it might be joined ; but that we deny. The intidelitv of a keeper may very well consist with the authority of the thing committed to his custody. But we know no one so- ciety of christians that is such a faithful keeper as you pretend. The scripture itself was not kept so faithfully by you, but that you suffered infinite variety of readings to creep into it ; all which could not possibly be divine, and yet, in several parts of your church, all of them, until the last age, were so esteemed. The interpretations of obscure places of scripture, which without question the apostles taught the primitive christians, are wholly lost ; there remains no certainty scarce of any one. Those worlds of miracles which our Saviour did, which were not written, for want of writing are vanished out of the memory of men ; and many profitable things which the apostles taught and writ not, as that which St. Paul glanceth at in his second epistle to the Thessalonians, of the cause of the hindrance of the coming of antichrist, are wholly lost and extinguished ; so unfaithful or negligent hath been this keeper of divine verities, whose eyes, like the Keeper's of Israel (you say) have never slumbered nor slept. Lastly, we deny not but a judge and a law might well stand together, but we deny that there is any such judge of God's appointment. Had he intended any such judge, he would have named him, lest otherwise (as now it is) our judge of controversies should be our greatest controversy. 11. Ad. § 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. In your second paragraph, you sum up those arguments wherewith you intend to prove that scripture alone cannot be judge in controversies : wherein 1 profess unto you beforehand, that you will fight without an adversary. whereby to judge of Controversies. Ill For though protestants, being warranted by some of the fathers, have called scripture the judge of controversy; and you, in say- ing, here, that scripture alone cannot be judge, impiv that it may be called in some sense a judge, though not alone: yet to speak properly (as men should speak when they write of controversies in religion) the scripture is not a judge of controversies, but a rule only, and the only rule for christians to judge them by. Every man is to judge for himself with the judgment of discretion, and to choose either his religion first, and then his church, as we sav ; or, as you, his church first, and then his religion. But, by the consent of both sides, every man is to judge and choose: and the rule whereby he is to guide his choice, if he be a natural man, is reason ; if he be already a christian, scripture ; which we say is the rule to judge controversies by. Yet not all simply, but all the controversies of christians, of those that are alreadv agreed upon this first principle, that the scripture is the word of God. But that there is any man, or any company of men appointed to be judge for all men, that we deny ; and that I believe you will never prove. The very truth is, we say no more in this matter, than evidence of truth hath made you confess in plain terms in the beginning of this chapter ; viz. That scripture is a perfect rule of faith forasmuch as a writing can be a rule. So that all your reasons, whereby you labour to dethrone the scripture from this office of judging, we might let pass as impertinent to the conclu- sion which we maintain, and you have already granted; yet out of courtesy we will consider them. 12. Your first is this : A judge must be a person fit to end con- troversies; but the scripture is not a person, nor fit to end contro- versies, no more than the law would be without the judges ; there- fore though it may be a rule, it cannot be a judge. Which conclusion I have already granted : only my request is, that you will permit scripture to have the properties of a rule, that is, to be fit to direct every one that will make the best use of it, to that end for which it was ordained : and that is as much as we need desire. For, as if I were to go a journey, and had a guide which could not err, I needed not to know mv way ; so on the other side, if I know my way, or have a plain rule to know it by, I shall need no guide. Grant therefore scripture to be such a rule, and it will quickly take away all necessity of having an infallible guide. But without a living judge it will be no fitter (you say) to end controversies, than the law alone to end suits. 1 answer, if the law were plain and perfect, and men honest and desirous to understand aright, and obey it, he that says it were not fit to end controversies, must either want understanding himself, or think the world wants it. Now the scripture, we pretend, in things ne- cessary is plain and perfect ; and men, we say, are obliged under pain of damnation, to seek the true sense of it, and not to wrest it to their pre-conceived fancies. Such a law therefore to such men, cannot but be very fit to end all controversies necessary to be ended. For others that are not so, they will end when the world ends, and that is time enough. 112 Scripture the only Rule 13. Your next encounter is with them, who acknowledging the scripture a rule only and not a judge, make the Holy Ghost, speaking in scripture, the judge of controversies. Which you disprove, by saying, that the Holy Ghost, speaking only in scrip- ture, is no more intelligible to us, than the scripture in which he speaks. But by this reason, neither the pope, nor a council can be a judge neither. For first, denying the scriptures, the writings of the Holy Ghost, to be judges, you will not, I hope, offer to pretend, that their decrees, the writings of men, are more capable of this function ; the same exceptions at least, if not more, and greater lying against them as do against scripture. And then what you object against the Holy Ghost, speaking in scripture, to exclude him from this office, the same I return upon them and their decrees, to debar them from it; that they speaking unto us only in their decrees, are no more intelli- gible than the decrees in which they speak. And therefore if the Holy Ghost speaking in scripture may not be a judge for this reason, neither may they, speaking in their decrees, be judges for the same reason. If the pope's decrees, you will say, be obscure, he can explain himself; and so the scripture cannot. But the Holy Ghost that speaks in scripture, can do so, if he please; and when he is pleased, will do so. In the mean time, it will be fit for you to wait his leisure, and to be content that those things of scripture which are plain should be so, and those which are obscure should remain obscure, until he please to declare them. Besides, he can, which you cannot warrant me of the pope or a council, speak at first so plainly, that his words shall need no farther explanation ; and so in things necessary we believe he hath done. And if you say, the decrees of councils touching controversies, though they be not the judge, yet they are the judge's sentence : so I say the scripture, though not the judge, is the sentence of the judge. When therefore you con- clude, that to say a judge is necessary for deciding controver- sies about the meaning of scripture, is as much as to say, he is necessary to decide what the Holy Ghost speaks in scripture : this I grant is true ; but I may not grant that a judge, such an one as we dispute of, is necessary either to do the one, or the other. For if the scripture (as it is in things necessary) be plain, why should it be more necessary to have a judge to interpret it in plain places, than to have a judge to interpret the meaning of a council's decrees, and others to interpret their interpretations, and others to interpret theirs, and so on for ever ? And where they are not plain, there if we, using diligence to find the truth, do yet miss of it and fall into error, there is no danger in it. They that err, and they that do not err, may both be saved. So that those places, which contain things necessary, and wherein errors were dangerous, need no infallible interpreter, because they are plain ; and those that are obscure need none, because they contain not things necessary, neither is error in them dangerous. 13. The law maker speaking in the law, I grant it, is no more whereby to judge of Controversies. 1 1 3 easily understood than the law itself; for his speech is nothing else but the law; I grant it very necessary, that besides the law maker speaking in the law, there should be other judges to determine civil and criminal controversies, and to give every man that justice which the law allows him. But your argument drawn from hence to shew a necessity of a visible judge in con- troversies of religion, I say is sophistical ; and that for many reasons. 14. First, because the variety of civil cases is infinite* and therefore there cannot be possibly laws enough provided for the determination of them; and therefore there must be a judge to supply, out of the principles of reason, the interpretation of the law, where it is defective. But the scripture, we say, is a perfect rule of faith, and therefore needs no supply of the defects of it. 15. Secondly, to execute the letter of the law, according to rigour, would be many times unjust, and therefore there is need of a judge to moderate it; whereof in religion there is no use at all. 16. Thirdly, in civil and criminal causes the parties have for the most part so much interest, and very often so little honesty, that they will not submit to a law, though never so plain, if it be against them ; or will not see it to be against them, though it be so never so plainly; whereas, if men were honest, and the law were plain and extended to all cases, there would be little need of judges. Now in matters of religion, when the question is, whether every man be a fit judge and chooser for himself, we suppose men honest, and such as understand the difference be- tween a moment and eternity. And such men, we conceive, will think it highly concerns them to be of the true religion, but nothing at all that this or that religion should be the true. And then we suppose that all the necessary points of religion are plain and easy, and consequently every man in this cause to be a competent judge for himself; because it concerns himself to judge right as much as eternal happiness is worth. And if through his own default he judge amiss, he alone shall suffer for it. 17. Fourthly, in civil controversies we are obliged only to external passive obedience, and not to an internal and active. We are bound to obey the sentence of the judge, or not to resist it, but not always to believe it just : but in matters of religion, such a judge is required whom we should be obliged to believe to have judged aright. So that in civil controversies every honest understanding man is fit to be a judge ; but in religion none but he that is infallible. 18. Fifthly, in civil causes there is means and power, when the judge hath decreed, to compel men to obey his sentence ; otherwise, I believe laws alone would be to as much purpose for the ending of differences, as laws and judges both. But all the power in the world is neither fit to convince, nor able to compel a man's conscience to consent to any thing. Worldly terror may h 10* 1 14 Scripture the only Rule prevail so far as to make men profess a religion which they believe not, (such men, I mean, who know not that there is a heaven provided for martyrs, and a hell for those that dissemble such truths as are necessary to be professed) : but to force either any man to believe what he believes not, or any honest man to dissemble what he does believe, (if God commands him to pro- fess it,) or to profess what he does not believe, all the powers in the world are too weak, with all the powers of hell to assist them. 19. Sixthly, in civil controversies the case cannot be so put, but there may be a judge to end it, who is not a party ; in con- troversies of religion, it is in a manner impossible to be avoided, but the judge must be a party. For this must be the first, whether he be a judge or no, and in that he must be a party. Sure I am, the pope, in the controversies of our time, is a chief party : for it highly concerns him, even as much as his popedom is worth, not to yield any one point of his religion to be erroneous. And he is a man subject to like passions with other men ; and therefore we may justly decline his sentence, for fear temporal respects should either blind his judgment, or make him pronounce against it. 20. Seventhly, in civil controversies, it is impossible Titus should hold the land in question and Sempronius too ; and there- fore either the plaintiff must injure the defendant, by disquieting his possession, or the defendant wrong the plaintiff by keeping his right from him. But in controversies of religion, the case is otherwise. I may hold my opinion, and do you no wrong; and you yours, and do me none : nay, we may both of us hold our opinion, and yet do ourselves no harm ; provided the difference be not touching any thing necessary to salvation, and that we love truth so well, as to be diligent to inform our conscience, and constant in following it. 21. Eighthly, for the deciding of civil controversies, men may appoint themselves a judge: but in matters of religion, this office may be given to none but whom God hath designed for it ; who doth not always give us those things which we conceive most expedient for ourselves. 22. Ninthly and lastly, for the ending of civil controversies, who does not see, it is absolutely necessary, that not only judges should be appointed, but that it should be known and unquestioned who they are ? Thus all the judges of our land are known men, known to be judges, and no man can doubt or question but these are the men. Otherwise, if it were a disputable thing, who were these judges, and they have no certain warrant for their authority, but only some topical congruities; would not any man say, such judges, in all likelihood, would rather multiply controversies than end them ? So likewise if our Saviour, the king of heaven, had intended, that all controversies in religion should be by some visi- ble judge finally determined, who can doubt, but in plain terms he would have expressed himself about this matter? He would have said plainly, The bishop of Rome I have appointed to decide whereby to judge of Controversies. 115 all emergent controversies ; for that our Saviour designed the bishop of Rome to this office, and yet would not say so, nor cause it to be written, ad rex memoriam, by any of the evangelists or apostles, so much as once ; but leave it to be drawn out of uncer- tain principles, by thirteen or fourteen more uncertain consequences, he that can believe it, let him. 23. All these reasons, I hope, will convince you, that though we have, and have great necessity of, judges in civil and criminal causes ; yet you may not conclude from hence, that there is any public authorised judge to determine controversies in religion, nor any necessity there should be any. 24. But the scripture stands in need of some watchful and unerr- ing eye to guard it, by means of whose assured vigilancy, we may undoubtedly receive it sincere and pure. Very true; but this is no other than the watchful eye of divine providence ; the good- ness whereof will never suffer, that the scripture should be de- praved, and corrupted, but that in them should be always extant a conspicuous and plain way to eternal happiness. Neither can any thing be more palpably inconsistent with his goodness, than to suffer scripture to be undiscernably corrupted in any matter of moment, and yet to exact of men the belief of those verities, which without their fault, or knowledge, or possibility of prevention, were defaced out of them. So that God requiring of men to be- lieve scripture in its purity, engages himself to see it preserved in sufficient purity ; and you need not fear but he will satisfy his engagement. You say, we can have no assurance of this, but your church's vigilance. But if we had no other, we were in a hard case ; for, who could then assure us, that your church hath been so vigilant, as to guard scripture from any the least alteration? there being various lections in the ancient copies of your bibles. What security can your new-raised office of assurance give us, that the reading is true, which you now receive, and that false, which you reject? Certainly, they that anciently received and made use of these divers copies, were not all guarded by the church's vigi- lancy from having their scripture altered from the purity of the original in many places. For of different readings, it is not in nature impossible, that all should be false; but more than one cannot possibly be true. Yet the want of such a protection, was no hindrance to their salvation ; and why then shall having of it be necessary for ours? But then, this vigilancy of your church, what means have we to be ascertained of it ? First, the thing is not evident of itself; which is evident, because many do not be- lieve it : neither can any thing be pretended to give evidence to it, but only some places of scripture; of whose incorruption more than any other, what is it that can secure me ? If you say the church's vigilancy, you are in a circle, proving the scriptures un- corrupted by the church's vigilancy, and the church's vigilancy by the incorruption of some places of scripture, and again the incorruption of those places by the church's vigilancy. If you name any other means, then that means which secures me of the h2 116 Scripture the only Rule scriptures incorruption in those places, will also serve to assure me of the same in other places. For my part, abstracting from divine providence, which will never suffer the way to heaven to he blocked up, or made invisible ; I know no other means (I mean, no other natural and rational means) to be assured hereof, than I have, that any other book is uncorrupted. For though I have a greater degree of rational and human assurance of that than this, in regard of divers considerations, which makes it more cre- dible, that the scripture hath been preserved from any material alteration; yet my assurance of both is of the same kind and condition ; both moral assurances, and neither physical nor ma- thematical. 25. To the next argument the reply is obvious : that though we do not believe the books of scripture to be canonical, because they say so, (for other books that are not canonical may say they are, and those that are so, may say nothing of it :) yet we believe not this upon the authority of your church, but upon the credibility of universal tradition, which is a thing credible of itself, and therefore fit to be rested on; whereas the authority of your church is not so. And therefore your rest thereon is not rational, but merely voluntary. I might as well rest upon the judgment of the next man I meet, or upon the chance of a lottery for it. For by this means I only know I might err, but by relying on you, I know I should err. But yet (to return you one suppose for another) suppose I should for this and all other things submit to her direc- tion, how could she assure me that I should not be misled bv doing so. She pretends indeed infallibility herein ; but how can she assure us that she hath it ? What, by scripture ? That you say cannot assure us of its own infallibility, and therefore not of yours. What, then, by reason ? That you say, may deceive in other things, and why not in this ? How then will she assure us hereof? By saying so? Of this very affirmation there will re- main the same question still, how can it prove itself to be infallibly true ? Neither can there be an end of the like multiplied demands, till we rest in something evident of itself, which demonstrates to the world that this church is infallible. And seeing there is no such rock for the infallibility of this church to be settled on, it must of necessity, like the island of Delos, float up and down for ever. And yet upon this point, according to papists, all other con- troversies in faith depend. 26. To the 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 §. The sum and substance of the ten next paragraphs is this, that it appears by the confes- sions of some protestants, and the contentions of others, that the questions about the canon of scripture, what it is ; and about the various readings and translations of it, which is true, and which not ; are not to be determined by scripture, and therefore that all controversies of religion are not decidable by scripture. 27. To which I have already answered, saying, that when scripture is affirmed to be the rule by which all controversies of religion are to be decided ; those are to be excepted out of this Whereby to judge of Con troversies. 117 generality, which are concerning the scripture itself; for as that general saying of scripture, "He hath put all things under his feet," is most true ; though yet St Paul tells us, that when it is said, 11 He hath put all things under him, it is manifest he is excepted who did put all things under him :" so when we say, that all con- troversies of religion are decidable by the scripture, it is manifest to all but cavillers, that we do, and must, except from this gene- rality, those which are touching the scripture itself. Just as a merchant, showing a ship of his own, may say, all my substance is in this ship ; and yet never intend to deny, that his ship is part of his substance, nor yet to say, that his ship is in itself. Or, as a man may say, that a whole house is supported by the foundation, and yet never mean to exclude the foundation from being a part of the house, or to say, that it is supported by itself. Or, as you yourselves used to say, that the bishop of Rome is the head of the whole church, and yet would think us but captious sophisters, should we infer from hence, that either you made him no part of the whole, or else made him head of himself. Your negative con- clusion therefore, that these questions touching scripture, are not decidable by scripture, you needed not have cited any authorities, nor urged any reason to prove it; it is evident of itself, and I grant it without more ado. But your corollary from it, which you would insinuate to your unwary reader, that therefore they are to be decided by your, or any visible church, is a mere incon- sequence, and very like his collection, who because Pamphilus was not to have Glycerium for his wife, presently concluded that he must have her ; as if there had been no more men in the world but Pamphilus and himself. For so you, as if there were nothing in the world capable of this office, but the scripture, or the present church ; having concluded against scripture, you conceive, but too hastily, that you have concluded for the church. But the truth is, neither the one nor the other have any thing to do with this matter. For, first, the question, whether such or such a book be canonical scripture, though it may be decided negatively out of scripture, by showing apparent and irreconcileable contradic- tions between it and some other book confessedly canonical; but affirmatively it cannot, but only by the testimonies of the ancient churches ; any book being to be received as undoubtedly canoni- cal, or to be doubted of as uncertain, or rejected as apocryphal, according as it was received, or doubted of, or rejected by them. Then for the question, of various readings which is the true 1 It is in reason evident, and confessed by your own pope, that there is no possible determination of it, but only by comparison with an- cient copies". And, lastly, for controversies about different trans- lations of scripture, the learned have the same means to satisfy themselves in it, as in the questions which happen about the translation of any other author ; that is, skill in the language of the original, and comparing translations with it. In which way, if there be no certainty, I would know what certainty you have, that your Doway Old, and Rhemish New Testament, are true trans- lations? And then for the unlearned, those on your side are sub- 118 Scripture the only Rule ject to as much, nay, the very same uncertainty with those on ours. Neither is there any reason imaginable why an ignorant English protestant may not be as secure of the translation of our church, that it is free from error, if not absolutely, yet in matters of mo- ment, as an ignorant English papist can be of his Rhemish testa- ment, or Doway bible. The best direction I can give them, is to compare both together, and where there is no real difference (as in the translation of controverted places I believe there is very little) there to be confident, that they are right ; where they differ, there to be prudent in the choice of the guides they follow. Which way of proceeding, if it be subject to some possible error, yet it is the best that either we or you have ; and it is not required that we use any better than the best we have. 28. You will say, dependence on your church's infallibility is a better. I answer, it would be so, if we could be infallibly cer- tain that your church is infallible, that is, if it were either evident of itself, and seen by its own light, or could be reduced unto, and settled upon some principle that is so. But seeing you yourselves do not so much as pretend to enforce us to the belief hereof, by any proofs infallible and convincing; but only to induce us to it by such as are, by your confession, only probable and prudential motives ; certainly it will be to very little purpose to put off your uncertainty for the first turn, and to fall upon it at the second; to please yourselves in building your house upon an imaginary rock, when you yourselves see and confess, that this very rock stands itself at the best but upon a frame of timber. I answer, secondly, that this cannot be a better way, because we are infal- libly certain, that your church is not infallible, and indeed hath not the real prescription of this privilege, but only pleaseth herself with a false imagination and vain presumption of it ; as I shall hereafter demonstrate by many unanswerable arguments. 29. Now seeing I make no scruple or difficulty to grant the conclusion of this discourse, that these controversies about scrip- ture are not decidable by scripture ; and have showed, that your deduction from it, that therefore they are to be determined by the authority of some present church, is irrational and inconsequent ; I might well forbear to tire myself with an exact and punctual examination of your premises xara <™5a, which whether they be true or false, is to the question disputed wholly impertinent. Yet because you shall not complain of tergiversation, I will run over them, and let nothing that is material and considerable pass with out some stricture or animadversion. 30. You pretend that M. Hooker acknowledged, that that whereon we must rest our assurance that the scripture is God's word, is the church, and for this acknowledgement you refer us to 1. 3, § 8. Let the reader consult the place, and he shall find that he and M. Hooker hath been much abused, both by you here, and by M. Breerly and others before you ; and that M. Hooker hath not one syllable to your pretended purpose, but very much directly to the contrary. There he tells us, indeed, that ordinarily the first introduction and probable motive to the belief whereby to judge of Controversies. 119 of the verity, is the authority of the church ; hut that it is the last foundation whereon our belief hereof is rationally grounded, that in the same place he plainly denies. His words are, " Scripture teacheth us that saving truth which God hath discovered unto the world by revelation, and it presumeth us taught otherwise, that itself is divine and sacred. The question then being by what means we are taught this : *some answer, that to learn it we have no other way than tradition : as namely, that so we believe, be- cause we from our predecessors, and they from theirs, have so re- ceived. But is this enough ? That which all men's experience teacheth them, may not in any wise be denied ; and by experience we all know, fthat the first outward motive leading men to esteem of the scripture is, the authority of God's church. For when we knowj the whole church of God hath that opinion of the scrip- ture, we judge it at the first an impudent thing for any man, bred and brought up in the church, to be of a contrary mind without cause. Afterwards, the more we bestow our labour upon reading or hearing the mysteries thereof,^ the more we find that the thing itself doth answer our received opinion concerning it ; so that the former inducement prevailing somewhat|| with us before, doth now much more prevail, when the very thing hath ministered farther reason. If infidels or atheists chance at any time to call it in question, this giveth us occasion to sift what reason there is whereby the testimony of the church concerning scripture, and our own persuasion, which scripture itself hath settled, may be proved a truth infallible. TT In which case the ancient fathers, being often constrained to show what warrant they had so much to rely upon the scriptures, endeavoured still to maintain the au- thority of the books of God, by arguments such as the unbelievers themselves must needs think reasonable, if they judge thereof as they should. Neither is it a thing impossible, or greatly hard, even by such kind of> proofs, so to manifest and clear that point, that no man living shall be able to deny it, without denying some appa- rent principle, such as all men acknowledge to be true." **By this time I hope the reader sees sufficient proof of what I said in my reply to your Preface, that Mr. Breerly's great ostentation of exact- ness is no very certain argument of his fidelity. 31. But, seeing the belief of the scripture is a necessary thing, * Some answer so, but he doth not. t The first outward motive, not the last assurance whereon we rest. X The whole church that he speaks of, seems to be that particular church wherein a man is bred and brought up ; and the authority of this he makes an argument, which presseth a man's modesty more than his reason. And in saying it seems impudent to be of a contrary mind without cause, he implies, there may be a just cause to be of a contrary mind, and that then it were no impudence to be so. § Therefore the authority of the church is not the pause whereon we rest ; we had need of more assurance, and the intrinsical arguments afford it. || Somewhat, but not much, until it be backed and enforced by farther reason; itself, therefore, is not the farthest reason, and the last resolution. IT Observe, I pray, our persuasion, and the testimony of the church concerning scripture, may be proved true ; therefore neither of them was in his account the farthest proof. ** Natural reason, then, built on principles common to all men, is the last resolution, unto which the church's authority is but the first inducement. 120 Scripture the only Rule and cannot be proved by scripture, how can the church of England teach, as she doth, Art. VI. that all things necessary are contained in scripture ? 32. I have answered this already. And here again I say, that all but cavillers will easily understand the meaning of the article to be, that all the divine verities, which Christ revealed to his apostles, and the apostles taught the churches, are contained in scripture ; that is, all the material objects of our faith, whereof the scripture is none, but only the means of conveying them unto us ; which we believe not finally, and for itself, but for the matter contained in it. So that, if men did believe the doctrine contained in scripture, it should no way hinder their salvation, not to know whether there were any scripture or no. Those barbarous nations Irenaeus speaks of, were in this case, and yet no doubt but they might be saved. The end that God aims at is the belief of the gospel, the covenant between God and man ; the scripture he hath provided as a means for this end, and this also we are to be- lieve, but not as the last object of our faith, but as the instrument of it. When, therefore, we subscribe to the sixth article, you must understand, that by articles of faith, they mean the final and ultimate objects of it, and not the means and instrumental objects ; and then there will be no repugnance between what they say, and that which Hooker, and D. Covel, and D. Whitaker, and Luther here say. 33. But, protestants agree not in assigning the canon of holy scripture ; Luther and Illyricus reject the epistle of St. James : Kemnitius, and other lutherans, the second of Peter, the second and third of John, the epistle to the Hebrews, the epistle of James, of Jude, and the Apocalypse. Therefore, without the au- thority of the church, no certainty can be had what scripture is canonical. 34. So also the ancient fathers, and not only fathers, but whole churches, differed about the certainty of the authority of the very same books ; and by their difference shewed, they knew no ne- cessity of conforming themselves herein to the judgment of your or any church : for, had they done so, they must have agreed all with that church, and consequently among themselves. Now, I pray, tell me plainly, had they sufficient certainty what scripture was canonical, or had they not ? If they had not, it seems there is no great harm or danger in not having such a certainty whether some books be canonical, or not, as you require; if they had, why may not protestants, notwithstanding their differences, have suffi- cient certainty hereof, as well as the ancient fathers and churches, notwithstanding theirs? 35. You proceed : and whereas the protestants of England in the sixth article have these words — " In the name of the holy scrip- ture we do understand those books, of whose authority was never any doubt in the church ;" you demand what they mean by them ? Whether that, by the church's consent they are assured what scriptures be canonical? I answer for them, yes, they are so. And whereas you infer from hence, this is to make the church whereby to judge of Controversies. 121 judge. 1 have told you already, that of this controversy we make the church the judge ; but not the present church, much less the present Roman church, but the consent and testimony of the ancient and primitive church ; which though it be but an highly probable inducement, and no demonstrative enforcement, yet methinks you should not deny, but it may be a sufficient ground of faith; whose faith, even of the foundation of all your faith, your church's authority is built lastly and wholly upon prudential motives. 36. But, by this rule, the whole book of Esther must quit the canon, because it was excluded by some in the church ; by Melito Athanasius, and Gregory Nazianzen. Then, for aught I know, he that should think he had reason to exclude it now, might be still in the church as well as Melito, Athanasius, Nazianzen were. And while you thus inveigh against Luther, and charge him with lucife- rian heresy, for doing that which you in this very place confess, that saints in heaven before him have done, " are you not partial, and a judge of evil thoughts ?" 37. Luther's censures of Ecclesiastes, Job, and the prophets, though you make such tragedies with them, I see none of them but is capable of a tolerable construction, and far from having in them any fundamental heresy. He that condemns him for saying, the book of Ecclesiastes is not full, that it hath many abrupt things, condemns him, for aught I can see, for speaking truth. And the rest of the censure is but a bold and blunt expression of the same thing. The book of Job may be a true history ; and yet, as many true stories are, and have been, an argument of a fable to set before us an example of patience. And though the books of the prophets were not written by themselves, but by their disciples, yet it does not follow, that they were written casually (though I hope you will not damn all for heretics, that say some books of scripture were written casually). Neither is there any reason they should the sooner be called in question for being written by their disciples, seeing being so written they had attestation from themselves. Was the prophecy of Jeremy the less canonical, for being written by Baruch ? Or, because St. Peter the master dic- tated the gospel, and St. Mark the scholar writ it, is it the more likely to be called in question? 38. But leaving Luther, you return to our English canon of scripture ; and tell us, that in the New Testament, by the above- mentioned rule (of whose authority was never any doubt in the church) divers books must be discanonized. Not so, for I may believe even those questioned books to have been written by the apostles, and to be canonical ; but I cannot in reason believe this of them so undoubtedly, as of those books which were never questioned ; at least I have no warrant to damn any man that shall doubt of them or deny them now, having the example of saints in heaven, either to justify or excuse such their doubting or denial. 39. You observe in the next place, that our sixth article, spe- cifying by name all the books of the Old Testament, shuffles over 11 122 Scripture the only Rule those of the new with this generality : — " All the books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive, and account them canonical :" and in this you fancy to yourself a mystery of iniquity. But if this be all the shuffling that the church of England is guilty of, I believe the church, as well as the king, may give for her motto, honi soit qui mal y pense: for all the bibles, which since the composing of the articles have been used and allowed by the church of England, do testify and even proclaim to the world, that by " commonly received," they meant received by the church of Rome, and other churches before the reformation. I pray take the pains to look in them, and there you shall find the books which the church of England accounts apocryphal, marked out, and severed from the rest, with this title in the beginning, The books called Apocrypha ; and with this close or seal in the end, The end of the Apocrypha. And having told you by name, and in particular, what books only she esteems apo- cryphal, I hope you will not put her to the trouble of telling you, that the rest are in her judgment canonical. 40. But if by " commonly received," she meant by the church of Rome ; then, by the same reason, must she receive divers books of the Old Testament, which she rejects. 41. Certainly a very good consequence. The church of Eng- land receives the books of the New Testament which the church of Rome receives : therefore she must receive the books of the Old Testament which she receives. As if you should say, if you will do as we in one thing, you must in all things. If you will pray to God with us, ye must pray to saints with us. If you hold with us, when we have reason on our side, you must do so when we have no reason. 42. The discourse following, is but a vain declamation. No man thinks that this controversy is to be tried by most voices, but by the judgment and testimony of the ancient fathers and churches. 43. But with what coherence can we say in the former part of the article, that by scripture we mean those books that were never doubted of; and in the latter say, we receive "all the books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received," whereas of them many were doubted ? I answer, when they say, of whose autho- rity there was never any doubt in the church, they mean not those only of whose authority there was simply no doubt at all, by any man in the church ; but such as were not at any time doubted of by the whole church, or by all churches; but had attestation, though not universal, yet at least sufficient to make considering men receive them for canonical. In which number they may well reckon those epistles which were sometimes doubted of by some, yet whose num- ber and authority was not so great, as to prevail against the con- trary suffrages. 44. But if to be "commonly received," passed for a good rule to know the canon of the New Testament by, why not of the Old ? You conclude many times very well ; but still when you do so, it is out of principles which no man grants: for who ever told you whereby to judge of Controversies. 123 that to be " commonly received" is a good rule to know the canon of the New Testament by ? Have you been trained up in schools of subtilty, and cannot you see a great difference between these two — we receive the books of the New Testament as they are " commonly received," and we receive those that are " commonly received," because they are so ? To say this, were indeed to make being " commonly received," a rule or reason to know the canon by. But to say the former, doth no more make it a rule, than you should make the church of England the rule of your receiving them, if you should say, as you may, the books of the New Tes- tament we receive for canonical, as they are received by the church of England. 45. You demand upon what infallible ground we agree with Luther against you in some, and with you against Luther in others? And I also demand, upon what infallible ground you hold your canon, and agree neither with us, nor Luther? For sure your differing from us both, is of itself no more apparently reasonable, than our agreeing with you in part, and in part with Luther. If you say, your church's infallibility is your ground ; I demand again some infallible ground, both for the church's infal- libility, and for this, that yours is the church; and shall never cease multiplying demands upon demands, until you settle me upon a rock ; I mean, give such an answer, whose truth is so evident, that it needs no further evidence. If you say, this is universal tradition ; I reply, your church's infallibility is not built upon it, and that the canon of scripture, as we receive it, is : for we do not profess ourselves so absolutely and undoubtedly certain, neither do we urge others to be so, of those books, which have been doubted, as of those that never have. 46. The conclusion of your 10th §. is, that the divinity of a writing cannot be known from itself alone, but by some extrin- sical authority : which you need not prove ; for no wise man denies it. But then, this authority is that of universal tradition, not of your church. For to me it is altogether as auToTiffTov that the gospel of St. Matthew is the word of God, as that all which your church says is true. 47. That believers of the scripture, by considering the divine matter, the excellent precepts, the glorious promises contained in it, may be confirmed in their faith of the scripture's divine autho- rity ; and that among other inducements and enforcements here- unto, internal arguments have their place and force, certainly no man of understanding can deny. For my part, I profess, if the doctrine of the scripture were not as good, and as fit to come from the Fountain of goodness, as the miracles by which it was con- firmed were great, I should want one main pillar of my faith ; and for want of it, I fear, should be much staggered in it. Now this, and nothing else, did the doctor mean in saying, " the believer sees, by that glorious beam of divine light, which shines in scrip- ture, and by many internal arguments, that the scripture is of divine authority. By this (saith he) he sees" it, that is, he is moved to, and strengthened in his belief of it; and by this partly, not 124 Scripture the only Rule wholly ; by this, not alone, but with the concurrence of other arguments. He that will quarrel with him for saying so, must tind fault with the master of the sentences, and all his scholars, for they all say the same. The rest of this paragraph, I am as willing it should be true, as you are to have it ; and so let it pass as a discourse wherein we are wholly unconcerned. You might have met with an answerer, that would not have suffered you to have said so much truth together ; but to me it is sufficient, that it is nothing to the purpose. 48. In the next division, out of your liberality, you will suppose, .hat scripture, like to a corporal light, is by itself alone able to determine and move our understanding to assent ; yet notwith- standing this supposal, faith still (you say) must go before scrip- ture ; because as the light is visible only to those that have eyes, so the scripture only to those that have the eye of faith. But to my understanding, if scripture do move and determine our under- standing to assent; then the scripture, and its moving, must be before this assent, as the cause must be before its own effect : now this very assent is nothing else but faith, and faith nothing else than the understanding's assent. And therefore (upon this supposal) faith doth, and must originally proceed from scripture, as the effect from its proper cause, and the influence and efficacy of scripture is to be presupposed before the assent of faith, unto which it moves and determines ; and, consequently, if this suppo- sition of yours were true, there should need no other means pre- cedent to scripture to beget faith.; scripture itself being able (as here you suppose) to determine and move the understanding to assent, that is, to believe them, and the verities contained in them. Neither is this to say, that the eyes with which you see, are made by the light by which we see. For you are mistaken much, if you conceive, that in this comparison, faith answers to the eye. But if you will not prevent it, the analogy must stand thus ; scripture must answer to light ; the eye of the soul, that is, the understand- ing or the faculty of assenting, to the bodily eye : and, lastly, assenting or believing, to the act of seeing. As therefore the light, determining the eye to see, though it presupposeth the eye, which it determines, as every action doth the object on which it is employed, yet itself is presupposed and antecedent to the act of seeing, as the cause is always to its effect : so, if you will suppose that scripture, like light, moves the understanding to assent, the understanding (that is, the eye and object on which it works) must be before this influence upon it ; but the assent, that is, the belief whereto the scripture moves, and the understanding is moved, which answers to the act of seeing, must come after : for, if it did assent already, to what purpose should the scripture do that which was done before ? Nay, indeed, how were it possible it should be so, any more than a father can beget a son that he hath already ? Or an architect build a house, that is built already ? Or, that this very world can be made again, before it be unmade ? Transubstantiation indeed is fruitful of such monsters: but they that have not sworn themselves to the defence of error, will whereby to judge of Controversies. 125 easily perceive, that jam factum facer -e, and factum infectumfacere, are equally impossible. But I digress. 49. The close of this paragraph is a fit cover for such a dish. There you tell us, that if there be some other means precedent to scripture to beget faith, this can be no other than the church. By the church, we know you do and must understand the Roman church : so that in effect you say, no man can have faith, but he must be moved to it by your church's authority: and that is to say, that the king and all other protestants, to whom you write, though they verily think they are christians, and believe the gos- pel, because they assent to the truth of it, and would willingly die for it, yet indeed are infidels, and believe nothing. The scripture tells us, " The heart of man knoweth no man, but the spirit of man which is in him." And who are you, to take upon you to make us believe, that we do not believe what we know we do ? But if I may think verily that I believe the scripture, and yet not believe it ; how know you that you believe the Roman church ? I am as verily and as strongly persuaded that I believe the scripture, as you are that you believe the church : and if I may be deceived, why may not you? Again, what more ridiculous, and against sense and experience, than to affirm, that there are not millions amongst you and us, that believe upon no other rea- son than their education, and the authority of their parents and teachers, and the opinion they have of them ? The tenderness of the subject, and aptness to receive impressions, supplying the defect and imperfection of the agent. And will you proscribe from heaven all those believers of your own creed, who do indeed lay the foundation of their faith (for I cannot call it by any other name) no deeper than upon the authority of their father, or master, or parish priest ? Certainly, if they have no true faith, your church is very full of infidels. Suppose Xaverius, by the holiness of his life, had converted some Indians to Christianity, who could (for so I will suppose) have no knowledge of your church but from him, and therefore must last of all build their faith of the church upon their opinion of Xaverius : do these remain as very pagans after conversion, as they were before ? Are they brought to assent in their souls, and obey in their lives the gospel of Christ, only to be tantalized and not saved and not benefited, but deluded by it, be- cause, forsooth, it is a man, and not the church that begets faith in them? What if their motive to believe be not in reason sufficient? Do they therefore not believe what they do believe, because they do it upon insufficient motives? They choose the faith imprudently, perhaps, but yet they choose it. Unless you will have us believe, that that which is done is not done, because it is not done upon good reason ; which is to say, that never any man living ever did a foolish action. But yet I know not why the authority of one holy man, which apparently hath no ends upon me, joined with the goodness of the christian faith, might not be a far greater and more rational motive to me to embrace Christianity, than any I can have to continue in paganism. And therefore for shame, if not for love of truth, you must recant the fancy when you write again, and 11* 126 Scripture the only Rule suffer true faith to be many times, where your church's infallibility hath no hand in the beginning of it : and be content to tell us hereafter, that we believe not enough; and not go about to per- suade us we believe nothing, for fear with telling us what we know to be manifestly false, you should gain only this, not to be believed when you speak truth. Some pretty sophisms you may haply bring us, to make us believe we believe nothing ; but wise men know, that reason against experience is always sophistical. And there- fore as he that could not answer Zeno's subtilties against the ex- istence of motion, could yet confute them, by doing that which he pretended could not be done : so, if you should give me a hun- dred arguments to persuade me, because I do not believe in God, and the knots of them I could not untie, yet I should cut them in pieces with doing that, and knowing that I do so, which you pre- tend I cannot do. 50. In the thirteenth division, we have again much ado about nothing. A great deal of stir you keep in confuting some, that pretend to know canonical scripture to be such, by the titles of the books. But these men you do not name ; which makes me suspect you cannot. Yet it is possible there may be some such men in the world ; for Gusman de Alferache hath taught us, that the fool's hospital is a large place. 51. In the fourteenth §. we have very artificial juggling. D. Potter had said, that the scripture (he desires to be understood of those books wherein all christians agree) is a principle, and needs not to be proved among christians. His reason was, because that needs no farther proof, which is believed already. Now by this (you say) he means either that the scripture is one of these first principles, and most known in all sciences, which cannot be proved : which is to suppose it cannot be proved by the church ; and that is to suppose the question : or, he means that it is not the most known in Christianity, and then it may be proved. Where we see plainly, that two most different things, most known in all sciences, and most known in Christianity, are cap- tiously confounded. As if the scripture might not be the first and most known principle in Christianity, and yet not the most known in all sciences : or as if to be a first principle in Christianity, and in all sciences, were all one. That scripture is a principle among christians, that is, so received by all, that it need not be proved in any emergent controversy to any christian, but may be taken for granted, I think few will deny. You yourselves are of this a sufficient testimony ; for urging against us many texts of scrip- ture, you offer no proof of the truth of them, presuming we will not question it. Yet this is not to deny, that tradition is a prin- ciple more known than scripture; but to say, it is a principle not in Christianity, but in reason, not proper to christians, but com- mon to all men. 52. But it is repugnant to our practice to hold scripture a principle, because we are wont to affirm, that one part of scrip- ture may be known to be canonical, and may be interpreted by another. — Where the former device is again put in practice. For whereby to judge of Controversies. 127 to be known to be canonical, and to be interpreted, is not all one. That scripture may be interpreted by scripture, that protestants grant, and papists do not deny ; neither does that any way hin- der, but that this assertion — scripture is the word of God, may be among christians a common principle. But the first — that one part of scripture may prove another part canonical, and need no proof of its own being so ; for that you have produced divers pro- testants that deny it ; but who they are that affirm it, nondum constat. 53. It is superfluous for you to prove out of St. Athanasius, and St. Austin, that we must receive the sacred canon upon the credit of God's church : understanding by church, as here you explain yourself, the credit of tradition. And that not the tradition of the present church, which we pretend may deviate from the an- cient, but such a tradition, which involves an evidence of fact, and from hand to hand, from age to age, bringing us up to the times and persons of the apostles, and our Saviour himself, cometh to be confirmed by all these miracles and other arguments, whereby they convinced their doctrine to be true. Thus you. Now prove the canon of scripture, which you receive by such tra- dition, and we will allow it: prove your whole doctrine, or the infallibility of your church by such tradition, and we will yield to you in all things. Take the alleged places of St. Athanasius and St. Austin in this sense (which is your own), and they will not press us any thing at all. We will say, with Athanasius, that only four gospels are to be received, because the canons of the holy and ca- tholic church (understand all ages since the perfection of the canon) have so determined. 54. We will subscribe to St. Austin and say, that we also would not believe the gospel unless the authority of the catholic church did move us (meaning by the church, the church of all ages, and that succession of christians which takes in Christ himself and his apostles). Neither would Zuinglius have needed to cry out upon this saying, had he conceived as you now do, that by the catholic church, the church of all ages, since Christ, was to be understood. As for the council of Carthage, it may speak not of such books only as were certainly canonical, and for the regulating of faith, but also of those which were only profitable, and lawful to be read in the church : which in England is a very slender argument that the book is canonical, where every body knows that apocry- phal books are read as well as canonical. But howsoever, if you understand by fathers, not only their immediate fathers and pre- decessors in the gospel, but the succession of them from the apos- tles; they are right in the thesis, that whatsoever is received from these fathers, as canonical, is to be so esteemed ; though in the application of it to this or that particular book, they may haply err, and think that book received as canonical, which was only received as profitable to be read; and think that book received alway, and by all, which was rejected by some, and doubted of by many. 55. But we cannot be certain in what language the scriptures 128 Scripture the only Rule remain uncorrupted. Not so certain, I grant, as of that which we can demonstrate ; but certain enough, morally certain, as cer- tain as the nature of the thing will bear; so certain we may be, and God requires no more. We may be as certain as St. Austin was, who, in his second book of baptism, against the donatists, c. 3, plainly implies, the scripture might possibly be corrupted. He means sure in matters of little moment, such as concern not the covenant between God and^ man. But thus he saith, the same St. Austin, in his 48th epist. clearly intimates,* that in his judgment, the only preservative of the scripture's integrity was the translating it into so many languages, and the general and perpetual use and reading of it in the church ; for want whereof the works of particular doctors were more exposed to danger in this kind ; but the canonical scripture being by this means guarded with universal care and diligence, was not obnoxious to such attempts. And this assurance of the scripture's incorruption is common to us with him ; we therefore are as certain hereof, as St. Austin was, and that I hope was certain enough. Yet if this does not satisfy you, I say farther, we are as certain hereof as your own pope Sixtus Quintus was. He in his preface to his bible tells us,f that " in the pervestigation of the true and genuine text, it was perspicuously manifest to all men, that there was no argu- ment more firm and certain to be relied on than the faith of an- cient books." Now this ground we have to build upon as well as he had ; and therefore our certainty is as great, and stands upon as certain ground as his did. 56. This is not all I have to say in this matter ; for I will add, moreover, that we are as certain in what language the scripture is uncorrupted, as any man in your church was, until Clement the Eighth set forth your own approved edition of your vulgar trans- lation : for you do not, nor cannot, without extreme impudence, deny, that until then, there were great variety of copies current in divers parts of your church, and those very frequent in various lections, all which copies might possibly be false in some things, but more than one sort of them could not possibly be true in all things ; neither were it less impudence to pretend, that any man in your church could until Clement's time have any certainty what that one true copy and reading was (if there were any one perfectly true). Some, indeed, that had got Sixtus's bible, might after the edition of that, very likely think themselves cock-sure of a perfect, true, uncorrupted translation, without being beholden * Neque enim sic potuit integritas atque notitia literarum quamlibet illustris episcopi custodiri, quemadmodum scriptura canonica tot linguarum Uteris et ordine et succes- sione celebrationis ecclesiastics custoditur ; contra quant non defuerunt tamen, qui sub noniinibus apostolorum multa conjingerent. Frustra quidem ; quia ilia sic commendata, sic celebrata, sic nota est. Verum quid possit adversus litems non canonica authoritate fundatas etiarn hinc demonstrabit impia conatus audacia, quod et adversus eos qua tanta notitia mole Jirmata sunt, sese erigere non prater misit. Aug. ep. 48. ad Vincent. cant. Donat. et Rogat. t In hac germani textus pervestigatione, satis perspicue inter omnes constat, nullum argumentum esse aut certius aut Jirmius, quam antiquorum probatorum codicum La- tin or urn jidem, Sfc. sic Sixtus in Praef. whereby to judge of Controversies. 129 to Clement ; but how foully they were abused and deceived that thought so, the edition of Clement, differing from that of Sixtus in a multitude of places, doth sufficiently demonstrate. 57. This certainty, therefore, in what language the scriptuie remains uncorrupted, is it necessary to have it, or is it not ? If it be not, I hope we may do well enough without it. If it be neces- sary, what became of your church for 1500 years together? All which time you must confess she had no such certainty; no one man being able truly and upon good ground to say, this or this copy of the bible is pure and perfect, and uncorrupted in all things. And now at present, though some of you are grown to a higher degree of presumption in this point, yet are you as far as ever from any true, and real, and rational assurance of the absolute purity of your authentic translation, which I suppose myself to •have proved unanswerably in divers places. 58. In the sixteenth division, it is objected to protestants in a long discourse transcribed out of the Protestant's Apology, that their translations of the scripture are very different, and by each other mutually condemned. Luther's translation by Zuinglius and others ; that of the zuinglians by Luther ; the translation of CEco- lampadius, by the divines of Basil ; that of Castalio, by Beza ; that of Beza by Castalio ; that of Calvin, by Carolus Molinaeus ; that of Geneva, by M. Parker and King James ; and, lastly, one of our translations by the puritans. 59. All which might have been as justly objected against that great variety of translations extant in the primitive church, and made use of by the fathers and doctors of it. For which, I desire not that my word, but St. Austin's may be taken : " They which have translated the scriptures out of the Hebrew into Greek, may be numbered ; but the Latin interpreters are innumerable : for, whensoever any one, in the first times of Christianity, met with a Greek bible, and seemed to himself to have some ability in both languages, he presently ventured upon an interpretation." So he, in his second book of christian doctrine, chap. 11. Of all these, that which was called the Italian translation was esteemed best ; so we may learn from the same St. Austin, in chap. 15 of the same book : " Amongst all these interpretations," saith he, " let the Italian be preferred, for it keeps closer to the letter, and is perspicuous in the sense." Yet so far was the church of that time from presuming upon the absolute purity and perfection even of this best translation, that St. Jerome thought it necessary to make a new translation of the Old Testament out of the Hebrew fountain (which himself testifies in his book de viris illustribus); and to correct the vulgar version of the New Testament accord- ing to the truth of the original Greek, amending many errors which had crept into it, whether by the mistake of the author, or the negligence of the transcribers, which work he undertook and performed at the request of Damascus, bishop of Rome. " You constrain me," saith he, " to make a new work of an old : that after the copies of the scripture have been dispersed through the whole world, I should sit, as it were, an arbitrator amongst i 130 Scripture the only Rule them; and because they vary among themselves, should deter- mine what are those things in them which consent with the Greek verity." And after : " Therefore this present preface pro- mises the four gospels only, corrected by collation with Greek copies; but that they might not be very dissonant from the cus- tom of the Latin reading, I have so tempered with my style the translation of the ancients, that those things amended which did seem to change the sense, other things I have suffered to remain as they were." So that in this matter protestants must either stand or fall with the primitive church. 60. The corruption that you charge Luther with, and the falsi- fication that you impute to Zuinglius, what have we to do with them? Or why may not we as justly lay to your charge the errors which Lyranus, or Paulus Brugensis, or Laurentius Valla, or Cajetan, or Erasmus, or Arias Montanus, or Augustus Nebiensis, or Pagnine, have committed in their translation ? 61. Which yet I say not, as if these translations of Luther and Zuinglius were absolutely indefensible ; for what such great difference is there between faith without the works of the law, and faith alone without the works of the law ? Or, why does not without, alone, signify all one with alone, without? Consider the matter a little better, and observe the use of these phrases of speech in our ordinary talk, and perhaps you will begin to doubt whether you had sufficient ground for this invective. And then for Zuinglius, if it be true, as they say it is, that the language our Saviour spake in had no such word as to signify, but used always to be instead of it, as it is certain the scripture does in a hundred places; then this translation, which you do so declaim against, will prove no falsification in Zuinglius, but a calumny in you. 62. " But the faith of protestants relies upon scripture alone ; scripture is delivered to most of them by translations; transla- tions depend upon the skill and honesty of men, who certainly may err because they are men, and certainly do err, at least some of them, because their translations are contrary. It seems then the faith, and consequently the salvation of protestants, relies upon fal- lible and uncertain grounds." 63. This objection, though it may seem to do you a great service for the present ; yet I fear you will repent the time that ever you urged it against us as a fault, that we make men's salva- tion depend upon uncertainties: for the objection returns upon you many ways; as first thus — the salvation of many millions of papists (as they suppose and teach) depends upon their having the sacrament of penance duly administered unto them. This again upon the minister's being a true priest. That such or such a man is priest, not himself, much less any other can have any possible certainty ; for it depends upon a great many contingent and uncertain supposals. He that will pretend to be certain of it, must undertake to know for a certain all these things that follow. 64. First, that he was baptized with due matter. Secondlv whereby to judge of Controversies. 131 with the due form of words, which he cannot know, unless he were both present and attentive. Thirdly, he must know that he was baptized with due intention, and that is, that the minister of his baptism was not a secret Jew, nor a Moor, nor an atheist (of all which kinds, I fear, experience gives you a just cause to fear, that Italy and Spain have priests not a few), but a christian, in heart as well as profession (otherwise, believing the sacrament to be nothing, in giving it he could intend to give nothing), nor a Samosatenian, nor an Arian, but one that was capable of having due intention, from which they that believe not the doctrine of the trinity are excluded by you. And, lastly, that he was neither drunk nor distracted at the administration of the sacrament, nor out of negligence or malice omitted his intention. 65. Fourthly, he must undertake to know, that the bishop which ordained him priest, ordained him completely with due matter, form, and intention ; and, consequently, that he again was neither Jew, nor Moor, nor atheist, nor liable to any such excep- tion, as is inconsistent with due intention in giving the sacrament of orders. 66. Fifthly, he must undertake to know, that the bishop, which made him priest, was a priest himself; for your rule is, nihil dat quod non habet ; and, consequently, that there was again none of the former nullities in his baptism, which might make him inca- pable of ordination, nor no invalidity in his ordination, but a true priest to ordain him again, the requisite matter and farm, and due intention all concurring. 67. Lastly, he must pretend to know the same of him that made him priest, and him that made him priest, even until he comes to the very fountain of priesthood. For take any one in the whole train and succession of ordainers, and suppose him, by reason of any defect, only a supposed, and not a true priest ; then, according to your doctrine, he could not give a true, but only a supposed priesthood ; and they that receive it of him, and again, they that derive it from them, can give no better than they re- ceived ; receiving nothing but a name and shadow, can give nothing but a name and shadow ; and so from age to age, from generation to generation, being equivocal fathers, beget only equivocal sons; no principle in geometry being more certain than this, that the unsuppliable defect of any necessary antecedent, must needs cause a nullity of all those consequences which depend upon it. In fine, to know this one thing you must first know ten thousand others, whereof not any one is a thing that can be known, there being no necessity that it should be true, which only can qualify any thing for an object of science, but only, at the best, a high degree of probability that it is so. But then, that of ten thousand probables, no one should be false ; that of ten thousand requisites, whereof any one may fail, not one should be wanting, this to me is extremely improbable, and even cousin- german to impossible. So that the assurance hereof is like a machine composed of an innumerable multitude of pieces, of which it is strangely unlikelv but some will be out of order ; and i2 132 Scripture the only Rule yet if any one be so, the whole fabric of necessity falls to the ground : and he that shall put them together, and maturely con- sider all the possible ways of lapsing, and nullifying a priesthood in the church of Rome, I believe will be very inclinable to think, that it is a hundred to one, that amongst a hundred seeming priests, there is not one true one : nay, that it is not a thing very improbable, that amongst those many millions, which make up the Romish hierarchy, there are not twenty true. But be the truth in this what it will be, once this is certain, that they, which make men's salvation (as you do) depend upon priestly absolution ; and this again (as you do) upon the truth and reality of the priest- hood that gives it ; and this, lastly, upon a great multitude of ap- parent uncertainties, are not the fittest men in the world to object to others, as a horrible crime, that they make men's salvation de- pend upon fallible and uncertain foundations. And let this be the first retorting of your argument. 68. But suppose this difficulty assoyled, and that an angel from heaven should ascertain you (for other assurances you can have none) that the person you make use of, is a true priest, and a competent minister of the sacrament of penance ; yet still the doubt will remain, whether he will do you that good which he can do, whether he will pronounce the absolving words with intent to absolve you ; for perhaps he might bear you some secret malice, and project to himself your damnation for a complete Italian revenge. Perhaps (as the tale is of a priest that was lately burnt in France) he may upon some conditions have compacted with the devil to give no sacraments with intention. Lastly, he may be (for aught you can possibly know) a secret Jew, or Moor, or anti-trinitarian, or perhaps such an one as is so far from intending your forgiveness of sins and salvation by this sacrament, that in his heart he laughs at all these things, and thinks sin nothing, and salvation a word. All these doubts you must have clearly resolved (which can hardly be done but by another revelation) before you can upon good grounds assure yourself, that your true priest gives you true and effectual abso- lution. So that when you have done as much as God requires for your salvation, yet can you by no means be secure, but that you may have the ill luck to be damned ; which is to make salvation a matter of chance, and not of choice ; and which a man may fail of, not only by an ill life, but by ill fortune. Verily, a most com- fortable doctrine for a considering man lying upon his death-bed, who either feels or fears that his repentance is but attrition only, and not contrition, and consequently believes, that if he be not absolved really by a true priest, he cannot possibly escape damna- tion. Such a man, for his comfort, you tell first (you that will have men's salvation depend upon no uncertainties) that though he verily believe that his sorrow for his sins is a true sorrow, and his purpose for amendment a true purpose, yet he may deceive himself, perhaps it is not; and, if it be not, he must be damned. You bid him hope well ; but spes est rei incertce nomen. You tell him, secondly, that though the party he confesses to, seem to be whereby to judge of Controversies. 133 a true priest, yet, for aught he knows, or for aught himself knows, by reason of some secret undiscernable invalidity in his baptism or ordination, he may be none ; and if he be none, be can do nothing. This is a hard saying ; but this is not the worst : you tell him, thirdly, that he may be in such a state, that he cannot, or if he can, that he will not give the sacrament with due inten- tion ; and if he does not, all is in vain. But in case a man by these considerations should be cast into some agonies; what advice, what comfort would you give him 1 Verily, I know not what you could say to him, but this; that, first, for the qualification re- quired on his part, he might know that he desired to have true sorrow, and that is sufficient : but then if he should ask you, why he might not know his sorrow to be a true sorrow, as well as his desire to be sorrowful to be a true desire, I believe you would be put to silence. Then, secondly, to quiet his fears, concerning the priest and his intention, you should tell him, by my advice, that God's goodness (which will not suffer him to damn men for not doing better than their best) will supply all such defects, as to human endeavours were unavoidable. And therefore though his priest were indeed no priest, yet to him he should be as if he were one ; and if he gave absolution without intention, yet in doing so he should hurt himself only, and not his penitent. This were some comfort indeed, and this were to settle men's salvation upon reasonable certain grounds. But this, 1 fear, you will never say ; for this were to reverse many doctrines established by your church ; and besides, to degrade your priesthood from a great part of their honour, by lessening the strict necessity of the laity's dependence upon them : for it were to say, that the priest's inten- tion is not necessary to the obtaining of absolution ; which is to say, that it is not in the parson's power to damn whom he will in his parish, because, by this rule, God should supply the defect which his malice had caused : and besides, it were to say, that infants dying without baptism might be saved ; God supplying the want of baptism, which to them is unavoidable : but, beyond all this, it were to put into my mouth a full and satisfying answer to your argument, which I am now returning ; so that in answering my objection you should answer your own : for then I should tell you, that it were altogether as abhorrent from the goodness of God, and as repugnant to it, to suffer an ignorant layman's soul to perish, merely for being misled by an undiscernable false translation, which yet was commended to him by the church, which (being of necessity to credit some in this matter) he had reason to rely upon, either above all other, or as much as any other, as it is to damn a penitent sinner for a secret defect in that desired absolution, which his ghostly father perhaps was an atheist, and could not give him, or was a villain, and would not. This answer, therefore, which alone would serve to comfort your penitent in his perplexities, and to assure him, that he cannot fail of salvation, if he will not ; for fear of inconvenience you must forbear: and seeing you must, I hope you will, come down from the pulpit, and preach no more against others for making men's salvation depend upon fallible and uncertain grounds, lest by 134 Scripture the only Rule judging others, you make yourselves, and your own church inex- cusable, who are strongly guilty of this fault, above all the men and churches of the world ; whereof I have already given you two very pregnant demonstrations, drawn from your presumptuous tying God and salvation to your sacraments; and the efficacy of them to your priest's qualifications and intentions. 69. Your making the salvation of infants depend on baptism, a casual thing, and in the power of man to confer, or not confer, would yield me a third of the same nature. And your suspend- ing the same on the baptizer's intention, a fourth. And, lastly, your making the real presence of Christ in the eucharist depend upon the casualties of the consecrator's true priesthood and in- tention, and yet commanding men to believe it for certain that he is present, and to adore the sacrament, which, according to your doctrine, for aught they can possibly know, may be nothing else but a piece of bread, so exposing them to the danger of idolatry, and consequently of damnation, doth offer me a fifth demonstration of the same conclusion, if I thought fit to insist upon them. But I have no mind to draw any more out of this fountain ; neither do I think it charity to cloy the reader with uniformity, when the sub- ject affords variety. 70. Sixthly, therefore, I return it thus : the faith of papists relies alone upon their church's infallibility. That there is any church infallible, and, that theirs is it, they pretend not to believe, but only upon prudential motives. Dependence upon prudential motives they confess to be obnoxious to a possibility of erring. What then remaineth, but truth, faith, salvation, and all, must in them rely upon a fallible and uncertain ground 1 71. Seventhly, the faith of papists relies upon the church alone. The doctrine of the church is delivered to most of them by their parish-priest, or ghostly father, or, at least by a company of priests, who, for the most part, sure, are men and not angels, in whom nothing is more certain than a most certain possibility to err. What then remaineth, but that truth, faith, salvation, and all, must in them rely upon a fallible and uncertain ground ? 72. Eighthly, thus : It is apparent and undeniable, that many thousands there are, who believe your religion upon no better grounds than a man may have for the belief almost of any religion. As some believe it, because their forefathers did so, and they were good people. Some, because they were christened and brought up in it. Some, because many learned and religious men are of it. Some, because it is the religion of their country, where all other religions are persecuted and proscribed. Some, because protestants cannot shew a perpetual succession of professors of all their doctrines. Some, because the service of your church is more stately, and pompous, and magnificent. Some, because they find comfort in it. Some, because vour religion is farther spread, and hath more professors of it than the religion of protestants. Some, because your priests compass sea and land to gain prose- lytes to it. Lastly, an infinite number by chance, and they know not why, but only because they are sure they are in the right. This which I say, is a most certain experimented truth, and if whereby to judge of Controversies. 135 you will deal ingenuously, you will not deny it. And, without ques- tion, he that builds his faith upon our English translation, goes upon a more prudent ground than any of these can, with reason, be pre- tended to be. What then can you allege, but that with you, rather than with us, truth, and faith, and salvation, and all, rely upon fallible and uncertain grounds ? 73. Ninthly, your Rhemish and Doway translations are de- livered to your proselytes (such, I mean, that are dispensed with, for the reading of them) for the direction of their faith and lives. And the same may be said of your translation of the bible into other national languages, in respect of those that are licensed to read them. This, I presume, you will confess. And, moreover, that these translations came not by inspiration, but were the pro- ductions of human industry ; and that not angels, but men, were the authors of them. Men, I say, mere men, subject to the same passions, and to the same possibility of erring with our translators. And then, how does it not unavoidably follow, that in them which depend upon these translations for their direction, faith, and truth, and salvation, and all rely upon fallible and uncertain grounds ? 74. Tenthly, and lastly (to lay the axe to the root of the tree) the Helena which you so fight for, your vulgar translation, though some of you believe, or pretend to believe, it to be, in every par- ticular of it, the pure and uncorrupted word of God ; yet others among you, and those as good and zealous catholics as you, are not so confident hereof. 75. First, for all those who have made translations of the whole bible or any part of it different many times in sense from the vul- gar, as Lyranus, Cajetan, Pagnine, Arias, Erasmus, Valla, Steuchus, and others, it is apparent, and even palpable, that they never dreamt of any absolute perfection and authentical infallibility of the vulgar translation. For, if they had, why did they in many places reject it, and differ from it 1 76. Vega was present at the council of Trent, when the decree was made, which made the vulgar edition (then not extant any where in the world) authentical, and not to be rejected upon any pretence whatsoever. At the forming this decree, Vega, I say, was present, understood the mind of the council as well as any man, and professes, that he was instructed in it by the president of it, the Cardinal S. Cruce. And yet he hath written, that the coun- cil in this decree means to pronounce this translation free (not simply from all error) but only from such errors, out of which any opinion pernicious to faith and manners might be collected. This, Andradius, in his defence of that council, reports of Vega, and assents to himself. Driedo, in his book of the translation of holy scripture, hath these words, very pregnant and pertinent to the same purpose : " The see apostolic hath approved or ac- cepted Jerome's edition, not as so wholly consonant to the ori- ginal, and so entire, and pure, and restored in all things, that it may not be lawful for any man, either by comparing it with the fountain, to examine it, or, in some places, to doubt, whether or no Jerome did understand the true sense of the scripture ; but 136 Scripture the only Rule only, as an edition to be preferred before all others then extant, and no where deviating from the truth in the rules of faith and good life." Mariana, even where he is a most earnest advocate for the vulgar edition, yet acknowledges the imperfection of it in these words : " The faults of the vulgar edition are not approved* bv the decree of the council of Trent, a multitude whereof we did collect from the variety of copies." And again, " We maintain, that the Hebrew and Greek were by no means rejected by the Trent fathers; and that the Latin edition is indeed approved; yet not so, as if they did deny, that some places might be translated more plainly, some more properly, whereof it were easy to produce in- numerable examples." And this he there professes to have learnt of Laines, the then general of the society ; who was a great part of that council, present at all the actions of it, and of very great authority in it. 77. To this so great authority he adds a reason of his opinion ; which with all indifferent men will be of a far greater authority. " If the council (saith he) hath purposed to approve an edition in all respects, and to make it of equal authority and credit with the fountains, certainly they ought with exact care first to have cor- rected the errors of the interpreter ;" which certainly they did not. 78. Lastly, Bellarmine himself, though he will not acknow- ledge any imperfection in the vulgar edition, yet he acknowledges, that the case may, and does oft-times, so fall out, thatf it is im- possible to discern, which is the true reading of the vulgar edition, but only by recourse unto the originals and dependence upon them. 79. From all which it may evidently be collected, that though some of you flatter yourselves with a vain imagination of the cer- tain absolute purity and perfection of your vulgar edition, yet the matter is not so certain, and so resolved, but that the best learned men amongst you are often at a stand, and very doubtful some- times whether your vulgar translation be true, and sometimes whether this or that be your vulgar translation, and sometimes undoubtedly resolved, that your vulgar translation is no true translation, nor consonant to the original, as it was at first de- livered. And what then can be alleged, but that out of your own grounds it may be inferred and enforced upon you, that not only in your laymen, but your clergymen and scholars, faith and truth, and salvation, and all, depend upon fallible and uncertain grounds? And thus, by ten several retortions of this one argument, I have endeavoured to shew you, how ill you have complied with your own advice, which was — to take heed of urging arguments that might be returned upon you. I should now, by a direct answer, shew that it presseth not us at all : but I have in passing, done it already in the end of the second retortion of this argument, and thither I refer the reader. 80. Whereas, therefore you exhort them, that will have assu- rance of true scriptures, to fly to your church for it ; — I desire to know (if they should follow your advice) how they should be as * Pro edit. vulg. c. xxi. p. 99. t Bell, de verbo Dei, 1. 2, c. xi. p. 120. whereby to judge of Controversies. 137 sured, that your church can give them any such assurance, which hath been confessedly so negligent, as to suffer many whole books of scripture to be utterly lost: again, in those that remain, con- fessedly so negligent, as to suffer the originals of these that remain to be corrupted: and, lastly, so careless of preserving the inte- grity of the copies of her translation, as to suffer infinite variety of readings to come into them, without keeping any one perfect copy, which might have been as the standard and Polycletus's canon to correct the rest by. So that which was the true reading and which the false, it was utterly undiscernible, but only by comparing them with the originals, which also she pretends to be corrupted. 81. But — Luther himself, by unfortunate experience, was at length enforced to confess thus much, saying, If the world last longer, it will be again necessary to receive the decrees of coun- cils, by reason of divers interpretations of scripture which now reign. — 82. And what if Luther, having a pope in his belly, (as he was wont to say that most men had,) and desiring perhaps to have his own interpretations pass without examining, spake such words in heat of argument : do you think it reasonable, that we should subscribe to Luther's divinations and angry speeches ? Will you oblige yourself to answer for all the assertions of your private doctors ? If not, why do you trouble us with what Luther says, and what Calvin says ? Yet this I say not, as if these words of Luther made any thing at all for your present purpose. For what if he feared, or pretended to fear, that the infallibility of councils being rejected, some men would fall into greater errors than were imposed upon them by the councils? Is this to confess, that there is any present visible church, upon whose bare authority we may infallibly receive the true scriptures, and the true sense of them ? Let the reader judge. But, in my opinion, to fear a greater inconvenience may follow from the avoiding of the less, is not to confess that the less is none at all. 83. For Dr. Covel's commending your translation, what is it to the business in hand ? Or how proves it the perfection, of which it is here contested, any more than St. Augustine's com- mending the Italian translation argues the perfection of that, or that there was no necessity, that St. Jerome should correct it 1 Dr. Covel commends your translation, and so does the bishop of Chi- chester, and so does Dr. James, and so do I ; but I commend it for a good translation, not for a perfect. Good may be good, and deserve commendations ; and yet better may be better. And though he says, that — the then approved translation of the church of England, is that which cometh nearest the vulgar — yet he does not say, that it agrees exactly with it. So that whereas you infer, that the truth of your translation must be the rule to judge of the goodness of ours; this is but a vain flourish. For, to say of our translations, that is the best which comes nearest the vulgar (and yet it is but one man that says so) is not to say, it is therefore the best, because it does so : for this may be true by accident, and 12* 138 Scripture the only Rule yet the truth of our translation no way depend upon the truth of yours: for, had that been their direction, they would not only have made a translation that should come near to yours, but such a one, which should exactly agree with it, and be a translation of your translation. 84. Ad. 17. §. In this division you charge us with great uncer- tainty concerning the meaning of scripture — which hath been answered already, by saying, that, if you speak of plain places (and in such all things necessary are contained) we are sufficiently certain of the meaning of them, neither need they any inter- preter : if of obscure and difficult places, we confess we are uncertain of the sense of many of them : but then we say there is no necessity we should be certain : for, if God's will had been, we should have understood him more certainly, he would have spoken more plainly. And we say, besides, that as we are un- certain, so are you too; which he that doubts of, let him read your commentators upon the bible, and observe their various and dissonant interpretations, and he shall in this point need no further satisfaction. 85. But seeing there are contentions among us, we are taught by nature and scripture and experience (so you tell us out of Mr. Hooker) to seek for the ending of them, by submitting unto some judicial sentence, whereunto neither part may refuse to stand. — This is very true. Neither should you need to persuade us to seek such a means of ending all our controversies, if we could tell where to find it. But this we know, that none is fit to pro- nounce for all the world a judicial definite obliging sentence, in controversies of religion, but only such a man, or such a so- ciety of men, as is authorised thereto by God. And besides, we are able to demonstrate, that it hath not been the pleasure of God to give to any man, or society of men, any such authority. And therefore, though we wish heartily, that all controversies were ended, as we do, that all sin were abolished, yet we have little hope of the one or the other, until the world be ended : and in the meanwhile, think it best to content ourselves with, and to persuade others unto, an unity of charity, and mutual toleration ; seeing God hath authorised no man to force all men to unity of opinion. Neither do we think it fit to argue thus; to us it seems convenient there should be one judge of all controversies for the whole world ; therefore God hath appointed one ; but more modest and more reasonable to collect thus : God hath appointed no such judge of controversies ; therefore, though it seems to us convenient there should be one, yet it is not so ; or though it were convenient for us to have one, yet it hath pleased God (for reasons best known to himself) not to allow us this convenience. 86. Dr. Field's words, which follow, I confess are somewhat more pressing : and if he had been infallible, and the words had not slipt unadvisedly from him, they were the best argument in your book. But yet it is evident out of his book, and so acknow- ledged by some of your own, that he never thought of any one company of christians invested with such authority from God, whereby to judge of Controversies. 139 that all men were bound to receive their decrees without examin- ation, though they seem contrary to scripture and reason, which the church of Rome requires. And therefore, if he have in his preface strained too high in commendation of the subject he writes of (as writers very often do in their prefaces and dedicatory epistles), what is that to us? Besides, by all the societies of the world, it is not impossible, not very improbable, he might mean, all that are, or have been, in the world, and so include even the primitive church ; and her communion we shall embrace, her di- rection we shall follow, her judgment we shall rest in, if we be- lieve the scripture, endeavour to find the true sense of it, and live according to it. 87. Ad. §. 18. That the true interpretation of the scripture ought to be received from the church, you need not prove ; for it is very easily granted by them, who profess themselves very ready to receive all truths, much more the true sense of scripture, not only from the church, but from any society of men, nay from any man whatsoever. 88. That the church's interpretation of scripture is always true — that is it which you would have said : and that in some sense may be also admitted ; viz. if you speak of that church (which before you spake of in the 14th §.) that is, of the church of all ages since the apostles. Upon the tradition of ,which church you there told us — we were to receive the scripture, and to believe it to be the word of God. For there you teach us, that — our faith of scripture depends on a principle, which requires no other proof; and that, such' is tradition, which from hand to hand, and age to age, bringing us up to the times and persons of the apostles, and our Saviour himself, cometh to be confirmed by all those miracles, and other arguments, whereby they convinced their doctrine to be true. — Wherefore the ancient fathers avouch, that we must re- ceive the sacred scripture upon the tradition of this church. The tradition then of this church, you say, must teach us what is scrip- ture ; and we are willing to believe it. And now, if you make it good unto us, that the same tradition, down from the apostles, hath delivered from age to age, and from hand to hand, any interpre- tation of any scripture, we are ready to embrace that also. But now, if you will argue thus : the church in one sense tells us what is scripture, and we believe ; therefore, if the church taken in another sense, tells us, this or that is the meaning of the scripture, we are to believe that also; this is too transparent sophistry, to take any but those that are willing to be taken. 89. If there be any traditive interpretation of scripture, produce it, and prove it to be so; and we embrace it. But the tradition of all ages is one thing; and the authority of the present church, much more of the Roman church, which is but a part, and a corrupted part of the catholic church, is another. And therefore, though we are ready to receive both scripture and the sense of scripture, upon the authority of original tradition, yet we receive neither the one nor the other upon the authority of your church. 90. First, for the scriptures how can we receive them upon the 140 Scripture the only Rule authority of your church, who hold now those books to be canonical, which formerly you rejected from the canon ? I instance in the book of Maccabees, and the epistle to the Hebrews : the first of these you held not to be canonical in St. Gregory's time, or else he was no member of your church ; for it is apparent* he held other- wise. The second you rejected from the canon in St. Jerome's time, as it is evident out off many places of his works. 91. If you say (which is all you can say) that Jerome spake this of the particular Roman church, not of the Roman catholic church — I answer there were none such in his time, none that was called so. Secondly what he spake of the Roman church, must be true of all other churches, if your doctrine of the necessity of the conformity of all other churches to that church, were then catholic doctrine. Now then choose whether you will, either thaf the particular Roman church was not then believed to be the mistress of all other churches, notwithstanding ad hanc ecclesiam, necesse est omnem convenire ec- clesiam, hoc est, omnes qui sunt undique jideles ; which Cardinal Perron and his translatress so often translate false : or, if you say she was, you will run into a greater inconvenience, and be forced to say, that all the churches of that time rejected from the canon the epistle to the Hebrews, together with the Roman church. And, consequently, that the catholic church may err in rejecting from the canon scriptures truly canonical. 92. Secondly, how can we receive the scripture upon the autho- rity of the Roman church, which hath delivered at several times scriptures in many places different and repugnant, for authentical and canonical? which is most evident out of the place of Malachi, which is so often quoted for the sacrifice of the mass, that either all the ancient fathers had false bibles, or yours is false: most evident likewise from the comparing the story of Jacob in Genesis, with that which is cited out of it, in the epistle to the Hebrews, according to the vulgar edition : but above all, to any one who shall compare the bibles of Sixtus and Clement, so evident that the wit of man cannot disguise it. 93. And thus you see what reason we have to believe your antecedent, that your church it is, which must declare what books be true scripture. Now, for the consequence, that certainly is as liable to exception as the antecedent : for if it were true, that God had promised to assist you, for the delivering of true scripture, would this oblige him, or would it follow from hence, that he had obliged himself to teach you, not only sufficiently, but effectually and irresistibly, the true sense of scripture? God is not defective in things necessary ; neither will he leave himself without witness, nor the world without means of knowing his will, and doing it. And therefore it was necessary, that by his providence he should preserve the scripture from any undiscernible corruption in those * See Greg. Mor. 1. xix. c. xiii. tThus he testifies, Com. in Isa. c. vi. in these words: " Unde et Paulus Apost. in Epist. ad Heb. (quam Latina consuetudo non recipit)." And again, in c. viii. in these, " In Epist. quae ad Hebraeos scribitur (licet earn Latini consuetudo inter canonicas scrip- turas non recipiat)," &c. whereby to judge of Controversies. 141 things which he would have known ; otherwise it is apparent, it had not heen his will, that these things should be known, the only means of continuing the knowledge of them being perished. But now neither is God lavish in superfluities ; and therefore, having given us means sufficient for ouf direction, and power sufficient to make use of these means, he will not constrain or necessitate us to make use of these means: for that were to cross the end of our creation, which was to be glorified by our free obedience; whereas necessity and freedom cannot stand together : that were to reverse the law which he hath prescribed to himself in his dealing with man ; and that is, to set life and death before him, and leave him in the hands of his own counsel. God gave the wise men a star to lead them to Christ, but he did not necessitate them to follow the guidance of this star ; that was left to their liberty. God gave the children of Israel a fire to lead them by night, and a pillar of cloud by day; but he constrained no man to follow them ; that was left to their liberty. So he gives the church the scripture ; which in those things which are to be believed or done are plain and easy to be followed like the wise men's star. Now that which he de- sires of us, on our part, is the obedience of faith, and love of the truth, and desire to find the true sense of it, and industry in searching it, and humility in following, and constancy in professing it ; all which, if he should w r ork in us by an absolute irresistible necessity, he could no more require of us, as our duty, than he can of the sun to shine, of the sea to ebb and flow, and of all other creatures to do those things which by mere necessity they must do, and cannot choose. Besides, what an impudence is it to pretend, that your church is infallibly directed concerning the true meaning of the scripture, whereas there are thousands of places of scripture, which you do not pretend certainly to understand, and about the interpretation whereof, your own doctors differ among themselves! If your church be infallibly directed concerning the true meaning of scripture, why do not your doctors follow her in- fallible direction? And, if they do, how comes such difference among them in their interpretations ? 94. Again, why does your church thus put her candle under a bushel, and keep her talent of interpreting scripture infallibly thus long wrapped up in napkins ? Why sets she not forth infallible commentaries or expositions upon all the bible? Is it, because this would not be profitable for christians, that scripture should be interpreted ? It is blasphemous to say so. The scripture itself tells us, " all scripture is profitable." And the scripture is not so much the words as the sense. And if it be not profitable, why does she employ particular doctors to interpret scriptures fallibly ? unless we must think that fallible interpretations of scripture are profita- ble, and infallible interpretations would not be so. 95. If you say — the Holy Ghost, which assists the church in interpreting, will move the church to interpret when he shall think fit, and that the church will do it when the Holy Ghost shall move her to do it — I demand, whether the Holy Ghost's moving of the church to such works as these, be resistible by the church or 142 Scripture the only Rule irresistible : if resistible, then the Holy Ghost may move, and the church may be moved. As certainly the Holy Ghost doth always move to an action, when he shows us plainly, that it would be for the good of men, and honour of God ; as he that hath any sense will acknowledge, that an infallible exposition of scripture could not but be; and there is no conceivable reason whv such a work should be put off a day, but only because you are conscious to yourselves you cannot do it, and therefore make excuses. But if the moving of the Holy Ghost be irresistible, and you are not yet so moved to go about this work, then I confess you are excused. But then I would know, whether those popes, which so long de- ferred calling of a council for the reformation of your church, at length pretended to be effected by the council of Trent, whether they may excuse themselves, for that they were not moved by the Holy Ghost to do it 1 I would know, likewise, as this motion is irresistible when it comes, so whether it be so simply necessary to the moving of your church to any such public action, that it can- not possibly move without it 1 that is, whether the pope now could not, if he would, seat himself in cathedra, and fall to writing ex- positions upon the bible for the direction of christians to the true sense of it 1 If you say he cannot, you will make yourself ridicu- lous; if he can, then I would know, whether he should be infallibly directed in these expositions or no ; if he should, then what need he stay for irresistible motion ? Why does he not go about this no- ble work presently ? If he should not, how shall we know that the calling of the council of Trent was not upon his voluntary motion, or upon human importunity and suggestion, and not upon the mo- tion of the Holy Ghost ; and consequently, how shall we know whe- ther he were assistant to it or no, seeing he assists none but what he himself moves to ? And whether he did move the pope to call this council, is a secret thing, which we cannot possibly know, nor perhaps the pope himself. 96. If you say, your meaning is only — that the church shall be infallibly guarded from giving any false sense of any scripture, and not infallibly assisted positively to give the true sense of all scrip- ture — I put to you your own question, why should we believe the Holy Ghost will stay there 1 Or, why may we not as well think he will stay at the first thing, that is, in teaching the church what books be true scripture ? for, if the Holy Ghost's assistance be promised to all things profitable, then will he be with them infalli- bly, not only to guard them from all errors, but to guide them to all profitable truths, such as the true sense of all scripture would' be. Neither could he stay there, but defend them irresistibly from all vices : nor there neither, but infuse into them irresistibly all virtues ; for all these things would be much for the benefit of chris- tians. If you say, he cannot do this without taking away their free-will in living ; I say, neither can he necessitate men to believe aright, without taking away their free-will in believing, and in pro- fessing their belief. 97. To the place of St. Augustine, I answer that not the autho- rity of the present church, much less a part of it (as the Roman whereby to judge of Controversies. 143 church is) was that which alone moved St. Augustine to believe the gospel, but the perpetual tradition of the churches of all ages. Which you yourself have taught us to be the only principle by which the scripture is proved, and which itself needs no proof; and to which you have referred this very saying of St. Augus- tine, ego vero evangelio non crederem, nisi, &c. chap. ii. § 14. And, in the next place, which you cite out of his book, De Util. Cred. c. xiv. he shows that his motives to believe, were fame, celebrity, consent, antiquity. And seeing this tradition, this consent, this antiquity, did as fully and powerfully move him not to believe Manichaeus, as to believe the gospel (the christian tradition being as full against Manichaeus, as it was for the gospel) therefore he did well to conclude upon these grounds, that he had as much reason to disbelieve Manichaeus, as to believe the gospel. Now if you can truly say, that the same fame, celebrity, consent, antiquity, that the same universal and original tradition lies against Luther and Calvin, as did against Manichaeus, you may do well to apply the argument against them, otherwise it will be to little purpose to substitute their names instead of Manichaeus, unless you can shew the thing agrees to them as well as him. 98. If you say, that St. Augustine speaks here of the authority of the present church, abstracted from consent with the ancient ; and therefore you, seeing you have the present church on your side against Luther and Calvin, as St. Augustine against Mani- chaeus, may urge the same words against them which St. Augustine did against him, — 99. I answer, first, that it is a vain presumption of yours, that the catholic church is of your side. Secondly, that if St. Augus- tine speak here of that present church, which moved him to believe the gospel, without consideration of the antiquity of it, and its both personal and doctrinal succession from the apostles; his argument will be like a buskin, that will serve any leg: it will serve to keep an arian or a Grecian from being a Roman catholic, as well as a catholic from being an arian or a Grecian : inasmuch as the arians and Grecians did pretend to the title of catholics and the church, as much as the papists now do. If then you should have come to an ancient Goth or Vandal, whom, the arians converted to Christianity, and should have moved him to your religion ; might he not say the very same words to you as St. Augustine to the Manichaeans 1 "I would not believe the gospel, unless the authority of the church did move me. Them, therefore, •whom I obeyed, saying, believe the gospel, why should I not obey, saying to me, do not believe the Homoousians? Choose what thou pleasest : if thou shalt say, believe the arians, they warn me not to give any credit to you: if therefore I believe them, I cannot believe thee. If thou say, do not believe the arians, thou shalt not do well to force me to the faith of the Homoousians, because by the preaching of the arians, I believed the gospel itself. If you say, you do well to believe them, commending the gospel, but you did not well to believe them, discommending the Homoousians: dost thou think me so very foolish, that without any reason at all, 144 Scripture the only Rule I should believe what thou wilt, and not believe what thou wilt not ?" It were easy to put these words into the mouth of a Gre- cian, Abyssine, Georgian, or any other of any religion. And I pray, bethink yourselves what you would say in such a case, and imagine that we say the very same to you. 100. Whereas you ask — whether protestants do not perfectly resemble those men to whom St. Augustine spake, when they will have men to believe the Roman church delivering scripture, but not to believe her condemning Luther 1 — I demand again, whether you be well in your wits to say, that protestants would have men believe the Roman church delivering scripture, whereas they ac- cuse her to deliver many books for scripture which are not so? And do not bid men to receive any book which she delivers, for that reason, because she delivers it; and, if you meant only, protestants will have men to believe some books to be scripture which the Roman church delivers for such, may not we then ask as you do, do not papists perfectly resemble these men, which will have men believe the church of England delivering scripture, but not to be- lieve her condemning the church of Rome ? 101. And whereas you say — St. Augustine may seem to have spoken prophetically against protestants, when he said, " Why should I not most diligently inquire what Christ commanded, of them before all others, by whose authority I was moved to believe, that Christ commanded any good thing?" — I answer, until you can shew, that protestants believe that Christ commanded any good thing, that is, that they believe the truth of christian religion, upon the authority of the church of Rome, this place must be wholly impertinent to your purpose, which is to make protestants believe your church to be the infallible expounder of scriptures and judge of controversies. Nay, rather, is it not directly against your purpose ? For why may not a member of the church of England, who received his baptism, education, and faith, from the ministry of this church, say just so to you as St. Augustine here to the Manichees ? Why should not I most diligently inquire what Christ commanded, of them (the church of England) before all others, by whose authority I was moved to believe, that Christ commanded any good thing ? Can you, F. or K., or whosoever you are, better declare to me what he said, whom I would not have thought to have been, or to be, if the belief thereof had been re- commended by you to me ? This, therefore (that Christ Jesus did those miracles, and taught that doctrine, which is contained evi- dently in the undoubted books of the New Testament), I believed, by fame, strengthened with celebrity and consent (even of those which in other things are at infinite variance one with another) ; and lastly,- by antiquity (which gives an universal and a constant attestation to them) ; but every one may see that you, so few (in comparison of all those upon whose consent we ground our belief of scripture), so turbulent, that you damn all to the fire, and to hell, that any ways differ from you ; that you profess it is lawful for you, to use violence and power whensoever you can have it, for the planting of your own doctrine, and extirpation of the contrary : whereby to judge of Controversies. 145 lastly, so new in many of your doctrines, as in the lawfulness and expedience of debarring the laity of the sacramental cup, the law- fulness and expedience of your Latin service, transubstantiation, indulgences, purgatory, the pope's infallibility, his authority over kings, &c. So new, I say, in comparison of the undoubted books of scripture, which evidently containeth, or rather is our religion, and the sole and adequate object of our faith : I say, every one may see that you, so few, so turbulent, so new, can produce no- thing deserving authority (with wise and considerate men). What madness is this ? Believe then the consent of christians, which are now. and have been ever since Christ in the world, that we ought to believe Christ ; but learn of us what Christ said, which contradict and damn all other parts of Christendom. Why, I be- seech you? Surely if they were not at all, and could not teach me any thing, I would more easily persuade myself, that I were not to believe in Christ, than that I should learn any thing concerning him, from any other, than them by whom I believed him ; at least, than that I should learn what his religion was from you, who have wronged so exceedingly his miracles and his doctrine, by forging so evidently so many false miracles for the confirmation of your new doctrine, which might give us just occasion, had we no other assurance of them but your authority, to suspect the true ones. Who, with forging so many false stories, and false authors, have taken a fair way to make the faith of all stories questionable, if we had no other ground for our belief of them but your authority ; who have brought in doctrines plainly and directly contrary to that which you confess to be the word of Christ, and which, for the most part, make either for the honour or profit of the teachers of them ; which (if there were no difference between the christian and the Roman church) would be very apt to make suspicious men believe, that christian religion was a human invention, taught by some cunning impostors, only to make themselves rich and power- ful ; who make a profession of corrupting all sorts of authors — a ready course to make it justly questionable, whether any remain uncorrupted. For if you take this authority upon you, upon the six ages last past, how shall we know, that the church of that time did not usurp the same authority upon the authors of the six last ages before them, and so upwards, until we come to Christ him- self ? Whose questioned doctrines, none of them came from the fountain of apostolic tradition, but have insinuated themselves into the streams, by little and little ; some in one age, and some in another ; some more anciently, some more safely ; and some yet are embryos, yet hatching, and in the shell : as the pope's infalli- bility, the blessed virgin's immaculate conception, the pope's power over the temporalities of kings, the doctrine of predetermination, &c, all which yet are, or in time may be, imposed upon christians under the title of original and apostolical tradition ; and that with that necessity, that they are told, they were as good believe no- thing at all, as not believe these things to have come from the apostles, which they know to have been brought in but yesterday, which whether it be not a ready and likely way to make men con- ic 13 146 Scripture the only Rule elude thus with themselves: — I am told, that I were as good believe nothing at all, as believe some points which the church teacheth me, and not others; and some things which she teacheth to be ancient and certain, I plainly see to be new and false ; there- fore I will believe nothing at all. — Whether, I say, the aforesaid grounds be not a ready and likely way to make men conclude thus, and whether this conclusion be not too often made in Italy and Spain, and France, and in England too, I leave it to the judgment of those that have wisdom and experience. Seeing therefore the Roman church is so far from being a sufficient foundation for our belief in Christ, that it is in sundry regards a dangerous temptation against it ; why should not I much rather conclude, seeing we re- ceive not the knowledge of Christ and scriptures from the church of Rome, neither from her must we take his doctrine, or the inter- pretation of scripture. 102. Ad. §. 19. In this number, this argument is contained. — The judge of controversies ought to be intelligible to learned and unlearned : the scripture is not so, and the church is so ; therefore the church is the judge, and not the scripture. 103. To this I answer — As to be understandable is a condi- tion requisite to a judge, so is not that alone sufficient to make a judge ; otherwise you might make yourself judge of controversies, by arguing, the scripture is not intelligible by all, but I am ; there- fore I am judge of controversies. If you say, your intent was to conclude against the scripture, and not for the church : I demand why then, but to delude the simple with sophistry did you say in the close of this section — Such is the church, and the scripture is not such? — but that you would leave it to them, to infer in the end (which indeed was more than you undertook in the beginning) ; therefore the church is judge, and the scripture not. I say, sec- ondly, That you still run upon a false supposition, that God hath appointed some judge of all controversies, that may happen among christians about the sense of obscure texts of scripture ; whereas he hath left every one to his liberty herein, in those words of St. Paul — Quisque abundet in sensu suo, &c. I say, thirdly, whereas some protestants make the scripture judge of controversies, that they have the authority of fathers to warrant their manner of speaking; as of Optatus.* 104. But, speaking truly and properly, the scripture is not a judge, nor can be, but only a sufficient rule for those to judge by, that believe it to be the word of God (as the church of England and the church of Rome both do) what they are to believe, and what they are not to believe. I say sufficiently perfect, and sufficiently intelligible, in things necessary, to all that have understanding, whether they be learned or unlearned. And my reason hereof is convincing and demonstrative, because nothing is necessary to be believed, but what is plainly revealed. For to say, that when a place of scripture, by reason of ambiguous terms, lies indifferent between divers senses, whereof one is true, and the other is false, * Contra. Parmen. 1. 5, in Prin. whereby to judge of Controversies. 147 that God obliges men, under pain of damnation, not to mistake through error and human frailty, is to make God a tyrant ; and to say, that he requires us certainly to attain that end, for the attain- ing whereof we have no certain means ; which is to say, that, like Pharaoh, he gives no straw, and requires brick; that he reaps where he sows not ; that he gathers where he strews not ; that he will not be pleased with our utmost endeavours to please him, without full, and exact, and never-failing performance ; that his will is, we should do what he knows we cannot do ; that he wm not accept of us, according to that which we have, but require4h of us what we have not. Which, whether it can consist with his goodness, with his wisdom, and with his word, I leave it to hohest men to judge. If I should send a servant to Paris, or Rome, or Jerusalem, and he using his utmost diligence not to mistake his way, yet notwithstanding, meeting often with such places where the road is divided into several ways, whereof every one is as likely to be true, and as likely to be false, as any other, should at length mistake, and go out of the way, would not any man say, that I were an impotent, foolish, and unjust master, if I should be of- fended with him for so doing ? and shall we not tremble to impute that to God, which we would take in foul scorn if it were imputed to ourselves ? Certainly, I, for my part, fear I should not love God, if I should think so strangely of him. 105. Again, when you say — that unlearned and ignorant men cannot understand scripture — I would desire you to come out of the clouds, and tell us what you mean : whether that they cannot understand all scripture, or that they cannot understand any scrip- ture, or that they cannot understand so much as is sufficient for their direction to heaven. If the first, I believe the learned are in the same case. If the second, every man's experience will confute you ; for, who is there that is not capable of a sufficient under- standing of the story, the precepts, the promises, and the threats of the gospel ? If the third, that they may understand something, but not enough for their salvations: I ask you, first, Why then doth St. Paul say to Timothy, the scriptures are able to make him wise unto salvation? Why doth St. Augustine say — Ea qua. mani- feste posita stint in sacris seripturis, omnia continent quce pertinent ad jidem, moresque vivendi? Why does every one of the four evan- gelists entitle their book, The Gospel, if any necessary and essential part of the gospel were left out of it? Can we imagine that either they omitted something necessary out of ignorance, not knowing it to be necessary ? or, knowing it to be so, maliciously concealed it ? or, out of negligence, did the work they have undertaken by halves? If none of these things can without blasphemy be imputed to them, considering they were assisted by the Holy Ghost in this work, then certainly it most evidently follows, that every one of them writ the whole gospel of Christ ; I mean, all the essential and necessary parts of it. So that if we had no other book of scripture, but one of them alone, we should not want any thing necessary to salvation. And what one of them hath more than another, it is only profitable and not necessary : necessary indeed to be k2 1 48 Scripture the only Rule believed, because revealed ; but not therefore revealed, because necessary to be believed. 106. Neither did they write only for the learned, but for all men. This being one special means of the preaching of the gospel, which was commanded to be preached, not only to learned men, but to all men. And therefore, unless we will imagine the Holy Ghost and them to have been wilfully wanting to their own desire and purpose, we must conceive, that they intended to speak plain, even to the capacity of the simplest ; touching all things necessary to be published by them, and believed by us. 107. And whereas you pretend — it is so easy, and obvious both for the learned and the ignorant both to know, which is the church, and what are decrees of the church, and what is the sense of the decrees ; I say, this is a vain pretence. 108. For, first, How shall an unlearned man, whom you have supposed now ignorant of scripture, how shall he know which of all the societies of christians is indeed the church ? You will say, perhaps — He must examine them by the notes of the church, which are perpetual visibility, succession, conformity with the ancient church, &c. But how shall he know, first, that these are the notes of the church, unless by scripture, which, you say, he understands not ? You may say, perhaps, he may be told so. But seeing men may deceive, and be deceived, and their words are no demonstra- tions, how shall he be assured, that what they say is true ? so that at the first he meets with an impregnable difficulty, and cannot know the church but by such notes, which whether they be the notes of the church he cannot possibly know. But let us suppose this isthmus digged through, and that he is assured these are the notes of the true church ; how can he possibly be a competent judge, which society of christians hath title to these notes, and which hath not? seeing this trial of necessity requires a great sufficiency of knowledge of the monuments of christian antiquity, which no un- learned man can have, because he that hath it cannot be unlearned. As for example, how shall he possibly be able to know whether the church of Rome hath had a perpetual succession of visible pro- fessors, which held always the same doctrine which they now hold, without holding any thing to the contrary ; unless he hath first examined, what was the doctrine of the church in the first age, what in the second, and so forth ? And whether this be not a more difficult work, than to stay at the first age, and to examine the church by the conformity of her doctrine with the doctrine of the first age, every man of ordinary understanding may judge. Let us imagine him advanced a step further, and to know which is the church ; how shall he know what the church hath decreed, seeing the church hath not been so careful in keeping her decrees, but that many are lost, and many corrupted ? Besides, when even the learned among you are not agreed concerning divers things, whether they be de fide, or not, how shall the unlearned do ? Then for the sense of the decrees, how can he be more capable of the understanding of them, than of plain texts of scripture, which you will not suffer him to understand 1 especially seeing the de- whereby to judge of Controversies. 149 erees of divers popes and councils are conceived so obscurely, that the learned cannot agree about the sense of them : and then they are written all in such languages, which the ignorant understand not, and therefore must of necessity rely herein upon the uncertain and fallible authority of some particular men, who inform them, that there is such a decree. And if the decrees were translated into vulgar languages, why the translators should not be as fal- lible as you say the translators of scripture are, who can possiblv imagine ? 109. Lastly, how shall an unlearned man, or indeed any man, be assured of the certainty of that decree, the certainty whereof depends upon suppositions, which are impossible to be known whether they be true or no? for it is not the decree of a council, unless it be confirmed by a true pope. Now the pope cannot be a true pope, if he came in by simony ; which whether he did or no, who can answer me ? he cannot be a true pope, unless he were baptized ; and baptized he was not, unless the minister had due intention. So likewise he cannot be a true pope, unless he were rightly ordained priest, and that again depends upon the ordainer's secret intention, and also upon his having the episcopal character. All which things, as I have formerly proved, depend upon so manv uncertain suppositions, that no human judgment can possibly be resolved in them. I conclude, therefore, that not the learnedest man amongst you all, no, not the pope himself, can, according to the grounds you go upon, have any certainty, that any decree of any council is good and valid, and consequently, not any assurance, that it is indeed the decree of a council. 110. Ad. §. 20. If by a private spirit, you mean a particular per- suasion, that a doctrine is true, which some men pretend, but cannot prove to come from the Spirit of God ; I say, to refer con- troversies to scripture, is not to refer them to this kind of private spirit. For is there not a manifest difference between saying, the Spirit of God tells me, that this is the meaning of such a text (which no man can possibly know to be true, it being a secret thing) and between saying — these and these reasons I have to show, that this or that doctrine, or that this or that is the meaning of such a scripture ? reason being a public and certain thing, and exposed to all men's trial and examination. But now, if by private spirit you understand every man's particular reason, then your first and second inconvenience will presently be reduced to one, and shortly to none at all. 111. Ad. §. 20. And does not also giving the office of judicature to the church, come to confer it upon every particular man? for, before any man believes the church infallible, must he not have reason to induce him to believe it to be so? and must he not judge of those reasons, whether they be indeed good and firm, or cap- tious and sophistical? or, would you have all men believe all your doctrine upon the church's infallibility, and the church's infalli- bility they know not why ? 112. Secondly, supposing they are to be guided by the church, they must use their own particular reason to find out which is the church. And, to that purpose, you yourselves give a great many 13* 150 Scripture the only Rule notes, which you pretend first to be certain notes of the church, and then to be peculiar to your church, and agreeable to none else ; but you do not so much as pretend, that either of those pre- tences is evident of itself, and therefore you go about to prove them both by reasons ; and those reasons, I hope, every particular man is to judge of, whether they do indeed conclude and convince that which they are alleged for ; that is, that these marks are indeed certain notes of the church ; and then, that your church hath them, and no other. 113. One of these notes, indeed the only note of a true and un- corrupted church, is conformity with antiquity ; I mean, the most ancient church of all, that is, the primitive and apostolic. Now, how is it possible any man should examine your church by this note, but he must by his own particular judgment find out what was the doctrine of the primitive church, and what is the doctrine of the present church, and be able to answer all these arguments which are brought to prove repugnance between them ? Otherwise, he shall but pretend to make use of this note for the finding the true church, but indeed make no use of it, but receive the church at a venture, as the most of you do, not one in a hundred being able to give any tolerable reason for it. So that instead of reducing men to particular reasons, you reduce them to none at all, but to chance, and passion, and prejudice, and such other ways, which if they lead one to the truth, they lead hundreds, nay thousands, to false- hood. But it is a pretty thing to consider, how these men can blow hot and cold out of the same mouth to serve several purposes. Is there hope of gaining a proselyte ? Then they will tell you— God hath given every man reason to follow ; and " if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch:" that it is no good reason for a man's religion, that he was born and brought up in it ; for then a Turk should have as much reason to be a Turk, as a christian to be a christian : that every man hath a judgment of discretion ; which, if they will make use of, they shall easily find, that the true church hath always such and such marks, and that their church hath them, and no others but theirs. But then, if any of theirs be persuaded to a sincere and sufficient trial of their church, even by their own notes of it, and to try whether they be indeed so conformable to antiquity as they pretend, then their note is changed. You must not use your own reason, nor your judg- ment, but refer all to the church, and believe her to be conformable to antiquity, though they have no reason for it ; nay, though they have evident reason to the contrary. For my part, I am certain, that God hath given us our reason, to discern between truth and falsehood; and he that makes not this use of it, but believes things he knows not why ; I say, it is by chance that he believes the truth, and not by choice ; and that I cannot but fear, that God will not accept of this " sacrifice of fools." 114. But you that would not have men follow their reason, what would you have them follow? their passions? or pluck out their eyes, and go blindfold ? No, you say, you would have them follow authority. On God's name let them ; we also would have them follow authority ; for it is upon the authority of universal tradition, whereby to judge of Controversies. 151 that we would have them believe scripture. But then, as for the authority which you would have them follow, you will let them see reason why they should follow it. And is not this to go a little about ? To leave reason for a short turn, and then to come to it again, and to do that which you condemn in others? It being in- deed a plain impossibility for any man to submit his reason but to reason ; for he that doth it to authority, must of necessity think himself to have greater reason to believe that authority. There- fore the confession cited by Breerly, you need not think to have been extorted from Luther and the rest. It came very freely from them, and what they say you practise as much as they. 115. And whereas you say, that — a protestant admits of fathers, councils, church, as far as they agree with scripture, which upon the matter is himself: — I say, you admit neither of them, nor the scripture itself, but only so far as it agrees with your church ; and your church you admit, because you think you have reason to do so : so that by you as well as protestants all is finally resolved into your own reason. 116. Nor do heretics only, but Romish catholics also, set up as many judges as there are men and women in the christian world. For do not your men and women judge your religion to be true, before they believe it, as well as the men and women of other reli- gions? Oh, but you say — they receive it, not because they think it agreeable to scripture, but because the church tells them so. But then I hope they believe the church, because their own reason tells them they are to do so. So that the difference between a papist and a protestant is this : not that the one judges, and the other does not judge, but that the one judges his guide to be infal- lible, the other his way to be manifest. This same pernicious doc- trine is taught by Brentius, Zanchius, Cartwright, and others. It is so in very deed : but it is taught also by some others, whom you little think of. It is taught by St. Paul, where he says, " Try all things; hold fast that which is good." It is taught by St. John, in these words : " Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits, whether they be of God or no." It is taught by St. Peter, in these: " Be ye ready to render a reason of the hope that is in you." Lastly, this very pernicious doctrine is taught by our Saviour, in these words: " If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch :" and, " Why of yourselves judge you not what is right ?" All which speeches, if they do not advise men to make use of their reason for . the choice of their religion, I must confess myself to understand nothing. Lastly, not to be infinite, it is taught by Mr. Knot him- self, not in one page only, or chapter of his book, but all his book over; the very writing and publishing whereof supposes this for cer- tain, that the readers are to be judges, whether his reasons, which he brings, be strong and convincing, of which sort we have hitherto met with none ; or else captious, or impertinences, as indifferent men shall (as I suppose) have cause to judge them. 117. But you demand, — what good statesmen would they be, who should ideate, or fancy, such a commonwealth as these men have framed to themselves a church ? Truly if this be all the fault 152 Scripture the only Rule they have, that they say, every man is to use his own judgment in the choice of his religion, and not to believe this or that sense ol scripture, upon the bare authority of any learned man or men, when he conceives he hath reasons to the contrary which are of more weight than their authority ; I know no reason but, notwithstanding all this, they might be as good statesmen as any of the society. But what hath this to do with commonwealths, where men are bound only to external obedience unto the laws and judgment of courts, but not to an internal approbation of them, no, nor to con- ceal their judgment of them, if they disapprove them? As, if I conceived I had reason to mislike the law of punishing simple theft with death, as Sir Thomas More did, I might profess lawfully my judgment ; and represent my reasons to the king or commonwealth in a parliament, as Sir Thomas More did, without committing any fault or fearing any punishment. 118. To the place of St. Augustine wherewith this paragraph is concluded, I shall need give no other reply, but only to desire you to speak like an honest man, and to say, whether it be all one for a man to allow and disallow in every scripture what he pleases? which is either to dash out of scripture such texts or such chapters, because they cross his opinion : or to say (which is worse) though they be scripture, they are not true? whether, I say, for a man thus to allow and disallow in scripture what he pleases, be all one, and no greater fault, than to allow that sense of scripture which he con- ceives to be true and genuine, and deduced out of the words, and to disallow the contrary? for God's sake, sir, tell me plainly: in those texts of scripture, which you allege for the infallibility of your church, do not you allow what sense you think true, and disallow the contrary ? and do you not this, by the direction of your private reason? if you do, why do you condemn it in others? if you do not, I pray you tell me, what direction you follow, or whether you follow none at all? if none at all, this is like drawing lots, or throwing the dice, for the choice of a religion : if any other, I beseech you tell me what it is. Perhaps you will say, the church's authority ; and that will be to dance finely in a round, thus — to believe the church's infallible authority, because the scriptures avouch it ; and to believe, that scriptures say and mean so, because they are so expounded by the church. Is not this for a father to beget his son, and the son to beget his father ? for a foundation to support the house, and the house to support the foundation ? would not Campian have cried out at it, Ecce quos gyros, quos Mceandros ! And to what end was this going about, when you might as well at first have concluded the church infallible, because she says so, as thus to put in scripture for a mere stale, and to say the church is infallible, because the scrip- ture says so, and the scripture means so, because the church says so, which is infallible ? Is it not most evident therefore to every intelligent man, that you are enforced of necessity to do that your- self, which so tragically you declaim against in others ? The church, you say, is infallible ; 1 am very doubtful of it : how shall I know it ? The scripture, you say, affirms it, as in the 59th of Isaiah, " My spirit that is in thee," &c. Well, I confess I find there these words, but whereby to judge of Controversies. 153 I am still doubtful whether they be spoken of the church of Christ ; and if they be, whether they mean as you pretend. You say, the church says so, which is infallible. Yea, but that is the question, and therefore not to be begged, but proved : neither is it so evident, as to need no proof; otherwise, why brought you this text to prove it? Nor is it of such a strange quality, above all other propositions, as to be able to prove itself. What then remains, but that you say, reasons drawn out of the circumstances of the text will evince, that this is the sense of it. Perhaps they will : but reasons cannot convince me unless I judge of them by my reason ; and for every man or woman to rely on that, in the choice of their religion, and in the interpreting of scripture, you say is a horrible absurdity •; and therefore must neither make use of your own in this matter, nor desire me to make use of it. 119. But universal tradition (you say, and so do I too) is of itself credible ; and that hath, in all ages, taught the church's infallibility with full consent. — If it have, I am ready to believe it; but that it hath, I hope you would not have me take upon your word ; for that were to build myself upon the church, and the church upon you. Let then the tradition appear ; for a secret tradition is somewhat like a silent thunder. You will perhaps produce, for the con- firmation of it, some sayings of some fathers, who in every age taught this doctrine (as Gualterius in his Chronology undertakes to do; but with so ill success, that 1 heard an able man of your religion profess, that in the first three centuries, there was not one authority pertinent) : but how will you warrant that none of them teach the contrary ? Again, how shall I be assured, that the places have indeed this sense in them, seeing there is not one father for five hundred years after Christ, that does say in plain terms, the church of Rome is infallible? What, shall we believe your church, that this is their meaning? But this will be again to go into the circle, which made us giddy before ; to prove this church infallible, because tradition says so ; tradition to say so, because the fathers say so ; the fathers to say so, because the church says so, which is infallible : yea, but reason will show this to be the meaning of them. Yes, if we may use our reason, and rely upon it: otherwise, as light shows nothing to the blind, or to him that uses not his eyes, so reason cannot prove any thing to him, that either hath not or useth not his reason to judge of them. 120. Thus you have excluded yourself from all proof of your church's infallibility from scripture or tradition : and if you fly, lastly, to reason itself for succour, may it not justly say to you as Jephtha said to his brethren, " Ye have cast me out, and banished me, and do you now come to me for succour !" But if there be no certainty in reason, how shall I be assured of the certainty of those which you allege for this purpose? Either I may judge of them, or not; if not, why do you propose them ? If I may, why do you say 1 may not, and make it such a monstrous absurdity, that men in the choice of their religion should make use of their reason ? which yet, without all question, none but unreasonable men can deny to have been the chiefest end why reason was given them. 154 Scripture the only Rule 121. Ad. §. 22. " A heretic he is (saith D. Potter) who opposeth any truth, which to be a divine revelation he is convinced in con- science by any means whatsoever ; be it by a preacher or layman ; be it by reading scriptures, or hearing them read." And from hence you infer, that he makes all these safe propounders of faith. — A most strange and illogical deduction ! For, may not a private man by evident reason convince another man, that such or such a doctrine is divine revelation ; and yet though he be a true propounder in this point, yet propound another thing falsely, and without proof, and consequently, not to be a safe propounder in every point? Your preachers in their sermons, do they not propose to men divine re- velations ? and do they not sometimes convince men in conscience, by evident proof from scripture, that the things they speak are divine revelations? And whosoever, being thus convinced, should oppose this divine revelation, should he not be a heretic, according to your own grounds, for calling God's own truth into question ? And would you think yourself well dealt with, if I should collect from hence, that you make every preacher a safe, that is, infallible, propounder of faith ? Be the means of proposal what it will, suffi- cient or insufficient, worthy of credit, or not worthy; though it were if it were possible, the barking of a dog, or the chirping of a bird ; or were it the discourse of the devil himself, yet if I be, I will not say convinced, but persuaded, though falsely, that it is a divine reve- lation, and shall deny to believe it, I shall be a formal, though not a material, heretic. For he that believes, though falsely, any thing to be divine revelation, and yet will not believe it to be true, must of necessity believe God to be false ; which, according to your own doctrine, is the formality of a heretic. 122. And how it can be any way advantageous to civil govern- ment, that men without warrant from God should usurp a tyranny over other men's consciences, and prescribe unto them, without reason, and sometimes against reason, what they shall believe, you must show us plainer, if you desire we should believe. For to say — Verily I do not see but it must be so — is no good demonstration ; for whereas you say — that a man may be a passionate and seditious creature ; from whence you would have us infer, that he may make use of his interpretation to satisfy his passion, and raise sedi- tion : there were some colour in this consequence, if we (as you do) made private men infallible interpreters for others ; for then indeed they might lead disciples after them, and use them as instruments for their vile purposes. But when we say, they can only interpret for themselves, what harm they can do by their passionate or sedi- tious interpretations, but only endanger both their temporal and eternal happiness, I cannot imagine ; for though we deny the pope or church of Rome to be an infallible judge, yet we do not deny, but that there are judges which may proceed with certainty enough against all seditious persons, such as draw men to disobedience, either against church or state, as well as against rebels, and trai- tors, and thieves, and murderers. 123. Ad. §. 23. The next §. in the beginning argues thus : — For many ages there was no scripture in the world ; and for many whereby to judge of Controversies. 155 more there was none in many places of the world ; yet man wanted not then and there some certain direction what to believe ; therefore there was then an infallible judge. — Just as if I should say, York is not my way from Oxford to London, therefore Bristol is ; or a dog is not a horse, therefore he is a man : as if God had no other ways of revealing himself to men, but only by scripture and an infallible church. *St. Chrysostom and Isidorus Pelusiota conceived, he might use other means. And St. Paul telleth us that the yvwtfruv rod ©sou, "might be known by his works;" and that they had " the law written in their hearts." Either of these ways might make some faithful men, without either necessity of scripture or church. 124. But Dr. Potter says, you say — In the Jewish church there was a living judge, endowed with an absolute infallible direction in cases of moment ; as all points belonging to divine faith are." And where was that infallible direction in the Jewish church when they should have received Christ for their Messias and re- fused him ? Or, perhaps this was not a case of moment. Dr. Potter indeed might say very well, not that the high priest was infallible (for certainly he was not), but that his determination was to be of necessity obeyed, though for the justice of it there was no necessity that it should be believed. Besides, it is one thing to say, that the living judge in the Jewish church had an in- fallible direction ; another, that he was necessitated to follow this direction. This is the privilege which you challenge. But it is that, not this, which the doctor attributes to the Jews. As a man may truly say, the wise men had an infallible direction to Christ, without saying or thinking they were constrained to follow it and could not do otherwise. 125. But either the church retains still her infallibility, or it was divested of it upon the receiving of holy scripture, which is ab- surd : — an argument methinks like this : either you have horns, or you have lost them ; but you never lost them, therefore you have them still. If you say you never had horns ; so say I, for aught appears by your reasons, the church never had infallibility. 126. But some scriptures were received in some places, and not in others: therefore if scriptures were the judge of contro- versies, some churches had one judge, and some another. — And what great inconvenience is there in that, that one part of Eng- land should have one judge, and another another: especially seeing the books of scripture, which were received by those that received fewest, had as much of the doctrine of Christianity in them, as they all had which were received by any : all the necessary parts of the gospel being contained in every one of the four gospels, as I have proved ? So that they which had all the books of the New Testament, had nothing superfluous ; for it was not superfluous, *See Chrysost. Hom.l, in Mat. Isidor. Pelus. I. 3, ep. 106; and also Basil in Psal. xxviii. and then you shall confess, that by other means besides these, God did commu- nicate himself unto men, and made them receive and understand his law. See also, to the same purpose, Heb. i. 1. 156 Scripture the only Rule but profitable, that the same thing should be said divers times and be testified by divers witnesses; and they, that had but one of the four gospels, wanted nothing necessary : and therefore it is vainly inferred by you, that — with months and years, as new canonical scriptures grew to be published, the church altered her rule of faith, and judge of controversies. 127. Heresies, you say, would arise after the apostles' time and after the writing of scriptures; these cannot be discovered, con- demned, and avoided, unless the church be infallible ; therefore there must be a church infallible. — But I pray tell me, why cannot heresies be sufficiently discovered, condemned, and avoided, by them which believe scripture to be the rule of faith ? If scripture be sufficient to inform us what is the faith, it must of necessity be also sufficient to teach us what is heresy ; seeing heresy is nothing but a manifest deviation from, and an opposition to, the faith. That which is straight will plainly teach us what is crooked : and one contrary cannot but manifest the other. If any one should deny, that there is a God ; that this God is omnipotent, omni- scient, good, just, true, merciful, a rewarder of them that seek him, a punisher of them that obstinately offend him ; that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and the Saviour of the world; that it is he, by obedience to whom men must look to be saved : if any man should deny either his birth, or passion, or resurrec- tion, or ascension, or sitting at the right hand of God ; his having all power given him in heaven and earth; that it is he whom God hath appointed to be judge of the quick and dead ; that all men shall rise again at the last day ; that they which believe and repent shall be saved; that they which do not believe and repent shall be damned; if a man should hold that either the keeping of the mosaical law is necessary to salvation ; or that good works are not necessary to salvation : in a word, if any man should obstinately contradict the truth of any thing plainly de- livered in scripture, who does not see that every one, which be- lieves the scripture, hath a sufficient means to discover, and condemn, and avoid that heresy without any need of an infallible guide? If you say, that the obscure places of scripture contain matters of faith — I answer, that it is a matter of faith to believe, that the sense of them, whatsoever it is, which was intended by God, is true; for he that doth not so, calls God's truth into question. But to believe this or that to be the true sense of them, or, to believe the true sense of them, and to avoid the false, is not necessary either to faith or salvation. For if God would have had his meaning in these places certainly known, how could it stand with his wisdom, to be so wanting to his own will and end, as to speak obscurely ? Or, how can it consist with his justice to require of men to know certainly the meaning of those words, which he himself hath not revealed ? Suppose there were an absolute monarch, that, in his own absence from one of his kingdoms, had written laws for the government of it, some very plainly, and some very ambiguously and obscurely, and his whereby to judge of Controversies. 157 subjects should keep those that were plainly written with all ex- actness, and for those that were obscure use their best diligence to find his meaning in them, and obey them according to the sense of them which they conceived ; should this king either with justice or wisdom be offended with these subjects, if by reason of the obscurity of them they mistook the sense of them, and failed of performance by reason of their error ? 128. But it is more useful and fit (you say) for deciding of con- troversies, to have, besides an infallible rule to go by, a living in- fallible judge to determine them : and from hence you conclude, that certainly there is such a judge. But why then may not another say, that it is yet more useful for many excellent purposes that all the patriarchs should be infallible, than that the pope only should ? Another, that it would be yet more useful, that all the archbishops of every province should be so, than that the patri- archs only should be so. Another, that it would be yet more use- ful if all the bishops of every diocess were so. Another, that it would be yet more available, that all parsons of every parish should be so. Another, that it would be yet more excellent, if all the fathers of families were so. And, lastly, another, that it were much more to be desired, that every man and every woman were so ; just as much as the prevention of controversies is better than the decision of them ; and the prevention of heresies better than the condemnation of them; and upon this ground conclude, by your own very consequence, that not only a general council, nor only the pope, but all the patriarchs, archbishops, bishops, pastors, fathers, nay, all the men in the world are infallible : if you say now, as I am sure you will, that this conclusion is most gross and absurd, against sense and experience, then must also the ground be false from which it evidently and undeniably follows, viz. That that course of dealing with men seems always more fit to divine providence, which seems most fit to human reason. 129. And so, likewise, that there should men succeed the apostles, which could show themselves to be their successors, by doing of miracles, by speaking all kinds of languages, by de- livering men to Satan as St. Paul did Hymenasus, and the inces- tuous Corinthian : it is manifest in human reason, it were im- comparably more fit and useful for the decision of controversies, than that the successor of the apostles should have none of these gifts, and for want of the signs of apostleship, be justly ques- tionable, whether he be his successor or no ; and will you now con- clude, that the popes have the gift of doing miracles as well as the apostles had 1 130. It were in all reason very useful and requisite that the pope should, by the assistance of God's Spirit, be freed from the vices and passions of men, lest otherwise, the authority given him for the good of the church, he might employ (as divers popes you well know have done) to the disturbance and oppression, and mischief of it. And will you conclude from hence, that the popes are not subject to the sins and passions of other men? that there never have been ambitious, covetous, lustful, tyrannous popes ? 14 158 Scripture the only Rule 131. Who sees not that for men's direction it were much more beneficial for the church, that infallibility should be settled in the pope's person, than in a general council ; that so the means of deciding controversies might be speedy, easy, and perpetual : whereas that of general councils is not so. And will you hence infer, that not the church representative, but the pope, is indeed the infallible judge of controversies? Certainly, if you should, the Sorbonne doctors would not think this a good conclusion. 132. It had been very commodious (one would think) that seeing either God's pleasure was, the scripture should be translated, or else in his providence he knew it would be so, that he had ap- pointed some men for this business, and by his Spirit assisted them in it, that so we might have translations as authentical as the ori- ginal : yet you see God did not think fit to do so. 133. It had been very commodious (one would think) that the scripture should have been, at least for all things necessary, a rule, plain and perfect ; and yet you say, it is both imperfect and obscure, even in things necessary. 134. It had been most requisite (one would think) that the copies of the bibles should have been preserved free from variety of read- ings, which make men very uncertain in many places, which is the word of God, and which is the error or presumption of man ; and yet we see God hath not thought fit so to provide for us. 135. Who can conceive, but that an apostolic interpretation of all the difficult places of scripture, would have been strangely be- neficial to the church, especially there being such danger in mis- taking the sense of them, as is by you pretended, and God in his providence foreseeing that the greatest part of christians would not accept of the pope for the judge of controversies ? And yet we see God hath not so ordered the matter. 136. Who doth not see, that supposing the bishop of Rome had been appointed head of the church, and judge of controversies, that it would have been infinitely beneficial to the church, perhaps as much as all the rest of the bible, that in some book of scripture, which was to be undoubtedly received, this one proposition had been set down in terms — The bishops of Rome shall be always monarchs of the church, and they either alone, or with their adhe- rents, the guides of faith, and the judges of controversies that shall arise amongst christians 1 This, if you deal ingenuously, you can- not but acknowledge ; for then all true christians would have sub- mitted to him, as willingly as to Christ himself; neither needed you and your fellows have troubled yourself to invent so many sophisms for the proof of it. There would have been no more doubt of it among christians, than there is of the nativity, passion, resurrection, or ascension of Christ. You were best now rub your forehead hard, and conclude upon us, that because this would have been so useful to have been done, therefore it is done. Or if you be (as I know you are) too ingenuous to say so, then must you ac- knowledge that the ground of your argument, which is the very ground of all these absurdities, is most absurd ; and that it is our duty to be humbly thankful for those sufficient, nay, abundant, whereby to judge of Controversies. 159 means of salvation, which God hath of his own goodness granted us ; and not conclude he hath done that which he hath not done, because, forsooth," in our vain judgments, it seems convenient he should have done so. 137. But you demand, what repugnance there is between infal- libility in the church, and existence of scripture, that the produc- tion of the one must be the destruction of the other? Out of which words I can frame no other argument for you than this: there is no repugnance between the scripture's existence and the church's infallibility; therefore the church is infallible. Which consequence will then be good, when you can shew that nothing can be untrue, but that only which is impossible; that whatsoever may be done, that also is done : which, if it were true, would con- clude both you and me to be infallible, as well as either your church or pope ; inasmuch as there is no more repugnance between the scripture's existence and our infallibility, than there is between theirs. 138. But if protestants will have the scripture alone for their judge, let them first produce some scripture, affirming that, by the entering thereof, infallibility went out of the church. This argu- ment, put in form, runs thus: no scripture affirms that, by the entering thereof, infallibility went out of the church; therefore there is an infallible church ; and therefore the scripture alone is not to judge, that is, the rule to judge by. But as no scripture affirms that, by the entering of it, infallibility went out of the church; so neither do we, neither have we any need to do so. But we say that it continued in the church, even together with the scriptures, so long as Christ and his apostles were living, and then departed ; God in his providence having provided a plain and infallible rule, to supply the defect of living and infallible guides. Certainly, if your cause were good, so great a wit as yours is, would devise bet- ter arguments to maintain it. We can shew no scripture affirming infallibility to have gone out of the church ; therefore it is infallible. Somewhat like his discourse that said, it could not be proved out of scripture that the king of Sweden was dead ; therefore he is still living. Methinks, in all reason, you that challenge privileges, and exemption from the condition of men, which is to be subject to er- ror ; you that, by virtue of this privilege, usurp authority over men's consciences, should produce your letters patent from the King of heaven, and show some express warrant for this authority you take upon you ; otherwise you know the rule is — Ubi contrarium non manifeste probatur, presumitur pro libertate. 139. But Dr. Potter may remember what himself teacheth, that the church is still endued with infallibility in points fundamental, and consequently, that infallibility in the church doth well agree with the truth, the sanctity, yea, with the sufficiency of scripture, for all matters necessary to salvation. Still your discourse is so far from hitting the white, that it roves quite beside the butt. You conclude that the infallibility of the church may well agree with the truth, the sanctity, the sufficiency of scripture. But what is this, but to abuse your reader with the proof of that which no man denies? The question is not, whether an infallible church might 160 Scripture the only Rule agree with scripture ; but whether there be an infallible church ? Jam die, posthume, de tribus capellis. Besides, you must know there is a wide difference between being infallible in fundamentals, and being an infallible guide even in fundamentals. Dr. Potter says, that the church is the former, that is, there shall be some men in the world, while the world lasts, which err not in fundamentals; for otherwise there should be no church. For to say, the church, while it is the church, may err in fundamentals, implies a contra- diction, and is all one as to say, the church, while it is the church, may not be the church. So that to say that the church is infallible in fundamentals, signifies no more but this : there shall be a church in the world for ever. But we utterly deny the church to be the latter ; for, to say so, were to oblige ourselves to find some certain society of men, of whom we might be certain, that they neither do nor can err in fundamentals, nor in declaring what is fundamental, what is not fundamental : and, consequently, to make any church an infallible guide in fundamentals, would be to make it infallible in all things which she proposes and requires to be believed. This, therefore, we deny both to your and all other churches of any one denomination, as the Greek, the Roman, the Abyssine ; that is, indeed, we deny it simply to any church ; for no church can possibly be fit to be a guide, but only a church of some certain denomination : for otherwise no man can possibly know which is the true church, but by a pre-examination of the doctrine controverted, and that were not to be guided by the church to the true doctrine, but by the true doctrine to the church. Hereafter, therefore, when you hear protestants say, the church is infallible in fundamentals, you must not conceive them as if they meant as you do, that some society of christians, which may be known by adhering to some one head, for example, the pope, or the bishop of Constantinople, is infallible in these things ; but only thus, that true religion shall never be so driven out of the world, but that it shall always, somewhere or other, have some that be- lieve and profess it, in all things necessary to salvation. 140. But you would therefore gladly know out of what text he imagines that the church, by the coming of scripture, was deprived of infallibility in some points, and not in others? And I also would gladly know, why you do thus frame to yourself vain imaginations, and then father them upon others ? We yield unto you, that there shall be a church which never erreth in some points, because (as we conceive) God hath promised so much ; but not that there shall be such a church, which doth or can err in no points, because we find not that God hath promised such a church ; and therefore may not promise such a one to ourselves. But for the church's being deprived by the scripture of infallibility in some points, and not in others, that is a wild notion of your own, which we have nothing to do with. 141. But he affirmeth, that the Jewish church retained infalli- bility in herself: and therefore it is unjustly and unworthily done of him to deprive the church of Christ of it. That the Jews had sometimes an infallible miraculous direction from God in some whereby to judge of Controversies. 161 cases of moment, he doth affirm, and had good warrant ; hut that the synagogue was absolutely infallible, he nowhere affirms ; and therefore it is unjustly and unworthily done of you to obtrude it upon him. And, indeed, how can the infallibility of the syna^o^ue be conceived, but only by settling it in the high priest, and the company adhering and subordinate unto him ? And whether the high priest was infallible, when he believed not Christ to be the Messias, but condemned and excommunicated them that so pro- fessed, and caused him to be crucified for saying so, I leave it to christians to judge. But then suppose God had been so pleased to do as he did not, to appoint the synagogue an infallible guide ; could you by your rules of logic constrain him to appoint such an one to christians also ; or say unto him, that in wisdom he could not do otherwise? Vain man, that will be thus always tying God to your imaginations ! It is well for us that he leaves us not with- out directions to him ; but if he will do this sometimes by living guides, sometimes by written rules, what is that to you ? May not he do what he will with his own ? 142. And whereas you say, for the further enforcing of this ar- gument, that there is greater reason to think the church should be infallible than the synagogue ; because to the synagogue all laws and ceremonies, &c. were more particularly and minutely delivered than in the New Testament is done, our Saviour leaving particulars to the determination of the church. But I pray walk not thus in generality, but tell us what particulars? If you mean particular rites and ceremonies, and orders for government, we grant it, and you know we do so. Our Saviour only hath left a general injunc- tion by St. Paul, " Let all things be done decently and in order." But what order is fittest, i. e. what time, what place, what manner, &c. is fittest ? That he hath left to the discretion of the governors of the church. But if you mean that he hath only concerning mat- ters of faith, the subject in question, prescribed in general, that we are to hear the church, and left it to the church to determine what particulars we are to believe, the church being nothing else but an aggregation of believers: this in effect is to say, he hath left it to all believers to determine what particulars they are to believe. Besides, it is so apparently false, that I wonder how you could con- tent yourself, or think we should be contented, with a bare saying, without any show or pretence of proof. 143. As for Dr. Potter's objection against this argument — That as well you might infer, that christians must have all one king, because the Jews had so. For aught I can perceive, notwithstand- ing any thing answered by you, it may stand still in force ; though the truth is, it is urged by him not against the infallibility, but the monarchy, of the church. For whereas you say, the disparity is very clear; he that should urge this argument for one monarch over the whole world, would say that this is to deny the conclu- sion, and reply unto you, that there is disparity as matters are now ordered, but that there should not be so : for that there was no more reason to believe that the ecclesiastical government of the Jews was a pattern for the ecclesiastical government of christians, l 14* 162 Scripture the only Rule than the civil of the Jews for the civil of the christians. He would tell you, that the church of Christ, and all christian commonwealths and kingdoms, are one and the same thing : and therefore he sees no reason why the synagogue should be a type and figure of the church, and not of the commonwealth. He would tell you, that as the church succeeded the Jewish synagogue, so christian princes should succeed the Jewish magistrates ; that is, the temporal governors of the church should be christians. He would tell you, that as the church is compared to a house, a kingdom, an army, a body, so all distinct kingdoms might and should be one army, one family, &e. and that it is not so, is the thing he complains of. And therefore you ought not to think it enough to say, it is not so ; but you should shew why it should not be so ; and why this argument will not follow — the Jews had one king, therefore all christians ought to have ; as well as this, the Jews had one high priest over them all, therefore all christians ought also to have. He might tell you, moreover, that the church may have one master, one general, one head, one king, and yet he not be the pope, but Christ. He might tell you, that you beg the question, in saying without proof that it is necessary to salvation, that all (whether christians or churches) have recourse to one church, if you mean by one church, one particular church, which is to govern and direct all others : and that, unless you mean so, you say nothing to the purpose. And besides, he might tell you, and that very truly, that it may seem altogether as available for the temporal good of christians to be under one temporal prince, or commonwealth, as for their salvation to be subordinate to one visible head: I say, as necessary, both for the prevention of the effusion of the blood of christians by christians, and for the defence of Christendom from the hostile in- vasions of Turks and pagans. And from all this he might infer, that though now, by the fault of men, there were in several king- doms several laws, governments, and powers; yet that it were much more expedient, that there were but one : nay, not only ex- pedient, but necessary, if once your ground be settled for a general rule — that what kind of government the Jews had, that the chris- tians must have. And, if you limit the generality of this proposi- tion, and frame the argument thus — what kind of ecclesiastical government the Jews had, that the christians must have : but they were governed by one high priest, therefore these must be so : he will say, that the first proposition of this syllogism is altogether as doubtful as the conclusion ; and therefore neither fit nor sufficient to prove it, until itself be proved. And then, besides that, there is as great reason to believe this, that what kind of civil government the Jews had, that the christians must have. And so Dr. Potter's objection remains still unanswered, that there is as much reason to conclude a necessity of one king over all christian kingdoms, from the Jews having one king ; as one bishop over all churches, from their being under one high priest. 144. Ad. §.24. Neither is this discourse confirmed by *Irenaeus at all, whether by this discourse you mean that immediately fore- * Irenseus, 1. iii. c. 3. whereby to judge of Controversies. 163 going all the analogy between the church and the synagogue, to which this speech of Irenaeus alleged by you is utterly and plainly impertinent ; or whether by this discourse you mean (as 1 think you do) not your discourse, but your conclusion which you dis- course on ; that is, that your church is the infallible judge in con- troversies. For neither hath Irenaeus one syllable to this purpose ; neither can it be deduced out of what he says, with any colour of consequence. For, first in saying — what if the apostles had not \e(t scripture, ought we not to have followed the order of tradition ? And in saying, that to this order many nations yield assent, who believe in Christ, having salvation written in their hearts by the Spirit of God, without letters or ink, and diligently keeping ancient tradition : — doth he not plainly shew, that the tradition he speaks of is nothing else but the very same that is written ; nothing but to believe in Christ? To which, whether scripture alone, to them that believe it, be not a sufficient guide, I leave it to you to judge. And are not his words just as if a man should say, " If God had not given us the light of the sun, we must have made use of can- dles and torches: if we had no eyes, we must have felt out our way : if we had no legs, we must have used crutches." And doth not this in effect import, that, while we have the sun we need no candles ? While we have our eyes, we need not feel out our way ? While we enjoy our legs, we need not crutches? And, by like reason, Irenaeus in saying — If we had no scripture, we must have followed tradition; and they that have none, do well to do so — doth he not plainly import, that to them that have scripture and believe it, tradition is unnecessary ? which could not be, if the scripture did not contain evidently the whole tradition, which, whether Irenaeus believed or no, these words of his may inform you — JVon enim per alios, &c, we have received the disposition of our salvation from no others, but from them by whom the gospel came unto us. Which gospel truly the apostles first preached, and afterwards by the will of God delivered in writing to us, to be the pillar and foundation of our faith. — Upon which place Bellar- mine's two observations, and his acknowledgment ensuing upon them, are very considerable ; and, as I conceive, as home to my purpose as I could wish them. His first notandum is, that — in the christian doctrine, some things are simply necessary for the salva- tion of all men ; as the knowledge of the articles of the apostles' creed ; and besides, the knowledge of the ten commandments, and some of the sacraments. Other things are not so necessary, but that a man may be saved without the explicit knowledge, and belief, and profession of them. His second note is, that — those things, which were simply necessary, the apostles were wont to preach to all men ; but of other things not all to all, but some things to all ; to wit, those things which were profitable for all, other things only to prelates and priests. These things premised, he acknowledgeth, that — all these things were written by the apostles which are necessary for all, and which they were wont to preach to all ; but that other things were not all written ; that therefore, when Irenaeus says, that the apostles wrote what they l2 164 Scripture the only Rule preached in the world, it is true (saith he), and not against tradi- tion, because they preached not to the people all things, but only those things which are necessary and profitable for them. 145. So that, at the most, you can infer from hence but only a suppositive necessity of having an infallible guide, and that grounded upon a false supposition, in case we had no scripture ; but an abso- lute necessity hereof, and to them who have and believe the scrip- ture, which is your assumption, cannot with any colour from hence be concluded, but rather the contrary. 146. Neither because (as he says) it was then easy to receiv the truth from God's church ; then in the age next after the apos- tles, then when all the ancient and apostolic churches were at an agreement about the fundamentals of faith : will it therefore follow, that now one thousand six hundred years after, when the ancient churches are divided almost into as many religions as there are churches, every one being the church to itself, and heretical to all other, that it is as easy, but extremely difficult, or rather impossi- ble, to find the church first independently of the true doctrine, and then to find the truth by the church 1 147. As for the last clause of the sentence, it will not any whit advantage, but rather prejudice your assertion. Neither will I seek to avoid the pressure of it, by saying that he speaks of small questions, and therefore not of questions touching things necessary to salvation, which can hardly be called small questions ; but I will favour you so far as to suppose, that saying this of small questions, it is probable he would have said it much more of the great ; but I will answer that which is most certain and evident, and which I am confident you yourself, were you as impudent as I believe you modest, would not deny, that the ancient apostolic churches are not now as they were in Irenaeus's time ; then they were all at unity about matters of faith, which unity was a good assurance that what they so agreed in, came from some one com- mon fountain, and that no other than of apostolic preaching. And this is the very ground of Tertullian's so often mistaken prescrip- tion against heretics : Variasse debuerat error ecclesiarum ; quod autem apud multos unum est, non est erratum sed traditum. " If the churches had erred, they could not but have varied ; but that which is among so many, came not by error, but tradition." But now the case is altered, and the mischief is, that these ancient churches are divided among themselves; and, if we have recourse to them, one of them will say, this is the way to heaven, another that. So that now in place of receiving from them certain and clear truths, we must expect nothing but certain and clear contra- dictions. 148. Neither will the apostles' depositing with the church all things belonging to the truth, be any proof that the church shall certainly keep this depositum entire and sincere, without adding to it, or taking from it; for this whole depositum was committed to every particular church, nay, to every particular man which the apostles converted. And yet no man, I think, will say that there was any certainty, that it should be kept whole and inviolate by whereby to judge of Controversies. 165 every man, and every church. It is apparent out of scripture it was committed to Timothy, and by him consigned to other faithful men ; and yet St. Paul thought it not superfluous, earnestly to exhort him to the careful keeping of it : which exhortation you must grant had been vain and superfluous, if the not keeping had been impossible. And therefore though Irenagus says, the apostles fully deposited in the church all truth, yet he says not, neither can we infer from what he says, that the church should always in- fallibly keep this depositum entire, without the loss of any truth, and sincere, without the mixture of any falsehood. 149. Ad. §. 25. But you proceed and tell us — that besides all this, the doctrine of protestants is destructive of itself. For either they have certain and infallible means not to err in interpreting, or not. If not, scripture to them cannot be a sufficient ground for infallible faith : if they have, and so cannot err in interpreting scripture, then they are able with infallibility to hear and deter- mine all controversies of faith; and so they may be, and are, judges of controversies, although they use the scripture as a rule. And thus, against their own doctrine, they constitute another judge of controversies besides scripture alone. — And may not we with as much reason substitute church and papists instead of scripture and protestants, and say unto you, besides all this, the doctrine of papists is destructive of itself? For either they have certain and infallible means not to err in the choice of the church, and inter- preting her decrees, or they have not ; if not, then the church to them cannot be a sufficient (but merely a fantastical) ground for infallible faith, nor a meet judge of controversies: (for unless I be infallibly sure, that the church is infallible, how can I be, upon her authority, infallibly sure that any thing she says is infallible 1) if they have certain infallible means, and so cannot err in the choice of their church, and interpreting her decrees, then they are able with infallibility to hear, examine, and determine, all controversies of faith, although they pretend to make the church their guide. And thus, against their own doctrine, they constitute another judge of controversies besides the church alone. Nay, every one makes himself a chooser of his own religion, and of his own sense of the church's decrees, which very thing in protestants, they so highly condemn ; and so, in judging others, condemn themselves. 150. Neither in saying thus have I only cried quittance with you ; but that you may see how much you are in my debt, I will show unto you, that for your sophism against our way, I have given you a demonstration against yours. First, I say, your argu- ment against us is a transparent fallacy. The first part of it lies thus : protestants have no means to interpret, without error, ob- scure and ambiguous places of scripture ; therefore plain places of scripture cannot be to them a sufficient ground of faith. But though we pretend not to certain means of not erring in interpreting all scripture, particularly such places as are obscure and ambigu- ous, yet this, methinks, should be no impediment, but that we may have certain means of not erring in and about the sense of those places which are so plain and clear, that they need no interpreters; 166 Scripture the only Rule and in such we say our faith is contained. If you ask me how I can be sure that I know the true meaning of these places ? I ask you again, can you be sure, that you understand what I, or any man else says? They that heard our Saviour and the apostles preach, could they have sufficient assurance, that they understood at any time what they would have them do ? If not, to what end did they hear them ? If they could, why may we not be as well assured that we understand sufficiently what we conceive plain in their writings? 151. Again, I pray tell us, whether you do certainly know the sense of these scriptures, with which you pretend you are led to the knowledge of your church ? If you do not, how know you that there is any church infallible, and that these are the notes of it, and that this is the church that hath these notes? If you do, then give us leave to have the same means, and the same abilities, to know other plain places, which you have to know these. For, if all scripture be obscure, how come you to know the sense of these places? If some place of it be plain, why should we stay here? 152. And now to come to the other part of your dilemma. In saying, " If they have certain means, and so cannot err," methinks you forget yourself very much, and seem to make no difference between having certain means to do a thing, and the actual doing of it. As if you should conclude, because all men have certain means of salvation, therefore all men certainly must be saved, and cannot do otherwise ; as if, whosoever had a horse must presently get up and ride ; whosoever had means to find out a way, could not neglect those means, and so mistake it. God be thanked, that we have sufficient means to be certain enough of the truth of our faith ! But the privilege of not being in possibility of erring, that we challenge not, because we have as little reason as you to do so; and you have none at all. If you ask, seeing we may possibly err, how can we be assured we do not ? I ask you again, seeing your eye-sight may deceive you, how can you be sure you see the sun when you do see it ? Perhaps you may be in a dream, and perhaps you, and all the men in the world, have been so, when they thought they were awake, and then only awake, when they thought they dreamt. But this I am sure of, as sure as that God is good, that he will require no impossibilities of us; not an infallible, nor a certainly unerring belief, unless he hath given us certain means to avoid error ; and, if we use those which we have, he will never require of us, that we use that which we have not. 153. Now from this mistaken ground, that it is all one to have means of avoiding error, and to be in no danger, nor possibility of error, you infer upon us an absurd conclusion — That we make our- selves able to determine controversies of faith without infallibility, and judges of controversies. — For the latter part of this inference, we acknowledge and embrace it : we do make ourselves judges of controversies; that is, we do make use of our own understanding in the choice of our religion. But this, if it be a crime, is common to us with you (as I have proved above) ; and the difference is, whereby to judge of Controversies. 167 not that we are choosers, and you not choosers ; but that we, as we conceive, choose wisely ; but you, being wilfully blind, choose to follow those that are so too, not remembering what our Saviour hath told you, when " the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch." But then again I must tell you, you have done ill to confound together judges and infallible judges, unless you will say, either that we have no judges in our courts of civil judicature, or that they are all infallible. 154. Thus have we cast off your dilemma, and broken both the horns of it. But now my retortion lies heavy upon you, and will not be turned off For, first you content not yourselves with a moral certainty of the things you believe, nor with such a degree of as- surance of them, as is sufficient to produce obedience to the con- dition of the new covenant, which is all that we require. God's Spirit, if he please, may work more, a certainty of adherence beyond a certainty of evidence : but neither God doth, nor man may, require of us, as our duty, to give a greater assent to the conclusion than the premises deserve ; to build an infallible faith upon motives that are only highly credible, and not infallible, as it were a great and heavy building upon a foundation that hath not strength pro- portionable. But though God require not of us such unreasonable things, you do ; and tell men they cannot be saved, unless they believe your proposals with an infallible faith. To which end they must believe also your propounder, your church, to be simply in- fallible. Now how is it possible for them to give a rational assent to the church's infallibility, unless they have some infallible means to know that she is infallible 1 Neither can they infallibly know the infallibility of this means, but by some other, and so on for ever ; unless they can dig so deep as to come at length to the rock ; that is, to settle all upon something evident of itself, which is not so much as pretended. But the last resolution of all is into motives, which indeed, upon examination, will scarce appear pro- bable, but are not so much as vouched to be any more than very credible. For example ; if I ask you, why you do believe transub- stantiation? What can you answer, but because it is a reve- lation of the prime verity. I demand, again, how can you assure yourself or me of that, being ready to embrace it if it may appear to be so 1 And what can you say, but that you know it to be so, because the church says so, which is infallible ? If I ask, what mean you by your church 1 You can tell me nothing but the company of christians which adhere to the pope. I demand then, further," why should I believe this company to be the infallible pro- pounder of divine revelation ? And then you tell me, that there are many motives to induce a man to this belief. But are these mo- tives, lastly, infallible 1 No, say you, but very credible. Well, let them pass for such, because now we have not leisure to examine them. Yet methinks, seeing the motives to believe the church's infallibility are only very credible, it should also be but as credible that your church is infallible; and as credible, and no more, perhaps somewhat less, that her proposals, particularly transub- stantiation, are divine revelations. And methinks you should 168 Scripture the only Rule require only a moral and modest assent to them, and not a divine, as you call it, and infallible faith. But then of these motives to the church's infallibility, I hope you will give us leave to consider, and judge, whether they be indeed motives, and sufficient ; or whe- ther they be not motives at all, or not sufficient ; or whether these motives or inducements to your church be not impeached, and op- posed with compulsives and enforcements from it; or, lastly, whether these motives, which you use, be not indeed only motives to Chris- tianity, and not to popery ; give me leave for distinction-sake to call your religion so. If we may not judge of these things, how can my judgment be moved with that which comes not within its cognizance? If I may, then at least I am to be a judge of all these controversies. 1. Whether every one of these motives be indeed a motive to any church ? 2. If to some, whether to yours ? 3. If to yours, whether sufficient, or insufficient ? 4. Whether other societies have not as many, and as great motives, to draw me to them? 5. Whether I have not greater reason to believe you do err, than that you cannot ? And now, Sir, I pray let me trouble you with a few more questions. Am I a sufficient judge of these controversies, or no ? If of these, why shall I stay here, why not of others, why not of all ? Nay, doth not the true examining of these few contain and lay upon me the ex- amination of all? What other motives to your church have you, but your notes of it ? Bellarmine gives some fourteen or fifteen. And one of these fifteen contains in it the examination of all controversies : and, not only so, but of all uncontroverted doctrines. For how shall I, or can I, know the church of Rome's conformity with the ancient church, unless I know first what the ancient church did hold, and then what the church of Rome doth hold? And, lastly, whether they be conformable, or if in my judgment they seem not conform- able, I am then to think the church of Rome not to be the church, for want of the note, which she pretends is proper and perpetual to it ? So that, for aught I can see, judges we are, and must be of all sides, every one for himself, and God for us all. 155. Ad. §. 26. I answer — This assertion, that " scripture alone is judge of all controversies in faith," if it be taken properly, is neither a fundamental nor unfundamental point of faith, nor no point of faith at all, but a plain falsehood. It is not a judge of con- troversies, but a rule to judge them by ; and that not an absolutely perfect rule, but as perfect as a written rule can be ; which must always need something else, which is either evidently true, or evidently credible, to give attestation to it, and that in this case is universal tradition. So that universal tradition is the rule to judge all controversies by. But then, because nothing besides scripture comes to us with as full a stream of tradition as scripture, scripture alone, and no unwritten doctrine, nor no infallibility of any church, having attestation from tradition truly universal ; for this reason we conceive, as the apostles' persons, while they were living, were the only judges of controversies, so their writings, now they are dead, are the only rule for us to judge them by; there being nothing unwritten, which can go in upon half so fair cards for the title of apostolic tradition as these things, which by the whereby to judge of Controversies. 169 confession of both sides are not so; I mean — the doctrine of the mil- lenaries, and of the necessity of the eucharist for infants. 156. Yet when we say, the scripture is the only rule to judge all controversies by ; methinks you should easily conceive, that we would be understood of all those that are possible to be judged by scripture, and of those that arise among such as believe the scripture. For, if I had a controversy with an atheist, whether there was a God or no, I would not say, that the scripture were a rule to judge this by; seeing that, doubting whether there be a God or no, he must needs doubt whether the scripture be the word of God ; or if he does not, he grants the question, and is not the man we speak of. So, likewise, if I had a controversy about the truth of Christ with a Jew, it would be vainly done of me should I press him with the authority of the New Testament, which he believes not, till out of some principles, common to us both, I had persuaded him that it is the word of God. The New Testament, therefore, while he remains a Jew, would not be a fit rule to decide this controversy, inasmuch as that which is doubted of itself, is not fit to determine other doubts. So, likewise, if there wereany that believe the christian religion, and yet believe not the Bible to be the word of God, though they believed the matter of it to be true (which is no impossible supposition ; for I may believe a book of St. Augustine's to contain nothing but the truth of God, and yet not to have been inspired by God himself) ; against such men therefore there were no disputing out of the Bible, because nothing in question can be a proof to itself. When there- fore we say, scripture is a sufficient means to determine all contro- versies, we say not this either to atheists, Jews, Turks, or such christians (if there be any such) as believe not scripture to be the word of God; but among such men only, as are already agreed upon this, that " the scripture is the word of God," we say, all controversies that arise about faith, are either not at all decidable, and consequently not necessary to be believed one way or other, or they may be determined by scripture. In a word, that all things necessary to be believed are evidently contained in scrip- ture, and what is not there evidently contained, cannot be neces- sary to be believed. And our reason hereof is convincing, because nothing can challenge our belief, but what hath thus descended to us from Christ by original and universal tradition. Now nothing but scripture hath thus descended to us, therefore nothing but scripture can challenge our belief. Now then to come up closer to you, and to answer to your question, not as you put it, but as you should have put it: I say, that this position, "scripture alone is the rule whereby they which believe it to be God's word, are to judge all controversies in faith," is no fundamental point, though not for your reasons: for, your first and strongest reason, you see, is plainly voided and cut off by my stating of the question as I have done, and supposing in it, that the parties at variance are agreed about this, that the scripture is the word of God ; and con- sequently that this is none of their controversies. To your second, that " controversies cannot be ended without some living authority ;" 15 170 Scripture the only Rule we have said already, that necessary controversies may be and are decided : and, if they be not ended, this is not through defect of the rule, but through the default of men. And, for those that cannot thus be ended, it is not necessary they should be ended : for, if God did require the ending of them, he would have provided some certain means for the ending of them. And to your third, I say, that your pretence of using these means is but hypocritical ; for j r ou use them with prejudice, and with a settled resolution not to believe any thing which these means happily may suggest unto you, if it any way cross your preconceived persuasion of your church's infallibility. You give not yourselves liberty of judgment in the use of them, nor suffer yourselves to be led by them to the truth, to which they would lead you, would you but be as willing to believe this consequence — our church doth oppose scripture, therefore it doth err, therefore it is not infallible; as you are reso- lute to believe this — the church is infallible, therefore it doth not err, and therefore it doth not oppose scripture, though it seem to do so never so plainly. 157. You pray, but it is not that God would bring you to the true religion, but that he would confirm you in your own. You confer places, but it is that you may confirm, or colour over with plausible disguises your erroneous doctrines ; not that you may judge of them, and forsake them, if there be reason for it. You consult the originals, but you regard them not when they make against your doctrine or translation. 158. You add, not only the authority, but the infallibility, not of God's church, but of the Roman, a very corrupt and degenerous part of it : whereof Dr. Potter never confessed, that it cannot err damna- bly. And which being a company made up of particular men, can afford you no help, but the industry, learning, and wit of private men : and, that these helps may not help you out of your error, tell you that you must make use of none of all these to discover any error in the church, but only to maintain her impossibility of erring. And, lastly, Dr. Potter assures himself, that your doctrines and practices are damnable enough in themselves ; only he hopes (and spes est rei incertce nomen) he hopes, I say, that the truths which you retain, especially the necessity of repentance and faith in Christ, will be as an antidote to you against the errors which you maintain ; and that your superstruction may burn, yet they amongst you qui sequuntur Absolonem in simplicitate cordis, may be saved, " yet so as by fire." Yet his thinking so is no reason for you or me to think so, unless you suppose him infallible ; and, if you do, why do you write against him ? 159. Notwithstanding, though not for these reasons, yet for others, I conceive this doctrine not fundamental ; because, if a man should believe christian religion wholly, and entirely, and live according to it, such a man, though he should not know or not believe the scripture to be a rule of faith, no, nor to be the word of God, my opinion is, he may be saved ; and my reason is, because he performs the entire condition of the new covenant, which is, that we believe the matter of the gospel, and not that it is contained in these or lohereby to judge of Con troversies. 171 these books. So that the books of scripture are not so much the objects of our faith, as the instruments of conveying it to our under- standing ; and not so much of the being of the christian doctrine as requisite to the well-being of it. Irenaeus tells us (as M. K. ac- knowledged) of some barbarous nations — that believed the doctrines of Christ, and yet believed not the scripture to be the word of God ; for they never heard of it, and faith comes by hearing. — But these barbarous people might be saved : therefore men might be saved without believing the scripture to be the word of God ; much more without believing it to be a rule, and a perfect rule of faith. Neither doubt I, but if the books of scripture had been proposed to them by the other parts of the church, where they had been before re- ceived, and had been doubted of, or even rejected by those barbarous nations, but still by the bare belief and practice of Christianity they might be saved ; God requiring of us, under pain of damnation, only to believe the verities therein contained, and not the divine authority of the books wherein they are contained. Not but that it were now very strange and unreasonable, if a man should believe the matter of these books, and not the authority of the books : and therefore if a man should profess the not-believing of these, I should have reason to fear he did not believe that. But there is not always an equal necessity for the belief of those things, for the belief whereof there is an equal reason. We have, I believe, as great reason to believe there was such a man as Henry the Eighth, King of England, as that Jesus Christ suffered under Pontius Pilate : yet this is ne- cessary to be believed, and that is not so. So that if any man should doubt of or disbelieve that, it were most unreasonably done of him, yet it were no mortal sin, nor no sin at all ; God having no where commanded men under pain of damnation to believe all which reason induceth them to believe. Therefore as an executor, that should perform the whole will of the dead, should fully satisfy the law, though he did not believe that parchment to be his written will which indeed is so ; so I believe, that he, who believes all the particular doctrines which integrate Christianity, and lives according to them, should be saved, though he neither believed nor knew that the gospels were written by the evangelists, or the epistles by the apostles. 160. This discourse, whether it be rational and concluding or no, I submit to better judgment; but sure I am, that the corollary, which you draw from this position, that this point is not funda- mental, is very inconsequent; that is, that we are uncertain of the truth of it, because we say, the whole church, much more particular churches and private men, may err in points not fundamental. A pretty sophism, depending upon this principle, that whosoever pos- sibly may err, he cannot be certain that he doth not err ! And upon this ground, what shall hinder me from concluding, that seeing you also hold, that neither particular churches, nor private men, arc in- fallible even in fundamentals, that even the fundamentals of Christi- anity remain to you uncertain ? A judge may possibly err in judg- ment : can he therefore never have assurance that he hath judged right ? A traveller may possibly mistake his way ; must I therefore 172 Scripture the only Rule be doubtful whether I am in the right way from my hall to my chamber ? Or can our London carrier have no certainty, in the middle of the day, when he is sober and in his wits, that he is in the way to London 1 These you see are right worthy consequences, and yet they are as like your own, as an egg to an egg, or milk to milk. 161. And, for the self-same reason (you say) we are not certain, that the church is not judge of controversies. — But now this self- same appears to be no reason ; and therefore, for all this, we may be certain enough that the church is no judge of controversies. The ground of this sophism is very like the former, viz. that we can be certain of the falsehood of no propositions, but those only which are damnable errors. But I pray, good sir, give me your opinion of these : the snow is black, the fire is cold, that M. Knot is arch- bishop of Toledo, that the whole is not greater than a part of the whole, that twice two make not four : in your opinion, good Sir, are these damnable heresies, or, because they are not so, have we no certainty of the falsehood of them ? I beseech you, Sir, to con- sider seriously, with what strange captions you have gone about to delude your king and your country ; and if you be convinced they are so, give glory to God, and let the world know it by your desert- ing that religion, which stands upon such deceitful foundations. 162. Besides (you say) among public conclusions defended in Oxford in the year 1633, to the questions, Whether the church have authority to determine controversies of faith 1 and to inter- pret holy scripture ? The answer to both is affirmative. — But what now if I should tell you, that in the year 1632, among public con- clusions defended in Doway, one was — that God predeterminates men to all their actions, good, bad, and indifferent? will you think yourself obliged to be of this opinion ? If you will, say so : if not, do as you would be done by. Again, methinks so subtile a man as you are, should easily apprehend a wide difference between authority to do a thing, and infallibility in doing it: and again, between a conditional infallibility, and an absolute. The former, the doctor, together with the articles of the church of England, at- tributeth to the church, nay, to particular churches, and I subscribe to his opinion ; that is, an authority of determining controversies of faith according to plain and evident scripture and universal tra- dition, and infallibility, while they proceed according to this rule. As if there should arise an heretic, that should call in question Christ's passion and resurrection, the church had authority to de- cide this controversy, and infallible direction how to do it, and to excommunicate this man, if he should persist in error. I hope you will not deny, but that the judges have authority to determine criminal and civil controversies : and yet I hope, you will not say, that they are absolutely infallible in their determinations : infallible while they proceed according to law, and if they do so ; but not infallibly certain that they shall ever do so. But that the church should be infallibly assisted by God's Spirit to decide rightly all emergent controversies, even such as might be held diversely of divers men, salva compage Jidei, and that we might be absolutely certain that the church should never fail to decree the truth, whereby to judge of Controversies. 173 whether she used means or no, whether she proceed according to her rule or not ; or, lastly, that we might be absolutely certain, that she should never fail to proceed according to her rule, this the de- fender of these conclusions said not : and therefore said no more to your purpose, than you have all this while — that is, just nothing. 163. Ad. §. 27. To the place of St. Augustine, alleged in this paragraph, I answer, first, that in many things you will not be tried by St. Augustine's judgment, nor submit to his authority ; not con- cerning appeals to Rome ; not concerning transubstantiation ; not touching the use and worshipping of images ; not concerning the state of saints' souls before the day of judgment ; not touching the Virgin Mary's freedom from actual and original sin ; not touching the necessity of the eucharist for infants ; not touching the damning infants to hell that die without baptism ; not touching the know- ledge of saints departed ; not touching purgatory ; not touching the fallibility of councils, even general councils ; not touching per- fection and perspicuity in scriptures in matters necessary to salva- tion ; not touching auricular confession ; not touching the half- communion ; not touching prayers in an unknown tongue : in these things, I say, you will not stand to St. Augustine's judgment, and therefore can with no reason or equity require us to do so in this matter. To St. Augustine, in heat of disputation against the dona- tists, and ransacking all places for arguments against them, we oppose St. Augustine out of this heat, delivering the doctrine of Christianity calmly and moderately, where he says, In Us qua aperie posita sunt in sacris scripturis, omnia ea reperiuntur qua continent fidem, Moresque vivendi. 3. We say, he speaks not of the Roman, but the catholic church, of far greater extent, and there- fore of far greater credit and authority than the Roman church. 4. He speaks of a point not expressed, but yet not contradicted by scripture. 5. He says not, that Christ hath recommended the church to us for an infallible definer of all emergent controver- sies, but for a credible witness of ancient tradition. Whosoever therefore refuseth to follow the practice of the church (understand of all places and ages) though he be thought to resist our Saviour, what is that to us, who cast off no practices of the church, but such as are evidently post-nate to the time of the apostles, and plainly contrary to the practice of former and purer times. Lastly, it is evident, and even to impudence. itself undeniable, that upon this ground, of believing all things taught by the present church as taught by Christ, error was held ; for example, the necessity of the eucharist for infants, and that in St. Augustine's time, and that by St. Augustine himself: and therefore without controversy this is no certain ground for truth, which may support falsehood as well as truth. 164. To the argument wherewith you conclude, I answer, that though the visible church shall always without fail propose so much of God's revelation, as is sufficient to bring men to heaven, for otherwise it will not be the visible church ; yet it may some- times add to this revelation things superfluous, nay, hurtful, nay, in themselves damnable, though not unpardonable ; and sometime? 15* 174 Charity maintained by Catholics. take from it things very expedient and profitable : and therefore it is possible, without sin, to resist in some things the visible church of Christ. But you press us farther, and demand — what visible church was extant when Luther began, whether it were the Roman or protestant church ? — As if, it must of necessity either be pro- testant or Roman, or Roman of necessity, if it were not protestant. Yet this is the most usual fallacy of all your disputers, by some specious arguments to persuade weak men, that the church of pro- testants cannot be the true church ; and thence to infer, that with- out doubt it must be the Roman. But why may not the Roman be content to be a part of it, and the Grecian another ? And if one must be the whole, why not the Greek church as well as the Roman ? there being not one note of your church which agrees not to her as well as to your own ; unless it be, that she is poor and oppressed by the Turk, and you are in glory and splendour. 165. Neither is it so easy to be determined as you pretend — that Luther and other protestants opposed the whole visible church in matters of faith; — neither is it so evident, that the visible church may not fall into such a state, wherein she may be justly opposed. And, lastly, for calling the distinction of points into fundamental and not fundamental, an evasion, I believe you will find it easier to call it so than to prove it so. But that shall be the issue of the controversy in the next chapter. CHAPTER III. That the distinction of points fundamental, and not fundamental, is neither pertinent nor true in our present controversy ; and that the catholic visible church cannot err in either kind of the said points. " This distinction is abused by protestants to many purposes of theirs ; and therefore if it be either untrue or impertinent (as they understand, and apply it) the whole edifice built thereon must be ruinous and false. For if you object their bitter and continued discords in matters of faith, without any means of agreement — they instantly tell you (as Charity Mistaken plainly shews) that they differ only in points not fundamental. If you convince them, even by their own confessions, that the ancient fathers taught divers points held by the Roman church against protestants — they reply, that those fathers may nevertheless be saved, because those errors were not fundamental. If you will them to re- member, that Christ must always have a visible church on earth, with administration of sacraments, and succession of pastors, and that when Luther appeared, there was no church distinct from the Roman, whose communion and doctrine Luther then forsook, and for that cause must be guilty of schism and heresy — they have an answer (such as it is) that the catholic church cannot perish, yet may err in points not fundamental, and therefore Luther and other protestants were obliged to forsake her for such errors, Charity maintained by Catholics. 175 under pain of damnation : as if, forsooth, it were damnable to hold an error not fundamental, nor damnable. If you wonder how they can teach, that both catholics and protestants may be saved in their several professions — they salve this contradiction, by saying, that we both agree in all fundamental points of faith, which is enough for salvation. And yet, which is prodigiously strange, they could never be induced to give a catalogue whal points in particular be fundamental, but only by some general description, or by referring us to the apostles' creed, without de- termining what points therein be fundamental or not fundamental for the matter ; and in what sense they be, or be not, such : and yet concerning the meaning of divers points contained in, or reduced to, the creed, they differ both from us, and among them- selves. And indeed it being impossible for them to exhibit any such catalogue, the said distinction of points, although it were pertinent and true, cannot serve them to any purpose, but still they must remain uncertain, whether or no they disagree from one another, from the ancient fathers, and from the catholic church, in points fundamental ; which is to say, they have no certainty whether they enjoy the substance of christian faith, without which they cannot hope to be saved. But of this more hereafter. " 2. And to the end, that what shall be said concerning this distinction may be better understood, we are to observe, that there be two precepts, which concern the virtue of faith, or our obligation to believe divine truths. The one is by divines called affirmative, whereby we are obliged to have a positive explicit belief of some chief articles of christian faith ; the other is termed negative, which strictly binds us not to disbelieve, that is, not to believe the contrary of one point sufficiently represented to our understandings, as revealed or spoken by Almighty God. The said affirmative precept (according to the nature of such com- mands) enjoins some act to be performed, but not at all times, nor doth it equally bind all sorts of persons, in respect of all ob- jects to be believed. For objects; we grant that some are more necessary to be explicitly and severally believed than other ; either because they are in themselves more great and weighty ; or else in regard they instruct us in some necessary christian duty towards God, ourselves, or our neighbour. For persons ; no doubt but some are obliged to know distinctly more than others, by reason of their office, vocation, capacity, or the like. For times; we are not obliged to be still in act of exercising acts of faith, but according as several occasions permit or require. The second kind of precept, called negative, doth (according to the nature of all such commands) oblige universally all persons, in respect of all objects; and at all times semper et pro semper, as divines speak. This general doctrine will be more clear by ex- amples. I am not obliged to be always helping my neighbour, because the affirmative precept of charity bindeth only in some particular cases; but I am always bound, by a negative precept, never to do him any hurt, or wrong. I am not always bound to 176 Charity maintained by Catholics. utter what I know to be true ; yet lam obliged never to speak any one least untruth against my knowledge. And (to come to our present purpose) there is no affirmative precept, commanding us to be at all times actually believing any one or all articles of faith : but we are obliged never to exercise any act against any one truth, known to be revealed. All sorts of persons are not bound explicitly and distinctly to know all things testified by God either in scripture, or otherwise ; but every one is obliged not to believe the contrary of any one point known to be testified by God. For that were in fact to affirm, that God could be de- ceived, or would deceive ; which were to overthrow the whole certainty of our faith wherein the thing most principal is not the point which we believe, which divines call the material object, but the chiefest is the motive for which we believe, to wit, Al- mighty God's infallible revelation, or authority, which they term the formal object of our faith. In two senses, therefore, and with a double relation, points of faith may be called fundamental, and necessary to salvation : the one is taken with reference to the affirmative precept, when the points are of such quality, that there is obligation to know and believe them explicitly and severally. In this sense we grant that there is difference betwixt points of faith, which Dr. Potter* to no purpose laboureth to prove against his adversary, who in express words doth grant and explicate f it. But the doctor thought good to dissemble the matter, and not to say one pertinent word in defence of his distinction, as it was impugned by Charity Mistaken, and as it is wont to be applied by protestants. The other sense, according to which points of faith may be called fundamental, and necessary to salvation, with reference to the negative precept of faith, is such, that we cannot, without grievous sin, and forfeiture of salvation, disbelieve any one point, sufficiently propounded, as revealed by Almighty God. And in this sense we avouch, that there is no distinction in points of faith, as if to reject some must be damn- able, and to reject others, equally proposed as God's word, might stand with salvation. Yea, the obligation of the negative precept is far more strict, than is that of the affirmative, which God freely imposed, and may freely release. But it is impossible, that he can dispense, or give leave to disbelieve, or deny what he affirmeth ; and in this sense sin and damnation are more inse- parable from error in points not fundamental, than from igno- rance in articles fundamental. All this I shew by an example, which I wish to be particularly noted for the present, and for divers other occasions hereafter. The creed of the apostles con- tains divers fundamental points of faith, as the deity, trinity of persons, the incarnation, passion, and resurrection of our Saviour Christ, &c. It contains also some points, for their matter and nature in themselves not fundamental; as under what judge our Saviour suffered ; that he was buried ; the circumstance of the time of his resurrection the third day, &c. But yet nevertheless whosoever once knows that these points are contained in the * Page 209. t Charity Mistaken, c. viii. p. 75. Charity maintained by Catholics. 177 apostles' creed, the denial of them is damnable, and is in that sense a fundamental error : and this is the precise point of the present question. " 3. And all that hitherto hath been said, is so manifestly true, that no protestant or christian, if he do but understand the terms, and state of the question, can possibly deny it : insomuch, as I am amazed that men, who otherwise were endued with excellent wits, should so enslave themselves to their predecessors in pro testantism, as still to harp on this distinction, and never regard how impertinently and untruly it was employed by them at first, to make all protestants seem to be of one faith, because, forsooth, they agree in fundamental points. For the difference against pro- testants consists not in that some believe some points, of which others are ignorant, or not bound expressly to know (as the dis tinction ought to be applied) ; but that some of them disbelieve, and directly, wittingly, and willingly oppose what others do be- lieve to be testified by the word of God, wherein there is no difference between points fundamental and not fundamental , because, till points fundamental be sufficiently proposed as re vealed by God, it is not against faith to reject them ; or rather, without sufficient proposition, it is not possible prudently to believe them ; and the like is of points not fundamental, which as soon as they come to be sufficiently propounded as divine truths, they can no more be denied than points fundamental pro- pounded after the same manner : neither will it avail them to their other end, that for the preservation of the church in being, it is sufficient that she doth not err in points fundamental. For if, in the mean time, she maintain any one error against God's revela- tion, be the thing in itself never so small, her error is damnable, and destructive of salvation. "4. But Dr. Potter, forgetting to what purpose protestants make use of their distinction, doth finally overthrow it, and yields to as much as we can desire. For, speaking of that mea- sure* and quantity of faith, without which none can be saved, he saith, ' It is enough to believe some things by a virtual faith, or by a general, and as it were a negative faith, whereby they are not denied or contradicted.' Now our question is, in case that divine truths, although not fundamental, be denied and contradicted; and therefore even according to him, all such denial excludes salvation. After he speaks more plainly. ' It is true (saith he) whatsoeverf is revealed in scripture, or propounded by the church out of scripture, is in some sense fundamental, in regard of the divine authority of God, and his word, by which it is re- commended ; that is, such as may not be denied or contradicted without infidelity ; such as every christian is bound, with humility and reverence, to believe, whensoever the knowledge thereof is offered to him. And, further, where J the revealed will or word of God is sufficiently propounded ; there he that opposeth is con- vinced of error, and he, who is thus convinced, is a heretic, and heresy is a work of the flesh which excludeth from heaven : * Page 211. t Page 212. X Page 250. M 178 Charity maintained by Catholics. (Gal. v. 20, 21 :) and hence it followeth, that it is fundamental to a christian's faith, and necessary for his salvation, that he believe all revealed truths of God, whereof he may be convinced, that they are from God.' Can any thing be spoken more clearly or directly from us, that it is a fundamental error to deny any one point, though never so small, if once it be sufficiently propounded as a divine truth, and that there is, in this sense, no distinction betwixt points fundamental and not fundamental? And if any should chance to imagine, that it is against the foundation of faith not to believe points fundamental, although they be not sufficiently propounded, Dr. Potter doth not admit of this differ- ence* betwixt points fundamental and not fundamental : for he teacheth, that sufficient proposition of revealed truth is required before a man can be convinced ; and, for want of sufficient convic- tion, he excuseth the disciples from heresy, although they believed not our Saviour's resurrection,! which is a very fundamental point of faith. Thus, then, I argue out of Dr. Potter's own confession : no error is damnable, unless the contrary truth be sufficiently pro- pounded as revealed by God : every error is damnable, if the con- trary truth be sufficiently propounded as revealed by God : there- fore all errors are alike for the general effect of damnation, if the difference arise not from the manner of being propounded. And what now is become of their distinction ? " 5. I will therefore conclude with this argument : according to all philosophy and divinity, the unity and distinction of every thing followeth the nature and essence thereof; and therefore, if the nature and being of faith be not taken from the matter which a man believes, but from the motive for which he believes (which is God's word or revelation) we mud; likewise affirm, that the unity and diversity of faith must be measured by God's revelation (which is alike for all objects) and not by the smallness or great- ness of the matter which we believe. Now, that the nature of faith is not taken from the greatness or smallness of the things believed, is manifest ; because, otherwise, one who believes only fundamental points, and another, who, together with them, doth also believe points not fundamental, should have faith of different natures ; yea, there should be as many differences of faith, as there are different points which men believe, according to diffe- rent capacities or instructions, &c, all which consequences are absurd, and therefore we must say, that unity in faith doth not depend upon points fundamental, or not fundamental, but upon God's revelation equally or unequally proposed ; and protestants, pretending an unity only by reason of their agreement in funda- mental points, do indeed induce as great a multiplicity of faith as there is multitude of different objects which are believed by them ; and since they disagree in things equally revealed by Almighty God, it is evident that they forsake the very formal motive of faith, which is God's revelation, and consequently lose all faith and unity therein. 6. The first part of the title of this chapter — that the dis- * Page 246. t Ibid. " Charity maintained by Catholics. 179 tinction of points fundamental, and not fundamental, in the sense of protestants, is both impertinent and untrue, being demon- strated ; let us now come to the second : — that the church is infallible in all her definitions, whether they concern points fundamental, or not fundamental. And this I prove by these reasons. " 7. It hath been showed in the precedent chapter, that the church is judge of controversies in religion ; which she could not be, if she could err in any one point ; as Dr. Potter would not deny, if he were once persuaded that she is judge : because, if she could err in some points, we could not rely upon her authority and judg- ment in any one thing. " 8. This same is proved by the reason we alleged before ; that seeing the church was infallible in all her definitions before scripture was written (unless we will take away all certainty of faith for that time) we cannot with any show of reason affirm that she hath been deprived thereof by the adjoined comfort and help of sacred writ. " 9. Moreover, to say that the catholic church may propose any false doctrine, maketh her liable to damnable sin and error ; and yet Dr. Potter teacheth, that the church cannot err damn- ably. For, if in that kind of oath which divines call assertorium, wherein God is called to witness, every falsehood is a deadly sin in any private person whatsoever, although the thing be of itself neither material nor prejudicial to any; because the quantity or greatness of that sin is not measured so much by the thing which is affirmed, as by the manner and authority whereby it is avouched, and by the injury that is offered to Almighty God, in applying his testimony to a falsehood : in which respect it is the unanimous consent of all divines, that in such kind of oaths, no levitas materia?, that is, smallness of matter, can excuse from a mortal sacrilege against the moral virtue of religion, which respects worship due to God : if, I say, every least falsehood be a deadly sin in the aforesaid kind of oath, much more pernicious a sin must it be in the public person of the catholic church to propound untrue articles of faith, thereby fastening God's prime verity to false- hood, and inducing and obliging the world to do the same. Besides, according to the doctrine of all divines, it is not only injurious to God's eternal verity, to disbelieve things by him revealed, but also to propose as revealed truths things not re- vealed ; as, in commonwealths, it is a heinous offence to coin either by counterfeiting the metal or the stamp, or to apply the king's seal to a writing counterfeited, although the contents were supposed to be true. And whereas to show the detestable sin of such pernicious fictions, the church doth most exemplarily punish all broachers of feigned revelations, visions, miracles, prophecies, &c, as in particular appeareth in the council of Lateran,* excom- municating such persons; if the church herself could propose false revelations, she herself should have been the first and chiefest deserver to have been censured and as it were excom- * Sub Leon. 10. Sess. 11. m2 180 Charity maintained by Catholics. municated bv herself. For as the Holv Ghost saith in Job,* • Doth God need your lie, that for him you may speak deceits V And that of the Apocalypse is most truly verified in fictitious reve- lations : ' If anyf shall add to these things, God will add unto him the plagues which are written in this book.' And Dr. Potter saith, * to addj to it (speaking of the creed) is high presumption, almost as great as to detract from it.' And therefore, to say the church may add false revelations, is to accuse her of high presumption, and of pernicious error, excluding salvation. " 10. Perhaps some will here reply, that although the church may err, yet it is not imputed to her for sin, by reason she doth not err upon malice or wittingly, but by ignorance or mistake. "11. But it is easilv demonstrated, that this excuse cannot serve : for if the church be assisted only for points fundamental, she cannot but know, that she may err in points not fundamental, at least she cannot be certain that she cannot err, and therefore cannot be excused from headlong and pernicious temerity, in proposing points not fundamental to be believed by christians as matters of faith, wherein she can have no certainty, yea, which always imply a falsehood : for although the thing might chance to be true, and perhaps all revealed, yet for the matter, she, for her part, doth always expose herself to danger of falsehood and error, and in fact doth always err in the manner in which she doth propound any matter not fundamental ; because she proposeth it as a point of faith certainly true, which yet is always uncertain, if she in such things may be deceived. " 12. Besides, if the church may err in points not funda- mental, she may err in proposing some scripture for canonical, which is not such; or else err in keeping and conserving from corruptions .such scriptures as are already believed to be cano- nical. For I will suppose, that, in such apocryphal scripture as she delivers, there is no fundamental error against faith, or that there is no falsehood at all, but only want of divine testification : in which case, Dr. Potter must either grant, that it is a funda- mental error to apply divine revelation to any point not revealed, or else must yield, that the church may err in her proposition or custody of the canon of scripture : and so we cannot be sure, whether she hath not been deceived already in books recom- mended by her, and accepted by christians. And thus we shall have no certainty of scripture, if the church want certainty in all her definitions : and it is worthy to be observed, that some books of scripture, which were not always known to be canonical, have been afterwards received for such ; but never any one book or syllable, defined by the church to be canonical, was afterward questioned, or rejected for apocryphal : a sign that God's church is infallibly assisted by the Holy Ghost, never to propose as di- vine truth any thing not revealed by God : and, that omission to define points not sufficiently discussed is laudable; but com- mission in propounding things not revealed, inexcusable : into * Cap. xiii. v. 7. t Cap. ult. v. 18. X Page 223. Charity maintained by Catholics. 181 which precipitation our Saviour Christ never hath, nor never will, permit his church to fall. " 13. Nay, to limit the general promises of our Saviour Christ made to his church to points only fundamental ; namelv, that the 'gates* of hell shall not prevail against her:' and that < the Holv Ghostf shall lead her into all truth, &c., is to destrov all faith. For we may, by that doctrine and manner of interpreting the scripture, limit the infallibility of the apostles' words," and preaching, only to points fundamental : and whatsoever general texts of scripture shall be alleged for their infallibility, they mav, by Dr. Potter's example, be explicated, and restrained to points fundamental. By the same reason it may be further affirmed, that the apostles, and other writers of canonical scripture, were endued with infallibility, only in ' setting down points funda- mental. For if it be urged, that, all scripture is divinely in- spired ; that it is the word of God, &c, Dr. Potter hath afforded you a ready answer, to say that scripture is inspired, &.c. only in those parts, or parcels, wherein it delivereth fundamental points. In this manner, Dr. Fotherby saith, ' The apostlej twice in one chapter professed, that this he speaketh, and not the Lord : he is very well content, that where he wants the warrant of the express word of God, that part of his writings should be esteemed as the word of man.' Dr. Potter also speaks very dangerously towards this purpose, §. 5, where he endeavoureth to prove, that the infallibility of the church is limited to points fundamental, be- cause 'as nature, so God is neither defective in§ necessaries, nor lavish in superfluities.' Which reason doth likewise prove, that the infallibility of scripture, and of the apostles, must be re- strained to points necessary to salvation, that so God be not accused ' as defective in necessaries, or lavish in superfluities.' In the same place he hath a discourse much tending to this pur- pose ; where, speaking of these words, ' the Spirit shall lead you into all truth, and shall abide with || you for ever,' he saith, ' though that promise was H directly and primarily made to the apostles (who had the Spirit's guidance in a more high and abso- lute manner than any since them) yet it was made to them for the behoof of the church, and is verified in the church universal. But all truth is not simply all, but all of some kind. To be led into all truths, is to know and believe them. And who is so simple, as to be ignorant that there are many millions of truths (in nature, history, divinity) whereof the church is simply igno- rant 1 How many truths lie unrevealed in the infinite treasure of God's wisdom, wherewith the church is not acquainted, &c. So then the truth itself enforceth us to understand by (all truths) not simply all, not all which God can possibly reveal, but all per- taining to the substance of faith, all truth absolutely necessary to salvation.' Mark what he saith : ' that promise — (the Spirit shall lead you into all truths) was made directly to the apostles, and is verified in the universal church ; but by all truth is not understood * Malt. xvi. 18. t In his Sermons, Serm. II. p. 50. II John xvi. 13 ; xiv. 16. t John xvi. 13. § Page 150. T Page 151, 152. 16 182 Charity maintained by Catholics. simply all, but all appertaining to the substance of faith, and ab- solutely necessary to salvation.' Doth it not hence follow, that the promise made to the apostles, of being led into all truth, is to be understood only of all truth absolutely necessary to salvation ; and consequently their preaching and writing were not infallible in points not fundamental ? Or, if the apostles were infallible in all things which they proposed as divine truth, the like must be affirmed of the church, because Dr. Potter teacheth the said pro- mise to be verified in the church. And as he limits the aforesaid works to points fundamental, so may he restrain what other text soever that can be brought for the universal infallibility of the apostles or scriptures ; so he may, and so he must, lest otherwise he receive this answer of his own from himself: ' How many truths lie unrevealed in the 'infinite treasures of God's wisdom, wherewith the church is not acquainted !' And therefore, to verify such general sayings, they must be understood of truths absolutely necessary to salvation. Are not these fearful consequences ! And yet Dr. Potter will never be able to avoid them, till he come to acknowledge the infallibility of the church in all points by her pro- posed as divine truths: and thus it is universally true, that she is led into all truth, in regard, that our Saviour never permits her to define or teach any falsehood. " 14. All that with any colour may be replied to this argu- ment, is — that if once we call any one book, or parcel of scrip- ture in question, although for the matter it contains no funda- mental error, yet it is of great importance, and fundamental, by reason of the consequence ; because, if once we doubt of one book received for canonical, the whole canon is made doubtful and un- certain, and therefore the infallibility of scripture must be univer- sal, and not confined within compass of points fundamental. " 15. I answer : for the thing itself it is very true, that if I doubt of any one parcel of scripture received, for such, I may doubt of all : and thence, by the same parity, I infer, that if we doubt of the church's infallibility in some points, we could not believe her in any one, and, consequently, not in propounding canonical books, or any other points fundamental, or not funda- mental ; which thing being most absurd, and withal most impious, we must take away the ground thereof, and believe that she cannot err in any point great or small : and so this reply doth much more strengthen what we intend to prove. Yet I add, that protestants cannot make use of this reply with any good cohe- rence to this their distinction, and some other doctrines which they defend. For, if Dr. Potter can tell what points in parti- cular be fundamental (as in his 7th section he pretendeth) then he might be sure, that whensoever he meets with such points in scripture, in them it is infallibly true, although it may err in others : and not only true, but clear, because protestants teach that in matters necessary to salvation the scripture is so clear, that all such necessary truths are either manifestly contained therein, or may be clearly deduced from it. Which doctrines being put together, to wit, that scripture cannot err in points Charity maintained by Catholics. 183 fundamental; that they clearly contain all such points, and that they can tell what points in particular be such, I mean funda- mental — it is manifest, that it is sufficient. for salvation, that scrip- ture be infallible only in points fundamental : for supposing these doctrines of theirs be true, they may be sure to find in scripture all points necessary to salvation, although it were fallible in other points of less moment: neither will they be able to avoid this impiety against holy scripture, till they renounce their other doctrines, and, in particular, till they believe that Christ's promises to his church are not limited to points fundamental. " 16. Besides, from the fallibility of Christ's catholic church in some points, it followeth, that no true protestants, learned or unlearned, doth or can with assurance believe the universal church in any one point of doctrine : not in points of lesser mo- ment, which they call not fundamental, because they believe that in such points she may err : not in fundamental, because they must know what points be fundamental, before they go to learn of her, lest otherwise they be rather deluded than instructed, in regard, that her certain and infallible direction extends only to points fundamental. Now, if before they address themselves to the church, they must know what points are fundamental, they learn not of her, but will be as fit to teach, as to be taught by her : how then are all christians so often, so seriously, upon so dreadful menaces, by fathers, scriptures, and our blessed Saviour himself, counselled and commanded to seek, to hear, to obey the church? St. Augustine was of a very different mind from pro- testants : ' If (saith he) the* church through the whole world practise any of these things ; to dispute whether that ought to be so done, is a most insolent madness.' And in another place he saith, ' that which thef whole church holds, and is not ordained by councils, but hath always been kept, is most rightly believed to be delivered by apostolical authority.' The same holy father teacheth, that the custom of baptizing children cannot be proved by scripture alone, and yet that it is to be believed, as derived from the apostles. ' The custom of our mother, thej church (saith he), in baptizing infants, is in nowise to be condemned, nor to be accounted superfluous, nor is it all to be believed, unless it were an apostolical tradition.' And elsewhere : ' Christy is of profit to children baptized : is he therefore of profit to persons not believing? But, God forbid that I should say, infants do not believe. I have already said, he believes in another, who sinned in another. It is said he believes, and it is of force, and he is reckoned among the faithful that are baptized. This is the autho- rity our mother the church hath ; against this strength, against this invincible wall, whosoever rusheth shall be crushed in pieces.' To this argument the protestants, in the conference at Ratisbon, gave this round answer : — JVos ah Augustino\\ hac in parte libere dissentimus : ' in this we plainly disagree from Augustine.' Now, * Epist. 118. t Lib. iv.de Bapt. c. xxiv. § Serm. XIV. verbis Apost. c. xviii. X Lib. x. de Genesi ad liter, cap. xxiii. || See Protocol Monach. edit. 2. p. 367. 184 Chanty maintained by Catholics. if this doctrine of baptizing infants be not fundamental in Dr. Potter's sense, then, according to St. Augustine, the infallibility of the church extends to points not fundamental. But if, on the other side, it be a fundamental point; then, according to the same holy doctor, we must rely upon the authority of the church for some fundamental point not contained in scripture, but delivered by tradition. The like argument I frame out of the same father, about the not rebaptizing of those who were baptized by here- tics, whereof he excellently, to our present purpose, speaketh in this manner : ' We follow,* indeed, in this matter even the most certain authority of canonical scripture.' But, how ? consider his words : ' although verily there be brought no example for this point out of the canonical scriptures, yet even in this point the truth of the same scripture is held by us, while we do that which the authority of scriptures doth recommend ; that so, because the holy scripture cannot deceive us, whosoever is afraid to be deceived by the obscurity of this question, must have recourse to the same church concerning it, which, without any ambiguity, the holy scripture doth demonstrate to us.' Among many other points in the aforesaid words, we are to observe, that, according to this holy father, when we prove some points, not particularly con- tained in scripture, by the authority of the church ; even in that case we ought not to be said to believe such points without scrip- ture, because scripture itself recommends the church ; and there- fore, relying on her, we rely on scripture, without danger of being deceived by the obscurity of any question defined by the church. And elsewhere he saith : ' Seeing this isf written in no scripture, we must believe the testimony of the church, which Christ de- clareth to speak the truth.' But, it seems, Dr. Potter is of opi- nion, that this doctrine about not rebaptizing such as were baptized by heretics, is no necessary point of faith, nor the con- trary an heresy : wherein he contradicteth St. Augustine, from whom we have now heard, that what the church teacheth, is truly said to be taught by scripture ; and consequently to deny this particular point, delivered by the church, is to oppose scrip- ture itself. Yet, if he will needs hold, that this point is not fun- damental, we must conclude out of St. Augustine (as we did con- cerning the baptizing of children), that the infallibility of the church reacheth to points not fundamental. The same father, in another place, concerning this very question of the validity of baptism conferred by heretics, saith : ' TheJ apostles indeed have prescribed nothing of this ; but this custom ought to be believed to be originally taken from their tradition, as there are many things that the universal church observeth, which are therefore with good reason believed to have been commanded by the apostles, although they be not written.' No less clear is St. Chrysostome for the infallibility of the traditions of the church. For, treating on these words, (2 Thess. ii.) ' Stand and hold the traditions which * Lib. i. cont. Crescon. cap. xxxii., xxxiiii. t De Unit. Eccl. cap. xix. t De Bapt. cont. Donat. lib. v. c. xxiii. Charity maintained by Catholics. 185 you have learned, whether by speech or by our epistle/ he saith : * Hence it is* manifest, that they delivered not all things by letter, but many things also without writing, and these also are worthy of belief. Let us therefore account the tradition of the church to be worthy of belief : it is a tradition : seek no more.' Which words are so plainly against protestants, that Whitaker is as plain with St. Chrysostome, saying, ' I answer f that this is an inconsiderable speech, and unworthy so great a father.' But let us conclude with St. Augustine, that the church cannot approve any error against faith, or good manners : ' The church (saith he), being J placed be- tween much chaff and cockle, doth tolerate many things ; but yet she doth not approve, nor dissemble, nor do those things which are against faith or good life.' " 17. And as I have proved that protestants, according to their grounds, cannot yield infallible assent to the church in any one point ; so, by the same reason, I prove, that they cannot rely upon scripture itself in any one point of faith ; not in points of lesser moment (or not fundamental) because in such points the catholic church (according to Dr. Potter), and much more any protestant, may err, and think it is contained in scripture, when it is not : not in points fundamental, because they must first know what points be fundamental, before they can be assured that they cannot err in understanding the scripture: and consequently, independently of scripture, they must foreknow all fundamental points of faith : and therefore they do not indeed rely upon scripture, either for funda- mental or not fundamental points. " 18. Besides, I mainly urge Dr. Potter, and other protestants, that they tell us of certain points which they call fundamental, and we cannot wrest from them a list in particular of such points, with- out which no man can tell whether or no he errs in points funda- mental, and be capable of salvation. And, which is most lament- able, instead of giving us such a catalogue, they fall to wrangle among themselves about the making of it. " 19. Calvin holds § the pope's primacy, invocation of saints, free-will, and such like, to be fundamental errors, overthrowing the gospel. Others are not of his mind, as Melancthon, who saith, in || the opinion of himself, and other his brethren, that ' the monarchy of the bishop of Rome is of use or profit, to this end, that consent of doctrine may be retained. An agreement, therefore, may be easily established in this article of the pope's primacy, if other articles could be agreed upon.' If the pope's primacy be a means, that consent of doctrine may be retained, first to submit to it, and other articles will be easily agreed upon. Luther also saith of the pope's primacy, it may be borne If withal. And why then, O Luther ! did you not bear with it 1 And how can you and your followers be excused from damnable schism, who chose rather to divide God's church, than to bear with that which you confess may be borne withal 1 But let us go forward. That the doctrine of free-will, prayer for the dead, worshipping * Horn. 4. t De sacra Scrip, p. 678. t Ep. 119. § Instit. lib. iv. c. ii. || Cent. Ep. Theol. Ep. 74. IT In Assertionib. art. 36. 16* 186 Charity maintained by Catholics. of images, worship and invocation of saints, real-presence, tran. substantiation, receiving under one kind, satisfaction and merit of works, and the mass, be not fundamental errors, is taught (respec- tive) by divers protestants, carefully alleged in the Protestants'* Apology, &c. as namely, by Perkins, Cartwright, Frith, Fulk, Henry, Sparke, Goad, Luther, Reynolds, Whitaker, Tindal, Francis Johnston, with others. Contrary to these, is the Confes- sion of the Christian Faith, so called by protestants, which I men- tioned! heretofore, wherein we are damned unto unquenchable fire, for the doctrine of mass, prayer to saints, and for the dead, free-will, presence at idol-service, man's merit, with such like. Justification by faith alone is by some protestants affirmed to be — the soul of the J church: the only principal origin of ^salvation, of all other points of || doctrine the chiefest and weightiest. — Which yet, as we have seen, is contrary to other protestants, who teach, that merit of good works is not a fundamental error ; yea, divers protestants defend merit of good works, as may be seen in Breerly.^I One would think that the king's supremacy, for which some blessed men lost their lives, was once among protestants held for a capital point : but now, Dr. Andrews, late of Win- chester, in his book against Bellarmine, tells us, that it is suffi- cient to reckon it among true doctrines. And Wotton denies — that protestants hold** the king's supremacy to be an essential point of faith. — O freedom of the new gospel! Hold with ca- tholics, the pope ; or with protestants, the king ; or with puritans, neither pope nor king to be the head of the church, all is one, you may be saved. Some, as Castalio,ff and the whole sect of the academical protestants hold, that doctrines about the supper, baptism, the state and office of Christ, how he is one with his Father, the trinity, predestination, and divers other such questions, are not necessary to salvation. And (that you may observe how ungrounded and partial their assertions be) Perkins teacheth, that the real presence of our Saviour's body in the sacrament, as it is believed by catholics, is a fundamental error ; and yet affirmeth the consubstantiation of lutherans not to be such, notwithstanding that divers chief lutherans to their consubstantiation join the pro- digious heresy of ubiquitation. Dr. Usher, in his sermon of the Unity of the Catholic Faith, grants salvation to the Ethiopians, who yet with christian baptism join circumcision. Dr. Potter JJ cites the doctrine of some, whom he termeth men of great learn- ing and judgment, that — all who profess to love and honour Jesus Christ are in the visible christian church, and by catholics to be reputed brethren. — One of these men of great learning and judg- ment, is Thomas Morton, by Dr. Potter cited in his margin, * Tract. 2, c. ii. § 14, after F. tCap. i. v. 4. t Chark in the Tower Disputation, the Four Days' Conference. $ Fox's Acts and Mon. p. 402. II The Confession of Bohemia in the Harmony of Confessions, p. 253. t Tract. 3, § 7, under M. n. 15. ** In his Answer to a Popish Pamphlet, p. 68. tt Vid. Gal. Reginald. Calv. Turcis. 1. 2, c. vi. ttPage 113, 114. Morton in his Treatise of the Kingdom of Israel, p. 94. Charity maintained by Catholics. 187 whose love and honour to Jesus Christ you may perceive by his say- ing, that — the churches of Arians (who denied our Saviour Christ to be God) are to be accounted the church of God, because they do hold the foundation of the gospel, which is faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and Saviour of the world. — And, which is more, it seems by these charitable men, that for being a member of the church, it is not necessary to believe one only God. For Dr. Potter,* among the arguments to prove Hooker's and Morton's opinion, brings this: — the people of the ten tribes, after their defection, notwithstanding their gross corruption and idolatry — remaineth still a true church. We may also, as it seemethby these men's reasoning, deny the resurrection, and yet be members of the true church. For a learned man (saith Dr. Potter f in behalf of Hooker's and Morton's opinion) was anciently made a bishop of the catholic church, though he did professedly doubt of the last resurrection of our bodies. Dear Saviour ! what times do we behold ? If one may be a member of the true church, and yet deny the trinity of the persons, the Godhead of our Saviour, the necessity of baptism; if we may use circumcision, and with the worship of God join idolatry, wherein do we differ from Turks and Jews? Or rather, are we not worse than either of them? If they who deny our Saviour's divinity, might be accounted the church of God, how will they deny that favour to those ancient heretics, who denied our Saviour's true humanity ; and so the total denial of Christ will not exclude one from being a member of the true church. St. Hilary J makes it of equal necessity for salvation, that we believe our Saviour to be true God, and true man, saying: — This manner of confession we are to hold, that we remember him to be the Son of God, and the Son of man, because the one without the other can give no hope of salvation. — And yet Dr. Potter saith of the aforesaid doctrine of Hooker and Morton — the ^reader may be pleased to approve or reject it, as he shall find cause. — And in another place, ||he showeth so much good liking of this doctrine,, that he explicateth and proveth the church's perpetual visibility by it. And in the second edition of his book he is careful to declare and illustrate it more at large than he had done before : howsoever, this sufficiently sheweth, that they have no certainty what points be fundamental. As for the Arians in particular, the author whom Dr. Potter cites for a moderate catholic, but is indeed a plain heretic, or rather atheist, Lucian like, jesting at all religion, Tf placeth Arianism among fundamental errors: but, contrarily, an English protestant divine, masked under the name of Irenaeus Philalethes, in a little book in Latin, entitled Dissertalio de pace, et Concordia ecclesia, endeavoureth to prove, that even the denial of the blessed trinity may stand with salvation. Divers protestants have taught, that the Roman church erreth in fundamental points : but Dr. Potter, and others teach the contrary; which could not happen, if they could agree what be fundamental points. You brand the donatists with a note of an error — in the matter** and •Page 121. tPagel22. t Comment, in Matt. cap. xvi. § Page 123. || Page 253. IT A Moderate Examination, &c. cap. i. paulo post initium. ** Page 126. 188 Charity maintained by Catholics. the nature of it properly heretical — -because they taught, that the church remained only with them, in the part of Donatus. And yet many protestants are so far from holding that doctrine to be a fundamental error, that themselves go further, and say, that for divers ages before Luther there was no true visible church at all. It is then too apparent, that you have no agreement in specifying what be fundamental points : neither have you any means to deter- mine what they be; for, if you have any such means, why do you not agree 1 You tell us the creed contains all points fundamental : which, although it were true, yet you see it serves not to bring you to a particular knowledge and agreement in such points. And no wonder ; for (besides what I have said already in the beginning of this chapter, and am to deliver more at large in the next) after so much labour and paper spent to prove that the creed contains all fundamental points, you conclude — It remains* very probable, that the creed is the perfect summary of those fundamental truths, whereof consists the unity of faith, and of the catholic church.— Very probable ! Then, according to all good logic, the contrary may remain very probable, and so all remain as full of uncertainty as before. The whole rule, you say, and the sole judge of your faith must be scripture. Scripture doth indeed deliver divine truths, but seldom doth qualify them, or declare whether they be, or be not, absolutely necessary to salvation. You fallf heavy upon Charity Mistaken, because he demands a particular catalogue of funda- mental points, which yet you are obliged in conscience to do, if you be able. For without such a catalogue, no man can be assured whether or no he have faith sufficient to salvation : and therefore take it not in ill part, if we again and again demand such a catalogue. And that you may see we proceed fairly, I will per- form, on our behalf, what we request of you, and do here deliver a catalogue, wherein are comprised all points taught by us to be necessary to salvation in these words : — We are obliged, under pain of damnation, to believe whatsoever the catholic visible church of Christ proposeth, as revealed by Almighty God. — If any be of another mind, all catholics denounce him to be no catholic. But, enough of this. And I go forward with the infallibility of the church in all points. " 20. For even out of your own doctrine, that the church can- not err in points necessary to salvation, any wise man will infer, that it behoves all who have care of their souls, not to forsake her in any one point. First, because they are assured, that although her doctrine proved not to be true, in some point, yet even, according to Dr. Potter, the error cannot be fundamental, nor destructive of faith and salvation : neither can they be accused of any the least imprudence, in erring (if it were possible) with the universal church. Secondly, since she is, under pain of eternal damnation, to be believed, and obeyed in some things, wherein confessedly she is endued with infallibility, I cannot in wisdom suspect her credit in matters of less moment : for who would trust * Page 241. t Page 215. Charity maintained by Catholics. 189 another in matters of highest consequence, and be afraid to rely- on him in things of less moment ? Thirdly, since (as I said) we are undoubtedly obliged not to forsake her in the chiefest, or fundamental points, and that there is no rule to know precisely what, and how many, those fundamental points be, I cannot, without hazard of my soul, leave her in any one point, lest, perhaps, that point, or points, wherein I forsake her, prove indeed to be fundamental, and necessary to salvation. Fourthly, that visible church, which cannot err in points fundamental, doth without distinction propound all her definitions concerning matters of faith to be believed under anathemas or curses, esteeming all those that resist to be deservedly cast out of her communion, and holding it a point necessary to salvation, that we believe she can- not err ; wherein, if she speak truth, then to deny any one point in particular, which she defineth, or to affirm in general that she may err, puts a man into a state of damnation : whereas to believe her in such points as are not necessary to salvation, cannot endanger salvation ; as likewise to remain in her communion, can bring no great harm, because she cannot maintain any damnable error, or practice ; but to be divided from her (she being Christ's catholic church) is most certainly damnable. Fifthly, the true church, being in lawful and certain possession of superiority and power, to command and require obedience from all christians in some things; I cannot without grievous sin withdraw my obedience in any one, unless I evidently know, that the thing commanded comes not within the compass of those things to which her power extendeth. And who can better inform me, how far God's church can proceed, than God's church herself? or to what doctor can the children and scholars, with greater reason and more security fly for direction, than to the mother and appointed teacher of all christians? In following her, I sooner shall be excused, than in cleaving to any particular sect or person, teaching or applying scriptures against her doctrine or interpretation. Sixthly, the fearful examples of innumerable persons, who, forsaking the church under pretence of her errors, have failed even in funda- mental points, and suffered shipwreck of their salvation, ought to deter all christians from opposing her in any one doctrine, or practice ; as (to omit other, both ancient and modern heresies) we see, that divers chief protestants, pretending to reform the cor- ruptions of the church, are come to affirm, that for many ages she erred to death, and wholly perished : which Dr. Potter cannot deny to be a fundamental error against that article of our creed — I believe the catholic church — as he affirmeth of the donatists, because they confined the universal church within Africa, or some other small tract of soil. Lest therefore I may fall into some fundamental error, it is most safe for me to believe all the decrees of that church which cannot err fundamentally; especially if we add, that, according to the doctrine of catholic divines, one error in faith, whether it be for the matter itself, great or small, destroys faith, as is shewed in Charity Mistaken ; and consequently, to 190 Charity maintained by Catholics. accuse the church of any one error, is to affirm, that she lost all faith, and erred damnably ; which very saying is damnable, because it leaves Christ no visible church on earth. "21. To all these arguments I add this demonstration: Dr. Potter teacheth, that — there neither was,* nor can be, any just cause to depart from the church of Christ, no more than from Christ himself. — But if the church of Christ can err in some points of faith, men not only may, but must, forsake her in those (unless Dr. Potter will have them believe one thing, and profess another) : and if such errors and corruptions should fall out to be about the church's liturgy, public service, administration of sacraments, and the like, they, who perceive such errors, must of necessity leave her external communion. And, therefore, if once we grant the church may err, it followeth, that men may, and ought, to forsake her (which is against Dr. Potter's own words), or else they are inexcusable who left the communion of the Roman church, under pretence of errors, which they grant not to be fundamental. And, if Dr. Potter think good to answer this argument, he must re- member his own doctrine to be, that even the catholic church may err in points not fundamental. " 22. Another argument for the universal infallibility of the church, I take out of Dr. Potter's own words. ' If (saith he) wef did not dissent in some opinions from the present Roman church, we could not agree with the church truly catholic. These words cannot be true, unless he presuppose that the church truly catholic cannot err in points not fundamental : for if she may err in such points, the Roman church, which he affirmeth to err only in points not fundamental, may agree with the church truly catholic, if she likewise may err in points not fundamental.' Therefore, either he must acknowledge a plain contradiction in his own words, or else must grant that the church truly catholic cannot err in points not fundamental, which is what we intended to prove. " 23. If words cannot persuade you, that in all controversies you must rely upon the infallibility of the church, at least yield your assent to deeds : hitherto I have produced arguments drawn, as it were, ex natura rei, from the wisdom and goodness of God, who cannot fail to have left some infallible means to determine contro- versies, which, as we have proved, can be no other, except a visible church, infallible in all her definitions. But because both catholics and protestants receive holy scripture, we may thence also prove the infallibilitv of the church in all matters which concern faith and religion. Our Saviour speaketh clearly: 'the gates of hell J shall not prevail against her.' And, '§1 will ask my Father, and he will give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever, the Spirit of truth.' And, ' But when he, the Spirit of || truth cometh, he shall teach you all truth.' The apostle saith, that the church is ' the pillar and ground of H truth.' And, ' he gave some apostles, and some prophets, and other some evange- * Page 75. X Matt. xvi. || Ibid. xvi. t Page 97. § John xiv. IT 1 Tim. iii. Charity maintained by Catholics. 191 lists, and other some pastors and doctors, to the consummation of the saints unto the work of the ministry, unto the edifying of the body of Christ; until we meet all into the unity of faith and knowledge of the Son of God, into a perfect man, into the measure of the age of the fulness of Christ : that now we be not children, wavering, and carried about with every wind of doctrine in the wickedness of men, in craftiness, to the circumvention* of error.' All which words seem clearly enough to prove, that the church is universally infallible ; without which, unity of faith could not be conserved against ' every wind of doctrine.' And yet Dr. Potterf limits these promises and privileges to fundamental points, in which he grants the church cannot err. I urge the words of scripture, which are universal, and do not mention any such re- straint. I allege that most reasonable and received rule, that scripture is to be understood literally, as it soundeth, unless some manifest absurdity force us to the contrary. But all will not serve to accord our different interpretation. In the mean time, divers of Dr. Potter's brethren step in, and reject his limitation, as over- large, and somewhat tasting of papistry : and therefore they restrain the mentioned texts, either to the infallibility which the apostles and other sacred writers had in penning of scripture, or else to the invisible church of the elect ; and to them not abso- lutely, but with a double restriction, that they shall not fall damn- ably, and finally ; and other men have as much right as these to interpose their opinion and interpretation. Behold we are three at debate about the self-same words of scripture ; we confer divers places and texts ; we consult the originals ; we examine trans- lations ; we endeavour to pray heartily ; we profess to speak sincerely, to seek nothing but truth, and the salvation of our own souls, and that of our neighbours ; and, finally, we use all those means, which, by protestants themselves, are prescribed for finding out the true meaning of scripture: nevertheless, we neither do, or have any possible means to agree, as long as we are left to ourselves; and when we should chance to be agreed, the doubt will still remain, whether the thing itself be a fundamental point or no : and yet it were great impiety to imagine, that God, the lover of all souls, hath left no certain infallible means, to decide both this and all other differences arising about the interpretation of scripture, or upon any other occasion. Our remedy therefore in these contentions must be, to consult and hear God's visible church, with submissive acknowledgment of her power and in- fallibility, in whatsoever she proposeth as a revealed truth ; ac- cording to that divine advice of St. Augustine, in these words : « If at lengthj thou seem to be sufficiently tossed, and hast a desire to put an end to thy pains, follow the way of the catholic discipline, which from Christ himself, by the apostles, hath come down even to us, and from us shall descend to all posterity.' And though I conceive, that the distinction of points, fundamental and not fundamental, hath now been sufficiently confuted, yet that no * Ephes. iv. + Page 151. 1. 153. X De Util. Cred. cap. viii. 192 Points rightly distinguished shadow of difficulty may remain, I will particularly refel a common saying of protestants, that it is sufficient for salvation to believe the apostles' creed, which they hold to be a summary of all funda- mental points of faith. ' THE ANSWER TO THE THIRD CHAPTER. Wherein it is maintained, that the distinction of points, funda- mental and not fundamental, is in this present controversy good and pertinent : and that the catholic church may err in the lat- ter kind of the said points. 1. This distinction is employed by protestants to many purposes ; and, therefore, if it be pertinent and good, (as they understand and apply it,) the whole edifice built thereon must be either firm and stable, or, if it be not, it cannot be for any default in this distinction. 2. If you object to them discords in matters of faith without any means of agreement — they will answer you, that they want not good and solid means of agreement in matters necessary to salva- tion ; viz. their belief of those things which are plainly and un- doubtedly delivered in scripture, which whoso believes, must of necessity believe all things necessary to salvation : and their mutual suffering one another to abound in their several sense, in matters not plainly and undoubtedly there delivered. And for their agreement in all controversies of religion, either they may have means to agree about them or not ; if you say they have, why did you before deny it ? if they have not means, why do you find fault with them for not agreeing 1 3. You will say, that their fault is, that — by remaining protes- tants, they exclude themselves from the means of agreement which you have — and which by submission to your church they might have also. But if you have means of agreement, the more shame for you that you still disagree. For who, I pray, is more inex- cusably guilty, for the omission of any duty ? they that either have no means to do it, or else know of none they have, which puts them in the same case, as if they had none : or they which profess to have an easy and expedite means to do it, and yet still leave it undone ? " If you had been blind (saith our Saviour to the pharisees) you had had no sin; but now you say you see, there- fore your sin remaineth." 4. If you say, you do agree in matters of faith, I say this is ridiculous, for you define matters of faith to be those wherein you agree : so that to say you agree in matters of faith, is to say you agree in those things wherein you do agree. And do not pro- testants do so likewise? Do not they agree in those things wherein they do agree ? 5. But you are all agreed, that only those things wherein you do agree are matters of faith. — And protestants, if they were wise, would do so too. Sure I am they have reason enough to do so : into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 193 seeing all of them agree with explicit faith in all those things, which are plainly and undoubtedly delivered in scripture ; that is, in all which God hath plainly revealed : and with an implicit faith, in that sense of the whole scripture which God intended, whatsoever it was. Secondly, That which you pretend is false ; for else, why do some of you hold it against faith, to take or allow the oath of allegiance ; others, as learned and honest as they, that it is against faith, and unlawful to refuse it, and allow the refusing of it ? Why do some of you hold that it is de fide, that the pope is head of the church by divine law, others the contrary? Some hold it de fide, that the blessed Virgin was free from actual sin ; others that it is not so. Some that the pope's indirect power over princes in temporalities is de fide ; others the contrary. Some that it is universal tradition, and consequently defide, that the Virgin Mary was conceived in original sin ; others the contrary. 6. But what shall we say now, if you be not agreed touching your pretended means of agreement, how then can you pretend to unity, either actual or potential, more than protestants may? Some of you say, the pope alone, without a council, may determine all controversies : but others deny this. Some, that a general coun- cil without a pope may do so : others deny this. Some, both in conjunction are infallible determiners : others again deny this. Lastly, some among you hold the acceptation of the decrees of councils by the universal church to be the only way to decide con- troversies : which others deny, by denying the church to be infal- lible. And, indeed, what way of ending controversies can this be, when either party may pretend that they are part of the church, and they receive not the degree, therefore the whole church hath not received it ? 7. Again, means of agreeing differences are either rational and well-grounded, and of God's appointment ; or voluntary, and taken up at the pleasure of men. Means of the former nature, we say, you have as little as we. For where hath God appointed, that the pope, or a council, or a council confirmed by the pope, or that society of christians which adhere to him, shall be the in- fallible judge of controversies ? I desire you to show any one of these assertions plainly set down in scripture, (as in all reason a thing of this nature should be,) or at least delivered with a full consent of fathers, or at least taught in plain terms by any one father for four hundred years after Christ. And if you cannot do this (as I am sure you cannot), and yet will still be obtruding yourselves upon us for our judges, who will not cry out, — perisse frontem de rebus ? 8. But then for means of the other kind, such as yours are, we have great abundance of them. For, besides all the ways which you have devised, which we make use of when we please, we have a great many more, which you yet have never thought of, for which we have as good colour out of scripture, as you have for yours. For, first, we could, if we would, try it by lots, whose doctrine is true, and whose false: and you know it is written, X 17 194 Points rightly distinguished *"The lot is cast into the lap, but the whole disposition of it is from the Lord." 2. We could refer them to the king, and you know it is written, f" A divine sentence is in the lips of the king ; his mouth transgresseth not in judgment." J" The heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord." We could refer the matter to any assembly of christians assembled in the name of Christ, see- ing it is writtten, § " W r here two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." We may refer it to any priest, because it is written, || " The priest's lips shall preserve knowledge." H " The scribes and pharisees sit in Moses' chair," &c. To any preacher of the gospel, to any pastor, or doctor ; for to every one of them Christ hath promised,** he will be with them "always, even to the end of the world;" and to every one of them, it is said, ff" He that heareth you, heareth me, &c. To any bishop, or prelate; for it is written, JJ"Obey your prelates;" and again, §§" He hath given pastors and doctors, &c. lest we should be carried about with every wind of doctrine." To any particular church of christians, seeing it is a particular church which is called ||||" The house of God, the pillar and ground of truth ;" and seeing of any particular church it is written, Till "He that heareth not the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen or a publican." We might refer it to any man that prays for God's Spirit; for it is written, ***" Every one that asketh, receiveth:" and again, fff"If any man want wisdom, let him ask of God, who giveth all men liberally, and upbraideth not." Lastly, we might refer it to the Jews ; for, without all doubt, of them it is written, XXX" My spirit that is in thee," &c. All these means of agreement, whereof not any one but hath as much pro- bability from scripture, as that which you obtrude upon us, offer themselves upon a sudden to me ; haply many more might be thought on, if we had time ; but these are enough to shew, that, would we make use of voluntary and devised means to determine differences, we had them in great abundance. And if you say, these would fail us and contradict themselves : so, as we pretend, have yours. There have been popes against popes ; councils against councils ; councils confirmed by popes against councils con- firmed by popes : lastly, the church of some ages against the church of other ages. Lastly, whereas you find fault — that protestants, upbraided with their discord, answer, that they differ only in points not fundamen- tal : — I desire you to tell me, whether they do so, or not so : if they do so, I hope you will not find fault with the answer ; if you say, they do not so, but in points fundamental also, then they are not members of the same church one with another, no more than with you : and therefore, why should you object to any of them, their differences from each other, any more than to yourselves, their more and greater differences from you ? * Prov. xvi. 33. + Prov. xvi. 10. X Prov. xxi. 1. § Matt, xviii. 20. || Mai. ii. 7. f Matt. xxv. 2. ** Matt, xxviii. 20. ft Luke x. 16. XX Heb. xiii. 17. §§Eph. iv.ll. |||| 1 Tim. iii. 15. INT Matt, xviii. 17. *** Matt. vii. 8. ttt Jam. i. 5. XXX Isa. lix. 21. •* into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 195 10. But they are convinced, sometimes even by their own con- fessions, that the ancient fathers taught divers points of popery : and then they reply, those fathers may nevertheless be saved, be- cause those errors were not fundamental. — And may not you also be convinced, by the confessions of your own men, that the fathers taught divers points held by protestants against the church of Rome, and divers against protestants, and the church of Rome ? Do not your purging indexes clip the tongues, and seal up the lips of a great many for such confessions ; and is not the above- cited confession of your Doway divines, plain and full to the same purpose? And do you not also, as freely as we, charge the fathers with errors, and yet say they were saved. Now what else do we understand by an unfundamental error, but such a one with which a man may possibly be saved? So that still you proceed in condemning others for your own faults, and urging arguments against us, which return more strongly upon your- selves. 11. But your will is — we should remember that Christ must always have a visible church. — Ans. Your pleasure shall be obeyed, on condition you will not forget that there is a difference between perpetual visibility and perpetual purity. As for the answer which you make for us, true it is, we believe the catholic church cannot perish, yet that she may, and did, err in points not fundamental; and that protestants were obliged to forsake those errors of the church, as they did, though not the church for her errors : for that they did not, but continued still members of the church. For it is not all one (though you perpetually confound them) to forsake the errors of the church, and to forsake the church : or to forsake the church in her error, and simply to forsake the church ; no more than it is for me to renounce my brother's or my friend's vices or errors, and to renounce my brother or my friend. The former then was done by protestants, the latter was not done: nay, not only not from the catholic, but not so much as from the Roman, did they separate per omnia ; but only in those practices which they con- ceived superstitious or impious. If you would at this time propose a form of liturgy, which both sides hold lawful, and then they would not join with you in this liturgy, you might have some colour then to say, they renounce your communion absolutely. But as things are now ordered, they cannot join with you in prayers, but they must partake with you in unlawful practices; and for this reason, they (not absolutely, but thus far) separate from your communion. And this, I say, they were obliged to do under pain of damnation. Not as if it were damna- ble to hold an error not damnable, but because it is damnable out- wardly to profess and maintain it, and to join with others in the practice of it, when inwardly they do not hold it. Now had they continued in your communion, that they must have done ; viz. have professed to believe, and externally practised, your er- rors, whereof they were convinced that they were errors ; which, though the matters of the errors had been not necessary, but n2 196 Points rightly distinguished only profitable, whether it had not been damnable dissimulation and hypocrisy, I leave it to you to judge. You yourself tell us, within two pages after this, that — you are obliged never to speak any one least lie against your knowledge, §. 2. — Now what is this but to live in a perpetual lie ? 12. As for that which, in the next place, you seem so to wonder at, that both catholics and protestants, according to the opinion of protestants may be saved in their several professions, because, forsooth, we both agree in all fundamental points — answer, this proposition, so crudely set down, as you have hei set it down, I know no protestant will justify : for you seem to make them teach that it is an indifferent thing, for the attainment of salvation, whether a man believe the truth or the falsehood ; and that they care not in whether of these religions a man live or die, so he die in either of them : whereas all that they say is this — that those amongst you which want means to find the truth, and so die in error ; or use the best means they can with industry, and without partiality to find the truth, and yet die in error, these men, thus qualified, notwithstanding these errors, may be saved. Secondly, For those that have means to find the truth, and will not use them, they conceive, though their case be dangerous, yet if they die with a general repentance for all their sins, known and unknown, their salvation is not desperate. The truths which they hold of faith in Christ and repentance, being, as it were, an antidote against their errors, and their negligence in seeking the truth. Especially, seeing, by confession of both sides, we agree in much more than is simply and indispensably necessary to salvation. 13. But seeing we make such various use of this distinction, is it not prodigiously strange that we will never be induced to give in a particular catalogue what points be fundamental? — And why, I pray, is it so prodigiously strange, that we give no answer to an unreasonable demand? God himself hath told us, *that " where much is given, much shall be required ; where little is given, little shall be required." To infants, deaf men, madmen, nothing, for aught we know, is given ; and, if it be so, of them nothing shall be required. Others, perhaps, may have means only given them to believe, f" that God is, and that he is a rewarder of them that seek him ;" and to whom thus much only is given, to them it shall not be damnable, that they believe but only this much. Which methinks is very manifest from the apostle, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, where, having first said, that " without faith it is impossible to please God," he subjoins, as his reason, " For whosoever cometh unto God must believe that God is, and that he is a rewarder of them that seek him." Where, in my opinion, this is plainly intimated, that this is the minimum quod, sic, the lowest degree of faith, wherewith, in men, capable of faith, God will be pleased; and that with this lowest degree he will be pleased, where means of rising higher are deficient. Besides, if without this belief, " that God is, and that * Luke xii. 48. t Heb. xi. 6. into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 197 he is a rewarder of them that seek him," God will not be pleased., then his will is, that we should believe it. Now his will it cannot be, that we should believe a falsehood ; it must be therefore true, " that he is a rewarder of them that seek him." Now it is pos- sible that they, which never heard of Christ, may seek God; therefore it is true, that even they shall please him, and be rewarded by him; I say rewarded, not with bringing them im- mediately to salvation without Christ, but with bringing them, according to his good pleasure, first, to faith in Christ, and so to salvation. To which belief the story of Cornelius, in the tenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, and St. Peter's words to him, are to me a great inducement. For, first, it is evident he be- lieved not in Christ, but was a mere gentile, and one who knew not but men might be worshipped ; and yet we are assured, that " his prayers and alms (even while he was in that state) came up for a memorial before God, that his prayer was heard, and his alms had in remembrance in the sight of God," ver. 4. That upon his then fearing God, and working righteousness (such as it was) he was accepted with God. But how accepted ? Not to be brought immediately to salvation, but to be promoted to a higher degree of the knowledge of God's will : for so it is in the fourth and fifth verses : " Call for one Simon, whose surname is Peter, he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do :" and, at ver. 33, " We are all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God." So that though even in his gentilism, he was accepted for his present state; yet, if he had continued in it, and refused to believe in Christ after the sufficient revelation of the gospel to him, and God's will to have him be- lieve it, he that was accepted before would not have continued accepted still : for then that condemnation had come upon him, — that light was come unto him, and he " loved darkness more than light." So that (to proceed a step farther) to whom faith in Christ is sufficiently propounded, as necessary to salvation, to them it is simply necessary and fundamental to believe in Christ ; that is, to expect remission of sins and salvation from him, upon the performance of the conditions he requires ; among which conditions one is, that we believe what he hath revealed, when it is sufficiently declared to have been revealed by him : for, by doing so, " we set our seal that God is true," and that Christ was sent by him. Now that may be sufficiently declared to one (all things considered), which (all things considered) to another is not sufficiently declared ; and, consequently, that may be funda- mental and necessary to one, which to another is not so. Which variety of circumstances makes it impossible to set down an exact catalogue of fundamentals ; and proves your request as reason- able as if you should desire us (according to the fable) to make a coat to fit the moon in all her changes; or to give you a garment that will fit all statures; or to make you a dial to serve all meridians; or to design particularly, what provision will serve an army for a year ; whereas there may be an army of ten thou- sand, there may be of one hundred thousand : and therefore 17* 198 Points rightly distinguished without setting down a catalogue of fundamentals in particular, (because none that can be given can universally serve for all men, God requiring more of them to whom he gives more, and less of them to whom he gives less) we must content ourselves by a general description to tell you what is fundamental ; and to warrant us in doing so, we have your example, §. 19, where, being engaged to give us a catalogue of fundamentals, instead thereof you tell us only in general — that all is fundamental, and not to be disbelieved, under pain of damnation, which the church hath defined. — As you therefore think it enough to say in general, that all is fundamental which the church hath de- fined, without setting down in particular a complete catalogue of all things, which in any age the church hath defined (which, I believe, you will not undertake to do ; and, if you do, it will be contradicted by your fellows) : so in reason you might think it enough for us also to say in general, that it is sufficient for any man's salvation to believe that the scripture is true, and contains all things necessary for salvation ; and do his best endeavour to find and believe the true sense of it; without delivering any particular catalogue of the fundamentals of faith. 14. Neither doth the want of such a catalogue leave us in such a perplexed uncertainty as you pretend. For though, perhaps, we cannot exactly distinguish in the scripture what is revealed, because it is necessary, from what is necessary, consequently and accidentally, merely because it is revealed ; yet we are sure enough, that all that is necessary any way, is there ; and there- fore, in believing all that is there, we are sure to believe all that is necessary. And if we err from the true and intended sense of some, nay, many obscure and ambiguous texts of scrip- ture, yet we may be sure enough that we err not damnably ; because, if we do indeed desire and endeavour to find the truth, we may be sure we do so, and as sure that it cannot consist with the revealed goodness of God, to damn him for error, that desires and endeavours to find the truth. 15. Ad. §. 2. The effect of this paragraph (forasmuch as con- cerns us) is this: that for any man to deny belief to any one thing, be it great or small, known by him to be revealed by Almighty God for a truth, is, in effect, to charge God with falsehood ; for it is to say, that God affirms that to be a truth which he either knows to be not a truth, or which he doth not know to be a truth : and therefore, without all controversy, this is a damnable sin. To this I subscribe with hand and heart, adding withal, that not only he which knows but he which believes (nay, though it be erroneously) any thing to be revealed by God, and yet will not believe it nor assent unto it, is in the same case, and commits the same sin of derogation from God's most perfect and pure veracity. 16. Ad. §. 3. I said purposely knows by himself, and believes himself; for as, without any disparagement of a man's honesty, I may believe something to be false, which he affirms of his cer- tain knowledge to be true ; provided I neither know nor believe into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 199 that he hath so affirmed : so, without any the least dishonour to God's eternal never-failing veracity, I may doubt of, or deny, some truth revealed by him, if I neither know nor believe it to be revealed by him. 17. Seeing therefore the crime of calling God's veracity in question, and consequently (according to your grounds) of erring fundamentally, is chargeable upon those only that believe the contrary of any one point known (not by others) but themselves to be testified by God : I cannot but fear, (though I hope other- wise,) that your heart condemned you of a great calumny and egregious sophistry, jn imputing fundamental and damnable errors to disagreeing protestants ; because, forsooth, some of them disbelieve; and directly, wittingly, and willingly oppose, what others do believe to be testified by the word of God. The sophistry of your discourse will be apparent, if it be contrived into a syllogism : thus, therefore, in effect you argue : Whosoever disbelieves any thing known by himself to be re- vealed by God, imputes falsehood to God, and therefore errs fundamentally : But some protestants disbelieve those things which others believe to be testified by God : Therefore, they impute falsehood to God, and err fundamen- tally : Neither can you with any colour pretend, that in these words — known to be testified by God — you meant — not by himself, but by any other ; seeing he only in fact affirms, that God doth deceive, or is deceived, who denies some things which himself knows or believes to be revealed by God, as before I have demon- strated. For otherwise, if I should deny belief to some thing which God had revealed secretly to such a man as I had never heard of, I should be guilty of calling God's veracity into question, which is evidently false. Besides, how can it be avoided, but the Jesuits and dominicans, the dominicans and franciscans. must upon this ground differ fundamentally, and one of them err damnably, seeing the one of them disbelieves, and willingly opposes, what the others believe to be the word of God ? 18. Whereas you say, that — the difference among protestants consists in this, that some believe some points, of which others are ignorant, or not bound expressly to know — I would gladly know whether you speak of protestants differing in profession only, or in opinion also. If the first, why do you say, presently after, that some disbelieve what others of them believe? If they differ in opinion, then sure they are ignorant of the truth of each other's opinions ; it being impossible and contradictious, that a man should know one thing to be true, and believe the contrary; or know it, and not believe it. And if they do not know the truth of each other's opinions, then I hope you will grant they are ignorant of it. If your meaning were, they were not ignorant, that each other held these opinions, or of the sense of the opinions which they held; I answer, this is nothing to the convincing of their understandings of the truth of them ; and these remaining 200 Points rightly distinguished unconvinced of the truth of them, they are excusable if they do not believe. 19. But — ignorance of what we are expressly bound to know is itself a fault, and therefore cannot be an excuse : — and there- fore if you could shew, that protestants differ in those points, the truth whereof (which can be but one) they were bound ex- pressly to know, I should easily yield that one side must of ne- cessity be in a mortal crime. But for want of proof of this, you content yourself only to say it; and therefore I also might be contented only to deny it, yet I will not, but give a reason for my denial. And my reason is, because our obligation expressly to know any divine truth must arise from God's manifest revealing of it, and his revealing unto us that he hath revealed it, and that his will is we would believe it: now, in the points controverted among protestants, he hath not so dealt with us, therefore he hath not laid any such obligation upon us. The major of this syllo- gism is evident, and therefore I will not stand to prove it : the minor also will be evident to him that considers that, in all the controversies of protestants there is a seeming conflict of scripture with scripture, reason with reason, authority with authority : which how it can consist with the manifest revealing of the truth of either side I cannot well understand. Besides, though we grant that scripture, reason, and authority, were all on one side, and the appearances of the other side all easily answerable ; yet if we consider the strange power that education and prejudices in- stilled by it have over even excellent understandings, we may well imagine that many truths, which in themselves are reveal- ed plainly enough, and yet to such or such a man, prepossessed with contrary opinions, not revealed plainly : neither doubt I, but God, who knows whereof we are made, and what passions we are subject unto, will compassionate such infirmities, and not enter into judgment with us for those things, which, all things considered, were unavoidable. 20. But till fundamentals (say you) be sufficiently proposed (as revealed by God) it is not against faith to reject them ; or rather, it is not possible prudently to believe them : and points unfunda- mental, being thus sufficiently proposed as divine truths, may not be denied ; therefore you conclude, there is no difference between them. — Ans. A circumstantial point may by accident become funda- mental, because it may be so proposed, that the denial of it will draw after it the denial of this fundamental truth — that all which God says is true. Notwithstanding in themselves there is a main differ- ence between them ; points fundamental being those only which are revealed by God, and commanded to be preached to all and be- lieved by all. Points circumstantial being such, as though God hath revealed them, yet the pastors of the church are not bound, under pain of damnation, particularly to teach them unto all men every where, and the people may be securely ignorant of them. 21. You say — not erring in points fundamental, is not suffi- cient for the preservation of the church ; because any error maintained by it against God's revelation is destructive. — I answer, into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 201 if you mean against God's revelation, known by the church to be so, it is true ; but it is impossible that the church should do so ; for ipso facto in doing it, it were a church no longer. But, if you mean against some revelation, which the church by error thinks to be no revelation, it is false. The church may ignorantly dis- believe such a revelation, and yet continue a church : which thus I prove : That the gospel was to be preached to all nations, was a truth revealed before our Saviour's ascension, in these words ; " Go and teach all nations," (Matt, xxviii. 19.) Yet through prejudice or inadvertence, or some other cause, the church dis- believed it, as it is apparent out of the eleventh and twelfth chapters of the Acts, until the conversion of Cornelius ; and yet was still a church. Therefore, to disbelieve some divine reve- lation, not knowing it to be so, is not destructive of salvation, or of the being of a church. Again, it is a plain revelation of God, that *the sacrament of the eucharist should be administered in both kinds; and fthat the public hymns and prayers of the church should be in such a language as is most for edification : yet these revelations the church of Rome not seeing, by reason of the veil before their eyes, their church's supposed infallibility, I hope the denial of them shall not be laid to their charge, no otherwise than as building hay and stubble on the foundation, not overthrowing the foundation itself. 22. Ad. §. 4. In the beginning of this paragraph, we have this argument against this distinction. — It is enough (by Dr. Potter's confession) to believe some things negatively; i. e. not to deny them ; therefore all denial of any divine truth excludes salvation. — As if you should say, one horse is enough for a man to go a journey ; therefore without a horse no man can go a journey. As if some divine truths, viz. those which are plainly revealed, might not be such, as of necessity were not to be denied : and others, for want of sufficient declaration, deniable without danger. Indeed, if Dr. Potter had said there had been no divine truth, declared sufficiently or not declared, but must upon pain of damnation be believed, or at least not denied ; then you might justly have con- cluded as you do: but now, that some may not be denied, and that some may be denied without damnation, why they may. not both stand together, I do not yet understand. 23. In the remainder you infer out of Dr. Potter's words — that all errors are alike damnable, if the manner of propounding the contrary truths be not different — which, for aught I know, all protestants, and all that have sense, must grant. Yet I deny your illation from hence, that the distinction of points into funda- mental and unfundamental, is vain and uneffectual for the purpose of protestants. For though, being alike proposed as divine truths, they are by accident alike necessary ; yet the real difference still remains between them, that they are not alike necessary to be proposed. 24. Ad. §. 5. The next paragraph, if it be brought out of the clouds, will, I believe, have in it these propositions: 1. Things * 1 Cor. xi. 28. t 1 Cor. xiv. 15, 16, 26. 202 Points rightly distinguished are distinguished by their different natures. 2. The nature of faith is taken, not from the matter believed; for then they that be- lieved different matters should have different faiths, but from the motive to it. 3. This motive is God's revelation. 4. This revela- tion is alike for all objects. 5. Protestants disagree in things equally revealed by God; therefore they forsake the formal motives of faith; and therefore have no faith nor unity therein. Which is truly a very proper and convenient argument to close up a weak discourse, wherein both the propositions are false for matter, confused and disordered for the form, and the conclusion utterly inconsequent. First, for the second proposition ; who knows not that the essence of all habits (and therefore of faith among the rest) is taken from their act, and their object ? If the habit be general, from the act and object in general ; if the habit be special, from the act and object in special. Then for the motive to a thing ; that it cannot be of the essence of the thing to which it moves, who can doubt that knows that a motive is an efficient cause, and that the efficient is always extrinsical to the effect 1 For the fourth, that God's revelation is alike for all ob- jects, it is ambigious : and if the sense of it be, that his revelation is an equal motive to induce us to believe all objects revealed by him, it is true, but impertinent : if the sense of it be, that all objects revealed by God are alike (that is, alike plainly and undoubtedly) revealed by him, it is pertinent, but most untrue. Witness the great diversity of texts of scripture, whereof some are so plain and evident, that no man of ordinary sense can mistake the sense of them. Some are so obscure and ambiguous, that to say this or this is the certain sense of them, were high presumption. For the fifth, protestants disagree in things equally revealed by God: in themselves, perhaps, but not equally to them, whose understandings, by reason of their different educa- tions, are fashioned and shaped for the entertainment of various opinions, and consequently some of them more inclined to believe such a sense of scripture, others to believe another ; which, to say that God will not take it into his consideration in judging men's opinions, is to disparage his goodness. But to what purpose is it that these things are equally revealed to both, (as the light is equally revealed to all blind men) if they be not fully revealed to either ? The sense of this scripture, " Why are they then bap- tized for the dead ?" And this, " He shall be saved, yet so as by fire ;" and a thousand others, is equally revealed to you, and to another interpreter, that is, certainly to neither. He now con- ceives one sense of them, and you another; and would it not be an excellent inference, if I should conclude now as you do ? That you forsake the formal motive of faith, which is God's reve- lation, and consequently lose all faith and unity therein ? So likewise the Jesuits and dominicans, and the franciscans and dominicans, disagree about things equally revealed by Almighty God ; and, seeing they do so, I beseech you let me understand, why this reason will not exclude them as well as protestants from all faith and unity therein ? Thus you have failed of your under- into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 203 taking in your first part of your title, and that is a very ill omen, especially in points of so straight mutual dependence, that we shall have but slender performance in your second assumpt : which is — that the church is infallible in all her definitions, whether concern- ing points fundamental or not fundamental. 25. Ad. §. 7, 8. The reasons in these two paragraphs, as they were alleged before, so they were before answered, chapter 2. And thither I remit the reader. 26. Ad. §. 9, 10, 11. I grant that the church cannot, without damnable sin, either deny any thing to be truth, which she knows to be God's truth ; or propose any thing as his truth, which she knows not to be so. — But that she may not do this by ignorance or mistake, and so, without damnable sin, that you should have proved, but have not. But, say you — this excuse cannot serve : for if the church be assisted only for points fundamental, she cannot but know that she may err in points not fundamental. — Answer, it does not follow, unless you suppose that the church knows that she is assisted no farther : but if, being assisted only so far, she yet did conceive by error, her assistance absolute and unlimited, or, if knowing her assistance restrained to funda- mentals, she yet conceived by error, that she should be guarded from proposing any thing but what was fundamental, then the consequence is apparently false. — But at least she cannot be cer- tain that she cannot err, and therefore cannot be excused from headlong and pernicious temerity in proposing points not funda- mental, to be believed by christians as matters of faith. — Answer, neither is this deduction worth any thing, unless it be understood of such unfundamental points, as she is not warranted to propose by evident text of scripture. Indeed, if she propose such, as matters of faith certainly true, she may well be questioned, quo warranto? she builds without a foundation, and says — thus saith the Lord, when the Lord doth not say so : which cannot be ex- cused from rashness and high presumption ; such a presumption, as an ambassador should commit, who should say in his master's name that for which he hath no commission : of the same nature, I say, but of a higher strain ; as much as the King of heaven is greater than any earthly king. But though she may err in some points not fundamental, yet may she have certainty enough in proposing others ; as for example, these : that Abraham begat Isaac, that St. Paul had a cloak, that Timothy was sick; because these, though not fundamental ; i. e. not essential parts of Chris- tianity, yet are evidently, and undeniably, set down in scripture, and consequently may be, without all rashness, proposed by the church as certain divine revelations. Neither is your argument concluding, when you say — if in such things she may be deceived she must be always uncertain of all such things — for my sense may sometimes possibly deceive me, yet I am certain enough that I see what I see, and feel what I feel. Our judges are not in- fallible in their judgments, yet are they certain enough that they judge aright, and that they proceed according to the evidence that is given, when they condemn a thief or a murderer to the 204 Points rightly distinguished gallows. A traveller is not always certain of his way, but often mistaken ; and doth it therefore follow that he can have no assu- rance that Charing-cross is his right way from the Temple to Whitehall? the ground of your error here, is your not distin- guishing between actual certainty and absolute infallibility. Geometricians are not infallible in their own science ; yet they are very certain of those things which they see demonstrated : and carpenters are not infallible, yet certain of the straightness of those things which agree with the rule and square. So, though the church be not infallibly certain, that in all her definitions, whereof some are about disputable and ambiguous matters, she shall proceed according to her rule ; yet being certain of the in- fallibility of her rule, and that, in this or that thing, she doth manifestly proceed according to it, she may be certain of the truth of some particular decrees, and yet not certain that she shall never decree but what is true. 27. Ad. §. 12. But if the church may err in points not funda- mental, she may err in proposing scripture, and so we cannot be assured, whether she have not been deceived already. — The church may err in her proposition or custody of the canon of scripture, if you understand by the church, any present church of one denomination ; for example, the Roman, the Greek, or so. Yet have we sufficient certainty of scripture, not from the bare testimony of any present church, but from universal tradition, of which the testimony of any present church is but a little part. So that here you fall into the fallacy, a dido secundum quid, ad dictum simpliciter. For, in effect, this is the sense of your argument : unless the church be infallible, we can have no certainty of scrip- ture from the authority of the church : therefore, unless the church be infallible, we can have no certainty hereof at all. As if a man should say, if the vintage of France miscarry, we can have no wine from France ; therefore, if that vintage miscarry, we can have no wine at all. And for the incorruption of scripture, I know no other rational assurance we can have of it than such as we have of the incorruption of other ancient books, that is, the consent of ancient copies : such I mean for the kind, though it may be far greater for the degree, of it. And if the Spirit of God give any man any other assurance hereof, this is not rational and discursive, but supernatural and infused : an assurance it may he to himself, but no argument to another. As for the infallibility of the church, it is so far from being a proof of the scripture's incorruption, that no proof can be pretended for it, but contro- verted places of scripture ; which yet are as subject to corruption as any other, and more likely to have been corrupted (if it had been possible) than any other, and made to speak as they do, for the advantage of those men, whose ambition it hath been a long time to bring all under their authority. Now then, if any man should prove the scriptures uncorrupted, because the church says so, which is infallible ; I would demand again, touching this very thing, that there is an infallible church, seeing it is not of itself evident, how shall I be assured of it? and what can he answer, into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 205 but that the scripture says so, in these and these places: here- upon I would ask him, how shall I be assured that the scriptures are incorrupted in these places ; seeing it is possible, and not alto- gether improbable, that these men, which desire to be thought infallible, when they had the government of all things in their own hands, may have altered them for their purpose? If to this he answer again, that the church is infallible, and therefore can- not do so ; I hope it would be apparent, that he runs round in a circle, and proves the scripture's incorruption by the church's infal- libility, and the church's infallibility by the scripture's incorrup- tion ; and that is, in effect, the church's infallibility by the church's infallibility, and the scripture's incorruption by the scrip- ture's incorruption. 28. Now for your observation, that — some books which were not always known to be canonical have been afterwards received for such ; but never any book or syllable defined for canonical, was after questioned or rejected for apocryphal — I demand, touching the first sort, whether they were commended to the church by the apostles as canonical or not ? if not, seeing the whole faith was preached by the apostles to the church, and see- ing, after the apostles, the church pretends to no new revelations, how can it be an article of faith to believe them canonical ? and how can you pretend that your church, which makes this an article of faith, is so assisted, as not to propose any thing as a divine truth which is not revealed by God? If they were, how then is the church an infallible keeper of the canon of the scrip- ture, which hath suffered some books of canonical scripture to be lost ? and others, to lose for a long time their being canonical, at least the necessity of being so esteemed, and afterwards, as it were by the law of Postliminium, hath restored their authority and canonicalness unto them ? If this were delivered by the apostles to the church, the point was sufficiently discussed ; and therefore your church's omission to teach it for some ages, as an article of faith, nay, degrading it from the number of articles of faith, and putting it among disputable problems, was surely not very laudable. If it were not revealed by God to the apostles, and by the apostles to the church, then can it be no revelation, and therefore her presumption in proposing it as such is inex- cusable. 29. And then for the other part of it — that never any book or syllable defined for canonical, was afterwards questioned or reject- ed for apocryphal — certainly it is a bold asseveration, but ex- tremely false. For I demand, the book of Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom, the Epistles of St. James and to the Hebrews, were they by the apostles approved for canonical, or no ? If not, with what face dare you approve them, and yet pretend that all your doctrine is apostolical ; especially, seeing it is evident that this point is not deducible, by rational discourse, from any other defined by them ? If they were approved by them, this, I hope, was a sufficient defi- nition ; and therefore you were best rub your forehead hard, and say that these books were never questioned. But, if you do so, 18 206 Points rightly distinguished then I shall he bold to ask you, what books you meant in saying before — some books, which were not always known to be ca- nonical, have been afterwards received. — Then for the book of Maccabees, I hope you will say it was defined for canonical before St. Gregory's time ; and yet he, (lib. xix. Moral, c. xiii.) citing a testimony out of it, prefaceth to it after this manner ; " Concerning which matter we do not amiss, if we produce a testimony out of books, although not canonical, yet set forth for the edification of the church. For Eleazer in the book of Maccabees," &c. which, if it be not to reject it from being canonical, is, without question, at least to question it. Moreover, because you are so punctual as to talk of words and syllables, I would know whether, before Sixtus Quintus's time, your church had a defined canon of scripture, or not? If not, then was your church surely a most vigilant keeper of scripture, that for one thousand five hundred years, had not defined what was scripture, and what w r as not. If it had, then I demand, was it that set forth by Sixtus ? or that set forth by Clement ? or a third different from both ? If it were that set forth by Sixtus, then is it now condemned by Clement ; if that of Clement, it was condemned I say ; but sure you will say con- tradicted and questioned by Sixtus: if different from both, then was it questioned and condemned by both, and still lies under the condemnation. But then, lastly, suppose it had been true, that both some book not known to be canonical had been received, and that never any after receiving had been questioned : how had this been a sign that the church is infallibly assisted by the Holy Ghost? In what mood or figure would this conclusion follow out of these premises? Certainly, your flying to such poor signs as these are, is to me a great sign that you labour with penury of better arguments ; and that thus to catch at shadows and bulrushes, is a shrewd sign of a sinking cause. 30. Ad. §. 13. We are told here — that the general promises of infallibility to the church, must not be restrained only to points fundamental ; because then the apostles' words and writings may also be restrained. — The argument put in form, and made complete, by supply of the concealed proposition, runs thus : The infallibility promised to the present church of any age, is as absolute and unlimited, as that promised to the apostles in their preachings and writings : But the apostles' infallibility is not to be limited to fundamen- tals: Therefore neither is the church's infallibility thus to be limited. Or, thus: The apostles' infallibility in their preaching and writing may be limited to fundamentals, as well as the infallibility of the pre- sent church : but that is not to be done : therefore this also is not to be done. Now to this argument, I answer, that, if by may be as well, in the major proposition, be understood, may be as possibly, it is true, but impertinent. If by it we understand, may be as justly and rightly, it is very pertinent, but very false. So that as Dr. into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 207 Potter limits the infallibility of the present church unto funda- mentals, so another may limit the apostles' unto them also. He may do it, de facto, but dejure he cannot ; that may be done, and done lawfully ; this also may be done, but not lawfully. That may be done, and, if it be done, cannot be confuted : this also mav be done, but, if it be done, may easily be confuted. It is done to" our hand in this very paragraph, by five words taken out of scripture : "All scripture is divinely inspired." Shew but as much for the church : shew where it is written, that all the decrees of the church are divinely inspired ; and the controversy will be at an end. Be- sides, there is not the same reason for the church's absolute infalli- bility, as for the apostles' and scripture's. For, if the church fall into error, it may be reformed by comparing it with the rule of the apostles' doctrine and scripture : but, if the apostles have erred in delivering the doctrine of Christianity, to whom shall we have re- course, for the discovering and correcting their error ? Again, there is not so much strength required in the edifice as in the foundation ; and if but wise men have the ordering of the building, they will make it a much surer thing, that the foundation shall not fail the building, than that the building shall not fall from the foundation. And though the building be to be of brick or stone, and perhaps of wood, yet it may be possibly they will have a rock for their foundation, whose stability is a much more indubitable thing, than the adherence of the structure to it. Now the apostles, and pro- phets, and canonical writers, are the foundation of the church, ac- cording to that of St. Paul, " built upon the foundation of apostles and prophets ;" therefore their stability, in reason, ought to be greater than the church's, which is built upon them. Again, a dependent infallibility (especially if the dependence be voluntary) cannot be so certain, as that on which it depends: but the infallibility of the church depends upon the infallibility of the apostles, as the straight- ness of the thing regulated upon the straightness of the rule : and, besides, this dependence is voluntary, for it is in the power of the church to deviate from this rule ; being nothing else but an aggre- gation of men, of which every one hath free-will, and is subject to passions and error : therefore the church's infallibility is not so cer- tain as that of the apostles. 31. Lastly, Quid verba audiam, cum facta fideam? If you be so infallible as the apostles were, shew it as the apostles did : " They went forth (saith St. Mark) and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming their words with signs following." It is impossible that God should lie, and that the eternal Truth should set his hand and seal to the confirmation of a falsehood, or of such doctrine as is partly true, and partly false. The apostles' doctrine was thus confirmed, therefore it was entirely true, and in no part either false or uncertain. I say, in no part of that which they delivered constantly, as a certain divine truth, and which had the attestation of divine miracles. For that the apostles themselves, even after the sending of the Holy Ghost, were, and through inadvertence or prejudice, continued for a time in an error, repugnant to a revealed truth ; it is, as I have already 208 Points rightly distinguished noted, unanswerably evident, from the story of the Acts of the Apostles. For notwithstanding our Saviour's express warrant and injunction, to "go and preach to all nations," yet until St. Peter was better informed by a vision from heaven, and by the conver- sion of Cornelius, both he and the rest of the church held it un- lawful for them to go or preach the gospel to any but the Jews. 32. And for those things which they profess to deliver as the dictates of human reason and prudence, and not as divine revela- tions, why we should take them to be divine revelations, I see no reason ; nor how we can do so, and not contradict the apostles, and God himself. Therefore, when St. Paul says, in the first Epistle to the Corinthians, vii. 12. " To the rest speak I, not the Lord ;" and again, " concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord, but I deliver my judgment:" if we will pretend that the Lord did certainly speak what St. Paul spake, and that his judgment was God's commandment, shall we not plainly contradict St. Paul, and that Spirit, by which he wrote 1 which moved him to write, as in other places, divine revelations, which he certainly knew to be such : so, in this place, his own judgment touching some things which God had not particularly revealed unto him. And if Dr. Potter did speak to this purpose — that the apostles were infallible only in these things which they spake of certain knowledge — I cannot see what danger there were in saying so: yet the truth is, you wrong Dr. Potter. It is not he, but Dr. Stapleton in him, that speaks the words you cavil at. Dr. Sta- pleton, saith he, p. 140, is full and punctual to this purpose : then sets down the effect of his discourse, I. 8. Princ. Doct. 4. c. 15, and in that, the words you cavil at; and then, p. 150, he shuts up this paragraph with these words: thus Dr. Stapleton. So that, if either the doctrine or the reason be not good, Dr. Stapleton, not Dr. Potter, is to answer for it. 33. Neither do Dr. Potter's ensuing words — limit the apostles' infallibility to truths absolutely necessary to salvation — if you read them with any candour ; for, it is evident, he grants the church infallible in truth absolutely necessary ; and as evident, that he ascribes to the apostles the Spirit's guidance, and conse- quently infallibility, in a more high and absolute manner than any since them. — From whence, thus I argue : he that grants the church infallible in fundamentals, and ascribes to the apostles the infallible guidance of the Spirit, in a more high and absolute man- ner than to any since them, limits not the apostles' infallibility to fundamentals ; but Dr. Potter grants to the church such a limited infallibility, and ascribes to the apostles the Spirit's in- fallible guidance in a more high and absolute manner ; therefore he limits not the apostles' infallibility to fundamentals. I once knew a man out of courtesy help a lame dog over a stile, and he for requital bit him by the fingers: just so you serve Dr. Potter. He out of courtesy grants you that those words, " The Spirit shall lead you into all truth, and shall abide with you ever ;" though in their high and most absolute sense, they agree only to the apostles, yet in a conditional, limited, moderate, secondary sense, into Fundamental and not Fundamental 209 they may be understood of the church : but says, that if they be understood of the church, " all must not be simply all," no, nor so large an all as the apostles' all, " but all necessary to salva- tion." And you, to requite his courtesy in granting you thus much, cavil at him, as if he had prescribed these bounds to the apostles also, as well as the present church. Whereas, he hath explained himself to the contrary, both in the clause aforemen- tioned, " the apostles who had the Spirit's guidance in a more high and absolute manner than any since them ;" and in these words ensuing, " whereof the church is simply ignorant;" and again, " wherewith the church is not acquainted." But most clearly in those which, being most incompatible to the apostles, you, with an &c, I cannot but fear, craftily have concealed : " How many obscure texts of scripture which she understands not? How many school-questions, which she hath not, haply cannot de- termine ? And for matters of fact, it is apparent that the church may err ;" and then concludes, that " we must understand by all truths, not simply all, but (if you conceive the words as spoken of the church) all truth absolutely necessary to salvation ;" and yet, beyond all this, the negative part of his answer agrees very well to the apostles themselves ; for that all, which they were led unto, was not simply all, otherwise St. Paul erred in saying, " we know in part ;" but such an all as was requisite to make them the church's foundations. Now such they could not be, without freedom from error, in all those things which they delivered con- stantly, as certain revealed truths. For, if we once suppose they may have erred in some things of this nature, it will be utterly undiscernible what they have erred in, and what they have not. Whereas, though we suppose the church hath erred in some things, yet we have means to know what she hath erred in, and what she hath not ; I mean, by comparing the doctrine of the present church with the doctrine of the primitive church delivered in scripture. But then, last of all, suppose the doctor had said, (which I know he never intended) that this promise, in this place made to the apostles, was to be understood only of truths abso- lutely necessary to salvation ; is it consequent that he makes their preaching and writing not infallible in points not fundamental? Do you not blush for shame at this sophistry ? The doctor says, no more was promised in this place ; therefore he says no more was promised ! Are there not other places besides this ? And may not that be promised in other places, which is not pro- mised in this ? 34. But if the apostles were infallible in all things proposed hy them as divine truths, the like must be affirmed of the church, because Dr. Potter teacheth the said promise to be verified in the church. True, he doth so, but not in so absolute a manner. Now what is opposed to absolute, but limited, or restrained 1 To the apostles then it was made, and to them only, yet the words are true of the church. And this very promise might have been made to it, though here it is not. They agree to the apostles in a higher, to the church in a lower sense ; to the apostles in a more absolute, o 18* 210 Points rightly distinguished to the church in a more limited sense. To the apostles absolutely for the church's direction ; to the church conditionally bv adhe- rence to that direction, and so far as she doth adhere to it. In a word, the apostles were led into all truths by the Spirit, efficaciter : the church is led also into all truths by the apostles' writings, sufficienter : so that the apostles and the church may be fitly com- pared to the star, and the wise men. The star was directed by the finger of God, and could not but go right to the place where Christ was : but the wise men were led by the star to Christ ; led by it, I say, not efficaciter or irresistibiliter, but sufficienter ; so that, if they would, they might follow it; if they would not, they might choose. So was it between the apostles writing scrip- tures and the church. They, in their writings, were infallibly assisted to propose nothing as a divine truth, but what was so : the church is also led into all truth, but it is by the intervening of the apostles' writings : but it is as the wise men were led by the star, or as a traveller is directed by a Mercurial statue, or as a pilot by his card and compass, led sufficiently, but not irre- sistibly ; led as that she may follow, not so that she must. For, seeing the church is a society of men, whereof every one (accord- ing to the doctrine of the Romish church) hath free-will in believing, it follows, that the whole aggregate hath free-will in believing. And if any man say that at least it is morally im- possible, that of so many, whereof all may believe aright, not any should do so : I answer, it is true, if they did all give themselves any liberty of judgment. But if all (as the case is here) captivate their understandings to one of them, all are as likely to err as that one ; and he more likely to err than any other, because he may err, and thinks he cannot, and because he conceives the Spirit absolutely promised to that succession of bishops, of which many have been notoriously and confessedly wicked men — men of the world : whereas this Spirit is the " Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him." Besides, let us suppose, that neither in this, nor in any other place, God hath promised any more unto them, but to lead them into all truth, necessary for their own, and other men's salvation : doth it therefore follow that they were, de facto, led no farther 1 God, indeed, is obliged by his veracity to do all that he hath promised, but is there any thing that binds him not to do any more ? May not he be better than his word, but you will quarrel at him 1 May not his bounty exceed his promise ? And may not we have certainty enough that oft-times it doth so? God at first did not promise to Solomon, in his vision at Gibeon, any more than what he asked, which was — wisdom to govern his people, and that he gave him. But yet, I hope, you will not deny that we have certainty enough that he gave him something which neither God had promised, nor he had asked. If you do, you contra- dict God himself: for, " Behold (saith God), because thou hast asked this thing, I have done according to thy word. Lo, I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart ; so that there was none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 211 unto thee : and I have also given thee that which thou hast not asked, both riches and honour, so that there shall not be any among the kings like unto thee in all thy days." God, for aught appears, never obliged himself by promise, to shew St. Paul those unspeakable mysteries, which in the third heaven he shewed unto him ; and yet, I hope, we have certainty enough that he did so. God promises to those that seek his kingdom, and the righteousness thereof, that all things necessary shall be added unto them ; and in rigour by his promise he is obliged to do no more ; and if he give them necessaries, he hath discharged his obligation : shall we therefore be so injurious to his bounty to- wards us, as to say it is determined by the narrow bounds of mere necessity? So, though God hath obliged himself by promise to give his apostles infallibility only in things necessary to salvation ; nevertheless, it is utterly inconsequent that he gave them no more, than by the rigour of his promise he was engaged to do ; or that we can have no assurance of any farther assistance than he gave them ; especially when he himself, both by his word and by his works, hath assured us, that he did assist them farther. You see by this time that your chain of fearful consequences (as you call them) is turned to a rope of sand, and may easily be avoided, with- out any flying to your imaginary infallibility of the church in all her proposals. 35. Ad. §. 14, 15. Doubting of a book received for canonical, may signify, either doubting whether it be canonical ; or, sup- posing it to be canonical, whether it be true. If the former sense were yours, I must then again distinguish of the term, received ; for it may signify, either received by some particular church, or by the present church universal, or the church of all ages. If you meant the word in either of the former senses, that which you say is not true. A man may justly and reasonably doubt of some texts, or some book received by some particular church, or by the universal church of this present time, whether it be canonical or no ; and yet have just reason to believe, and no reason to doubt, but that other books are canonical. As Eusebius, perhaps, had reason to doubt, of the Epistle of St. James; the church of Rome, in Jerome's time, of the Epistle to the Hebrews : and yet they did not doubt of all the books of the canon, nor had reason to do so. If by received, you mean received by the church of all ages, I grant, he that doubts of any one such book, hath as much reason to doubt of all. But yet here again I tell you, that it is possible a man may doubt of one such book, and yet not of all ; because it is possible men may do not according to reason. If you meant your words in the latter sense, then, I confess, he that believes such a book to be canonical, i. e. the word of God, and yet (to make an impossible supposition) believes it not to be true, if he will do according to reason, must doubt of all the rest, and believe none. For there being no greater reason to believe any thing true than because God hath said it, nor no other reason to believe the scripture to be true, but only because it is God's word ; he that doubts of the truth of any thing said by God, hath as much o2 212 No Church of one Denomination infallible. reason to believe nothing that he says ; and therefore, if he will do according to reason, neither must nor can believe any thing he says. And upon this ground you conclude rightly, that the infalli- bility of true scripture must be universal, and not confined to points fundamental. 36. And this reason why we should not refuse to believe any part of scripture, upon pretence that the matter of it is not fundamental, you confess to be convincing. — But the same reason, you say, is as convincing for the universal infallibility of the church : for (say you) unless she be infallible in all things, w cannot believe her in any one. — But by this reason your pro selytes, knowing you are not infallible in all things, must not, nor cannot believe you in any thing : nay, you yourself must not believe yourself in any thing, because you know that you are not infallible in all things. Indeed, if you had said, we could not rationally believe her for her own sake, and upon her own word and authority in any thing, I should willingly grant the conse- quence. For an authority subject to error can be no firm or stable foundation of my belief in any thing ; and if it were in any thing, then this authority, being one and the same in all proposals, I should have the same reason to believe all, that I have to believe one ; and therefore must either do unreasonably, in believing any one thing, upon the sole warrant of this au- thority ; or unreasonably, in not believing all things equally warranted by it. Let this therefore be granted ; and what will come of it ? Why then, you say, we cannot believe her in pro- pounding canonical books. If you mean still (as you must do unless you play the sophister) not upon her own authority, I grant it : for we believe canonical books not upon the authority of the present church, but upon universal tradition. If you mean not at all, and that with reason we cannot believe these books to be cano- nical, which the church proposes, I deny it. There is no more consequence in the argument than in this : the devil is not infalli- ble ; therefore, if he says there is one God, I cannot believe him. No geometrician is infallible in all things, therefore not in these things which he demonstrates. Mr. Knot is not infallible in all things, therefore he may not believe that he wrote a book, entitled "Charity Maintained." 37. But though the reply be good, protestants cannot make use of it, with any good coherence to this distinction, and some other doctrines of theirs : because they pretend to be able to tell what points, are fundamental, and what not; and therefore, though they should believe scripture erroneous in others, yet they might be sure it erred not in these. — To this I answer, that if, without dependence on scripture, they did know what were fundamental, and what not, they might possibly believe the scripture true in fundamentals, and erroneous in other things. But seeing they ground their belief, that such and such things only are fun- damental, only upon scripture, and go about to prove their assertion true, only by scripture ; then must they suppose the scripture true absolutely and in all things, or else the scripture No Church of one Denomination infallible. 213 could not be a sufficient warrant to them to believe this thing, that these only points are fundamental. For who would not laugh at them if they should argue thus : the scripture is true in something, the scripture says that these points only are funda- mental, therefore this is true, that these only are so ? For every freshman in logic knows, that from mere particulars nothing can be certainly concluded. But, on the other side, this reason is firm and demonstrative — the scripture is true in all things; but the scripture says, that these only points are the fundamentals of christian religion ; therefore it is true that these only are so. So that the knowledge of fundamentals, being itself drawn from scripture, is so far from warranting us to believe the scripture is, or may be, in part true, and in part false ; that itself can have no foundation, but the universal truth of scripture. For, to be a fun- damental truth, presupposes to be a truth ; now I cannot know any doctrine to be a divine and supernatural truth, or a true part of Christianity, but only because the scripture says so, which is all true : therefore, much more can I not know it to be a fundamental truth. 38. Ad. §. 16. To this paragraph I answer — Though the church being not infallible, I cannot believe her in every thing she says ; yet I can and must believe her in every thing she proves, either by scripture, reason, or universal tradition, be it fundamental, or be it not fundamental. This you say — we cannot in points not fundamental, because in such we believe she may err : — but this I know, we can ; because, though we may err in some things, yet she does not err in what she proves, though it be not funda- mental. Again, you say — we cannot do it in fundamentals, because we must know what points be fundamental, before we go to learn of her. Not so. But seeing faith comes by hearing, and by hearing those who give testimony to it, which none doth but the church, and the parts of it ; I must learn of the church, or of some part of it, or I cannot know any thing fundamental or not fundamental. For how can I come to know, that there was such a man as Christ, that he taught such doctrine, that he and his apostles did such miracles in confirmation of it, that the scripture is God's word, unless I be taught it? So then, the church is, though not a certain foundation and proof of my faith, yet a necessary introduction to it. 39. But the church's infallible direction extending only to fundamentals, unless I know them before I go to learn of her, I may be rather deluded than instructed by her. — The reason and connexion of this consequence, I fear neither I nor you do well understand. And besides I must tell you, you are too bold in taking that which no man grants you — that the church is an infallible director in fundamentals. For if she were so, then must we not only learn fundamentals of her, but also learn of her what is fundamental, and take all for fundamental which she delivers to us as such. In the performance whereof, if I knew any one church to be infallible, I would quickly be of that church. But, good Sir, you must needs do us this favour, to be so acute 214 No Church of one Denomination infallible. as to distinguish between being infallible in fundamentals, and being an infallible guide in fundamentals. That there shall be always a church infallible in fundamentals, we easily grant ; for it comes to no more but this — that there shall be always a church : but that there shall be always such a church, which is an infallible guide in fundamentals, this we deny. For this cannot be without settling a known infallibility in some one known society of christians (as the Greek or the Roman, or some other church) ; by adhering to which guide, men might be guided to believe aright in all fundamentals. A man that were destitute of all means of communicating his thoughts to others, might yet, in himself and to himself, be infallible, but he could not be a guide to others. A man or a church that were invisible, so that none could know how to repair to it for direction, could not be an infallible guide, and yet he might be in himself infallible. You see, then, there is a wide difference between these two ; and there- fore I must beseech you not to confound them, nor to take the one for the other. 40. But they that know what points are fundamental, otherwise than by the church's authority, learn not of the church. — Yes, they may learn of the church, that the scripture is the word of God, and from the scripture, that such points are fundamental, others are not so; and consequently learn, even of the church, even of your church, that all is not fundamental, nay, all is not true, which the church teacheth to be so. Neither do I see what hinders, but a man may learn of a church how to confute the errors of that church which taught him: as well as of my master in physic, or the mathematics, I may learn those rules and prin- ciples, by which 1 may confute my master's erroneous conclusion. 41. But you ask — If the church be not an infallible teacher, why are we commanded to hear, to seek, to obey the church ? — I answer, for commands to seek the church, I have not yet met with any ; and, I believe, you, if you were to show them, would be yourself to seek. But yet, if you could produce some such, we might seek the church to many good purposes, without supposing her a guide infallible. And then for hearing and obey- ing the church, 1 would fain know, whether none be heard and obeyed, but those that are infallible ; whether particular churches, governors, pastors, parents, be not to be heard and obeyed ? Or whether all these be infallible? I wonder you will thrust upon us so often these worn-out objections, without taking notice of their answers. ' 42. Your argument from St. Austin's first place is a fallacy, A dicto secundum quid, ad dictum simpliciter : If the whole church practise any of these things (matters of order and decency, for such only there he speaks of), to dispute whether that ought to be done, is insolent madness. — And from hence you infer — If the whole church practise any thing, to dispute whether it ought to be done, is insolent madness. — As if there were no difference between any thing, and any of these things ? Or, as if I might not esteem it pride and folly to contradict and disturb the church No Church of one Denomination infallible. 215 for matter of order, pertaining to the time, and place, and other circumstances of God's worship ; and yet account it neither pride nor folly, to go about to reform errors, which the church hath suffered to come in, and to vitiate the very substance of God's worship. It was a practice of the whole church in St. Augustine's time, and esteemed an apostolic tradition even by St. Augustine himself, that the eucharist should be administered to infants : tell me, Sir, I beseech you, had it been insolent madness to dispute against this practice, or had it not ? If it had, how insolent and mad are you, that have not only disputed against it, but utterly abolished it? If it had not, then, as I say, you must understand St. Augustine's words, not simply of all things, but (as indeed he himself restrained them) of these things, of matter of order, de- cency, and uniformity. 43. In the next place, you tell us out of him — that that which hath been always kept, is most rightly esteemed to come from the apostles: — very right, and what then? Therefore the church cannot err in defining of controversies. Sir, I beseech you, when you write again, do us the favour to write nothing but syllogisms : for I find it still an extreme trouble to find out the concealed propositions, which are to connect the parts of your enthymemes. As now, for example, I profess unto you I am at my wit's end, and have done my best endeavour, to find some glue, or solder, or cement, or chain, or thread, or any thing to tie this antecedent and this consequent together, and at length am enforced to give it over, and cannot do it. 44. But the doctrines — that infants are to be baptized, and those that are baptized by heretics, are not to be rebaptized, are neither of them to be proved by scripture: and yet, according to St. Augus- tine, they are true doctrines, and we may be certain of them upon the authority of the church, which we could not be, unless the church were infallible; therefore the church is infallible. — I answer, that there is no repugnance, but we may be certain enough of the uni- versal traditions of the ancient church ; such as, in St. Augustine's account, these were, which here are spoken of, and yet not be certain enough of the definitions of the present church, unless you can show (which I am sure you never can do) that the infallibility of the present church was always a tradition of the ancient church. Now your main business is to prove the present church infallible, not so much in consigning ancient tradition, as in defining emer- gent controversies. Again, it follows not, because the church's authority is warrant enough for us to believe some doctrine, touch- ing which the scripture is silent ; therefore it is warrant enough to believe these, to which the scripture seems repugnant. Now the doctrines which St. Augustine received upon the church's authority, are of the first sort ; the doctrines for which we deny your church's infallibility, are of the second : and, therefore, though the church's authority might be strong enough to bear the weight which St. Augustine laid upon it, yet haply it may not be strong enough to bear that which you lay upon it ; though it may support some doctrines without scripture, yet surely not 216 No Church of one Denomination infallible. against it. And, last of all, to deal ingenuously with you and the world, lam not such an idolater of St. Augustine as to think a thing proved sufficiently, because he says it, nor that all his sentences are oracles ; and particularly in this thing, that, what- soever was practised or held by the universal church of his time, must needs have come from the apostles; though considering the nearness of his time to the apostles, I think it a good probable way, and therefore am apt enough to follow it, when I see no reason to the contrary : yet, I profess, I must have better satisfac- tion before I can induce myself to hold it certain and infallible. And this, not because popery would come in at this door, as some have vainly feared, but because by the church universal of some time, and the church universal of other times, I see plain con- tradictions held and practised : both which could not come from the apostles ; for then the apostles had been teachers of falsehood. And therefore, the belief or practice of the present universal church, can be no infallible proof, that the doctrine so believed, or the custom so practised, came from the apostles. I instance in the doctrine of the Millenaries, and the eucharist's necessity for infants; both which doctrines have been taught by the consent of the eminent fathers of some ages, without any opposition from any of their contemporaries; and were delivered by them, not as doctors, but as witnesses; not as their opinions, but apostolic traditions. And therefore, measuring the doctrine of the church by all the rules which Cardinal Perron gives us for that purpose, both these doctrines must be acknowledged to have been the doctrine of the ancient church of some age or ages ; and that the contrary doctrines were catholic at some other time, I believe you will not think it needful for me to prove. So that either I must say the apostles were fountains of contradictious doctrines, or that being the universal doctrine of this present church, is no sufficient proof that it came originally from the apostles. Besides, who can warrant us that the universal traditions of the church were all apostolical ? Seeing in that famous place for traditions, in Tertullian* — Quicunque traditor, any author whatsoever is * De corona Militis, c. iii. &c. Where having recounted sundry unwritten traditions then observed by chiistians, many whereof, by the way, (notwithstanding the council of Trent's profession, to " receive them and the written word with like affection of piety") are now rejected and neglected by the church of Rome : for example, immer- sion in baptism, tasting a mixture of milk and honey presently after, abstaining from baths for a week after; accounting it an impiety to pray kneeling on the Lord's day, or between Easter and Pentecost : I say, having reckoned up these and other tradi- tions in chap. iii. he adds another in the fourth, of the veiling of women ; and then adds, " since I find no law for this, it follows, that tradition must have given this ob- servation to custom, which shall gain in time apostolical authority by the interpre- tation of the reason of it. By these examples, therefore, it is declared, that the observing of unwritten tradition, being confirmed by custom, may be defended. The perseverance of the observation being a good testimony of the goodness of the tradition. Now custom, even in civil affairs, where a law is wanting, passeth for a law. Neither is it materia], whether it be grounded on scripture, or reason, seeing reason is com- mendation enough for a law. Moreover, if law be grounded on reason, all that must bo law, which is so grounded — A quocunque productum — Whosoever is the producer of it. Do ye think it is not lawful, omni Jideli, for every faithful man to conceive and constitute ? provided he constitute only what is not repugnant to God's will, what is conducible for discipline, and available to salvation ? seeing the Lord says, ' why even of No Church of one Denomination infallible. 217 founder good enough for them. And who can secure us that human inventions, and such as came a quocunque traditore, might not, in short time, gain the reputation of apostolic 1 Seeing the direction then was, *Prcecepta majorum apostolicas traditiones quisque existimat. 45. No less, you say, is St. Chrysostome for the infallible tradi- tions of the church. But you were to prove the church infalli- ble, not in her traditions (which we willingly grant, if they be as universal as the tradition of the undoubted books of scripture is, to be as infallible as the scripture is : for neither doth being written make the word of God the more infallible, nor being unwritten make it the less infallible:) not therefore in her uni- versal traditions were you to prove the church infallible, but in all her decrees and definitions of controversies. To this point, when you speak, you shall have an answer ; but hitherto you do but wander. 4G. But let us see what St. Chrysostome says : " They (the apostles) delivered not all things in writing ; (who denies it ?) but many things also without writing ; (who doubts of it ?) and these also are worthy of belief." Yes, if we knew what they were. But many things are worthy of belief, which are not necessary to be believed: as that Juiius Caesar was emperor of Rome is a thing worthy of belief, being so well testified as it is, but yet it is not necessary to be believed ; a man may be saved without it. Those many works which our Saviour did, which St. John supposes would not have been contained in a world of books, if they had been written ; or if God, by some other means, had preserved the knowledge of them, had been as worthy to be believed, and as necessary, as those that are written. But to shew you how much a more faithful keeper records are than report, those few that were written are preserved and believed ; those infinitely more, that were not written, are all lost and vanished out of the memory of men. And seeing God in his providence hath not thought fit to preserve the memory of them, he hath freed us from the obligation of believing them : for every obligation ceaseth, when it becomes impossible. Who can doubt but the primitive christians, to whom the epistles of the apostles were written, either of themselves understood or were instructed by the apostles, touching the sense of the obscure places of them? These traditive interpretations, had they been written and dispersed, as the scrip- tures were, had without question been preserved as the scriptures are. But, to shew how excellent a keeper of the tradition the church of Rome hath been, or even the catholic church ; for v/ant of writing they are all lost, nay, were all lost within a few ages after Christ : so that if we consult the ancient interpreters, we shall hardly find any two of them agree about the sense of any yourselves judge ye not what is right V " And a little after, " this reason now demands saving the respect of the tradition — A quocunque. traditore censelur, nee authorem respiciens sed authoritatem ; from whatsoever tradition it comes, neither regarding the author, but the authority." *Jer. 19 218 No Church of one Denomination infallible. one of them. Cardinal Perron, in his Discourse of Traditions, having alleged this place for them, " Hold the traditions," &c. tells us, " we must not answer that St. Paul speaks here only of such traditions which (though not in this Epist. to Thess. yet) were afterwards written, and in other books of scripture : because it is upon occasion of tradition (touching the cause of the hinderance of the coming of Antichrist) which was never written, that he lays this injunction upon them, to hold the traditions." Well, let us grant this argument good, and concluding : and that the church of the Thessalonians, or the catholic church (for what St. Paul writ to one church, he writ to all) were to hold some un- written traditions, and among the rest, what was the cause of the hinderance of the coming of Antichrist. But what if they did not perform their duty in this point, but suffered this tradition to be lost out of the memory of the church ? Shall we not conclude, that seeing God would not suffer any thing necessary to salvation to be lost, and he hath suffered this tradition to be lost, therefore the knowledge or belief of it, though it were a profitable thing, yet it was not necessary ? I hope you will not challenge such authority over us, as to oblige us to impossibilities, to do that which you cannot do yourselves : it is therefore requisite that you make this command possible to be obeyed, before you require obedience unto it. Are you able then to instruct us so well, as to be fit to say unto us, Now ye know what withholdeth ? Or do you yourselves know that ye may instruct us? Can ye, or dare you say, this or this was this hinderance which St. Paul here meant, and all men under pain of damnation are to believe it? Or if you cannot-, (as I am certain you cannot) go then, and vaunt your church, for the only watchful, faithful, infallible keeper of the apostles' traditions; when here this very tradition, which here in particular was deposited with the Thessalonians and the primi- tive church, you have utterly lost it ; so that there is no footstep or print of it remaining, which, with divine faith, we may rely upon. Blessed therefore be the goodness of God, who, seeing that what was not written was in such danger to be lost, took order, that what was necessary should be written ! St. Chrysos- tome's counsel, therefore, of accounting the church's traditions worthy of belief, we are willing to obey : and, if you can of any thing make it appear that it is tradition, we will seek no farther. But this we say withal, that we are persuaded you cannot make this appear in any thing, but only in the canon of scripture ; and that there is nothing now extant, and to be known by us, which can put in so good plea to be the unwritten word of God, as the unquestioned books of canonical scripture, to be the written word of God. 47. You conclude this paragraph with a sentence of St. Au- gustine, who says, " The church doth not approve, nor dissemble, nor do those things which are against faith or good life:" and from hence you conclude, that it never has done so, nor ever can do so. But though the argument hold in logic a non posse, ad non esse, yet I never heard that it would hold back again, a No Church of one Denomination infallible. 219 non esse, ad non posse. The church cannot do this, therefore it does not, follows with good consequence : but the church doth not this, therefore it shall never do it, nor can never do it, this I believe will hardly follow. In the epistle next before to the same Januarius, writing of the same matter, he hath these words : " It remains, that the thing you inquire of must be of that third kind of things, which are different in divers places. Let every one, therefore, do that which he finds done in the church to which he comes; for none of them is against faith or good manners." And why do you not infer from hence, that — no particular church can bring up any custom that is against faith or good manners? Certainly this consequence hath as good reason for it as the former. If a man say of the church of England, (what St. Au- gustine of the church) that she neither approves nor dissembles, nor doth any thing against faith or good manners, would you collect presently, that this man did either make or think the church of England infallible 1 Furthermore, it is observable out of this, and the former epistle, that this church, which did not (as St. Augustine, according to you, thought) approve or dis- semble, or do any thing against faith or a good life, did not tolerate and dissemble vain superstitions and human presump- tions, and suffer all places to be full of them, and to be exacted as, nay, more severely than, the commandments of God him- self. This St. Augustine himself professeth in this very epistle. " This (saith he) I do infinitely grieve at, that many most whole- some precepts of the divine scripture are little regarded ; and in the mean time all is so full of so many presumptions, that he is more grievously found fault with, who during his octaves touch- eth the earth with his naked foot, than he that shall bury his soul in drunkenness." Of these, he says, that " they were neither contained in scripture, decreed by councils, nor corro- borated by the custom of the universal church : and though not against faith, yet unprofitable burdens of christian liberty, which made the condition of the Jews more tolerable than that of christians." And therefore he professeth of them, Approbare non possum, I cannot approve them. And, ubi facultas tribuitur, resecanda existimo ; I think they are to be cut off, wheresoever we have power. — Yet so deeply were they rooted, and spread so far, through the indiscreet devotion of the people, always more prone to superstition than true piety, and through the conni- vance of the governors, who should have strangled them at their birth, that himself, though he grieved at them, and could not allow them, yet for fear of offence he durst not speak against them. Multa hujusmodi, propter nollullarum vel sanctarum vel tur- bulentarum personarum scandala, deviianda, liberius improbare non audeo : many of these things for fear of scandalizing many holy persons, or provoking those that are turbulent, I dare not freely disallow. Nay, the catholic church itself did see, and dissemble, and tolerate them ; for these are the things of which he pre- sently says after, " the church of God (and you will have him speak of the true catholic church), placed between chatl and 220 Alb Church of one Denomination infallible. tares, tolerates many things." Which was directly against the command of the Holy Spirit, given the church by St. Paul, to " stand fast in that liberty wherewith Christ hath made her free," and not to suffer herself to be brought in bondage to these servile burdens. Our Saviour tells the scribes and pharisees, that " in vain they worshipped God, teaching for doctrines men's commandments : for that, laying aside the commandments of God, they held the traditions of men, as the washing of pots and cups, and many other such like things." Certainly, that which St. Augustine complains of as the general fault of chris- tians of his time, was parallel to this: Multa (saith he) quce in divinis libris saluberrime prcecepta sunt, minus curantur ; this, I suppose, I may very well render in our Saviour's words, " the commandments of God are laid aside;" and then, Tarn multis pre- sumptionibus sic plena sunt omnia, all things, or all places, are so full of so many presumptions, and those exacted with such severity, nay, with tyranny, that he was more severely censured, who in the time of his octaves touched the earth with his naked feet, than he which drowned and buried his soul in drink. — Certainly, if this be not to teach for doctrines men's command- ments, I know not what is: and therefore these superstitious christians might be said to worship God in vain, as well as the scribes and pharisees. And yet great variety of superstitions of this kind were then already spread over the church, being different in divers places. This is plain from these words of St. Augustine concerning them, diversorum locorum diversis moribus innumerabiliter variantur ; and apparent, because the stream of them was grown so violent, that he durst not oppose it ; liberius improbare non audeo, I dare not freely speak against them. So that to say the catholic church tolerated all this, and, for fear of offence, durst not abrogate or condemn it ; is to say (if we judge rightly of it) that the church, with silence and connivance, generally tolerated christians to worship God in vain. Now, how this tolerating of universal superstition in the church, can consist with the assistance and direction of God's omnipotent Spirit to guard it from superstition, and with the accomplish- ment of that pretended prophecy of the church, " I have set watchmen upon thy walls, O Jerusalem, which shall never hold their peace day nor night ;" besides, how these superstitions, being thus nourished, cherished, and strengthened by the prac- tice of the most, and urged with great violence upon others, as the commandments of God, and but fearfully opposed or contra- dicted by any, might in time take such deep root, and spread their branches so far, as to pass for universal customs of the church, he that does not see, sees nothing. Especially, consi- dering the catching and contagious nature of this sin, and how fast ill weeds spread, and how true and experimented that rule is of the historian, Exempla non consistunt ubi incipiunt, sed quam- libet in tenuem recepta tramitem latissime evagandi sibi faciunt potestatem. Nay, that some such superstition had not already, even in St. Augustine's time, prevailed so far, as to be consuetu- No Church of one Denomination infallible. 221 dine universa ecclesice roboratum, who can doubt that considers, that the practice of communicating infants, had even then got the credit and authority, not only of an universal church, but also of an apos- tolic tradition 1 48. But (you will say) notwithstanding all this, St. Augustine here warrants us, that the church can never either approve, or dis- semble, or practise any thing against faith or good life, and so long you may rest securely upon it. — Yea, but the same St. Augustine tells us, in the same place, that " the church may tolerate human presumptions, and vain superstitions, and those urged more severely than the commandments of God :" and whether superstition be a sin or no, I appeal to our Saviour's words before cited, and to the consent of your schoolmen. Besides, if we consider it rightly, we shall find, that the church is not truly said only to tolerate these things, but rather that a part, and far the lesser, tolerated and dissembled them in silence, and a part, and a far greater, publicly avowed and practised, them, and urged them upon others with great violence, and yet continued still a part of the church. Now, why the whole church might not continue the church, and yet do so, as well as a part of the church might continue a part of it, and yet do so, I desire you to inform me. 49. But now, after all this ado, what if St. Augustine says not this which is pretended of the church ; viz. that she neither ap- proves, nor dissembles, nor practises any thing against faith or good life, but only of good men in the church ; certainly, though some copies read as you would have it, yet you should not have dissembled, that others read the place otherwise ; viz. ecclesia multa tolerat : et tamen quce sunt contra fidem et bonam vitam, nee bonus approbat, &c. ; the church tolerates many things, and yet what is against faith or good life, a good man will neither approve, nor dis- semble, nor practise. 50. Ad. §. 17. That Abraham begat Isaac, is a point very far from being fundamental ; and yet, I hope, you will grant that pro- testants, believing scripture to be the word of God, may be certain enough of the truth and certainty of it : for what if they say that the catholic church, and much more themselves, may possibly err in some fundamental points, is it therefore consequent they can be certain of none such ? What if a wiser man than I may mistake the sense of some obscure place of Aristotle, may I not therefore, without any arrogance or inconsequence, conceive my- self certain that I understand him in some plain places, which carry their sense before them ? And then for points fundamental, to what purpose do you say, that — we must first know what they be, before we can be assured that we cannot err in under- standing the scripture — when we pretend not at all to any as- surance that we cannot err, but only to a sufficient certainty that we do not err, but rightly understand those things that are plain, whether fundamental or not fundamental ; that " God is, and is a rewarder of them that seek him ;" that there is no salva- tion but by faith in Christ ; that by repentance from dead works, 19* 222 No Church of one Denomination infallible. and faith in Christ, remission of sins may he obtained ; that there shall be a resurrection of the body : these we conceive both true, because the scripture says so, and truths fundamental, because they are necessary parts of the gospel, whereof our Saviour says, Qui non crediderit, damnabitur. All which we either learn from scrip- ture immediately, or learn of those that learn it of scripture; so that neither learned nor unlearned pretend to know these things inde- pendently of scripture. And therefore, in imputing this to us, you cannot excuse yourself from having done us a palpable injury. 51. Ad. §. 18. And I urge you as mainly as you urge Dr. Potter, and other protestants, that you tell us all the traditions, and all the definitions of the church are fundamental points, and we cannot wrest from you — a list in particular of all such tra- ditions and definitions — without which no man can tell whether or no he err in points fundamental, and be capable of salvation (for, I hope, erring in our fundamentals is no more conclusive of salvation than erring in yours). And, which is most lamentable, instead of giving us such a catalogue, you also fall to wrangle among yourselves about the making of it ; some of you, as I have said above, holding some things to be matters of faith, which others deny to be so. 52. Ad. §. 19. I answer, that these differences between protes- tants concerning errors damnable and not damnable, truths funda- mental and not fundamental, may be easily reconciled. For either the error they speak of may be purely and simply involun- tary, or it may be in respect of the cause of it voluntary. If the cause of it be in some voluntary and avoidable fault, the error is itself sinful, and consequently in its own nature damnable ; as if, by negligence in seeking the truth, by unwillingness to find it, by pride, by obstinacy, by desiring that religion should be true which suits best with my ends, by fear of men's ill opinion, or any other worldly fear, or any other worldly hope, I betray myself to any error contrary to any divine revealed truth, that error may be justly styled a sin, and consequently of itself to such an one dam- nable. But if I be guilty of none of these faults, but be desirous to know the truth, and diligent in seeking it, and advise not at all with flesh and blood about the choice of my opinions, but only with God, and that reason that he hath given me: if I be thus qualified, and yet through human infirmity fall into error, that error cannot be damnable. Again, the party erring may be con- vinced either to die with contrition, for all his sins known and un- known, or without it ; if he die without it, this error in itself damnable will be likewise so unto him ; if he die with contrition, (as his error can be no impediment but he may) his error, though in itself damnable, to him, according to your doctrine, will not prove so. And therefore, some of those authors, whom you quote, speaking of errors whereunto men were betrayed, or wherein they were kept by their fault, or vice, or passion (as for the most part men are) ; others speaking of them, as errors simply and purely involuntary, and the effects of human infirmity; some, as they were retracted by contrition (to use your own phrase) ; others, as JVb Church of one Denomination infallible. 223 they were not; no marvel that they have passed upon them, some a heavier, and some a milder, some an absolving, and some a condemning sentence. The least of all these errors, which here you mention, having malice enough too frequently mixed with it, to sink a man deep enough into hell ; and the greatest of them all being, according to your principles, either no fault at all, or venial, where there is no malice of the will conjoined with it. And if it be, yet, as the most malignant poison will not poison him that re- ceives with it a more powerful antidote : so, I am confident, your own doctrine will force you to confess, that whosoever dies with faith in Christ, and contrition for all sins, known and unknown (in which heap all his sinful errors must be comprised), can no more be hurt by any the most malignant and pestilent error, than St. Paul by the viper which he shook off into the fire. Now touching the " necessity of repentance from dead works, and faith in Christ Jesus, the Son of God, and Saviour of the world," they all agree ; and therefore you cannot deny, but they agree about all that is simply necessary. Moreover, though, if they should go about to choose out of scripture all those propositions and doctrines which integrate and make up the body of christian religion, per- adventure there would not be so exact agreement amongst them, as some say there was between the seventy interpreters, in translat- ing the Old Testament ; yet thus far, without controversy, they do all agree, that in the bible all these things are contained, and therefore, that whosoever doth truly and sincerely believe the scripture, must of necessity, either in hypothesi, or at least in thesi ; either formally, or at least virtually ; either explicitly, or at least implicitly ; either in act, or at least in preparation of mind, believe all things fundamental. It being not fundamental, nor required of Almighty God, to believe the true sense of scripture in all places, but only that we should endeavour to do so, and be prepared in mind to do so, whensoever it shall be sufficiently pro- pounded to us. Suppose a man in some disease were prescribed a medicine consisting of twenty ingredients, and he, advising with physicians, should find them differing in opinion about it, some of them telling him that all the ingredients were absolutely necessary ; some, that only some of them were necessary, the rest only profitable, and requisite ad melius esse ; lastly, some, that some only were neces- sary, some profitable, and the rest superfluous, yet not hurtful ; yet all with one accord agreeing in this, that the whole receipt had in it all things necessary for the recovery of his health, and that, if he made use of it, he should infallibly find it successful ; what wise man would not think they agreed sufficiently for bis direction to the recovery of health 1 Just so these protestant doctors, with whose discords you make such tragedies; agreeing in thesi thus far — that the " scripture evidently contains all things necessary to salvation," both for matter of faith, and of practice ; and that whosoever be- lieves it, and endeavours to find the true sense of it, and to conform his life unto it, shall certainly perform all things necessary to salva- tion, and undoubtedly be saved ; agreeing, I say, thus far, what matters it for the direction of men to salvation, though they differ 224 JVb Church of one Denomination infallible. in opinion, touching what points are absolutely necessary, and what not? What errors absolutely repugnant to salvation, and what not ? Especially considering, that although they differ about the question of the necessity of these truths, yet for the most part they agree in this, that truths they are, and profitable at least, though not simply necessary. And though they differ in the ques- tion, whether the contrary errors be destructive of salvation, or no ; yet in this they consent, that errors they are, and hurtful to religion, though not destructive of salvation. Now that which God requires of us, is this, that we should believe the doctrine of the gospel to be truths, not all necessary truths, for all are not so ; and consequently, the repugnant errors to be falsehoods ; yet not all such falsehoods, as unavoidably draw with them damnation upon all that hold them ; for all do not so. 53. Yea, but you say — it is very requisite we should agree upon a particular catalogue of fundamental points ; for without such a catalogue no man can be assured whether or no he hath faith suffi- cient to salvation. — This I utterly deny, as a thing evidently false, and I wonder you should content yourself magisterially to say so, without offering any proof of it. I might much more justly think it enough barely to deny it, without refutation, but 1 will not ; thus, therefore, I argue against it. Without being able to make a catalogue of fundamentals, I may be assured of the truth of this assertion, if it be true, that " the scripture contains all necessary points of faith," and know that I believe explicitly all that is expressed in scrip- ture, and implicitly all that is contained in them : now he that believes all this, must of necessity believe all things necessary : therefore, without being able to make a catalogue of fundamen- tals, I may be assured that I believe all things necessary, and consequently that my faith is sufficient. I said, of the truth of this assertion, " if it be true :" because I will not here enter into the question of the truth of it, it being sufficient for my present purpose, that it may be true, and may be believed without any dependence upon a catalogue of funda- mentals : and therefore, if this be all your reason to demand a particular catalogue of fundamentals, we cannot but think vour demand unreasonable. Especially, having yourself expressed the cause of the difficulty of it, and that is — because scripture doth deliver divine truths, but seldom qualifies them, or declares whether they be or be not absolutely necessary to salvation. — Yet not so seldom, but that out of it 1 could give you an abstract of the essential parts of Christianity, if it were necessarv : but I have shewed it not so by confuting your reason, pretended for the necessity of it, and at this time 1 have no leisure to do you courtesies that are so troublesome to myself. Yet thus much I will promise, that when you deliver a particular catalogue of your church's proposals with one hand, you shall receive a parti- cular catalogue of what I conceive fundamental with the other for, as yet, I see no such fair proceeding as you talk of, nor any performance on your own part of that which so clamorously you No Church of one Denomination infallible. 225 require on ours. For, as for the catalogue which here you have given us, in saying — you are obliged under pain of damnation to believe whatsoever the catholic visible church of Christ proposeth as revealed by Almighty God — it is like a covey of one partridge, or a flock of one sheep, or a fleet composed of one ship, or an army of one man. The author of Charity Mistaken demands a particular catalogue of fundamental points; and we (sav you) again and again demand such a catalogue. And surely," if" this one proposition, which here you think to stop our mouths with, be a catalogue, yet at least such a catalogue it is not, and there- fore as yet you have not performed what you require. For, if to set down such a proposition, wherein are comprised all points taught by us to be necessary to salvation, will serve you instead of a catalogue, you shall have catalogues enough. As we are obliged to believe all, under pain of damnation, which God com- mands us to believe : there is one catalogue. We are obliged, under pain of damnation, to believe all, whereof we may be suffi- ciently assured that Christ taught it his apostles, his apostles the church : there is another. We are obliged, under pain of damna- tion, to believe God's word, and all contained in it to be true : there is a third. If these generalities will not satisfy you, but you will be importuning us to tell you in particular what those doc- trines are which Christ taught his apostles, and his apostles the church, what points are contained in God's word ; then I beseech you do us reason, and give us a particular and exact inventory of all your church-proposals, without leaving out, or adding any ; such an one which all the doctors of your church will subscribe to; and if you receive not then a catalogue of fundamentals, I for my part will give you leave to proclaim us bankrupts. 54. Besides this deceitful generality of your catalogue (as you call it) another main fault we find with it, that it is extremely ambiguous ; and therefore, to draw you out of the clouds, give me leave to propose some questions to you concerning it. I would know, therefore, whether, by believing, you mean explicitly or implicitly? If you mean implicitly, I would know, whether your church's infallibility be, under pain of damnation, to be believed explicitly, or no ? Whether any other point or points besides this, be, under the same penalty, to be believed ex- plicitlv, or no? and if any, what they be? I would know what vou esteem the proposal of the catholic visible church ? In particular, whether the decree of a pope ex cathedra, that is, with an intent to oblige all christians by it, be a sufficient and an obliging proposal? Whether men, without danger of damnation, may examine such a decree, and, if they think they have just cause, refuse to obey it? Whether the decree of a council, with- out the pope's confirmation, be such an obliging proposal, or no ? Whether it be so in case there be no pope, or in case it be doubtful who is pope ? Whether the decree of a general council confirmed bv the pope be such a proposal, and whether he be a heretic that "thinks otherwise ? Whether the decree of a particular council confirmed by the pope, be such a proposal ? W hether the 226 No Church of one Denomination infallible. general uncondemned practice of the church for some ages be such a sufficient proposition? Whether the consent of the most eminent fathers of any age, agreeing in the affirmation of any doctrine, not contradicted by any of their contemporaries, be a sufficient proposition? Whether the fathers' testifying such or such a doctrine or practice to be a tradition, or to be the doctrine or practice of the church, be a sufficient assurance that it is so ? Whether we be bound, under pain of damnation, to believe every text of the vulgar bible, now authorised by the Roman church, to be the true translation of the originals of the prophets, and evan- gelists, and apostles, without any the least alteration ? Whether they that lived when the bible of Sixtus was set forth, were bound, under pain of damnation, to believe the same of that? And if not of that, of what bible were they bound to believe it? Whether the catholic visible church be always that society of christians which adheres to the bishop of Rome ? Whether every christian that hath ability and opportunity, be not bound to en- deavour to know explicitly the proposals of the church ? Whether implicit faith in the church's veracity, will not save him that actually and explicitly disbelieves some doctrine of the church, not knowing it to be so; and actually believes some damnable heresy, as, that God hath the shape of a man ? Whether an ig- norant man be bound to believe any point to be decreed by the church, when his, priest or ghostly father assures him it is so ? Whether his ghostly father may not err in telling him so, and whether any man can be obliged, under pain of damnation, to believe an error ? Whether he be bound to believe such a thing defined, when a number of priests, perhaps ten or twenty, tell him it is so ? And what assurance he can have, that they neither err, nor deceive him, in this matter ? Why implicit faith in Christ or the scripture should not suffice for a man's salvation, as well as implicit faith in the church ? Whether, when you say — what- soever the church proposeth — you mean, all that she ever pro- posed, or that only which she now proposeth ; and whether she now proposeth all that ever she did propose ? Whether all the books of canonical scripture were sufficiently declared to the church to be so, and proposed as such by the apostles ? And if not, from whom the church had this declaration afterwards ? If so, whether all men, ever since the apostles' time, were bound, under pain of damnation, to believe the epistle of St. James, and the epistle to the Hebrews, to be canonical ? at least, not to dis- believe it, and believe the contrary? Lastly, why it is not suffi- cient for any man's salvation to use the best means he can to inform his conscience, and to follow the direction of it ? To all these de- mands when you have given fair and ingenuous answers, you shall hear farther from me. 55. Ad. §. 20. At the first entrance into this paragraph, from our own doctrine — that the church cannot err in points necessary, it is concluded, if we are wise, we must forsake it in nothing, lest we should forsake it in something necessary. — To which I answer, first, that the supposition, as you understand it, is falsely imposed No Church of one Denomination infallible. 227 upon us, and, as we understand it, will do you no service. For when we say that there shall be a church always, somewhere or other, unerring in fundamentals, our meaning is but this, that there shall be always a church to the very being whereof it is re- pugnant that it should err in fundamentals ; for if it should do so, it would want the very essence of a church, and therefore cease to be a church. But we never annexed this privilege to any one church of any one denomination, as the Greek or the Roman church ; which if we had done, and set up some settled certain society of christians, distinguishable from all others by adhering to such a bishop for our guide in fundamentals, then indeed, and then only, might you with some colour, though not with certainty, have concluded that we could not, in wisdom — forsake this church in any point, for fear of forsaking it in a necessary point. — But now that we say not this of any one determinate church, which alone can perform the office of guide or director, but indefinitely of the church, meaning no more but this — that there shall be always, in some place or other, some church that errs not in funda- mentals ; will you conclude from hence, that we cannot in wisdom forsake this or that, the Roman or the Greek church, for fear of erring in fundamentals ? 56. Yea, you may say, (for I will make the best I can of all your arguments) that this church, thus unerring in fundamentals, when Luther arose, was by our confession the Roman ; and there- fore we ought not in wisdom to have departed from it in any thing. I answer, first, that we confess no such thing, that the church of Rome was then this church, but only a part of it, and that the most corrupted, and most incorrigible. Secondly, that if, by adhering to that church, we could have been thus far secured, this argument had some show of reason. But seeing we are not warranted thus much by any privilege of that church, that she cannot err fundamentally, but only from scripture, which assures us that she doth err very heinously, collect our hope, that the truths she retains, and the practice of them, may prove an antidote to her against the errors which she maintains in such persons, as, in simplicity of heart, follow this Absalom ; we should then do against the light of our conscience, and so sin damnably, if we should not abandon the profession of her errors, though not fundamental. Neither can we thus conclude, we may safely hold with the church of Rome in all her points, for she cannot err damnably ; for this is false, she may, though, perhaps, she doth not ; but rather thus : these points of Christianity, which have in them the nature of antidotes against the poison of all sins and errors, the church of Rome, though otherwise much corrupted, still retains ; therefore we hope she errs not fundamentally, but still remains a part of the church. But this can be no warrant to us to think with her in all things ; seeing the very same scripture, which puts us in hope she errs not fundamentally, assures us that in many things, and those of great moment, she errs very griev- ously. And these errors, though to them that believe them, we hope they will not be pernicious, yet the professing of them p2 228 No Church of one Denomination infallible. against conscience, could not but bring to us certain damnation. As for the fear of departing from some fundamental truths withal, while we depart from her errors ; haply it might work upon us, if adhering to her might secure us from it, and if nothing else could : but both these are false. For, first, adhering to her in all things cannot secure us from erring in fundamentals : because though de facto we hope she doth not err, yet we know no privi- leges she hath but she may err in them herself: and therefore we had need have better security hereof than her bare authority. Then, secondly, without dependence on her at all, we may be secured that we do not err fundamentally : I mean, by believing all things plainly set down in scripture, wherein all necessary, and most things profitable, are plainly delivered. Suppose I were travelling to London, and knew two ways thither; the one very safe and convenient, the other very inconvenient and dangerous, but yet a way to London ; and that I overtook a passenger on the way, who himself believed, and would fain persuade me, there was no other way but the worse, and would persuade me to accompany him in it, because I confessed his way, though very inconvenient and very dangerous, yet a way ; so that going that way we might come to our journey's end by the consent of both parties ; but he believed my way to be none at all ; and therefore I might justly fear, lest out of a desire of leaving the worst way, I left the true and the only way : if now I should not be more secure upon my own knowledge, than frighted by this fallacy, would you not beg me for a fool 1 Just so might you think of us, if we would be frighted out of our own knowledge by this bug- bear. For the only and the main reason why we believe you not to err in fundamentals, is your holding the doctrine of faith in Christ and repentance : which knowing we hold as well as you, notwithstanding our departure from you, we must needs know that we do not err in fundamentals, as well as we know that you in some sort do not err in fundamentals, and therefore cannot pos- sibly fear the contrary. Yet let us be more liberal to you, and grant that which can never be proved, that God had said in plain terms, — the church of Rome shall never destroy the foundation — but withal had said — that it might and would lay much hay and stubble upon it : that you should never hold any error destructive of salvation, but yet many that were prejudicial to edification: I demand, might we have dispensed with ourselves in the believing and professing these errors in regard of the smallness of them 1 Or, had it not been a damnable sin to do so, though the errors in themselves were not damnable? had we not had as plain direction to depart from you in some things profitable, as to adhere to you in things necessary ? In the beginning of your book, when it was for your purpose to have it so, the greatness or smallness of the matter was not considerable, the evidence of the revelation was all in all. But here must we err with you in small things, for fear of losing your direction in greater 1 and for fear of departing too far from you, not go from you at all, even where we see plainly that you have departed from the truth ? No Church of one Denomination infallible. 229 57. Beyond all this, I say, that this which you say is wisdom we are to do, is not only unlawful, but, if we will proceed according to reason, impossible. I mean to adhere to you in all tilings, havin«- no other ground for it, but because you are (as we will now sup- pose) infallible in some things, that is, in fundamentals. For whether by skill in architecture a large structure may be supported by a narrow foundation, I know not ; but sure I am, in reason, no con- clusion can be larger than the principles on which it is founded. And therefore, I consider what I do, and be persuaded that vour infallibility is but limited, and particular, and partial ; my adherence upon this ground cannot possibly be absolute, and universal, and total. I am confident, that should I meet with such a man among you (as I am well assured there be many) that would grant your church infallible only in fundamentals, which what they are he knows not, and therefore upon this only reason adheres to you in all things; I say that I am confident that it may be demon- strated, that such a man adheres to you with a fiducial and certain assent in nothing. To make this clear (because at the first hearing it may seem strange) give me leave, good Sir, to suppose you the. man, and to propose to you a few questions, and to give for you such answers to them, as upon this ground you must of necessity give, were you present with me. First, supposing you hold your church infallible in fundamentals, obnoxious to error in other things, and that you know not what points are fundamental, I demand, C. Why do you believe the doctrine of transubstantiation ? K. Because the church hath taught it, which is infallible. C. What ! infallible in all things, or only in fundamentals ? K. In fundamentals only. C. Then in other points she may err ? K. She may. C. And do you know what points are fundamental, what not ? K. No, and therefore I believe her in all things, lest I should disbelieve her in fundamentals. C. How know you then, whether this be a funda- mental point or no ? K. I know not. C. It may be then (for aught you know) an unfundamental point? K. Yes, it may be so. C. And in these, you said, the church may err ? K. Yes, I did so. C. Then possibly it may err in this ? K. It may be so. C. Then what certainty have you that it does not err in it ? K. None at all, but upon this supposition, that this is a fundamental. C. And this sup- position you are uncertain of? K. Yes, I told you so before. C. And therefore you can have no certainty of that which depends upon this uncertainty, saving only a suppositive certainty if it be a fundamental truth ; which is, in plain English, to say, you are certain it is true, if it be both true and necessary. Verily, Sir, if you have no better faith than this you are no catholic. K. Good words, I pray ! I am so, and, God willing, will be so. C. You mean in outward profession and practice, but in belief you are not, no more than a protesfant is a catholic. For every protestant yields such a kind of assent to all the proposals of the church; for surely they believe them true, if they be fundamental truths. And therefore you must either believe the church infallible in all her proposals, be they foundations, or be they superstructions; or you must believe all fundamental which she proposes, or else you are 20 230 No Church of one Denomination infallible. no catholic. K. But I have been taught, that, seeing I believed the church infallible in points necessary, in wisdom I was to believe her in every thing. C. That was a pretty plausible in- ducement to bring you hither; but now you are here you must go farther and believe her infallible in all things, or else you were as good go back again, which will be a great disparagement to you, and draw upon you both the bitter and implacable hatred of our part, and even, with your own, the imputation of rashness and levity. You see, I hope, by this time, that though a man did believe your church infallible in fundamentals, yet he hath no reason to do you the courtesy of believing all her proposals; nay, if he be ignorant what these fundamentals are, he hath no certain ground to believe her, upon her authority, in any thing. And whereas, you say, it can be no imprudence, to err with the church ; I say, it may be very great imprudence, if the question be, whether we should err with the present church, or hold true with God Almighty. 58. But we are, under pain of damnation, to believe and obey her in greater things, and therefore cannot in wisdom suspect her credit in matters of less moment. — Arts. I have told you already, that this is falsely to suppose, that we grant that, in some certain points, some certain church is infallibly assisted ; and under pain of dam- nation to be obeyed : whereas all that we say is this; that, in some place or other, some church there shall be, which shall retain all necessary truths. Yet, if your suppositions were true, I would not grant your conclusion, but with this exception, unless the matter were past suspicion, and apparently certain, that in these things I cannot believe God and believe the church. For then I hope you will grant, that be the thing of never so little moment ; were it, for instance, but that St. Paul left his cloak at Troas, yet I were not to gratify the church so far, as for her sake to disbelieve what God himself hath revealed. 59. Whereas you say — Since we are undoubtedly obliged to believe her in fundamentals, and cannot precisely know what those funda- mentals be, we cannot without hazard of our souls leave her in any point — I answer, first, that this argument proceeds upon the same false ground with the former. And then, that I have told you formerly, that you fear where no fear is ; and though we know not precisely, just how much is fundamental, yet we know that the scrip- ture contains all fundamentals, and more too ; and therefore that, in believing that, we believe all fundamentals, and more too ; and, consequently, in departing from you can be in no danger of depart- ing from that which may prove a fundamental truth : for we are well assured that certain errors can never prove fundamental truths. 60. Whereas you add that — That visible church, which cannot err in fundamentals, propounds all her definitions without dis- tinction to be believed under anathemas. — Ans. Again you beg the question, supposing untruly, that there is any — that visible church. I mean any visible church of one denomination*, which cannot err in points fundamental. Secondly, proposing definitions to be be- lieved under anathemas, is no good argument that the propounders No Church of one Denomination infallible. 231 conceive themselves infallible ; but only that they conceive the doctrine they condemn is evidently damnable. A plain proof hereof is this, that particular councils, nay, particular men, have been very liberal of their anathemas, which yet were never conceived infalli- ble, either by others or themselves. If any man should now deny Christ to be the Saviour of the world, or deny the resurrection, I should make no great scruple of anathematizing his doctrine, and yet am very far from dreaming of infallibility. 61. And for the visible church's holding it a point necessary to salvation, that we believe she cannot err, I know no such tenet ; unless by the church, you mean the Roman church, which you have as much reason to do, as that petty king in Afric hath, to think him- self king of all the world. And therefore your telling us — If she speak true, what danger is it not to believe her ? And if false, that it is not dangerous to believe her — is somewhat like your pope's setting your lawyers to dispute whether Constantino's donation were valid or no ; whereas the matter of fact was the far greater question — whether there were any such donation, or rather when, without question, there was none such. That you may not seem to delude us in like manner, make it appear that the visible church doth hold so as you pretend, and then, whether it be true or false, we will consider afterwards: but, for the present, with this invisible tenet of the visible church, we will trouble ourselves no farther. 62. The effect of the next argument is this — I cannot without grievous sin disobey the church, unless I know she commands those things which are not in her power to command ; and how far this power extends, none can better inform me than the church ; therefore I am to obey, so far as the church requires my obedience. — I answer, first, that neither hath the catholic church, but only a corrupt part of it, declared herself, nor required our obedience, in the points contested among us : this, therefore, is falsely and vainly supposed here by you, being one of the greatest questions amongst us. Then, secondly, that God can better inform us what are the limits of the church's power than the church herself; that is, than the Roman clergy, who being men subject to the same passions with other men, why they should be thought the best judges in their own cause, I do not well understand ; but yet we oppose against them no human decisive judges, nor any sect or person, but only God and his word. And therefore it is in vain to say that — in following her, you shall be sooner excused than in following any sect or man applying scriptures against her doctrine, inasmuch as we never went about to arrogate to ourselves that infallibility or absolute authority, which we take away from you. But if you would have spoken to the purpose, you should have said, that in following her you should sooner have been excused, than in cleaving to the scripture, and to God himself. 63. Whereas, you say — The fearful examples of innumerable persons, who forsaking the church, upon pretence of her errors, have failed even in fundamental points, ought to deter all christians from opposing her in any one doctrine or practice : this is just as if you should say, divers men have fallen into Scylla 232 No Church of one Denomination infallible. with going too far from Charybdis ; be sure, therefore, you keep close to Charybdis : divers, leaving prodigality, have fallen into covetousness ; therefore be you constant to prodigality : many have fallen from worshipping God perversely and foolishly, not to worship him at all ; from worshipping many gods, to worship- ping none ; this, therefore, ought to deter men from leaving su- perstition or idolatry, for fear of falling into atheism and impiety. This is your counsel and sophistry : but God says, clean contrary — Take heed you swerve not either to the right hand or to the left; you must not do evil that good may come thereon; there- fore, neither that you may avoid a greater evil ; you must not be obstinate in a certain error, for fear of an uncertain. What if some, forsaking the church of Rome, have forsaken fundamen- tal truths 1 Was this because they forsook the church of Rome ? No sure, this is non causa pro causa ; for else all that have for- saken that church should have done so, which we say they have not : but because they went too far from her. The golden mean, the narrow way, is hard to be found, and hard to be kept ; hard, but not impossible ; hard, but yet you must not please yourself out of it, though you err on the right hand, though you offend on the milder part ; for this is the only way " that leads to life, and few there be that find it." It is true, if we said there was no danger in being of the Roman church, and there were danger in leaving it, it were madness to persuade any man to leave it. But we protest and proclaim the contrary, and that we have very little hope of their salvation, who, either out of negligence in seeking the truth, or unwillingness to find it, live and die in the errors and impieties of that church ; and therefore cannot but con- ceive.those fears to be most foolish and ridiculous, which persuade men to be constant in one way to hell, lest haply, if they leave it, they should fall into another. 64. But, not only others, but even protestants themselves, whose example ought most to move us, pretending to reform the church, are come to affirm that she perished for many ages, which Dr. Potter cannot deny to be a fundamental error, against the article of the creed, I believe the catholic church, seeing he affirms — donatists erred fundamentally in confining it to Africa. — To this I answer, first, that the error of the donatists was not, that they held it possible that some, or many, or most parts of Christendom, might fall away from Christianity, and that the church may lose much of her amplitude, and be contracted to a narrow compass, in comparison of her former extent : which is proved not only possible, but certain, by irrefragable experience : for who knows not that gentilism, and mahometanism, man's wickedness deserving it and God's providence permitting it, have prevailed, to the utter extirpation of Christianity, upon far the greater part of the world ; and St. Augustine, when he was out of the heat of disputation, confesses the militant church to be like the moon, sometimes increasing, and sometimes decreasing. This, there- fore, was no error in the donatists, that they held it possible that the church, from a large extent, might be contracted to a No Church of one Denomination infallible. 233 lesser; nor that they held it possible to be reduced to Africa: (for why not to Afric then, as well as within these few ages you pretend it was to Europe?) but their error was, that they held de facto, this was done when they had no just ground or reason to do so; and so, upon a vain pretence which they could not justify, separated themselves from the communion of all other parts of the church ; and that they required it as a necessary condition, to make a man a member of the church, that he should be of their communion, and divide himself from all other communions from which they were divided ; which was a condition both unnecessary and unlawful to be required, and therefore the exacting of it was directly opposite to the church's Catholicism ; in the very same nature with their errors who required circumcision, and the keeping of the law of Moses, as necessary to salvation. For whosoever requires harder or heavier conditions of men than God requires of them, he it is that is properly an enemy of the church's universa- lity, by hindering either men or countries from adjoining them- selves to it ; which, were it not for these unnecessary and there- fore unlawful conditions, in probability would have made them members of it. And seeing the present church of Rome per- suades men they were as good (for any hope of salvation they have) not to be christians, as not to be Roman catholics ; believe nothing at all, as not believe all she imposes upon them; be ab- solutely out of the church's communion, as be out of her commu- nion, or be in any other : whether she be not guilty of the same crime with the donatists, and those zealots of the Mosaical law, I leave it to the judgment of those that understand reason : this is sufficient to show the vanity of this argument. But I add, moreover, that you neither have named those protestants who held the church to have perished for many ages, who perhaps held not the destruction, but the corruption, of the church ; not that the true church, but that the pure church perished ; or rather, that the church perished not from its life and existence, but from its purity and integrity, or perhaps from its splendour and visibility ; neither have you proved by any one reason, but only affirmed it, to be a fundamental error to hold that the church militant may possibly be driven out of the world, and abolished for a time from the face of the earth. 65. But to accuse the church of any error in faith, is to say she lost all faith : for this is the doctrine of catholic divines, that one error in faith destroys faith. — To which I answer, that to ac- cuse the church of some error in faith, is not to say, she lost all faith : for this is not the doctrine of all catholic divines ; but that he which is an heretic in one article, may have true faith of other articles. And the contrary is only said, and not shewed, in Charity Mistaken. 66. Ad. §. 21. Dr. Potter says— We may not depart from the church absolutely, and in all things — and from hence you conclude — therefore we may not depart from it in any thing : and this argu- ment you call a demonstration. But, a fallacy a dido simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid, was not used heretofore to be called a de- 20* 234 No Church of one Denomination infallible. monstration. Dr. Potter says not, that you may not depart from any opinion or any practice of the church ; for you tell us in this very place, that he says, even the catholic may err ; and every man may lawfully depart from error. He only says — you may not cease to be of the church, nor depart from those things which make it so to be ; and from hence you infer a necessity of forsaking it in nothing. — Just as if you should argue thus: you may not leave your friend or brother, therefore you may not leave the vice of your friend, or the error of your brother. What he says of the catholic church, p. 75, the same he extends presently after to every true, though never so corrupted, part of it. And why do you not con- clude from hence, that no particular church (according to his judg- ment) can fall into any error, and call this a demonstration too ? For as he says, p. 75, that " there can be no just cause to depart from the whole church of Christ, no more than from Christ himself;" so, p. 76, he tells you, that " whosoever forsakes any one true member of the body, forsakes the whole." So that what he says of the one, he says of the other ; and tells you, that neither universal nor particular church, so long as they continue so, may be forsaken ; he means absolutely, no more than Christ himself may be forsaken absolutely : for the church is the body of Christ, and whosoever forsakes either the body, or his coherence to any one part of it, must forsake his subordination and relation to the head. Therefore, whosoever forsakes the church, or any christian, must forsake Christ himself. 67. But then he tells you plainly, in the same place, that " it may be lawful and necessary to depart from a particular church in some doctrines and practices ;" and this he would have said even of the catholic church, if there had been occasion ; but there was none. For there he was to declare and justify our departure, not from the catholic church, but the Roman, which we maintain to be a particular church. But, in other places, you confess his doctrine to be, that even the catholic church may err in points not fundamental : which you do not pretend that he ever imputed to Christ himself. And therefore you cannot, with any candour, interpret his words as if he had said, we may not forsake the church in any thing, no more than Christ himself; but only thus — we may not cease to be of the church, nor forsake it ab- solutely and totally, no more than Christ himself: and thus we see, sometimes, a mountain may travail, and the production be a mouse. 68. Ad. §. 22. But — Dr. Potter either contradicts himself, or else must grant the church infallible ; because he says, if we did not differ from the Roman, we could not agree with the catholic : which saying supposes the catholic church cannot err. — Jins. This argument, to give it the right name, is an obscure and in- tricate nothing ; and to make it appear so, let us suppose, in contra- diction to your supposition, either that the catholic church may err, but doth not, but that the Roman actually doth ; or that the catholic church doth err, in some few things, but that the Roman errs in many more. And is it not apparent, in both these cases, No Church of one Denomination infallible. 235 (which yet both suppose the church's infallibility) a man may truly say unless I dissent in some opinions from the Roman church, I can- not agree with the catholic : either, therefore, you must retract your imputation laid upon Dr. Potter, or do that which you condemn in him, and be driven to say, that the same man may hold some errors with the church of Rome, and at the same time with the catholic church, not to hold, but condemn them. For otherwise, in neither of these cases is it possible for the same man, at the same time, to agree both with the Roman and the catholic. 69. In all these texts of scripture, which are here alleged in this last section of this chapter, or in any one of them, or in any other, doth God say clearly and plainly — the bishop of Rome, and that society of christians which adheres to him, shall be ever the infal- lible guide of faith ? You will confess, I presume, he doth not, and will pretend it was not necessary. Yet if the king should tell us, the lord-keeper should judge such and such causes ; but should either not tell us at all, or tell us but doubtfully, who should be lord-keeper, should we be any thing the nearer for him to an end of contentions ? Nay rather, would not the dissensions about the person who it is, increase contentions rather than end them ? Just so it would have been, if God had appointed a church to be judge of controversies, and had not told us which was that church. Seeing, therefore, God doth nothing in vain, and seeing it had been in vain to appoint a judge of controversies, and not to tell us plainly who it is; and seeing, lastly, he hath not told us plainly, no not at all who it is; is it not evident he hath appointed none? Obj. But (you will say, perhaps) if it be granted once, that some church of one denomination is the infallible guide of faith, it will be no difficult thing to prove that yours is the church, seeing no other church pretends to be so. Ans. Yes, the primitive and the apostolic church pretends to be so. That assures us, that the Spirit was promised and given unto them, to lead them into all saving truth, that they might lead others. Obj. But that church is not now in the world, and how then can it pretend to be the guide of faith ? Ans. It is now in the world sufficient to be our guide ; not by the persons of those men that were members of it, but by their writings, which do plainly teach us, what truth they were led into, and so lead us into the same truth. Obj. But these writings were the writings of some particular men, and not of the church of those times; how then doth that church guide us by these writings? Now these places show that a church is to be our guide, therefore they cannot be so avoided. Ans. If you regard the conception and production of these writings, they were the writings of parti- cular men: but if you regard the reception and approbation of them, they may be well called the writings of the church, as having the attestation of the church, to have been written by those that were inspired and directed by God. As a statute, though penned by some one man, yet being ratified by the parliament, is called the act, not of that man, but of the parliament. Obj. But the words seem clearly enough to prove, that the church, the present church of every age, is universally infallible. Ans. For my part 236 No Church of one Denomination infallible. I know I am as willing and desirous, that the bishop or church of Rome should be infallible, (provided I might know it) as they are to be so esteemed. But he that would not be deceived must take heed, that he take not his desire that a thing should be so, for a reason that it is so. For, if you look upon scripture through such spectacles as these, they will appear to you, of what colour pleases your fancies best ; and will seem to say, not what they do say, but what you would have them. As some say the manna, wherewith the Israelites were fed in the wilderness, had in every man's mouth that very taste which was most agreeable to his palate. For my part I profess, I have considered them a thousand times, and have looked upon them (as they say) on both sides, and yet to me they seem to say no such matter. 70. Not the first, for the church may err, and yet " the gates of hell not prevail against her." It may err, and yet continue still a true church, and bring forth children unto God, and send souls to heaven. And therefore this can do you no service, without the plain begging of the point in question, viz. that every error is one of the gates of hell : which we absolutely deny, and therefore, you are not to suppose, but prove it. Neither is our denial without reason : for seeing you do and must grant that a particular church may hold some error, and yet be still a true member of the church; why may not the universal church hold the same error, and yet remain a true universal ? 71. Not the second or third; for, the spirit of truth may be with a man or a church for ever, and teach him all truth — and yet he may fall into some error, if this all be not simply all, but all of some kind ; which you confess to be so unquestioned and certain, that you are offended with Dr. Potter for offering to prove it. Secondly, he may fall into some error, even contrary to the truth which is taught him, if it be taught him only sufficiently, and not irre- sistibly, so that he may learn it if he will, not so that he must and shall, whether he will or no. Now, who can ascertain me that the Spirit's teaching is not of this nature ? or how can you possibly re- concile it with your doctrine of free-will in believing, if it be not of this nature. Besides, the word in the original is h^yfyu, which signifies, to be a guide and director only, not to compel or necessitate. Who knows not, that a guide may set you in the right way, and you may either negligently mistake it, or willingly leave it ? And to what purpose does God complain so often and so earnestly of some that had eyes to see, and would not see ; that stopped their ears, and closed their eyes, lest they should hear and see 1 Of others — that would not understand, lest they should do good ; that the light shined, and "the darkness comprehended it not; that he came unto his own, and his own received him not ; that light came into the world, and men loved darkness more than light ;" to what purpose should he wonder so few believed his report, and that to so few his arm was revealed ; and that when he comes, he should find no faith upon earth, if his outward teaching were not of this nature, that it might be followed, and might be resisted ? And if it be, then God may teach, and the church not learn ; God may . No Chiwch of one Denomination infallible. 237 lead, and the church be refractory, and not follow. And, indeed, who can doubt, that hath not his eyes veiled with prejudice, that God hath taught the church of Rome plain enough in the Epistle to the Corinthians, that all things in the church are to be done for edification ; and that, in any public prayers, or thanksgiving, or hymns, or lessons of instruction, to use a language, which the as- sistants generally understand not, is not for edification ? Though the church of Rome will not learn this, for fear of confessing an error, and so overthrowing her authority : yet the time will come, when it shall appear, that not only by scripture, they were taught this sufficiently and commanded to believe it, but by reason and common sense. And so for the communion in both kinds, who can deny but they are taught it by our Saviour (John vi.) in these words, according to most of your own expositions : " Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you have no life in you." (If our Saviour speaks there of the sacrament, as to them he doth, because they conceive he doth so.) For though they may pretend, that receiving in one kind, they receive the blood together with the body, yet they can with no face pretend that they drink it ; and so obey not our Saviour's injunction according to the letter, which yet they profess is literally always to be obeyed, unless some impiety, or some absurdity, forces us to the contrary : and they are not yet arrived to that impudence to pretend, that either there is impiety or absurdity in receiving the communion in both kinds. This, therefore, they, if not others, are plainly taught by our Saviour in this place ; but by St. Paul all, without exception, when he says, " Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of this bread, and drink of this chalice." This (a man) that is to examine himself, is every man that can do it ; as is confessed on all hands. And there- fore it is all one, as if he had said, " Let every man examine himself, and so let him eat of this bread, and drink of this cup." They which acknowledge St. Paul's epistles, and St. John's Gospel, to be the word of God, one would think should not deny, but that they are taught these two doctrines plain enough; yet we see they neither do, nor will, learn them. I conclude, therefore, that the Spirit may ver.y well teach the church, and yet the church fall into and continue in error, by not regarding what she is taught by the Spirit. 72. But all this I have spoken upon a supposition only, and showed unto you, that though these promises had been made unto the present church of every age, (I might have said, though they had been to the church of Rome by name) yet no certainty of her universal infallibility could be built upon them. But the plain truth is, that these promises are vainly arrogated by you, and were never made to you, but to the apostles only. I pray deal ingenuously, and tell me, who were they, of whom our Saviour says, "These things have I spoken unto you being present with you." (Chap. xiv. 25.) "But the Comforter shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have told you." (Ver. 26.) Who are they to whom he says, "I go away, and come again unto you ;" and, " I have told you before it came to pass." (Ver. 28, 29.) 238 No Church of one Denomination infallible. " You have been with me from the beginning." (Chap. xv. 27.) And again ; " These things I have told you, that when the time shall come, you may remember that I told you of them : and these things I said not unto you at the beginning, because I was with you." (Chap. xvi. 4.) And, " Because I said these things unto you, sorrow hath filled your hearts." (Ver. 6.) Lastly, who are they, of whom he saith, (ver. 12,) " I have many things to say unto you, but you cannot bear them now ?" Do not all these cir- cumstances appropriate this whole discourse of our Saviour to his disciples that were then with him ; and, consequently re- strain the promises of the Spirit of truth, which was to lead them into all truth, to their persons only? And seeing it is so, is it not an impertinent arrogance and presumption, for you to lay claim unto them, in the behalf of your church ? Had Christ been present with your church ? Did the Comforter bring these things to the remembrance of your church, which Christ had before taught, and she had forgotten ? Was Christ then departing from your church ? and did he tell of his departure before it came to pass ? Was your church with him from the beginning ? Was your church filled with sorrow, upon the mentioning of Christ's departure? or, lastly, did he, or could he, have said to your church, which was then not extant, " I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now ?" as he speaks, in the 12th verse, immediately before the words by you quoted. And then goes on, " Howbeit when the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth." Is it not the same you he speaks to in the 13th verse, and that he speaks to in the 14th? and is it not appa- rent to any one that has but half an eye, that in the 13th verse he speaks only to them that then were with him ? Besides, in the very text by you alleged, there are things promised, which your church cannot with any modesty pretend to : for there it is said, the Spirit of truth, not only will " guide you into all truth," but also will " show you things to come." Now your church (for aught I could ever understand) doth not so much as pretend to the spirit of prophecy and knowledge of future events: and, therefore, hath as little cause to pretend to the former promise of being led by the Spirit into all truth. And this is the reason, why both you in this place, and generally, your writers of controversies, when they treat of this argument, cite this text perpetually by halves; there being in the latter part of it a clear and convincing demonstration that you have nothing to do with the former. Unless you will say, which is most ridiculous, that when our Saviour said, " He will teach you," &c. and " he will show you," &c. he meant one you in the former clause, and another you in the latter. 73. Obj. But this is to confine God's Spirit to the apostles only, or to the disciples, that then were present with him ; which is directly contrary to many places of scripture, .ins. I confess, that to confine the Spirit of God to those that were then present with Christ, is against scripture. But I hope it is easy to conceive a difference between confining the Spirit of God to them, and con- fining the promises made in this place to them. God may do many JVo Church of one Denomination infallible. 239 things which he doth not promise at all; much more, which he doth not promise in such or such a place. 74. Obj. But it is promised in the 13th chap. — that this Spirit shall abide with them for ever : now they in their persons were not to abide for ever, and therefore the Spirit could not abide with them in their persons for ever, seeing the co-existence of two things supposes of necessity the existence of either. Therefore, the pro- mise was not made to them only in their persons, but by them to the church, which was to abide for ever. — Ans. Your conclusion is, not to them only; but your reason concludes either nothing at all, or that this promise of abiding with them for ever was not made to their persons at all ; or, if it were, that it was not performed ; or if you will not say (as I hope you will not) that it was not per- formed, nor that it was not made to their persons at all ; then must you grant, that the words for ever are here used in a sense restrained, and accommodated to the subject here treated of; and that it signifies, not eternally, without end of time, but perpetually, without interruption, for the time of their lives: so that the force and sense of the words is, that they shall never want the Spirit's assistance in the performance of their functions : and that the Spirit would not (as Christ was to do) stay with them for a time, and afterwards leave them, but would abide with them, if they kept their station, unto the very end of their lives, which is man's for ever. Neither is this use of the words for ever, any thing strange, either in our ordinary speech, wherein we use to say — This is mine for ever — This shall be yours for ever, without ever dreaming of the eternity either of the thing or persons. And then in scripture, it not only will bear, but requires this sense very frequently, as Exod. xxi. 6; Deut. xv. 17. "His master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall serve him for ever." Psal. Hi. 9. " I will praise thee for ever." Psal. lxi. 4. "I will abide in thv tabernacle for ever." Psal. cxix. 111. " Thy testimonies have I taken as mine heritage for ever." And lastly, in the Epistle to Philemon, " He therefore departed from thee for a time, that thou shouldst receive him for ever." 75. And thus, I presume, I have shewed sufficiently, that this for ever hinders not, but that the promise may be appropriated to the apostles, as by many other circumstances I have evinced it must be. But what now, if the place produced by you, as a main pillar of your church's infallibility, prove upon trial an engine to batter and overthrow it ? at least, (which is all one to my purpose) to take away all possibility of our assurance of it ? This will seem strange news to you at first hearing, and not far from a prodigy. And I confess, as you here, in this place, and generally all your writers of controversy, by whom this text is urged, order the matter, it is very much disabled to do any service against you in this question ; for with a bold sacrilege, and horrid impiety, somewhat like Procrustes' cruelty, you perpetually cut off the head and foot, the beginning and the end of it; and presenting your confidants, (who usually read no more of the bible than is alleged by you) only these words, " I will ask my Father, and he shall give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever, even the 240 No Church of one Denomination infallible. Spirit of truth ;" conceal, in the meantime, the words before and the words after ; that so the promise of God's Spirit may seem to be absolute, whereas it is indeed most clearly and expressly condi- tional ; being both in the words before, restrained to those only that love God and keep his commandments; and in the words after, flatly denied to all, whom the scripture styles by the name of the world; that is, as the very antithesis gives us plainly to understand, to all wicked and worldly men. Behold the place entire, as it is set down in your own bible : " If ye love me, keep my command- ments, and I will ask my Father, and he shall give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive." Now, from the place thus restored and vindicated from your mutilation, thus I argue against your pretence. We can have no certainty of the infallibility of your church, but upon this supposition, that your popes are infal- lible in confirming the decrees of general councils : we can have no certainty hereof, but upon this supposition, that the Spirit of truth is promised to them for their direction in this work : and of this again we can have no certainty, but upon supposal, that they per- form the condition whereunto the promise of the Spirit of truth is expressly limited, viz. that they " love God, and keep his com- mandments:" and of this, finally, not knowing the pope's heart, we can have no certainty at all; therefore, from the first to the last, we can have no certainty at all of your church's infallibility. This is my first argument. From this place another follows, which will charge you as home as the former. If many of the Roman see were such men as could not receive the Spirit of truth, even men of the world, that is, worldly, wicked, carnal, diabolical men ; then the Spirit of truth is not here promised, but flatly denied them ; and consequently, we can have no certainty, neither of the decrees of councils, which the popes confirm, nor of the church's infallibility, which is guided by these decrees: but many of the Roman see, even by the confession of the most zealous defenders of it, were such men ; therefore, the Spirit of truth is not here promised, but denied them, and consequently, we can have no certainty neither of the decrees which they confirm, nor of the church's infallibility, which guides herself by these decrees. 76. You may take as much time as you think fit to answer these arguments. In the meanwhile I proceed to the consideration of the next text alleged for this purpose by you, out of St. Paul, 1st Epist. to Timothy, where he saith, as you say, " the church is the pillar and ground of truth ;" but the truth is, you are somewhat too bold with St. Paul ; for he saith not in formal terms what you make him say, " the church is the pillar and ground of truth ;" neither is it certain that he means so : for it is neither impossible nor improbable, that these words, " the pillar and ground of truth," may have reference not to the church, but to Timothy, the sense of the place — " that thou mayest know how to behave thyself, as a pillar and ground of the truth, in the church of God, which is the house of the living God ;" which exposition offers no violence at all to the words, but only supposes an ellipsis of the particle ug, No Church of one Denomination infallible. 241 in the Greek very ordinary. Neither wants it some likelihood, that St. Paul, comparing the church to a house, should here exhort Timothy, to carry himself as a pillar in that house should do, ac- cording as he had given other' principal men in the church the name of pillars ; rather than having called the church a house, to call it presently a pillar : which may seem somewhat heterogeneous. Yet if you will needs have St. Paul refer this, not to Timothy, but to the church, I will not contend about it any farther, than to say, possibly it may be otherwise. But then, secondly, I am to put you in mind, that the church, which St. Paul here speaks of, was that in which Timothy conversed, and that was a particular church, and not the Roman; and such you will not have to be universally infallible 77. Thirdly, If we grant you, out of courtesy (for nothing can enforce us to it), that he both speaks of the universal church, and says this of it; then I am to remember you, that many attributes in scripture are not notes of performance, but of duty, and teach us not what the thing or person is of necessity, but what it should be. " Ye are the salt of the earth," saith our Saviour to his disciples ; not that this quality was inseparable from their persons, but because it was their office to be so. For, if they must have been so of necessity, and could not have been otherwise, in vain had he put them in fear of that which follows : " If the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? It is henceforth good for nothing, but to be cast forth, and trodden under foot." So the church may be by duty " the pillar and ground ;" that is, the teacher of truth, of all truth, not only necessary, but profitable to salvation : and yet she may neglect and violate this duty, and be in fact the teacher of some error. 78. Fourthly and lastly, If we deal most liberally with you, and grant that the apostle here speaks of the catholic church, calls it " the pillar and ground of truth," and that not only because it should, but because it always shall and will, be so, yet after all this you have done nothing ; your bridge is too short to bring you to the bank where you would be, unless you can shew, that by truth here is certainly meant, not only all necessary to salvation, but all that is profitable, absolutely and simply all. For that the true church always shall be the maintainer and teacher of all ne- cessary truth, you know we grant, and must grant ; for it is of the essence of the church to be so ; and any company of men were no more a church without it, than any thing can be a man, and not be reasonable. But as a man may be still a man, though he want a hand or an eye, which yet are profitable parts; so the church may be still a church, though it be defective in some profitable truth. And as a man may be a man that hath some biles and botches in his body ; so the church may be the church, though it may have many corruptions both in doctrine and practice. 79. And thus you see we are at liberty from the former places ; having shewed that the sense of them either must or may be such as will do your cause no service. But the last you suppose will be a Gordian knot, and tie us fast enough : the words are, " He gave some apostles, and some prophets, &c. to the consummation of q 21 242 No Church of one Denomination infallible. saints, to the work of the ministry, &c. until we all meet in the unity of faith, &c. That we be not hereafter children, wavering, and carried up and down with every wind of doctrine." Out of which words this is the only argument which you collect, or I can collect for you. There is no means to conserve unity of faith, against every wind of doctrine, unless it be a church universally infallible. But it is impious to say, there is no means to preserve unity of faith against every wind of doctrine : Therefore there must be a church universally infallible. Whereunto I answer, that your major is so far from being con- firmed, that it is plainly confuted by the place alleged. For that tells us of another means for this purpose, to wit — the apostles, and prophets, and evangelists, and pastors, and doctors, which Christ gave upon his ascension, and that their consummating the saints, doing the work of the ministry, and edifying the body of Christ, was the means, to bring those (which are there spoken of, be they who they will) to the unity of faith, and to perfection in Christ, that they might not be wavering, and carried about with every wind of false doctrine. Now the apostles, and prophets, and evangelists, and pastors, and doctors, are not the present church ; therefore the church is not the only means for this end, nor that which is here spoken of. 80. Peradventure by he gave, you conceive it to be understood — he promised that he would give unto the world's end. But what reason have you for this conceit ? Can you shew that the word Uuxz hath this signification in other places, and that it must have it in this place ? Or, will not this interpretation drive you pre- sently to this blasphemous absurdity, that God hath not performed his promise ? Unless you will say, which for shame I think you will not, that you have now, and in all ages since Christ have had, apostles, and prophets, and evangelists : for as for pastors and doctors alone, they will not serve the turn. For if God promised to give all these, then you must say he hath given all, or else that he hath broken his promise. Neither may you pretend, that the pastors and doctors were the same with the apostles, and prophets, and evangelists, and therefore having pastors and doctors you have all. For it is apparent, that by these names are denoted several orders of men, clearly distinguished and diversified by the original texts; but much more plainly by your own translations, for so you read it — " some apostles, and some prophets, and other some evangelists, and other some pastors and doctors :" and yet more plainly in the parallel place, 1 Cor. xii. to which we are referred by your vulgar translation. "God hath set some in the church; first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers;" therefore this subterfuge is stopped against you. Obj. But how can they, which died in the first age, keep us in the unity, and guard us from error, that live now, perhaps in the last ? This seems to be all one, as if a man should say, that Alexander or Julius Caesar should quiet a mutiny in the King of Spain's army. Ans. I hope you will grant, that Hippocrates, and Galen, and Euclid, and Aristotle, No Church of one Denomination infallible. 243 and Sallust, and Caesar, and Livy, were dead many ages since ; and yet that we are now preserved from error by them, in a great part of physic, of geometry, of logic, of the Roman story. But what if these men had writ by divine inspiration, and writ com- plete bodies of the sciences they professed, and writ them plainly and perspicuously ; you would then have granted, I believe, that their works had been sufficient to keep us from error, and from dissension in these matters. And why then should it be incon- gruous to say, that the apostles, and prophets, and evangelists, and pastors, and doctors, which Christ gave upon his ascension, by their writings, which some of them writ, but all approved, are even now sufficient means, to conserve us in unity of faith, and guard us from error ? Especially, seeing these writings are, by the con- fession of all parts, true and divine, and, as we pretend and are ready to prove, contain a plain and perfect rule of faith ; and, as the chiefest* of you acknowledge, " contain immediately all the principal and fundamental points of Christianity," referring us to the church and tradition only for some minute particularities. But, tell me, I pray, the bishops that composed the decrees of the coun- cil of Trent, and the pope that confirmed them, are they the means to conserve you in unity, and keep you from error, or are they not ? Perad venture you will say, their decrees are, but not their persons; but you will not deny, I hope, that you owe your unity and freedom from error to the persons that made these decrees ; neither will you deny, that the writings which they have left behind them, are suffi- cient for this purpose. And why then may not the apostles' writings be as fit for such purpose, as the decrees of your doctors ? Surely their intent in writing was to conserve us in unity of faith, and to keep us from error, and we are sure God spake in them ? But your doctors, from whence they are, we are not so certain. Was the Holy Ghost then unwilling, or unable, to direct them so, that their writing should be fit and sufficient to attain the end they aimed at in writing 1 for if he were both able and willing to do so, then certainly he did do so. And then their writings may be very sufficient means, if we would use them as we should do, to preserve us in unity, in all necessary points of faith, and to guard us from all pernicious error. 81. If yet you be not satisfied, but will still pretend, that all these words, by you cited, seem clearly enough to prove, that the church is universally infallible, without which unity of faith could not be con- served against every wind of doctrine ; I answer, that to you which will not understand, that there can be any means to conserve the unity of faith, but only that which conserves your authority over the faithful, it is no marvel that these words seem to prove that the church, nay, that your church, is universally infallible. But we that have no such end, no such desires, but are willing to leave all men to their liberty, provided they will not improve it to a tyranny over others, we find it no difficulty to discern between dedit and promisit — he gave at his ascension, and he promised to the world's end. Besides, though you, whom it concerns, may haply flatter * Perron. Q2 244 No Church of one Denomination infallible. yourselves, that you have not only pastors, and doctors, but pro- phets, and apostles, and evangelists, and those distinct from the former, still in your church ; yet we that are disinterested persons, cannot but smile at these strange imaginations. Lastly, though you are apt to think yourselves such necessary instruments for all good purposes, and that nothing can be well done unless you do it ; that no unity or constancy in religion can be maintained, but inevitably Christendom must fall to ruin and confusion, unless you support it : yet we, that are indifferent, and impartial, and well content that God should give us his own favours, by means of his own appointment, not of our choosing, can easily collect out of these very words, that not the infallibility of yours, or of any church, but the apostles, and prophets, and evangelists, &c. which Christ gave upon his ascension, were designed by him for the compassing all these excellent purposes, by their preaching while they lived, and by their writings for ever. And if they fail hereof, the reason is not any insufficiency or invalidity in the means, but the voluntary perverseness of the subjects they have to deal with ; who, if they would be themselves and be content that others should be, in the choice of their religion, the servants of God, and not of men ; if they would allow, that the way to heaven is not narrower now than Christ left it, his yoke no heavier than he made it ; that the belief of no more difficulties is required now to salva- tion, than was in the primitive church ; that no error is in itself destructive and exclusive from salvation now, which was not then ; if, instead of being zealous papists, earnest calvinists, rigid lutherans, they would become themselves, and be content that others should be, plain and honest christians ; if all men would believe the scrip- ture, and, freeing themselves from prejudice and passion, would sincerely endeavour to find the true sense of it, and live according to it, and require no more of others but to do so ; nor denying their communion to any that do so, would so order their public service of God, that all which do so may, without scruple, or hypocrisy, or protestation against any part of it, join with them in it ; who doth not see that seeing (as we suppose here, and shall prove hereafter) all necessary truths are plainly and evidently set down in scripture, there would of necessity be among all men, in all things necessary, unity of opinion 1 and, notwithstanding any other differences that are, or could be, unity of communion, and charity, and mutual toleration ? by which means all schism and heresy would be banished the world, and those wretched conten- tions which now rend and tear in pieces, not the coat, but the members and bowels of Christ, which mutual pride and tyranny, and cursing, and killing, and damning, would fain make immortal, should speedily receive a most blessed catastrophe. But of this hereafter, when we shall come to the question of schism, wherein I persuade myself, that I shall plainly shew, that the most vehe- ment accusers are the greatest offenders, and that they are indeed, at this time, the greatest schismatics who make the way to heaven narrower, the yoke of Christ heavier, the differences of faith greater, the conditions of ecclesiastical communion harder and stricter, No Church of one Denomination infallible. 245 than they were made at the beginning by Christ and his apostles ; they who talk of unity, but aim at tyranny, and will have peace with none but with their slaves and vassals. In the meanwhile, though I have shewed how unity of faith, and unity of charity too, may be preserved without your church's infallibility, yet see- ing you modestly conclude from hence, not that your church is, but only seems to be, universally infallible, meaning to yourself, of which you are a better judge than I : therefore I willingly grant your conclusion, and proceed. 82. Whereas you say, that Dr. Potter limits those promises and privileges to fundamental points; the truth is, with some of them he meddles not at all, neither does his adversary give him occasion; not with those out of the Epistle to Timothy, and the Ephesians. To the rest he gives other answer besides this. 83. But the words of scripture by you alleged are universal, and mention no such restraint to fundamentals as Dr. Potter applies to them. — I answer, that, of the five texts which you allege, four are indefinite, and only one universal, and that you confess is to be re- strained, and are offended with Dr. Potter for going about to prove it. And whereas you say, they mention no restraint, intimating that therefore they are not to be restrained, I tell you, this is no good consequence ; for it may appear out of the matter and cir- cumstances, that they are to be understood in a restrained sense, notwithstanding no restraint be mentioned. That place quoted by St. Paul, and applied by him to our Saviour, " He hath put all things under his feet," mentions no exception ; yet St. Paul tells us, not only that it is true or certain, but, " it is manifest that He is excepted which did put all things under him." 84. But your interpretation is better than Dr. Potter's because it is literal. — I answer his is literal as well as yours : and you are mistaken if you think a restrained sense may not be a literal sense ; for to restrained, literal is not opposed, but unlimited or absolute; and to literal is not opposed restrained, but figurative. 85. Whereas you say, Dr. Potter's brethren, rejecting his limita- tion, restrain the mentioned texts to the apostles — implying hereby a contrariety between them and him ; I answer, so doth Dr. Potter restrain all of them which he speaks of, in the pages by you quoted, to the apostles, in the direct and primary sense of the words : though he tells you there, the words in a more restrained sense are true, being understood of the church universal. 86. As for your pretence, that — to find the meaning of those places, you confer divers texts, you :onsult originals, you examine translations, and use all the means by protestants appointed. I have told you before, that all this is vain and hypocritical, if (as your manner and your doctrine is) you give not yourselves liberty of judgment in the use of these means: if you make not yourselves judges of, but only advocates for, the doctrine of your church, re- fusing to see what these means show you, if it any way make against the doctrine of your church, though it be as clear as the light at noon. Remove prejudice, even the balance, and hold it even, make it indifferent to you which way you go to heaven so 21* 246 No Church of one Denomination infallible. you go the true, which religion be true, so you be of it, then use the means, and pray for God's assistance, and assure as God is true, you shail be led into all necessary truth. 87. Whereas you say — you neither do, nor have, any possible means to agree, as long as you are left to yourselves : the first is very true, that while you differ you do not agree. But for the second, that you have no possible means of agreement, as long as you are left to yourselves, i. e. to your own reasons and judgment, this sure is very false, neither do you offer any proof of it, unless you intend this, that you do not agree, for a proof that you can- not ; which sure is no good consequence, nor half so good as this which I oppose against it. Dr. Potter and I, by the use of these means by you mentioned, do agree, concerning the sense of these places, therefore there is a possible means of agreement ; and therefore you. also, if you would use the same means, with the same minds, might agree so far as it is necessary, and it is not necessarv that you should agree farther. Or if there be no possible means to agree about the sense of these texts, whilst we are left to ourselves, then sure it is impossible that we should agree in your sense of them, which was, that the church is universally infallible. For if it were possible for us to agree in this sense of them, then it were possible for us to agree. And why then said you of the self- same texts but in the page next before, " These words seem clearly enough to prove that the church is universally infallible." A strange forgetfulness, that the same man, almost in the same breath, should say of the same words, they seem clearly enough to prove such a conclusion true, and yet that three indifferent men, all presumed to be lovers of truth, and industrious searchers of it, should have no possible means; while they follow their own reason, to agree in the truth of this conclusion ! 88. Whereas you say, that — It were great impiety to imagine that God, the lover of souls, hath left no certain infallible means to decide both this and all other differences arising about the in- terpretation of scripture, or upon any other occasion — I desire you to take heed you commit not an impiety in making more impieties than God's commandments make. Certainly, God is no way obliged, either by his promise or his love, to give us all things that we may imagine would be convenient for us, as formerly I have proved at large. It is sufficient that he denies us nothing necessary to salvation. Deus non deficit in necessariis, nee redundat in super- fluis : so Dr. Stapleton. But that the ending of all controversies, or having a certain means of ending them, is necessary to salvation, that you have often said and supposed, but never proved, though it be the main pillar of your whole discourse. So little care you take how slight vour foundations are, so your building make a fair show : and as little care, how you commit those faults yourself, which you condemn in others. For here you charge them with great impiety, who imagine that God, the lover of souls, hath left no in- fallible means to determine all differences arising about the inter- pretation of scripture, or upon any other occasion : and yet after- wards being demanded by Dr. Potter, why the questions between No Church of one Denomination infallible. 247 the Jesuits and dominicans remain undetermined ? vou return him this cross interrogatory.. Who hath assured you that the point, "wherein these learned men differ, is a revealed truth, or capable of definition ; or is it not rather by plain scripture indeterminable, or by any rule of faith ? So then when you say, it were great im- piety to imagine that God hath not left infallible means to decide all differences ; I may answer, it seems you do not believe vour- self. For in this controversy, which is of as high consequence as any can be, you seem to be doubtful whether there be anv means to determine it. On the other side, when you ask Dr. Potter, who assured him that there is any means to determine this controversv 7 I answer for him, that you have ; in calling it a great impiety to imagine that there is not some infallible means to decide this and all other differences arising about the interpretation of scripture, or upon any other occasion. For what trick you can devise to show that this difference between the dominicans and Jesuits, which in- cludes a difference about the sense of many texts of scripture, and many other matters of moment, was not included under this, and all other differences, I cannot imagine. Yet if you can find out any, thus much at least we shall gain by it, that general speeches are not always to be understood generally, but sometimes with excep- tions and limitations. 89. But if there be any infallible means to decide all differences, I beseech you name them. You say it is to consult and hear God's visible church with submissive acknowledgment of her infallibility. But suppose the difference be (as here it is) whether your church be infallible, what shall decide that ? If you would say (as you should do) scripture and reason, then you foresee that you should be forced to grant, that these are fit means to decide this controversy, and therefore may be as fit to decide others. Therefore, to avoid this, vou run into a most ridiculous absurdity, and tell us, that this difference also, whether the church be infallible, as well as others, must be agreed by a submissive acknowledgment of the church's infallibility : as if you should have said, My brethren, I perceive this is a great contention among you, whether the Roman church be infal- lible ! If you will follow my advice, I will show you a ready means to end it; you must first agree that the Roman church is infallible, and then vour contention, whether the Roman church be infallible, will quickly be at an end. Verily, a most excellent advice, and most compendious way of ending all controversies, even without - troubling the church to determine them ! For why may not you say in all other differences as you have done in this ? Agree that the pope is supreme head of the church ; that the substance of the bread and wine, in the sacrament, is turned into the body and blood of Christ ; that the communion is to be given to laymen but in one kind ; that pictures may be worshipped ; that saints are to be in- vocated ; and so in the rest : and then your differences about the pope's supremacy, transubstantiation, and all the rest, will speedily be ended. If you say, the advice is good in this, but not in other cases, I must request you, not to expect always to be believed upon your word, but to show us some reason, why any one thing, namely, 248 No Church of one Denomination infallible. the church's infallibility ; is fit to prove itself; and any other thing, by name the pope's supremacy, or transubstantiation, is not as fit? Or if for shame you will at length confess, that the church's infal- libility is not fit to decide this difference, whether the church be infallible, then you must confess it is not fit to decide all : unless you will say it may be fit to decide all, and yet not fit to decide this, or pretend that this is not comprehended under all. Besides, if you grant that your church's infallibility cannot possibly be well grounded upon, or decided by itself, then having professed before, that there is no possible means besides this for us to agree here- upon, I hope you will give me leave to conclude, that it is impossi- ble upon good ground for us to agree that the Roman church is in- fallible. For certainly, light itself is not more clear than the evi- dence of this syllogism : If there be no other means to make men agree upon your church's infallibility, but only this, and this be no means; then it is simply impossible for men upon good grounds to agree that your church is infallible : But there is (as you have granted) no other possible means to make men agree hereupon, but only a submissive acknowledg- ment of her infallibility ; and this is apparently no means ; Therefore it is simply impossible for men upon good grounds to agree that your church is infallible. 90. Lastly, to the place of St. Augustine, wherein we are advised to follow the way of catholic discipline, which from Christ himself by the apostles hath come down even to us, and from us shall de- scend to all posterity — I answer, that the way which St. Augustine speaks of, and the way which you commend, being diverse ways, and in many things, clean contrary, we cannot possibly follow them both ; and therefore, for you to apply the same words to them is a vain equivocation. Show us any way, and do not say, but prove it to have come from Christ and his apostles down to us, and we are ready to follow it. Neither do we expect demonstra- tion hereof, but such reasons as may make this more probable than the contrary. But if you bring in things into your now catholic discipline, which christians in St. Augustine's time held abominable, (as the picturing of God,) and which you must, and some of you do confess to have come into the church seven hundred years after Christ: if you will bring in things, as you have done the half com- munion, with a non obstante, notwithstanding Christ's institution, and the practice of the primitive church were to the contrary ; if you will do such things as these, and yet would have us believe, that your whole religion came from Christ and his apostles, this we conceive a request too unreasonable for modest men to make, or for wise men to grant. Charity maintained by Catholics. 249 CHAPTER IV. To say that the creed contains all points necessarily to be believed, is neither pertinent to the question in hand ; nor in itself true. " I say, neither pertinent nor true. Not pertinent ; because our question is not what points are necessary to be explicitly believed; but what points may be lawfully disbelieved, or rejected after sufficient proposition that they are divine truths. You say, the creed contains all points necessary to be believed : be it so : but doth it likewise contain all points not to be disbelieved? Certainly it doth not. For how many truths are there in holy scripture not contained in the creed, which we are not obliged distinctly and particularly to know and believe, but are bound under pain of damnation not to reject, as soon as we come to know that they are found in holy scripture ; and we having al- ready shewed that whatsoever is proposed by God's church as a point of faith, is infallibly a truth revealed by God ; it followeth, that whosoever denieth any such point, opposeth God's sacred testimony, whether that point be contained in the creed or no. In vain then was your care employed to prove, that all points of faith necessary to be explicitly believed, are contained in the creed. Neither was that the catalogue which Charity Mistaken demanded. His demand was (and it was most reasonable) that you would once give us a list of all fundamentals, the denial whereof destroys salvation; whereas the denial of other points not fundamental may stand with salvation, although both these kinds of points be equally proposed as revealed by God. For if they be not equally proposed, the difference will arise from diversi- ty of the proposal, and not of the matter fundamental, or not fun- damental. This catalogue only can shew how far protestants may disagree without breach of unity in faith ; and upon this many other matters depend according to the ground of protestants. But you will never adventure to publish such a catalogue. I say more ; you cannot assign any one point so great, or fundamental, that the denial thereof will make a man a heretic, if it be not sufficiently propounded as a divine truth. Nor can you assign any one point so small, that it can without heresy be rejected, if once it be suffi- ciently represented as revealed by God. "2. Nay, this your instance in the creed is not only impertinent, but directly against you. For all points in the creed are not of their own nature fundamental, as I shewed* before : and yet it is damnable to deny any one point contained in the creed. So that it is clear, that to make an error damnable, it is not necessary that the matter be of itself fundamental. " 3. Moreover, you cannot ground any certainty upon the creed itself, unless first you presuppose that the authority of the church is universally infallible, and consequently that it is damnable to oppose her declarations, whether they concern matters great or small, contained or not contained in the creed. This is clear ; be- * Cap. iii. n. 3. 250 Charity maintained by Catholics. cause we must receive the creed itself upon the credit of the church, without which we could not know that there was any such thing as that which we call the apostles' creed. And yet the ar- guments whereby you endeavour to prove, that the creed contains all fundamental points, are grounded upon supposition, that the creed was made either by the apostles themselves, or by the church* of their times from them : which thing we could not cer- tainly know, if the succeeding and still continued church may err in her traditions ; neither can we be assured, whether all funda- mental articles which you say were, out of the scriptures, summed and contracted into the apostles' creed, were faithfully summed and contracted, and not one pretermitted, altered or mistaken, unless we undoubtedly know that the apostles composed the creed ; and that they intended to contract all fundamental points of faith into it; or at least that the church of their times (for it seemeth you doubt whether indeed it were composed by the apostles themselves) did understand the apostles aright ; and that the church of their times did intend that the creed should contain all fundamental points. For if the church may err in points not fundamental, may she not also err in the particulars which I have specified ? Can you shew it to be a fundamental point of faith, that the apostles intended to comprise all points of faith necessary to sal- vation in the creed ? Yourself say no more than that it is veryf probable ; which is far from reaching to a fundamental point of faith. Your probability is grounded upon the judgment of anti- quity, and even of the Roman doctors, as you say in the same place. But if the catholic church may err, what certainty can you expect from antiquity or doctors ? Scripture is your total rule of faith. Cite therefore some text of scripture, to prove that the apostles, or the church of their times composed the creed, and composed it with a purpose that it should contain all fundamental points of faith ; which being impossible to be done, you must for the creed itself rely upon the infallibility of the church. " 4. Moreover, the creed consisteth not so much in the words, as in their sense and meaning. All such as pretend to the name of christians, recite the creed, and yet many have erred funda- mentally, as well against the articles of the creed, as other points of faith. It is then very frivolous to say, the creed contains all fundamental points ; without specifying, both in what sense the articles of the creed be true, and also in what true sense they be fundamental. For, both these tasks you are to perform, who teach that all truth is not fundamental : and you do but delude the ignorant when you say, that the creed, taken in a catholicj sense, comprehendeth all points fundamental ; because with you, •all catholic sense is not fundamental ; for so it were necessary to salvation that all christians should know the whole scripture, wherein every least point hath a catholic sense. Or if, by catholic sense, you understand that sense which is so universally to be known and believed by all, that whosoever fails therein cannot be saved, you trifle, and say no more than this — all points of the * Page 216. t Page 241. i Page 216. Charity maintained by Catholics. 251 creed, in a sense necessary to salvation, are necessary to salvation : or, all points fundamental are fundamental. — After this manner it were an easy thing to make many true prognostications, by saying it will certainly rain when it raineth. You say the creed* was opened and explained in some parts in the creeds of Nice, &c. But how shall we understand the other parts, not explained in those creeds 1 "5. For what article in the creed is more fundamental, or may seem more clear, than that wherein we believe Jesus Christ to be the Mediator, Redeemer, and Saviour of mankind, and the founder and foundation of a catholic church, expressed in the creed 1 And yet about this article, how many different doctrines are there, not only of old heretics, as Arius, Nestorius, Eutiches, &c, but also of protestants, partly against catholics, and partly against one another 1 For the said main article of Christ's being the only Saviour of the world, &c., according to different senses of dis- agreeing sects, doth involve these and many other such questions : that faith in Jesus Christ doth justify alone ; that sacraments have no efficiency in justification ; that baptism doth not avail infants for salvation, unless they have an act of faith ; that there is no sacerdotal absolution from sins ; that good works proceeding from God's grace are not meritorious ; that there can be no satisfaction for the temporal punishment due to sin, after the guilt or offence is pardoned ; no purgatory ; no prayers for the dead ; no sacrifice of the mass ; no invocation ; no mediation or intercession of saints ; no inherent justice ; no supreme pastor ; yea, no bishop by divine ordinance; no real presence; no transubstantiation, with divers others. — And why ? because (forsooth) these doctrines derogate from the titles of Mediator, Redeemer, Advocate, Foundation, &c. Yea, and are against the truth of our Saviour's human nature, if we believe divers protestants writing against transubstantiation. Let then any judicious man consider, whether Dr. Potter, or others, do really satisfy, when they send men to the creed for a perfect catalogue, to distinguish points fundamental, from those which they say are not fundamental. If he will speak indeed to some purpose, let him say, this article is understood in this sense, and in this sense it is fundamental — that other is to be understood in such a meaning ; yet according to that meaning it is not so fundamental, but that men may disagree, and deny it without damnation. But it were no policy for any protestant to deal so plainly. "6. But to what end should we use many arguments? Even yourself are forced to limit your own doctrine, and come to say, that the creed is a perfect catalogue of fundamental points, taken as it was further opened and explained in some parts (by occasion of emergent heresies) in the other catholic creeds of Nice, Con- stantinople, Ephesus,f Chalcedon, and Athanasius. But this ex- plication, or restriction, overthroweth your assertion. For as the apostles' creed was not to us a sufficient catalogue, till it was explained by the first council, nor then till it was declared by * Page 216. • t Ibid. 252 Charity maintained by Catholics. another, &c, so now, also, as new heresies may arise, it will need particular explanation against such emergent errors ; and so it is not yet, nor ever will be, of itself alone, a particular catalogue, sufficient to distinguish betwixt fundamental and not fundamental points. " 7. I come to the second part — that the creed doth not contain all main and principal points of faith : and to the end we may not strive about things either granted by us both, or nothing concerning the point in question, I must premise these observations : " 8. First, that it cannot be denied, but that the creed is most full and complete, to that purpose for which the holy apostles, in- spired by God, meant that it should serve, and in that manner as they did intend it ; which was, not to comprehend all particular points of faith, but such general heads as were most befitting and requisite for preaching the faith of Christ to Jews and Gentiles, and might be briefly and compendiously set down, and easily learned and remembered. And therefore, in respect of gentiles, the creed doth mention God as Creator of all things ; and for both Jews and Gentiles, the trinity, the Messias and Saviour, his birth, life, death, resurrection, and glory, from whom they were to hope remission of sins, and life everlasting, and by whose sacred name they were to be distinguished from all other professions, by being called christians : according to which purpose St. Thomas of Aquine* doth distinguish all the articles of the creed into these general heads : that some belong to the majesty of the Godhead, others to the mystery of our Saviour Christ's human nature : which two general objects of faith the Holy Ghost doth express and conjoin, John xvii. hcec est vita ceterna, &c. ' This is life everlasting, that they know thee, the true God, and whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ.' But it was not their meaning to give us, as it were, a course of divinity, or a catechism, or a particular expression of all points of faith, leaving those things to be per- formed as occasion should require, by their own word or writing, for their time, and afterwards by their successors in the catholic church. Our question then is not, whether the creed be perfect, as far as the end for which it was composed did require ; for we believe and are ready to give our lives for this ; but only we deny, that the apostles did intend to comprise therein all particular points of belief, necessary to salvation, as even by Dr. Potter's own confession,| ^ doth not comprehend agenda, or things be- longing to practice ; as sacraments, commandments, the acts of hope, and duties of charity which we are obliged not only to practise, but also to believe by divine infallible faith. Will he therefore infer that the creed is not perfect, because it contains not all those necessary and fundamental objects of faith ? He will answer, no, because the apostles intended only to express credenda, things to be believed, not practised. Let him therefore give us leave to say, that the creed is perfect, because it wanteth none of those objects of belief which were intended to be set down, as we explicated before. * 2, 2. q. 1. Art. 8. t Page 235, 215. Charity maintained by Catholics. 253 "9. The second observation is, that to satisfy our question what points in particular be fundamental, it will not be sufficient to allege the creed, unless it contains all such points, either ex- pressly and immediately ; or else in such manner, that by evident and necessary consequence they may be deduced from articles both clearly and particularly contained therein. For if the deduction be doubtful, we shall not be sure, that such conclusions be funda- mental ; or if the articles themselves which are said to be funda- mental, be not distinctly and particularly expressed, they will not serve us to know and distinguish all points fundamental, from those which they call not fundamental. We do not deny but that all points of faith, both fundamental and not fundamental, may be said to be contained in the creed, in some sense ; as for ex- ample, implicitly, generally, or in some such involved manner. For when we explicitly believe the catholic church, we do implicitly believe whatsoever she proposeth as belonging to faith ; or else by way of reduction, that is, when we are once instructed in the belief of particular points of faith, not expressed, nor by necessary con- sequence deducible from the creed ; we may afterwards by some analogy, or proportion, and resemblance, reduce it to one or more of those articles, which are explicitly contained in the symbol. Thus St. Thomas, the cherubim among divines, teacheth* that the miraculous existence of our blessed Saviour's body in the eucharist, as likewise all his other miracles, are reduced to God's omnipo- tency expressed in the creed. And Dr. Potter saith, ' The eucharistf being a seal of that holy union which we have with Christ our head by his Spirit and faith, and with the saints his members by charity, is evidently included in the communion of saints.' But this reductive way is far from being sufficient to infer out of the articles of God's omnipotency, or of the communion of saints, that our Saviour's body is in the eucharist, and much less whether it be only in figure, or else in reality ; by transubstantiation or consub- stantiation, &c; and least of all, whether or no these points be fundamental. And you hyperbolize in saying, the eucharist is evidently included in the communion of saints, as if there could not have been, or was not, a communion of saints before the blessed sacrament was instituted. Yet it is true, that after we know and believe there is such a sacrament, we may refer it to some of those heads expressed in the creed, and yet so, as St. Thomas refers it to one article, and Dr. Potter to another ; and in respect of different analogies or effects, it may be referred to several articles. The like I say of other points of faith, which may in some sort be reduced to the creed, but nothing to Dr. Potter's purpose; but contrarily it sheweth that your affirming such and such points to be fundamental or not fundamental, is merely arbi- trary to serve your turn, as necessity and your occasions may re- quire. Which was an old custom amongst heretics, as we read inj St. Augustine, Pelagius, and Coelestius, ' desiring fraudulently to avoid the hateful name of heresies, affirmed that the question of * 2. 2. q. 1. Art. 8. ad. 6. t Page 231. X De peccat. Orig. cont. Pelag. 1. ii. c. 22. 22 254 Charity maintained by Catholics. original sin may be disputed without danger of faith.' But this holy father affirms that it belongs to the foundation of faith. ' We may (saith he) endure a disputant who errs in other questions not yet diligently examined, not yet diligently established by the whole authority of the church; their error may be borne with; but it must not pass so far as to attempt to shake the founda- tion of the church.' We see St. Augustine placeth the being of a point fundamental, or not fundamental, in that it hath been examined and established by the church, although the points of which he speaketh, namely, original sin, be not contained in the creed. " 10. Out of that which hath been said, I infer, that Dr. Potter's pains in alleging catholic doctors, the ancient fathers, and the coun- cil of Trent, to prove that the creed contains all points of faith, was needless; since we grant it in manner aforesaid. But Dr. Potter cannot in his conscience believe, that catholic divines, or the coun- cil of Trent, and the holy fathers did intend, that all points in par- ticular which we are obliged to believe, are contained explicitly in the creed ; he knowing well enough, that all catholics hold them- selves obliged to believe all those points, which the said council de- fines to be believed under an anathema, and that all christians be- lieve the commandments, sacraments, &c. which are not expressed in the creed. "11. Neither must this seem strange. For who is ignorant, that summaries, epitomes, and the like brief extracts, are not intended to specify all particulars of that science or subject, to which they belong. For as the creed is said to contain all points of faith ; so the decalogue comprehends all articles (as I may term them) which concern charity and good life; and yet this cannot be so understood, as if we were disobliged from performance of any duty, or the eschewing of any vice, unless it be expressed in the ten commandments. For, (to omit the precepts of receiving sacraments, which belong to practice or manners, and yet are not contained in the decalogue) there are many sins, even against the law of nature, and light of reason, which are not contained in the ten commandments, except only by similitude, analogy, reduc- tion, or some such way. For example, we find not expressed in the decalogue, either divers sins, as gluttony, drunkenness, pride, sloth, covetousness in desiring either things superfluous, or with too much greediness ; or divers of our chief obligations, as obedience to princes, and all superiors, not only ecclesiastical but also civil ; whose laws Luther, Melancthon, Calvin, and some other protestants do dangerously affirm not to oblige in conscience, and yet these men think they know the ten commandments; as likewise divers protes-, tants defend usury to be lawful, and the many treatises of civilians, canonists, and casuists are witnesses, that divers sins against the light of reason, and law of nature, are not distinctly expressed in the ten commandments; although when by other diligence they are found to be unlawful, they may be reduced to some of the com- mandments, and yet not so evidently and particularly but that divers do it in divers manners. " 12. My third observation is that our present question being, Charity maintained by Catholics. 255 whether or no the creed contains so fully all fundamental points of faith, that whosoever do not agree in all and every one of those fundamental articles, cannot have the same substance of faith, nor hope of salvation ; if I can produce one or more points, not contained in the creed, in which if two do not agree, both of them cannot ex- pect to be saved, I shall have performed as much as I intend ; and Dr. Potter must seek out some other catalogue for points fundamental than the creed. Neither is it material to the said purpose, whether such fundamental points rest only in knowledge, and speculation, or belief; or else be farther referred to work and practice. For the habit, or virtue of faith, which inclineth and enableth us to be- lieve both speculative and practical verities, is of one and the self- same nature and essence. For example, by the same faith, whereby I speculatively believe there is a God, I likewise believe that he is to be adored, served, and loved ; which belong to practice. The reason is, because the formal object or motive, for which I yield assent to those different sorts of material objects, is the same in both, to wit, the revelation or word of God. Where, by the way, I note, that if the unity or distinction and nature of faith were to be taken from the diversity of things revealed, by one faith I should believe speculative verities, and by another such as tend to practice, which I doubt whether Dr. Potter himself will admit. " 13. Hence it followeth, that whosoever denieth any one main practical revealed truth, is no less a heretic, than if he should deny a point resting in belief alone. So that when Dr. Potter (to avoid our argument, that all fundamental points are not contained in the creed, because in it there is no mention of the sacraments, which yet are points of so main importance, that protestants make the due administration of them to be necessary and essential to constitute a church) answereth, that the sacraments are to be* reckoned rather among the agenda o( the church, than the credenda; they are rather divine rites and ceremonies, than doctrines ; he either grants that we affirm, or in effect says, of two kinds of re- vealed truths which are necessary to be believed, the creed contains one sort only ; ergo, it contains all kinds of revealed truths neces- sary to be believed. Our question is not de nomine, but re, not what be called points of faith, or of practice, but what points in- deed be necessarily to be believed, whether they be termed agenda or credenda; especially the chiefest part of christian perfection, con- sisting more in action than in barren speculation ; in good works, than bare relief; in doing than knowing. And there are no less con- tentions concerning practical, than speculative, truths; as sacra- ments, obtaining remission of sin, invocation of saints, prayers for the dead, adoration of Christ in the sacrament, and many other; all which do so much the more import, as on them, beside right belief, doth also depend our practice, and the ordering of our life. Though Dr. Potter could therefore give us (as he will never be able to do) a minute and exact catalogue of all truths to be believed; that would not make me able enoiigh to know whether or no I * Page 235. 256 Charity maintained by Catholics. have faith sufficient for salvation, till he also did bring in a par- ticular list of all believed truths, which tend to practice, decla- ring which of them be fundamental, which not ; that so every man might know, whether he be not in some damnable error, for some article of faith, which farther might give influence into damnable works. " 14. These observations being premised, I come to prove, that the creed doth not contain all points of faith necessary to be known and believed. And, to omit that in general it doth not tell us what points be fundamental or not fundamental, which, in the way of protestants, is most necessary to be known ; in particular, there is no mention of the greatest evils from which man's calamity pro- ceeded ; I mean, the sin of the angels, of Adam, and of original sin in us ; nor of the greatest good, from which we expect all good, to wit, the necessity of grace for all works tending to piety. Nay, there is no mention of angels, good or bad. The meaning of that most general head (Oportet accedentem, &c. ' It behoves* him that comes to God, to believe that he is, and is a remunerator') is questioned by the denial of merit, which makes God a giver, but not a rewarder. It is not expressed whether the article of remis- sion of sins be understood by faith alone, or else may admit the efficiency of sacraments. There is no mention of ecclesiastical, apostolical, Divine traditions, one way or other ; or of holy scrip- tures in general, and much less of every book in particular ; nor of the name, nature, number, effects, matter, form, ministry, inten- tion, necessity of sacraments; and yet the due administration of the sacraments is with protestants an essential note of the church. There is nothing for baptism of children, nor against rebaptization. There is no mention in favour or against the sacrifice of the mass, of power in the church to institute rites, holy days, &c. and to in- flict excommunication, or other censures; of priesthood, bishops, and the whole ecclesiastical hierarchy, which are very fundamental points ; of St. Peter's primacy, which to Calvin seemeth a funda- mental error ; nor of the possibility or impossibility to keep God's commandments; of the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and Son ; of purgatory, or prayer for the dead, in any sense. And yet Dr. Potter doth not deny, but that Arius was esteemed a heretic, for denyingf all sort of commemoration from the dead. Nothing of the church's visibility or invisibility, fallibility or infal- libility, nor of other points controverted betwixt protestants them- selves, and between protestants and catholics, which to Dr. Potter seem so heinous corruptions, that they cannot without damnation join with us in profession thereof. There is no mention of the cessation of the old law, which yet is a very main point of faith. And many other might be also added. " 15. But what need we labour to specify particulars? There are many important points of faith not expressed in the creed, as, since the world's beginning, now, and for all future times there have been, are, and may be, innumerable gross damnable heresies, * Heb. xi. 6. . t Page 35. Charity maintained by Catholics. 257 whose contrary truths are not contained in the creed. For every fundamental error must have a contrary fundamental truth: because of two contradictory propositions in the same degree, if the one is false the other must be true. As for example, if it be a damnable error to deny the blessed Trinity, or the Godhead of our Saviour, the belief of them must be a truth necessary to salvation : or rather, if we will speak properly, the error is damnable, because the op- posite truth is necessary; as death is frightful, because life is sweet; and, according to philosophy, the privation is measured by the form to which it is repugnant. If therefore the creed contain in particular all fundamental points of faith, it must explicitly, or by clear consequence, comprehend all truths opposite to innumerable heresies of all ages past, present, and to come, which no man in his wits will affirm it to do. " 16. And here I cannot omit to signify how you* applaud the saying of Dr. Usher, ' That in those propositions, which without all controversy are universally received in the whole christian world, so much truth is contained, as being joined with holy obedience, may be sufficient to bring a man to everlasting salva- tion ; neither have we cause to doubt, but that — as many as walk according to this rule (neither overthrowing that which they have builded, by superinducing any damnable heresies thereupon, nor otherwise vitiating their holy faith with a lewd and wicked conversation) peace shall be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.' Now Dr. Potter knows, that the mystery of the blessed Trinity is not universally received in the whole christian world, as appears in very many heretics in Polony, Hungary, and Tran- silvania, and therefore according to this rule of Dr. Usher, approved by Dr. Potter, the denial of the blessed Trinity shall not exclude salvation. " 17. Let me note, by the way, that you might have easily espied a foul contradiction in the said words of Dr. Usher, by you cited, and so much applauded. For he supposeth that a man agrees with other churches in belief which, joined with holy obedience, may bring him to everlasting salvation, and yet that he may superinduce damnable heresies. For how can he superinduce damnable heresies, who is supposed to believe all truths necessary to salvation 1 Can there be any damnable heresy, unless it con- tradict some necessary truth, which cannot happen in one who is supposed to believe all necessary truths? Besides, if one be- lieving all fundamental articles in the creed, may superinduce damnable heresies, it followeth, that the fundamental truths, contrary to those damnable heresies, are not contained in the creed. " 18. According to this model of Dr. Potter's foundation, con- sisting in the agreement of scarcely one point of faith ; what a strange church would he make of men concurring in some one or few articles of belief, who yet for the rest should be holding conceits plainly contradictory ; so patching up a religion of men * Page 255. r 22* 258 Charity maintained by Catholics. who agree only in the article, that Christ is our Saviour, but for the rest, are like to the parts of a chimera ; having the head of a man, the neck of a horse, the shoulders of an ox, the foot of a lion, &c. I wrong them not herein. For in good philosophy, there is greater repugnancy between assent and dissent, affirma- tion and negation, est, est, non, non, (especially when all these contradictories pretend to rely upon one and the self-same motive — the infallible truth of Almighty God) than between the integral parts, as head, neck, &c. of a man, horse, lion, &c. And thus protestants are far more bold to disagree, even in matters of faith, than catholic divines, in questions merely philosophical, or not de- termined by the church. And while thus they stand only upon fundamental articles, they do by their own confession destroy the church, which is the house of God. For the foundation alone of a house is not a house, nor can they, in such an imaginary church, any more expect salvation, than the foundation alone of a house is fit to afford a man habitation. " 19. Moreover, it is most evident that protestants, by this chaos rather than church, do give unavoidable occasion of desperation to poor souls. Let some one who is desirous to save his soul repair to Dr. Potter, who maintains these grounds, to know upon whom he may rely in a matter of so great consequence : I suppose the doctor's answer will be, upon the truly catholic church. She cannot err damnably. What understand you by the catholic church ? Cannot general councils, which are the church repre- sentative, err? Yes, they may weakly or* wilfully misapply, or misunderstand, or neglect scripture, and so err damnably. To whom then shall I go for my particular instruction ? I cannot confer with the united body of the whole church about my par- ticular difficulties, as yourself affirms, that the catholic church cannot be toldf of private injuries. Must I then consult with every particular person of the catholic church 1 So it seems by what you write in these words, ' The wholej militant church (that is, all the members of it) cannot possibly err, either in the whole faith, or any necessary article of it.' You say, M. Doctor, I cannot for my instruction acquaint the universal church with my particular scruples. You say the prelates of God's church meeting in a lawful general council may err damnably : it remains then for my necessary instruction, I must repair to every particular member of the universal church, spread over the face of the earth : and yet you teach that the promises^ which our Lord hath made unto his church for his assistance, are in- tended not to any particular persons or churches, but only to the church catholic, with which (as I said) it is impossible for me to confer. Alas! O most uncomfortable ghostly father, you drive . me to desperation ! How shall I confer with every christian soul, man and woman, by sea and by land, close prisoner or at liberty? &c. Yet upon supposal of this miraculous pilgrimage for faith, before I have the faith of miracles, how shall I proceed at our * Page 167. t Page 27. X Page 150, 151. § Page 151. Charity maintained by Catholics. 259 meeting ? Or how shall I know the man on whom I may securely rely? Procure (will you say) to know whether he believe all fundamental points of faith : for if he do, his faith for point of belief, is sufficient for salvation, though he err in a hundred things of less moment. But how shall I know, whether he hold all fundamental points or no ? For till you tell me this, I cannot know whether or no his belief be sound in all fundamental points. Can you say the creed? Yes, and so can many damnable heretics. But why do you ask me this question? Because the creed contains all fundamental points of faith. Are you sure of that ? Not sure ; I hold it very probable.* Shall I hazard my soul on probabilities, or even wagers? This yields a new cause of despair. But what ? doth the creed contain all points neces- sary to be believed, whether they rest in the understanding or else do further extend to practice ? No. It was composed to deliver credenda, not agenda to us; faith, not practice. How then shall I know what points of belief, which directs my prac- tice, be necessary to salvation ? Still you chalk out new paths for desperation. Well, are all articles of the creed, for their nature and matter, fundamental? I cannot say so. How then shall I know which in particular be and which be not funda- mental ? Read my answer to a late popish pamphlet, entitled Charity Mistaken, &c: there you shall find, that fundamental doc- trines are such catholic verities, as principally and essentially per- tain fto the faith, such as properly constitute a church, and are necessary (in ordinary course) to be distinctly believed by every christian that will be saved. They are those grand and capital doctrines which make up our faith in Christ ; that is, that com- mon faith which is alike precious in all, being one and the same in the highest apostle and the meanest believer, which the apos- tle elsewhere calls the first principles of the oracles of God, and the form of sound words. But how shall I apply these gene- ral definitions, or descriptions, or (to say the truth) these only varied words and phrases (for I understand the word fundamen- tal as well as the words principal, essential, grand, and capital doctrines, &c.) to the particular articles of the creed in such sort, as that I may be able precisely, exactly, particularly, to distinguish fundamental articles from points of less moment? You labour to tell us what fundamental points be, but not which they be ; and yet unless you do this, your doctrine serves only either to make men despair, or else to have recourse to those whom you call papists, and who give one certain rule, that all points defined by Christ's visible church belong to the foundation of faith, in such sense as that to deny any one cannot stand with salvation. And seeing yourself acknowledges that these men do not err in points fundamental, I cannot but hold it most safe for me to join with them, for the securing of my soul, and the avoid- ing of desperation, into which this your doctrine must cast all them who understand and believe it. For the whole discourse * Page 241. t Page 211, 213, 214. r2 260 Charity maintained by Catholics. and inference which here I have made, are either your own direct assertions, or evident consequences clearly deduced from them. " 20. But now let us answer some few objections of Dr. Potter's, against that which we have said before : to avoid our argument, that the scripture is not so much as mentioned in the creed, he saith, ' the creed is an abstract of such necessary *doctrines as are delivered in scripture, or collected out of it; and therefore needs not express the authority of that which it supposes.' "21. This answer makes for us. For by giving a reason why it was needless that scripture should be expressed in the creed, you grant as much as we desire ; namely, that the apostles judged it needless to express all necessary points of faith* in their creed. Neither doth the creed suppose, or depend on scripture in such sort as that we can, by any probable consequence, infer from the articles of the creed, that there is any canonical scripture at all; and much less that such books in particular be canonical. Yea, the creed might have been the same, although holy scripture had never been written ; and, which is more, the creed, even in priority of time, was before all the scripture of the New Testa- ment, except the gospel of St. Matthew. And so, according to this reason of his, the scripture should not mention articles con- tained in the creed. And I note in a word, how little connexion Dr. Potter's arguments have, while he tells us, that 'the creed f is an abstract of such necessary doctrines as are delivered in scrip- ture, or collected out of it, and therefore needs not express the authority of that which it supposes ;' it doth not follow : the arti- cles of the creed are delivered in scripture ; therefore the creed supposeth scripture. For two distinct writings may well deliver the same truths, and yet one of them not suppose the other, unless Dr. Potter be of opinion that two doctors cannot, at one time, speak the same truth. " 22. And notwithstanding that Dr. Potter hath now told us, it was needless that the creed should express scripture, whose authority it supposes ; he comes at length to say, that the Nicene fathers in their creed confessing that the Holy Ghost spake by the prophets, do thereby sufficiently avow the divine authority of all canonical scripture. But I would ask him, whether the Nicene Creed be not also an abstract of doctrines delivered in scripture, as he said of the Apostles' Creed, and thence did infer, that it was needless to express scripture, whose authority it supposes? Be- sides, we do not only believe, in general, that canonical scripture is of divine authority, but we also are bound, under pain of dam- nation, to believe, that such and such particular books, not men- tioned in the Nicene Creed, are canonical. And, lastly, Dr. Potter in this answer grants as much as we desire : which is, that all points of faith are not contained in the Apostles' Creed, even as it is explained by other creeds. For these words, ' who spake by the prophets,' are no way contained in the Apostles' Creed, and therefore contain an addition, not an explanation thereof. " 23. But ' how can it be necessary (saith Dr. Potter) for any * Page 234. + Ibid. Charity maintained by Catholics. 261 christian to have more in his creed than the * apostles had, and the church of their times?' I answer, you trifle, not distinguish- ing between the apostles' belief, and that abridgment of some articles of faith, which we call the Apostles' Creed ; and withal, you beg the question, by supposing the apostles believed no more than is contained in their creed, which every unlearned person knows and believes ; and I hope you will not deny but the apostles were endued with greater knowledge than ordinary persons. " 24. Your pretended proof out of the Acts, that the apostles revealed to the church ' the whole counsel of God,' keeping f back nothing, with your gloss (needful for our salvation) is no proof, unless you still beg the question, and do suppose, that whatsoever the apostles revealed to the church is contained in the creed. And I wonder you do not reflect that those words were by St. Paul particularly directed to pastors and governors of the church, as is clear by the other words, ' he called the ancients of the church.' And afterward, ' take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops to rule the church. And yourself say, that ' more knowledge is J necessary in bishops, and priests, to whom is committed the government of the church, and care of souls, than in vulgar laics.' Do you think that the apostles taught Christians nothing but their creed ? Said they nothing of the sacraments, commandments, duties of hope, charity, &c. 1 " 25. Upon the same affected ambiguity is grounded your other objections : ' to say, the whole faith of those times § is not con- tained in the Apostles' Creed, is all one as if a man should say, this is not the Apostles' Creed, but a part of it.' For the faith of the apostles is not all one with that which we commonly call their creed. Did not, I pray you, St. Matthew and St. John believe their writings to be canonical scripture ? And yet their writings are not mentioned in the creed. It is therefore more than clear that the faith of the apostles is of larger extent than the Apostles' Creed. " 26. To your demand, why, amongst many things of equal necessity to be believed, the apostles should || so distinctly set down some, and be altogether silent of others ? 1 answer, that you must answer your own demand. For in the creed there be diverse points, in their nature, not fundamental or necessary to be explicitly and distinctly believed, as above we showed ; why are these points which are not fundamental expressed rather than other of the same quality 1 Why our Saviour's descent to hell, and burial, expressed, and not his circumcision, his manifestation to the three kings, working of miracles, &c. Why did they not express scriptures, sacraments, and all fundamental points of faith tending to practice, as well as those which rest in belief? Their intention was, particularly to deliver such articles as were fittest for those times, concerning the Deity, Trinity, and Messias, (as * Page 221. + Acts xx. 27. t Page 244. § Page 222, 223. || Page 225. 262 Charity maintained by Catholics. heretofore I have declared) leaving many things to be taught by the catholic church, which in the creed we all profess to believe. Neither doth it follow as you infer — that ' as well, nay better, they might have given no article, but that (of the church) and sent us to the church for all the rest. For in, setting down others besides that, and not all, they make us believe we have all, when * we have not all.' For by this kind of arguing, what may not , be deduced 1 One might, quite contrary to your inference, say, j if the Apostles' Creed contain all points necessary to salvation, what need we any church to teach us? and, consequently, what need of the article concerning the church 1 What need we the creeds of Nice, Constantinople, &c. ? Superfluous are your catechisms, wherein, besides the articles of the creed, you add divers other particulars. These would be poor consequences, and so is yours. But shall I tell you news'? for so you are pleased to esteem it. We grant your inference thus far ; that our Saviour Christ re- ferred us to his church, by her to be taught, and by her alone. For she was before the creed, and scripture ; and she, to discharge this imposed office of instructing us, hath delivered us the creed, but not it alone, as if nothing else were to be believed. We have, besides it, holy scripture ; we have unwritten, divine, apostolical, ecclesiastical traditions. It were a childish argument, the creed contains not all things which are necessary to be believed : ergo, it is not profitable. Or, the church alone is sufficient to teach us by some convenient means : ergo, she must teach us without all means, without creeds, without councils, without scripture, &c. If the apostles had expressed no article, but that of the catholic church, she must have taught us the other articles in particular, by creeds, or other means, as in fact we have even the Apostles' Creed from the tradition of the church. If you will believe you have all in the creed, when you have not all, it is not the apostles, or the church, that makes you so believe, but it is your own error, whereby you will needs believe that the creed must contain all. For neither the apostles, nor the church, nor the creed itself tell you any such matter ; and what necessity is there that one means of instruction must involve whatsoever is contained in all the rest ? We are not to recite the creed with anticipated persuasion, that it must contain what we imagine it ought, for better main- taining some opinions of our own ; but we ought to say, and be- lieve, that it contains what we find in it, of which one article is, to believe the catholic church, surely to be taught by her, which presupposeth that we need other instruction beside the creed; and in particular we may learn of her what points be contained in the creed, what otherwise ; and so we shall not be deceived, by believing we have all in the creed, when we have not all ; and you may in the same manner say — as well, nay better, the apostles might have given us no articles at all, as have left out articles tending to practice. For in setting down one sort of article, and not the other, they make us believe we have all, when we have not all. * Page 223. Charity maintained by Catholics. 263 "27. To our argument, that baptism is not contained in the creed, Dr. Potter, besides his answer, that sacraments belong rather to practice than faith, (which I have already confuted, and which indeed maketh against himself, and serveth only to shew that the apostles intended not to comprise all points in the creed which we are bound to believe) adds that the creed of * Nice, ex- pressed baptism by name (' I confess one baptism for the remis- sion of sins'). Which answer is directly against himself, and manifestly proves that baptism is an article of faith, and yet is not contained in the Apostles' Creed, neither explicitly, nor by any necessary consequence from other articles expressed therein. If, to make it an article of faith, it be sufficient that it is contained in the Nicene council ; he will find that protestants maintain many errors against faith, as being repugnant to definitions of general councils: as, in particular, that the very council of Nice (which, saith Mr. Whitgift,f is of all wise and learned men reverenced, esteemed, and embraced, next unto the scriptures themselves) decreed, that to those who were chosen to the ministry unmarried, it was not lawful to take any wife afterwards, is affirmed by pro- testants. And your grand reformer, Luther {Lib. de Conciliis parte prima) saith, that he understands not the Holy Ghost in that council. For in one canon it saith, that those who have gelded themselves are not fit to be made priests, in another it forbids them to have wives. Hath (saith he) the Holy Ghost nothing to do in councils, but to bind and load his ministers, with impossible, dangerous, and unnecessary laws ? I forbear to show that this very article, ' I confess one baptism for the remission of sins,' will be understood by protestants in a far different sense from catholics ; yea, protestants among themselves do not agree, how baptism for- gives sins, nor what grace it confers. Only concerning the unity of baptism against rebaptization of such as were once baptized, (which I noted as a point not contained in the Apostles' Creed) I cannot omit an excellent place of St. Augustine, where, speaking of the donatists, he hath these words : ' they are so bold as J to re- baptize catholics, wherein they shew themselves to be the greater heretics, since it hath pleased the universal catholic church not to make baptism void even in the very heretics themselves.' In which few words, this holy father delivereth against the donatists these points which do also make against protestants : that to make a heresy, or a heretic, known to such, it is sufficient to oppose the definition of God's church : that a proposition may be heretical, though it be not repugnant to any texts of scripture. For St. Augustine teacheth that the doctrine of rebaptization is heretical, and yet acknowledged it cannot be convinced for such out of scripture. And that neither the heresy of rebaptization of those who were baptized by heretics, nor the contrary catholic truth being expressed in the Apostles' Creed, it followeth that it doth not contain all points of faith necessary to salvation. And so we must conclude, that to believe the creed is not sufficient for unity of faith, and spirit, in the same church ; unless there be also a * Page 237. t In his Defence, p. 330. X Lib. de Hoeres. in 69 264 The Creed contains all total agreement both in belief of other points of faith, and in ex- ternal profession, and communion also : (whereof we are to speak in the next chapter) according to the saying of St. Augustine : 5 you are * with us in baptism, and in the creed ; but in the spirit of unity, and bond of peace, and, lastly, in the catholic church, you are not with us.' " THE ANSWER TO THE FOURTH CHAPTER. Wherein is shewed, that the creed contains all necessary points of mere belief. 1. Ad. §. 1 — 6. Concerning the creed's containing the fundamen- tals of Christianity, this is Dr. Potter's assertion, delivered in the 207th page of his book. " The creed of the apostles (as it is ex- plained in the latter creeds of the catholic church) is esteemed a sufficient summary or catalogue of fundamentals by the best learned Romanists, and by antiquity." 2. By fundamentals he understands not the fundamental rules of good life and action (though every one of these is to be believed to come from God, and therefore virtually includes an article of the faith) : but the fundamental doctrines of faith, such as though they have influence upon our lives, as every essential doctrine of Christianity hath, yet we are commanded to believe them, and not to do them. The assent of our understandings is required to them, but not obedience from our wills. 3. But these speculative doctrines again he distinguished out of Aquinas, Occham, and Canus, and others, into two kinds : of the first are those which are the objects of faith, in and for themselves, which, by their own nature and God's prime intention, are essen- tial parts of the gospel ; such as the teachers in the church cannot without mortal sin omit to teach the learners ; such as are in- trinsical to the covenant between God and man ; and not only plainly revealed by God, and so certain truths, but also command- ed to be preached to all men, and to be believed distinctly by all, and so necessary truths. Of the second sort are accidental, cir- cumstantial, occasional objects of faith ; millions whereof there are in holy scripture ; such as are to be believed, not for themselves, but because they are joined with others, that are necessary to be believed, and delivered by the same authority which delivered these. Such as we are not bound to know to be divine revelations (for without any fault we may be ignorant hereof, nay, believe the contrary) ; such as we are not bound to examine, whether or no they be divine revelations ; such as pastors are not bound to teach their flock, nor their flock bound to know and remember; no, nor the pastors themselves to know them or believe them, or not to disbelieve them absolutely and always; but then only when they do see and know them to be delivered in scripture, as divine revelations. * Aug. Ep. 48. necessary Points of mere Belief. 265 4. I say when they do so, and not only when they may do. For to lay an obligation upon us of believing, or not disbelieving any verity, sufficient revelation on God's part is not sufficient: for then, seeing all the express verities of scripture are either to all men, or at least to all learned men, sufficiently revealed by God, it should be a damnable sin in any learned man actually to disbelieve any one particular historical verity contained in scripture, or to be- lieve the contradiction of it, though he knew it not to be there con- tained. For though he did not, yet he might have known it ; it being plainly revealed by God, and this revelation being extant in such a book, wherein he might have found it recorded, if with dili- gence he had perused it. To make, therefore, any points neces- sary to be believed, it is requisite that either we actually know them to be divine revelations; and these though they be not articles of faith nor necessary to be believed, in and for themselves, yet indirectly, and by accident, and by consequence they are so ; the necessity of believing them being enforced upon us by a ne- cessity of believing this essential and fundamental article of faith — that all divine revelations are true — which to disbelieve, or not to believe, is for any christians not only impious, but impossible. Or else it is requisite that they be, first, actually revealed by God : Secondly, commanded, under pain of damnation, to be parti- cularly known, (I mean known to be divine revelations) and dis- tinctly to be believed. And of this latter sort of speculative divine verities, Dr. Potter affirmed, that the Apostles' Creed was a suffi- cient summary ; yet he affirmed it not as his own opinion, but as the doctrine of the ancient fathers, and your own doctors. And besides, he affirmed it not as absolutely certain, but very probable. 5. In brief, all that he says is this : — It is very probable, that ac- cording to the judgment of the Roman doctors, and the ancient fathers, the Apostles' Creed is to be esteemed a sufficient summary of all those doctrines which being merely credenda, and not agenda, all men are ordinarily, under pain of damnation, bound particu- larly to believe. 6. Now this assertion (you say) is neither pertinent to the ques- tion in hand, nor in itself true. Your reasons to prove it imperti- nent, put into form, and divested of impertinences, are these : 1. because the question was not — What points were necessary to be explicitly believed, but what points were necessary not to be disbe- lieved after sufficient proposal ? And therefore, to give a catalogue of points necessary to be explicitly believed, is impertinent. 7. Secondly, because errors may be damnable, though the con- trary truths be not of themselves fundamental ; as, that Pontius Pilate was our Saviour's judge is not in itself a fundamental truth, yet to believe the contrary were a damnable error. And there- fore, to give a catalogue of truths, in themselves fundamental, is of pertinent satisfaction to this demand, what errors are damnable 8. Thirdly, because, if the church be not universally infallible, we cannot ground any certainty upon the creed, which we must receive upon the credit of the church : and, if the church be uni- 23 266 The Creed contains all versally infallible, it is damnable to oppose her declaration in any thing, though not contained in the creed. 9. Fourthly, because not to believe the articles of the creed in the true sense is damnable, therefore it is frivolous to say the creed contains all fundamentals, without specifying in what sense the articles of it are fundamental. 10. Fifthly, because the Apostles' Creed (as Dr. Potter himself confesseth) was not a sufficient catalogue until it was explained by the first council; nor then until it was declared in the second, &c. by occasion of emergent heresies: therefore now, also, as new heresies may arise, it will need particular explanation ; and so is not yet, nor ever will be, a complete catalogue of fundamentals. 11. Now to the first of these objections, I say, first, that your distinction, between points necessary to be believed and necessary not to be disbelieved, is more subtle than sound ; a distinction without a difference ; there being no point necessary to be believed which is not necessary not to be disbelieved ; nor no point to any man, at any time, in any circumstances, necessary not to be dis- believed, but it is to the same man at the same time, in the same circumstances, necessary to be believed. Yet that which (I believe) you would have said, I acknowledge true; that many points which are not necessary to be believed absolutely, are yet necessary to be believed upon a supposition, that they are known to be revealed by God ; that is, become then necessary to be believed, when they are known to be divine revelations. But then I must needs say, you do very strangely, in saying, that the question was — What points might lawfully be disbelieved, after sufficient propo- sition that they are divine revelation ? You affirm, that none may ; and so doth Dr. Potter, and with him all protestants, and all christians. And how then is this the question? Who ever said or thought, that of divine revelations, known to be so, some might safely and lawfully be rejected, and disbelieved, under pre- tence that they are not fundamental ? Which of us ever taught, that it was not damnable, either to deny, or so much as doubt of the truth of any thing whereof we either know, or believe, that God hath revealed it 1 What protestant ever taught that it was not damnable, either to give God the lie, or to call his veracity into question ? • Yet, you say, " the demand of Charity Mistaken was, and it was most reasonable, that a list of fundamentals should be given, the denial whereof destroys salvation, whereas the denial of other points may stand with salvation, although both kinds be equally proposed as revealed by God." 12. Let the reader peruse Charity Mistaken, and he will find that this qualification, " although both kinds of points be equally proposed as revealed by God," is your addition, and no part of the demand. And if it had, it had been most unreasonable, seeing he and you know well enough, that (though we do not presently, without examination, fall down and worship all your church's pro- posals as divine revelations) yet we make no such distinction of known divine revelations, as if some only of them were necessary to be believed, and the rest might safely be rejected. So that to necessary Points of mere Belief. 267 demand a particular minute catalogue of all points that may not be disbelieved after sufficient proposition, is indeed to demand a ca- talogue of all points that are or may be, inasmuch as none may be disbelieved after sufficient proposition that it is a divine revelation. At least it is to desire us, first, to transcribe into this catalogue every text of the whole bible. Secondly, to set down distinctly those innumerous millions of negative and positive consequences, which may be evidently deduced from it : for these, we say, God hath revealed. And, indeed, you are not ashamed in plain terms to require this of us. For having first told us that the demand was what points were necessary not to be disbelieved after sufficient proposition that they are divine truth : you come to say, " certainly the creed contains not all these." And this you prove by asking, " How many truths are there in holy scripture, or contained in the creed, which we are not bound to know and believe, but are bound, under pain of damnation, not to reject, as soon as we come to know that they are found in holy scripture ?" So that, in re- quiring a particular catalogue of all points not to be disbelieved after sufficient proposal, you require us to set you down all points contained in scripture, or evidently deducible from it. And yet this you are pleased to call a reasonable, nay, a most reasonable demand ; whereas, having engaged yourself to give a catalogue of your fundamentals, you conceive your engagement very well sat- isfied by saying — All is fundamental which the church proposeth, without going about to give us an endless inventory of her propo- sals. And therefore from us, instead of a perfect particular of divine revelations of all sorts, (of which, with a less hyperbole than St. John useth, we might say, " if they were to be written, the world would not hold the books that must be written ;") me- thinks you should accept of this general — All divine revelations are true, and to be believed : which yet I say, not as if I thought the belief of this general sufficient to salvation ; but because I conceive it as sufficient as the belief of your general ; and therefore I said not — Methinks all should accept of this general, but me- thinks you should accept of it. 13. The very truth is, the main question in this business is not — What divine revelations are necessary to be believed or not reject- ed when they are sufficiently proposed? for all, without exception, all without question are so : but — what revelations are simply and absolutely necessary to be proposed to the belief of christians, so that that society, which doth propose, and indeed believe them, hath, for matter of faith, the essence of a true church; that which doth not, hath not? Now to this question, though not to yours, Dr. Potter's assertion (if it be true) is apparently very pertinent. And though not a full and total satisfaction to it, yet very effectual, and of great moment towards it. For the main question being — what points are necessary to salvation ? and points necessary to salvation being of two sorts, some of simple belief, some of practice and obedience, he that gives you a sufficient summary of the first sort of necessary points, hath brought you half way towards your journey's end. And therefore that which he doth, is no more to be 268 The Creed contains all slighted, as vain and impertinent, than an architect's work is to be thought impertinent towards the making of a house, because he doth it not all himself. Sure I am, if his assertion be true, as I be- lieve it is, a corollary may presently be deduced from it, which, if it were embraced, cannot in all reason but do infinite service, both to the truth of Christ, and the peace of Christendom. For seeing falsehood and error could not long stand against the power of truth, were they not supported by tyranny and worldly advantage, he that could assert christians to that liberty which Christ and his apostles left them, must needs do truth a most heroical service. And seeing the overvaluing of the differences among christians, is one of the greatest maintainers of the schisms of Christendom, he that could demonstrate, that only these points of belief are simply necessary to salvation, wherein christians generally agree, should he not lay a very fair and firm foundation of the peace of Christendom? Now the corollary, which, I conceive, would produce these good effects, and which flows naturally from Dr. Potter's assertion, is this : — That what man or church soever believes the creed, and all the evident consequences of it, sincerely and heartily, cannot possibly (if also he believe the scripture) be in any error of simple belief which is offensive to God ; nor therefore deserve for any such error to be de- prived of his life, or to be cut off from the church's communion, and the hope of salvation. — And the production of this again would be this (which highly concerns the church of Rome to think of,) — That whatsoever man or church doth for any error of simple belief, de- prive any man so qualified as above, either of his temporal life, or livelihood, or liberty, or of the church's communion, and hope of salvation, is for the first, unjust, cruel, and tyrannous; schismatical, presumptuous, and uncharitable for the second. 13. Neither yet is this (as you pretend) to take away the necessity of believing those verities of scripture, which are not contained in the creed, when once we come to know that they are written in scripture, when once they know them to be there written. For he that believes not all known divine revelations to be true, how doth he believe in God ? Unless you will say, that the same man, at the same time, may not believe God, and yet believe in him. The greater difficulty is, how it will not take away the necessity of believing scripture to be the word of God? But that it will not neither. For though the creed be granted a sufficient summary of articles of mere faith, yet no man pretends that it contains the rules of obedience ; but for them all men are referred to scripture. Besides, he that pretends to believe in God, obligeth himself to be- lieve it necessary to obey that which reason assures him to be the will of God. Now reason will assure him that believes the creed, that it is the will of God he should believe the scripture : even the very same reason which moves him to believe the creed : universal and never-failing tradition having given this testimony both to creed and scripture, that they both by the works of God were sealed, and testified to be the words of God. And thus much be spoken in answer to your first argument ; the length whereof will be the more excusable, if I oblige myself to say but little to the rest. necessary Points of mere Belief. 269 14. I come then to your second; and, in answer to it, deny flatly, as a thing destructive of itself, that any error can be damna- ble, unless it be repugnant, immediately or mediately, directly or indirectly, of itself, or by accident, to some truth for the matter of it fundamental. And to your example of Pontius Pilate being judge of Christ, I say, the denial of it in him that knows it to be revealed by God, is manifestly destructive of this fundamental truth, that all divine revelations are true. Neither will you find any error so much as by accident damnable, but the rejecting of it will be necessarily laid upon us, by a real belief of all' fundamen- tals, and simply necessary truths. And I desire you would reconcile with this, that which you have said §. 15. "Every fundamental error must have a contrary fundamental truth, because of two con- tradictory propositions, in the same degree, if the one is false, the other must be true," &c. 15. To the third I answer, that the certainty I have of the creed, that it was from the apostles, and contains the principles of faith, I ground it not upon scripture, and yet not upon the infallibility of any present, much less of your church, but upon the authority of the ancient church, and written tradition, which (as Dr. Potter hath proved) gave this constant testimony unto it. Besides, I tell you, it is guilty of the same fault which Dr. Potter's assertion is here ac- cused of; having, perhaps, some colour towards proving it false, but none at all to show it impertinent. 16. To the fourth, I answer plainly thus, that you find fault with Dr. Potter for his virtues : you are offended with him for not usurping the authority which he hath not ; in a word, for not play- ing the pope. Certainly, if protestants be faulty in this matter, it is for doing it too much, and not too little. This presumptuous imposing of the senses of men upon the words of God, the special senses of men upon the general words of God, and laying them upon men's consciences together, under the equal penalty of death and damnation ; this vain conceit that we can speak of the things of God, better than in the words of God : this deifying our own in- terpretations, and tyrannous enforcing them upon others : this restraining of the word of God from that latitude and generality, and the understandings of men from that liberty, wherein Christ and the apostles left them,* is, and hath been, the only fountain of all the schisms of the church, and that which makes them immortal ; the common incendiary of Christendom, and that which (as I said before) tears into pieces, not the coat, but the bowels and members of Christ : Ridente Turca nee dolente Judceo. Take away these walls of separation, and all will quickly be one. Take away this persecuting, burning, cursing, damning of men for not subscribing to the words of men, as the words of God ; require of christians only to believe Christ, and to call no man master but him only ; let * This persuasion is no singularity of mine, but the doctrine which I have learned from divines of great learning and judgment. Let the reader be pleased to peruse the seventh book of Acont. de Strat. Santanse, and Zanchius' last oration, delivered by him after the composing of the discord between him and Amerbachius, and he shall confess as much. 23* 270 The Creed contains all those leave claiming infallibility that have no title to it, and let them that in their words disclaim it, disclaim it likewise in their actions. In a word, take away tyranny, which is the devil's instru- ment to support errors, and superstitions, and impieties, in the seve- ral parts of the world, which could not otherwise long withstand the power of truth ; I say take away tyranny, and restore chris- tians to their just and full liberty of captivating their understanding to scripture only, and as rivers, when they have a free passage, run all to the ocean, so it may well be hoped, by God's blessing, that universal liberty, thus moderated, may quickly reduce Christendom to truth and unity. These thoughts of peace (I am persuaded) may come from the God of peace, and to his blessing I commend them, and proceed. 18. Your fifth and last objection stands upon a false and dan- gerous supposition — that new heresies may arise. For a heresy being in itself nothing else but a doctrine repugnant to some article of the christian faith, to say that new heresies may arise, is to say, that new articles of faith may arise: and so some great ones among you stick not to profess in plain terms, who yet, at the same time, are not ashamed to pretend that your whole doctrine is catholic and apostolic ; so Salmeron : JVon omnibus omnia dedit Deus, ut qucdibet cetas suis gaudeat veritatibus, quas prior cetas ignoravit. " God hath not given all things to all ; so that every age hath its proper veri- ties, which the former age was ignorant of." Dis. 57, in Epist. ad Rom. — And again in the margin, Habet tinumquodque seculum pe- culiares revelationes Divinas. " Every age hath its peculiar divine revelations." Where he that speaks of such revelations, as are, or may by the church be made matters of faith, no man can doubt that reads him ; an example whereof he gives us a little before in these words : Unius Agustini doctrina assumptionis B. Deiparce cul- tum in ecclesiam introduxit. " The doctrine of Augustine only hath brought into the church the worship of the assumption of the mo- ther of God," &c. Others again mince and palliate the matter with this pretence, that your church undertakes not to coin new articles of faith, but only to declare those that want sufficient de- claration : but if sufficient declaration be necessary to make any doctrine an article of faith, then this doctrine which before wanted it, was not before an article of faith ; and your church by giving it the essential form and last complement of an article of faith, makes it, though not a truth, yet certainly an article of faith. But I would fain know, whether Christ and his apostles knew this doc- trine, which you pretend hath the matter, but wants the form, of an article of faith ; that is, sufficient declaration, whether they knew it to be a necessary article of the faith or no ? If they knew it not to be so, then either they taught what they knew not, which were very strange, or else they taught it not ; and, if not, I would gladly be informed, seeing you pretend to no new revelations, from whom you learned it ? If they knew it, then either they concealed or declared it. To say, they concealed any necessary part of the gospel, is to charge them with far greater sacrilege, than what was punished in Ananias and Sapphira. It is to charge these glorious necessary Points of mere Belief. 271 stewards and dispensers of the mystery of Christ, with want of the great virtue requisite in a steward, which is fidelity. It is to charge them with presumption for denouncing anathemas even to angels, in case they should teach any other doctrine than what they had received from them, which sure could not merit an anathema, if they left any necessary part of the gospel untaught. It is, in a word, in plain terms, to give them the lie, seeing they profess, plainly and frequently, that they taught christians the whole doc- trine of Christ. If they did know and declare it, then was it a full and formal article of faith, and the contrary a full and formal heresy, without any need of further declaration ; and then their successors either continued the declaration of it, or discontinued it : if they did the latter, how are they such faithful depositaries of apostolic doctrine as you pretend ? Or, what assurance can you give us, that they might not bring in new and false articles, as well as suffer the old and true ones to be lost ? If they did con- tinue the declaration of it, and deliver it to their successors, and they to theirs, and so on perpetually ; then continued it still a full and formal article of faith, and the repugnant doctrine a full and formal heresy, without and before the definition or declaration of a council. So that councils, as they cannot make that a truth or falsehood, which before was not so : so neither can they make or declare that to be an article of faith, or a heresy, which before was not so. The supposition therefore on which this argument stands, being false and ruinous, whatsoever is built upon it, must together with it fall to the ground. This explication therefore, and restric- tion of this doctrine, (whereof you make your advantage) was to my understanding unnecessary. The fathers of the church in after-times might have just cause to declare their judgment, touching the sense of some general articles of the creed : but to oblige others to receive their declarations, under pain of damna- tion, what warrant they had I know not. He that can shew, 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 shew either of these things, let him : for my part, I cannot. Yet I willingly confess the judgment of a council, though not infallible, is yet so far directive and obliging, that without ap- parent reason to the contrary, it may be a sin to reject it, at least not to afford it an outward submission for public peace sake. 19. Ad. §. 7 — 9. Were I not peradventure more fearful than I need be of the imputation of tergiversation, I might very easily rid my hands of the remainder of this chapter : for in the question there discussed, you grant (for aught I see) as much as Dr. Potter desires ; and Dr. Potter grants as much as you desire : and there- fore that I should disease myself, or my reader with a punctual examination of it, may seem superfluous. First, that which you would have, and which your arguments wholly drive at, is this — that the creed doth not contain all main and principal points of faith of all sorts, whether they be speculative, or practical, whether 272 The Creed contains all they contain matter of simple belief, or whether they contain matter of practice and obedience. This Dr. Potter grants, p. 215, 235. And you grant that he grants it, §. 8, where your words are, "even by Dr. Potter's own confession, it (the creed) doth not comprehend agenda, or things belonging to practice, as sacraments, command- ments, the act of hope, and duties of charity." And if you will in- fer from hence, that therefore C. M. hath no reason to rest in the Apostles' Creed, as a perfect catalogue of fundamentals, and a full satisfaction to his demand, I have, without any offence of Dr. Potter, granted as much, if that would content you. But seeing you go on, and because his assertion is not (as neither is it pre- tended to be) a total satisfaction to the demand, cashier it as im- pertinent, and nothing towards it, here I have been bold to stop your proceeding as unjust and unreasonable. For, as if you should request a friend to lend you, or demand of a debtor to pay you, a hundred pounds, and he could or should let you have but fifty, this were not fully to satisfy your demand, yet sure it were not to do nothing towards it : or, as this rejoinder of mine, though it be not an answer to all your book, but only to the first consider- able part of it, and so much of the second, as is material and falls into the first, yet I hope you will not deal so unkindly with me, as for this reason, to condemn it of impertinence : so Dr. Potter be- ing demanded a catalogue of fundamentals of faith, and finding them of two kinds, and those of one kind summed up to his hand in the Apostles' Creed, and this creed consigned unto him for such a summary by very great authority ; if upon these consi- derations he hath entreated his demander to accept of thus much, in part of payment, of the Apostles' Creed as a sufficient sum- mary of these articles of faith, which are merely credenda, me- thinks he has little reason to complain, that he hath not been fairly and squarely dealt with. Especially, seeing for full satisfac- tion, by Dr. Potter, and all protestants, he is referred to scripture, which we affirm contains evidently all necessary points of faith, and rules of obedience : and seeing Dr. Potter in this very place hath subjoined, though not a catalogue of fundamentals, which (because to some, more is fundamental, to others less, to others nothing at all) had been impossible, yet such a comprehension of them, as may serve every one that will make a conscionable use of it, instead of a catalogue. For thus he says, " It seems to be fundamental to the faith, and for the salvation of every member of the church, that he acknowledge and believe all such points of faith, whereof he may be sufficiently convinced that they belong to the doctrine of Jesus Christ." This general rule, if I should call a catalogue of fundamentals, I should have a precedent for it with you above exception, I mean yourself; for chap. 3, §. 19, just such another proposition you have called by this name. Yet because it were a strange figure of speech, I forbear it : only I will be bold to say, that this assertion is as good a catalogue of fundamentals, as any you will bring of your church proposals, though you take as much time to do it, as he that undertook to make an ass speak. necessary Points of mere Belief. 273 20. I come now to show that you also have requited Dr. Potter with a mutual courteous acknowledgment of his assertion, that the creed is a sufficient summary of all the necessary articles of faith which are merely credenda. 21. First, then, §. 8, you have these words: "It cannot be denied that the creed is most full and complete to that purpose, for which the holy apostles, inspired by God, meant that it should serve, and in that manner as they did intend it ; which was, not to comprehend all particular points of faith, but such general heads as were most befitting and requisite for preaching the faith of Christ to Jews and gentiles, and might be briefly and com- pendiously set down, and easily learned and remembered." These words, I say, being fairly examined without putting them on the rack, will amount to a full acknowledgment of Dr. Potter's assertion. But before I put them to the question, I must crave thus much right of you, to grant me this most reasonable postu- late, that the doctrine of repentance from dead works, which St. Paul saith was one of the two only things which he preached, and the doctrine of charity, without which (the same St. Paul assures us that) the knowledge of all mysteries, and all faith is nothing, were doctrines more necessary and requisite, and therefore more fit to be preached to Jews and gentiles than these, under what judge our Saviour suffered, that he was buried, and what time he rose again ; which you have taught us, chap. 3, §. 2, for their matter and nature in themselves not to be funda- mental. 22. And upon this grant, I will ask no leave to conclude, that whereas you say, " the Apostles' Creed was intended for a com- prehension of such heads of faith, as were most befitting and re- quisite, for preaching the faith of Christ," &c. ; you are now, for fear of too much debasing those high doctrines of repentance and charity, to restrain your assertion, as Dr. Potter doth his, and (though you speak indefinitely) to say you meant it, only of those heads of faith, which are merely credenda. And then the mean- ing of it (if it hath any) must be this: that the creed is full for the apostles' intent, which was to comprehend all such general heads of faith, which, being points of simple belief, were •most fit and requisite to be preached to Jews and gentiles, and might be briefly and compendiously set down, and easily learned and remembered. Neither I nor you, I believe, can make any other sense of your words than this ; and upon this ground thus I subsume. But all the points of belief, which were necessary under pain of damnation for the apostles to preach, and for those to whom the gospel was preached particularly to know and believe, were most fit and requisite, nay, more than so, necessary to be preached to all, both Jews and gentiles, and might be briefly and compendiously set down, and easily learned and remembered : therefore the apostles' intent by your confession was in this creed to comprehend all such points. And you say, " the creed is most full and complete, for the purpose which they intended." The major of this syllogism is your own. The minor, I should s 274 The Creed contains all think, needs no proof; yet, because all men may not be of my mind, I will prove it by its parts; and the first part thus: There is the same necessity for the doing of these things, which are commanded to be done, by the same authority under the same penalty : But the same authority, viz. divine, under the same penalty, to wit, of damnation, commanded the apostles to preach all these doctrines which we speak of, and those to whom they were preached, particularly to know and believe them ; for we speak of those only, which were so commanded, to be preach- ed and believed : Therefore all these points were alike necessary to be preached to all, both Jews and gentiles. Now that all these doctrines we speak of, may be briefly and com- pendiously set down and easily learned and remembered ; he that remembers that we speak only of such doctrines as are necessary to be taught and learned, will require hereof no farther demon- stration. For (not to put you in mind of what the poet says, JVon sunt longa quibus nihil est quod demere possis), who sees not, that seeing the greatest part of men are of very mean capacities, that it is necessary that they may be learned easily, which is to be learned of all? What then can hinder me from concluding thus: All the articles of simple belief, which are fit and requisite to be preached, and may easily be remembered, are by your confession comprised in the creed : But all the necessary articles of faith are requisite to be preach- ed, and easy to be remembered: Therefore they are all comprised in the creed. Secondly, From grounds granted by you, I argue thus : Points of belief in themselves fundamental are more requisite to be preached than those which are not so: (this is evi- dent.) But the apostles have put into their creed some points that are not in themselves fundamental : (so you confess, ubi supra.) Therefore if they have put in all most requisite to be preached, they have put in all that in themselves are fundamental. Thirdly, and lastly, from your own words, §. 26, thus I conclude my purpose: The apostles' intention was, particularly to deliver in the creed such articles as were fittest for those times, concerning the Deity, Trinity, and Messias; (thus you) now I sub- sume, But all points simply necessary, by virtue of God's command, to be preached and believed in particular, were as fit for those times as these here mentioned ; Therefore their intention was, to deliver in it particularly all the necessary points of belief. 23. And certainly, he that considers the matter advisedly either must say that the apostles were not the authors of it, or that this was their design in composing it, or that they had none at all. necessary Points of mere Belief. 275 For whereas, you say, "their intent was, to comprehend in it such general heads as were most befitting and requisite for preaching the faith :" and elsewhere, " particularly to deliver such articles as were fittest for those times ;" every wise man may easily see that your desire here was, to escape away in a cloud of indefinite terms. For otherwise, instead of such general heads and such articles, why did not you say plainly, all such, or some such ? This had been plain dealing : but I fear, cross to your design, which yet you have failed of. For that which you have spoken (though you are loath to speak out) either signifies no- thing at all, or that which I and Dr. Potter affirm ; viz. that the Apostles' Creed contains all those points of belief, which were, by God's command, of necessity to be preached to all, and believed by all. Neither when I say so, would I be so mistaken, as if I said, that all points in the creed are thus necessary ; for punies in logic know that universal affirmatives are not simply converted. And therefore it may be true, that all such necessary points are in the creed ; though it be not true, that all points in the creed are thus necessary : which I willingly grant of the points by you mentioned. But this rather confirms, than any way invalidates my assertion. For how could it stand with the apostles' wisdom, to put in any points circumstantial and not necessary, and, at the same time, to leave out any that were essential and necessary for that end, which, you say, they proposed to themselves in making the creed ; that is, the preaching of the faith to Jews and gentiles ? 24. Neither may you hope to avoid the pressure of these ac- knowledgments by pretending as you do, §. 10, that you do indeed acknowledge the creed to contain all the necessary articles of faith ; but yet so, that they are not either there expressed in it, or deducible from it by evident consequence, but only by way of implication or reduction. For, first, not to tell you, that no pro- position is implied in any other, which is not deducible from it ; nor, secondly, that the article of the catholic church, wherein you will have all implied, implies nothing to any purpose of yours, unless out of mere favour we will grant the sense of it to be, that the church is infallible, and that yours is the church. To pass by all this, and require no answer to it, this one thing I may not omit ; that the apostles' intent was (by your own confession) particularly to deliver in the creed such articles of belief as were fittest for those times (and all necessary articles I have proved were such) : now to deliver particularly, and to deliver only implicitly ; to be delivered particularly in the creed, and only to be reducible to it ; I suppose are repugnances hardly reconcileable. And therefore, though we desire you not to grant, that the creed contains all points of faith of all sorts, any other way than by implication or reduction, no, nor so neither; yet you have granted, and must grant, of the fundamental points of simple belief, those which the apostles were commanded in particular to teach all men, and all men in particular to know and believe, that these are delivered in the creed, after a more s2 276 The Creed contains all particular, and punctual manner, than implication or reduction comes to. 25. Ad. §. 10 — 15. It is vain for you to hope, that the testi- monies of the ancient and modern doctors, alleged to this pur- pose by Dr. Potter in great abundance, will be turned off with this general deceitful answer, that the allegation of them was needless to prove, that the creed contains all points of faith, under pretence that you grant it in manner aforesaid. For what if you grant it in manner aforesaid, yet if you grant it not (as indeed you do but inconsistently) in the sense which their testimonies re- quire, then for all this their testimonies may be alleged to very good purpose. Now let any man read them with any tolerable indifference, and he shall find they say plainly, that all points of faith, necessary to be particularly believed, are explicitly con- tained in the creed; and that your gloss of implication and re- duction, had it been confronted with their sentences, would have been much out of countenance, as having no ground nor colour of ground in them. For example, if Azorius had thought thus of it, how could he have called it * " a brief comprehension of the faith, and a sum of all things to be believed, and, as it were, a sign or cognizance whereby christians are to be differenced and distinguished from the impious and misbelievers, who profess either no faith, or not the right?" If Huntly had been of this mind, how could he have said of it, with any congruity, f " that the rule of faith is expressly contained in it, and all the prime foundations of faith :" and, that " the apostles were not so forgetful as to omit any prime principal foundation of faith in that creed which they delivered to be believed by all christians?" The words of Filiucius are pregnant to the same purpose : J " There cannot be a fitter rule from whence christians may learn that they are explicitly to believe, than that which is contained in the creed." Which words cannot be justified, if all points necessary to be believed explicitly be not comprised in it. " To this end (saith Putean) § was the creed composed by the apostles, that christians might have a form whereby they might profess them- selves catholics." But certainly, the apostles did this in vain, if a man might profess this, and yet for matter of faith be not a catholic. 26. The words of Cardinal Richelieu|| exact this sense, and refuse your gloss as much as any of the former : " The Apostles' Creed is the summary and abridgment of that faith which is neces- sary for a christian : these holy persons being by the command- ment of Jesus Christ to disperse themselves over the world, and in all parts by preaching the gospel to plant the faith, es- teemed it very necessary to reduce into a short sum, all that which christians ought to know, to the end that being dispersed into divers parts of the world, they might preach the same thing in a short form, that it might be the easier remembered. For this effect they called this abridgment a symbol, which signifies a * Azor. part 1, c. v. t Cont. 2, c. x. n. 10. X Moral, quest. Tr. 22, c. ii. n. 34. § In 2. 2. qu. Art. 3, Dub. ult. || Instruction du Chrestien. Lecon premiere. necessary Points of mere Belief. 277 mark, or sign, which might serve to distinguish true christians which embraced it, from infidels which rejected it." Now I would fain know how the composition of the creed could serve for this end, and secure the preachers of it, that they should preach the same thing, if there were other necessary articles, not com- prised in it? Or how could it be a sign to distinguish true christians from others, if a man might believe it all, and for want of believing something else, not be a true christian ? 27. The words of the *author of the consideration of four heads propounded to King James, require the same sense, and utterly renounce your qualification. " The symbol is a brief yet entire methodical sum of christian doctrine, including all points of faith either to be preached by the apostles, or to be believed by their disciples; delivered both for a direction unto them, what they were to preach, and others to believe, as also to discern and put a difference betwixt all faithful christians and misbelieving in- fidels?" 28. Lastly, fGregory of Valence affirms our assertion even in terms: "The articles of faith contained in the creed, are, as it were, the first principles of the christian faith, in which is con- tained the sum of evangelical doctrine, which all men are bound explicitly to believe." 29. To these testimonies of your own doctors, I should have added the concurrent suffrages of the ancient fathers, but the full and free acknowledgment of the same Valentia, in the place above quoted, will make this labour unnecessary. " So judge (saith he) the holy fathers, affirming that this symbol of faith was composed by the apostles, that all might have a short sum of those things which are to be believed, and are dispersedly contained in scrip- ture." 30. Neither is there any discord between this assertion of your doctors, and their holding themselves obliged to believe all the points which the council of Trent defines. For protestants and papists may both hold, that all points of belief necessary to be known and believed, are summed up in the creed : and yet both the one and the other think themselves bound to believe whatsoever other points they either know, or believe to be revealed by God. For the articles which are necessary to be known that they are revealed by God, may be very few; and yet those which are neces- sary to be believed, when they are revealed and known to be so, may be very many. 31. But summaries and abstracts are not intended to specify all the particulars of the science or subject to which they belong. Yes, if they be intended for perfect summaries, they must not omit any necessary doctrine of that science whereof they are sum- maries ; though the illustration and reasons of it they may omit. If this were not so, a man might set down forty or fifty of the principal definitions and divisions, and rules of logic, and call it a summary or abstract of logic. But sure, this were no more a * Ch. 3, Confid. 1, Sect. v. p. 110. t 2. 2. dis. i. q. 2, p. 4, in fin. 24 278 The Creed contains all summary, than that were the picture of a man in little, that wanted any of the parts of a man ; or that a total sum wherein all the particulars were not cast up. Now the Apostles' Creed, you here intimate that it was intended for a summary ; otherwise why talk you here of summaries, and tell us that they need not contain all the particulars of their science ; and of what I pray may it be a summary, but of the fundamentals of christian faith I Now you have already told us — that it is most full and complete to that purpose for which it was intended. Lay all this to- gether, and I believe the product will be, that the Apostles' Creed is a perfect summary of the fundamentals of the christian faith ; and what the duty of a perfect summary is, I have already told you. 32. Whereas therefore to disprove this assertion, in divers particles of this chapter, but especially the fourteenth, you muster up whole armies of doctrines, which you pretend are necessary, and not contained in the creed ; I answer very briefly thus: that the doctrines you mention, are either concerning matters of practice, and not simple belief? or else they are such doctrines wherein God hath not so plainly revealed himself, but that honest and good men, true lovers of God and of truth; those that desire above all things to know his will and do it, may err, and yet commit no sin at all, or only a sin of infirmity, and not destructive of salvation ; or lastly, they are such doctrines which God hath plainly revealed, and so are necessary to be believed, when they are known to be divine, but not necessary to be known and believed : not necessary to be known for divine, that they may be believed. Now all these sorts of doctrines are impertinent to the present question. For Dr. Potter never affirmed, either that the necessary duties of a christian, or that all truths piously credible, but not necessary to be believed, or that all truths necessary to be believed upon the supposal of divine revelation, were specified in the creed. For this he affirms only of such speculative divine verities which God hath commanded particularly to be preached to all, and be believed by all. Now let the doctrines objected by you be well considered, and let all those that are reducible to the three former heads be discarded ; and then of all these instan- ces against Dr. Potter's assertion, there will not remain as much as one. 33. First, questions touching the conditions to be performed by us to obtain remission of sins : the sacraments, the commandments, and the possibility of keeping them ; the necessity of imploring the assistance of God's grace and Spirit for the keeping of them ; how far obedience is due to the church ; prayer for the dead ; the ces- sation of the old law ; are all about agenda, and so cut otf upon the first consideration. 34. Secondly, the question touching fundamentals is profitable, but not fundamental. He that believes all fundamentals cannot be damned for any error in faith, though he believe more or less to be fundamental than is so. That also of the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son, of purgatory, of the necessary Points of mere Belief. 279 church's visibility, of the books of the New Testament, which were doubted of by a considerable part of the primitive church, (until I see better reason for the contrary than the bare authority of men) I shall esteem of the same condition. 35. Thirdly, these doctrines are — That Adam and the angels sinned ; that there are angels, good and bad ; that those books of scripture which were never doubted of by any considerable part of the church, are the word of God ; that St. Peter had no such primacy as you pretend ; that the scripture is a perfect rule of faith, and consequently that no necessary doctrine is unwritten ; that there is no one society or succession of christians absolutely infallible. These to my understanding are truths plainly revealed by God, and necessary to be believed by them who know they are so. But not so necessary, that every man and woman is bound under pain of damnation particularly to know them to be divine revelations, and explicitly to believe them. And for this reason, these with innumerable other points, are to be referred to the third sort of doctrines above mentioned, which were never pretended to have place in the creed. There remains one only point of all that army you mustered together, reducible to none of these heads; and that is, that God is, and is a remu- nerator, which you say is questioned by the denial of merit : but if there were such a necessary indissoluble coherence, be- tween this point, and the doctrine of merit, methinks with as much reason, and more charity, you might conclude that we hold merit, because we hold this point; than that we deny this point, because we deny merit. Besides, when protestants deny the doctrine of merits, you know right well, for so they have declared themselves a thousand times, that they mean nothing else, but with David, that their well-doing extendeth not, is not truly beneficial to God : with our Saviour, when they have done all which they are commanded, they have done their duty only, and no courtesy. And, lastly, with St. Paul, that all which they can suffer for God (and yet suffering is more than doing) " is not worthy to be compared to the glory which shall be revealed." So that you must either misunderstand their meaning in denying merit, or you must discharge their doctrine of this odious consequence, or you must charge it on David and Paul, and Christ himself. Nay, you must either grant their denial of true merit just and reasonable ; or you must say, that our good actions are really profitable to God ; that they are not debts already due to him, but voluntary and undeserved favours ; and that they are equal unto and well worthy of eternal glory which is prepared for them. As for the inconvenience which you so much fear, that the denial of merit makes God a giver only and not a rewarder ; I tell you, good sir, you fear where no fear is ; and that it is both most true, on the one side, that you in holding good works meritorious of eternal glory, make God a rewarder only, and not a giver, contrary to plain scripture, affirm- ing that " the gift of God is eternal life ;" and that it is most false, on the other side, that the doctrine of protestants makes God a giver 280 The Creed contains all only, and not a rewarder ; inasmuch as their doctrine is — That God gives not heaven but to those which do something for it, and so his gift is also a reward : but withal, that whatsoever they do is due unto God beforehand, and worth nothing to God. and worth nothing in respect of heaven, and so man's work is no merit, and God's reward is still a gift. 36. Put the case the pope, for a reward of your service done him in writing this book, had given you the honour and means of a cardinal, would you not, not only in humility, but in sincerity, have professed that you have not merited such a reward 1 And yet the pope is neither your creator, nor redeemer, nor preserver, nor perhaps your very great benefactor ; sure I am not so great as God Almighty, and therefore hath no such right and title to your service as God hath, in respect of precedent obligations. Besides, the work you have done him hath been really advantageous to him : and, lastly, not altogether unproportionable to the fore- named reward. And, therefore, if by the same work you will pretend that either you have, or hope to have, deserved immortal happiness, I beseech you consider well, whether this be not to set a higher value upon a cardinal's cap than a crown of immortal glory, and with that cardinal to prefer a part in Paris before a part in paradise. 37. In the next paragraph you beat the air again, and fight manfully with your own shadow. The point you should have spoken to was this : — that there are some points of simple belief necessary to be explicitly believed, which yet are not contained in the creed. Instead hereof you trouble yourself in vain to de- monstrate, that many important points of faith are not contained in it, which yet Dr. Potter had freely granted, and you yourself take particular notice of his granting of it. All this pains, there- fore, you have employed to no purpose ; saving that to some neg- ligent reader you may seem to have spoken to the very point, be- cause that which you speak to, at the first hearing, sounds somewhat near it. But such a one I must entreat to remember, there be many more points of faith than there be articles of simple belief necessary to be explicitly believed : and that though all of the former sort are not contained in the creed, yet all of the latter sort may be. As for your distinction between heresies that have been, and here- sies that are, and heresies that may be, I have already proved it vain ; and that whatsoever may be a heresy, that is so ; and what- soever is so, that always hath been so, ever since the publication of the gospel of Christ. The doctrine of your church may like a snow-ball increase with rolling, and again, if you please, melt away and decrease : but as Christ Jesus, so his gospel, is yesterday, and to-day, and the same for ever. 38. Our Saviour sending his apostles to preach, gave them no other commission than this: " Go teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things, whatsoever I have com- manded vou." These were the bounds of their commission. If your church have any larger, or if she have a commission at large, necessary Points of mere Belief. 281 to teach what she pleaseth, and call it the gospel of Christ, let her produce her letters patent from heaven for it. But if this be all you have, then must you give me leave to esteem it both great sacrilege in you to forbid any thing, be it never so small or ceremo- nious, which Christ hath commanded ; as the receiving of the com- munion in both kinds; and as high a degree of presumption, to enjoin men to believe, that there are or can be any other funda- mental articles of the gospel of Christ, than what Christ himself commanded his apostles to teach all men ; or any damnable heresies, but such as are plainly repugnant to these prime verities. 39. Ad. §. 16, 17. The saying of the most learned prelate, and excellent man, the Archbishop of Armagh, is only related by Dr. Potter, p. 155, and not applauded: though the truth is, both the man deserves as much applause as any man, and his saying as much as any saying ; it being as great and as good a truth, and as necessary for these miserable times, as possibly can be uttered. For this is most certain, and I believe you will easily grant it, that to reduce christians to unity of communion, there are but two ways that may be conceived probable : the one, by taking away the diversity of opinions touching matters of religion ; the other, by showing that the diversity of opinions, which is among the several sects of christians, ought to be no hinderance to their unity in communion. 40. Now the former of these is not to be hoped for without a miracle, unless that could be done, which is impossible to be per- formed, though it be often pretended ; that is, unless it could be made evident to all men, that God hath appointed some visible judge of controversies, to whose judgment all men are to submit themselves. What then remains, but that the other way must be taken, and christians must be taught to set a higher value upon these high points of faith and obedience wherein they agree, than upon these matters of less moment wherein they differ ; and understand that agreement in those ought to be more effectual to join them in one communion, than their difference in other things of less moment to divide them 1 When 1 say, in one com- munion, I mean in a common profession of those articles of faith, wherein all consent : a joint worship of God, after such a way as all esteem lawful ; and a mutual performance of all those works of charity, which christians owe one to another. And to such a communion what better inducement could be thought of, than to demonstrate that what was universally believed of all christians, if it were joined with a love of truth, and with holy obedience, was sufficient to bring men to heaven 1 For why should men be more rigid than God 1 Why should any error exclude any man from the church's communion, which will not deprive him of eternal salvation ? Now that christians do generally agree in all those points of doctrine, which are necessary to salvation, it is apparent, because they agree with one accord in believing all those books of the Old and New Testament, which in the church were never doubted of to be the undoubted word of God. And it is so certain that in all these books, all necessary doctrines are 24* 282 The Creed contains all evidently contained, that of all the four evangelists this is very probable, but of St. Luke most apparent, that in every one of their books they have comprehended the whole substance of the gospel of Christ For what reason can be imagined, that any of them should leave out any thing which he knew to be necessary, and yet (as apparently all of them have done) put in many things which they knew to be only profitable, and not necessary 1 What wise and honest man that were now to write the gospel of Christ, would do so great a work of God after such a negligent fashion 1 Suppose Xaverius had been to write the gospel of Christ for the Indians, think you he would have left out any fundamental doc- trine of it ? If not, I must beseech you to conceive as well of St. Matthew, and St. Mark, and St. Luke, and St. John, as you do of Xaverius. Besides, if every one of them have not in them all necessary doctrines, how have they complied with their own de- sign, which was, as the titles of their books shew, to write the gospel of Christ, and not a part of it ? Or how have they not de- ceived us, in giving them such titles ? By the whole gospel of Christ I understand not the whole history of Christ, but all that makes up the covenant between God and man. Now if this be wholly contained in the gospel of St. Mark, and St. John, I be- lieve every considering man will be inclinable to believe, that then without doubt it is contained, with the advantage of many other profitable things, in the larger gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke. And that St. Mark's gospel wants no necessary ar- ticle of this covenant, I presume you will not deny, if you believe Irenaeus, when he says, " Matthew, to the Hebrews in their tongue published the scripture of the gospel : when Peter and Paul did preach the gospel, and found the church, or a church at Rome, or of Rome, and after their departure Mark, the scholar of Peter, delivered to us in writing those things which had been preached by Peter; and Luke, the follower of Paul, compiled in a book the gospel which was preached by him : and afterwards John, residing in Asia, in the city of Ephesus, did himself also set forth a gospel." 41. In which words of Irenseus, it is remarkable that they are spoken by him against some heretics, that pretended (as you know who do now-a-days) that — some necessary doctrines of the gospel were unwritten, and that out of the scriptures truth (he must mean sufficient truth) cannot be found by those which know not tradition. Against whom to say, that part of the gospel, which was preached by Peter, was written by St. Mark, and some other necessary points of it omitted, had been to speak impertinently, and rather to confirm than confute their error. It is plain, there- fore, that he must mean, as I pretend, that all the necessary doc- trine of the gospel, which was preached by St. Peter, was written by St. Mark. Now you will not deny, I presume, that St. Peter preached all ; therefore, you must not deny but St. Mark wrote all. 42. Our next inquiry, let it be touching St. John's intent in writing his gospel, whether it were to deliver so much truth, as necessary Points of mere Belief. 283 being believed and obeyed would certainly bring men to an eternal life, or only part of it, and to leave part unwritten? A great man there is, but much less than the apostle, who saith, that " writing; last, he purposed to supply the defects of the other evangelists that had wrote before him :" which, if it were true, would suffi- ciently justify what I have undertaken, that at least all the four evangelists have them in all the necessary parts of the gospel of Christ. Neither will I deny, but St. John's secondary intent might be to supply the defects of the former three gospels, in some things very profitable. But he that pretends, that anv ne- cessary doctrine is in St. John, which is in none of the other evan- gelists, hath not so considered them as he should do, before he pronounce sentence in so weighty a matter. And for his prime intent in writing his gospel, what that was, certainly no father in the world understood it better than himself, therefore let us hear him speak : " Many other signs (saith he) also did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book ; but these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name." By " these are written," may be understood these things are writ- ten, or these signs are written. Take it which way you will, this conclusion will certainly follow; that either all that which St. John wrote in his gospel, or less than all, and therefore all much more, was sufficient to make them believe that, which being believed with lively faith, would certainly bring them to eternal life. 43. This which hath been spoken, I hope, is enough to justify my undertaking to the full, that it is very probable that every one of the four evangelists hath in his book the whole substance, all the necessary parts of the gospel of Christ. But for St. Luke, that he hath written such a perfect gospel, in my judgment, it ought to be with them that believe him no manner of question. Consi- der first the introduction to his gospel, where he declares what he intends to write in these words : " Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed amongst us, even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eye-witnesses, and ministers of the word ; it seemed good to me also, having had per- fect understanding of all things from the first, to write to thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the cer- tainty of those things wherein thou hast been instructed." Add to this place the entrance to his history of the acts of the Apostles : " The former treatise have I made, Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach, until the day in which he was taken up." Weigh well these two places, and then answer me freely and ingenuously to these demands. 1. Whether St. Luke doth not undertake the very same thing which he says " many had taken in hand ?" 2. Whether this were not " to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed amongst" christians? 3. Whether the whole gospel of Christ, and every necessary doctrine of it, were not surely believed among christians ? 4. Whether they which were " eye-witnesses and 284 The Creed contains all ministers of the word from the beginning," delivered not the whole gospel of Christ? 5. Whether he doth not undertake to write in order these things, whereof he had perfect understanding from the first ? 6. Whether he had not perfect understanding of the whole gospel of Christ? 7. Whether he doth not undertake to write to Theophilus of all those things wherein he had been instructed ? 8. And whether he had not been instructed in all the necessary parts of the gospel of Christ? 9. Whether in the other text, " all things which Jesus began to do and teach," must not at least imply all the principal and necessary things? 10. Whether this be not the very interpretation of your Rhemish doctors, in their annotation upon this place? 11. Whether all these articles of the christian faith, without the belief whereof no man can be saved, be not the principal and most necessary things which Jesus taught? 12. And, lastly, Whether many things which St. Luke hath wrote in his gospel be not less principal, and less necessary, than all and every one of these ? When you have well considered these proposals, I believe you will be very apt to think (if St. Luke be of credit with you) that all things ne- cessary to salvation are certainly contained in his writings alone. And from hence you will not choose but conclude, that seeing all the christians in the world agree in the belief of what St. Luke hath written ; and, not only so, but in all other books of canonical scripture, which were never doubted of, in and by the church, the learned archbishop had very just and certain ground to say, that " in these propositions, which, without controversy, are universally received in the whole christian world, so much truth is contained, as, being joined with holy obedience, may be sufficient to bring a man to everlasting salvation ; and that we have no cause to doubt, but that as many as walk according to this rule, neither overthrow- ing that which they have builded, by superinducing any damnable heresy thereupon, nor otherwise vitiating their holy faith, with a lewd and wicked conversation, peace shall be upon them, and upon the Israel of God." 44. Against this you object two things : the one, that by this rule, " seeing the doctrine of the trinity is not received universally among christians, the denial of it shall not exclude salvation." The other, " that the bishop contradicts himself, in supposing a man may believe all necessary truths, and yet superinduce some damna- ble heresies." 45. To the first I answer, what I conceive he would, whose words I here justify, that he hath declared plainly in this very place, that he meant not an absolute, but a limited universality, and speaks not of propositions universally believed by all profes- sions of Christianity that are, but only by all those several pro- fessions of Christianity that have any large spread in any part of the world : by which words he excludes from the universality, here spoken of, the deniers of the doctrine of the trinity, as being but a handful of men, in respect of all, nay, in respect of any of these professions which maintain it. And, therefore, it was a great fault in you, either willingly to conceal these words, which necessary Points of mere Belief. 285 evacuate your objection, or else negligently to oversee them. Especially seeing your friend, to whom you are so much beholden, Paulus Veridicus, in his scurrilous and sophistical pamphlet against Bishop Usher's sermon, hath so kindly offered to lead you by the hand to the observation of them, in these words : " To con- sider of your coinopista, or communiter credenda, articles as you call them, universally believed of all these several professions of Christianity, which have any large spread in the world ; these articles, for example, may be the unity of the Godhead, the trinity of persons, immortality of the soul," &c. Where you see that your friend, whom you so much magnify, hath plainly con- fessed, that notwithstanding the bishop's words, the denial of the doctrine of the trinity may exclude salvation ; and, therefore, in approving and applauding his answer to the bishop's sermon, you have unawares allowed this answer of mine to your own greatest objection. 46. Now for the foul contradiction, which you say the doctor might easily have espied in the bishop's saying, he desires your pardon for his oversight, for Paulus Veridicus' sake; who, though he set himself to find fault with the bishop's sermon, yet it seems this he could not find, or else, questionless, we should have heard it from him. And, therefore, if Dr. Potter, being the bishop's friend, has not been more sharp-sighted than his enemies, this, he hopes, to indifferent judges will seem no unpardonable offence. Yet this, I say, not as if there were any contradiction at all, much less any foul contradiction, in the bishop's words; but as Anti- pheron's picture, which he thought he saw in the air before him, was not in the air, but in his disturbed fancy ; so all the contra- diction, which here you descant upon, is not indeed in the bishop's saying, but in your imagination : for wherein, I pray, lies this foul contradiction 1 " In supposing, (say you) a man may believe all truths necessary to salvation, and superinduce a damnable heresy." I answer, it is not certain that his words do suppose this; neither, if they do, doth he contradict himself. I say, it is not certain that his words import any such matter : for ordinarily men use to speak and write so, as here he doth, when they intend not to limit or restrain, but only to repeat, and press, and illus- trate what they have said before. And I wonder why, with your eagle's eyes, you did not espy another foul contradiction in his words as well as this, and say, that he supposes a man may walk according to the rule of holy obedience, and yet vitiate his holy faith with a lewd and wicked conversation. Certainly, a lewd conversation is altogether as contradictious to holy obedience, as a damnable heresy to necessary truth. What then was the reason that you espied not this foul contradiction in his words as well as that 1 Was it because, according to the spirit and genius of your church, your zeal is greater to that which you conceive true doc- trine than holy obedience; and think simple error a more capi- tal crime, than sins committed against knowledge and conscience? Or was it because your reason told you, that herein he meant only to repeat and not to limit what he said before 1 And why 286 The Creed contains all then had you not so much candour to conceive that he might have the same meaning in the former part of the disjunction ; and in- tend no more but this — whosoever walks according to this rule of believing all necessary truths, and holy obedience, (neither poisoning his faith of those truths which he holds with the mixture of any damnable heresy, nor vitiating it with a wicked life) peace shall be upon him ! In which words what man of any ingenuity will not presently perceive, that the words within the parenthesis, are only a repetition of, and no exception from, those that are without ? St. Athanasius, in his creed, tells us, " The catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in trinity, and trinity in unity, neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the sub- stance ;" and why now do you not tell him that he contradicts himself, and supposes that we may worship a trinity of persons, and one God in substance, and yet confound the persons, or divide the substance ; which yet is impossible, because three remaining three cannot be confounded, and one remaining one cannot be divided? If a man should say unto you, he that keeps all the commandments of God, committing no sin either against the love of God, or the love of his neighbour, is a perfect man : or thus, he that will live in constant health had need to be exact in his diet, neither eating too much nor too little : or thus, he that will come to London, must go on straight forward in such a way, and neither turn to the right hand nor to the left, I verily believe you would not find any contradiction in his words, but confess them as coherent and consonant as any in your book. And certainly, if you would look upon this saying of the bishop with any indiffer- ence, you would easily perceive it to be of the very same kind, and capable of the very same construction. And, therefore, one of the grounds of your accusation is uncertain. Neither can you assure us, that the bishop supposes any such matter as you pre- tend. Neither, if he did suppose this (as perhaps he did) were this to contradict himself: for though there can be no damnable heresy, unless it contradict some necessary truth, yet there is no contradiction but the same man may at once believe this heresy and this truth ; because, there is no contradiction that the same man, at the same time, should believe contradictions. For, first, whatsoever a man believes true, that he may and must believe; but there have been some who have believed and taught that con- tradictions might be true, against whom Aristotle disputes in the third of his Metaphysics: therefore, it is not impossible that a man may believe contradictions. Secondly, They which believe there is no certainty in reason, must believe that contradictions may be true ; for otherwise there will he no certainty in this rea- son : this contradicts truth, therefore it is false. But there be now divers in the world, who believe there is no certainty in reason (and whether you be of their mind or no, I desire to be informed); therefore, there be divers in the world who believe contradictions may be true. Thirdly, They which do captivate their understand- ings to the belief of those things which to their understanding seem irreconcileable contradictions, may as well believe real con- necessary Points of mere Belief. 287 tradictions ; (for the difficulty of believing arises not from their being repugnant, but from their seeming to be so;) but you do captivate your understandings to the belief of those things which seem to your understandings irreconcileable contradictions ; there- fore, it is as possible and easy for you to believe those that indeed are so. Fourthly, Some men may be confuted in their errors, and persuaded out of them; but no man's error can be confuted, who, together with his error, doth not believe and grant some true principle that contradicts his error : for nothing can be proved to him who grants nothing, neither can there be (as all men know) any rational discourse but out of grounds agreed on by both par- ties. Therefore, it is not impossible, but absolutely certain, that the same man at the same time may believe contradictions. Fifthly, It is evident, neither can you, without extreme madness and uncharitableness, deny that we believe the bible ; those books, I mean, which we account canonical. Otherwise, why dispute you with us out of them, as out of a common principle ? Either, therefore, you must retract your opinion, and acknowledge that the same man at the same time may believe contradictions ; or else, you will run into a greater inconvenience, and be forced to confess, that no part of our doctrine contradicts the bible. Sixthly, I desire you to vindicate from contradiction these follow- ing assertions : that there should be length, and nothing long : breadth, and nothing broad ; thickness, and nothing thick ; white- ness, and nothing white ; roundness, and nothing round : weight, and nothing heavy ; sweetness, and nothing sweet ; moisture, and nothing moist; fluidness, and nothing flowing; many actions, and no agent ; many passions, and no patient ; that is, that there should be a long, broad, thick, white, round, heavy, sweet, moist, flowing, active, passive, nothing ! That bread should be turned into the substance of Christ, and yet not any thing of the bread become any thing of Christ; neither the matter, nor the form, nor the accidents of bread, be made either the matter, or form, or the accidents of Christ. That bread should be turned into nothing ; and at the same time with the same action turned into Christ, and yet Christ should not be nothing. That the same thing, at the same time, should have its just dimensions, and just distance of its parts one from another, and at the same time not have it, but all its parts together in one and the self- same point. That the body of Christ, which is much greater, should be contained wholly, and in its full dimensions, without anv alteration, in that which is the lesser ; and that not once only, but as many times over as there are several points in the bread and wine. That the same thing, at the same time, should be wholly above itself, and wholly below itself, within itself, and without itself, on the right hand, and on the left hand, and round about itself. That the same thing, at the same time, should move to and from itself, and lie still ; or that it should be carried from one place to another through the middle space, and yet not move. That it should be brought from heaven to earth, and yet not come out of heaven, nor be at all in any of the middle spaces 288 The Creed contains all between heaven and earth. That to be one, should be to be undivided from itself, and yet that one and the same thing should be divided from itself. That a thing; may be, and yet be no where ; that a finite thing may be in all places at once. That a body may be in a place, and have there its dimensions, and colour, and all other qualities, and yet that it is not in the power of God to make it visible, and tangible there, nor capable of doing or suffering any thing. That there should be no certainty in our senses, and yet that we should know something certainly, and yet know nothing but by our senses. That that which is, and was Jong ago, should now begin to be. That that is now to be made of nothing, which is not nothing but something. That the same thing should be before and after itself. That it should be truly and really in a place, and yet without locality. Nay, that he which is omnipotent, should not be able to give it locality in this place, where it is, as some of you hold ; or, if he can, as others say he can, that it should be possible that the same man, for example, you or I, may at the same time be awake in London, and not awake but asleep at Rome; there run or walk, here not run or walk, but stand still, sit, or lie along ; there study or write, here do neither but dine or sup ; there speak, here be silent. That he may in one place freeze with cold, in another burn with heat. That he may be drunk in one place, and sober in another; valiant in one place, and a coward in another; a thief in one place, and honest in another. That he may be a papist, and go to mass in Rome ; a protestant and go to church in England. That he may die in Rome and live in England ; or, dying in both places, may go to hell from Rome, and to heaven from England. That the body and soul of Christ should cease to be where it was, and yet not go to another place, nor be destroyed. All these and many other of the like nature are the unavoidable, and most of them the acknowledged, consequences of your doctrine of transubstantiation, as it is explained one way or other by your schoolmen. Now I beseech you, Sir, to try your skill: and, if you can compose their repugnance, and make peace between them, certainly none but you shall be catholic moderator. But, if you cannot do it, and that after an intelligible manner, then you must give me leave to believe, that either you do not believe transubstantiation, or else, that it is no contradiction, that men should subjugate their understandings to the belief of contra- dictions. 47. Lastly, I pray tell me whether you have not so much charity in store for the bishop of Armagh, and Dr. Potter, as to think that they themselves believe this saying which the one preached and printed, the other reprinted, and as you say ap- plauded 1 If you think they do, then certainly you have done unadvisedly, either in charging it with a foul contradiction, or in saying, it is impossible that any man should at once believe contradictions. Indeed, that men should assent to contradictions, and that it is unreasonable to do so, I willingly grant ; but to say, it is impossible to be done, is against every man's experi- necessary Points of mere Belief. 289 ence, and almost as unreasonable, as to do the thing which is said to be impossible : for though perhaps it may be very difficult for a man in his right wits to believe a contradiction expressed in terms, especially if he believe it to be a contradiction ; yet for men, being cowed and awed by superstition, to persuade them- selves upon slight and trivial grounds, that these or these, though they seem contradictions, yet indeed are not so, and so to believe them : or, if the plain repugnance of them be veiled or disguised a little with some empty unintelligible nonsense distinction ; or if it be not expressed but implied, not direct but by consequence, so that the parties, to whose faith the propositions are offered, are either innocently, or perhaps affectedly, ignorant of the contrariety of them : for men, in such cases, easily to swallow and digest con- tradictions, he that denies it possible must be a mere stranger in the world. 48. Ad. §. 18. This paragraph consists of two immodest un- truths, obtruded upon us without show or shadow of reason : and an evident sophism, grounded upon an affected mistake of the sense of the word fundamental. 49. The first untruth is, that " Dr. Potter makes a church, of men agreeing scarcely in one point of faith : of men concurring in some one or few articles of belief, and in the rest holding con- ceits plainly contradictory : agreeing only in this one article, that Christ is our Saviour ; but, for the rest, like to the parts of a chimera," &c. which I say is a shameless calumny, not only be- cause Dr. Potter in this point delivers not his own judgment, but relates the opinion of others, Mr. Hooker and Mr. Merton ; but, especially because even these men (as they are related by Dr. Potter) to the constituting the very essence of a church in the lowest degree, require not only faith in Christ Jesus, the Son of God and the Saviour of the world, but also submission to his doctrine in mind and will. Now I beseech you, Sir, tell me in- genuously, whether the doctrine of Christ may be called without blasphemy scarcely one point of faith ? Or whether it consists only of some one or few articles of belief? Or whether there be nothing in it, but only this article, that Christ is our Saviour? Is it not manifest to all the world, that christians of all professions do agree with one consent in the belief of all those books of scrip- ture, which were not doubted of in the ancient church, without danger of damnation? Nay, is it not apparent that no man, at this time, can without hypocrisy pretend to believe in Christ, but of necessity he must do so ? Seeing he can have no reason to be- lieve in Christ, but he must have the same to believe the scripture. I pray then read over the scripture once more, or, if that be too much labour, the New Testament only ; and then say, whether there be nothing there, but " scarcely one point of faith ? But some one or two articles of belief? Nothing but this article only, that Christ is our Saviour ?" Say, whether there be not there an infinite number of divine verities, divine precepts, divine pro- mises, and those so plainly and undoubtedly delivered, that if any sees them not, it cannot be because he cannot, but because he T 25 290 The Creed contains all will not ! So plainly, that whosoever submits sincerely to the doctrine of Christ, in mind and will, cannot possibly but submit to these in act and performance. And in the rest, which it hath pleased God, for reasons best known to himself, to deliver ob- scurely or ambiguously, yet thus far at least they agree, that the sense of them intended by God is certainly true, and that they are without passion or prejudice to endeavour to find it out; the dif- ference only is, which is that true sense which God intended. Neither would this long continue, if the walls of separation, whereby the -devil hopes to make their divisions eternal, were pulled down ; and error were not supported against truth by hu- man advantages. But, for the present, God forbid the matter should be so ill as you make it ! For whereas you looking upon their points of difference and agreement, through I know not what strange glasses, have made the first innumerable, and the other scarce a number : the truth is clean contrary ; that those divine verities, speculative and practical, wherein they universally agree, (which you will have to be but a few, or but one, or scarcely one) amounting to many millions (if an exact account were taken of them) : and, on the other side, the points in variance are in comparison but few, and those not of such a quality, but the error in them may well consist with the belief and obedience of the entire covenant, ratified by Christ between God and man. Yet I would not be so mistaken, as if I thought the errors even of some protestants inconsiderable things, and matters of no mo- ment. For the truth is, I am very fearful that some of their opinions, either as they are, or as they are apt to be mistaken, (though not of themselves so damnable, but that good and holy men may be saved with them, yet,) are too frequent occasions of our remissness, and slackness, in running the race of christian perfection, of our deferring repentance and conversion to God, of our frequent relapses into sin, and not seldom of security in sinning ; and, consequently, though not certain causes, yet too frequent occasions of many men's damnation : and such I conceive all these doctrines, which either directly or obliquely put men in hopes of eternal happiness by any other means, saving only the narrow way of sincere and universal obedience, grounded upon a true and lively faith. These errors, therefore, I do not elevate or extenuate : and, on condition the ruptures made by them might be composed, do heartily wish, that the cement were made of my dearest blood, and only not to be an anathema from Christ: only this I say, that neither are their points of agreement so few, nor their differences so many as you make them ; nor so great as to exclude the opposite parties from being members of the church militant, and joint-heirs of the glory of the church tri- umphant. 50. Your other palpable untruth is, that " protestants are far more bold to disagree, even in matters of faith, than catholic divines (you mean your own) in questions only merely philoso- phical, or not determined by the church." For neither do they differ at all in matters of faith, if you take the word in the highest necessary Points of mere Belief. 291 sense, and mean by matters of faith, such doctrines as are abso- lutely necessary to salvation to be believed, or not to be disbelieved. And then in those wherein they do differ, with what colour or shadow of argument can you make good, that they are more bold to disagree, than you are in questions merely philosophical, or not determined by the church? For is there not as great repugnancy between your assent and dissent, your affirmation and negation, your est est, non non, as there is between theirs? You follow your reason in those things which are not determined by your church ; and they theirs, in things not plainly determined in scripture. And wherein then consists their greater, their far greater boldness ? And what if they, in their contradictory opinions, pretend both to rely upon the truth of God, doth this make their contradictions ever a whit the more repugnant ? I had always thought that all contradictions had been equally contradic- tions, and equally repugnant ; because the least of them are as far asunder as est and non est can make them, and the greatest are no farther. But then you in your differences (by name, about prede- termination, the immaculate conception, the pope's infallibility) upon what other motive do you rely ? Do not you cite scripture or tradition, or both, on both sides ? And do you not pretend, that both these are the infallible truths of Almighty God ? 51. You close up this section with a fallacy, proving forsooth, that — we destroy, by our confession, the church which is the house of God, because we stand only upon fundamental articles, which cannot make up the whole fabric of the faith, no more than the foundation of a house alone can be a house. 52. But I hope, Sir, that you will not be difficult in granting, that that is a house which hath all the necessary parts belonging to a house : now by fundamental articles, we mean all those which are necessary. And you yourself, in the very leaf after this, take notice that Dr. Potter doth so. Where to this question, how shall I know in particular which points be, and which be not fundamental ; you scurrilously bring him in making this ridicu- lous answer, " read my answer to a late pamphlet entitled Charity Mistaken, &c. There you shall find that fundamental doctrines are such catholic verities, as principally and essentially pertain to the faith, such as properly constitute a church, and are necessary (in ordinary course) to be distinctly believed by every christian that will be saved." All which words he used, not to tell you what points be fundamental, as you dishonestly impose upon him, but to explain what he meant by the word fundamental. May it please you therefore now at last to take notice, that by funda- mental we mean all and only that which is necessary ; and then I hope you will grant, that we may safely expect salvation in a church which hath all things fundamental to salvation. Unless you will say, that more is necessary than that which is necessary. 53. Ad. §. 19. This long discourse, so full of uningenuous deal- ing with your adversary, perhaps would have done reasonably well in a farce or a comedy, and 1 doubt not but you have made your- self, and your courteous readers, good sport with it. But if Dr. t2 292 The Creed contains all Potter, or I, had been by when you wrote it, we should have stopped your career at the first starting, and have put you in mind of these old school proverbs, Ex falso supposito sequitur quodlibet, and Uno absurdo dato, sequuntur mille. For whereas you sup- pose, first, that to a man desirous to save his soul, and inquiring whose direction he might rely upon 1 the doctor's answer would be — upon the true catholic church : I suppose, upon better reason, because I know his mind, that he would advise him to call no man master on earth, but according to Christ's command, to rely upon the direction of God himself. If he should inquire, wher he should find this direction 1 He would answer him — in his word contained in scripture. If he should inquire what assurance he might have, that the scripture is the word of God ? he would answer him — that the doctrine itself is very fit and worthy to be thought to come from God, nee vox hominem sonat, and that they which wrote and delivered it, confirmed it to be the word of God, by doing such works as could not be done but by power from God himself. For assurance of the truth hereof he would advise him to rely upon that which all wise men in all matters of belief rely upon ; and that is the consent of ancient records and universal tradi- tion. And that he might not mistrust him as partial in this advice, he might farther tell him, that a gentleman that would be nameless, that hath written a book against him, called Charity Maintained by Catholics, though in many things he differ from him, yet agrees with him in this — that tradition is such a principle as may be rested in, and which requires no other proof. As, indeed, no wise man doubts but there was such a man as Julius Caesar> or Cicero, that there are such cities as Rome or Constantinople, though he have no other assurance for the one or the other, but only the speech of people. This tradition, therefore, he would counsel him to rely upon, and to believe that the book which we call scripture, was confirmed abundantly by the works of God to be the word of God. Believing it the word of God, he must of necessity believe it true: and if he believe it true, he must believe it contains all ne- cessary direction to eternal happiness, because it affirms itself to do so. Nay, he might tell him that so far is the whole book from want- ing any necessary direction to his eternal salvation, that one only author, that hath writ two little books of it, St. Luke by name, in the beginning of his gospel, and in the beginning of his story, shews plainly that he alone hath written at least so much as is necessary. And what they wrote, they wrote by God's direction for the direc- tion of the world, not only for the learned, but for all that would do their true endeavour to know the will of God, and to do it ; there- fore you cannot but conceive, that writing to all, and for all, they wrote so as that in things necessary they might be understood by all. Besides that, here he should find, that God himself has engaged himself by promise, that if he would love him and keep his commandments, and pray earnestly for his Spirit, and be willing to be directed by it, he should undoubtedly receive it, even the Spirit of truth, which shall lead him into all truth ; that is cer- tainly, at least, into all necessary truth, and suffer him to fall into necessary Points of mere Belief. 293 no pernicious error. The sum of his whole direction to him briefly would be this: believe the scripture to be the word of God, use your true endeavour to find the true sense of it, and to live according to it, and then you may rest securely that you are in the true way of eternal happiness. This is the substance of that answer which the doctor would make to any man in this case: and this is a way so plain, that fools, unless they will, cannot err from it. Because, not knowing absolutely all truth, nay, not all profitable truth, and being free from error; but endeavouring to know the truth and obey it, and endeavouring to be free from error, is by this way made the only condition of salvation. As for your supposition, that he would advise such a man to rely upon the catholic church for finding out the doctrine of Christ; he utterly disclaims it, and truly very justly : there being no certain way to know that any company is a true church, but only by their professing the true doctrine of Christ. And therefore as it is impossible that I should know that such a company of philoso- phers are peripatetics, or stoics, unless I first know what was the doctrine of the peripatetics, and stoics ; so it is as impossible that I should certainly know any company to be the church of Christ, before I know what is the doctrine of Christ, the profession where- of constitutes the visible church, the belief and obedience the in- visible. And, therefore, whereas you would have him directed by the catholic church to the doctrine of Christ ; the contrary rather is most certain and necessary, that by the foreknowledge of the doctrine of Christ, he must be directed to a certain assurance,* which is the catholic church, if he mean not to choose at a venture, but desire to have certain direction to it. This supposition, there- fore, being the hinge whereon your whole discourse turns, is the Minerva of your own brain ; and, therefore, were it but for this, have we not great reason to accuse you of strange immodesty, in saying, as you do, that the whole discourse and inferences, which here you have made, are either Dr. Potter's own direct assertions, or evident consequences clearly deduced from them? Especially, seeing your proceeding in it is so consonant to this ill beginning, that it is in a manner wholly made up, not of Dr. Potter's asser- tions, but your own fictions obtruded on him. 54. To the next question — cannot general councils err ? You pretend, he answers,f — they may err damnably. Let the reader see the place, and he shall find damnably is your addition. To the third demand, " must I consult (about my difficulties) with every particular person of the catholic church ?" you answer for him, (that which is most false) that " it seems so by his words ; the whole militant church ; that is, all the members of it cannot pos- sibly err either in the whole faith, or any necessary article of it :" which is very certain, for should it so do, it should be the church no longer. But what sense is there that you should collect out of these words, that every member of the militant church must be consulted with? By like reason, if he had said that all men in * Which is the church. t Answers, §. 19. Lond. 25* 294 The Creed contains all the world cannot err; if he said that God in his own person, or his angels could not err in these matters, you might have gathered from thence, that he laid a necessity upon men in doubt, to con- sult with angels, or with God in his own person, or with all men in the world. Is it not evident to all sober men, that to make any man or men fit to be consulted with, besides the understanding of the matter, it is absolutely requisite that they may be spoken with 1 And is it not apparently impossible, that any man should speak with all the members of the militant church ? Or if he had spoken with them all, know that he had done so? Nay, does not Dr. Potter say as much in plain terms ? Nay more, do not you take notice that he does so in the very next words before these, where you say, " he affirms that the catholic church cannot be told of private injuries :" unless you will persuade us there is a difference between the catholic church and the whole militant church. For whereas you make him deny this of the catholic church united, and affirm it of the militant church sdispersed into particulars: the truth is, he speaks neither of united nor dispersed, but affirms simply (as appears to your shame, by your own quotations) that " the catholic church cannot be told of private injuries:" and then, that the whole militant church cannot err. But then, besides that the united church cannot be consulted, and the dispersed may; what a wild imagination is it, and what a strange injustice was it in you to father it upon him? I beseech you, sir, to consider seriously, how far blind zeal to your superstition hath transported you be- yond all bounds of honesty and discretion, and made you careless of speaking either truth or sense, so you speak against Dr. Potter ? 55. Again you make him say, " the prelates of God's church meeting in a lawful council may err damnably :" and from this you collect, " it remains then, for your necessary instruction you must repair to every particular member of the universal church spread over the face of the earth." And this is also pergula pic- to?~is, veri nihil, omnia jicta. The antecedent false, (not for the matter of it, but) that Dr. Potter says it. And the consequence as far from it as Gades from Ganges ; and as coherent as a rope of sand. A general council may err ; therefore you must travel all the world over, and consult with every particular christian ! As if there were nothing else to be consulted with : nay, as if ac- cording to the doctrine of protestants (for so you must say), there was nothing to be consulted with, but only a general council, or all the world ! Have you never heard that protestants say, that men for their direction must consult with scripture ? Nay, doth not Dr. Potter say it often in this very book which you are con- futing X Nay more, in this very page out of which you take this piece of your cento, " a general council may err damnably," are there not these plain words : " in searchers of truth (he means divine truth) God ever directs us to the infallible rule of truth, the scripture 1" With what conscience, then, or modesty, can you impose upon him this unreasonable consequence, and yet pretend that your whole discourse is either his own direct assertions, or evident consequences, clearly deduced from them ? You add, that necessary Points of mere Belief. 295 yet he teaches (as if he contradicted himself) that " the promises of God made to the church for his assistance, are not intended to particular persons, but only to the catholic church:" which sure agrees very well with any thing said by Dr. Potter. If it be re- pugnant to what you said for him falsely, what is that to him ? 56. Neither yet is this to drive any man to desperation : unless it be such an one, as hath such a strong affection to this word church, that he will not go to heaven, unless he hath a church to lead him thither. For what though a council may err, and the whole church cannot be consulted With, yet this is not to send you on the fool's pilgrimage for faith, and bid you go and "confer with every christian soul, man and woman, by sea and by land, close prisoner or at liberty," as you dilate the matter : but to tell you very briefly, that universal tradition directs you to the word of God, and the word of God directs you to heaven. And therefore here is no cause of desperation, no cause for you to be so vain, and tragical, as here you would seem. " Yet upon supposal (you say) of this miraculous pilgrimage for faith, before I have the faith of miracles, how shall 1 proceed at our meeting ? Or how shall I know the man, on whom I may securely rely ?" And hereunto you frame this answer for the doctor : " procure to know whether he believe all fundamental points of faith :" whereas, in all the doctor's book, there is no such answer to any such question, or any like it. Neither do you, as your custom is, note any page where it may be found ; which makes me suspect, that sure you have some private license to use heretics (as you call them) at your pleasure, and make them answer any thing to any thing. 57. Wherein I am yet more confirmed by the answer you put in his mouth to your next demand : " how shall I know whether he hold all fundamental points or no?" For whereas hereunto Dr. Potter, having given one answer fully satisfactory to it, which is : " if he truly believe the undoubted books of canonical scrip- ture, he cannot but believe all fundamentals :" and another, which is but something towards a full satisfaction of it, that " the creed contains all the fundamentals of simple belief;" you take no no- tice of the former, and pervert the latter, and make him say — the creed contains all fundamentals of faith. Whereas you know, and, within six or seven lines after this, confess that he never pre- tended it to contain all simply, but all of one sort, all necessary points of simple belief. Which assertion, because he modestly delivers as very probable (being willing to conclude rather less than more than his reasons require) hereupon you take occasion to ask, "shall I hazard my soul on probabilities, or even wagers?" As if whatsoever is but probable, though in the highest degree of probability, were as likely to be false as true ! Or, because it is but morally, not mathematically, certain, that there was such a woman as Queen Elizabeth, such a man as Henry VIII., that is, in the highest degree probable, therefore it were an even wager there were none such! By this reason, seeing the truth of your whole religion depends finally upon prudential motives, which you do but pretend to be very credible, it will be an even wager 296 The Creed contains all that your religion is false. And, by the same reason, or rather infinitely greater, seeing it is impossible for any man (according to the grounds of your religion) to know himself, much less another, to be a true pope, or a true priest ; nay, to have a moral certainty of it ; because these things are obnoxious to innumerable secret and undiscernible nullities, it will be an even wager, nay, (if we proportion things indifferently), a hundred to one, that every consecration and absolution of yours is void, and that when- soever you adore the host, you and your assistants commit idol- atry : that there is a nullity in any decree that a pope shall make, or any decree of a council which he shall confirm : particularly, it will be at least an even wager, that all the decrees of the coun- cil of Trent are void, because it is at most but very probable that the pope which confirmed them was the true pope. If you mislike these inferences, then confess you have injured Dr. Potter in this also, that you have confounded, and made all one, probabilities, and even wagers. Whereas every ordinary gamester can inform you, that though it be a thousand to one that such a thing will hap- pen, yet it is not sure, but very probable. 58. To make the measure of your injustice yet fuller, you de- mand, " if the creed contains only points of simple belief, how shall we know what points of belief are necessary which direct our practice ?" Dr. Potter would have answered you in our Saviour's words, " search the scriptures." But you have a great mind, it seems, to be despairing; and, therefore, having proposed your questions, will not suffer him to give you an answer, but shut your ears and tell him, " still he chalks out new paths for despe- ration." 59. In the rest of your interlude, I cannot but commend one thing in you, that you keep a decorum, and observe very well the rule given you by the great master of your art, Servetur ad imum Qualis ab incepto processerat, et sibi constet : one vein of scurrility and dishonesty runs clean through it, from the beginning to the end. Your next demand then is, " are all the articles of the creed for their nature and matter fundamental?" And the answer, " I cannot say so." Which answer (though it be true) Dr. Potter no where gives it, neither hath he occasion, but you make it for him, to bring in another question, and this is, '* how then shall I know, which in particular be, and which be not, fundamental V Dr. Potter would have answered, it is a vain question : believe all, and you shall be sure to believe all that is fundamental. 60. But what says now his prevaricating proxy ? What does he make him say ? This which follows : " Read my answer to a late popish pamphlet, entitled, Charity Mistaken : there you shall find that fundamental doctrines are such catholic verities, as principally and essentially pertain to the faith, such as properly constitute a church, and are necessary, in ordinary course, to be distinctly believed by every christian that will be saved. They necessary Points of mere Belief. 297 are those grand and capital doctrines which make up our faith, that is, the common faith, which is alike precious in all ; being one and the same, in the highest apostle and the meanest believer, which the apostle elsewhere calls, ' the first principles of the oracles of God, and the form of sound words.' " Gl. But in earnest, good sir, doth the doctor, in these places by you quoted, make to this question this same sottish answer? Or do you think that against a heretic nothing is unlawful ? Cer- tainly, if he doth answer thus, I will make bold to say, he is a very fool. But, if he does not, (as indeed he does not) then — : but I forbear you, and beseech the reader to consult the places of Dr. Potter's book ; and there he shall find, that, in the former half of these (as you call them) varied words and phrases, he de- clared only what he means by the word fundamental, which was needful to prevent mistakes, and cavilling about the meaning of the word, which is metaphorical, and therefore ambiguous ; and that the latter half of them are several places of scripture em- ployed by Dr. Potter, to show that his distinction of fundamental and not fundamental hath express ground in it. Now of these two places, very pertinent unto two very good purposes, you have ex- ceedingly fairly patched together a most ridiculous answer to a question, that Dr. Potter never dreamed of. But the words you will say are in Dr. Potter's book, though in divers places, and to other purposes. Very true ! And so the words of Ausonius's ob- scene Fescennine are taken out of Virgil, yet Virgil surely was not the author of this poem. Besides, in Dr. Potter's book there are these words : " Dread sovereign, amongst the many excellent virtues, which have made your majesty's person so dear unto God," &c. And why now may not you say as well, that in these he made answer to your former question, what points of the creed were, and what were not, fundamentals'? 62. But — unless this question may be answered, his doctrine (you say) serves only either to make men despair, or else to have recourse to these whom we call papists. — It seems a little thing will make you despair, if you be so sullen as to do so, because men will not trouble themselves to satisfy your curious questions. And I pray be not offended with me for so esteeming it, because, as I before told you, if you will believe all the points of the creed, you cannot choose but believe all the points of it that are funda- mental, though you be ignorant which are so, and which are not so. Now, I believe, your desire to know which are fundamentals, proceeds only from a desire to be assured that you do believe them; which, seeing you may be assured of, without knowing which they be, what can it be but curiosity to desire to know it? Neither may you think to mend yourself herein one whit by having re- course to them whom we call papists ; for they are as far to seek as we in this point, which of the articles of the creed are, for their nature and matter, fundamental, and which are not. Particularly you will scarce meet with any amongst their doctors, so adven- turous as to tell you for a certain, whether or no the conception of Christ by the Holy Ghost, his being born of a virgin, his 298 The Creed contains all burial, his descent into hell, and the communion of saints, be points of their own nature and matter fundamental. Such, I mean, as without the distinct and explicit knowledge of them no man can be saved. 63. But you will say — at least they give this certain rule, that all points defined by Christ's visible church, belong to the founda- tion of faith, in such sense, as to deny any such, cannot stand with salvation. — So also protestants give you this more certain rule, that whosoever believes heartily those books of scripture, which all the christian churches in the world acknowledge to be canonical, and submits himself indeed to this, as to the rule of his belief, must of necessity believe all things fundamental ; and if he live according to his faith, cannot fail of salvation : but, besides, what certainty have you that the rule of papists is so certain ? By the visible church it is plain, they mean only their own : and why their own only should be the visible church, I do not understand : and as little why all points defined by this church should belong to the foundation of faith. These things you had need see well and sub- stantially proved, before you rely upon them, otherwise you expose yourself to danger of embracing damnable errors instead of funda- mental truths. But you will say, Dr. Potter himself acknowledges, that you do not err in fundamentals. If he did so, yet methinks you have no reason to rest upon his acknowledgment with any security, whom you condemn of error in many other matters. Perhaps, excess of charity to your persons, may make him censure your errors more favourably than he should do. But the truth is, and so I have often told you, though the Doctor hopes that your errors are not so unpardonably destructive, but that some men who ignorantly hold them may be saved, yet, in themselves, he professes and proclaims them damnable, and such as, he fears, will be certainly destructive to such as you are ; that is, to all those who have eyes to see, and will not see. 64. Ad. §. 20 — 23. In the remainder of this chapter, you promise to answer Dr. Potter's arguments against that which you said before. But, presently forgetting yourself, instead of an- swering his arguments, you fall a confuting his answers to your own. The arguments objected by you, which here you vindicate, were two: 1. "The scripture is not so much as mentioned in the creed, therefore the creed contains not all things necessary to be believed. Baptism is not contained in the creed, therefore not all things necessary." To both which arguments my answer shortly is this — that they prove something, but it is that which no man here denies. For Dr. Potter (as you have also confessed) never said, nor undertook to show, that the apostles intended to com- prise in the creed all points absolutely, which we are bound to be- lieve, or, after sufficient proposal, not to disbelieve : which yet here, and every where, you are obtruding upon him : but only that they purposed to comprise in it all such doctrines purely specu- lative, all such matters of simple belief, as are, in ordinary course, necessary to be distinctly and explicitly believed by all men : now neither of these objections do any way infringe or impeach the truth necessary Points of mere Belief. 299 of this assertion. Not the first, because, according co your own doctrine, all men are not bound to know explicitly what books of scripture are canonical. Nor the second, because baptism is not a matter of faith, but practice : not so much to be believed as to be given and received. And against these answers, whether you have brought any considerable new matter, let the indifferent reader judge. As for the other things, which Dr. Potter rather glanceth at, than builds upon, in answering these objections, as the creed's being collected out of scripture; and, supposing the authority of it, which Gregory of Valentia, in the place above cited, seems to me to confess to have been the judgment of the ancient fathers; and the Nicene Creed's intimating the authority of canonical scripture, and making mention of baptism: these things are said ex abundanti, and therefore I conceive it superfluous to examine your exceptions against them. Prove that Dr. Potter did affirm that the creed con- tains all things necessary to be believed of all sorts, and then these objections will be pertinent, and deserve an answer. Or produce some point of simple belief, necessary to be explicitly believed, which is not contained either in terms, or by consequence in the creed, and then I will either answer your reasons, or confess I can- not. But all this while you do but trifle, and are so far from hit- ting the mark, that you rove quite beside the butt. 65. Ad. §. 23 — 25. Dr. Potter demands — how can it be neces- sary for any christian to have more in his creed than the apostles had, and the church of their times ? You answer — that he trifled, not distinguishing between the apostles' belief, and that abridgment of some articles of faith, which we call the Apostles' Creed. — I re- ply, that it is you which trifle, affectedly confounding (what Dr. Potter hath plainly distinguished) the apostles' belief of the whole religion of Christ, as it comprehends both what we are to do, and what we are to believe, with their belief of that part of it, which contains not duties of obedience, but only the necessary articles of simple faith. Now though the apostles' belief be in the former sense a larger thing than that which we call the Apostles' Creed, yet, in the latter sense of the word, the creed (I say) is a full com- prehension of their belief, which you yourself have formerly con- fessed, though somewhat fearfully and inconstantly ; and here again, unwillingness to speak the truth makes you speak that which is hardly sense, and call it — an abridgment of some articles of faith. For I demand, these some articles which you speak of, which are they 1 Those that are out of the creed, or those that are in it? Those that are in it, it comprehends at large, and there- fore it is not an abridgment of them : those that are out of it, it comprehends not at all, and therefore it is not an abridgment of them. If you would call it now an abridgment of the faith, this would be sense, and signify thus much, that all the necessary arti- cles of the christian faith are comprised in it. For this is the pro- per duty of abridgments, to leave out nothing necessary, and to take in nothing unnecessary. 66. Moreover, in answer to this demand, you tell us, that " the Doctor begs the question, supposing that the apostles 300 The Creed contains all believed no more than is contained in their creed." I answer, he supposes no such matter ; but only that they knew no more ne- cessary articles of simple belief, thari what are contained in their creed. So that here you abuse Dr. Polter and your reader, by taking sophistically without limitation, that which is delivered with limitation. 67. But this demand of Dr. Potter's was equivalent to a ne- gation, and intended for one : how can it be necessary for any christian to have more in his creed than the apostles had ? All one with this — It cannot be necessary, &c. And this negation of his, he forces with many arguments which he proposes by way of interrogation, thus : " May the church of after ages make the nar- row way to heaven narrower than our Saviour left it? Shall it be a fault to straiten and encumber the king's highway with public nuisances? And is it lawful, by adding new articles to the faith, to retrench any thing from the latitude of the King of heaven's highway to eternal happiness? The yoke of Christ, which he said was easy, may it be justly made heavier by the governors of the church in after ages ? The apostles profess they revealed to the church the whole counsel of God, keeping back nothing needful for our salvation ; what tyranny, then, to impose any new unnecessary matters on the faith of christians, especially (as the late popes have done) under the high commanding form, qui non crediderit, damnabitur. If this may be done, why then did our Saviour reprehend the pharisees so sharply for binding heavy burdens, and laying them on men's shoulders? And why did he teach them, that in vain they worshipped God, teaching for doc- trines men's traditions ? And why did the apostles call it tempting of God, to lay those things upon the necks of christians that were not necessary ?" 68. All which interrogations seem to me to contain so many plain and convincing arguments of the premised assertion ; to all which (one excepted) according to the advice of the best masters of rhetoric in such cases, you have answered very discreetly by saying 0. But when you write again, I pray take notice of them ; and, if you can devise no fair and satisfying answer to them, then be so ingenuous as to grant the conclusion, that no more can be necessary for christians to believe now, than was in the apostles' time. A conclusion of great importance, for the decision of many controversies, and the disburdening of the faith of Christ from many incumbrances. 69. As for that one, which you thought you could fasten upon, grounded on the xx. Act. 27, let me tell you plainly, that, by your answering this, you have shewed plainly that it was wisely done of you to decline the rest. You tell Dr. Potter, that need- ful for salvation is his gloss, which, perhaps you intended for a piece of an answer. But, good Sir, consult the place, and you shall find that there St. Paul himself says, that he kept back ovSsv tuv (fyufpspovTCdv, " not any thing that was profitable :" and, I hope, you will make no difficulty to grant that whatsoever is need- ful for salvation is very profitable. necessary Points of mere Belief. 301 70. But then, you say — this is no proof unless he beg the question, and suppose that whatsoever the apostle revealed to the church is contained in the creed. — I answer, it is nut Dr. Potter that begs the question, but you that mistake it ; which is not here in this particular place, whether all points of simple belief necessary for the salvation of the primitive christians, were contained in the apostles' symbol 1 (for that and the proofs of it follow after in the next §. p. 223, of Dr. Potter's book :) but, whether any thing can be necessary for christians to believe now, which was not so from the beginning ? Dr. Potter maintains the negative : and, to make good his opinion, thus he argues: St. Paul declared to the Ephesians the whole counsel of God, touching their salvation; therefore that which St. Paul did not declare can be no part of the counsel of God, and therefore not necessary. And, again : St. Paul kept back nothing from the Ephesians that was profitable ; therefore he taught them all things necessary to salva- tion. Consider this, I pray, a little better, and then I hope you will acknowledge, that there was no petitio principii in Dr. Potter : but rather ignoratio elenchi in you. 71. Neither is it material that these words were particularly directed by St. Paul to the pastors of the church : for (to say nothing that the point here issuable, is not, whom he taught, whether priests or laymen 1 but how much he taught, and whe- ther all things necessary?) it appears plainly out of the text, and I wonder you should read it so negligently, as not to observe it, that though he speaks now to the pastors, yet he speaks of what he taught not only them, but also the laity as well as them. " I have kept back nothing," says St. Paul, " that was profitable, but have shewed, and have taught you publicly, and from house to house testifying (I pray observe) both to the Jews and also to the Greeks, repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ." And a little after, " I know that all ye, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more : wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am innocent from the blood of all men ; for I have kept nothing back, but have showed you all the counsel of God." And again, " remember that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears." Certainly, though he did all things to the pas- tors among the rest, nay, above the rest, yet, without controversy they whom he taught publicly, and from house to house : the Jews and Greeks to whom he testified, i. e. preached faith and repent- ance : those all, among whom he went preaching the kingdom of God : those every one, whom for three years together he warned, were not bishops and pastors only. 72. Neither is this to say, that the apostles taught christians nothing but their creed, nothing of the sacraments, command- ments, &c. for that is not here the point to be proved ; but only, that they taught them all things necessary, so that nothing can be necessary which they did not teach them. But how much of this they put into their creed, whether all the necessary points of 26 302 The Creed contains all simple belief, as we pretend, or only as you say, I know not what, is another question, and which comes now to be farther examined. Dr. Potter, in confirmation of it, besides the authorities which you formerly shifted off with so egregious tergiversation, urges five several arguments. 73. We urge against you — that if all necessary points of simple belief be not comprised in the creed, it can no way deserve the name of the Apostles' Creed, as not being their creed in any sense, but only a part of it. — To this you answer, §. 25, " Upon the same affected ambiguity," &c. Ans. It is very true that their whole faith was of a larger extent, but that was not the question ; but whether all the points of simple belief which they taught as ne- cessary to be explicitly believed, be not contained in it ? And if thus much at least of christian religion be not comprised in it, I again desire you to inform me, how it could be called the Apostles' Creed ? 74. Four other reasons Dr. Potter urges to the same purpose, grounded upon the practice of the ancient church ; the last whereof you answer in the second part of your book. But to the rest, drawn from the ancient church's appointing her infants to be instructed (for matter of simple belief,) only in the creed ; from her admitting catechumens unto baptism ; and of strangers to her com- munion upon their only profession of the creed, you have not for aught I can perceive, thought fit to make any kind of answer. 75. The difficulties of the 27th and last §. of this chapter, have been satisfied, so that there remains unexamined only the 26th §. wherein you exceed yourself in sophistry : especially, in that trick of cavillers, which is to answer objections by other objec- tions ; an excellent way to make controversies endless ! Dr. Pot- ter desires to be resolved — why, amongst so many things of equal necessity to be believed, the apostles should distinctly set down some in the creed, and be altogether silent of others? — instead of resolving him in this difficulty, you put another to him, and that is — why are some points not fundamental expressed in it rather than others of the same quality 1 — Which demand is so far from satisfying the former doubt, that it makes it more intricate. For upon this ground it may be demanded — how was it possible that the apostles should leave out any articles simply necessary, and put in others not necessary, especially if their intention were (as you say it was) to deliver in it such articles as were fittest for those times'? Unless (which were wondrous strange) unnecessary articles were fitter for those times than necessary. But now to your question, the answer is obvious ; these unnecessary things might be put in, because they were circumstances of the neces- sary ; Pontius Pilate, of Christ's passion ; the third day of the re- surrection. Neither doth the adding of them make the creed ever a whit the less portable, the less fit to be understood and re- membered. And for the contrary reasons, other unnecessary things might be left out. Besides, who sees not that the addition of some unnecessary circumstances is a thing that can hardly be necessary Points of mere Belief. 303 avoided without affectation : and therefore not so great a fault, nor deserving such a censure, as the omission of any thing essen- tial to the work undertaken, and necessary to the end proposed in it. 76. You demand again (as it is no hard matter to multiply demands) " why our Saviour's descent to hell, and burial, was expressed, and not his circumcision, his manifestation to the three kings, and working of miracles ?" I answer : his resurrection, ascension, and sitting at the right hand of God are very great miracles, and they are expressed. Besides, St. John assures us, that the miracles which Christ did, were done and written not for themselves, that they might be believed; but for a further end, that we might believe that Jesus was the Christ, and believing have eternal life. He therefore that believes this may be saved, though we have no explicit and distinct faith of any miracle that our Saviour did. His circumcision and manifestation to the wise men, (for I know not upon what grounds you call them kings) are neither things simply necessary to be known, nor have any near relation to those that are so. As for his descent into hell, it may (for aught you know) be put in as a thing necessary of itself to be known. If you ask, why more than his circumcision 1 I refer you to the apostles for an answer, who put that in, and left this out of their creed : and yet, sure, were not so forgetful, after the receiving of the Holy Ghost, as to leave out any prime and prin- cipal foundation of the faith, which are the very words of your own Gordonius Huntlaeus, contr. 2, c. x. n. 10. Likewise his burial was put in, perhaps, as necessary of itself to be known. But though it were not, yet hath it manifestly so near relation to these that are necessary, (his passion and resurrection ; being the consequent of the one, and the antecedent of the other) that it is no marvel if for their sakes it was put in. For though I verily believe that there is no necessary point of this nature, but what is in the creed, yet I do not affirm, because I cannot prove it, that there is nothing in the creed but what is necessary. You demand, thirdly, " why did they not express scriptures, sacraments, and all fundamental points of faith tending to practice, as well as those which rest in belief?" I answer, because their purpose was to comprise in it only these necessary points which rest in belief: which appears, because of practical points there is not in it so much as one. 77. Dr. Potter subjoins to what is said above, " That as well, nay better, they might have given no article but that of the church, and sent us to the church for all the rest : for in setting down others besides that, and not all, they make us believe we have all, when we have not all." The consequence you deny: and neither give reason against it, nor satisfy his reason for it, which yet, in my judgment, is good and concluding. The propo- sition to be proved is this : that, if your doctrine were true, this short creed — I believe the Roman church to be infallible — would have been better ; that is, more effectual to keep the believers of it from heresy, and in the true faith, than this creed which now 304 The Creed contains all we have. A proposition so evident, that I cannot see how either you, or any of your religion, or indeed any sensible man, can from his heart deny it. Yet, because you make show of doing so, or else, which I rather hope, do not rightly apprehend the force of the rea- son, I will endeavour briefly to add some light and strength to it, by comparing the effects of these several supposed creeds. 78. The former creed, therefore, would certainly produce these effects in the believers of it : an impossibility of being in any formal heresy : a necessity of being prepared in mind to come out of all error in faith, or material heresy, which certainly you will not deny; or, if you do, you pull down the only pillar of your church and re- ligion, and deny that which is in effect the only thing you labour to prove through your whole book. 79. The latter creed which now we have, is so ineffectual for these good purposes, that you yourself tell us of innumerable, gross, damnable heresies, that have been, are, and may be, whose contrary truths are neither explicitly, nor by consequence, com- prehended in this creed ; so that no man, by the belief of this creed without the former, can be possibly guarded from falling into them, and continuing obstinate in them. Nay, so far is this creed from guarding them from these mischiefs, that it is more likely to ensnare them into them, by seeming, and yet not being a full comprehension of all necessary points of faith : which is apt (as experience shows) to misguide men into this (as you conceive it) pernicious error, that believing the creed, they believe all ne- cessary points of faith ; whereas, indeed, according to you, they do not so. Now upon these grounds I thus conclude : that creed, which hath great commodities and no danger, would certainly be better than that which hath great danger, and wants many of these great commodities; but the former short creed proposed by me — I be- lieve the Roman church to be infallible — (if your doctrine be true) is of the former condition, and the latter, that is the Apostles' Creed, is of the latter ; therefore the former (if your doctrine be true) would, without controversy, be better than the latter. 80. But (say you) by this kind of arguing, one might infer quite contrary. — If the Apostles' Creed contain all points necessary to salvation, what need have we of any church to teach us? And, consequently, what need of the article of the church 1 — To which I answer, that having compared your inference and Dr. Potter's together, I cannot discover any shadow of resemblance between them, nor any show of reason, why the perfection of the Apostles' Creed should exclude a necessity of some body to deliver it. Much less why the whole creed's containing all things necessary should make the belief of a part of it unnecessary. As well (for aught 1 understand) you might avouch this inference to be as good as Dr. Potter's : the Apostles' Creed contains all things necessary, there- fore there is no need to believe in God. Neither doth it follow so well as Dr. Potter's argument follows, that if the Apostles' Creed contains all things necessary, that all other creeds and catechisms, wherein are added divers others particulars, are su- perfluous. For these other particulars may be the duties of necessary Points of mere Belief. 305 obedience, they may be profitable points of doctrine, they may be good expositions of the Apostles' Creed, and so not superfluous ; and yet for all this the creed may still contain all points of belief that are simply necessary. These therefore are poor consequences, but no more like Dr. Potter's than an apple is like an oyster. 81. But this consequence after you have sufficiently slighted and disgraced it, at length you promise us news, and pretend to grant it. But what is that which you mean to grant ? That the apostles did put no article in their creed but only that of the church ? Or, that, if they had done so, they had done better than now they have done ? This is Dr. Potter's inference out of your doctrine : and truly, if you should grant this, this were news in- deed. Yes, say you, I will grant it, but only thus far, that Christ hath referred us only to his church. Yea, but this is clean another thing, and no news at all, that you should grant that which you would fain have granted to you. So that your dealing with us is just as if a man should proffer me a courtesy, and pretend that he would oblige himself, by a note under his hand, to give me twenty pounds ; and instead of it write, that I owe him forty, and desire me to subscribe to it, and be thankful. Of such favours as these it is very safe to be liberal. 82. You tell us afterward (but how it comes in I know not) that — it were a childish argument, the creed contains not all things necessary : ergo, it is not profitable. Or, the church alone is suffi- cient to teach us by some convenient means : ergo, she must teach us without means. — These indeed are childish arguments ; but, for aught I see, you alone are the father of them : for, in Dr. Potter's book, I can neither meet with them, nor any like them. He, indeed, tells you, that if (by any impossible supposition) your doctrine were true, another and a far shorter creed would have been more expedient : even this alone — I believe the Roman church to be infallible. But why you should conclude, he makes this creed which we have unprofitable; because he says another, that might be conceived upon this false supposition, would be more profitable : or, that he lays a necessity upon the church of teaching without means : or, of not teaching this very creed which now is taught ; these things are so subtle that I cannot compre- hend them. To my understanding, by those words, " and sent us to the church for all the rest," he does rather manifestly imply, that the rest might be very well not only profitable, but necessary, and that the church was to teach this by creeds, or catechisms, or councils, or any other means which she should make choice of: for being infallible, she could not choose amiss. 83. Whereas therefore, you say, " if the apostles had expressed no article but that of the catholic church, she must have taught us the other articles, in particular, by creeds or other means:" this is very true, but no way repugnant to the truth of this which follows, that the apostles (if your doctrine be true) had done better service to the church, though they had never made this creed of theirs which now we have, if, instead thereof, they had com- manded, in plain terms, that for men's perpetual direction in the u 26* 306 The Creed contains all necessary Points of mere Belief. faith, this short creed shall he taught all men — I believe the Roman church shall be for ever infallible. Yet you must not so mistake me, as if I meant that they had done better, not to have taught the church the substance of christian religion ; for then the church not having learned it of them, could not have taught it us. This therefore I do not say, but supposing they had written these scriptures as they have written, wherein all the articles of their creed are plainly delivered, and preached that doctrine which they did preach, and done all other things as they have done, besides the composing their symbol ; I say, if your doctrine were true, they had done a work infinitely more beneficial to the church of Christ, if they had never composed this symbol, which is but an imperfect comprehension of the necessary points of simple belief, and no distinctive mark (as a symbol should be) between those that are good christians, and those that are not so ; but instead thereof, had delivered this one proposition, which would have been certainly effectual for all the aforesaid good intents and pur- poses — the Roman church shall be for ever infallible in all things which she proposes as matters of faith. 84. Whereas you say — if we will believe we have all in the creed when we have not all, it is not the apostles' fault, but our own. I tell you plainly, if it be a fault, I know not whose it should be but theirs. For sure it can be no fault in me to follow such guides whithersoever they lead me : now, I say, they have led me into this persuasion, because they have given me great reason to believe it, and none to the contrary. The reason they have given me to believe it, is, because it is apparent and con- fessed, they did propose to themselves in composing it, some good end or ends ; as that christians might have a form, by which (for matter of faith) they might profess themselves catholics ; so Pu- tean out of Tho. Aquinas. " That the faithful might know what the christian people is to believe explicitly." So Vincent Filiucius. " That being separated into divers parts of the world, they might preach the same thing : and, that they might serve as a mark to distinguish true christians from infidels." So Cardinal Richelieu. Now for all these, and for any other good intent, it will be plainly ineffectual, unless it contain at least all points of simple belief, which are, in ordinary course, necessary to be explicitly known by all men. So that if it be a fault in me to believe this, it must be my fault to believe the apostles wise and good men : which I cannot do if I believe not this. And, therefore, what Richardus de sancto Victore says of God himself, I make no scruple at all to apply to the apostles, and to say, Si error est quod credo, a vobis deceptus sum ? If it be an error, which I believe, it is you, and my reverend esteem of you and your actions, that hath led me into it. For as for your suspicion, that we are led into this per- suasion out of a hope that we may the better maintain by it some opinions of our own, it is plainly uncharitable. I know no opi- nion I have which I would not as willingly forsake as keep, if I could see sufficient reason to induce me to believe, that it is the will of God I should forsake it. Neither do I know any opinion Charity maintained by Catholics. 307 I hold against the church of Rome, but I have more evident grounds than this whereupon to build it. For let but these truths be granted — that the authority of the scriptures is independent on your church, and dependent only in respect of us upon uni- versal tradition ; that scripture is the only rule of faith ; that all things necessary to salvation are plainly delivered in scripture : let, I say, these most certain and divine truths be laid for founda- tions, and let our superstructions be consequent and coherent to them ; and I am confident peace would be restored, and truth maintained against you, though the Apostles' Creed were not in the world. CHAPTER V. That Luther, Calvin, their associates, and all who began or con- tinue the separation from the external communion of the Roman church, are guilty of the proper and formal sin of schism. " The Searcher of all hearts is witness, with how unwilling mind catholics are drawn to fasten the denomination of schismatics, or heretics, on them for whose souls, if they employed their best blood, they judge that it could not be better spent! If we rejoice that they are contristated at such titles, our joy riseth not from their trouble or grief, but as that of the apostles did, from the fountain of charity, because they are contristated to repentance ; that so, after impartial examination, they, finding themselves to be what we say, may, by God's holy grace, begin to dislike what themselves are. For our part, we must remember that our obligation is, to keep within the mean, betwixt uncharitable bitterness and pernicious flattery, not yielding to worldly respects, nor offending christian modesty, but uttering the substance of truth in so chari- table manner that not so much we, as truth and charity, may seem to speak, according to the wholesome advice of St. Gregory Nazian- zen in these divine words : ' We do not affect peace with pre- judice of the true doctrine, that so we may get a name of being gentle and mild ; and yet we seek to conserve peace, fighting in a lawful manner, and containing ourselves within our compass, and the rule of spirit. And of these things my judgment is, and for my part, I prescribe the same law to all that deal with souls, and treat of true doctrine, that neither they exasperate men's minds by harshness, nor make them haughty or insolent by submission ; but that in the cause of faith they behave themselves prudently and advisedly, and not in either of these things exceed the mean.'* With whom agreeth St. Leo, saying : * It behoveth us in such causes to be most careful, that, without noise of contentions, both charity be conserved and truth maintained.'! " For better method, we will handle these points in order. First, we will set down the nature and essence, or, as I may call it, the quality of schism. In the second place, the greatness and griev- *Orat. 32. t Epist. 8. u2 308 Charity maintained by Catholics* ousness, or (so to term it) the quantity thereof. For the nature, or quality, will tell us who may without injury be judged schismatics; and by the greatness, or quantity, such as find themselves guilty thereof will remain acquainted with the true state of their soul, and whether they may conceive any hope of salvation or no. And be- cause schism will be found to be a division from the church, which could not happen, unless there were .always a visible church ; we will, thirdly, prove, or rather take it as a point to be granted by all christians, that in all ages there hath been such a visible congrega- tion of faithful people. Fourthly, we will demonstrate that Luther, Calvin, and the rest, did separate themselves from the communion of that always visible church of Christ, and therefore were guilty of schism. And, fifthly, we will make it evident, that the visible true church of Christ, out of which Luther and his followers departed, was no other but the Roman church ; and consequently, that both they, and all others who persist in the same divisions, are schismatics, by reason of their separation from the church of Rome. " 3. I. Point. The nature of schism. For the first point, touching the nature or quality of schism : as the natural perfection of man consists in his being the image of God, his Creator, by the powers of his soul ; so his supernatural perfection is placed in similitude with God as his last end and felicity ; and, by having the said spiritual faculties, his understanding and will, linked to him. His understanding is united to God by faith, his will by charity: the former relies upon his infallible truth ; the latter carrieth us to his infinite goodness. Faith hath a deadly opposite, heresy. Contrary to the union or unity of charity, is separation and divi- sion. Charity is twofold. As it respects God, his opposite vice is hatred against God ; as it uniteth us to our neighbour, his con- trary is separation or division of affections and will, from our neighbour : our neighbour may be considered, either as one private person hath a single relation to another, or as all concur to make one company or congregation, which we call the church; and this is the most principal reference and union of one man with another ; because the chiefest unity is that of the whole, to which the particular unity of parts is subordinate. This unity, or oneness (if so I may call it) is effected by charity, uniting ail the members of the church in one mystical body ; contrary to which is schism, from the Greek word signifying scissure, or division. Wherefore upon the whole matter, we find that schism, as the angelical Doctor St. Thomas defines it, is 'a voluntary separation from the unity of that charity whereby all the members of the church are united.'* From hence he deduceth, that schism is a special and particular vice, distinct from heresy, because they are opposite to two different virtues; heresv to faith; schism to charity. To which purpose he fitly alleged St. Jerome upon these words: (Tit. 3.) ' A man that is a heretic after the first and second admonition avoid, saying, I conceive that there is this difference betwixt schism and heresy, that heresy involves some perverse assertion : schism for episcopal dissension doth separate men from * 2. 2. q. 39. art. incorp. et ad 3. Charity maintained by Catholics. 309 the church.' The same doctrine is delivered by St. Augustine in these words : ' heretics and schismatics call their congrega- tions churches : but heretics corrupt the faith by believing of God false things; but schismatics by wicked divisions break from fra- ternal charity, although they believe what we believe. Therefore the heretic belongs not to the church, because she loves God; nor the schismatic, because she loves her neighbour.'* And in another place he saith, ' It is wont to be demanded how schismatics be distinguished from heretics ; and this difference is found, that not a diverse faith, but the divided society of communion doth make schismatics.'f It is then evident that schism is different from heresy. Nevertheless (saith St. ThomasJ) as he who is deprived of faith must needs want charity ; so every heretic is a schismatic, but not conversively every schismatic is a heretic ; though because want of charity disposes and makes way to the destruction of faith (accord- ing to those words of the apostle, 'which [a good conscience] some casting off, have suffered shipwreck in their faith') schism speedily degenerates to heresy. St. Jerome after the rehearsed words teacheth, saying, ' Though schism in the beginning may in some sort be understood different from heresy ; yet there is no schism which doth not feign some heresy to itself, that so it may seem to have departed from the church upon good reason.' Nevertheless, when schism proceeds originally from heresy, heresy as being in that case the predominant quality in these two peccant humours, giveth the denomination of a heretic ; as, on the other side, we are wont, especially in the beginning, or for a while, to call schis- matics those men who first began with only schism, though in process of time they fell into some heresy, and by that means are indeed both schismatics and heretics. " 4. The reason why both heresy and schism are repugnant to the being of a good catholic, is, because the catholic or universal church signifies one congregation or company of faithful people, and therefore implies not only faith, to make them faithful be- lievers, but also communion, or common union, to make them one in charity, which excludes separation and division ; and therefore in the Apostles' Creed, communion of saints is immediately joined to the catholic church. " 5. From this definition of schism may be inferred, that the guilt thereof is contracted, not only by division from the universal church, but also by a separation from a particular church or diocese which agrees with the universal. In this manner Meletius was a schismatic, but not a heretic, because, as we read in St. Epi- phanius,§ ' he was of the right faith, for his faith was not altered at any time from the holy catholic church, &c. He made a sect, but departed not from faith.' Yet because he made to himself a particular congregation against St. Peter, archbishop of Alexandria, his lawful superior, and by that means brought in a division in that particular church, he was a schismatic. And it is well worth the noting, that the Meletians building new churches, put this * Lib. de Fid. et Symbol, cap. 10. X Ubi supra. f Qu. Evang. ex Matth. q. 11. § Haeres. 68. 310 Charity maintained by Catholics. title upon them, The Church of Martyrs; and upon the ancient churches of those who succeeded Peter, was inscribed, The Ca- tholic Church : for so it is. A new sect must have a new name, which though it be never so gay and specious, as the church of martyrs, the reformed church, &c. yet the novelty sheweth that it is not the catholic, nor a true church. And that schism may be committed by division from a particular church, we read in Optatus Milevitanus* these remarkable words, (which do well declare ~ who be schismatics) brought by him to prove that not Caecilianus but Parmenianus was a schismatic : ' for Caecilianus went not out from Majorinus thy grandfather (he means his next pre- decessor but one in the bishopric) but Majorinus from Caecilianus ; neither did Caecilianus depart from the chair of Peter, or of Cyprian (who was but a particular bishop), but Majorinus, in whose chair thou sittest, which had no beginning before Majorinus himself: seeing it is manifestly known that those things were so done, it evidently appeareth that you are heirs both of traditors (that is, of those who delivered up the holy bible to be burned) and of schismatics.' And it seemeth that this kind of schism must prin- cipally be admitted by protestants, who acknowledge no one visible head of the whole church, but hold that every particular diocese, church, or country is governed by itself, independently of any one person, or general council, to which all christians have obligation to submit their judgments and wills. " 6. II. Point. The grievousness of schism. As for the griev- ousness or quantity of schism (which was the second point pro- posed) St. Thomas teacheth, that, amongst sins against our neigh- bour, schism-f is the most grievous ; because it is against the spirit- ual good of the multitude or community. And therefore as in a kingdom or commonwealth, there is as great difference between the crime of rebellion or sedition, and debates among private men, as there is inequality betwixt one man and a whole kingdom ; so, in the church, schism is as much more grievous than sedition in a kingdom, as the spiritual good of souls surpasselh the civil and po- litical weal. And St. Thomas adds farther, that they lose the spi- ritual power of jurisdiction ; and if they go about to absolve from sin, or to excommunicate, their actions are invalid; which he proves out of the canon JVovatianus, causa 7, quest. 1, which saith, ' He that keepeth neither the unity of spirit, nor the peace of agree- ment, and separates himself from the bond of the church, and the college of priests, can neither have the power nor dignity of a bishop.' The power also of order (for example, to consecrate the eucharist, to ordain priests, &c.) they cannot lawfully exercise. " 7. In the judgment of the holy fathers, schism is a most grievous offence. St. ChrysostomeJ compares these schismatical dividers of Christ's mystical body to those who sacrilegiously pierced his natural body, saying, ' Nothing doth so much incense God, as that the church should be divided. Although we should do innumerable good works, if we divide the full ecclesiastical con- * Lib. i. cont. Parmen. t Supra, art. 2. ad 3. I Horn. 11. in ep. ad. Eph. Charity maintained by Catholics. 311 gregation, we shall be punished no less than they who tore his (natural) body. For that was done to the gain of the whole world, although not with that intention; but this hath no profit at all, but there ariseth from it most great harm. These things are spoken, not only to those who bear office, but also to those who are governed by them.' Behold how neither a moral good life, (which conceit deceiveth many) nor authority of magistrates, nor any necessity of obeying superiors, can excuse schism from being a most heinous offence. Optatus Milevitanus* calls schism ingens Jlagitium, * a huge crime.' And speaking to the donatists, saith, that 'schism is evil in the highest degree, even you are not able to deny.' No less pathetic is St. Augustine upon this subject. He reckons schismatics amongst pagans, heretics, and Jews, saying, ' religion is to be sought, neither in the confusion of pagans, nor in the filth of heretics, nor in the languishing of schismatics, nor in the age of the Jews, but amongst those alone who are called christian catholics, or othodox ; that is, lovers of unity in the whole body, and followers of truth.f Nay, he esteems them worse than infidels and idolaters, saying, ' Those whom the donatists heal from the wound of infidelity and idolatry, they hurt more grievously with the wound of schism. 'J Let here those men who are pleased untruly to call us idolaters reflect upon themselves, and consider that this holy father judgeth schismatics (as they are) to be worse than idolaters, which they absurdly call us. And this he proveth by the example of Corah, Dathan, and Abiram, and other rebellious schismatics of the Old Testament, who were con- veyed alive down into hell, and punished more openly than ido- laters. ' No doubt (saith this holy father) but that was com- mitted most wickedly, which was punished most severely. '§ In another place he yoketh schism with heresy, saying, upon the eighth beatitude: || ' Many heretics, under the name of christians, deceiving men's souls,' do suffer many such things ; but therefore they are excluded from this reward, because it is not only said, ' happy are they who suffer persecution,' but there is added, ' for justice.' But where there is not sound faith, there cannot be justice. Neither can schismatics promise to themselves any part of this reward, because likewise when there is no charity, there cannot be justice. And, in another place, yet more effectually he saith, TI' being out of the church, and divided from the heap of unity, and the bond of charity, thou shouldst be punished with eternal death, though thou shouldst be burned alive for the name of Christ.' And in another place he hath these words : ' If he hear not the church, let him be to thee as an heathen or publican; which is more grievous than if he were smitten with the sword, consumed with flames, or cast to wild beasts.** And elsewhere, 'Out of the catholic church (saith he) one may have faith, sacra- ments, orders, and, in sum, all things except salvation. 'ff With St. * Lib. i. cont. Parmen. t Lib. de vera Relig. cap. vi. t Cont. Donatist. 1. 1, cap. viii. § Ibid. 1. 2, cap. vi. || De serm. Dom. in monte, cap. v. IT Epist. 204. ** Cont. adv. Leg. et Prophet. 1. 2, cap. xvii. tt De gest cum. Emerit. 312 Charity maintained by Catholics. Augustine, his countryman and second self in sympathy of spirit, St. Fulgentius agreeth, saying,* ' believe this steadfastly without doubting, that every heretic or schismatic baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, if before the end of his life he be not reconciled to the catholic church, what alms soever he give, yea, though he should shed his blood for the name of Christ, he cannot obtain salvation.' Mark again, how no moral honesty of life, no good deeds, no martyrdom, can without repent- ance avail any schismatic for salvation. Let us also add that Dr. Potter saith : schism is no less damnable than heresy .f " 8. But O you holy, learned, zealous fathers and doctors of God's church out of these premises, of the grievousness of schism, and of the certain damnation which it bringeth (if unrepented) what con- clusion draw you for the instruction of christians? St. Augustine maketh this wholesome inference : ' there is no just necessity to divide unity. 'J St. Irenaeus concludeth : ' they cannot make any so important reformation, as the evil of the schism is pernicious.'^ St. Dennis, of Alexandria, saith : ' certainly all things should rather be endured, than to consent to the division of the church of God : those martyrs being no less glorious, that exposed themselves to hinder the dismembering of the church, than those that suffer, rather than they will offer sacrifice to idols.'|| Would to God, all those who divided themselves from that visible church of Christ, which was upon earth when Luther appeared, would rightly con- sider of these things ! And thus much of the second point. " 9. III. Point. Perpetual visibility of the church. We have just and necessary occasion eternally to bless Almighty God, who hath vouchsafed to make us members of the catholic Roman church, from which while men fall, they precipitate themselves into so vast absurdities, or rather sacrilegious blasphemies, as is implied in the doctrine of the total deficiency of the visible church, which yet is maintained by divers chief protestants, as may at large be seen in Brerely, and others ; out of whom I will here name Jewel, saying,Tf ' the truth was unknown at that time, and unheard of, when Martin Luther and Ulderick Zuinglius first came unto the knowledge and preaching of the gospel.' Perkins saith :** we say, that before the days of Luther, for the space of many hundred years, an universal apostacy overspread the whole face of the earth, and that our (protestant) church was not then visible to the world. Napper upon the Revelations teacheth,ff that from the year of Christ three hundred and sixteen, the anti- christian and papistical reign hath begun, reigning universally and without any debatable contradiction, one thousand two hundred sixty years' (that is, till Luther's time) : and that,JJ 'from the year of Christ three hundred and sixteen, God hath withdrawn his visible church from open assemblies, to the hearts of particular * De fide ad Pet. t Page 42. X Cont. Parm. I. 2, cap. lxii. § Cont. haeres. 1. 4, c. lxii. || Apud. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. 1. 6. IT Apol. part 4, c. iv. divis. 2, and in Defence, printed ann. 1571, p. 426. ** In his Exposition upon the Creed, p. 400. tt Propos. xxxvii. p. 68 tt Ibid. cap. xii. p. 161, col. 3. Charity maintained by Catholics. 313 godly men, &c. during the space of one thousand two hundred threescore years.' And that ' the pope and clergy have possessed the outward visible church of christians even one thousand two hundred threescore years.* And that the true church abode la- tent, and invisible.'! And Brocard upon the revelations,J pro- fesseth to join in opinion with Napper. Fulk affirmeth, < that in the time of Boniface the Third, which was the year six hun- dred and seven, the church was invisible and fled into the wilder- ness, there to remain a long season. '§ Luther saith Primo solus eram. ' At the first I was alone. '|| Jacob Hailbronnerus, one of the disputants for the protestant party in the conference at Ratisbon, affirmeth,^! that ' the true church was interrupted by apostacy from the true faith.' Calvin saith :** ' it is absurd in the very beginning to break one from another, after we have been forced to make a separation from the whole world.' It were over long to allege the words of Joannes Regius, Daniel Chamierus, Beza, Ochi- mus, Castalio, and others, to the same purpose. The reason which cast them upon this wicked doctrine, was a desperate voluntary ne- cessity : because they being resolved not to acknowledge the Ro- man church to be Christ's true church, and yet being convinced by all manner of evidence, that for divers ages before Luther there was no other congregation of christians, which could be the church of Christ: there was no remedy but to affirm, that upon earth Christ had no visible church : which they would never have avouched, if they had known how to avoid the aforesaid inconvenience (as they apprehended it) of submitting themselves to the Roman church. " 10. Against these exterminating spirits, Dr. Potter, and other more moderate protestants, profess, that Christ always had, and always will have, upon earth a visible church : otherwise (saith he) our Lord'sff promise of her stableJJ edification should be of no value. And, in another place, having affirmed that pro- testants have not left the church of Rome, but her corruptions, and acknowledging her still to be a member of Christ's body, he seeketh to clear himself and others from schism, because (saith he)§§ ' the property of schism is (witness the donatists and luci- ferians) to cut ofT, from the body of Christ and the hope of sal- vation, the church from which it separates. And if any zealots amongst us have proceeded to heavier censures, their zeal may be excused, but their charity and wisdom cannot be justified.' And elsewhere he acknowledged, that the Roman church hath those main and essential truths, which give her the name and essence of a church. mi "11. It being therefore granted by Dr. Potter, and the chiefest and best learned English protestants, that Christ's visible church cannot perish, it will be needless for me on this occasion to prove it. St. Augustine doubted not to say ,111 ' the prophets spake more obscurely of Christ than of the church : because, as I think, * Propos. in cap. xi. p. 145. t Ibid. p. 191. t Fol. 110, 123. § Answer to a counterfeit catholic, p. 16. || In praefat. operum suorum. IT In suo Acatholico, vol. a. 15, c. ix. p. 479. ** Epist. 141. tt Page 154. tt Matt. xvi. 18. ^ Page 76. |||| Page 83. IHTInPsal. xxx. Com. 2. 27 314 Charity maintained by Catholics. they did foresee in spirit that men were to make parties against the church, and that they were not to have so great strife con- cerning Christ : therefore that was more plainly foretold, and more openly prophesied, about which greater contentions were to rise, that it might turn to the condemnation of them who have seen it, and yet gone forth.' And in another place he saith :* ' how do ye confide to have received manifestly Christ himself from holy scriptures, if we have not also manifestly received the church from them?' And, indeed, to what congregation shall a man have recourse for the affairs of his soul, if upon earth there be no visible church of Christ? Besides, to imagine a company of men believing one thing in their heart, and with their mouth professing the contrary, (as they must be supposed to do : for, if they had pro- fessed what they believed, they would have become visible) is to dream of a damned crew of dissembling sycophants, but not to con- ceive a right notion of the church of Christ our Lord. And there- fore St. Augustine saith,f ' we cannot be saved, unless labouring also for the salvation of others, we profess with our mouths the same faith which we bear in our hearts.' And if any man hold it law- ful to dissemble, and deny matters of faith, we cannot be assured, but that they actually dissemble, and hide anabaptism, arianism, yea turcism, and even atheism, or any other false belief, under the outward profession of Calvinism. Do not protestants teach that preaching of the word, and administration of sacraments (which cannot but make a church visible) are inseparable notes of the true church? And therefore they must either grant a visible church, or none at all. No wonder, then, if St. Augustine account this heresy so gross, that he saith against those who in his time defended the like error : J ' but this church which hath been of all nations is no more, she hath perished : so say they that are not in her. O impudent speech !' And afterward : ' this voice so abominable, so detestable, so full of presumption and falsehood, which is sustained with no truth, enlightened with no wisdom, seasoned with no salt, vain, rash, heady, pernicious, the Holy Ghost foresaw,' &c. And ' peradventure some one may say, there are other sheep I know not where, with which I am not acquainted, yet God hath care of them. But he is too absurd in human sense, that can imagine such things.'^ And these men do not consider, that while they deny the perpe- tuity of a visible church, they destroy their own present church, according to the argument, which St. Augustine urged against the donatists in these words : || 'If the church were lost in Cyprian's (we may say in Gregory's) time, from whence did Donatus, (Luther) appear ? From what earth did he spring 1 From what sea is he come ? From what heaven did he drop ?' And in another place :T[ « how can they vaunt to have any church, if she hath ceased ever since those times V And all divines by * Epis. 48. § De ovib. c. i. t St. Aug. de Fide et Symbol, c. 7. || De Bapt. cont. Donat. X In Psal. 101. 1f Lib. iii. cont. Parm. Charity maintained by Catholics. defining schism to be a division from the true church, supposed that there must be a known church, from which it is possible for men to depart. But enough of this in these few words. " 12. IV. Point. Luther and all that follow him are schismatics. Let us now come to the fourth and chiefest point, which was, to examine whether Luther, Calvin, and the rest, did not depart from the external communion of Christ's visible church, and by that separation become guilty of schism. And that they are properly schismatics clearly followeth from the grounds which we have laid concerning the nature of schism, which consists in leaving the ex- ternal communion of the visible church of Christ our Lord: and it is clear, by evidence of fact, that Luther and his followers forsook the communion of the ancient church. " For they do not so much as pretend to join with any congrega- tion, which had a being before their time ; for they would needs conceive that no visible company was free from errors in doctrine, and corruption in practice ; and therefore, they opposed the doc- trine ; they withdrew their obedience from the prelates ; they left participation in sacraments ; they changed the liturgy of pub- lic service of whatsoever church then extant. And these things they pretended to do out of a persuasion, that they were bound (forsooth) in conscience so to do, unless they would participate with errors, corruptions, and superstitions. ' We dare not (saith Dr. Potter)* communicate with Rome, either in her public liturgy, which is manifestly polluted with gross superstition,' &c. « or in those corrupt and ungrounded opinions, which she hath added to the faith of catholics.' But now let Dr. Potter tell me with what visible church extant before Luther, he would have adventured to communicate in her public liturgy and doctrine, since he durst not communicate with Rome 1 He will not be able to assign any, even with any little colour of common sense. If then they departed from all visible communities professing Christ, it follow- eth that they also left the communion of the true visible church whichsoever it was, whether (hat of Rome, or any other ; of which point I do not for the present dispute. Yea, this the lu- therans do not only acknowledge, but prove and brag of. ' If (saith a learned lutheran)f there had been right believers which went before Luther in his office, there had then been no need of a lutheran reformation.' Another affirmed it to be ridiculous, to think that in the time before Luther, any had the purity of doctrine ; and that Luther should receive it from them, and not they from Luther. J Another speaketh roundly and saith : it is impudency to say, ' that many learned men in Germany, before Luther, did hold the doctrine of the gospel. '§ And I add: that far greater impudency were it to affirm, that Germany did not agree with the rest of Europe, and other christian catholic nations, and consequently, that it is the greatest impudency to deny, that * Page 68. t Georgius Milius in Aug. Confess, art. 7, de Eccles. p. 137. t Bened.Morgenstern, tract, de Eccles. p. 145. § Conrad. S. Husselb. in Theol. Calvin, lib. ii. fol. 130. 316 Charity maintained by Catholics. he departed from the communion of the visible catholic church, spread over the whole world. We have heard Calvin saying of protestants in general,* ' we were even forced to make a separa- tion from the whole world.' And Luther of himself in particular: \ in the beginning I was alone ;'f ergo, (say I, by your good leave) you were at least a schismatic, divided from the ancient church, and a member of no new church. For no sole man can consti- tute a church ; and though he could, yet such a church could not be that glorious company, of whose number, greatness, and am- plitude, so much hath been spoken, both in the Old Testament and in the New. " 13. Dr. Potter endeavours to avoid this evident argument by divers evasions ; but by the confutation thereof I will (with God's holy assistance) take occasion, even out of his own answers and grounds, to bring unanswerable reasons to convince them of schism. " 14. His chief answer is: that they have not left the church, but her corruptions. "15. I reply. This answer may be given either by those furious people, who teach that those abuses and corruptions in the church were so enormous, that they could not stand with the nature or being of a true church of Christ : or else by those other more calm protestants, who affirm that those errors did not destroy the being, but only deform the beauty of the church. Against both these sorts of men, I may fitly use that unanswerable dilemma, which St. Augustine brings against the donatists in these con- cluding words :J ' tell me whether the church at that time, when vou say she entertained those who were guilty of all crimes, by the contagion of those sinful persons, perished or perished not ? Answer, whether the church perished, or perished not. Make choice of what you think. If then she perished, what church brought forth Donatus 1 (we may say Luther.) But if she could not perish, because so many were incorporated into her, without baptism, (that is without a second baptism, or rebaptization, and, I may say, without Luther's reformation) answer me, I pray you, what madness did move the sect of Donatus to separate themselves from her upon the pretence to avoid the communion of bad men V I beseech the reader to ponder every one of St. Augustine's words, and to consider, whether any thing could have been spoken more directly against Luther and his followers, of what sort soever. "16. And now to answer more in particular; I say to those who teach that the visible church of Christ perished for many ages, that I can easily afford them the courtesy to free them from mere schism ; but all men touched with any spark of zeal, to vindicate the wisdom and goodness of our Saviour from blas- phemous injury, cannot choose but believe and proclaim them to be superlative arch-heretics. Nevertheless, if they will needs * Epis. 141. t In Prsefat. operum suorem. X Lib. cont. Epist. Guadent. cap. vii. Charity maintained by Catholics. 317 have the honour of singularity, and desire to be both formal heretics, and properly schismatics, I will tell them, that while they dream of an invisible church of men, which agreed with them in faith, they will upon due reflection find themselves to be schismatics from those corporeal angels, or invisible men, because they held external communion with the visible church of those *imes, the outward communion of which visible church these modern Hotspurs forsaking, were thereby divided from the out- ward communion of their hidden brethren, and so are separatists from the external communion of them, with whom they agree in faith ; which is schism in the most formal and proper signification thereof. Moreover, according to Dr. Potter, those boisterous crea- tures are properly schismatics. For, the reason why he thinks himself, and such as he is, to be cleared from schism, notwith- standing their division from the Roman church, is, (because ac- cording to his divinity) the property of* schism is, (witness the donatists and luciferians) to cut off from the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation, the church from which it separates ; but those protestants of whom we now speak — cut off from the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation, the church from which they separated themselves ; and they do it directly as the donatists (in whom you exemplify) did, by affirming that the true church had perished ; and therefore they cannot be cleared from schism, if you may be their judge. Consider, I pray you, how many prime protestants, both domestical and foreign, you have at one blow struck off from hope of salvation, and condemned to the lowest pit for the grievous sin of schism. And withal it imports you to consider, that you also involve yourself, and other mode- rate protestants, in the self-same crime and punishment, while you communicate with those, who, according to your own prin- ciples, are properly and formally schismatics. For if you held yourself obliged, under pain of damnation, to forsake the com- munion of the Roman church, by reason of their errors and cor- ruptions, which yet you confess were not fundamental ; shall it not be much more damnable for you, to live in communion and confraternity with those who defend an error of the failing of the church; which in the donatists you confessf to have been pro- perly heretical against the article of our creed — I believe the church ? And I desire the reader here to apply an authority of St. Cyprian, (Epist. 76,) which he shall find alleged in the next number. And this > may suffice for confutation of the aforesaid answer, as it might have relation to the rigid calvinists. " 17. For confutation of those protestants, who hold that the church of Christ had always a being, and cannot err in points fundamental, and yet teach that she may err in matters of less moment, wherein, if they forsake her, they would be accounted not to leave the church, but only her corruptions ; I must say that they change the state of our present question, not distinguishing between internal faith and external communion, nor between schism and heresy. This I demonstrate out of Dr. Potter himself, * Page 76. 2? # t Page 126. 318 Charity maintained by Catholics. who in express words teacheth, *that ' the promises which our Lord hath made unto his church for his assistance, are intended not to any particular persons or churches, but only to the church catholic. And they are to be extended not to every parcel, or particularity of truth, but only to points of faith or fundamental.' And afterwards, speaking of the universal church, he saith : f' it is comfort enough for the church, that the Lord in mercy will secure her from all capital dangers, and conserve her on earth against all enemies; but she may not hope to triumph over all sin and error till she be in heaven.' Out of which words I observe, that, according to Dr. Potter, the self-same church, which is the universal church, remaining the universal true church of Christ, may fall into errors and corruptions ; from whence it clearly followeth, that it is impossible to leave the external com- munion of the church so corrupted, and retain external commu- nion with the catholic church; since the church catholic, and the church so corrupted, is the self-same one church, or company of men. And the contrary imagination talks in a dream, as if the errors and infections of the catholic church were not inherent in her, but were separate from her, like to accidents without any subject, or rather, indeed, as if they were not accidents but hypostases of persons subsisting by themselves; for men cannot be said to live in or out of the communion of any dead creature, but with persons endued with life and reason ; and much less can men be said to live in the communion of accidents, as errors and corruptions are; and therefore it is an absurd thing to affirm, that protestants divided themselves from the corruptions of the church, but not from the church herself, seeing the corruptions of the church were inherent in the church. All this is made more clear, if we consider that when Luther appeared, there were not two distinct visible true catholic churches, holding contrary doc- trines, and divided in external communion ; one of the which two churches did triumph over all error and corruption in doctrine and practice ; but the other was stained with both. For to feign this diversity of two churches cannot stand with record of his- tories, which are silent of any such matter. It is against Dr. Potter's own grounds, that the church may err in points not fundamental, which were not true, if you will imagine a certain visible catholic church free from error even in points not fundamental. It con- tradicteth the words in which he said, the church may not hope to triumph over all error till she be in heaven. It evacuateth the brag of protestants, that Luther reformed the whole church; and, lastly, it maketh Luther a schismatic, for leaving the communion of all visible churches, seeing (upon this supposition) there was a visible church of Christ free from all corruption, which there- fore, could not be forsaken without just imputation of schism. We must therefore truly affirm, that since there was but one visible church of Christ, which was truly catholic, and yet was (according to protestants) stained with corruption ; when Luther left the external communion of the corrupted church, he could * Page 151. t Page 155. Charity maintained by Catholics. 319 not remain in the communion of the catholic church, no more than it is possible to keep company with Dr. Christopher Potter, and not to keep company with the provost of Queen's College, in Oxford, if Dr. Potter and the provost be one and the self-same man : for so one should, and not be, with him at the same time. This very argument, drawn from the unity of God's church, St. Cyprian urgeth to convince, that Novatianus was cut off from the church, in these words: # 'the church is one, which being one, cannot be both within and without. If she be with Novatianus, she was not with Cornelius ; but if she were with Cornelius, who succeeded Fabianus by lawful ordination, Novatianus is not in the church.' I purposely here speak only of external commu- nion with the catholic church. For in this point there is great difference between internal acts of our understanding and will and of external deeds. Our understanding and will are faculties (as philosophers speak) abstractive, and able to distinguish, and, as it were, to part things, though in themselves they be really conjoined. But real external deeds do take things in gross as they find them, not separating things which in reality are joined together. Thus one may consider and love a sinner as he is a man, friend, bene- factor, or the like ; and, at the same time, not consider him, nor love him as he is a sinner ; because these are acts of our under- standing and will, which may respect their objects under some one formality or consideration, without reference to other things contained in the self-same objects. But if one should strike, or kill a sinful man, he will not be excused by alleging that he killed him, not as a man, but as a sinner ; because the self-same person being a man, and the sinner, the external act of murder fell jointly upon the man and the sinner. And for the same reason one can- not avoid the company of a sinner, and at the same time be really present with that man who is a sinner. And this is our case; and in this our adversaries are egregiously, and many of them affectedly, mistaken : for one may in some points believe as the church be- lieveth, and disagree from her in other. One may love the truth which she holds, and detest her (pretended) corruptions. But it is impossible that a man should really separate himself from her external communion, as she is corrupted, and be really within the same external communion as she is sound ; because she is the self-same church, which is supposed to be sound in some things, and to err in others. Now, our question for the present doth concern only this point of external communion ; because schism, as it is distinguished from heresy, is committed when one divides himself from the external communion of that church with which he agrees in faith: whereas heresy doth necessarily imply a dif- ference in matter of faith and belief; and therefore to say that they left not the visible church, but her errors, can only excuse them from heresy (which shall be tried in the next chapter), but not from schism, as long as they are really divided from the ex- ternal communion of the self-same visible church ; which, not- withstanding those errors wherein they do in judgment dissent * Epist. 76. ad Mag. 320 Charity maintained by Catholics. from her, doth still remain the true catholic church of Christ : and therefore while they forsake the corrupted church, they for- sake the catholic church. Thus then it remaineth clear, that their chiefest answer changeth the very state of the question ; confoundeth internal acts of the understanding with the external deeds ; doth not distinguish between schism and heresy, and leaves this demonstrated against them, that they divided them- selves from the communion of the visible catholic church, because they conceived that she needed reformation. But whether this pretence of reformation will acquit them of schism, I refer to the impartial judges heretofore alleged;* as to St. Irenaeus, who plainly saith, * They cannot make any so important reforma- tion, as the evil of schism is pernicious.' To St. Dennis, of Alexandria, saying, ' Certainly all things should be endured rather than to consent to the division of the church of God; those martyrs being no less glorious that expose themselves to hinder the dismembering of the church, than those that suffer, rather than they will offer sacrifice to idols.' To St. Augustine, who tells us, that ' not to hear the church is a more grievous thing than if he were stricken with the sword, consumed with flames, exposed to wild beasts.' And to conclude all in few words, he giveth this general prescription ; ' there is no just necessity to divide unity ;' and Dr. Potter may remember his own words :f ' there neither was nor can be any just cause to depart from the church of Christ, no more than from Christ himself.' But I have shewed that Luther, and the rest departed from the church of Christ (if Christ had any church upon earth) : therefore there could be no just cause (of reformation, or what else soever) to do as they did ; and therefore they must be contented to be held for schismatics. " 18. Moreover, I demand' whether those corruptions which moved them to forsake the communion of the visible church, were in manners or doctrine ? Corruption in manners yields no sufficient cause to leave the church, otherwise men must go not only out of the church, but out of the world, as the apostle saith. J Our blessed Saviour foretold that there would be in the church tares with choice corn, and sinners with just men. If then pro- testants wax zealous with the servants to pluck up the weeds, let them first hearken to the wisdom of the Master, ' Let both grow up.' And they ought to imitate them who, as St. Augustine saith, ' tolerate for the good of unity, that which they detest for the good of equity. '§ And to whom the more frequent and foul such scandals are, by so much the more is the merit of their perse- verance in the communion of the church, and the martyrdom of their patience, as the same saint calls it. If they were offended with the life of some ecclesiastical persons, must they therefore deny obedience to their pastors, and finally break with God's church 1 The Pastor of pastors teacheth us another lesson. || ' Upon the chair of Moses have sitten the scribes and pharisees. All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe ye, * Numb. 8. ' t Page 75. t 1 Cor. v. 10. § Ep. 162. || Matt, xxiii. 2, 3. Charity maintained by Catholics. 321 and do ye ; but according to their works do ye not.' Must people except against laws, and revolt from magistrates, because some are negligent or corrupt in the execution of the same laws and performance of their office ? If they intended reformation of manners, they used a strange means for the achieving of such an end, by denying the necessity of confession, laughing at austerity of penance, condemning the vows of chastity, poverty, obedience, breaking fasts, &c. And no less unfit were the men than the means. I love not recrimination, but it is well known to how great crimes Luther, Calvin, Zuinglius, Beza, and others of the prime reformers were notoriously obnoxious ; as might be easily demonstrated by only the transcribing of what others have deli- vered upon that subject ; whereby it would appear that they were very far from being any such apostolical men as God is wont to use in so great a work. And whereas they were wont, espe- cially in the beginning of their revolt, maliciously to exaggerate the faults of some clergymen, Erasmus said well, (Ep. ad fratres inferioris Germaniai) ' Let the riot, lust, ambition, avarice of priests, and whatsoever other crimes be gathered together, heresy alone doth exceed all this filthy lake of vices.' Besides, nothing at all was omitted by the sacred council of Trent which might tend to reformation of manners. And, finally, the vices of others are not hurtful to any but such as imitate and consent to them; according to the saying of St. Augustine :* ' we conserve inno- cency, not by knowing the ill deeds of men, but by not yielding consent to such as we know, and by not judging rashly of such faults as we know not.' If you answer, that not corruption in manners, but the approbation of them, doth yield sufficient cause to leave the church ; I reply with St. Augustine, that the church doth (as the pretended reformers ought to have done) tolerate or bear with scandals and corruptions, but neither doth nor can ap- prove them. ' The church (saith he)f being placed betwixt much chaff and cockle, doth bear with many things: but doth not ap- prove, nor dissemble, nor act those things which are against faith and good life.' But because to approve corruption in manners as lawful, were an error against faith, it belongs to corruption in doctrine, which was the second part of my demand. " 19. Now then that corruptions in doctrine (I still speak upon the untrue supposition of our adversaries) could not afford any sufficient cause or colourable necessity to depart from that visible church, which was extant when Luther rose, I demonstrate out of Dr. Potter's own confession ; that the catholic church neither hath, nor can, err in points fundamental, as we shewed out of his own express words, which he also of set purpose delivereth in divers other places, and all they are obliged to maintain the same, who teach that Christ had always a visible church upon earth ; because any one fundamental error overthrows the being of a true church. Now (as schoolmen speak) it is implicatio in ter- minis (a contradiction so plain, that one word destroyeth the other, as if one should say, a living dead man) to affirm that the church * De unit. Eccles. c. ii. * Ep. 116. 322 Charity maintained by Catholics. doth not err in points necessary to salvation, and damnably ; and yet that it is damnable to remain in her communion, because she teacheth errors which are confessed not to be damnable. For if the error be not damnable, nor against any fundamental article of faith, the belief thereof cannot be damnable. But Dr. Potter teacheth that the catholic church cannot, and that the Roman church hath not, erred against any fundamental article of faith: therefore it cannot be damnable to remain in her communion; and so the pretended corruptions in her doctrines could not induce any obligation to depart from her communion ; nor could excuse them from schism, who, upon pretence of necessity, in point of conscience, forsook her. And Dr. Potter will never be able to salve a manifest contradiction in these his words: *'To depart from the church of Rome in some doctrines and practices there might be necessary cause, though she wanted nothing necessary to salvation.' For if, notwithstanding these doctrines and prac- tices, she wanted nothing necessary to salvation ; how could it be necessary to salvation to forsake her 1 And therefore we must still conclude, that to forsake her was properly an act of schism. " 20. From the self-same ground of the infallibility of the church in all fundamental points, I argue after this manner — the visible church cannot be forsaken without damnation, upon pre- tence that it is damnable to remain in her communion, by reason of corruption in doctrine ; as long as, for the truth of her faith and belief, she performeth the duty which she oweth to God and her neighbour ; as long as she performeth what our Saviour exacts at her hands; as long as she doth as much as lies in her power to do. But * (even according to Dr. Potter's assertion) the church performeth all these things as long as she erreth not in points fundamental, although she were supposed to err in other points not fundamental : therefore the communion of the visible church cannot be forsaken without damnation, upon pretence that it is damnable to remain in her communion, by reason of corruption in doctrine. The major or first proposition of itself is evident. The minor or second proposition doth necessarily follow out of Dr. Potter's own doctrine above rehearsed, that the ' promises of our Lord made to his church for his assistance, are to be extended only to points of faith or fundamental ;'f (let me note here by the way, that by his [or] he seems to exclude from faith all points which are not fundamental, and so we may deny innumerable texts of scripture :) thatj ' it is comfort enough for the church that the Lord in mercy will secure her from all capital dangers, &c. but she may not hope to triumph over all sin and error, till she be in heaven.' For it is evident that the church (forasmuch as concerns the truth of her doctrines and belief) owes no more duty to God and her neighbour ; neither doth our Saviour exact more at her hands, nor is it in her power to do more than God doth assist her to do, which assistance is promised only for points fundamental; and consequently, as long as she teacheth no fun- damental error, her communion cannot, without damnation, be * Page 75. t Page 151. t Page 155. Charity maintained by Catholics. 323 forsaken. And we may fitly apply against Dr. Potter, a concio- natory declamation which he makes against us, where he saith, * ' May the church of after-ages make the narrow way to heaven narrower than our Saviour left it V &c. since he himself obligeth men, under pain of damnation, to forsake the church, by reason of errors; against which our Saviour thought it needless to pro- mise his assistance, and for which he neither denieth his grace in this life, nor glory in the next. Will Dr. Potter oblige the church to do more than she may even hope for, or to perform on earth that which is proper to heaven alone? "21. And as from your own doctrine concerning the infalli- bility of the church in fundamental points, we have proved that it was a grievous sin to forsake her : so do we take a strong argu- ment from the fallibility of any who dare pretend to reform the church, which any man in his wits will believe to be endued with at least as much infallibility as private men can challenge ; and Dr. Potter expressly affirmeth, that Christ's promises of his as- sistance are not intended to any particular persons or churches :f and therefore, to leave the church by reason of errors, was at the best hand but to flit from one erring company to another, with- out any new hope of triumphing over errors, and without neces- sity, or utility, to forsake that communion, of which St. Augustine saith,J ' There is no just necessity to divide unity.' Which will appear to be much more evident, if we consider that though the church hath maintained some false doctrines, yet to leave her com- munion to remedy the old, were but to add a new increase of errors, arising from the innumerable disagreements of sectaries, which must needs bring with it a mighty mass of falsehoods, because the truth is but one, and indivisible. And this reason is yet stronger, if we still remember, that, even according to Dr. Potter, the visible church hath a blessing not to err in points fundamental, in which any private reformer may fail : and therefore, they could not pre- tend any necessity to forsake that church, out of whose communion they were exposed to danger of falling into many more, and even into damnable errors. Remember, I pray you, what yourself affirms (page 69,) where, speaking of our church and yours, you say : ' All the difference is from the weeds which remain there, and here are taken away; yet neither here perfectly nor every where alike.' Behold a fair confession of corruption still remaining in your church, which you can only excuse by saying they are not fundamental, as likewise those in the Roman church are confessed to be not fundamental. What man of judgment will be a protes- tant, since that church is confessedly a corrupt one 1 "22. I still proceed to impugn you expressly upon your own grounds. — You say, that 'it is comfort enough for the church, that the Lord in mercy will secure her from all capital dangers ; but she may not hope to triumph over all sin and error till she be in heaven.' Now if it be comfort enough to be secured from all capital dangers, which can arise only from error in fundamental * Page 221. t Page 151. I Ep. con. Parmen. lib. 2, 2, cap. xi. x2 324 Charity maintained by Catholics. points, why were not your first reformers content with enough, but would needs dismember the church, out of a pernicious greediness of more than enough 1 for this enough, which according to you is attained by not erring in points fundamental, was enjoyed before Luther's reformation, unless you will now against yourself affirm, that long before Luther there was no church free from error in fun- damental points : moreover, if (as you say) no church may hope to triumph over all error till she be in heaven ;-you must either grant that errors not fundamental cannot yield sufficient cause to forsake the church, or else you must affirm that all communities may and ought to be forsaken, and so there will be no end of schisms: or rather, indeed, can there be no such thing as schism, because, ac- cording to you, all communities are subject to errors not fundamen- tal ; for which, if they may be lawfully forsaken, it followeth clearly that it is not schism to forsake them. Lastly, since it is not lawful to leave the communion of the church for abuses in life and manners, because such miseries cannot be avoided in this world of temptation : and since, according to your assertion, no church may hope to triumph over all sin and error ; you must grant, that as she ought not to be left by reason of sin, so neither by reason of errors not fundamental ; because both sin and error are (according to you) impossible to be avoided till she be in heaven. " 23. Furthermore, I ask, whether it be the quantity or number, or quality and greatness, of doctrinal errors that may yield suffi- cient cause to relinquish the church's communion ? I prove that neither. Not the quality, which is supposed to be beneath the degree of points fundamental, or necessary to salvation. Nor the quantity, or number, for the foundation is strong enough to sup- port all such unnecessary additions, as you term them. And if they once weighed so heavy as to overthrow the foundation, the)'' should grow to fundamental errors, into which yourself teach the church cannot fall. ' Hay and stubble (say you)* and such un- profitable stuff, laid on the roof, destroys not the house, while the main pillars are standing on the foundation.' And tell us, I pray you, the precise number of errors which cannot be tolerated ? I know you cannot do it : and therefore being uncertain, whether or no you have cause to leave the church, you are certainly obliged not to forsake her. Our blessed Saviour hath declared his will, that we forgive a private offender seventy-seven times; that is, without limitation of quantity of time, or quality of trespasses; and why then dare you allege his command, that you must not pardon his church for errors acknowledged to be not fundamental ? What excuse can you feign to yourselves, who, for points not necessary to salvation, have been occasions, causes, and authors of so many mischiefs, as could not but unavoidably accompany so huge a breach in kingdoms, in commonwealths, in private persons, in public magistrates, in body, in soul, in goods, in life, in church, in the state, by schisms, by rebellions, by war, by famine, by plague, by bloodshed, by all sorts of imaginable calamities upon the whole * Page 155. Charity maintained by Catholics. 325 face of the earth, wherein, as in a map of desolation, the heaviness of your crime appears, under which the world doth pant. " 24. To say for your excuse, that you left not the church, hut her errors, doth not extenuate, but aggravate, your sin. For by this device you sow seeds of endless schisms, and put into the mouth of all separatists a ready answer how to avoid the note of schism from your protestant church of England, or from any other church whatsoever. They will, I say, answer, as you do prompt, that your church may be forsaken, if she fall into errors, though they be not fundamental: and, further, that no church must hope to be free from such errors; which two grounds being once laid, it will not be hard to infer the consequence that she may be forsaken. " 25. From some other words of Dr. Potter I likewise prove, that for errors not fundamental, the church ought not to be for- saken. ' There neither was (saith he)* nor can be any just cause to depart from the church of Christ, no more than from Christ him- self. To depart from a particular church, and, namely, from the church of Rome, in some doctrines and practices, there might be just and necessary cause, though the church of Rome wanted no- thing necessary to salvation.' Mark his doctrine, that there can be no 'just cause to depart from the church of Christ:' and yet he teacheth, that the church of Christ may err in points not funda- mental ; therefore (say I) we cannot forsake the Roman church for points not fundamental ; for then we might also forsake the church of Christ, which yourself deny : and I pray you consider, whether you do not plainly contradict yourself, while, in the words above recited, you say there can be no just cause to forsake the catholic church; and yet that there may be necessary cause to de- part from the church of Rome ; since you grant that the church of Christ may err in points not fundamental ; and that the Roman church hath erred only in such points; as by and by we shall see more in particular. And thus much be said to disprove their chief- est answer, that they left not the church, but her corruptions. " 26. Another evasion Dr. Potter bringeth, to avoid the im- putation of schism, and it is because they still acknowledge the church of Rome to be a ' member of the body of Christ, and not cut off from the hope of salvation. And this (saith he) clears us from the imputation of schism, whose property it is to cut off from the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation, the church from which it separates.'! " 27. This is an answer which, perhaps, you may get some one to approve, if first you can put him out of his wits. For what prodigious doctrines are these? Those protestants who believe that the church erred in points necessary to salvation, and for that cause left her, cannot be excused from damnable schism : but others, who believed that she had no damnable errors, did very well, yea, were obliged to forsake her : and (which is more miraculous, or rather monstrous) they did well to forsake her * Page 75. + Page 76. 23 326 Charity maintained by Catholics. formally and precisely — because they judged that she retained all means necessary to salvation. I say, because they so judged. For the very reason for which he acquitteth himself, and cotidemneth those others as schismatics, is, because he holdeth that the church, which both of them forsook, is not cut off from the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation ; whereas those other zealots deny her to be a member of Christ's body, or capable of salvation, wherein alone they disagree from Dr. Potter: for in the effect of separation they agree, only they do it upon a different motive or reason. Were it not a strange excuse, if a man would think to cloak his rebellion, by alleging that he held the person against whom he rebelleth to be his lawful sovereign ? And yet Dr. Potter thinks himself free from schism, because he forsook the church of Rome ; but yet so, as that he still held her to be the true church, and to have all ne- cessary means to salvation. But I will no further urge this most solemn foppery, and do much more willingly put all catholics in mind what an unspeakable comfort it is that our adversaries are forced to confess, that they cannot clear themselves from schism, otherwise than by acknowledging that they do not, nor cannot, cut off from the hope of salvation our church. Which is as much as if they should in plain terms say, they must be damned, unless we may be saved. Moreover, this evasion doth indeed condemn your zealous brethren of heresy, for denying the church's perpetuity, but doth not clear yourself from schism, which consists in being divided from that true church, with which a man agreeth in all points of faith, as you must profess yourself to agree with the church of Rome in all fundamental articles. For otherwise you should cut her off from the hope of salvation ; and so condemn yourself of schism. And, lastly, even according to this your own definition of schism, you cannot clear yourself from that crime, unless you be content to acknowledge a manifest contradiction in your own assertions. For if you do not cut us off from the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation, how come you to say, in another place, that you judge a reconciliation with us to be* damnable? That to depart from the church of Rome, there might be just and neces- saryf cause 1 That they that have the understanding and means to discover their error, and neglect to use them, wej dare not flatter them (say you) with so easy a censure, of hope of salvation ? — If then it be (as you say) a property of schism, to cut off, from the hope of salvation, the church from which it separates, how will you clear yourself from schism, who dare not flatter us with so easy a censure ? and who affirm, that a reconciliation with us is damnable ? But the truth is, there is no constancy in your as- sertions, by reason of difficulties which press you on all sides. For you are loath to affirm clearly, that we may be saved, lest such a grant might be occasion (as in all reason it ought to be) of the conversion of protestants to the Roman church : and, on the other side, if you affirm that our church erred in points funda- mental, or necessary to salvation, you know not how, nor where, * Page 20. t Page 75. t Page 79. Charity maintained by Catholics. 327 nor among what company of men, to find a perpetual visible church of Christ before Luther : and therefore your best shift is to say, and unsay, as your occasions command. I do not examine your assertion, that it is the property of schism, to cut off from the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation, the church from which it separates : wherein you are mightily mistaken, as appears by your own example of the donatists, who were most formal and proper heretics, and not schismatics, as schism is a vice distinct from heresy. Besides, although the donatists, and luciferians (whom you also allege) had been mere schismatics, yet it were against all good logic, from a particular to infer a general rule, to determine what is the property of schism. " 28. A third device I find in Dr. Potter to clear his brethren from schism. * There is (saith he)* great difference between a schism from them, and a reformation of ourselves.' "29. This, I confess, is a quaint subtilty, by which all schism and sin may be as well excused. For what devil incarnate could merely pretend a separation, and not rather some other motive, of virtue, truth, profit, or pleasure 1 But now since their pre- tended reformation consisted, as they gave out, in forsaking the corruptions of the church ; the reformation of themselves, and their division from us, falls out to be one and the self-same thing. Nay, we see, that although they infinitely disagree in the parti- culars of their reformation, yet they symbolize and consent in the general point of forsaking our pretended corruptions : an evident sign that the thing upon which their thoughts first pitched, was not any particular model, or idea of religion, but a settled reso- lution to forsake the church of Rome. Wherefore this metaphy- sical speculation, that they intended only to reform themselves, cannot possibly excuse them from schism, unless first they be able to prove that they were obliged to depart from us. Yet foras- much as concerns the fact itself; it is clear, that Luther's revolt did not proceed from any zeal of reformation. The motives which put him upon so wretched and unfortunate a work, were covetousness, ambition, lust, pride, envy, and grudging that the promulgation of indulgences was not committed to himself, or such as he desired. He himself taketh God to witness, that he fell into these troubles casually,f and against his will, not upon any intention of reformation, not so much as dreaming or sus- pecting any change which might happen. J And he began to preach (against indulgences) when he knew not what the matter meant.§ ' For (saith he) I scarcely understood then what the name of indulgences meant.'|| Insomuch as afterwards Luther did* much mislike of his own undertaken course, oftentime (saith he)Tf wishing that I had never begun that business. And Fox saith,** ' It is apparent that Luther promised Cardinal Caje- tan to keep silence, provided also his adversaries would do the * Page 75. t Casu, non voluntate, in has turbas incidi, Deum ipsum testor. X Act. et Mon. p. 404. § Sleid. 5. lib. xvi. fol. 232. || Lutli. in colloq. mensal. H Ibid. ** Act. et Mon. p. 404. 328 Charity maintained by Catholics. like.' Mr. Cowper reporteth further,* that ' Luther by his letter submitted himself to the pope, so that he might not be compelled to recant,' with much more, which may be seen in Brerely.f But this is sufficient to show, that Luther was far enough from intending any reformation. And if he judged a reformation to be necessary, what a huge wickedness was it in him to promise silence, if his adversa- ries would do the like ! Or to submit ' himself to the pope, so that he might not be compelled to recant !' Or if the Reformation were not indeed intended by him, nor judged to be necessary, how can he be excused from damnable schism ? And this is the true manner of Luther's revolt, taken from his own acknowledgments, and the words of the more ancient protestants themselves, whereby Dr. Potter's faltering and mincing the matter is clearly discovered and confuted. Upon what motives our country was divided from the Roman church by King Henry the Eighth, and how the schism was continued by Queen Elizabeth, I have no heart to rip up. The world knoweth it was not upon any zeal of reformation. " 30. But you will prove your former evasion by a couple of similitudes ;J 'If a monastery should reform itself, and should reduce into practice ancient good discipline, when others would not ; in this case could it in reason be charged with schism from others, or with apostacy from its rule and order ? Or '( as in a society of men, universally infected with some disease, they that shall free themselves from the common disease, could not be there- fore said to separate from the society ; so neither can the reformed churches be truly accused for making a schism from the church, seeing all they did was to reform themselves.' "31. I was very glad to find you in a monastery, but sorry when I perceived that you were inventing ways how to forsake your vocation, and to maintain the lawfulness of schism from the church, and apostacy from a religious order. Yet, before you make your final resolution, hear a word of advice. Put case, that a monastery did confessedly observe their substantial vows, and all principal statutes or constitutions of the order, though with some neglect of lesser monastical observances; and that a reformation were undertaken, not by authority of lawful superiors, but by some one, or very few in comparison of the rest : and those few known to be led, not by any spirit of re- formation, but by some other sinister intention; and that the statutes of the house were even by those busy fellows confessed to have been, time out of mind, understood and practised as now they were : and further, that the pretended reformers acknow- ledge that themselves, as soon as they were gone out of their monastery, must not hope to be free from those, or the like errors and corruptions, for which they left their brethren ; and (which is more) that they might fall into more enormous crimes than they did, or could do, in their monastery, which we suppose to be secured from all substantial corruptions, for the avoiding of which they have an infallible assistance. Put (I say) together * Cowp. in his Chronicle. t Tract. 2, c. ii. Sect. 11 subd. 2. t Page 81, 82. Charity maintained by Catholics. 329 all these my and's, and then come with your if's, ' If a monastery shall reform, itself,' &c. and tell rne if you could excuse such re- formers from schism, sedition, reheilion, apostacy, &c. ? What would you say of such reformers in your college? or tumultuous per- sons in a kingdom ? Remember now your own tenets, and then re- flect how fit a similitude you have picked out, to prove yourself a schismatic. You teach that the church may err in points not fundamental, but that for all fundamental points she is secured from error. You teach that no particular person, or church, hath any promise of assistance in points fundamental : you, and the whole world can witness, that when Luther began, he being but only one, opposed himself to all, as well subjects as superiors ; and that even when he himself confessed that he had no intention of re- formation : you cannot be ignorant but that many chief learned protestants are forced to confess the antiquity of our doctrine and practice, and do in several and many controversies, acknowledge that the ancient fathers stood on our side : consider, I say, these points, and see whether your similitude do not condemn your pro- genitors of schism from God's visible church, yea, and of apostacy also from their religious orders, if they were vowed regulars, as Luther and divers of them were. " 32. From the monastery you are fled into a hospital of per- sons universally affected with some disease, where you find to be true what I supposed, that after your departure from your bre- thren you might fall into greater inconveniences, and more in- fectious diseases than those for which you left them. But you are also upon the point to abandon these miserable needy persons, in whose behalf, for charity's sake, let me set before you these considerations : If the disease neither were, nor could be, mortal, because in that company of men God had placed a tree of life ; if going thence, the sick man might, by curious tasting the tree of knowledge, eat poison under pretence of bettering his health : if he could not hope thereby to avoid other diseases like those for which he had quitted the company of the first infected men : if, by his departure, innumerable mischiefs were to ensue; could such a man, without senselessness, be excused by saying, that — he thought to free himself from the common disease, but not, forsooth, to separate from the society ? Now yourself compare the church to a man deformed with* superfluous fingers and toes, but yet who hath not lost any vital part : you acknowledge that, out of her society no man is secured from damnable error, and the world can bear witness what unspeakable mischiefs and calamities ensued Luther's revolt from the church. Pronounce then concern- ing them the same sentence which even now I have showed them to deserve, who, in the manner aforesaid, should separate from per- sons universally infected with some disease. " 33. But, alas ! to what pass hath heresy brought men, who term themselves christians, and yet blush not to compare the beloved spouse of our Lord, the one dove, the purchase of our Saviour's most precious blood, the holy catholic church, I mean *Page 156. 28* 330 Charity maintained by Catholics. that visible church of Christ which Luther found spread over the whole world, to a monastery so disordered that it must be forsaken ; to the giant in Gath, much deformed with superfluous fingers and toes; to a society of men universally infected with some disease? And yet all these comparisions, and much worse, are neither inju- rious nor undeserved, if once it be granted, or can be proved, that the visible church of Christ may err in any one point of faith, al- though not fundamental. " 34. Before I part from these similitudes, one thing I must ob- serve against the evasion of Dr. Potter, that they left not the church, but her corruptions. For as those reformers of the mo- nastery, or those other, who left the company of men universally infected with some disease, would deny themselves to be schisma- tics, or any way blameworthy, but could not deny but that they left the said communities: so Luther and the rest cannot so much as pretend not to have left the visible church, which according to them was infected with many diseases, but can only pretend that they did not sin in leaving her. And you speak very strangely when you say, ' in a society of men universally infected with some disease, that they should free themselves from the common dis- ease, could not be therefore said to separate from the society :' for, if they do not separate themselves from the society of the infected persons, how do they free themselves and depart from the common disease ? Do they at the same time remain in the company, and yet depart from those infected creatures? We must then say, that they separate themselves from the persons, though it be by occa- sion of the disease ? Or if you say they free their own persons from the common disease, yet so, that they remain still in the company infected, subject to the superiors and governors thereof, eating and drinking, and keeping public assemblies with them, you cannot but know Luther and your reformers, the first pre- tended free persons from the supposed common infection of the Roman church, did not so ; for they endeavoured to force the so- ciety whereof they were parts, to be healed and reformed as they were; and if it refused, they did, when they had forces, drive them away, even their superiors, both spiritual and temporal, as is noto- rious. Or, if they had not power to expel that supposed infected community or church of that place, they departed from them cor- porally, whom mentally they had forsaken before. So that you cannot deny, but Luther forsook the external communion and com- pany of the catholic church, for which as yourself confess,* there neither was nor can be any just cause, no more than to depart from Christ himself. We do therefore infer, that Luther and the rest, who forsook that visible church, which they found upon earth, were truly and properly schismatics. " 35. Moreover, it is evident that there was a division between Luther and that church which was visible when he arose ; but that church cannot be said to have divided herself from him, be- fore whose time she was, and in comparison of whom she was a whole, and he but a part ; therefore we must say, that he divided * Page 75. Charity maintained by Catholics. 331 himself and went out of her, which is to be a schismatic, or heretic, or both. By this argument, Optatus Milevitanus proveth, that not Caecilianus, but Parmenianus was a schismatic, saying — • For Caecilianus went not* out from Majorinus, thy grandfather ; but Majorinus from Caecilianus : neither did Cascilianus depart from the chair of Peter, or Cyprian ; but Majorinus, in whose chair thou sittest, which had no beginning before Majorinus. Since it mani- festly appeareth, that these things were acted in this manner, it is clear, that you are heirs both of the deliverers up (of the holy bible to be burned) and also of schismatics.' The whole argument of this holy father makes directly both against Luther, and all those who continue the division which he began : and proves, that going out convinceth those who go out to be schismatics ; but not those from whom they depart : that to forsake the chair of Peter is schism ; yea, that it is schism to erect a chair which had no origin, or as it were predecessor, before itself: that to continue in a divi- sion begun by others, is to be heirs of schismatics ; and, lastly, that to depart from the communion of a particular church (as that of St. Cyprian was) is sufficient to make a man incur the guilt of schism, and consequently, that although protestants, who deny the pope to be supreme head of the church, do think by that heresy to clear Luther from schism, in disobeying the pope ; yet that will not serve to free him from schism, as it importeth a division from the obedience or communion of the particular bishop, diocese, church, and country wherein he lived. " 36. But it is not the heresy of protestants, or any other sec- taries, that can deprive St. Peter, and his successors, of the authority which Christ our Lord conferred upon them over his whole militant church ; which is a point confessed by learned pro- testants to be of great antiquity, and for which the judgment of divers most ancient holy fathers is reproved by them, as may be seen at large in Brerely,f exactly citing the places of such chief protestants. And we must say with St. Cyprian,J ' Heresies have sprung, and schism been bred from no other cause than for that the priest of God is not obeyed; nor one priest and judge is con- sidered to be for the time in the church of God :' which words do plainly condemn Luther, whether he will understand them as spoken of the universal, or of every particular church ; for he withdrew himself both from the obedience of the pope, and of all particular bishops and churches. And no less clear is the said Optatus Milevitanus, saying : § 'Thou canst not deny but that thou knowest, that, in the city of Rome, there was first an epis- copal chair placed for Peter, wherein Peter, the head of all the apostles, sat ; wherefore, also, he was called Cephas ; in which one chair, unity was to be kept by all, lest the other apostles might attribute to themselves each one his particular chair; and that he should be a schismatic and a sinner, who against that one single chair should erect another.' Many other authorities of fa- *Lib. i. cont. Parmen. X Ep. 55. t Tract. 1, Sect. 3, subd. 10. § Lib. ii. cont. Parmen. 332 Charity maintained by Catholics. thers might be alleged to this purpose, which I omit ; my intention being not to handle particular controversies. " 37. Now the arguments which hitherto I have brought, prove that Luther and his followers were schismatics, without examining (forasmuch as belongs to this point) whether or no the church can err in any one thing great or small, because it is universally true, that there can be no just cause to forsake the communion of the visible church of Christ, according to St. Augustine, say- ing:* 'It is not possible that any men have just cause to separate their communion, from the communion of the whole world, and call themselves the church of Christ, as if they had separated themselves from the communion of all nations upon just cause.' But since, indeed, the church cannot err in any one point of doc- trine, nor can prove any corruption in manners, they cannot with any colour avoid the just imputation of eminent schism, according to the verdict of the same holy father in these words :f ' The most manifest sacrilege of schism is eminent, when there was no cause of separation.' " 38. Lastly, I prove that protestants cannot avoid the note of schism, at least by reason of their mutual separation from one another ; for most certain it is, that there is very great difference, for the outward face of a church, and profession of different faith, between the lutherans, the rigid calvinists, and the protestants of England. So that if Luther were in the right, those other protestants who invented doctrines far different from his, and di- vided themselves from him, must be reputed schismatics: and the like argument may proportionably be applied to their further di- visions, and subdivisions: which reason 1 yet urge more strongly out of Dr. Potter,J who affirms, that to him and to such as are convicted in conscience of the errors of the Roman church, a re- conciliation is impossible, and damnable. And yet he teacheth, that their difference from the Roman church is not in fundamen- tal points. Now, since amongst protestants there is such diver- sity of belief, that one denieth what the other affirmeth, they must be convicted in conscience that one part is in error, (at least not fundamental) and if Dr. Potter will speak consequently, that a reconciliation between them is impossible and damnable: and what greater division, or schism, can there be, than when one part must judge a reconciliation with the other to be impossible and damnable 1 "39. Out of all which premises this conclusion follows: that Luther and his followers were schismatics ; from the universal visible church; from the pope, Christ's vicar on earth and suc- cessor to St. Peter; from the particular diocese in which they re- ceived baptism ; from the country or nation to which they be- longed : from the bishop under whom they lived ; many of them from the religious order in which they were professed ; from one another ; and lastly, from a man's self (as much as is possible) because the self-same protestant to-day is convicted in conscience, that his yesterday's opinion was an error (as Dr. Potter knows a * Ep. 48. t De Bapt. lib. 5, c. i. I Page 20. Charity maintained by Catholics. 333 man in the world, who from a puritan was turned to a moderate protestant), with whom therefore a reconciliation, according to Dr. Potter's grounds, is both impossible and damnable. " 40. It seems Dr. Potter's last refuge to excuse himself and his brethren from schism, is because they proceeded according to their conscience, dictating an obligation, under damnation, to for- sake the errors maintained by the church of Rome. His words are :* ' Although we confess the church of Rome to be (in some sense) a true church, and her errors to some men not damnable; yet for us who are convinced in conscience, that she errs in many things, a necessity lies upon us, even under pain of damnation, to forsake her in these errors.' "41. I answer: it is very strange, that you judge us extremely uncharitable, in saying protestants cannot be saved; while your- self avouch the same of all learned catholics, whom ignorance cannot excuse. If this your pretence of conscience may serve, what schismatic in the church, what popular seditious brain in a kingdom, may not allege the dictamen of conscience, to free themselves from schism or sedition ? No man wishes them to do any thing against their conscience ; but we say, that they may and ought to rectify and depose such a conscience, which is easy for them to do, even according to your own affirmation, that we catholics want no means necessary to salvation. Easy to do? Nay, not to do so, to any man in his right wits must seem impos- sible. For how can these two apprehensions stand together : in the Roman church, I enjoy all means necessary to salvation, and yet I cannot hope to be saved in that church ? Or, who can conjoin in one brain (not cracked) these assertions? After due examina- tion I adjudge the Roman errors not to be in themselves funda- mental, or damnable ; and yet, I judge that, according to true reason, it is damnable to hold them: I say, according to true reason. For, if you grant your conscience to be erroneous, in judging that you cannot be saved in the Roman church by reason of her errors, there is no other remedy, but that you must rectify your erring conscience by your other judgment, that her errors are not fundamental nor damnable. And this is no more charity than you daily afford to such other protestants as you term bre- thren, whom you cannot deny to be in some errors, (unless you will hold, that of contradictory propositions both may be true) and yet you do not judge it damnable to live in their communion, because you hold their errors not to be fundamental. You ought to know that, according to the doctrine of all divines, there is great difference between a speculative persuasion, and a practical dictamen of conscience ; and, therefore, although they had in speculation conceived the visible church to err in some doctrines, of themselves not damnable ; yet with that speculative judgment they might, and ought, to have entertained this practical dicta- ' men, that for points not substantial to faith, they neither were bound, nor lawfully could break the bond of charity, by breaking unity in God's church. You say thatf ' hay and stubble, and * Page 81. t Page 145. 334 Charity maintained by Catholics. such unprofitable stuff (as are corruptions in points not funda- mental) laid on the roof, destroys not the house, whilst the main pillars are standing on the foundation.' And you would think him a madman who to be rid of such stuff, would set his house on fire, that so he might walk in the light, as you teach that Luther was obliged to forsake the house of God, for an unneces- sary light, not without a combustion formidable to the whole christian world, rather than bear with some errors which did not destroy the foundation of faith. And as for others, who entered in at the breach first made by Luther, they might, and ought, to have guided their consciences by that most reasonable rule of Vincentius Lyrinensis, delivered in these words :* ' Indeed it is a matter of great moment, and both most profitable to be learned, and necessary to be remembered, and which we ought again and again to illustrate and inculcate with weighty heaps of exam- ples, that almost all catholics may know, that they ought to re- ceive the doctors with the church, and not forsake the faith of the church with the doctors :' and much less should they forsake the faith of the church to follow Luther, Calvin, and such other novelists. Moreover, though your first reformers had conceived their own opinions to be true, yet they might, and ought, to have doubted whether they were certain : because yourself affirm, that infallibility was not promised to any particular persons or churches. And since, in cases of uncertainties, we are not to leave our superior, nor can cast off his obedience, or publicly oppose his decrees ; your reformers might easily have found a safe way to satisfy their zealous conscience, without a public breach ; especially if, with this their uncertainty, we call to mind the peaceable pos- session and prescription, which, by the confession of your own brethren, the church and pope of Rome did for many ages enjoy. I wish you would examine the works of your brethren, by the words yourself sets down to free St. Cyprian from schism : every syllable of which words convinceth Luther and his co-partners to be guilty of that crime, and showeth in what manner they might, with great ease and quietness, have rectified their con- sciences about the pretended errors of the church. ' St. Cyprian (say you) f was a peaceable and modest man, dissented from others in his judgment, but without any breach of charity, con- demned no man (much less any church) for the contrary opinion. He believed his own opinion to be true, but believed not that it was necessary, and therefore did not proceed rashly and peremp- torily to censure others, but left them to their liberty.' Did your reformers imitate this manner of proceeding? Did they censure no man; much less any church? St. Cyprian believed his own opinion to be true, but believed not that it was necessary, and therefore did not proceed rashly and peremptorily to censure others. You believe the points, wherein Luther differs from us, not to be fundamental, or necessary ; and why do you not thence infer the like therefore, he should not have proceeded to censure others? In a word, since their disagreement from us concerned * Adv. hares, c. xxvii. t Page 124. Charity maintained by Catholics. 335 only points which were not fundamental, they should have believed that they might have been deceived, as well as the whole visible church, which you say may err in such points; and therefore their doctrines, being not certainly true, and certainly not necessary, they could not give such sufficient cause to depart from the communion of the church. " 42. In other places you write so much, as may serve us to prove, that Luther and his followers ought to have deposed and rectified their consciences : as, for example, when you say,* ' when the church hath declared herself in any matter of opinion, or of rites ; her declaration obliges all her children to peace and ex- ternal obedience : nor is it fit, or lawful, for any private man to oppose his judgment to the public (as Luther and his fellows did). He may offer his opinion to be considered of, so he do it with evidence, or great probability of scripture or reason, and very modestly, still containing himself within the dutiful respect which he oweth : but if he will factiously advance his own conceits (what ! do you mean that they are his own conceits, and yet grounded upon evidence of scripture ?) and despise the church so far as to cut off her communion ; he may be justly branded and condemned for a schismatic, yea, a heretic also, in some degree, and in foro exteriori, though his opinion were true, and much more if it be false.' Could any man, even for a fee, have spoken more home to condemn your predecessors of schism, or heresy ? Could they have stronger motives to oppose the doctrine of the church, and leave her communion, than evidence of scripture 1 and ) r et, according to your own words, they should have answered, and rectified their conscience, by your doctrine, that though their opinion were true, and grounded upon evidence of scripture or reason ; yet it was not lawful for any private man to oppose his judgment to the public, which obligeth all christians to peace and external obedience : and if they cast off the communion of the church for maintaining their own conceits, they may be branded for schismatics and heretics, in some degree, and in foro exteriori, that is, all other christians ought so esteem of them, (and why then are we accounted uncharitable for judging so of you?) and they also are obliged to behave themselves in the face of all christian churches, as if indeed they were not reformers, but schismatics and heretics, or as pagans and publicans. I thank you for your ingenuous confession : in recompense whereof, I will do a deed of charity, in putting you in mind, into what labyrinths you are brought, by teaching that the church may err in some points of faith, and yet that it is not lawful for any man to oppose his judgment, or leave her communion, though he have evidence of scripture against her. Will you have such a man dissemble against his conscience, or externally deny a truth, known to be contained in holy scripture ? How much more coherently do catholics proceed, who believe the universal infalli- bility of the church, and from thence are assured, that there can be no evidence of scripture, or reason, against her definitions, nor * Page 105. 336 Charity maintained by Catholics. any just cause to forsake her communion. Mr. Hooker, esteemed by many protestants an incomparable man, yields as much as we have alleged out of you. ' The will of God is (saith he)* to have them to do whatsoever the sentence of judicial and final decision shall determine, yea, though it seem, in their private opinion, to swerve utterly from that which is right.' Doth not this man tell Luther, what the will of God was, which he transgressing must of necessity be guilty of schism 1 And must not Mr. Hooker either acknowledge the universal infallibility of the church, or else drive men into the perplexities and labyrinths of dissembling against their conscience, whereof now I speak ? Not unlike to this, is your doctrine delivered elsewhere :,' Before the Nicene council (say you)f many good catholic bishops were of the same opinion with the donatists, that the baptism of heretics was in- effectual : and with the novatians, that the church ought not to absolve some grievous sinners. These errors therefore (if they had gone no further) were not in themselves heretical, especially in the proper, and most heavy, or bitter sense of that word ; neither was it in the church's intention (nor in her power) to make them such by her declaration. Her intention was to silence all disputes, and to settle peace and unity in her government, to which all wise and peaceable men submitted, whatsoever their opinion was. And those factious people, for their unreasonable and uncharitable opposition, were very justly branded for schis- matics. For us, the mistake will never prove that we oppose any declaration of the catholic church, &c. and therefore he doth unjustly charge us either with schism or heresy.' These words manifestly condemn your reformers, who opposed the visible church in many of her declarations, doctrines, and commands imposed upon them, for silencing all disputes, and settling peace and unity in her government ; and therefore they, still remaining obstinately disobedient, are justly charged with schism and heresy. And it is to be observed, that you grant the donatists to have been very justly branded for schismatics, although their opposi- tion against the church did concern (as you hold) a point not fundamental to the faith, and which, according to St. Augustine, cannot be proved out of scripture alone ; and therefore, either doth evidently convince, that the church is universally infallible, even in points not fundamental ; or else that it is schism to oppose her declaration in those very things wherein she may err ; and consequently, that Luther and his fellows were schismatics, by opposing the visible church for points not fundamental, though it were (untruly) supposed that she erred in such points. But, by the way, how come you on the sudden to hold the determination of a general council (of Nice) to be the declaration of the catholic church, seeing you teach, that general councils may err even fun- damentally ? And do you now say, with us, that to oppose the de- claration of the church is sufficient that one may be branded with heresy, which is a point so impugned by you ? " 43. It is therefore most evident, that no pretended scruple * In his pref. to his Books of Ecclesiastical Polity. Sect. 6, p. 28. t Page 131. Charity maintained by Catholics. 337 of conscience could excuse Luther ; which he might, and ought, to have rectified by means enough, if pride, ambition, obstinacy, &c. had given him leave. I grant he was touched with scruple of conscience, but it was because he had forsaken the visible church of Christ ; and I beseech all protestants, for the love they bear to that sacred ransom of their souls, the blood of our blessed Saviour, attentively to ponder, and impartially to apply to their own con- science, what this man spoke concerning the feelings and remorse of his. 'How often (saith he)* did my trembling heart beat within me, and, reprehending me, object against me that most strong argument, Art thou only wise? Do so many worlds err? Were so many ages ignorant ? What if thou errest, and drawest so many into hell to be damned eternally with thee?' And in another place he saith :f 'Dost thou, who art but one, and of no account, take upon thee so great matters? What, if thou, being but one, offendest ? If God permit such, so many, and all to err ; why may he not permit thee to err? To this belong those argu- ments, the church, the church, the fathers, the fathers, the coun- cils, the customs, the multitudes, and greatness of wise men : whom do not these mountains of arguments, these clouds, yea these seas of examples overthrow ?' And these thoughts wrought so deep in his soul, that he often wished and desired that he hadj never begun this business: wishing yet further that his writings were burned, and §buried in eternal oblivion. Behold what re- morse Luther felt, and how he wanted no strength of malice to cross his own conscience: and therefore it was no scruple, or conceived obligation of conscience, but some other motives which induced him to oppose the church. And if yet you doubt of his courage to encounter, and strength to master, all reluctations of conscience, hear an example or two for that purpose. Of com- munion, under both kinds, thus he saith :|| ' If the council should in any way decree this, least of all would we then use both kinds ; yea, rather, in despite of the council and that decree, we would use either but one kind only, or neither, and in no case both.' Was not Luther persuaded in conscience, that to use neither kind was against our Saviour's command ? Is this only to offer his opinion to be considered of, as you said all men ought to do? And, that you may be sure that he spoke from his heart, and if occasion had been offered, would have been as good as his word ; mark what he saith of the elevation of the sacrament: 'I did know the elevation of the sacrament to be idolatrical ; yet never- theless I did retain it in the church at Wirtemberg, to the end that I might vex the devil Carolostadius.'H Was not this a con- science large and capacious enough, that could swallow idolatry ? Why would he not tolerate idolatry in the church of Rome (as these men are wont to blaspheme) if he could retain it in his own * Tom. ii. Germ. Jen. fol. 9. et torn. ii. Witt, of anno 1562. de abrog. Mis. privat. fol. 244. t Tom. v. Annot. breviss. X Colloq. mensal. 161. 158. § Praefat. in torn. German. Jen. || De formula missae. IT In parva Confess. Vid. Tan. torn. i. disput. 1, q. 2, dub. 4, n. 108. Y 29 338 Charity maintained by Catholics. church at Wirtemberg? If Carolostadius, Luther's offspring, was the devil, who but himself must be his dam? Is Almighty God wont to send such furies to preach the gospel ? and yet, further (which makes most directly to the point in hand) Luther, in his book of abrogating the private mass, exhorts the Augustine friars of Wirtemberg, who first abrogated the mass, that, even against their conscience accusing them, they should persist in what they had begun, acknowledging that in some things he himself had done the like. And Joannes Mathesius, a lutheran preacher, saith :* ' Antonius Musa, the parish priest of Rocklitz, recounted to me, that on a time he heartily moaned himself to the doctor (he means Luther) that he himself could not believe what he preached to others : and that Dr. Luther answered — Praise and thanks be to God, that this happens also to others, for I had thought it happened only to me.' Are not these conscionable and fit re- formers? And can they be excused from schism, under pretence that they held themselves obliged to forsake the Roman church ? If then it be damnable to proceed against one's conscience, what will become of Luther, who against his conscience persisted in his division from the Roman church? "44. Some are said to flatter themselves with another pernicious conceit, that they, forsooth, are not guilty of sin ; because they were not the first authors, but only are the continuers, of the schism which was already begun. "45. But it is hard to believe, that any man of judgment, can think this excuse will subsist, when he shall come to give up his final account. For according to this reason no schism will be damnable, but only to the beginners: whereas, contrarily, the longer it continues the worse it grows to be, and at length de- generates to heresy ; as wine by long keeping grows to be vinegar, but not by continuance returns again to its former nature of wine. Thus St. Augustine saith,f that ' heresy is schism inveterate.' And in another place :J ' We object to you only the crime of schism ; which you have also made to become heresy, by evil per- severing therein.' And St. Jerome saith,§ ' Though schism in the beginning may be in some sort understood to be different from heresy ; yet there is no schism which doth not feign to itself some heresy, that it may seem to have departed from the church upon just cause.' And so indeed it falleth out : for men may begin upon passion, but afterward, by instinct of corrupt nature, seeking to maintain their schism as lawful, they fall into some heresy, without which their separation could not be justified with any colour ; as in our present case, the very affirming that it is lawful to continue a schism unlawfully begun, is an error against the main principle of Christianity, that it is not lawful for any christian to live out of God's church, within which alone salvation can be had ; or, that it is not damnable to disobey her decrees, according to the words of our Saviour :|| ' If he shall not hear the * In orat. Germ. 12, de Luth. t Lib. ii. cont. Cres. c. vii. % Ep. 164. § Upon these words ad Tit. 3. Haereticum hominem, &c. II Matt, xviii. Charity maintained by Catholics. 339 church, let him be to thee as a pagan, or publican.' And, 'he that despiseth you, despiseth me.'* We heard above Optatus Milevitanus saying to Parmenianus, that both he, and all those other, who continued in the schism begun by Majorinus, did inherit their forefathers' schism; and yet Parmenianus was the third bishop after Majorinus in his see, and did not begin, but only continue the schism. ' For (saith this holy father)f Caeci- lianus went not out of Majorinus, thy grandfather, but Majorinus from Caecilianus : neither did Cascilianus depart from the chair of Peter or Cyprian, but Majorinus, in whose chair thou sittest, which before Majorinus (Luther) had no beginning.' Seeing it is evident that these things passed in this manner (that, for ex- ample, Luther departed from the church, and not the church from Luther), it is clear that you be heirs both of the givers up of the bible to be burned, and of schismatics. And the regal power, or example, of Henry the eighth could not excuse his subjects from schism, according to what we have heard out of St. Chrysostome, sayingj — 'Nothing doth so much provoke the wrath of Almighty God, as that the church should be divided. Although we should do innumerable good deeds, if we divide the full ecclesiastical congregation, we shall be punished no less than they who did rend his (natural) body : for that was done to the gain of the whole world, though not with that intention ; but this hath no good in it at all, but the greatest hurt riseth from it. These things are spoken not only to those who bear office, but to such also as are governed by them.' Behold, therefore, how liable both subjects and superiors are to the sin of schism, if they break the unity of God's church. The words of St. Paul can in no occasion be verified more than in this of which we speak. ' They who do such things are worthy of death : and not only they that do them, but they also that consent with the doers.'§ In these things, which are indifferent of their own nature, custom may be occasion, that some act, not well begun, may in time come to be lawfully continued. But no length of time, no quality of persons, no circumstance of necessity, can legitimate actions which are of their own nature unlawful: and therefore division from Christ's mystical body being of the number of those actions, which divines teach to be intrinsece malas, evil of their own nature and essence, no difference of persons or time can ever make it lawful. Dr. Potter saith : ' There neither was, nor can be, any cause to depart from the church of Christ, no more than from Christ himself.' And who dares say, that it is not damnable to continue a separation from Christ ? Prescription cannot in con- science run, when the first beginner, and his successors, are con- scious that the thing to be prescribed, for example, goods or lands, were unjustly possessed at the first. Christians are not like strays, that, after a certain time of wandering from their right home, fall from their owner to the lord of the soil; but as long as they retain the indelible character of baptism, and live upon earth, they are obliged to acknowledge subjection to God's * Luke x. 16. t Lib. i. cont. Parm. X Horn. 11, in ep. ad Eph. § Rom. i. 32. y2 340 Charity maintained by Catholics. church. Human laws may come to nothing by discontinuance of time ; but the law of God, commanding us to conserve unity in his church, doth still remain. The continued disobedience of children cannot deprive parents of their paternal right, nor can the grandchild be undutiful to his grandfather, because his father was unnatural to his own parent. The longer God's church is disobeyed ; the profession of her doctrine denied ; her sacraments neglected ; her liturgy condemned ; her unity violated ; the more grievous the fault grows to be : as the longer a man withholds a due debt, or retains his neighbour's goods, the greater injustice he commits. Constancy in evil doth not extenuate, but aggravate, the same, which by extension of time receiveth increase of strength, and addition of greater malice. If these men's conceits were true, the church might come to be wholly divided by wicked schisms, and yet after some space of time none could be accused of schism, nor be obliged to return to the visible church of Christ : and so there should remain no one true visible church. Let therefore these men, who pretend to honour, reverence, and believe the doctrine and practice of the visible church, and to condemn their forefathers who forsook her, and say, they would not have done so, if they had lived in the days of their fathers, and yet fol- low their example in remaining divided from her communion ; con- sider how truly these words of our Saviour fall upon them : ' Woe be to you, because you build the prophets' sepulchres, and garnish the monuments of just men, and say : if we had been in our fathers' days, we had not been their fellows in the blood of the prophets. Therefore, you are a testimony to your ownselves, that you are the sons of them that killed the prophets, and till up the measure of your fathers.'* " 46. And thus having demonstrated that Luther, his associates, and all that continue in the schism by them begun, are guilty of schism, by departing from the visible true church of Christ; it remaineth that we examine what in particular was that visible true church, from which they departed, that so they may know to what church in particular they ought to return : and then we shall have performed what was proposed to be handled in the fifth point. " 47. V. Point. Luther and the rest departed from the Roman church. — That the Roman church (I speak not for the present of the particular diocese of Rome, but of all visible churches dispersed throughout the whole world, agreeing in faith with the chair of Peter, whether that see were supposed to be in the city of Rome, or any other place :) that, I say, the church of Rome, in this sense, was the visible catholic church, out of which Luther departed, is proved by your own confession, who assign for notes of the church, the true preaching of God's word, and due administration of sacraments; both which for the substance you cannot deny to the Roman church, since you confess, that she wanted nothing funda- mental, or necessary to salvation, and for that very cause you hink to clear yourself from schism, whose property, as you say, * Matt, xxiii. 29, &c. Charity maintained by Catholics. 341 ' is to cut off from the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation, the church from which it separates.'* Now that Luther and his fellows were born and baptized in the Roman church, and that she was the church, out of which they departed, is notoriously known : and therefore you cannot cut her off from the body of Christ, and hope of salvation, unless you will acknowledge your- self to deserve the just imputation of schism. Neither can you deny her to be truly catholic by reason of (pretended) corruptions, not fundamental. For yourself avouch, and endeavour to prove, that the true catholic church may err in such points. Moreover, I hope you will not so much as go about to prove, that when Luther arose there was any other visible church disagreeing from the Roman, and agreeing with protestants in their particular doctrines ; and you cannot deny, but that England in those days agreed with Rome, and other nations with England ; and there- fore, either Christ had no visible church upon earth, or else you must grant that it was the church of Rome. A truth so manifest, that those protestants, who affirm the Roman church to have lost the nature and being of a true church, do by inevitable conse- quence grant, that for divers ages Christ had no visible church on earth : from which error, because Dr. Potter disclaimeth, he must of necessity maintain, that the Roman church is free from fundamental and damnable error, and that she is not cut off from the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation. ' And if (saith he)f any zealots among us have proceeded to heavier censures, their zeal may be excused, but their charity and wisdom cannot be justified.' "48. And, to touch particulars, which perhaps some may ob- ject, no man is ignorant that the Grecians, even the schismatical Grecians, do in most points agree with the Roman catholics, and disagree from the protestant reformation. They teach transub- stantiation (which point Dr. PotterJ also confesseth) ; invocation of saints and angels ; veneration of relics and images ; auricular confession ; enjoined satisfaction ; confirmation with chrism ; ex- treme unction ; all the seven sacraments, prayer, sacrifice, alms for the dead ; monachism, that priests may not marry after their ordination. In which points that the Grecians agree with the Roman church appeareth by a treatise published by the protestant divines of Wirtemberg, entitled, ' Acta Theologorum Wirtem- bergensium, et Jeremiae Patriarchal Constantinop. de Augustana Confessione, &c. Wirtembergae, anno 1584,' by the protestant§ Crispinus, and by Sir Edwin Sands in the relation of the state of religion of the west. And I wonder with what colour of truth (to say no worse) Dr. Potter could affirm that the doctrines de- bated between the protestants|| and Rome are only the partial and particular fancies of the Roman church ; unless happily the opinion of transubstantiation may be excepted, wherein the latter Grecians seem to agree with the Romanists. Beside the protestant authors, already cited, Petrus Arcudius, a Grecian * Page 76. t Ibid. X Page 225. § De statu Eecles. p. 253. II Page 225. 29* 342 Charity maintained by Catholics. and a learned catholic writer, had published a large volume, the argument and title whereof is : 'Of the agreement of the Roman and Greek church in the Seven Sacraments.' As for the heresy of the Grecians, that the Holy Ghost proceeds not from the Son, I suppose that protestants disavow them in that error, as we do. " 49. Dr. Potter will not (I think) so much wrong his reputa- tion, as to tell us, that the Waldenses, Wickliffe, Huss, or the like, were protestants, because in some things they disagreed from catholics ; for he well knows that the example of such men is subject to these manifest exceptions. They were not of all ages, nor in all countries, but confined to certain places, and were in- terrupted in time against the notion and nature of the word catholic. They had no ecclesiastical hierarchy, nor succession of bishops, priests and pastors. They differed among themselves, and from protestants also. They agreed in divers things with us against protestants. They held doctrines manifestly absurd, and damnable heresies. "50. The Waldenses began not before the year 1218; so far were they from universality of all ages. For their doctrine, first, they denied all judgments which extended to the drawing of blood, and the sabbath, for which cause they were called in- sabbatists. Secondly, they taught that laymen and women might consecrate the sacrament, and preach (no doubt but by this means to make their master Waldo, a mere layman, capable of such functions). Thirdly, that clergymen ought to have no posses- sions or properties. Fourthly, that there should be no division of parishes, nor churches ; for a walled church they reputed as a barn. Fifthly, that men ought not to take an oath in any case. Sixthly, that those persons sinned mortally, who accompanied without hope of issue. Seventhly, they held all things done above the girdle, by kissing, touching, words, compression of the breasts, &c. to be done in charity, and not against continency. Eighthly, that neither priest, nor civil magistrate, being guilty of mortal sin, did enjoy their dignity, or were to be obeyed. Ninthly, they condemned princes and judges. Tenthly, they affirmed singing in the church to be a hellish clamour. Eleventhly, they taught that men might dissemble their religion, and so accordingly they went to catholic churches, dissembling their faith, and made offertories, confessions, and communions, after a dissembling manner. ' Waldo was so unlearned (saith Fox*) he gave rewards to certain learned men to translate the holy scripture for him, and being thus holpen did (as the same Fox there reporteth) confer the form of religion in his time to the infallible word of God.' A goodly example, for such as must needs have the scripture in English, to be read by every simple body, with such fruit of godly doctrine as we have seen in the aforesaid gross heresies of Waldo. The followers of Waldo were like their master, so unlearned, that ' some of them (saith Fox J) expounded the words, Joan. 1, Sui eum non receperunt ; * Act. Mon. p. 628. + Ibid. Charity maintained by Catholics. 343 swine did not receive him.' And, to conclude, they agreed in divers things with catholics against protestants, as may be seen in Brerely.* "51. Neither can it be pretended that these are slanders forged by catholics. For, besides that the same things are testified by protestant writers, as Illyricus, Cowper, and others, our authors cannot be suspected of partiality in disfavour of protestants, unless you would say, perhaps, that they were prophets, and some hundred years ago, did both foresee that there were to be protes- tants in the world, and that such protestants were to be like the Waldenses. Besides, from whence, but from our historians, are protestants come to know, that there were any such men as the Waldenses? and that in some points they agreed with the pro- testants, and disagreed from them in others ? And upon what ground can they believe our author, for that part wherein the Waldenses were like to protestants, and imagine they lied in the rest ? " 52. Neither could Wickliffe continue a church never inter- rupted from the time of the Waldenses, after whom he lived more than 150 years ; to wit, in the year 1371. He agreed with catholics about the worshipping of relics and images ; and about the intercession of our blessed lady, the ever-immaculate mother of God : he went so far as to say,f ' It seems to me impossible, that we should be rewarded without the intercession of the Virgin Mary.' He held seven sacraments, purgatory, and other points. And against both catholics and protestants he maintained sundry damnable doctrines, as divers protestant writers relate. As, first, if a bishop, or priest, be in deadly sin, he doth not indeed either give orders, consecrate or baptize. Secondly, that ecclesi- astical ministers ought not to have any temporal possessions, nor property in any thing, but should beg ; and yet he himself brake into heresy, because he had been deprived by the Archbishop of Canterbury of a certain benefice, as all schisms and heresies begin upon passion, which they seek to cover with the cloak of refor- mation. Thirdly, he condemned lawful oaths, like the anabaptists. Fourthly, he taught that all things came to pass by absolute neces- sity. Fifthly, he defended human merits as the wicked pelagians did ; namely, as proceeding from natural forces, without the neces- sary help of God's grace. Sixthly, that no man is a civil magistrate while he is in mortal sin, and that people may at their pleasure correct princes when they offend ; by which doctrine he proves him- self both a heretic and a traitor. " 53. As for Huss, his chiefest doctrines were, that lay-people must receive in both kinds ; and that civil lords, prelates, and bishops, lose all right and authority while they are in mortal sin. For other things he wholly agreed with catholics against protes- tants ; and the Bohemians, his followers, being demanded in what points they disagreed from the church of Rome, propounded only these: — The necessity of communion under both kinds — that all * Tract. 2, cap. ii. sect. sub. 3. t In serm. de assump. Marise. 344 Charity maintained by Catholics. civil dominion was forbidden to the clergy — that preaching of the word was free for all men, and in all places — that open crimes were in no wise to be permitted, for avoiding of greater evil. By these particulars, it is apparent that Huss agreed with protestants against us, in one only point of both kinds, which, according to Luther, is a thing indifferent; because he teacheth, that 'Christ in this matter commanded nothing as necessary.'* And he saith further : ' If thou come to a place where one only kind is adminis- tered, use one kind only as others do.'f Melancthon, likewise, holds it a thing indifferent ;J and the same is the opinion of some other protestants. All which considered, it is clear, that protestants can- not challenge the Waldenses, Wickliffe, and Huss, for members of their church ; and although they could, yet that would advantage them little towards the finding out a perpetual visible church of theirs, for the reasons above specified.^ " 54. If Dr. Potter would go so far off, as to fetch the Muscovites, Armenians, Georgians, ^Ethiopians, or Abyssines into his church, they would prove over dear bought; for they either hold the dam- nable heresy of Eutyches, or use circumcision, or agree with the Greek or Roman church. And it is most certain that they have nothing to do with the doctrine of protestants. " 55. It being, therefore, granted that Christ had a visible church in all ages, and that there can be none assigned but the church of Rome ; it follows, that she is the true catholic church, and that those pretended corruptions for which they forsook her, are indeed divine truths, delivered by the visible catholic church of Christ. And that Luther and his followers departed from her, and consequently are guilty of schism, by dividing themselves from the communion of the Roman church. Which is clearly convinced out of Dr. Potter himself, although the Roman church were but a particular church. For he saith,|| ' whosoever professes himself to forsake the communion of any one member of the body of Christ, must confess himself consequently to forsake the whole.' Since, therefore, in the same place, he expressly acknowledges the church of Rome to be a member of the body of Christ, and that it is clear they have forsaken her ; it evidently follows, that they have forsaken the whole, and therefore are most properly schismatics. " 56. And, lastly, since the crime of schism is so grievous, that, according to the doctrine of holy fathers rehearsed above, no mul- titude of good works, no moral honesty of life, no cruel death en- dured even for the profession of some article of faith, can excuse any one who is guilty of that sin from damnation ; I leave it to be considered, whether it be not true charity to speak as we believe, and to believe as all antiquity hath taught us, that whosoever either begins, or continues a division from the Roman church, which we have proved to be Christ's true militant church on earth, cannot without effectual repentance hope to be a member of his triumphant church in heaven. And so I conclude with * In Epist. ad Bohemos. X In cent. Epist. Theol. p. 225. + De utraque specie Sacram. § Num. 49. II Page 76. Protestants not guilty of Schism. 345 these words of blessed St. Augustine ;* < it is common to all heretics to be unable to see that thing which in the world is most manifest, and placed in the light of all nations ; out of whose unity what- soever they work, though they seem to do it with great care and diligence, can no more avail them against the wrath of God, than the spider's web against the extremity of cold.' But now it is high time that we treat of the other sort of division from the church, which is by heresy." THE ANSWER TO THE FIFTH CHAPTER. The separation of protestants from the Roman church, being upon just and necessary causes, is not any way guilty of schism. 1. Ad. §. 1 — 7. In the seven first sections of this chapter there be many things said, and many things supposed by you which are un- true, and deserve a censure. As, 2. First, — That schism could not be a division from the church, or that a division from the church could not happen, unless there * always had been, and should be, a visible church. — Which asser- tion is a manifest falsehood ; for although there never had been any church visible or invisible before this age, nor should be ever after, yet this could not hinder but that a schism might now be, and be a division from the present visible church. As though in France there never had been until now a lawful monarch, nor after him ever should be ; yet this hinders not, but that now there might be a rebellion, and that rebellion might be an insurrection against sovereign authority. 3. That it is a point to be granted by all christians, that in all ages there hath been a visible congregation of faithful people. — Which proposition, howsoever you understand it, is not absolutely certain. But if you mean by faithful, (as it is plain you do) free from all error in faith, then you know all protestants with one consent affirm it to be false ; and therefore without proof to take it for granted, is to beg the question. 4. That supposing Luther, and they which did first separate from the Roman church, were guilty of schism, it is certainly con- sequent, that all who persist in this division, must be so like- wise. — Which is not so certain as you pretend. For they, which alter, without necessary cause, the present government of any state, civil or ecclesiastical, do commit a great fault ; whereof, notwithstanding, they may be innocent who continue this alter- ation, and to the utmost of their power oppose a change, though to the former state, when continuance of time hath once settled the present. Thus have I known some of your own church condemn the Low Countrymen, who first revolted from the king of Spain, of the sin of rebellion ; yet absolve them from it, who now being of your religion there, are yet faithful maintainers of the common liberty against the pretences of the king of Spain. *Cont. Parm. lib. ii. c. iii. 346 Separation of Protestants from the 5. Fourthly — That all those which a christian is to esteem neigh- bours do concur to make one company, which is the church. — Which is false ; for a christian is to esteem those his neighbours, who are not members of the true church. 6. Fifthly — That all the members of the visible church are by charity united into one mystical body. — Which is manifestly untrue ; for many of them have no charity. 7. Sixthly — That the catholic church signifies one company of faithful people. — Which is repugnant to your own grounds : for you require, not true faith, but only the profession of it, to make men members of the visible church. 8. Seventhly — That every heretic is a schismatic. — Which you must acknowledge false in those, who though they deny, or doubt of some point professed by your church, and so are heretics; yet con- tinue still in the communion of the church. 9. Eighthly — That all the members of the catholic church, must of necessity be united in external communion. — Which, though it were much to be desired it were so, yet certainly cannot be perpetually true. For a man unjustly excommunicated, is not in the church's communion, yet he is still a member of the church. And divers times it hath happened, as in the case of Chrysostome and Epiphanius, that particular men and particular churches have upon an overvalued difference, either renounced communion mu- tually, or one of them separated from the other, and yet both have continued members of the catholic church. These things are in those seven sections, either said or supposed by you untruly, without all show, or pretence of proof. The rest is impertinent common place, wherein protestants, and the cause in hand, are absolutely unconcerned. And therefore I pass to the eighth section. 10. Ad. §. 8. Wherein you obtrude upon us a double fallacy; one, in supposing and taking for granted that whatsoever is affirmed by three fathers, must be true : whereas yourselves make no scruple of condemning many things of falsehood, which yet are maintained by more than thrice three fathers. Another, in pre- tending their words to be spoken absolutely, which by them are limited and restrained to some particular cases. For whereas you say St. Augustine, c. 62, 1. 2, cont. Parm. infers out of the former premises, that there is no necessity to divide unity : to let pass your want of diligence, in quoting the sixty-second chapter of that book, which hath but twenty-three in it; to pass by also, that these words, which are indeed in the eleventh chapter, are not inferred out of any such premises as you pretend : this, I say, is evident, that he says not absolutely, that there never is or can be any necessity to divide unity, (which only were for your purpose,) but only in a such a special case as he there sets down ; that is, " when good men tolerate bad men, which can do them no spiri- tual hurt, to the intent they may not be separated from those who are spiritually good ; then (saith he) there is no necessity to divide unity." Which very words do clearly give us to under- stand, that it may fall out (as it doth in our case,) that we cannot Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 347 keep unity with bad men without spiritual hurt ; i. e. without partaking with them in their impieties, and that then there is a necessity to divide unity from them ; I mean to break off conjunc- tion with them in their impieties. Which, that it was St. Augus- tine's mind, it is most evident out of the twenty-first chapter of the same book ; whereto Parmenian demanding, " How can a man remain pure, being joined with those that are corrupted?" he an- swers, " Very true, this is not possible, if he be joined with them ; that is if he commit any evil with them, or favour them which do commit it. But if he do neither of these he is not joined with them." And, presently after, " These two things retained, will keep such men pure and uncorrupted ; that is, neither doing ill, nor approving it." And therefore, seeing you impose upon all men of your communion a necessity of doing, or at least approving many things unlawful, certainly there lies upon us an unavoidable neces- sity of dividing unity, either with you or with God ; and whether of these is rather to be done, be ye judges. 11. Irenaeus, also, says not simply (which only would do you service), " There cannot possibly be any so important reformation, as to justify a separation from them who will not reform; but only, they cannot make any corruption so great, as is the perni- ciousness of a schism." Now, they, here, is a relative, and hath an antecedent expressed in Irenaeus, which, if you had been pleased to take notice of, you would easily have seen, that what Irenaeus says, falls heavily upon the church of Rome, but toucheth protestants nothing at all. For the men he speaks of, are such as propter modicas et quaslibet causas, for trifling or small causes divide the body of Christ ; such as speak of peace, and make war ; such as strain at gnats, and swallow camels. " And these (saith he) can make no reformation of any such importance, as to countervail the danger of a division." Now, seeing the causes of our separation from the church of Rome are (as we pretend, and are ready to justify) because we will not be partakers with her in superstition, idolatry, impiety, and most cruel tyranny, both upon the bodies and souls of men : who can say, that the cause of our separation may be justly esteemed, modicas et qucelibet causes? On the other side, seeing the bishop of Rome, who was contemporary to Irenaeus, did (as much as in him lay) cut off from the church's unity many great churches, for not conforming to him in an in- different matter upon a difference, non de catholico dogmate, sed de ritu, vel ritus potius tempore ; " not about any catholic doctrine, but only a ceremony, or rather about the time of observing it :" so Petavius values it: which was just all one, as if the church of France should excommunicate those of their own religion in. England for not keeping Christmas upon the same day with them. And seeing he was reprehended sharply and bitterly for it, by most of the bishops of the world, as Eusebius* testifies, and (as Cardinal Perron,f though mincing the matter, yet confesseth) by this very Irenaeus himself in particular admonished, that for so small a cause {propter tarn modicam causam) he should not have * Euseb. Hist. 1. 5, c. xxiv. t Perron Replic. 1. 3, c. ii 348 Separation of Protestants from the cut off so many provinces from the body of the church: and, lastly, seeing the ecclesiastical story of those times mentions no other notable example of any such schismatical presumption, but this of Victor, certainly we have great inducement to imagine, that Irenaeus, in this place by you quoted, had a special aim at the bishop and church of Rome. Once, this I am sure of, that the place fits him, and many of his successors, as well as if it had been made purposely for them. And this also, that he which finds fault with them who separate upon small causes, implies clearly that he conceived there might be such causes as were great and sufficient; and that then a reformation was to be made, notwithstanding any danger of division that might ensue upon it. 12. Lastly — St. Dennis of Alexandria, says indeed, and very well, that " all things should rather be endured, than we should consent to the division of the church :" — I would add, rather than consent to the continuation of the division, if it might be remedied. But then I am to tell you, that he says not — all things should rather be done — but only, " all things should rather be endured or suffered :" wherein he speaks not of the evil of sin, but of pain and misery ; not of tolerating either error or sin in others, (though that may be lawful) much less of joining with others for quietness' sake, (which only were to your purpose) in the profession of error and practice of sin, but of suffering any affliction, nay, even mar- tyrdom in our own persons, rather than consent to the division of the church. Omnia incommoda, so your own Christopherson, en- forced by the circumstances of the place, translates Dionysius's words : — " All miseries should rather be endured than we should consent to the church's division." 13. Ad. §. 9. In the next paragraph you affirm two things, but prove neither, unless a vehement asseveration may pass for a weak proof. You tell us, first, that " the doctrine of the total deficiency of the visible church, which is maintained by divers chief pro- testants, implies in it vast absurdity, or rather sacrilegious blas- phemy." But neither do the protestants alleged by you maintain the deficiency of the visible church, but only of the church's visi- bility, or of the church as it is visible, which so acute a man as you, now that you are minded of it, I hope, will easily distinguish : neither do they hold, that the visible church hath failed totally, and from its essence, but only from its purity : and that it fell into many corruptions, but yet not to nothing. And yet, if they had held, that there was not only no pure visible church, but none at all ; surely they had said more than they could justify ; but yet you do not shew, neither can I discover, any such vast absurdity or sacrilegious blasphemy in this assertion. You say, secondly, that the reason which cast them upon this wicked doctrine, was a desperate voluntary necessity, because they were resolved not to acknowledge the Roman to be the true church, and were con- vinced, by all manner of evidence, that for divers ages before Luther there was no other. But this is not to dispute, but to divine, and take upon you the property of God, which is to know the hearts of man. For why, I pray, might not the reason hereof Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. ' 349 rather be, because they were convinced by all manner of evidence, as scripture, reason, antiquity, that all the visible churches in the world, but above all the Roman, had degenerated from the purity of the gospel of Christ, and thereupon did conclude there was no visible church, meaning by no church, none free from corruption, and conformable in all things to the doctrine of Christ. 14. Ad. §. 10. Neither is there any repugnance (but in words only) between these, as you are pleased to style them, exterminat- ing spirits, and those other, whom out of courtesy you entitle in your 10th §. more moderate protestants. For these, affirming the per- petual visibility of the church, yet neither deny nor doubt of her being subject to manifold and grievous corruptions, and those, of such a nature, as, were they not mitigated by invincible, or at least a very probable, ignorance, none subject to them could be saved. And they, on the other side, denying the church's visibility, yet plainly affirm, that they conceive very good hope of the salvation of many of their ignorant and honest forefathers. Thus declaring plainly, though in words they denied the visibility of the true church, yet their meaning was not to deny the perpetuity, but the perpetual purity and incorruption of the visible church. 15. Ad. §. 11. Let us proceed therefore to your 11th §. where though Dr. Potter and other protestants granting the church's per- petual visibility, make it needless for you to prove it, yet you will needs be doing that which is needless. But you do it so coldly and negligently, that it is very happy for you that Dr. Potter did grant it. 10. For — What if the prophets speak more obscurely of Christ, than of the church ? What if they had foreseen that greater con- tentions would arise about the church than Christ ? Which yet, he that is not a mere stranger in the story of the church must needs know to be untrue, and therefore not to be foreseen by the prophets. What if we have manifestly received the church from the scrip- tures : does it follow from any, or all these things, that the church of Christ must always be visible ? 17. Besides, what protestant ever granted (that which you presume upon so confidently,) that " every man for all the affairs of his soul must have recourse to some congregation V If some one christian lived alone among pagans in some country, remote from Christendom, shall we conceive it impossible for this man to be saved, because he cannot have recourse to any congregation for the affairs of his soul 1 Will it not be sufficient for such an one's salvation, to know the doctrine of Christ, and live according to it ? Such fancies as these, you do very wise to take for granted, because you know well it is hard to prove them. 18. Let it be as unlawful as you please, to deny and dissemble matters of faith. Let them that do so, not be a church, but a damned crew of sycophants : what is this to the visibility of the church 1 May not the church be invisible, and yet these that are of it profess their faith? No, say you: their profession will make them visible. Very true, visible in the places where, and in the times when, they live, and to those persons unto whom they have 30 350 Separation of Protestants from the necessary occasion to make their profession : but not visible to all, or any great or considerable part of the world while they live, much less conspicuous to all ages after them. Now it is a church thus illustriously and conspicuously visible that you require ; by whose splendour all men may be directed and drawn to repair to her, for the affairs of their souls: neither is it the visibility of the church absolutely, but this degree of it, which the most rigid protestants deny: which is plain enough, out of the places of Napper, cited by you in the ninth part of this chapter. Where his words are, " God hath withdrawn his visible church from open assemblies to the hearts of particular godly men." And this church which hath not open assemblies, he calls the latent and invisible church. Now, I hope, papists in England will be very apt to grant men may be so far latent and invisible, as not to profess their faith in open assemblies, nor to proclaim it to all the world, and yet not deny, nor dissemble it? Nor deserve to be es- teemed a " damned crew of dissembling sycophants." 19. But, preaching of the word, and administration of the sacraments, cannot but make a church visible : and these are in- separable notes of the church. — I answer, they are so far insepar- able, that wheresoever they are, there a church is : but not so, but that in some cases there may be a church, where these notes are not. Again, these notes will make the church visible : but to whom? Certainly not to all men, nor to most men ; but to them only to whom the word is preached, and the sacraments adminis- tered. They make the church visible, to whom themselves are visible, but not to others. As where your sacraments are ad- ministered, and your doctrine preached, it is visible that there is a popish church. But this may, perhaps, be visible to them only who are present at these performances, and to others as secret as if they had never been performed. 20. But St. Augustine saith, it is an impudent, abominable, de- testable speech, &c. to say, the church hath perished. — I answer, 1. All that St. Augustine says is not true. 2. Though this were true, it were nothing to your purpose, unless you will conceive it all one, not to be, and not to be conspicuously visible. 3. This very speech, that the church perished, might be false and im- pudent in the donatists, and yet not so in the protestants. For there is no incongruity, that what hath lived five hundred years, may perish in sixteen hundred. But St. Augustine denieth not only the actual perishing, but the possibility of it : and not only of its falling to nothing, but of its falling into corruptions. I an- swer, though no such thing appears out of those places, yet, I believe, heat of disputation against the donatists, and a desire to over-confute them, transported him so far, as to urge against them more than was necessary, and perhaps more than was true. But were he now revived, and did but confront the doctrine of after- ages with that, his own experience would enforce him to change his opinion. As concerning the last speech of St. Augustine, I cannot but wonder very much, why he should think it absurd for any man to say, there are sheep which he knows not, but God Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 351 knows; and no less at you, for obtruding this sentence upon us, as pertinent proof of the church's visibility. 21. Neither do I see, how the truth of any present church de- pends upon the perpetual visibility, nay, nor upon the perpetuity of that which is past or future: for what sense is there, that it should not be in the power of God Almighty, to restore to a flou- rishing estate, a church which oppression had made invisible ? to repair that which is ruined, to reform that which was corrupted, or ]to revive that which was dead ? Nay, what reason is there, but that by ordinary means this may be done, so lono- as the scriptures, by Divine Providence, are preserved in their integrity and authority 1 As a commonwealth, though never so far col- lapsed and over-run with disorders, is yet in possibility of being reduced into its original state, so long as the ancient laws and fun- damental constitutions are extant, and remain inviolate, from whence men may be directed how to make such a reformation. But St. Augustine urges this very argument against the donatists, and there- fore it is good. I answer, that I doubt much of the consequence ; and my reason is, because you yourselves acknowledge, that even general councils (and therefore much more particular doctors), though infallible in their determinations, are yet in their reasons and arguments, whereupon they ground them, subject to like pas- sions and errors with other men. 22. Lastly, Whereas you say that all divines define a schism, a division from the true church, and from thence collect that there must be a known church from which it is possible for men to depart : I might very justly question your antecedent, and desire you to consider, whether schism be not rather, or at least be not as well, a division of the church as from it? A separation, not of a part from the whole, but of some parts from the other. And if you liked not this definition, I might desire you to inform me in those many schisms which have happened in the church of Rome, which of the parts was the church, and which was divided from it : but, to let this pass, certainly your consequence is most un- reasonable. For though whensoever there is a schism, it must necessarily suppose a church existent there ; yet sure we may de- fine a schism, that is, declare what the word signifies (for defining is no more) though at this present there was neither schism nor church in the world. Unless you will say, that we cannot tell what a rose is, or what the word rose signifies, but only in the summer when we have roses : or that in the world to come when men shall not marry, it is impossible to know what it is to marry : or that the plague is not a disease, but only when somebody is infected: or that adultery is not a sin, unless there be adulterers: or that before Adam had a child, he knew not, and God could not have told him, what it was to be a father. Certainly, Sir, you have forgot your metaphysics, which you so much glory in, if you know not that the connexions of essential predicates with their subjects are eternal, and depend not at all upon the actual ex- istence of the thing defined. This definition therefore of schism, concludes not the existence of a church, even when it is defined : 352 Separation of Protestants from, the much less the perpetual continuance of it, and least of all the continuance of it in perpetual visibility and purity, which is the only thing that we deny, and you are to prove. By this time you perceive, I hope, that I had reason to say that it was well for you, that Dr. Potter granted the church's perpetual visibility : for, for aught I can perceive, this concession of his is the best stake in your hedge, the best pillar upon which this conclusion stands ; which yet is the only groundwork of your whole accusation. 23. Ad. §. 12, 47 — 55. The remainder of this chapter, to con- vince Luther, and all that follow him, to be schismatics, affords us arguments of two sorts ; the first, drawn from the nature of the thing; the second, from Dr. Potter's words and acknowledgment. So that the former, if they be good, must be good against all pro- testants; the latter only against Dr. Potter. I will examine them all, and do not doubt to make it appear even to yourself, if you have any indifference, that there is not any sound and concluding reason amongst them, but that they are all poor and miserable sophisms. 24. First, then, to prove us schismatics, you urge from the nature of schism this only argument : Whosoever leave the external communion of the visible church, are schismatics : but Luther and his followers left the exter- nal communion of the visible church of Christ; therefore they are schismatics. The major of this syllogism you leave naked without proof; and conceive it, as it should seem, able enough to shift for itself. The minor, or second proposition of this argument, you prove by two other. The first is this : They which forsook the external communion of all visible churches, must needs forsake the external communion of the true visible church of Christ : but Luther and his followers forsook the external communion of all visible churches ; therefore they forsook the external communion of the true visible church. The major of this syllogism you take for granted, as you have reason : the minor you prosecute with great pomp of words, and prove with plenty of reasons, built upon the confessions of Dr. Potter, Luther, Calvin, and other protestants; and this you do in the 12th §. of this chapter. The second argument, to prove the assumption of your first syl- logism, stands thus : The Roman church, when Luther and his followers made the separation, was the true visible church of Christ : but Luther and his followers forsook the external communion of the Ro- man church ; therefore they forsook the external communion of the true visible church of Christ. The assumption of this syllogism needs no proof: the proposi- tion which needs it very much, you endeavour to confirm by these reasons : 1. The Roman church had the notes of the church assigned by protestants, i. e. the true preaching of the word, and due ad- Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 353 ministration of the sacraments; therefore she was the true church. The antecedent is proved; because Dr. Potter confesses she wanted nothing fundamental or necessary to salvation ; therefore, for the substance of the matter, she had these notes. 2. Either the Roman church was the true visible church, or pro- testants can name and prove some other, disagreeing from the Roman, and agreeing with protestants in their particular doc- trines ; or else they must say — there was no visible church ; but they will not say, there was no church. They cannot name and prove any other disagreeing from the Roman, and agreeing with protestants, in their particular doctrines; be- cause this cannot be the Greek church, nor that of the Wal- denses, Wickliffites, Hussites, nor that of the Muscovites, Ar- menians, Georgians, ^Ethiopians, which you confirm by several arguments ; therefore they must grant, that the Roman church Was the true visible church. And this is the business of your 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, and 55th sections of this chapter. 25. Now to all this I answer very briefly thus: That you have played the unwise builder and erected a stately structure upon a false foundation. For whereas you take for granted as an un- doubted truth, that whosoever leave the external communion of the visible church, are schismatical ; I tell you, Sir, you presume too much upon us, and would have us grant that which is the main point in question : for, either you suppose the external communion of the church corrupted, and that there was a neces- sity for them that would communicate with this church to com- municate in her corruptions; or, you suppose her communion uncorrupted. If the former, and yet will take for granted, that all are schismatics that leave her communion though it be cor- rupted, you beg the question in your proposition. If the latter, you beg the question in your supposition ; for protestants, you know, are peremptory and unanimous in the denial of both these things ; both that the communion of the visible church was then uncorrupted, and that they are truly schismatics who leave the communion of the visible church if corrupted ; especially if the case be so (and Luther's was so) that they must either leave her communion, or of necessity communicate with her in her corrup- tions. You will say, perhaps, that you have already proved it impossible, that the church or her communion should be cor- rupted : and, therefore, that they are schismatics who leave the external communion of the visible church because she cannot be corrupted. And that hereafter you will prove, that corruptions in the church's communion, though the belief and profession of them be made the condition of her communion, cannot justify a separation from it; and, therefore, that they are schismatics who leave the church's communion though corrupted. I answer, that I have examined your proofs of the former, and found that a vein of sophistry runs clean through them; and, for the latter, it is so plain and palpable a falsehood, that I cannot but be con- z 30* 354 Separation of Protestants from the fident, whatsoever you bring in proof of it, will, like the apples of Sodom, fall to ashes upon the first touch. And this is my first and main exception against your former discourse ; that, accusing pro- testants of a very great and horrible crime, you have proved your accusation only with a fallacy. 26. Another is, that, although it were granted schism, to leave the external communion of the visible church in what state or case soever it be, and that Luther and his followers were schisma- tics, for leaving the external communion of the visible churches ; yet you fail exceedingly of clearing the other necessary point undertaken by you, that the Roman church was then the visible church. For, neither do protestants (as you mistake) make the true preaching of the word, and due administration of the sacra- ments, the notes of the visible church, but only of a visible church : now these you know are very different things ; the for- mer signifying the church catholic, or the whole church; the lat- ter, a particular church or a part of the catholic. And, therefore, suppose out of courtesy we should grant, what by argument you can never evince, that your church has these notes, yet would it by no means follow that your church were the visible church, but only a visible church ; not the whole catholic, but only a part of it. But then, besides, where doth Dr. Potter acknowledge any such matter as you pretend 1 Where doth he say that you had for the substance — the true preaching of the word, or due admi- nistration of the sacraments? Or where does he say, that (from which you collect this) — you wanted nothing fundamental or ne- cessary to salvation ? He says, indeed, that though your errors were in themselves damnable, and full of great impiety, yet he hopes, that those amongst you, that were invincibly ignorant of the truth, might, by God's great mercy, have their errors par- doned, and their souls saved. And this is all he says, and this you confess to be all he says in* divers places of your book ; which is no more than yourself do and must affirm of protestants ; and yet I believe, you will not suffer us to infer from hence, that you grant protestants to have, for the substance, the true preaching of the word and due administration of the sacraments, and want nothing fundamental or necessary to salvation. And if we should draw this consequence from your concession, certainly we should do you injury, in regard many things may, in themselves and in ordinary course be necessary to salvation, to those that have means to attain them, as your church generally hath ; which yet, by accident, to these which were, by some impregnable impedi- ment, debarred in those means, may by God's mercy be made unnecessary. 27. Lastly, Whereas you say, that protestants must either grant that your church then was the visible church, or name some other disagreeing from yours, and agreeing with protestants in their particular doctrine, or acknowledge there was no visible church; it is all one, as if (to use St. Paul's similitude) the head should * See c. i. §. 3. Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 355 say to the foot, Either you must grant that I am the whole body, or name some other member that is so, or confess that there is no body. To which the foot may answer, I acknowledge there is a body ; and yet, that no member beside you is this body, nor yet that you are it, but only a part of it. And in like manner say we, we acknowledge a church there was, corrupted indeed univer- sally ; but yet such a one as we hope, by God's gracious accept- ance, was still a church. We pretend not to name any one so- ciety that was this church ; and yet we see no reason "that can enforce us to confess that yours was the church, but only a part of it, and that one of the worst then extant in the world. In vain, therefore, have you troubled" yourself, in proving that we cannot pretend, that either the Greeks, Waldenses, Wickliffites, Hussites, Muscovites, Armenians, Georgians, Abyssines, were then the visible church. For all this discourse proceeds upon a false and vain supposition, and begs another point in question be- tween us, which is, that some church of one denomination and one communion (as the Roman, the Greek, &c.) must be always exclusively to all other communions the whole visible church. And though, perhaps, some weak protestant, having the false principle settled in him, that there was to be always some visible church of one denomination, pure from all error in doctrine, might be wrought upon and prevailed with by it, to forsake the church of protestants ; yet why it should induce him to go to yours, rather than the Greek church, or any other pretenders to perpetual succession as well as yours, that I do not understand ; unless it be for the reason which ^Eneas Sylvius gave, why more held the pope above a council, than a council above the pope; which was, because popes did give bishopricks and archbishop- ricks, but councils gave none ; and, therefore, suing in forma pauperis, were not like to have their cause very well maintained. For put the case, I should grant of mere favour, that there must be always some church of one denomination or communion free from all errors in doctrine, and that protestants had not always such a church : it would follow, indeed, from hence, that I must not be a protestant ; but that I must be a papist, certainly it would follow by no better consequence than this — if you will leave England, you must of necessity go to Rome. And yet with this wretched fallacy have I been sometimes abused myself, and known many other poor souls seduced, not only from their own church and .. religion, but unto yours : I beseech God to open the eyes of all that love the truth, that they may not always be held captive, under such miserable delusions. 28. We see, then, how successful you have been in making good your accusation, with reasons drawn from the nature of the thing, and which may be urged in common against all protestants. Let us come now to the arguments of the other kind, which you build upon Dr. Potter's own words, out of which you promise unanswer- able reasons to convince protestants of schism. 29. But let the understanding reader take with him three or four short remembrances, and I dare say he will tind them, upon z2 356 Separation of Protestants from the examination, not only answerable, but already answered. The memorandums I would commend to him are these : 30. 1. That not every separation, but only a causeless separa- tion, from the external communion of any church, is the sin of schism. 31. 2. That imposing upon men, under pain of excommunication, a necessity of professing known errors, and practising known cor- ruptions, is a sufficient and necessary cause of separation ; and that this is the cause which protestants allege to justify their separation from the church of Rome. 32. 3. That to leave the church, and to leave the external com- munion of a church, at least as Dr. Potter understands the word, is not the same thing : that being done by ceasing to be a mem- ber of it, by ceasing to have those requisites which constitute a man a member of it, as faith and obedience : this, by refusing to communicate with any church in her liturgies and public wor- ship of God. This little armour, if it be rightly placed, I am persuaded will repel all those batteries which you threaten shall be so furious. 33. Ad. §. 13 — 15. The first is a sentence of St. Augustine against Donatus, applied to Luther thus: "if the church perished, what church brought forth Donatus? (you say, Luther?) If she could not perish, what madness moved the sect of Donatus to separate, upon pretence to avoid the communion of bad men ?" Whereunto, one fair answer (to let pass many others) is obvious out of the second observation : that this sentence, though it were gospel, as it is not, is impertinently applied to Luther and lutherans, whose pretence of separation (be it true or be it false) was not (as that of the Donatists) only to avoid the communion of bad men ; but to free themselves from a necessity (which but by separating was unavoidable) of joining with bad men in their impieties. And your not substituting Luther, instead of Donatus, in the latter part of the dilemma, as well as in the former, would make a suspicious man conjecture that you yourself took notice of this exception of disparity between Donatus and Luther. 34. Ad. §. 16. Your second onset drives only at those protest- ants who hold the true church was invisible for many ages. Which doctrine (if by the true church be understood the pure church, as you do understand it) is a certain truth ; and it is easier for you to declaim (as you do) than to dispute against it. But " these men (you say) must be heretics, because they separate from the commu- nion of the visible church : and therefore also from the communion of that which they say was invisible, inasmuch as the invisible church communicated with the visible." 35. Ans. I might very justly desire some proof of that which so confidently you take for granted : that there were no perse- cuted and oppressed maintainers of the truth in the days of our forefathers, but only such as dissembled their opinions, and lived in your communion. And truly, if I should say there were many of this condition, I suppose I could make my affirmative much more probable, than you can make your negative. We read in Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 357 scripture, that El ias conceived there was none left beside himself in the whole kingdom of Israel who had not revolted from God ; and yet God himself assures us that he was deceived. And if such a man, a prophet, and one of the greatest, erred in his judg- ment touching his own time, and his own country, why may not you, who are certainly but a man, and subject to the same passions as Elias was, mistake in thinking, that in former ages, in some country or other, there were not always some good christians, which did not so much as externally bow their knees to vour Baal ? But this answer I am content you shall take no notice of, and think it sufficient to tell you, that if it be true, that this supposed invisible church did hypocritically communicate with the visible church in her corruptions, then protestants had cause, nay necessity, to forsake their communion also ; for otherwise they must have joined with them in the practice of impieties : and see- ing they had such cause to separate, they presume their separation cannot be schismatical. 36. Yes, you reply, to forsake the external communion of them with whom they agree in faith, is the most formal and proper sin of schism. Ans. Very true, but I would fain know wherein. I would gladly be informed, whether I be bound, for fear of schism, to communicate with those that believe as I do, only in lawful things, or absolutely in every thing ; whether I am to join with them in superstition and idolatry, and not only in a common pro- fession of the faith wherein we agree, but in a common dissimula- tion or abjuration of it. This is that which you would have them to do, or else, forsooth, they must be schismatics. But hereafter, I pray you remember, that there is no necessity of communicating even with true believers in wicked actions : nay, that there is a ne- cessity herein to separate from them. And then I dare say, even you being their judge, the reasonableness of their cause to separate shall, according to my first observation, justify their separation from being schismatical. 37. Arg. But the property of schism, according to Dr. Potter, is to cut off from the hope of salvation, the church from which it separates : and these protestants have this property ; therefore they are schismatics. 38. Ans. I deny the syllogism ; it is no better than this : One symptom of the plague is a fever ; But such a man hath a fever; Therefore he hath the plague. The true conclusion which issues out of these premises, should be this — therefore he hath one symptom of the plague. And so likewise in the former — therefore they have one property or one quality of schismatics. And as, in the former instance, the man that hath one sign of the plague may, by reason of the absence of other requisites, not have the plague : so these protestants may have something of schismatics, and yet be not schismatics. A tyrant sentencing a man to death for his pleasure, and a just judge that condemns a malefactor, do both sentence a man to death, and so for the matter do both the same thing ; yet the one does 358 Separation of Protestants from the. wickedly, the other justly. What is the reason ? Because the one hath cause, the other hath not. In like manner, schismatics either always or generally denounce damnation to them from whom they separate. The same do these protestants, and yet are not schismatics. The reason — because schismatics do it, and do it without a cause, and protestants have cause for what they do. The impieties of your church being, generally speaking, damna- ble ; unless where they are excused by ignorance, and expiated, at least, by a general repentance. In fine, though perhaps it may be true, that all schismatics do so ; yet universal affirmatives are not converted, and therefore it follows not by any good logic that all that do so, when there is just cause for it, must be schis- matics. The cause in this matter of separation is all in all, and that, for aught I see, you never think of. But if these rigid pro- testants have just cause to cut off your church from the hope of salvation ; how can the milder sort allow hope of salvation to the members of this church? Ans. Distinguish the quality of the persons censured, and this seeming repugnance of their censures will vanish into nothing. For your church may be considered either in regard of those in whom either negligence, or pride, or worldly fear, or hopes, or some other voluntary sin, is the cause of their ignorance ; which I fear is the case of the generality of men amongst you : or in regard of those who owe their errors from truth to want of capacity, or default of instruction : either in respect of those that might know the truth, and will not; or of those who would know the truth, but (all things considered) cannot : in respect of those that have eyes to see, and will not ; or those that would gladly see, but want eyes, or light. Consider the former sort of men, (which your more rigid censures seem especially to reflect upon) and the heaviest sentence will not be too heavy. Consider the latter, and the mildest will not be too mild. So that here is no difference but in words only ; neither are you flattered by the one, nor uncharitably censured by the other. 39. Your next blow is directed against the milder sort of pro- testants, who (you say) involve themselves in the sin of schism, by communicating with those (as you call them) exterminating spirits, whom you conceive yourself to have proved schismatics; and now load them farther with the crime of heresy. For, say you, if you held yourselves obliged, under pain of damnation, to forsake the communion of the Roman church, by reason of her errors, which yet you confess were not fundamental ; shall it not be much more damnable to live in confraternity with these, who defend an error of the failing of the church, which in the donatists you confess to have been properly heretical? 40. Ans. You mistake, in thinking that protestants hold them- selves obliged not to communicate with you, only or principally by reason of your errors and corruption. For the true reason, ac- cording to my third observation, is not so much because you maintain errors and corruptions, as because you impose them, and will allow your communion to none but to those that will hold Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 359 them with you; and have so ordered your communion, that either we must communicate with you in these things, or nothing. And for this very reason, though it were granted that these protestants held this doctrine which you impute to them ; and though this error were as damnable, and as much against the creed as you pretend : yet, after all this, this parity between you and them might make it more lawful for us to communicate with them than you, because what they hold they hold to themselves, and refuse not (as you do) to communicate with them that hold the contrary. 41. Thus we may answer your argument, though both your former suppositions were granted. But then, for a second an- swer, I am to tell you, that there is no necessity of granting either of them. For neither do these protestants hold the failing of the church from its being, but only from its visibility ; which, if you conceive all one, then must you conceive that the stars fail every day, and the sun every night. Neither is it certain that the doctrine of the church's failing is repugnant to the creed : for, as the truth of the article of the remission of sins, depends not upon the actual remission of any man's sins, but upon God's readiness and resolution to forgive the sins of all that believe and repent; so that, although unbelief or impenitence should be universal, and the faithful should absolutely fail from the children of men, and the Son of man should find no faith in the earth ; yet should the article still continue true, that God would forgive the sins of all that repent. In like manner, it is not certain that the truth of the article of the catholic church depends upon the actual existence of the catholic church ; but rather upon the right that the church of Christ, or rather (to speak properly) the gospel of Christ, hath to be universally believed. And therefore the article may be true, though there were no church in the world. In regard, this not- withstanding, it remains still true, that there ought to be a church, and this church ought to be catholic. For as, of these two proposi- tions, there is a church in America ; and there should be a church in America: the truth of the latter depends not upon the truth of the former; so neither does it in these two: there is a church dif- fused all the world over ; and there should be a church diffused all the world over. 42. Thirdly, If you understand by errors not fundamental, such as are not damnable, it is not true, as I have often told you, that we confess your errors not fundamental. 43. Lastly, For your desire that I should here apply an authority of St. Cyprian, alleged in your next number, I would have done so very willingly, but indeed I know not how to do it ; for, in my ap- prehension, it hath no more to do with your present business of proving it unlawful to communicate with these men, who hold the church was not always visible, than in novafert animus. Besides, 1 am here again to remember you, that St. Cyprian's words, were they never so pertinent, yet are by neither of the parties litigant esteemed any rule of faith. And, therefore, the urging of them, and such-like authorities, serves only to make books great, and con- troversies endless. 360 Separation of Protestants from the 44. Ad. §. 17. The next section, in three long leaves, delivers us this short sense : That those protestants which say they have not left the church's external communion, but only her corruptions, pretend to do that which is impossible; because these corruptions were inherent in the church's external communion ; and, therefore, he that forsakes them, cannot but forsake this. 45. Ans. But, who are they that pretend they forsook the church's corruptions, and not her external communion ? Some there be that say, they have not left the church, that is, not ceased to be members of the church, but only left her corruptions : some, that they have not left the communion, but the corruptions of it; meaning the internal communion of it, and conjunction with it, by faith and obedience : which disagree from the former only in the manner of speaking ; for he that is in the church, is in this kind of communion with it ; and he that is not in this in- ternal communion, is not in the church. Some, perhaps, that they left not your external communion in all things ; meaning, that they left it not voluntarily, being not* fugitivi, but fugati, as being willing to join with you in any act of piety ; but were by you necessitated and constrained to do so, because you would not suffer them to do well with you, unless they would do ill with you. Now to do ill that you may do well, is against the will of God, which to every good man is a high degree of necessity. But for such protestants as pretend, that de facto, they forsook your corruptions only, and not your external communion, that is, such as pretend to communicate with you in your confessions and li- turgies, and participation of sacraments ; I cannot but doubt very much, that neither you, nor I, have ever met with any of this condition. And if perhaps you were led into error, by thinking that to leave the church, and to leave the external communion of it, was all one in sense and signification, I hope by this time you are disabused, and begin to understand, that as a man may leave any fashion or custom of a college, and yet remain still a member of the college ; so a man may possibly leave some opinion or prac- tice of a church, formerly common to himself and others, and con- tinue still a member of that church : provided that what he forsakes be not one of those things wherein the essence of the church con- sists. Whereas peradventure this practice may be so involved with the external communion of this church, that it may be simply im- possible for him to leave this practice, and not to leave the church's external communion. 46. You will reply, perhaps, that the difficulty lies as well against those who pretend to forsake the church's corruptions, and not the church, as against those who say, they forsook the church's corruptions, and not her external communion. And that the reason is still the same; because they supposed corruptions were inhe- rent in the whole church : and, therefore, by like reason with the former, could not be forsaken, but if the whole church were for- saken. 47. Ans. A pretty sophism, and very fit to persuade men that * Casaubon. in Ev. ad Card. Perron. Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 3G1 it is impossible for them to forsake any error they hold, or any vice they are subject to, either peculiar to themselves, or in com- mon with others ; because, forsooth, they cannot forsake them- selves ; and vices and errors are things inherent in themselves. The deceit lies, in not distinguishing between a local and a moral forsaking of any thing. For as it were an absurdity, fit for the maintainers of transubstantiation to defend, that a man may lo- cally and properly depart from the accidents of a subject, and not from the subject itself; so it is also against reason to deny, that a man may (by an usual phrase of speech) forsake any custom or quality, good or bad, either proper to himself, or common to him- self with any company, and yet never truly or properly forsake either his company or himself. Thus if all the Jesuits in the so- ciety were given to write sophistically, yet you might leave this ill custom, and yet not leave your society. If all the citizens of a city were addicted to any vanity, they might, either all, or some of them, forsake it, and yet not forsake the city. If all the parts of a man's body were dirty or filthy, nothing hinders but that all, or some of them might cleanse themselves, and yet continue parts of the body. And what reason then in the world is there, if the whole visible church were overrun with tares and weeds of su- perstitions and corruptions, but that some members of it might reform themselves, and yet remain still true members of the body of the church, and not be made no members, but the better by thnr reformation 1 Certainly it is so obvious and sensible a ti uth, that this thing is possible, that no man in his wits will be persuaded out of it, with all the quirks and metaphysics in the world. Neither is this to say, that a man may keep company with Christopher Potter, and not keep company with the Provost of Queen's College : nor that a man can avoid the company of a sinner, and at the same time be really present with the man who is the sinner : which we leave to those protestants of your in- vention, who are so foolish as to pretend, that a man may really separate himself from the church's external communion, as she is corrupted, and yet continue in that church's external communion, which in this external communion is corrupted. But we, that say only the whole church being corrupted, some parts of it might and did reform themselves, and yet might and did continue parts of the church, though separated from the external communion of the other parts, which would not reform, need not trouble our- selves to reconcile any such repugnance. For the case put by you, of keeping Dr. Potter's company, and leaving the company of the Provost of Queen's College ; and of leaving a sinner's com- pany, and not the man's; are nothing at all like ours. But, if you would speak to the point, you must show, that Dr. Potter cannot leave being Provost of Queen's College, without ceasing to be himself; or, that a sinner cannot leave his sin, without ceasing to be a man; or, that he that is part of any society, can- not renounce any vice of that society, but he must relinquish the society. If you would show any of these things, then indeed (I dare promise) you shall find us apt enough to believe, that the 31 362 Separation of Protestants from the particular parts of the visible church could not reform themselves, but they must of necessity become no parts of it. But until we see this done, you must pardon us if we choose to believe sense rather than sophistry. 48. In this paragraph you bring in the sentence of St. Cyprian, whereto you referred us in the former : but why, in a controversy of faith, do you cite any thing, which is confessed on all hands not to be a rule of faith ? Besides, in my apprehension, this sentence of St. Cyprian's is, in this place, and to this purpose, merely impertinent. St. Cyprian's words are, " The church (he speaks of the particular church or diocese of Rome) being one, can- not be within and without : if she be with Novatianus, she was not with Cornelius : but if she were with Cornelius, who succeeded Fa- bianus by lawful ordination, Novatianus is not in the church." And now, having related the words, I am only to remember the reader, that your business was to prove it impossible for a man to forsake the church's corruptions, and not the church ; and to request him to tell me, whether, as I said, in nova fert animus had not been as much to the purpose 1 49. Toward the conclusion of this section, you number up your victories, and tell us — that out of your discourse it remaineth clear, that this our chiefest answer changeth the very state of the question ; confoundeth internal acts of the understanding with external deeds ; doth not distinguish between schism and heresy, and leaves this demonstrated against us, that they (protestants) divided themselves from the communion of the visible catholic church, because they conceived that she needed reformation. To which triumphs, if any reply be needful, then briefly thus : We do not change the state of the question, but you mistake it. For the question was not, whether they might forsake the corruption of the church, and continue in her external communion, which we confess impossible, because the corruptions were in her communion : but the question was, whether they might forsake the corruptions of the church, and not the church, but continue still the members of it. And to this question there is not in your whole discourse one pertinent syllable. 50. We do not confound internal acts of understanding with ex- ternal deeds, but acknowledge (as you would have us) that we can- not (as matters now stand) separate from your corruptions, but we must depart from your external communion. For you have so ordered things, that whosoever will communicate with you at all, must communicate with you in your corruptions. But it is you that will not perceive the difference between being a part of the church, and being in external communion of all the other parts of it ; taking for granted, that which is certainly false, that no two men or churches, divided in external communion, can be both true parts of the catholic church. 51. We are not to learn the difference between schism and heresy, for heresy we conceive an obstinate defence of any error against any necessary article of the christian faith ; and schism, a causeless separation of one part of the church from another. But Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 363 this we say, that if we convince you of errors and corruptions, professed and practised in your communion, then we cannot be schismatics, for refusing to join with you in the profession of these errors, and the practice of these corruptions. And there- fore you must free either us from schism or yourselves from error ; at least from requiring the profession of it as a condition of your communion. 52. Lastly, Whereas you say — that you have demonstrated against us, that protestants divided themselves from the external communion of the visible church ; add — which external commu- nion was corrupted — and we shall confess the accusation, and glory in it. But this is not that quod erat demonstrandum, but that we divided ourselves from the church, that is, made ourselves outlaws from it, and no members of it. And, moreover, in the rea- son of our separation from the external communion of your church you are mistaken ; for it was not so much because she, your church, as because your church's external communion, was corrupted, and needed reformation. 53. That a pretence of reformation will acquit no man from schism, we grant very willingly, and therefore say, that it con- cerns every man, who separates from any church's communion, even as much as his salvation is worth, to look most carefully to it, that the cause of his separation be just and necessary ; for, unless it be necessary, it can very hardly be sufficient. But whether a true reformation of ourselves from errors, superstitions, and impieties, will not justify our separation in these things ; our separation, I say, from them who will not reform themselves, and as much as in them lies, hinder others from doing so : this is the point you should have spoken to, but have not. As for the sen- tences of the fathers, to which you refer us, for the determination of this question, I suppose by what I have said above, the reader understands, by alleging them you have gained little credit to your cause or person. And that, if they were competent judges of this controversy, their sentence is against you much rather than for you. 54. Lastly, whereas you desire Dr. Potter to remember his own words: — " There neither was, nor can be, any just cause to depart from the church of Christ, no more than from Christ himself," and pretend that you have shewed that Luther did so. — The Doctor remembers his words very well, and hath no reason to be ashamed of them. Only he desires you to remember, that hereafter you do not confound, as hitherto you have done, departing from the church (i. e. ceasing to be a member of it) with departing from the church's external communion ; and then he is persuaded it will ap- pear to you, that against Luther and his followers you have said many things, but shewed nothing. 55. But the church universal remaining the church universal, according to Dr. Potter, may fall into error: and from hence it clearly follows, that it is impossible to leave the external com- munion of the church so corrupted, and retain external commu- nion with the catholic church. — Arts. The reason of this conse- 364 Separation of Protestants from the quence, which you say is so clear, truly I cannot possibly discern ; but the conclusion inferred, methinks, is evident of itself, and therefore without proof I grant it. I mean, that it is impossible to leave the external communion of the catholic church corrupted, and to retain external communion with the catholic church. But what use you can make of it, I do not understand ; unless you will pretend, that to say, a man may forsake the church's corrup- tion, and not the church, is all one as to say he may forsake the church's external communion, and not forsake it. If you mean so, sure you mistake the meaning of protestants when they say — they forsook not the church, but her corruptions. For in saying so, they neither affirm, nor deny, that they forsook the external communion of the church, nor speak at all of it ; but they mean only, that they ceased not to be still members of the church, though they ceased to believe and practise some things which the whole church formerly did believe and practise. And as for the external communion of the visible church, we have without scruple formerly granted, that protestants did forsake it ; that is, renounce the practice of some observance, in which the whole visible church before them did communicate. But this we say they did without schism, because they had cause to do so, and no man can have cause to be a schismatic. 56. But your argument, you conceive, will be more convincing — if we consider, that when Luther appeared, there were not two distinct visible true churches; one pure, the other corrupted, but one church only. — Ans. The ground of this is no way certain, nor here sufficiently proved. For, whereas you say, histories are silent of any such matter; I answer, there is no necessity, that you or I should have read all histories, that may be extant of these matters; nor that all should be extant that were written, much less extant uncorrupted ; especially, considering your church, which had lately all the power in her hands, hath been so per- niciously industrious, in corrupting the monuments of antiquity that made against her ; nor that all records should remain, which were written ; nor that all should be recorded which was done. Neither, secondly, to suppose a visible church before Luther, which did not err, is to contradict this ground of Dr. Potter's that the church may err : unless you will have us believe, that may be and must be is all one, and that all which may be true, is true : which rule, if it were true, then sure all men would be honest, because all men may be so ; and you would not make so bad arguments, unless you will pretend you cannot make better. Nor, thirdly, is it to contradict these words, " the church may not hope to triumph over all error, till she be in heaven ;" for to triumph over error, it is to be secure from it, to be out of danger of it, not to be obnoxious to it. Now a church may be free from error, and yet not secure from it, and consequently, in this sense, not triumph over it. Fourthly, Whereas you say, it evacuateth the brag of protestants, that Luther reformed the whole church: perhaps (though I know not who they be that say so) by a frequent synecdoche, they may mean by the whole the Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 365 greatest and most illustrious part of it, the lustre whereof did much obscure the other, though it were not wholly invisible. Besides, if their brag be evacuated, (as you call it) let it be so, I see no harm will come of it. Lastly, whereas you say, that, supposing a visible pure church, Luther must be a schismatic who separated from all visible churches. — I tell you, if you will suppose a visible church extant before, and when Luther arose, conformable to him in all points of doctrine, necessary and profitable, then Luther separated not from this church, but adjoined himself to it : not indeed in place, which was not necessary ; not in external com- munion, which was impossible; but by the union of faith and charity. Upon these grounds, I say, that the ground of this ar- gument is no way made certain ; yet because it is not manifestly false, I am content to let it pass. And, for aught I see, it is very safe for me to do so ; for you build nothing upon it, which I may not fairly grant. For what do you conclude from hence, but that, seeing there was no visible church but corrupted, Luther forsaking the external communion of the corrupted church, could not but forsake the external communion of the catholic church 1 Well, let this also be granted, what will come of it 1 What, that Luther must be a schismatic ? By no means : for not every separation, but only a causeless separation, from the communion of the church, we maintain to be schismatical. Hereunto may be added, that though the whole church was corrupted, yet, properly speaking, it is not true, that Luther and his followers forsook the whole corrupted church, or the external communion of it : but only that he forsook that part of it which was corrupted, and still would be so : and forsook not, but only reformed another part, which part they themselves were, and I suppose you will not go about to persuade us that they forsook themselves or their communion. And if you urge, that they joined themselves to no other part, therefore they separated from the whole ; I say, it follows not, inasmuch as themselves were a part of it, and still continued so; and therefore could no more separate from the whole than from themselves. Thus though there were no part of the people of Rome, to whom the plebeians joined themselves, when they made their se- cession into the Aventine hill; yet they divided themselves from the patricians only, and not from the whole people ; because themselves were a part of this people, and they divided not from themselves. 57. Ad. §. 18. In the 18th section, you prove that which no man denies, that " corruption in manners yields no sufficient cause to leave the church :" yet sure, it yields sufficient cause to cast them out of the church, that are, after the church's public admonition, obstinate in notorious impieties. Neither doth the cutting off such men from the church, lay any necessity upon us, either to go out of the world, or out of the church, but rather puts these men out of the church into the world, where we may converse with them freely, without scandal to the church. Our blessed Saviour foretold, you say, that there should be in the church tares with choice corn. Look again, I pray, and you shall 31* 366 Separation of Protestants from the see, that the field, he speaks of, is not the church, but the world ; and therefore neither do you obey our Saviour's command, " let both grow up till the harvest," who teach it to be lawful to root these tares (such are heretics) out of the world ; neither do protest- ants disobey it, if they eject manifest heretics and notorious sinners out of the church. 58. Ad. §. 19. In the 19th you are so courteous as to suppose corruptions in your doctrine; and yet undertake to prove, that neither could they afford us any sufficient cause, or colourable necessity to depart from them. Your reason is, because damnable errors there were none in your church by Dr. Potter's confession ; neither can it be damnable in respect of error, to remain in any church's communion, whose errors are not damnable ; for if the error be not damnable, the belief thereof cannot. — Ans. Dr. Potter confesseth no such matter; but only that — he hopes that your er- rors, though in themselves sufficiently damnable, yet by accident did not damn all that held them : such, he means and says, as were excusably ignorant of the truth, and amongst the number of their unknown sins, repented daily of their unknown errors. The truth is, he thinks as ill of your errors and their desert, as you do of ours; only he is not so peremptory and presumptuous in judging your persons, as you are in judging ours, but leaves them to stand or fall to their own master, who is infinitely merciful, and therefore will not damn them for mere errors, who desire to find the truth, and cannot; and withal infinitely just, and therefore (it is to be feared) will not pardon them, who might easily have come to the knowledge of the truth, and either through pride or obstinacy, or negligence, would not. 59. To your minor also, I answer almost in your own words, §. 42 of this chapter. — I thank you for your courteous supposal, that your church may err, and, in recompense thereof, will do you a charity, by putting you in mind, into what labyrinths you cast yourself, by supposing that the church may err in some of her proposals, and yet denying it lawful for any man, though he know this, which you suppose, to oppose her judgment, or leave her communion. — Will you have such a man dissemble against his conscience, or externally deny that which he knows true \ No, that you will not; for them that do so, you yourself have pro- nounced " a damned crew of dissembling sycophants." Or, would you have him continue in your communion, and yet profess your church to err? This you yourselves have made to him impossible. Or, would you have him believe those things true, which together with him you have supposed to be errors ? This*, is such an one as is assured or persuaded of that, which you here suppose, that your church doth err, (and such only, we say, are obliged to for- sake your communion) is, as schoolmen speak, implicatio in ter- minis, which is " a contradiction so plain that one word destroy- eth another: as if one should say, a living man dead." For it is to require that they which believe some part of your doctrine false, should withal believe it all true. Seeing, therefore, for any man to believe your church in error, and profess the contrary, is Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 367 damnable hypocrisy ; to believe it, and not believe it, a manifest re- pugnancy ; and, thirdly, to profess it, and to continue in your communion (as matters now stand) a plain impossibility ; what remains, but that whosoever is supposed to have just reason to disbelieve any doctrine of your church, must of necessity forsake her communion ; unless you would remit so far from your present rigour, as to allow them your church's communion, who publicly profess that they do not believe every article of her established doctrine. Indeed if you would do so, you might with some co- herence suppose your church in error, and yet find fault with men for abandoning her communion, because they might continue in it, and suppose her in error. But to suppose your church in error, and to excommunicate all those that believe your own supposition, and then to complain that they continue not in your communion, is the most ridiculous incongruity that can be ima- gined. And, therefore, though your corruptions in doctrine, in themselves (which yet is false) did not, yet your obliging us to profess your doctrine uncorrupted against knowledge and con- science, may induce an obligation to depart from your commu- nion. As, if there were any society of christians, that held there were no antipodes ; notwithstanding this error, I might commu- nicate with them : but if I could not do so without professing myself of their belief in this matter, then I suppose I should be excused from schism, if I should forsake their communion, rather than profess myself to believe that which I do not believe. Neither is there any contradiction, or shadow of contradiction, that it may be necessary for my salvation to depart from the church's communion : and that this church (though erring in this matter) wants nothing necessary to salvation. And yet this is that manifest contradiction, which Dr. Potter (you say) will never be able to solve, viz. " that there might be necessary cause to de- part from the church of Rome in some doctrines and practices, though she wanted nothing necessary to salvation." 60. And your reason, wherewith you prove that there is in these words such a plain contradiction, is very notable. " For (say ycu) if she wanted nothing necessary to salvation, how could it be necessary to salvation to forsake her?" Truly, sir, if this be a good manner of proving, it is a very ready way to prove any thing; for what is there that may not be proved, if it be proof enough to ask, how can it be otherwise? Methinks, if you would convince Dr. Potter's ^ words of manifest contradiction, you should shew, that he affirms and denies the same of the same. From which fault methinks he should be very innocent, who says only, that that may be damnable to one, which is not so to another ; and that may be necessary for one, which is not necessary for another. And this is all that Dr. Potter says here, viz. that the profession of a falsehood to him that believes it, may be not damnable; and yet damnable to him that believes the contrary : or that not to profess a falsehood, in him that knows it to be so, is necessary to salvation ; and yet not so in him that by error conceives it to be a truth. The words by you cited, and charged with unsalvable contradiction, are in the 75th page ; but, in the progress of the same particular discourse, in the 368 Separation of Protestants from the next page but one, he gives such evident reason of them, (which can hardly be done to prove implicancy true) that whereas you say, he will never be able to salve them from contradiction, I believe any indifferent reader, having considered the place, will be very apt to think, that you (whatsoever you pretend) were very able to have done this courtesy for him, if your will had been answerable to your ability. I will set down the words, and leave the reader to condemn or absolve them. " To forsake the errors of that church, and not to join with her in those practices which we account erro- neous, we are enforced by necessity. For though in the issue they are not damnable to them which believe as they profess, yet for us to profess and avow by oath (as the church of Rome enjoins) what we believe not, were, without question, damnable. And they, with their errors, by the grace of God, might go to heaven, when we for our hypocrisy and dissimulation, (he might have added, and perjury) should certainly be condemned to hell." 61. Ad. §. 20. But a church not erring in fundamentals, though erring in other matters, doth what our Saviour exacts at her hands, doth as much as lies in her power to do : therefore, the communion of such a church is not upon pretence of error to be forsaken. — The consequence is manifest. The antecedent is proved ; because God, by Dr. Potter's* confession, hath promised his assistance no further, nor is it in her power to do more than God doth assist her to do. — Ans. The promise of divine assistance is twofold, ab- solute or conditional. That there shall be by divine providence preserved in the world, to the world's end, such a company of christians, who hold all things precisely and indispensably neces- sary to salvation, and nothing inevitably destructive of it. This and no more, the doctor affirms that God hath promised absolutely. Yet he neither doubts nor denies, but that a farther assistance is conditionally promised us, even such an assistance as shall lead us, if we be not wanting to it and ourselves, into all not only neces- sary, but very profitable truth, and guard us from all, not only destructive, but also hurtful errors. This, I say, he neither denies nor questions. And should he have done so, he might have been confuted by evident and express texts of scripture. When therefore you say, that a church, not erring in fundamentals, doth as much as by God's assistance lies in her power to do, this is manifestly untrue ; for God's assistance is always ready to promote her farther. It is ready, I say, but on condition the church does implore it; on condition, that when it is offered in the divine directions of scripture and reason, the church be not negligent to follow it. If therefore there be any church, which, retaining the foundation, builds hay and stubble upon it ; which, believing what is precisely necessary, errs shamefully and dangerously in other things very profitable ; this by no means argues defect of divine assistance in God, but neglect of this assistance in the church. Neither is there any reason, why such a church should please herself too much for retaining fundamental truths, while she remains so re- gardless of others. For though the simple defect of some truths * Page 151, 155. Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 369 profitable only, and not simply necessary, may consist with salva- tion ; yet who is there that can give her sufficient assurances, that the neglect of such truths is not damnable? Besides, who is there that can put her in sufficient caution, that these errors about pro- fitable matters may not, according to the usual fecundity of error, bring forth others of a higher quality, such as are pernicious and pestilent, and undermine by secret consequences the very founda- tions of religion and piety 1 Lastly, who can say that she hath sufficiently discharged her duty to God and man, by avoiding only fundamental heresies, if in the mean time she be negligent of others, which though they do not plainly destroy salvation, yet obscure and hinder, and only not block up the way to it? Which though of themselves and immediately they damn no man, yet are causes and occasions that many men run the race of christian piety more remissly than they should, many defer their repentance, many go on securely in their sins, and so at length are damned by means and occasion of these errors, though not for them. Such errors as these, (though those of the Roman church be much worse, even in themselves damnable, and by accident only pardonable) yet, I say, such errors as these, if any church should tolerate, dissemble, and suffer them to reign, and neglect to reform them, and not permit them to be freely, yet peaceably, opposed and impugned ; will any wise man say, that she hath sufficiently discharged her duty to God and man ? That she hath with due fidelity dispensed the gospel of Christ ? That she hath done what she could, and what she ought? What shall we say, then, if these errors be taught by her, and commanded to be taught ? What if she thunder out her curses against those that will not believe them ? What if she rave and rage against them, and persecute them with fire and sword, and all kinds of most exquisite torments ? Truly, I do much fear that from such a church (though it hold no error ab- solutely inconsistent with salvation) the candlestick of God either is already removed, or will be very shortly ; and because she is negligent of profitable truths, that she will lose those that are necessary ; and because she will not be led into all truths, that in short time she shall be led into none. And although this should not happen, yet what mortal man can secure us, that not only a probable unaffected ignorance, not only a mere neglect of profit- able truths, but also a reckless, supine negligence, manifest contempt, dissimulation, opposition, oppression of them, may con- sist with salvation ? I truly, for my part, though I hope very well of all such as, seeking all truth, find that which is necessary; who endeavouring to free themselves from all errors, any way contrary to the purity of Christianity, yet fail of performance, and remain in some : yet if 1 did not find in myself a love and desire of all profit- able truth ; if I did not put away idleness, and prejudice, and worldly affections, and so examine to the bottom all my opinions of divine matters, being prepared in mind to follow God, and God only, which way soever he shall lead me ; if I did not hope, that I either do or endeavour to do, these things, certainly I should have little hope of obtaining salvation. A A 370 Separation of Protestants from the 62. But to oblige any man, under pain of damnation, to forsake a church by reason of such errors, against which Christ thought it superfluous to promise his assistance ; and for which he neither denies his grace here, nor his glory hereafter ; what is it but to make the narrow way to heaven, narrower than Christ left it? — Ans. It is not ; for Christ himself hath obliged us hereunto. He hath forbid us, under pain of damnation, to profess what we believe not, and consequently, under the same penalty, to leave that com- munion in which we cannot remain without this hypocritical pro- fession of those things which we are convinced to be erroneous. But then, besides, it is here falsely supposed (as hath been shewed already), that Christ hath not promised assistance to those that seek it, but only in matters simply necessary. Neither is there any reason, why any church, even in this world, should despair of victory over all errors, pernicious or noxious, provided she humbly and earnestly implore divine assistance, depend wholly upon it, and be not wanting to it. Though a triumph over all sin and error, that is, security that she neither doth nor can err, be rather to be desired than hoped for on earth, being a felicity reserved for heaven. 63. Ad. §. 21. But at least the Roman church is as infallible as protestants, and protestants as fallible as the Roman church ; therefore to forsake the Roman church for errors, what is it but to flit from one erring society to another ? — Ans. The incon- sequence of this argument is too apparent : protestants may err, as well as the church of Rome, therefore they did so ! Boys in the schools know, that a posse ad esse, the argument follows not. He is equally fallible who believes twice two to be four, as he that believes them to be twenty ; yet in this he is not equally deceived, and he may be certain that he is not so. One architect is no more infallible than another, and yet he is more secure that his work is right and straight, who hath made it by the level, than he which hath made it by guess and by chance. So he that forsakes the errors of the church of Rome, and therefore renounceth her communion, that he may renounce the profession of her errors, though he knows himself fallible, as well as those whom he hath forsaken, yet he may be certain (as certain as the nature of the thing will bear) that he is not herein deceived ; because he may see the doctrine forsaken by him repugnant to scripture, and the doctrine embraced by him consonant to it. At least, this he may know, that the doctrine which he hath chosen to him seems true, and the contrary which he hath forsaken seems false ; and, there- fore, without remorse of conscience, he may profess that, but this he cannot. 64. But we are to remember, that, according to Dr. Potter, the visible church hath a blessing not to err in fundamentals, in which any private reformermay fail; therefore, there was no ne- cessity of forsaking the church, out of whose communion they were exposed to danger of falling into many more, and even into damnable errors. — Ans. The visible church is free indeed from all errors absolutely destructive and unpardonable ; but not from Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 371 all eiror which in itself is damnable; nor from all which will actually bring damnation upon them that keep themselves in them, by their own voluntary and avoidable fault. From such errors, which are thus damnable, Dr. Potter doth no where say, that the visible church hath any privilege or exemption. Nay, you yourself teach, that he plainly teacheth the contrary, and thereupon will allow him to be no more charitable to the papists, than papists are to protestants: and yet upon this affected mis- take your discourse is founded in almost forty places of your book. Besides, any private man, who truly believes the scripture, and seriously endeavours to know the will of God, and to do it, is as secure as the visible church, more secure than your church, from the danger of erring in fundamentals; for it is impossible, that any man so qualified should fall into any error which to him will prove damnable : for God requires no more of any man to his sal- vation, but his true endeavour to be saved. Lastly, abiding in your church's communion is so far from securing me or any man from damnable error, that if I should abide in it, I am certain I could not be saved : for abide in it I cannot, without professing to believe your entire doctrine true: profess this I cannot, but I must lie perpetually and exulcerate my conscience. And though your errors were not in themselves damnable, yet to resist the known truth, and to continue in the profession of known errors and false- hoods, is certainly a capital sin, and of great affinity with the sin which never will be forgiven. 65. But neither is the church of protestants perfectly free from errors and corruptions: so the Doctor confesses, (n. 69,) which he can only excuse by saying, they are not fundamental ; as like- wise those in the Roman Church are confessed not to be funda- mental. And what man of judgment will be a protestant, since that church is confessedly a corrupted one? — Ans. And yet you yourself make large discourses in this very chapter, to persuade protestants to continue in the church of Rome, though supposed to have some corruptions. And why, I pray, may not a man of judg- ment continue in the communion of a church confessedly corrupted, as well as a church supposed to be corrupted, especially when this church, supposed to be corrupted, requires the belief and profes- sion of her supposed corruptions, as the condition of her com- munion ; which this church, confessedly corrupted, doth not. What man of judgment will think it any disparagement to his judgment to prefer the better, though not simply the best, before that which is stark naught ? to prefer indifferent good health, be- fore a diseased and corrupted state of body '\ to prefer a field, not perfectly weeded, before a field that is quite over-run with weeds and thorns'? And, therefore, though protestants have some errors, yet seeing they are neither so great as yours, nor imposed with such tyranny, nor maintained with such obstinacy ; he that con- ceives it any disparagement to his judgment, to change your communion for theirs, though confessed to have some corrup- tions, it may well be presumed that he hath but little judgment. For as for your pretence that yours are confessed not to be a a2 372 Separation of Protestants from the fundamental, it is an affected mistake, as already I have often told you. 66. Ad. §. 22. But Dr. Potter says, " It is comfort enough for ihe church, that the Lord in mercy will secure her from all her capital dangers; but she may not hope to triumph over all sin ind error till she be in heaven. Now, if it be comfort enough to be secured from all capital dangers, which can arise only from error in fundamental points, why were not your first reformers content with enough, but would needs dismember the church, out of a pernicious greediness of more than enough ?" — Ans. I have already shewed you sufficiently, how capital danger may arise from errors, though not fundamental. I add now, that what may be enough to men in ignorance, may be to knowing men not enough; according to that of the gospel, "To whom much is given, of him much shall be required:" that the same error may be not capital to those who want means of finding the truth, and capital to others who have means, and neglect to use them : that to continue in the profession of error, discovered to be so, may be damnable, though the error be not so. These, I presume, are reasons enough, and enough why the first reformers might think, and justly, that not enough for themselves, which yet to some of their predecessors they hope might be enough. This very argu- ment was objected to St. Cyprian upon another occasion,* and also by the British quartodecimans to the maintainers of the doc- trine of your church;f and by both this very answer was re- turned ;J and therefore I cannot but hope, that for their sakes you will approve it. 67. But if (as the Doctor says) no church may hope to triumph over all error till she be in heaven, then we must either grant, that errors not fundamental cannot yield sufficient cause to forsake the church, or you must affirm, that all communities may and ought to be forsaken. — Ans. The Doctor does not say, that no church may hope to be free from all error, either pernicious, or any way noxious; but that no church may hope to be secure from all error simply, for this were indeed truly to triumph over all. * St. Cyprian, Ep. 63, in these words : " Siquis de antecessoribus nostris, vel ignoran- ter vel simpliciter non hoc observavit, et tenuit quod nos Dominus facere exemplo et magisterio suo docuit, potest simplicitati ejus, de indulgentia Domini, venia concedi : nobis vero non potest ignosci, qui nunc a Domino admoniti et instructi sumus. tWilfridus, to Abbot Coleman, alleging that he followed the example of his prede- cessors, famous for holiness, and famous for miracles, in these words : " De patre vestro Columba et sequacibus ejus, quorum sanctitatem vos imitari et regulam ac praecepta, ccelestibus signis confirmata, sequi perhibelis, possum respondere: quia multis in judicio dicentibus Domino quod in nomine ejui prophetaverint et daBmonia ejecerint, et virtutes multas fecerint, responsurus sit Dominus, quia nunquam eos noverit. Sed absit ut de patribus vestris hoc dicam, quia justius multo est de incognitus bonum credere quam malum. Unde et illos Dei famulos et Deo dilectos esse non nego, qui simplicitate rus- tica, sed intentione pia Deum dilexerunt : neque ill is multum obesse Paschce talem reor observantiam, quamdiu nullus advenerat qui cis instituti perfectioris decreta quae se- querentur ostenderet. Quos utique credo, siquis tunc ad eos catholicus circulator ad- veniret, sic ejus monita fuisse secuturos, quomodo ea quae noverant ac didicerunt Dei mandata, probantur fuisse secuti. Tu autem et socii tui, si audita decreta sedis aposto- licae, imo universalis ecclesiee, et haec Uteris sacris confirmata contemnitis, absque ulla dubietate peccatis." X Beda, I. 5, Eccl. Hist. c. xxv. Church of Ro?ne, not guilty of Schism. 373 But then we say not, that the communion of any church is to be forsaken for errors unfundamental, unless it exact withal either a dissimulation of them being noxious, or a profession of them against the dictates of conscience, if they be mere errors. This, if the church does (as certainly yours doth), then her communion is to be forsaken, rather than the sin of hypocrisy to be committed. Where- as, to forsake the churches of protestants for such errors, there is no necessity, because they err to themselves, and do not under pain of excommunication exact the profession of their errors. 68. But the church may not be left by reason of sin, therefore neither by reason of errors not fundamental, inasmuch as both sin and error are impossible to be avoided till she be in heaven. — Ans. The reason of the consequence does not appear to me ; but I answer to the antecedent : neither for sin nor errors ought a church to be forsaken, if she does not impose and enjoin them ; but if she do (as the Roman does), then we must forsake men rather than God ; leave the church's communion rather than commit sin, or profess known errors to be divine truths. For the prophet Ezekiel hath assured us, that to say, "The Lord hath said so, when the Lord hath not said so," is a great sin, and a high presumption, be a matter never so small. 69. Ad. §. 23. But neither the quality nor the number of your church's errors could warrant our forsaking it. Not the quality, because we suppose them not fundamental : not the number, be- cause the foundation is strong enough to support them. — Ans. Here again you vainly suppose, that we conceive your errors in themselves not damnable : though we hope they are not absolutely unpardonable : but to say they are pardonable, is indeed to suppose them damnable. Secondly, though the errors of your church did not warrant our departure, yet your tyrannous imposition of them would be our sufficient justification. For this lays a necessity on us, either to forsake your company, or to profess what we know to be false. 70. Our blessed Saviour hath declared his will, that we forgive a private offender seventy-seven times ; that is, without limitation of quantity or time, or quality of trespasses; and then, how dare we allege his command, that we must not pardon his church for errors acknowledged to be not fundamental ? — Ans. He that commands us to pardon our brother, sinning against us so often, will not allow us for his sake to sin with him so much as once ; he will have us to do any thing, but sin, rather than offend any man. But his will is also, that we offend all the world, rather than sin in the least matter. And, therefore, though his will were, and it were in our power (which is yet false) to pardon the errors of an erring church ; yet certainly it is not his will, that we should err with the church, or, if we do not, that we should against conscience pro- fess the errors of it. 71. Ad. §. 24. But schismatics from the church of England, or any other church, with this very answer, that they forsake not the church, but the errors of it, may cast off from themselves the imputation of schism. — Ans. True, they may make the same an- 32 374 Separation of Protestants from the swer, and the same defence as we do ; as a murderer can cry not guilty, as well as an innocent person ; but not so truly, nor so justly. The question is not what may be pretended, but what can be proved, by schismatics. They may object errors to other churches, as well as we do to yours ; but that they prove their accusation so strongly as we can, that appears not. To the priests and elders of the Jews, imposing that sacred silence mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, St. Peter and St. John answered, they " must obey God rather than men." The three children to the King of Babylon, gave in effect the same answer. Give me now any factious hypocrite, who makes religion the pretence and cloak of his rebellion, and who sees not that such an one may answer for himself, in those very formal words which the holy apostles and martyrs made use of? And yet, I presume, no christian will deny, but this answer was good in the mouth of the apostles and martyrs, though it were obnoxious to be abused by traitors and rebels. Certainly, therefore, it is no good consequence to say, schismatics may make use of this answer: therefore all that do make use of it are schismatics. But, moreover, it is to be observed, that the chief part of our defence, that you deny your communion to all that deny or doubt of any part of your doctrine, cannot with any colour be employed against protestants; who grant their communion to all who hold with them, not all things, but things necessary ; that is, such as are in scripture plainly delivered. 72. But the forsaking the Roman church opens a way to in- numerable sects and schisms, and therefore it must not be for- saken. — Ans. We must not do evil to avoid evil ; neither are all courses presently lawful, by which inconveniences may be avoided. If all men would submit themselves to the chief Mufti of the Turks, it is apparent there would be no divisions ; yet unity is not to be purchased at so dear a rate. It were a thing much to be desired, that there were no divisions; yet difference of opinions, touching points controverted, is rather to be chosen than unani- mous concord in damned errors : as it is better for men to go to heaven by diverse ways, or rather by diverse paths of the same way, than in the same path to go on peaceably to hell — Arnica pax, magis arnica Veritas ! 73. But there can be no just cause to forsake the church, so the doctor grants; who, notwithstanding, teacheth that the church may err in points not fundamental ; therefore, neither is the Roman church to be forsaken for such errors. — Ans. There can be no just cause to forsake the church absolutely and simply in all things, that is, to cease being a member of the church ; this I grant, if it will do you any service. But that there can be no just cause to forsake the church in some things, or (to speak more properly) to forsake some opinions and practices, which some true church retains and defends ; this I deny, and you mistake the doctor, if you think he affirms it. " 74. Ad. §. 26, 27. What prodigious doctrines (say you) are these ? Those protestants who believe that your church erred in Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 375 points necessary to salvation, and for that cause left her, cannot he excused from damnable schism. But others," &c. Prodigious doctrines indeed ! but who, I pray, are they that teach them ? — Where does Dr. Potter accuse those protestants of damnable schism who left your church because they hold it erroneous in necessary points? What protestant is there that holds not that you taught things contrary to the plain precepts of Christ ; both ceremonial, in mutilating the communion, and moral, in points of superstition and idolatry, and most bloody tyranny ; which is without question to err in necessary matters ? Neither does Dr. Potter accuse any man of schism for holding so, if he should call himself a schismatic : only he says, such (if there be any such) as affirm, that ignorant souls among you, who had no means to know the truth, cannot possibly be saved, that their wisdom and charity cannot be justified. Now you yourself have plainly af- firmed, that ignorant protestants, dying with contrition, may be saved ; and yet would be unwilling to be thought to say, that protestants err in no points necessary to salvation : for that may be in itself, and in ordinary course, where there are means of knowledge, necessary, which to a man invincibly ignorant, will prove not necessary. Again, where doth Dr. Potter suppose (as you make him) that there were other protestants who believed that your church had no errors? Or, where does he say, they did well to forsake her, upon this ridiculous reason, because they judged that she retained all means necessary to salvation ? Do you think us so stupid, as that we cannot distinguish between that which Dr. Potter says, and that which you make him say ? He vindicates protestants from schism two ways ; the one is, be- cause they had just, and great, and necessary cause to separate, which schismatics never have ; because they that have it are no schismatics : for schism is always a causeless separation. The other is, because they did not join with their separation, an un- charitable damning of all those from whom they did divide them- selves, as the manner of schismatics is. Now, that which he in- tends for a circumstance of our separation, you make him make the cause of it, and the motive to it. And whereas he says, " Though we separate from you in some things, yet we acknow- ledge your church a member of the body of Christ, and therefore are not schismatics;" you make him say, most absurdly, we did well to forsake you, because we judged you a member of the body of Christ. Just as if a brother should leave his brother's com- pany in some ill courses, and should say to him — herein I forsake you, yet I leave you not absolutely, for I acknowledge you still to be my brother, and shall use you as a brother ; and you per- verting his speech, should pretend that he had said, I leave your company in all these ill courses, and I do well to do so, because you are my brother : so making that the cause of leaving him, which indeed is the cause that he left him no farther. 75. But you say, " The very reason for which he acquitteth himself from schism, is, because he holds that the church which they forsook is not cut off from the body of Christ." — Jlns. This 376 Separation of Protestants from the is true ; but can you not perceive a difference between justifying his separation from schism by this reason, and making this th reason of his separation ? If a man denying obedience in some unlawful matter to his lawful sovereign, should say to him — herein I disobey you, but yet I am no rebel, because I acknow- ledge you my sovereign lord, and am ready to obey you in all things lawful ; should he not be an egregious sycophant, that should ac- cuse him as if he had said — I do well to disobey you, because I ac- knowledge you my lawful sovereign 1 Certainly, he that joins this acknowledgment with his necessitated obedience, does well ; but he that makes this consideration the reason of disobedience, doth ill. Urge, therefore, this (as you call it) most solemn foppery as far as you please ; for every understanding reader will easily perceive that this is no foppery of Dr. Potter's, but a calumny of yours, from which he is as far, as he is from holding yours to be the true church ; whereas it is a sign of a great deal of charity in him, that he allows you to be a part of it. 76. And whereas you pretend to find such unspeakable comfort herein, that we cannot clear ourselves from schism, otherwise than by acknowledging that they do not, nor cannot, cut off your church from the hope of salvation ; I beseech you to take care that this false comfort cost you not too dear : for why this good opinion of God Almighty, that he will not damn men for error, who were without their own fault ignorant of the truth, should be any consolation to them, who, having the key of knowledge, will neither use it themselves, nor permit others to use it ; who have eyes to see, and will not see ; who have ears to hear, and will not hear ; this, I assure you, passeth my capacity to appre- hend. Neither is this to make our salvation depend on yours, but only ours and yours not desperately inconsistent ; nor to say, we must be damned, unless you may be saved ; but that we assure our- selves, if our lives be answerable, we shall be saved by our know- ledge. And that we hope (and I tell you again, Spes est rei incertce nomen) that some of you may possibly be saved by occasion of their unaffected ignorance. 77. For our brethren, whom, you say, we condemn of heresy for denying the church's perpetuity, we know none that do so : unless you conceive a corrupted church to be none at all ; and if you do, then, for aught I know, in your account we must be all heretics : for all of us acknowledge that the church might be cor- rupted even with errors in themselves damnable, and not only might, but hath been. 78. But schism consists in being divided from that true church, with which a man agreeth in all points of faith : now we must profess, you say, that we agree with the church of Rome in all fundamental articles ; therefore we are schismatics. — Ans. Either in your major, by all points of faith, you mean all fundamental points only, or all simply and absolutely. If the former, I deny your major ; for I may, without all schism, divide from that church which errs in any point of faith fundamental, or other- wise, if she require the profession of this error among the conditions Cliurc.h of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 377 of her communion. Now this is our case. If the latter, I deny the syllogism, as having manifestly four terms, and being cousin german to this: He that obeys God in all things is innocent ; Titius obeys God in some things, Therefore he is innocent. 79. But they who judge a reconciliation with the church of Rome to be damnable ; they that say, there might be just and necessary cause to depart from it, and that they of that church which have understanding and means to discover their errors, and neglect to use them, are not to be flattered with hope of salva- tion ; they do cut off that church from the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation, and so are schismatics; but Dr. Potter doth the former, therefore he is a schismatic. — Ans. No, he doth not ; nor cut off that whole church from the hope of salvation, not those members of it who were invincibly or excusably ignorant of the truth; but those only, who, having understanding and means to discover their error, neglect to use them. Now these are not the whole church ; and therefore he that, supposing their impenitence, cuts these off from hopes of salvation, cannot be justly said to cut off that whole church from the body of Christ, and the hope of sal- vation. 80. Ad. §. 28, 29. Whereas Dr. Potter says, " There is a great difference between a schism from them, and a reformation of our- selves :" this, you say, " is a quaint subtilty, by which all schism and sin may be as well excused." It seems then, in your judg- ment, that thieves, and adulterers, and murderers, and traitors, may say, with as much probability as protestants, that they did no hurt to others, but only reform themselves. But then, methinks, it is very strange that all protestants should agree with one con- sent in this defence of themselves from the imputation of schism; and that to this day, never any thief or murderer should have been heard of, to make use of this apology ! And then for schis- matics, I would know whether Victor, Bishop of Rome, who ex- communicated the churches of Asia, for not conforming to his church in keeping Easter : whether Novatian, that divided from Cornelius, upon pretence that himself was elected Bishop of Rome, when indeed he was not ; whether Felicissimus and his crew, that went out of the church of Carthage, and set up altar against altar, because having fallen in persecution, they might not be restored to the peace of the church presently, upon the intercession of the confessors; whether the donatists, who di- vided from, and damned all the world, because all the world would not excommunicate them who were accused only, and not convicted, to have been traditors of the sacred books; whether they, which for the slips and infirmities of others, which they might and ought to tolerate, or upon some differences in matters of order and ceremony, or for some error in doctrine, neither pernicious nor hurtful to faith or piety, separate themselves from others, or others from themselves ; or lastly whether they that put themselves out of the church's unity and obedience, because 3-2* 378 Separation of Protestants from the their opinions are not approved there, but reprehended and con- futed, or because being of impious conversation, they are impa- tient of their church's censure ; I would know, I say, whether all, or any of these, may, with any face, or without extreme impu- dence, put in this plea of protestants, and pretend, with as much likelihood as they, that they did not separate from others, but only reformed themselves? But suppose they were so impudent as to say so in their own defence falsely, doth it follow by any good logic, that therefore this apology is not to be employed by pro- testants, who may say so truly 1 We make, say they, no schism from you, but only a reformation of ourselves : this, you reply, is no good justification, because it may be pretended by any schis- matic. Very true, any schismatic that can speak may say the same words, (as any rebel that makes conscience the cloak of his impious disobedience, may say with St. Peter and St. John, " We must obey God rather than men ;") but then the question is, whe- ther any schismatic may say so truly ? And to this question you say just nothing ; but conclude, because this defence may be abused by some, it must be used by none. As if you should have said, St. Peter and St. John did ill to make such an answer as they made, because impious hypocrites might make use of the same to palliate their disobedience and rebellion against the lawful commands of lawful authority. 81. But seeing their pretended reformation consisted in for- saking the church's corruptions, their reformation of themselves, and their division from you, falls out to be one and the same thing. — Just as if two men having been a long while companions in drunkenness, one of them should turn sober ; this reformation of himself, and desertion of his companion in this ill custom, would be one and the same thing, and yet there is no necessity that he should leave his love to him at all, or his society in other things. So protestants, forsaking their own former corruptions, which were common to them with you, could not choose, but withal forsake you in the practice of these corruptions ; yet this they might and would have done without breach of charity towards you ; and without a renunciation of your company in any act of piety and devotion, confessedly lawful. And, therefore, though both these by accident joined together, yet this hinders not but that the end they aimed at was not a separation from you, but a reformation of themselves. 82. Neither doth their disagreement, in the particulars of the reformation, (which yet when you measure it without partiality, you will find to be far short of infinite) nor their symbolizing in the general of forsaking your corruption's, prove any thing to the contrary, or any way advantage your design, or make for your purpose. For it is not any sign at all, much less an evident sign, that they had no evident design, but only to forsake the church of Rome; for nothing but malice can deny, that -their intent at least was, to reduce religion to that original purity from which it was fallen. The declination from which, some conceiving to have begun (though secretly) in the apostles' times (the mystery of Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 379 iniquity being then in work), and after their departure, to have showed itself more openly ; others again believing, that the church continued pure for some ages after the apostles, and then declined: and consequently some aiming at an exact conformity with the apostolic times; others thinking they should do God and men good service, could they reduce the church to the condition of the fourth and fifth ages : some taking their direction in this work of reformation only from scripture; others, from the writings of fathers, and the decrees of councils of the first five ages ; certainly it is no great marvel, that there was, as you say, disagreement between them, in the particulars of their reformation ; nay, morally speaking, it was impossible it should be otherwise. Yet let me tell you, the difference between them (especially in comparison of your church and religion) is not the difference between good and bad, but between good and better ; and they did best that followed scripture interpreted by catholic written tradition ; which rule the reformers of the church of England proposed to themselves to follow. 83. Ad. §. 30—32. To this effect Dr. Potter, p. 81, 82, of his book speaks thus : " If a monastery should reform itself, and should reduce into practice ancient good discipline, when others would not ; in this case could it be charged with schism from others, or with apostacy from its rule and order 1 So in a society of men universally infected with the same disease, they that should free themselves from it, could they be therefore said to separate from the society 1" He presumes they could not, and from hence concludes, that " neither can the reformed churches be truly accused for making a schism, (that is, separating from the church and making themselves no members of it) if all they did was (as indeed it was) to reform themselves." Which cases, I believe, any understanding man will plainly see to have in them an exact parity of reason, and that therefore the argument drawn from them is pressing and unanswerable. And it may well be sus- pected, that you were partly of this mind, otherwise you would not have so presumed upon the simplicity of your reader, as, pre- tending to answer it, to put another of your own making in place of it, and then to answer that. 84. This you do, §. 31, 32, of this chapter, in these words, "I was very glad to find you in a monastery," &c. Where I beseech the reader to observe these things, to detect the cunning of your . tergiversation ; first, that you have no reason to say, that you found Dr. Potter in a monastery ; and as little, that you find him "inventing ways how to forsake his vocation, and to maintain the lawfulness of schism from the church, and apostacy from a reli- gious order." Certainly the innocent case put by the doctor, of a monastery reforming itself, hath not deserved such grievous accusations: unless reformation with you be all one with apos- tacy ; and to forsake sin and disorder, be to forsake one's voca- tions : and surely, if it be so, your vocations are not very lawful, and your religious orders not very religious. Secondly, that you quite pervert and change Dr. Potter's cases, and instead of the 360 Separation of Protestants from the case of a whole monastery reforming itself, when other monasteries of their order would not ; and of some men freeing themselves from the common disease of their society, when others would not ; you substitute two others, which you think you can better deal with, of some particular monks, upon pretence of the neglect of lesser monastical observances, going out of their monastery, which monastery yet did confessedly observe their substantial vows, and all principal statutes: and of a diseased person, quitting the company of those that were infected with the same disease, though in their company there was no danger from his disease, it being impossible that should be mortal, and out of it no hope of escaping others like that for which he forsook the first infected company. — I appeal now to any indifferent judge, whether these cases be the same, or near the same, with Dr. Potter's? Whether this be fair and ingenuous dealing — instead of his two instances, which plainly shewed it possible in other societies, and conse- quently in that of the church, to leave the faults of a society, and not leave being of it, to foist in two others clean cross to the doctor's purpose, of men, under colour of faults, abandoning the society wherein they lived ? I know not what others may think of this dealing, but, to me, this declining Dr. Potter's cases, and conveying others into their place, is a great assurance, that, as they were put by him, you could say nothing to them. 85. But, that no suspicion of tergiversation may be fastened upon me, I am content to deal with you a little at your own weapons. Put the case then, though not just as you would have it, yet with as much favour to you as in reason you can expect — that a monastery did observe her substantial vows, and all prin- cipal statutes, but yet did generally practise, and also enjoin the violation of some lesser, yet obliging observances, and had done so time out of mind; and that some inferior monks, more con- scientious than the rest, discovering this abuse, should first, with all earnestness, solicit their superiors for a general and orderly reformation of these, though small and venial corruptions, yet corruptions; but, finding they hoped and laboured in vain to ef- fect this, should reform these faults in themselves, and refuse to join in the practice of them, with the rest of their confraternity, and persisting resolutely in such a refusal, should, by their su- periors, be cast out of their monastery, and being not to be re- admitted without a promise of remitting from their stiffness in these things, and of condescending to others in the practice of these small faults, should choose rather to continue exiles, than to re-enter upon such conditions; I would know whether you would condemn such men of apostacy from the order? Without doubt, if you should, you would rind the stream of your casuists against you; and besides, involve St. Paul in the same condem- nation, who plainly tells us, that " we may not do the least evil, that we may do the greatest good." Put case again, you should be part of a society universally infected with some disease, and discovering a certain remedy for this disease, should persuade the whole company to make use of it, but find the greatest part of Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 381 them so far in love with their disease, they were resolved to keep it ; nay, so fond of it, that they should make a decree, that who- soever would leave it, should leave their company. Suppose now that you yourself, and some few others, should, notwithstanding their injunction to the contrary, free yourselves from this disease, and thereupon they should absolutely forsake and reject vou : I would know in this case who deserves to be condemned — whether you of uncharitable desertion of your company, or they of a ty- rannical peevishness ? And if in these cases you will (as I verily believe you will) acquit the inferiors, and condemn the superiors, absolve the minor part, and condemn the major, then can you with no reason condemn protestants, for choosing rather to be ejected from the communion of the Roman church, than with her to persist (as of necessity they were to do, if they would continue in her communion) in the profession of errors, though not de- structive of salvation, yet hindering edification ; and in the prac- tice, or at least approbation, of many (suppose not mortal but) venial corruptions. 86. Thirdly, the reader may be pleased to be advertised that you censure too partially the corrupt estate of your church in comparing it to a monastery, which did confessedly observe their substantial vows, and all principal statutes of their order, and moreover was secured by an infallible assistance, for the avoiding of all substantial corruptions : for of your church we confess no such matter, but say plainly, that she not only might fall into substantial corruptions, but did so ; that she did not only gene- rally violate, but of all the members of her communion, either in act or approbation, require and exact the violation of many sub- stantial laws of Christ, both ceremonial and moral, which, though we hope it was pardonable in them who had not means to know their error, yet, of its own nature, and to them who did or might have known their error, was certainly damnable. And that it was not the tything "of mint, and anise, and cummin," the neglect whereof we impute unto you, but the neglect of judgment, justice, and the weightier matters of the law. 87. Fourthly, I am to represent unto you that you use pro- testants very strangely, in comparing them to a company, who all were known to be led to their pretended reformation, not with an intent of reformation, but with some other sinister inten- tion ; which is impossible to be known of you, and therefore to judge so, is against christian charity, and common equity ; and to such a company as acknowledge that themselves, as soon as they were gone out from the monastery that refused to reform, " must not hope to be free from those, or the like errors and corruptions, for which they left their brethren ;" seeing this very hope and no- thing else moved them to leave your communion ; and this speech of yours, so far as it concerns the same errors, plainly destroys itself. For how can they possibly fall into the same errors, by forsaking your communion, which that they may forsake, they do forsake your communion ? And then for other errors of the like nature and quality, or more enormous than yours, though they 382 Separation of Protestants from the deny it not possible, but by tbeir negligence and wickedness they may fall into them, yet they are so far from acknowledging that they have no hope to avoid this mischief, that they proclaim to all the world, that it is most prone and easy to do so, to all those that fear God and love the truth ; and hardly possible for them to do otherwise, without supine negligence and extreme impiety. 88. To fit the reddition of your perverted simile to the propo- sition of it, you tell us, that we teach, that for all fundamental points, the church is secured from error. I answer, fundamental errors may signify, either such as are repugnant to God's com- mand, and so in their own nature damnable, though to those which out of invincible ignorance practise them, not unpardon- able : or such as are not only meritoriously, but remedilessly per- nicious and destructive of salvation. We hope that yours, and the Greek, and other churches before the Reformation, had not so far apostated from Christ, as to be guilty of errors of the latter sort. We say, that not only the catholic church, but every par- ticular true church, so long as it continues a church, is secured from fundamental errors of this kind, but secured not absolutely by any promise of divine assistance, which being not ordinarily irresistible, but tempered to the nature of the receivers, may be neglected, and therefore withdrawn ; but by the repugnance of any error in this sense fundamental to the essence and nature of a church. So that, to speak properly, not any set known company of men is secured, that, though they neglect the means of avoiding error, yet certainly they shall not err in fundamentals, which were necessary for the constitution of an infallible guide of faith : but rather they which know what is meant by a church, are se- cured, or rather certain, that a church remaining a church cannot fall into fundamental errors; because, when it does so, it is no longer a church. As they are certain men cannot become unrea- sonable creatures, because when they do so, they are no longer men. But for fundamental errors of the former sort, which yet, I hope, will warrant our departure from any communion infected with them, and requiring the profession of them ; from such fundamental errors we do not teach so much as the church catho- lic, much less (which only were for your purpose) that your church had any protection or security, but know for a certain, that many errors of this nature had prevailed against you ; and that a vain presumption of an absolute divine assistance (which yet is promised but upon conditions) made both your present errors incurable, and exposed you to the imminent danger of more and greater. This therefore is either to abuse what we say, or to impose falsely upon us what we say not. And to this you presently add another manifest falsehood, viz. that we say — that no particular person, or church, hath any promise of assistance in points fundamental. Whereas, cross to this in diameter, there is no protestant but holds, and must hold, that there is no parti- cular church, no, nor person, but hath promise of divine as- sistance to lead them into all necessary truth, if they seek it as Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 383 they should, by the means which God hath appointed. And should we say otherwise, we should contradict plain scripture, which as- sures us plainly, that — Every one that seeketh findeth, and every one that asketh receiveth : and that — If we being evil, can give good gifts to our children, much more shall our heavenly Father give his Spirit to them that ask it : and that — If any man want wisdom (especially spiritual wisdom) he is to ask of God, who giveth to all men, and upbraideth not. 89. You obtrude upon us, thirdly — that when Luther began, he being but one, opposed himself to all, as well subjects as su- periors. — Ans. If he did so in the cause of God, it was heroically done of him. This had been without hyperbolizing, Mundus contra Athanasium, and Athanasius contra mundum ; neither is it impossible that the whole world should so far lie in wickedness, (as St. John speaks) that it may be lawful and noble for one man to oppose the world. But yet were we put to our oaths, we should surely not testify any such thing for you; for how can we say properly, and without straining, that — he opposed himself to all, unless we could say, also, that all opposed themselves to him ? And how can we say so, seeing the world can witness, that so many thousands, nay, millions, followed his standard as soon as it was advanced 1 90. But none that lived immediately before him thought or spake as he did. This is, first, nothing to the purpose. The church was then corrupted, and sure it was no dishonour to him to begin the reformation. In the christian warfare, every man ought to strive to be foremost. Secondly, it is more than you can justify : for though no man before him lifted up his voice like a trumpet, as Luther did ; yet who can assure us, but that many before him both thought and spake in the lower voice of petitions and remonstrances, in many points, as he did ? 91. Fourthly, and lastly, whereas you say, that many chief learned protestants are forced to confess the antiquity of your doc- trine and practice ; I answer, of many doctrines and practices of yours this is not true, nor pretended to be true by those that have dealt in this argument. Search your storehouse, Mr. Brerely, who hath travelled as far in this north-west discovery, as it was pos- sible for human industry ; and, when you have done so, I pray inform me, what confessions of protestants have you, for the an- tiquity of the doctrine of the communion in one kind : the law- fulness and expedience of the Latin service : for the present use of indulgences : for the pope's power in temporalities over princes : for the picturing of the Trinity : for the lawfulness of the worship of pictures : for your beads, and rosary, and ladies' psalter ; and, in a word, for your whole worship of the blessed Virgin : for your oblations by way of consumption, and therefore in the quality of sacrifices to the Virgin Mary, and other saints : for your saying of paternosters and creeds to the honour of saints, and of ave-maries to the honour of other saints besides the blessed Virgin : for the infallibility of the bishop or church of Rome : for your prohibiting the scripture to be read publicly in the 384 Separation of Protestants from the church, in such languages as all may understand : for your doctrine of the blessed Virgin's immunity from actual sin ; and for your doctrine and worship of her immaculate conception : for the necessity of auricular confession : for the necessity of the priests' intention to obtain benefit by any of your sacraments: and, lastly, (not to trouble myself with finding out more) for this very doctrine of licentiousness, that though a man live and die without the practice of Christian virtues, and with the habits cf many damnable sins unmortified ; yet if he in the last moment of life have any sorrow for his sins, and join confession with it, certainly he shall be saved. Secondly, they that confess some of your doc- trines to have been the doctrine of the fathers may be mistaken, being abused by many words and phrases of the fathers, which have the Roman sound, when they are far from the sense. Some of them I am sure are so, I will name Goulartius, who in his Commentaries on St. Cyprian's 35th Ep. grants that the sentence (" heresies have sprung," &c.) quoted by you, §. 36 of this chapter, was meant of Cornelius : whereas it will be very plain to any attentive reader, that St. Cyprian speaks there of himself. Thirdly, though some protestants confess some of your doctrine to be ancient, yet this is nothing, so long as it is evident, even by the confession of all sides, that many errors, I instance in that of the millenaries, and the communicating of infants, were more ancient. Not any antiquity, therefore, unless it be absolute and primitive, is a certain sign of true doctrine. For if the church were obnoxious to corruption (as we pretend it was) who can pos- sibly warrant us, that part of this corruption might not get in and prevail in the fifth, or fourth, or third, or second age? Especially seeing the apostles assure us, that the mystery of iniquity was working, though more secretly, even in their times. If any man ask, how could it become universal in so short a time? let him tell me how the error of the millenaries, and the communicating of infants, became so soon universal ; and then he shall acknow- ledge, what was done in some, was possible in others. Lastly, to cry quittance with you, as there are protestants who confess the an- tiquity, but always post-nate to apostolic, of some points of your doctrine : so there want not papists who acknowledge as freely the novelty of many of them, and the antiquity of ours. A col lection of whose testimonies we have (without thanks to you) in your Indices expurgatorii ; the divine providence blessedly abusing for the readier manifestation of the truth this engine intended by you for the subversion and suppression of it. Here is no place to stand upon particulars : only one general ingenuous confession of that great Erasmus* may not be passed over in silence. JVon desunt magni theologi qui non verentur affirmare, nihil esse in Lu- thero quin per probatos authores defendi possit : there want not great divines, which stick not to affirm that there is nothing in Luther which may not be defended by good and allowed authors. Whereas therefore you close up this simile with — "Consider these points, and see whether your similitude do not con- * Erasm. Ep. lib. xv. Ep. ad Godeschalcum Ros. Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 385 demn your progenitors of schism from God's visible church;" I assure you, I have well considered them, and do plainly see that this is not Dr. Potter's similitude, but your own : and besides, that it is wholly made up of mistakes and falsehood, and is at no hand a sufficient proof of this great accusation. 92. Let us come now to the second similitude of your making ; in the entrance whereunto you tell us — that from the monastery Dr. Potter is fled to a hospital of persons universally infected with some disease, where he finds to be true what you supposed, that after his departure from his brethren, he might fall into greater inconveniences, and more infectious diseases than those for which he left them. — Thus you. But, to deal truly with you, I find nothing of all this, nor how it is consequent from any thing said by you, or done by Dr. Potter. But this I find, that you have composed this your similitude as you did the former, of a heap of vain suspicions, pretended to be grounded on our confessions. As, first, that your diseases, which we forsook, neither were nor could be mortal : whereas we assure ourselves, and are ready to justify, that they are and were mortal in themselves, and would have been so to us, if when light came to us, we had loved dark- ness more than light. And Dr. Potter, though he hoped your church wanted no necessary vital part, that is, that some in your church by ignorance might be saved ; yet he nothing doubts but that it is full of ulcers without, and diseases within, and is far from so extenuating your errors as to make them only like the superfluous fingers of the giant of Gath. Secondly, that we had no hope to avoid other diseases like those for which we forsook your company, nor to be secure out of it from damnable errors : — whereas the hope hereof was the only motive of our departure; and we assure ourselves that the means to be secured from damnable error, is not to be secure as you are, but carefully to use those means of avoiding it, to which God hath promised, and will never fail to give, a blessing. Thirdly, that those innumerable mischiefs which follow upon the departure of protestants, were caused by it as by a proper cause : — whereas their doctrine was no otherwise the occasion of them, than the gospel of Christ of the division of the world. The only fountain of all these mischiefs being indeed no other than your pouring out a flood of persecutions against protestants, only because they would not sin and be damned with you for company. Unless we may add, the impatience of some protestants, who not enduring to be torn in pieces like sheep by a company of wolves without resistance, chose rather to die like sol- diers than martyrs. 93. But you proceed, and, falling into a fit of admiration, cry out and say thus, " To what pass hath heresy brought men, who blush not to compare the blessed spouse of the Lord, the only dove," &c. to a monastery that must be forsaken, to the giant in Gath with superfluous fingers! — But this spouse of Christ, this only dove, this purchase of our Saviour's blood, this catholic church which you thus almost deify, what is it but a society of men, whereof every particular, and by consequence the whole b b 33 386 Separation of Protestants from the company, is, or may be, guilty of many sins daily committed against knowledge and conscience 1 Now I would fain under- stand why one error in faith, especially if not fundamental, should not consist with the holiness of this spouse, this dove, this church, as well as many and great sins committed against knowledge and conscience ? If this be not to strain at gnats and swallow camels, I would fain understand what it is ? And here, by the way, I desire you to consider whether, as it were with one stroke of a sponge, you do not wipe out all that you have said, to prove protestants schismatics for separating from your church, though supposed to be in some errors not fundamental. For if any such error may make her deserve to be compared to " a monastery so disordered that it must be forsaken ;" then if you suppose (as here you do) your church in such errors, your church is so disordered that it must, and therefore without question may be, forsaken ; I mean in those her disorders and corruptions, and no farther. 94. And yet you have not done with those similitudes — but must observe (you say) one thing, and that is, that as these re- formers of the monastery, and others who left the diseased com- pany, could not deny but that they left the said communities : so Luther and the rest cannot pretend not to have left the visible church. And that Dr. Potter speaks very strangely when he says, " In a society of men universally infected with some disease, they that should free themselves from the common disease, could not be therefore said to separate from the society." For if they do not separate themselves from the society of the infected per- sons, how do they free themselves from the common disease? To which I answer : that indeed if you speak of the reformers of a monastery, and of the deserters of the diseased company, as you put the cases, that is, of those which left these communities, then it is as true as gospel, that they cannot deny but that they left the said communities. But it appears not to me, how it will ensue hereupon, that Luther and the rest cannot pretend not to have left the visible church. For, to my apprehension, this argument is very weak. They which left some communities cannot truly deny but that they left them ; therefore Luther and his followers cannot deny but that they left the visible church. Where, methinks, you prove little, but take for granted that which is one of the greatest questions amongst us, that is, that the company which Luther left was the whole visible church : whereas you know we say, it was but a part of it, and that corrupted, and obstinate in her corruptions. Indeed, that Luther and his fol- lowers left off the practice of those corruptions wherein the whole visible church did communicate formerly, (which I meant when I acknowledged above that they forsook the external communion of the visible church) or that they left that part of the visible church in her corruptions which would not be reformed : these things, if you desire, 1 shall be willing to grant ; and that by a synecdoche of the whole for the part, he might be said to forsake the visible church, that is, a part of it, and the greater part. But Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 387 that, properly speaking, he forsook the whole visible church, I hope you will excuse me if I grant not this, until you bring better proof of it than your former similitude. And my reason is this, because he and his followers were a part of this church, and ceased not to be so by their reformation. Now he and his fol- lowers certainly forsook not themselves ; therefore not every part of the church, therefore not the whole church. But then, if you speak of Dr. Potter's cases, according as he put them, and answer not your own arguments, when you make show of answering his; methinks it should not be so unreasonable as you make it, for the persons he speaks of to deny that they left the communities whereof they were members. For example, that the monks of St. Bennet's order make one body, whereof their several monas- teries are several members, I presume it will be easily granted. Suppose now, that all these monasteries, being quite out of order, some twenty or thirty of them should reform themselves, the rest persisting still in their irregular courses ; were it such a mon- strous impudence as you make it, for these monasteries, which we suppose reformed, to deny that they forsook their order, or the community whereof they were parts? In my opinion it is no such matter. Let the world judge. Again, whereas the doctor says, that "in a society of men universally infected with some disease, they that should free themselves from the common dis- ease, could not therefore be said to separate from the society :" it is very strange to me that you should say, he speaks very strangely. Truly, sir, I am extremely deceived if his words be not plain English, and plain sense, and contain such a manifest truth as cannot be denied with modesty, nor gone about to be proved without vanity. For whatsoever is proved must be proved by something more evident. Now what can be more evident than this: that if some whole family were taken with agues, if the father of this family should free himself from his, that he should not therefore deservedly be thought to abandon and desert his family 1 But (say you) if they do not separate themselves from the society of the wicked persons, how do they free themselves from the common disease 1 Do they at the same time remain in the company, and yet depart from those infected creatures? Methinks a writer of controversies should not be ignorant how this may be done without any such difficulty ! But if you do not know, I will tell you, there is no necessity they should leave the company of these infected persons at all, much less that they should at once depart from it and remain with it, which I confess were very difficult. But if they will free themselves from their disease, let them stay where they are, and take physic. Or, if you would be better informed how this strange thing may be done, learn from yourself — they may free their own persons from the common disease, yet so that they remain still in the company infected, eating and drinking with them, &c. Which are your own words within four or live lines after this: plainly showing, that your mistaking Dr. Potter's meaning, and your wondering at his words as at some strange monsters, was all this while bb2 388 Separation of Protestants from the affected, and that you are conscious to yourself of perverting his argument, that you may seem to say something, when indeed you say nothing. Whereas therefore you add, we must then say that they separate themselves from the persons, though it be by occa- sion of the disease ; I assure you, good sir, you must not do so at any hand ; for then you alter and spoil Dr. Potter's case quite, and fight not with his reason, but your own shadow. For the instance of a man freeing himself from the disease of his company, and not leaving his company, is very fit to prove, by the parity of reason, that it is very possible a man may leave the corruptions of a church, and not leave the church, that is, not cease to be a mem- ber of it : but yours, of a man leaving his company, by occasion of their disease, hath no analogy at all with this business. 95. But Luther and his followers did not continue in the com- pany of those from whose diseases they pretended to free them- selves. — Very true, neither was it said they did so. There is no necessity that that which is compared to another thing should agree with it in all things ; it is sufficient if it agree in that wherein it is compared. A man freeing himself from the common disease of a society, and yet continuing a part of it, is here compared to Luther and his followers, freeing themselves from the corruptions of the visible church, and continuing a part of the church. As for accompanying the other parts of it in all things, it was neither necessary, nor without destroying our supposition of their for- saking the corruptions of the church possible: not necessary, for they may be parts of the church which do not join with other parts of it in all observances: nor possible, for had he accom- panied them in all things, he had not freed himself from the common corruptions. 96. But they endeavoured to force the society, whereof they were parts, to be healed and reformed as they were ; and, if it refused, they did, when they had power, drive them away, even their superiors, both spiritual and temporal, as is notorious. The proofs hereof are wanting, and therefore I might defer my answer until they were produced ; yet take this beforehand : if they did so, then herein, in my opinion, they did amiss ; for I have learned from the ancient fathers of the church, that nothing is more against religion than to force religion ; and of St. Paul, the weapons of the christian warfare are not carnal. And great rea- son : for human violence may make men counterfeit, but cannot make them believe, and is therefore fit for nothing, but to breed form without, and atheism within. Besides, if this means of bringing men to embrace any religion were generally used, (as if it may be justly used in any place by those that have power, and think they have truth, certainly they cannot with reason deny but that it may be used in every place, by those that have power as well as they, and think they have truth as well as they) what could follow but the maintenance perhaps of truth, but perhaps only of the profession of it in one place, and the oppression of it in a hundred ? What will follow from it, but the preservation peradventure of unity, but peradventure only of uniformity, in Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism 389 particular states and churches: but the immortalizing the greater and more lamentable divisions of Christendom and the world ? And, therefore, what can follow from it, but perhaps in the judg- ment of carnal policy, the temporal benefit and tranquillity of temporal states and kingdoms, but the infinite prejudice, if not the desolation, of the kingdom of Christ ? And therefore it well becomes them, who have their portions in this life, who serve no higher state than that of England, or Spain, or France, nor this neither, any further than they may serve themselves by it ; who think of no other happiness but the preservation of their own fortunes and tranquillity in this world; who think of no other means to preserve states, but human power and Machiavellian policy, and believe no other creed but this, Regi aut civitaf.i im- perium habenti nihil injustumquod utile: such men as these it may become to maintain by worldly power and violence their state instrument, religion. For if all be vain and false (as in their judgment it is), the present whatsoever is better than any, be- cause it is already settled : and alteration of it may draw with it change of states, and the change of state the subversion of their fortune. But they that are indeed servants and lovers of Christ, of truth, of the church, and of mankind, ought with all courage to oppose themselves against it, as a common enemy of all these. They that know there is a King of kings, and Lord of lords, by whose will and pleasure kings and kingdoms stand and fall ; they know that to no king or state any thing can be profitable which is unjust; and that nothing can be more evidently unjust, than to force weak men, by the profession of a religion which they be- lieve not, to lose their own eternal happiness, out of a vain ana needless fear, lest they may possibly disturb their temporal quiet- ness. There is no danger to any state from any man's opinion ; unless it be such an opinion, by which disobedience to authority, or impiety, is taught or licensed ; which sort, I confess, may justly be punished as well as other faults; or, unless this sanguinary doctrine be joined with it, that it is lawful for him by human violence to enforce others to it. Therefore, if protestants did offer violence to other men's consciences, and compel them to embrace their Reformation, I excuse them not ; much less if they did so to the sacred persons of kings, and those that were in authority over them, who ought to be so secured from violence, that even their unjust and tyrannous violence, though it may be avoided, (according to that of our Saviour, " when they persecute you in one city, flee unto another") yet may it not be resisted by opposing violence against it. Protestants, therefore, that were guilty of this crime, are not to be excused ; and blessed had they been, had they chosen rather to be martyrs than murderers, and to die for their religion rather than to fight for it. But of all the men in the world, you are the most unfit to accuse them hereof, against whom the souls of the martyrs from under the altar cry much louder than against all their other persecutors together : who for these many ages together have daily sacrificed hecatombs of innocent christians, under the name of heretics, to your blind 33* 390 Separation of Protestants from the zeal, and furious superstition : who teach plainly, that you may propagate your religion, whensoever you have power, by depo- sing of kings, and invasion of kingdoms; and think, when you kill the adversaries of it, you do God good service. But for their departing corporally from them, whom mentally they had for- saken ; for their forsaking the external communion and company of the unreformed part of the church, in their superstitions and impieties: thus much of your accusation we embrace, and glory in it; and say, though some protestants might offend in the manner or degree of their separation, yet certainly their separation itself was not schismatical, but innocent; and not only so, but just and necessary. And as for your obtruding upon Dr. Potter, that he should say, there neither was nor could be just cause to do so, no more than to depart from Christ himself, I have showed divers times already, that you deal very injuriously with him, confound- ing together departing from the church, and departing from some general opinions and practices, which did not constitute, but vitiate, not make the church, but mar it. For though he says that which is most true, that there can be no just cause to depart from the church, that is, to cease being a member of the church, no more than to depart from Christ himself, inasmuch as these are not divers, but the same thing ; yet he no where denies, but there might be just and necessary cause to depart from some opinions and practices of your church, nay, of the catholic church. And there- fore you do vainly infer that, Luther and his followers for so doing were schismatics. 97. Ad. §. 35. I answer in a word, that neither are Optatus's sayings rules of faith, and therefore not fit to determine contro- versies of faith : and then, that Majorinus might well be a schis- matic for departing from Caecilianus, and the chair of Cyprian and Peter without cause ; and yet Luther and his followers, who departed from the communion of the bishop of Rome, and the bishop of their own diocese, be none, because they had just and necessary cause of their departure. For otherwise they must have continued in the profession of known errors, and the practice of manifest corruptions. 98. Ad. §. 36. In the next section you tell us, that Christ our Lord gave St. Peter and his successors authority over his whole militant church. And, for proof hereof, you first refer us to Brerely, citing exactly the places of such chief protestants as have confessed the antiquity of this point. Where first you fall into the fallacy which is called ignoratio elenchi, or mistaking the question ; for being to prove this point true, you only prove it ancient : which, to what purpose is it, when both the parties liti- gant are agreed, that many errors were held by many of the ancient doctors, much more ancient than any of those who are pretended to be confessed by protestants to have held with you in this matter : and when those, whom you have to do with, and whom it is vain to dispute against, but out of principles received by them, are all peremptory, that though novelty be a certain note of falsehood, yet no antiquity, less than apostolical, is a cer- Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 391 tain note of truth ? Yet this I say not as if I did acknowledge what you pretend, that protestants did confess the fathers against them in this point. For the point here issuable is not, whether St. Peter were head of the church ? Nor, whether the bishop of Rome had any priority in the church ? Nor, whether he had authority over it given him by the church? But, whether bv divine right, and by Christ's appointment, he were head of the catholic church? Now, having perused Brerely, I cannot find any one protestant confessing any one father to have concurred in opinion with you in this point. And the reader hath reason to suspect, that you also out of all the fathers could not find any one authority pertinent to this purpose ; for otherwise you were much to blame, citing so few, to make choice of such as are imperti- nent. For let the understanding reader peruse the 55th epist. of St. Cyprian, with an ordinary attention, out of which you take your first place; and I am confident, that he shall find, that he means nothing else by the words quoted by you, but that in one particular church, at one time, there ought to be but one bishop, and that he should be obeyed in all things lawful; the non-per- formance whereof was one of the most ordinary causes of heresies against the faith, and schism from the communion of the church universal. He shall find, secondly, and that by many convincing arguments, that though he write to Cornelius, Bishop of Rome, yet he speaks not of him, but of himself then bishop of Carthage, against whom a faction of schismatics had then set up another. And therefore here your ingenuity is to be commended above many of your side : for whereas they ordinarily abuse this place to prove, that in the whole church there ought to be but one priest, and one judge ; you seem somewhat diffident hereof, and thereupon say, that the words plainly condemn Luther, whethe* he will understand them as spoken of the universal, or of every particular church: but whether they condemn Luther is another question. The question here is, whether they plainly prove the pope's supremacy over all other bishops? Which certainly they are as far from proving as from proving the supremacy of any other bishop ; seeing it is evident they were intended not of one bishop over the whole catholic church, but of one bishop in one particular church. 99. And no less impertinent is your saying out of Optatus, if it be well looked into, though at the first sight it may seem other- wise ; because Optatus's scene happened to be Rome, whereas St. Cyprian's was Carthage. The truth is, the donatists had set up at Rome a bishop of their faction ; not with intent to make him bishop of the whole church, but of that church in particular. Now Optatus, going upon St. Cyprian's above-mentioned ground of one bishop in one church, proves them schismatics for so doing, and he proves it by this argument : St. Peter was first bishop of Rome, neither did the apostles attribute to themselves each one his particular chair (understand, in that city; for in other places others, I hope, had chairs beside St. Peter) ; and therefore he is a schismatic, who against that one single chair erects another, 392 Separation of Protestants from the (understand, as before, in that place) making another bishop in that diocese besides him who was lawfully elected to it. 100. But yet by the way he styles St. Peter head of the apostles, and says, that from thence he was called Cephas. — Ans. Perhaps he was abused in this opinion, by thinking Cephas derived from the Greek word xstpaX-q, a head : whereas it is a Syriac word, and signifies a stone. Besides, St. Peter might be head of the apostles, that is, first in order and honour among them, and not have supreme authority over them. And indeed that St. Peter should have authority over all the apostles, and yet exercise no one act of authority over any one of them, and that they should show to him no sign of subjection, methinks is as strange as that a king of England for twenty-five years together should do no act of re- gality, nor receive any one acknowledgment of it. As strange methinks it is, that you, so many ages after, should know this so certainly, as you pretend to do, and that the apostles (after that those words were spoken in their hearing, by virtue whereof St. Peter is pretended to have been made their head) should still be so ignorant of it, as to question which of them should be the greatest ? Yet more strange, that our Saviour should not bring them out of their error, by telling them St. Peter was the man, but rather confirm it by saying — the kings of the gentiles exercise authority over them, but it should not be so among them. No less a wonder was it, that St. Paul should so far forget St. Peter and himself, as that, first, mentioning of him so often, he should do it without any title of honour : secondly, speaking of the several degrees of men in the church, he should not give St. Peter the highest, but place him in equipage with the rest of the apostles, and say, " God hath appointed (not first Peter, then the rest of the apostles, but) first apostles, secondly prophets." Certainly, if the apostles were all first, to me it is very probable, that no one of them was before the rest. For by first, all men understand either that which is before all, or that before which is nothing. Now, in the former sense, the apostles could not be all first, for then every one of them must have been before every one of the rest ; and therefore they must be first in the other sense. And therefore no man, and therefore not St. Peter, must be before any of them. Thirdly and lastly, that speaking of himself in particu- lar, and perhaps comparing himself with St. Peter in particular, rather than any other, he should say, in plain terms, I am nothing inferior to the very chiefest apostles. But, besides all this, though we should grant against all those probabilities, and many more, that Optatus meant, that St. Peter was head of the apostles, not in our, but in your sense, and that St. Peter indeed was so; yet still you are very far from showing, that in the judgment of Optatus, the bishop of Rome was to be at all, much less by divine right, successor to St. Peter in this his headship and authority. For what incongruity is there if we say, that he might succeed St. Peter in that part of his care, the government of that par- ticular church, (as sure he did even while St. Peter was living) and yet that neither he nor any man was to succeed him in his Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 393 apostleship, nor in his government of the church universal? — Especially, seeing St. Peter and the rest of the apostles, by laying the foundations of the church, were to be the foundations of it, and accordingly are so called in scripture. And therefore as in a build- ing it is incongruous, that foundations should succeed foundations ; so it may be in the church, that any other apostles should succeed the first. 101. Ad. §. 37. The next paragraph I might well pass over, as having no argument in it. For there is nothing in it but two sayings of St. Augustine, which I have great reason to esteem no argument, until you will promise me to grant whatsoever I shall prove by two sayings of St. Augustine. But, moreover, the second of these sentences seems to me to imply the contradiction of the first. For to say, that the sacrilege of schism is eminent, when there is no cause of separation, implies to my understanding, that there may be a cause of separation. Now in the first he says plainly, that this is impossible. Neither doth any reconciliation of his words occur to me, but only this, that in the former he speaks upon supposition, that the public service of God, wherein men are to communicate, is unpolluted, and no unlawful thing practised in their communion ; which was so true of their com- munion, that the donatists who separated, did not deny it. And to make this answer no improbable evasion, it is observable out of St. Augustine and Optatus, that though the donatists, at the beginning of their separation, pretended no cause for it, but only that the men from whom they separated, were defiled with the contagion of traditors; yet afterwards, to make the continuance of it more justifiable, they did invent and spread abroad this ca- lumny against catholics, that they set pictures upon their altars ; which, when St. Augustine comes to answer, he does not deny the possibility of the thing, for that had been to deny the catholic church to be made up of men, all which had free will to do evil, and therefore might possibly agree in doing it ; and, had he de- nied this, the action of after ages had been his refutation : neither does he say (as you would have done), that it was true, they placed pictures there, and moreover worshipped them, but yet not for their own sakes, but for theirs who were represented by them: nei- ther does he say (as you do in this chapter), that though this were granted a corruption, yet were they not to separate for it. What then does he 1 Certainly nothing else but abhor the thing and deny the imputation. Which way of answering does not, I con- fess, plainly shew, but yet it somewhat intimates, that he had no- thing else to answer; and that if he could not have denied this, he could not have denied the donatist's separation from them to have been just. If this answer to this little argument seem not sufficient, I add, moreover, that if it be applied to Luther's sepa- ration, it hath the common fault of all your allegations out of fathers, impertinence. For it is one thing to separate from the communion of the whole world, another to separate from all the communions in the world : one thing to divide from them who are united among themselves, another to divide from them who are 394 Separation of Protestants from the divided among themselves. Now the donatists separated from the whole world of Christians, united in one communion, professing the same faith, serving God after the same manner, which was a very- great argument, that they could not have just cause to leave them : according to that of Tertullian — Variasse debuerat error ecclesia- rum ; quod autem apud multos unum est, non est erratum, sed tra- ditum. But Luther and his followers did not so. The world, I mean of christians and catholics, was divided and subdivided long before he divided from it ; and by their divisions had much weak- ened their own authority, and taken away from you this plea of St. Augustine, which stands upon no other foundation, but the unity of the whole world's communion. 102. Ad. §. 38. If Luther were in the right, most certain those protestants that differed from him were in the wrong : — but that either he or they were schismatics, it follows not. Or, if it does, then either the Jesuits are schismatics from the dominicans, or they from the Jesuits : the canonists from the Jesuits, or the Jesuits from the canonists ; the scotists from the thomists, or they from the scotists; the franciscans from the dominicans, or the domini- cans from the franciscans : for between all these the world knows, that, in point of doctrine, there is a plain and irreconcilable con- tradiction ; and therefore one part must be in error, at least not fundamental. Thus your argument returns upon yourself, and, if it be good, proves the Roman church in a manner to be made up of schismatics. But the answer to it is, that it begs this very false and vain supposition — that whosoever errs in any point of doctrine is a schismatic. 103. Ad. §. 39. In the next place you number up your victories, and tell us — that out of those premises, this conclusion follows; that Luther and his followers were schismatics from the visible church ; the pope ; the diocese wherein they were baptized ; from the bishop under whom they lived ; from the country to which they belonged ; from their religious order, wherein they were pro- fessed; from one another; and, lastly, from a man's self; because the self-same protestant is convicted to-day, that his yesterday's opinion was an error. — To which I answer, that Luther and his followers separated from many of these, in some opinions and practices; but that they did it without cause, which only can make them schismatics, that was the only thing you should have proved : and to that you have not urged one reason of any moment. All of them for weight and strength were cousin-germans to this pretty device, wherewith you will prove them schismatics from themselves, because the self-same protestant to-day is convicted in conscience, that his yesterday's opinion was an error. It seems, then, that they that hold errors, must hold them fast, and take special care of being convicted in conscience, that they are in er- ror, for fear of being schismatics! protestants must continue protest- ants, and puritans puritans, and papists papists; nay, Jews, and Turks, and pagans, must remain Jews, and Turks, and pagans, and go on constantly to the devii ; or else, forsooth, they must be schismatics, and that from themselves. And this, perhaps, is the Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 395 cause that makes papists so obstinate, not only in their common superstition, but also in adhering to the proper fancies of their several sects ; so that it is a miracle to hear of any Jesuit that hath forsaken the opinion of the Jesuits, or any dominican that hath changed his for the Jesuits'. Without question, this gentleman, my adversary, knows none such, or else, methinks, he should not have objected it to Dr. Potter, that he knew a man in the world, who, from a puritan, was turned to a moderate protestant, which is likely to be true. But sure, if this be all his fault, he hath no reason to be ashamed of his acquaintance : for, possibly it may be a fault to be in error, because many times it proceeds from a fault ; but sure the forsaking of error cannot be a sin, unless to be in error be a virtue. And, therefore, to do as you do, to damn men for false opinions, to call them schismatics for leaving them; to make pertinacy in error, that is, an unwilling- ness to be convicted, or a resolution not to be convicted, the form of heresy, and to find fault with men for being convicted in con- science, that they are in error, is the most incoherent and contra- dictious injustice that ever was heard of. But, sir, if this be a strange matter to you, that which I shall tell you will be much stranger ; I know a man that of a moderate protestant turned a papist ; and the day that he did so (as all things that are done are perfected some day or other) was convicted in conscience, that his yesterday's opinion was an error, and yet thinks he was no schismatic for doing so, and desires to be informed by you, whether or no he was mistaken ? The same man, afterwards, upon better consideration, became a doubt- ing papist ; and of a doubting papist a confirmed protestant. And yet this man thinks himself no more to blame for all these changes, than a traveller, who, using all diligence to find the right way to some remote city, where he had never been (as the party I speak of had never been in heaven), did yet mistake it, and after find his error, and amend it. Nay, he stands upon his justification so far, as to maintain, that his alterations, not only to you, but also from you, by God's mercy, were the most satisfactory actions to himself that ever he did, and the greatest victories that ever he obtained over himself, and his affections to those things which in this world are most precious ; as wherein for God's sake, and (as he was verily persuaded) out of love to the truth, he went, upon a certain expec- tation of those inconveniences, which to ingenuous natures are of all most terrible : so that, though there were much weakness in some of these alterations, yet certainly there was no wickedness. Neither does he yield his weakness altogether without apology, see- ing his deductions were rational, and out of some principles com- monly received by protcstants as well as papists, and which by his education had got possession of his understanding. 104. Ad. §. 40, 41. Dr. Potter, p. 81 of his book, to prove our separation from you not only lawful, but necessary, hath these words : " Although we confess the church of Rome (in some sense) to be a true church, and her errors (to some men) not damnable ; yet for us who are convinced in conscience that she errs in many things, a necessity lies upon us, even under pain of damnation, to 396 Separation of Protestants from the forsake her in those errors." He means not, in the belief of those errors, for that is presupposed to be done already ; for whosoever is convinced in conscience, that she errs, hath for matter of belief forsaken, that is, ceased to believe, those errors. This, therefore, he meant not, nor could not mean ; but, that whosoever is con- vinced in conscience, that the church of Rome errs, cannot, with a good conscience, but forsake her in the profession and practice of these errors : and the reason hereof is manifest, because other- wise he must profess what he believes not, and practise what he approves not. Which is no more than yourself in these have divers times affirmed : for in one place you say, " it is unlawful to speak any the least untruth." Now he that professeth your religion, and believes it not, what else doth he but live in a per- petual lie 1 Again, in another, you have called them that profess one thing, and believe another, " a damned crew of dissembling sycophants :" and, therefore, in inveighing against protestants for forsaking the profession of these errors, the belief whereof they had already forsaken, what do you but rail at them for not being " a damned crew of dissembling sycophants ?" And, lastly, §. 42 of this chapter, within three leaves after this, whereas Dr. Potter grants but only a necessity of peaceable external obedience to the declaration of the church, though perhaps erroneous, (provided it be in matter not of faith, but of opinions or rites) condemning those men, who, by occasion of errors of this quality, disturb the church's peace, and cast off her communion : upon this occasion you come upon him with this bitter sarcasm, " I thank you for your ingenuous confession, in recompense whereof I will do a deed of charity, by putting you in mind into what labyrinths you are brought, by teaching that the church may err in some points of faith, and yet that it is not lawful for any man to oppose his judgment, or leave her communion, though he have evidence of scripture against her ! Will you have such a man dissemble against his conscience, or externally deny truth known to be con- tained in holy scripture V I answer for him, No, it is not he, but you, that would have men do so ; not he, who says plainly, that " whosoever is convinced in conscience, that any church errs, is bound, under pain of damnation, to forsake her in her profession and practice of these errors;" but you, who find fault with him, and make long discourses against him for thus affirming : not he, who can easily wind himself out of your imaginary labyrinth, by telling you, that he no where denies it lawful for any man to oppose any church erring in matter of faith ; for that he speaks not of matters of faith at all, but only of rites and opinions. And in such matters, he says indeed at first, " It is not lawful for any man to oppose his judgment to the public :" but he pre- sently explains himself by saying, not only that he may hold an opinion contrary to the public resolution, but besides that he may offer it to be considered of, (so far is he from requiring any sinful dissimulation) provided he do it with great probability of reason, very modestly and respectfully, and without separation from the church's communion. It is not, therefore, in this case, opposing Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 397 a man's private judgment to the public simply, which the doctor finds fault with ; but the degree only and malice of this opposi- tion, opposing it factiously ; and not holding a man's own con- ceit different from the church absolutely, which here he censures; but a factious advancing it, and despising the church, so far as to cast off her communion ; because, forsooth, she errs in some opinion, or useth some inconvenient, though not impious, rites and ceremonies. Little reason, therefore, have you to accuse him there, as if he required that men should dissemble their con- science, or externally deny a truth " known to be contained in holy scripture." But certainly a great deal less to quarrel with him for saying, (which is all that here he says) — that men, under pain of damnation, are not to dissemble ; but if they be convinced in conscience, that your, or any other church, (for the reason is alike for all) errs in many things, are of necessity to forsake that church, in the profession and practice of those errors. 105. But to consider your exception to this speech of the doctor's somewhat more particularly, I say, your whole discourse against it is compounded of falsehoods and impertinences. The first false- hood is, that he in these words avoucheth, that no learned catholics can be saved. Unless you will suppose, that all learned catholics are convinced in conscience, that your church errs in many things. It may well be feared, that many are so convinced, and yet pro- fess what they believe not. Many more have been, and have stifled their consciences, by thinking it an act of humility to do so. Many more would have been, had they, with liberty and in- difference of judgment, examined the grounds of the religion which they profess. But to think, that all the learned of your side are actually convinced of errors in your church, and yet will not forsake the profession of them, this is so great an uncharitable- ness, that I verily believe that Dr. Potter abhors it. Your next falsehood is, that the doctor affirms, that you catholics want no means of salvation ; and that he judges the Roman errors not to be in themselves fundamental or damnable. Which calumny I have very often confuted : and in this very place it is confuted by Dr. Potter, and confessed by yourself. For, in the beginning of this answer, you tell us, that the doctor avouches of all catholics, whom ignorance cannot excuse, that they cannot be saved. Cer- tainly, then, he must needs esteem them to want something neces- sary to salvation. And then in the doctor's saying, it is remark- able, that he confesses your errors to some men not damnable ; which clearly imports, that, according to his judgment, they were damnable in themselves, though by accident, to them who lived and died in invincible ignorance, and with repentance, they might prove not damnable. A third is, that these assertions " the Roman errors are in themselves not damnable, and yet it is damn- able for me (who know them to be errors) to hold and confess them, are absolutely inconsistent :" which is false ; for, be the matter what it will, yet for a man to tell a lie, especially in mat- ters of religion, cannot but be damnable. How much more, then, to go on in a course of lying, by professing to believe these things 34 398 Separation of Protestants from the divine truths, which he verily believes to be falsehoods and fables? A fourth is, that — if we erred in thinking, that your church holds error, this error, or erroneous conscience, might be rectified and deposed by judging those errors not damnable. For what repug- nance is there between these two suppositions, that you do hold some errors, and that thev are not damnable? And if there be no repugnance between them, how can the belief of the latter remove, or destroy, or, if it be erroneous, rectify the belief of the former ? Nay, seeing there is a manifest consent between them, how can it be avoided, but the belief of the latter will maintain and pre- serve the belief of the former ? For who can conjoin in one brain, not cracked, (pardon me if I speak to you in your own words) these assertions — in the Roman church there are errors not damn- able ; and, in the Roman church there are no errors at all ? Or, what sober understanding would ever think this a good collection — 1 esteem the errors of the Roman church not damnable; there- fore I do amiss to think that she errs at all ? If, therefore, you would have us alter our judgment, that your church is erroneous, your only way is to shew your doctrine consonant, at least not evidently repugnant, to scripture and reason. For, as for this device, this short cut of persuading ourselves, that you hold no errors, because we believe your errors not damnable, assure yourself' it will never hold. 106. A fifth falsehood is — that we daily do this favour for pro- testants, you must mean (if you speak consequently) to judge they have no errors, because we judge they have none damnable. Which the world knows to be most untrue. And for our con- tinuing in their communion, notwithstanding their errors, the justification hereof is not so much, that their errors are not damn- able, as that they required not the belief and profession of these errors among the conditions of their communion. Which puts a main difference between them and you : because we may con- tinue in their communion without professing to believe their opin- ions, but in yours we cannot. A sixth is — that according to the doctrines of all divines, there is not any difference between a spe- culative persuasion of conscience, of the unlawfulness of any thing, and a practical dictamen, that the same thing is unlawful. — For these are but divers words signifying the same thing ; neither is such persuasion wholly speculative, but tending to practice ; nor such a dictamen wholly practical, but grounded upon speculation. A seventh is — that protestants did only conceive in speculation, that the church of Rome erred in some doctrines, and had not also a practical dictamen, that it was damnable for them to con- tinue in the profession of these errors. An eighth is — that it is not lawful to separate from any church's communion, for errors not appertaining to the substance of faith : — which is not univer- sally true, but with this exception, • unless that church requires the belief and profession of them. The ninth is — that Dr. Potter teacheth, that Luther was bound to forsake the house of God, for an unnecessary light, confuted manifestly by Dr. Potter in this very place ; for, by the house of God, you mean the Roman Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 399 church, and of her the doctor says, that a necessity did lie upon him, even under pain of damnation, to forsake the church of Rome in her errors. This sure is not to say, that he was obliged to forsake her, for an unnecessary light. The tenth is covertly vented in your intimation — that Luther and his followers were the proper cause of the christian world's combustion : whereas, indeed, the true cause of this lamentable effect, was your violent persecution of them, for serving God according to their con- science, which, if it be done to you, you condemn of horrible im- piety ; and, therefore, may not hope to be excused if you do it to others. 107. The eleventh is — that our first reformers ought to have doubted whether their opinions were certain. Which is to say, that they ought to have doubted of the certainty of scripture ; which, in formal and express terms, contains many of these opi- nions. And the reason of this assertion is very vain : for, though they had not an absolute infallibility promised unto them, yet may they be of some things infallibly certain. As Euclid sure was not infallible ; yet was he certain enough, that twice two were four, and that every whole was greater than a part of that whole. And so, though Calvin and Melancthon were not infallible in all things, yet they might and did know well enough, that your Latip service was condemned by St. Paul, and that the communion in both kinds was taught by our Saviour. The twelfth and last is this — that your church was in peaceable possession, (you must mean of her doctrine, and the professors of it) and enjoyed prescription for many ages. For, besides that doctrine is not a thing that may be possessed ; and the professors of it were the church itself, and in nature of possessors (if we speak improperly), rather than the thing possessed, with whom no man hath reason to be offended, if they think fit to quit their own possession : I say, that the pos- session, which the governors of your church held for some ages of the party governed, was not peaceable, but got by fraud, and held by violence. 108. These are the falsehoods which in this answer offered themselves to any attentive reader, and that which remains is mere impertinence. As, first, that a pretence of conscience will not serve to justify separation from being schismatical. Which i« true, but little to the purpose, seeing it was not an erroneous persuasion, much less an hypocritical pretence, but a true and well-grounded conviction of conscience, which Dr. Potter alleged to justify protestants from being schismatical. And, therefore, though seditious men in church and state may pretend conscience for a cloak of their rebellion; yet this, I hope, hinders not, but that an honest man ought to obey his rightly-informed conscience, rather than the unjust commands of his tyrannous superiors: otherwise, with what colour can you defend either your own re- fusing the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, or the ancient mar- tyrs, and apostles, and prophets, who oftentimes disobeyed the commands of men in authority, and for their disobedience made no other but this apology, " We must obey God rather than men V 400 Separation of Protestants from the It is, therefore, most apparent, that this answer must be merely- impertinent ; seeing it will serve against the martyrs, and apostles, and prophets, and even against yourselves, as well as against protestants. To as little purpose is your rule out of Lyrinensis against them that followed Luther, seeing they pretend and are ready to justify, that they forsook not, with the doctor, the faith, but only the corruption of the church. As vain altogether is that which follows: that in cases of uncertainty we are not to leave our superior, nor cast off his obedience, nor publicly oppose his decrees. From whence it will follow very evidently, that seeing it is not a matter of faith, but a disputed question amongst you, whether the oath of allegiance be lawful, that either you ac- knowledge not the king your superior, or do against conscience, in opposing his and the kingdom's decree, requiring the taking of this oath. This good use, I say, may very fairly be made of it, and is by men of your religion. But, then, it is so far from being a confutation, that it is rather a confirmation, of Dr. Potter's as- sertion. For he that useth these words, doth he not plainly im- port, (and such was the case of protestants) that we are to leave our superiors, cast off obedience to them, and publicly to oppose their decrees, when we are certain (as protestants were) that what they command, God doth countermand? Lastly, St. Cyprian's example is against protestants impertinently, and even ridiculously, alleged. For what if St. Cyprian, holding his opinion true, but not necessary, condemned no man (much less any church) for holding the contrary ? Yet, methinks, this should lay no obligation upon Luther to do likewise ; seeing he held his own opinions not only true, but also necessary; and the doctrine of the Roman church not only false, but damnable. And, therefore, seeing the condition and state of the parties censured by St. Cyprian and Luther was so different, no marvel though their censures also were different according to the supposed merit of the parties delinquent. For, as for your obtruding again upon us, that we believe the points of difference not fundamental or necessary, you have been often told, that it is a calumny. We hold your errors as damnable in them- selves as you do ours; only by accident, through invincible igno- rance, we hope they are not unpardonable : and you also profess to think the same of ours. 109. Ad. §. 42. The former part of this discourse, grounded on Dr. Potter's words, p. 105, I have already in passing examined and confuted: I add in this place, 1. That though the doctor says, " It is not fit for any private man to oppose his judgment to the public ;" that is, his own judgment, and bare authority : yet he denies not, but occasions may happen, wherein it may be warrantable to oppose his reason, or the authority of scripture, against it; and is not then to be esteemed to oppose his own judgment to the public, but the judgment of God to the judgment of men. Which his following words seem to import : " he may offer his opinion to be considered of, so he do it with evidence, or great probability of scripture or reason." Secondly, I am to teil you, that you have no ground from him, to interline his words Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 4U1 with that interrogatory — " his own conceits, and yet grounded upon evidence of scripture ?" For these things are in his words opposed, and not confounded ; and the latter not intended for a repetition, (as you mistake it) but for an antithesis of the former. " He may offer (saith he) his opinion to be considered of, so he do it with evidence of scripture. But if he will factiously advance his own conceits, (that is, say I, clear contrary to your gloss) such as have not evident nor very probable ground in scripture, (for these conceits are properly his own) he may justly be branded," &c. Now that this of the two is the better gloss, it is proved by your own interrogation. For that imputes absurdity to Dr. Potter, for calling them a man's own conceits, which were grounded upon evidence of scripture. And, therefore, you have shewed little candour or equity, in fastening upon them this absurd con- struction ; they not only bearing, but even requiring, another, more fair and more sensible. Every man ought to be presumed to speak sense, rather than nonsense ; coherently, rather than contradictiously, if his words be fairly capable of a better con- struction. For Mr. Hooker, if, writing against puritans, he had said something unawares, that might give advantage to papists, it were not inexcusable ; seeing it is a matter of such extreme difficulty, to hold such a temper in opposing one extreme opinion, as not to seem to favour the other. Yet if his words be rightly considered, there is nothing in them that will do you any service. For though he says, that men are bound to do whatsoever the sentence of final decision shall determine, as it is plain men are bound to yield such an obedience to all courts of civil judicature; yet he says not, they are bound to think that determination law- ful, and that sentence just. Nay, it is plain, he says, that they must do according to the judges' sentences, though in their pri- vate opinion it seem unjust. As if I be cast wrongfully in a suit at law, and sentenced to pay a hundred pounds, I am bound to pay the money ; yet I know no law of God or man, that binds me in conscience to acquit the judge of error in his sentence. The question therefore being only what men ought to think, it is vain for you to tell us what Mr. Hooker says at all ; for Mr. Hooker, though an excellent man, was but a ma~n : and much more vain, to tell us out of him, what men ought to do, for point of external obedience ; when, in the very same place, he supposeth and al- loweth, that in their private opinion they may think this sentence, to which they yield a passive obedience, to swerve utterly from that which is right. If you will draw his words to such a con- struction, as if he had said — They must think the sentence of judicial and final decision just and right, though it seem in their private opinion to swerve utterly from what is right — it is mani- fest you make him contradict himself, and make him say, in effect, they must think thus, though, at the same time, they think the contrary. Neither is there any necessity, that he must either acknowledge the universal infallibility of the church, or drive men into dissembling against their conscience, seeing no- thing hinders, but I may obey the sentence of a judge, paying the cc 34* 402 Separation of Protestants from the money he awards me to pay, or foregoing the house or land which he hath judged from me, and yet withal plainly profess, that in my conscience I conceive his judgment erroneous. To which pur- pose, they have a saying in France, that " Whosoever is cast in any cause, hath liberty, for ten days after, to rail at his judges." 110. This answer to this place, the words themselves offered me, even as they are alleged by you : but upon perusal of the place in the author himself, I find that here, as elsewhere, you and Mr. Brerely wrong him extremely. For, mutilating his words, you make him say that absolutely, which he there expressly limits to some certain cases. " In litigious and controverted causes of such a quality (saith he) the will of God is, to have them do what- soever the sentence of judicial and final decision shall determine." Observe, I pray, he says not absolutely, and in all causes, this is the will of God ; but only in litigious causes, of the quality of those whereof he there entreats. In such matters, as have plain scripture or reason neither for them nor against them, and wherein men are persuaded this or that way, upon their own only probable collection ; in such cases, " this persuasion (saith he) ought to be fully settled in men's hearts, that the will of God is, that they should not disobey the certain commands of their lawful superiors, upon uncertain grounds; but do that which the sentence of judicial and final decision shall determine." For the purpose, a question there is, whether a surplice may be worn in divine ser- vice ? The authority of superiors enjoins this ceremony, and nei- ther scripture nor reason plainly forbids it. Sempronius, notwith- standing, is, by some inducements, which he confesses to be only probable, led to this persuasion, that the thing is unlawful. The query is, whether he ought for matter of practice to follow the injunction of authority, or his own private and only probable persuasion ? Mr. Hooker resolves for the former, upon this ground, that the certain commands of the church we live in, are to be obeyed in all things, not certainly unlawful. Which rule is your own, and by you extended to the commands of all superiors, in the very next section before this, in these words : " In cases of uncertainty we are not to leave our superior, nor cast off his obe- dience, or publicly oppose his decrees." And yet, if a man should conclude upon you, that either you make all superiors universally infallible, of else drive men into perplexities and labyrinths of doing against conscience, I presume you would not think yourself fairly dealt with ; but allege, that your words are not extended to all cases, but limited to cases of uncertainty. As little there- fore ought you to make this deduction from Mr. Hooker's words, which are apparently also restrained to cases of uncertainty. For as for requiring a blind and unlimited obedience to ecclesiastical decisions universally and in all cases, even when plain texts or reason seems to control them, Mr. Hooker is as far from making such an idol of ecclesiastical authority, as the puritans, whom he writes against: "I grant (saith he) that proof derived from the authority of man's judgment, is not able to work that assurance which doth grow by a stronger proof. And therefore although Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 403 ten thousand general councils would set down one and the same definitive sentence, concerning any point of religion whatsoever ; yet one demonstrative reason alleged, or one manifest testimony cited from the word of God himself to the contrary, could not choose but overweigh them all : inasmuch as for them to be de- ceived, it is not impossible ; it is, that demonstrative reason, or divine testimony, should deceive." And again, " Whereas it is thought, that, especially with the church, and those that are called, man's authority ought not to prevail ; it must and doth prevail even with them, yea, with them especially, as far as equity requireth, and farther we maintain it not. For men to be tied and led by authority, as it were with a kind of captivity of judg- ment; and, though there be reason to the contrary, not to listen to it, but to follow like beasts the first in the herd, this were brutish." Again, " That authority of men should prevail with men either against or above reason, is no part of our belief. Companies of learned men, be they never so great and reverend, are to yield unto reason, the weight whereof is no whit prejudiced by the simplicity of his person which doth allege it; but, being found to be sound and good, the bare opinion of men to the con- trary must of necessity stoop and give place." Thus Mr. Hooker in his 7th §. book ii. which place, because it is far distant from that which is alleged by you, the oversight of it might be excusable, did you not impute it to Dr. Potter as a fault, that he cites some clauses of some books, without reading the whole. But besides, in that very section, out of which you take this corrupted sentence, he hath very pregnant words to the same effect : " As for the orders established, sith equity and reason favour that which is in being, till orderly judgment of decision be given against it, it is but justice to exact of you, and perverseness in you it would be to deny thereunto your willing obedience. Not that I judge it a thing allowable, for men to observe those laws, which in their hearts they are steadfastly persuaded to be against the law of God : but your persuasion in this case ye are all bound for the time to suspend ; and, in otherwise doing, ye offend against God, by troubling his church without just and necessary cause. Be it that there are some reasons inducing you to think hardly of our laws : are those reasons demonstrative, are they necessary, or but mere probabilities only? An argument necessary and demon- strative is such, as, being proposed to any man, and understood, -the mind cannot choose but inwardly assent. Any one such reason dischargeth, I grant, the conscience, and setteth it at full liberty. For the public approbation given by the body of this whole church, unto those things which are established, doth make it but probable, that they are good. And therefore unto a neces- sary proof, that they are not good, it must give place." This plain declaration of his judgment in this matter, this express limitation of his former resolution, he makes in the very same section, which affords your former quotation ; and therefore what apology can be made for you, and your store-house, Mr. Brerely, for dissembling of it, I cannot possibly imagine. cc2 404 Protestants not guilty of Schism. 111. Dr. Potter, p. 131, says, that the errors of the donatists and novatians were not in themselves heresies, nor could be made so by the church's determination : but that the church's intention was only to silence disputes, and to settle peace and unity in her government: which because they factiously opposed, they were justly esteemed schismatic. From hence you conclude, that the same condemnation must pass against the first reformers, seeing they also opposed the commands of the church, imposed on them, for silencing all disputes, and settling peace and unity in govern- ment. But this collection is deceitful, and the reason is, because, though the first reformers, as well as the donatists and novatians,. opposed herein the commands of the visible church, that is, of a great part of it ; yet the reformers had reason, nay necessity, to do so, the church being then corrupted with damnable errors; which was not true of the church, when it was opposed by the novatians and donatists. And therefore, though they, and the reformers, did the same action, yet doing it upon different grounds, it might in these merit applause, and in them con- demnation. 112. Ad. §. 43. The next section hath in it some objections against Luther's person, and none against his cause, which alone I have undertaken to justify, and therefore I pass it over. Yet this I promise, that when you, or any of your side, shall publish a good defence of all that your popes have said and done, espe- cially of them whom Bellarmine believes, in such a long train, to have gone to the devil, then you shall receive an ample apology for all the actions and words of Luther. In the mean time, I hope, all reasonable and equitable judges will esteem it not un- pardonable in the great and heroical spirit of Luther, if, being opposed and perpetually baited with a world of furies, he was transported sometimes, and made somewhat furious. As for you, I desire you to be quiet, and to demand no more, whether God be wont to send such furies to preach the gospel? Unless you desire to hear of your killing of kings, massacring of people, blowing up of parliaments; and have a mind to be asked, whether it be pro- bable, that that should be God's cause, which needs to be main- tained by such devilish means. 113. Ad. §. 44, 45. In the two next particles, which are all of this chapter that remain unspoken to, you spend a great deal of reading, and wit, and reason against some men, who, pretending to honour and believe the doctrine and practice of the visible church, (you mean your own) and condemning their forefathers, who forsook her, say they would not have done so, yet remain divided from her communion. Which men, in my judgment, cannot be defended: for if they believe the doctrine of your church, then must they believe this doctrine, that they are to return to your communion. And therefore, if they do not so, it cannot be avoided but they must be auToxaraxpiToi, and so I leave them ; only I am to remember you, that these men cannot pre- tend to be protestants, because they pretend to believe your doc- trine, which is opposite in diameter unto the doctrine of protes- Charity maintained by Catholics. 405 tants ; and therefore, in a work which you profess to have written merely against protestants, all this might have been spared. CHAPTER VI. That Luther and the rest of protestants have added heresy unto schism. " 1. Because vice is best known by the contrary virtue, we cannot well determine what heresy is, nor who be heretics, but bv the opposite virtue of faith, whose nature being once understood, as far as belongs to our present purpose, we shall pass on with ease to the definition of heresy, and so be able to discern who be here- tics. And this I intend to do, not by entering into such particular questions, as are controverted between catholics and protestants, but only by applying some general grounds, either already proved, or else yielded to on all sides. " 2. Almighty God having ordained man to a supernatural end of beatitude by supernatural means, it was requisite that his un- derstanding should be enabled to apprehend that end and means by a supernatural knowledge : and because if such a knowledge were no more than probable, it could not be able sufficiently to overbear our will, and encounter with human probabilities, being backed with the strength of flesh and blood ; it was further ne- cessary, that this supernatural knowledge should be most certain and infallible ; and that faith should believe nothing more cer- tainly than that itself is a most certain belief, and so be able to beat down all gay probabilities of human opinion. And because the aforesaid means and end of beatifical vision do far exceed the reach of natural wit, the certainty of faith could not always be joined with such evidence of reason, as is wont to be found in the principles or conclusions of human natural sciences, that so all flesh might not glory in the arm of flesh, but he ' who glories, should glory in our Lord.'* Moreover, it was expedient, that our belief or assent to divine truths, should not only be unknown or inevident by any human discourse, but that absolutely also it should be obscure in itself, and (ordinarily speaking) be void even of supernatural evidence, that so we might have occasion to actuate and testify the obedience which we owe to our God, not only by submitting our will to his will and commands, but by subjecting also our understanding to his wisdom and words, cap- tivating (as the apostle speaks) the same understanding! to the obedience of faith ; which occasion had been wanting, if Almighty God had made clear to us the truths which now are certainly, but not evidently, presented to our minds: for where truth doth mani- festly open itself, not obedience, but necessity, commands our assent. For this reason, divines teach, that the objects of faith being not evident to human reason, it is in man's power, not only to abstain from believing, by suspending our judgment, or exer- *2Cor. x. 17. t2Cor. x. 5. 406 Charity maintained by Catholics. cising no act one way or the other ; but also to disbelieve, that is, to believe the contrary of that which faith proposeth ; as the exam- ples of innumerable arch-heretics can bear witness. This obscurity of faith we learn from holy scripture, according to those words of the apostle,* ' faith is the substance of things to be hoped for, the argument of things not appearing.' And, ' we see now by a glass in a dark manner : but then face to face.'f And accordingly St. Peter saith,J ' which you do well attending unto, as to a candle shining in a dark place.' " 3. Faith being then obscure, (whereby it differeth from natural sciences) and yet being most certain and infallible (wherein it surpasseth human opinion), it must rely upon some motive and ground, which may be able to give it certainty, and yet not release it from obscurity. For if this motive, ground, or formal object of faith, were any thing evidently presented to our understanding ; and if, also, we did evidently know, that it had a necessary con- nexion with the articles which we believe, our assent to such articles could not be obscure, but evident ; which, as we said, is against the nature of our faith. If, likewise, the motive or ground of our faith were obscurely propounded to us, but were not in itself infallible, it would leave our assent in obscurity, but could not endue it with certainty. We must, therefore, for the ground of our faith, find out a motive obscure to us, but most certain in itself, that the act of faith may remain both obscure and certain. Such a motive as this can be no other but the divine authority of Almighty God, revealing or speaking those truths which our faith believes: for it is manifest, that God's infallible testimony may transfuse certainty to our faith, and yet not draw it out of obscurity ; because no human discourse or demonstration can evince, that God revealeth any supernatural truth, since God had been no less perfect than he is, although he had never revealed any of those objects which we now believe. " 4. Nevertheless, because Almighty God, out of his infinite wis- dom and sweetness, doth concur with his creatures in such sort as may befit the temper and exigence of their natures ; and because man is a creature endued with reason, God doth not exact of his will or understanding any other than, as the apostle saith, ra- tionabile obsequium, § an obedience sweetened with good reason — which could not so appear, if our understandings were summoned to believe with certainty things no way represented as infallible and certain. And, therefore, Almighty God, obliging us, under pain of eternal damnation, to believe with greatest certainty divers verities not known by the light of natural reason, cannot fail to furnish our understanding with such inducements, motives, and arguments, as may sufficiently persuade any mind, which is not partial or passionate, that the objects which we believe proceed from an authority so wise, that it cannot be deceived, and so good, that it cannot deceive ; according to the words of David, ' Thy testimonies are made credible exceedingly. '|| These inducements * Heb. xi. 1. 1 1 Cor. xiii. 12. t 2 Pet. i. 19. § Rom. xii. 1. II Psal. xcii. Charity maintained by Catholics. 407 are by divines called argumsnta credibilitatis, ' arguments of cre- dibility,' which, though they cannot make us evidently see what we believe, yet they evidently convince, that in true wisdom and prudence the objects of faith deserve credit, and ought to be ac- cepted as things revealed by God : for without such reasons and inducements, our judgment of faith could not be conceived pru- dent, holy scripture telling us,* that ' he who soon believes, is light of heart.' By these arguments and inducements our under- standing is both satisfied with evidence of credibility, and the objects of faith retain their obscurity ; because it is a different thing to be evidently credible, and evidently true ; as those, who were present at the miracles wrought by our blessed Saviour, and his apostles, did not evidently see their doctrine to be true (for then it had not been faith, but science, and all had been necessi- tated to believe, which we see fell out otherwise), but they were evidently convinced, that the things, confirmed by such miracles, were most credible, and worthy to be embraced as truths revealed by God. " 5. These evident arguments of credibility are in great abun- dance found in the visible church of Christ, perpetually existing on earth : for that there hath been a company of men, professing such and such doctrines, we have from our next predecessors, and these from theirs upwards, till we come to the apostles, and our blessed Saviour ; which gradation is known by evidence of sense, by reading books, or hearing what one man delivers to another. And, it is evident, that there was neither cause nor possibility that men, so distant in place, so different in temper, so repugnant in private ends, did or could agree to tell one and the self-same thing, if it had been but a fiction invented by them- selves, as ancient Tertullian well saith: ' How is it likely, that so manyf and so great churches should err in one faith? Among many events there is not one issue ; the error of the churches must needs have varied. But that which among many is found to be one, is not mistaken, but delivered. Dare then any body say, that they erred who delivered it V With this never-inter- rupted existence of the church are joined the many and great miracles wrought by men of that congregation or church ; the sanctity of the persons ; the renowned victories over so many per- secutions, both of all sorts of men, and of the infernal spirits; and, lastly, the perpetual existence of so holy a church. Being brought, up to the apostles themselves, she comes to partake of the same assurance of truth, which they, by so many powerful ways, did communicate to their doctrine, and to the church of their times, together with the divine certainty which they re- ceived from our blessed Saviour himself, revealing to mankind what he heard from his Father; and so we conclude with Tertul- lian, ' We receive it from the churches, the churches from the apostles, the apostles from Christ, Christ from his father :'J and if we once interrupt this line of succession, most certainly made known by means of holy tradition, we cannot conjoin the present * Ecclus. xlx. 4. t Prescript, c. xxviii. t Ibid. c. xxi. xxxvii. 408 Charity maintained by Catholics. church and doctrine with the church and doctrine of the apostles, but must invent some new means and arguments, sufficient of them- selves to find out and prove a true church and faith independently of the preaching and writing of the apostles; neither of which can be known but by tradition ; as is truly observed by Tertullian, saying,* ' I will prescribe, that there is no means to prove what the apostles preached, but by the same churches which they founded.' " 6. Thus then we are to proceed : — By evidence of manifest and incorrupt tradition, I know that there hath always been a never-interrupted succession of men from the apostles' time, be- lieving, professing, and practising such and such doctrines : by evident arguments of credibility, as miracles, sanctity, unity, &c. and by all those ways, whereby the apostles, and our blessed Sa- viour himself, confirmed their doctrine, we are assured, that what the said never-interrupted church proposeth, doth deserve to be accepted and acknowledged as a divine truth : by evidence of sense, we see that the same church proposeth such and such doc- trines as divine truths; that is, as revealed and testified by Almighty God. By this divine testimony we are infallibly assured of what we believe : and so the last period, ground, motive, and formal ob- ject of our faith, is the infallible testimony of that supreme verity, which neither can deceive, nor be deceived. " 7. By this orderly deduction our faith cometh to be endued with those qualities, which we said were requisite thereto, namely — certainty, obscurity, and prudence. Certainty proceeds from the infallible testimony of God, propounded and conveyed to our understanding by such a mean as is infallible in itself, and to us is evidently known, that it proposeth this point or that, and which can manifestly declare in what sense it proposeth them : which means we have proved to be the only visible church of Christ. Obscurity, from the manner in which God speaks to mankind, which ordinarily is such, that it doth not manifestly show the person who speaks, nor the truth of the thing spoken. Prudence is not wanting, because our faith is accompanied with so many ar- guments of credibility, that every well-disposed person may and ought to judge, that the doctrines so confirmed deserve to be be- lieved, as proceeding from divine authority. "8. And thus, from what hath been said, we may easily gather the particular nature or definition of faith. For — it is a voluntary, or free, infallible, obscure assent to some truth, be- cause it is testified by God, and is sufficiently propounded to us for such ; which proposal is ordinarily made by the visible church of Christ. I say, sufficiently proposed by the church; not that I purpose to dispute, whether the proposal of the church enter into the formal object, or motive of faith ; or whether an error be a heresy, formally and precisely, because it is against the proposi- tion of the church, as if such proposal were the formal object of faith, which Dr. Potter to no purpose at all labours so very hard to disprove : but I only affirm that when the church propounds * Praescript. c. xxi. Charity maintained by Catholics. 409 any truth, as revealed by God, we are assured, that it is such in- deed ; and so it instantly grows to be a fit object for christian faith, which inclines and enables us to believe whatsoever is duly presented, as a thing revealed by Almighty God. And in the same manner we are sure, that whosoever opposeth any doctrine proposed by the church, doth thereby contradict a truth, which is testified by God : as when any lawful superior notifies his will, by the means, and, as it were, proposal, of some faithful messen- ger, the subject of such a superior, in performing or neglecting what is delivered by the messenger, is said to obey or disobey his own lawful superior. And, therefore, because the testimony of God is notified by the church, we may, and we do, most truly say, that not to believe what the church proposeth, is to deny God's holy word or testimony signified to us by the church, ac- cording to that saying of St. Irenaeus: * ' We need not go to any other to seek the truth, which we may easily receive from the church.' " 9. Fom this definition of faith we may also know what heresy is, by taking the contrary terms, as heresy is contrary to faith, and saying — heresy is a voluntary error against that which God hath revealed, and the church hath proposed for such. Neither doth it import, whether the error concern points in themselves great or small, fundamental or not fundamental : for more being required to an act of virtue than of vice, if any truth, though never so small, must be believed by faith, as soon as we know it to be testified by divine revelation ; much more will it be a formal heresy to deny any the least point sufficiently propounded as a thing wit- nessed by God. " 10. This divine faith is divided into actual and habitual. Actual faith, or faith actuated, is when we are in act of considera- tion, and belief of some mystery of faith : for example, that our Saviour Christ is true God and man, &c. Habitual faith is that from which we are denominated faithful, or believers, as by actual faith they are styled believing. This habit of faith is a quality enabling us most firmly to believe objects above human discourse, and it remaineth permanently in our soul, even when we are sleeping, or not thinking of any mystery of faith. This is the first among the three theological virtues. For charity unites us to God, as he is infinitely good in himself: hope ties us to him, as he is unspeakably good to us : faith joins us to him, as he is the supreme immovable verity. Charity relies on his -goodness ; hope on his power ; faith on his divine wisdom. From hence it followeth, that faith, being one of the virtues which divines term infused (that is, which cannot be acquired by human wit, or in- dustry, but are in their nature and essence supernatural), it hath this property ; that it is not destroyed by little and little, (contrarily to the habits called acquisili, that is, gotten by human endeavour; which as they are successively produced, so also are they lost successively, or by little and little) but it must either be conserved entire, or wholly destroyed : and, since it cannot stand entire * Lib. iii. cont. Haercs. c. iv. 35 410 Charity maintained by Catholics. with any one act, which is directly contrary, it must be totally overthrown, and, as it were, demolished and razed by every such act. Wherefore, as charity, or the love of God, is expelled from our soul, by any one act of hatred, or any other mortal sin against his divine majesty : and as hope is destroyed by any one act of voluntary desperation ; so faith must perish by any one act of heresy, because every such act is directly and formally opposite thereunto. I know that some sins, which (as divines speak) are ex genere suo, in their kind, grievous and mortal, may be much lessened, and fall to be venial, ob levitatem materia?, because they may happen to be exercised in a matter of small consideration : as, for example, to steal a penny is venial, although theft in its kind be a deadly sin. But it is likewise true, that this rule is not general for all sorts of sins: there being some so inexcusably wicked of their own nature, that no smallness of matter, nor paucity in number, can defend them from being deadly sins. For, to give an instance, what blasphemy against God, or voluntary false oath, is not a deadly sin ? Certainly none at all, although the salvation of the whole world should depend upon swearing such a falsehood. The like happeneth in our present case of heresy, the iniquity whereof, redounding to the injury of God's supreme wisdom and goodness, is always great and enormous. They were no precious stones which David* picked out of the water to encounter Goliah ; and yet if a man take from the num- ber but one, and say there were but four, against the scriptures affirming them to have been five, he is instantly guilty of a damnable sin. Why ? Because by this subtraction of one, he doth deprive God's word and testimony of all credit and infalli- bility ; for if ever he could deceive, or be deceived, in any one thing, it were but wisdom to suspect him in all. And seeing every heresy opposeth some truth revealed by God, it is no wonder that no man can be excused from deadly and damnable sin: for, if volun- tary blasphemy and perjury, which are opposite only to the infused moral virtue of religion, can never be excused from mortal sin : much less can heresy be excused, which opposeth the theological virtue of faith. "11. If any object, that schism may seem to be a greater sin than heresy, because the virtue of charity (to which schism is op- posite) is greater than faith ; according to the apostle, saying, ' Now there remain faith, hope, charity ; but the greater of these is charity ;'f St. Thomas answers in these words : ' Charity hath two objects ; one principal, to wit, the divine goodness ; and another secondary, namely, the good of our neighbour: but schism, and other sins, which are committed against our neighbour, are opposite to charity in respect of this secondary good, which is less than the object of faith, which is God, as he is the prime verity, on which faith doth rely ; and therefore these sins are less than infidel- ity. 'J He takes infidelity after a general manner, as it compre- hends heresy, and other vices against faith. 12. Having therefore sufficiently declared wherein heresy << *Reg. i. 17. t 1 Cor. xiii. 13. t 2, 2, q. 39, ar. 2, in corp. et ad 3. Charity maintained by Catholics. 411 consists, let us come to prove that which we proposed in this chap- ter: where I desire it to be still remembered, that the visible ca- tholic church cannot err damnably, as Dr. Potter confesseth ; and that, when Luther appeared, there was no other visible true church of Christ, disagreeing from the Roman, as we have demonstrated in the next precedent chapter. " 13. Now, that Luther and his followers cannot be excused from formal heresy, I prove by these reasons : — To oppose any truth propounded by the visible true church, as revealed by God, is formal heresy, as we have shewed out of the definition of heresy ; but Luther, Calvin, and the rest, did oppose divers truths propounded by the visible church, as revealed by God ; yea, they did therefore oppose her, because she propounded, as divine revealed truths, things which they judged either to be false, or human inven- tions: therefore they committed formal heresy. " 14. Moreover, every error, against any doctrine revealed by God, is damnable heresy, whether the matter in itself be great or small, as I proved before ; and, therefore, either the protes- tants, or the Roman church, must be guilty of formal heresy, be- cause one of them must err against the word and testimony of God : but you grant (perforce) that the Roman church doth not err damnably ; and I add, that she cannot err damnably, because she is the true catholic church, which you confess cannot err damnably : therefore protestants must be guilty of formal heresy. " 15. Besides, we have shewed, that the visible church is judge of controversies, and therefore must be infallible in all her pro- posals ; which, being once supposed, it manifestly followeth, that to oppose what she delivereth, as revealed by God, is not so much to oppose her, as God himself; and therefore cannot be excused from grievous heresy. " 16. Again, if Luther were a heretic, for those points wherein he disagreed from the Roman church, all they who agree with him in those very points must likewise be heretics. Now, that Luther was a formal heretic, I demonstrate in this manner : — To say that God's visible true church is not universal, but confined to one only place or corner of the world, is, according to your own express words, * ' properly heresy against that article of the creed, wherein we profess to believe the holy catholic church :' and you brand Donatus with heresy, because he limited the universal church to Africa. But it is manifest, and acknowledged by Luther himself, and other chief protestants, that Luther's Refor- mation, when it first began, (and much more for divers ages be- fore) was not universal, nor spread over the world, but was con- fined to that compass of ground which did contain Luther's body. Therefore his Reformation cannot be excused from formal heresy. If St. Augustine in those times said to the donatists,f ' There are innumerable testimonies of holy scripture, in which it ap- peareth, that the church of Christ is not only in Africa, as these men with most impudent vanity do rave, but that she is spread * Page 126. t Epist. 50. 412 Charity maintained by Catholics. over the whole earth ;' much more may it be said, — It appeareth, by innumerable testimonies of holy scripture, that the church of Christ cannot be confined to the city of Wirtemberg, or to the place where Luther's (eat stood, but must be spread over the whole world. It is therefore most impudent vanity and dotage to limit her to Luther's Reformation. In another place, also, this holy father writes no less effectually against Luther than against the Donatists. For having out of those words, ' in thy seed all nations shall be blessed,' proved that God's church must be universal, he saith, * ' Why do you superadd, by saying that Christ remains heir in no part of the earth, except where he may have Donatus for his co-heir ? Give me this (universal) church, if it be among you ; shew yourselves to be all nations, which we already shew to be blessed in this seed. Give us this (church), or else, laying aside all fury, receive her from us.' But it is evident, that Luther could not, when he said, ' at the beginning I was alone,' give us an universal church : therefore happy had he been, if he had then, and his followers would now, ' receive her from us.' And, therefore, we must conclude with the same holy father, saying in another place of the universal church,f ' she hath this most certain mark, that she cannot be hidden : she is then known unto all nations. The sect of Donatus is unknown to many nations ; therefore that cannot be she.' The sect of Lu- ther (at least when he began, and much more before his begin- ning) was unknown to many nations ; therefore that cannot be she. " 17. And that it may yet further appear, how perfectly Luther agreed with the donatists, it is to be noted, that they never taught that the catholic church ought not to extend itself further than that part of Africa where their faction reigned, but only that in fact it was so confined, because all the rest of the church was pro- faned by communicating with Cascilianus, whom they falsely affirmed to have been ordained bishop by those who were traditors, or givers up of the Bible to the persecutors to be burned ; yea, at that very time they had some of their sect residing in Rome, and sent thither one Victor, a bishop, under colour to take care of their brethren in that city ; but, indeed, as Baronius observeth,J that the world might account them catholics, by communicating with the Bishop of Rome, to communicate with whom was ever taken by the ancient fathers, as an assured sign of being a true catholic. They had also, as St. Augustine witnesseth,§ a pretended church in the house and territory of a Spanish lady, called Lucilla, who went flying out of the catholic church, because she had been justly checked by Cascilianus. And the same saint, speaking of the conference he had with Fortunius, the donatist, saith, || ' Here did he first attempt to affirm, that his communion was spread over the whole earth, &c, but, because the thing was evidently false, they got out of this discourse by confusion of language, whereby, nevertheless, they sufficiently declared, that they did * De Unit. Eccles. c. vi. t Cont. lit. Petil. 1. i. c. civ. t Anno 321, nu. 5, spond. § De Unit Eccles. c. iii. || Ep. 163. Charily maintained by Catholics. 413 not hold that the true church ought necessarily to he confined to one place; but only by mere necessity were forced to yield, that it was so in fact, because their sect, which they held to be the only true church, was not spread over the world ; in which point Fortunius, and the rest, were more modest, than he who should affirm, that Luther's Reformation, in the very beginning, was ' spread over the whole earth ;' being, at that time, by many degrees not so far diffused as the sect of the donatists. I have no desire to prose- cute the similitude of protcstants with donatists, by remembering that the sect of these men were begun and promoted by the pas- sion of Lucilla ; and who is ignorant what influence two women, the mother and daughter, ministered to protestancy in England 1 Nor will I stand to observe their very likeness of phrase with the donatists, who call the chair of Rome, the chair of pestilence, and the Roman church a harlot, which is Dr. Potter's own phrase; wherein he is less excusable than they, because he maintaineth her to be a true church of Christ ; and, therefore, let him duly ponder these words of St. Augustine against the donatists:* ' If I persecute him justly, who detracts from his neighbour, why should not I persecute him who detracts from the church of Christ, and saith, This is not she, but this is a harlot V and least of all will I consider, whether you may not be well compared to one Ticonius, a donatist, who wrote against Parmenianus ; likewise a donatist, who blasphemed that the church of Christ had perished, (as you do even in this your book write against some of your protestant brethren, or, as you call them, zealots among you, who hold the very same, or rather a worse heresy) and yet remained among them, even after Parmenianus had excommunicated him (as those your zealous brethren would proceed against you, if it were in their power) ; and yet, like Ticonius, you remain in their com- munion, and come not into that church, which is, hath been, and ever shall be, universal : for which very cause St. Augustine complains of Ticonius, that although he wrote against the do- natists, yet he was of ' a heart so extremely absurd, 'f as not to forsake them altogether. And, speaking of the same thing in another place, he observes, that although Ticonius did manifestly confute them who affirmed that the church had perished ; yet ' he saw not (saith this holy father) that which, in good consequence, he should have seen, that those christians of Africa belonged to the church spread over the whole world, who remained united, not with them, who are divided from the communion and unity of the same world, but with such as did communicate with the whole world. But Parmenianus, and the rest of the donatists, saw that consequence, and resolved rather to settle their mind in obstinacy against the most manifest truth, which Ticonius main- tained, than by yielding thereto, to be overcome by those churches in Africa, which enjoyed the communion of that unity, which Ticonius defended, from which they had divided themselves. 'J How fitly these words agree to catholics in England, in respect ot * Cone. 7, super gest. cum Emer. t De doct Christ, lib. iii. c. xix. X Cont. Parm. 1. i. c. i. 35* 414 Charity maintained by Catholics. the protestants, I desire the reader to consider. But these and the like resemblances of the protestants to the donatists, I will- ingly let pass, and only urge the main point — that since Luther's reformed church was not in being for divers centuries before Luther, and yet was (because so forsooth they will needs have it) in the apostles' time, they must of necessity affirm heretically with the donatists, that the true and unspotted church of Christ perished : and that she which remained on earth was (O blas- phemy !) a harlot. Moreover the same heresy follows out of the doctrine of Dr. Potter and other protestants, that the church may err in points not fundamental, because we have shewed, that every error against any one revealed truth is heresy, and damnable, whether the matter be otherwise of itself great or small. And how can the church more truly be said to perish, than when she is permitted to maintain a damnable heresy ? Besides, we will hereafter prove, that by an act of heresy all divine faith is lost; and to imagine a true church of faithful persons without any faith, is as much as to fancy a living man without life. It is therefore clear, that donatist-like, they hold that the church of Christ perished ; yea, they are worse than the donatists, who said, that the church remained at least in Africa ; whereas protes- tants must of necessity be forced to grant, that for a long space before Luther she was no where at all. But let us go forward to other reasons. " 18. The holy scripture, and ancient fathers, do assign separa- tion from the visible church as a mark of heresy ; according to that of St. John, ' They went out from us.'* And, ' Some who went out from us.'f And, ' Out of you shall arise men speaking perverse things.'^ And, accordingly, Vincentius Lyrinensis saith, ' Whoever began heresies, who did not first separate himself from the universality, antiquity, and consent of the catholic church ?'§ But it is manifest, that when Luther appeared, there was no visible church distinct from the Roman, out of which she could depart, as it is likewise well known, that Luther and his followers departed out of her : therefore she is no way liable to this mark of heresy ; but protestants cannot possibly avoid it. To this purpose St. Prosper hath these pithy words : a christian, communicating with the universal church, ' is a catholic ; and he who is divided from her, is a heretic, and antichrist.'|| But Luther in his first reformation could not communicate with the visible catholic church of those times, because he began his re- formation by opposing the supposed errors of the then visible church : we must therefore say with St. Prosper, that he was a heretic, &c. Which likewise is no less clearly proved out of St. Cyprian, saying,Tf ' Not we departed from them, but they from us; and since heresies and schisms are bred afterwards, while they make to themselves divers conventicles, they have forsaken the head and origin of truth.' " 19. And that we might not remain doubtful what separation * 1 John ii. 19. t Acts xv. 24. t Acts xx. 30. § Lib. adversus haer. c. xxxiv. || Dimid. temp. c. v. V Lib. de Unitat. Eccles. Charity maintained by Catholics. 415 it is, which is the mark of heresy, the ancient fathers tell us more in particular, that it is from the church of Rome, as it is the see of Peter. And, therefore, Dr. Potter need not to be so hot with us, because we say and write, that the church of Rome, in that sense as she is the mother church of all others, and with which all the rest agree, is truly called the catholic church. St. Jerome, writing to Pope Damasus, saith,* ' I am in the communion of the chair of Peter; I know that the church is built upon that rock. Whosoever shall eat the lamb out of this house, he is profane. If any shall not be in the ark of Noah, he shall perish in the time of the deluge. Whosoever doth not gather with thee doth scatter that is, he that is not of Christ, is of antichrist.' And elsewhere,f ' Which doth he call his faith ? That of the Roman church, or that which is contained in the books of Origen ? If he answer, the Roman ; then we are catholics, who have translated nothing of the error of Origen.' And yet farther,! ' Know thou, that the Roman faith, commended by the voice of the apostle, doth not receive these delusions, though an angel should denounce other- wise than it hath once been preached.' St. Ambrose, recounting how his brother Satyrus inquired for a church, wherein to give thanks for his delivery from shipwreck, saith,§ ' He called unto him the bishop, neither did he esteem any favour to be true, ex- cept that of the true faith; and he asked of him, whether he agreed with the catholic bishops?' That is, with the Roman church. — And having understood that he was a schismatic, that is, separated from the Roman church, he abstained from communicating with him. Where we see the privilege of the Roman church con- firmed both by word and deed, by doctrine and practice. And the same saint saith of the Roman church, || 'From thence the rites of venerable communion do flow to all.'H St. Cyprian saith, ' They are bold to sail to the chair of Peter, and to the principal church, from whence priestly unity hath sprung. Neither do they con- sider that they are Romans, whose faith was commended by the preaching of the apostle, to whom falsehood cannot have access.' Where we see this holy father joins together the principal church and the chair of Peter; and affirmeth, that falsehood not only hath not had, but cannot have, access to that see. And elsewhere,** ' Thou wrotest that I should send a copy of the same letters to Cornelius, our colleague, that, laying aside all solicitude, he might now be assured that thou didst communicate with him, that is, with the catholic church.' What think you, Mr. Doctor, of these words? Is it so strange a thing to take for one and the same thing, to communicate with the church and pope of Rome, and to communicate with the catholic church? St. Irenaeus saith.ff 'Because it were long to number the successions of all churches, we declaring the tradition (and faith preached to men, and coming to us by tradition) of the most great, most ancient, and most known church, founded by the two most glorious apostles Peter * Ep. 57. ad Damas. t Lib. i. Apolog. t Ibid. lib. iii. § De obitu Satyri fratris. || Lib. i. Ep. 4. ad Imperatores. V Epist. 55. ad Cornel. ** Epist. 52. tt Lib. iii. cont. hser. c. iii. 416 Charity maintained by Catholics, and Paul, which tradition it hath from the apostles, coming to us hy succession of bishops : we confound all those who any way, either by evil compliance of themselves, or vain glory, or by blindness, or ill opinion, do gather otherwise than they ought. — For to this church, for a more powerful principality, it is neces- sary that all churches resort, that is, all faithful people of what place soever ; in which (Roman church) the tradition, which is from the apostles, hath always been conserved from those who are every where.' St. Augustine saith,* ' It grieves us to see you so to lie cut ofK Number the priests even from the see of Peter, and consider in that order of fathers who succeeded, to whom she is the rock, which the proud gates of hell do not overcome.' — And, in another place, speaking of Cascilianus, he saith,f ' He might condemn the conspiring multitude of his enemies, because he knew himself to be united by communicatory letters, both to the Roman church, in which the principality of the see apostolic did always flourish ; and to other countries, from whence the gospel came first into Africa.' Ancient Tertullian saith,J " If thou be near Italy, thou hast Rome, whose authority is near at hand to us; a happy church, into which the apostles have poured all doctrine, together with their blood.' St. Basil, in a letter to the bishop of Rome, saith,§ ' In very deed that which was given by our Lord to thy piety, is worthy of that most excellent voice which proclaimed thee blessed ; to wit, that thou mayest discern betwixt that which is counterfeit, and that which is lawful and pure, and without any diminution mayest preach the faith of our ancestors.' Maximinianus, bishop of Constantinople, about twelve hundred years ago, said, ' All the bounds of the earth, who have sincerely acknowledged our Lord, and catholics through the whole world, professing the true faith, look upon the power of the bishop of Rome, as upon the sun, &c. For the creator of the world amongst all men of the world elected him, (he speaks of St. Peter) to whom he granted the chair of doctor, to be principally pos- sessed by a perpetual right of privilege ; that whosoever is desirous to know any divine and profound thing, may have recourse to the oracle and doctrine of this instruction.' John, patriarch of Con- stantinople, more than eleven hundred years ago, in an epistle to Pope Hormisda, writeth thus :|| 'Because the beginning of salva- vation is to conserve the rule of faith, and in no wise to swerve from the tradition of our forefathers; because the words of our Lord cannot fail, saying, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church : the proofs of deeds have made good those words; because in the see apostolical the catholic religion is al- ways conserved inviolable.' And again, ' We promise hereafter not to recite in the sacred mysteries the names of them who are excluded from the communion of the catholic church; that is to say, who consent not fully with the see apostolic' Many other authorities of the ancient fathers might be produced to this pur- pose ; but these may serve to shew, that both the Latin and Greek * In Psal. cont. patretn Donati. f Ep. 162. X Praescr. c. xxxvi. § Epist. ad. Pont. Rom. || Epist. ad Hormis. P. P. Charity maintained by Catholics. 417 fathers held for a note of being a catholic, or a heretic, to have been united or divided from the see of Rome. And I have pur- posely alleged only such authorities of fathers, as speak of the privileges of the see of Rome, as of things permanent, and de- pending on our Saviour's promise to St. Peter, from which a gene- ral rule and ground ought to be taken for all ages, because ' Heaven and earth shall pass; but the word of our Lord shall remain for ever.'* So that I here conclude, that, seeing it is manifest that Luther and his followers divided themselves from the see of Rome, they bear the inseparable mark of heresy. " 20. And though my meaning be not to treat the point of or- dination or succession in the protestant church, yet because the fathers alleged in the last reason, assign succession as one mark of the true church ; I must not omit to say, that, according to the grounds of protestants themselves, they can neither pretend per- sonal succession of bishops, nor succession of doctrine. For whereas succession of bishops signifies a never-interrupted line of persons endued with an indelible quality, which divines call a character, which cannot be taken away by deposition, degradation, or other means whatsoever, and endued also with jurisdiction and authority to teach, to preach, to govern the church by laws, pre- cepts, censures, &c. protestants cannot pretend succession in either of these: for (besides that there was never protestant bishop before Luther, and that there can be no continuance of succession, where there was no beginning to succeed) they commonly acknow- ledge no character, and consequently must affirm, that when their pretended bishops or priests are deprived of jurisdiction, or de- graded, they remain mere lay persons, as before their ordination ; fulfilling what Tertullian objects as a mark of heresy, ' To-day a priest, to-morrow a layman. 'f For if there be no immovable character, their power of order must consist only in jurisdiction and authority, or in a kind of moral deputation to some function, which therefore may be taken away by the same power by which it was given. Neither can they pretend succession in authority or jurisdiction : for all the authority or jurisdiction which they had, was conferred by the church of Rome, that is, by the pope : because the whole church coilectivelv doth not meet to ordain bishops or priests, or to give them authority : but, according to their own doctrine, they believe that the pope neither hath, nor ought to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm, which they swear even when they are ordained bishops, priests, and dea- cons. How then can the pope give jurisdiction, where they swear he neither hath, nor ought to have, any? Or, if yet he had, how could they, without schism, withdraw themselves from his obedience ? Beside, the Roman church never gave them authority to oppose her, by whom it was given. But grant, their first bishops had such au- thority from the church of Rome ; after the decease of those men, who gave authority to their pretended successors? The primate of England ? But from whom had he such authority ? And, after * Matt. xxiv. 35. t Prase, c. xli. D D 418 Charity maintained by Catholics. his decease, who shall confer authority upon his successors ? The temporal magistrate ? King Henry, neither a catholic nor a pro- testant? King Edward, a child ? Queen Elizabeth, a woman ? An infant of one hour's age is true king in case of his predecessor's decease: but shall your church lie fallow, till that infant king and green head of the church, come to years of discretion ? Do your bishops, your hierarchy, your succession, your sacraments, your be- ing or not being heretics, for want of succession, depend upon this new-found supremacy-doctrine, brought in by such a man, merely upon base occasions, and for shameful ends; impugned by Calvin, and his followers; derided by the christian world; and even by chief protestants, as Dr. Andrews, Wotton, &c. not held for any necessary point of faith ? And from whom, I pray you, had bishops their authority, when there were no christian kings ? Must the Greek patriarchs receive spiritual jurisdiction from the great Turk ? Did the pope, by the baptism of princes, lose the spiritual power he formerly had of conferring spiritual jurisdiction upon bishops 1 Hath the temporal magistrate authority to preach, to assoil from sins, to inflict excommunications, and other censures ? Why hath he not power to excommunicate, as well as to dispense in irregularity, as our late sovereign lord King James either dispensed with the late Archbishop of Canterbury, or else gave commission to some bishops to do it ? And, since they were subject to their primate, and not he to them, it is clear, that they had no power to dispense with him, but that power must proceed from the prince, as superior to them all, and head of the protestant church in England. If he have no such authority, how can he give to others what himself hath not? Your ordination or consecration of bishops and priests, imprinting no character, can only consist in giving a power, authority, juris- diction, or (as I said before) some kind of deputation to exercise episcopal or priestly functions. If then the temporal magistrate confers this power, &c. he can, nay, he cannot choose but, ordain and consecrate bishops and priests, as often as he confers authority or jurisdiction ; and your bishops, as soon as they are designed and confirmed by the king, must ipso facto be ordained and consecrated by him without intervention of bishops, or matter and form of or- dination : which absurdities you will be more unwilling to grant, than well able to avoid, if you will be true to your own doctrines. The pope, from whom originally you must beg your succession of bishops, never received, nor will nor can acknowledge to receive, any spiritual jurisdiction from any temporal prince ; and, therefore, if jurisdiction must be derived from princes, he hath none at all: and yet, either you must acknowledge that he hath true spiritual jurisdiction, or that yourselves can receive none from him. "21. Moreover, this new reformation, or reformed church of protestants, will by them be pretended to be catholic or univer- sal, and not confined to England alone, as the sect of the donatists was to Africa; and, therefore, it must comprehend all the re- formed churches in Germany, Holland, Scotland, France, &c. In which number they of Germany, Holland, and France, are not governed by bishops, nor regard any personal succession, unless Charity maintained by Catholics. 419 of such fat-beneficed bishops as Nicolas Amsfordius, who was con- secrated by Luther, (though Luther himself was never bishop) as witnesseth Dresserus.* And, though Scotland hath of late admit- ted some bishops, I much doubt whether they hold them to be ne- cessary, or of divine institution; and so their enforced admitting of them, doth not so much furnish that kingdom with personal succes- sion of bishops, as it doth convince them to want succession of doc- trine, since, in this their neglect of bishops, they disagree both from the milder protestants of England, and the true catholic church : and by this want of a continued personal succession of bishops, they retain the note of schism and heresy. So that the church of protestants must either not be universal, as being confined to En- gland : or, if you will needs comprehend all those churches which want succession, you must confess, that your church doth not only communicate with schismatical and heretical churches, but it is also compounded of such churches, and yourselves cannot avoid the note of schismatics or heretics, if it were but for participating with such heretical churches: for it is impossible to retain commu- nion with the true catholic church, and yet agree with them who are divided from her by schism or heresy ; because that were to affirm, that for the self-same time they could be within and without the catholic church, as proportionably I discoursed in the next pre- cedent chapter, concerning the communicating of moderate pro- testants with those who maintain that heresy of the latency and invisibility of God's church, where I brought a place of St. Cyprian to this purpose, which the reader may be pleased to review in the 5th chapter, and 17th number. " 22. But, besides this defect in the personal succession of pro- testant bishops, there is another of great moment ; which is, that they want the right form of ordaining bishops and priests, because the manner which they use is so much different from that of the Roman church (at least according to the common opinion of divines,) that it cannot be sufficient for the essence of ordination; as I could demonstrate, if this were the proper place of such a treatise ; and will not fail to do, if Dr. Potter give me occasion. In the mean time the reader may be pleased to read the authorf cited here in the margent, and then compare the form of our ordination with that of protestants ; and to remember, that if the form which they use, either in consecrating bishops, or in ordain- ing priests, be at least doubtful, they can neither have undoubted priests nor bishops : for priests cannot be ordained but by true bishops, nor can any be a true bishop, unless he first be priest. I say, their ordination is at least doubtful ; because that sufficeth for my present purpose. For bishops and priests, whose ordina- tion is notoriously known to be doubtful, are not to be esteemed bishops or priests; and no man without sacrilege can receive sacraments from them ; all which they administer unlawfully : and (if we except baptism) with manifest danger of invalidity, and * In Millenario sexto, p. 187. t See Adainum Tannerum, torn. iv. disp. 5, qurest. 2, dub. 3, 4. dd2 420 Charity maintained by Catholics. with obligation to be at least conditionally repeated ; and so pro- testants must remain doubtful of remission of sins of their eccle- siastical hierarchy, and may not pretend to be a true church ; which cannot subsist without undoubted true bishops and priests, nor without due administration of sacraments, which (according to protestants) is an essential note of the true church. And it is a world to observe the proceeding of the English protestants in this point of their ordinations. For, first, An. 3. Edw. 6, cap. 2, when he was a child about twelve years of age, it was enacted,* ' that such form of making and consecrating of bishops and priests, as by six prelates, and six other to be appointed by the king, should be devised, (mark this word, devised) and set forth under the great seal, should be used, and none other.' But after this act was re- pealed, 1 Mar. Sess. 2, insomuch as that when afterward, anno 6, 7, Reg. Elizabeth, Bishop Bonner being indicted upon a certificate made by Dr. Home, a protestant bishop of Winchester, for his re- fusal of the oath of supremacy ; and he excepting against the indictment, because Dr. Home was no bishop ; all the judges re- solved, that his exception was good, if, indeed, Dr. Home was not bishop; and they were all at a stand, till anno 8, Eliz. cap. 1, the act of Edw. 6 was renewed and confirmed, with a particular pro- viso, that no man should be impeached or molested, by means of any certificate by any bishop or archbishop made before this last act. Whereby it is clear, that they made some doubt of their own ordination, and that there is nothing but uncertainty in the whole business of their ordination, which (forsooth) must depend upon six prelates, the great seal, acts of parliament being contrary one to another, and the like. " 23. But though they want personal succession, yet at least they have succession of doctrine, as they say, and pretend to prove, because they believe as the apostles believed. This is to beg the question, and to take what they may be sure will never be granted. For if they want personal succession and slight ecclesiastical tra- dition, how will they persuade any man, that they agree with the doctrine of the apostles? We have heard Tertullianf saying, 'I will prescribe (against all heretics) that there is no means to prove what the apostles preached, but by the same churches which they founded.' And St. Irenseus tells us,J ' that we may behold the tradition of the apostles in every church, if men be desirous to hear the truth, and we can number them who were made bishops by the apostles in churches, and their successors even to us.' And the same father in another place saith,§ ' We ought to obey those priests who are in the church, who have succession from the apostles, and who, together with succession in their bishoprics, have received the certain gift of truth.' St. Augus- tine saith,|| ' I am kept in the church by the succession of priests from the very see of Peter the apostle, to whom our Saviour, after his resurrection, committed his sheep to be fed, even to the present bishop.' Origen to this purpose giveth us a good and * Dyer, f'ol. 234, Term. Mich. 6 & 7 Eliz. + Sup. c. v. X Lib. iii. c. v. § Lib. iv. c. xliii. II Cont epist. Fundain. c. iv. Charity maintained by Catholics. 421 wholesome rule, (happy, if himself had followed the same !) in these excellent words :* ' Since there be many who think they believe the things which are of Christ, and some arc of different opinion from those who went before them ; let the preaching of the church be kept, which is delivered by the apostles by order of succession, and remains in the church to this very day ; that only is to be believed for truth, which in nothing disagrees from the tradition of the church." In vain, then, do these men brag of the doctrine of the apostles, unless first they can demonstrate, that they enjoy a continued succession of bishops from the apostles, and can shew us a church, which, according to St. Augustine, is deduced by undoubted succession from the see of the apostles,f even to the present bishops. "24. But yet, nevertheless, suppose it were granted, that they agreed with the doctrine of the apostles, this were not sufficient to prove a succession in doctrine. For succession, besides agree- ment or similitude, doth also require a never-interrupted convey- ing of such doctrine, from the time of the apostles, till the days of those persons who challenge such a succession. And so St. Augustine saith ;J we are to believe that gospel, which from the time of the apostles the church hath brought down to our days, * by a never-interrupted course of times, and by undoubted suc- cession of connexion.' Now that the reformation begun by Luther, was interrupted for divers ages before him, is manifest out of history, and by his endeavouring a reformation, which must presuppose abuses. He cannot, therefore, pretend a continued succession of that doctrine which he sought to revive and reduce to the knowledge and practice of men. And they ought not to prove, that they have succession of doctrine, because they agree with the doctrine of the apostles ; but contrarily we must infer, that they agree not with the apostles; because they cannot pre- tend a never-interrupted succession of doctrine from the times of the apostles till Luther. And here it is not amiss to note, that although the Waldenses, Wickliff, &c. had agreed with protestants in all points of doctrine; yet they could not brag of succession from them, because their doctrine hath not been free from inter- ruption, which necessarily crosseth succession. " 25. And as want of succession of persons and doctrine cannot stand with that universality of time, which is inseparable from the catholic church ; so likewise the disagreeing sects, which are dispersed through divers countries and nations, cannot help towards that universality of place, wherewith the true church must be endued ; but rather such local multiplication doth more and more lay open their division, and want of succession in doc- trine. For the excellent observation of St. Augustine doth punc- tually agree with all modern heretics; wherein this holy father, having cited these words out of the prophet Ezekiel§, ' My flocks are dispersed upon the whole face of the earth;' he adds this re- markable sentence :|| ' Not all heretics are spread over the face * Praef. ad lib. Peri Archon. + Cont Faust, c. ii. t Lib. xxviii. Cont. Faust, c. ii. § Cap. xxiv. || Lib. de Pastori. c. viii 36 422 Charity maintained by Catholics. of the earth, and yet there are heretics spread over the whole face of the earth, some here, some there ; yet they are wanting in no place, they know not one another. One sect, for example, in Africa, another heresy in the East, another in Egypt, another in Mesopotamia. In divers places they are diverse; one mother pride hath begot them all, as our own mother the catholic church hath brought forth all faithful people dispersed throughout the whole world. No wonder, then, if pride breed dissension, and charity union.' And, in another place, applying to heretics those words of the Canticles,* ' if thou know not thyself, go forth, and follow after the steps of the flocks, and feed thy kids;' he saith,f ' if thou know not thyself, go thou forth : I do not cast thee out, but go thou out, that it may be said of thee,. they went from us, but they were not of us. Go thou out in the steps of the flocks ; not in my steps, but in the steps of the flocks ; nor of one flock, but of divers and wandering flocks; and feed thy kids, not as Peter, to whom it is said, feed my sheep ; but feed thy kids in the tabernacles of the pastors, not in the tabernacle of the pastor, where there is one flock, and one pastor.' In which words this holy father doth set down the marks of heresy, to wit, going out from the church, and want of unity among themselves, which proceed from not acknowledging one supreme and visible pastor and head under Christ. And so it being proved, that protestants have neither succession of persons, nor doctrine, nor universality of time or place, they cannot avoid the just note of heresy. " 26. Hitherto we have brought arguments to prove, that Luther and all protestants are guilty of heresy against the nega- tive precept of faith, which obligeth us, under pain of damnation, not to embrace any one error, contrary to any truth sufficiently pro- pounded as testified or revealed by Almighty God. Which were enough to make good, that among persons, who disagree in any one point of faith, one part only can be saved ; yet we will now prove, that whosoever erreth in any one point, doth also break the affirmative precept of faith, whereby we are obliged positively to believe some revealed truth, with an infallible and supernatural faith, which is necessary to salvation, even necessitate finis, or medii, as divines speak, that is, so necessary, that not any, after he is come to the use of reason, was or can be saved without it, according to the words of the apostle :J ' Without faith it is impossible to please God.' "27. In the beginning of this chapter I shewed, that to chris- tian catholic faith are required certainty, obscurity, prudence, and supernaturality : all which conditions we will prove to be want- ing in the belief of protestants, even in those points which are true in themselves, and to which they yield assent, as happeneth in all particulars wherein they agree with us; from whence it will follow, that they, wanting true divine faith, want means abso- lutely necessary to salvation. " 28. And, first, that their belief wanteth certainty, I prove * Cant. 1. t Ep. 48. t Heb. xi. 6. Charity maintained by Catholics. 423 because they, denying the universal infallibility of the church, can have no certain ground to know what objects are revealed and tes- tified by God. Holy scripture is in itself most true and infallible : but without the direction and declaration of the church, we can neither have certain means to know what scripture is canonical, nor what translations be faithful, nor what is the true meaning of scripture. Every protestant, as I suppose, is persuaded that his own opinions be true, and that he hath used such means as are wont to be prescribed for understanding the scripture ; as prayer, conferring of divers texts, &c. and yet their disagreements show, that some of them are deceived : and therefore it is clear, that they have no one certain ground whereon to rely for understand- ing of scripture. And seeing they hold all the articles of faith, even concerning fundamental points, upon the selfsame ground of scripture, interpreted, not by the church's authority, but ac- cording to some other rules, which, as experience of their contra- dictions teach, do sometimes fail ; it is clear, that the ground of their faith is infallible in no point at all. And albeit sometime it chance to hit on the truth, yet it is likewise apt to lead them to error: as all arch-heretics, believing some truths, and withal divers errors, upon the same ground and motive, have indeed no true divine infallible faith, but only a fallible human opinion and persuasion ; for if the ground upon which they rely were certain, it could never produce any error. " 29. Another cause of uncertainty, in the faith of protestants, must rise from their distinction of points fundamental and not fundamental : for since they acknowledge, that every error in fundamental points destroyeth the substance of faith, and yet can- not determine what points be fundamental, it followeth, that they must remain uncertain, whether or no they be not in some funda- mental error, and so want the substance of faith, without which there can be no hope of salvation. " 30. And that he who erreth against one revealed truth, (as certainly some protestants must do, because contradictory pro- positions cannot both be true) doth lose all divine faith, is a very true doctrine delivered by catholic divines with so general a con- sent, that the contrary is wont to be censured as temerarious. The angelical doctor St. Thomas proposeth this question,* ' Whether he who denieth one article of faith may retain faith of other articles V And resolves that he cannot; which he proveth, (argumento sed contra) because, 'as deadly sin is opposite to charity, so to deny one article of faith is opposite to faith. But charity doth not remain with any one deadly sin : therefore faith doth not remain after the denial of any one article of faith.' Whereof he gives this farther reason ; ' because (saith he) the nature of every habit doth depend upon the formal motive and object thereof, which motive being taken away, the nature of the habit cannot remain. But the formal object of faith is the supreme truth, as it is manifested in scriptures, and in the doctrine of the church, which proceeds from the same supreme verity. Whosoever there- * 2, 2, q. 5, art. 3, in corp. 424 Charity maintained by Catholics. fore doth not rely upon the doctrine of the church, (which pro- ceeds from the supreme verity manifested in scriptures) as upon an infallible rule, he hath not the habit of faith, but believes those things which belong to faith by some other means than by faith ; as, if one should remember some conclusion, and not know the reason of that demonstration, it is clear, that he hath not certain knowledge, but only opinion ; now it is manifest, that he who relies upon the doctrine of the church, as upon an infallible rule, will yield his assent to all that the church teacheth : for, if among those things which she teacheth, he hold what he will, and doth not hold what he will not, he doth not rely upon the doctrine of the church, as uport an infallible rule, but only upon his own will. And so it is clear, that a heretic, who with pertinacity denieth one article of faith, is not ready to follow the doctrine of the church in all things: and therefore, it is manifest, that whosoever is a heretic in any one article of faith, concerning other articles hath not faith, hut a kind of opinion, or his own will.' Thus far St. Thomas. And afterward,* ' A man doth believe all the articles of faith, for one and the self-same reason, to wit, for the prime verity proposed to us in the scripture, understood aright according to the doctrine of the church ; and therefore, whosoever falls from this reason or motive, is totally deprived of faith.' From this true doctrine we are to infer, that to retain or want the substance of faith, doth not consist in the matter or multitude of the articles, but in the opposition against God's divine testimony, which is involved in every least error against faith. And since some protestants must needs err, and that they have no certain rule to know why rather one than another, it manifestly follows, that none of them have any certainty for the substance of their faith in any one point. More- over Dr. Potter being forced to confess that the Roman church wants not the substance of faith, it follows that she doth not err in any one point against faith, because, as we have seen out of St. Thomas, every such error destroys the substance of faith. Now if the Roman church did not err in any one point of faith, it is man- ifest, that protestants err in all those points wherein they are con- trary to her. And this may suffice to prove, that the faith of pro- testants wants infallibility. "31. And now for the second condition of faith, I say, if pro- testants have certainty, they want obscurity, and so have not that faith, which, as the apostle saith, is of things not appearing, or not necessitating our understanding to an assent ; for the whole edifice of the faith of protestants is settled on these two prin- ciples: — These particular books are canonical scripture ; and the sense and meaning of these canonical scriptures is clear and evi- dent, at least in all points necessary to salvation. Now these principles being once supposed, it clearly followeth, that what protestants believe as necessary to salvation is evidently known by them to be true, by this argument : — It is certain and evident, that whatsoever is contained in the word of God is true : but it is * Ad. 2. Charity maintained by Catholics. 425 certain and evident, that these hooks in particular are the word of God : therefore it is certain and evident, that whatsoever is contained in these books is true. Which conclusion I take for a major in a certain argument, and say thus : it is certain and evi- dent, that whatsoever is contained in these books is true ; but it is certain and evident, that such particular articles (for example, the trinity, incarnation, original sin, &c.) are contained in these books : therefore it is certain and evident, that these particular objects are true. Neither will it avail you to say, that the said principles are not evident by natural discourse, but only to the eye of reason, cleared by grace, as you speak. For supernatural evi- dence, no less (yea, rather more) drowns and excludes obscurity, than natural evidence doth ; neither can the party so enlightened be said voluntarily to captivate his understanding to that light, but rather his understanding is by a necessity made captive, and forced not to disbelieve what is presented by so clear a light : and there- fore your imaginary faith is not the true faith, defined by the apostle, but an invention of your own. " 32. That the faith of protestants wanted the third condition, which was prudence, is deduced from all that hitherto hath been said. What wisdom was it, to forsake a church confessedly very ancient, and besides which there could be demonstrated no other visible church of Christ upon earth ? A church acknowledged to want nothing necessary to salvation ; endued with succession of bishops, with visibility and universality of time and place : a church, which, if it be not the true church, her enemies cannot pretend to have any church, ordination, scripture, succession, &c. and are forced, for their own sake, to maintain her perpetual ex- istence and being. To leave, I say, such a church, and frame a community, without either unity, or means to procure it : a church, which, at Luther's first revolt, had no larger extent than where his body was : a church without universality of time or place : a church, which can pretend no visibility or being, except only in that former church, which it opposeth : a church void of succession of persons or doctrine. What wisdom was it to follow such men as Luther, in an opposition against the visible church of Christ, begun upon mere passion ? What wisdom is it to receive from us a church, ordination, scriptures, personal succession, and not suc- cession of doctrine ? Is not this to verify the name of heresy, which signifieth election or choice ? Whereby they cannot avoid that note of imprudency, or (as St. Augustine calls it) foolishness, set down by him against the manichees, and by me recited before. ' I would not (saith he*) believe the gospel, unless the authority of the church did move me. Those therefore whom I obeyed, saying believe the gospel, why should I not obey the same men saying unto me, do not believe Manichaeus (Luther, Calvin, &c.)? Choose what thou pleasest : if thou say, believe the catholics, they warn me not to believe thee : wherefore if I believe them I cannot believe thee. If thou say, do not believe the catholics, thou shalt not do well, in forcing me to the faith of Manichaeus, because, bj * Cont. ep. Fund. c. v. 36* 426 Charity maintained by Catholics. the preaching of catholics I believed the gospel itself. If thou say, you did well to believe them (catholics) commending the gospel ; but you did not well to believe them, discommending Manichaeus ; dost thou think me so very foolish, that, without any reason at all, I should believe what thou wilt, and not believe what thou wilt not V Nay, this holy father is not content to call it foolish- ness, but mere madness, in these words : * ' why should 1 not most diligently inquire what Christ commanded, of those before all others, by whose authority I was moved to believe, that Christ commanded any good thing ? Canst thou better declare to me what he said, whom I would not have thought to have been, or to be, if the belief thereof had been recommended by thee to me 1 This, therefore, I believed by fame, strengthened with celebrity, consent, antiquity. But every one may see, that you, so few, so turbulent, so new, can produce nothing which deserves authority. What madness is this? Believe them (catholics) that we ought to believe Christ; but learn of us what Christ said. Why, I be- seech thee 1 Surely if they (catholics) were not at all, and could not teach me any thing, I would more easily persuade myself, that I were not to believe Christ, than I should learn any thing concerning him from any other than those by whom I believed him.' Lastly, I ask, what wisdom it could be to leave all visible churches, and consequently the true catholic church of Christ, which you confess cannot err in points necessary to salvation, and the Roman church, which you grant doth not err in fundamentals, and follow private men, who may err even in points necessary to salvation 1 Especially, if we add, that when Luther rose, there was no visible true catholic church besides that of Rome, and them who agreed with her ; in which sense she was and is the only true church of Christ, and not capable of any error in faith. Nay, even Luther, who first opposed the Roman Church, yet, coming to dispute against other heretics, he is forced to give the lie both to his own words and deeds, in saying,f ' we freely con- fess, that in the papacy there are many good things worthy the name of christian, which have come from them to us: namely, we confess that in the papacy there is true scripture, true baptism, the true sacrament of the altar, the true keys for the remission of sins, the true office of preaching, true catechism, as our Lord's Prayer, Ten Commandments, Articles of Faith,' &c. And after- ward, ' I avouch, that under the papacy there is true Christianity, yea, the kernel and marrow of Christianity, and many pious and great saints.' And again he affirmeth, that ' the church of Rome hath the true Spirit, gospels, faith, baptism, sacraments, the keys, the office of preaching, prayer, holy scripture, and whatsoever Christianity ought to have.' And a little before, ' I hear and see, that they bring in anabaptism only to this end, that they might spite the pope, as men that will receive nothing from antichrist, no otherwise than the sacra mentaries do, who therefore believe only bread and wine to be in the sacrament, merely in hatred * Lib. de util. Cred. c. xiv. t In epist. cont. Anab. ad duos Parochos, to 2 Germ. Wit. fol. 229, 230. Charity maintained by Catholics. 427 against the bishop of Rome ; and they think, that by this means they shall overcome the papney. Verily these men rely upon a weak ground : for by this means they must deny the whole scrip- ture, and the office of preaching : for we have all these things from the pope, otherwise we must go make a new scripture.' ' O truth, more forcible (as St. Augustine says*) to wring out confes- sion, than is any rack or torment !' And so we may truly say with Moses, inimici nostri sunt judices, 'our very enemies give sentence for us.'f " 33. Lastly, since your faith wanteth certainty and prudence, it is easy to infer, that it wants the fourth condition, supernatu- rality : for being but a human persuasion or opinion, it is not in nature or essence supernatural. And, being imprudent and rash, it cannot proceed from divine motion and grace; and, therefore, it is neither supernatural in itself, nor in the cause from which it proceedeth. " 34. Since, therefore, we have proved, that whosoever errs against any one point of faith, loseth all divine faith, even con- cerning those other articles wherein he doth not err ; and that, although he could still retain true faith for some points, yet any one error in whatsoever other matter concerning faith is a grievous sin ; it clearly follows, that when two or more hold different doc- trines concerning faith and religion, there can be but one part saved. For declaring of which truth, if catholics be charged with want of charity and modesty, and be accused of rashness, ambi- tion, and fury, as Dr. Potter is very free in this kind ; I desire every one to ponder the words of St. Chrysostome, who teacheth, that every least error overthrows all faith, and whosoever is guilty thereof, is, in the church, like one who in the commonwealth forgeth false coin. ' Let them hear (saith the holy father) what St. Paul saith ; namely, that they who brought in some small errorj had overthrown the gospel : for, to show how a small thing ill mingled doth corrupt the whole, he said, that the gospel was subverted. For as he who clips a little of the stamp from the king's money, makes the whole piece of no value ; so, whosoever takes away the least particle of sound faith, is wholly corrupted, always going from that beginning to worse things. Where then are they who condemn us as contentious persons, because we can- not agree with heretics ; and do often say, that there is no differ- ence betwixt us and them, but that our disagreement proceeds ^frorn ambition to domineer?' And thus having shewed, that pro- testants want true faith, it remaineth that, according to my first design, I examine whether they do not also want charity, as it re- spects a man's self." * Cont. Donat. post, collat. c xxiv. t Deut. xxxii. 31. t Gal. i. 7. 428 The Nature of Faith. THE ANSWER TO THE SIXTH CHAPTER. That protestants are not heretics. Ad. §. 1. He that will accuse any one man, much more any great multitude of men, of any great and horrible crime, should in all reason and justice take care, that the greatness of his evi- dence do equal, if not exceed, the quality of the crime. And such an accusation you would here make shew of, by pretending first, to lay such grounds of it, as are " either already proved, or else yield- ed on all sides;" and after to raise a firm and stable structure of convincing arguments upon them. Both these I find to be mere and vain pretences ; and, having considered this chapter also with- out prejudice or passion, as I did the former, I am enforced, by the light of truth, to pronounce your whole discourse a painted and ruinous building, upon a weak and sandy foundation. 2. Ad. §. 2, 3. First, for your grounds; a great part of them is falsely said to be either proved or granted. It is true, indeed, that man, by his natural wit or industry, could never have attained to the knowledge of God's will to give him a supernatural and eternal happiness; nor of the means, by which his pleasure was to bestow this happiness upon him. And, therefore, your first ground is good, that " it was requisite his understanding should be enabled to apprehend that end and means, by a knowledge supernatural." I say, this is good, if you mean by knowledge an apprehension or belief. But if you take the word properly and exactly, it is both false ; for faith is not knowledge, no more than three is four, but eminently contained in it, so that he that knows believes, and something more ; but he that believes, many times does not know, nay, if he doth barely and merely believe, he doth never know ; and, besides, it is retracted by yourself presently, where you re- quire, that the object of faith must be both naturally and super- naturally unknown. And, again, in the next page, where you say — faith differs from science in regard of the object's obscurity. For that science and knowledge, properly taken, are synonymous terms, and that a knowledge of the thing absolutely unknown is a plain implicancy, I think are things so plain, that you will not require any proof of them. 3. But then, whereas you add, that " if such a knowledge were no more than probable, it could not be able sufficiently to over- bear our will and encounter with human probabilities, being backed with the strength of flesh and blood ;" and, therefore, con- clude, that " it was farther necessary, that this supernatural knowledge should be most certain and infallible :" — to this 1 answer, that I do heartily acknowledge and believe the articles of our faith to be in themselves truths, as certain and infallible as the very common principles of geometry and metaphysics. But that there is required of us a knowledge of them, and adherence to them, as certain as that of sense or science; that such a cer- tainty is required of us under pain of damnation, so that no man can hope to be in a state of salvation, but he that finds in himself The Nature of Faith. 429 such a degree of faith, such a strength of adherence ; this I have already demonstrated to be a great error, and of dangerous and pernicious consequence. And because I am more and more con- firmed in my persuasion, that the truth which I there delivered, is of great and singular use, I will here confirm it with more reasons. And to satisfy you, that this is no singularity of my own, my margent presents you with a protestant divine* of great authority, and no way singular in his opinions, who hath long since preached and justified the same doctrine. 4. I say, that every text of scripture which makes mention of any that were weak, or any that were strong, in faith ; of any that were of little, or any that were of great faith; of any that abounded, or any that were rich in faith ; of increasing, growing, rooting, grounding, establishing, confirming in faith ; every such text is a demonstra- tive refutation of this vain fancy, proving that faith, even true and saving faith, is not a thing consisting in such an indivisible point of perfection as you make it, but capable of augmentation and diminution. Every prayer you make to God to increase your faith, or (if you conceive such a prayer derogatory from the per- fection of your faith) the apostles' praying to Christ to increase their faith, is a convincing argument of the same conclusion. Moreover, if this doctrine of yours were true, then, seeing not any the least doubting can consist with a most infallible certainty, it will follow, that every least doubting in any matter of faith, though resisted and involuntary, is a damnable sin, absolutely destructive, so long as it lasts, of all true and saving faith ; which you are so far from granting, that you make it no sin at all, but only an occasion of merit : and if you should esteem it a sin, then must you acknowledge, contrary to your own principles, that there are actual sins merely involuntary. The same is furthermore in- vincibly confirmed by every deliberate sin that any christian com- mits, by any progress in charity that he makes. For seeing, as St. John assures us, our faith is " the victory which overcomes the world," certainly if the faith of all true believers were perfect (and, if true faith be capable of no imperfection, if all faith be a knowledge most certain and infallible, all faith must be perfect ; for the most imperfect that is, according to your doctrine, if it be true, must be most certain ; and sure the most perfect that is, cannot be more than most certain), then certainly their victory over the world, and therefore over the flesh, and therefore over * Mr. Hooker, in his answer to Travers's Supplication : — I have taught, that the as- surance of things which we believe by the word, is not so certain as of that we perceive by sense. And is it as certain ? Yea I taught, that the things which God doth pro- mise in his word, are surer unto us than any thing we touch, handle, or see. But are we so sure and certain of them ? If we be, why doth God so often prove his promises unto us, as he doth, by arguments taken from our sensible experience ? We must be surer of the proof than the thing proved, otherwise it is no proof. How is it, that if ten men do all look upon the moon, every one of them knows it as certainly to be the moon as another ; but many believing one and the same promises, all have not one and the same fulness of persuasion? How falleth it out, that men being assured of any thing by sense, can be no surer of it than they are ? Whereas, the strongest in faith that liveth upon the earth, hath always need to labour, and strive, and pray, that his assurance concerning heavenly and spiritual things may grow, increase, and be aug- mented. 430 The Nature of Faith. sin, must of necessity be perfect, and so it should be impossible for any true believer to commit any deliberate sin ; and therefore he that commits any sin must not think himself a true believer. Besides, seeing faith worketh by charity, and charity is the effect of faith ; certainly, if the cause were perfect, the effect would be perfect ; and, consequently, as you make no degrees in faith, so there would be none in charity, and so no man could possibly make any progress in it, but all true believers should be equal in charity, as in faith you make them equal ; and from thence it would follow unavoidably, that whosoever finds in himself any true faith, must presently persuade himself, that he is perfect in charity ; and whosoever, on the other side, discovers in his charity any imperfection, must not believe that he hath any true faith. These, you see, are strange and portentous consequences; and yet the deduction of them from your doctrine is clear and apparent ; which shews this doctrine of yours, which you would fain have true, that there might be some necessity of your church's infalli- bility, to be indeed plainly repugnant not only to truth, but even to all religion and piety, and fit for nothing, but to make men negligent of making any progress in faith or charity. And, there- fore, I must entreat and adjure you either to discover unto me (which I take God to witness I cannot perceive) some fallacy in my reasons against it, or never hereafter to open your mouth in defence of it. 5. As for that one single reason which you produce to confirm it, it will appear upon examination to be resolved finally into a groundless assertion of your own, contrary to all truth and expe- rience, and that is, that no degree of faith, less than a most cer- tain and infallible knowledge, can be " able sufficiently to over- bear our will, and encounter with human probabilities, being backed with the strength of flesh and blood." For who sees not that many millions in the world forego many times their present ease and pleasure, undergo great and toilsome labours, encounter great difficulties, adventure upon great dangers, and all this not upon any certain expectation, but upon a probable hope of some future gain and commodity, and that not infinite and eternal, but finite and temporal 1 Who sees not that many men abstain from many things they exceedingly desire, not upon any certain assur- ance, but a probable fear, of danger that may come after ? What man ever was there so madly in love with a present penny, but that he would willingly spend it upon any little hope, that by doing so he might gain a hundred thousand pounds? And I would fain know, what gay probabilities you could devise to dissuade him from this resolution. And if you can devise none, what reason then or sense is there, but that a probable hope of infinite and eternal happiness, provided for all those that obey Christ Jesus, and much more a firm faith, though not so certain, in some sort, as sense or science, may be able to sway our will to obedience, and encounter with all those temptations which flesh and blood can suggest to avert us from it ? Men may talk their pleasure of an absolute and most infallible certainty, but did they The Nature of Faith. 431 generally believe that obedience to Christ were the only way to present and eternal felicity, but as firmly and undoubtedly as that there is such a citv as Constantinople, nay, but as much as Caesar's Commentaries, or the History of Sallust ; I believe the lives of most men, both papists and protestants, would be better than they are. Thus, therefore, out of your own words I argue against you: — he that requires to true faith an absolute and infalli- ble certainty, for this only reason — because any less degree could not be able to overbear our will, &c. — imports, that if a less degree of faith were able to do this, then a less degree of faith may be true, and divine, and saving faith : but experience shews, and rea- son confirms, that a firm faith, though not so certain as sense or science, may be able to encounter and overcome our will and affec- tions; and therefore it follows, from your own reason, that faith, which is not a most certain and infallible knowledge, may be true, and divine, and saving faith. 6. All these reasons I have employed to shew, that such a most certain and infallible faith, as here you talk of, is not so necessary, but that, without such a high degree of it, it is possible to please God. And, therefore, the doctrines delivered by you, §. 25, are most presumptuous and uncharitable, viz. that such a most certain and infallible faith is necessary to salvation, necessi- tate finis or medii ; so necessary, that after a man is come to the use of reason, no man ever was or can be saved without it. — Wherein you boldly intrude into the judgment-seat of God, and damn men for breaking laws, not of God's but your own making. But withal you clearly contradict yourself, not only* where you affirm, that your faith finally depends upon the tradition of age to age, of father to son, which cannot be a fit ground, but only for a moral assurance; nor only where you pretend,f 'that not alone hearing and seeing, but also histories, letters, relations of many (which certainly are things not certain and infallible), are yet foundations good enough to support your faith : which doc- trine, if it were good and allowable, protestants might then hope, that their histories, and letters, and relations, might also pass for means sufficient of a sufficient certainty, and that they should not be excluded from salvation for want of such a cer- tainty. But indeed the pressure of the present difficulty com- pelled you to speak here, what I believe you will not justify, and with a pretty tergiversation to shew Dr. Potter your means of moral certainty ; whereas, the objection was, that you had no means or possibility of infallible certainty, for which you are plainly at as great a loss, and as far to seek as any of your ad- versaries. And, therefore, it concerns you highly not to damn others for want of it, lest you involve yourselves in the same condemnation ; according to those terrible words of St. Paul, " thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest : for, wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest dost the same things," &c. In this, therefore, you plainly contradict yourself. And lastly, most plainly, in * P. 1, c. ii. §. 14. t P. 2, c. v. §. 32. 432 The Nature of Faith. saying as you do here, you contradict and retract your pretence of charity to protestants in the beginning of your book : for there you make professions, that you have no assurance, but that " protest- ants, dying protestants, may possibly die with contrition, and be saved :" and here you are very peremptory, that " they cannot but want a means absolutely necessary to salvation, and, wanting that, cannot but be damned." 7. The third condition you require to faith is, that our assent to divine truths " should not only be unknown and unevident by any human discourse," but that " absolutely also it should be obscure in itself, and, ordinarily speaking, be void even of super- natural evidence." Which words must have a very favourable construction, or else they will not be sense. For who can make any thing of these words taken properly, that " faith must be an unknown unevident assent, or an assent absolutely obscure?" I had always thought, that known and unknown, obscure and evi- dent, had been affections not of our assent, but the object of it, not of our belief, but the thing believed. For well may we as- sent to a thing unknown, obscure, or unevident; but that our as- sent itself should be called therefore unknown or obscure, seems to me as great an impropriety, as if I should say, your sight were green or blue, because you see something that is so. In other places, therefore, I answer your words, but here I must answer your meaning: which I conceive to be, that it is necessary to faith, that the objects of it, the points which we believe, should not be so evidently certain, as to necessitate our understanding to an assent, so that there might be some merit in faith, as you love to speak (who will not receive, no, not from God himself, but a pennyworth for a penny), but as we, some obedience in it, which can hardly have place where there is no possibility of disobedi- ence; as there is not, where the understanding does all, and the will nothing. Now seeing the religion of protestants, though it be much more credible than yours, yet is not pretended to have the absolute evidence of sense or demonstration ; therefore I might let this doctrine pass without exception, for any prejudice that can redound to us by it. But yet I must not forbear to tell you, that your discourse proves, indeed, this condition re- quisite to the merit, but yet not to the essence of faith : with- out it faith were not an act of obedience, but yet faith may be faith without it; and this you must confess, unless you will say either the apostles believed not the whole gospel which they preached, or that they were not eye-witnesses of a great part of it-, unless you will question St. John for saying, " that which we have seen with our eyes, and with our hands have handled, &c. declare we unto you ;" nay, our Saviour himself for saying, " Thomas, because thou seest thou believest ; blessed are they which have not seen, and yet have believed." Yet if you will say, that in respect of the things which they saw, the apostles' assent was not pure, and proper, and mere faith, but somewhat more, an assent containing faith, but superadding to it, I will not contend with you; for it will be a contention about words. But then, again, The Nature of Faith. 433 I must crave leave to tell you, that the requiring this condition is, in my judgment, a plain revocation of the former : for had you made the matter of faith either naturally or supernaturally evi- dent, it might have been a fitly attempered and duly proportioned object for an absolute certainty natural or supernatural ; but re- quiring as you do — that faith should be an absolute knowledge of a thing not absolutely known, an infallible certainty of a thing, •which though it is in itself, yet is it not made appear to us to be infallibly certain — to my understanding you speak impossibilities. And truly for one of your religion to do so, is but a good decorum : for the matter and object of your faith being so full of contra- dictions, a contradictious faith may very well become a contradic- tious religion. Your faith, therefore, if you please to have it so, let it be a free necessitated, certain uncertain, evident obscure, prudent and foolish, natural and supernatural unnatural assent. But they which are unwilling to believe nonsense themselves, or persuade others to do so, it is but reason they should make the faith, wherewith they believe, an intelligible, compossible, con- sistent thing, and not define it by repugnancies. Now nothing is more repugnant, than that a man should be required to give most certain credit unto that which cannot be made appear most cer- tainly credible ; and if it appear to him to be so, then is it not obscure that it is so. For if you speak of an acquired, rational, discursive faith, certainly these reasons, which make the object seem credible, must be the cause of it ; and consequently, the strength and infirmity of my assent must rise and fall, together with the apparent credibility of the object. If you speak of a su- pernatural infused faith, then you either suppose it infused by the former means, and then that which was said before must be said again ; for whatsoever effect is wrought merely by means, must bear proportion to, and cannot exceed, the virtue of the means by which it is wrought. As nothing by water can be made more cold than water, nor by fire more hot than fire, nor by honey more sweet than honey, nor by gall more bitter than gall : or if you will suppose it infused without means, then that power which infuseth into the understanding assent, which bears analogy to sight in the eye, must also infuse evidence, that is, visibility into the object : and look what degree of assent is infused into the un- derstanding, at least the same degree of evidence must be infused into the object. And for you to require a strength of credit, be- yond the appearance of the object's credibility, is all one as if you should require me to go ten miles an hour upon a horse, that will go but five ; to discern a man certainly through a mist or cloud, that makes him not certainly discernible ; to hear a sound more clearly than it is audible ; to understand a thing more fully than it is intelligible : and he that doth so, I may well expect that his next injunction will be, that I must see something that is invisible, hear something inaudible, understand something that is wholly unintelligible. For he that demands ten of me, knowing I have but five, does in effect as if he demanded five, knowing that I have none: and, by like reason, you requiring that I should e e 37 434 The Nature of Faith. see things farther than they are visible, require I should see some- thing invisible ; and in requiring that I believe something more firmly than it is made to me evidently credible, you require, in ef- fect, that I believe something which appears to me incredible, and while it does so. I deny not but that I am bound to believe the truth of many texts of scripture, the sense whereof is to me obscure; and the truth of many articles of faith, the manner whereof is ob- scure, and to human understandings incomprehensible : but then it is to be observed, that not the sense of such texts, nor the manner of these things, is that which I am bound to believe, but the truth of them. But that I should believe the truth of any thing, the truth whereof cannot be made evident with an evidence propor- tionable to the degree of faith required of me ; this, I say, for any man to be bound to, is unjust and unreasonable, because to do it is impossible. 8. Ad. §. 4 — 12. Yet though I deny that it is required of us to be certain in the highest degree, infallibly certain of the truth of the things which we believe, for this were to know, and not believe, neither is it possible, unless our evidence of it, be it na- tural or supernatural, were of the highest degree; yet I deny not, but we ought to be, and may be, infallibly certain that we are to believe the religion of Christ. For, first, this is most certain, that we are in all things to do according to wisdom and reason, rather than against it. Secondly, this is as certain, that wisdom and rea- son require, that we should believe these things which are by many degrees more credible and probable than the contrary. Thirdly, this is as certain, that to every man who considers impartially what great things may be said for the truth of Christianity, and what poor things they are which may be said against it, either for any other religion, or for none at all, it cannot but appear by many de- grees more credible, that the christian religion is true, than the con- trary. And, from all these premises, this conclusion evidently fol- lows, that it is infallibly certain, that we are firmly to believe the truth of the christian religion. 9. Your discourse therefore touching the fourth requisite to faith, which is prudence, I admit, so far as to grant, 1. That if we were required to believe with certainty (I mean a moral cer- tainty) things no way represented as infallible and certain, (I mean morally) an unreasonable obedience were required of us. And so likewise were it, were we required to believe as absolutely certain, that which is no way represented to us as absolutely certain. 2. That whom God obligeth to believe any thing, he will not fail to furnish their understandings with such inducements, as are suf- ficient (if they be not negligent and perverse) to persuade them to believe. 3. That there is an abundance of arguments exceedingly credible, inducing men to believe the truth of Christianity ; I say so credible, that though they cannot make us evidently see what we believe; yet they evidently convince, that in true wisdom and prudence the articles of it deserve credit, and ought to be ac- cepted as things revealed by God. 4. That without such reasons and inducements, our choice even of the true faith is not to be Protestants not Heretics. 435 commended as prudent, but to be condemned of rasbness and levity. 10. But then for your making prudence not only a commenda- tion of a believer, and a justification of his faith, but also essential to it, and part of the definition of it, in that questionless you were mistaken, and have done as if being to say what a man is, you should define him, a reasonable creature that hath skill in astro- nomy. For as all astronomers are men, but all men are not astronomers, and therefore astronomy ought not to be put into the definition of man, where nothing should have place, but what agrees to all men : so though all that are truly wise, (that is, wise for eternity) will believe aright, yet many may believe aright, which are not wise. I could wish with all my heart, as Moses did — that all the Lord's people could prophesy — that all that believe the true religion were "able (according to St. Peter's injunction) to give a reason of the hope that is in them," a reason why they hope for eternal happiness by this way rather than any other ! Neither do I think it any great difficulty, that men of ordinary capacities, if they would give their mind to it, might quickly be enabled to do it. But should I affirm, that all true believers can do so, I suppose it would be as much against experience and mo- desty, as it is against truth and charity to say as you do — that they which cannot do so, either are not at all, or to no purpose, true believers. And thus we see, that the foundations you build upon are ruinous and deceitful, and so unfit to support your fabric, that they destroy one another. I come now to shew that your arguments to prove protestants heretics are all of the same quality with your former grounds ; which 1 will do, by opposing clear and satisfying answers in order to them. 11. Ad. §. 13. To the first, then, delivered by you §. 13, that protestants must be heretics, because they opposed divers truths propounded for divine by the visible church ; 1 answer, it is not heresy to oppose any truth propounded by the church, but only such a truth as is an essential part of the gospel of Christ. 2. The doctrines which protestants opposed were not truths, but plain and impious falsehoods. Neither, thirdly, were they propounded as truths by the visible church, but only by a part of it, and that a corrupted part. 12. Ad. §. 14. The next argument, in the next particle, tells us, that every error against any doctrine revealed by God is damn- able heresy : now either protestants or the Roman church must err against the word of God : but the Roman church we grant (perforce) doth not err damnably, neither can she, because she is the catholic church, which we (you say) confess cannot err damn- ably : therefore protestants must err against God's word, and consequently are guilty of formal heresy. Whereunto I answer, plainly, that there be in this argument almost as many falsehoods as assertions. For neither is every error against any doctrine revealed by God a damnable heresy, unless it be revealed pub- licly and plainly, with a command that all should believe it. 2. Dr. Potter nowhere grants, that the errors of the Roman church E e2 436 Protestants not Heretics. are not in themselves damnable, though he hopes by accident they may not actually damn some men amongst you ; and this you yourself confess in divers places of your book, where you tell us, that he allows no hope of salvation to those amongst you, whom ignorance cannot excuse.* 3. You beg the question twice in taking for granted, first, that the Roman church is the truly catholic church ; which without much favour can hardly pass for a part of it : and again, that the catholic church cannot fall into any error of itself damnable ; for it may do so, and still be the catholic church, if it retain those truths which may be an antidote against the malignity of this error, to those that held it out of a simple unaffected ignorance. Lastly, though the thing be true, yet I might well require some proof of it from you, that either protestants or the Roman church must err against God's word. For if their contradiction be your only reason, then also you or the do- minicans must be heretics, because you contradict one another as much as protestants and papists. 13. Ad. §. 15. The third argument pretends, that you have shewed already, that the visible church is judge of controversies, and therefore infallible ; from whence you suppose it follows, that to oppose her is to oppose God. To which I answer, that you have said only, and not shewed, that the visible church is judge of controversies. And, indeed, how can she be judge of them, if she cannot decide them 1 And how can she decide them, if it be a question, whether she be judge of them ? That which is ques- tioned itself, cannot with any sense be pretended to be fit to decide other questions ; and much less this question, whether it have authority to judge and decide all questions ? 2. If she were judge, it would not follow that she were infallible ; for we have many judges in our courts of judicature, yet none infallible. Nay, you cannot with any modesty deny, that every man in the world ought to judge for himself what religion is truest ; and yet you will not say that every man is infallible. 3. If the church were supposed infallible, yet it would not follow at all, much less mani- festly, that to oppose her declaration is to oppose God ; unless you suppose also, that as she is infallible, so by her opposers she is known or believed to be so. Lastly, if all this were true (as it is all most false), yet were it to little purpose, seeing you have omitted to prove that the visible church is the Roman. 14. Ad. §. 16. Instead of a fourth argument, this is presented to us — that if Luther were a heretic, then they that agreed with him must be so. And that Luther was a formal heretic, you endeavour to prove by this most formal syllogism — To say the visible church is not universal, is properly a heresy : but Luther's reformation was not universal ; therefore it cannot be excused from formal heresy. Whereunto I answer, first, to the first part, that it is no way impossible that Luther, had he been the inventor and first broacher of a false doctrine, (as he was not) might have been a formal heretic, and yet that those who follow him may be only so materially and improperly, and indeed no * Ch. v. $. 41. Protestants not Heretics. 437 heretics. Your own men out of St. Augustine distinguish between hceretici, et hcereticorum sequaces : and you yourself, though you pronounce the leaders among the arians formal heretics, yet con- fess, that Salvian was at least doubtful, whether these arians, who in simplicity followed their teachers, might not be excused by ignorance. And about this suspension of his you also seem suspended ; for you neither approve nor condemn it. Secondly, to the second part, I say, that had you not presumed upon your ignorance in logic, as well as metaphysic and school divinity, you would never have obtruded upon us this rope of sand for a formal syllogism. It is even cousin-german to this : — To deny the resurrection, is properly a heresy : but Luther's reformation was not universal ; therefore it cannot be excused from formal heresy. Or to this — To say the visible church is not universal, is properly a heresy : but the preaching of the gospel at the beginning was not universal ; therefore it cannot be excused from formal heresv. For as he, whose reformation is but particular, may yet not deny the resurrection, so may he also not deny the church's universal- ity. And as the apostles, who preached the gospel in the begin- ning, did believe the church universal, though their preaching at the beginning was not so : so Luther also might and did believe the church universal, though his reformation were but particular. I say, he did believe it universal, even in your own sense, that is, universal de jure, though not de facto. And as for universality in fact, he believed the church much more universal than his re- formation : for he did conceive (as appears by your own allega- tions out of him), that not only the part reformed was the true church, but also that they were part of it, who needed reforma- tion. Neither did he ever pretend to make a new church, but to reform the old one. Thirdly, and lastly > to the first proposition of this unsyllogistical syllogism, I answer, that to say the true church is not always de facto universal, is so far from being a heresy, that it is a certain truth known to all those that know the world, and what religions possess far the greater part of it. Do- natus therefore was not to blame for saying, that the church might possibly be confined to Afiic; but for saying, without ground, that then it was so. And St. Augustine, as he was in the right in think- ing that the church was then extended farther than Afric : so was he in the wrong, if he thought of necessity it always must be so ; but most palpably mistaken in conceiving that it was then spread over the whole earth, and known to all nations, which, if passion did not trouble you, and make you forget how lately almost half the world was discovered, and in what estate it was then found, you would very easily see and confess. 15. Ad. §. 17. In the next section you pretend, that you have no desire to prosecute the similitude of protestants with the do- natists; and yet you do it with as much spite and malice as could well be devised, but in vain : for Lucilla might do iil in promot- ing the sect of the donatists, and yet the mother and the daughter, whom you glance at, might do well in ministering influence (as you phrase it) to protestants in England. Unless you will con- 37* 438 Protestants not Heretics. elude, because one woman did one thing ill, therefore no woman can do any thing well ; or because it was ill done to promote one sect, therefore it must be ill done to maintain any. 16. The donatists might do ill in calling the chair of Rome the chair of pestilence, and the Roman church a harlot; and yet the state of the church being altered, protestants might do well to do so : and therefore, though St. Augustine might l perhaps have reason to persecute the donatists for detracting from the church, and calling her harlot, when she was not so ; yet you may have none to threaten Dr. Potter that you would persecute him (as the application of this place intimates you would), if it were in your power ; plainly showing that you are a cursed cow, though your horns be short, seeing the Roman church is not now what it was in St. Augustine's time. And hereof the conclusion of your own book affords us a very pregnant testimony ; where you tell us out of St. Augustine, that one grand impediment, which among many kept the seduced followers of the faction of Donatus from the church's communion, was a calumny raised against the catholics, that they did set some strange thing upon their altar. " To how many (saith St. Augustine) did report of ill tongues shut up the way to enter, who said, that we put I know not what upon the altar ?" Out of detestation of the calumny, and just indignation against it, he would not so much as name the impiety wherewith they were charged ; and therefore, by a rhetorical figure, calls it I know not what. But compare with him Optatus, writing of the same matter, and you shall plainly perceive that this (I know not what) pretended to be set upon the altar, was indeed a picture, which the donatists (knowing how detestable a thing it was to all chris- tians at that time, to set up any pictures in a church to worship them, as your new fashion is), bruited abroad to be done in the churches of the catholic church. But what answer do St. Au- gustine and Optatus make to this accusation ? Do they confess and maintain it ? Do they say, as you would now, It is true, we do set pictures upon our altar, and that not only for ornament or memory, but for worship also; but we do well to do so, and this ought not to trouble you, or affright you from our communion 1 What other answer your church could now make to such an objec- tion, is very hard to imagine : and therefore were your doctrine the same with the doctrine of the fathers in this point, they must have answered so likewise. But they to the contrary not only deny the crime, but also abhor and detest it. To little purpose, therefore, do you hunt after these poor shadows of resemblances between us and the donatists, unless vou could show an exact resemblance be- tween the present church of Rome and the ancient : which seeing, by this and many other particulars, it is demonstrated to be impos- sible, that church, which was then a virgin, may be now a harlot, and that which was detraction in the donatists, may be in protest- ants a just accusation. 17. As ill success have you in comparing Dr. Porter with Ty- conius, whom as St. Augustine finds fault with for continuing in the donatists' separation, having forsaken the ground of it, the Protestants not Heretics. 439 doctrine of the church's perishing ; so you condemn the doctor for continuing in their communion, who hold (as you say) the very same heresy. But if this were indeed the doctrine of the dona- tists, how is it that you say presently after, that the protestants, who hold the church of Christ perished, were worse than the do- natists, who said that the church remained at least in Africa? These things, methinks, hang not well together. But to let this pass: the truth is, this difference, for which you would fain raise such a horrible dissension between Dr. Potter and his brethren, if it be well considered, is only in words and the manner of expres- sion ; they affirming only, that the church perished from its integ- rity, and fell into many corruptions, which he denies not; and the doctor denying only that it fell from its essence, and became no church at all, which they affirm not. 18. These, therefore, are but velitations, and you would seem to make but small account of them. But the main point, you say, is — that "since Luther's reformed church was not in being for divers centuries before Luther, and yet was in the apostle's time, they must of necessity affirm heretically with the donatists, that the true unspotted church of Christ perished, and that she, which remained on earth, was (O blasphemy!) a harlot." By which words it seems you are resolute perpetually to confound true and un- spotted ; and to put no difference between a corrupted church, and none at all. But what is this, but to make no difference between a diseased and a dead man 1 Nay, what is it but to contradict yourselves, who cannot deny but that sins are as great stains, and spots, and deformities, in the sight of God, as errors; and confess your church to be a congregation of men, whereof every particular, not one excepted (and consequently the generality, which is nothing but a collection ot them), is polluted and defiled with sin 1 You proceed, 19. But say, " The same heresy follows out of Dr. Potter and other protestants, that the church may err in points not funda- mental ; because we have shewed that every error against any revealed truth is heresy and damnable, whether the matter be great or small : and how can the church more truly be said to perish, than when she is permitted to maintain damnable heresy ? Besides, we will hereafter prove, that by every act of heresy all divine faith is lost, and to maintain a true church without any faith, is to fancy a living man without life." Ans. What you , have said before, hath been answered before ; and what you shall say hereafter, shall be confuted hereafter. But if it be such a certain ground, that every error against any one revealed truth is a damnable heresy, then, I hope, I shall have your leave to subsume that the dominicans in your account must hold a damna- ble heresy, who hold an error against the immaculate concep- tion : which you must needs esteem a revealed truth, or otherwise why are you so urgent and importunate to have it detined, seeing your rule is, Nothing may be denned unless it be first revealed ? But, without your leave, I will make bold to conclude, that, if either that or the contrary assertion be a revealed truth, you or 440 Protestants not Heretics. they, choose you whether, must without contradiction hold a damnable heresy; if this ground be true, that every contradic- tion of a revealed truth is such. And now I dare say, for fear of inconvenience, you will begin to temper the crudeness of your former assertion, and tell us, that neither of you are heretics, be- cause the truth, against which you err, though revealed, is not sufficiently propounded. And so say I, neither is your doctrine, which protestants contradict, sufficiently propounded. For though it be plain enough, that your church proposeth it, yet still, me- thinks, it is as plain, that your church's proposition is not suffi- cient; and I desire you would not say, but prove the contrary. Lastly, to your question — How can the church more truly be said to perish, than when she is permitted to maintain a damnable heresy ? — I answer, she may be more truly said to perish, when she is not only permitted to do so, but de facto doth maintain a damnable heresy. Again, she may be more truly said to perish, when she falls into a heresy, which is not only damnable in itself and ex natura rei, as you speak, but such a heresy, the belief of whose contrary truth is necessary, not only necessitate prcecepti, but medii, and therefore the heresy so absolutely and indispen- sably destructive of salvation, that no ignorance can excuse it, nor any general repentance, without a dereliction of it, can beg a pardon for it. Such a heresy, if the church should fall into, it might be more truly said to perish, than if it fell only into some heresy of its own nature damnable. For, in that state, all the mem- bers of it without exception, all without mercy must needs perish for ever : in this, although those that might see the truth, and would not, cannot upon any good ground hope for salvation, yet without question it might send many souls to heaven, who would gladly have embraced the truth, but that they wanted means to discover it. Thirdly and lastly, she may yet be more truly said to perish, when she apostates from Christ absolutely, or rejects even those truths, out of which her heresies may be reformed; as if she should directly deny Jesus to be the Christ, or the scripture to be the word of God. Towards which state of perdition it may well be feared, that the church of Rome doth somewhat incline, by her superinducing upon the rest of her errors the doctrine of her own infallibility, whereby her errors are made incurable: and by her pretending the scripture is to be interpreted according to her doctrine, and not her doctrine to be judged of by scrip- ture, whereby she makes the scripture ineffectual for her re- formation. 20. Ad. §.18. I was very glad when I heard you say — The holy scripture and ancient fathers, do assign separation from the visible church as a mark of heresy: — for I was in good hope, that no christian would so belie the scripture, as to say so of it, unless he could have produced some one text, at least, wherein this was plainly affirmed, or from whence it might be undoubtedly and undeniably collected. For assure yourself, good sir, it is a very heinous crime to say, thus saith the Lord, when the Lord doth not say so. I expected therefore some scripture should have Protestants not Heretics. 441 been alleged, wherein it should have been said, whosoever se- parates from the Roman church is an heretic ; or, the Roman church is infallible, or the guide of faith: or, at least, there shall be always some visible church infallible in matters of faith. Some such direction as this I hoped for : and I pray consider, whether I had not reason. The evangelists and apostles, who wrote the New Testament, we all suppose were good men, and very desirous to direct us the surest and plainest way to heaven ; we suppose them likewise very sufficiently instructed by the spirit of God in all the necessary points of the christian faith, and therefore certainly not ignorant of this iinum necessarium, this most neces- sary point of all other, without which, as you pretend and teach, all faith is no faith ; that is, that the church of Rome was designed by God the guide of faith. We suppose them, lastly, wise men, especially being assisted by the Spirit of wisdom, and such as knew, that a doubtful and questionable guide was for men's di- rection as good as none at all. And, after all these propositions, which I presume no good christian will call into question, is it possible that any christian heart can believe, that not one amongst them all should, ad rei memoriam, write this necessary doctrine plainly so much as once? Certainly, in all reason they had pro- vided much better for the good of christians, if they had wrote this, though they had written nothing else. Methinks the evan- gelists, undertaking to write the gospel of Christ, could not pos- sibly have omitted, any one of them, this most necessary point of faith, had they known it necessary (St. Luke, especially, who plainly professes, that his intent was to write all things necessary). Methinks St. Paul writing to the Romans, could not but have con- gratulated this their privilege to them ! Methinks, instead of saying, " Your faith is spoken of all the world over," (which you have no reason to be very proud of; for he says the very same thing to the Thessalonians) he could not have failed to have told them, once, at least, in plain terms, that their faith was the rule for all the world for ever. But then sure he would have forborne to put them in fear of an impossibility, as he doth in his eleventh chapter, that they also, nay, the whole church of the gentiles, if they did not look to their standing, might fall away to infidelity, as the Jews had done. Methinks, in all his other epistles, at least in some, at least in one of them, he could not have failed to have given the world this direction, had he known it to be a true one — that all men were to be guided by the church of Rome, and none to separate from it under pain of damnation. Methinks, writing so often of heretics and antichrist, he should have given the world this (as you pretend) only sure preservative from them. How was it possible, that St. Peter, writing two catholic epistles, mentioning his own departure, writing to preserve christians in the faith, should in neither of them commend them to the guid- ance of his pretended successors, the bishops of Rome 1 How was it possible, that St. James and St. Jude, in their catholic epistles, should not give this catholic direction 1 Methinks, St. John, instead of saying, "He that believeth that Jesus is the 442 Protestants not Heretics. Christ, is born of God," (the force of which direction your glosses do quite enervate, and make unavailable to discern who are the sons of God) should have said — he that adheres to the doctrine of the Roman church, and lives according to it, he is a good chris- tian, and by this mark ye shall know him ! What man, not quite out of his wits, if he consider, as he should, the pretended neces- sity of this doctrine, that without the belief hereof no man ordi- narily can be saved, can possibly force himself to conceive, that all these good and holy men, so desirous of men's salvation, and so well assured of it (as it is pretended), should be so deeply and affectedly silent in it, and not one of them say it plainly so much as once, but leave it to be collected from uncertain principles, by many more uncertain consequences? Certainly, he that can judge so uncharitably of them, it is no marvel if he censure other inferior servants of Christ as atheists and hypocrites, and what he pleases. Plain places therefore I did and had reason to look for, when I heard you say — the holy scripture assigns separation from the visible church as a mark of heresy. But, instead here- of, what have you brought us but mere impertinence? St. John said of some who pretended to be christians, and were not so, and therefore, when it was for their advantage, forsook their pro- fession, " They went out from us, but they were not of us ; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us." Of some, who, before the decree of the council to the con- trary, were persuaded, and accordingly taught, that the convert gentiles were to keep the law of Moses, it is said in the Acts, " Some who went out from us." And, again St. Paul in the same book forewarns the Ephesians, that " out of them should arise men speaking perverse things." And from these places, which it seems are the plainest you have, you collect — that separation from the visible church is assigned by scripture as a mark of heresy. Which is certainly a strange and unheard-of strain of logic : un- less you will say, that every text, wherein it is said, that some- body goes out from somebody, affords an argument for this pur- pose ; for the first place, there is no certainty that it speaks of heretics, but no christians, of antichrists, of such as denied Jesus to be the Christ. See the place, and you shall confess as much. The second place, it is certain, you must not say it speaks of heretics ; for it speaks only of some who believed and taught an error, while it was yet a question, and not evident ; and therefore, according to your doctrine, no formal heresy. The third says, indeed, that, of the professors of Christianity, some shall arise that shall teach heresy ; but not one of them all, that says or inti- mates, that whosoever separates from the visible church, in what state soever, is certainly a heretic. Heretics, I confess, do always do so ; but they that do so are not always heretics ; for, perhaps, the state of the church may make it necessary for them to do so; as rebels always disobey the command of their king, yet they "which disobey a king's command (which perhaps may be unjust) are not presently rebels. 21. Your allegations out of Vincentius, Prosper, and Cyprian, Protestants not Heretics. 443 are liable to these exceptions: 1. That they are the sayings of men not assisted by the Spirit of God, and whose authority your- selves will not submit to in all things. 2. That the first and last are merely impertinent, neither of them affirming or intimating, that separation from the present visible church is a mark of heresy ; and the former, speaking plainly of separation from uni- versality, consent, and antiquity, which if you will presume with- out proof that we did, and you did not, you beg the question : for you know we pretend, that we separated only from that present church, which had separated from the doctrine of the ancients, and because she had done so, and so far forth as she had done so, and no farther. And, lastly, the latter part of Prosper's words cannot be generally true, according to your own grounds; for you say a man may be divided from the church upon mere schism, without any mixture of heresy ; and a man may be justly excommunicated for many other sufficient causes besides heresy. Lastly, a man may be divided by any unjust excommunication, and be both before and after a very good catholic ; and therefore, you cannot maintain it universally true — that he who is divided from the church is a here- tic, and antichrist. 22. In the 19th section we have the authority of eight fathers urged to prove — that the separation from the church of Rome, as it is the see of St. Peter, (I conceive you mean, as it is that par- ticular church) is the mark of heresy. — Which kind of argument I might well refuse to answer, unless you would first promise me, that whensoever I should produce as plain sentences of as great a number of fathers, as ancient, for any doctrine whatsoever, that you will subscribe to it, though it fall out to be contrary to the doctrine of the Roman church. For I conceive nothing in the world more unequal or unreasonable, than that you should press us with such authorities as these, and think yourselves at liberty from them ; and that you should account them fathers when they are for you, and children when they are against you. Yet I would not you should interpret this, as if I had not great assurance, that it is not possible for you ever to gain this cause at the tribunal of the fathers ; nay, not of the fathers, whose sentences are here al- leged. Let us consider them in order, and I doubt not to make it appear, that far the greater part of them, nay, all of them that are any way considerable, fall short of your purpose. 23. St. Jerome, (you say) writing to Pope Damasus, saith, " I am in the communion of the chair of Peter," &c. But then, I pray, consider he saith it to Pope Damasus ; and this will much weaken the authority, with them who know how great overtruths men usually write to one another in letters. Consider, again, that he says only, that he was then in communion with the chair of Peter ; not that he always would, or of necessity must be so ; for his resolution to the contrary is too evident out of that which he saith elsewhere, which shall be produced hereafter. He says, that the church at that present was built upon that rock ; but not that only, nor that always. Nay, his judgment, as shall appear, is express to the contrary. And so likewise the rest of his cxpres- 444 Protestants not Heretics. sions (if we mean to reconcile Jerome with Jerome) must be con- ceived, as intended by him of that bishop and see of Rome, at that present time, and in the present state, and in respect of that doc- trine which he there treats of. For otherwise, had he conceived it necessary for him and all men to conform their judgment, in matters of faith, to the judgment of the bishop and church of Rome, how came it to pass, that he chose rather to believe the epistle to the Hebrews canonical, upon the authority of the eastern church, than to reject it from the canon, upon the au- thority of the Roman? How comes it to pass, that he dissented from the authority of that church, touching the canon of the Old Testament? For if you say, that the church then consented with St. Jerome, I fear you will lose your fort by maintaining your outworks ; and, by avoiding this, run into a greater danger of being forced to confess the present Roman church opposite herein to the ancient. How was it possible, that he should ever believe, that Liberius, bishop of Rome, either was or could have been wrought over by* the solicitation of Fortunatianus, bishop of Aquileia, and brought after two years' banishment to subscribe heresy ? Which act of Liberius though some fondly question, being so vain as to expect we should rather believe them that lived but yesterday, thirteen hundred years almost after the thing is said to be done, and speaking for themselves in their own cause, rather than the disinterested time-fellows or immediate successors of Liberius himself; yet, I hope, they will not proceed to such a degree of immodesty, as once to question, whether St. Jerome thought so. And if this cannot be denied, I demand then, if he had lived in Liberius's time, could he, or would he, have written so to Liberius as he does to Damasus? Would he have said to him — I am in the communion of the chair of Peter : I know that the church is built upon this rock ; whosoever gathereth not with thee, scattereth ? — Would he then have said, the Roman faith and the catholic were the same ? Or, that the Roman faith received no delusions, no, not from an angel ? I suppose he could not have said so with any coherence to his own belief; and therefore conceive it undeniable, that what he said then to Damasus, he said it (though perhaps he strained too high) only of Damasus, and never conceived that his words would have been extended to all his pre- decessors and successors. 24. The same answer I make to the first place of St. Ambrose, viz. that no more can be certainly concluded from it, but that the catholic bishops and the Roman church were then at unity ; so that whosoever agreed with the latter, could not then but agree with the former. But that this rule was perpetual, and that no man could ever agree with the catholic bishops, but he must agree with the Roman church ; this he says not, nor gives you any ground to conclude from him. Athanasius, when he was excom- municated by Liberius, agreed very ill with the Roman church ; and yet you will not gainsay but he agreed well enough with the catholic bishops. The second 1 am uncertain what the sense of it * Hieronym. de Script. Eccles. tit. Fortunatianus. Protestants not Heretics. 445 is, and what truth is in it ; but most certain, that it makes no- thing to your present purpose : for it neither affirms nor imports, that separation from the Roman church is a certain mark of heresy. For the rights of communion (whatsoever it signifies) might be said to flow from it, if that church were, by ecclesiastical law, the head of all other churches : but unless it were made so by divine author- ity, and that absolutely, separation from it could not be a mark of heresy. 25. For St. Cyprian, all the world knows, that he* resolutely opposed a decree of the Roman bishop, and all that adhered to him in the point of rebaptizing, which that church at that time delivered as a necessary tradition ; so necessary, that by the bishop of Rome, Firmilianus, and other bishops of Cappadocia, Cilicia, and Galatia, and generally all who persisted in the contrary opinionf were therefore deprived of the church's communion, (which excommunication could not but involve St. Cyprian, who defended the same opinion as resolutely as Firmilianus, though cardinal Perron magisterially, and without all colour of proof, affirms the contrary) and Cyprian in particular so far cast off, as for it to be pronounced by Stephen, " a false Christ." Again, so necessary, that the bishops which were sent by Cyprian from Afric to Rome, were not admitted to the communion of ordinary conference : but all men, who were subject to the bishop of Rome's authority, were commanded by him not only to deny them the church's peace, and communion, but even lodging and entertainment ; manifestly declaring, that they reckoned them among those whom St. John forbids to receive to house, or to say God speed to them. All these terrors notwithstanding, St. Cy- prian holds still his former opinion. And though, out of respect to the church's peace,J he judged no man, nor cut off any man from the right of communion, for thinking otherwise than he held ; yet he conceived Stephen and his adherents^ to hold a per- nicious error. And St. Augustine, though, disputing with the donatists, he uses some tergiversation in the point, yet confesses elsewhere, that " it is not found, that Cyprian did ever change his opinion." And so far was he from conceiving any necessity of doing so, by submitting to the judgment of the bishop and church of Rome, that he plainly professes, that no other bishop — but our Lord Jesus only, had power to judge (with authority) of his judg- ment ; — and as plainly intimates, that Stephen, for usurping such a power, and making himself — a judge over bishops, was little better than a tyrant — and as heavily almost he censures him, and peremptorily opposes him as obstinate in error, in that very place where he delivers that famous saying, " how can he have God for his father, who hath not the church for his mother!" Little * It is confessed by Baronius, Ann. 238, N. 41. By Bellarm. 1. iv. de R. Pont. c. vii. Sect. Tertia ratio. t Confessed by Baronius, Ann. 258, N. 14, 15. By Card. Perron's Rep. 1. 1. c. xxv. Ibid. X Vide Cone. Carth. apud Sur. to 1. § Bell. 1. ii. de Cone. c. v. Aug. ep. 48, et 1. 1, de Bap. c. xviii. 38 446 Protestants not Heretics. doubting, it seems, but a man might have the church for his mother, who stood in opposition to the church of Rome, and being far from thinking, what you fondly obtrude upon him, that to be united to the Roman church, and to the church, was all one ; and that separation from St. Peter's chair was a mark, I mean a cer- tain mark, either of schism or heresy. If, after all this, vou will catch at a phrase or a compliment of St. Cyprian's, and with that hope to persuade protestants, who know this story as well as their own name, that St. Cyprian did believe — that falsehood could not have access to the Roman church — and that opposition to it was the brand of a heretic; may we not well expect, that you will, the next time you write, vouch Luther and Calvin also for abettors of this fancy, and make us poor men believe, not only (as you say) that we have no metaphysics, but that we have no sense? And, when you have done so it will be no great difficulty for you to assure us, that we read no such thing in Bellarmine* as that Cyprian was always accounted in the number of catholics ; nor in Canisius, that he was a most excellent doctor, and a glorious martyr; nor in your calendar, that he is a saint and a martyr; but that all these are deceptions of our sight, and that you ever esteemed him a very schismatic and a heretic, as having on him the mark of the beast — opposition to the chair of St. Peter : nay, that he (whatever he pretended) knew and believed himself to be so, inasmuch as he knew (as you pretend) and esteemed this opposi- tion to be the mark of heresy, and knew himself to stand, and stand out in such an opposition. 26. But we need not seek so far for matter to refute the vanity of this pretence. Let the reader but peruse this very epistle, out of which this sentence is alleged, and he shall need no further satisfaction against it : for he shall find, first, that you have helped the dice a little with a false, or, at least, with a very bold and strained translation ; for St. Cyprian saith not, " to whom falsehood cannot have access," by which many of your favourable readers, I doubt, understood that Cyprian had exempted that church from a possibility of error, but, " to whom pertidiousness cannot have access," meaning by pertidiousness in the abstract, according to a common figure of speech, those perfidious schis- matics, whom he there complains of; and of these, by a rhetorical insinuation, he says, that " with such good christians as the Ro- mans were, it was not possible they should find favourable enter- tainment." Not that he conceived it any way impossible they should do so ; for the very writing this epistle, and many passages in it, plainly shew the contrary ; but because he was confident, or, at least, would seem to be confident, they never would, and so by his good opinion and confidence in the Romans, lay an obligation upon them to do as he presumed they would do ; as also in the end of his epistle he says, even of the people of the church of Rome, that " being defended by the providence of their bishop, nay, by their own vigilance sufficiently guarded, they could not be taken nor deceived with the poison of heretics." Not * Bell. 1. ii. de Con. c. v. sect. 1. Canisius in Initio Catech. Sept. die 14. Protestants not Heretics. 447 that, indeed, he thought either this or the former any way impos- sible : for to what purpose, but for prevention hereof, did he write this long, and accurate, and vehement epistle to Cornelius? Which sure had been most vainly done, to prevent that which he knew or believed impossible ! Or how can this consist with his taking notice in the beginning of it, that Cornelius " was some- what moved and wrought upon by the attempts of his adversaries," with his reprehending him for being so, and with his vehement exhorting him to courage and constancy, or with his request to him in the conclusion of his epistle, that it should " be read publicly to the whole clergy and laity of Rome, to the intent that if any contagion of their poisoned speech, and pestiferous semi- nation had crept in amongst them, it might be wholly taken away from the ears and the hearts of the brethren ; and that the entire and sincere charity of good men might be purged from all dross of heretical detraction?" Or, lastly, with his vehement persuasions to them to decline, " for the time to come, and resolutely avoid their word and conference, because their speech crept as a canker, as the apostle saith ; because 'evil communication would corrupt good manners,' because wicked men carry perdition in their mouths, and hide fire in their lips?" All which had been but vain and ridiculous pageantry, had he verily believed the Romans such inaccessible forts, such immovable rocks, as the former sen- tences would seem to import, if we will expound them rigidly and strictly, according to the exigence of the words, and not allow him, who was a professed master of the art, to have used here a little rhetoric, and to say — that could not be, whereof he had no abso- lute certainty but that it might be, but only had, or would seem to have, a great confidence, that it never would be, Ut fides habita Jidem obligaret; that he professing to be confident of the Romans, might lay an obligation upon them to do as he promised himself they would do. For as for joining the principal church and the chair of Peter, how that will serve for your present purpose of proving separation from the Roman church a mark of heresy, I suppose it is hard to understand ! Nor, indeed, how will it advan- tage you in any other design against us, who do not altogether deny but that the church of Rome might be called the chair of Peter, in regard he is said to have preached the gospel there ; and the principal church, because the city was the principal and impe- rial city: which perogative of the city, if we believe the fathers of the council of Chalcedon, was the ground and occasion why the fa- thers of former time (I pray observe) conferred upon this church this perogative above other churches. 27. And as far am I from understanding how you can collect from the other sentence, that to communicate with the church and pope of Rome, and to communicate with the catholic church, is always (for that is your assumpt) one and the same thing. St. Cyprian speaks not of the church of Rome at all, but of the bishop only, who, when he doth communicate with the catholic church, as Cornelius at that time did, then whosoever communicates with him, cannot but communicate with the catholic church ; and then 448 Protestants not Heretics. by accident one might truly say, such an one communicates with you, that is, with the catholic church ; and that to communicate with him, is to communicate with the catholic church. As if Titius and Sempronius be together, he that is in company with Titius, cannot but be at that time in company with Sempronius. As if a general be marching to some place with an army, he that then is with the general, must at that time be with the army : and a man may say, without absurdity, such a time I was with the general, that is, with the army ; and that to be with the general, is to be with the army. Or, as if a man's hand be joined to his body, the finger, which is joined to the hand, is joined to the body ; and a man may truly say of it, this finger is joined to the hand, that is, to the body; and to be joined to the hand, is to be joined to the body ; because all these things are by accident true. And yet I hope you will not deny, but the finger might pos- sibly be joined to the hand, and yet not to the body, the hand being cut off from the body; and a man might another time be with his general, and not with his army, he being absent from the army. And therefore, by like reason, your collection is sophistical, being in effect but this: to communicate with such a bishop of Rome, who did communicate with the catholic church, was to communi- cate with the catholic church ; therefore absolutely and always it must be true, that to communicate with him, is by consequence to communicate with the catholic church ; and to be divided from his communion, is to be a heretic. 28. In urging the place of Irenasus, you have shewed much more ingenuousness than many of your fellows. For as they usually begin at " declaring the tradition of the," &c. and conceal what goes before ; you have set it down, though not so completely as you should have done, yet sufficiently to shew, that what autho- rity in the matter he attributed to the Roman church in parti- cular, the same, for the kind (though perhaps not in the same degree), he attributed to all other apostolic churches. Either, therefore, you must say, that he conceived the testimony of other apostolic churches divine and infallible (which certainly he did not, neither do you pretend he did; and if he had, the confessed errors and heresies, which, after they fell into, would demonstrate plainly, that he had erred), or else that he conceived the testi- mony of the Roman church only human and credible, though perhaps more credible than any one church beside (as one man's testimony is more credible than another's), but certainly much more credible, which was enough for his purpose, than that secret tradition, to which those heretics pretended, against whom he wrote, overbearing them with an argument of their own kind, far stronger than their own. Now, if Irenasus thought the testi- mony of the Roman church in this point only human and falli- ble, then surely he could never think either adhering to it a certain mark of a catholic, or separation from it a certain mark of a heretic. 29. Again, whereas your great Achilles, Cardinal Perron, (in French, as also his noble translatress, misled by him, in English) Protestants not Heretics. 449 knowing that men's resorting to Rome would do his cause little service, hath made bold with the Latin tongue, as he does very often with the Greek, and rendered ad banc ecclesiam necesse est omnem convenire ecclesiam, " to this church it is necessary that every church should agree," you have translated it as it should be, "to this church it is necessary that all churches resort;" wherein you have showed more sincerity, and have had more re- gard to make the author speak sense. For if he had said — by showing the tradition of the Roman church, we confound all heretics; for to this church all churches must agree; — what had this been, but to give for a reason that which was more question- able than the thing in question? As being neither evident in itself, and plainly denied by his adversaries, and not at all proved, nor offered to be proved, here or elsewhere, by Irenaeus. To speak thus therefore had been weak and ridiculous. But on the other side, if we conceive him to say thus : — You heretics decline a trial of your doctrine by scripture, as being corrupted and imperfect, and not fit to determine controversies without recourse to tradition : and, instead hereof, you fly for a refuge to a secret tradition, which you pretend that you received from your ances- tors', and they from the apostles, certainly your calumnies against scripture are most unjust and unreasonable : but yet moreover assure yourselves, that if you will be tried by tradition, even by that also you will be overthrown. For our tradition is far more famous, more constant, and in all respects more credible, than that which you pretend to. For it were easy for me to muster up against you the uninterrupted succession of all the churches founded by the aposties, all conspiring in their testimonies against you : but because it were too long to number up the successions of all churches, I will content myself with the tradition of the most ancient and most glorious church of Rome, which alone is sufficient for the confutation and confusion of your doctrine, as being in credit and authority, as far beyond the tradition you build upon, as the light of the sun is beyond the light of a glowworm. For to this church, by reason it is placed in the imperial city, whither all men's affairs do necessarily draw them, or by reason of the powerful principality it hath over all the adjacent churches, there is, and always hath been, a necessity of a perpetual recourse of all the faithful round about; who, if there had been any alter- ation in the church of Rome, could not, in all probability, but have observed it. But they, to the contrary, have always observed in this church the very tradition which came from the apostles, and no other. — I say, if we conceive his meaning thus, his words will be intelligible and rational; which, if instead of resort, we put in agree, will be quite lost. Herein therefore we have been beholden to your honesty, which makes me think you did not wittingly falsify, but only twice in this sentence mistake undique for ubique, and translated it " every where," and " of what place soever," instead of round about. For that it was necessary for all the faithful of what place soever, to resort to Rome, is not true. That the apostolic tradition hath always been conserved pp 38 * 450 Protestants not Heretics. there from those who are every where, is not sense. Now in- stead of conservata read observata, as in all probability it should be, and translate undique truly " round about," and then the sense will be both plain and good ; for then it must be rendered thus: — For to this church, by reason of a more powerful prin- cipality, there is a necessity that all the churches, that is, all the faithful round about, should resort, in which the apostolic tradition hath been always observed by those who were round about. If any man say, I have been too bold a critic in sub- stituting observata instead of conservata; I desire him to know, that the conjecture is not mine; and therefore, as I expect no praise for it, so I hope I shall be far from censure. But I would entreat him to consider, whether it be not likely, that the same Greek word, signifying observo and conservo, the translator of Ire- naeus, who could hardly speak Latin, might not easily mistake, and translated (SiaTrjpvjrai, conservata est, instead of observata est : or whether it be not likely, that those men, which anciently wrote books, and understood them not, might not easily commit such an error : or whether the sense of the place can be salved any other way ; if it can, in God's name let it ; if not, I hope he is not to be condemned, who with such a little alteration hath made that sense, which he found nonsense. 30. But whether you will have it observata or conservata, the new sumpsimus or the old mumpsimus, possibly it may be some- thing to Irenaeus; but to us, or our cause, it is no way material. For if the rest be rightly translated, neither will conservata afford you any argument against us, nor observata help us to any evasion. For though at the first hearing the glorious attributes here given (and that justly) to the church of Rome — the confounding heretics with her tradition, and saying it is necessary for all churches to resort to her — may sound like arguments for you; yet he that is attentive, I hope, will easily discover, that it might be good and rational in Irenaeus, having to do with heretics, who, somewhat like those who would be the only catholics, declined a trial by scrip- ture, as not containing the truth of Christ perfectly, and not fit to decide controversies, without recourse to tradition : I say, he will easily perceive, that it might be rational in Irenaeus to urge them with any tradition of more credit than their own, especially a tradition consonant to scripture, and even contained in it : and yet that it may be irrational in you to urge us, who do not de- cline scripture, but appeal to it as a perfect rule of faith, with a tradition which we pretend is many ways repugnant to scripture, and repugnant to a tradition far more general than itself, which gives testimony to scripture ; and lastly, repugnant to itself, as giv- ing attestation both to scripture, and to doctrines plainly contrary to scripture. Secondly, that the authority of the Roman church was then a far greater argument of the truth of her tradition, when it was united with all other apostolic churches, than now, when it is divided from them, according to that of Tertullian: "had the churches erred, they would have varied; but that which is the same in all, cannot be error, but tradition." And Protestants not Heretics. 451 therefore Irenaeus's argument may be very probable, yet yours may be worth nothing. Thirdly, that fourteen hundred years may have made a great deal of alteration in the Roman church ; as rivers, though near the fountain they may retain their native and unmixed sincerity, yet in long progress cannot but take in much mixture that came not from the fountain. And, therefore, the Roman tradition, though then pure, may now be corrupted and impure: and so this argument (being one of those things which are the worse for wearing) might in Irenaeus's time be strong and vigorous, and after declining and decaying, may long since have fallen to nothing: especially, considering that Irenaeus plays the his- torian only, and not the prophet, and says only, that the " apostolic tradition had been always there, as in other apostolic churches," conserved or observed, choose you whether ; but that — it should be always so, he says not, neither had he any warrant. He knew well enough, that there was foretold a great " falling away" of the churches of Christ to antichrist ; that the Roman church, in par- ticular, was forewarned, that she also — nay,* the whole church of the gentiles might fall, if they looked not to their standing : and, therefore, to secure her, that she should stand for ever, he had no reason nor authority. Fourthly, that it appears manifestly, out of this book of Irenaeus, quoted by you, that the doctrine of the chiliasts was in his judgment apostolic tradition, as also it was esteemed (for aught appears to the contrary) by all the doctors, and saints, and martyrs, of or about his time; for all that speak of it, or whose judgments in the point are any way recorded, are for it: and Justin Marty rf professeth, that all good and orthodox christians of his time believed it ; and those that did not, he reckons amongst heretics. Now I demand, was this tradition one of those that was conserved and observed in the church of Rome, or was it not? If not, had Irenaeus known so much, he must have retracted this commendation of that church. If it was, then the tradition of the present church of Rome contradicts the ancient, and accounts it heretical ; and then sure it can be no certain note of heresy, to depart from them, who have departed from themselves, and prove themselves subject unto error, by holding contradictions. Fifthly, and lastly, that out of the story of the church, it is as manifest as the light at noon, that though Irenaeus did esteem the Roman tradition a great argument of the doctrine which he there delivers and defends against the heretics of his time, viz. that there is one God ; yet he was very far from thinking that church was, and ever should be, a safe keeper, and an infallible witness, of tradition in general; inasmuch as, in his own life, his actions proclaimed the contrary. For when Victor, bishop of Rome, obtruded the Roman tradition, touching the time of Easter, upon the Asian bishops, under the pain of excom- munication and damnation; Irenaeus, and all the other western bishops, though agreeing with him in his observation, yet sharply reprehended him for excommunicating the Asian bishops for their disagreeing; plainly shewing, that they esteemed that not a * Rom. xi. t In Dial, cum Tryplion. FF2 452 Protestants not Heretics. necessary doctrine, and a sufficient ground of excommunication;, which the hishop of Rome and his adherents did so account of: for otherwise, how could they have reprehended him for excom- municating them, had they conceived the cause of this excommu- nication just and sufficient? and, besides, evidently declaring, that they esteemed not separation from the Roman church a certain mark of heresy, seeing they esteemed not them heretics, though separated and cut off from the Roman church. Cardinal Perron,* to avoid the stroke of this convincing argu- ment, raiseth a cloud of eloquent words, which, because you bor- row them of him in your second part, I will here insert, and with short censures dispel ; and let his idolaters see, that truth is not afraid of giants. His words are these : " The first instance, then, that Calvinf allegeth against the pope's censures, is taken from Eusebius, (a) an arian author, and from Ruffinus, (6) enemy to the Roman church, his translator, who writ (c) that St. Ircnaeus reprehended Pope Victor, for having excommunicated the churches of Asia, for the question of the day of pasche, which they observed according to a particular tradition that St. John had introduced (d) for a time in their pro- vinces, because of the neighbourhood of the Jews, and to bury the synagogue with honour, and not according to the universal tradition of the apostles. ' Irenaeus (saith Calvin) reprehended Pope Victor bitterly, because for a light cause he had moved a great and perilous contention in the church.' There is this in the text that Calvin produceth — 'He reprehended him, that he had not done well, to cut off from the body of unity so many and so great churches.' But against whom maketh he this, but (e) against those that object it ? For who sees not thatj St. Irenaeus doth not there reprehend the pope for the (/) want of power, but for the ill use of his power; and doth not reproach the pope that he could not excommunicate the Asians, but ad- monisheth him, that for (g) so small a cause he should not have cut off so many provinces from the body of the church? ' Irenaeus (saith Eusebius)§ did fitly exhort Pope Victor, that he should not cut off all the churches of God which held this ancient tradition.' And Ruffinus, translating and envenoming Eusebius, saith, || ' He questioned Victor, that he had not done well, in cutting off from the body of unity so many and so great churches of God.' And in truth how could St. Irenaeus have reprehended the pope for want of power ? He that cries — To the Roman church, because of a more powerful principality; that is to say, as above appeareth, (h) because of a principality more powerful than the temporal; or, (as we have expounded other-where) because of a more powerful original, (i) it is necessary that every church should agree : and (A:) therefore also St. Irenaeus allegeth not to Pope Victor the ex- ample of him and of the other bishops of the Gaulslf assembled in a * Lib. iii. c. ii. of his Reply to K. James, c. ii. sect. 32. + Calv. ubi supra. t Ruffin. in Vers. Hist. Eccl. Eus. 1. v. c. xxiv. § Eus. Hist. Eccl. 1. v. c. xxiv. II Ruffin. ib. c. xxiv. Iren. 1. iii. c. iii. 1 book, ch. xxv. *ff Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. v. c. xxii. Protestants not Heretics. 453 council holden expressly for this effect, who had not excommuni- cated the Asians : nor the example of Narcissus, bishop of Jerusa- lem, and of the bishops of Palestina, assembled in another council, holden expressly for the same effect, who had not excommunicated them ; nor the example of Palmas, and of the other bishops of Pontus, assembled in the same manner, and for the same cause, in the region of Pontus, who had not excommunicated them: but only alleges to him the example of the popes, his prede- cessors:* 'The prelates (saith he) who have presided before Soter, in the church where thou presidest, Anisius, Pius, Hyginus, Telesphorus, and Sixtus, have not observed this custom, &c. and, nevertheless, none of those that observed it have been excommu- nicated.' And yet, O admirable providence of God ! the (/) suc- cess of the after-ages shewed, that even in the use of his power the pope's proceeding was just. For after the death of Victor,f the councils of Nicea, of Constantinople, and of Ephesus, ex- communicated again those that held the same custom with the provinces that the pope had excommunicated, and placed them in the catalogue of heretics, under the titles of heretics quarto- decumans. " But to this instance Calvin's sect do annex two new obser- vations ; the first, that the pope having threatened the bishops of Asia to excommunicate them, Polycrates, the bishop of Ephesus and metropolitan of Asia, despised the pope's threats, as it appears by the answer of the same Polycrates to Pope Victor, which is inserted in the writings of Eusebius,J and of St. Jerome, and which Jerome seemeth to approve, when he saith, he reports it to show the spirit and authority of the man. And the second, that when the pope pronounced anciently his excommunications, he did no other thing but separate himself from the communion of those that he excommunicated, and did not thereby separate them fiom the universal communion of the church. To the first then we say, that so far is this epistle of Polycrates from abating and diminishing the pope's authority, that contrariwise it greatly mag- nifies and exalts it. For although Polycrates, blinded with the love of the custom of his nation, which he believed to be grounded upon the word of God, who had assigned the fourteenth of the month of March§ for the observation of the pasche, and upon the example of St. John's tradition, || maintains it obstinately ; never- theless this that he answers, speaking in his own name, and in the name of the council of the bishops of Asia, to whom he presided, ' I fear not those that threaten us ; for my elders have said, it is better to obey God than man ;' doth it not shew, that had it not been, that he believed the pope's threat was against the express words of God, there had been cause to fear it, and he had been obliged to obey him 1 For (m) who knows not, that this answer, ' it is better to obey God than man,' is not to be made but to those * Iren. apud Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. v. c. xxvi. t Cone. Antioch. c. i. Cone. Const, c. 7, Cone. Eph. p. 2, act. 6. t Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. v. c. xxiv. Hieron. in Script. Eccl. in Polycr. § Exod. xii. || Hieron. ubi supra. 454 Protestants not Heretics. whom we were obliged to obey, if their commandments were not contrary to the commandments of God? And that he adds, that he had called the bishops of Asia to a national council, being (w) summoned to it by the pope ; doth it not insinuate, that the other councils, whereof Eusebius* speaks, that were holden about this matter, through all the provinces of the earth, and particularly that of Palestina, which, if you believe the act that Bedaf said came to his hands, Theophilus, archbishop of Csesarea, had called by the authority of Victor, were holden at the instance of the pope, and, consequently, that the pope was the first mover of the universal church ? And that the councils of Nicea, of Constanti- nople, of Ephesus, embraced the censure of Victor, and excom- municated those that observed the custom of Polycrates; doth it not prove, that it was not the pope, but (o) Polycrates, that was deceived in believing, that the pope's commandment was against God's commandment 1 And that St. Jerome himself celebrates the paschal homilies of Theophilus, patriarch of Alexandria, which followed the order of Nicea concerning the pasche : doth it not justify, that when St. Jerome saith, that he reports the epistle of Polycrates, 'to shew the spirit and authority of the man,' he intends by authority, not authority of right, but of fact, that is to say, the credit that Polycrates had amongst the Asians, and other quartodecumans ?" These are the cardinal's words, the most material and consider- able passages whereof, to save the trouble of repetition, I have noted with letters of reference ; whereunto my answers, noted respectively with the same letters, follow now in order. (a) If Eusebius were an arian author, it is nothing to the pur- pose ; what he writes there is no arianism, nor any thing towards it. Never any error was imputed to the arians for denying the authority or the infallibility of the bishop or church of Rome. Besides, what Eusebius says, he says out of Irenaeus : neither doth or can the cardinal deny the story to be true, and therefore he goes about by indirect arts to foil it, and cast a blur upon it. Lastly, whensoever Eusebius says any thing which the cardinal thinks for the advantage of his side, he cites him, and then he is no arian ; or at least he would not take that for an answer to the arguments he draws out of him. (b) That Ruffinus was enemy to the Roman church, is said, but not proved, neither can it be. (c) Eusebius says the same also of cmteri omnes episcopi, all the other bishops, that they advised Victor to keep those things that belonged to peace and unity, and that they sharply reprehended Victor for having done otherwise. (d) This is said, but no offer made of any proof of it : the car- dinal thinks we must take every thing upon his word. They to whom the tradition was delivered, Polycrates and the Asian bishops, knew no such matter, nay, professed the contrary. And who is more likely to know the truth, they who lived within two * Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. v. c. xxiii. t Beda in frag, de jEquinoctio vcrnnlio. Protestants not Heretics. 455 ages of the fountain of it, or the cardinal who lived sixteen ages after it ? (e) How can it make against those that object it, seeing it is evi- dent from Irenaeus's reprehensions, that he thought Victor and the Roman church no infallible nor sufficient judge of what was neces- sary to be believed and done, what not; what was universal tradi- tion, what not; what was a sufficient ground of excommunication, and what not; and, consequently, that there was no such necessity as is pretended, that all other churches should in matters of faith conform themselves to the church of Rome 1 (f) This is to suppose, that excommunication is an act, or ar- gument, or sign, of power and authority in the party excommuni- cating, over the party excommunicated; whereas it is undeniably evident out of the church story, that it was often used by equals upon equals, and by inferiors upon superiors, if the equals or in- feriors thought their equals or superiors did any thing which de- served it. (g) And what is this but to confess, that they thought that a small cause of excommunication and insufficient, which Victor and his adherents thought great and sufficient: and, consequently, that Victor and his part declared that to be a matter of faith, and of necessity, which they thought not so? And where was then their conformity 1 (h) True, you have so expounded it, but not proved nor offered any proof of your exposition. This also we must take upon your authority. Irenaeus speaks not one word of any other power, to which he compares, or before which he prefers, the power of the Roman church. And it is evident, out of the council of Chal- cedon,* that — all the principality which it had, was given it (not by God, but) by the church, in regard it was seated in the impe- rial city. Whereupon, when afterwards Constantinople was the imperial city, they decreed, that — that church should have equal privileges, and dignity, and pre-eminence, with the church of Rome. — All the fathers agreed in this decree, saving only the legates of the bishop of Rome : showing plainly, that they never thought of any supremacy given the bishops of Rome by God, or grounded upon scripture, but only by the church, and therefore alterable at the church's pleasure. (i) This is falsely translated : convenire ad Romanam ecclesiam, every body knows, signifies no more but to resort or come to the Roman church ; which then there was a necessity that men should do, because that the affairs of the empire were transacted in that place. But yet Irenaeus says not so of every church simply, which had not been true, but only of the adjacent churches; for so he expounds himself in saying, " to this church it is necessary that every church ;" that is, all the faithful, round about, should re- sort. With much more reason therefore we return the argument thus: had Irenaeus thought, that all churches must of necessity agree with the Roman, how could he and all other bishops have * Can. 38. 456 Protestants not Heretics. then pronounced that to be no matter of faith, no sufficient ground of excommunication, which Victor and his adherents thought to be so? And how then could they have reprehended Victor so much for the ill use of his power, as Cardinal Perron confesses they did; seeing, if that was true which is pretended, in this also as well as other things, it was necessary for them to agree with the church of Rome ? Some there are that say, but more wittily than truly, that all Cardinal Bellarmine's works are so consonant to themselves, as if he had written them in two hours. Had Cardinal Perron wrote his book in two hours, sure he would not have done that here in the middle of the book, which he condemns in the beginning of it : for here he urgeth a consequence drawn from the mistaken words of Irenaeus against his lively and actual practice ; which proceeding there he justly condemns of evident injustice. His words are, *"for who knows not, that it is too great an injustice to allege consequences from passages, and even those ill interpreted and misunderstood, and in whose illation there is always some paralogism hid against the express words, and the lively and ac- tual practice of the same fathers from whom they are collected; and that it may be good to take the fathers for adversaries, and to accuse them for want of sense or memory ; but not to take them for judges, and to submit themselves to the observation of what they have believed and practised ?" (k) This is nothing to the purpose ; he might choose these ex- amples, not as of greater force and authority in themselves, but as titter to be employed against Victor ; as domestic examples are fitter and more effectual than foreign : and for his omitting to press him with his own example and others, to what purpose had it been to use them, seeing their letters sent to Victor from all parts, wherein they reprehended his presumption, shewed him sufficiently, that their example was against him? But, besides, he that reads Irenaeus's letter shall see, that in the manner of the Lent fast, and the great variety about the celebration of it, which he parallels with this of Easter, he presseth Victor with the example of himself and others, not bishops of Rome : " both they (saith he, speaking of other bishops) notwithstanding this difference, retained peace among themselves; and we also among ourselves retain it ;" inferring, from his example, that Victor also ought to do so. (/) If the pope's proceeding was just, then the churches of Asia were indeed, and in the sight of God, excommunicate, and out of the state of salvation, which Irenaeus and all the other ancient bishops never thought ; and, if they were so, why do you account them saints and martyrs? But the truth is, that these councils did no way show the pope's proceedings just, but rather the contrary. For, though they settled an uniformity in this matter, yet they settled it as a matter formerly indifferent, and not as a matter of faith or necessity, as it is evident out of Atha- * In his letter to Casaubon, towards the end. Protestants not Heretics. 457 nasius;* and, consequently, they rather declare Victor's proceeding unjust, who excommunicated so many churches for differing from him in an indifferent matter. (m) It seems, then, Polycrates might be a saint and a martyr, and yet think the commands of the Roman church, enjoined upon pain of damnation, contrary to the commandments of God. Besides, St. Peter himself, the head of the church, the vicar of Christ (as you pretend), made this very answer to the high-priest ; yet I hope you will not say he was his inferior, and obliged to obey him. Lastly, who sees not, that when the pope commands us any thing unjust, as to communicate laymen in one kind, to use the Latin service, we may very fitly say to him — It is better to obey God than man, and yet never think of any authority he hath over us? (n) Between requesting and summoning, methinks there should be some difference ; and Polycrates says no more but he was requested by the church of Rome to call them, and did so. Here then (as very often) the cardinal is fain to help the dice with a false translation ; and his pretence being false, every one must see that that which he pretends to be insinuated by it is clearly incon- sequent. (o) Polycrates was deceived, if he believed it to be against God's commandment, and the pope deceived as much in thinking it to be God's commandment ; for it was neither one nor the other, but an indifferent matter wherein God had not interposed his authority. Neither did the council of Nice embrace the censure of Victor, by acknowledging his excommunication to be just and well-grounded, for which the cardinal neither doth pre- tend, nor can produce any proof any way comparable to the fore-alleged words of Athanasius testifying the contrary ; though peradventure, having settled the observation, and reduced it to an uniformity, they might excommunicate those who afterward should trouble the church's peace for an indifferent matter. And thus much for Irenaeus. 31. I come now to St. Augustine, and to the first place out of him, where he seems to say that the succession in the see of Peter was the rock which our Saviour meant, when he said, " Upon this rock," &c. I answer, first, we have no reason to be confi- dent of the truth hereof, because St. Augustine himself was not, but retracts it as uncertain, and leaves to the reader whether he will think that or another more probable, Retr. 1. i. c. xxvi. Secondly, what he says of the succession in the Roman church in this place, he says it elsewhere of all the successions in all other apostolic churches. Thirdly, that as in this place he urgeth the donatists with separation from the Roman church, as an argu- * In Ep. ad Episcopos in Africa, where he clearly shews that this question was not a question of faith, by saying, "The council of Nice was celebrated by occasion of the arian heresy, and the difference about Easter : insomuch as they in Syria, and Cilicia, and Mesopotamia, did differ herein from us, and kept this feast on the same day with the Jews. But, thanks be to God, an agreement was made, as concerning the faith, 60 also concerning this holy feast." 39 458 Protestants not Heretics. ment of their error ; so elsewhere he presseth them with their separation from other apostolic churches, nay, more from these than from that ; because in Rome the donatists had a bishop, though not a perpetual succession of them ; but in other apos- tolic churches they wanted both. " These scattered men (saith he of the donatists, Epist. 105.) read in the holy books in the churches to which the apostles wrote, and have no bishop in them ; but what is more perverse and mad, than to the lectors reading these epistles to say — Peace with you, and to separate from the peace of these churches, to which these epistles were written ?" So Optatus, having done you (as it might seem) great service in upbraiding the donatists as schismatics, because they had not communion with the church of Rome, overthrows and undoes it all again, and, as it were, with a sponge wipes out all that he had said for you, by adding after, that they were schis- matics, because they had not the fellowship of communion with the seven churches of Asia, to which St. John writes ; whereof he pronounces confidently (though I know not upon what ground) Extra septem ecclesias quicquid foris est, alienum est. Now, 1 pray tell me, do you esteem the authority of these fathers a sufficient assurance that separation from these other apostolic churches was a certain mark of heresy, or not? If so, then your church had been for many ages heretical. If not, how is their authority a greater argument for the Roman than for the other churches? If you say, they conceived separation from these churches a note of schism, only when they were united to the Roman ; so also they might conceive of the Roman, only when it was united to them. If you say they urged this only as a probable, and not as a certain argument, so also they might do that. In a word, what- soever answer you can devise to shew, that these fathers made not separation from these other churches a mark of heresy, apply that to your argument, and it will be satisfied. 32. The other place is evidently impertinent to the present question, nor is there in it any thing but this — that Caecilian might contemn the number of his adversaries, because those that were united with him were more, and of more account, than those that were against him. — Had he preferred the Roman church alone, before Caecilian's enemies, this had been little, but something ; but when other countries, from which the gospel came first into Africa, are joined in this patent with the church of Rome, how she can build any singular privilege upon it, I am yet to learn ; neither do I see what can be concluded from it, but that in the Roman church was the principality of an apostolic see,* which no man doubts ; or that the Roman church was not the mother church, because the gospel came first into Africa, not from her, but from other churches. 33. Thus you see his words make very little, or indeed nothing * You do ill to translate it " the principality of the see apostolic," as if there were but one ; whereas St. Augustine presently after speaks of apostolical churches in the plural number, and makes the bishops of them joint-commissioners for the judging of ecclesiastical causes. Protestants not Heretics. 459 for you. But now his action, which, according to Cardinal Per- ron's rule, is much more to be regarded than his words, as not being so obnoxious to misrepresentation, I mean his famous oppo- sition of three bishops of Rome, in succession, touching tbe great question of appeals, wherein he and the rest of the African bishops proceeded so far in the first or second Milevitan council, as to *decree any African excommunicate, that should appeal to any out of Afric, and therein continued resolute unto death ; I say this famous action of his makes clearly, and evidently, and infi- nitely against you. For, had Boniface, and the rest of the African bishops, a great part whereof were saints and martyrs, believed as an article of faith, that union and conformity with the doctrine of the Roman church, in all things which she held necessary, was a certain note of a good catholic, and by God's command neces- sary to salvation, how was it possible they should have opposed it in this \ Unless you will say they were all so foolish as to believe at once direct contradictions, viz. that conformity to the Roman church was necessary in all points, and not necessary in this : or so horribly impious, as believing this doctrine of the Roman church true, and her power to receive appeals derived from divine author- ity, notwithstanding to oppose and condemn it, and to anathe- matize all those Africans, of what condition soever, that should appeal unto it; I say — of what condition soever: for it is evident that they concluded, in their determination, bishops as well as the inferior clergy and laity : and Cardinal Perron's pretence of the contrary is a shameless falsehood, repugnant to the plain wordsf of the remonstrance of the African bishops to Celestine, bishop of Rome. 34. Your allegation of Tertullian is a manifest conviction of your want of sincerity : for you produce with great ostentation what he says of the church of Rome : but you and your fellows always conceal and dissemble, that immediately before these words he attributes as much for point of direction to any other apostolic church, and that as he sends them to Rome, who lived near Italy, so those near Achaia he sends to Corinth, those about Macedonia to Philippi and Thessalonica, those of Asia to Ephesus. His words are, " Go to now, thou that wilt better employ thy curiosity in the business of thy salvation ; run over the apostolical churches, wherein the chairs of the apostles are yet sat upon in their places, wherein their authentic epistles are recited, sounding out the voice, and representing the face, of every one ! Is Achaia * The words of the decree (which also Bellarm. I. i. de Matrim. c. xvii. assures us to have been formed by St. Augustine) are these : " Si qui (Africani) ab episcopis provo- candum putaverint, non nisi ad African^ provocent concilia, vel ad primates provincia- rum suarum. Ad transmarina autem qui putaverit appellandum, a. nullo intra Africani in eommunionem suscipiatur." This decree is by Gratian most impudently corrupted. For whereas the fathers of that council intended it particularly against the church of Rome, he tells us they forbad appeals to all, excepting- only the church of Rome. t The words are these : " Prcefato debito salutationis officio, impendio deprecamur, ut deinceps ad aures vestrashinc vcnientcs, non facilius admittatis ; nee a. nobis e.xcom- municatos ultra in eommunionem velitis recipere; quia hoc etiam Niceno concilio defi- nitum facile advertet venerabilitas tua. Nam si de inferioribus clericis vcl laicis videtur ad praecaveri, quanto magis hoc de episcopis voluit observari ?' : 460 Protestants not Heretics. near thee ? There thou hast Corinth. If thou art not far from Macedonia, thou hast Philippi, thou hast Thessalonica. If thou canst go into Asia, there thou hast Ephesus. If thou be adjacent to Italy, thou hast Rome, whose authority is near at hand to us (in Afric) : a happy church, into which the apostles poured forth all their doctrine, together with their blood," &c. Now I pray you, sir, tell me, if you can for blushing, why this place might not have been urged by a Corinthian, or Philippian, or Thessa- lonian, or an Ephesian, to shew, that, in the judgment of Tertul- lian, separation from any of their churches is a certain mark of heresy, as justly and rationally as you allege it to vindicate this privilege to the Roman church only. Certainly, if you will stand to Tertullian's judgment, you must either grant the authority of the Roman church, though at that time a good topical argument, and perhaps a better than any the heretics had, especially in conjunc- tion with other apostolic churches ; yet, I say, you must grant it perforce but a fallible guide, as well as that of Ephesus, and Thessalonica, and Philippi, and Corinth ; or you shall maintain the authority of every one of these infallible as well as the Roman. For though he make a panegyric of the Roman church in parti- cular, and of the rest only in general, yet, as I have said, for point of direction, he makes them all equal, and therefore makes them (choose you whether) either all fallible, or all infallible. Now you will and must acknowledge, that he never intended to attri- bute infallibility to the churches of Ephesus or Corinth ; or, if he did, that (as experience shows) he erred in doing so : and what can hinder, but then we may say also, that he never intended to attribute infallibility to the Roman church ; or, if he did, that he erred in doing so ? 35. From the saying of St. Basil, certainly nothing can be gathered, but only that the bishop of Rome may discern between that which is counterfeit and that which is lawful and pure, and without any diminution may preach the faith of our ancestors. Which certainly he might do, if ambition and covetousness did not hinder him, or else I should never condemn him for doing otherwise. But is there no difference between may and must ? Between he may do so, and he cannot but do so 1 Or doth it follow, because he may do so, therefore he always shall or will do so ? In my opinion rather the contrary should follow : for he that saith, you may do thus, implies, according to the ordinary sense of the words, that if he will he may do otherwise. You certainly may, if you please, leave abusing the world with such sophistry as this : but whether you will or no, of that I have no assurance. 36. Your next witness I would willingly have examined : but it seems you are unwilling he should be found, otherwise you would have given us your direction where we might have him. Of that Maximianus, who succeeded Nestorius, I can find no such thing in the councils: neither can I believe, that any patriarch of Constantinople twelve hundred years ago was so base a parasite of the see of Rome. 37. Your last witness, John of Constantinople, I confess, speaks Protestants not Heretics. 461 home, and advanceth the Roman see even to heaven ; hut I fear it is, that his own may go up with it, which he there professes to be all one see with the see of Rome ; and therefore his testimony, as speaking in his own cause, is not much to be regarded. But be- sides, I have little reason to be confident that this epistle is not a forgery ; for certainly Binius hath obtruded upon us many a hun- dred such. This, though written by a Grecian, is not extant in Greek, but in Latin only. Lastly, it comes out of a suspicious place, an old book of the Vatican Library, which library, the world knows to have been the mint of very many impostures. 38. Ad. §. 20 — 23. The sum of your discourse in the four next sections, if it be pertinent to the question in agitation, must be this: — Want of succession of bishops and pastors, holding always the same doctrine, and of the forms of ordaining bishops and priests, which are in use in the Roman church, is a certain mark of heresy : but protestants want all these things, therefore they are heretics. — To which I answer, that nothing but want of truth, and holding error, can make or prove any man or church hereti- cal. For, if he be a true aristotelian, or platonist, or pyrrhonian, or epicurean, who holds the doctrine of Aristotle, or Plato, or Pyrrho, or Epicurus, although he cannot assign any that held it before him for many ages together ; why should not I be made a true and orthodox christian, by believing all the doctrine of Christ, though I cannot derive my descent from a perpetual suc- cession that believed it before me ? By this reason, you should say as well, that no man can be a good bishop, or pastor, or king, or magistrate, or father, that succeeds a bad one. For, if I may con- form my will and actions to the commandments of God, why may I not embrace his doctrine with my understanding, although my predecessors do not so? You have above, in this chapter, defined faith — a free, infallible, obscure, supernatural assent to divine truths, because they are revealed by God, and sufficiently pro- pounded: this definition is very fantastical ; but for the present I will let it pass, and desire you to give me some piece or shadow of reason, why I may not do all this without a perpetual succes- sion of bishops and pastors, that have done so before me. You may judge as uncharitably, and speak as maliciously of me, as your blind zeal to your superstition shall direct you; but certainly I know (and with all your sophistry you cannot make me doubt of what I know), that I do believe the gospel of Christ (as it is delivered in the undoubted books of canonical scripture), as verily as that it is now day, that I see the light, that I am now writing; and I believe it upon this motive, because I conceive it sufficiently, abundantly, superabundantly, proved to be divine revelation ; and yet in this I do not depend upon any succession of men, that have always believed it without any mixture of error ; nay, I am fully persuaded, there hath been no such succession, and yet do not find myself any way weakened in my faith by the want of it, but so fully assured of the truth of it, that not only, though your devils at Lowden do tricks against it, but though an angel from heaven should gainsay it, or anv part of it, 1 persuade myself 39'* 462 Protestants not Heretics. that I should not be moved. This I say, and this I am sure is true ; and if you will be so hypersceptical as to persuade me, that I am not sure that I do believe all this, I desire you to tell me, how you are sure that you believe the church of Rome? For if a man may persuade himself he doth believe what he doth not be- lieve, then you may think you believe the church of Rome, and yet not believe it. But if no man can err concerning what he believes, then you must give me leave to assure myself, that I do believe, and consequently that any man may believe the fore- said truths upon the foresaid motives, without any dependence upon any succession that hath believed it always. And as from your definition of faith, so from your definition of heresy, this fancy may be refuted. For questionless, no man can be a heretic but he that holds a heresy, and a heresy, you say, is a voluntary error ; therefore no man can be necessitated to be a heretic whe- ther he will or no, by want of such a thing that is not in his power to have : but that there should have been a perpetual succession of believers in all points orthodox, is not a thing which is in our own power ; therefore our being, or not being heretics, depends not on it. Besides, what is more certain than that he may make a straight line, who hath a rule to make it by, though never man in the world had made any before ? And why then may not he that believes the scripture to be the word of God, and the rule of faith, regulate his faith by it, and consequently be- lieve aright, without much regarding what other men either will do, or have done? It is true, indeed, there is a necessity, that if God will have his word believed, he by his providence must take order, that either by succession of men, or by some other means, natural or supernatural, it be preserved and delivered, and suffi- ciently notified to be his word ; but that this should be done by a succession of men that hold no error against it, certainly there is no more necessity, than that it should be done by a succession of men that commit no sin against it. For if men may preserve the records of a law, and yet transgress it, certainly they may also preserve directions for their faith, and yet not follow them. I doubt not but lawyers at the bar do find, by frequent experience, that many men preserve and produce evidences, which, being ex- amined, ofttimesmake against themselves. This they do ignorantly, it being in their power to suppress, or perhaps to alter them. And why then should any man conceive it strange, that an erroneous and corrupted church should preserve and deliver the scriptures uncorrupted, when indeed, for many reasons which I have formerly alleged, it was impossible for them to corrupt them ? Seeing, there- fore, this is all the necessity that is pretended of a perpetual suc- cession of men orthodox in all points, certainly there is no necessity at all of any such, neither can the want of it prove any man or any church heretical. 39. When therefore you have produced some proof of this, which was your major in your former syllogism, that want of suc- cession is a certain mark of heresy, you shall then receive a full answer to your minor. We shall then consider, whether your Protestants not Heretics. 463 indelible character be any reality, or whether it be a creature of your own making, a fancy of your own imagination ? And if it be a thing, and not only a word, whether our bishops and priests have it not as well as yours ; and whether some men's persuasions, that there is no such thing, can hinder them from having it, or prove that they have it not, if there be any such thing (any more than a man's persuasion, that he has not taken physic or poison, will make him not to have taken it, if he has, or hinder the operation of it)? And whether Tertullian, in the place quoted by you, speaks of a priest made a layman by just deposition or de- gradation, and not by a voluntary desertion of his order? And whether in the same place he set not some mark upon heretics that will agree to your church? Whether all the authority of our bishops in England, before the Reformation, was conferred on them by the pope ? And, if it were, whether it were the pope's right, or an usurpation ? If it were his right, whether by divine law or ecclesiastical ? And if by ecclesiastical only, whether he might possibly so abuse his power, as to deserve to lose it? Whe- ther de facto he had done so ? Whether, supposing he had de- served to lose it, those that deprived him of it had power to take it from him ? Or, if not, whether they had power to suspend him from the use of it until good caution were put in, and good assu- rance given, that if he had it again, he would not abuse it as he had formerly done ? Whether, in case they had done unlawfully that took his power from him, it may not (things being now set- tled, and the present government established) be as unlawful to go about to restore it ? Whether it be not a fallacy to conclude, because we believe the pope hath no power in England, now when the king, and state, and church, hath deprived him upon just grounds of it, therefore we cannot believe that he had any before his deprivation ? Whether without schism a man may not with- draw obedience from an usurped authority, commanding unlawful things? Whether the Roman church might not give authority to bishops and priests to oppose her errors, as well as a king gives authority to a judge to judge against him, if his cause be bad ; as well as Trajan gave his sword to his prefect with this commission, that — if he governed well, he should use it for him ; if ill, against him ? Whether the Roman church gave not authority to her bishops and priests to preach against her corruptions in manners? And, if so, why not against her errors in doctrine, if she had any ? Whether she gave them not authority to preach the whole gospel of Christ, and consequently against her doctrine, if it should contradict any part of the gospel of Christ? Whether it be not acknowledged lawful in the church of Rome, for any layman, or woman, that has ability, to persuade others by word or writing from error, and unto truth? And why this liberty may not be practised against their religion, if it be false, as well as for it, if it be true ? Whether any man need any other commission or vo- cation than that of a christian, to do a work of charity? And whether it be not one of the greatest works of charity (if it be done after a peaceable manner, and without an unnecessary dis- 464 Protestants not Heretics. turbance of order), to persuade men out of a false into a true way of eternal happiness? Especially, the apostle having assured us, that he (whosoever he is) " who converteth a sinner from the error of his way, shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins." Whether the first reformed bishops died all at once, so that there were not enough to ordain others in the places that were vacant? Whether the bishops of England may not consecrate a metropolitan of England, as well as the cardinals do the pope ? Whether the king or queen of England, or they that have the government in their hands, in the minority of the prince, may not lawfully commend one to them to be consecrated, against whom there is no canonical exception ? Whether the doctrine, that the king is supreme head of the church of England, (as the kings of Judah, and the first christian emperors, were of the Jewish and christian church) be any new-found doctrine? Whether it may not be true, that bishops, being made bishops, have their authority immediately from Christ, though this or that man be not made bishop without the king's authority ; as well as vou say the pope, being pope, has authority immediately from Christ, and yet this or that man cannot be made pope without the authority of the cardinals? Whether you do well to suppose, that christian kings have no more authority in ordering the atfairs of the church than the great Turk, or the pagan emperors? Whe- ther the king may not give authority to a bishop to exercise his function in some part of his kingdom, and yet not be capable of doing it himself; as well as a bishop may give authority to a physician to practise physic in his diocese, which the bishop can- not do himself? Whether, if Nero the emperor would have com- manded St. Peter or St. Paul to preach the gospel of Christ, and to exercise the oflice of a bishop of Rome, whether they would have questioned his authority to do so ? Whether there were any law of God or man that prohibited king James to give com- mission to bishops, nay, to lay his injunction upon them, to do any thing that is lawful ? Whether a casual irregularity may not be lawfully dispensed with? Whether the pope's irregularities, if he should chance to incur any, be indispensable? And, if not, who is he, or who are they, whom the pope is subject unto, that they may dispense with him ? Whether that be certain, which you take for granted, that your ordination imprints a character, and ours doth not? Whether the power of consecrating and or- daining by imposition of hands, may not reside in the bishops, and be derived unto them, not from the king, but God ? And yet the king have authority to command them to apply this power to such a fit person, whom he shall commend unto them ? As well as if some architects only had the faculty of architecture, and had it immediately by infusion from God himself; yet, if they were the king's subjects, he wants not authority to command them to build him a palace for his use, or a fortress for his service; or, as the King of France pretends not to have power to make priests himself, yet I hope you will not deny him power to command any of his subjects, that has this power to ordain any fit person priest, Protestants not Heretics. 465 whom he shall desire to be ordained. Whether it do not follow, that whensoever the king commands a house to be built, a mes- sage to be delivered, or a murderer to be executed, that all these things are presently done without the intervention of the architect, messenger, or executioner 1 As well as that they are ipso facto ordained and consecrated, who by the king's authority are com mended to the bishops to be ordained and consecrated : especially, seeing the king will not deny but that these bishops may refuse to do what he requires to be done, lawfully, if the person be un worthy, if worthy, unlawfully indeed, but yet de facto they may refuse; and in case they should do so, whether justly or unjustly, neither the king himself, nor any body else, would esteem the person bishop upon the king's designation. Whether many popes, though they were not consecrated bishops by any temporal prince, yet might not, or did not, receive authority from the emperor to exercise their episcopal function in this or that place ? And whe- ther the emperors had not authority, upon their desert, to deprive them of their jurisdiction, by imprisonment or banishment ? Whether protestants do indeed pretend that their reformation is universal ? Whether in saying, the donatists' sect was confined to Africa, you do not forget yourself, and contradict what you said above in §. 17 of this chapter, where you tell us — they had some of their sect residing in Ptome 1 Whether it be certain that none can admit of bishops willingly, but those that hold them of divine institution 1 Whether they may not be willing to have them, conceiving that way of government the best, though not absolutely necessary ? Whether all those protestants, that conceive the distinction between priests and bishops not to be of divine institution, be schismatical and heretical for thinking so ? Whether your form of ordaining bishops and priests be essential to the constitution of the true church? Whether the forms of the church of England differ essentially from your forms 1 Whether in saying, that the true church cannot subsist without undoubted true bishops and priests, you have not overthrown the truth of your own church ? Wherein I have proved it plainly impossible, that any man should be so much as morally certain, either of his own priesthood, or any other man's. Lastly, whether any one kind of these external forms, and orders, and government, be so necessary to the being of a church, but that they may be diverse in divers places, and that a good and peaceable christian may and ought to submit himself to the government of the place where he lives, whatsoever it be ? All these questions will be necessary to be discussed for the clearing of the truth of the minor proposition of your former syllogism, and your proofs of it; and I will promise to debate them fairly with you, if first you will bring some better proof of the major, that want of succession is a certain note of heresy, which for the present remains both unproved and improbable. 40. Ad. §. 23. The fathers, you say, assign succession as one mark of the true church : I confess they did urge tradition as an argument of the truth of their doctrine, and of the falsehood of GG 466 Protestants not Heretics. the contrary ; and thus far they agree with you. But now see the difference ; they urged it not against all heretics that ever should he, but against them that rejected a great part of the scripture, for no other reason, but " because it was repugnant to their doc- trine, and corrupted other parts with their additions and detrac- tions, and perverted the remainder with divers absurd interpreta- tions :" so Tertullian, not a leaf before the words by you cited. Nay, they urged it against them, who, " when they were confuted out of scripture, fell to accuse the scriptures themselves, as if they were not right, and came not from good authority, as if they were various one from another, and as if truth could not be found out of them, by those who know not tradition ; for that it was not delivered in writing, (they did mean wholly) but by word of mouth : and that thereupon Paul also said, ' we speak wisdom amongst the perfect.' " So Irenaeus, in the very next chapter be- fore that which you allege. Against these men being thus neces- sitated to do so, they did urge tradition ; but what or whose tradition was it ? Certainly no other but the joint tradition of all the apostolic churches, with one mouth and one voice, teaching the same doctrine. Or if, for brevity's sake, they produce the tradition of any one church, yet it is apparent, that that one was then in conjunction with all the rest; Irenseus, Tertullian, Origen, testify as much in the words cited, and St. Augustine in the place before alleged by me. This tradition they did urge against these men, and in a time, in comparison of ours, almost contiguous to the apostles : so near, that one of them, Irenoeus, was scholar to one who was scholar to St. John, the apostle. Tertullian and Origen were not an age removed from him : and the last of them all little more than an age from them. Yet after all this they urged it not as a demonstration, but only as a very probable argu- ment, far greater than any their adversaries could oppose against it. So Tertullian, in the place above quoted, Sect. 5. " How is it likely, that so many and so great churches should err in one faith V (It should be — should have erred into one faith.) And this was the condition of this argument, as the fathers urged it. Now, if you having to deal with us, who question no book of scripture, which was not anciently questioned by some whom you yourselves esteemed good catholics ; nay, who refuse not to be tried by your own canon, and your own translation ; who, in in- terpreting scriptures are content to allow all those rules which you propose, only except that we will not allow you to be our judges ; if you will come one thousand five hundred years after the apostles, a fair time for the purest church to gather much dross and corruption, and for the mystery of iniquity to bring its work to some perfection, which in the apostles' time began to work; if (I say) you will come thus long after, and urge us with the single tradition of one of these churches, being now catholic to itself alone, and heretical to all the rest ; nay, not only with her ancient and original traditions, but also with her post-nate introduced definitions, and these, as we pretend, repugnant to scripture and ancient tradition, and all this to decline an indif- Protestants not Heretics. 467 ferent trial by scripture, under pretence (wherein also you agree with the calumny of the old heretics) that all necessary truth can- not he found in them without recourse to tradition : if, I say, not- withstanding all these differences, you will still be urging us with this argument as the very same, and of the same force with that wherewith the forementioned fathers urged the old heretics ; cer- tainly this must needs proceed from a confidence you have, not only that we have no school divinity, nor metaphysics, but no logic, or common sense ; that we are but pictures of men, and have the defi- nition of rational creatures given us in vain. 41. But now suppose I should be liberal to you, and grant what you cannot prove, that the fathers make succession a certain and perpetual mark of the true church : I beseech you what will come of it 1 What, that want of succession is a certain sign of an heretical company 1 Truly, if you say so, either you want logic, which is a certain sign of an ill disputer ; or are not pleased to use it, which is a worse. For speech is a certain sign of a living man, yet want of speech is no sure argument that he is dead ; for he may be dumb, and yet living still ; and we may have other evident tokens that he is so, as eating, drinking, breathing, moving. So, though the constant and universal delivery of any doctrine by the apostolic churches, ever since the apostles, be a very great argu- ment of the truth of it, yet there is no certainty but that truth, even divine truth, may, through men's wickedness, be contracted from its universality, and interrupted in its perpetuity, and so lose this argument, and yet not want others to justify and support itself. For it may be one of those principles which God hath written in all men's hearts, or a conclusion evidently arising from them : it may be either contained in scripture in express terms, or deducible from it by apparent consequence. If therefore you in- tend to prove want of a perpetual succession of professors a cer- tain note of heresy, you must not content yourself to shew, that having it is one sign of truth ; but you must shew it to be the only sign of it, and inseparable from it. But this, if you be well ad- vised, you will never undertake ; first, because it is an impossible attempt ; and then because, if you do it, you will mar all : for by proving this an inseparable sign of catholic doctrine, you will prove your own, which apparently wants it in many points, not to be catholic. For whereas you say — this succession requires two things, agreement with the apostles' doctrine, and an uninter- rupted conveyance of it down to them that challenge it ; it will be proved against you, that you fail in both points ; and that some things wherein you agree with the apostles, have not been held always; as, your condemning the doctrine of the chiliasts, and hold- ing the eucharist not necessary for infants ; and that in many other things you agree not with them, nor with the church for many ages after : for example ; in mutilation of the communion, in having your service in such a language as the assistants generally understand not, your offering to saints, your picturing of God, your worshipping of pictures. 42. Ad. §. 24. As for universality of place, the want whereof gg2 468 Protestants not Heretics. you object to protectants as a mark of heresy : you have not set down clearly and univocally what you mean by it, whether uni- versality of fact, or of right ; and if of fact, whether absolute or comparative ; and if comparative, whether of the church in com- parison of any other religion, or only of heretical christians ; or if in comparison of these, whether in comparison of all other sects conjoined, or in comparison only of any one of them. Nor have you proved it by any good argument in any sense to be a certain mark of heresy : for those places of St. Augustine do not deserve the name. And truly in my judgment you have done advisedly in proving it no better. For as for universality of right, or a right to universality, all religions claim it, but only the true has it ; and which has it cannot be determined, unless it be first deter- mined which is the true. An absolute universality and diffusion through all the world if you should pretend to, all the world would laugh at you: if you should contend for latitude with any one re- ligion, Mahometanism would carry the victory from you : if you should oppose yourselves against all other christians besides you, t is certain you would be cast in this suit also : if, lastly, being hard driven, you should please yourselves with being more than any one sect of christians, it would presently be replied, that it is uncertain whether now you are so, but most certain, that the time has been when you have not been so ; then when the whole world wondered, that it was become arian ;* then when Athanasius opposed the world, and the world Athanasius ; then when your Liberiusf having the contemptible paucity of his adherents ob- jected to him as a note of error, answered for himself, " there was a time when there were but three opposed the decree of the king, and yet those three were in the right, and the rest in the wrong ; then when the professors of error surpassed the number of the professors of truth, in proportion as the sands of the sea do the stars of heaven" (as St. AugustineJ acknowledges) ; then when Vincentius§ confesses, that the poison of the arians had contami- nated, not now some certain portion, but almost the whole world ; then when the author of Nazianzen's life testifies,|| that the heresy of Arius had possessed in a manner the whole extent of the world ; and when Nazianzen found cause to cry out,^[ " Where are they who reproach us with our poverty, who define the church by the mul- titude, and despise the little flock 1 They have the people, but we the faith." And lastly, when Athanasius was so overborne with shoals and floods of arians, that he was enforced to write a trea- tise on purpose,** against those who judge of the truth only by plurality of adherents. So that if you had proved want of uni- versality even thus restrained, to be an infallible note of heresy, there would have been no remedy but you must have confessed, that the time was when you were heretics. And besides, I see not how you would have avoided this great inconvenience, of * Hier. contr. Luciferianos. t In Theod. Hist. 1. xvi. c. ii. X In Ep. 48, ad Vincentium. § Commentarii, 1. i. c. iv. )| In vita Nazianz. IT In Orat. Arian. et pro seipso. ** Tom. ii. Protestants not Heretics. 469 laying grounds, and storing up arguments for antichrist, against he comes, by which he may prove his company the true church. For it is evident, out of scripture, and confessed by you, that though his time be not long, his dominion shall be very large ; and that the true church shall be then the woman driven into the wilderness. 43. Ad. §. 25, 26. The remainder of this chapter, if I would deal strictly with you, I might let pass as impertinent to the question now disputed. For whereas your argument promises, that this whole chapter shall be employed in proving Luther and the pro- testants guilty of heresy ; here you desert this question and strike out into another accusation of them — that their faith, even of the truth they hold, is not indeed true faith. But put case it were not, does it follow, that the having of this faith makes them heretics, or that they are therefore heretics, because they have this faith? Aristotle believed there were intelligences which moved the spheres ; he believed this with a human persuasion, and not with a certain, obscure, prudent, supernatural faith ; and will you make Aristotle a heretic, because he believed so? You believe there was such a man as Julius Caesar, that there is such a city as Constantinople, and your belief hereof has not these qualifications which you require to divine faith. And will you be content, that this shall pass for a sufficient proof, that you are a heretic ? Heresy you have defined above to be a voluntary error : but he that believes truth, though his belief be not qualified ac- cording to your mind, yet sure in believing truth, he believes no error ; and from hence, according to ordinary logic, methinks it should follow, that such a man for doing so cannot be guilty of heresy. 44. But you will say, though he be not guilty of heresy for believing these truths, yet, if his faith be not saving, to what purpose will it be 1 Truly very little to the purpose of salvation ; as little as it is to your proving protestants guilty of heresy. But out of our wonted indulgence, let us pardon this fault also, and do you the favour to hear what you can say, to beget this faith in us, that indeed we have no faith, or at least not such a faith, with- out which " it is impossible to please God." Your discourse upon this point you have, I know not upon what policy, disjoined, and given us the grounds of it in the beginning of the chapter, and the superstruction here in the end. Them I have already examined, and, for a great part of them, proved them vain and deceitful. I have shewed, by many certain arguments, that though the sub- ject matter of our faith be in itself most certain, yet that absolute certainty of adherence is not required to the essence of faith, no, nor to make it acceptable to God ; but that to both these effects it is sufficient, if it be firm enough to produce obedience and charity. I have shewed, besides, that prudence is rather commendable in faith, than intrinsical and essential to it: so that whatsoever is here said, to prove the faith of protestants no faith, for want of certainty, or for want of prudence, is already answered before it is objected ; for the foundation being destroyed, the building 40 470 Protestants not Heretics. cannot stand. Yet, for the fuller refutation of all pretences, I will here make good that to prove our faith destitute of these qualifications, you have produced but vain sophisms, and, for the most part, such arguments as return most violently upon your- selves. Thus then you say : 45. First, that their belief wanteth certainty, I prove, because they, denying the universal infallibility of the church, can have no certain ground to know what objects are revealed or testified by God. — But if there be no other ground of certainty, but your church's infallibility, upon what certain ground do you know that your church is infallible 1 Upon what certain ground do you know all those things which must be known, before you can know that your church is infallible 1 As, that there is a God ; that God hath promised his assistance to your church, in all her decrees ; that the scripture, wherein this promise is extant, is the word of God ; that those texts of scripture, which you allege for your infallibility, are uncorrupted ; that that which you pretend, is the true sense of them ? When you have produced certain grounds for all these things, I doubt not but it will appear, that we also may have grounds certain enough to believe our whole religion, which is nothing else but the bible, without dependence on the church's infallibility. Suppose you should meet with a man, that for the present believes neither church, nor scripture, nor God, but is ready and willing to believe them all, if you can shew some suf- ficient ground to build his faith upon ; will you tell such a man there are no certain grounds by which he may be converted, or there are ? If you say the first, you make all religion an uncertain thing ; if the second, then either you must ridiculously persuade, that your church is infallible, because it is infallible, or else that there are other certain grounds besides your church's infallibility. 46. But you proceed and tell us — that holy scripture is in itself most true and infallible ; but without the direction and declaration of the church, we can neither have certain means to know what scripture is canonical, nor what translations be faith- ful, nor what is the true meaning of scripture. — Ans. But all these things must be known before we can know the direction of your church to be infallible ; for no other proof of it can be pre- tended, but only some texts of canonical scripture, truly inter- preted : therefore, either you are mistaken, in thinking there is no other means to know these things, but your church's infallible direction ; or we are excluded from all means of knowing her direc- tion to be infallible. 47. But protestants, though, as you suppose, they are per- suaded their own opinions are true, and that they have used such means as are wont to be prescribed for understanding the scrip- ture, as prayer, conferring of texts, &c. yet by their disagreement shew, that some of them are deceived. Now they hold all the articles of their faith upon this only ground of scripture, inter- preted by these rules; and therefore it is clear, that the ground of their faith is infallible in no point at all. The first of these suppositions must needs be true, but the second is apparently Protestants not Heretics. 471 false: I mean that every protestant is persuaded, that he hath used those means which are prescribed for understanding of scrip- ture. But that which you collect from these suppositions, is clearly inconsequent; and by as good logic you might conclude, that logic and geometry stand upon no certain grounds, that the rules of the one and the principles of the other do sometimes faill because the disagreements of logicians and geometricians shew, that some of them are deceived. Might not a Jew conclude as well against all christians, that they have no certain ground whereon to rely in their understanding of scripture, because their disagreements shew that some are deceived ; because some deduce from it the infallibility of a church, and others no such matter 1 ? So, likewise, a Turk might use the same argument against both Jews and christians, and an atheist against all religions, and a sceptic against all reason. Might not the one say, men's disa- greement in religion shews, that there is no certainty in any : and the other that experience in their contradictions teacheth, that the rules of reason do sometimes fail ? Do not you see, and feel, how void of reason, and how full of impiety, your sophistry is ? and how, transported with zeal against protcstants, you urge arguments against them, which if they could not be answered, would overthrow not only your own, but all religion ? But God be thanked ! the answer is easy and obvious ; for let men but re- member not to impute the faults of men but only to men, and then it will easily apear, that there may be sufficient certainty in reason, in religion, in the rules of interpreting scripture, though men, through their faults, take not care to make use of them, and so run into divers errors and dissensions. 48. But protestants cannot determine what points be funda- mental, and therefore must remain uncertain, whether or no they be not in some fundamental error. — Ans. By like reason, since you acknowledge, that every error in points defined and declared by your church, destroys the substance of faith, and yet cannot determine what points be defined, it followeth, that you must re- main uncertain, whether or no you be not in some fundamental error, and so want the substance of faith, without which there can be no hope of salvation. Now that you are uncertain what points are defined, appears from your own words, ch. 4, §. 3, of your second part, where, you say, — No less impertinent is your discourse concerning the difficulty to know what is heresy : for we grant, that it is not always easy to determine in particular occasions, whether this or that doctrine be such, because it may be doubtful, whether it be against any scripture or divine tradition, or defini- tion of the church. Neither were it difficult to extort from you this confession, by naming divers points, which some of you say are defined, others the contrary, and others hang in suspense, and know not what to determine. But this I have done else- where ; as also I have shewed plainly enough, that though we cannot perhaps say in particular, this much, and no more, is fundamental, yet believing all the bible, we are certain enough that we believe all that is fundamental. As he that in a re- 472 Protestants not Heretics. ceipt takes twenty ingredients, whereof ten only are necessary, though he know not what those ten are, yet, taking the whole twenty, he is sure enough that he hath taken all that are ne- cessary. 49. Ad. §. 29. — But that he who erreth against any one re- vealed truth, loseth all divine faith, is a very true doctrine, de- livered by catholic divines (you mean your own) with so general a consent, that the contrary is wont to be censured as temerarious : now certainly some protestants must do so, because they hold con- tradictions which cannot all be true ; therefore some of them, at least, have no divine faith. — Ans. I pass by your weakness, in urging protestants with the authority of your divines, which yet in you might very deservedly be censured. For when Dr. Potter, to show the many actual dissensions between the Romish doctors, notwithstanding their brags of potential unity, refers to Pappus, who has collected out of Bellarmine their contradictions, and sets them down in his own words to the number of 237 ; and to Fla- cius, de Sectis et Controversis Religionis Papisticce ; you, making the very same use of Brerely against protestants, yet jeer and scorn Dr. Potter, as if he offered you for a proof the bare autho- rity of Pappus, and Flacius; and tell him, which is all the answer you vouchsafe him — it is pity that he brings Pappus and Flacius, flat heretics, to prove your many contradictions: — as if he had proved this with the bare authority, the bare judgment, of these men, which sure he does not, but with the formal words of Bellar- mine, faithfully collected by Pappus. And why then might we not say to you, is it not pretty, that you bring Brerely, as flat a heretic as Pappus or Flacius, to prove the contradictions of pro- testants? Yet had he been so vain as to press you with the mere authority of protestant divines in any point, methinks, for your own sake, you should have pardoned him, who here, and in many other places, urges us with the judgment of your divines as with weighty arguments. Yet if the authority of your divines were even canonical, certainly nothing could be concluded from it in this matter, there being not one of them, who delivers for true doctrine this position of yours, thus nakedly set down, that any error against any one revealed truth destroys all divine faith. For they all require (not yourself excepted), that this truth must not only be revealed, but revealed publicly, and (all things con- sidered) sufficiently propounded to the erring party, to be one of those which God, under pain of damnation, commands all men to believe. And, therefore, the contradiction of protestants (though this vain doctrine of your divines were supposed true) is but a weak argument, that any of them have no divine faith, seeing you neither have, nor can ever prove (without begging the ques- tion of your church's infallibility), that the truths about which they differ are of this quality and condition. But though out of courtesy we may suppose this doctrine true, yet we have no rea- son to grant it, nor to think it any thing but a vain and ground- less fancy ; and, that this very weak and inartificial argument, from the authority of your divines, is the strongest pillar which Protestants not Heretics. 473 it hath to support it. Two reasons you allege for it out of Thomas Aquinas ; the first whereof vainly supposeth, against reason and experience, that, by the commission of any deadly sin, the habit of charity is quite extirpated. And for the second, though you cry it up for an Achilles, and think, like the Gorgon's head, it will turn us all into stone; and, in confidence of it, insult upon Dr. Potter, as if he durst not come near it; yet in very truth, having considered it well, I find it a serious, grave, prolix, and profound nothing. I could answer it in a word, by telling you that it begs without all proof, or colour of proof, the main ques- tion between us, that the infallibility of your church is either the formal motive or rule, or a necessary condition of faith : which you know we flatly deny, and therefore all that is built upon it has nothing but wind for a foundation. But to this answer I will add a large confutation of this vain fancy, out of one of the most rational and profound doctors of your own church ; I mean Es- tius, who upon the third of the Sent, the 23 dist. §. 13, writes thus : " It is disputed (saith he) whether in him, who believes some of the articles of our faith, and disbelieves others, or per- haps some one, there be faith properly so called in respect of that which he does believe ? In which question we must, before all, carefully distinguish between those, who, retaining a general readiness to believe whatsoever the church believes, yet err by ignorance in some doctrine of faith, because it is not as yet suffi- ciently declared to them, that the church does so believe ; and those who, after sufficient manifestation of the church's doctrine, do yet choose to dissent from it, either by doubting of it, or af- firming the contrary. For of the former, the answer is easy : but of these, that is, of heretics retaining some part of wholesome doctrine, the question is more difficult, and on both sides by the doctors probably disputed. For that there is in them true faith of the articles wherein they do not err, first, experience seems to convince : for many at this day denying, for example sake, pur- gatory, or invocation of saints, nevertheless firmly hold, as by divine revelation, that God is three and one, that the Son of God was incarnate, and suffered, and other like things. As anciently the novatians, excepting their peculiar errors, of denying recon- ciliation to those that fell in persecution, held other things in common with catholics: so that they assisted them very muck against the arians, as Socrates relates in his ecclesiastical history. Moreover, the same is proved by the example of the apostles, who, in the time of Christ's passion, being scandalized, lost their faith in him : as also, Christ after his resurrection upbraids them with their incredulity, and calls Thomas incredulous, for denying the resurrection, John xx. Whereupon St. Augustine also in his preface upon Psa. xcvi. saith, that ' after the resurrection of Christ, the faith of those that fell was restored again. And yet we must not say, that the apostles then lost the faith of the trinity, of the creation of the world, of eternal life, and such-like other articles. Besides, the Jews, before Christ's coming, held the faith of one God, the creator of heaven and earth : who, although 40* 474 Protestants not Heretics. they lost the true faith of the Messias by not receiving Christ ; yet we cannot say, that they lost the faith of one God, but still retained this article as firmly as they did before.' " Add hereunto, that neither Jews nor heretics seem to lie, in saying, they believe either the books of the prophets, or the four gospels : it being apparent enough, that they acknowledge in them divine authority, though they hold not the true sense of them; to which purpose is that in the Acts, ch. xx. * Believest thou the prophets ? I know that thou believest.' Lastly, it is manifest that many gifts of God are found even in bad men, and such as are out of the church ; therefore nothing hinders, but that Jews and heretics, though they err in many things, yet in other things may be so divinely illuminated as to believe aright. So St. Augustine seems to teach in his book De Unico Baptismo contra Petilianum, c. 3, in these words : ' When a Jew comes to us to be made a christian, we destroy not him in God's good things, but his own will. That he believes one God is to be wor- shipped ; that he hopes for eternal life ; that he doubts not of the resurrection, we approve and commend him : we acknowledge that as he did believe these things, so he is still to believe them ; and as he did hold, so he is still to hold them.' Thus he, sub- joining more to the same purpose in the next. And again, in the xxvi. chap, and in his third book, De Bapt. contra. Donat. cap. ult. and upon Psa. lxiv. ' But now this reason seems to persuade the contrary because the formal object of faith seems to be the first verity, as it is manifested by the church's doctrine as the divine and infallible rule ; wherefore, whosoever adheres not to this rule, although he assent to some matters of faith, yet he embraces them not with faith, but with some other kind of assent ; as if a man assent to a conclusion, not knowing the reason by which it is demonstrated, he hath not true knowledge, but an opinion only of the same conclusion. Now, that a heretic adheres not to the rule aforesaid, it is manifest ; because if he did adhere to it, as divine and infallible, he would receive all, without excep- tion, which the church teacheth, and so would not be a heretic.' After this manner St. Thorn, ii. 2. q. 5, art. 3. From whom yet Durand dissents upon this distinction, thinking, there may be in a heretic true faith, in respect of the articles in which he doth not err. Others, as Scotus and Bonaventure, define not the matter plainly, but seem to choose a middle way. " To the authority of St. Augustine and these schoolmen this may be adjoined — that it is usual with good christians to say that heretics have not the entire faith. Whereby it seems to be in- timated that some part of it they do retain : whereof this may be another reason ; that if the truths, which a Jew or a heretic holds, he should not hold them by faith, but after some other manner, to wit, by his own proper will and judgment, it will follow, that all that excellent knowledge of God and divine things, which is found in them, is to be attributed not to the grace of God, but to the strength of free-will, which is against St. Augustine, both else- where, and especially in the end of his book De Potentia. Protestants not Heretics. 475 " As for the reason alleged to the contrary, we answer — it is impertinent to faith by what means we believe the prime verity, that is, by what means God useth to confer upon men the gift of faith. For, although now the ordinary means be the testimony and teaching of the church, yet it is certain, that by other means faith hath been given heretofore, and it is given still. For many of the ancients, as Adam, Abraham, Melchisedech, Job, received faith by special revelation ; the apostles, by the miracles and preaching of Christ ; others again, by the preaching and miracles of the apostles ; and, lastly, others by other means, when as yet they had heard nothing of the infallibility of the church. To little children, by baptism, without any other help, faith is infused : and therefore it is possible that a man, not adhering to the church's doctrine as a rule infallible, yet may receive some things for the word of God which do indeed truly belong to the faith, either be- cause they are now, or heretofore have been, confirmed by mira- cles; or because he manifestly sees that the ancient church taught so, or upon some other inducement. And yet, nevertheless, we must not say that heretics and Jews do hold the faith, but only some part of the faith. For the faith signifies an entire thing, and complete in all parts; whereupon a heretic is said to be simply an infidel, to have lost the faith, and according to the apostle, 1 Tim. i. to have made shipwreck of it, although he holds some things with the same strength of assent, and readiness of will, wherewith by others are held all these points which appertain to the faith." And thus far Estius, whose discourse, I presume, may pass for a sufficient refutation of your argument out of Aquinas. And, therefore, your corollaries drawn from it — that every error against faith involves opposition against God's testimony; that protestants have no faith, no certainty ; and that you have all faith, must, together with it, fall to the ground. 50. But, if protestants have certainty, they want obscurity, and so have not that faith, which, as the apostle saith, is of things not appearing. — This argument you prosecute in the next paragraph : but I can find nothing in it, to convince or persuade me, that pro- testants cannot have as much certainty as is required to faith of an object not so evident as to beget science. If obscurity will not consist with certainty in the highest degree, then you are to blame for requiring to faith contradicting conditions. If certainty and obscurity will stand together, what reason can be imagined that a protestant may not entertain them both as well as a papist? Your bodies and souls, your understandings and wills, are, I think, of the same condition with ours: and why then may not we be certain of an obscure thing as well as you? And as you make this long discourse against protestants, why may not we, putting church instead of scripture, send it back again to you? And say — if papists have certainty, they want obscurity, and so have not that faith, which, as the apostle saith, is of things not appearing, or not necessitating our understanding to an assent? For the whole edifice of the faith of papists is settled on these two principles : these particular propositions are the propositions of the church ; 476 Protestants not Heretics. and the sense and meaning of them is clear and evident, at least in all points necessary to salvation. Now these principles being once supposed, it clearly followeth, that what papists believe as necessary to salvation, is evidently known by them to be true, by this argument : It is certain and evident, that whatsoever is the word of God, or divine revelation, is true : but it is certain and evident, that these propositions of the church in particular are the word of God, or divine revelations : therefore it is certain and evident, that all propositions of the church are true. Which con- clusion I take for a major in a second argument, and say thus: It is certain and evident that all propositions of the church are true : but it is certain and evident that such particulars, for example, the lawfulness of the half-communion, the lawfulness and expedience of Latin service, the doctrine of transubstantia- tion, indulgences, &c, are the propositions of the church: there- fore it is certain and evident that these particular objects are true. Neither will it avail you to say, that the said principles are not evident by natural discourse, but only by the eye of reason, cleared by grace: for supernatural evidence no less (yea, rather more) drowns and excludes obscuritv, than natural evidence doth. Nei- ther can the party so enlightened be said voluntarily to captivate his understanding to that light, but rather his understanding is by necessity made captive, and forced not to disbelieve what is pre- sented by so clear a light; and therefore your imaginary faith is not the true faith defined by the apostle, but an invention of your own. 51. And having thus cried quittance with you, I must entreat you to devise (for truly I cannot) some answer to this argument, which will not serve in proportion to your own. For I hope you will not pretend that I have done you injury, in settling your faith upon principles which you disclaim. And if you allege this disparity, that you are more certain of your principles than we of ours, and yet you do not pretend that your principles are so evi- dent, as we do that ours are: what is this but to say, that you are more confident than we, but confess you have less reason for it? For the evidence of the thing assented to, be it more or less, is the reason and cause of the assent in the understanding. But then, besides, I am to tell you that you are here, as every where, ex- tremely, if not affectedly, mistaken in the doctrine of protestants; who, though they acknowledge that the things which they believe are in themselves as certain as any demonstrable or sensible veri- ties, yet pretend not that their certainty of adherence is most per- fect and absolute, but such as may be perfected and increased as long as they " walk by faith, and not by sight." And consonant hereunto is their doctrine touching the evidence of the objects whereunto they adhere. For you abuse the world and them, if you pretend that they hold the first of your two principles, that these particular books are the word of God (for so I think you mean), either to be in itself evidently certain, or of itself, and be- ing divested of the motives of credibility, evidently credible: for they are not so fond as to conceive, nor so vain as to pretend, that Protestants not Heretics. 477 all men do assent to it, which they would, if it were evidently certain ; nor so ridiculous as to imagine, that if an Indian, that never heard of Christ or scripture, should hy chance find a bible in his own language, and were able to read it, that upon the read- ing it, he would certainly, without a miracle, believe it to be the word of God ; which he could not choose, if it were evidently credible. What then do they affirm of it? Certainly no more than this, that whatsoever man, that is not of a perverse mind, shall weigh with serious and mature deliberation those great mo- ments of reason which may incline him to believe the divine au- thority of scripture, and compare them with the light objections, that in prudence can be made against it, he shall not choose, but find sufficient, nay abundant, inducements to yield unto it firm faith and sincere obedience. Let that learned man, Hugo Grotius, speak for all the rest, in his book of the Truth of the Christian Religion ; which book, whosoever attentively peruses, shall find, that a man may have great reason to be a christian without de- pendence upon your church for any part of it; and that your re- ligion is no foundation of, but rather a scandal and an objection against, Christianity. He then in the last chapter of his second book hath these excellent words : " If any be not satisfied with these arguments above said, but desires more forcible reasons for confirmation of the excellency of christian religion, let such know, that as there are variety of things which be true, so there are divers ways of proving or manifesting the truth. Thus is there one way in mathematics, another in physics, a third in ethics ; and, lastly, another kind, when a matter of fact is in question : wherein verily we must rest content with such testimonies as are free from all suspicion of untruth ; otherwise, down goes all the frame and use of history, and a great part of the art of physic, together with all dutifulness that ought to be between parents and children ; for matters of practice can no way else be known but by such testimonies. Now it is the pleasure of Almighty God, that those things, which he would have us to believe (so that the very belief thereof may be imputed to us for obedience), should not so evidently appear, as those things which are apprehended by sense, and plain demonstration, but only be so far forth revealed as may beget faith, and a persuasion thereof, in the hearts and minds of such as are not obstinate ; that so the gospel may be as a touch- stone for trial of men's judgments, whether they be sound or un- sound. For seeing these arguments, whereof we have spoken, have induced so many honest, godly, and wise men, to approve of this religion, it is thereby plain enough that the fault of other men's infidelity is not for want of sufficient testimony, but because they would not have that to be had and embraced for truth which is contrary to their wilful desires; it being a hard matter for them to relinquish their honours, and set at nought other commodities; which thing they know they ought to do, if they admit of Christ's doctrine, and obey what he hath commanded. And this is the rather to be noted of them, for that many other historical narra- tions are approved by them to be true, which notwithstanding are 478 Protestants not Heretics. i only manifest by authority, and not by any such strong proofs, and persuasions, or tokens, as do declare the history of Christ to be true ; which are evident, partly by the confession of those Jews that are yet alive; and partly in those companies and congrega- tions of christians, which are anywhere to be found ; whereof, doubtless, there was some cause. Lastly, " Seeing the long duration or continuance of christian religion, and the large extent thereof, can be ascribed to no hu- man power, therefore the same must be attributed to miracles: or, if any deny that it came to pass through a miraculous manner, this very getting so great strength and power without a miracle, may be thought to surpass any miracle." 52. And now you see, I hope, that protestants neither do, nor need to pretend to any such evidence in the doctrine they believe, as cannot well consist both with the essence and obedience of faith. Let us come now to the last nullity which you impute to the faith of protestants, and that is — want of prudence : touching which point, as I have already demonstrated, that wisdom is not essential to faith, but that a man may truly believe truth, though upon insufficient motives; so I doubt not but I shall make good, that if prudence were necessary to faith, we have better title to it than you ; and that if a wiser than Solomon were here, he should have better reason to believe the religion of protestants than papists, the Bible rather than the council of Trent. But let us hear what you can say. 53. Ad. §. 31. You demand then, first of all — What wisdom was it to forsake a church confessed very ancient, and besides which there could be demonstrated no other visible church of Christ upon earth ? — I answer, Against God and truth there lies no pre- scription, and therefore certainly it might be great wisdom to forsake ancient errors for more ancient truths. One God is rather to be followed than innumerable worlds of men ; and therefore it might be great wisdom, either for the whole visible church, nay, for all the men in the world, having wandered from the way of truth, to return unto it ; or for a part of it, nay, for one man to do so, although all the world besides were madly resolute to do the contrary. It might be great wisdom to forsake the errors, though of the only visible church, much more of the Roman, which, in conceiving herself the whole visible church, does somewhat like the frog in the fable, which thought the ditch he lived in to be all the world. 54. You demand again — What wisdom was it to forsake a church acknowledged to want nothing necessary to salvation, endued with succession of bishops, &c. usque ad election or choice ? — I answer, Yet might it be great wisdom to forsake a church not acknowledged to want nothing necessary to salvation, but accused and convicted of many damnable errors ; certainly damnable to them who were convicted of them, had they still persisted in them after their conviction ; though perhaps pardon- able (which is all that is acknowledged) to such as ignorantly continued in them : a church vainly arrogating, without possibility Protestants not Heretics. 479 of proof, a perpetual succession of bishops, holding always the same doctrine; and with a ridiculous impudence pretending per- petual possession of the world ; whereas the world knows, that a little before Luther's arising, your church was confined to a part of a part of it: lastly, a church vainly glorying in the dependence of other churches upon her, which yet she supports no more than those crouching antics, which seem in great buildings to labour under the weight they bear, do indeed support the fabric. For a corrupted and false church may give authority to preach the truth, and consequently against her own falsehoods and corrup- tions. Besides, a false church may preserve the scripture true (as now the Old Testament is preserved by the Jews), either not being arrived to that height of impiety as to attempt the corrup- tion of it, or not able to effect it, or not perceiving, or not regard- ing the opposition of it to her corruptions. And so we might receive from you lawful ordination, and true scriptures, though you were a false church; and, receiving the scriptures from you (though not from you alone), I hope you cannot hinder us, neither need we ask your leave, to believe and obey them. And this, though you be a false church, is enough to make us a true one. As for a succession of men that held with us in all points of doc- trine, it is a thing we need not, and you have as little as we. So that if we acknowledge that your church before Luther was a true church, it is not for any ends, for any dependence that we have upon you ; but because we conceive, that in a charitable construc- tion you may pass for a true church, such a church (and no bet- ter) as you do sometimes acknowledge protestants to be ; that is, a company of men, wherein some ignorant souls may be saved. So that in this balancing of religion against religion, and church against church, it seems you have nothing of weight and moment to put into your scale ; nothing but smoke and wind, vain sha- dows, and fantastical pretences. Yet if protestants, on the other side, had nothing to put in their scale but those negative com- mendations which you are pleased to afford them ; nothing but, no unity, nor means to procure it; no farther extent, when Luther arose, than Luther's body; no universality of time or place; no visibility or being, except only in your church ; no succession of persons or doctrine; no leader but Luther, in a quarrel begun upon no ground but passion ; no church, no ordination, no scrip- tures, but such as they received from you ; if all this were true, and this were all that could be pleaded for protestants, possibly, with an allowance of three grains of partiality, your scale might seem to turn. But then, if it may appear, that part of these ob- jections are falsely made against them, the rest vainly : that what- soever of truth is in these imputations, is impertinent to this trial, and whatsoever is pertinent is untrue; and besides, that plenty of good matter may be alleged for protestants, which is here dissem- bled : then, I hope, our cause may be good, notwithstanding these pretences. 55. I say then, that want of universality of time and place, the invisibility or not existence of the professors of protestant doctrine 480 Protestants not Heretics. before Luther, Luther's being alone when he first opposed your church, our having our church, ordination, scriptures, personal, and yet not doctrinal, succession from you, are vain and imperti- nent allegations, against the truth of our doctrine and church. That the entire truth of Christ, without any mixture of error, should be professed or believed in all places at any time, or in any place at all times, is not a thing evident in reason, neither have we any revelation for it. And, therefore, in relying so con- fidently on it, you build your house upon the sand. And what obligation we had, either to be so peevish, as to take nothing of yours, or so foolish as to take all, I do not understand. For whereas you say, that this is to be choosers, and therefore here- tics, I tell you, that though all heretics are choosers, yet all choosers are not heretics; otherwise they also which choose your religion must be heretics. As for our wanting unity, and means of proving it, Luther's opposing your church upon mere passion, our following private men rather than the catholic church, the first and last are mere untruths ; for we want not unity, nor means to procure it in things necessary. Plain places of scrip- ture, and such as need no interpreter, are our' means to obtain it. Neither do we follow any private men, but only the scripture, the word of God, as our rule; and reason, which is also the gift of God given to direct us in all, our actions, in the use of this rule. And then for Luther's opposing your church upon mere passion, it is a thing I will not deny, because I know not his heart; and, for the same reason, you should not have affirmed it. Sure I am, whether he opposed your church upon reason or no, he had reason enough to oppose it. And, therefore, if he did it upon passion, we will follow him only in his action, and not in his passion ; in his opposition, not in the manner of it; and then, I presume, you will have no reason to condemn us, unless you will say that a good action cannot be done with reason, because somebody before us hath done it upon passion. You see, then, how imprudent you have been in the choice of your arguments, to prove protes- tants unwise in the choice of their religion." 56. It remains now, that I should show that many reasons of moment may be alleged for the justification of protestants, which are dissembled by you, and not put into the balance. Know then, sir, that when I say the religion of protestants is in pru- dence to be preferred before yours, as, on the one side, I do not understand by your religion the doctrine of Bellarmine, or Earo- nius, or any other private man amongst you ; nor the doctrine of the sorbonne, or of the Jesuits, or of the dominicans, or of any other particular company among } r ou, but that wherein ) r ou all agree, or profess to agree — the doctrine of the council of Trent; so accordingly, on the other side, by the religion of protestants, I do not understand the doctrine of Luther, or Calvin, or Melanc- thon ; nor the confession of Augusta, or Geneva, nor the catechism of Heidelberg, nor the articles of the church of England, no, nor the harmony of protestant confessions; but that wherein they all agree, and which they all subscribe with a greater harmony, as a Protestants not Heretics. 481 perfect rule of their faith and actions : that is, the Bible. The Bible, I say, the Bible only, is the religion of protestants! What soever else they believe besides it, and the plain, irrefragable, in dubitable consequences of it, well may they hold it as a matter ol opinion : but as matter of faith and religion, neither can they with coherence to their own grounds believe it themselves, nor require the belief of it of others, without most high and most schismatical presumption. I, for my part, after a long, and (as I verily believe and hope) impartial search of the true way to eter- nal happiness, do profess plainly, that I cannot find any rest for the sole of my foot but upon this rock only. I see plainly, and with mine own eyes, that there are popes against popes, councils against councils, some fathers against others, the same fathers against themselves, a consent of fathers of one age against a con- sent of fathers of another age, the church of one age against the church of another age. Traditive interpretations of scripture are pretended ; but there are few or none to be found : no tradition, but only of scripture, can derive itself from the fountain, but may be plainly proved, either to have been brought in, in such an age after Christ, or that in such an age it was not in. In a word, there is no sufficient certainty but of scripture only, for any con- sidering man to build upon. This therefore, and this only, I have reason to believe ; this I will profess ; according to this I will live ; and for this, if there be occasion, I will not only willingly, but even gladly, lose my life, though I should be sorry that chris- tians should take it from me. Propose me any thing out of this book, and require whether I believe it or no, and seem it never so incomprehensible to human reason, I will subscribe it with hand and heart, as knowing no demonstration can be stronger than this — God hath said so, therefore it is true. In other things 1 will take no man's liberty of judgment from him; neither shall any man take mine from me. I will think no man the worse man, nor the worse christian, I will love no man the less, for differing in opinion from me. And what measure I mete to others, I expect from them again. I am fully assured that God does not, and therefore that men ought not, to require any more of any man than this — to believe the scripture to be God's word, to endeavour to find the true sense of it, and to live according to it. 57. This is the religion which I have chosen after a long deli- beration, and 1 am verily persuaded that I have chosen wisely, much more wisely than if I had guided myself according to your church's authority. For the scripture being all true, I am secured, by believing nothing else, that I shall believe no false- hood as matter of faith. And if I mistake the sense of scrip- ture, and so fall into error, yet I am secure from any danger thereby, if but your grounds be true ; because, endeavouring to find the true sense of scripture, I cannot but hold my error with- out pertinacity, and be ready to forsake it, when a more true and more probable sense shall appear unto me. And then all neces- sary truth being, as I have proved, plainly set down in scripture, HH 41 482 Protestants not Heretics. I am certain by believing scripture to believe all necessary truth : and he that does so, if his life be answerable to his faith, how is it possible he should fail of salvation ? 58. Besides, whatsoever may be pretended to gain to your church the credit of a guide, all that and much more may be said for the scripture. Hath your church been ancient ? The scripture is more ancient. Is your church a means to keep men at unity ? So is the scripture, to keep those that believe it, and will obey it, in unity of belief, in matters necessary or very profitable ; and in unity of charity, in points unnecessary. Is your church universal for time or place 1 Certainly the scripture is more universal : for all the christians in the world (those, I mean, that in truth deserve this name) do now and always have believed the scripture to be the word of God, so much of it, at least, as contains all things necessary ; whereas only you say, that you only are the church of God, and all christians besides you deny it. 59. Thirdly, Following the scripture, I follow that whereby you prove your church's infallibility, (whereof, were it not for scripture, what pretence could you have, or what notion could we have ?) and by so doing tacitly confess, that yourselves are surer of the truth of the scripture than of your church's authority : for we must be surer of the proof than of the thing proved, otherwise it is no proof. 60. Fourthly, Following the scripture, I follow that which must be true, if your church be true ; for your church gives attestation to it: whereas, if I follow your church, I must follow that, which, though scripture be true, may be false, nay, which, if scripture be true, must be false, because the scripture testifies against it. 61. Fifthly, To follow the scripture, I have God's express war- rant and command, and no colour of any prohibition : but to be- lieve your church infallible, I have no command at all, much less an express command. Nay, I have reason to fear, that I am prohibited to do so in these words : " Call no man master on the earth : they fell by infidelity ; thou standest by faith : be not high-minded, but fear : the spirit of truth the world cannot receive." 62. Following your church, I must hold many things not only above reason, but against it, if any thing be against it ; whereas, following the scripture, I shall believe many mysteries, but no impossibilities; many things above reason, but nothing against it; many things, which, had they not been revealed, reason could never have discovered, but nothing which by true reason may be confuted ; many things, which reason cannot comprehend how they can be, but nothing which reason can comprehend that it can- not be. Nay, I shall believe nothing which reason will not con- vince that I ought to believe it: for reason will convince any man, unless he be of a perverse mind, that the scripture is the word of God : and then no reason can be greater than this ; God says so, therefore it is true. 63. Following your church, I must hold many things, which to any man's judgment, that will give himself the liberty of judg- Protestants not Heretics. 483 ment, will seem much more contradicted by scripture, than the infallibility of your church appears to be confirmed by it ; and consequently, must be so foolish as to believe your church ex- empted from error upon less evidence, rather than subject to the common condition of mankind upon greater evidence. Now, if I take the scripture only for my guide, I shall not need to do any thing so unreasonable. 64. If I will follow your church, I must believe impossibilities, and that with an absolute certainty, upon motives which are con- fessed to be but only prudential and probable; that is, with a weak foundation, I must firmly support a heavy, a monstrous heavy build- ing : now following the scripture, I shall have no necessity to under- go any such difficulties. 65. Following your church, I must be a servant of Christ, and a subject of the king, but only ad placitum papce. I must be prepared in mind to renounce my allegiance to the king, when the pope shall declare him a heretic, and command me not to obey him ; and I must be prepared in mind to esteem virtue vice, and vice virtue, if the pope shall so determine. Indeed, you say, it is impossible he should do the latter ; but that you know is a great question, neither is it fit my obedience to God and the king should depend upon a questionable foundation. And howsoever, you must grant, that if by an impossible supposition, the pope's com- mands should be contrary to the law of Christ, that they of your religion must resolve to obey rather the commands of the pope than the law of Christ : whereas, if I follow the scripture, I may, nay I must, obey my sovereign in lawful things, though a heretic, though a tyrant ; and though, I do not say the pope, but the. apostles themselves, nay, an angel from heaven, should teach any thing against the gospel of Christ, I may, nay I must, denounce anathema to him. 66. Following the scripture, I shall believe a religion, which, being contrary to flesh and blood, without any assistance from worldly power, wit, or policy, nay, against all the power and po- licy of the world, prevailed and enlarged itself in a very short time all the world over; whereas it is too apparent, that your church hath got, and still maintains, her authority over men's consciences, by counterfeiting false miracles, forging false stories, by obtruding on the world suppositious writings, by corrupting the monuments of former times, and defacing out of them all which any way makes against you, by wars, by persecutions, by massacres, by treasons, by rebellions ; in short, by all manner of carnal means, whether violent or fraudulent. 67. Following the scripture, I shall believe a religion, the first preachers and professors whereof, it is most certain, they could have no worldly ends upon the world ; that they should not pro- ject to themselves by it any of the profits, or honours, or plea- sures, of this world : but rather were to expect the contrary, even all the miseries which the world could lay upon them. On the other side, the head of your church, the pretended successor of the apostles, and guide of faith, it is even palpable, that he makes h h2 484 Protestants not Heretics. your religion the instrument of his ambition, and by it seeks to entitle himself directly or indirectly to the monarchy of the world. And besides it is evident to any man, that has but half an eye, that most of those doctrines which you add to the scripture, do make, one way or other, for the honour or temporal profit of the teachers of them. 68. Following the scripture only, I shall embrace a religion of admirable simplicity, consisting in a manner wholly in the worship of God, in spirit, and in truth : whereas your church and doctrine is even loaded with an infinity of weak, childish, ridiculous, unsa voury superstitions and ceremonies, and full of that righteousness, for which Christ shall judge the world. 69. Following the scriptures, I shall believe that which univer- sal, never-failing tradition assures me, that it was by the admi- rable supernatural works of God confirmed to be the word of God ; whereas never any miracle was wrought, never so much as a lame horse cured, in confirmation of your church's authority and infallibility. And if any strange things have been done, which may seem to give attestation to some parts of your doc- trine, yet this proves nothing but the truth of the scripture, which foretold that (God's providence permitting it, and the wickedness of the world deserving it) strange signs and wonders should be wrought to confirm false doctrine, that they which love not the truth may be given over to strong delusions. Neither does it seem to me any strange thing, that God should permit some true wonders to be done, to delude them who have forged so many to deceive the world. 70. If I follow the scripture, I must not promise myself salva- tion without effectual dereliction and mortification of all vices, and the effectual practice of all christian virtues: but your church opens an easier and a broader way to heaven, and though I con- tinue all my life long in a course of sin, and without the practice of any virtue, yet gives me the assurance that I may be let into heaven at a postern-gate, even by an act of attrition at the hour of death, if it be joined with confession, or by an act of contrition without confession. 71. Admirable are the precepts, of piety and humility, of inno- cence and patience, of liberality, frugality, temperance, sobriety, justice, meekness, fortitude, constancy, and gravity, contempt of the world, love of God, and the love of mankind; in a word, of all virtues, and against all vice, which the scriptures impose upon us, to be obeyed under pain of damnation : the sum where- of is in a manner comprised in our Saviour's sermon on the Mount, recorded in the 5th, 6th, and 7th, of St. Matthew, which, if they were generally obeyed, could not but make the world generally happy, and the goodness of them alone were suf- ficient to make any wise and good man believe, that this religion, rather than any other, came from God, the fountain of all good- ness. And that they may be generally obeyed, our Saviour hath ratified them all in the close of his sermon, with these universal sanctions : " Not every one that saith, Lord, Lord, shall enter Protestants not Heretics. 485 into the kingdom, but be that doth the will of my Father which is in heaven." And again, " Whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand : and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and it fell, and great was the fall thereof." Now your church, notwithstanding all this, enervates, and in a manner dissolves and abrogates many of these precepts, teaching men that they are not laws for all christians, but counsels of perfection, and matters of supererogation : that a man shall do well, if he do observe them ; but he shall not sin, if he observe them not ; that they are for them who aim at high places in heaven, who aspire with the two sons of Zebedee to the right hand, or to the left hand of Christ : but if a man will be con- tent barely to go to heaven, and to be a door-keeper in the house of God, especially if he will be content to taste of purgatory in the way, he may attain it at an easier purchase. Therefore the religion of your church is not so holy nor so good as the doctrine of Christ delivered in scripture, and therefore not so likely to come from the fountain of holiness and goodness. 72. Lastly, if I follow your church for my guide, I shall do all one as if I should follow a company of blind men in a judgment of colours, or in the choice of a way. For every unconsidering man is blind in that which he does not consider. Now what is your church but a company of unconsidering men, who comfort themselves because they are a great company together? but all of them, either out of idleness, refuse the trouble of a severe trial of their religion (as if heaven were not worth it), or out of super- stition fear the event of such a trial, that they may be scrupled, and staggered, and disquieted by it ; and, therefore, for the most part, do it not at all : or, if they do it, they do it negligently and hypocritically, and perfunctorily, rather for the satisfaction of others than themselves ; but certainly without indifference, with- out liberty of judgment, without a resolution to doubt of it, if upon examination, the grounds of it prove uncertain, or to leave it, if they prove apparently false. My own experience assures me, that in this imputation I do you no injury ; but it is very apparent to all men from your ranking doubting of any part of your doctrine among mortal sins. For from hence it follows, that seeing every man must resolve, that he will never commit mortal sin, that he must never examine the grounds of it at all, for fear he should be moved to doubt ; or if he do, he must resolve, that no motives, be they never so strong, shall move him to doubt, but that, with his will and resolution, he will uphold himself in a firm belief of your religion, though his reason and his understand- ing fail him. And seeing this is the condition of all those whom you esteem good catholics, who can deny, but you are a company of men unwilling and afraid to understand, lest you should do good ! That have eyes to see, and will not see, that have not the love of truth, (which is only to be known by an indifferent trial) and therefore deserve to be given over to strong delusions : men that love darkness more than light : in a word, that vou are the 41 * 486 Protestants not Heretics. blind leading the blind ; and what prudence there can be in follow- ing such guides, our Saviour hath taught us in saying, " If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch." 73. There remain unspoken to in this section, some places out of St. Augustine, and some sayings of Luther, wherein he con- fesses that in the papacy are many good things; but for the former, I have already considered, and returned the argument grounded on them. As for Luther's speeches, I told you not long since, that we follow no private men, and regard not much what he says either against the church of Rome, or for it, but what he proves. He was a man of a vehement spirit, and very often what he took in hand he did not do it, but overdo it. He that will justify all his speeches, especially such as he wrote in heat of opposition, I believe will have work enough. Yet in these sen- tences, though he overreach in the particulars, yet what he says in general we confess true, and confess with him, that in the papacy are many good things, which have come from them to us; but withal we say, there are many bad, neither do we think ourselves bound in prudence either to reject the good with the bad, or to retain the bad with the good ; but rather conceive it a high point of wisdom — to separate between the precious and the vile, to sever the good from the bad, and to put the good in vessels to be kept, and to cast the bad away; to try all things, and to hold that which is good. 74. Ad. §. 32. Your next and last argument against the faith of protestants is — because wanting certainty and prudence, it must also want the fourth condition supernatural ity. For that being a human persuasion, it is not in the essence of it supernatural; and being imprudent and rash, it cannot proceed from divine motion, and so is not supernatural in respect of the cause from which it proceedeth. — Jlns. This little discourse stands wholly upon what went before, and therefore must fall together with it. I have proved the faith of protestants as certain and as pru- dent as the faith of papists; and, therefore, if these be certain grounds of supernaturality, our faith may have it as well as yours. I would here furthermore be informed, how you can assure us, that your faith is not your persuasion or opinion, (for you make them all one) that your church's doctrine is true ? Or, if you grant it your persuasion, why is it not the persuasion of men, and in respect of the subject of it, a human persuasion ? I desire also to know, what sense there is in pretending that your persuasion is, not in regard of the object only and cause of it, but in the nature or essence of it, supernatural ? Lastly, whereas you say — that being imprudent, it cannot come from divine motion ; cer- tainly, by this reason, all they that believe your own religion, and cannot give a wise and sufficient reason for it, (as millions amongst you cannot) must be condemned to have no supernatural faith: or, if not, then, without question, nothing can hinder, but that the im- prudent faith of protestants may proceed from divine motion, as well as the imprudent faith of papists. 75. And thus having weighed your whole discourse, and found Charity maintained by Catholics. 487 it altogether lighter than vanity, why should I not invert your conclusion, and say, seeing you have not proved, that whosoever errs against any one point of faith loseth all divine faith ; nor that any error whatsoever, concerning that which by the parties litigant may be esteemed a matter of faith, is a grievous sin, it follows not at all, that when two men hold different doctrines con- cerning religion, that but one can be saved? Not that I deny) but that the sentence of St. Chrysostome, with which you conclude , this chapter, may, in a good sense, be true; for oft-times by the' faith is meant only that doctrine which is necessary to salvation ; and to say, that salvation may be had without any the least thing which is necessary to salvation, implies a repugnance, and de- stroys itself. Besides, not to believe all necessary points, and to believe none at all, is for the purpose of salvation all one ; and therefore he that does so, may justly be said to destroy the gospel of Christ, seeing he makes it ineffectual to the end for which it was intended, the salvation of men's souls. But why you should conceive that all differences about religion are concerning matters of faith, in this high notion of the word, for that I conceive no reason. CHAPTER VII. In regard of the precept of charity towards one's self, protestants are in a state of sin, as long as they remain separated from the Roman church. " 1. That due order is to be observed in the theological virtue of charity, whereby we are directed to prefer some objects before others, is a truth taught by all divines, and declared in these words of holy scripture ; ' he hath ordered charity in me.'* The reason whereof is, because the infinite goodness of God, which is the for- mal object or motive of charity, and for which all other things are loved, is differently participated by different objects : and there- fore, the love we bear to them for God's sake, must accordingly be unequal. In the virtue of faith, the case is far otherwise ; be- cause all the objects or points, which we believe, do equally parti- cipate the divine testimony or revelation, for which we believe alike all things propounded for such. For it is as impossible for God to speak an untruth in a small as in a great matter. And this is the ground for which we have so often affirmed, that any least error against faith is injurious to God, and destructive of salvation. " 2. This order in charity may be considered, towards God, our own soul, the soul of our neighbour, our own life or goods, and the life or goods of our neighbour. God is to be beloved above all things, both objective (as the divines speak), that is, we must wish or desire to God a good more great, perfect, and noble, than to any or all other things; namely, all that indeed he is, a nature infinite, independent, immense, &-C. and also appreciative, that is, that we i * Cant. ii. 4. 488 Charity maintained by Catholics. must sooner lose what good soever, than leave and abandon him. In the other objects of charity, of which I spake, this order is to be kept : we may, but are not bound to, prefer the life and goods of our neighbour before our own : we are bound to prefer the soul of our neighbour before our own temporal goods or life, if he happen to be in extreme spiritual necessity, and that we by our assistance can succour him, according to the saying of St. John, ' In this we have known the charity of God, because he hath yielded his life for us, and we ought to yield our life for our brethren.'* And St. Augustine likewise saith,f ' a christian will not doubt to lose his own temporal life, for the eternal life of his neighbour.' Lastly, we are to prefer the spiritual good of our own soul, before both the spiritual and temporal good of our neighbour, because as charity doth of its own nature chiefly incline the person, in whom it resides, to love God, and to be united with him, so of itself it inclines him to procure those things whereby the said union with God is effected rather to himself than to others. And from hence it follows, that in things necessary to salvation, no man ought in any case, or any respect whatsoever, to prefer the spiritual good, either of any particular person, or of the whole world, before his own soul, according to those words of our blessed Saviour, ' What doth it avail a man, if he gain the whole world, and sustain the damage of his own soul ?'J And therefore (to come to our present purpose) it is directly against the order of charity, or against charity as it has a reference to ourselves, which divines call charitas propria, to adventure either the omitting of any means necessary to salvation, or the committing of any thing repugnant to it, for whatsoever respect ; and consequently, if by living out of the Roman church we put ourselves in hazard either to want something necessarily required to salvation, or else to perform some act against it, we commit a most grievous sin against the virtue of charity as it respects ourselves, and so cannot hope for salvation without re- pentance. " 3. Now of things necessary to salvation, there are two sorts, according to the doctrine of all divines. Some things (say they) are necessary to salvation, necessitate prcecepti, necessary only be- cause they are commanded; for, • If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.'^ In which kind of things, as probable igno- rance of the law, or of the commandments, doth excuse the party from all faulty breach thereof; so likewise doth it not exclude sal- vation, in case of ignorance. Some other things are said to be necessary to salvation, necessitate medii, finis or salutis ; because they are means appointed by God to attain our end of eternal salvation in so strict a manner, that it were presumption to hope for salvation without them. And as the former means are said to be necessary, because they are commanded, so the latter are com- monly said to be commanded, because they are necessary ; that is, although there were no other special precept concerning them, yet supposing they be once appointed as means absolutely necessary * 1 John iii. 16. X Matt. vi. tDe mendac. c. vi. § Matt. xix. 17. Charity maintained by Catholics. 489 to salvation, there cannot but arise an obligation of procuring to have them, in virtue of that universal precept of charity, which obligeth every man to procure the salvation of his own soul. In this sort, divine infallible faith is necessary to salvation ; as like- wise repentance of every deadly sin, and in the doctrine of catholics, baptism in re, that is, in act, to children, and for those who are come to the use of reason, in voto, or hearty desire, when they cannot have it in act. And as baptism is necessary for remission of original and actual sin committed before it, so the sacrament of confession or penance is necessary in re, or in voto, in act or desire, for the remission of mortal sins, committed after baptism. The minister of which sacrament of penance being necessarily a true priest, true ordination is necessary in the church of God for re- mission of sins by this sacrament, as also for other ends not belonging to our present purpose. From hence it riseth, that no ignorance or impossibility can supply the want of those means which are absolutely necessary to salvation. As if, for example, a sinner depart this world without repenting himself of all deadly sins, although he die suddenly, or unexpectedly fall out of his wits, and so commit no new sin by omission of repentance ; yet he shall be eternally punished for his former sins committed, and never re- pented of. If an infant die without baptism, he cannot be saved ; not by reason of any actual sin committed by him in omitting baptism, but for original sin, not forgiven by the means which God hath ordained to that purpose. Which doctrine all, or most, pro- testants will (for aught I know) grant to be true, in the children of infidels ; yea, not only lutherans, but also some other protestants, as Mr. Bilson, late of Winchester,* and others, hold it to be true, even in the children of the faithful : and if protestants in general disagree from catholics in this point, it cannot be denied, but that our disagreement is in a point very fundamental. And the like I say of the sacrament of penance, which they deny to be necessary to salvation, either in act, or in desire : which error is likewise funda- mental, because it concerns (as I said) a thing necessary to salva- tion : and, for the same reason, if their priesthood and ordination be doubtful, as certainly it is, they are in danger to want a means, without which they cannot be saved. Neither ought this rigour to seem strange or unjust : for Almighty God having, of his own goodness, without our merit, first ordained man to a supernatural end of eternal felicity; and then, after our fall in Adam, vouchsafed to reduce us to the attaining of that end, if his blessed will be pleased to limit the attaining of that end, to some means, which in his infi- nite wisdom he thinks most fit; who can say, Why dost thou so? Or who can hope for that end without such means? Blessed be his divine Majesty, for vouchsafing to ordain us, base creatures, to so sublime an end, by any means at all ! " 4. Out of the aforesaid difference followeth another, that (generally speaking) in things necessary only because they are commanded, it is sufficient for avoiding sin, that we proceed pru- dently, and by the conduct of some probable opinion, maturely * In his True Difference, &c. part iv. p. 368, 369. 490 Charity maintained by Catholics. weighed and approved by men of virtue, learning and wisdom. Neither are we always obliged to follow the most strict, and severe, or secure part, as long as the doctrine which we embrace proceeds upon such reasons, as may warrant it to be truly probable and pru- dent, though the contrary part want not also probable grounds. For, in human affairs and discourse, evidence and certainty cannot be always expected : but when we treat not precisely of avoiding sin, but moreover of procuring something, without which I cannot be saved ; I am obliged by the law and order of charity, to pro- cure as great certainty as morally I am able, and am not to follow every probable opinion or dictamen, but tutiorem partem, the safer part ; because, if my probability prove false, I shall not probably, but certainly, come short of salvation. Nay, in such a case, I shall incur a new sin against the virtue of charity towards myself, which obligeth every one not to expose his soul to the hazard of eternal perdition, when it is in his power, with the assistance of God's grace, to make the matter sure. From this very ground it is, that although some divines be of opinion, that it is not a sin to use some matter or form of sacraments only pro- bable, if we respect precisely the reverence or respect which is due to sacraments, as they belong to the moral infused virtue of religion ; yet when they are such sacraments, as the invalidity thereof may endanger the salvation of souls, all do with one consent agree, that it is a grievous offence to use a doubtful, or only probable, matter or form, when it is in our power to procure certainty. If therefore it may appear, that though it were not certain, that protestancy unrepented destroys salvation (as we have proved to be very certain) yet at least that it is probable, and withal, that there is a way more safe ; it will follow, out of the grounds already laid, that they are obliged by the law of charity to embrace that safe way. " 5. Now that protestants have reason at least to doubt, in what case they stand, is deduced from what we have said and proved about the universal infallibility of the church, and of her being judge of controversies, to whom all christians ought to submit their judg- ment (as even some protestants grant), and whom to oppose in any one of her definitions is a grievous sin : as also from what we have said of the unity, universality, and visibility of the church, and of succession of persons and doctrine; of the conditions of divine faith, certainty, obscurity, prudence, and supernaturality, which are wanting in the faith of protestants ; of the frivolous distinction of points fundamental and not fundamental (the confutation whereof proveth, that heretics disagreeing among themselves, in any least point, cannot have the same faith, nor be of the same church) ; of schism, of heresy, of the persons who first revolted from Rome, and of their motives ; of the nature of faith, which is destroyed by any least error; and it is certain that some of them must be in error, and want the substance of true faith ; and, since all pretend the like certainty, it is clear that none of them have any certainty at all, but that they want true faith, which is a means most absolutely necessary to salvation. Moreover, as I said heretofore, since it is Charity maintained by Catholics. 491 granted, that every error in fundamental points is damnable, and that they cannot tell in particular what points be fundamental, it follows, that none of them knows whether he or his brethren do not err damnably, it being certain, that among so many disagreeing persons some must err. Upon the same ground of not being able to assign what points be fundamental, I say, they cannot be sure whether the difference among them be fundamental, or no; and, consequently, whether they agree in the substance of faith, and hope of salvation. I omit to add, that you want the sacrament of penance, instituted for remission of sins; or at least you must con- fess, that you hold it not necessary ; and yet your own brethren, for example, the century writers,* do acknowledge, that in the times of Cyprian and Tertullian, private confession, even of thoughts, was used, and that it was then commanded and thought necessary. The like I say concerning your ordination, which at least is very doubtful ; and, consequently, all that depends thereon. " 6. On the other side, that the Roman church is the safer way to heaven (not to repeat what hath been already said upon divers occasions), I will again put you in mind, that unless the Roman church was the true church, there was no visible church upon the earth: a thing so manifest, that protestants themselves confess, that for more than one thousand years the Roman church possessed the whole world, as we have shewed heretofore out of their own words :f from whence it follows, that unless ours be the true church, you cannot pretend to any perpetual visible church of your own ; but ours doth not depend on yours, before which it was. And here I wish you to consider, with fear and trembling, how all Roman catholics, not one excepted, that is, those very men whom you must hold not to err damnably in their belief, unless you will destroy your own church and salvation, do with unanimous consent believe and profess that protestancy unrepented destroys salvation ; and then tell me, as you will answer at the last day, whether it be not more safe to live and die in that church, which even yourselves are forced to acknowledge not to be cut off from hope of salvation (which are your own words), than to live in a church which the said confessedly true church doth firmly believe, and constantly profess, not to be capable of salvation. And therefore I conclude, that by the most strict obligation of charity towards your own soul, you are bound to place it in safety, by returning to that church, from which your progenitors schismatically departed, lest too late you find that say- ing of the Holy Ghost verified in yourselves, ' He that loves the danger, shall perish therein. 'J " 7. Against this last argument of the greater security of the Roman church, drawn from your own confession, you bring an ob- jection, which in the end will be found to make for us against your- self. It is taken from the words of the donatists, speaking of catholics in this manner :§ — Yourselves confess our baptism, sacra- ments, and faith (here you put an explication of your own, and say, for the most part, as if any small error in faith did not destroy all * Cont. 3, c. vi. col. 127. t Eccl. iii. 27. t Chap. v. Num. 9. § Page 112. 492 Charity maintained by Catholics. faith), to be good and available. We deny yours to be so, and say, there is no church, no salvation among you ; therefore, it is safest for all to join with us. " 8. By your leave, our argument is not (as you say) for simple people alone ; but for all of them, who have care to save their souls. Neither is it grounded upon your charitable judgment (as you* speak), but upon an inevitable necessity for you either to grant salvation to our church, or to entail certain damnation upon your own ; because yours can have no being till Luther, unless ours be supposed to have been the true church of Christ. And, since you term this argument a charm, take heed you be none of those, who, according to the prophet David, do not hear the ' voice of him who charmeth wisely. 'f But, to come to the purpose : catholics never granted, that the donatists had a true church, or might be saved: and, therefore, you, having cited out of St. Augustine the words of the catholics, that the donatists had true baptism, when you come to the contrary words of the donatists, you add, ' No church, no salvation;' making the argument to have quinque terminos, with- out which addition you did see it made nothing against us: for, as I said, the catholics never yielded, that among the donatists there was a true church, or hope of salvation. And yourself, a few leaves after, acknowledge — that the donatists maintained an error, which was in the matter and nature of it properly heretical, against that article of the creed, wherein we profess to believe the holy catholic churchj — and, consequently, you cannot allow salvation to them, as you do, and must do, to us. And, therefore, the dona- tists could not make the like argument against catholics, as catho- lics make against you, who grant us salvation, which we deny to you. But, at least (you will say) this argument for the certainty of their baptism was like to ours, touching the security and cer- tainty of our salvation ; and, therefore, that catholics should have esteemed the baptism of the donatists more certain than their own, and so have allowed rebaptization of such as were baptized by heretics or sinners, as the donatists esteemed all catholics to be. I answer, no; because it being a matter of faith, that baptism, ad- ministered by heretics, observing due matter, form, &c. is valid; to rebaptize any, so baptized, had been both a sacrilege in reiterating a sacrament not reiterable, and a profession also of a damnable heresy ; and therefore had not been more safe, but certainly damn- able. But you confess that, in the doctrine or practice of the Roman church, there is no belief or profession of any damnable error, which if there were, even your church should certainly be no church. To believe, therefore, and profess as we do, cannot ex- clude salvation, as rebaptization must have done. But if the do- natists could have affirmed with truth, that in the opinion both of catholics and themselves, their baptism was good; yea, and good in such sort, as that, unless theirs was good, that of the catholics could not be such; but theirs might be good, though that of the catholics were not; and further, that it was no damnable error to believe, that baptism administered by the catholics was not good, * Page 81. t Psal. lvii. 6. X Page 126. Charity maintained by Catholics. 493 nor that it was any sacrilege to reiterate the same baptism of cath- olics: if, I say, they could have truly affirmed these things, they had said somewhat which at least had seemed to the purpose. But these things they could not say with any colour of truth, and there- fore their argument was fond and impious. But we with truth say to protestants — you cannot hut confess, that our doctrine contains no damnable error, and that our church is so certainly a true church, that unless ours be true, you cannot pretend any : yea, you grant, that you should be guilty of schism, if you did cut off our church from the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation. But we neither do nor can grant, that yours is a true church, or that within it there is hope of salvation : therefore it is safest for you to join with us. And now, against whom hath your objection greatest force ? " 9. But I wonder not a little, and so I think will every body else, what the reason may be, that you do not so much as go about to answer the argument of the donatists, which you say is all one with ours, but refer us to St. Augustine, there to read it ; as if every one carried with him a library, or were able to examine the place in St. Augustine : and yet you might be sure your reader would be greedy to see some solid answer to an argument so often urged by us, and which, indeed, unless you can confute it, ought alone to move every one that hath care of his soul, to take the safest way, by incorporating himself in our church. But we may easily imagine the true reason of your silence; for the answer which St. Augustine gives to the donatists is directly against yourself, and the same which I have given, namely, that catholics* approve the baptism of donatists, but abhor their heresy of rebaptization. And that, as gold is good (which is the similitude used by St. Augustinef), yet not to be sought in company of thieves ; so, though baptism be good, yet it must not be sought for in the conventicles of donatists. But you free us from damnable heresy, and yield us salvation, which I hope is to be embraced in whatever company it is found ; or rather, that company is to be embraced before all other, in which all sides agree that salvation may be found. We therefore must infer, that it is safest for you to seek salvation among us. You had good reason to conceal St. Augustine's answer to the donatists. " 10. You frame another argument in our behalf, and make us speak thus :J ' if protestants believe the religion of catholics to be a safe way to heaven, why do they not follow it?' Which wise argument of your own, you answer at large, and confirm your answer by this instance: 'The Jesuits and dominicans hold dif- ferent opinions touching predetermination, and the immaculate conception of the blessed Virgin ; yet so, that the Jesuits hold the dominicans' way safe, that is, their error not damnable ; and the dominicans hold the same of the Jesuits ; yet neither of them with good consequence can press the other to believe his opinion, be- cause, by his own confession, it is no damnable error.' "11. But what catholic maketh such a wise demand as you * Ad lit. Petil. 1. ii. c. cviii. t Contra Cresc. L i. c. xxi. X Page 79. 42 494 Charity maintained by Catholics. put into our mouths? If our religion be a safe way to heaven, that is, not damnable, why do you not follow it? As if every thing that is good must be of necessity embraced by every body ! But what think you of the argument framed thus? Our religion is safe even by your confession ; therefore you ought to grant, that all may embrace it. And yet further, thus? Among different re- ligions and contrary ways to heaven, one only can be safe: but ours, by your own confession, is safe, whereas we hold, that in yours there is no hope of salvation; therefore you may and ought to embrace ours. This is our argument. And if the dominicans and Jesuits did say one to another, as we say to you ; then one of them might with good consequence press tbe other to believe his opinion. You have still the hard fortune to be beat with your own weapon. " 12. It remaineth, then, that both in regard of faith and charity, protestants are obliged to unite themselves with the church of Rome. And I may add also, in regard of the theological virtue of hope, without which none can hope to be saved, and which you want, either by excess of confidence, or defect by despair, not un- like to your faith, which I shewed either to be deficient in certainty, or excessive in evidence ; as likewise, according to the rigid cal- vinists, it is either so strong, that, once had, it can never be lost ; or so more than weak, and so much nothing, that it can never be gotten. For the true theological hope of christians, is a hope which keeps a mean between presumption and desperation, which moves us to work our salvation with fear and trembling, which conducts us to make sure our salvation by good works, as holy scripture adviseth ; but, contrarily, protestants do either exclude hope by despair, with the doctrine, that our Saviour died not for all, and that such want grace sufficient to salvation ; or else by vain pre- sumption, grounded upon a fantastical persuasion, that they are predestinate; which faith must exclude all fear and trembling. Neither can they make their calling certain by good works, who do certainly believe, that before any good works they are justified, and justified even by faith alone, and by that faith, whereby they certainly believe that they are justified. Which points some protes- tants do expressly affirm to be the soul of the church, the principal origin of salvation, of all other points of doctrine the chiefest and weightiest, as already I have noted, chap. iii. n. 19. And if some protestants do now relent from the rigour of the aforesaid doctrine, we must affirm, that at least some of them want the theological virtue of hope; yea, that none of them can have true hope, while they hope to be saved in the communion of those who defend such doctrines, as do directly overthrow all true christian hope. And forasmuch as concerns faith, we must also infer, that they want unity therein, (and consequently have none at all) by their disagreement about the soul of the church, the principal origin of salvation, of all other points of doctrine the chiefest and weightiest. And, if you want true faith, you must by consequence want hope: or if you hold, that this point is not to be so indivisible on either side, but that it hath latitude sufficient to embrace all parties, without Charity maintained by Catholics, 495 prejudice to their salvation; notwithstanding that your brethren hold it to be the soul of the church, &c, I must repeat what I have said heretofore, that even by this example it is clear, you cannot agree what points be fundamental. And so (to whatsoever answer you fly) I press you in the same manner, and say, that you have no certainty, whether you agree in fundamental points, or unity and substance of faith, which cannot stand with difference in fundamentals. And so, upon the whole matter, I leave it to be considered, whether want of charity can be justly charged on us, because we affirm, that they cannot (without repentance) be saved, who want of all other the most necessary means to salvation, which are the three theological virtues, faith, hope, and charity. " 13. And now I end this first part, having, as I conceive, com- plied with my first design (in that measure which time, commodity, scarcity of books, and my own small abilities, could afford), which was to show, that amongst men of different religions one side can only be saved. For, since there must be some infallible means to decide all controversies concerning religion, and to propound truths revealed by Almighty God ; and this means can be no other but the visible church of Christ, which at the time of Luther's ap- pearance was only the church of Rome, and such as agreed with her ; we must conclude, that whosoever opposeth himself to her definitions, or forsaketh her communion, doth resist God himself, whose spouse she is, and whose divine truth she propounds ; and therefore becomes guilty of schism and heresy, which since Luther, his associates, and protestants have done, and still continue to do, it is not want of charity, but abundance of evident cause, that forceth us to declare this necessary truth — Protestancy unrepented destroys salvation" THE ANSWER TO THE SEVENTH CHAPTER. That protestants are not bound by the charity which they oioe to themselves to re-unite themselves to the Roman church. The first four paragraphs of this chapter are wholly spent in an unnecessary introduction unto a truth, which I presume never was, nor will be, by any man in his right wits, either denied or ques- tioned ; and that is — that every man, in wisdom and charity to himself, is to take the safest way to his eternal salvation. 2. The fifth and sixth are nothing, in a manner, but references to discourses already answered by me, and confuted in their pro- per places. 3. The seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, and eleventh, have no other foundation but this false pretence — that we confess the Roman church free from damnable error. 4. In the twelfth, there is something that has some probability to persuade some protestants to forsake some of their opinions, or others to leave their communion; but to prove protestants in general to be in a state of sin, while they remain separate from the Roman 496 The Religion of Protestants a safer way church, there is not one word or syllable. And besides, whatso- ever argument there is in it for any purpose, it may as forcibly be returned upon papists, as it is urged against protestants; inasmuch as all papists either hold the doctrine of predetermination, and absolute election, or communicate with those that do hold it. Now from this doctrine, what is more plain and obvious, than for every natural man (without God's especial preventing grace) to make this practical collection? Either I am elected, or not elected; but if I be, no impiety possible can ever damn me ; if not, no possible industry can ever save me. Now, whether this disjunctive persua- sion be not as likely, as any doctrine of any protestants, to extin- guish christian hope, and filial fear, and to lead some men to de- spair, others to presumption, all to a wretched and impious life, I desire you ingenuously to inform me ? And, if you deny it, assure yourself you shall be contradicted and confuted by men of your own religion, and your own society, and taught at length this charitable doctrine, that though men's opinions may be charged with the ab- surd consequences which naturally flow from them, yet the men themselves are not; I mean, if they perceive not the consequence of these absurdities, nor do not own and acknowledge, but disclaim and detest them. And this is all the answer which I should make to this discourse, if I should deal rigidly and strictly with you. Yet, that you may not think yourself contemned, nor have occa- sion to pretend, that your arguments are evaded, I will entreat leave of my reader to bring to the test every particle of it, and to censure what deserves a censure, and to answer what may any way seem to require an answer ; and then, J doubt not, but what I have affirmed in general, will appear in particular. 5. Ad. §. 1. To the first, then, I say, 1. It was needless to prove, that due order is to be observed in any thing, much more in charity, which, being one of the best things, may be spoiled by being disordered: yet, if it stood in need of proof, I fear this place of the Canticles, " He hath ordered charity in me," would be no enforcing demonstration of it. 2. The reason alleged by you why we ought to love one object more than another, because one thing participates the divine goodness more than another, is fantastical, and repugnant to what you say presently after : for, by this rule, no man should love himself more than all the world, which yet you require, unless he were first vainly persuaded, that he doth more participate the divine goodness than all the world. But the true reason why one thing ought to be loved more than another is, because one thing is better than another, or because it is better to us, or because God commands us to do so, or because God himself does so, and we are to conform our affections to the will of God. 3. It is not true, that all objects, which we believe, do equally participate the divine testimony or revelation: for some are testified more evidently, and some more obscurely ; and therefore, what- soever you have built upon this ground, must of necessity fall together with it. And thus much for the first number. 6. Ad. §. 2. In the second, many passages deserve a censure : 1. It is not true, that we are to wish or desire to God a nature to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 497 infinite, independent, immense; for it is impossible I should desire to any person that which he hath already, if I know that he hath it ; nor the perpetuity of it, if I know it impossible but he must have it for perpetuity. And therefore, rejoicing only, and not well- wishing, is here the proper work of love. 2. Whereas you say, that — in things necessary to salvation no man ought in any case, or in any respect whatsoever, to prefer the spiritual good of the whole world before his own soul. — In saying this, you seem to me to condemn one of the greatest acts of charity, of one of the great- est saints that ever was; I mean St. Paul, who for his brethren desired to be an anathema from Christ. And as for the text alleged by you in confirmation of your saying, " What doth it avail a man, if he gain the whole world, and sustain the damage of his own soul 1" it is nothing to the purpose : for, without all ques- tion, it is not profitable for a man to do so ; but the question is, whether it be not lawful for a man to forego, and part with, his own particular profit, to procure the universal, spiritual, and eter- nal benefit of others ? 3. Whereas you say — It is directly against charity to ourselves, to adventure the omitting of any means ne- cessary to salvation. This is true : but so is this also ; that it is directly against the same charity, to adventure the omitting of any thing that may any way help or conduce to my salvation, that may make the way to it more secure, or less dangerous. And, therefore, if the errors of the Roman church do but hinder me in this way, or any way endanger it, I am, in charity to myself, bound to forsake them, though they be not destructive of it. 4. Whereas you conclude — that if by living out of the Roman church we put ourselves in hazard to want something necessary to salvation, we commit a grievous sin against the virtue of charity, as it respects ourselves. — This consequence may be good in those which are thus persuaded of the Roman church, and yet live out of it. But the supposition is certainly false ; we may live and die out of the Roman church, without putting ourselves in any such hazard : nay, to live and die in it is as dangerous as to shoot a gulf, which, though some good ignorant souls may do and escape, yet it may well be feared, that not one in a hundred but miscarries. 7. Ad. §. 3. I proceed now to the third section ; and herein, first, I observe this acknowledgment of yours — that in things necessary, only because commanded, a probable ignorance of the command- ment excuses the party from all fault, and doth not exclude salva- tion. From which doctrine it seems to me to follow, that seeing obedience to the Roman church cannot be pretended to be neces- sary, but only because it is commanded, therefore not only an invincible, but even a probable, ignorance of this pretended com- mand, must excuse us from all faulty breach of it, and cannot exclude salvation. Now, seeing this command is not pretended to be expressly delivered, but only to be deduced from the word of God, and that not by the most clear and evident consequences that may be; and seeing an infinity of great objections lie against it, which seem strongly to prove, that there is no such command, with what charity can you suppose, that our ignorance of this II 42* 498 The Religion of Protestants a safer way command is not at the least probable, if not, all things considered, plainly invincible ? Sure I am, for my part, that I have done my true endeavour to find it true, and am still willing to do so ; but the more I seek, the farther I am from finding ; and, therefore, if it be true, certainly my not finding it is very excusable, and you have reason to be very charitable in your censures of me. 2. Whereas you say — that besides these things necessary, because commanded, there are other things which are commanded, because necessary ; of which number you make a divine infallible faith, baptism in act for children, and in desire for those who are come to the use of reason, and the sacrament of confession for those who have committed mortal sin. — In these words you seem to me to deliver a strange paradox, viz. that faith, and baptism, and confes- sion, are not therefore necessary for us, because God appointed them ; but are therefore appointed by God, because they were necessary for us, antecedently to his appointment ; which, if it were true, 1 wonder what it was beside God that made them ne- cessary, and made it necessary for God to command them ! Be- sides, in making faith one of these necessary means, you seem to exclude infants from salvation ; for " faith comes by hearing," and they have not heard. In requiring that this faith should be divine and infallible, you cast your credence into infinite perplexity, who cannot possibly, by any sure mark, discern whether their faith be divine or human ; or if you have any certain sign, whereby they may discern whether they believe your church's infallibility with divine, or only with human faith, I pray produce it ; for perhaps it may serve us to shew, that our faith is divine as well as yours. Moreover, in affirming, that baptism in act is necessary for infants, and for men only in desire, you seem to me in the latter to destroy the foundation of the former. For if a desire of baptism will serve men instead of baptism, then those words of our Saviour, " Unless a man be born again of water," &c. are not to be understood lite- rally and rigidlv of external baptism; for a desire of baptism is not baptism, and so your foundation of the absolute necessity of bap- tism is destroyed. And if you may gloss the text so far, as that men may be saved by the desire, without baptism itself, because they cannot have it, why should you not gloss it a little farther, that there may be some hope of the salvation of unbaptized infants ; to whom it was more impossible to have a desire of baptism, than for the former to have the thing itself? Lastly, for your sacrament of confession, we know none such, nor any such absolute necessity of it. They that confess their sins, and forsake them, shall find mercy, though they confess them to God only, and not to men. They that confess them both to God and men, if they do not effec- tually, and in time forsake them, shall not find mercy. 3. Whereas you say — that supposing these means once appointed as absolutely necessary to salvation, there cannot but arise an obligation of pro- curing to have them. — You must suppose, I hope, that we know them to be so appointed, and that it is in our power to procure them ; otherwise, though it may be our ill fortune to fail of the end for want of the means, certainly we cannot be obliged to procure to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 499 them. For the rule of the law is also the dictate of common reason and equity, that no man can be obliged to what is impossible. We can be obliged to nothing but by virtue of some command : now it is impossible that God should command in earnest any thing which he knows to be impossible. For to command in earnest, is to command with an intent to be obeyed, which it is not possible he should do, when he knows the thing commanded to be impossi- ble. Lastly, Whosoever is obliged to do any thing, and does it not, commits a fault ; but infants commit no fault in not procuring to have baptism ; therefore no obligation lies upon them to procure it. 4. Whereas you say, that — if protestants dissent from you in the point of the necessity of baptism for infants, it cannot be denied but that our disagreement is in a point fundamental. — If you mean a point esteemed so by you, this indeed cannot be denied : but if you mean, a point that indeed is fundamental, this may certainly be denied; for I deny it, and say, that it doth not appear to me any way necessary to salvation to hold the truth, or not to hold an error, touching the condition of these infants. This is certain, and we must believe, that God will not deal unjustly with them ; but how in particular he will deal with them, concerns not us, and therefore we need not much regard it. 5. Whereas you say the like of your sacrament of penance, you only say so, but your proofs are wanting. Lastly, Whereas you say — This rigour ought not to seem strange or unjust in God, but that we are rather to bless him for ordaining us to salvation by any means. — I answer, that it is true we are not to question the known will of God of injustice ; yet whether that which you pretend to be God's will be so indeed, or only your presumption, this I hope may be questioned lawfully and without presumption; and if we have occasion, we may safely put you in mind of Ezekiel's commination against all those who say, Thus saith the Lord, when they have no certain warrant or authority from him to do so. 8. Ad. §. 4. In the fourth paragraph you deliver this false and wicked doctrine — that for the procuring our own salvation, we are always bound, under pain of mortal sin, to take the safest way; but for avoiding sin we are not bound to do so, but may follow the opinion of any probable doctors, though the contrary way be cer- tainly free from sin, and theirs be doubtful. — Which doctrine, in the former part of it, is apparently false : for, though wisdom and charity to ourselves would persuade us always to do so, yet many times, that way, which to ourselves and our salvation is more full of hazard, is notwithstanding not only lawful, but more charitable, and more noble. For example, to fly from a persecution, and so to avoid the temptation of it, may be a safer way for a man's own salvation ; yet, I presume no man ought to condemn him of impiety, who should resolve not to use his liberty in this matter, but for God's greater glory, the greater honour of truth, and the greater confirmation of his brethren in the faith, choose to stand out the storm, and endure the fiery trial, rather than to avoid it ; rather to put his own soul to the hazard of a temptation, in hope of God's assistance to go through with it, than to balk the opportunity of n2 500 The Religion of Protestants a safer way doing God and his brethren so great a service. This part, there- fore, of this doctrine is manifestly untrue : the other, not only false, but impious ; for therein you plainly give us to understand, that in your judgment, a resolution to avoid sin, to the uttermost of our power, is no necessary means of salvation ; nay, that a man may resolve not to do so, without any danger of damnation. Therein you teach us, that we are to do more for the love of ourselves, and our own happiness, than for the love of God ; and in so doing con- tradict our Saviour, who expressly commands us, to love the Lord our God with all our heart, with all our soul, and with all our strength ; and hath taught us, that the love of God consists in avoiding sin, and keeping his commandments. Therein you di- rectly cross St. Paul's doctrine, who, though he were a very pro- bable doctor, and had delivered his judgment for the lawfulness of eating meats offered to idols ; yet he assures us, that he which should make scruple of doing so, and forbear upon his scruple, should not sin, but only be a weaker brother; whereas he, who should do it with a doubtful conscience, (though the action were by St. Paul warranted lawful, yet) should sin, and be condemned for so doing. You pretend indeed to be rigid defendeis, and stout champions, for the necessity of good works ; but the truth is, you speak lies in hypocrisy ; and, when the matter is well examined, will appear to make yourselves and your own functions necessary, but obedience to God unnecessary : which will appear to any man, who considers what strict necessity the scripture imposes upon all men, of effectual mortification of the habits of all vices, and effectual conversion to newness of life, and universal obedience ; and withal remembers that an act of attrition, which, you say, with priestly absolution is sufficient to salvation, is not mortification, which being a work of difficulty and time, cannot be performed in an instant. But, for the present, it appears sufficiently out of this im- pious assertion, which makes it absolutely necessary for men, either in act if it be possible, or if not, in desire, to be baptized and ab- solved by you, and that with intention ; and, in the meantime, warrants them, that for avoiding of sin, they may safely follow the uncertain guidance of vain man, who you cannot deny may either be deceived himself, or out of malice deceive them, and neglect the certain direction of God himself, and their own consciences. What wicked use is made of this doctrine, your own long experience can better inform you, than it is possible for me to do ; yet my own little conversation with you affords one memorable example to this purpose. For upon this ground I knew a young scholar in Doway, licensed by a great casuist to swear a thing as upon his certain knowledge, whereof he had yet no knowledge, but only a great presumption, because (forsooth) it was the opinion of one doctor that he might do so. And, upon the same ground, whensoever you shall come to have a prevailing party in this kingdom, and power sufficient to restore your religion, you may do it by deposing or killing the king, by blowing up of parliaments, and by rooting out all others of a different faith from you. Nay, this you may do, though in your own opinion it be unlawful, because Bellar- to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 501 mine,* a man with you of approved virtue, learning, and judgment, had declared his opinion for the lawfulness of it in saying — that want of power to maintain a rebellion, was the only reason, that the primitive christians did not rebel against the persecuting em- perors. By the same rule, seeing the priests, and scribes, and pharisees, men of greatest repute among the Jews for virtue, learn- ing, and wisdom, held it a lawful and a pious work to persecute Christ and his apostles, it was lawful for the people to follow their leaders ; for herein, according to your doctrine, they proceeded prudently, and, according to the conduct of opinion, maturely weighed and approved by men (as it seemed to them) of virtue, learning, and wisdom ; nay, by such as sat in Moses' chair, and of whom it was said, " Whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do ;" which universal you pretend is to be understood univer- sally, and without any restriction or limitation. And as lawful was it for the pagans to persecute the primitive christians, because Trajan and Pliny, men of great virtue and wisdom, were of this opinion. Lastly, That most impious and detestable doctrine (which by a foul calumny you impute to me, who abhor and detest it), that men may be saved in any religion, follows from this ground unavoidably. For certainly, religion is one of those things which is necessary, only because it is commanded ; for if none were com- manded, under pain of damnation, how could it be damnable to be of any, or to be of none 1 Neither can it be damnable to be of a false religion, unless it be a sin to be so. For neither are men saved by good luck, but only by obedience ; neither are they damned for their ill fortune, but for sin and disobedience. Death is the wages of nothing but sin ; and St. James sure intended to deliver the adequate cause of sin and death in these words ; " Lust, when it hath conceived, bringeth forth sin ; and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death." Seeing, therefore, in such things, according to your doctrine, it is sufficient for avoiding of sin, that we proceed prudently, and by the conduct of some probable opin- ion, maturely weighed and approved by men of learning, virtue, and wisdom : and, seeing neither Jews want their Gamaliels, nor pagans their Antonius's, nor any sect of christians such professors and maintainers of their several sects, as are esteemed by the peo- ple which know no better (and that very reasonably), men of virtue, learning, and wisdom ; it follows evidently, that the embracing their religion proceeds upon such reason as may warrant their ac- tion to be prudent ; and this (you say) is sufficient for the avoiding of sin, and therefore, certainly for avoiding damnation ; for that in human affairs and discourse evidence and certainty cannot be * Bellar. contr. Barcl. c. vii. in 7. c. Refutare conatur Barcl. verba ilia Romuli ; Veteres illos imperatores, Constantium, Valentem, el caeteros, non ideo toleravit eccle- sia, quod legitime successissent, sed quod illos sine populi detrimento coercere non poterat. Et miratur hoc idem scripsisse Bellar. 1. v. de Pontif. c. vii. Sed ut magis miretur, sciat hoc idem sensisse St. Thorn. 2. 2. q. 2, art. 2, ad. 1. Ubi dicit eccle- siam tolcrasse, ut fideles obedirent Juliano Apostatae, quia in sui novitate nondum habe- bant vires compescendi principes terrenos. Et postea : Sanctus Greg-orius dicit, Nullum adversus Juliani persecutionem fuisse remedium praeter lacrynias, quoniam non habebat ecclesia vires, quibus illius tyrannidi resistere posset. 502 The Religion of Protestants a safer way always expected. I have stood the longer upon the refutation of this doctrine, not only because it is impious, and because bad use is made of it, and worse may be, but also, because the contrary position, — that men are bound for avoiding sin always to take the safest way, is a fair and sure foundation for a clear confutation of the main conclusion, which in this chapter you labour in vain to prove; and a certain proof, that in regard of the precept of charity towards one's self and of obedience to God, papists (unless ignorance excuse them) are in a state of sin as long as they remain in subjec- tion to the Roman church. 9. For if the safer way for avoiding sin be also the safer way for avoiding damnation, then certainly it will not be hard to deter- mine, that the way of protestants must be more secure, and the Roman way more dangerous. Take but into your consideration these ensuing controversies; whether it be lawful to worship pic- tures? To picture the Trinity? To invocate saints and angels? To deny laymen the cup in the sacrament ? To adore the sacra- ment ? To prohibit certain orders of men and women to marry 1 To celebrate the public service of God in a language which the assistants generally understand not ? And you will not choose but confess, that in all these you are on the more dangerous side for the committing of sin, and we on that which is more secure. For in all these things, if we say true, you do that which is impious. On the other side, if you were in the right, yet we might be secure enough ; for we should only not do something which you confess not necessary to be done. We pretend, and are ready to justify out of principles agreed upon between us, that in all these things you violate the manifest commandments of God ; and allege such texts of scripture against you, as, if you would weigh them with any indifference, would put the matter out of question ; but cer- tainly you cannot with any modesty deny, but that at least they make it questionable. On the other side, you cannot with any face pretend, and if you should, know not how to go about to prove, that there is any necessity of doing any of these things ; that it is unlawful not to worship pictures, not to picture the Trinity, not to invocate saints and angels, to give all men the entire sacrament, not to adore the eucharist, not to prohibit marriage, not to cele- brate divine service in an unknown tongue ; I say, you neither do nor can pretend, that there is any law of God which enjoins us, no, nor so much as an evangelical council that advises us, to do any of these things. Now " where no law is, there can be no sin ; for sin is the transgression of the law." It remains, therefore, that if your church should forbear to do these things, she must undoubt- edly herein be free from all danger and suspicion of sin ; whereas your acting of them must be, if not certainly impious, without all contradiction questionable and dangerous. I conclude, therefore, that which was to be concluded, that if the safer way for avoiding sin be also (as most certainly it is) the safer way for avoiding dam- nation, then certainly the way of protestants must be more safe, and the Roman way more dangerous. You will say, I know, that these things being by your church concluded lawful, we are obliged to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 503 by God, though not to do, yet to approve, them : at least in your judgment we are so, and therefore our condition is as questionable as yours. I answer, the authority of your church is no common principle agreed upon between us, and therefore from that you are not to dispute against us. We might press you with our judgment as well and as justly as you do us with yours. Besides, this very thing, that your church hath determined these things lawful, and commanded the approbation of them, is that whereof she is accused by us, and we maintain you have done wickedly, or at least very dangerously, in so determining; because in these very determina- tions, you have forsaken that way which was secure from sin, and chosen that which you cannot but know to be very questionable and doubtful ; and, consequently, have forsaken the safe way to heaven, and taken a way which is full of danger. And, therefore, although, if your obedience to your church were questioned, you might fly for shelter to your church's determinations, yet when these determinations are accused, methinks they should not be alleged in defence of themselves. But you will say, your church is infallible, and therefore her determinations are not unlawful. — Ans. They that accuse your church of error, you may be sure do question her infallibility : shew therefore where it is written, that your church is infallible, and the dispute will be ended. But, till you do so, give me leave rather to conclude thus — your church, in many of her determinations, chooses not that way which is most secure from sin, and therefore not the safest way to salvation ; than vainly to imagine her infallible, and thereupon to believe, though she teach not the surest way to avoid sin, yet she teaches the cer- tainest way to obtain salvation. 10. In the close of this number, you say as follows: — If it may appear, though not certain, yet at least probable, that protestancy unrepented destroys salvation, and withal, that there is a safer way, it will follow, that they are obliged by the law of charity to embrace that safe way. — Ans. Make this appear, and I will never persuade any man to continue a protestant; for, if I should, I should per- suade him to continue a fool. But, after all these prolix discourses, still we see you are at — if it may appear: from whence, without all ifs and ands, that appears sufficiently which I said in the beginning of the chapter, that the four first paragraphs of this chapter are wholly spent in an unnecessary introduction unto that which never by any man in his right wits was denied, that men, in wisdom and charity to themselves, are to take the safest way to eternal salva- tion. 11. Ad. §. 5. In the fifth you begin to make some shew of argu- ing, and tell us, that protectants have reason to doubt in what case they stand, from what you have said about the church's universal infallibility, and of her being judge of controversies, &c. — Ans. From all that which you have said, they have reason only to con- clude, that you have nothing to say. They have as much reason to doubt, whether there can be any motion, from what Zeno says in Aristotle's physics, as to doubt from what you have said, whether the Roman church may possibly err. For this, I dare say, that 504 The Religion of Protestants a safer way not the weakest of Zeno's arguments but is stronger than the strong- est of yours, and that you would be more perplexed in answering any one of them, than I have been in answering all yours. You are pleased to repeat two or three of them in this section, and in all probability so wise a man as you are, if he would repeat any, would repeat the best; and, therefore, if I desire the reader by these to judge of the rest, I shall desire but ordinary justice. 12. The first of them being put into form, stands thus — every least error in faith destroys the nature of faith : it is certain, that some protestants do err ; and therefore they want the substance of faith. The major of which syllogism I have formerly confuted by unanswerable arguments out of one of your own best authors, who shews plainly that he hath amongst you, as strange as you make it, many other abettors. Besides, if it were true, it would conclude, that either you or the dominicans have no faith, inasmuch as you oppose one another as much as arminians and calvinists. 13. The second argument stands thus: — Since all protestants pretend the like certainty, it is clear, that none of them have any certainty at all. Which argument, if it were good, then what can hinder but this must also be so; since protestants and papists pre- tend the like certainty, it is clear, that none of them have any cer- tainty at all ! And this too : Since all christians pretend the like certainty, it is clear, that none of them have any certainty at all F And, thirdly, this : Since men of all religions pretend a like cer- tainty, it is clear, that none of them have any at all ! And, lastly, this : Since ofttimes they, which are abused with a specious para- logism, pretend the like certainty with them which demonstrate, it is clear, that none of them have any certainty at all ! Certainly, sir, zeal and the devil did strangely blind you, if you did not see, that these horrid impieties were the immediate consequences of your positions; if you did see it, and yet would set them down, you deserve a worse censure. Yet such as these are all the arguments wherewith you conceive yourself to have proved undoubtedly, that protestants have reason at least to doubt in what case they stand. Neither am I afraid to venture my life upon it, that yourself shall not choose so much as one out of all the pack, which 1 will not shew before indifferent judges, either to be impertinent to the question, inconsequent in the deduction, or grounded upon some false, or at least uncertain, foundation. 14. Your third and fourth argument may be thus put into one : — Protestants cannot tell what points in particular be fundamental; therefore they cannot tell whether they or their brethren do not err fundamentally, and whether their difference be not fundamental. — Both which deductions I have formerly shewed to be most incon- sequent ; for knowing the scripture to contain all fundamentals, (though many more points besides,' which makes it difficult to say precisely what is fundamental, and what not ; knowing this, I say, and believing it,) what can hinder but that 1 may be well assured that 1 believe all fundamentals, and that all who believe the scrip- ture sincerely, as well as 1, do not differ from me in any thing fun- damental? to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 505 15. In the close of this section, you say that you omit to add that we want the sacrament of repentance, instituted for the remis- sion of sins ; or at least we must confess that we hold it not neces- sary : and yet our own brethren the century writers acknowledge, that in the time of Cyprian and Tertullian, private confession even of thoughts was used, and that it was then commanded and thought necessary ; and then our ordination (you say), is very doubtful, and all that depends upon it. — Jins. I also omit to answer, 1. that your brother Rhenanus acknowledges the contrary, and assures us, that the confession then required, and in use, was public, and before the church, and that your auricular confession was not then in the world; for which his mouth is stopped by your Index Expurga- torius. 2. That your brother Arcadius acknowledges, that the eucharist was in Cyprian's time given to infants, and esteemed necessary, or at least profitable for them ; and the giving it shews no less: and now I would know, whether you will acknowledge your church bound to give it, and to esteem so of it ? 3. That it might be then commanded, and being commanded, be thought necessary, and yet be but a church constitution. Neither will I deny, if the present church could, and would, so order it, that the abuses of it might be prevented, and conceiving it profitable, should enjoin the use of it, but that, being commanded, it would be necessary. 4. Concerning our ordinations, besides that I have proved it impossible, that they should be so doubtful as yours, according to your own principles; I answer, that experience shews them certainly sufficient to bring men to faith and repentance, and consequently to salvation ; and that if there were any secret defect of any thing necessary, which we cannot help, God will certainly supply it. 16. Ad. §. 6. In the sixth you say — You will not repeat, but only put us again in mind, that unless the Roman church were the true church, there was no visible church upon earth ; a thing so manifest, that protestants themselves confess, &c. — Ans. Neither will I repeat, but only put you in mind, that you have not proved that there is any necessity that there should be any true church in your sense visible; nor, if there were, that there was no other be- sides the Roman. For as for the confession of protestants, which here you insist upon, it is evident out of their own words cited by yourself, that by the whole world, they meant only the greatest part of it, which is an usual figure of speech, and never intended to deny, that besides the church then reigning and triumphing in this world, there was another militant church, other christians visible enough, though persecuted and oppressed. Nor, thirdly, do you here make good so much as with one fallacy, that if the Roman church were then the visible church, it must needs be now the only or the safer way to heaven ; and yet the connexion of this consequence was very necessary to be shewn. For, for aught I know, it was not impossible that it might then be the only visible church, and yet now a very dangerous way to heaven, or perhaps none at all. * 17. Afterwards you vainly pretend, that all Roman catholics, 43 506 The Religion of Protestants a safer way not one excepted, profess, that protestancy unrepented destroys salvation. From which generality we may except two at least to my knowledge; and those are, yourself and Franciscus de Sancta Clara, who assures us,* that ignorance and repentance may excuse a protestant from damnation, though dving in his error. And this is all the charity, which by your own confession also, the most fa- vourable protestants allow to papists; and, therefore, with strange repugnance to yourself, you subjoin, that these are the men whom we must hold not to err damnably, unless we will destroy our own church and salvation. Whereas, as I have said before, though you were Turks and pagans, we might be good christians. Neither is it necessary for perpetuating of a church before Luther, that your errors even then should not be damnable, but only not actu- ally damning, to some ignorant souls among you. In vain therefore do you make such tragedies as here you do ! In vain you conjure us with fear and trembling, to consider these things! We have con- sidered them again and again, and looked upon them on both sides, and find neither terror nor truth in them. Let children and fools be terrified with bugbears : men of understanding will not regard them. 18. Ad. §. 7 — 11. Your whole discourse in your five next para- graphs I have in the beginning of this chapter fully confuted, by saying, that it stands altogether upon the false foundation of this affected mistake, that we do and must confess the Roman church free from damnable error; which will presently be apparent to any one who considers, that the seventh and tenth are nothing but Dr. Potter's words, and that in the other three you obtrude upon us this crambe no fewer than seven times. May you be pleased to look back to your own book, and you shall find it so as I have said ; and that at least in a hundred other places, you make your advantage of this false imputation: which, when you have observed, and withal considered, that yourself plainly intimate, that Dr. Potter's discourses, which here you censure, would be good and concluding, if we did not (as we do not) free you from damnable error ; I hope you will acknowledge, that my vouchsafing these sections the honour of any farther answer, is a great supererogation in point of civility. Never- theless, partly that I may the more ingratiate myself with you, but especially that I may stop their mouths, who will be apt to say, that every word of yours, which I should omit to speak to, is an unan- swerable argument, I will hold my purpose of answering them more punctually and particularly. 19. First, then, to your little parenthesis, which you interline among Dr. Potter's words, §. 7, That any small error in faith de- stroys all faith (to omit what hath been said before), I answer here, what is proper for this place, that St. Augustine, whose authority is here stood upon, thought otherwise: he conceived the donatists to hold some error in faith, and yet not to have no faith. His words of them to this purpose are most pregnant and evident : " You are with us (saith he to the donatists, Ep. 48,) in baptism, in the creed, * In problem 15 and 16. to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 507 and the other sacraments:" and, again, Super gestis cum emerit, 1 Thou hast proved to me that thou hast faith ; prove to me, like- wise, that thou hast charity." Parallel to which words are these of Optatus:* " Amongst us and you is one ecclesiastical conversa- tion, common lessons, the same faith, the same sacraments." Where, by the way, we may observe, that in the judgment of these fathers, even donatists, though heretics and schismatics, gave true ordination, the true sacrament of matrimony, true sacramental absolution, con- firmation, the true sacrament of the eucharist, true extreme unction; or else (choose you whether) some of these were not then esteemed sacraments. But for ordination, whether he held it a sacrament or no, certainly he held, that it remained with them entire; for so he says in express terms, in his book against Parmenianus's Epistle.f Which doctrine, if you can reconcile with the present doctrine of the Roman church, Eris mihi magnus Apollo. 20. Whereas, in the beginning of the eighth section — you deny, that your argument drawn from our confessing the possibility of your salvation is for simple people alone, but for all men — I an- swer, certainly whosoever is moved with it, must be so simple as to think this a good and a concluding reason : some ignorant men in the Roman church may be saved, by the confession of protestants (which is indeed all that they confess) ; therefore, it is safe for me to be of the Roman church : and he that does think so, what rea- son is there why he should not think this as good? Ignorant pro- testants may be saved, by the confession of papists (by name Mr. K.) ; therefore, it is safe for me to be of the protestant church. Whereas you say — that this your argument is grounded upon an inevitable necessity for us, either to grant salvation to your church, or to entail certain damnation upon our own, because ours can have no being till Luther, unless yours be supposed to have been the true church — I answer, this cause is no cause ; for, first, as Luther had no being before Luther, and yet he was when he was, though he was not before ; so there is no repugnance in the terms, but that there might be a true church after Luther, though there were none for some ages before; as, since Columbus's time there have been christians in America, though before there were none for many ages. For neither do you shew, neither does it appear, that the generation of churches is univocal, that nothing but a church can possibly beget a church ; nor that the present being of a true church depends necessarily upon the perpetuity of a church in all ages, any more than the present being of peripatetics or stoics depends upon a perpetual pedigree of them. For though I at no hand deny the church's perpetuity, yet I see nothing in your book to make me understand, that the truth of the present depends upon it, nor any thing that can hinder, but that a false church (God's providence over- watching and over-ruling) may preserve the means of confuting their own heresies, and reducing men to truth, and so raising a true church ; I mean the integrity and the authority of the word of God with men. Thus the Jews preserve means to make * Lib. v. prope initium. t Lib. ii. c. iii. 508 The Religion of Protestants a safer way men christians, and papists preserve means to make men protes- tants, and protestants (which you say are a false church) do, as you pretend, preserve means to make men papists ; that is, their own bibles, out of which you pretend to be able to prove that they are to be papists. Secondly, you shew not, nor does it appear, that the perpetuity of the church depends on the truth of yours. For though you talk vainly, as if you were the only men in the world before Luther, yet the world knows that this is but talk; and that there were other christians besides you, which might have per- petuated the church, though you had not been. Lastly, you show not, neither doth it appear, that your being acknowledged in some sense a true church, doth necessarily import, that we must grant salvation to it, unless by it you understand the ignorant members of it, which is a very unusual synecdoche. 21. Whereas you say — that the catholics never granted that the donatists had a true church, or might be saved : — I answer, St. Augustine himself granted, that those among them who sought the truth, being " ready, when they found it, to correct their error, were not heretics; and, therefore, notwithstanding their error, might be saved." And this is all the charity that protestants allow to papists." 22. Whereas you say, that Dr. Potter, having cited out of St. Augustine the words of the catholics, that the donatists had true baptism, when he comes to the contrary words of the donatists, adds, " no church, no salvation :" — Ans. You wrong Dr. Potter, who pretends not to cite St. Augustine's formal words, but only his sense, which in him is complete and full for that purpose whereto it is alleged by Dr. Potter. His words are,* Petilianus dixit, Venite ad ecclesiam, populi, et aufugite traditores, si perire non vultis : " Petilian saith, come to the church, ye people, and fly from the traditores, if ye will not be damned; for that ye may know, that they, being guilty, esteem very well of our faith, behold, I baptize these whom they have infected, but they receive those whom we have baptized." Where, it is plain, that Petilian by his words makes the donatists the church, and excludes the catholics from salvation absolutely. And, therefore, " no church, no salvation," was not Dr. Potter's addition. And, whereas you say — the catho- lics never yielded, that among the donatists there was a true church, and hope of salvation ; — I say, it appears by what I have alleged out of St. Augustine, that they yielded both these were among the donatists, as much as we yield them to be among the papists. As for Dr. Potter's acknowledgment, that they maintained an error in the matter and nature of it heretical; this proves them but material heretics, whom you do not exclude from possibility of salvation. So that, all things considered, this argument must be much more forcible from the donatists against catholics, than from papists against protestants, in regard protestants grant papists no more hope of salvation than papists grant protestants: whereas the donatists excluded absolutely all but their own party from hope of salvation, so far as to account them no christians that were not of * Cont. lit. Petil. 1. ii. c. cviii. to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 509 it; the catholics meanwhile accounting them brethren, and freeing those among them from the imputation of heresy, who, being in error, qucerebant cauta solicitudine veritatem, corrigi parati, cum invenerint. 23. Whereas you say — that the argument for the certainty of their baptism (because it was confessed good by catholics, whereas the baptism of catholics was not confessed by them to be good) is not so good as yours, touching the certainty of your salvation grounded on the confession of protestants, because we confess there is no damnable error in the doctrine or practice of the Roman church: — I answer, no; we confess no such matter, and though you say so a hundred times, no repetition will make it true. We profess, plainly, that many damnable errors, plainly repugnant to the precepts of Christ, both ceremonial and moral, more plainly than this of rebaptization, and therefore more damnable, are be- lieved and professed by you. And, therefore, seeing this is the only disparity you can devise, and this is vanished, it remains, that as good an answer as the catholics made touching the certainty of their baptism, as good may we make, and with much more evidence of reason, touching the security and certainty of our salvation. 24. By the way, I desire to be informed, seeing you affirm — that rebaptizing those whom heretics had baptized was a sacrilege, and a profession of a damnable heresy, when it began to be so? If from the beginning it were so, then was Cyprian a sacrilegious professor of a damnable heresy, and yet a saint and a martyr. If it were not so, then did your church excommunicate Firmilian and others, and separate from them without sufficient ground of excommunica- tion or separation, which is schismatical. You see what difficulties you run into, on both sides; choose whether you will, but certainly both can hardly be avoided. 25. Whereas again, in this section, you obtrude upon us — that we cannot but confess, that your doctrine contains no damnable error, and that yours is so certainly a true church, that, unless yours be true, we cannot pretend any ; — I answer, there is in this neither truth nor modesty to outface us, that we cannot but con- fess what indeed we cannot but deny. For my part, if I were upon the rack, I persuade myself I should not confess the one nor the other. 26. Whereas again presently you add — that Dr. Potter grants we should be guilty of schism, if we did cut off your church from the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation : — I have shewed above, that he grants no such matter. He says, indeed, that our not doing so frees us from the imputation of schism; and from hence you sophistically infer, that he must grant, if we did so, we were schismatics ; and then make your reader believe, that this is Dr. Potter's confession, it being indeed your own false collection. For as every one, that is not a papist, is not a Jesuit ; and yet not every one, that is a papist, is a Jesuit: as whosoever comes not into England, comes not to London ; and yet many may come into England, and not come to London : as whosoever is not a man, is not a king; and yet manv are men, that are not kings: so likewise 43* 510 The Religion of Protestants a safer way it may be certain, that whosoever does not so, is free from schism ; and yet they that do so, (if there be sufficient cause) may not be guilty of it. 27. Whereas you pretend to wonder, that the doctor did not answer the argument of the donatists, which he says is all one with yours, but refers you to St. Augustine, there to read it, as if every one carried with him a library, or were able to examine the places in St. Augustine: — I answer, the parity of the arguments was, that which the doctor was to declare, whereunto it was imper- tinent what the answer was; but sufficient it was to shew, that the donatists' argument, which you would never grant good, was yet as good as yours, and therefore yours could not be good. Now to this purpose, as the concealing the answer was no way advan- tageous, so to produce it was not necessary ; and therefore he did you more service than he was bound to, in referring you to St. Augustine for an answer to it. Whereas you say, he had reason to conceal it, because it makes directly against himself; I say, it is so far from doing so, that it will serve in proportion to the argu- ment, as fitly as if it had been made for it : for as St. Augustine says, that catholics approve the doctrine of donatists, but abhor their heresy of rebaptization ; so we say, that we approve those fundamental and simple necessary truths which you retain, by which some good souls among you may be saved, but abhor your many superstitions and heresies. And, as he says that gold is good, yet ought not to be sought for among a company of thieves; and baptism good, but not to be sought for in the conventicles of donatists; so say we, that the truths you retain are good, and, as we hope, sufficient to bring good ignorant souls among you to sal- vation ; yet are they not to be sought for in the conventicles of papists, who hold with them a mixture of many vanities, and many impieties. For, as for our freeing you from damnable heresy, and yielding you salvation, (which stone here again you stumble at) neither he nor any other protestant is guilty of it; and, therefore, you must confess, that this very answer will serve protestants against this charm of papists, as well as St. Augustine against the donatists, and that indeed it was not Dr. Potter, but you, that without a sarcasm had reason to conceal it. 28. The last piece of Dr. Potter's book, which you are pleased to take notice of in this first part of yours, is an argument he makes in your behalf, p. 79 of his book, where he makes you speak thus : if protestants believe the religion of papists to be a safe way to heaven, why do they not follow it? This argument you like not, because many things may be good, and yet not necessary to be embraced by every body ; and, therefore, scoff at it, and call it an argument of his own, a wise argument, a wise demand ; and then ask of him, what he thinks of it being framed thus; our religiofl is safe, even by your confession ; and therefore, you ought to grant that all may embrace it. — And yet farther thus : among different religions one only can be safe. But yours, by our own confession, is safe : whereas you hold, that in ours there is no hope of salva- tion : therefore we ought to embrace yours. Ans. I have advised to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 511 "with him, and am to tell you from him, that he thinks reasonably well of the arguments, but very ill of him that makes them, as affirming so often without shame and conscience, what he cannot but know to be plainly false ; and his reason is, because he is so far from confessing, or giving you any ground to pretend he does con- fess, that your religion is safe,. for all that are of it, from whence only it will follow, that all may safely embrace it; that in this very place, from which you take these words, he professeth plainly — that it is extremely dangerous, if not certainly damnable, to all such as profess it, when either they do, or, if their hearts were upright, and not perversely obstinate, might believe the contrary ; and that, for us, who are convinced in conscience, that she (the Roman church) errs in many things, it lies upon us, even under pain of damnation, to forsake her in those errors: and though here you take upon you a shew of great rigour, and will seem to hold that in our way there is no hope of salvation ; yet formerly you have been more liberal of your charity towards us, and will needs vie and contend with Dr. Potter, which of the two shall be more cha- ritable, assuring us* — that you allow protestants as much charitv as Dr. Potter spares you, for whom he makes ignorance the best hope of salvation. — And now I appeal to any indifferent reader, whether our disavowing to confess you free from damnable error, were not (as I pretend) a full confutation of all that you say in these five foregoing paragraphs : and, as for you, I wonder what answer, what evasion, what shift you can devise to clear yourself from dis- honesty, for imputing to him, almost a hundred times, this acknow- ledgment, which he never makes, but very often, and that so plainly that you take notice of it, professeth the contrary. 29. The best defence that possibly can be made for you, I con- ceive, is this ; that you were led into this error, by mistaking a supposition of a confession for a confession, a rhetorical conces- sion of the doctor's for a positive assertion. He says indeed of your errors — Though in the issue they be not damnable to them which believe as they profess ; yet for us to profess what we be- lieve not, were without question damnable. — But to say, though your errors be not damnable, we may not profess them, is not to say your errors are not damnable, but only though they be not. As if you should say, though the church err in points not fundamental, yet you may not separate from it; or, though we do err in believ- ing Christ really present, yet our error frees us from idolatry ; or, as if a protestant should say, though you do not commit idolatry in adoring the host, yet being uncertain of the priest's intention to consecrate, at least you expose yourself to the danger of it ; 1 pre- sume you would not think it fairly done, if any man should inter- pret either this last speech as an acknowledgment, that you do not commit idolatry, or the former as confessions, that you do err in points not fundamental, that you do err in believing the real pre- sence. And, therefore, you ought not so to have mistaken Dr. Potter's words, as if he had confessed the errors of your church not damnable, when he says no more but this — though they be so — or, * Chap. i. §. 4. 512 The Religion of Protestants a safer way suppose, or put the case they be so, yet being errors, we that know them, may not profess them to be divine truths. Yet this mistake might have been pardonable, had not Dr. Potter in many places of his book, by declaring his judgment touching the quality and malignity of your errors, taken away from you all occasion of error. But now that he says plainly — that your church hath many ways played the harlot, and in that regard deserved a bill of divorce from Christ, and the detestation of christians, p. 11. That for that mass of errors and abuses in judgment and practice, which is proper to her, and wherein she differs from us, we judge a reconciliation impossible, and to us (who are convicted in conscience of her cor- ruptions) damnable, p. 20. That popery is the contagion or plague of the church, p. 60. That we cannot, we dare not, communicate with her in her public liturgy, which is manifestly polluted with gross superstition, p. 08. That they who in former ages died in the church of Rome, died in many sinful errors, p. 78. That they that have understanding and means to discover their errors, and neglect to use them, he dares not to flatter them with so easy a censure as to give them hope of salvation, p. 79. That the way of the Roman religion is not safe, but very dangerous, if not certainly damnable, to such as profess it when they believe (or, if their hearts were upright, and not perversely obstinate, might believe) the contrary, p. 79. That your church is but, in some sense, a true church; and your errors only to some men not damnable ; and that we, who are convinced in conscience, that she errs in many things, are, under pain of damnation, to forsake her in those errors: — Seeing, I say, he says all this so plainly, and so frequently, cer- tainly your charging him falsely with this acknowledgment, and building a great part not only of your discourse in this chapter, but of your whole book upon it, possibly it may be palliated with some excuse, but it can no way be defended with any just apology : especially seeing you yourself, more than once or twice, take notice of these his severer censures of your church, and the errors of it, and make your advantage of them. In the first number of your first chapter, you set down three of the former places ; and from thence infer, that as you affirm protestancy un- repented destroys salvation, so Dr. Potter pronounces the like heavy doom against Roman catholics: and again, §. 4 of the same chapter — We allow protestants as much charity as Dr. Potter spares us, for whom he makes ignorance the best hope of salvation. — And Chap. V. §. 41, you have these words: " It is very strange, that you judge us extremely uncharitable in saying, protestants cannot be saved, while yourself avouch the same of all learned ca- tholics, whom ignorance cannot excuse !" Thus out of the same mouth you blow hot and cold ; and, one while, when it is for your purpose, you profess Dr. Potter censures your errors as heavily as you do ours; which is very true, for he gives hope of salvation to none among you, but to those whose ignorance was the cause of their error, and sin no cause of their ignorance ; and, presently after, when another project comes in your head, you make his words softer than oil towards you : you pretend he does and must to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 513 confess, that your doctrine contains no damnable error, that your church is certainly a true church, that your way to heaven is a safe way ; and all these acknowledgments you set down simple and absolute, without any restriction or limitation ; whereas in the doctor they are all so qualified, that no knowing papist can promise himself any security or comfort from them. " We confess (saith he) the church of Rome to be, in some sense, a true church, and her errors to some men not damnable ; we believe her religion safe, that is, by God's great mercy, not damnable, to some such as be- lieve what they profess ; but we believe it not safe, but very dan- gerous, if not certainly damnable, to such as profess it, when they believe (or, if their hearts were upright, and not perversely obsti- nate, might believe) the contrary." Observe, I pray you, these restraining terms which formerly you have dissembled: — A true church, in some sense, not damnable to some men ; a safe way, that is, by God's great mercy, not damnable to some. — And then, seeing you have pretended these confessions to be absolute, which are thus plainly limited, how can you avoid the imputation of an egregious sophister ? You quarrel with the doctor, in the end of your preface, for using in his book such ambiguous terms as these — in some sort, in some sense, in some degree ; and desire him, if he make any reply, either to forbear them, or to tell you roundly in what sort, in what sense, in what degree, he understands these and the like mincing phrases. But the truth is, he hath not left them so ambiguous and undetermined as you pretend : but told you plainly, in what sense your church may pass for a true church, viz. in regard we may hope, that she retains those truths which are simply, absolutely, and indispensably necessary to salvation, which may suffice to bring those good souls to heaven, who wanted means of discovering their errors. This is the charitable construction in which you may pass for a church ; and to what men your religion may be safe, and your errors not damnable, viz. to such whom ignorance may excuse. And, therefore, he hath more cause to complain of you, for quoting his words without those qualifications, than you to find fault with him for using of them. 30. That your discourse in the 12th §. presseth you as forcibly as protestants, I have shewed above. I add here, 1. Whereas you say, that " faith, according to your rigid calvinists, is either so strong, that, once had, it can never be lost; or so more than weak, and so much nothing, that it can never be gotten;" that these are words without sense. Never any calvinist affirmed that faith was so weak, and so much nothing, that it can never be gotten ; but it seems you wanted matter to make up your antithesis; and, therefore, were resolved to speak empty words, rather than lose your figure. -Crimina rasis Librat in antithetis, doctas posuisse figuras Laudatur . 2. That there is no calvinist that will deny the truth of this pro- position, Christ died for all ; nor subscribe to that sense of it, which your dominicans put upon it ; neither can you, with coherence K K 514 The Religion of Protestants a safer way to the received doctrine of your own society, deny that they, as well as the calvinists, take away the distinction of sufficient and effectual grace, and indeed hold none to be sufficient, but only that which is effectual. 3. Whereas you say — They cannot make their calling certain by good works, who do certainly believe, that before any good works they are justified, and justified by faith alone, and by that faith whereby they certainly believe they are justified. — I answer, there is no protestant but believes, that faith, repentance, and universal obedience, are necessary to the obtaining of God's favour and eternal happiness. This being granted, the rest is but a speculative controversy, a question about words, which would quickly vanish, but that men affect not to understand one another. As if a company of physicians were in consultation, and should all agree, that three medicines, and no more, were necessary for the recovery of the patient's health ; this were sufficient for his direction towards the recovery of his health; though concerning the proper and specifical effects of these three medicines, there should be amongst them as many differences as men ; so likewise, being generally at accord, that these three things, faith, hope, and charity, are neces- sary to salvation, so that, whosoever wants any of them, cannot obtain it, and he which hath them all, cannot fail of it ; is it not very evident, that they are sufficiently agreed for men's directions to eternal salvation ? And, seeing charity is a full comprehension of all good works, they requiring charity as a necessary qualifica- tion in him that will be saved, what sense is there in saying — they cannot make their calling certain by good works? — They know what salvation is as well as you, and have as much reason to desire it; they believe it as heartily as you, that there is no good work but shall have its proper reward, and that there is no possibility of obtaining the eternal reward, without good works ; and why then may not this doctrine be a sufficient incitement and provocation unto good works? 31. You say — that they certainly believe that before any good works they are justified: but this is a calumny ; there is no protes- tant but requires to justification remission of sins, and to remission of sins they all require repentance, and repentance, I may presume, may not be denied the name of a good work ; being, indeed, if it be rightly understood, and according to the sense of the word in scrip- ture, an effectual conversion from all sin to all holiness. But though it be taken for mere sorrow for sins past, and a bare purpose of amendment, yet even this is a good work ; and therefore protestants, requiring this to remission of sins, and remission of sins to justifica- tion, cannot with candour be pretended to believe, that they are justified before any good work. 32. You say — they believe themselves justified by faith alone, and that by that faith whereby they believe themselves justified. Some peradventure do so; but withal they believe, that that faith which is alone, and unaccompanied with sincere and universal obedience, is to be esteemed not faith, but presumption, and is at no hand sufficient to justification ; that though charity be not im- puted unto justification, yet it is required as a necessary disposi- to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 515 tion in the person to be justified ; and that though, in regard of the imperfection of it, no man can be justified by it, yet that, on the other side, no man can be justified without it. So that, upon the whole matter, a man may truly and safely say, that the doc- trine of these protestants, taken all together, is not a doctrine of liberty, not a doctrine that turns hope into presumption and carnal security ; though it may justly be feared, that many licentious per- sons, taking it by halves, have made this wicked use of it. For my part, 1 do heartily wish, that by public authority it were so ordered, that no man should ever preach or print this doctrine, that faith alone justifies, unless he joins this together with it, that universal obedience is necessary to salvation ; and, besides, that those chap- ters of St. Paul, which entreat of justification by faith, without the works of the law, were never read in the church, but when the 13th chapter of the first epistle to the Corinthians, concerning the absolute necessity of charity, should be, to prevent misprision, read together with them. 33. Whereas you say — that some protestants do expressly affirm the former point to be the soul of the church, &c. and that, there- fore, they must want the theological virtue of hope; and that none can have true hope, while they hope to be saved in their commu- nion : — I answer, they have great reason to believe the doctrine of justification by faith only, a point of great weight and importance, if it be rightly understood : that is, they have reason to esteem it a principal and necessary duty of a christian, to place his hope of justification and salvation, not in the perfection of his own right- eousness (which, if it be imperfect, will not justify), but only in the mercies of God, through Christ's satisfaction ; and yet, notwith- standing this, nay, the rather for this, may preserve themselves in the right temper of good christians, which is a happy mixture, and sweet composition, of confidence and fear. If this doctrine be otherwise expounded than I have here expounded, I will not un- dertake the justification of it; only I will say (that which I may do truly), that I never knew any protestant such a soli-jidian, but that he did believe these divine truths: — that he must make his calling certain by good works; that he must work out his salva- tion with fear and trembling; and that, while he does not so, he can have no well-grounded hope of salvation : — I say, I never met with any who did not believe these divine truths, and that with a more firm, and a more unshaken assent, than he does, that himself is predestinate, and that he is justified by believing himself jus- tified. I never met with any such, who if he saw there was a necessity to do either, would not rather forego his belief of these doctrines than the former; these which he sees disputed, and con- tradicted, and opposed, with a great multitude of very potent argu- ments, than those, which, being the express words of scripture, whosoever should call into question, could not with any modesty pretend to the title of christian. And, therefore, there is no reason but we may believe, that their full assurance of the former doctrine doth very well qualify their persuasion of the latter; and that the former (as also the lives of many of them do sufficiently testify) are kk2 516 The Religion of Protestants a safer way more effectual to temper their hope, and to keep it at a stay of a filial and modest assurance of God's favour, built upon the con- science of his love and fear, than the latter can be to swell and puff them up into vain confidence and ungrounded presumption. This reason, joined with our experience of the honest and religious conversation of many men of this opinion, is a sufficient ground for charity, to hope well of their hope ; and to assure ourselves, that it cannot be offensive, but rather most acceptable to God, if, not- withstanding this diversity of opinion, we embrace each other with the strict embraces of love and communion. To you and your church we leave it to separate christians from the church, and to proscribe them from heaven upon trivial and trifling causes. As for ourselves, we conceive a charitable judgment of our brethren and their errors, though untrue, much more pleasing to God than a true judgment, if it be uncharitable; and, therefore, shall always choose (if we do err) to err on the milder and more merciful part, and rather to retain those in our communion, which deserve to be ejected, than eject those that deserve to be retained. 34. Lastly, whereas you say — that seeing protestants differ about the point of justification, you must needs infer, that they want unity in faith, and consequently all faith; and, then, that they can- not agree what points are fundamental : — I answer to the first oi these inferences, that as well might you infer it upon Victor, bishop of Rome, and Polycrates, upon Stephen, bishop of Rome, and St. Cyprian, inasmuch as it is undeniably evident, that what one of those esteemed necessary to salvation, the other esteemed not so. But points of doctrine (as all other things) are as they are, and not as they are esteemed : neither can a necessary point be made un- necessary, by being so accounted, or an unnecessary point be made necessary, by being overvalued. But as the ancient philosophers (whose different opinions about the soul of man you may read in Aristotle de Anima, and Cicero's Tusculan Questions), notwith- standing their diverse opinions touching the nature of the soul, yet all of them had souls, and souls of the same nature; or, as those physicians, who dispute whether the brain or heart be the princi- pal part of a man, yet all of them have brains, and have hearts, and herein agree sufficiently; so likewise, though some protestants esteem that doctrine the soul of the church, wdiich others do not so highly value, yet this hinders not, but that which is indeed the soul of the church may be in both sorts of them : and though one account that a necessary truth, which others account neither ne- cessary, nor perhaps true : yet, this notwithstanding, in those truths, which are truly and really necessary, they may all agree. For no argument can be more sophistical than this: they differ in some points, which they esteem necessary ; therefore they differ in some that in deed and in truth are so. 35. Now as concerning the other inference — that they cannot agree what points are fundamental : — I have said and proved for- merly, that there is no such necessity as you imagine or pretend, that you should certaiidy know what is, and what is not, funda- mental. They that believe all things plainly delivered in scripture, to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 517 believe all things fundamental, and are at sufficient unity in mat- ters of faith, though they cannot precisely and exactly distinguish between what is fundamental, and what is profitable : nay, though by error they mistake some vain, or perhaps some hurtful opinions, for necessary and fundamental truths. Besides, I have shewed above, that as protestants do not agree (for you over-reach in say- ing they cannot,) touching what points are fundamental, so neither do you agree what points are defined, and so to be accounted, and what are not; nay,* not concerning the subject in which God hath placed this pretended authority of defining, some of you settling it in the pope himself, though alone without a council ; others in a council, though divided from the pope; others only in the con- junction of council and pope ; others not in this neither, but in the acceptation of the present church universal. Lastly, others not attributing it to this neither, but only to the perpetual succession of the church of all ages; of which divided company, it is very evi- dent and undeniable, that every former may be and are obliged to hold many things defined, and therefore necessary, which the latter, according to their own grounds, have no obligation to do; nay, can- not do so, upon any firm, and sure, and infallible foundation. THE CONCLUSION. And thus, by God's assistance, and the advantage of a good cause, I am at length, through a passage rather tiring than difficult, arrived at the end of my undertaken voyage ; and have, as I sup- pose, made appear, to all disinterested and unprejudicate readers, ,what in the beginning I undertook, that a vein of sophistry and calumny runs through this first part of your book; wherein, though I never thought of the directions you have been pleased to give me in your pamphlet, intituled, " A Direction to N. N.," yet, upon consideration of my answer, I find that I have proceeded as if I had it always before my eyes, and steered my course by it, as by a card and compass. For, first, I have not proceeded by a mere destructive way (as you call it), nor objected such difficulties against your religion, as upon examination tend to the overthrow of all religion ; but have shewed, that the truth of Christianity is clearly independent upon the truth of popery ; and that, on the other side, the arguments you urge, and the courses you take, for the maintenance of your religion, do manifestly tend (if they be closely and consequently followed) to the destruction of all religion, and lead men by the hand to atheism and impiety ; whereof I have given you ocular demonstrations in divers places of my book ; but especially in my answer to your " Direction to N. N." Neither can I discover any repugnance between any one part of my answer and any other, though 1 have used many more judicious and more searching eyes than mine own, to make, if it were pos- * C. 3, k- 54, et alibi. 44 518 Conclusion. sible, such a discovery; and therefore am in good hope, that though the music I have made he but dull and flat, and even down- right plain song, even your curious and critical ears shall discover no discord in it; but, on the other side, I have charged you fre- quently, and very justly, with manifest contradiction and retracta- tion of your own assertions, and not seldom of the main grounds you build upon, and the principal conclusions which you endeavour to maintain, which I conceive myself to have made apparent, even to the eye, c. ii. §. 5, c. hi. §. 88, c. iv. §. 14, 24, c. v. §. 93, c. vi. §. G, 7, 12, 17, c. vii. §. 29, and in many other parts of my answer. And though I did never pretend to defend Dr. Potter absolutely, and in all things, but only so far as he defends truth (neither did Dr. Potter desire me, nor any law of God or man oblige me, to de- fend him any farther), yet f do not find that I have cause to differ from him in any matter of moment, particularly, not concerning the infallibility of God's church, which 1 grant with him to be infallible in fundamentals ; because, if it should err in fundamentals, it were not the church : nor concerning the supernaturality of faith, which I know and believe as well as you, to be the gift of God, and that flesh and blood revealed it not unto us, but our Father which is in heaven. But now, if it were demanded what defence you can make for deserting " Charity Mistaken," in the main question dis- puted between him and Dr. Potter — whether protestancy, without a particular repentance and dereliction of it, destroys salvation, whereof I have convinced you ? I believe your answer would be much like that which Ulysses makes in the Metamorphosis for his running away from his friend Nestor ; that is, none at all. For opposing the articles of the church of England, the appro- bation, I presume, clears my book from this imputation. And whereas you gave me a caution — that my grounds destroy not the belief of divers doctrines, which all good christians believe, yea, and of all verities that cannot be proved by natural reason : — I profess sincerely that I do not know, nor believe, that any ground laid by me in my whole book is any way inconsistent with any one such doctrine, or with any verity revealed in the word of God, though never so improbable or incomprehensible to natural reason; and if I thought there were, I would deal with it as those primitive converts dealt with their curious books in the Acts of the Apostles. For the epistle of St. James, and those other books which were anciently controverted, and are now received by the church of England as canonical, I am so far from relying upon any principles, which must, to my apprehension, bring with them the denial of the authority of them, that I myself believe them all to be canonical. For the overthrowing the infallibility of all scripture, my book is so innocent of it, that the infallibility of scripture is the chiefest of all my grounds. And, lastly, for arguments tending to prove an impossibility of all divine, supernatural, infallible faith and religion, I assure my- self, that if you were ten times more a spider than you are, you could suck no such poison from them. My heart, I am sure, is Conclusion. 519 innocent of any such intention, and the Searcher of all hearts knows that I had no other end in writing this book, but to confirm to the uttermost of my ability, the truth of the divine and infal- lible religion of our dearest Lord and Saviour Christ Jesus, which I am ready to seal and confirm, not with my arguments only, but my blood. Now these are the directions which you have been pleased to give me, whether out of a fear that I might otherwise deviate from them, or out of a desire to make others think so; but howsoever, I have not, to my understanding, swerved from them in any thing; which puts me in good hope, that my answer to this first part of your book will give even to yourself indifferent good satisfaction. I have also provided, though this were more than I undertook, a just and punctual examination and refutation of your second part; but, if you will give your consent, am resolved to suppress it, and that for divers sufficient and reasonable considerations. First, because the discussion of the controversies entreated of in the first part, if we shall think fit to proceed in it, as I for my part shall, so long as I have truth to reply, will, I conceive, be sufficient employment for us, though we cast off the burden of those many lesser disputes which remain behind in the second. And perhaps we may do God and his church more service, by exactly discussing, and fully clearing, the truth in these few, than by handling many after a slight and perfunctory manner. Secondly, because the addition of the second part, whether for your purpose or mine, is clearly unnecessary ; there being no under- standing man, papist or protestant, but will confess, that (forasmuch as concerns the main question now in agitation, about the saveable- bleness of protestants) if the first part of your book be answered, there needs no reply to the second ; as, on the other side, I shall willingly grant, if I have not answered the first, I cannot answer a great part of the second. Thirdly, because the addition of the second not only is unneces- sary, but in effect by yourself confessed to be so. For in your preamble to your second part you tell us, that the substance of the present controversy is handled in the first; and therein also you pretend to have answered the chief grounds of Dr. Potter's book; so that in replying to your second part, I shall do little else but pur- sue shadows. Fourthly, because your second part (setting aside repetitions and references) is in a manner made up of disputes about particular matters, which you are very importunate to have forborne, as sus- pecting, at least pretending to suspect, that they were brought in purposely by Dr. Potter to dazzle the reader's eyes, and distract his mind that he might not see the clearness of the reasons brought in defence of the general doctrine delivered in "Charity Mistaken :" all which you are likely enough, if there be occasion, to say again to me ; and therefore 1 am resolved for once even to humour you so far as to keep my discourse within those very lists and limits which yourself have prescribed, and to deal with you upon no other arguments, but only those wherein you conceive 520 Conclusion. your chief advantage, and principal strength, and, as it were, your Samson's lock, to lie ; wherein, if I gain the cause clearly from you (as I verily hope, by God's help, I shall do), it cannot but redound much to the honour of the truth maintained by me, which by so weak a champion can overcome such an Achilles in error, even in his strongest holds. For these reasons, although I have made ready an answer to your second part, and therein have made it sufficiently evident, that, for shifting evasions from Dr. Potter's arguments, for imper- tinent cavils, and frivolous exceptions, and injurious calumnies against him for his misalleging of authors ; for proceeding upon false and ungrounded principles; for making inconsequent and so- phistical deductions; and, in a word for all the virtues of an ill answer, your second part is no way second to the first ; yet, not- withstanding all this disadvantage, I am resolved, if you will give me leave, either wholly to suppress it, or at least to defer the pub- lication of it, until I see what exceptions, upon a twelve-month's examination (for so long I am well assured you have had it in your hands), you can take at this which is now published ; that so, if my grounds be discovered false, I may give over building on them ; or (if it shall be thought fit) build on more securely, when it shall appear that nothing material and of moment, is or can be objected against them. This I say upon a supposition, that your- self will allow these reasons for satisfying and sufficient, and not repent of the motion which yourself have made, of reducing the controversy between us to this short issue. But in case your mind be altered, upon the least intimation you shall give me, that you do but desire to have it out, your desire shall prevail with me above all other reasons, and you shall not fail to receive it with all con- venient speed. Only, that my answer may be complete, and that I may have all my work together, and not be troubled myself, nor enforced to trou- ble you, with after-reckonings, I would first entreat you to make good your promise, of not omitting to answer all the particles of Dr. Potter's book, which may any way import, and now, at least, to take notice of some (as it seems to me) not inconsiderable passages of it, which between your first and second part, as it were between two stools, have been suffered hitherto to fall to the ground, and not been vouchsafed any answer at all. For after this neglectful fashion you have passed by in silence, first, his discourse, wherein he proves briefly, but very effectually, that protestants may be saved, and that the Roman church, espe- cially the Jesuits, are very uncharitable. S. 1, p. 6 — 9. Secondly, The authorities, whereby he justifies, that the ancient fathers, by the Roman, understood always a particular, and never the catholic, church ; to which purpose he allegeth the words of Ignatius, Am- brose, Innocentius, Celestine, Nicolaus. S. 1, p. 10. Whereunto you say nothing, neither do you infringe his observation with any one instance to the contrary. Thirdly, The greatest and most substantial part of his answers to the arguments of Charity Mistaken, built upon Deut. xvii. Conclusion. 521 Numb. xvi. Matt, xxviii. 20; xviii. 17, and in particular many preg- nant and convincing texts of scripture, quoted in the margin of his book, p. 25, to prove, that the judges of the synagogue (whose in- fallibility yet you make an argument of yours, and therefore must be more credible than yours) are vainly pretended to have been in- fallible: but as they were obliged to judge according to law, so were obnoxious to deviations from it. S. 2, p. 23 — 27. Fourthly, His discourse, wherein he shews the difference between the prayers for the dead used by the ancients^and those now in use in the Roman church. Fifthly, The authority of three ancient, and above twenty modern, doctors of your own church, alleged by him to shew, that in their opinion even pagans, and therefore much more erring christians, (if their lives were morally honest) by God's extraordinary mercy, and Christ's merit, may be saved. S. 2, p. 45. Sixthly, A great part of his discourse, whereby he declares, that actual and external communion w r ith the church is not of absolute necessity to salvation ; nay, that those might be saved, whom the church utterly refused to admit to her communion. S. 2, p. 46—49. Seventhly, His discourse concerning the church's latitude, which hath in it a clear determination of the main controversy against you : for therein he proves plainly, that all appertain to the church, who believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and Saviour of the world, with submission to his doctrine in mind and will ; which he irrefragably demonstrates by many evident texts of scrip- ture, containing the substance of his assertion even in terms. S. 4, p. 114—117. Eighthly, That wherein he shews, by many pertinent examples, that gross error and true faith may be lodged together in the same mind. And that men are not chargeable with the damnable con- sequences of their own erroneous opinions. S. 4, p. 112. Ninthly, A very great part of this chapter touching the dissen- sions of the Roman church, which he shews (against the pretences of Charity Mistaken) to be no less than ours, for the importance of the matter, and the pursuit of them to be exceedingly uncharitable. S. 6, p. 188—191, 193—197. Tenthly, His clear refutation, and just representation, of the doc- trine of implicit faith, as it is delivered by the doctors of your church ; which he proves very consonant to the doctrine of heretics and infidels, but evidently repugnant to the word of God. Ibid. p. 202—205. Lastly, His discourse, wherein he shews — that it is unlawful for the church of after ages to add any thing to the faith of the apostles ; and many of his arguments, whereby he proves, that in the judg- ment of the ancient church the apostles' creed was esteemed a suf- ficient summary of the necessary points of mere belief; and a great number of great authorities, to justify the doctrine of the church of England, touching the canon of scripture, especially the Old Testament. S. 7, p. 221, 223, 228, 229. All these parts of Dr. Potter's book, for reasons best known to 44* 522 The Apostolical Institution of Episcopacy demonstrated. yourself, you have dealt with, as the priest and Levite in the gospel did with the wounded Samaritan ; that is, only looked upon them, and passed by: but now, at least, when you are admonished of it, that my reply to your second part (if you desire it) may be perfect, I would entreat you to take them into your consideration, and to make some show of saying something to them, lest otherwise the world should interpret your obstinate silence a plain confession, that you can say nothing. _ THE APOSTOLICAL INSTITUTION OF EPISCOPACY DEMONSTRATED. Sect. 1. If we abstract from episcopal government all acciden- tals, and consider only what is essential and necessary to it, we shall find in it no more but this ; an appointment of one man of eminent sanctity and sufficiency to have the care of all the churches, within a certain precinct or diocese, and furnishing him with autho- rity, (not absolute or arbitrary, but regulated and bounded by laws, and moderated by joining to him a convenient number of assistants) to the intent, that all the churches under him may be provided of good and able pastors : and that both of pastors and people, conformi- ty to laws, and performance of their duties, may be required, under penalties not left to discretion, but by law appointed. Sect. 2. To this kind of government, I am not, by any particular interest, so devoted, as to think it ought to be maintained, either in opposition to apostolic institution, or to the much-desired reforma- tion of men's lives, and restoration of primitive discipline, or to any law or precept of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ; for that were to maintain a means contrary to the end ; for obedience to our Saviour is the end for which church government is appointed. But if it may be demonstrated, (or made much more probable than the contrary) as I verily think it may : 1. That it is not repugnant to the government settled in and for the church by the apostles : 2. That it is as compilable with the reformation of any evil, which we desire to reform, either in church or state, or the introduction of any good, which we desire to introduce, as any kind of government : and, 3. That there is no law, no record of our Saviour against it : then, I hope, it will not be thought an unreasonable motion, if we humbly desire those that are in authority, especially the high court of parliament, that it may not be sacrificed to clamour, or over- borne by violence : and though (which God forbid) the greater part of the multitude should cry, crucify, crucify, yet our governors would be so full of justice and courage, as not to give it up, until they perfectly understand concerning episcopacy itself, quid malt fecit ? The Apostolical Institution of Episcopacy demonstrated. 523 Sect. 3. I shall speak at this lime only of the first of these three points ; that episcopacy is not repugnant to the government settled in the church for perpetuity by the apostles. Whereof I conceive this which follows is as clear a demonstration as any thing of this nature is capable of: " That this government was received universally in the church, either in the apostles' time, or presently after, is so evident and unquestionable, that the most learned adversaries of this go- vernment do themselves confess it." Sect. 4. Petrus Molinasus, in his book, De Munere Pastorali, purposely written in defence of the presbyterial government, acknow- ledged, that presently after the apostles' times, or even in their time, (as ecclesiastical story witnesseth) it was ordained, that in every city one of the presbytery should be called a bishop, who should have pre-eminence over his colleagues, to avoid confusion, which ofttimes ariseth out of equality. And truly this form of govern- ment all churches every where received. Sect. 5. Theodorus Beza, in his tract, De triplici Episcopatus genere, confesseth in effect the same thing. For, having distin- guished episcopacy into three kinds, divine, human, and satanical, and attributing to the second (which he calls human, but we main- tain and conceive to be apostolical) not only a priority of order, but a superiority of power and authority over other presbyters, bounded yet by laws and canons provided against tyranny ; he clearly professeth, that of this kind of episcopacy is to be understood whatsoever we read concerning the authority of bishops, (or presi- dents, as Justin Martyr calls them) in Ignatius, and other more ancient writers. Sect. 6. Certainly, from these two great defenders of the pres- bytery,* we should never have had this free acknowledgment, (so prejudicial to their own pretence, and so advantageous to their adversaries' purpose) had not the evidence of clear and undeniable truth enforced them to it. It will not therefore be necessary to spend any time in confuting that uningenuous assertion of the anonymous author of the Catalogue of Testimonies, for the equality of bishops and presbyters, who affirms, that their disparity began long after the apostles' times : but we may safely take for granted, that which these two learned adversaries have confessed, and see, whether upon this foundation laid by them, we may not by unan- swerable reason raise this superstructure : " That seeing episcopal government is confessedly so ancient, and so catholic, it cannot with reason be denied to be apostolic." Sect. 7. For so great a change, as between presbyterial govern- ment and episcopal, could not possibly have prevailed all the world over in a little time. Had episcopal government been an * To whom two others also from Geneva may be added : Daniel Chamierus (in Panstratia, torn. ii. lib. x. cap. vi. sect. 24,) and Nicol. Videlius, (Exercitat. 3, in Epist. Ignatii ad Philadelph. cap. xiv. et Exercit. 8, in Epist. ad Mariam, cap. iii.) which is also fully demonstrated in Dr. Hammond's Dissertations against Blondel, (which never were answered, and never will) by the testimonies of those who wrote in the very next ages after the apostles. 524 The Apostolical Institution of Episcopacy demonstrated. aberration from (or a corruption of) the government left in the churches by the apostles, it had been very strange, that it should have been received in any one church so suddenly, or that it should have prevailed in all for many ages after. Variasse debuerat error ecclesiarum : quod autem apud omnes unum est, non est erratum, sed traditum. " Had the churches erred, they would have varied : what therefore is one and the same amongst all, came not surely by error, but tradition." Thus Tertullian argues very probably, from the consent of the churches of his time, not long after the apostles, and that in matter of opinion much more subject to unobserved alteration. But that in the frame and substance of the necessary government of the church, a thing always in use and practice, there should be so sudden a change, as presently after the apostles' times ; and so universal, as received in all churches : this is clearly impossible. Sect. 8. For, what universal cause can be assigned or feigned of this universal apostacy ? You will not imagine, that the apostles, all or any of them, made any decree for this change when they were living ; or left order for it in any will or testament when they were dying. This were to grant the question ; to wit — That the apostles, being to leave the government of the churches themselves, and either seeing by experience, or, foreseeing by the Spirit of God, the distractions and disorders which would arise from a mul- titude of equals, substituted episcopal government instead of their own. General councils, to make a law for a general change, for many ages there was none. There was no christian emperor, no coercive power, over the church to enforce it. Or, if there had been any, we know no force was equal to the courage of the chris- tians of those times. Their lives were then at command (for they had not then learnt to fight for Christ), but their obedience to any thing against his law was not to be commanded (for they had perfectly learnt to die for him). Therefore, there was no power then to com- mand this change ; or, if there had been any, it had been in vain. Sect. 9. What device then shall we study, or to what fountain shall we reduce this strange pretended alteration ? Can it enter into our hearts to think, that all the presbyters and other christians then, being the apostles' scholars, could be generally ignorant of the will of Christ, touching the necessity of a presbyterial govern- ment? Or, dare we adventure to think them so strangely wicked all the world over, as against knowledge and conscience to con- spire against it 1 Imagine the spirit of Diotrephes had entered into some, or a great many of the presbyters, and possessed them with an ambitious desire of a forbidden superiority, was it possible they should attempt and achieve it at once without any opposition or contradiction ? And, besides, that the contagion of this ambition should spread itself, and prevail without stop or control ; nay, without any noise or notice taken of it, through all the churches in the world ; all the watchmen in the mean time being so fast asleep, and all the dogs so dumb, that not so much as one should open his mouth against it 1 Sect. 10. But let us suppose (though it be a horrible untruth) Reasons against Popery. 525 that the presbyters and people then were not so good christians as the presbyterians are now ; that they were generally so negligent to retain the government of Christ's church commanded by Christ, which we are now so zealous to restore, yet certainly we must not forget nor deny, that they were men as we are. And if we look upon them as mere natural men, yet, knowing by experience, how hard a thing it is, even for policy armed with power, by many attempts and contrivances, and in a long time, to gain upon the liberty of any one people ; undoubtedly we shall never entertain so wild an imagination, as that, among all the christian presbyters in the world, neither conscience of duty, nor love of liberty, noi averseness from pride and usurpation of others over them, should prevail so much with any one, as to oppose this pretended uni versal invasion of the kingdom of Jesus Christ, and the liberty of christians. Sect. 11. When I shall see therefore all the fables in the Meta- morphosis acted, and prove true stories ; when I shall see all the democracies and aristocracies in the world lie down and sleep, and awake into monarchies ; then will I begin to believe, that presby- terial government, having continued in the church during the apostles' times, should presently after (against the apostles' doc- trine, and the will of Christ) be whirled about like a scene in a mask, and transformed into episcopacy. In the mean time, while these things remain thus incredible, and in human reason impossible, I hope I shall have leave to conclude thus : " Episcopal government is acknowledged to have been universally received in the church, presently after the apostles' times." " Between the apostles' times and this presently after, there was not time enough for, nor possibility of, so great an alteration." " And therefore, there was no such alteration as is pretended. And therefore episcopacy, being confessed to be so ancient and catholic, must be granted also to be apostolic : Quod erat demonstrandum." REASONS AGAINST POPERY, In a letter from Mr. Wm. Chillingworth to his friend Mr. Lewgar, persuading him to return to his mother, the church of England, from the corrupt church of Rome. Good Mr. Lewgar, Though I am resolved not to be much afflicted at that which is not in my power to help, yet I cannot deny, but the loss of a friend goes very near to my heart ; and by this name of a friend, I did presume, till of late, that I might have called you ; because, though perhaps for want of power and opportunity I have done you no good office, yet I have always been willing and ready to do you the best service I could; and therefore, I cannot but admire at your affected strangeness, which in your last letter to me you seem to take upon you ; renouncing in a manner all relation to me, and 526 Reasons against Popery. tacitly excommunicating me from all interest in you. The super- scription of your letter is to Mr. William Chillingworth, and the subscription John Lewgar, as if you either disdained, or made a conscience of styling me your friend, or yourself mine. If this pro- ceed from passion and weakness, pray mend it ; if from reason pray shew it : if you think me one of those, to whom St. John forbids you to say, God save you, then you are to think and prove me one of those deceivers, which deny Christ Jesus to be come in the flesh. If you think me an heretic, and therefore to be avoided, you must prove me to be auroxaraxpiTov, condemned by mine own judgment, which I know I am not, and therefore think you cannot. If you say I do not hear the church, and therefore am to be esteemed an heathen or publican, you are to prove then, that by the church is meant the church of Rome ; and yet, when you have done so, I hope christians are not forbidden to shew humanity and civility even to pagans. For God's sake, Mr. Lewgar, free yourself from this blind zeal, at least for a little space, and consider with reason and moderation, what strange crime you can charge me with, that should deserve this strange usage, especially from you. Is it a crime with all my understanding to endeavour to find your religion true, and to make myself a believer of it, and not to be able to do so ? Is it a crime to employ all my reason upon the justification of the infallibility of the Roman church, and to find it impossible to be justified? I will call God to witness, who knows my heart better than you do, that I have evened the scale of my judgment as much as possibly I could, and have not willingly allowed one grain of worldly mo- tives on either side, but have weighed the reasons for your religion, and against it, with such indifference, as if there were nothing in the world but God and myself; and is it my fault, that the scale goes down, which hath the most weight in it ? That the building falls that hath a false foundation ? Have you such power over your own understanding, that you can believe what you please, though you see no reason ? Or that you can suspend your belief, when you see reason? If you have, I pray for old friendship's sake teach me this trick ; and, until I have learned it, I pray blame me not for going the ordinary way, I mean for believing, or not believing, as I see reason. If you can convince me of wilful opposition against the known truth, of negligence in seeking it, of unwillingness to find it, of preferring temporal respects before it, or of any other fault which is in my power to amend, that is indeed a fault; if I mend it not, be as angry with me as you please: but to impute to me involuntary errors, or that I do not see that which I would see, but cannot ; or that I will not profess that which I do not believe ; certainly this is a far more unreasonable error, than any you can justly charge me with ; for, let me tell you, the imputing socinian- ism to me (whosoever was the author of it) was a wicked and groundless slander. Perhaps you will say, (for this is the usual song of that side) pride is a voluntary fault, and with this I am justly chargeable, for forsaking the guide that God hath appointed me to follow; but what, if I forsook it, because I thought I h.?d Reasons against Popery. 527 reason to fear it was one of those blind guides, which whosoever blindly follows, is threatened by our Saviour, that both he and his guide shall fall into the ditch t Then I hope you will grant it was not pride, but conscience, that moved me to do so ; for as it is wise humility to obey those whom God hath set over me, so it is sinful credulity to follow every man, or every church, that without warrant will take upon them to guide me : shew then some good and evident title which your church of Rome hath to this office ; produce but one reason for it, which upon trial will not finally be resolved and vanished into uncertainty ; and if I yield not unto it, say, if you please, I am as proud as Lucifer. In the mean time, give me leave to think it strange, and not far from a prodigy, that this doctrine of the Roman church's being the guide of faith, (if it be true doctrine) should either not be known to the evangelists, or if it were known to them, yet being wise and good men, they should either be so envious of the church's happi- ness, or so forgetful of the work they took in hand, which was to write the whole gospel of Christ, as that not so much as one of them should mention so much as once this so necessary part of the gospel, without the belief whereof there is no salvation, and with the belief whereof, unless men be snatched away by sudden death, there is hardly any damnation. It is evident, they do all of them with one consent speak very plainly of many things of no impor- tance in comparison hereof; and, is it credible, or indeed possible, that with one consent, or rather conspiracy, they should be so deeply silent concerning this unum necessarium ? You may believe it, if you can ; for my part, I cannot, unless I see demonstration of it : and if you say they send us to the church, and consequently to the church of Rome, this is to suppose that which can never be proved, that the church of Rome is the only church ; and without this supposal upon the division of the church, I am as far to seek for a guide of my faith as ever. As, for example : in that great division of the church, when the whole world wondered, said St. Jerome, that it was become arian, when Liberius, pope of Rome (as St. Athanasius, St. Jerome, and St. Hilary testify) subscribed their heresy, and joined in commu- nion with them ; or in the division betwixt the Greek and Roman church, about the procession of the Holy Ghost, when either side was the church to itself, and each part schismatical and heretical to the other ; what direction could I then, an ignorant man, have found from the text.of scripture, " unless he hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen or a publican : upon this rock will I build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Again ; give me leave to wonder, that neither St. Paul writing to the Romans, should so much as intimate this their privilege of in- fallibility, but rather, on the contrary, put them in fear, in the 11th chapter, that they, as well as the Jews, were in danger of falling away. That St. Peter, the pretended bishop of Rome, writing two catho- lic epistles, mentioning his departure, should not once acquaint the christians whom he writes to, what guide they were to follow after he was taken from them ! 528 Reasons against Popery. That the writers of the New Testament should so frequently warn men of heretics, false christs, fyjse prophets, and not once arm them against them, with letting them know this only sure means of avoiding their danger ! That so great a part of the New Testament should be employed about antichrist, and so little, and indeed none at all, about the vicar of Christ, and the guide of the faithful ! That our Saviour should leave this only means for the ending of controversies, and yet speak so obscurely and ambiguously of it, that now our judge is the greatest controversy, and the greatest hindrance of ending them ! That there should be better evidence in the scripture to justify the king to this office, who disclaims it, than the pope, who pretends to it! That St. Peter should never exercise over the apostles any one act of jurisdiction, nor they ever give him any one title of authority over them ! That if the apostles did know, that St. Peter was made head of them, when our Saviour said, " thou art Peter," they should still contend who shall be the first, and that our Saviour should never tell them, that St. Peter was the man ! That St. Paul should say, he was nothing inferior to the very chief apostles ! That the catechumeni in the primitive church should never be taught this foundation of their faith, that the church of Rome was the guide of their faith ! That the fathers, Tertullian, St. Jerome, and Optatus, when they flew highest in recommendation of the Roman church, should attribute no more unto her than to all apostolical churches ! That in the controversy about Easter, the bishops and churches of Asia should be so ill catechised, as not to know this principle of christian religion, the necessity of conformity of doctrine with the church of Rome ! That they should never be pressed with any such conformity in all things, only with the particular tradition of the western churches in that point ! That Irenaeus, and many other bishops, notwithstanding, ad hancce ecclesiam necesse est omnem convenire ecclesiam, should not yet think that a necessary doctrine, nor a sufficient ground of excommunica- tion, which the church of Rome thought to be so ! That St. Cyprian, and the bishops of Afric, should be so ill in- structed in their faith, as not to know this foundation of it ! That they likewise were never urged with any such necessity of conformity with the church of Rome, nor ever charged with heresy or error for denying of it ! That when Liberius joined in communion with the arians, and subscribed their heresy, the arians then should not be the church, and the guide of the faith ! That never any heretics, for five ages after Christ, were pressed with this argument of the infallibility of the present church of Rome, or charged with the denial of it as a distinct heresy ; so that Reasons against Popery. 529 ./Eneas Sylvius should have cause to say, Ante tempora Concilii Niceni quisque sibi vivebat, et parvus respectus habebatur ad eccle- siam Romanam ! That the ecclesiastical story of these times, mentions no act of authority of the church of Rome over other churches; as if there should be a monarchy, and the king for some ages together should exercise no act of jurisdiction in it ! That to supply this defect, the decretal epistles should be so im- pudently forged, which in a manner speak nothing else but reges et monarchas, I mean the pope's making laws to exercise authority over all other churches! That the African churches in St. Augustine's time should be so ignorant that the pope was the head of the church, and judge of appeals, Jure Divino, and that there was a necessity of conformity with the church in this and all other points of doctrine ! Nay, that the popes themselves should be so ignorant of the ground of this their authority, as to pretend to it, not upon scrip- ture, or universal tradition ; but upon an imaginary pretended non- such canon of the council of Nice ! That Vincentius Lirinensis* seeking for a guide of his faith, and a preservation from heresy, should be ignorant of this so ready an one, the infallibility of the church of Rome! All these things, and many more are very strange to me, if the infallibility of the Roman church be indeed, and were always, by christians acknowledged, the foundation of our faith ; and there- fore, I beseech you, pardon me, if I choose mine upon one that is much firmer and safer, and lies open to none of these objections, which is scripture and universal tradition. And if one, that is of this faith, may have leave so to do, I will subscribe with hand and heart, Your very loving and true friend, W. Chillingworth. ll 45 SERMONS. SERMON I. " This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall he lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, truce-breakers, false accusers, incon- tinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God ; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof:' — 2 Tim. iii. 1 — 5. To a discourse upon these words, I cannot think of any fitter in- troduction, that that wherewith our Saviour sometime began a sermon of his, " This day is this scripture fulfilled." And I would to God, there were not great occasion to fear, that a great part of it may be fulfilled in this place. Two things are contained in it : First, the real wickedness of the generality of the men of the latter times, in the first four verses. For by " men shall be lovers of themselves, covetous, boasters, proud," &c, I conceive is meant, men generally shall be so ; otherwise this were nothing peculiar to the last, but common to all times; for in all times some, nay, many, have been "lovers of themselves, covetous, boasters, proud," &c. Secondly, we have here the formal and hypocritical godliness of the same times, in the last verse ; " having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof;" which latter ordinarily and naturally accompanies the former. For, as the shadows are longest when the sun is lowest, and as vines, and other fruit-trees, bear the less fruit, when they are suffered to luxuriate and spend their sap upon superfluous suckers, and abundance of leaves; so commonly, we may observe, both in civil conversation, where there is great store of formality, there is little sincerity ; and in religion, where there is a decay of true cordial piety, there men entertain and please themselves, and vainly hope to please God, with external formalities and perform- ances, and great store of that righteousness, for which Christ shall judge the world. It were no difficult matter to shew, that the truth of St. Paul's prediction is by experience justified in both parts of it; but my purpose is to restrain myself to the latter, and to endeavour to clear unto you that, that in our times is generally accomplished : that almost in all places the power of godliness is decayed and vanished ; the form and profession of it only remaining ; that the spirit, and soul, and life of religion, is for the most part gone ; only the out- (530) The First Sermon. 531 ward body or carcass, or rather the picture or shadow of it, being left behind. This is the doctrine which at this time I shall deliver to you ; and the use, which I desire most heartily you shall make of it, is this : to take care that you confute, so far as it concerns your particulars, what I fear I shall prove true in the general. To come then to our business without further compliment, let us examine our ways, and consider impartially, what the religion of most men is. We are baptized in our infancy, that is, as I conceive, dedicated and devoted to God's service, by our parents and the church, as young Samuel was by his mother Hannah ; and there we take a solemn vow, to forsake the devil and all his works, the vain pomp and glory of the world, with all the covetous desires of it ; to for- sake also the carnal desires of the flesh, and not to follow nor be led by them. This vow we take when we are children, and under- stand not ; and how many are there, who know, and consider, and regard what they have vowed, when they are become men, almost as little as they did being children ! Consider the lives and public actions of most men of all conditions, in court, city, and country, and then deny it, if you can, that those three things, which we have renounced in our baptism, the profits, honours, and pleasures of the world, are the very gods which divide the world amongst them; are served more devoutly, confided in more heartily, loved more affectionately, than the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in whose name we are baptized : deny, if you can, the daily and con- stant employment of all men to be either a violent prosecution of the vain pomp and glory of the world, or of the power, riches, and contemptible profits of it, or of the momentary or unsatisfying plea- sures of the flesh, or else of the more diabolical humours of pride, malice, revenge, and such like ; and yet with this empty form we please and satisfy ourselves, as well as if we were lively born again by the Spirit of God, not knowing or not regarding what St. Peter has taught us, that the baptism which must save us, is, " not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good con- science unto God." 1 Pet. iii. 21. When we are come to years capable of instruction, many, which is lamentable to consider, are so little regarded by themselves or others, that they continue little better than pagans in a common- wealth of christians, and know little more of God, or of Christ, than if they had been bred in the Indies. A lamentable case, and which will one day lie heavy upon their account which might have amended it, and did not. But many, 1 confess, are taught to act over this plav of religion and learning to say, " Our Father which art in heaven;" and, "I believe in God the Father Almighty;" but where are the men that live so, as if they did believe in earnest, that God is the almighty father? Where are they that fear him, and trust in him, and depend upon him only for their whole happi- ness, and love him, and obey him, as in reason we ought to do to an almighty Father ; who, if he be our Father, and we be indeed his children, will do for us all the good he can; and if he be almighty, can do for us all the good he will ; and yet, how few ll2 532 The First Sermon. are there, who love him with half that affection as children usually do their parents, or believe him with half that simplicity, or serve him with half that diligence? And then, for the Lord's Prayer, the plain truth is, we lie unto God for the most part clean through it; and for want of desiring indeed, what in word we pray for, tell him to his face, as many false tales as we make petitions. For who shews by his endeavours, that he desires heartily that God's name should be hallowed, that is, holily and religiously worshipped and adored by all men ? That his kingdom should be advanced and enlarged ; that his blessed will should be universally obeyed ? Who shows, by his forsaking sin, that he desires, so much as he should do, the forgiveness of it? Nay, who doth not revenge, upon all occasions, the affronts, contempts, and injuries put upon him, and so upon the matter curse himself, as often as he says, "Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us." How few depend upon God only for their " daily bread," viz. the good things of this life, as upon the only giver of them, so as neither to get nor keep any of them, by any means, which they know or fear to be offensive unto God? How few desire in earnest to avoid temptation ? Nay, who almost is there, that takes not the devil's office out of his hand, and is not himself a tempter both to himself and others ? Lastly, who almost is there that desires heartily, and above all things, so much as the thing deserves, to be delivered from the greatest evil ; sin, I mean, and the anger of God ? Now, beloved, this is certain ; he that employs not requisite industry, to obtain what he pretends to desire, does not desire indeed, but only pretends to do so ; he that desires not what he prays for, prays with tongue only, and not with his heart : indeed does not pray to God, but play and dally with him. And yet this is all which men generally do, and therefore herein also accomplish this prophecy, " Having a form of godliness, but deny- ing the power thereof." And this were ill enough, were it in private ; but we abuse God Almighty also with our public and solemn formalities : we make the church a stage whereon to act our parts, and play our pagean- try ; there we make a profession every day of confessing our sins with humble, lowly, and obedient hearts ; and yet, when we have talked after this manner, twenty, thirty, forty years together, our hearts for the most part continue as proud, as impenitent, as dis- obedient, as they were in the beginning. We make great protes- tations, " when we assemble and meet together to render thanks to God Almighty, for the benefits received at his hands ;" and if this were to be performed with words, with hosannas and halle- lujahs, and gloria patris, and psalms and hymns, and such like out- ward matters, peradventure we should do it very sufficiently ; but, in the mean time, with our lives and actions we provoke the Almighty, and that to his face, with all variety of grievous and bitter provocations; we do daily and hourly such things as we know, and he hath assured us, to be as odious unto him, and contrary to his nature, as any thing in the world is to the nature of any man in the world ; and all this upon poor, trifling, trivial, no The First Sermon. 533 temptations. If a man whom you have dealt well with, should deal so with you, one whom you had redeemed from the Turkish slavery, and instated in some indifferent good inheritance, should make you fine speeches, entertain you with panegyrics, and have your praises always in his mouth ; but all this while do nothing that pleases you, but upon all occasions, put all affronts and indignities upon you : would you say this were a thankful man ? Nay, would you not make heaven and earth ring of his unthankfulness, and detest him almost as much for his fair speeches, as his foul actions ? Beloved, such is our unthankfulness to our God and Creator, to our Lord and Saviour : our tongues ingeminate, and cry aloud, Hosan- na, hosanna, but the louder voice of our lives and actions is, " Crucify him, crucify him." We court God Almighty, and compliment with him, and profess to esteem his service perfect freedom ; but if any thing be to be done, much more if any thing be to be suffered for him, here we leave him. We bow the knee before him, and put a reed in his hand, and a crown upon his head, and cry, " Hail, King of the Jews:" but then, with our customary sins, we give him gall to eat, and vinegar to drink ; we thrust a spear in his side, nail him to the cross, and crucify to ourselves the Lord of glory. This is not the office of a friend to bewail a dead friend with vain la- mentations; sed quce voluerit meminisse, quce mandaverit exequi — to remember what he desires, and execute what he commands. So said a dying Roman to his friend, and so say I to you. To be thankful to God, is not to say, God be praised, or, God be thanked; but to remember what he desires, and execute what he commands. To be thankful to God is certainly to love him, and to love him is to keep his commandments : so saith our Saviour (John xix.) " If ye love me, keep my commandments." If we do so, we may justly pretend to thankfulness ; which, believe me, is not a word, nor to be performed with words : but, if we do not so, as generally we do not, our talk of thankfulness is nothing else but mere talk, and we accomplish St. Paul's prophecy herein also ; having a form of thank- fulness, but not the reality, nor the power of it. If I should reckon up unto you, how many direct lies every wicked man tells to Almighty God, as often as he says amen to this " form of godliness," which our church hath prescribed ; if I should present unto you all our acting of piety, and playing of hu- miliation, and personating of devotion, in the psalms, the litanies, the collects, and generally in the whole service, I should be infinite ; and, therefore, I have thought good to draw a veil over a great part of our hypocrisy, and to restrain the remainder of our discourse to the contrariety between our profession and performance, only in two things ; I mean faith and repentance. And, first, for faith : we profess, and indeed generally, because it is not safe to do otherwise, that we believe the scripture to be true, and that it contains the plain and only way to infinite and eternal happiness ; but if we did generally believe what we do profess, if this were the language of our hearts, as well as our tongues, how comes it to pass, that the study of it is so generally neglected ? Let a book, that treats of the philosopher's stone, promise never 45* 534 TJie First Sermon. so many mountains of gold, and even the restoring of the golden age again, yet were it no marvel, if few should study it ; and the reason is, because few would believe it. But if there were a book extant, and ordinarily to be had, as the bible is, which men did generally believe to contain a plain and easy way for all men to become rich, and to live in health and pleasure, and this world's happiness, can any man imagine, that this book would be unstudied by any man? And why then should I not believe, that, if the scripture were firmly and heartily believed the certain and only way to happiness, which is perfect and eternal, it would be studied by all men with all diligence ? Seeing, therefore, most christians are so cold and negligent in the study of it, prefer all other business, all other pleasures, before it, is there not great reason to fear, that many, who pretend to believe it firmly, believe it not at all, or very weakly and faintly 1 If the general of an army, or an ambassador to some prince or state, were assured by the king his master, that the transgressing any point of his commission should cost him his life, and the exact performance of it be recompensed with as high a reward as were in the king's power to bestow upon him; can it be imagined, that any man, who believes this, and is in his right mind, can be so supinely and stupidly negligent of this charge, which so much imports him, as to oversee, through want of care, any one necessary article, or part of his commission, especially, if it be delivered to him in writing, and at his pleasure to peruse it every day ? Certainly, this absurd negligence is a thing without example, and such as peradventure will never happen to any sober man to the world's end ; and, by the same reason, if we were firmly persuaded, that this book doth indeed contain that charge and commission, which infinitely more concerns us, it were not in reason possible, but that to such a persuasion, our care and diligence about it should be in some measure answerable. Seeing, therefore, most of us are so strangely careless, so grossly negligent of it, is there not great reason to fear, that though we have professors and protestors in abundance, yet the faithful, the truly and sincerely faithful, are, in a manner, failed from the children of men ? What but this can be the cause, that men are so commonly ignorant of so many articles and particular mandates of it, which yet are as manifest in it, as if they were written with the beams of the sun ? For example, how few of our ladies and gentlewomen do or will understand, that a voluptuous life is damnable and prohibited to them? Yet St. Paul saith so very plainly, "She that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth."* I believe this case directly regards not the sex : he would say, he, as well as she, if there had been occasion. How few of the gallants of our time do or will understand, that it is not lawful for them to be as expensive and costly in apparel, as their means, or perhaps their credit, will ex- tend unto? Which is to sacrifice unto vanity, that which by the law of Christ is due unto charity ; and yet, the same St. Paul forbids plainly this excess even to women — " Also let women (he would have said it much rather to the men) array themselves in comely * 1 Tim. v. 6. The First Sermon. 535 apparel, with shamefacedness and modesty, not with embroidered hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly apparel."* And, to make our ig- norance the more inexcusable, the very same rule is delivered by St. Peter also, 1 epist. iii. 3. How few rich men are or will be persuaded that the law of Christ permits them not to heap up riches forever, nor perpetually to add house to house, and land to land, though by lawful means ; but requires of them thus much charity at least, that ever, while they are providing for their wives and children, they should, out of the increase wherewith God hath blessed their industry, allot the poor a just and free proportion ? And when they have provided for them in a convenient manner (such as they themselves shall judge sufficient and convenient in others), that then they should give over making purchase after purchase ; but with the surplus- age of their revenue beyond their expense, procure, as much as lies in them, that no christian remain miserably poor ; few rich men, I fear, are or will be thus persuaded, and their daily actions shew as much: yet undoubtedly, either our Saviour's general command, of loving our neighbours as ourselves, which can hardly consist with our keeping vainly, or spending vainly what he wants for his ordi- nary subsistence, lays upon us a necessity of this high liberality : or his special command concerning this matter ; Quod superest date pauperibus, " That which remains give to the poor :" or that which St. John saith, 1 epist. iii. 17, reacheth home unto it: " Whosoever hath this world's goods, and seeth his brother have need, and shut- teth up the bowels of his compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him 1" Which is, in effect, as if he had said, he that keepeth from any brother in Christ, that which his brother wants, and he wants not, doth but vainly think, that he loves God; and therefore vainly hopes, that God loves him. Where almost are the men that are or will be persuaded, the gos- pel of Christ requires of men humility, like to that of little children, and that under the highest pain of damnation ? That is, that we should no more overvalue ourselves, or desire to be highly esteemed by others ; no more undervalue, scorn, or despise others ; no more affect pre-eminence over others, than little children do, before we have put that pride into them, which afterwards we charge wholly upon their natural corruption : and yet our blessed Saviour requires nothing more rigidly, nor more plainly, than this high degree of hu- mility : " Verily (saith he), I say unto you, (he speaks to his disci- ples affecting high places, and demanding which of them should be greatest) except you be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Would it not be strange news to a great many, that not only adultery and fornication, but even uncleanness and lasciviousness ; not only idolatry and witchcraft, but hatred, variance, emulations, wraths, and contentions; not only murders, but envyings; not drunkenness only, but revelling, are things prohibited to christians, and such as, if we forsake them not, we cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven ? And yet these things, as strange as they may seem, * 1 Tim. ii. 9. 536 The First Sermon. are plainly written; some of them by St. Peter (1 epist. ch. iv.); but all of them by St. Paul (Gal. v.'l9), "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these, adultery, fornication, unclean- ness, lasciviousness, &c. of the which I tell you before, as I have told you in times past, that they who do such things, shall not in- herit the kingdom of God." If I should tell you, that all bitterness and evil-speaking, (nay, such is the modesty and gravity which Christianity requires of us) foolish talk and jesting, are things not allowed to christians, would not many cry out, these are hard and strange sayings, who can hear them? And yet, as strange as they may seem, they have been written, well nigh one thousand six hundred years, and are yet ex- tant in very legible characters, in the epistle to the Ephesians, the end of the fourth, and the beginning of the fifth chapter. To come a little nearer to the business of our times, the chief ac- tors in this bloody tragedy, which is now upon the stage, who have robbed our Sovereign Lord the king of his forts, towns, treasure, ammunition, houses, of the persons of many of his subjects, and (as much as lies in them) of the hearts of all of them ; is it credible they know and remember, and consider the example of David, re- corded for their instruction, whose heart smote him, when he had but cut off the hem of Saul's garment? They that made no scruple at all of fighting with his sacred majesty, and shooting muskets and ordnance at him, (which sure have not the skill to choose a subject from a king) to the extreme hazard of his sacred person, whom by all possible obligations they are bound to defend, do they know, think you, the general rule, without exception or limitation, left by the Holy Ghost, for our direction in all such cases: " Who can lift up his Jiand against the Lord's anointed, and be innocent?"* Or do they consider his com- mand in the Proverbs of Solomon : " My son, fear God, and the king, and meddle not with them that desire change ?"f Or, his counsel in the book of Ecclesiastes : " I counsel thee to keep the king's commandment, and that in regard of the oath of God ?"J Or, because they possibly may pretend, that they are exempted from, or unconcerned in the commands of obedience delivered in the Old Testament, do they know and remember the precept given to all christians by St. Peter; "Submit yourselves to every ordi- nance of man for the Lord's sake, whether it be to the king, as supreme, or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him ?" Or, that terrible sanction of the same command, " They that resist shall receive to themselves damnation," left us by St. Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans, who then were the miserable subjects of the worst king, the worst man, nay, I think 1 may add truly, the worst beast in the world; that so all rebels' mouths might be stopped for ever, and left without all colour of pretence whatso- ever, to justify resistance of sovereign power? Undoubtedly, if they did kne^w, and consider, and lay close to their hearts, these places of scripture, or the fearful judgment which befel Corah, Dathan, and Abiram, for this very sin which now they commit, and * 1 Sam. xxvi. 9. t Prov. xxiv. 21. t Eccles. viii. 2. The First Sermon. 537 with a high hand still proceed in, it would be impossible but their hearts would smite them, as David's did upon an infinitely less oc- casion, and affright them out of those ways of present confusion, and eternal damnation. And then, on the other side, they that maintain the king's righteous cause with the hazard of their lives and fortunes, but by their oaths and curses, by their drunkenness and debauchery, by their irreligion and profaneness, fight more powerfully against their party, than by all other means they do or can fight for it, are not, I fear, very well acquainted with any part of the bible: but that strict caution, which properly concerns them- selves, in the book of Leviticus, I much doubt they have scarce ever heard of it : " When thou goest to war with thine enemies, then take heed there be no wicked thing in thee :" not only no wickedness in the cause thou maintainest, nor no wickedness in the means by which thou maintainest it, but no personal impieties in the persons that maintain it. Beloved, for the former two, we have reason to be full of comfort and confidence : for what is our cause 1 What is that which you fight, and we pray for ? But to deliver the king and all his good subjects out of the power of their enemies, who will have no peace but with their slaves and vassals; and for the means by which it is maintained, it is not by lying; it is not by calumnies ; it is not by running first ourselves, and then forcing the people, to universal perjury; but by a just Avar, be- cause necessary ; and by as fair and merciful a war, as if they were not rebels and traitors you fight against, but competitors in a doubtful title. But now for the third part of the caution, that, to deal ingenuously with you, and to deliver my own soul, if I cannot other men's, that I cannot think of with half so much comfort as the former ; but seeing so many Jonahs embarked in the same ship, the same cause with us, and so many Achans entering into battle with us, against the Canaanites ; seeing publicans and sinners on the one side, against scribes and pharisees on the other ; on the one side hypocrisy, on the other profaneness; no honesty nor justice on the one side, and very little piety on the other ; on the one side, horrible oaths, curses, and blasphemies; on the other, pestilent lies, calumnies, and perjury: when I see among them the pretence of reformation, if not the desire, pursued by antichristian, mahome- tan, devilish means; and amongst us little or no zeal for reforma- tion of what is indeed amiss, little or no care to remove the cause of God's anger towards us, by just, lawful, and christian means ; I profess plainly, I cannot without trembling consider, what is likely to be the event of these distractions ; I cannot but fear, that the goodness of our cause may sink under the burden of our sins ; and that God in his justice, because he will not suffer his judgments to achieve their prime scope and intention, which is our amendment and reformation, may either deliver us up to the blind zeal and fury of our enemies, or else, which I rather fear, make us instru- ments of his justice each against other, and of our own just and deserved confusion. This, I profess plainly, is my fear, and I would to God it were the fear of every soldier in his majesty's army : but, that which increaseth my fear is, that I see very many 538 The First Sermon. of them have very little or none at all ; I mean not, that they are fearless towards their enemies, (that's our joy and triumph) but that they show their courage even against God, and fear not him, whom it is madness not to fear. Now from whence can their not fearing him proceed, but from their not knowing him, their not knowing his will, and their own duty ? Not knowing how highly it concerns soldiers, above other professions, to be religious? And then, if ever, when they are engaged in dangerous adventures, and every moment have their lives in their hands, when they go to war with their enemies, then to take heed there be no wicked thing in them. You see, beloved, how many instances and examples I have given you of our gross ignorance of what is necessary and easy for us to know ; and to these it were no difficult matter to add more : now from whence can this ignorance proceed, but from supine negligence ? And from whence this negligence, but from our not believing what we pretend to believe ? For, did we believe firmly and heartily, that this book were given us by God for the rule of our actions, and that obedience to it were the certain and only way to eternal happiness, it were impossible we should be such enemies to ourselves, such traitors to our own souls, as not to search it, at least with so much diligence, that no necessary point of our duty plainly taught in it, could possibly escape us. But it is certain and apparent to all the world, that the greatest part of christians, through gross and wilful negligence, remain utterly ignorant of many necessary points of their duty to God and man ; and there- fore it is much to be feared, that this book, and the religion of Christ contained in it, among an infinity of professors, labours with great penury of true believers. It were an easy matter (if the time would permit) to present unto you many other demonstrations of the same conclusion; but to this, drawn from our willing ignorance of that which is easy and neces- sary for us to know, I will content myself to add only one more, taken from our voluntary and presumptuous neglect to do those things which we know and acknowledge to be necessary. If a man should say unto me, that it concerns him as much as his life is worth, to go presently to such a place, and that he knows but one way to it, and I should see him stand still, or go some other way, had I any reason to believe, that this man believes himself? Quid verba audiam, cum facta videam? saith he in the comedy: Protestatio contra factum non valet, saith the law ; and why should I believe, that that man believes obedience to Christ the only way to present and eternal happiness, whom I see, wit- tingly, and willingly, and constantly, and customarily, to disobey him ? The time was, that we all knew, that the king could reward those that did him service, and punish those that did him disservice, and then all men were ready to obey his command, and he was a rare man that durst do any thing to his face that offended him. Beloved, if we did but believe in God, so much as most subjects do in their king ; did we as verily believe, that God could and would make us perfectly happy, if we serve him, though all the The First Sermon. 539 world conspire to make us miserable; and that he could and would make us miserable, if we serve him not, though all the world should conspire to make us happy ; how were it possible, that to such a faith our lives should not be conformable ? Who was there ever so madly in love with a present penny, as to run the least hazard of the loss of 10,000?. a year to gain it, or not readily to part with it upon any probable hope, or light persuasion, much more a firm belief, that by doing so he should gain 100,000/. Now, beloved, the happiness which the servants of Christ are promised in the scripture, we all pretend to believe, that it exceeds the conjunction of all the good things of the world, and much more such a propor- tion as we may possibly enjoy, infinitely more than 10,000/. a year, or 100,000/. doth a penny; for 100,000/. is but a penny so many times over, and 10,000/. a year is worth but a certain number of pence; but between heaven and earth, between finite and infinite, between eternity and a moment, there is utterly no proportion; and therefore, seeing we are so apt, upon trifling occasions, to hazard this heaven for this earth, this infinite for this finite, this all for this nothing; is it not much to be feared, that though many of us pre- tend to much faith, we have indeed but very little or none at all? The sum of all, which hath been spoken concerning this point, is this — Were we firmly persuaded, that obedience to the gospel of Christ is the true and only way to present and eternal happiness (without which faith no man living can be justified), then the in- nate desire of our own happiness could not but make us studious inquirers of the will of Christ, and conscionable performers of it; but there are (as experience shows) very few who make it their care and business to know the will of Christ ; and of those few again, very many, who make no conscience at all of doing what they know ; therefore, though they profess and protest they have faith, yet their protestations are not to be regarded against their actions; but we may safely and reasonably conclude what was to be concluded, that the doctrine of Christ, amongst an infinity of professors, labours with great scarcity of true, serious, and hearty believers; and that herein also we accomplish St. Paul's predic- tion, " Having a form of godliness, but denying," &c. But perhaps the truth and reality of our repentance may make some kind of satisfaction to God Almighty for our hypocritical dallying with him in all the rest. Truly, I would be heartily glad it were so: but I am so far from being of this faith, that herein I fear we are most of all hypocritical, and that the generality of pro- fessors is so far from a real practice of true repentance, that scarce one in a hundred understands truly what it is. Some satisfy themselves with a bare confession and acknowledg- ment, either that they are sinners in general, or that they have com- mitted such and such sins in particular; which acknowledgment comes not yet from the heart of a great many, but only from their lips and tongues: for how many are they, that do rather complain and murmur, that they are sinners, than acknowledge and confess it; and make it, upon the matter, rather their unhappiness and mis- fortune, than their true fault, that they are so? Such are all they 540 The First Sermon. who impute all their commissions of evil to the unavoidable want of restraining grace, and all their omission of good to the like want of effectual exciting grace ; all such as pretend, that the commandments of God are impossible to be kept any better than they are kept; and that the world, the flesh, and the devil, are even omnipotent enemies; and that God neither doth, nor will, give sufficient strength to resist and overcome them ; all such as lay all their faults upon Adam, and say, with those rebellious Israelites (whom God assures, that they neither had nor should have just reason to say so), that their fathers had eaten sour grapes, and their teeth were set on edge : lastly, all such as lay their sins upon divine prescience and predestination, saying with their tongues, O what wretched sinners have we been ! but in their hearts, How could we help it ? We were predestinate to it, we could not do otherwise. All such as seriously persuade themselves, and think to hide their nakedness with such fig-leaves as these, can no more be said to acknowledge themselves guilty of a fault, than a man that was born blind, or lame, with the stone or gout, can accuse himself with any fault for being born so; well may such an one complain, and bemoan himself, and say, O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from this unhappiness? But such a complaint is as far from being a true acknowledgment of any faults, as a bare acknowledgment of a fault is from true repentance. For to confess a fault, is to acknowledge, that freely and willingly, without any constraint, or unavoidable necessity, we have transgressed the law of God, it being in our power, by God's grace, to have done other- wise. To aggravate this fault, is to confess we have done so when we might easily have avoided it, and had no great nor violent temptation to it : to pretend any great difficulty in the matter, is to excuse and extenuate it : but to say, that, all things considered, it was absolutely impossible for you to avoid it, is flatly to deny it. Others there are, that think they have done enough, if to confes- sion of sin they add some sorrow for it ; if, when the present fit of sin is past, and they are returned to themselves, the sting re- maining breed some remorse of conscience, some complaints against their wickedness and foil} 7 for having done so, and some intentions to forsake it, though vanishing and ineffectual. These heat-drops, this morning dew of sorrow, though it presently vanish, and they return to their sin again upon the next temptation, "as a dog to his vomit," when the pang is over: yet in the pauses between, while they are in their good mood, they conceive themselves to have very true, and very good repentance : so that if they should have the good fortune to be taken away in one of these intervalla, one of these sober moods, they should certainly be saved ; which is just as if a man in a quartan ague, or the stone, or gout, should think himself rid of his disease as oft as he is out of his fit. But if repentance were no more but so, how could St. Paul have truly said, that "godly sorrow worketh repentance?" (2 Cor. vii. 10.) Every man knows, that nothing can work itself. The archi- tect is not the house which he builds, the father is not the son The First Sermon. 541 which he begets, the tradesman is not the work which he makes ; and therefore, if sorrow, godly sorrow, worketh repentance, cer- tainly sorrow is not repentance. The same St. Paul tells us in the same place, that " the sorrow of the world worketh death ;" and you will give me leave to conclude from hence, therefore it is not death ; and what shall hinder me from concluding thus also; "godly sorrow worketh repentance," therefore it is not repentance ? To this purpose it is worth observing, that when the scripture speaks of that kind of repentance, which is only sorrow for some- thing done, and wishing it undone, it constantly useth the word (xsraixeXsia, to which forgiveness of sins is nowhere promised. — So it is written of Judas, the son of perdition, (Matt, xxvii. 5,) fjLSTafAsXr^sjg a<7rsV£s4'£, " he repented, and went and hanged him- self," and so constantly in other places. But that repentance, to which remission of sins and salvation are promised, is perpetually expressed by the word (xsravoia, which signifies a thorough change of the heart and soul, of the life and actions, Msravosw-s 1 tyy/ms 54 The Second Sermon. daily in acting that over again. For what was it destroyed Adam, hut the preferring of the tree of knowledge before the tree of life ! 21. St. James,* speaking of such persons so ensnared, seems to take much of the envy and deceit of so cruel deceit and cozenage, as this is, from off the devil, and to lay it upon themselves : " be not hearers of the word only, but doers also; deceiving yourselves." He confesses such to be fools, cozened and deceived people : but, themselves, saith he, are their own cheaters; wherein lies a strong emphasis, expressing the extreme unhappiness of such poor deceived wretches. If the cunning insinuation of one, that for his own ends pretends friendship to me, draw me into some inconvenience or danger, the world will think me a fool for being so catched, and not being able to dive and pierce into his secret purposes : but this folly is not of so perfect a strain, but that it may deserve both ex- cuse and pity. But that man that spends his whole life in con- triving and plotting, and laying snares for his own soul ; if, after all this ado, he be indeed caught in the pit, that, with so much pains, he digged only for himself, would not any man forfeit his discretion, that should either excuse or pity him? And in such, or worse a case, is he, that contents himself with bare hearing and knowing the word. 22. Who do you think would undertake to excuse a pharisee, if he should be condemned for want of spiritual wisdom ; one whose profession it was, whose trade and course of life, to be conversant in the scriptures; who had spent his age in reading the holy writ, and teaching others out of it; one that was so curious in having the scripture always near him, that he wore it continually about him ; it was a trimming and ornament to his apparel ; it was always in his eyes; it was girded about the wrists of his arms, and instead of a lace or fringe at the bottom of his garment? If one, after all this curiosity of dressing, sedulity in reading, industry in teaching, should, at length, with so good parts, in such good clothes, go down into hell, and so die for want of true knowledge ; who would adventure to excuse him, who would dare to pity him? 23. Yet not one or two, but the whole college, the whole faction of them, you shall find, in Matt, xxiii. very near the end, no less than eight woes denounced against them by our Saviour himself (who is not very forward to destroy; he came upon a far other business), and all those woes for their folly and blindness. In the denouncing of every woe, but one, he styles them hypocrites (and a hypocrite, you know, is the veriest fool in the world ; for he thinks to cozen and put a cheat upon God, whom yet himself confesses to be omniscient, and who knoweth all things) : in that single woe he calls them " blind guides," elsewhere " fools and blind." This was our Saviour's judgment of them, and you may rest upon it, that it was upon sufficient grounds. 24. But their folly and ridiculous madness will yet more appear, if you take notice of the opinion and judgment that these very pharisees gave of themselves: it is in John vii. 48, 49. The occa- sion of it was this : the great council of the sanhedrim, seeing so * James i. 22. The Second Sermon. 555 many of the ignorant people (as they thought), seduced by our Saviour, to remedy any further spreading of so dangerous a con- tagion, they, by common advice, send officers to attach him, and to make him sure enough for preaching. The officers find him busy, instructing the people ; and, instead of laying hands on him, themselves are even caught, and almost bereft of their infidelity. When sermon was done, they return to their masters, the rulers and pharisees, without their prisoner, and give a good account why they did not fulfil their command, in telling them, they never heard a better preacher in their lives: " never man (say they*) spake like this man." These wise magistrates, pitying the simplicity and easiness of their sergeants, answer them thus :f " are ye also de- ceived ? Have any of the rulers, or of the pharisees, believed on him ? But this people, who know not the law, are cursed ;" imply- ing that, if the people had been as well read in the law of God as their teachers were, they would have kept themselves safe enough from the ensnaring sermons of Christ. But now they may see what difference there is between men utterly unacquainted with God's word, and themselves; how subject they are to destruction, and to be cursed of God. 25. How is it possible for the wit of man to imagine folly and madness of a more perfect strain ? Our Saviour Christ, who is truth itself, did not exact faith from his followers merely for his miracles' sake, but sent them to search the scriptures :J " for they (saith he) testify of me." And yet these wise men impute it to their knowledge of the law, that they were freed from this curse, into which the poor ignorant people fell. How cunningly have these fools laid a snare for their own lives ! 26. Alas ! what could the poor people think, when they heard their doctors and magistrates (men that were gods to them, that sat in Moses' chair) condemned of such extreme folly and indiscre- tion? What will become of us, might they say, if the pharisees (from whom all that we know is but a thin thrifty gleaning), have so many woes denounced against them for want of spiritual know- ledge 1 27. Certain it was, there were many poor souls whom the pharisees kept out of heaven for company. Our Saviour tells them so much, " Ye neither go into heaven yourselves, nor suffer others to go in :" but they were such as they had infected with their leaven ; such as made those rotten superstructions which those great doctors built upon the word, foundations of their faith and hope. And as certain it is, that many there were, upon whom God, out of his gracious favour and mercy, had not bestowed such piercing brains, and inquiring heads, as to make them acquainted with their dangerous opinions and traditions. Thev were such as made better use of that little kuowledge they had, than to vent it in discourse, or in maintaining opinions and tenets against the church. They heard the word with an humble honest heart, sub- mitting themselves wholly to it, and restored their faith to its proper seat, the heart and affections; and it was fruitful in their * John vii. 46. t Ver. 47—49. X John v. 39. 556 The Second Sermon. lives and practice. The wisdom of Solomon himself, as long as he gave himself to idolatry and luxury, was folly and madness, to the discretion and prudence of these poor despised people. 28. Thus you see, " the fool," that in my text is so mad as to say, "there is no God," may have wit enough to understand more; nay, in the opinion of the world, may make a silly fool of him that has laid up in his heart invaluable treasures of spiritual wisdom and knowledge. And, therefore, the Latin translation, following St. Paul, might more significantly have styled him imiprudens than insipiens. For the wisdom which is according to godliness, doth most exactly answer to that prudence which moral philosophers make a general overruling virtue, to give bounds and limits to all our actions, and to find out a temper and mean wherein we ought to walk : and, therefore, a most learned divine of our church, yet alive, knew very well what he said, when he defined our faith to be a spiritual prudence ; implying, that faith bears the same office and sway in the life and practice of a christian, as prudence of a moral honest man. 29. Now, saith Aristotle, there may be many intemperate, youthful, dissolute spirits, which may have an admirable, piercing, discerning judgment in speculative sciences, as the mathematics, metaphysics, and the like ; because the dwelling upon such con- templations does not at all cross or trouble those rude untamed passions and affections of theirs ; yea, they may be cunning in the speculative knowledge of virtues : but all this while they are, not- withstanding, utterly, invincibly imprudent ; because prudence requires not only a good discerning judgment and apprehension, but a serenity and calmness in the passions. 30. Therefore the same philosopher does worthily reprehend some ancients, who called all virtues sciences; and said, that each particular virtue was a several art, requiring only an enlightening or informing of the reason and understanding, which any, for a little cost, and small pains-taking, in frequenting the learned lec- tures of philosophers, need not doubt but easily to obtain. 31. This conceit of so learned a man does very well deserve our prosecution ; and it will not be at all swerving from the business in hand : therefore I shall shew you, how the moralist, by the force of natural reason, hath framed to himself a divinity and religion, resembling, both in method and many substantial parts, the glorious learning of a christian. I told you, the fore-named doctor did very well to call our faith, or assent to supernatural mysteries, a spiritual prudence. 32. Now, besides moral prudence, nay, before the moralist can make any use thereof, or exercise it in the work of any virtue, there is required another general virtue, which the philosopher calls universal justice ; which is nothing else but a sobriety and temper in the affections, whereby they are subdued and captivated unto well informed reason : so that whatsoever it commands to be done, there is no rebellion, no unwillingness in the passions, but they proceed readily to execution, though it be never so distasteful to sense. The Second Sermon. 557 33. Now, how well does this express the nature of charity ! for, what else is love, but a sweet breathing of the Holy Spirit upon our passions, whereby the Holy Ghost does, as it did in the be- ginning of Genesis, incubare aquis, move by a cherishing, quieting virtue, upon the sea of our passions ? Did not the same Spirit come to Elijah in a soft whisper 1 he walks not, in turbine, in a strong wind, to raise a tempest in our affections. Now, when we have received this ipsissimam Dei particulam, (as Plato said of the soul) this shred or portion of the Holy Spirit, which is charity, how evenly and temperately do we behave ourselves to God, and all the world besides ! how willingly and obediently do we submit ourselves to the performance of whatsoever faith, out of God's word, doth enjoin us ! 34. But yet the analogy and proportion between these two are more evident and observable : that universal justice is no particular singular virtue, neither hath it any particular singular object (as other virtues have ; for example, temperance, or absti- nence, which hath to do with sensual delights and pleasures, and none else) ; but when it is determined to, and fastens on, the object of a particular virtue, it is converted into, and incorporates with, that very virtue : for example, if I do exercise this general habit of observing a mean and temper in things that concern diet, or sensual pleasures, it becomes abstinence ; if upon objects of ter- ror, it becomes fortitude, or magnanimity. Just so is it with charity. For, 35. Charity is a virtue which never goes alone, and is busied in solitary places, being reserved and excluded from the society and communion of other graces : but it is that which seasons, gives life and efficacy to, all the rest; without which, if it were possible for me to enjoy all the graces that the bountiful hand of God ever showered upon a reasonable creature, yet, if St. Paul speaks truth, I should be nothing worth : it is that which fulfils all the com- mandments. This is evident to all that shall but slightly, and in haste, read over 1 Cor. xiii. beginning with verse 4, and so onwards; where we may behold almost all the virtues that can be named, enwrapt in one virtue of charity and love, according to the several acts thereof, changed and transformed into so many several graces: it " suffereth long," and so it is longanimity: it "is kind," and so it is courtesy; it "vaunteth not itself," and so it is modesty; it " is not puffed up," and so it is humility ; it " is not easily pro- voked," and so it is lenity ; it " thinketh no evil," and so it is simplicity; it " rejoiceth in the truth," and so it is verity; it " beareth all things," and so it is fortitude ; it " believeth all things," and so it is faith ; it " hopeth all things," and so it is confidence; it " endureth all things," and so it is patience; it " never faileth," and so it is perseverance. 36. You see two glorious and divine virtues, namely, faith and charity, though not naturally expressed, yet pretty well counter- feited, by the moralist. And, to make up the analogy complete, we have the third royal virtue, which is hope, reasonably well shadowed out in that which they call intentio finis ; which is 47* 558 The Second Semnon. nothing else but a foretasting of the happiness which they propose to themselves as a sufficient reward for all their severe and melancholic endeavours. 37. What shall we say (my beloved friends) ? Shall the heathen- ish moralist, merely out of the strength of natural reason, conclude the knowledge of what is good, and fit to be done, without a practice of it upon our affections, and outward actions, to be nothing worth, nay, ridiculous and contemptible? and shall we, who have the oracles of God, nay, the whole perfect will of God, fully set down in the holy scriptures, in every page almost whereof we find this urged and pressed upon us, that to know our master's will, without performing it, is fruitless unto us; nay, will intend the heat, and add virtue and power to the lake of fire and brim- stone, reserved for such empty and unfruitful christians: and shall we, I say, content ourselves any longer with bare hearing and knowing of the word, and no more ? God forbid ! rather let us utterly avoid this holy temple of God; let us rather cast his word behind our backs, and be as ignorant of his holy will as even our forefathers were; let us contrive any course to cut off all commerce and intercourse, all communion and acquaintance with our God, rather than when we profess to know him, and willingly to allow him all those glorious titles and attributes, by which he hath made himself known unto us in his word, in our hearts to deny him, in our jives and practices to dishonour him, and use him despitefully. 38. It were no hard matter, I think, to persuade any, but resolved hardened minds, that fruit is necessary before any admis- sion into heaven, only by proposing to your considerations the form and process of that judgment, to which you and every man in his own person must submit. The author's word may be taken for the truth of what I shall tell you ; for the story we receive from his mouth that shall be judge of all, and therefore is likely to know what course and order himself will observe. 39. In the general resurrection, when sentence of absolution, or condemnation, shall be passed upon every one according to his deserts, knowledge is on no side mentioned: but one, because he hath clothed the 'naked, and fed the hungry, and done such-like works of charity, he is taken; and the rest, that have not done so much, are refused. Will it avail any one then to say, Lord, we confess we have not done these works, but we have spent many an hour in hearing and talking of thy word ; nay, we have main- tained, to the utmost of our power, and to our own great preju- dice, many opinions and tenets? Alas! we little thought, that any spotted imperfect work of ours was requisite ; we were resolved that, for working, thou hadst done enough for us to get us to hea- ven. Will any such excuses as these serve the turn? far be it from us to think so. 40. If you will turn to Matt. vii. 22, you shall find stronger and better excuses than these to no purpose. " Many shall say unto me, (saith Christ) Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name ?" These were something more than hearers, they had The Second Sermon. 559 spent their time in preaching and converting souls unto Christ; (which ib a work, if directed to a right end, of the most precious and admirable value that it is possible for a creature to perform :) and yet, while they did not practise themselves what they taught others, they became castaways. Others there were, that had "cast out devils, and done many miracles;" and yet so loved the unclean spirits that themselves were possessed withal, that thev could not endure to part company then, and now were never likely. 41. But have not I all this while mistaken my auditory? Were not these instructions fitter for the universities? Had it not been more fit and seasonable for me to have instructed and catechized mine hearers, rather than to give them cautions and warnings, lest they should abuse their knowledge ? No, surely ! instructions to make use of knowledge in our practice and conversation, and not to content ourselves with mere knowing, and hearing, and talking of the mysteries of our salvation, cannot in the most igno- rant congregation be unseasonable. Even the heathen, which were utter strangers from the knowledge of God's ways, did, notwith- standing, render themselves inexcusable, for detaining some part of the truth, as it were, naturally ingrafted in them, in unrighteous- ness. So that there is no man in the world but knows much more than he practises; every man hides some part, at least, of his talent in a napkin ; wherefore let every man, even the most igno- rant that hears me this day, search the most inward secret corners of his heart for this treasure of knowledge, and let him take it forth, and put it into the usurer's hands, and trade thriftily with it, that he may return his Lord his own with increase. "Blessed is that servant, whom his lord, when he cometh, shall find so do- ing : verily, I say unto you, he shall make him ruler over all his household." 42. And thus I have gone through one member of my first general, namely, the consideration wherein the imprudence of the fool in my text doth consist. In the prosecution whereof I have discovered unto you, how severally Satan plants his engines for the subversion of the church. In the primitive times, when reli- gion was more stirring and active, and charity in fashion, he essayed to corrupt men's understandings with heresies; and there, by the way, was observed his order and method, how distinctly beginning in those first times with the first article, he hath orderly proceeded to corrupt the next following; and now, in these last days, he is got to even the last end of the creed. But since, by the mercy and goodness of God, we are delivered, and stand firm in the " faith once delivered to the saints;" he hath raised another engine against us that stand, and that is, to work, that our orthodox opinions do us no good, which he performs by snatching the word out of our hearts, and making it unfruitful in our lives. Now, those that are thus inveigled and wrought upon, are merely be- fooled by the devil, or rather by themselves; for so 1 told you that St. James says; and, for an example, I proposed the learned pharisees, who, for all their learning and knowledge in the scrip- 560 The Second Sermon. ture, yet our Saviour denounceth eight several woes against them for being fools and blind guides. So that the fool in hand was not opposed to a learned man, but to a prudent man ; and therefore, a worthy doctor of our church did well define faith to be a spiritual prudence, that is, a knowledge sought not only for practice. And there I compared faith with moral prudence, and the fruit thereof, charity, with the virtue of universal justice. Therefore, lest the very heathen should rise up in judgment against us, for not doing so much, with the help and advantage of God's word, as they could without it; I did and do beseech }rou, not to content yourselves with mere knowing and hearing, with only a conceit of faith without works; for that was an ancient heresy in the Nicolaitans (whom God by name professed a hatred to, as Eusebius tells us). And, for an effectual motive, I told you how, at the last great trial, you shall not be catechized, how well you can say your creed, or how many catechisms without book, but how fruitful in works of charity your faith hath been. And so I come to the second member of the first general, namely, the consideration how dangerous and grievous a burthen know- ledge will be, where it is fruitless and ineffectual ; of which briefly. 43. I will once again repeat that divine sentence of the Psalmist in Psal. cxi. 10. " The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, and a good understanding have all they that do thereafter ;" i. e. till a man put his knowledge in practice, he is so far from being a good man, that he is scarce a man, hath not the understanding of a man, till he do, till he fall at work : he was wiser a great deal before he gained his knowledge. Knowledge alone is a goodly pur- chase in the mean time; it is so worthy a purchase, that, as it should seem by our Saviour's account, till a man have obtained some competency in knowledge, he hath gotten no right to the king- dom of darkness and hell. 44. For, certainly, no man can justly challenge damnation, but he that is burdened with sin; now, he that hath no knowledge, but is utterly blind in his understanding, hath no sin, that is, in comparison. The words are : (John ix. 39, &c.) " And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see, and that they which see might be made blind:" not as if Christ did imprint, or inflict, blindness upon any man, but only occasionally; that is, those which walk in darkness, and love it, when the light comes upon them, and discovers their wandering, they hate it, and turn their eyes from it, and become more perversely and obstinately blind. In the same sense that St. Paul saith, (Rom. vii.) "Sin, taking occasion by the law, be- comes more sinful ;" whilst sin is not opposed, it goes on in its course quietly ; but when the commandment comes, and discovers and rebukes it, it becomes furious and abominable, and much more raging and violent. 45. There follows, (ver. 40,) " And some of the pharisees, which were with him, heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?" There is nothing in the world that a pharisee The Second Sermon. 561 can with less patience endure, than to hear any intimation given, that he may be suspected of folly ; and, therefore, they were not so sensible or conceited of some wrong received, when our Saviour called them " generation of vipers," as they are when their wis- dom and discretion are called in question. .Witness this answer; when no man spake to them, they suspiciously demand, whether Christ, in his last words, meant them, or not. But what answers our Saviour? 46. (Ver. 41.) "Jesus said unto them, if ye were blind ye should have no sin ; but now ye say, we see, therefore your sin remaineth." As if he had said, so little shall this supposed know- ledge and wisdom that ye have profit you, that you shall curse the time that ever you saw the holy word of God, and wish that all the sermons that ever you have heard, all the gracious invi- tations, and sweet promises, which God, by the ministry of his servants the prophets, hath sent unto you, had been sentences of some horrible death and torments from the mouth of a severe judge : for your sins, which otherwise had not been so insupport- able, now, by your abusing the knowledge which God hath given you by your wilful contempt of those many invitations which have continually sounded in your ears, are become as a mountain upon you, to crush you into powder. You have hanged a mill-stone about your own necks, which shall irrecoverably sink you into the bottomless, comfortless pit, whereas otherwise there might have been some hope of escape. 47. And yet, for all this, let not any one favour and cherish himself in this conceit, that he thanks God he is ignorant enough, that a very little practice will serve his turn, his knowledge is not so much, that it should put him to too great a labour in ex- pressing it in the course of his life ; for whosoever he be, that dares entertain or give way to such a thought as this is, let him be sure, that if he do not know so much as God requires at his hands (especially now that God hath sealed up the scripture canon, now that the whole will of God is revealed), this very ignorance alone will be a thousand weights, to fasten him to the earth, to make him sure from ever ascending to God, in whom there is no darkness at all. 48. For it is not so with an ignorant man, as it is with one that is blind, who, if he will be sure not to tempt God, by venturing and rushing forward in paths unknown to him, may live as long and as safe as he that is most quick-sighted : no, ignorance alone, though it be not active and fruitful in works of darkness, is crime enough. For, with what colour of reason will such an one expect the reward of the just ? Such an one will not doubt, but that the gates of heaven are barred against the sottish, blind, ignorant heathen, to whom God never revealed any part of his will ; yet himself may fare well enough. Is not this a degree beyond mad- ness itself? What, docs such an one think, that because he lives among religious people, and such as are well acquainted with the way to heaven, that himself shall be sure to go for company? Does he make no doubt of his part in the resurrection of the just, 562 The Second Sermon. because he was born in England, or in such a year of our Lord, when the gospel flourished ? Nay, shall it not be much more tolerable for the worst of heathens than for such a man ? 49. For, if the heathen were left without excuse, because they knew not God, or, if they knew him, they did not honour him as God, whereas they were only instructed by the book of nature; the very main principle of all religion, namely — that there is a God, was a business of great labour, and required a good under- standing to find out, being a conclusion to be collected and de- duced from many experiments of his power, providence, and the like : shall those hope to escape, that pretend ignorance, after they may, if they refuse it not, have use of all that ever reason found out ; nay, have before their eyes the sum and effect of all the sermons and instructions that ever any prophet or apostle made since the world began ? If, after all this, there be any safety to be hoped for from ignorance, then have the apostles travelled, Christ preached, nay died, in vain. 50. But to return to our business in hand. Knowledge, at least in some measure, there must necessarily be, else no hope of salvation ; and with knowledge there must of necessity be joined some proportionable measure of practice, else a greater and more insupportable burden of woe and destruction. And the reason is evident out of those words of our Saviour, " To whom much is given, of him shall much be required." We must know that there is not any good thing in the world wherein we have any propriety ; we are only stewards, and have such things committed to our trust, and one day there will certainly be exacted a strict account, as of our riches, health, education, but much more our knowledge, and especially that knowledge which is perfected only in practice : such is the wisdom of a christian. 51. What reason can be imagined why God should take such pains, give such royal and precious graces to his servants the prophets and apostles, to enable them to make known his good will and pleasure, and what he commands us, and expects at our hands ? Was all this performed, think we, to afford us only mat- ter of table-talk 1 Does he exhort and persuade us, to hear and discourse? No, surely; he gave it us to profit withal both our- selves and others. And, therefore, where there is a more abundant plenty of knowledge lent us, the bill of account must arise propor- tionably, or for what is wanting in the sum we remain debtors ; and when once the creditor catches us by the throat, and casts us into prison, there is no coming out till all, even the uttermost farthing, be discharged : he might well have said never ; for it comes all to one end. 52. It will be worth our consideration, and very material to press this so necessary a point, to take notice of the nature and fashion of the judgment which shall befall the fool in my text, and such companions of his as are content to enjoy a fruitless in- effectual knowledge, how fit and suitable it is to their offence. You shall find it expressed in Luke xiii. 25, &c. in these terms: " Many in that day shall begin to say, We have eaten and drunk 77/e Second Sermon. 563 in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets :" this is something more than hearing *ermons, or learning catechisms by heart. These had heard him preach, nay, were familiarly ac- quainted with him; and yet in that day will get but a comfortless answer from him in the following verse ; " But he shall say, I tell you, I know not whence you are : depart from me, ye workers of iniquity." St. Matthew hath it more sharply : " I never knew ye." They might else have imputed his not knowing them to the weakness of his memory : but he stops that conceit, and professes he never knew them, i. e. he denies not but he had often seen them at sermon when he preached ; and, it may be, he had eaten and drunk with them ; yet, for all this, he never knew them ; they were strangers to him, he never acknowledged them to be his flock, and therefore was not bound to take notice of them : but there is one will own them, even Satan, whom before they ac- knowledged for their Lord, and to his kingdom they may, nay they must, go. 53. Are not these men rightly served ? Are not they justly and righteously dealt withal? They had eaten and drunk in his pre- sence, it is true ; nay, peradventure they had eaten him and drunk him in his sacrament ; they had oft heard him preach in their streets, and could for a need repeat a great deal of the sub- stance of his sermons ; but in very deed they never knew him, nor one word that ever he spoke ; that is, they took no especial notice of him, they did not acknowledge him for their Lord, neither cared they to perform any thing that he commanded. And now he is quit with them, he remembers well enough what kind of peo- ple they were, even his very enemies and deriders ; and as he never did acknowledge them for his sheep, so neither now will he admit them into his fold. A most righteous, yet withal a most heavy doom. 54. And here I will briefly end my other member of the first general, namely, how dangerous and heavy a burden knowledge will be, where it is fruitless and ineffectual : where you have heard, how poor and worthless a purchase knowledge alone is, nay, how without it a man has scarce any title at all unto hell ; there is no guilt without it : alone it is a good qualification, a fair towardly disposition towards our ruin. Our Saviour pro- fesses, that the pharisees themselves, (a nation the very proverb of perverseness and infidelity) if they had been blind, i. e. with- out knowledge, they had had no sin. Yet for all this, though knowledge be so dangerous a ware, (it is something like gunpow- der ; a man when he has it, must take heed how he uses it) yet this is by no means a sufficient excuse for any one utterly to neglect the purchase of it, at least, in some measure: for it is true, knowledge not used, or ill used, will aggravate our tor- ment, and adds even fire unto hell; yet withal it is true, that an utter neglect of all knowledge, especially in these times of light, when it is to be had at so cheap a rate, will make damnation as sure to a man as the former. Now the reason why knowledge, where it is fruitless in practice, will be abundantly fruitful in tor- N n2 564 The Second Sermon. ment, is taken from that maxim of our Saviour, " To whom much is given, of him much shall be required ;" i. e. we beiug only stewards of God's blessings, no proprietaries in them, must expect one day to give account for them all, but especially knowledge, which is a ware of the chiefest trade. Now where there are great receipts, and no disbursements, the debt must needs be exceeding great; and when once the sergeant hath arrested us for it, the Lord knows when we shall pay it. The last thing that I pro- posed to your thoughts was, the suitableness of the punishmen that will attend such an offence : for the fool in my text, when hv. would give himself leave to think, knew well enough that there was a God, and that all his love and service were due to him; but these were melancholic thoughts, and such as would hinder him in the prosecution of his designed projects, and therefore he put them far from him : so that, in effect, and in God's account, he was utterly ignorant of him, did not at all know him. Just so shall they be served. Christ knows all the world better than any man knows his own heart ; yet, in that great day, he shall prove to be a very stranger, utterly ignorant of the greatest part of the world, though many of them had been his acquaintance here ; nay, though, through faith in his power, they had, unawares, by wonders and miracles, brought many to heaven, and had been good helpers to destroy the infernal kingdoms, whereof before they were in affection, and now for ever must be inhabitants. 55. There remains the other main general, which is indeed the substance of the whole text, namely, the fruit of this folly ; and that is, atheism, not in opinion, but practice. In the prosecution whereof, I shall mainly insist upon this : to demonstrate, by in- fallible deductions, out of God's word, that men who profess re- ligion, and a perfect knowledge of God, yet, whilst they allow him only the brain, and not (what he only desires) the heart and affections, may prove, in God's account, very atheists. Or, to bring it nearer home, I will shew how that many the ordinary courses, and the most uncontrolled practices, of men of this age, do utterly contradict, and formally destroy, the very foundations and princi- ples of the glorious religion which they profess. But this will re- quire a much longer time than your patience can allow me: there- fore I will only add some few words of application of what hath been spoken, and so conclude. 56. That jewel which our Saviour so magnifies, (Matt, xiii.) and so commends the wisdom of the merchant for selling all, even utterly undoing himself, to purchase it, is the gospel of the kingdom of heaven : which, though it be of most precious and inestimable value, worthy the selling of the whole world to buy it, yet is every man's money, every man has riches enough to adventure upon it, so he will but sell all that he has, so he will be content to turn bank- rupt for it ; and upon no other terms can he have it. 57. That advice which Christ gave the rich young man, that had a good mind to follow him, viz. that he should sell all that he had, and take up his cross, was not any extraordinary unusual trial, but we have all accepted the same offer upon the very same The Second Sermon. 565 conaitions : we must of necessity sell all, deny and renounce the keeping and possessing of any thing besides this pearl ; we must even sell ourselves, deny and renounce our own souls; they are both become God's own, and we are but borrowers of them. — Now, if we be not masters of our goods, nor of ourselves, neither then may we do our own actions, we must not think our own thoughts. They were such fools as this great notorious one in my text, who in Psal. xii. say, " Our tongues are our own ; we may say what we list." We are all bought with a price, yea, all that we have is bought. 58. Yet though we must sell all, and deny our ownselves, yet we need not part with our goods or riches, we need not make away ourselves. For example : when our Saviour says, " He that hateth not father, and mother, and brethren, and sisters," and all the world besides, " for my name's sake, and the gospel's, is not worthy of me ;" this speech does not bind me to hate, persecute, and destroy all the kindred I have: no, but rather to love and honour them, to spend and be spent for them : yet, if those per- sons, or if it be possible for aught else to be more dear and pre- cious than they, stand in my way to hinder me from coming to Christ, then it is time for me to hate them, then I must trample them under my feet. So that a man is no more bound to sell his goods, that is, to throw them away, than he is to hate his parents; only neither of them may by any means offend us or annoy us in our journey to Christ. 59. Now, to bring this home to our purpose : can any face be so impudent as to profess he hath already sold all, himself to boot, and is ready to part with them when God shall call for them, who contents himself only with knowing and hearing stories of him, and reserves his heart to his own use which is all that God re- quires ? Can he with any reason in the world be said to sell all for the gospel of Christ, that sees Christ himself, every day al- most, hungry, and does not feed him ; naked, and does not clothe him; in prison, and does not visit him? for, inasmuch as they do not these offices of charity to his beloved little ones, they deny them to him. Will he be found to be worthy of Christ, that for his sake will not renounce one delightful sin, which an heathen would easily have done, only for the empty reward of fame ? that for his sake will not forgive his brother some small injury received, nay, perhaps some great kindness offered, as a season- able reproof, or loving dissuasion from sinning ; that for his sake will not undergo the least trouble in furthering his own salvation? 60. Far from us, beloved christians, be so barren a profession ; a profession having only the visard and " form of godliness, but denying the power thereof!" No: let us, with thankful hearts and tongues, recount and consider what God hath done for our souls, how he hath given us his word, abundantly sufficient to instruct us; how he hath spoken the word, and great is the multitude of preachers. Yet withal let us consider, that it is 48 566 The Third Sermon. in our power to turn these invaluable treasures of God's favours into horrible curses. Let us consider how God hath sent out his word, and it will not return unto him empty : it will be ef- fectual one way or other, it will perform some great work in us. God doth but expect what entertainment it finds upon earth, and will proportion a reward accordingly : on them which de- tain the truth in unrighteousness, he will rain snares, fire, and brimstone : but to such as, with meek hearts, and due reverence, "receive it into good ground," and express the power thereof in their lives, there remaineth an exceeding eternal weight of joy and glory. " Let us therefore walk as children of the light," and not content ourselves with a bare empty profession of religion: "Let him that but nameth the name of the Lord, depart from iniquity." Brethren, consider what I say, and the Lord give you understand- ing in all things ! " To God/' &c. SERMON III. " The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." — Psalm xiv. 1. I will not be ashamed to be so far my own plagiary, as for your sakes, that you may be the better able to go along with me in what remains of this text, briefly to discover unto you, how far I have already, in another auditory, proceeded in it. 2. First, therefore, I conceived (by attending to the course and series of the psalm, and by comparing this place with many others in holy scripture in different language, expressing the same sense) that this fool in my text was not a man utterly ig- norant and devoid of the knowledge of God and his word : for he is supposed by the psalmist to be a man living within the pale of the church, and outwardly professing the true religion and worship of God. And thereupon, secondly, that his atheism was no heathenish, philosophical atheism, no problematical main- taining an opinion that " There is no God ;" for, even among the very heathens, we read not of above three or four of any account, which have proceeded to this excelling degree and height of impiety. 3. But this person (whether Doeg the Edomite, or whosoever he were) is such an one, as, though in his profession, and even serious thoughts, he do not question a deity, but would be a mortal enemy to any one who should dare to deprive and rob Almighty God of any of his glorious attributes; yet notwith- standing, in his heart, (that is, in the phrase of the scripture) in the propension and inclination of his affections, and, by conse- quence, in the course and practice of his life, he denies and re- nounces God : he accounts the spending a little time in thinking and meditating on the providence, or mercy, or severity of God, to be an employment very ungainful and disadvantageous to him, a business likely to trouble and spoil many of his ungodly The Third Sermon. 567 projects, and to hinder him in his fortunes; and, for this reason, he will put God far away from him ; he will not suffer him to be (as the Psalmist saith, Psal. x. 4,) " in all his crafty purposes." 4. I yet willingly confess, that this saying in the heart, " There is no God," may reasonably be interpreted to be a secret whisper- ing suggestion, an inward persuasion, by fits, which a wretched worldling may have, that since he has thrived so well by his carelessness in observing God's word, and obstinate opposing himself to his will, it may be possible there is indeed no God at all ; or if there be, that he will not vouchsafe to descend so low as to take notice what is done here on earth, or to observe how each particular person behaves himself in this life. Now, be- cause I will not set up one of these expositions against the other, I will hereafter, as occasion shall offer itself, make use of them both. 5. Having therefore conceived the sense of the text to be such as I have now told you ; in the words I observed two general parts. First, the cause of atheism, and, by consequence, all the abominations following through the whole psalm, intimated in the person Nabal, i. e. the fool, which is folly, i. e. ignorance or ra- ther incogitancy, inconsideration. Secondly, the effect of this folly, which is atheism, and that seated not in the brain, but in the heart or affections. I have already gone through the former part, namely, the cause of atheism, which is folly ; in the prosecu- tion whereof, I endeavoured to discover wherein this folly doth con- sist : and that is not so much in an utter ignorance of God, and his holy word, as not making a good use of it, when it is known ; a suffering it to lie dead, to swim unprofitably in the brain, with- out any fruit thereof in the reformation of a man's life and con- versation. And, there I shewed, first, what extreme folly it was for a man to seek to increase the knowledge of his master's will, without a resolution to increase proportionably in a serious active performance thereof. And, secondly, the extreme unavoidable danger and increase of guilt, which knowledge, without practice, brings with it. To both which considerations I severally annexed applications to the consciences of them that heard me, and should have proceeded to — 6. The second general part ; which is, the effect and fruit of the folly or inconsideration of Nabal, (the fool) in my text, which is atheism practical, not of the understanding, but the will and affec- tions. But the time being spent in the prosecution of the former general part, I was forced to reserve this second general, to be the employment of another hour. 7. Only thus much I then made promise of, (which debt I pur- pose now to discharge to you) namely, to demonstrate by infallible deductions out of God's word, that many who profess religion and a perfect knowledge of God's word, yet whilst they allow him only the brain, and not (what he almost only requires) the heart and affections, may prove in God's account very atheists. Or, to bring it nearer home, I promised to shew how that many of the 568 The Third Sermon. ordinary courses, and most uncontrolled practices, of men of this age, do utterly contradict, and formally destroy the very founda- tions and principles of that glorious religion which they profess. Of these, &c. 8. At the first sight, indeed, a man would think, that of all the places in holy scripture, and of all the ages which have been since the world began, that this text, and these times, should suit worst together : for, first, if a man would strive, with all the earnest- ness, and even spite, he could, in all the abominable odious colours to describe the worst of all human creatures, even the idolatrous, self-devouring Indians, what more horrible expression could he imagine to himself than to call them fools, and such fools who say in their heart — " There is no God V Again, if we shall in- quire and ask the former ages, if ever the world was so stored, and even oppressed with knowledge ; they will tell us, that the light was never a burden, nor knowledge a vice, before now. Never, till now, did all sorts and conditions of men pretend to be able to state the most intricate profound questions of our religion : never till now, was Moses' wish fulfilled, " I would to God, that all the people of the Lord were prophets ;" though in a sense which would scarce have pleased him. 9. These things considered, were it not fit (think you) that I should renounce my text, or travel to find out a nation whom it may concern, and who have need to hear atheists condemned? I would to God (my beloved brethren) that whatsoever I shall speak against that fearful sin of atheism, may prove vain unpro- fitable words, words which may return empty, having found none to fasten upon: I would to God, that I might strive now as one that beateth the air, so that you (even you that know so much) were innocent. But David found this a doctrine fit to be pressed in his days, which were none of the worst neither : yea, he hath a second time, in Psal. liii. almost in terminis terminantibus, re- peated whatsoever he here speaks of the atheist : we find not such an example through the whole scripture, except it be in a history, or where the quotation is mentioned. Therefore, surely it may be pertinent, and sometimes useful, even in the church, to have atheism discovered, to have this doctrine preached and re-preached; it was so in David's time ; and it shall go hard, but we shall shew, that we ourselves, though never so wise, and learned, and knowing in our own opinion, yet that we also ought not to take it to heart, if sometimes we be suspected and challenged of atheism. 10. That temptation which the devil found hard enough for himself, even when he was an angel of light, namely, Ero similis Altissimo, " I shall be like the Most Highest," now that it is his office and employment to become a tempter, he hath since scarce ever varied. At the first exercise of his trade with his first cus- tomers, Adam and Eve, he began with it : " Ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." And if we shall impartially examine our own thoughts, we shall find almost in every suggestion, at least, some degree and tincture of atheism : either we do exalt The Third Sermon/ 569 and deify our ownselves, or else we do dishonour, and in a manner degrade Almighty God, deposing him from that sovereignty and sway which he ought to exercise in our hearts and consciences. 11. This, I say, is true, in some measure, in all temptations, in all sins whatsoever — there is some quantity of atheism, though the sins be but of an ordinary size and rank. But this is not that which I would now stand upon : it concerns me to shew, that though men be never so orthodox in their opinions, though they pretend to never so much zeal of the truth which they profess, yet unless that divine truth be powerful and persuasive enough to the performance and practice of such duties as bear a natural resemblance and propor- tion unto it ; they that make such a profession of God's truth do but flatter themselves; they only think they believe; but in deed, and in truth, there is no such thing as faith in them. For we must know, that there is no divine truth so utterly speculative, but that there naturally and infallibly flows and results from it (as necessarily as warmth from light) a duty to be practised and put in execution ; insomuch that it is impossible for a man to be truly persuaded of the one, but he shall infallibly be persuaded to the other : so that " he which saith he knoweth God, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him." (1 John ii. 4.) And this I shall endeavour to confirm by induction, examining the truth and reality of our assent to the chief funda- mental points of our religion by our practices answerable thereto, and concluding, that where the latter is not to be found, it is but a vain persuasion, and fantastical illusion, for a man to think he hath the former. 12. But, in the first place, that we may be the better able and without interruption proceed in this designed course, I will first remove an objection which may seem to prevail against that which hath been spoken to this effect : " The devils (as St. James saith*) believe and tremble :" they do indeed assent unto the truth of all the mysteries of our salvation : in the place of St. James they acknowledge one God ; in Matt. viii. 29, they acknowledge the se- cond article of our faith, allowing Christ to be the Son of God ; and the like may be said of the others following : and yet, if we ex- amine their practice, how absolutely contradicting and warring it is with their profession ! Therefore, it may seem, that where there is a firm assent to divine truths, there may consist with it a contrary repugnant practice. 13. For answer, therefore, we must know, that the assent which the devil gives to the revelations of God is extremely different from that belief which is exacted of us christians, and which every one of us (though never so vicious and irreligious) would gladly persuade ourselves that we allow unto God's word. For though, for example, the devils acknowledged the precepts and command- ments of God to be holy, and just, and good, and most fit to be observed; as likewise, that to those who sincerely, and without hypocrisy, shall perform these commandments of God, the pro- * James ii. 19. 48* 570 TJie Third Sermon. mises of God shall be "yea and amen," they shall infallibly attain those joys, which exceed man's understanding to comprehend : yet these things to them are only as a tale which is told ; or ra- ther, they are to some occasion of horror and gnashing of teeth, that there should be such glorious comfortable things, which do no- thing concern them, and of malice and hatred to those who have an interest in them, and are in a fair possibility of attaining unto them ; and therefore no marvel, if such a faith as this be barren and unfruitful of good works: whereas "our faith (saith St. Paul, Heb. xi. 1,) is the substance of things hoped for," of things which concern us: we do not only acknowledge, that the precepts of God are good, but also necessarily to be performed by us; and, that the promises of God are not only desirable in themselves, but also that, being such, they were revealed for our sakes, and are infallibly destined unto us, when we shall have performed such conditions as may, by the assistance of God, be executed by us, even with ease and pleasure. Now, wheresoever persuasions such as these are, it is impossible (even if the devils themselves could be supposed ca- pable of them) but that there should accompany them earnest and serious endeavours not to come short of the glory of God. This difficulty therefore being dissolved, I shall pursue the examination of our belief of the foundations of our religion by the fruits and is- sues of it in the practice of our lives. 14. We will begin with some of God's attributes: Whosoever thou art that professest thyself a christian, thou believest that God, whom thou servest, is present every where, both in heaven and earth, insomuch that it is altogether impossible for thee to exclude him from thy company ; wheresoever thou goest, he will pursue thee : though thou should clothe thyself with darkness as it were with a garment, the darkness would be to him as the noon- day ; and though it were possible for thee to deceive the eyes and observation of men and angels, yea, eyen of thine own conscience, yet to him thou wouldst be open and transparent, yv^wg xui Tsrpa-^rjkni^swg, as it were, dissected, and having the very entrails exposed to his sight. 15. Thou canst hide, therefore, nothing which thou doest from his eyes; he taketh notice of every word which thou speakest, he hears even the very whispering of thy thoughts: and all this thou sayest thou acknowledgest. Out of thy own mouth shalt thou be condemned, thou wicked servant: darest thou then make thy master a witness of thy rebellion and disobedience ? When thou art about the fulfilling of any of thine ungodly lusts, thou retirest thyself from company, and art afraid of the faces of men ; thou abhorrest the light, and yet darest outface him whose eyes are ten thou- sand times brighter than the sun. Thou wouldst not have the con- fidence to commit filthiness, if thy friend were in company; and yet, what injury is done to him by it? What commandment of his dost thou transgress in it? Or, if thou didst, what power or au- thority has he over thee to punish thee ? Thou wouldst be ashamed to commit such a sin, if thy servant were by, one whom thou art The Third Sermon. 571 so far from being afraid of, that himself, his words, almost his very thought . are in thy power; nay, If a child were in company, thou wouldst not have the face to do it. 16. Thou canst not deny, but respect to a friend, to a servant, even to a child, will withhold thee from such practices ; and yet withal confessest, that Almighty God, whom thou professest to serve, to fear, and to love, that he all the while looks upon thee, and observes thee ; his eyes are never removed from thee, and, which is worse, though thou mayest endeavour to forget and blot such actions out of thy remembrance, yet it is impossible he should ever forget them; he keeps a register of all thy sins, which no time shall ever be able to deface : and what will it then profit thee to live a close concealed sinner from the world, or to gain amongst men the reputation of a devout religious christian, when in the mean time thine own heart and conscience shall condemn thee ; nay, when Almighty God, " who is greater than thy heart, and knoweth all things," when he shall be able to object unto thee all thy close and ungodly projects, all thy bosom private lusts ? Yea, when that conceit (wherein thou didst so much please thyself) of being able to delude and blind the observation of the world, shall nothing avail thee ; but whatsoever mischiefs thou hast contrived in thy closet, whatsoever abominations thou hast practised in thy bed, all these, with each aggravating circumstance, shall be discovered in the presence of all men, and angels and devils ; when Satan, whom before thou madest an instrument and bawd unto thy lusts, to whose counsels and suggestions thou before wouldst only hearken, shall be the most forward and eager to ap- peach thee. 17. When thou art brought to such an exigent as this, (which, without a timely unfeigned repentance, as sure as there is a God in heaven, thou shalt at last be brought to) what will then thy orthodox opinions do thee good 1 What will it then profit thee to say, thou never didst maintain any impious dishonourable tenets concerning God, or any of his glorious attributes'? Yea, how happy haclst thou been, if, worse than the most ignorant heathen- ish atheist, no thought or consideration of God had entered into thy heart! For this professing thyself a christian, rightly in- structed in the knowledge of God, will prove heavier to thee than a thousand mill-stones hanged about thy neck, to sink thee into the bottom of that comfortless lake of fire and brimstone. For, for example, what a strange plea would it be for a murderer, to say, 1 confess I have committed such or such a murder, but all the excuse which I can allege for myself is, that I was well studied in the laws which forbade murder, and I knew, that my judge, who tied me to the observance of this law, upon pain of death, was present, and observed me when I committed the fact ? Surely it would be more tolerable for him to say, I never heard of any such law or judge; or, if 1 had been told of such things, I gave but little heed to the report, I did not at all believe it. For though this plea will be very insufficient to acquit the malefactor, vet it will be much more advantageous than the 572 The Third Sermon. former ; for what were that, but to fbut the judge to his face, and to pretend a respectful worthy opinion, for this end, that his con- tempt and negligence in performing his commandments may be more extreme and inexcusable, and, by consequence, without all hope or expectation of pardon 1 I need make no application of the example ; the similitude doth sufficiently apply itself. 18. Therefore, if I were to advise any man, who is resolved by his practice to contradict that opinion, which he saith he hath of God, or that is not resolved to live with that reverence and awfulness due to the majesty of Almighty God, in whose presence he always is, I would counsel him not to believe himself, when he professes the omnipresence or omniscience of God ; for, without all contra- diction, though by living in a nation, where every one with whom he converses, professeth so much, he may have learned to say, there is a God, and that this God is every where present, and takes particular notice of whatsoever is done in heaven and earth; yet, if this notion were firmly rooted in his soul, as a matter of religion, as a business upon which depends the everlasting welfare of his soul and body, it is altogether impossible for him to con- tinue in an habitual practice of such things as are evidently re- pugnant and destructive to such a conceit. For, tell me, would any man in his right senses, when he shall see another drink down a poison, which he knows will suddenly prove mortal unto him, — I say, will any man be so mad as to believe such an one, though he should, with all the most earnest protestations that can be imagined, profess that he is not weary of his life, but intends to prolong it as long as God and nature will give him leave? 19. The case is altogether, in each point and circumstance, the same: for he which saith, he believeth or assenteth to any doctrine, as a fundamental point of his religion, intends thus much by it — that he has bound himself in certain bonds unto Almighty God (for so the very name of religion doth import) to expect no bene- fit at all from him, but upon condition of believing such divine truths, as it shall please him to reveal unto him, namely, as means and helps of a devout religious life, and worship of him : for God reveals nothing of himself to any man for this end, to satisfy his curiosity, or to afford him matter of discourse or news; but to in- struct him how he may behave himself here in this life, that he may attain those promises, which shall be fulfilled to those who sincerely and devoutly serve and obey him. 20. Therefore he that shall say, I believe such a truth revealed by God, and yet lives as if he had never heard of such a thing, yea, as if he had been persuaded of the contrary, is as much to be believed, as if he should say, I will drink a deadly poison to quench my thirst, or will stab myself to the heart for physic, to let out superfluous blood : so that that man who is not resolved to break off his wicked courses by re- pentance, and conversion unto God ; that lives as if the devil only were every where, and he resolved to please and delight him with his ungodly life ; let not such an one use himself to say, I believe that God is always present with me, and a spectator of my The Thii'd Sermon. 573 actions; for thereby he shall only add a lie to the rest of his sins, and fuel to the lake of fire and brimstone : he shall never persuade God to believe him, that he was of such an opinion ; but that what- soever his tongue said, and his fancy now and then apprehended, yet in his conscience he was always a constant resolved atheist, and in his heart he said, " There is no God." 21. In the second place, thou acknowledgest, that God, whom thou professest obedience to, is infinitely righteous, insomuch that it is impossible that he should not hate and abhor unrighteousness in whomsoever he finds it ; yea, so natural and essential is his justice unto him, that he should deny himself, if he should except any man's person, if he should not be avenged on sin, if he should not most severely punish it. Thou canst not be ignorant how many vows and protestations he hath made almost every where through the holy scripture, of his hatred and indignation against sin, insomuch that heaven and earth may pass away, but not one jot or tittle of those curses and plagues shall fall to the ground, which he hath denounced against impenitent sinners. 22. And shall not thy own mouth here once again condemn thee, O thou wicked servant ? Barest thou then every hour wilfully, and even contentedly, do such things as must certainly pro- cure his anger and indignation against thee for ever? Wilt thou, for the sinful pleasure of a few minutes, put thyself in such a con- dition, that God must of necessity be angry with thee ? That he must cease to be God, unless he hate and abhor thee? Certainly, if thou wouldst descend into thine own heart, if thou wouldst give thyself leave carefully and impartially to examine thy thoughts, thou wouldst find, that thy tongue has given thy soul the lie, when it has told thee, that God is immutably just and righteous; and yet for all that, that thou art resolved to run on in such courses, as must of necessity pull down his heavy displeasure against thee. 23. At least, thou wilt find in thy heart earnest desires and wishes, that God were not so righteous as preachers tell thee he is ! O ! (thinkest thou in thy heart,) that God were such an un- righteous person as I am ! O ! that he could be content to wink at me, when I am about the fulfilling of my ungodly desires ! Alas ! what harm is it to him, what inconvenience accrues to him by it, if I enjoy the sinful pleasures of this life ? Or, if he will needs be angry, O that it were not in his power to revenge him- self upon me ! O that his power were not so unlimited as they say it is! 24. I know men will be apt to flatter themselves though they be never so vicious, and to think, that they are extremely wronged, to have such imputations laid upon them : they will be ready to answer me, in the words of Hazael to the prophet Elisha, when he told him what horrible massacres he should commit among the Israelites, when he should have the crown of Syria set on his head, " What ! dost thou think us dogs, that we should do such things as these?" We are so far from robbing God of his justice, that we should be mortal enemies to any that dare proceed to that height 574 The Third Sermon. of impiety ; nay, we should be content to sacrifice our own lives, rather than be brought to deny that, or any other of his glorious attributes. 25. Truly, I am so charitably minded, as to think that there is none so wicked, but would confidently make this defence for him- self, yea, and believes he is in earnest when he speaks so. But this will not serve the turn ; for " God seeth not as man sees," he judgeth not as man judgeth, but he judgeth righteous judg- ment : for instance, in that great example which our Saviour gives of the fashion and course of judgment, according to which he purposes to proceed in the last day ; he accuses the wicked, and condemns them for neglect of visiting, and feeding, and clothing him. The apology which they make for themselves, as having never seen him in that exigence, would not be taken : for though I am persuaded they there spake nothing but what they verily thought, namely, that if ever they had seen Christ himself in such want and necessity, they would not have been so hard-hearted to him as they were to his poor servants; yet Christ will not allow of that excuse, but accounts of their uncharitableness to afflicted christians as directed to himself. 26. So likewise in the case in hand : though I believe it would be hard to persuade even the most licentious professed sinner, that he believes not indeed the justice and righteousness of God : yet he shall find at last, and that miserably to his cost, that God, who knows his heart much better than himself, for all his professions, will yet esteem him an atheist ; and will prove evidently and con- vincingly unto him, that since that knowledge, which he pretended to have of God's righteousness, had been so fruitless and superficial, that, notwithstanding such a conceit, he proceeded still on in his ungodly courses, that therefore he did but delude himself all the while with fantastical ungrounded illusions ; so that what- soever imagination swim in his brain, yet, in the language of his heart, that is, in the propension and sway of his affections, he said, " There is no God." — Now, what hath been said of the omnipresence, infinite knowledge, and justice of God, may by the same reason and proportion, be spoken of the rest of his glorious attributes. But the straitness of time will force me to leave the rest untouched : I will proceed therefore to make the like collections from one or two articles more of the creed. 27. Thou believest, that, after this life, (which cannot last very long; it will, and that shortly, have an end,) there remain but two ways for all men, of what state and condition soever, that ever were to be disposed of; either into life and glory everlasting, or else into pains and torments infinite and insupportable ; and, by consequence, that thy soul is an immortal substance, which shall for ever continue somewhere : and according to thy beha- viour here, during that short measure of time which thou livest upon the earth, it must expect a reward proportionable thereto. If thou canst persuade thyself to walk worthy of that calling, whereunto thou art called in Jesus Christ ; if thou wilt not for- swear and renounce that glorious profession which thou madest TJie Third Sermon. 575 in thy baptism ; if thou canst be content to submit thyself to the easy yoke of Christ ; propose to thyself what reward thou canst imagine, give thy thoughts scope and license to be excessive and overflowing in their desires ; if thou art not satisfied to the utter- most, infinitely above what thou art now able to comprehend, tell God he is a liar, and hath deceived thee. O ! what unspeakable joys shall hereafter expect thee ! O ! with what a burden and weight of glory shalt thou even be oppressed ! 28. But on the other side, if, notwithstanding such inestimable blessings as are now set before thine eyes, thou art yet resolved to content thyself with such vain trifling pleasures as thou canst meet with in this life, which yet thou canst not attain to but with as much pains, and anxiety, and care, as, if rightly applied, would have been sufficient to have procured heaven for thee ! what shall I say unto thee? Only this — "thou hast thy reward; remem- ber that thou hast already received thy good things." What a terrible affrighting speech is this ! it may be, thou hast fed and glutted thy lusts with some pleasures of this life ; it may be, thou hast satisfied, in some small measure, thy ambition with honour and preferment ; and yet it may be, for all thy cares and travails, thou hast not been able to attain to any of those things as thou didst desire : whether thou hast or not, it is all one, there is little to choose ; but howsoever, " Remember that thou hast received thy good things;" remember, "Thou hast thy reward." Do not hereafter presume to offer to pretend to any the least good from God. It may be, hereafter thou mayest come to such want, as to stand in need of a cup of cold water ; nay, it may be, thou wouldst think thyself happy, if any body would afford thee but one drop of water to refresh thy tongue : but in vain ; for, " Son, remem- ber thou hast already received thy good things." Thou never sawest a beggar so utterly wretched and destitute, but he might almost every where have filled himself with water, and have thanked nobody for it ; and yet, though thou shouldst even con- sume thyself with entreating and crying for it, yet none should be found to give it thee; even thy liberal good father Abraham will deny it to thee. 29. Surely there cannot be found so impudent, so unreasonable a sinner, as to profess he is fully persuaded of these things, and that he hath a desire, and even some hope, that God will be so merciful to him, as to preserve him, that none of those things happen unto him, and yet resolve to follow the devices of his own heart; to say, he acknowledgeth that the joys, which are reserved for penitent believers, are so excessively glorious, that the afflic- tions of this life are not worthy of them, much less the vain plea- sures thereof; and yet withal, rather than not enjoy the "plea- sures of sin for a season," to make himself incapable of those great blessings! Such a generation of men I find in holy scripture, and God himself takes notice of them, who say, " We shall have peace, though we walk in the imaginations of our heart:" but withal I can scarcely meet with God so impatient through the whole Bible, as he is with people of such a temper as this; 576 The Third Sermon. " Surely the Lord will be avenged of such a nation as this, and will make his wrath to smoke against them." 30. Therefore, whosoever thou art, that hast taken up thy re- solution to walk in the imagination of thine own 'heart; at least, take so much pity of thyself, do not thou thyself add violence and heat to the wrath of God, which shall smoke against thee, by pretending to a belief of heaven or hell, or by seeming to profess, that all the while that thou art busy in the prosecution of thine ungodly lusts, notwithstanding that, all that time, this opinion hath never left thee, " that God will bring thee to judgment;" that even that very body of thine, which thou madest a mansion for the devil, an instrument for any wickedness that he would suggest unto thee, yet that that body would be raised up ; that, to thy extreme horror and astonishment, God would take such particular care of that very body of thine, that wheresoever it were lost, he would recover it, though dispersed to the four winds of heaven, and build it up again, (thou sayest thou knowest for what use) even to be a mark, against which he will empty his quivers, and shoot out all the darts of fiery indignation, in the punishing of whom he will express his Almighty power. 31. But I cannot allow myself any longer time to prosecute the former part of my proposition, viz. to shew how much men deceive themselves, who think they indeed believe the funda- mental points of their faith, when, by their practice and course of life, they live in an habitual exercise of such sins as are utterly repugnant and destructive of such a belief. And this I think I have performed but yet only in general terms, not descending to a view of some more eminent and particular sins and enormities : for that therefore which remains of the time that your patience will allow me, I will spend it in acquitting myself of the other part of my promise, namely, in instancing in some extraordinary uncontrolled practices of these times, and discovering how utterly they do destroy the very grounds and foundations of our religion, and how impossible it is they should consist with a true sincere pro- fession of Christianity. 32. As first, for example, how ordinarily do we meet with this practice, for men which are above others in wealth and power, to employ both these to their utmost abilities for the maintaining of an unjust cause against a poor inferior adversary? I am sure this is no news to you ; you do not startle at the hearing of such a crime as this ; and yet, if it be well considered, what can be imagined more monstrous and abominable ? For, give me leave to suppose, or put the case, that some one of this company were guilty of this sin. 33. If I should ask him, Whence, and from whom he had his riches or power? whom he would acknowledge for his benefactor? I make no question but he would give me a good religious an- swer, and say, " that he would not sacrifice to his net, nor burn incense to his drag;" but that God who gave a blessing to his cares and endeavours, had advanced him to such a place and for- tune in the world. Again, if I should ask him, In what esteem The Third Sermon. 577 and value (he thought that) God holds his faithful servants ? or, whether he would take it well to have them oppressed and tram- pled on by others more potent than themselves? he must needs answer again, that God is no accepter of persons, neither riches nor poverty are a means to procure his favour; but that in all conditions of men, " he that loveth righteousness, and hateth ini- quity, shall be accepted by him." 34. If these be his answers (as, without all contradiction, unless he will profess himself an atheist, such must be the effect of them), then let him consider, what a woeful condition he has con- cluded himself to be in, and what reason he has to thank God for his honour or riches ! Does he think, that God has furnished him with strength and weapons for this end, that thereby he might be able to make war with himself, that he might have the power to overrun and lay w r aste those whom God loveth as the apple of his own eye ? Can he imagine, that God has been so beneficial and liberal to him, in preferring him to a rank and degree above others not inferior to him in the riches and treasures of God's grace, and therefore as dear unto him as himself, for this end, that thereby he may prove a more able and fit instrument for the devil to wreak his malice and hatred upon those whom God loves ? 35. Therefore, if there be ever such a person in this auditory (yet I hope there is not, but and if there be), what shall I say unto him? Let him consider, what a hard task he has under- taken, to war against God ! Let him consider, what a strange reckoning he is likely to make unto God, when he shall at last (as undoubtedly he will) require of him an account of his stewardship! Behold, Lord, thou hast given me five talents, and what have I done with them ? Why, lo, I have made them ten talents. But how, by what courses? Why, I have unjustly and injuriously robbed and wrung from my fellow-servants those few talents which thou gavest them : I have gained thus much by my violent maintaining of a cause which thou hatest, and which myself could not deny but to be most unjust. This is surely a sore evil under the sun. But since I hope it little concerns any one here to have such a crime as this dissected curiously, and purposely insisted upon, it shall suffice me to say, that they who are guilty of it are far from knowing of what spirit they are, when they say they are christians, since even a very heathen would abhor to countenance or entertain such a vice as this. 36. In the second place, " How can ye believe (saith Christ), who seek honour one of another, and not that honour which is of God?" If these words of Christ be true, that they who too earn- estly desire applause and reputation among men, neglecting in the mean time seriously to endeavour the attaining to the honour which is of God, that is, obedience and submission to his com- mands, which is that wherein a christian ought especially to place his honour and reputation ; if such men as these do in vain, and without all ground of reason, reckon themselves in the number of true believers; again, if the chief badge and xpiTrj^ov, whereby 49 578 The Third Sermon. Christ would have his servants to he distinguished from the world, be a willingness to suffer injuries, a desire rather to have the other cheek stricken, and to have the cloak go the same way wilh the coat, than to revenge one blow with another, or go to law for a matter of no great moment, for recovering of that which a man might well enough lose, without endangering his estate: 37. If these things, I say, be true; suppose Christ (according to the vision of Ezekiel, Ezek. ix. 5, 0,) should command his angels utterly " to slay through all Jerusalem," that is, the church, "old and young, maids, and little children, and women, excepting only those upon whom his mark and badge were to be found;" what destruction and desolation would there be ! How would the sanctuary of God be defiled, and his courts be rilled with the slain ! How would many (who now pass, both in their own and other men's opinions, for good christians enough) be taken for Mahomet's servants, whose religion it is, by fury and murder to gain proselytes to their abominable profession ! Suppose our gar- ments should be presented to God with the same question that Jacob's sons sent their brother Joseph's, JVum hcec est tunica jilii tui? " Is this thy son's coat 1" Would they not rather be taken for the skins of savage beasts? so unlike are they to that garment of humility and patience, which our Saviour wore, and which he bequeathed us in his legacy ! 38. We are so far from seeking that honour which is of God, from endeavouring to attain unto, or so much as countenancing, such virtues, which God hath often professed that he will exalt and glorify, such as humility, and patiently bearing of injuries, that we place our honour and reputation in the contrary ; that is counted noble and generous in the world's opinion, which is odious and abominable in the sight of God. If thy brother offend or injure thee, forgive him, sailh Christ ; if he proceed, forgive him: what, until seven times? Ay, until seventy times seven times. But how is this doctrine received now in the world? What counsel would men, and those none of the worst sort, give thee in such a case? How would the soberest, discreetest, well- bred christians advise thee? Why thus; If thy brother or thy neighbour have offered thee an injury, or affront, forgive him ! by no means; of all things in the world take heed of that: thou art utterly undone in thy reputation then, if thou dost forgive him. What is to be done then? Why, let not thy heart rest, let all other business and employment be laid aside, till thou hast his blood. What! a man's blood for an injurious passionate speech, for a disdainful look! Nay, this is not all: that thou mayst gain amongst men the reputation of a discreet well-tempered murderer, be sure thou killest him not in passion, when thy blood is hot and boiling with the provocation, but proceed with as much temper and settledness of reason, with as much discretion and prepared- ness, as thou wouldst to the communion: after some several days' meditation, invite him, mildly and affably, into some retired place; and there let it be put to the trial, whether thy life or his must answer the injury. The Third Sermon. 579 39. Oh most horrible Christianity ! That it should be a most sure settled way for a man to run into danger and disgrace with the world, if he shall dare to perform a commandment of Christ's, which is as necessary to be observed by him, if he have any hope of attaining heaven, as meat and drink is for the sustaining of his life ! That ever it should enter into the heart of a'christian, to walk so exactly and curiously contrary to the ways of God ; that whereas he every day and hour sees himself contemned and de- spised by thee, who art his servant, his creature, upon whom he might (without any possible imputation of unrighteousness) pour down the phials of his fierce wrath and indignation ! yet he, not- withstanding, is patient and long-suffering towards thee, hoping that his long-suffering may lead thee to repentance, and earnestly desiring and soliciting thee by his ministers to be reconciled unto him ! Yet, that thou, for all this, for a blow in anger, it may be, for a word, or less, shouldest take upon thee to send his soul, or thine, or, it may be, both, clogged and pressed with all your sins unrepented of (for thou canst not be so wild as to think thou canst repent of thy sins, and yet resolve upon such a business,) to expect your sentence before the judgment-seat of God ; wilfully and irre- coverably to deprive yourselves of all those blessed means, which God had contrived for your salvation, the power of his word, the efficacy and virtue of his sacraments, all which you shall utterly exclude yourselves from, and leave yourselves in such a state, that it shall not be in God's power to do you any good ! " O consider this, all ye that fight against God, lest he tear you in pieces, and there be none to deliver you." 40. In the third place, there is another great evil under the sun, and that is, when men are not content to dishonour Almighty God, and their glorious religion, by unworthy scandalous prac- tices, but, to make themselves innocent, they will entitle God to their abominations: of this nature are those who are curious and inquisitive into scripture, great students in it, for this end, that they may furnish themselves with some places, which, being violently wrested, and injuriously handled, may serve, at least in their opinion, to patronize and warrant their ungodly, irreligious courses. The time will come, saith Christ to his disciples, when they who hate and persecute you shall think they do God good service. And the time is come, when men think they can give no greater nor more approved testimony of their religion, and zeal of God's truth, than by hating and abhorring, by reviling and traducing, their brethren, if they differ from them in any, though the most ordinary innocent opinions: if men accord not altogether with them, if they run not on furiously with them in all their tenets, they are enemies unto God and his truth, and they can find scripture enough to warrant them to disgrace and revile such, to raise any scandalous dishonourable reports of them, and to poison utterly their reputation with the world. An Application to the Communion. I have hitherto, as carefullv as so short a time would permit oo2 580 The Fourth Sermon. (and yet, it may be, with greater earnestness than you could have been content I should), searched into the retired corners of our hearts, and there discovered a vice, which, it may be, you little expected, namely, atheism ; a strange vice, I confess, to be found in christian hearts. I have likewise exemplified in some particular practices of these times, most exactly contrary to our profession of christian religion. If I should endeavour to discover all that might be observed of this nature, not my hour only, but the day itself, would fail me. Notwithstanding, I am resolved to make one instance more about the business for which we are met together namely, the receiving of the blessed body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. I suppose you will all acknowledge with me, that that is a business of the greatest consequence that a christian is capable of performing. I hope I need not to instruct you, how inexcusably guilty those men render themselves, who come with an unprepared heart, with an unsanctified mouth, to the partaking of these heavenly mysteries. " Who art thou (saith God by the psalm- ist) that takest my word into thy mouth, when thou hatest to be reformed ?" And if that be so great a crime for a man only to talk of God, to make mention of his name, when the heart is unclean and unreformed, with how much greater reason may Christ say, what art thou that takest me into thy mouth? What art thou that darest devour my flesh, and suck my blood, that darest incorporate my flesh and blood into thyself, to make my spotless body an instru- ment of thy lusts, a temple for the devil to inhabit and reign in ? To crucify Christ once more, and put him to open shame ? To crucify him so that no good shall follow upon it, to make the blood of the new covenant a profane thing ? And thus far, if not deeper is that man guilty, that shall dare to come to this heavenly feast with spotted and unclean affections. SERMON IV. "Let him deny himself." — Luke ix. 23. Good reason there is, that, according to that excess ot value and weight, wherewith heavenly and spiritual things do surmount and preponderate earthly and transitory ; so likewise the desire and prosecution of them should be much more contentiously active and earnest, than that of the other : yet, if men were but in any proportion so circumspect and careful in businesses that concern their eternal welfare, as even the most foolish worldlings are about riches, honour, and such trifles, as are not worthy to take up the mind even of a natural man ; we should not have the glorious pro- fession of Christianity so carelessly and sleepily undertaken, so irresolutely and fearfully, nay, cowardly maintained; I might add, so treacherously pretended, and betrayed to the encompassing of base and unworthy ends, as now it is. 2. To what may we more justly impute this negligent, wretch- The Fourth Sermon. 581 less behaviour of christians, than to an extreme incogitancy, and want of consideration in us, upon what terms it is, that we have entered into league with God, and to what considerable strict con- ditions we have, in our first initiation at our baptism, so solemnly submitted and engaged ourselves; without a serious resolute per- formance whereof, we have promised by no means to expect any reward at all from God, but to remain strangers, utterly excluded from the least hope of enjoying any fruit of those many glori- ous promises, which it hath pleased our gracious God so liberally to offer and reach out unto us, in our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ? 3. It was no good sign, when the precious seed of the word was received into the stony ground with such a sudden joy : hearers, resembled by that ground, give good heed to the glorious and comfortable promises which attend religion, without having re- spect to many troublesome and melancholic conditions which must necessarily go along too ; and, therefore, when persecution begins, either within them, when they are commanded to strangle a lust as dear unto them, and as necessary for their employments, as an eye, or right hand ; or without them, when that profession, which they have undertaken, becomes offensive or scandalous to great men ; then (as if they had been mistaken in the purchase, or de- ceived by the preacher) the joy, so suddenly kindled, as soon van- ishes, and they retire themselves home, expecting a more commo- dious and gainful bargain. 4. Hereupon it is, that our Saviour in this chapter spends two parables — one for a king preparing for war, the other of a builder for a house ; whereby to instruct his hearers, what they should do, before they did offer to undertake this service ; the sum whereof is this : that, if they had any ends and projects of their own, if they thought to serve themselves upon him, they were much deceived : that they should deeply and thoughtfully con- sider, of what weight and consequence the business was that they were about. 5. There is a kingdom to be obtained, and a glorious palace, wherein are to be erected many fair mansions to reign in; but it is a kingdom that suffers violence, and the violent must take it by force; and it is a building that will exact perchance all the means they have, and their whole lives' labour to boot. Wherefore it is good for them to sit down, to send for their friends to counsel ; to ques- tion their hearts, whether they have courage and resolution : and to examine their incomes, whether they will bear the charges; to muster soldiers for the conquest, and labourers for the building. 6. If they like these large offers, and have means enough for the employment, and are unwilling to spare for cost, let them go in God's name : there is no doubt to be made of an end, that shall fully recompense their losses, and satisfy their utmost, boldest, de- sires, and fill the whole capacity of their thoughts. Cut on the other side, unless all these conditions concur, he has so much care of their credit, that he would wish them not to set one foot further in the employment, but to betake themselves home, lest 49* 582 The Fourth Sermon. if they should fail in the business, they should make themselves ri- diculous to the world of scorners; to whom it would be meat and drink to see some glorious fresh ruins of a building left to the fowls and beasts to inhabit ; or to see a fierce invading army forced to retire themselves home, cooled, and content with their former want and poverty. 7. Object. But might not some poor, low-minded, sinful hearer reply upon our Saviour, and inquire whence these sums must be raised, and these forces mustered? Alas! what is a wretched mortal man, that he should think of taking heaven by composi- tion, much more of forcing and invading it ? What is there on earth to lay in balance against heaven? Has not the Spirit of God told us, that all is vanity, nay, lighter than vanity, through all Ecclesiastes? And, again, that men of low condition are vanity, and men of high condition (to wit, such as, because they abound with wealth, think that therefore they are in much better esteem and favour with God than their brethren) they are worse than vanity ? for, as it is, Psal. lxii. 9, " they are a lie;" that is, they are no such things as they take themselves for, they are quite contrary to what they seem. 8. Reply. The answer hereto is not very difficult : for, it is true, if we consider our own abilities, such I mean as our forefathers have left us, it is as impossible for us, by any worth in our power to offer at the purchase of heaven, as to make a new one ; yet such is the mercy of God in Jesus Christ, that so glorious a bargain is al- ready made to our hands, the gain whereof will redound unto us upon very reasonable conditions : namely, if we can be brought to acknowledge our own beggarly, starved estate, and thereby eva- cuating ourselves of all manner of worth and desert in ourselves, and relying only upon his mercy, which is infinite, submitting like- wise ourselves to be absolutely at his disposition without any reser- vation at all. 9. So that the same invaluable precious jewel, which cost the rich merchant in the parable all his estate, and had like to have made a young gentleman in the gospel turn bankrupt, may be- come ours, even the poorest and most despised persons amongst us ; if we will be content to part with our totum nihil, all what- soever we are, or have ; if we can persuade ourselves to esteem pleasure and profit as dross and dung, when they come in com- petition with this pearl; if we can readily and affectionately hate our dearest friends and kindred, even tread our parents under our feet, when they lie in our way unto Christ; if we can perfectly de- test even the most dearest, closest lusts and affectionate sins; finally, if our own souls become contemptible and vile in our own eyes, in respect of that glorious inheritance so dearly purchased for us; then are we rich to purchase this pearl, then are we able and sufficient to go through with this building, and strong enough to conquer this kingdom. 10. Now all this (as must be shewed in many more particulars) is properly to deny ourselves, which is a condition that our Saviour makes so necessary and inseparable in every one, that The Fourth. Sermon. 583 purposes tp be anything the better for him ; that desires to be found in the i ber of those that have given up their names unto him: for, saitli the text, " Jesus saith unto them all, if any man will come after me, let him deny himself," &c. 11. These few words are not conveniently capable of a division : but, taking them in gross, as a precept or law delivered by Christ, and which concerns every man, of what state or condition soever, that resolves to accept of him for a Lord and Saviour; we will pro- - ceed according to the ordinary method of expounding a law; namely, first, we will, in general, consider the nature, meaning, and extent of this law ; how far the action here enjoined (which is a denying or renouncing) doth reach ; and how much is comprehended in the object thereof, ourselves. Secondly, I will restrain this general duty into several special cases, which may conveniently be re- duced to three; as namely, that by virtue thereof we are bound to evacuate ourselves, and utterly deny, 1. Our own wisdom or un- derstanding. 2. Our will and affections. And, lastly, our own de- sert and righteousness. 12. Out of this commandment then, considered in general terms only (for so I shall only handle it in this hour's discourse) as it is contained in these two words, a.Tapvritfaa'dw saurov, but two such words, so full and swelling with expression, that our lan- guage can scarce at all, or but faintly, express and render the force and vigour of them in twenty ; I shall observe unto you this doctrinal position ; namely, that it is absolutely and indispensa- bly required of every man that professes Christianity, not only ut- terly to renounce all manner of things that thwart and oppose God's will and command, but also resolutely, and without all manner of reservation, to purpose and resolve upon the denial of whatsoever is in ourselves, or any thing else, how full of pleasure, profit, or necessity soever, though in themselves indifferent, lawful, or con- venient, when they come in competition with what Christ hath enjoined us. Which, after I have explained and confirmed, by comparing this law with many other precepts of the same nature in the holy scripture, I shall apply unto your consciences by two useful enforcements: one, taken from the extreme undeniable reasonableness of the thing here commanded : the other from the wonderful love and kindness of the lawgiver, that requires not so much at our hands, as himself hath already voluntarily performed, and that for our sakes; for thus, or to this purpose run the words: "if any man will come after me, let him (do as I have done) even deny himself, take up his (indeed my) cross daily, and so follow me." 13. I told you, I remember, my text was a law, and I repent not of the expression, though I know not how, since our divinity has been imprisoned and fettered in theses and distinctions, we have lost this word law ; and men will by no means endure to hear that Christ came to command us any thing, or that he requires any thing at our hands: he is all taken up in promise: all those precepts which are found in the gospel are nothing, in these men's opinions, but mere promises of what God will work in us, I know 584 The Fourth Sermon. not how, sine nobis, though indeed they be delivered in fashion, like precepts. 14. These, and many other such dangerous consequences, do, and must necessarily arise from that newly-invented fatal neces- sity — a doctrine that fourteen centuries of Christianity never heard of. If we will inquire after the old and good ways, we shall find the gospel itself, by its own Author, called a law : for thus saith the Psalmist in the person of Christ : " I will preach the law, whereof the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee."* And how familiar are such speeches as those in our Saviour's mouth : This is my command : " A new com- mandment I give unto you ! Ye shall be my disciples, if you do those things which I command you !" Among the ancient fathers we find not only that Christ is a lawgiver, but that he hath published laws which were never heard of before ; that he hath enlarged the an- cient precepts, and enjoined new; and yet now it is socinianisrn to say but half so much. Clemens Alexandrinus (3. 2t£w/a. in fine) saith, that Christ is more than a lawgiver; he is both Aoyog xai No^os, and quotes St. Peter for it. 15. Well then, my text is a law, and a preparatory law; it is the voice of one crying, Prepare the ways of the Lord; let all hills be depressed, and all valleys exalted. It bears indeed the same office in our conversion, or new faith, that Aristotle assigns to his privation in respect to natural generation. It hath no positive active influence upon the work, but it is Principium occasion ale, a condition or state necessarily supposed, or pre-required in the sub- ject, before the business be accomplished. For, as in physical generation there can be no superinduction of forms, but the sub- ject, which expects a soul, must necessarily prepare a room or mansion for it; which cannot be, unless the soul that did before in- habit there be dispossessed ; so it likewise comes to pass in our re- generation : there is no receiving of Christ, to dwell and live with us, unless we turn all our other guests out of doors. The devil, you know, would not take possession of a house till it was swept and garnished; and dares any man imagine, that a heart defiled, full of all uncleanness, a decayed ruinous soul, an earthly sensual mind, is a tabernacle fit to entertain the Son of God 1 Were it reasona- ble to invite Christ to sup in such a mansion, much more to rest and inhabit there ? 16. In the ordinary sacrifices of the old law, God was content to share part of them with his servants the priests, and challenged only the inwards as his own due. And proportionably in the spiritual sacrifices, his claim was, " My son, give me thy heart." He was tender then in exacting all his due. It was only a tempt- ation, we know, when God required of Abraham that his only son Isaac should be offered in holocaustum, for a whole burnt sacrifice, to be utterly consumed, so that no part nor relics should remain of so beloved a sacrifice; yet even in those old times there were whole burnt-offerings: whereby (besides that one oblation of Christ) was prefigured likewise our giving up our whole selves, * Psalm ii. 7. The Fourth Ser?non. 585 souls and bodies, as a living reasonable sacrifice unto God. And, therefore, our Saviour Christ (who came to fulfil the law, not only by his obedience thereto, but also by his perfect and complete ex- pression of its force and meaning) doth in plain terms resolutely and peremptorily exact from all them that purpose to follow him, a full, perfect resignation of themselves to his disposing, without all manner of condition or reservation. 17. This was a doctrine never heard of in the world before completely delivered. Never did any prophet or scribe urge or enforce so much upon God's people as is herein contained. Yet, in the evangelical law, we have it precisely and accurately pressed; insomuch, that the Holy Spirit of God has taken up almost all the metaphors that can possibly be imagined, the more forcibly to urge this so necessary a doctrine. 18. We are commanded so perfectly and wholly to devote our- selves to God's service ; so earnestly and resolutely to undertake his commands, that we must determine to undervalue and despise all earthly and transitory things beside : nay, from the bottom of our hearts we must hate and detest all things (how gainful, or de- lightful, or necessary soever they seem) if they do in any measure hinder or oppugn us in our journey to Christ. 19. We must not so much as look upon Christ, or glance our eyes upon his glorious mercy, expressed in suffering and satisfying for us (for St. Luke calls this dswpiav) but we must resolve to keep them there fixed, and not deign to think any creature to be a spectacle worthy our looking on : dipopoOWss sfe 'Irjffouv, saith St. Paul.* We have no English term that can fully express the force of this word ; for it is not only, as we have it translated, " looking unto Christ," but taking off our speculations from other objects, and fastening them upon Christ, the author and finisher of our faith. 20. When we have been once acquainted, though- but imper- fectly, with this saving knowledge, we must straight bring our understandings into captivity unto the obedience thereof ; and whatsoever other speculations we have, how delightful soever they be unto us, yet, rather than they should over-leaven us, and (as knowledge without charity is apt to do) puff us up, we must, with much greater care and industry, study to forget them, and resolve, with St. Paul, to know nothing "save Jesus Christ and him crucified." 21. When we have had notice of that inestimable jewel, the kingdom of heaven (so called by our Saviour in the parable), exposed to sale, though our estate be never so great, our wares never so rich and glorious, yet we must resolvedly part with all we have; utterly undo ourselves, and turn bankrupts for the pur- chasing of it. Hence are those commands, "Sell all thou hast;" and, lest a man should think, that when the land is sold, he may keep the money in his purse, there follows, " and give to the poor." And such care is taken by the Holy Ghost in those ex- pressions, lest any evasion should be admitted ; lest it should hap- * Heb. xii. 2. 586 The Fourth Sermon. pen, that such a merchant should find no chapman to buy his wares, nor (which is scarce possible) hands to receive his money, when he would bestow it; it is further said — Forsake all, leave all; by all means quit thyself of thy own riches, run away from thy possessions, and, if there be any thing yet more dear unto thee than thy possessions, as necessary as thy clothes, Despolia teipsmn, "Put off the old man, with his lusts and affections;" and though it stick never so close, tear it from thee, shake off the sin that hangeth so fast on. 22. And yet the Holy Ghost proceeds further in a more for- cible expression: for many heathens have been found, that could persuade themselves to prefer fame, obtained by a philosophical austere life, before riches or honours; but " every one loveth and cherisheth his flesh ;" therefore, if there be a lust so incorpo- rated into thee, that it becomes as useful and necessary as thy right hand or eye, yet thou must resolve to be thine own execu- tioner, to deform and maim thyself; for what will it profit thee to go a proper personable man into hell ! Nay, if thy whole body begin to tyrannize over thee, thou must fight and war with it, and never leave till thou hast brought it into captivity. Then must thou use it like a slave, with short and coarse diet, and store of cor- rection, as St. Paul did, uiroiria^w fjwu to tfwfjux xa< 6oSkuyuy&. Nay, more, saith he, 'Eyw ra (fri-y^ura. tov xu£iou £v tuv ffajfJiaTJ fjiou /3atfTa£w. Such hatred he bore to the body of sin, which did always accom- pany him, that, not content to over-master it, he did ignominiously stigmatize and brand it with the marks of slavery. 23. Yet this is not all : if it be rebellious and incorrigible, thou must even dispatch it, put it to death, and that no ordinary one ; it must be a servile, slavish, cruel death : " Crucify the flesh, with the lusts and affections thereof." A man would think that this were sufficient, and that we might here rest from further tyrannizing over ourselves; but there is no such matter: "If any man hate not father, and mother, and brethren, and sisters, and all the world besides, even his own soul, for my name's sake and the gospel's," saith Christ, " he cannot be my disciple." And now we are at the height; never till now did I tell you the full meaning of my text ; bow far every man is engaged by virtue of this precept, " Let him deny himself." 24. The strength and vigour of this phrase (which expresses as much, indeed, as all the former laid together) we shall the better understand, saith St. Chrysostom, if we consider what it is to deny another : if a father in extreme displeasure do so cast off his son, that he denies him to be a son, he becomes worse than a stranger ; for he will not so much as admit him to enjoy the bene- fit, that common humanity teacheth every man to shew to another: he will not endure him in his sight, less will he vouchsafe to expos- tulate with him ; nay, he will rejoice when he hears of some mis- fortune that hath befallen him, and be beholden to any man that will revenge his injuries upon him. 25. Thus must every one do, who enters into league or friend- ship with God ; he must work himself out of his own acquaint- Tlie Fourth Sermon. 587 ance ; he must be a stranger, or (if God will have him) an enemy to all the world, and especially to himself; though he flow with wealth, yet he must live as being poor, " as having nothing," saith St. Paul. If afflictions or persecution come upon him in God's be- half, he must with all joy entertain them. Whatsoever God enjoins him, though otherwise never so distasteful to him, it must be his meat and drink to perform it. There is nothing must lay a neces- sity upon him, but only God; and, to serve him, he must account the only unum necessarium. 26. Will you see an example of such obedience, and (hat in the old law ? An extraordinary one you shall find in Exod. xxxii. 29, which depends upon a story which went before, the sum whereof was this : Moses, in revenge of that horrible idolatry which was committed during his absence upon the Mount, commands the sons of Levi, to consecrate every man himself unto the Lord, upon his son, and upon his brother, and upon his neighbour, by de- stroying any man, whoever he were, that came in their way; which they resolutely performed. And this obedience of theirs was so acceptable to God, that at Moses' death they obtained the blessing of Urim and Thummim above all the tribes, with this eulogy : "He said unto his father and to his mother, I have not seen them ; neither did he acknowledge his brethren, nor knew his own children, for they have observed thy word, and kept thy covenant." By which obedience, the children wiped out, as it were, the fact of their fa- ther Levi, who had before abused his sword unto injustice, for which he lost the blessing, that else he should have had. (Gen. xlix.) 27. But will not here be room for that earnest objection which the disciples, in great anxiety of mind, made to our Saviour, when he was pressing a doctrine of the same nature with this we have in hand, " Who then can be saved?" If there be required at our hands so absolute and peremptory a resignation of ourselves to God's disposal, that we must root out of our hearts all manner of love of ourselves, or any other creature, then Christ hath de- stroyed the whole second table of the law; for, at the best, we are but to love our neighbours as ourselves : if therefore our first lesson must be to learn to contemn and despise, nay, even hate our own souls, why do we not, with the Levites, so commended, even now consecrate every man himself to the Lord upon our kindred and neighbours, destroying all about us? Besides, how dare we presume to be rich, or retain those possessions, which, as it seems, God hath bought from us? If our goods be not our own, if our souls be not our own, "men and brethren, what shall we do ?" Into what a strait are we fallen ! We are commanded to love our brethren as our own souls, and we are commanded to hate our own souls ; we are enjoined to give God thanks for those blessings, which here we are enjoined to cast away ; we are counselled even by our Saviour, to be perfect as our heavenly father is perfect, and yet we must deny ourselves; whereas the Spirit of God hath told us, that it is impossible that God should deny himself. 28. For answer : this law must be read and understood (as the 588 The Fourth Sermon. schools say) cum grano salis : for though it must be most true, that by virtue of this precept we are obliged to an utter evacua- tion of the love and desire of any thing, and of all manner of confi- dence in ourselves, or any other creature ; yet this must be under- stood not absolutely, but when such things come in competition with our love or obedience to God ; for, otherwise, we are most necessa- rily bound to love ourselves and others, to study and care for our own good, and the welfare of our brethren, even to lay down our lives for them. So that we are not bound to destroy the love of ourselves, but only when it is a hindrance to our fulfilling of what God commands us. 29. We therefore, who have given up our names unto Christ, must expect to enjoy the fruits of his obedience, by treading in the same steps which he hath left unto us ; as shall be shewed here- after more plentifully. 30. And yet it is not necessary, that we should exactly and curi- ously apply ourselves to the rule of his obedience : for whereas he voluntarily undertook the form and fashion of a servant, and being Lord of heaven and earth, despised and neglected the riches and glory of this world ; we notwithstanding are not tied to such hard conditions, but may flow and abound with wealth and honour ; neither need we to deny to our souls any pleasure under the sun, but liberally enjoy it as the gift of God, as long as thereby we withdraw not our obedience and allegiance from God. 31. Peccatum non est appetitus malarum rerum, sed desertio meliorum (saith St. Augustine, quoted by Lombard, 2 Sent. 42. dist.) i. e. Sin does not consist in desiring or lusting after things, which in their own natures are evil and inconvenient, but in pre- ferring a low, inconstant, changeable good, before another more worthy, and of greater excellency and perfection. Whilst there- fore God has that estimation and value in our thoughts, that he deserves; whilst there is nothing in ourselves, or any other crea- ture, which we prefer before him ; whilst we conspire not with our lusts to depose him from bearing a sovereign sway in our hearts and consciences ; whilst we have no other God before him, not committing idolatry to wealth, honour, learning, and the like; it shall be lawful, in the second place, to love ourselves: so that we fulfil this commandment, when we do not deify ourselves; whilst we sacrifice not to our own wisdom, nor burn incense to the pride of our hearts, &c. 32. Conceive then the meaning of this law to be such, as if it had been more fully enlarged on this wise: let every one that but hears any mention of Christ this day, take into deep consideration, and spend his most serious morning thoughts, in pondering and weighing, whether those benefits, which Christ hath promised to communicate to every one that shall be joined and married to him by a lively faith, be worthy his acceptation : let him oppose to them all the pleasures and profits, which he can promise, or but fancy, to himself under the sun. 33. If after a due comparing of these things together, he have The Fourth Sermon. 589 so much wisdom as to acknowledge, that an eternal weight of joy and glory, an everlasting serenity and calmness be to be prefer- red before a transitory, unquiet, restless, unsatisfying pleasure; and seeing both these are offered and set before him ; or rather, seeing such is the extreme mercy of our God, that whereas the goods of this life are not allowed, nor so much as offered equally and universally to all (for not many have ground to hope for much wealth ; nor many wise, nor many learned, saith St. Paul), yet to every man, whom God hath called to the acknowledgment of the gospel, these inestimable benefits are offered and presented, bona fide, without any impossible condition ; so that (let the dis- puters of this age say what they will) it shall be found, that those, who have failed and come short of these glories offered, may thank themselves for it, and impute it to an actual voluntary misprision and undervaluing of these riches of God's mercies, which they might have procured, and not to any fatal over-ruling power, that did enforce, and necessitate, and drive them to their destruction. 34. These things considered, if you are indeed convinced, that light is to be preferred before darkness; it is impossible but that you should likewise acknowledge, that it were mere madness for a man to imagine to himself any the most vanishing faint expectation of those glorious promises, whilst he is busy and careful, by all means, to avoid those, indeed thorny and unpleasant, paths that lead unto them ; whilst he promiseth to himself rest and impunity, though he walk in the imagination of his own heart: surely the Lord will be avenged on such a person, and will make his fierce wrath to smoke against him. 35. Therefore resolve upon something : If the Lord be God, follow him, serve him, conform yourselves to the form of new obedience which he hath prescribed ; but if Baal be God, if Mam- mon be God, if yourselves be gods, follow the devices of your own hearts; but by no means expect any reward at all from God for dishonouring him, or preferring a base, unworthy lust before his commands. Lo, 'tis the Lord of glory, who is salvation, and the way too; it is he that hath professed, that there is no possible way of attaining unto him, but by treading in the same steps which he hath left us : a way, which he found full of thorns, full of difficulties, but hath left it to us even strewed with roses, in comparison. 36. The greatest and most terrible enemies which we can fashion to ourselves, are those three, which St. Paul hath mustered together, and ordered them just Roman-wise, the strongest in the rear: 1. Death; and, 2. The sting of that, sin; and, 3. The poison of that sting, the law. But over all these we are more than con- querors ; for it follows, " Thanks be to God, which (mark, hath al- ready) given us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." At the first, indeed, till the paths were worn, and made smooth, there were some difficulties; for what could the primitive christians expect, having all the world their enemies, but reproaches, exiles, deporta- tions, even horrible torments and death. 50 590 The Fourth Sermon. 37. But we (blessed be our gracious God !) are so far from being annoyed with such difficulties and pressures in the way, that all those are to be feared and expected by them, that dare deny the profession of our glorious religion. What, therefore, if the Lord had commanded some great thing of us, even as much as he did of his beloved servants, the apostles and primitive christians, would we not have done it ? How much more, when he says only, be not ashamed of me ; now, when you dare not be ashamed of me ; now, when it is almost death to be ashamed of me ; deny not me before this generation, who would hate and persecute you to the death, if you should deny me; crucify unto you the unclean affections, the incendiary lust of your hearts, which the heathens have performed for the poor empty reward of fame; prefer not riches nor honours before me, which is no more than many philoso- phers have done for those vulgar changeable gods, which themselves have contemned 1 38. Having therefore (beloved christians) such promises to en- courage, such as the poor heathens never dreamed of; and yet, for all that, travelled more earnestly after an airy fantastical happi- ness of their own, than we (to our extreme shame be it spoken) do after the true one; having such advantages, even above the blessed apostles and ancient martyrs; let us walk as becometh the children of God, having our eyes fastened upon the Lord our salvation, and conforming ourselves freely and unconstrainedly to whatsoever it shall please him to prescribe unto us: not admitting our own car- nal reason and worldly wisdom into council about his worship, nor believing any thing, which he has proposed unto us in his word, but for the authority of him that spoke it : not accepting the per- sons of men, nor persuading ourselves to the belief of horrible and unworthy opinions of God, because men, affected by us, have so de- livered. It was a grievous complaint that God made by the pro- phet Isaiah, (chap. xix. 13,) "Their fear towards me is taught by the commandments of men." 39. Again we must subdue our affections to be ruled and squared according' to the good will of God, rejoicing to see our most beloved sins discovered and rebuked, and even crucified by the powerful word and Spirit of God. Lastly, we must be ready for Christ's sake, to root out of our hearts that extravagant im- moderate love of our ownselves, that private affection, as Basil calleth it; resolving rather to undergo a shameful, horrible, death, than to maintain any inordinate base desire, or to take part with our filthy lusts against our Saviour, who hath so dearly re- deemed us. 40. Thus have you heard, in general terms, largely, and I fear tediously, delivered, the sum and effect of this doctrine of self- denial (for the restraining of it to particular cases I have reserved to another hour). Now I will, according to my promise, as earnestly as I can, enforce this necessary duty upon you, from the two circumstances before mentioned; viz. 1. From the great reasonableness in the thing commanded ; and, 2. Extreme love and kindness of the lawgiver, that hath, in his own person, given The Fourth Sermon. 591 us a perfect example, directing us how we should fulfil his com- mand. 41. For the first, namely, the reasonableness of the thing com- manded : to omit, how all creatures, in acknowledgment of that duty, which they owe to God their Creator, do willingly submit themselves to his disposition, denying their own specifical private natures for the general good of the world : for example ; the ele- ments are subject to alterations and deportations, to be destroyed and revived, to be instruments of God's favour, and again, of his wrath : surely man, above all the world besides, (not excepting that glorious heavenly host of angels) is by a more indissoluble adamantine chain obliged and bound to his Maker; " For to which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my son ; this day have I begotten thee V* 42. Again, when a great portion of those glorious spirits had mutinously rebelled against God, and man, following the example of their prevarication, had with them plunged himself irrecovera- bly into extreme unavoidable destruction ; in that necessity, God had no respect to those heavenly spirits, which were by nature much more admirable and perfect than we ; for he did in no wise (saith the apostle) take upon him the nature of angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham, and therein performed the glorious work of our redemption. 43. Surely, after this great love, than which (I dare not say, God cannot, but) I may well say, he will never shew a greater, we his unworthy creatures are bound to express some greater measure of thankful obedience, than we were for our creation ; and yet, even then, the least that could be expected from us, was a full perfect resignation of ourselves to the disposition of that God that gave us our being. Therefore now, after a work that has cost God all that pains and study in inventing and contriving, and so much sorrow and labour in performing; certainly, after all this, it is no great thing, if the Lord should require our whole selves, souls and bodies, for a whole burnt-offering, a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving; if he should require from us our whole sub- stance, whole rivers of oil, and all the cattle feeding on a thou- sand hills. 44. Yet now he is content that less thanks shall satisfv, than were due before ever he performed that glorious work ; nay, he hath after all this taken off and subducted from that debt, which we owed him for our creation : for whereas then one actual offence against this law did necessarily draw along with it inevitable de- struction ; yet now our gracious God, perceiving that we are but dust, accepts of our imperfect, sinful obedience, nay, sometimes, of the inward desire and willingness to perform, where there is not power to put it in execution. Nothing then can be more reasonable, than that a christian should be commanded, not to prefer the fulfilling of his own will before God's will ; not to suffer that his carnal desires should have greater power and sway with him than the command of such a God ; or, lastly, not to withdraw his allegiance and obedience due to his Redeemer, and 592 The Fourth Sermon. place them upon a creature, but equal, or may be, inferior to himself. 45. Secondly, consider the wonderful love and kindness of the lawgiver, that hath already tasted unto us; tasted, nay, hath drank the dregs of this unpleasant bitter potion. He, by whom all things were made, even the eternal almighty Word : he, who thought it no robbery to be equal with God ; became his own creature, and submitted himself to be trod upon, reviled, hated, despised by the worst of all creatures, cruel, ungodly, and per- verse sinners: he, of whose fulness we have all received, did utterly evacuate and empty himself of his glory and majesty, denying to himself such things, which he would not even to the most despised creatures. For, saith he, " The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of man hath not whereon to lay his head." — " Ye know (saith St. Paul, 2 Cor. viii. 9,) the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be made rich." So poor he was, that he was forced to borrow tribute money of a fish, and was fain to strain himself to a miracle to get the fish to bring it : so poor, that he was forced to borrow a young colt of strangers, never known to him : " Say (saith he) the Lord has need of him :" a strange unheard-of speech ! The Lord that created the world, and can as easily annihilate it, yet he hath need, and hath need of a colt, the foal of an ass ! Time would fail me, for I sup- pose the world itself would not contain the books that might be written of his dangers, his temptations, his fastings, his travels, his disgrace, torments, and death ; all performed without any end pro- posed to himself, besides our good and happiness. 46. " It behoved him (saith St. Paul) to be made like his brethren in all things, that he might be a merciful and faithful high-priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people ; for in that he himself hath suffered, being tempted, he is able to succour them which are tempted."* Which of you (my beloved friends) when he does seriously me- ditate on this place, will not be forced to sit down, even ravished and astonished at the excessive and superabundant mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ ; that he who was the God that created us, in whom we live, move, and have our being ; and, being more intrin- sical to us than our own natures (as the schools do boldly express) doth know our most hidden thoughts long before they are ; that he, notwithstanding, should descend to submit himself to the same in- firmities and temptations with us, to this end, that by bettering and adding to that knowledge, which he had before of our wants and miseries, to wit, by perfecting and increasing his former speculative knowledge by a new acquired experimental knowledge, he might be better acquainted with what we want, and thereby more in- clined to mercy and commiseration, and more powerful to succour us, being tempted. 47. See, behold, beloved christians, how for our sakes he hath enlarged, as it were, three of his glorious, incomprehensible attri- *Heb. ii. 17, 18. The Fourth Sermon. 593 butes. 1. His omniscience, by knowing that personally and ex- perimentally, which he did before only know contemplatively. 2. His mercy, in that this his knowledge doth more incite his goodness. And, 3. His omnipotent power : for (saith the text) in that he himself hath suffered, being tempted, he is (thereby) able to succour them which are tempted. There seems likewise to be an access to his glory by this his great humility; for, saith the text in Heb. v. 5, " Christ glorified not himself to be a high- priest." 48. Woe unto us, my beloved friends, if such mercies as these be neglected and slighted by us : woe unto us, if a commandment proceeding from such a Lawgiver have not greater force upon us, than any obligation whatsoever. 49. And if these things be so, then (in the first place) how miserably are those deceived, that think they have sufficiently observed this commandment, when they deny to themselves some one delightful insinuating affection, some one enormous crying sin, to which they see others wilfully and scandalously devoted ; yet, in the mean time, reserve to themselves many a bosom, pri- vate, beloved lust. 50. You that know the story of Ananias and Sapphira, may remember with what a fearful name the Holy Spirit hath branded their sin ; it is called no less than lying to the Holy Ghost ; it comes near, both in name and condition, to that fearful sin for which Christ did not die, and for which God could yet never find mercy enough to forgive. 51. Yet consider what this sin was; they voluntarily sold all the means they had, that the money, being equally divided, might supply the necessity of those that wanted. Notwithstanding, to make sure work for some certain estate whereupon they might rely, they subducted some part of the money, and laid the rest at the apostles' feet. 52. St. Peter told them that their land was in their own power ; neither did any constraint lie upon them to enforce them to sell all : but since they had professed themselves among the number of them who were willing to clothe, and cherish, and feed Christ, in the persons of their new-converted brethren ; it was horrible theft, and desperate lying against God, to diminish one penny of the sum. 53. Now that you may know how much .this concerns you : which of vou, beloved christians, hath not solemnly and publicly sworn and vowed to Almighty God at your baptism, not to prefer the vain pomp and vanities of this world, much less the abomi- nable crimes thereof, above your Saviour, into whose name you were baptized? 54. Are not you then most shamefully perjured, when you are so far from renouncing the vanities of this world for Christ's sake, that you will not be withdrawn from the crimes of it? When the base lust of a harlot, or the furious excess of wine, or that untempting, undelightful, and therefore more unpardonable pp 50* 594 The Fourth Sermon. sin of swearing, and blasphemy, shall be of sufficient force with you every hour, not only to withdraw all manner of respect and obedience from Christ, but even to make you crucify him again, and to put him to open shame. 55. And do not please yourselves in this conceit, that because God does not exact of you now the forfeiture of your vow and promise, as he did of Ananias and his wife, that therefore your case is much better than theirs; for, let me tell you, as our Saviour on such an occasion told the Jews, Think you that you are less sinners than they, whose blood Pilate mingled with the sacrifices ; or those, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell ? so let me say unto you : Think you, that because God shewed so terrible an example upon Ananias and Sapphira, for their lying to the Holy Ghost, by taking them away suddenly by a fearful death, and hath not yet shewed the like upon you, that your sin comes much short of theirs, and that you may notwithstanding escape? "I tell you nay, but except ye repent, ye shall likewise perish." Alas, what a trifle was that judgment which befel them, to those plagues which are reserved for wilful, obstinate sinners ! 56. I beseech you, therefore, brethren, even by the bowels of Jesus Christ, that you would consider what it is you do, when you allow yourselves in the practice of any one habitual sin : it is no less than a wilful wiping off the water wherewith you were bap- tized ; it is no less than an abjuring of Christ; nay, it is no less than a devoting and sacrificing yourselves to devils. 57. In the second place, where will those appear, that are so far from denying all for Christ, that for his sake they will not leave one delightful, profitable sin ? they will rather deny Christ himself, than the least troublesome pleasure, running into all excess of riot ; nay, they will sell Christ cheaper than Judas did ; they will sell him, and take no money for him ! What else do those that spend their time in idle, vain lying, in fruitless oaths, in unnecessary blasphemy ? They can be content to see Christ him- self almost every day naked, and do not clothe him; hungry, and do not feed him ; in prison, and do not visit him : for inasmuch as they perform not these works of charity to his beloved little ones, they deny them to him. Will they be found worthy of Christ, that for his sake will not do so much as a heathen hath done in a hu- mour, or for the unprofitable reward of fame ? That, for his sake, will not forgive their brother some small injury received; nay, per- haps, some great kindness offered, as a seasonable correction, or loving dissuasion from sin ; that, for his sake, will not take the least pains in furthering their own salvation ? 58. Lastly, what will become of me, and you, beloved fathers and brethren of the clergy, we to whom God hath intrusted the exercise and managing of three or four of his glorious attributes? for to us is committed the gospel of Christ, which is the wisdom of God hidden from the world ; and to us is committed the gospel of Christ, which is the power of God to salvation, and which worketh mightily in them which believe, even according to the The Fifth Sermon. 595 mighty working whereby he raised Christ from the dead; and re- us is committed the gospel of Christ, even the dispensation of the riches of his glorious mercy and compassions. 59. What then will become of us, if we, notwithstanding these great engagements, these inestimable prerogatives, shall turn this wisdom of God into foolishness, by exalting and deifying our own carnal wisdom ; if we shall weaken and make void this almighty power, by the violent opposition of our sinful lusts and affections ; finally, if we shall be too sparing and niggardly in the dispensing of these his mercies ; if we shall render his goodness suspected to our hearers, as if those frequent and plentiful offers of pity and compassion were only empty, histrionical expressions, and not pro- fessions of a mind heartily and sincerely inclined unto us 1 60. I will tell you what will become of us; and I shall the better do it, by telling you first, what an excessive weight of glory we, especially, shall lose by it: u They that be wise (saith Daniel) shall shine as the brightness of the firmament ; and they that turn many to righteousness, as the stars for ever and ever." Not as those vulgar, ordinary stars, that have light enough only to make them visible ; but like those more noble lights, which are able to cast a shadow through the whole creation, even like the sun in his full strength. And the preferment we are likely to gain is very an- swerable to our loss ; we shall be glorious, shining firebrands, of the first magnitude, in whose fearful, horrible destruction, God will show what he is able to do. SERMON V. " Who is he that condemneth ? it is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again." — Rom. viii. 34. If I durst appear in this place with any ends and projects of mine own ; if, whilst I preach unto you Jesus Christ, I could think it worth my labour to lose a thought about the purchasing of a vain, fruitless reputation and opinion amongst my hearers ; surely, I should by no means omit so commodious and tempting an opportunity as this argument of Christ's resurrection may sug- gest unto me ; it being a business, in the effecting whereof, above all the works which God ever made since he began to work, he most especially glorified almost all his divine attributes ; it be- ing a deliverance, even of God himself, from destruction and rottenness. 2. It is an argument so pleasing to St. Paul, that in many places, he seems to magnify it even to the undervaluing and dis- paragement of whatsoever Christ before either did or suffered. In a sermon of his (Acts xiii.) preached at Antioch, he makes it the complement and fulfilling of whatsoever God before had promised to the fathers, and of all the prophecies, which, since the begin- ning of the world, had been delivered by God's messengers. To pp2 596 The Fifth Sermon. make which good, the apostle himself in that place (whereas he needed not to strain so far; there were then extant prophecies enough, purposely and precisely declaring the glory and power of Christ's resurrection) he notwithstanding, as it would seem, mis- takes that famous prophecy of Christ's birth, in those words of the second psalm, "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee;" and seemingly misapplies them to his resurrection. Why, was he then indeed the carpenter's son 1 was it a confession, and not humility, that he called himself the Son of man ? were the tor- ments of his passion and death (as himself seems to intimate, John xvi. 21,) only the pangs and throes of his new birth? 3. By no means ; he was, even in the extremest degree, and lowest point of his humiliation ; yea, when himself, in that last terrible agony, did seem to call it in question ; yet then also he was indeed the only-begotten eternal Son of God ; or, if he had not, most miserable and desperate had been our case. But by his resurrection he did declare, unquestionably, and without all con- tradiction, unto the world, his glory and majesty; or, to speak in St. Paul's words, (Rom. i.) " He was mightily declared to be the Son of God, by his resurrection from the dead." 4. But we now celebrate a feast, a season of joy and exultation, which we used not to do upon the memory of God's most won- derful acts and exploits, though never so much expressing the glory of his majesty and power, unless they have been beneficial unto us ; unless they have very nearly concerned our safety and happiness. 5. And surely this great deliverance of Christ from the do- minion and power of hell and the grave, when God called his Son the third time out of Egypt ; this victory of his, did in a high degree import us, and advance our welfare ; it had some more than ordinary influence upon our salvation, otherwise, this season, dedicated to the memory thereof, would not have been so acceptable to the primitive Christians, to make them (as it were in revenge and faction against the late melancholy time of fasting and repentance) for its sake, to set up an anti-lent, and to ap- point other forty days of feasting and triumph, which was more (as Tertullian boasteth) than all the solemn holidays of the heathen joined together. Yea, so scrupulous were they in the celebration of this feast (quite opposite to the solemn peevishness of some Christians of our times) that, for the whole space between Easter and Pentecost, as it is thought, they quite intermitted the works and exercise of their vocations : they would not surfer one fasting-day to appear; they left off their severity and discipline, their Vigilia and Stationes ; nay, they would not, all that time, so much as de geniculis adorare (in the witty barbarous expression of the same father, in his book De corona militis) they would not shew so much faint-heartedness and dejection, as to kneel at prayers. 6. Therefore, instead of saying fine things of the fashion and contrivance of this business of Christ's resurrection; instead of raising matter of wonder and astonishment out of the glory and The Fifth Sermon. 597 power of it ; I will endeavour (being to conclude the solemn cele- bration of this feast) by way of use and application, to discover the issue and fruit thereof in respect of us: not only the convenience, but the extreme necessity, and the strict coherence, which our sal- vation has, not only upon the satisfaction and death, but upon the resurrection and life, of our blessed Saviour. 7. Now we find many things ascribed to Christ's life and death in holy scripture, only as to patterns and exemplary causes, being duties, which the consideration of Christ's death and resurrection ought proportionably to exact from us : as, if Christ be dead, then count yourselves also dead unto sin ; if risen again, then count your- selves alive unto righteousness. For how it should come to pass, that so much of our holiness as makes up mortification, and no more, should be ascribed to Christ's death, as a proper effect and fruit thereof ; and the rest, which is newness of life and obedience, should be imputed to his resurrection, I shall never be able to comprehend. 8. The benefits, therefore, which accrue unto us by Christ, 1 suppose may be divided either into those which flow from the merit of his death, or from the power and influence of his life. In the former, are comprehended all whatsoever Christ hath done for us ; in the latter, whatsoever he doth or will work in us. And both being extremely necessary, it shall be this hour's employ- ment, to shew with what good reason we celebrate a feast at this time, that we should not terminate our contemplation only on the great love and bowels of compassions on Good Friday expressed unto us; but also, and with better reason, on the joy and comfort, which with great reason we may collect from this business of Easter, even that lively hope whereunto we are regenerated by the resurrection of Christ ; and to join with St. Paul in his wonder and amazement, at the consideration of the infinite mercy and power of God ; and thereupon his boasting and challenging, se- curely, all manner of adversaries : " Who is he that shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect ? It is God that justifieth : who is he that condemneth X It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again." 9. In which words are comprehended the great dependence and combination which our non-condemnation or salvation has, not only with the death and satisfaction of Christ, but also rather, even with advantage, on his resurrection. Now because they are so few, they cannot conveniently be divided, I will out of them raise this doctrinal proposition, namely, That Christ's resurrection and exaltation is fully as necessary and effectual to procure and per- fect our salvation, if not more, than even the all-sufficient sacrifice upon the cross. 10. Which, that I may more fully and distinctly confirm it unto you, I will divide into two propositions, which, if sufficiently maintained, do necessarily infer the doctrine. The first whereof is this : That the purpose of Christ, who satisfied for our sins, and the covenant which he made with God, who accepted of this satisfaction, was not, that remission of sins should immediately 598 The Fifth Sermon. ensue upon his death, but only upon performance of the conditions of the new covenant made in Christ's blood ; which are, unfeigned repentance for sin, and a serious conversion unto God by faith. The second, That by the dominion and power of Christ, which at his resurrection, and not before, he received as a reward of his great humility ; we are not only enabled to the performance of the conditions of this new covenant, and, by consequence, made capable of an actual application of his satisfaction; but also, by the same power, we shall hereafter be raised up, and exalted to everlasting happiness. Of these two propositions, therefore, in the order pro- posed, very briefly, and even too plainly. And first of the first, namely, That the purpose of Christ, who, &c. 11. I confess, it would be no hard matter for a disputant, meeting with an adversary that would be content to be swayed and governed by reason alone, to molest, and even fright him from the truth of this doctrine : for, if we shall consider, not only the excessive, unspeakable torments which Christ suffered for us, but especially the infinite majesty and glory of the person, who wil- lingly submitted himself to that curse ; what less reward can be expected, than the present deliverance and salvation, not only of a few men, but even of many worlds of men and angels. 12. But it is not for us, beloved christians, to set our price and value upon Christ's precious blood : to say, thus much it is worth, and no more. As there have not wanted men on the other side, who have dared to affirm, that Christ's blood, according to exact estimation, did amount to a certain value, by the worth and cost "whereof, such a set number as shall be saved were redeemed and purchased ; and if one besides should be delivered, it were more than the price of the blood came to. What a fearful dangerous curiosity is this ! Is it not a piece of Judas's sin, to set our own estimation and value upon, to make a bargain and sale of Christ's death ; to set up a kind of shambles to sell his flesh and blood in ? 13. But leaving these vain, fantastical calculations to their chief professors, the schoolmen, who are so unreasonably addicted to this dreaming learning, that nothing can escape their compass and balance : for, to omit their curious descriptions and maps of the dimensions and situation of heaven and hell ; the figure, borders, islands of both ; they have undertaken to discover the exact, pro- portionable increase of the graces of the saints, especially of the blessed Virgin ; whose good actions they have found to increase just in octupla ratione : so that, for example, her twentieth good action did exceed the first in virtue and intention of grace, as much as the whole earth doth exceed a grain of mustard-seed : 14. Is not this, beloved friends, a learning and wisdom to be pitied ? Is not this that disease, which St. Paul discovers (1 Tim. vi.) the effect whereof is to make men sick about vain questions, and oppositions of science, falsely so called ? Therefore, leaving these vain speculations, as likewise others about the business in hand, no less curious, and much more dangerous, yet securely stated in these days, almost in every pamphlet and synopsis ; as, namelv, whether God could have contrived anv course for man's The Fifth Sermon. 599 salvation besides that which he prosecuted? Whether, without accepting any satisfaction to his justice, he could freely and abso- lutely have remitted our sins I 15. For what use or profit can be made of these questions, though with never so great subtilty and curiosity stated ? Besides, we find that God had professed unto Adam, that his death, to- gether with the destruction of all mankind, should be the reward of the breach of his covenant: by which means God's justice being interested in the business, the very grounds and foundation of this latter question are destroyed, the doubt and screw whereof must needs have been blasphemous; namely, whether God could have been unjust? Nay, more, it makes the sending of Christ into the world, together with his obedience to the death, even that accursed death of the cross, to be a matter of no necessary impor- tance ; to be only a great compliment, whereby God shews unto mankind, that though he could easily have remitted their sins with- out any satisfaction (for whatsoever is possible to God, is easy), notwithstanding, that they should see, he would strain himself even farther for them, was very requisite ; and withal, to shew his abomi- nation of sin, he was content, that all this ado, all these pompous, tragical businesses should be performed. 16. But what saith the scripture? "If there had been a law, which could have given life," Christ should have died without cause. And thereupon our apostle (Rom. iii. 25,) saith, that " God hath set forth his Son to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God : to declare, I say, at this time his righteousness, that he might be just." That is, lest by the forbearance of God, who since the foundation of the world had shewed no sufficient example of his hatred and indigna- tion unto sin ; as also to shew there was a reason sufficient to move him to remit the sins of many his chosen servants before Christ; he hath now at last evidently expressed unto the world his righteousness ; to wit, his ixtiixriGlv, and avrowroiWiav, by condemn- ing sin, and revenging himself upon it, in the person of his beloved, innocent Son. 17. And, lest this stir should seem to have been kept only to give us satisfaction, and to create in us a great opinion and con- ceit of his righteousness; the apostle clearly saith, he did all this to " declare at this time his righteousness, that he might be just," which otherwise it seems he could not have been. But I am re- solved to quit myself abruptly, and even sullenly, of those questions, and betake myself more closely to the matter in hand. 18. What therefore is the effect and fruit, which accrues even to the elect of God, by virtue of Christ's satisfaction, humiliation, and death, precisely considered, and excluding the power and virtue of his resurrection and glorious life ? Why, reconciliation to God, justification or remission of sins, and finally salvation both of body and soul. But is there any remission of sins without faith? Shall we not only exclude works from justification, but faith also ? God forbid : for so we should not only contradict the 600 The Fifth Sermon. grounds of God's holy word, but also raze and destroy the very foundations of the second covenant. 19. For answer ; we must consider our reconciliation under a two-fold state (according to the distinction of the reverend and learned Dr. Davenant, bishop of Salisbury) ; 1. Either as it is applicabilis, not yet actually conferred ; or, 2. as applicata, parti- cularly sealed and confirmed to us by a lively faith. For the understanding of which, we must know, that in Christ's death there was not only an abolishing of the old covenant of works, the hand-writing which was against us, which Christ nailed unto his cross ; (as St. Paul saith, Col. i.) delivering us from the curse and obligation thereof; but also there was a new gracious cove- nant, or (which is a word expressing greater comfort to us) a new will or testament made, wherein Christ hath bequeathed unto us many glorious legacies, which we shall undoubtedly receive, when we shall have performed the conditions, when we shall be found qualified so as he requires of us. 20. Till which conditions be performed, by the power of God's Spirit assisting us, all that we obtain by the death of Christ is this: that, first, whereas God, by reason of sin, was implacably angry with us, would by no means accept of any reconciliation with us, would hearken to no conditions ; now, by virtue of Christ's death and dissatisfaction, he is graciously pleased to admit of composition ; the former aversion and inexorableness is taken away; or, to speak more significantly, in St. Paul's language, (Ephes. ii. 16,) "the enmity is slain." Secondly, that whereas before we were liable to be tried before the throne of his exact, severe, rigorous justice, and bound to the performance of condi- tions, by reason of our own contracted weakness become intoler- able, nay, impossible unto us; we are released of that obligation, and though not utterly freed from all manner of conditions, yet tied to such as are not only possible, but by the help of his Spirit which inwardly disposeth and eo-operateth with us, with ease and pleasure to be performed. Besides which, we have a throne of equity and grace to appear before. Mercy is exalted above, even against justice ; it rejoiceth against judgment ; it is become the higher court, and hath the privileges of a superior court, that appeals may be made from the inferior court of justice to that of mercy and favour. Nay, more ; whereas before we were justly delivered into the power of Satan, now being reconciled to God, by the blood of Christ, we are (as it is in Col. i. 13,) delivered from the power of darkness, and translated into the kingdom of his dear Son. 21. All this, and more (if it were the business of this time to be punctual in discovering all) hatb Christ wrought for us, being aliens and strangers, yea, enemies afar off, without God in the world. Yet for all this that Christ hath merited thus much for us, and more; notwithstanding, take away the power of Christ's resurrection and life ; take away the influence of his Holy Spirit, whereby we are regenerated and made new creatures, and we are yet in the gall of bitterness and bond of iniquity. For though (as The Fifth Sermon. G01 it is, Heb. x. 19,) we have vafy^'mv, i. e. liberty, and free leave to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus; though there be a way made open, yet walk we cannot ; we are not able to set forwards into it, as long as we are bound and fettered with our sins; though there be an access to the throne of grace, yet it is only for them which are sanctified. 22. And, therefore, what dangerous consequences do attend that doctrine, which teacheth, that, immediately upon the death of Christ, all our sins are actually forgiven us, and we effectually reconciled ! But because another employment is required by this time, I will, out of many, make use of two reasons only to destroy that doctrine; whereof the one is taken from the nature of the second covenant, the other from the necessity of Christ's resur- rection. 23. For the first : if we, that is, the elect of God (for I am re- solved to have to do with none else at this time) be effectually reconciled to God, by virtue of Christ's death, having obtained a full perfect remission of all our sins, why are we frighted, or, to say truly, injured with new covenants? why are we, seeing our debts are paid to the utmost farthing, the creditor's demands ex- actly satisfied, the obligation cancelled ; why then are we made believe that we are not quite out of danger; nay, that unless we ourselves, out of our own stock, pay some charges and duties extra- ordinarily, and, by the by, enforced upon us; all the former pay- ments, how valuable soever, shall become fruitless, and we to re- main accountable for the whole debt ? 24. But it may be (and that seems most likely) there is no such thing indeed as a new covenant. Promises and threatenings are only a pretty kind of rhetorical device, which God is pleased to use, sometimes to allure us, and win our hearts to do that which shall please him ; at other times to startle and affright us, when we are about something contrary to his command. And, to say the truth, this must of necessity be the issue of the former doctrine : for how is it possible to make these things hold together ! We are already perfectly reconciled to God by the death of his Son, without any consideration had to our personal faith and repentance ; and yet, unless we do earnestly repent us of our sins, and with a lively faith adhere to God's promises, we shall never be reconciled unto God: or these? All our sins are already remitted, and that only for the virtue of Christ's satisfaction ; and yet, unless we believe, our sins shall never be forgiven us. 25. So that by this reckoning, we must be forced to purge the gospel of those troublesome, dangerous terms of covenant and conditions, of those fruitless, affrighting conjunctions, si credidcris, si non poznitentiam egeris. Or (which is all one) soften them into a sense utterly repugnant and warring against the natural force and signification of the words: on this wise; where the scripture saith, If thou repentest not, thy sins shall not be forgiven thee; thou art not to conceive, that forgiveness of thy sins is a work yet to be done, or that it has any dependence upon any thing in thee: but this great blessing shall be hid from thine eves, thou 51 602 The Fifth Sermon. shalt never come to the knowledge of it, and thereby shalt live here a discontented, pensive, suspicious life. Again: if thou be- lievest, thou shalt be saved : that is, thou shalt obtain a comforta- ble assurance of hope, nay, an infallible faith of thy future salva- tion ; though that was intended thee, without any consideration of thy faith. 26. So that the gospel of Christ is not the power of God unto salvation: for how can the word be an instrument of that which was long ago absolutely performed and purchased? and there- fore Christ, his preaching, his miracles, and tears, the apostles' travels and persecutions, the sending of the Holy Spirit, baptism, eucharist, imposition of hands, absolution, and many more blessed means of our salvation, were not instituted for this end, to make us capable of remission of sins (for that, it seems, was already not only meritoriously, but effectually procured, and without all manner of conditions infallibly destined to God's elect) ; but only for this end, that whilst they live here, to their thinking, in danger and hazard (but they are fools for thinking so) they may now and then be a little cheered and comforted with apprehending what Christ hath done for them; and to what a comfortable state and inheritance he hath destined them. Thus the covenant, which God hath sworn shall be everlasting, is by the improvidence and ignorance of some men rendered unprofitable; yea, utterly ab- rogated: but (ne quid inclementius dicam) we have not so learned Christ. 27. The second reason destroying the former doctrine, I told you should be taken from the necessity of Christ's resurrection. For if the immediate effect of Christ's death be the purchasing of a perfect reconciliation with God, and full remission of sins for us the elect of God ; then (I will not say, what benefit, but) what ne- cessity is there of Christ's resurrection in respect of us 1 For, by this account, after the consummation est upon the cross, when the satisfaction was perfected, and our debts paid; though Christ had afterwards miscarried, though he had been detained by death, though his soul had been left in hell, and he had seen corruption ; notwithstanding, we should stand upon good terms with God, unless we shall conceive of him worse than of the most oppressing usurer, that when a debt is discharged, and the bond cancelled, will not- withstanding not release the prisoner, unless the undertaker come in person, or by main force deliver him. 28. I confess, that to see a friend that had ventured so far for us, as our Saviour did : that to do us good had put himself in such extreme danger : I say, to see such an one to be utterly cast away, without all hopes and possibility of being able to pay him our thanks, would be a spectacle, which would grieve and pierce our very souls; it would be a rending to our bowels. But this is only charity and gratitude, or good nature in us. which would procure this grief; not that it stands upon our safety, his preservation being a matter only of convenience, not extreme necessity to us. 29. We all do worthily condemn and detest that blasphemous heresy of the socinians, who exclude the meritorious death and The Fifth Sermon. 603 suffering of Christ from having any necessary influence into our justification or salvation, making it of no greater virtue than the sufferings of the blessed martyrs, who, by their death, set their seal and testimony to the truth of the gospel, which freely offers forgiveness of sins to all penitent believers. Now the same injury which these heretics do to the merits of Christ's death, in propor- tion the former doctrine fastens upon his resurrection and new life, by taking from it the chief and proper effect thereof, which is an actual vindication of us from the power of sin, into the glo- rious liberty of the sons of God, by the power of Christ's Spirit, plentifully by him diffused and shed abroad in our hearts; and making the chief virtue thereof to consist in affording us only mat- ter of comfort and hope, that God will deal no otherwise with us, than he hath dealt with Christ, and after a life full of disturbance and misery, revive us to glory and immortality with his Son for evermore : whereas St. Paul hath another kind of conceit of Christ's resurrection ; for, saith he, in Heb. v. 9, Christ being made per- fect, i. e. glorified, (chap. ii. 10,) becomes author of eternal salva- tion to all that obey him : " And if Christ be not risen, your faith is vain, you are yet in your sins ;" and if Christ be not risen, neither shall we ever be raised, but be utterly irrecoverably condemned to everlasting rottenness. 30. And thus I am unawares fallen upon my second proposi- tion, namely, that by the dominion and power of Christ, which at his resurrection, and not before, he received as a reward of his great humility, we are not only enabled to the performance of the conditions of this new covenant, and, by consequence, made capable of an actual application of his satisfaction; but also by the same power, we shall hereafter be raised up, and exalted into everlast- ing happiness. 31. Though by the virtue of the incarnation of our Saviour, the human nature was raised to a state and condition of unspeak- able glory ; notwithstanding, if in this place, as well as before, we shall be content to submit our reason to scripture, we shall find, that, according to a covenant made between Christ and his Father, he was content not to challenge to himself any right of do- minion and rule over us, till he had perfectly deserved and earned it by a former voluntary submission and humiliation of himself. 32. The conditions on Christ's part we find most exactly per- formed by him, wholly resigning and prostrating his own will to the will and disposition of his Father. At his private passion, which immediately went before his attachment, when he was sacrificed, and even crucified alone in the garden, without the as- sistance and malice of a traitorous disciple, of the chief priests, or Romans; though he retained that innocent fear of death and shame, which is natural to man, which forced him to cry out, "Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me;" notwith- standing, though he could not hate his own life, yet to shew he preferred the fulfilling of his Father's will before it, he adds, " Nevertheless, not my will, but thy will be done :"* by which * Luke xxii. 42. 604 The Fifth Sermon. words he resigns the whole power and faculty of his will into his Father's hands. In the words of another evangelist he saith, — "Not what I will, but what thou wilt;"* where he resigns and submits the act and exercise of his will. And, lastly, to make all complete, in the expression of a third evangelist, he saith, "Not as I will, but as thou wilt ;"f where he subjects not only the faculty and exercise of his will to the performance of what God shall command him, but is willing and desirous to do it after what manner and fashion soever God shall be pleased. It is not possible for the understanding of man to add or conceive a degree beyond this. 33. In the next place, we shall see how God the Father is as good as his word to his son. But, first, give me leave to com- plain to you of that tyranny, which custom, partiality, or some- thing worse, has laid upon our understandings ; and that is this : that wheresoever any former protestant writer hath suspected a doctrine as not beneficial, but rather dangerous, to some conclusion, which he is resolved to maintain against the papists, we their scho- lars are obliged to make good their jealousies, and (may be) ground- less suspicions. 34. To omit many examples, I will produce only these few. It lies upon us to maintain, that St. John's baptism was one and the same sacrament with that of Christ's, contrary to express words of scripture : and something else : that Christ is a mediator, secundum divinam naturam ; which borders, I fear, upon an old dangerous heresy : as likewise (which especially concerns this place) that Christ merited nothing to himself by his passion, neither was the exaltation of his human nature to the dominion and rule over all creatures a reward of his humility, but a preferment due to his per- son, though by special dispensation the exercise thereof was defer- red for a time, but should have been conferred upon him as fully as he now enjoys it, though he had never suffered. 35. But scripture teacheth us, that Christ was to be made per- fect by sufferings: that because he had drunk of the brook by the way, therefore he should lift up his head : that, " for the joy which was set before him (that is, having an eye to the glorious re- ward and fruit of his sufferings) he endured the cross, and despised the shame, and therefore is set up at the right hand of glory." Because " being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient to death, even the death of the cross; <5io, therefore (for this reason) God hath highly exalted him, and given him a name, which is above every name,"J &c. Nay, St. Paul makes the obtaining a rule and dominion over mankind, a main end of his death ; for in Rom. xiv. 9, he saith, Efe touto, " For this end, Christ both died and rose again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living :" by his death meriting this dominion ; by his resurrection, receiving it. But I will forbear controversy, be- cause I desire to seek out no adversary, especially in my preaching, but only the devil and sin. 36. This therefore I think we shall agree upon, that it was the * Mark xiv. 36. t Matt. xxvi. 39. X Phil. ii. 8, 9. The Fifth Sermon. 605 purpose and immutable decree of God, that after the fall and misery of man, whatsoever good should befall us toward our re- stitution and repairing to our lost happiness, should be conveyed unto us by our own nature ; that the seed of the woman should break the serpent's head ; that is, not only, in St. John's phrase, destroy the works of the devil, but also, in St. Paul's, destroy his kingdom and power, which is death. So that, as by man came sin and error, so by man also should come grace and truth. " As by man came death, so by man also should come the resurrection from the dead." By man also, life and immortality should be brought to light. 37. Now that these great projects and intendments might be brought about, and that the human nature might be furnished with ability to discharge this province, and to go through with this great undertaking, God the Father, for the merit of Christ's great humility, by his resurrection, " hath highly exalted him far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come :* and hath given him a name above all names, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in the earth, and things under the earth ; and that every tongue should confess, that Jesus is the Lord, to the glory of God the Father."f 38. And thus much Christ himself confesseth and acknow- ledged presently upon his resurrection ; for then he saith, " All power is given unto me in heaven and earth." It was then only he received the dominion, whereof his father David's kingdom was but a type and shadow : and as his father David was anointed and deputed by God to the kingdom, but received not actual possession of it till after many persecutions and afflictions at the hands of his master Saul ; in like manner, though our Saviour, even in the days of his humility, teacheth us, that the Father judgeth no man, but resigneth all judgment to the Son ; notwith- standing these words are to be understood only by way of antici- pation or prophecy of what should befall him, after he should have performed the work of our redemption : for while he lived here among men, he professed he was so far from being a king, that be had no sufficient authority given him to be a petty judge in a case of inheritance ; and that wicked Pilate himself had power given him from heaven to become his judge : so that, though in the days of his flesh, he was heir of all things, yet he was only a conditional heir ; and, therefore, till the conditions were per- formed, and himself seised of the inheritance, even the heir himself differed nothing from a servant. 39. But within three days after his passion, the case was much altered: for, whereas before he was allowed no authority, no, not in Israel; at his resurrection, he obtains the heathen for his in- heritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for his possession. Now it would be a hard undertaking to describe the limits and borders of Christ's kingdom ; as also to define the polity, whereby *Eph. i. 20. + Phil. ii. 9— 11. 51* 606 The Fifth Sermon. it is administered. Therefore, leaving the most glorious part of it, which is in heaven, undiscovered; we find in holy scripture, that according to the several dispositions and qualifications of men here on earth, he hath both a sceptre of righteousness to govern and protect his faithful subjects and servants; and a rod of iron, to break the wicked in pieces like a potter's vessel. And though the greatest part of the world will acknowledge no subjection to Christ's kingdom, notwithstanding, this does not take away his authority over them, no more than the murmuring and rebellion of the Israelites did depose Moses their governor. But there will come a time when that prophetical parable of his shall be resolved, and interpreted to their confusion ; when he shall indeed say, " Where are those my enemies, which would not have me to reign over them ? Bring them hither, and slay them before me." 40. But the most eminent and notorious exercise of Christ's dominion is seen in the rule over his church, which he purchased with his own blood. Now the first business he took in hand, pre- sently upon his resurrection, when all power and dominion was given him, was, to give commission and authority to his ambassa- dors the apostles, and disciples, to make known to the world that so great salvation which he had wrought at his passion. Now, though the apostles were sufficiently authorised, by virtue of that commission, which Christ gave to them in those words : " As my Father sent me, so send I you" — notwithstanding, they were not to put this authority presently in practice, but to wait for the sending of the Holy Ghost, which Christ before had promised them ; that by his virtue and influence they might be furnished with abilities to go through with that great employment of reconciling the world unto God, by subduing men's understandings to the truth and obedience of the gospel. 41. We read in the gospel of St. John, that, during the life which Christ lived in the flesh, the Holy Ghost was not sent ; and the reason is added, " Because the Son of man was not yet glo- rified." The strength and vigour of which reason doth excellently illustrate the point in hand. For the sending of the Holy Ghost was one of the most glorious acts of Christ's kingly office, and the most powerful means of advancing his kingdom. Therefore, in the days of his humiliation, whilst he lived in the form of a servant, before he had purchased to himself a church by his own blood, his human nature obtained no right of dominion and power over mankind. For till we were redeemed from the power and subjection of the devil and sin, by the merit of Christ's death, we were none of Christ's subjects, but servants and slaves, sold under sin and Satan. 42. So that it being necessary that the Son of man should not only pay a price and ransom for our redemption by his death, but also that the same Son of man, and none else, should actually and powerfully vindicate his elect from the bondage they were in, and effectually apply his merits and satisfaction to their souls and consciences, till he was, in St. Paul's words,* Aia co ita^a. rov * Heb. ii. 9. Tlie Fifth Sermon. 607 flavotTou SoPji xou Ti(A7f Irfretpavoofjisvoc:, a For the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour ;" he, according to his human nature (and that was the only instrument whereby our salvation was to be wrought) had no power of sending the Holy Ghost. 43. And indeed till reconciliation was made by his death, to what purpose should the Holy Ghost be sent? what business or employment could we find for him on earth ? You will say, to work grace and new obedience in us. I confess that is a work worthy the majesty and goodness of God's Holy Spirit ; but yet, suppose all this had been wrought in us; put the case, our hearts were sprinkled from an evil conscience, and that we were renewed in the spirit of our minds ; perhaps all this might procure us a more tolerable cool place and climate in hell ; but without Christ it would be far from advantaging us towards our salvation : for, alas ! though we should turn never so holy, never so virtuous and reformed ; what satisfaction or recompense could we make for our former sins and iniquities? God knows, it must cost more to redeem a soul, therefore we must let that alone for ever ; we must take heed of ever meddling in that office, we must let it alone to him (even Jesus Christ) who alone is able to be at that cost. 44. But I might have spared all these suppositions: for as, ex- cluding Christ, there is no satisfaction, no hope of redemption for us; so excluding Christ's satisfaction, he hath no power or autho- rity, as man, of sending the Holy Ghost, thereby to work in us an ability of performing the conditions of the second covenant ; and, by consequence, of making us capable of the fruit and benefit of his satisfaction. Therefore, blessed be God, the Father, for the great glory which he gave unto Christ; and blessed be our Lord Jesus Christ, for meriting and purchasing that glory at so dear a rate ; and blessed be the Holy Spirit, who, when Christ (who is flesh of our flesh, and bone of our bone) did send him, would be content to come down and dwell among us. 45. We find in holy scripture, that our salvation is ascribed to all the three persons of the blessed Trinity, though in several re- spects : to the Father, who accepts of Christ's satisfaction, and offer- eth pardon of all our sins; to the Son, who merited and procured reconciliation for his elect faithful servants; and to the Holy Ghost, the comforter, who, being sent by the Son, worketh in us power to perform the conditions of the new covenant, thereby qualifying us for receiving actual remission of our sins, and a right to that glorious inheritance purchased for us. 46. And from hence may appear how full of danger the former doctrine is, which teacheth that actual remission of sins is pro- cured to God's elect immediately by Christ's death ; and how dis- honourable it is to the Spirit of grace, excluding him from having any concurrence or efficacy in our salvation : for, if this should be true, the powerful working of the Holy Spirit can in no sense concern either our justification, or everlasting happiness. For how can it be said that the Holy Spirit doth co-operate to our sal- vation, since all our good and happiness was procured by Christ's 608 The Fifth Sermon. death ; not only before, but without all manner of respect had to our regeneration and sanctification, by the power of the blessed Spirit? Therefore, by this doctrine, if we be any thing at all be- holden to the Holy Spirit, it is only for this, that he is pleased now and then, by fits, to be a messenger or intelligencer, to discover unto us what Christ alone hath purchased for us. 47. But I forbear to enlarge myself further in this point ; and, indeed, I have already done too much wrong to the honour and dignity of this feast, not only in mixing the business of Good Friday with it, as I did in my former part ; but also (as I now have done) in taking in the matter and employment of Whitsuntide too. Suf- fice it, therefore, that the sending of the Holy Ghost was an especial exercise of that power which was given Christ at his resurrection ; by the influence and virtue whereof, we do restrain and appropriate the merit of his death to our own good and benefit. 48. Now I would not be mistaken, as if I said that the resur- rection of Christ, precisely taken for that individual action, whereby he was restored to life and glory, was then effectual and powerful to produce those admirable effects : for, that being a transient action, past and finished many hundred years since, can very improperly be termed capable of having such effects ascribed to it, as have since, and shall to the end of the world be wrought in God's elect. Therefore St. Paul shall be my interpreter, in Rom. v. 10, saying, " If when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life ;" that is, by that glorious life which began at his resurrection. 49. For as in the matter of satisfaction, we ascribe our recon- ciliation to his death especially, yet not excluding his former obe- dience and humiliation; but naming that, as being the complement and perfection, terminating whatsoever went before; so, likewise, in Christ's exaltation, though there were divers degrees, and ascents, and stages of it ; yet we especially take notice of his re- surrection, because in that Christ took his rise, as it were, and was then* a bridegroom coming out of this chamber, " rejoicing as a giant to run his race." His goings out indeed were from the grave, but his circuit is to the ends of heaven, and nothing is hid from his heat and virtue. He illuminates every man that cometh into the world : " He was made (saith St. Paul) a quickening spirit ;" cherish- ing, actuating, and informing us with life and motion. By the influ- ence and power of his life he undergoes, as it were, a second incar- nation, living and dwelling in our hearts by his grace, and reigning powerfully in our souls by faith. 50. And hereby he even shares his kingdom, his power, and his victory with us : for (saith St. John) " this is the victory whereby ye overcome the world, even your faith." Christ is not content only to destroy in us the works of darkness, to dispel the clouds of ignorance and error, or to rectify the crookedness and perverseness of our wills; neither yet to implant in us a heavy, inactive, sleepy harmlessness, a dull, lethargic innocence ; but * Psal. six. The Fifth Sermon. 609 withal, endues us justitia germinante, with a fruitful, budding righteousness, and works in us, in the expression of St. Paul, both* C<7ro,aovi?v pentant, contrite sinner; but has he assured thee, that he will give thee repentance, whensoever thou pleasest to allow thyself leisure to seek it? No: know that there is a time (and pre- suming security, like sleep, doth hasten and add wings to that qq2 612 The Fifth Sermon. time) when there will be found no place for repentance, though thou seekest it with tears. And thus more than I meant for the persons. 61. And now what remains, but that we try an experiment? That we may know in what a comfortable state Christ hath set us, let us consider, and look about us, to see if we can find any ene- mies that are likely to do us any harm : for which purpose, we shall not meet with a more accurate spy and intelligencer than St. Paul, who, in the remainder of this chapter, after my text, hath mustered them together in one roll. But, first, there is one, if he were our adversary, he would be instead of a thousand enemies unto us, and that is God. But him we are sure of in the verse before my text ; for it is he that justifies, therefore surely he will not con- demn : therefore what say you to "tribulation, or distress, or per- secution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or the sword?" Why, these are not worthy the naming, for over all these we are more than conquerors. More than conquerors? What is that? Why they are not only overcome and disarmed, but they are brought over to our faction ; they war on our side. 62. Well, in the next file, there follow adversaries of better fashion ; there is life, and death, and angels, and principalities, and powers. Who are those? In truth I know not; but be they who they will, they can do us no harm : no, " nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth ;" (these are adversaries we should scarce have dreamed of:) and, to make all sure in a word, there is no other creature shall ever " be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Jesus Christ our Lord." 63. Yet for all St. Paul's exactness, there remains one enemy behind, and that is a sore one, of prime note; and truly I won- der how the apostle could miss him. And that is sin. I would to God St. Paul had taken notice of him: for this one enemy is able to do us more harm than all the rest put together: nay, but for sin, all the rest almost were our very good friends. Had we best supply St. Paul's incogitancy, and even adventure to put him in the catalogue too? Well, let them that have a mind to it, do it; truly, I dare not. And, but that I know Martin Luther was a bold-spirited man, I should wonder how he durst so confidently have adventured upon it : in his book, intituled, Captivitatis Babylonicce, (cap. de Baptismo, near the beginning) he hath these words : Vides quam dives sit homo Christianus sive baptizatus, qui etiam volens non potest perdere suam salutem quantiscunque pecca- tis, nisi nolit credere. I will not translate them to you ; and I would they never had been Englished ; for by that means, it may be, some of our loudest preachers would have wanted one point of comfortable false doctrine, wherewith they are wont to pleasure their friends and benefactors. Only let us do thus much for St. Paul's credit, to believe it was not merely inconsideration in him to leave out sin in this catalogue; that there was some ground of reason for it ; for though it may come to pass, by the mercy and goodness of God, that even sin itself shall not pluck us out of his hand, yet it would be something a strange, preposterons doctrine, The Fifth Sermon. 613 for a preacher of the new covenant to proclaim, that we shall un- doubtedly obtain the promises of the covenant, though we never so much break the conditions. 64. I do confess myself very guilty, and am sorry that I have thus long exercised and wearied your patience ; and yet, for all that, have not performed that task, which I fully resolved upon, when I adventured upon this subject : and that was, to spend this time in raising our devotions to the contemplation of the glorious mercies of God, expressed to us in Christ's resurrection and exalta- tion. But because other thoughts have carried me away (even against my will) almost all this while, I shall further take leave to wrong and injure your patience, with proposing one consideration more which ought by no means to be omitted. 65. And that is, to take notice of the person, to whom we have been beholden for these unspeakable mercies; and that is Christ, Christ alone, none else mentioned or thought upon. If Bellar- mine had been to advise St. Paul, if he had been privy to the writing of this epistle, it is likely he would not have taken it ill, to have had Christ's name in the matter of our salvation ; but he would not have endured the apostle's utter silence of all helps and aids besides : yea, though himself acknowledged it to be the safest course, to put our whole confidence only in the mercy of God ; yet, quia magis honorificum est habere aliquid ex merito, because it concerns our credit, to put in a little for merit and desert on our side ; he would not have us so to disparage our- selves, as to make salvation a mere alms, proceeding merely out of courtesy. 66. Nay, but, oh thou man, what art thou that answerest against God ? What art thou that justifiest thyself before him? Nay, what art thou that condemnest God, making him a liar all the scripture over 1 The whole project thereof is this, to let us know, how unable, how sick, how dead, we are of ourselves, and therefore ought most necessarily to have recourse to him for our salvation. As for us, beloved christians, if we must needs re- joice, let us rejoice, let us rejoice in our infirmities; let our glory be our shame, and let us lift up our eyes and behold, *" Who is this that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah ; this, that is glorious in his apparel, travelling in the greatness of his strength ?" And Christ will say, it is " I that speak in righte- ousness, mighty to save." But wherefore, Lord, art thou " red in thine apparel, and thy garments like him that treadeth in the wine-fat V He will answer, " I have trodden the wine-press alone, and of the people there was none with me ;" for which reason I am now crowned with glory, and honour, and immortality: I alone am mighty to save, and besides me there is none other. 67. And "good luck have thou with thine honour, O Lord; ride on, because of thy word of truth, of meekness, and of righte- ousness ; and thy right hand shall teach thee terrible things :"f terrible things for the king's enemies, for them who would not have thee to rule over them. And good luck have we " with * Isa. lxiii. 1, 2. ,„ t Psal. xiv. 614 The Sixth Sermon. thine honour, O Lord; ride on, because of thy word of truth, of meekness, and of righteousness; and thy right hand shall teach thee" gracious and comfortable things for us thy servants and sheep of thy pasture, who dare not exalt a weak arm of flesh against thee. Thy right hand shall mightily defend us in the midst of all our enemies. Thv right hand shall hnd us out, and gather us up, though lost and consumed in the grave ; though scattered before the four winds of heaven: and, thy right hand shall exalt us to glory and immortality for ever with thee in thy heavenly kingdom, where all the days of our life, yea, all the days of *thy glorious endless life, we shall, with angels and arch- angels, say, Glory, and honour, and power, and immortality, be unto him "which sitteth on the throne, and to the Lamb, and to the Holy Spirit, for ever and for ever. Amen, Amen. SERMON VI. " Moke to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness, that when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations:' — Luke xvi. 9. "The children of this world (saith Christ) are wiser in their generation than the children of light." To make which good, our Saviour, in so much of the chapter as goes before my text, brings in a story, or, as they call it, a parable of a cunning fellow, yet no great projector neither, no very subtle politician ; notwithstanding, one who being in an extremity, turned out of his office for mis-pending his master's goods, had found out a shift and that bv mere cozenage, to procure so much as would serve to keep him, indeed not according to the port and fashion after which before he had lived : but only to maintain him in meat and drink, out of danger of starving, or, which was more fearful, because more full of trouble or dishonour, hard labour or begging. I? Surely it had been no hard matter for our Saviour, who knew all whatsoever was in man, to have discovered more subtle projects, plots of a finer and more curious contrivance than this fellow's; but this, it seems, would serve his turn well enough for the purpose for which he made use of it: and, to say the truth, there cannot be imagined an example more exactly suiting, more closely applicable to his intent: which was, not to discredit and dishearten his followers, first, bv comparing and preferring the cunning of an ordinary fellow, a mere bailiff, or steward, before that spiritual, heavenlv wisdom, to which they pretend: nor, secondly, to instruct them by indirect and unwarrantable courses to provide for themselves hereafter; but chiefly this: 3. To teach us, by objecting to our view a man, who by his own negligence and carelessness being brought to an extremity, (for there was no necessity he should be brought to these plunges; a little timelv care and providence, even ordinary honesty, would easily have warranted and preserved him) had upon the sudden The Sixth Sermon. 615 found out a trick of his office, namely, by proceeding in his old courses, of wasting his master's substance to the enriching of his fellow-servants, and thereby gained their good wills, that for the time following they might preserve him from perishing. 4. Our Saviour, I say, by this example, would teach us, that since God hath placed us here in this world as his stewards, has put into our hands his goods, his riches, to be dispensed for his use and advantage : and such stewards we are, who have advan- tages infinitely more urgent, and pressing us to an honest, faithful discharge of our office, than this man in the parable ever had : as, first, we must of necessity fail, and be cashiered of our office : all the power of heaven and earth cannot procure us a perpetuity in it : the case did not stand so with this man, for it was merely his own fault to deserve discarding ; and, besides, having deserved that censure, it was his misfortune too, that his lord should come to the knowledge of it ; for it is no impossible thing, that a stew- ard should thrive by his lord's loss, and yet never be called to an account for it : and, secondly, upon our behaviour in this our office depends the everlasting welfare of our souls and bodies ; we shall for ever be disposed of, according to the honest or unfaithful dis- charge of our place. If ill, Lord, what shall become of us? Where shall we appear in that great day of account? I dare not almost tell you the issue of it : but if we have carried ourselves as faithful servants; propose to yourselves your own conditions, give your thoughts license and scope to be excessive and overflowing in their desires ; if the whole extension and capacity of your thoughts be not satisfied and filled to the brim, with measure pressed down and running over, God himself (which is impossible to imagine) will prove a deceiving, unfaithful master. 5. These things therefore considered, without question it doth infinitely concern us to consult, and project, what we mean to do with our riches; to what employment we intend to put those honours, and that power, which God hath conferred on us in this life : whether to receive them as our good things, to go away contented with them as our rewards, our final rewards, expecting no other good things from God after them ; or, which is our Saviour's advice, use them as means and helps of attaining bless- ings above all conceivable proportion exceeding them ; so dis- pensing and providently scattering them abroad, that against our time of need (which sooner or later will undoubtedly come) we may oblige to ourselves such friends, so gracious, and prevailing with our Master, who, either by their prayers and intercessions, or some other way, which we know not, may procure for us ad- mission into our Master's joys, to be no longer stewards and servants, but friends and sons. Thus, by the help and benefit of this mammon of unrighteousness in my text, these little things, even the least blessings that God has to bestow upon us, so called in the verse following, and in the next but one to that, these " things of other men," as if they were trifles, not worthy the owning, if compared with what rewards may be had in exchange for them, purchasing to ourselves everlasting and glorious re- 616 The Sixth Sermon. wards ; by the assistance of our riches (in the expression of St Paul) " laying up for ourselves a foundation of good works against the time to come, that we may lay hold on eternal life." 6. And this I suppose to be the force and meaning of this IsrifAudiov or moral of the parable, which Christ hath closely contrived and pressed into these few words : " make to yourselves friends of the," &c. In which words I shall observe unto you these three general parts : 1. What we must expect at last, notwithstanding all the riches and pomps of this world, i. e. " to fail." Christ, you see, makes no question at all of it; he takes it for granted, where he says, " that when ye fail," as implying, that certainly fail we must. 2. This being supposed, that fail we must, the counsel of Christ comes in very seasonably, namely, to provide for the main, to take order, that though we ourselves sink, yet we may pro- cure us friends to support us in our necessities; and that is, by making to ourselves " friends of the mammon," &c. 3. The comfortable issue and convenience, which shall accrue unto us by those friends thus purchased, i. e. by them to be received " into everlasting," &c. Of these in the order pro- posed. 7. You do not expect, I am sure, that I should go about seri- ously to persuade you, that you shall not live here for ever. For, whom should I seek to persuade? God forbid, I should be so uncharitable, as to think, or but suspect, that ever I should find occasion to make use of any persuasions for such a purpose. Indeed, a very good man (it was the prophet David) once said in his prosperity,* " I shall never be removed ; thou, Lord, of thy goodness hast made my hill so strong." But was this well said of him, think you ? It seems not ; for presently to confute this his confidence, " the Lord did but turn his face away from him, and he was troubled."! Yet surely such a speech as this could never be spoken upon better grounds ; for this his assurance, it seems, proceeded not out of any presumptuous confidence of his own strength or policy ; but only out of consideration of God's especial providence shewed in his wonderful preservation from many great and imminent dangers, and in preferring him from a low, contemptible fortune to the rule and dominion over his people. 8. There is another fellow in a parable,J who, though he came short of David, in this his unwarrantable confidence and presump- tion upon that foundation of riches and wealth, which with un- wearied anxiety and care he had laid up, notwithstanding was more suddenly and unanswerably confuted : for, he did not pro- mise to himself a perpetuity, only he imagined to himself (as he thought reasonably) that since he had at last obtained that which he had aimed at, and which had cost him so many years' travail, it were fit for him now to enjoy the fruit, which he had so dearly bought. And in a joyful contemplation of this his happiness, he * Psal. xxx. 6. t Psal. xxx. 7. t Luke xii. The Sixth Sermon. 617 enters into dialogue with his soul; " Soul, (saith he) now take thy rest ;" no more shalt thou be vexed, and even consumed with the painful and violent thirst after riches, thou hast that laid up for thee, which shall abundantly satisfy all thy desires. All my busi- ness hereafter, shall be to rind out ways how to repay unto mv soul all those pleasures, which heretofore I have denied unto my- self: I have store sufficient for many years' expenses safely laid up in my barns. Yet for all this man's thus pleasing himself with assured promises of many years' happiness; if you will but vouch- safe to inquire after him the very next day after he spoke thus, his garners, it is likely, you may yet find standing, thronged and op- pressed with the abundance of corn ; but for his soul (for whose sake all this ado had been kept) the Lord knows what became of that ; it was hurried away, no man can tell whither. 9. Now the thing that it becomes me to desire at your hands from the consideration of these two examples, is this: not to re- quire of you to believe that you must once fail, (for that I suppose were needless) nor yet to dissuade you from allowing to yourselves a reasonable use of, and moderate lawful pleasures from, that abundance of blessings wherewith God hath enriched you beyond all other men; but to beseech you, that this meditation, that cer- tainly you must fail, may be no unwelcome thought to you ; that when the time shall come, that you must leave these riches and pleasures, which God has given you here to enjoy, it may not come upon you as an unexpected misfortune, as a thing you were afraid of, and would willingly be content to avoid. 10. I confess, this were a meditation sufficient to discourage and quite dishearten a man, that were resolved to take up his rest in the pleasures and preferments of this world, that were content to sit down satisfied with such a slight happiness, as this life is able to afford him : for one, who would make riches his strong city, a place of refuge and security, a fortress whereto he would have re- course in all his extremities, and from whence he would expect, safety in all dangers and troubles which may assail him : for what were that, but to withdraw him from his strong holds, and leave him unfortified and exposed to any injury and misfortune? How could I be more injurious to such a man, than to vex and affright him with such sad melancholic thoughts as these, that the time will come, when that strong castle of his, his riches, shall be undermined and demolished, when he shall be left naked and defenceless ? At which time, if it were possible for him to retain his riches, which before he made his bulwark and place of security, yet he will find them but paper walls, unable to stand the weakest battery? 11. But I hope better things of you, beloved christians, even things which accompany salvation : and, indeed, why should I not ? Who can forbid me to hope so ? for, alas ! I know you not. I have no reason to assure myself of the contrary. And then I should be most inexcusably uncharitable, if I should not even re- joice in this my hope. I see God hath plentifully showered down upon you, almost overwhelmed you, with all the blessings of this 52* 618 The Sixth Sermon. life. He has moreover given you peaceable times to enjoy them (blessed be his holy name for it, and a thousand blessings be re- turned into the bosom of his anointed, for his most pious, chris- tian-like care to confirm this peace, and to preserve it from interruption !) God, I say, has given you leisure and opportunity to enjoy and improve these your riches for your everlasting hap- piness: a comfort, which he has denied almost to all other nations; nothing abroad but wars, and rumours of wars ; no joy nor comfort, but only in the effusion of precious christian blood ; nothing but sacking of towns, and invasions of countries, God only knows upon how just pretensions! But, which is above all other blessings (in- deed, without which all the rest will prove very curses) God has given you an abundant plentiful use of his blessed word and sacra- ments every week, several times (till now) a worthy and able clergy to put you in mind, how great an account you are to make to Al- mighty God of these his blessings, and what extraordinary interest is expected at your hands. 12. Let me not, therefore, I beseech you, be your enemy, if I prove troublesome to any slumbering lethargic spirit; if 1 put him in mind that the time will come, when sleep shall for ever depart from his eyes, and that if his slumber last till a trumpet awake him, darkness he may find, most palpable, Egyptian dark- ness, but not darkness commodious to call on and procure sleep, not very convenient to take one's rest in. Forgive, I beseech you, my importunity, if I earnestly desire you frequently to represent to your minds a time of failing, and presently after that a severe, inexorable judge, requiring a strict, exact account of your behaviour in your stewardship : if I beseech you, from the consideration of the foolish virgins, not to put far from you the coming of the bridegroom ; not to frame to yourselves reasons and probabilities, why he is not likely to come yet a good while (for he himseJf has told you, he will come as a thief in the night, and therefore when you are thus secure and slumbering, yourselves create a night, a fit season for him to come unawares upon you); for, if you be unprovided of oil in your lamps, of good works, which may shine before men, and the door be once shut, talk not of any new .devised faith, and I know not what assurance; there is no possibility of ever having it opened, but you shall be forced to remain exposed to all dangers, to all manner of misfortunes, not one shall be found to befriend you, and to receive you into everlast- ing habitations. 13. And, I pray you consider, that if the apprehension of these things conceived, not as present, but as to be expected, it may be many years hence, be so distasteful and ominous to flesh and blood, who will be able to abide the time, when it shall, indeed, overtake him? If now in these days of leisure and forbearance, (a season which God out of his glorious mercy hath allowed us on purpose to spend in such thoughts as these, in projecting against the evil day) the meditation thereof bring such anguish and torment along with it ; what terrible, insupportable elfects will it work in us, when we shall find ourselves surprised by it, The Sixth Sermon. 619 and caught as in a snare ! If a man can no sooner hear such things related, or but seriously think upon them, though in the height of his jollity, but straight, as if some ill news had been told him, as if he had heard some sad tragical story of his own misfortunes, he will presently recoil from his mirth, pleasure will become troublesome and distasteful to him ; O with what anguish and vexation of spirit, with what agony of soul shall they be entertained, when they come in earnest ! 14. Observe, therefore, I beseech you, that our Saviour does not bid you, when you fail, make to yourselves friends; no, alas! that is not the time to make friends in; then is the season when you are to expect comfort and assistance from those friends, which you have gained before, in time, when you were furnished with such good things, as were likely to oblige men unto you. What title then can be found out equal to express the folly and madness of such people, who, as if God had created them on purpose for the plea- sures and vanities of this world, make that the whole business of their lives; and, as if the care of their souls' everlasting disposal were but an employment of an hour's dispatch, will not vouchsafe so fruitlessly to cast away any part of the time, when their souls are vigorous and healthful, about such a trifling design ; but destine their last few hours, when they are unable for any business else, to settle for themselves an estate of eternity. 15. But because I have not the leisure now to prosecute this argument as fully as it may deserve, give me leave, I pray you, in brief, to present to your view, a man brought to such an ex- tremity as this ; one fastened and chained unto the bed of sick- ness, one that has already received within himself the messages of death — death beginning (in the language of the psalmist) to gnaw upon him. Take the pains, I beseech you, to imagine to yourselves (and it will require some courage but to consider it) what unquiet busy thoughts shall then possess him, what terrible affrighting meditations shall then be suggested to him, when he shall be forced to apprehend, that now he has but a very small portion of time left him; and yet for all that, all the business, for the dispatching of which he came into the world, is left undone ; the council and good intention of God, out of which he gave him his riches, being utterly defeated, scarce one friend made, that will vouchsafe to look upon him now in his necessity ; but, on the contrary, many sore enemies procured, that will be ready to cry for vengeance against him : no account to be found of the dispen- sation of those goods, which God has given him, but such an one as will serve to feed and nourish the distemper and sickness of his thoughts; so much (may be) spent in the prosecution and ful- filling of his ungodly lusts, so much in gorgeous raiment and de- licious feeding, yet all this while scarce one poor Lazarus obliged. Now all the remedy that is to be had in such an exigence as this, is to have the next preacher sent for, who must instil a little comfortable divinity into him, to make him sleep; and so his soul departs, the Lord knows whither. And yet these are but the 620 The Sixth Sermon. beginning of sorrows; but what the end and perfection of them will be, I confess I have not the courage to tell you. 16. (Obj. 1.) But yet for all this I know men are apt so much to favour themselves in their security, they will be ready lo pro- duce that famous example of the thief on the cross lo confute me, and to testify, that even he that shall at the last push, as it were, have recourse unto God's mercy, is not altogether hopeless. (Obj. 2.) Besides, did not he, who came the last hour of the day to la- bour in the vineyard, receive the same wages with them who had suffered the toil and heat of the whole dav? (Sol. 1.) For the thief on the cross, there can lie no exception against the example. But yet consider, I pray you, that from the beginning of the world, till the time that the scripture canon was sealed up, there is not to be found one example more to equal it. Besides, it was done at the time of Christ's suffering ; a season, wherein God, in that one act of the redemption of the world by the death of his Son, expressed the very utmost of his mercy, and discovered unto the world, as it were in one entire sum, all the riches and treasures of his goodness. If, therefore, at such a time, he was pleased to work a miracle of mercy upon one, who probably having spent his whole life in ungodly forbid- den courses, had not, till then, light upon any extraordinary oppor- tunities and means, able to break in pieces, and melt his flinty ob- durate heart; can this example, then, be any advantage to you, who every day, almost, have more than sufficient means and offers of grace, and are continually threatened with the danger of defer- ring your repentance, and of prolonging the time of making up your accounts; since you neither do, nor must, know the day nor hour, when God will expect them at your hands? 17. (2.) As concerning the man who was called the last hour of the day to labour in the vineyard, I pray you take notice, that this man was a labourer; and though he took pains but for a short time, yet labour he did : whereas he that shall defer his repentance and amendment of life till his last hour, if he indeed prove sorry for his sins, yet labour he cannot ; the best that he can do is, to make of- fers and resolutions to work the good work of God, if it shall please him to spare him life : but that those resolutions of his shall be accepted with God, instead of real, very labour indeed, I find no commission to assure you. But I confess, it is something unseason- ably done of me, to stand, so long at least, upon such sullen, me- lancholic meditations as these are; especially now in the midst of this solemn, glorious feast : therefore I am resolved even abruptly to break through them, and hasten to my second general, which is the counsel, which our Saviour gives upon this consideration, that necessarily we must fail; namely, to provide, and seriously project against that time, by all the means that we can make, to oblige to ourselves friends in that extremity ; expressed in these words : " Make to vourselves friends of the mammon of un- righteousness." 18. "Mammon of unrighteousness:" what is that? Shall I deal The Sixth Sermon. 621 freely and honestly with you ? Indeed I will : for woe unto me, if I should dare to come into this place to flatter you; and woe unto me, if I should dare to come into this place to vent my spleen against any. Then all this, for which there is such ado kept, not only here, but all the world over ; such making of friends, nay, such undermining of friends, so many dangers sought out and despised; this is the "mammon of unrighteousness." An untoward name, I confess, for a thing so much set by, so carefully and ambitiously courted, so insatiably thirsted after; but yet a name of Christ's devising. He has afforded this idol, riches, no better a title ; and therefore I must and dare call them so, any where. 19. But may it not be lawful to inquire after, or give some guesses, at least, at the reasons which might move our Saviour to put so disgraceful a name upon riches? Without question, it is not only lawful to be so curious, but also very useful and expe- dient. A main reason (I have heard) is, because, ordinarily, riches leave a tincture and infection in the persons who have any thing to do with them. It is a hard thing, almost impossible, for a man any ways to meddle with them without sin, ordinarily they are got with sin, they are possessed with sin, they are spent with sin. A man (saith Siracides) cannot hasten to be rich without sin ; and when he has once got them, how unwilling will he be to let a lust pass unsatisfied ; seeing he is furnished with that to which (in his opinion at least) nothing can be denied : how un- willing will he be to be worsted, though in the most unjust cause, seeing he is furnished with that which will blind the eyes of the prudent, and pervert the understanding of the wise ; for (saith the same wise man) " as a man's riches, so his anger increaseth." And upon the same grounds it may be said, that as a man's riches increase, so likewise his desires and lusts increase. I will under- take to give you one reason more, why riches are called " mammon of unrighteousness ;" and it is, because they are mammon, riches indeed, only to unrighteous men ; none beside such will rest con- tented with them, and suffer God to depart from them without a greater blessing than they can be. 20. But what need I trouble myself about inquiring after rea- sons, why this so universally-adored idol, mammon, is so disho- nourably branded and stigmatized by our Saviour, since himself in another place hath said enough of it; which may suffice not only to warrant the reasonableness of this title, but also to make them, who are apt to glory so much in riches, if they well con- sider it, even to envy the happiness and security of those, who are not trusted with so dangerous wares. The words were spoken upon occasion of a sudden great sorrow and melancholy, which appeared in a young man's countenance, and procured by the temptations of riches, which made him refuse the most advanta- geous bargain that ever was offered to man. Whereupon, saith Christ to his disciples, (as his words are recorded by St. Matthew) " Verily, I say unto you, that a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, that it 622 The Sixth Sermon. is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven."* Indeed St. Mark reports this speech something more largely than it is there; and, instead of a "rich man," puts in, "one that trusteth in his riches;"f which he does not so much to explain the phrase of the speech, as to give a reason of the impossibility. 21. For if our Saviour in saying, "It is impossible for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven," hy a rich man had meant one that trusteth in his riches, there had been no sufficient ground for so great an amazement as seized upon the disciples at the hearing of it; for that was a thing which they knew well enough before ; not the most ignorant of his hearers but could have told him as much. Therefore St. Matthew's and St. Mark's words, joined together, will make up this sense, (and I make no question at all but that it was Christ's meaning) namely — That it is even almost impossible for a rich man to be saved, because he cannot choose but trust in his riches. 22. And this is more clearly evinced by that satisfaction, which our Saviour gave to his disciples to recover them from their astonishment ; where he says, " With men it is impossible, but not with God ; for with God all things are possible ;" intimating thus much, that considering the great, almost irresistible, tempta- tions, which riches carry along with them, and man's extreme weakness and natural impotency ; his willing propension, and, to all ordinary, natural means, most incurable inclination to make them his place of rest, his strong city, wherein he trusts; it is impossible, that, these things meeting together, he should not put his confidence in them, and so make himself incapable of heaven, between which and riches thus used, there is as large, as impass- able a gulf, as between heaven and hell : " With men (therefore) these things are impossible, but not with God ; for with him all things are possible." It is in his power, by the help and assist- ance of that grace, which he showers upon every one of us in baptism, to cure this hereditary weakness and sickness of our natures, and to render us healthful and vigorous, powerful enough to free ourselves from that bondage and slavery, wherein these outward, worldly blessings are apt to captivate us, and where- unto by nature we do willingly submit ourselves: it is in his power to make these pernicious pleasures, which riches may pro- mise unto us, to become unwelcome and distasteful unto us: nay, which is more, it is in his power to make even this " mammon of unrighteousness," against its own nature, to become a help and instrument to procure for us the true riches, even those invaluable treasures, which God hath laid up in heaven for us. Take it not ill, therefore, I beseech you, if that, for which you are so much envied and reverenced above other men, be so undervalued by our Saviour, in comparison with the true riches : be not angry with our Saviour for it ; but rather endeavour, by trading providently with them, for your own and others' benefit, to render Christ's language in this place improper and abusive. * Matt. xiv. 34, 35. + Mark x. 20, 24. The Sixth Sermon. 623 23. But now if riches deserve no better a title at our Saviour's hands, how can it be likely that they can prove fit instruments to procure friends, and such friends as we stand in need of? " For, do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles V* Indeed, the argu- ment held well on St. Paul's side, when he says, " If we have sowed to you spiritual things, is it much, if we reap your temporal things?" But will the argument hold also on Christ's part? " If ye have not been faithful in the mammon of unrighteousness, who will trust you with the true riches?" Certainly, if it does not, not only this, but divers chapters besides, might, without any loss, have been left out of the gospel. 24. And therefore it was a sullen, ill-natured fellow, (he in the parable, I mean, who received the one talent) and without all question, a shameless liar, (though I fear there be many, who are not very averse from his opinion) who with an impudent face durst tell God, he was austere, reaping where he had not sown, and gathering where he had not scattered. And though he spake this with the same confidence, that his proselytes do in these our days, not as a probable opinion, but as a thing that he is assured of; (for, says he, " I know thee, that thou art austere," &c.) yet I beseech you believe him not : no, no, our God is a gracious God, and requires of us no more than we are able to do. He does not expect faith, and repentance, and good works, where he has given no abilities to perform them : nay, doth not God by his prophet tell us (and Christ repeats it in his parable) that he is so far from that, that after several years' labour bestowed on his vineyard, and yet no fruit issuing, yet he was content to expect one year longer, even till he had done so much, that no more could be done? He is at a stay, and asks, what he could have done more? 25. It were therefore verv tit and convenient, that we should, at least in our own hearts, silence and stifle such opinions con- cerning God as these are; and believe that he is a well-wisher to us, when he bestows any means upon us whereby we may do good. Otherwise we shall, without any comfort or courage, heartlessly, and even sleepily, go about the performing of what Christ here counsels us to. If you will not believe me, upon my word, take the man's own confession : says he, when I had once entertained this persuasion, that God would expect a more yielding plentiful harvest, fruitful beyond that proportion of seed which he gave me to sow, " I was afraid ;" horror and uncomfortable thoughts seized upon me, and I went and hid my talent in a napkin; 1 even sat still, resolved to put all to an adventure, and to expect what God would do with me ; for, alas ! how bootless, and to no purpose, would my weak endeavours be, to procure the favour of such a God, that would not be content but with a great deal more than lay in my power to perform. 26. It is true, indeed, Christ told him, that though he had had such an unworthy prejudicial conceit of him, yet that even from thence he might have been moved to have made the best and most advantageous use of that talent, which God had bestowed on him; for, says Christ, " If thou knewest I was austere, why didst thou 624 The Sixth Sermon. not therefore put my money into the exchanger's hands, and trade with it, that I might have received mine own with increase?" Why didst thou not at the least do thy best to give satisfaction to thy hard, austere master? God forbid that I should doubt, but there are thousands, who, though it may be they have entertained this man's opinion and conceit of God, yet make better use of it than he did. But yet the man's own confession shews what ordi- narily and naturally are the fruit and issue of it. 27. That, therefore, which God sows among you, is riches; but yet riches, most improperly so called : that which he scatters and strews abroad, is the mammon of unrighteousness. "Now he which sovveth, (saith the apostle) soweth in hope ;" and he who scattereth, scattereth in hope : but what gain or interest, what a kind of harvest does God hope for after this his seed-time? Why just such another as the same apostle speaks of (1 Cor. xv.) where he discourses upon the resurrection and glorious change of these our bodies: "They are sown (saith he) in corruption, but are raised in incorruption ; they are sown in dishonour, but are raised in glory ; they are sown in weakness, but are raised in power; they are sown natural bodies, but are raised spiritual heavenly bodies."* In like manner, God sows among you those riches, which himself, most disgracefully, calls " the mammon of un- righteousness," in hope that he may reap the true riches: he scat- ters among you such small trifles, that many, even heathen men, have been content to want, for the empty aerial reward of fame ; nay, that some of them have been content to cast away in a humour ; and these small things he scatters abroad, in hope that he may gather (what think you ?) the everlasting salvation of your souls and bodies. And is this that harsh austere master? 28. Indeed, if God were such a person as some men have given him out for; if he should scatter abroad his riches as snares, on purpose to fetter and entangle men with them; if he should be- stow upon any this " mammon of unrighteousness," with an intent and resolution that it should become unto them the " mammon of unrighteousness" indeed ; that it should make them indisposed and incapable of attaining unto the true riches; there might be some plea for them to fasten so injurious an accusation upon God. But can the judge of all the earth deal so with his servants? Can he, who is goodness and mercy itself, he who rejoices to style himself the preserver of men, can he be so cruelly bountiful to his creatures, as by heaping upon them the vanishing, unsatisfying blessings of this life, thereby to fatten and cherish them against the /lay of slaughter and destruction? God forbid ! 20. I confess, notwithstanding, that such persons there may be, upon whom God may in his wrath shower down blessings and riches in his tierce displeasure: but they are only such, as by living in a continual habitual practice of undervaluing and con- temning the daily offers of grace and favour, have already con- demned themselves, and sealed themselves unto the day of destruc- tion : and such an one was Pharaoh, concerning whom God him- * 1 Cor. xv. 42—44. The Sixth Sermon. 625 self testifies, saying, " For this reason I have raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth ;"* that is, since by thy con- tinual rebellions thou hast judged thyself unworthy of life, for this reason I have raised thee up, I have kept thee alive, and preserved thee, that none of my former plagues should sweep thee away, that at last, by an utter destruction of thee, together with the whole strength and flower of thy kingdom, I may be glorified throughout the whole world. But I will leave discoursing, and come nearer unto you, in the serious application of Christ's counsel here. 30. It is the property of riches (saith the wise man) to gather many friends.f Those who are above others in wealth and power, shall presently be furnished with friends more than they can well know what to do withal ; but such friends are not concerned at all in our Saviour's advice in my text ; the friends here intended are such, who are not here to restore again unto you in the same coin that they received. Give not to the rich (saith our Saviour) for fear they repay you. Of all things in the world, take heed of being paid back again in this life ; beware how you carry your reward along with you to your grave ; but leave it to be paid in exchange in another country, where, for using five talents well, you shall have ten cities given you; where, for the bounty of a cup of cold water, you shall receive a prophet's reward. Such a friend was offered once to the rich man in the gospel ; God sent him one to his doors, even to crave his friendship ; but the rich man was so busied with the care of his wardrobe and his table, that he was not at leisure to hearken to so gainless an offer : not- withstanding, the time came afterwards, when he miserably, to his cost, perceived, what a blessed opportunity he had most negligently omitted, and even in hell attempted to purchase his favour, and to obtain from his hand a poor alms (God knows!) but one drop of water ; but all too late ; the time of making friends was past, and a great unfordable gulf had divided them from all possible society and communion for ever. 31. Now consider (I beseech you) that it had been a very easy matter for God so to have provided for all his creatures, that each particular should have had enough of his own, without being beholden to another for supply ; but then two heavenly and divine virtues had been quite lost : for where had been the poor man's patience, and the rich man's charity 1 The poor man therefore wants, that you may have occasion to exercise your liberality ; and that by losing and diminishing your wealth upon him, ye may become more full of riches hereafter. So that it is God's great bounty to you, not only to give you plenty and abundance, but also to suffer others to languish in penury and want. It may be, God has suffered himself so long to be robbed of his own posses- sions, his tithes, that you might have the glory and comfort of restoring them. It may be, God has suffered the ancient, super- stitious, histrionical adorning of his temples to be converted into * Exod. ix. 16. t Prov. xix. 4. RR 53 626 The Sixth Sermon. the late slovenly profaneness (commonly called worshipping in spirit, but intended to be worship without cost) that you may find a happy occasion to restore those sacred places, dedicated to his honour, to that majesty and reverence, as may become houses wherein God delights that his name should dwell. 32. Now if it be not in my power to persuade you neither to make God, nor man your debtors by your riches ; yet I beseech you, make neither of them your enemies by them. Do not make your riches instruments of war to fight against God himself: for example, as maintaining an unjust cause by power, a cause which God abhors ; do not so requite God for his extraordinary liberality to you, as to make his riches instruments for the devil to wreak his malice upon those whom God loveth. If I had not a care not to injure your patience too far, what might not be said upon this subject? But I perceive it is fit for me to hasten to your release. 33. But before I quit myself, and ease you, of further prose- cution of this point, I shall desire you all to suffer one word of exhortation ; and if there be any here, whom it may more nearly concern, I beseech them, even by the bowels of Jesus Christ, that they will suffer too a word of most necessary reproof. And though what I shall say doth not naturally flow from the words in hand, yet they bear a reasonable resemblance and proportion with them: so pertinent, I am sure, they are to the auditory, to whom I speak, that I would choose rather quite to lose my text, than here to leave them unsaid. 34. It is about making friends too ; indeed, not with the " mam- mon of unrighteousness;" no, that is a trifle to it: it is about making friends with not revenging of injuries, with patient bearing and willing forgiving of offences: a duty so seriously, so incessantly, sometimes in plain words, sometimes in parables, all manner ef ways, upon all occasions, urged by our Saviour, that we cannot so much as pray, but we must be forced to acknowledge obe- dience to this law: " Forgive us — as we forgive:" yea, so bound- lessly, and without all restrictions or reservations is it enjoined, that when as Peter thought it fair to have it limited to a certain number, and proposed seven, as, in his opinion, reasonable and convenient ; No, saith our Saviour, forgive not until seven times, but until four hundred fourscore and ten times. And if he could have imagined, that it were possible for a man to have exceeded this number also in injuries, without question he would not have left there neither. 35. But how is this doctrine received in the world? What counsel would men, and those none of the worst sort, give thee in such a case? How would the soberest, discreetest, well-bred christian advise thee ? Why thus : If thy brother, or thy neigh- bour have offered thee an injury, or an affront, forgive him ? By no means ; thou art utterly undone, and lost in thy reputation with the world, if thou dost forgive him. What is to be done then? Why, let not thy heart take rest, let all other business and employment be laid aside, till thou hast his blood. How ! a The Sixth Sermon. 627 man's blood for an injurious, passionate speech, for a disdainful look ? Nay, that is not all : that thou mayest gain among men the reputation of a discreet, well-tempered murderer, be sure thou killest him not in passion, when thy blood is hot and boiling with the provocation ; but proceed with as great temper and settled- ness of reason, with as much discretion and preparedness, as thou wouldst to the communion : after some several days' respite, that it may appear it is thy reason guides thee, and not thy passion, invite him mildly and courteously into some retired place, and there let it be determined, whether his blood or thine shall satisfy the injury. 36. Oh thou holy christian religion ! whence is it that thy children have sucked this inhuman, poisonous blood, these raging, fiery spirits ? For if we shall inquire of the heathen, they will say, They have not learned this from us : or of the mahometans, they will answer, We are not guilty of it. Blessed God ! that it should become a most sure, settled course for a man to run into danger and disgrace with the world, if he shall dare to perform a commandment of Christ, which is as necessary for him to do, if he have any hopes of attaining heaven, as meat and drink is for the maintaining of life ! that it ever should enter into christian hearts to walk so curiously and exactly contrary unto the ways of God ! that whereas he sees himself every day and hour almost, contemned and despised by thee, who art his servant, his creature, upon whom he might, without all possible imputation of unright- eousness, pour down all the vials of his wrath and indignation, yet he notwithstanding is patient and long-suffering towards thee, hoping that his long-suffering may lead thee to repentance, and beseeching thee daily by his ministers to be reconciled unto him ; and yet thou, on the other side, for a distempered, passionate speech, or less, should take upon thee to send thy neighbour's soul, or thine own, or likely both, clogged and oppressed with all your sins unrepented of (for how can repentance possibly consist with such a resolution?) before the tribunal-seat of God, to expect your final sentence ; utterly depriving thyself of all the blessed means which God has contrived for thy salvation, and putting thyself in such an estate, that it shall not be in God's power almost, to do thee any good. Pardon, I beseech you, my earnestness, almost intemperateness, seeing it hath proceeded from so just, so war- rantable a ground ; and, since it is in your power to give rules of honour and reputation to the whole kingdom, do not you teach others to be ashamed of this inseparable badge of your religion, charity and forgiving of offences ; give men leave to be christians without danger or dishonour ; or, if religion will not work with you, yet let the laws of that state wherein you live, the earnest desires and care of your righteous prince, prevail with you. But I have done, and proceed to my last part, which is the convenience and gain, which shall accrue unto us by friends obliged with this " mam- mon of unrighteousness," namely, by them to be received "into everlasting habitations." 37. I must here again propose another question ; but when I rr2 628 The Sixth Sermon. have done that, I must be forced to leave it without an answer , unless you will be content to take a conjecture, a probability, for an answer : it is, how, or after what manner, those to whom we have done good here, shall hereafter receive us " into everlasting habitations?" Whether this is performed only by their prayers and intercession with God, in the behalf of their benefactors; or, whether they are used as instruments and conductors, as it were, as our Saviour may probably seem to intimate in the parable, where the Lord speaks to his servants, that they should take away the one talent from him which had no more, and bestow it on him which had ten talents? So uncertain it is, whether this task shall be performed by them one of these ways, or by some other unknown course, that St. Augustine ingenuously confesses, he knows not what to make of it : yet Cardinal Bellarmine says, he can easily assoil it, and can in these words find out purgatory, and satisfaction for sin after death, and a great deal more than I can understand. But truly, if he be able to spy purgatory in this text, especially such an one as he fancies to himself in his books of that argument, he has made use of better glasses than ever Galileo found out. And I would to God those of his party would consider, how much the weakness of their cause is argued even from hence, that they are forced to ground most of the points controverted between us, upon such difficult places as these, of so ambiguous and uncertain meanings, and therefore equally ob- noxious to any man's interpretation. There may yet be found out a convenient sense of this place, especially if he will allow an Hebraism in these words (which is frequent enough in the evan- gelical writings) of putting the third person plural to express a passive sense ; and then the meaning will be, " That when," &c. " they may receive you," i. e. that ye may be received " into everlasting habitations ;" parallel to a like phrase in Luke xii. 12, " Thou fool, this night shall they take away thy soul from thee ;" i. e. thy soul shall be taken from thee. And if this sense be true, as it is very likely, many of our Romish adversaries have spent much pains about this text to no purpose. 38. But to leave quarrelling : It is no very considerable matter, whether we have light upon the true sense of these words or not : or whether those, to whom we have done good, have a share in purchasing for us an admission into these " everlasting habita- tions ;" as long as we may infallibly hence conclude, that though it should fall out, that Abraham should forget us, and Israel become ignorant of us ; yet certainly God (who alone is instead of ten thou- sand such friends) he will keep a register of all our good actions, and will take particular care of us, to give us a just proportion of reward and harvest of glory, according to our sparingness or libe- rality in sowing. 39. But would Almighty God have us such mercenary servants, so careful and projecting for our own advantage, that we should not obey him without a compact and bargain ? Is not he worthy our serving, unless we first make our condition with him, to be sure to gain and thrive by him ? Is this a consideration worthy and The Sixth Sei'tnon. 629 befitting the ingenuity and nobleness of a christian mind, to have an eye to the " recompense of reward V Is Christ also become a schoolmaster unto us, as well as the law was to the Jews, that we should have need of thunder, and blackness of smoke, and voices to affright us, or promises to win and allure us? Nay, have not your ears oftentimes heard, from such places as this, an obedience of this nature disgraced and branded for a servile, slavish obedience ; an obedience ordinarily made the mark and badge even of a formal hypocrite, the worst kind of reprobates? 40. I confess I could shew you a more excellent way than this, if men were ordinarily fitted and qualified for the receiving of it; and that is St. Paul's more excellent way of charity ; the keeping of God's commandments merely out of the love of his goodness, and consideration of his infinite, inconceivable holiness: and he that can receive this, let him receive it; and thrice happy and blessed shall he be of the Lord : but, in the mean time, let him not be forward to judge his fellow-servants, if they acknowledge themselves so far guilty of weakness and imperfections, that they have need to re- ceive strength and encouragement in this their painful and labo- rious race, by looking forward unto the glorious prize of their "high calling in Jesus Christ." 41. Surely God is wise enough to contrive the surest course, and to set down the best and likeliest means for persuading us to his service, and the obedience of his commandments: he is able to in- quire and search into the most retired corners of our wicked, de- ceitful hearts, and, thereby knowing our temper and disposition, he is best able to prescribe us a method and diet suitable to our con- stitutions. Therefore, if he, out of his infinite wisdom, and the consideration of what encouragements we stand in need of, hath thought it fit to annex, to every precept almost, a promise of hap- piness, or a threatening of unavoidable danger to the transgressors; what art thou, O man, that thou darest take upon thee to calum- niate his proceedings, and to prescribe better directions than he has thought fit ? 42. I beseech you therefore, my beloved brethren, by all means make use of any advantages, which may serve to render you more earnest, more eager, and resolute, in your obedience to those holy and perfect commandments, which he hath enjoined you ; if you cannot find yourselves arrived as yet to that height of perfection, as that love and charity cannot wrest from you sufficient careful- ness to obey him ; let fear have its operation with you, fear and horror of that terrible issue, which shall attend the wilful and habitual transgressors of his laws: and you need not suspect this course as unwarrantable; for you shall have St. Paul for your example, even that Paul, for whose miraculous conversion Christ was pleased himself in person to descend from his throne of ma- jesty ; that Paul, who laboured in the gospel more than all the rest of the apostles; that Paul, whose joy and heart's comfort it was to be afflicted for the name of Christ ; lastly, that Paul who for a time was ravished from the earth to the third heaven, after a most inexpressible manner, and there heard things that cannot 53* 630 The Sixth Sermon. be uttered : this Paul, I say, shall be your example; who, after all these things, found it yet a convenient motive, and received great encouragement and eagerness to proceed in his most blessed conver- sation, even from this fear, " lest while he preached to others, him- self should become a cast-away." 43. And when fear has done its part, let hope come in ; hope of that happy communion, which you shall once again have with those friends which may be purchased in this life at so easy a rate ; hope of that eternal weight and burden of joy and glory, which is reserved in heaven for you, if you hold fast " the rejoic- ing of the hope steadfast unto the end."* Let a comfortable medi- tation of these things encourage and hearten you to proceed from one degree of holiness to another, " till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the fulness of the stature of Christ :" and for an example in this, take that whole cloud of witnesses mustered to- gether in Heb. xi. : or, if they will not serve the turn, take an ex- ample above all examples, an example beyond all imaginable ex- ceptions, even our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ himself, concerning whom the author of the same epistle (it was St. Paul sure) saith, (chap, xii.) that " for the joy that was set before him, he despised the shame, and endured the cross," &c. 44. God knows we have need of all manner of encouragements, and all little enough for us, so sluggish and immovable, so perverse and obstinate are we : therefore, for God's sake, upon any terms, continue in the service of Christ, make use of all manner of ad- vantages; and though ye find hope or fear predominant in you (these servile affections, as they are commonly called), yet for all that faint not, despair not, but rather give thanks to Almighty God ; and God, who sees such good effect of his promises and threatenings in you (of which all the scripture is full from one end to the other) will in his good time fill your hearts full of love, even that " per- fect love which casteth out fear," and of that perfect love, which shall have no need of hope; he will perfect that his good work in you unto the end. 45. To conclude all, whether ye shall perform this command- ment of Christ, or whether ye shall not perform it, it cannot be avoided, everlasting habitations shall be your reward : only the difference is whether ye shall have them of your enemies' provid- ing ; whether ye will be beholden to the devil and his angels, your ancient, mortal enemies, to prepare everlasting dwellings for you (and " who can dwell in everlasting fire V saith the pro- phet ; " who can dwell in continual burnings ?") or, whether ye will expect them from the assistance of those just persons whom you have by your good works eternally obliged to you ; even those blessed and glorious habitations, which God the Father Almighty hath from the beginning of the world provided and furnished for you ; which God the Son, by his meritorious death and passion, hath purchased for you; and for the admission whereunto, God the Holy Ghost hath sanctified and adorned you, * Heb. iii. 6. The Seventh Sermon. 631 that in thankfulness and gratitude you yourselves may become ever- lasting habitations, pure and undefined temples for him to dwell in for ever and ever. Now unto these glorious and everlasting habita- tions God of his infinite mercy bring us, even for Jesus Christ's sake: to whom, with the Father, &c. SERMON VII. "And if I have defrauded any man by forged cavillation, I restore unto him fourfold. 1 " — Luke xix. 8. " The Son of man (saith our Saviour of himself in the end of this story) is come to seek and save that which was lost ;" (verse 10;) and how careful and solicitous he was in the discharge of this employment and business, about which his Father sent him, this story of Zaccheus (out of which my text is taken) will evidently and lively discover: for here we have a man, that among ten thou- sand, one would think were the most unlikely to become a disciple of Christ, so indisposed he was for such a change, so unqualified in all respects; for first, he was rich, as the third verse tells us; and if that were all his fault, yet in our Saviour's judgment, who was never uncharitable, being so clogged and burdened with these im- pedimenta, (as even the heathens could call riches) it would be as hard for him to press through and enter in at the strait gate, with- out uneasing and freeing himself from them, as " for a camel to go through the eye of a needle." 2. But, secondly, these his riches, as it would seem, were scarce well and honestly gotten : for his trade and course of life was a dangerous trade, obnoxious to great, almost irresistible temptations : a great measure of grace would be requisite to preserve a man in- corrupt and undefiled in that course; and so ill a name he had got- ten himself, that all that afterwards saw Christ's familiarity with him, were much offended and scandalized at it : for we read in the seventh verse, that when they all saw it, they murmured, saying, that he was gone in to lodge with a sinful man ; with one famous and notorious for a great oppressor. 3. Yet, notwithstanding all this, such was the unspeakable mercy and goodness of Christ, that even of this stone, so scorned and rejected of all the people, he raised a son unto Abraham, as we find in the ninth verse. And, to bring this to pass, he took occasion even from a vain curiosity of this Zaccheus, a humour of his, it may be such an one as afterwards possessed Herod, (though God knows he had not the same success) namely, to see some strange work performed by Christ, of whom he had heard so much talk. This opportunity, I say, our Saviour took to perform an admirable miracle, even upon the man himself; and that he brought about by as unlikely a course, only with inviting himself to his house ; by which unexpected affability and courtesy of our Saviour, this so notorious and famous publican and sinner was so 632 , The Seventh Sermon. surprised with joy and comfort, that presently he gives over all thought and consideration of his trade, as a thing of no moment ; and being to receive Christ into his house, and knowing how ill- agreeing companions Christ and mammon would prove in the same lodging, he resolves to sweep it, and make it clean for the enter- taining of him ; he empties it of that dross and dung, wherewith before it was defiled ; half of his estate goes away at a clap upon the poor, and the remainder, in all likelihood, is in great danger to be consumed by that noble and generous offer, which he makes in the words of my text : " Whomsoever I have defrauded by forged cavillation, I restore," &c. 4, In which words I shall observe unto you these two general parts: first, a discovery, and, it may be, confession of his be- loved, bosom sin, the sin of his trade, in these words : " If I have defrauded any man," or " whomsoever I have defrauded." Se- condly, satisfaction tendered in the words following : " I restore unto him fourfold." In the former general, we may take notice of two particulars: 1. Zaccheus's willingness and readiness of his own accord to discover and confess his sin, when he said, " Whom- soever I have defrauded." And, 2. The nature and heinousness of the crime discovered, which is called a defrauding " by forged cavillation ;" or, as some translations read, " with false accusa- tion." In the second general, likewise, (which is the satisfac- tion tendered by Zaccheus) there offer themselves two particulars more; namely, 1. So much of the satisfaction as was necessary to be performed, by virtue of an indispensable precept, and that is restitution, in these words: "I restore unto him." 2. That which was voluntary and extraordinary, namely, the measure and excess of this restitution, which he professeth should be " fourfold." Of these two parts, therefore, with their several particulars, in the same order as they have been proposed, briefly, and with all the plainness and perspicuity I can imagine. And, 1. Of the former general, and therein of the first particu- lar, namely, Zaccheus's readiness to confess his sin in these words : " If I," &c. 5. I said, even now only, it may be, this was a confession of his crime ; but now I will be more resolute, and tell you peremp- torily, this was a confession ; for, without all question, Zaccheus, as the case now stood with him, was in no humour of justifying himself, he had no mind to boast his integrity in his office; or, if he had, he might be sure that common fame (if that were all, yet that alone) might be a sufficient argument, at least too great a presumption against him, to confute him. But, to put it out of question, our Saviour himself, by applying the tenth verse of this chapter to him, acknowledged him for a sinful, undone man; one that had so far lost himself in the wandering mazes of this wicked world, that unless Christ himself had taken the pains to search and inquire after him, and, having found him, by the power and might of his grace to rescue and recover him from the error of his ways, by restoring him his eyes, whereby he might The Seventh Sermon. 633 take notice towards what a dangerous precipice he was hastening, there had been no possibility but at last he must have needs fallen headlong into the gulf of destruction. 6. Now it being, I suppose, evident, that Zaccheus was guilty, and that in a high degree, and openly and scandalously guilty of the crime here discovered; there is no doubt to be made, but that he, who was so willing to unlock and disperse his ill-gotten trea- sures, would not begin to divert his covetousness upon his sins ; he would not hoard them up, but would place his glory even in his shame ; and whereas he had been the servant and slave of sin, he would wear his shackles and fetters, as signs of the glorious victory which through Christ he had won, and emblems of that blessed change, which he found in himself, being rescued from the basest slavery that possibly can be imagined, into the glorious liberty of the sons of God. 7. But it may be you will say, Suppose Zaccheus did freely and voluntarily confess his sin to Christ, who had authority to forgive him his sins, though he had never discovered them ; what collection shall be made from hence ? Zaccheus might be as bold as he would with himself; but as for us, his example shall be no rule to us: we thank God, this is popery in these days, and since we have freed ourselves from this burden, we will not be brought into bondage to any man ; we will confess our sins, I warrant you, only to God, who is only able to forgive us them ; as for the minister, it may be, we will sometimes be beholden to him to speak some comfortable words now and then to us, when we are troubled in couscience ; and we have not been taught to go any further. 8. I confess I find no great inclination in myself, especially being in the pulpit, to undertake a controversy, even where it may seem to offer itself, much less to press and strain a text for it ; for I desire to have no adversaries in my preaching, but only the devil and sin. Only having now mentioned confession, and considering how much the doctrine of our holy mother the church hath been traduced, not only by the malice and detraction of our professed enemies of the church of Rome, but also by the suspi- cious ignorance and partiality of her own children ; who, out of a liking of the zeal, or rather fury, of some former protestant writers, have laid this for a ground of stating controversies of our religion : That that is to be acknowledged for the doctrine of these reformed churches, which is most opposite and contradicting to the church of Rome : so that, as the case goes now, controversies of religion are turned into private quarrels, and it is not so much the truth that is sought after, as the salving and curing the reputa- tion of particular men. 9. These things therefore considered, truly for my part I dare not take upon me so much to gratify the papists, as to think my- self obliged to maintain many incommodious speeches of some of our divines in this point. Hoc Ithacus velit, et magno mercentur AtridcB. They will never be unfurnished of matter to write books to the world's end, if this shall be the method of stating contro- 634 The Seventh Sermon. versies. O what an impregnable cause should we have against the church of Rome, if we ourselves did not help to weaken and betray it, by mixing therewith the interests and conceits of particular men ! 10. Give me therefore leave, I pray you, to give you the state of the question, and the doctrine of our church, in the words of one, who both now is, and for ever will worthily be accounted, the glory of this kingdom. " Be it known (saith he) to our ad- versaries of Rome (I add, also, to our adversaries of even Great Britain, who sell their private fancies for the doctrine of our church,) that no kind of confession, either public or private, is disallowed by our church, that is any way requisite for the due execution of that ancient power of the keys, which Christ be- stowed upon his church. The thing which we reject, is that new picklock of sacramental confession, obtruded upon men's consciences, as a matter necessary to salvation, by the canons of the late con- venticle of Trent, in the 14th session."* 11. And this truth being so evident in scripture, and in the writings of the ancient, best times of the primitive church, the safest interpreters of scriptures, I make no question, but there will not be found one person amongst you, who, when he shall be in a calm, impartial disposition, will offer to deny it. For, I beseech you, give yourselves leave impartially to examine your own thoughts : can any man be so unreasonable, as at once to imagine with himself, that when our Saviour, after his resurrection, hav- ing received (as himself saith) all power in heaven and earth, having led captivity captive, came then to bestow gifts upon men ; when he, I say, in so solemn a manner (having first breathed upon his disciples, thereby conveying and insinuating the Holy Ghost into their hearts) renewed unto them, or rather confirmed and sealed unto them, that glorious commission, which before he had given to Peter, sustaining, as it were, the person of the whole church, whereby he delegated to them an authority of binding and loosing sins upon earth, with a promise, that the proceedings in the court of heaven should be directed and regulated by theirs on earth : can any man, I say, think so unworthily of our Saviour, as to esteem these words of his for no better than compliment? for nothing but court holy water? 12. Yet so impudent have our adversaries of Rome been in their dealings with us, that they have dared to lay to our charge, as if we had so mean a conceit .of our Saviour's gift of the keys; taking advantage indeed from the unwary expressions of some particular divines, who, out of too forward a zeal against the church of Rome, have bended the staff too much the contrary way ; and, instead of taking away that intolerable burden of a sacramental, necessary, universal confession, have seemed to void and frustrate all use and exercise of the keys. 13. Now, that I may apply something of that which hath now been spoken to your hearts and consciences, matters standing, as you see they do ; since Christ, for your benefit and comfort, hath * Bp. Usher's Answer to the Jesuit. Cap. of Confession, p. 84. The Seventh Sermon. 635 given such authority to his ministers, upon your unfeigned re- pentance and contrition, to absolve and release you from your sins; why should I doubt, or be unwilling to exhort and persuade you to make your advantage of this gracious promise of our Sa- viour's? Why should I envy you the participation of so heavenly a blessing? Truly, if I should deal thus with you, I should prove myself a malicious, unchristianlike, malignant preacher ; I should wickedly and unjustly, against my own conscience, seek to defraud you of those glorious blessings which our Saviour hath intended for you. 14. Therefore, in obedience to his gracious will, and as I am warranted, and even enjoined, by my holy mother the church of England expressly, in the book of Common Prayer, in the rubric of visiting the sick, (which doctrine this church hath likewise embraced so far) I beseech you, that by your practice and use, you will not suffer that commission, which Christ hath given to his ministers, to be a vain form of words, without any sense under them ; to be an antiquated, expired commission, of no use nor validity in these days ; but whensoever you find yourselves charged and oppressed, especially with such crimes as they call peccala vastantia conscientiam, such as do lay waste and depopulate the conscience, that you would have recourse to your spiritual physi- cian, and freely disclose the nature and malignancy of your dis- ease, that he may be able, as the cause shall require, to proportion a remedy, either to search it with corrosives, or comfort and temper it with oil. And come not to him only with such a mind as you would go to a learned man experienced in the scriptures, as one that can speak comfortable, quieting words to you, but as to one that hath authority delegated to him from God himself, to absolve and acquit you of your sins. If you shall do this, assure your souls, that the understanding of man is not able to conceive that transport and excess of joy and comfort, which shall accrue to that man's heart, that is persuaded, that he hath been made par- taker of this blessing, orderly and legally, according as our Saviour Christ hath prescribed. 15. You see I have dealt honestly and freely with you; it may be, more freely than I shall be thanked for: but I should have sinned against my own soul, if I had done otherwise ; I should have conspired with our adversaries of Rome against our own church, in affording them such an advantage to blaspheme our most holy and undenled religion. It becomes you now, though you will not be persuaded to like of the practice of what, out of an honest heart, 1 have exhorted you to ; yet for your own sakes, not to make any uncharitable construction of what hath been spoken. And here I will acquit you of this unwelcome subject, and from Zaccheus's confession of his sin, I proceed to my second particular, namely, the nature and heinousness of the crime confessed, which is here called a defrauding another " by forged cavillation." 16. The crime here confessed, is called in Greek, sycophancy ; for the words are E'/ Tivog « kuxocpavrriifa.. For the understand- ing of which word in this place, we shall not need so much to be 636 The Seventh Sermon. beholden to the classical Greek authors, as to the septuagint, who are the best interpreters of the idiom of the Greek language in the evangelical writings. Two reasons of the word 2uxo " weak and beggarly elements." (Gal. iv. 9.) And, N6/xov r% IvroXSjc; cfapxix%, " a law of a carnal commandment;" (Heb. vii. 16;) i. e. a law which a carnal man, one not guided by the Spirit of God, might perform, and a law, which made no man perfect. (Heb. vii. 19.) Nay more, saith he, it is not a/jtsfwrros, " not without fault ;" (Heb. viii. 7 ;) i. e. a man might perform the law of Moses, and yet not be ajxe/jwrTos, he may be a wicked man still in God's sight ; for all his legal right- eousness, he may remain dead in trespasses and sins. Insomuch, as the same Paul, speaking of himself before he was converted to Christianity, says " concerning the righteousness which is of the law, I was blameless:"* I did so exactly fulfil that measure of righte- ousness, which Moses' law required of me, that in respect of that law I was a guiltless, innocent person ; I could justify myself; I durst with confidence oppose myself in judgment to the censure of our most severe, strict judges. 16. But what then? Durst Paul with this his legal righteous- ness appear before God, as expecting to be justified in his sight, as claiming any interest in the promises of eternal life, by virtue of this his innocency? By no means: No, saith he, though I were blameless, as concerning this righteousness, which is of the law ; though I had all the privileges, that any Jew could be ca- pable of, " circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews, according to the law, a pharisee,"f (i. e. of that sect which had preserved the law in the greatest integrity) though I were so zealous thereof, that I persecuted the churches of Christ, which sought to abrogate it ;J and lastly, though " concerning the righteousness of the law, I was blameless ;" yet, notwithstanding all these, I will have no better an opinion of these privileges than they deserve ; I will account them only outward, carnal privileges ; if I at all rejoice in them, yet this I will account only " a rejoicing in the flesh." Far be it from me, to think to appear before Christ with such a righteousness as this is. God forbid I should expect to be accepted of by him, for these carnal, outward privileges: nay, so far am I from that, that whatsoever I thought, before I knew him, to be a gain and a prerogative unto me, now that I have attained to the excellency of the knowledge of Jesus Christ, " I account as loss,"§ as things likely to be rather a hindrance unto me ; yea, as * Phil. iii. 6. t Verse 5. t Verse 6. § Verse 8. The Eighth Sermon. 653 dross and dung: and desire to be "found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law ! (for, alas, how mean, and unworthy will that appear in his eyes) but the righteousness, which is of faith, the righteousness which is of God by faith." The for- mer righteousness was mine own, and therefore could not stand in his sight; but that righteousness, to which faith or the gospel di- rects me, proceeds not from my own strength, but only from God, who will crown his own graces in me. 17. I have thus far shewed you, both from our Saviour's autho- rity, and St. Paul likewise, that the performing of the moral duties, as far as they were enforced by virtue of Moses' law, could not make a man capable of attaining to the promises of the new covenant. And (that I may add one confirmation of this more out of the Old Testament) hereupon it is, that God by the prophet Ezekiel manifestly sheweth, that he gave not the law of Moses to the Israelites for this end, that they should think, that the performance of that law was all the duty which they owed unto God ; or that that obedience could make them accepted of him unto eternal life : no, saith he, if you have any such conceit of those or- dinances, " the statutes, which I gave them, were not good, and the judgments such, as they should not live by them."* I will now proceed to shew you the weakness and unprofitableness of the cere- monial part of Moses' law likewise, for such a purpose ; and that by arguments taken from St. Paul, especially out of that his most divine epistle to the Hebrews. 18. The first argument shall be drawn out of the ninth chapter of that epistle, the sum whereof is this : " the first covenant, which had ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary ;f which consisted in meats, and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances imposed on them till the time of reformation ; in which also were offered gifts and sacrifices;" yet with all these ceremonies and formalities, could enter no deeper than the flesh ; they " could not make him, who did the service, perfect, as per- taining to the conscience ,"j that is, for example, those expiatory sacrifices, which were to be offered for him which had trans- gressed, they absolved him indeed from a civil, carnal punishment, but they could not reach to the conscience ; that remained still as guilty and defiled before God as ever it was. And can it be ima- gined, that a man so qualified, with such an accusing, condemning conscience, could with any hope or confidence appear before God, as expecting to be freed from the danger of hell, for the cost or ceremony of a sacrifice 1 Those sacrifices therefore and cere- monies, " the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, might sanctify a man to the pu- rifying of the flesh, "§ and that is all they could do; and so far they could sanctify even the most profane person, or the vilest hypocrite in the world : but it must be only the " blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot unto God, "|| that is able to " purge our consciences from dead works to serve the living God." * Ezek. xx. 25. t Heb. ix. 1, 9, 10. X Verse 9. § Verse 13. || Verse 14. 55* 654 Tlie Eighth Sermon. 19. Obj. But it may be objected, the baptizing and washing of us christians, and our commemoration of the true sacrifice, are powerful and effectual, even to the sanctification of the soul and spirit : and why should not the water of Jordan have as much virtue in it during Moses' law, as it has had since, or as ours has now 1 Why should not their prefiguration of the true sacrifice by typical sacrifices be as much worth as our post-commemoration thereof? For Christ was the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever. — Sol. I answer that baptism and the eucharist are proper instruments, whereby the sacrifice of Christ is applied and made beneficial unto us, and were instituted for that and no other end; whereas the proper and direct end of Moses' liturgy and cere- monies were only civil, carnal immunities : and though it be true, that the legal sacrifices were very apt and commodious, to shadow forth the oblation and satisfaction of Christ ; yet this use of them was so mystical and reserved, so impossible to be collected out of the letter of the law, that without a special revelation from God, the eyes of the Israelites were too weak, to serve them to pierce through those dark clouds and shadows, and to carry their obser- vation to the substance. So that I conceive those sacrifices of that law, in this respect, are a great deal more beneficial to us chris- tians; for there is a great difference between sacraments and types: types are only useful after the anti-type is discovered, for the con- firmation of their faith that follow. As, for example, Abraham's offering of Isaac by faith, did lively represent the real oblation of Christ, but in that respect was of little or no use till Christ was indeed crucified ; it being impossible to make that history a ground- work of their faith in Christ. The like may be said of the legal sacrifices. 20. My second argument shall be taken out of those words of St. Paul, (Acts xiii. 38,) where speaking of Christ he saith, " By him all that believe are justified from all things from which they could not be justified by the law of Moses:" from which I infer, that since there were many sins, for which the law of Moses allowed no sacrifice, no redemption, no satisfaction, no commutation, in what a fearful, desperate case would a person, that should commit such sins, be, if he were to expect justification be- fore God by the law of Moses ! For that must needs lead him to despair : it could shew him no refuge, no sanctuary to fly unto ; — nothing would remain unto such a person, but " a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, to consume God's ad- versary : and therefore no marvel, if the same apostle (Heb. vii. 17, 18,) saith, that the former law, for the weakness and unprofitable- ness thereof (i. e. to justification) was to be disannulled, since it could make nothing perfect. 21. The last argument shall be inferred from that saying of the apostle, (Heb. viii. 6.) where, speaking of the new covenant of grace, he saith, " It was established on better promises," namely, than the Jewish covenant was: for all the happiness which was to be expected from Moses' law, was only an exemption from the inconveniences and curses of this life, long days and peaceable The Eighth Sermon. 655 enriched with worldly content and prosperity : whereas the bless- ings which attend the performance of the new covenant, or the gospel, are unspeakable and glorious ; " such as eye hath not seen," nor indeed, as long as it is mortal can see, neither can the heart of man conceive them, being eternal in the heavens. Neither will the ordinary evasion serve the turn, as if these temporal blessings, or plagues and curses, mentioned in Moses' writings, should purposely signify the blessed estate of glorified saints, or woes of the damned ; for then St. Paul's argument would fall to the ground ; and, indeed, that whole epistle to the Hebrews would be rendered inconcluding, as might easily be demonstrated, if the time, and throng of matter which follows, would permit. 22. 1 would not have you so conceive me, as if I would exclude the Jews of the Old Testament from being partakers of the pro- mises of the gospel : no, God forbid : but that which I have said, is this, that they attained not unto them by performing Moses' law, but by the very same means by which we hope to be par- takers of them, namely, by performing the substance of those duties, which are clearly delivered unto us in the gospel, and may be found sprinkled in several places, even in Moses' writings, and no question, but were more fully and completely delivered unto them by tradition from their fathers. And hereupon, I suppose it is, that when any were converted to the knowledge and worship of the true God in those times, they who made them proselytes, were not curious to enforce upon them the observation of Moses' ordinances and ceremonies; as we find in the behaviour of Elisha to Naaman the Assyrian, of Jonah to the Ninevites, of Daniel to Nebuchadnezzar, and of the rest of the prophets to the Tyrians, Moabites, Egyptians, to whom they wrote, and whose conversion they sought : none of which urged upon them the observation of the mosaical liturgy, as a thing necessary or needful to be observed by them. Indeed, those who were content to live amongst the Jews, and enjoy their privileges and immunities, were bound to undergo the burden and costliness of the offerings and sacrifices, which, as St. Paul saith, was so great, that they were both to themselves and their forefathers intolerable. 23. I will conclude this whole point of the difference between Moses' law, and the law of faith, or the gospel, in God's own words by the prophet, Jer. xxxi. 31, twice quoted by St. Paul in Heb. viii. and x. where God saith, " Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah : not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, which my cove- nant they broke, although I was a husband unto them, saith the Lord : but this shall be the covenant that I will make with them, after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws in their hearts, and write them in their inward parts," &c. As if he should say, The former covenant which I made with them by Moses, was only written in two tables of stone, as the Roman laws were in 656 The Eighth Sermon. twelve tables, and required only an outward conformity and obe- dience, for the which they did not need an inward sanctifying, spiritual grace to enable them, as the new covenant of grace doth. And, therefore, for the performing of that, I will abundantly afford and supply them with all the graces of my holy Spirit. 24. But a little to interrupt this text : you will say, What, had not the Jews God's law written in their hearts also ? Did not they worship him in spirit as well as we 1 No question : but this they did, not as commanded by Moses' law, but by that cove- nant made with Abraham, and by him traduced unto them. It follows, " And I will be their God, and they shall be my people ;" i. e. I will be their God after a more especial manner than I was unto them in the wilderness; I will not only be their king, to govern them in peace and tranquillity, out of the danger and fear of their enemies, the nations about them, and preserve them safe in the promised land; but I will keep them from the fury and malice of their spiritual enemies, that would seek to destroy their souls ; and I will bring them to a land infinitely exceeding theirs, and whereof the land of Canaan was but a most un proportionable type and shadow, even mine own blessed and glorious kingdom, reserved in the highest heavens for them who sincerely perform the conditions of my new covenant. Thus far, as largely as so small a measure of time would permit me, I have told you the difference betwixt the covenant of grace and Moses' law, implied in these words of my text, " through the Spirit." I come now to my second particular, namely, The distinction of the same cove- nant of grace from the law of works ; wherein I shall proceed by the same method, i. e. showing you first absolutely the nature of those laws, and then the several differences betwixt them. 25. The law of works is the same with that, to the obedience whereof Adam was obliged in paradise, with this exception, that besides the moral, natural law written in his heart (the substance whereof is to this day reserved in the minds of all the sons of Adam), Adam had a second, positive law enjoined him by God, namely, the forbidding him to eat of the tree of good and evil; which one precept cannot properly be called a part of the law of works, or nature, since the action thereby forbidden, was not of its own nature evil, but only made unlawful by virtue of God's prohibition. Excepting therefore this one particular precept, the law which was given to Adam (called the law of works) compre- hended in it all kind of moral duties referred either to God, his neighbour, or himself, which have in them a natural, essential goodness, or righteousness; and, by consequence, the prohibition of all manner of actions, words, or thoughts, which are in them- selves contrary to justice and reason. All these precepts are generally supposed to be contained in the ten words written by God's own finger in two tables of stone ; though with submission, I think, that those two tables contain only directly the moral duties of man to God and his neighbour; for it will require much forcing and straining, to bring the duties and sins of a man to and The Eighth Sermon. 657 against his own person within that compass ; as temperance, sobriety, and their opposites, gluttony, drunkenness, self-inconti- nencv, &c. 26. The obligation to this law is so strict, severe, and peremp- tory, that it required not only an universal obedience to whatso- ever is contained in that law, in the full extent, latitude, and perfection thereof, but that continual, without interruption, through the whole course of a man's life ; insomuch that he, that should but once transgress it in the least point or circumstance, should without redemption, or dispensation, be rendered culpable as of the breach of the whole law, and remain liable to the male- diction thereof. And to this law in this strictness mentioned, are all living men obliged, who are out of Christ, and who either know not of him, or are not willing to submit themselves to his new covenant. 27. The justification, which was due to the performance of this law by justice, and as the wages thereof, that is, the condition, wherein God obliged himself to such as fulfilled it, was the pro- mises of this life, and that which is to come ; long, happy, and peaceable days in this world, and in their due time a translation to the joys and glory of heaven. This justification did not com- prehend remission of sins, as ours does; for the law excluded all hope of pardon after sin, no promise made to repentance, re- pentance would do no good. The court, wherein they were to be judged, was a court of mere rigorous justice; justice rejoiced over and against mercy, grace, loving-kindness, and all those blessed and glorious attributes, whereby God, for our Saviour Jesus Christ's sake, is pleased and delighted to be known unto the world. 28. This law, in the rigour thereof, might easily have been per- formed by Adam : he had that perfection of grace and holiness given him, which was exactly equal and commensurable to what- soever duties were enjoined him : but by his wilful, voluntary (God forbid we should say enforced, or absolutely decreed) preva- rication, he utterly undid both himself and his posterity, leaving them engaged for his debts, and as much of their own, without almost any money to pay them. Without Christ we are all obliged to the same strictness and severity of the law, which by reason of our poverty and want of grace, is become impossible to be performed by us ; as the blessed apostle St. Paul hath evidently proved by induction, in the beginning of his epistle to the Romans : in the first chapter declaring, that the gentiles neither did, nor could, perform the law; in the second saying as much of the Jews; and in the third joining them both together in the same miserable, desperate estate. The conclusion of his whole discourse is, " all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." Thus much for the law of works. 29. The state of mankind without Christ being so deplored, so out of all hope, as I told you, Almighty God, out of his infinite mercy and goodness, by his unspeakable wisdom found out an atonement, accepting of the voluntary examination and humilia- T T 658 The Eighth Sermon. tion of his dearly beloved Son, who submitted himself to be made flesh, to all our natural infirmities (sin only excepted) and at last to die that ignominious, accursed death of the cross, for the re- demption of mankind; who in his death made a covenant with his Father, that those, and only those, who would be willing to submit themselves to the obedience of a new law, which he would prescribe unto mankind, should for the merits of his obedience and death be justified in the sight of God, have their sins forgiven them, and be made heirs of everlasting glory. Now that Christ's death was in order of nature, before the giving of the gospel, is (I think) evident by those words of St. Paul, Heb. ix. 16, 17, where, comparing the old covenant of the Jews with that of Christ, he saith, " where a testament is, there must of necessity be the death of the testator ; for a testament is of force after men are dead, otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. Whereupon neither the first covenant was dedicated with- out blood." " It was necessary therefore (saith he, ver. 23,) that the patterns of things in heaven should be purified with these ;" i. e. with the blood of beasts ; " but the heavenly things themselves with better things than those, namely, with the blood of Christ." 30. Which covenant of Christ (called in scripture the new cove- nant, the covenant of grace, the grace of God, the law of faith), according to the nature of all covenants, being made between two parties (at the least) requires conditions on both sides to be per- formed ; and being a covenant of promise, the conditions on man's part must necessarily go before, otherwise they are no condi- tions at all. Now man's duty is comprehended by St. Paul in this word faith, and God's promise in the word justification. And thus far we have proceeded upon sure grounds ; for we have plain, ex- press words of scripture for that which hath been said : but the main difficulty remains behind, and that is, the true sense and meaning of these two words, faith and justification, and what respect and de- pendence they have one of the other. Which difficulty, by God's assistance, and with your christian, charitable patience, I will now endeavour to dissolve. 31. For the first, therefore, which is faith, we may consider it in several respects; to wit, first, as referring us to, and denot- ing fhe principal object of evangelical faith, which is Christ. Now if faith be meant in this sense (as by many good writers of our reformed churches it is understood) then the meaning of that so often-repeated saying of St. Paul, " we are justified by faith without the works of the law," must be, we are justified only for the obedience of Christ, and not for our righteousness of the law ; which is certainly a most catholic, orthodox sense, and not to be denied by any christian, though I doubt it does not express all that St. Paul intended in that proposition. Secondly, faith signifies the act, or exercise, or duty of faith, as it comprehends all evan- gelical obedience; called by St. Paul, "the obedience of faith;" (Rom. xvi. 26;) "the righteousness of faith." (Rom. iv. 13, and ch. ix. 13; and ch. x. 6.) And it is an inherent grace or virtue, wrought in us by the powerful operation of God's Spirit. Or, The Eighth Sermon. 659 thirdly, it may be taken for the doctrine of faith, called also by him, " the word of faith ;" (Rom. x. 8 ;) and " the word of God's grace ;" (Acts xx. 32 ;) and " the hearing of faith." Gal. iii. 2.) In which sense of these he meant the word, St. Paul may seem to resolve us, (Rom. ii. 27,) where he saith, that boasting is excluded by the law of faith ; which words are extant in the very heat of the controversy of justification. Now these senses of faith, if they be applied to that conclusion of St. Paul, we are justified by faith, come all to one pass ; for in effect it is all one, to say, we are jus- tified by our obedience or righteousness of faith, and to say, we are justified by the gospel, which prescribes that obedience : as, on the contrary, to say we are justified by the law, or by works prescribed by the law, is all one. There is a fourth acceptation of faith, taken for the single habit or grace of faith, and applied to this proposition (only of all christians that I have heard of) by the Belgic remonstrants ; which, though a new-invented fancy, and therefore unwarrantable, yet I shall hereafter have occasion, it may be, to say something of it. 32. St. Paul's proposition, I am persuaded, excludes none of these senses : it is capable of them all. But before I shew you how they may consist together, I will, in the first place, declare, of what nature that righteousness is, which God, by virtue of his new covenant, requires at our hands, before he will make good his promise unto us. First, then, God requires at our hands a sincere obedience unto the substance of all moral duties of the old covenant, and that by the gospel ; and this obedience is so neces- sary, that is impossible any man should be saved without it. The pressing of this doctrine takes up by much the greatest part of the evangelical writings. Now, that these duties are not enforced upon us as conditions of the old covenant of works, is evident, because by Christ we are freed from the obligation of the old covenant: God forbids that we should have a thought of ex- pecting the hope of righteousness upon those terms ; for that cove- nant will not admit of any imperfection in our works, and then in what a miserable case are we ! There is no hope for us, unless some course be taken, that not only our imperfections, but our sins, and those of a high nature, be passed by, and overlooked by Almighty God, as if he had lost his eyes to see them, or his memory to remember them. 33. The substance then of the moral law is enjoined us by the new covenant, but with what difference I shall show you presently. And hereupon it is, that our Saviour saith to the pharisees, who were willing to make any misconstruction of the doctrine, " Think you, that I am come to destroy the law 1 Ay, by all means, say we : God forbid else, for unless the old law be destroyed, we are undone ; as long as that is alive, we are dead ; if the law of works have its natural force still, woe be to us. Therefore, that must not be Christ's meaning : his intent is, as if he should say, Think you that I am come to destroy the righteousness of the law ? or disoblige men from the necessity of being good, holy, and virtuous ? No, by no means ; " I am not come to destroy the law, but to fulfil t t2 660 The Eighth Sermon. it:" the righteousness of the law, according to the substance thereof, shall be as necessarily required by virtue of that new covenant, which I preach unto you, and to which I exhort you all to submit yourselves, as ever it was by the old covenant ; only, because of your weakness and infirmity, I will abate the rigour of it : those, who, notwithstanding my offer of grace and pardon upon such easy conditions as I prescribe, will yet continue in an habitual state of profaneness and irreligion, shall be as culpable, nay, ten times more miserable, than if they never had heard of me, for their wilful neglecting so great salvation. " It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away, than for one tittle of the laws to fail :" for God would be no loser by the annihilation of the world, whereas if any part of the moral law should expire, the very beams and rays of God's essential goodness should be darkened and destroyed. 34. In like manner saith St. Paul, (Rom. iii. ult.) " Do we make void the law through faith ? God forbid ! Yea, we esta- blish the law." ^ Now if a succeeding covenant establisheth any part of a precedent, especially if there be any alteration made in the conditions established, all obligation whatsoever is taken from the old covenant, and those conditions are in force only by virtue of the new. When the Norman Conqueror was pleased to esta- blish and confirm to the English some of the ancient Saxon laws, are those laws then become in force as they are Saxon ? No, for the authority of the Saxons, the authority of those laws, is sup- posed to be extinguished; and, therefore, no power remains in them to look to the execution of them : but by the confirmation of the Norman they are become indeed Norman laws, and are now in force, not because they were first made by the Saxons, but only by virtue of the succeeding power of the Norman line. So, likewise, when the gospel enjoins the substance of the same duties, which the old covenant of works required; are we christians enforced to the obedience of them, because they are duties of the law? By no means: but only because our Saviour, and only law-maker, Jesus Christ, commands the same in the law of faith. 35. Thus far the new covenant is in some terms of agreement with the old, inasmuch as the same moral duties are enjoined in them both, as parts of the conditions of both. But the difference herein is, that the law commands a precise, exact fulfilling of these precepts (as I told you before) which the gospel, descending to our infirmities, remits and qualifies much : for in the gospel, he is accounted to fulfil the moral precepts, that obeys them ac- cording to that measure of grace which God is pleased to allow him; that obeys God, though not with a perfect, yet with a sincere, up- right heart : that when he is overcome with a temptation to sin, continues not in it, but recovers himself to his former righteousness by repentance and new obedience. Thus much then for the moral precepts, and with what difference they are commanded in the old and new covenant. 36. In the second place, there is another part of evangelical The Eighth Sermon. 661 obedience, which is purely evangelical, and which hath no com- merce nor reference at all to the law, and that is, the grace of repentance : for, saith St. Paul, (Acts xvii. 30,) " But now (that is, by the gospel) God commands all men every where to repent." Now, repentance implies a serious consideration and acknowledg- ment of that miserable estate whereunto our sins have brought us, and thereupon a hearty, unfeigned sorrow for them, a perfect hatred and detestation of them, inferring a full, peremptory re- solution to break them off, and interrupt the course of them by new obedience. This, I say, is an obedience purely evangelical, the law of works did not at all meddle with it, neither indeed could it. The law condemns a man, as soon as ever he is guilty of the breach thereof, and makes no promise at all of remission of sins upon repentance ; but rather quite excludes it. Yet from the grace of repentance we may gather a forcible argument to make good that which before we spoke concerning the renewing of the moral precepts in the new covenant. For no reasonable man can deny, that repentance is absolutely necessary before a man can be justified. Now what is that, for which (for example) a new-converted heathen repents, but the breach of the moral law? Therefore by this necessity of repentance, he acknow- ledged (and so do we) that by such sins he was excluded from all hope of being justified. Now it were absurd for a man to say, that any thing excludes a man from being capable of receiv- ing the promises of a covenant, but only the breaking of the con- ditions thereof. 37. The third part of evangelical righteousness is faith ; not moral, but christian : which is, a relying upon Christ, as the only meritorious cause of whatsoever benefit we obtain by the new covenant; it being for his sake, both that God bestows upon us grace, whereby we are enabled to perform his will ; and, after we have done our duty, that he will freely, and not as wages, bestow upon us the reward thereof. There is another virtue evangelical, which is hope, but of that I must speak in my last point. And thus I have gone through the conditions required on man's part in the new covenant, all which, I suppose, are implied in this word faith; which, being taken in so general a sense, may, I conceive, be thus not improperly defined, viz. to be a receiving and embracing of the promises made unto us in Christ, upon the terms and conditions proposed in the gospel. 38. Now follow the conditions on God's part, comprehended in these words : " the hope of righteousness," which are equi- valent to the term justification ; the nature whereof I shall now endeavour to discover. Justification, I suppose, imports the whole treasure of blessings and favours, which God, who is rich in mercy, will freely bestow on those, whom he accepts as right- eous for his beloved Son our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ's sake ; which are, first, remission of sins, and an interest in the joys of heaven in this life, and a full consummation both of grace and glory in the life to come. Some, I know, think that St. Paul, when he discourses of justification, thereby intends onlv remis- 56 662 The Eighth Sermon. sion of sins: and the ground of this opinion is taken from St. Paul quoting those words of David when he states the doctrine of justification, (Rom. iv. 6 — 8,) where he saith, that " David describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, saying, Blessed are they whose unrighteousness is forgiven, and whose sins are covered ; blessed is the man unto whom the Lord will not impute sin." But if this argument out of the epistle to the Romans be of sufficient force for their sense of justification, then certainly an argu- ment from as express words in the epistle to the Galatians, will be as concluding for mine (in which epistle he also purposely states the same questions). The words are, (Gal. iii. 11,) "That no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident, for the just shall live by faith." Now, to live, I hope, does not signify, to have one's sins forgiven him, but to be saved : there- fore, unless St. Paul include a right unto salvation within the compass of justification, that text might have been spared, as no- thing at all serving for his purpose. Besides, is not salvation as free, as gracious, as undeserved an act of God, as remission of sins ? Is it not as much for Christ's sake, that we are saved, as that our sins are forgiven us ? Thus much for what I suppose is meant by justification. I will now as briefly and as perspicuously as I can (without using allegories and metaphorical expressions, with which this point is ordinarily much obscured) shew you the combination of these two words, in what sense I suppose St. Paul may use this proposition, " We are justified by faith, without the works of the law." 39. In the first place, therefore, I will lay down this conclu- sion, as an infallible, safe foundation, that if we have respect to the proper, meritorious cause of our justification, we must not take faith, in that proposition, for any virtue or grace inherent in us, but only for the proper and principal object thereof, Jesus Christ and his merits. And the meaning of that proposition must be, that we are not justified for the merits of any righteousness in ourselves, whether legal or evangelical, but only for the obedience and death of our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ. Though this be most true, yet I suppose, that St. Paul in that proposition had not a respect to the meritorious cause of our justification ; but to that formal condition required in us, before we be justified; as I think may appear by that which follows. 40. I told you even now, that I would in this point purposely abstain from using metaphors and figurative allusions ; and the reason is, because I suppose, and not without reasonable grounds, that the stating of this point of justification by metaphors, has made this doctrine, which is set down with greater light and per- spicuity in holy scripture than almost any other, to be a doctrine of the most scholastical subtilty, the fullest of shadows and clouds of all the rest. For example, in that fashion and dress of divinity, as it is now worn, sliced and mangled into theses and distinctions, we find this point of our justification thus expressed : that faith is therefore said to justify us, because it is that which makes The Eighth Sermon. 663 Christ's righteousness ours; it is as it were an instrument or hand, whereby we receive, lay hold on, and apply Christ unto ourselves. Here's naught but flowers of rhetoric, figures and metaphors ; which, though they are capable of a good sense, yet are very improper to state a controversy withal. 41. But let us examine them a little: we must not, say they, conceive of faith, as if it were a virtue or grace, or any part of righteousness inherent in us; for faith, as a grace, has no influ- ence at all in our justification. Mark the coherence of these things: faith is considered as a hand or an instrument in our justification, and yet, for all it is a hand, it is nothing in, or of us ; for it seems hands are not parts of men's bodies. Again, faith puts on Christ, receives him, lays hold upon him, makes his righteousness ours, and yet it does nothing for all that. Besides, how can faith be properly called an instrument of justification 1 An instrument is that, which the principal cause, the efficient, makes use of in his operation. Now justification, in this sense, is an imminent, internal action of God, in which there is no co- operation of any other agent, nor any real alteration wrought in man, the object thereof. Does God then use faith as an instru- ment, in producing the act of justification ? No, but it is instru- mentum passivum, saith one ; that is, a thing never heard of in nature before ; and the meaning is sure, faith certainly is some- thing, but what a kind of thing we know not. By these means it comes to pass, that the doctrine of our justification, as some men have handled it, is become as deep, as unsearchable a mystery, as that of the Trinity. 42. Without question there is nothing can be more evident to a man, that shall impartially consider St. Paul's method in his dis- course of justification, than that by faith he intends some opera- tive, working grace in us ; for instance, the apostle proves, that we christians are to seek for justification the same way that Abraham attained unto it, namely, by faith ; for, saith the scrip- ture in his quotation, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." What was that which was accounted to him 1 his believing ; that is, say some, Christ, who was the object of his belief. This is a forced interpretation cer- tainly, and which a Jew would never have been persuaded to. But that Christ was not at all intended in that place, it is evident ; for Abraham's belief there had respect to God's promise made to him of giving him a son in his old age, and by that son a seed as innumerable as the stars in heaven, as appears Gen. xv. 4 — 6; whereas the promise of Christ follows three chapters after, to wit, Gen. xviii. 18. Again, the apostle in many places useth these words : We are justified by faith in Christ, and by the faith of Jesus Christ; which speeches of his will admit of no tolerable sense, unless by faith he intends some work or obedience per- formed by us. This therefore being taken for granted, that by faith is meant some condition required at our hands (and yet my former conclusion of our justification only for the merits of Christ remaining firm), we will in the next place consider, what kind of 664 The Eighth Sermon. obedience that of faith is, and in what sense it may be said to justify us. 43. What satisfaction I conceive may be given to this query, I will set down in this assertion : That since justification, even as it includes remission of sins, is that promise, to perform which unto us God has obliged himself in the new covenant ; it must neces- sarily presuppose in the person to be so justified, such an obedience as the gospel requires ; namely, first, repentance from dead works, a conversion to a new obedience of those holy, moral commands, which are ratified in the gospel, and a relying upon Christ as the only meritorious cause of our justification and salvation, by a particular, evangelical faith. All this, I say, is prerequired in the person who is made capable of justification, either in the exercise, or at least in prc¶tione cordis, in a full resolution of the heart, and entire disposition of the mind : so that, though God be the sole, proper, efficient cause ; and Christ, as mediator, the sole, proper me- ritorious cause of our justification ; yet these inherent dispositions are exacted on our part as causes sine quibus non, as necessary con- ditions, to be found in us, before God will perform this great work freely and graciously towards us, and only for the merits of Christ. 44*. Reas. 1. This assertion may, I suppose, be demonstrated, first, from the nature of a covenant : for unless there be pre-requi- red conditions on man's part to be performed, before God will pro- portion his reward, the very nature of a covenant is destroyed. And it will not boot to answer, that though there be no qualifica- tions required in a man, before he obtain remission of sins, yet they are to be found in us before we be made capable of salvation. — Sol. 1. For, as I have shewn before, salvation is as properly a gracious act of mercy, as free and undeserved a gift, as truly be- stowed on us only for the merits of Christ, as remission of sins ; and therefore may as well consist without any change in us, as the for- mer. 2. And, secondly, if that proposition of St. Paul, " We are justified by faith, without the works of the law," exclude all con- ditions to be performed by man ; if it exclude not only the right- eousness of the law (which indeed it doth) but the obedience of faith, or the gospel likewise, from being necessary dispositions in us, before we receive remission of sins ; then another saying of his, parallel to this, will exclude as well the necessity of an evangelical obedience to our salvation : for, saith St. Paul, (Eph. ii. 8,) " By grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God : not of works, lest any man should boast." But I hope no man will be so unchristianlike, as to exclude the necessity of our good works to salvation, for all this saying of St. Paul ; there- fore they may as well be prerequired to remission of sins, notwith- standing the former place. 45. Reas. 2. Secondly, if there be no necessity of any predis- position in us before remission of sins, then a man may have his sins forgiven him, and so become a person accepted of God, whilst he is a person unregenerate, unsanctified ; whilst he is (Ephes. ii. 1,) dead in trespasses and sins; whilst he walks accord- ing to the course of this world, according to the prince of the Tlie Eighth Sermon. 665 power of the air, the spirit that worketh in the children of dis- obedience; whilst he has his conversation in the lusts of the flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh, and of the mind; being, notwith- standing his justification, a child of wrath as much as the profanest heathen, though the veriest reprobate in the world ; lastly, though he be no child of Abraham, according to faith, that is, not having in him that faith which was imputed to Abraham for righteousness. Now whether this divinity be consonant to God's word, let your own consciences be judges. 46. Reas. 3. A third argument to prove the truth of the for- mer assertion, shall be taken from several texts of scripture, where justification, even as it is taken for remission of sins, is ascribed to other virtues besides faith, whether it be taken for a particular virtue, or for the object thereof. For example, our Saviour saith expressly, (Matt. xii. 37,) " By thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned :" where we see jus- tification is taken in that proper sense, in which we maintain it against the papists. Again, (Matt. vi. 14, 15,) " If you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you ; but if you forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses." Again, our Saviour speaking concerning Mary, saith, (Luke vii. 47,) Heroins are forgiven her, because she loveth much. If the time, or your patience, could sutler me, I might add a fourth reason to prove my former asser- tion, which is the clearness and evidence of agreement and recon- ciliation between St. Paul and St. James in this point, upon these grounds, without any new-invented justification before men ; which is a conceit taken up by some men, only to shift off an adversary's argument, which otherwise would press them too hard, they think: for St. Paul's faith, taken for the obedience of the gospel, would easily accord with St. James's (James i. 27,) " holy and undefiled religion before God," or works, which is all one ; and St. James would be St. Paul's expositor, without any injury or detraction at all from the merits of Christ or God's free and undeserved mercy to us in him. But I must hasten. 47. The full meaning, then, of St. Paul's proposition, " we are justified by faith, and not by the works of the law ;" and, by con- sequence, the state of the whole controversy of justification, in brief, may be this: that if we consider the efficient cause of our justification, it is only God which justifies ; if that, for which we are justified, that is, the meritorious cause thereof, it is not for any thing in ourselves, but only for the obedience and satisfaction of our blessed Saviour, that God will justify us : but if we have re- spect to what kind of conditions are to be found in us, before Christ will suffer us to be made partakers of the benefit of his merits, then we must say, that we are not justified by such a righteousness, so perfect, absolute, and complete, as the law of works does require ; but by the righteousness of the gospel, by a righteousness proportionable to that grace which God is pleased to bestow on us; not by the perfection, but the sincerity, of our obedience to the new covenant. And the apostle's main argument 56* 666 The Eighth Sermon. will serve to prove this to any understanding most undeniably. St. Paul has demonstrated, that if we consider the rigour of the law, all men, both Jews and gentiles, are concluded under sin, and most necessarily obnoxious to God's wrath. Which reason of his would not be at all prevailing, unless, by works of the law, he in- tended only such a perfect obedience as the law requires ; which, by reason of man's weakness, is become impossible unto him. For it might easily be replied upon him thus : we confess no man can fulfil the law ; but the conditions of the gospel are not only possible, but, by the assistance of God's Spirit, easy to be performed ; so that though, for this reason, the former righteousness be excluded from our justification, not only quoad meritum, but also, quoad prcssen- tiam; yet the latter evangelical righteousness is excluded from our justification, only quoad meritum. 48. Obj. But I perceive an objection ready to assault me ; and I will impartially assist the force and strength thereof against myself, with all the advantage I can. It is to this purpose : when men are disputing in the schools, or discoursing in the pulpit, they may state this question as they please ; but the fittest time to decide this point is, when, in a serious contemplation, we present before our eyes Almighty God, the righteous, impartial judge of heaven and earth, sitting in his throne, ready to execute judgment, and our- selves arraigned at the bar before him, expecting a final, irreversi- ble sentence. In these circumstances, I would fain see the stoutest- hearted man alive, that should dare to say unto Almighty God, thou hast given me a law, which my conscience witnesseth unto me that I have performed. Therefore I now challenge thee upon thy truth and faithfulness, that thou perform thy conditions also with me, and give me remission of my former sins, as a reward of my obedience. 49. Sol. For answer to this objection : this is confessed by all christians of all religions, that a profane person, or a hypocrite, dying in such an estate, shall neither in the last day be acquitted of his sins, nor saved : therefore, unless a man's heart can witness unto him, that he hath unfeignedly kept God's commandment, " God, who is greater than his heart, and knoweth all things,"* will assuredly condemn him : but then we must know that it is not a christian's plea, to rely upon his own, though sincere, unhy- pocritical righteousness, and therefore to challenge heaven. But, as our Saviour adviseth us,f we, when we have done all we can, must say, we are unprofitable servants : and not say so in a com- pliment only, but in the truth and sincerity of our hearts. It is the perfection of evangelical righteousness, to deny our own righteousness, to disclaim all meritorious efficacy thereof, either in remission of sins, or salvation. Therefore he that, after he hath performed God's commandment, shall think to challenge the reward, as of a debt, or as promised only to his own holiness, wants the proper, peculiar righteousness of a christian, who must say, in holy Job's words,J " though I were righteous, yet would I not answer God, but I would make supplication to my Judge :" I * 1 John iii. 20. t Luke xvii. 10. t Job ix. 15. The Eighth Sermon. 667 would say unto him, Lord, look not upon that holiness which is in me, which yet is not mine neither, for thou wroughtest it in me; but look on him, in whom only thou art well pleased : accept of me in him, and for his sake only, who hath fulfilled all righteous- ness for me ; who, through the eternal Spirit, hath offered himself without spot unto thee, being made sin and a curse for me, that I might be made the righteousness of God in him. To him only be glory for ever and ever. The sum of all which I have said, is con- tained, Tit. ii. 11, 14, " The grace of God, which bringeth," &c. And so I come to the second general, namely, the promise which God will make good unto us, who sincerely obey him, contained in these words, " we wait for the hope," &c. 50. Which general I divided into two particulars: 1. The na- ture of the reward promised, which I told you was justification, containing remission of sins and everlasting life. 2. The interest, which, during this life, we ordinarily have in that reward, namely hope, expressed in these words : " we wait for the hope of righ- teousness ;" that is, by hope we expect the reward of righteous- ness. I cannot now enlarge myself in the former particular : some- thing I have already been forced to say of it, which must suffice. I will in few words consider the second particular, namely, the interest which we have in the promises, which is hope : " we wait for," &c. 51. I know nothing more effectual to persuade me to search for, and embrace, divine truth with singleness of heart, and with- out respect of persons, than to consider, that there are no opinions so unreasonable, so directly contradictory to one another, but the spirit of contradiction and partiality will make a man easily to swallow and digest them: as, for example, whereas the papists most presumptuously maintain, that it is in a man's power, by the ordinary assistance of grace, so exactly to perform all God's com- mandments, that he shall have no need to say, " Lord, forgive us our trespasses :" some of their adversaries strive so much to avoid this assertion on the contrary extreme, that they will not allow even the best and most holy actions of the most regenerate man to be such as God requires at our hands : they will not only have them to be imperfect, but sinful, nay, if strictly examined, sins. And yet, for all this, they who put it in a man's power to fulfil all God's commandments, will not suffer any man to have any cer- tainty of their salvation: on the contrary, the others, though they make a man's best actions to be sins, yet require at his hands an infallible divine faith of his salvation, not only as an attendant, but as the very nature and essence of that faith, whereby he shall be justified. 52. It may be possible, that one of these parties might light upon the truth, if either of them would be willing to change one of his opinions with his adversary : but as they have been pleased to yoke such jarring positions together, I am confidently per- suaded, that both of them have missed of the truth, and left it in the middle to any third person that will be willing to stand neuter in a mean betwixt them both. I will not now examine how far 668 The Eighth Sermon. each side have outrun the truth contrary ways ; only, as I am re- quired by that part of my text which remains, I will lay down two assertions participating, in some measure, of both opinions ; the first whereof is this (which I have already touched) : that no man can justly and reasonably expect or hope for the reward of righteous- ness, but he whose heart and conscience can unfeignedly witness unto him, that he hath, though not exactly, yet sincerely, and with- out hypocrisy, performed the conditions of the new covenant. The second, that the interest which such a person ordinarily hath in the promises, is only hope. 53. Assert. 1. Now concerning the first assertion, namely, that no man can justly, &c. I would not now be mistaken, as if I said, that before a man can hope for salvation, he must perform God's commandments exactly, but only according to the equity of the gospel ; according to that famous saying of St. Augustine, Retractat. 1. i. c. 19, Omnia mandata facta deputantur, quando quicquid non jit, ignoscitur. Now, that a man may keep God's commandments, as far as the equity of the gospel expects from him, may, I think, be thus demonstrated : there is no man that hears me this day, I am persuaded, but he does often seriously desire of God, that he would give him the grace to do his will: now all prayer, if it be right, is to be performed in faith, i. e. with a full persuasion, not onlv that it is lawful and warrantable for him to desire that which ml he prays for, but also with as full a persuasion, that Almighty God is not only able, but ready and willing also to grant him his petitions; otherwise, it is not only a vain, but a sinful prayer; it is a tempting of God, as if we should desire him to do that, which we know is impossible. Besides, can we think, that God would command us (and withal add a promise of hearing and granting our petitions), would he, I say, command us to pray for that, which we are assured of beforehand cannot, and must not, be granted? Therefore certainly, some christians have been heard in these petitions ; some men have been found, who have fulfilled the righteousness of the gospel. 54. Now till thou hast done this, which thou seest by the as- sistance of God's Spirit (which will never be wanting to them which desire it) it is possible for thee to do ; nay, I will add further, it is easy for thee to do (doth not Christ say as much ? " My yoke is easy, and my burden is light") ; I say, till thou hast done this, thou canst have no reason in the world to hope for God's mercy. For, tell me, why dost thou hope, thou that continuest still in an unrepentant estate, in an habitual opposition to God's holy commandments? Art thou resolved to hope, because thou hast a mind to it, upon no ground, when thou oughtest rather to fear, almost to despair ? or rather, canst thou persuade thyself in earnest, that this is indeed a hope ? Is it not a fancy of thine own brain, or rather a temptation of the devil ? Hope, which is hope indeed, (which is not a fancy and chimera) makes not ashamed, saith St. Paul :* a man may with confidence, without confusion of face, profess and maintain it. But such a hope as this is, which * Rom. v. 5. The Eighth Sermon. 669 is not a hope in earnest, how it will disgrace a man, and put him out of countenance, when God shall ask him why he did offer to hope 1 55. Let thy conscience now answer me, whosoever thou art, in such a state. Thou that knowest how often God hath said, nay, sworn in his wrath, that none of those, which continue disobe- dient, shall enter into his rest ! That none shall be partakers of the second resurrection unto glory, but those that have been par- takers of the first unto grace. Canst thou for all this imagine, that God has such a peculiar, particular affection and respect to thee, who art yet a slave of the devil's, that he will be content to strain his truth and veracity, to break his oath for thy company ? Shall the whole scripture, which promises glory to none but those who perform the conditions prescribed, for thy sake be turned into a romance, into a melancholy tale to fright children withal ? No, no, assure thyself, it is not a conceit of election, which will save thee ; thou must work, and work hard, in fear and trem- bling, before God will raise in thee the good spirit of christian hope. 56. For to say the truth, of all divine graces, hope is incom- parably the hardest to attain unto : and the reason is evident, be- cause it presupposes the possession of all other graces before it. And yet, for all this, nothing counted so easy, now-a-days, as hope, though men both are and resolve to be never so wicked: nay, and it is well if hope will serve their turn, they must have an infallible assurance, a divine faith of everlasting glory ; and no manner of sins, though ever so heinous, ever so oft committed, shall be able to weaken this their assurance, that they are resolved of. This they think is a spell strong enough for the devil in all assails ; when, God knows, the devil is more joyed and comforted, to see them so vainly delude themselves, than they themselves possibly can be. This for my first assertion: now follows the second. 57. Assert. 2. When I say, that the interest, which a christian ordinarily has in the promises of God, is hope; I mean, it is not absolute and irrespective, but depending upon conditions, namely, grace and perseverance therein. And this I took for granted, for I never heard of any yet, that denied perseverance to be necessary to salvation. If then his interest be by hope, then it is not yet by faith, properly so called ; for it is not possible, that the same object (considered with the same circumstances at the same time) should be the object both of faith and hope. For example, I be- lieve by a divine faith, i. e. a faith grounded upon God's word, that there shall be a resurrection of. the flesh, even of this flesh of mine, and I believe it firmly, because God hath said that he will bring it to pass; neither is there any condition of mine pre-re- quired to the performance of this promise of God ; for howsoever I behave myself here in this world, whether well or ill, it matters not, my behaviour cannot make God alter his resolution. Now, if I assuredly believe this, it would be improper and absurd for me to say, I hope there will be a resurrection of my body ; for 670 The Eighth Sermon. when I say, I hope any thing, I imply a possibility, in nature, that such a thing may not be, which in this case I cannot do without in fidelity. 58. But, on the other side, I hope that God will raise this flesk of mine unto glory, and I hope this upon safe grounds : therefore, if it be true that I hope it, I cannot properly be said to believe it, because my salvation yet depends upon conditions, namely, per- severance. Therefore, let me propose this one question to any man's conscience : Hast thou such an assurance of salvation given thee of God, that hope is quite evacuated in thee? Is there no such virtue left in thee as hope ? Surely God hath dealt extraor- dinarily mercifully with thee ; thou art many degrees gone beyond the state of those believers which St. Paul speaks of, and includes himself in the number, when he saith, " We live by hope ;" for thou dost not live by hope, thou art exalted above it. Notwith- standing, I beseech you, consider well upon the matter (for it concerns you very much) ; be not too hasty to credit fancies, when conceits of assurance or impeccability shall be suggested to your minds. There may be great danger of confidence ungrounded ;' a confidence only taken upon trust from other men's words or opinions. 59. Do I go about now (think you) to bereave you, or cozen you of any spiritual comfort in this life ? Do I envy any of you your assurance? Alas! why should I deal so with you? For I was never injured by you ; or, if I were, surely, of all places, I would not make choice of this to execute my revenge in : or, if I thought that such assurance were ordinarily to be had, at least necessary to the making up of a justifying faith (and have you never heard it said so?) would I not, think you, strive and endea- vour to obtain it at any rate, even with the loss of all worldly comforts? Yes, certainly, I would count them all but as dross and dung in comparison of it. But I confess unto you, I am yet contented with enjoying heaven by hope : and I bless Almighty God, that he hath dealt so graciously with me, that I should dare to hope for it, and not be ashamed and confounded by my hope : and if there be any amongst you, that will vouchsafe to content himself with such a neglected degree of comfort, with only hope, and no more, I will not enter into comparison with those that are perfect ; but I dare promise him, that all those troublesome plea- sures, which do so ravish the men of this world, shall be as no- thing; yea, as afflictions and torments, in comparison of those spiritual, heavenly joys, which hope, well and legally achieved, will be able to afford us : no dangers will there be of terrors or jealousies, as if God would happen to grow weary, or repent him- self of any grace or blessing which he hath bestowed upon us. 60. For, tell me ; do you think that Adam, while he continued in his innocency, had any grudgings of suspicions or fears? Was he not, during that time, in as great a quiet and serenity of mind, as any of us dare hope for? And yet the most that he could do then, was to hope that he might continue in that state even to the end : the event shows, he could not have an infallible faith of his The Ninth Sermon. 671 perseverance. If then such a contented, settled mind could ac- company Adam in paradise, even when he knew it was in his power, with but reaching out his hand, and tasting an apple; yea, with a sudden, wicked word, or an unsanctified thought, utterly and irrecoverably to degrade himself from that happy estate; surely, we christians have much more reason to rejoice in our hope, since we know assuredly, that as God has been so gracious to begin this good work in us, so he will not be wanting to perfect it even to the end, if we will but perform our parts, which he has already given us more than sufficient grace to do, and will never fail to supply us with more, for the asking; nay, more, (which are surer grounds to build upon, than ever Adam had) since we know, that not one, nor ten, nor a hundred sins, shall be able, so irrepara- bly to cast us out of God's favour, but that he will be willing, upon our repentance, especially calling to mind his old mercies, to restore us again to our lost happiness. 61. Neither are we utterly excluded from all assurance; for there is a tfX^odo^'a 1% ZXiriSos, " A full assurance of hope," saith St. Paul : (Heb. vi. 11 :) " This hope we have as a sure anchor of the soul," fastened on a rock, ibid. 19. The rock cannot fail us, the anchor will not ; all the danger is in the cable or chain of spi- ritual graces, whereby we are fastened to this rock : if this chain but hold, no tempests, no winds, no floods can endanger us. And part of our hope respects this chain ; for God has promised his' will- ingness and readiness to strengthen it every day more and more, till our state shall be so changed, that there shall be no such things as tempests known, no tossings of waves, no tumults of winds, nor fear of leaking or decay in the vessel, but all calmness and security. And, for the attaining to this happy, unchangeable estate, where is it that we place our hope ? truly our hope is even in thee, O God, who, if thou shalt think it convenient or necessary for us, will en- large this our hope into confidence, and add unto that assurance, and swallow up all in possession : and that not for any merits of ours, but only for thy free undeserved mercies in our blessed Sa- viour Jesus Christ, in whom alone thou art well pleased : to whom, with thee, Father, and the blessed Spirit, be ascribed by us, and thy whole church, the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever and ever. Amen. SERMON IX. '* God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able." — 1 Cor. x. 13. Whatever punishments befell the disobedient Israelites, who murmured, and tempted God in the wilderness, " they all hap- pened unto them (saith St. Paul) for ensamples unto us, and are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come."* This privilege we may have beyond our forefathers, that * 1 Cor. x. 6, 11. 672 The Ninth Sermon. we may present before our eyes a larger series and history of God's providence, even since the foundation of the world ; we may take a view and prospect of his constant, unaltered course of revenging himself upon sin, in whatsoever persons he finds it ; and we ought from thence to collect, that whatsoever immunities and privileges we may conceive to ourselves, whatsoever comfort- able errors we may take up upon trust, yet that God will not (for our sakes) begin a new frame of polity in the administration of the world ; but that we also, unless we break off our sins by re- pentance and conversion unto God, we, I say, after the example of these murmuring Israelites ; as those eighteen, upon whom the tower of Siloe fell ; as those Galileans, whose blood Pilate mingled with their sacrifices ; that we also, unless we repent, " shall all likewise perish." Nay, certainly we (upon whom the ends of the world are come) shall be much more culpable, our punishment and stripes shall be more in number, and weightier, if we (notwithstand- ing that larger experience which we may have of God's impartial dealing with sinners) shall yet promise to ourselves impunity ; if we shall say, " we shall have peace, though we walk in the ima- ginations of our hearts." 2. The same collection we may proportionably make, to our own benefit and advantage, from God's gracious dealing and beha- viour to any of his beloved faithful servants ; we may appropriate to ourselves all those blessings and promises, which have been af- forded unto them, if our consciences can assure us, that we do obey God's commandments in the truth and sincerity of our hearts. Now, for warrant to this kind of collection, instead of several ex- amples in holy scripture, I will only make use of one taken out of (I think) this our apostle, where he saith, " Let your conver- sation be without covetousness, and be content with such things as you have ; for God hath said, I will never leave thee, nor for- sake thee."* Which words by him quoted, as the margins of our Bibles will direct us, are to be found, Josh. i. 5 ; and, though they be a particular promise, which God immediately made to Joshua, thereby to encourage him after the death of Moses, to take upon him the conducting of the Jews into the land of promise, assuring unto him a continuation of his extraordinary assistance in the enter- prise ; yet, notwithstanding, St. Paul, we see (as if God had pro- claimed this promise to the whole world) applies these words to all the faithful among the Hebrews, and by the same proportion to all christians likewise. 3. Upon which grounds I may as reasonably direct the words of this verse, out of which my text is taken, to you that now hear ni£, as the apostle does to the Corinthians, and say, " there hath no temptation taken you, but such as is common to man :" for certainly we will not imagine, that the church or city of Corinth had any such extraordinary immunity or charter granted them, whereby they should be exempted from the danger of temptations above all the christian world besides. Therefore let your me- mories recollect and examine the time past of your lives, and tell * Heb. xiii. 5. The Ninth Sermon. 673 me, Did there ever any temptation take hold of you, or assault you, so powerful and irresistible, that there was no way left foi you but to be overcome by it ? Take temptation now in what sense you please, either for a misfortune and affliction, or else for a suggestion to sin : was there ever any calamity, any loss, any pain, any sickness, so violent and impetuous, but that still you might perceive yourselves notwithstanding (though perhaps in your outward man unequally matched by it) yet in your spirits and minds strong enough to conquer the malice thereof, and to convert it into wholesome physic 1 Again, was there ever any sinful temptation so strongly urged upon you, but that you might, by the assistance of that grace, which God had already given you, or at the least, for the asking, would have superadded, you might easily have dulled and diverted the force thereof? Did not your consciences, even after you were overcome by such a temptation, tell you, that it was mere voluntary cowardice in you, to suffer yourselves to be overcome by it 1 that you willingly surrendered, and betrayed those forces, which already God hath given you 1 4. Now, though I am persuaded this to be so evidently true, that there is scarce any one here, but his conscience will assure him as much ; yet, for all this, we must not begin hereupon to fancy in our minds any extraordinary worth or dignity in our- selves, as though by our own power or holiness we could work such wonders. No, alas ! nothing less : for take away the assist- ance and guard of our auxiliary forces, God's free and undeserved graces within us, and his divine assistances, together with the guard of his blessed angels without us, and there is no temptation so weak and despicable, which we should not suddenly yield unto ; nay, we should need no outward tempters to help us to sin, our own wicked hearts would save the devil that labour ; for nothing is there so vile and abominable, whereunto, without God's restrain- ing grace, we should not readily and impetuously hasten. 5. Therefore, let us neither defraud God nor ourselves of their dues ; but as we have spoken of the time past, so likewise of that which follows; if hereafter we shall overcome any temptation (as certainly by God's help, if we have but a mind to it, we may) let us bless Almighty God for assisting us so far, let us give the glory and trophies of the conquest to him : but, on the contrary side, if we shall neglect to make use and advantage of those many helps against sin, which Almighty God is ready to supply unto us; if, notwithstanding those many promises of assistance so frequently set down in holy scripture ; if, notwithstanding those many secret whisperings and inspirations of his holy Spirit in our souls; if, notwithstanding God's voice, which (as every day's experience can witness unto us) continually calls upon us, saying, " This is the right way, walk in it, and ye shall find rest to your souls;" we will yet continue to extinguish those good motions, to deafen and drown God's voice, and be ready to hearken unto and obey our own filthy lusts and vile affections; let us lay the fault where it is due, even upon our own deceitful, wicked hearts; or other- wise the time will come, when in hell we shall be evidently con- u u 57 674 Tlie Ninth Sermon. vinced thereof, when the worm of conscience, which never dieth, shall continually torment and gnaw us. Let God be true and faithful in his promises, and every man a liar. For, as hitherto God has been so merciful to you, to preserve you, that no temp- tation should take "vou, but such as is common to man:" so likewise, for the time following, though perhaps greater trials may befall you than hitherto you have had experience of; yet of this you may be confident, that however they may seem grievous, yet the same God continues faithful and righteous to fulfil his promises : " He will never suffer you to be tempted above that you are able." 6. Temptation is a thing of its own nature indifferent, and is rendered good or evil, from the end and intention of the tempter especially : it is nothing else but making a trial or experiment. If good, an assay, whether that good, which seems to be in a subject, be true and firmly grounded or no (so God may be said to tempt, as he did Abraham, &c. And this he performs not to satisfy his curiosity, but merely out of a good inclination to the party ; both hereby to confirm his graces in him, and to reward them with a greater measure of glory). If evil, temptation is an assay, whether that good, which seems to be in a man, may not by some means or other be extinguished, and so the person de- stroyed : so the devil is most properly called the tempter. And of this nature are the temptations of my text. Now these we find in holy scripture to be twofold : for either they are apt to draw us from good by way of discouragement (so all manner of afflictions, misfortunes, persecutions, &c. are called temptations, because by these a man is inclinable to be frighted from, or at least discountenanced in, a holy conversation) : or else they allure us by way of invitation or solicitation to evil : so wicked pleasing suggestions are said to be temptations, because these are fit to palliate the unloveliness and deformity of sin, and thereby to make it desirable unto us. It would be but loss of time to heap together examples of holy scripture to make good this distinction, since it is an argument which you daily meet withal discoursed of in sermons. 7. But, I confess, I find it something difficult to determine, whether of these two senses, with exclusion of the other, be in- tended by St. Paul in my text : whether, when he says, " God will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able," his meaning should be, God by his wisdom and providence will so contrive businesses for you, that though you are not likely to live in a continual, uninterrupted course of happiness and security, but that sometimes you shall dash your foot against a stone, you shall be disquieted and molested with afflictions of several natures; notwithstanding, this you may be confident of, that let what mis- fortunes will come, how grievous and even insupportable soever it may seem unto you, it shall never be so violent and outrageous, but that God will provide a way for you to escape from it, there will be a door left open for you to avoid the furiousness and im- petuousness of it : either God will arm you with patience to bear The Ninth Sermon. 675 it, and then the comfort, which your souls may feel in the con- sideration of what glorious rewards are promised unto your patience, shall make your afflictions even matters of rejoicing unto you ; in which respect (as St. James saith) you ought to "count it all joy, when you fall into divers temptations;" or, if those temptations and afflictions reach so far as the destroying of your lives, yet, notwithstanding all this, they are so unable to make you miserable, unless you will take part with them against your own souls, by repining and murmuring under the mighty hand of God, that when you shall consider that blessed change, which death shall bring unto you, when all tears shall be wiped from your eyes, all fear and expectation of misery removed, no- thing but inexpressible and everlasting joys to be expected, you shall bless the time that ever you were afflicted, and with St. Paul confess, that the afflictions of this life are not worthy of that joy which shall be revealed. This, I say, is a good catholic, orthodox sense, and which, it is very probable, that St. Paul might more directly intend in these words of my text 8. Notwithstanding, I cannot exclude the other sense of the word temptation from this text ; for, according to the analogy of faith, and without any wrong done to the dependence and con- nexion of these words, " God will not suffer you to be tempted," &c, St. Paul's intent in them might be such, as if it had been thus spread out more at large : though considering the many disadvan- tages we have in the way of godliness, in respect both of our powerful, malicious, industrious, and subtle enemy the devil, who continually waits upon us to entrap us ; in respect of our seeming flattering friend, the world and vanities thereof, alluring us; but especially in respect of our own wicked and deceitful hearts, for- ward and desirous enough to embrace the wicked suggestions and temptations of both, nay, sufficient to destroy us without the assistance of either ; I say, that though (these things considered) we may seem to be set, in the expression of the Holy Ghost, "upon slippery places," where it is almost impossible for us to keep our footing, and to preserve ourselves from falling danger- ously, and dashing ourselves in pieces : 9. Notwithstanding, if our eyes were opened, as were the eyes of the prophet Elisha's servant, we should find, as well as he, that they that be with us, are more than they that be against us : for God and his holy angels, who are on our side, are both wiser and stronger than the devil, and more willing to do us good, than the other can be to hurt us. Besides, the expectations of those glo- rious rewards, which are laid up in heaven for us, are sufficient even to any reasonable man, to disrelish unto him the vain, unsatisfying pleasures of this world. And though our own hearts naturally be never so traitorous and unfaithful, yet by the power of that grace, which is plentifully showered down upon every one of us in our baptism, and which is daily increased and supplied unto us, they may easily be corrected and renewed. So that if the suggestion of any wicked temptation get the mastery over us, let us not impute too much to the valour and strength of our uu2 676 The Ninth Sermon. enemies ; let us not accuse God of any unwillingness to succour us; for never any temptation hath or ever shall happen unto us, but such as is dvSpuiems, suitable unto the nature of man ; such as a reasonable, considerate, and a circumspect man, by the ordinary assistance of God's grace, and careful application of those means, wherewith we are abundantly furnished out of holy scripture, as prayer, watchfulness, fasting, and the like, may easily conquer and subdue. 10. This sense of these words may with as good reason and pro- bability be supposed to be intended by St. Paul in this place, as the former. And, indeed, unless we enlarge St. Paul's words to this meaning, also, we shall receive no extraordinary comfort and encouragement from them: for though indeed it is true, that it is more than we can deserve at God's hands, to obtain a promise from him, to secure us, that no temptations, no outward afflictions of this world, shall be so violent and furious upon us, as to exceed the strength of reason and grace to withstand them ; yet since sin is that only enemy, which is able to withdraw God's favour from us, and make him our enemy ; unless we can be put in some hope, that there is a possible course for us to prevail against sin also, and all the dangerous temptations and suggestions thereof, we should live but an uncomfortable, discontented life ; we should be continually affrighted with sad, melancholic thoughts, with dis- quieting jealousies and fears, that however we may now and then please ourselves with conceits of God's favour for the present, yet since he has passed no promise of securing us for the future, it may happen, that such a sinful temptation may come upon us, which may be able, do what we can, to overwhelm us irrecover- ably. Therefore since this latter sense (which I mentioned of these words) is more profitable and advantageous to us, I will especially at this time insist upon it, and labour to demonstrate undeniably to every one of us, that " God is faithful," and will assuredly make good that promise which he hath made unto us all, namely, not to suffer us to be tempted, that is, by any sinful temptation, " above that we are able." 11. Now he is said to be tempted above that he is able, who, do what he can, though he strain his natural endowments to the uttermost, and though he endeavour heartily to make use of all the outward helps and assistances which he finds prescribed unto him out of God's word ; though he extend that measure of grace, wherewith he is furnished, to the extremest activity thereof, to resist such a temptation : yet in the end is forced to yield to the power of it, utterly fainting and languishing in the combat. So, on the contrary, that man, who being completely furnished with all requisite weapons, both for his own defence and encountering his adversary ; and, besides, having in him both ability of body, and courage enough, and yet out of a sleepy negligence, or obsti- nate sullenness, will not take the pains to lift up his arm, or other- wise bestir himself to oppose his enemy ; such a man, if over- come, can in no reason be said to be overmatched, but is a mere traitor to his own safety and reputation. The Ninth Sermon. 677 12. And, indeed, before I can proceed any farther, I must either take this for granted, that some men, though (de facto) they have been overcome by a temptation, yet might have resisted it by the assistances of that grace wherewith they were enabled ; or truly I know not what to say. For if this be a good inference, a man is overcome by a temptation, therefore he could not possibly have resisted; Adam, for all he was seduced by the devil, is not so culpable as I took him to be. How can I charge such a man for not doing his duty? how can I convince his conscience, that it was his own fault and negligence, that he did not that, which he ought and might have done? Is there no man then to be found, that could possibly have done no more good than actually he has done ? Does every man improve that talent of grace, which God has given him, to the uttermost of his power and skill ? or will any of you, when you confess your sins unto Almighty God, tell him to this purpose : Lord, I confess, I do daily fall into many and grievous sins; but, since they are gone and past, I perceive there was no remedy for it; it could not be avoided; those sins must needs have been practised by me ; I did whatsoever I was enabled to do; if I had had more strength, I had done better; when thou bestowest on me more talents of grace, I shall be a more profitable servant, and yield thee a greater interest and advantage by them? If any of you entertain such conceits as these, I confess you are a great deal more righteous than I thought you had been. 13. For mine own part, I confess with grief, and shame, and self-condemnation, that I have offended Almighty God in many respects, when I might have done otherwise. I have not only hid my talent in a napkin ; I have not only not improved that stock of grace which God gave me; but, on the contrary, notwithstand- ing that, I have been very laborious and abounding in the unfruit- ful works of darkness. I have wilfully grieved the Holy Spirit of God, and many times quenched his good motions in me. Yea, so voluntarily and resolvedly have I done all these sins, that I am per- suaded, 1 could easily have chose, whether I would have commit- ted them or no: no necessity at all lay upon me, to compel me there- unto ; God was faithful and righteous in his promises and dealings with me, and my own wicked heart deceived me. And I think all of you have been guilty in some measure of betraying and surren- dering the abilities which God has bestowed on you, though I dare not charge you so deeply as myself. 14. Now that we have heard, who may be said to be able to resist a temptation, or not ; for my more distinct proceeding in the confirmation of St. Paul's proposition in my text, I wiil take our Saviour's counsel, I will sit down and examine, whether he that hath but ten thousand, be able to meet him which cometh against him with twenty thousand. Here are two enemies' camps, and no doubt great forces on both sides ; but, without question, disproportionable : it concerns me therefore now, by taking a survey and muster of each, to demonstrate, that in all respects the advantage lies on our side. I mentioned before, briefly, that 57* 678 The Ninth Sermon. we had three especial enemies to deal with; the devil, the world, and the flesh. We will proceed in this order against them, in the first place examining the devil's power, and the forces we have to oppose against him. 15. There are many terrible names, I confess, by which the devil is described in holy writ : he is called Abaddon, and 'AtfoXXuwv, the destroyer, as one, whose employment it were to counter-work against God, who calls himself " the Saviour and preserver of all men." He is called " a ramping and a roaring lion, that runs about seeking whom he may devour." He is called* " the great dragon, the old serpent, the devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world :" all this in one verse. He is called " the red fiery dragon." There are extant a great many more hideous pictures of him in God's word ; but these will serve our turn sufficiently, to show how dangerous an enemy we have, and therefore how great ought to be our resolution and wisdom in encountering with him. And, lest we should think, since he is named in the forecited places in the singular number, that there- fore there is but one lion, and but one fiery dragon to deal with all mankind, and thereupon begin to be a little more secure ; since we should have hard fortune, if it should light upon us to be singled out by him, out of so infinite a crowd as the world is; God knows, it is so far from that, that there is an unutterable number of them, such an infinite, vast army, that one whole legion (which are near about four thousand) were at leisure to possess one man : and St. Paul tells us j-" we wrestle not against flesh and blood ;" as if he should say, these worldly enemies are so weak and despicable, in comparison of those we are to meet withal, that they are not to be reckoned of : but, says he, " we wrestle against principalities and powers, (there are, it seems, many princi- palities and powers) against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickednesses in high places :" the word is, " in heavenly places." 16. Now what have we to oppose against such an innumerable multitude of spirits, whereof each particular, for his excessive strength, is called a " lion ;" for his fierceness, a " dragon ;" for his poisonous malice, a " red dragon ;" for the extreme intenseness of that poisonous malice, a " red fiery dragon ;" and for his wisdom and cunning to make use of this strength, fierceness, and malice, he is called " the old serpent ;" one that has been a serpent con- tinually spitting out his poison against us, within very few days since any creature was : and therefore, if at the first, by his own natural wit, he was able, upon even terms, to overcome Adam, then innocent, and therefore not apt to betray himself, as we are, what may we conceive of him now after above five thousand years' experience 1 I say, what shall we, who are ready to fall into a swoon, if we see but an apparition of one of them, though he do us no harm ; how are we likely, think you, to behave ourselves in com- bat against so many thousands of them 1 17. Why truly, God be thanked, notwithstandin g all this, we * Rev. xii. 9. t Eph. vi. 12. The Ninth Sermon. 679 may do well enough. For we have spiritual armies on our side too, that are able to contend with all these, and overcome them in all these advantages which they have against us. Are they many ? Michael and his angels are more, certainly : which to me is evi- dent by that saying in Daniel, where it is made an expression of God's glory and majesty, his innumerable multitude of attendants : the words are, " thousand thousands minister unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stand before him :"* which, surely, God would not have made choice of, as fit language to express his power and glory, if the devil had been able to contend with God, nay, and outvie him too, in this article. Again, are they strong ? These sure are stronger; for we read of one that slew a hundred fourscore and five thousand soldiers in one night. We never heard of such an exploit of the devil's. Are they malicious against us? These are more loving and careful to do us good. And certainly, as God is stronger than the devil, so likewise ex- cessive goodness in the angels will easily prevail against extreme malice in the devil. Now it is the nature of love, to be willing to take any pains for the good of the person beloved ; whereupon St. Paul, in that most divine description of the three cardinal chris- tian virtues, thus expresseth them :f " remembering your work of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope, in our Lord Jesus Christ." I confess, it is the nature of malice too, to be very labori- ous and observant of all advantages against the subject hated ; but this must needs be granted, that love will conquer malice in the same degree. 18. Thus you see, we are reasonably well befriended and backed by these our auxiliary forces of our guardian angels, so that we need not be disheartened, if we had no more : but, beyond all these, we have Almighty God to our friend, whose power is so unlimited, that without any straining of himself, without the bending of his bow, and drawing his sword, only with unclasping his hand, sub- tractione manutenentice, with mere letting hold go, all creatures in heaven and earth would return to nothing. He is, in the lan- guage of the psalmist, " a sun and a shield ;"J that is, in the phrase of another psalm, " a light and defence ;" a sun to discover unto us the secret ambushes and practices of our enemies, and a shield to protect us from their open force and violence. 19. Obj. Ay, (will some man say) there is no man can make any question of God's power ; but the difficulty is, how shall we be sure of his good will? If that were but once procured, the battle were as good as at an end. — Sol. Why, for that we have recourse to God's word; there it is, that we must find upon what terms businesses stand between him and us. And there certainly we shall find words, which, at the first sight, to any ordinary reason- able man, would seem to make much for us. There are invitations to a league with him : desires and requests, as passionate as, I think, ever poet strained for. There are promises, which look as if they were serious and unfeigned ; they are confirmed with vows and solemn oaths of sincerity, and all these seemingly directed to * Dan. vii. 10. 1 1 Thess. i. 3. t Psalm Ixxxiv. 11. 680 The Ninth Sermon. every one of us. What can we desire more, especially from Al- mighty God, who stands in no need of our favour, and therefore is not likely to hespeak our good opinions of him with dissembling and lies? 20. Obj. Oh, but it is the easiest matter in the world for a man, with a school subtilty, by an almighty distinction, to cut off any man's right of entail to those promises ; to appropriate them only to our own friends, to some two or three that he is pleased to favour. — Sol. I would to God, that men would but consider, what end, what project Almighty God should have in making his poor creatures believe he means well to them, when there is no such matter. " Would any of you," saith our Saviour, "when his son shall ask him bread, give him a stone?" Or in- stead of a fish, to nourish him, a serpent to destroy him ? If then you (which are evil) know how to give good gifts ; if you would not have the heart to mock poor children after this manner, how much rather would not God ? For God's sake, therefore, let there be but as much sincerity, as much good-nature in Almighty God, (I will not say as in yourselves, for it may be, that would be too much for you to grant, but) as our Saviour confesseth, that there was in the Jews that crucified him : and then we all of us have right enough to his promises ; we shall have no reason to doubt of his good intention to help and assist us so far, that unless we de- light in destruction, unless we will turn fugitives, unless we will fight on our enemy's side ; all the devils in hell shall not be able to prevail against us. And thus much of the first squadrons, Michael and his angels opposed to the devil and his angels. 21. The second enemy, which we professed hostility against in our baptism, was the vain temptations of this world : and so for- cible and prevailing are the temptations thereof, that the devil, (who for his powerful managing of this weapon, is called the God of this world) in his encounter with our Saviour, set up his rest upon it, as supposing, if this would not serve his turn, there were no more fighting for him : " all this will I give thee," said he. — And such a value he set upon this stake, that no less than the ex- tremest degree of horrible idolatry could serve his turn to oppose against it : " all this will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me." And when he saw, that this proffer would not be accepted, he presently quits the field, despairing utterly of any success. The more dangerous indeed is this enemy, I may say, more dangerous to us than the devil himself; because we all ac- knowledge the devil in person to be our enemy ; and therefore not one of us will be beholden to him for any thing, if he bring us the gift himself; a sick man would not be healed by him, nor a poor man made rich; but scarce one among a thousand has that opinion of the vain pomps and sinful pleasures of the world. — Our enemy! no certainly, it is the best and most comforting friend we have in this life; all our thoughts are taken up with it, it possesseth us at all times, we dream of it sleeping, and pursue it waking: and yet our Saviour saith, "ye cannot serve God and Mammon." And again, " how can ye believe, who seek honour The Ninth Sermon. 681 one of another ?" And again, " if any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." What strength then have we to oppose this enemy ? 22. Why, surely that which would suffice but an ordinary rea- sonable man, and might serve any of us, but that we will needs be unreasonable only in things which concern our everlasting wel- fare : and that is, the consideration of those unspeakable joys, which shall attend those who can despise the unsatisfying, vain pleasures of this life. A philosopher, who but reading Plato's poetical description of the serenity of that life which a virtuous soul, delivered from the prison of the body, lives, was so far tran- sported with the conceit of it, though, for aught he knew, there was no such thing indeed; or if there were, perhaps never in- tended for him; that he becomes presently weary of this prison, and by a violent death frees himself from it ; and God only knows what a change he found : whereas we have God's word for the certainty of that glorious life which his servants shall live ; yea, a great deal of pains he hath taken to make it desirable and amiable unto us, by ransacking all the treasures of this world, the most costly jewels, the most precious metals, to embellish the description thereof withal. We have besides the experience of several men, who have seen and tasted as much of that glory as a mortal crea- ture is capable of; St. Paul, and St. John the Divine. Surely the consideration hereof might serve our turn, if not quite to disrelish unto us, and even to make us hate the vain pleasures of this world; yet, at least, not to prefer them, when they come in competition with the other : and I would to God we would suffer them but so far to prevail upon us. But I cannot stay. 23. I have ranked the three armies of our enemies just after the Roman fashion, reserving the triaries, the old-experienced soldiers, to the last. For though in show, the first rank of the devils appears more terrible ; yet in very deed, all their power is nothing, unless the lusts of our hearts take part with them, and give them advantage against us. The lusts of the flesh are those traitors, which continually keep us company ; we cannot be quit of them; without the devil's assistance, they are able to captivate us: what think you then are they able to do, being managed by so powerful, so wise an enemy? Without them, all the powers of hell and darkness are insufficient to withdraw us from our obedience, and, by consequence, from the love and favour of God. For, sup- pose the devil, for example, present a lustful object to our fancy, as it were holding a lascivious picture before our eyes ; if we consent not in our minds to any base delight in such a spectacle ; if we set- tle not our thoughts upon it, as upon a pleasing sight ; it will be so far from doing us any harm, that it will rather prove a means to root us more deeply in the favour of God, as persons unwilling to take pay of his and our enemies. 24. But, alas! as we are ordinarily so far from this nobleness of mind, from this bravery of a christian-like spirit, that, as if the devil were too slow to object such temptations to us, we will not await his leisure, but on all occasions be ready and desirous to G82 The Ninth Sermon. raise up, and then settle such unworthy thoughts in our minds; we will be content to spend many hours sometimes in the acting of this inward, contemplative adultery. St. Paul, speaking of those lusts of our flesh, calls them our members, when he saith, (Coloss. iii. 5,) " Mortify your members, which are on the earth ; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence," &c. And indeed we, by our practice, make good the apostle's ex- pression ; for we account ourselves as lame, imperfect creatures without them ; we know not what to do with ourselves, especially when we are alone, unless we set ourselves on work this way, by acting to ourselves such filthy sins, which perhaps natural bashful- ness, want of money or opportunity, will not suffer us to put in prac- tice. What strength have we now to oppose to these most pernici- ous enemies, which are so closely cemented, and even incorporated within us, that they are become, as it were, flesh of our flesh, and bones of our bones 1 25. Why surely, as naturally we have received this root of bit- terness in our hearts, which is apt to give an infectious tincture to all the thoughts and actions issuing from thence ; so likewise it hath pleased Almighty God to imprint a new principle in our minds, to plant, as it were, a new spirit in our souls ; I mean that active, powerful grace, which, without any co-operation of our own, he infuses into us, especially in our baptism; and which is afterward dva£ wttu^wjasvov, strengthened and enlivened daily, by a constant, frequent exercising ourselves in the use of those man- ifold, blessed means of our salvation, the hearing, reading, and meditating on his holy word, and participation of his heavenly mysteries. For surely, if reason alone (by the help of those worthy, grave precepts, which are extant in the treatises of moral philosophy) hath been able to change many men from the habi- tual practice of several vices to a virtuous (I had like to have said also a religious) life ; why should any man think so meanly of God's holy word and sacraments, as to doubt but that much rather they should be able to make us " new creatures, to make us wise unto salvation ;" especially considering that continual assistance of God's Holy Spirit, which infallibly attends the use and exercise of those his blessed means? Do you think God is so favourable to the devil or his instruments (our lusts), that he is unwilling to have them subdued and mortified in us? And if he be not unwilling, surely much less is he unable, to perform this great work in us, even to the end. 26. Therefore, as before, speaking of those outward forces, God and his holy angels, which are ready to take our parts, and fight on our sides against the devil and his angels, we applied that saying of Elisha to his servant, If thine eyes were opened, thou shouldst perceive that " they which are with us are more than they which are against us;" so likewise in the case in hand we may make use of that saying of St. John, " Greater is he which is in you, than he which is in the world ;" implying, that God is not only in himself stronger than the devil, but also as considered in us, i. e. as working in our hearts by his grace : this way, I say, he The Ninth Sermon. 683 is stronger than the devil ; his Spirit co-operating with the means of our salvation, is more vigorous and powerful to renew us into the image of his holiness, if we will but do that which lies in our own power, than the devil (though taking his advantage of that concupiscence, which in some measure is continually resident in us) is or can be to corrupt, and so to destroy us. For his power is not considerable, unless we be willing to join with him. Thus you see, though our enemies be allowed all the advantages they can challenge; yet in exact esteem, without any flattering of ourselves, we may conclude, that they who are ready, and desirous to join forces with us, are greater, in all respects, than they which are against us. 27. But yet, for all this, since the conducting and managing of those forces is left to our discretion, (for God will not fight single against the devil in our behalf, unless we lend him our aid and assistance) and therefore, (Judg. v. 23,) " Curse ye Meroz, saith the angel of the Lord, (in the victorious song of Deborah,) curse bitterly the inhabitants thereof:" and why must poor Meroz be so bitterly cursed 1 " Because they came not to the help of the Lord, to the help of the Lord against the mighty :" hereupon it may seem, that Almighty God will not put to his strength in our defence, unless we join with him ; he will not be our champion to fight, whilst we sit still, only spectators of the combat. And therefore this consideration alone may be sufficient to abate that confidence, which the foregoing discourse might be apt to raise in us, especially if we be not utter strangers to ourselves, if we be not ignorant of our own weakness. 28. For satisfaction therefore to this discouragement, I will now endeavour to demonstrate by proofs drawn from undeniable reason and experience, that there is no sinful temptation so strong, but that an ordinary christian may (by the assistance before-men- tioned) easily conquer it. And lest my proceeding herein may lie open to any manner of exception, let me choose from among you the weakest, most inexperienced christian, I dare oppose this man against the sharpest and most furious temptation ; and will make him confess, that though he be (de facto) subdued by it, yet that that came to pass merely by his own voluntary and affected unwatchfulness and cowardice, and that it was truly, in very deed, in his power to have resisted it. I will make choice to instance in the sin of uncleanness and fornication ; a sin, that generally finds such excuse and patronage in the world, because it is supposed to be so naturally born and bred up with us, that there is no shaking it off; it is a sin so resolved upon to be unconquerable, that few men go about to restrain it. The ancient antidotes against this sin, watching and fasting, are grown out of use with us; we con- clude they will do us little good against this hereditary evil, and therefore the best way is to give them clean over. 29. Yet I say, let me suppose an ordinary christian, environed with all the strongest temptations to this so natural, and therefore concluded, so excusable a sin ; let him have the most charming beauty, that has the most artificial ways of solicitation, together 684 The Ninth Sermon. with opportunity, and all circumstances which are not fit to be sup- posed here ; yet for all this, if that man should say he is not able to resist such a temptation, he lies against his own soul : for if at that instant a sudden message should interrupt him, a threatening of death, if he did not free himself from the danger of her filthy embraces, would he not do it ? I desire only, that each one of you in his heart would answer for him. Then it is clear, he is able to resist this pretended, irresistible temptation : and why should not the consideration of the danger of eternal torments be as persuasive against any sin, as the fear of a momentary death ? But I will not make my advantage of so frightful an enemy to his pleasure, as death. Suppose, in all those circumstances before-mentioned, a good sum of money were but offered him, upon condition he would abstain but that time from the execution of his filthy lust ; I doubt not at all, but that upon these terms he would find strength enough to conquer this temptation. Shall Satan then be able to cast out Satan, and shall not God much more do it? Shall one sin be able to destroy the exercise of another, and shall not grace much rather ? 30. Besides, if we believe, that generally it is not in our power to resist any of these temptations ; how dare you, who are fathers, suffer your daughters, after they are come to years, to live un- married ? How dare you expose their souls to such dangers, unless you think, that ordinarily any man or woman is able to resist the temptations of the flesh ? How dare you, who are mer- chants, for the hope of a little gain, live in foreign countries, as if you were divorced from your wives ; if you religiously think, that, were it not for the benefit of marriage, they could not ordi- narily be honest? 31. Lastly, you may remember, that our Saviour (in his de- scriptions of hell) seldom leaves out this phrase, " where the worm dieth not ;" which worm is generally by interpreters mo- ralized into the sting of conscience, i. e. a continual vexation of soul in the reprobates, caused by the consideration, how it was merely their own fault, their wilful folly, which brought them to that misery. Now this worm would die, and be quite extinguished in them, if they were of some men's opinions ; that the reason why they sinned, was not because they would sin, but because they could not choose but to do it ; because they wanted power to resist all the temptations which were objected to them. Such a conceit may serve indeed to vex them, but it is not possible it should trouble their conscience; for by this reason Korah, Da- than, and Abiram, might with as good reason be tormented in conscience for falling into hell, when the earth opened under them, as for their sin of rebellion against Moses; if the reason why they committed that sin, was the subtraction of divine grace and assistance, without which it was impossible for them not to be rebels. But, indeed, why should Almighty God withdraw his grace from any man ? Because (say some) by falling, they may experimentally learn their own weakness without his assistance, and so be discouraged from trusting or relying upon themselves. The Ninth Sermon. 685 A strange reason, no doubt ! for as long as they have the grace of God, they will not rely upon themselves; and when they are desti- tute of his grace, they cannot rely upon him : so that, it seems, God takes away his grace from a man for this end, that, wanting it, he may sin ; and by that means, when he has got that grace again, he may perceive, that when he is destitute of God's grace, he cannot choose but sin ! which was a thing which he knew at the first without all this ado. But there may be a better reason given, why God should take away his grace from a man ; and that is, because he negligently omits to make his best use of it, and so deserves that punishment. But this reason will satisfy as little as the former : for suppose (for example) a man at this instant in the state of grace, and so in the favour of God : upon these grounds, it- is impossible that this man should ever sin ; for surely God will not undeservedly take away his grace from him, till he merit that pun- ishment by his sin ; and till God take away his grace from him, he cannot sin; therefore he must never sin. But this discourse, though it merely concern practice, looks so like a controversy, that I am weary of it. 32. We are apt enough to slander God with too much mercy sometimes, as if he bore us so particular an affection, that, notwith- standing our never-so-many sins, yet he will still be merciful unto us. Oh that we could conceive of his mercy and goodness aright ! as rather willing to prevent our sins, by giving us sufficient preser- vatives against the committing them. I would to God, that instead of making subtle, scholastical disputes of the power and efficacy of God's grace, we would magnify the force thereof, by suffering it to exercise its sway in our lives and conversation ! we should then easily find, that we are able to " do all things through Christ that strengtheneth us." 58 ADDITIONAL DISCOURSES. A CONFERENCE BETWIXT MR. CHILLINGWORTH AND MR. LEWGAR. Thesis. The church of Rome (taken diffusely for all christians com- municating with the bishop of Rome) was the judge of controversies at that time, when the church of England made an alteration in her tenets. Arg. She was the judge of controversies at that time, which had an authority of deciding them : but the church of Rome at that time had the authority of deciding them : Ergo. Ans. A limited authority to decide controversies according to the rule of scripture and universal tradition, and to oblige her own members (so long as she evidently contradicted not that rule) to obedience, I grant she had ; but an unlimited, an infallible authority, or such as could not but proceed according to that rule, and such as should bind all the churches in the world to obedience, (as the Greek church) I say she had not. Quest. When our church had decided a controversy, I desire to know whether any particular church or person hath authority to re-examine her decision ; whether she hath observed her rule or not ; and free themselves from the obedience of it, by their particular judgment 1 Ans. If you understand by your church the church catholic, probably I should answer, no ; but if you understand by your church, that only, which is in subordination to the see of Rome ; or if you understand a council of this church, I answer, yea. Arg. That was the catholic church, which did abide in the root of apostolic unity : but the church of Rome at that time was the only church that did abide in the root of apostolic unity : Ergo. Quest. What mean you by apostolic unity ? Ans. I mean the unity of that fellowship wherein the apostles lived and died. Quest. Wherein was this unity? Ans. Herein it consisted, that they all professed one faith, obeyed one supreme tribunal, and communicated together in the same prayers and sacraments. Solut. Then the church of Rome continued not in this apostolic unity ; for it continued not in the same faith wherein the apostles lived and died : for, though it retained so much (in my judgment) as was essential to the being of a church, yet it degenerated from the church of the apostles' times, in many things which were very profitable ; as in Latin service, and communion in one kind. Arg. Some church did continue in the same faith wherein the apostles lived and died : but there was no church at that time, which did continue in the apostles' faith, besides the Roman church : Ergo. A?is. That some church did continue in the apostles' faith in all things (686) A Conference betwixt Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Lewgar. 687 necessary, I grant it ; that any did continue in the integrity of it, and in a perfect conformity with it in all things expedient and profitable, I deny it. Quest. Is it not necessary to a church's continuing in the apostles' faith, that she continue in a perfect conformity with it in all things expedient and profitable? Ans. A perfect conformity in all things is necessary to a perfect con- tinuance in the apostles' faith ; but to an imperfect continuance an imper- fect conformity is sufficient ; and such, I grant, the Roman church had. Quest. Is not a perfect continuance in the apostles' faith necessary to a church's continuance in the apostolic unity? Ans. It is necessary to a perfect continuance in apostolic unity. Arg. There were some one company of christians at the time of Luther's rising, which was the catholic church : but there was no other company at that time, besides the Roman : Ergo, the Roman at that time was the catholic church. Ans. There was no one company of christians, which in opposition to, and exclusion of, all other companies of christians, was the catholic church. Arg. If the catholic church be some one company of christians in opposition to, and exclusion of, all other companies, then if there were some one company, she was in opposition to, and exclusion of, all other companies : but the catholic church is one company of christians in oppo- sition to, and exclusion of, &c. Ergo, there was then some one company, which was the catholic church, in opposition to, and exclusion of, all other companies. The minor is proved by the testimonies of the fathers, both Greek and Latin, testifying that they understood the church to be one in the sense alleged. 1. If this unity, which cannot be separated at all, or divided, is also among heretics, what contend we further? Why call we them heretics? — S. Cypr. Epist. 75. 2. But if there be but one flock, how can he be accounted of the flock, who is not within the number of it? — Id. ibid. 3. When Parmenian commends one church, he condemns all the rest; for, besides one, which is the true catholic, other churches are esteemed to be among heretics, but are not. — S. Optat. lib. i. 4. The church therefore is but one : this cannot be among all heretics and schismatics. — Ibid. 5. You say, you offer for the church, which is one : this very thing is part of a lie, to call it one, which you have divided into two. — Id. ibid. 6. The church is one, which cannot be amongst us. and amongst you ; it remains, then, that it be in one only place. — Id. ibid. 7. Although there be many heresies of christians, and that all would be called catholics, yet there is always one church, &c. — S. Aug. De TJtil. Credend. c. 7. 8. The question between us is, where the church is ; whether with us, or with them ; for she is but one. — Id. De. Unitat. c. 2. 9. The proofs of the catholics prevailed, whereby they evinced the body of Christ to be with them, and by consequence not to be with the donatists ; for it is manifest that she is one alone. — Id. Collat. Carthag. lib. iii. 10. In lllud Cantic. vi. 7. " There are sixty queens, and eighty con- cubines, and damsels without number ; but my dove is one," &c He said not — " My queens are sixty, and my concubines," &c. but he said, "My dove is but one;" because all the sects of philosophers, and here- 688 A Conference betwixt sies of christians, are none of his ; his is but one, to wit, the catholic church, &c. — S. Epiphan. in fine Panar. 11. A man may not call the conventicles of heretics (I mean the mar- cionites, manichees, and the rest) churches ; therefore the tradition ap- points you to say, " I believe one holy catholic church," &c. — S. Cyril. Catech. 18. And these testimonies, I think, are sufficient to show the judgment of the ancient church, that this title of the church one, is directly and pro- perly exclusive to all companies besides one; to wit, that where there are divers professions of faith, or divers communions, there is but one of these which can be the catholic church. Upon this ground I desire some com- pany of christians to be named, professing a diverse faith, and holding a diverse communion from the Roman, which was the catholic church at the time of Luther's rising : and if no other in this sense can be named, then was she the catholic church at that time ; and therefore her judg- ment to be rested in, and her communion to be embraced, upon peril of schism and heresy. Mr. Chillingworth's Answer. Upon the same ground, if you pleased, you might desire a protestant to name some company of christians, professing a diverse faith, and hold- ing a diverse communion, from the Greek church, which was the catholic church at the time of Luther's rising ; and seeing he could name no other in this sense, conclude, that the Greek church was the catholic church at that time. Upon the very same grounds you might have concluded for the church of the Abyssines, or Armenians, or any other society of chris- tians extant before Luther's time. And, seeing this is so, thus I argue against your ground. 1. That ground which concludes indifferently for both parts of a con- tradiction, must needs be false and deceitful, and conclude for neither part; but this ground concludes indifferently for both parts of a contra- diction ; viz. that the Greek church is the catholic church, and not the Roman ; as well as, the Roman is the catholic church, and not the Greek : therefore the ground is false and deceitful, seem it never so plausible. 2. I answer, secondly, that you should have taken notice of my answer, which I then gave you ; which was, that your major, as you then framed your argument, but as now, your minor, is not always true, if by one you understand one in external communion ; seeing nothing hindered, in my judgment, but that one church, excommunicated by another upon an insufficient cause, might yet remain a true member of the catholic church ; and that church, which upon the overvaluing this cause, doth excommuni- cate the other, though in fault, may yet remain a member of the catholic church ; which is evident from the difference about Easter day between the church of Rome and the churches of Asia ; for which vain matter, Victor, bishop of Rome, excommunicated the churches of Asia. And yet I believe you will not say, that either the church excommunicating, or the church excommunicated, ceased to be a true member of the church catholic. The case is the same between the Greek and the Roman church; for though the difference between them be greater, yet it is not so great as to be a sufficient ground of excommunication ; and therefore the excommunication was causeless, and consequently brutum fvlmen, and not ratified or confirmed by God in heaven : and therefore the church of Greece, at Luther's rising, might be, and was, a true member of the catholic church. As concerning the places of fathers, which you allege, I demand first, Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Lewgar. 689 if I can produce you an equal or greater number of fathers, or more ancient than these, not contradicted by any that lived with them or before them, for some doctrine condemned by the Roman church, whether you will subscribe it? If not, with what face or conscience can you make use of, and build your whole faith upon, the authority of fathers in some things, and reject the same authority in others ? 2. Because you urge St. Cyprian's authority, I desire you to tell me, whether this argument in his time would have concluded a necessity of resting in the judgment of the Roman church, or not? If not, how should it come to pass, that it should serve now, and not then ; fit this time, and not that ? As if it were like an almanack, that would not serve for all meridians : if it would, why was it not urged by others upon St. Cyprian, or represented by St. Cyprian to himself for his direction, when he differed from the Roman church, and all other that herein conformed unto her touching the point of rebaptizing heretics ; which the Roman church held unlawful and damnable ; St. Cyprian not only lawful, but necessary ; so well did he rest in the judgment of that church : Quid verba audiam, cum facta videam ? says he in the comedy. And Cardi- nal Perron tells you in his epistle to Casaubon, that nothing is more unreasonable, than to draw consequences from the words of fathers, against their lively and actual practice. The same may be said in refutation of the places out of St. Augustine ; who was so far from concluding from them, or any other, a necessity of resting in the judgment of the Roman church, that he himself, as your authors testify, lived and died in opposition of it, even of that main, fun- damental point, upon which Mr. Lewgar hath built the necessity of his departure from the church of England, and embracing the communion of the Roman church ; that is, the supreme authority of that church over other churches, and the power of receiving appeals from them. Mr. Lewgar, I know, cannot be ignorant of these things ; and therefore I wonder, with what conscience he can produce their words against us, whose actions are for us. If it be said that St. Cyprian and St. Augustine were schismatics for doing so ; it seems, then, schismatics may not only be members of the church, against Mr. Lewgar's main conclusion, but canonized saints of it ; or else St. Augustine and St. Cyprian should be rased out of the Ro- man calendar. If it be said, that the point of rebaptization was not defined in St. Cyprian's time ; I say, that in the judgment of the bishop and church of Rome, and their adherents, it was : for they urged it as an original and apostolic tradition, and consequently at least of as great force as any church definition. They excommunicated Firmilianus, and condemned St. Cyprian as a false Christ, and a false apostle, for holding the contrary; and urged him tyrannico terrore to conform his judgment to theirs, as he himself clearly intimates. If it be said, they differed only from the particular church of Rome, and not from the Roman church, taking it for the universal society of christians in communion with that church ; I answer, 1. They knew no such sense of the word, I am sure never used it in any such ; which whether it had been possible, if the church of Rome had been in their judgment, to other churches, in spiritual matters, as the city was to other cities and countries in temporals, I leave it to indifferent men to judge. 2. Secondly, That they differed not only from the particular Roman XX 58* 690 Jl Conference betwixt church, but also from all other churches that agreed with it in those doc- trines. 3. Thirdly, I desire you would answer me directly, whether the Roman church, taking it for that particular church, be of necessity to be held infallible in faith by every Roman catholic, or not? To this question, I instantly desire a direct answer without tergiversation, that we may at length get out of the cloud, and you may say, Coram, quern quaritis, adsum. If you say, they are not bound to believe so ; then it is no article of faith, nor any certain truth, upon which men may safely rest without fluctuation, or fear of error: and if so I demand, 1. Why are all your clergy bound to swear, and consequently your laity, (if they have communion of faith with them,) by your own grounds, bound to believe, that the Roman church is the mistress of all other churches? Where, it is evident, from the relation and opposition of the Roman to other churches, that the Roman church is there taken for that particular church. 2. Secondly, Why then do you so often urge that mistaken saying of Irena:us, Ad hanc ecclesiam necesse est omnem convenire ecclesiam ? Falsely translating it, as Cardinal Perron in French, and my L. F. in English — All churches must agree with this church? for convenire ad signifies not, to agree with, but to come unto ; whereas it is evident, for the aforesaid reason, that the Roman is here taken for that particular church. 3. Thirdly, If that particular church be not certainly infallible, but subject to error in points of faith ; I would know if any division of your church should happen, in which the church of Rome, either alone, or with some others, should take one way, the churches of Spain, and France, and many other churches another, what direction should an igno- rant catholic have then from the pretended guide of faith? How shall he know which of these companies is the church, seeing all other churches, distinguished from the Roman, may err, and seeing the Roman church is now supposed subject to error, and consequently not certain to guard those men, or those churches, that adhere unto it from erring? 4. Fourthly, If that particular church be not infallible in faith, let us then suppose, that de facto it does err in faith ; shall we not then have an heretical head upon a catholic body ? A head of the church, which were no member of the church? Which sure were a very strange and heterogeneous monster! if to avoid these inconveniences, you will say, that Roman catholics must of necessity hold that particular church infalli- ble in faith : I suppose it will evidently follow, that St. Augustine and St. Cyprian (notwithstanding those sentences you pretend out of them) were no Roman catholics, seeing they lived and died in the contrary belief and profession. Let me see these absurdities fairly and clearly avoided, and I will dispute no more, but follow you whithersoever you shall lead. 3. Thirdly, I answer, That the places alleged are utterly impertinent to the conclusion you should have proved ; which was, that it was im- possible, that two societies of christians, divided upon what cause soever in external communion, may be in truth, and in God's account, both of them parts of the catholic church : whereas your testimonies, if we grant them all, say no more than this ; that the societies of heretics, which are such as overthrow any doctrine necessary to salvation ; and of schis- matics, which are such as separate from the church's communion, with- out any pretence of error in the church, or unlawfulness in the conditions of her communion ; I say, they prove only this, that such societies as these are no parts of the church : which I willingly grant of all such as Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Lewgar. 691 are properly and formally heretics and schismatics; from which number I think (with St. Augustine) th'-y are to be exempted, Qui qucerunt cauta solicitudine veritatem, cowigi parati, cum invenerint. Whereas I put the case of two such societies, which not differing indeed in any thing necessary to salvation, do yet erroneously believe, that the errors, where- with they charge one another, are damnable ; and so, by this opinion of mutual error, are kept on both sides from being heretics. Because I desire to bring you and others to the truth, or to be brought to it by you, I thought good, for your direction in your intended reply, to acquaint you with these things : 1. That I conceive the rule in your discourse is this: that whensoever any two societies of christians differ in external communion, one of them must be of necessity heretical and schismatical. I conceive there is no such necessity ; and that the stories of Victor, and the bishops of Asia, St. Cyprian, and Pope Stephen, make it evident ; and therefore I desire you to produce some convincing argument to the contrary ; and that you may the better do it, I thought good to inform you what I mean by a heretic, and what by a schismatic. A heretic therefore I conceive him, that holds an error against faith with obstinacy. Obstinate I conceive him, who will not. change his opinion, when his reasons for it are so answered, that he cannot reply ; and when the reasons against it are so convincing, that he cannot answer them. By the faith, I understand all those doctrines, and no more, which Christ taught his apostles, and the apostles the church ; yet I exclude not from this num- ber the certain and evident deductions of them. A schismatic I account him (and Facundus Hermianensis hath taught me to do so) who, without any supposition of error in the conditions of a church's communion, divides himself either from the obedience of that church to which he owes obedience; or from the communion of that church to which he owes communion. 2. Another thing, which I thought fit to acquaint you with, is this : that you go upon another very false and deceitful supposition ; viz. that if we will not be protestants, presently we must be papists; if we forsake the church of England, we must go presently to the church of Rome : whereas if your arguments did conclude (as they do not) that before Luther's time there was some church of one denomination, which was the catholic church, I should much rather think it were the church of Greece than the church of Rome; and I believe others also would think so as well as I, but for that reason which one gives, why more men hold the pope above a council, than a council above a pope ; that is, because councils give no maintenance or preferment, and the popes do. Think not yet, I pray, that I say this, as if I conceived this to be your reason for preferring the Roman church before the Greek (for I protest I do not) ; but rather, that conceiving verily you were to leave the church of England, to avoid trouble, you took the next boat, and went to the church of Rome, because that bespoke you first. You impute to me (as I hear) that the way I take is destructive only? and that I build nothing: which, first, is not a fault, for Christian religion is not now to be built; but only I desire to have the rubbish and impertinent lumber taken off, which you have laid upon it, which hides the glorious simplicity of it from them who otherwise would embrace it. Remember, I pray, Averroe's saying, quandoquidem Christiani adorant quod come- dunt, sit anima mea cum philosophis : and consider the swarms of atheists in Italy, and then tell me, whether your unreasonable and contradictious doctrines, your forged miracles and counterfeit legends, have not, in all xx2 (>92 A Conference betwixt probability, produced this effect. Secondly, If it be a fault, it is certainly your own ; for your discourse, intended for the proof of a positive conclu- sion — that we must be papists, proves, in deed and in truth, nothing ; but even in show and appearance, no more but this negative, that we must not be protestants. But what we must be, if we must not be protestants, God knows : you, in this discourse, I am sure, do not shew it. Mr. Lewgar's Reply. §. 1. The minor of Mr. Chillingworth's argument against my ground is very weak, being framed upon a false supposition, that a protestant could name no other church professing a diverse faith, &c. from the Greek church, which was the catholic church: for if he could not indeed name any other, the title would remain to the Greek church ; but he hath the Roman to name ; and so my ground cannot conclude either for the Greek, or Abyssine, or any other besides the Roman ; but for that it does, except he can name some other. §. 2. His second answer is weak likewise ; for my minor is always true, at least they thought it to be so, whose authorities I produce in confirma- tion of it, as it will appear to any one that considers them well, how their force lies in thesi, not in hypothesi ; not that the church was not then divided into more societies than one, but that she could never be. §. 3. As for his instance to the contrary, wherein he believes I will not say the churches excommunicated by Victor, ceased to be true members of the catholic ; if I say so, I say no more than the ancient fathers said before me : Irenasus, when he desired Victor, w 7tpoxo7txtiv, not to cut off so many and great churches ; and Ruffinus, Reprehendit eum, quod non bene fecisset abscindere ab imitate corporis, t Infallibility of the Roman Church. 705 should be eternal : but in matters of doctrine the case is clean contrary ; I may hold my opinion, and do my adversary no wrong : and my adversary may hold his, and do me none. Texts of Scripture alleged for Infallibility. The texts alleged for it by Cardinal Perron and Mr. Stratford, are partly prophecies of the Old Testament, partly promises of the New. 1. (Isa. i. 26.) "Thou shalt be called the city of justice, the faithful city." 2. (Isa. lii. 1.) " Through thee shall no more pass any that is uncircum- cised, or unclean." 3. (Isa. lix. 21.) " As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord, my spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the Lord, from hence- forth and for ever." 4. (Isa. lxii. 6.) " Upon thy walls, Jerusalem, I have appointed watch- men all the day and all the night for ever ; they shall not hold their peace." 5. (Jerem. xxxi. 33.) " This shall be the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel, saith the Lord : I will give my law in their bowels, and in their heart I will write it ; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people." "• 6. (Ezek. xxxvi. 27.) " I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments and do them." 7. (Ezek. xxxvii. 26.) " I will give my sanctification in the midst of them for ever." 8. (Hos. ii. 19, 20.) "I will espouse thee to me for ever; and I will espouse thee to me in justice and judgment, and in mercy and commisera- tions ; I will espouse thee to me in faith ; and thou shalt know that I am the Lord." 9. (Cant. iv. 7.) " Thou art all fair, my love, and there is no spot in thee." Now before we proceed further, let us reflect upon these places, and make the most of them for the behoof of the Roman church ; and I believe it will then appear to any one not veiled with prejudice, that not one of them reaches home to the conclusion intended, which is, that the Roman church is infallible. The first place perhaps would do something, but that there are three main exceptions against it. 1. That here is no evidence, not so much as that of probability, that this is here spoken of the church of Rome. 2. That it is certain that it is not spoken of the church of Rome ; but of the nation of the Jews, after their conversion, as is apparent from that which follows : " Zion shall be redeemed with judgment, and her converts with righteousness." 3. That it was no way certain, that whatsoever society may be called, " the city of righteousness, the faithful city," must be infallible in all her doctrine ; with a great deal more probability, it might challenge from hence the privilege of being impeccable : which yet Roman catholics, I believe, do not pretend to. The second place is liable to the same exceptions ; the church of Rome is not spoken of in it, but Zion and Jerusalem ; and it will serve as well, nay better, to prove impeccability than infallibility. The third place is the Achilles for this opinion, wherein every writer triumphs ; but I wonder they should do so, considering the covenant here spoken of is made, not with the church of Rome, but with Zion, and them that turn from transgression in Jacob : the words are, " And the Redeemer Y V 706 A Discourse against the a' shall come out of Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the Lord. As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord ; my Spirit that is in thee, and my words," &c. Now if the church of Rome be Zion, and they that turn from iniquity in Jacob, they may have title to this covenant ; if not, they must forbear, and leave it to the Jews after their conversion ; to whom it is appropriated by a more infallible interpreter than the pope ; I mean St. Paul. (Rom. xi. 26.) And it seems, the church of Rome also believes as much ; for otherwise, why does she, in the margin of her bible, send us to that place of St. Paul for an exposition. Read the fourth place, and you shall find nothing can be made of it but this : that the watchmen of Jerusalem shall never cease importuning God for the sending of the Messias. To this purpose speaks the prophet in ver. 1. "For Zion's sake I will not hold my peace, and for Jerusalem's sake I will not rest, until the righteousness thereof go forth as brightness:" and the " gentiles shall see thy righteousness." But the words following these that are objected, make it most evident, which are, " Ye that make mention of the Lord, keep not silence, and give him no rest, till he estab- lish, and till he make Jerusalem a praise in the earth." The fifth place had they set down entirely, for very shame they could not have urged it for the infallibility of the Roman church. The words are, " Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new cove- nant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah ; not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers ; but this shall be the cove- nant that I will make with the house of Israel : after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people ; and they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, know the Lord ; for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, saith the Lord." And now I have' transcribed the place, I think it superfluous to make any other answer. The same answer, and no other, will I make also to the sixth place, The words are, " Therefore say unto the house of Israel, thus saith the Lord God, I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for my holy name's sake : (Ver. 22.) I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land. (Ver. 24.) Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you. (Ver. 25.) A new heart also will I give you. (Ver. 26.) And I will put my Spirit in you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judg- ments, and do them. (Ver. 27.) And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers : I will also save you from all your uncleannesses, and I will call for the corn, and will increase it, and lay no famine upon you. And the desolate land shall be tilled. (Ver. 34.) And they shall say, this land that was desolate, is become like the garden of Eden." The seventh place also carries its answer in its forehead : " Thus saith the Lord God, behold I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone ; and I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel, and one king shall be king to them all," &c. to the end of the chapter. In all which place he that can find a syl- lable of the church of Rome, he must have better eyes than I have. The next (eighth) place would be very pregnant for the church of Rome, if of courtesy we would grant, that whatsoever is promised to Israel is intended to them ; as you may see in the place at large, from ver. 17 to the end of the chapter. The ninth and last place, out of the Canticles, had it been urged by a Infallibility of the Roman Church. 707 protestant, it would have been thought a sufficient answer to have said, that mystical texts are not fit to argue upon. But if this will not serve, then we answer, 1. That there is no mention nor intimation of the church of Rome. 2. That it proves either too much, or nothing at all ; that is, that the Roman church is impeccable, as well as infallible ; unless we will say, that errors only are spots, and impieties are not. Out of the New Testament they allege these Texts. Matt. xvi. 18. " Upon this rock will I build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." But this is said of the catholic, not of the Roman church ; nor can it ever be proved, that the church in communion with the see of Rome, is the catholic church. Secondly, it says something for the perpetuity of the church, but not for the infallibility of it; unless you will take for granted what can never be proved, that a church that teaches any erroneous doc- trine, is a church no longer ; which is all one as if you should say, a man that has the stone, or gout, or any other disease, is not a man. They urge Matt, xxviii. 19, 20. "And I am with you all days, even unto the consummation of the world/' And here also if we will grant, 1. That by you, is meant you and only you of the church of Rome : 2. That our Saviour has here obliged him- self to assist, not only sufficienter, but also irresistibiliter ; not only to preserve in the church a light of sufficient direction, as he provided a star for the wise men, and a pillar of fire and a cloud for the conduct of the Israelites; but also compel, or at least necessitate, them to follow it: 3. That he will be with them, not only to keep them from all damnable and destructive errors, but absolutely from all erroneous doctrines: If these things, I say, were granted, some good might be done : but certainly these are ^syaxa uav ai-tqpata, too great favours to be looked for by strangers. And yet if all this be granted, we should run into this inconvenience on the other side ; that if the promise be absolute, not only the whole church of Rome ; not only a general council ; not the pope alone ; but every bishop, every priest, every one, who is sent by Christ to baptize and preach the gospel, might claim this assistance by virtue of Christ's words, and consequently infallibility. They urge Matt, xviii. 17. " If he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and the publican." And here again the church must be the church of Rome, or we are as far to seek as ever. But what if by it be meant (which is most evident out of the place) every particular church of christians, whereunto any one christian, injured by another, may address himself for remedy? Certainly whosoever reads the place without prejudice, I am confident, that he shall not deny, but that the sense of the words is, that if any christian injure another, and being first admonished of it by him in private ; then by him before two or three witnesses ; lastly, by the church he lives in ; and yet, still proceeds on obstinately in doing injury to his brother, he is to be esteemed as a heathen or a publican : and then if infallibility may be con- cluded, what a multitude of infallible churches shall we have ! They urge Matt, xviii. 20. " Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." y y 2 708 A Conference concerning the But this also either shoots short, or over ; either proves nothing, or too much: either it proves not the infallibility of the whole church, or it proves the infallibility of every part of it : either not the infallibility of general councils, or the infallibility of particular councils ; for there two or three at least are assembled in Christ's name. But then, besides, these two or three, for aught I can see or gather from the text, may as well be of any other church as the Roman. They urge Luke x. 16. " He that heareth you, heareth me ; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me." But this will not do you any service, unless of favour we grant, that you here, is you of the church of Rome : and but very little, if that be granted ; for then every bishop, every priest must be infallible. For there is not the meanest of the messengers of Christ, but this may be verified of him, That he that heareth him, heareth Christ ; and he that despiseth him, despiseth Christ. They urge out of John xiv. 15, 16. " I will ask my Father, and he will give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever, even the Spirit of truth." But here, also, what warrant have we, by you, to understand the church of Rome ? whereas he that compares verse 26 with this, shall easily per- ceive, that our Saviour speaks only of the apostles in their own persons ; for there he says, going on in the same discourse, " The Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said to you :" which cannot agree but to the apostles themselves in person ; and not to their successors, who had not yet been taught, and therefore had not forgotten any thing, and therefore could not have them brought to their remembrance. But what if it had been promised to them and their successors? Had they no successors but them of the Roman church ? This indeed is pretended and cried up, but for proofs of it, desiderantur. Again, I would fain know whether there be any certainty, that every pope is a good christian, or whether he may not be, in the sense of the scripture, of the world 1 If not, how was it that Bellarmine should have cause to think, that such a rank of them went successively together to the devil 1 III. — A Conference concerning the infallibility of the Roman church : proving, that the present church of Rome either errs in her ivorship- ping the blessed Virgin Mary, or that the ancient church did err in condemning the Collyridians as heretics. 1. Demand. Whether the infallibility of the Roman church be not the foundation of their faith, who are members of that church ? Ans. The infallibility of the church is not the foundation, but a part, of their faith, who are members of the church. And the Roman church is held to be the church, by all those who are members of it. Reply. That which is the last reason, why you believe the scripture to be the written word of God, and unwritten traditions his unwritten word, and this or that to be the true sense of scripture, that is to you the founda- tion of your faith ; and such unto you is the infallible authority of the Roman church. Therefore unto you it is not only a part of your faith, Infallibility of the Roman Church. 709 but also such a part, as is the foundation of all other parts. Therefore you are deceived, if you think there is any more opposition between being a part of the faith, and the foundation of other parts of it, than there is between being a part of a house, and the foundation of it. But whether you will have it the foundation of your faith, or only a part of it, for the present purpose, it is all one. 2. Demand. Whether the infallibility of the Roman church be not abso- lutely overthrown, by proving the present Roman church is in error, or that the ancient was ? Ans. It is, if the error be in those things wherein she is affirmed to be infallible ; viz. in points of faith. Reply. And this here spoken of, whether it be lawful to offer tapers and incense to the honour of the blessed Virgin, is, I hope, a question concern- ing a point of faith. 3. Demand. Whether offering a cake to the Virgin Mary, be not as lawful, as to offer incense, and tapers, and divers other oblations, to the same Virgin 1 Ans. It is as lawful to offer a cake to her honour, as wax tapers ; but neither the one, nor the other, may be offered to her, or her honour, as the term or object of the action. For, to speak properly, nothing is offered to her, or her honour, but to God in the honour of the blessed Virgin. For incense, it is a foul slander, that it is offered any way to the blessed Virgin ; for that incensing, which is used in the time of mass, is ever understood by all sorts of people to be directed to God only. Reply. If any thing be offered to her, she is the object of that oblation : as if I see water, and through water something else, the water is the object of my sight, though not the last object. If I honour the king's deputy, and by him the king, the deputy is the object of my action, though not the final object : and to say these things may be offered to her, but not as to the object of the action, is to say, they may be offered to her, but not to her. For what else is meant by the object of an action, but that thing, on which the action is employed, and to which it is directed ? If you say, that by the object of the action you mean the final object only, wherewith the action is terminated ; you should then have spoken more properly and distinctly, and not have denied her simply to be the object of this action, when you mean only she is not such a kind of object; no more than you may deny a man to be a living creature, meaning only that he is not a horse. Secondly, I say, it is not required of Roman catholics, when they offer tapers to the saints, that by an actual intention they direct their action actually to God ; but it is held sufficient, that they know and believe, that the saints are in subordination and near relation to God, and that they give this honour to the saints because of this relation ; and to God himself rather habitually and interpretative, than actually, expressly, and formally: as many men honour the king's deputy, without having any present thought of the king, and yet their action may be interpreted an honour to the king, being given to his deputy, only because he is his deputy, and for his rela- tion to the king. Thirdly, I say, there is no reason or ground in the world for any man to think, that the Collyridians did not choose the Virgin Mary for the object of their worship, rather than any other woman or any other creature, merely for her relation to Christ ; and, by consequence, there is no ground to imagine, but that at least habitually and interpretative, they directed their action unto Christ, if not actually and formally. And ergo, if that be a sufficient defence for the papists, that they make not the blessed Virgin the final object of their worship, but worship her, not for her own 60 710 A Conference concerning the sake, but for her relation unto Christ ; Epiphanius surely did ill to charge the Collyridians with heresy, having nothing to impute to them, but only that he was informed, that they offered a cake to the honour of the blessed Virgin ; which honour yet they might, and without question did, give unto her for her relation unto Christ, and so made her not the last object and term of their worship : and from hence it is evident, that he conceived the very action itself substantially and intrinsically malicious; i. e. he believed it a sin, that they offered to her at all ; and so by their action put her in the place of God, by giving unto her this worship proper to God ; and not that they terminated their action finally in her, or did in very deed think her to be God, and not a creature. But, to speak properly (you say) nothing is offered to her or to her honour, but to God in honour of the blessed Virgin. Belike then, if through Henley I go from hence to London, I may not be said properly to go to Henley, but only to London : or if through water I see the sand, I may not be properly said to see the water, but only the sand. Away with such shifting sophistry ; either leave your practice of offering to saints, if it be nought, or colour it not over with such empty distinctions, if it be good : Christ saith to his apostles in regard of their relation to him, " He that heareth you, heareth me, and he that despiseth you, despiseth me ;" and yet who doubts, but they that heard the apostles, did properly hear them, and they that despised them, did properly despise them, though their action staid not in them, but reached up to heaven and to Christ himself.' You pray to saints and angels, though you do not ter- minate your prayers in them ; and yet I doubt not but your prayers to saints may be as properly called prayers, as those you make to God him- self. For though these be of a more excellent nature than they, yet do they agree in the general nature, that they are both prayers: as, though a man be a more excellent living creature than a horse, yet he agrees with him in this, that both are living creatures. But if nothing be properly offered to her or to her honour, why do you in your sixth answer say, You may offer any thing to the Virgin Mary, by way of presents and gifts, by the doctrine of the Roman church? Certainly he that offers by way of gift or present, offers as properly as he that offers by way of sacrifice ; as a horse is as properly a living creature as a man. But if it were so, as you say, (which is most false) that you did not properly offer to the blessed Virgin, but to God in honour of her ; yet in my judgment, this would not qualify or mend the matter, but make it worse. For, first, who taught you, that in the time of the gospel (after the accomplishment of the prediction, "Sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not, but a body hast thou prepared me ;" after this interpretation of it in the epistle to the Hebrews, " He taketh away the first, that he may estab- lish the second,'") that it is still lawful to offer tapers or incense to God? Secondly, in my understanding, to offer to God in honour of the Virgin, is more derogatory from God's honour, than to offer to her in the honour of God ; for this is, in my apprehension, to subordinate God to her, to make her the terminating and final object of the action ; to make God the way, and her the end, and by and through God to convey the worship unto her. But for incense (you say) it is a foul slander, that it is offered any way to the blessed Virgin. To this I answer, that your imputing slander to me is itself a slander: for, 1. In your fifth answer you have given a clear intimation, that you have never been out of England ; so that you cannot certainly know what is the practice of your church in this point beyond sea. And he that lives Infallibility of the Roman Church. 711 amongst you, and has but half an eye open and free from prejudice, can- not but see, that the Roman religion is much more exorbitant in the general practice of it, than it is in the doctrine published in books of controversy; where it is delivered with much caution and moderation, nay, cunning and dissimulation, that it may be the fitter to win and engage proselytes ; who being once ensnared, though they be afterwards startled with strange and unlooked-for practices, yet a hundred to one but they will rather stifle their conscience, and dash all scruples against the pretended rock of their church's infallibility, and blindly follow those guides, to whose conduct they have unadvisedly committed themselves, than come off again with the shame of being reputed weak and inconstant ; so terrible an idol is this vain nothing, the opinion and censure of foolish man. But to return again to you, I say, your ignorance of the practice of the Roman church beyond the seas does plainly convince, that you have rash- ly, and therefore slanderously, charged me with the crime of slander. As for your reason you add, consider it again, and you will see it is worth nothing. For what if incensing in time of mass be understood by all sorts of people to be directed to God alone, (which yet you cannot possibly know) yet this I hope hinders not, but that in processions you may incense the images of the saints, and consequently (according to your doctrine) do this honour to the saints themselves represented by the images. I myself (un- less I am very much mistaken) was present when this very thing was done to the picture of St. Bennet or St. Gregory, in the cloister of St. Vedastus in the monastery in Doway. But indeed what a ridiculous inconsequence is it to think, that wax tapers may lawfully be offered to the saints, and incense may not; or if incense may not, which you seem to disclaim as impious, that wax tapers may ! 4. Demand. Whether the Collyridians were not condemned as heretics by the ancient church, first, for offering a cake upon an anniversary feast to the blessed Virgin : secondly, for that they did this, not being priests ? Ans. The Collyridians were condemned as heretics for two things : first, for employing women in the place and office of priests to offer a cake (not in the nature of a gift or present but) in the nature of a sacrifice,* which was never lawful for any but men,f and those consecrated.:}: Secondly, for offering this sacrifice «j oi/o,ua,§ in the name of the blessed Virgin, id est, unto her, herself directly and terminatively, as an act of divine worship and adoration, || due unto her, as unto a sovereign power and deity.1T Reply. It seems then these women might offer this cake to the honour and name of the Virgin Mary, if they had done it as a gift or present, and * Ut in nomen Virginis Collyridem quandam sacrificarent. Epiph. hcer. 78. Offe- runt panem in nomen Marioe, omnes autem pane participant. t Deo enim ab reterno nullatenus mulier sacrificavit. Idem hares. 79. X Diaconissarum ordo est in ecclesia, sed non ad sacrificandum ; nam neque diaconis concreditum est, ut aliquod mysterium perficiant. Id. ibid. § Vid. sup. notam. || Mortuis cultum divinum prasstantes, Id. ibid. — And again : Revera Virgo erat honorata, scd non ad adorationem nobis data, sed ipsa adorans Deum. — And again : Non ut adoretur Virgo, nee ut Deum banc efficeret, &c. Sit in bonore Maris ; Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus S. adoretur, Mariam nemo adoret. Deo debetur boc mysterium. Id. ibid. IT Pro Deo hanc introducere statuerant. Id. ibid. — Revera sanctum erat Mariae corpus, non tamen Deus. — And again : Mulierem earn appellavit Joh. ii. velut prophe- tans: et ne aliqui nimium admirali sanctam, in hanc heraesin dilabantur. — And again: Non tamen aliter genita est praeter hominis naturam, sed sicut omnes ex semine viriet utero mulieris. Id. ibid. 712 A Conference concerning the not as a sacrifice. Epiphanius then surely was too hasty to condemn them, being informed of nothing, but that they offered a cake unto her. Methinks before he had put them in his catalogue he should have inquired whether they offered this cake as a gift only, or as a sacrifice. Certainly, had the practice of offering to saints by way of gifts been the practice of the church in his time, he would not have been so uncharitable, as to condemn that action as impious and heretical, which might have received so lawful and pious a construction. But he, good man ! it seems, could not conceive a difference between a sacrifice, and the offering a creature by way of con- sumption to the honour of that, to which it is offered. The subtle wits of our times I hope have found out another definition for it, and I shall under- stand by you what it is. But if you can find no other, then certainly, though setting up a picture, or hanging up a leg, or eye, or ear, in memory of some miraculous cure, obtained by a saint's intercession, would be a gift or present only ; yet offering of incense or burning a taper in the honour of a saint, daub the matter how you will, will be, without question, a sacrifice. If you say, that there may be such an offering, and yet no sacrifice ; I would know, then, how you would prove that the Collyridians' offering was indeed a sacrifice? All that Epiphanius says of them is but this — Panem proponunt et in Maries nomen offcrunt. And though this offering of theirs was indeed a sacrifice in the notion of the word, which I have given it, yet doth he not any where say expressly that they did sacri- fice, or offer it as a sacrifice ; but only and barely that they did offer it ; not using (as good fortune would have it) any word, which doth of neces- sity, and properly, signify to sacrifice ; and therefore you are fain to help the dice, and alter every place for your advantage. Epiphanius says not, as you translate him, ut in nomen Virginia Collyridem quandam sacri- ficent ; nor sacrificantes offerunt, as Petavius ; but luitfrtw, which may as well signify, to consecrate or offer, as to sacrifice, if there be any dif- ference between them. So the next place, offerunt panem in nomen Marice, omnes autem pane participant ; proves not, I hope, offering, by way of sacrifice, unless the consumption of the oblation make it a sacrifice; which if it do, how your tapers can be kept from being sacrifices I cannot ima- gine ; unless again perhaps consumption by way of eating will make it a sacrifice, and by burning will not ; which cannot be, because the whole burnt-offerings were sacrifices as well as any other. Your third place is, Deo autem ab aterno nullatenus mulier sacrificavit. But upafsvu, signifies not to sacrifice, but only to perform the office of a priest ; and so Petavius translates the place, nunquam sacerdotio functa est mulier. And though sacrificing be one perhaps, yet will you not say it is the only office of a priest ; as your next and last place would have declared, had you set it down faithfully ; but in that also you juggle again, and force it to speak to your purpose thus : diaconissarum ordo est in ecclesia, sed non ad sacrijicandum : but Petavius hath translated it truly thus : quanquam vero diaconissarum in ecclesia ordo sit, non tamen ad sacerdotii functionem, aut ullam administrationem institutus est. And now though, by an usual synecdoche, the name of the genus be given to the species ; and therefore, had a man fairly and candidly translated itpatsv-w, by sacrifico, I should not have much condemned him ; yet to do it, when the question is, whether this their offering, confessed to be an offering, were in propriety of speech a sacrifice ; to do it for ends, to shift off a convincing argument, to palliate over a foul matter, by putting a verbal difference where there is none indeed, and all that you may imperi- tos rerum in fraudem illicere ; that is — but I forbear you. But, secondly, it is pretended — they offered this sacrifice «s ovo[ia, in the Infallibility of the Roman Church. 713 name of the blessed Virgin, i. e. unto her, herself, directly and terminately as an act of divine worship and adoration due unto her, as unto a sovereign power and deity. — And, to colour and countenance this strange gloss, many places are quoted out of Epiphanius, which I will examine in order as they lie. The first place is, mortuis cultum divinum pr&stantes, where your mean- ing is, I believe, that Epiphanius says, the Collyridians did so ; but the truth is, he says only mortuos colentes, as Petavius translates it ; and there- fore here once again you help the dice : yet if he had said so, why should you rather from cultum divinum collect that, that they thought her God, than from mortuis, that they thought her dead, and therefore certainly not a God ? Certainly this can be no warrant to you, that Epiphanius charges them with so thinking: for protestants, you know, impute to papists, that they give to saints cultum divinum, and yet they do not impute to them the heresy of thinking, that the saints are sovereign powers and deities : but as St. Paul accuseth the gentiles, for that, knowing God to be God, they did not worship him as God ; so, on the other side, protestants con- demn papists, and Epiphanius, for aught we can see hitherto, might con- demn the Collyridians, for that, knowing the blessed Virgin not to be God, they yet worshipped her as God : that is, gave her that worship, which is God's own peculiar ; which yet they might do, not because they thought her God, but because this worship, which was indeed proper to God, they might think not proper, but communicable to such creatures as were high in his favour. The next place is — Revera Virgo erat honorata, sed non ad adora- tionem nobis data, sed ipsa adorans Deum, Spc. I answer, that the &c. perhaps conceals something more pertinent to your purpose, but in the words set down there appears to me just nothing; for I can frame out of them no other syllogism but this : Whatsoever Epiphanius in this place says is not to be adored, that the Collyridians thought to be God. But Epiphanius here says, the Virgin is not to be adored : ergo, the Collyridians thought her God. Of this syllogism I deny the major proposition, and I believe shall stay as long for a proof of it, as I have done for an answer to some other dis- courses, which, being written in a few days, have waited now with a long- ing expectation for a promised answer many months. If you say, you would conclude from these words, that they did adore her, and therefore thought her God ; I have answered already, that they might do this, not because they thought her God, but because they thought creatures, high in God's favour, capable of adoration. The next place (Non ut adoretur Virgo, nee ut Deum hanc efficeret) tells us, that Christ took flesh of the Virgin, not that she should be adored, nor to make her God : and this you think imports that they conceive her God. Yet if I should, condemning your practice of offering tapers to her, use the same words, and say, Christ took flesh of the Virgin, not that she should be adored, or to make her God ; you would not yet conceive, that I charged you with the heresy of believing her God, but only with the im- piety of giving to her that worship, which was peculiar to God : and why then might not Epiphanius, having like occasion, use the same words to the Collyridians, upon the same, and no other ground ? The next place (Mariam nemo adoret, Deo debetur hoc mystcrivm) is so far from proving your imagination, that it strongly confirms my asser- tion, that Epiphanius did not impute to the Collyridians the opinion, that the Virgin Mary was God. If I should say to a papist, the blessed Virgin 60* 714 A Conference concerning the is not to be worshipped with the worship of Hyperdulia, because such wor- ship is due only to the mother of God, would they not say I were mad, and argued against myself, for that they believed she was the mother of God ? By like reason, if Epiphanius knew that the Collyridians believed the Virgin Mary to be God, he reasoned as wildly against himself in say- ing — Mariam nemo adoret, Deo debetur hoc mysterium — for it is very true (might they have said) this service is due to God alone : but you know our belief and profession that she is God, and therefore by your own rule capable of this worship. The next place is — Pro Deo hanc introducere studuerunt. And may not this be justly said to any man, who to any thing besides God gives that worship, which is proper and peculiar unto God ? What, if to a man that should teach — the pope had power to dispense with men for the keeping of God's laws — I should say, pro Deo papain introducis ; must I of neces- sity mean, that that man did verily believe the pope not a man, but a sovereign power and deity ? St. Paul tells us that covetousness is idolatry ; he tells us of some, whose god is their belly; is it therefore consequent, that every covetous man doth indeed believe his gold, and every glutton his belly, to be indeed a sovereign power and deity? Away with such fopperies. Whosoever loves, or fears, or trusts, in any thing more than God, may yet be justly said to make that his god ; and whosoever should worship any creature with that external worship, which God has appro- priated to himself, might justly be said to bring in that creature for God. St. Paul tells us of some, " who in words professed God," yet factis nega- bant, " in their deeds denied him ;" so these, on the contrary, may in their words deny this creature to be God, and in their hearts not think it so; yet seeing their actions to it are as if it were God, they may be justly charged, that with their deeds they make this creature God. Qui fingit sacros ex auro et marmore vultus, Non facit ille Deos ; qui colit, ille facit. What, if upon consideration of the strangely enormous worship, which papists give to the Virgin Mary, (swearing by her name, making vows unto her, offering tapers to her honour, attributing a kind of communicated omniscience and almost omnipotence to her, as I can easily make good they do, partly out of the offices of their church, partly out of private men's works, but set out with license and approbation) what I say, if upon this consideration I should affirm, pro Deo ipsam introducere conantur ; would it therefore be consequent, that I must impute this blasphemy to them, that they believed and taught her to be a sovereign power and deity? I trow not. And therefore Epiphanius might say the same of the Collyri- dians, considering their action, without any intent of imputing to them any such opinion. This Petavius sure saw well enough, and therefore (as I shall hereafter demonstrate to the eye) to countenance his marginal anno- tation, Quidam Mariam Deum esse crediderunt, he cunningly abuses and perverts Epiphanius's text with false translation. — Sic pugnat, sic est metuendus Ulysses. The next place is, Revera sanctum, erat Marice corpus non tamen Deus : the body of Mary was truly holy, but not a God. As much to the purpose as — Tityre, tu patulcB — for what if Epiphanius say, she is not God, and therefore not to be adored ; does it therefore follow, that the Col- lyridians believed she was a God ? He that knows logic or sense, cannot but know, that he that will confute an adversary's conclusion, must choose such principles to do it, to which his adversary consents, and out of that which he grants, prove that which he denies ; or if his first propositions be Infallibility of the Roman Church. 715 not agreed to by his adversary, he must prove them in the end by such as are agreed to ; or else he does nothing. And therefore seeing Epiphanius thinks it sufficient for the convincing of the Collyridians of the unlawful- ness of the practice, to say she was not God ; it is evident, that so far was he from imputing to them the belief that she was God, that he seems rather to take the contrary for a principle agreed upon between them, which it was sufficient to say, and superfluous to prove. This answer I thought good to make, while I conceived that here Epiphanius had denied the per- son of the Virgin Mary to be God ; but after, upon better consideration, I found that Petavius had abused me with adding to Epiphanius of his own — lllafuit — and that Epiphanius says not here, non tamen Deus (she was not God) of her person, but of her body ; and as yet I do not understand that you impute to the Collyridians the belief, that her body was God. The next place {Mulierem earn appellavit, &c.) says no more but this ; that our Saviour calls the blessed Virgin, woman, that no man might think her any thing more than a woman, as it were prophetically refuting the schisms and heresies which would be in the world ; lest some out of excess of admiration of her, might fall into the dotage of this heresy. Thus far Epiphanius : but then the question will be, what was this heresy '? You say, the belief that she was God. I say, not that she was God, but that they might lawfully offer to her. And as I deny not but it follows, she is a woman, therefore not a God ; so I think you will grant it follows as justly, she is a woman, therefore not to be adored with offerings. And, therefore, seeing the words lie indifferently between us, and are not express- ly and especially here applied for the refutation of that heresy, which you pretend they were guilty of, I see no reason why Epiphanius might not as well intend them for that purpose which I conceive, as for that which you conceive. The last place alleged tells us, that she was begotten and born as other men and women are : which, if the Collyridians had thought her God, eternal and absolutely without beginning, should not have been barely said, but proved, as being in effect the very point in question ; and, therefore, seeing Epiphanius contents himself with saying so without proof, it is evi- dent he never thought they would make difficulty to grant it, and conse- quently, that they did not believe her to be God eternal. But then again, if the rule be good which part of our proofs depend upon, that whatever Epiphanius denies in this discourse, that the Collyri- dians held (for upon that ground from — Non ut Deum hanc efficeret ; et non tamen Deus, you conclude they believed her God) ; if, I say, this rule be good, then you should be constant to it ; and now that he says — Non tamen aliter genita est prceter hominum naturam, (she was not begotten in a different way from other men) you should infer, that they believed not that she was God, but that she was otherwise born and begotten than the ordinary sort of men. And so whereas he says before, Non tamen corpus de ccelo tulit (her body was not from heaven), you should infer, that they believed her body came from heaven. And again, from those — Sanctum erat Mariee corpus, non tamen Deus, you should collect, that they thought not only her person, but her body, to be God ; or if these be wild and weak deductions, then you must acknowledge that I have done yours some favour in vouchsafing them a particular answer. 5. Demand. Whether in the church of Rome it be not an approved and perpetually practised worship of the blessed Virgin, that incense, which was never anciently offered unto any, either by Jews or gentiles, but to the true, or to a supposed true God, and tapers, and divers other oblations, should be offered to her honour? 716 A Conference concerning the Arts. A practice of the church of Rome, and approved too by those that practise it, belongs not to her, except it be a practice of the church, and approved by her. What her practice is abroad, I know not ; here at home I see no such practice ; nor do I know any approbation of it in any of her public declarations : but this I know, that there is nothing in it unlawful, or savouring of the Collyridian superstition, to offer wax tapers, or any other thing, to the memory of the blessed Virgin, or any other canonized saint, either as means to procure their intercession, by these outward signs of the honour and devotion which they bear to them, (as of old we find by St. Augustine* they did use to adorn their tombs with flowers) or as monuments of their thankfulness for some benefits received by their inter- cession, as Theodoretf tells us of eyes, and ears, and hands, some of silver, (hung up in the chapels of the saints) that had been presented as oblations by those that had recovered health in those members, according to their vows made to that purpose in times of sickness. Reply. I do not deny, but a practice may be tolerated in a church, and not approved ; as the public stews are in Italy, and usury in England : but it is one thing to tolerate with condemnation, and another to tolerate with- out condemnation, nay, with condemnation of those that should oppose or condemn it. And such, I doubt not, upon examination, you may find in this practice, general in the church of Rome, offering tapers to the saints, and for their honour : I say, not only to God, at the memories of the saints, as you would mince the matter, which yet were a groundless superstition (God having appointed no such sacrifice to be offered to him under the gospel) ; but to the saints themselves, and to their honour. Prove this lawful for either of those purposes you mention, either to procure their intercession, or as monuments of thankfulness for benefits obtained by it, and then you shall do something. Otherwise you will but trifle, as now you have done : for instead of telling us what may be done de jure, you tell us what of old has been done de facto. As if ab antiquo and a prin- cipio were all one; or as if the church (as we pretend) being subject to corruption, part of this corruption might not possibly have come in St. Augustine's or Theodoret's time : yet this I say, not as if I would decline the trial of this cause by St. Augustine or Theodoret ; but because I am sure you will not be tried by the fathers, no, nor the consent of fathers in all things ; and therefore there is no reason nor equity in the world, that you should serve yourselves with their authority in any thing. But now what is it, which was done in St. Augustine's time, that may justify the practice of the Roman church? Was there then any approved offering of wax tapers and incense to the queen of heaven, or any other saint ? Nil horum : you neither do, nor can, produce any thing out of St. Augustine to this purpose. But what then is it ? Why forsooth, they were used to adorn their tombs: Egregiam vero laudem et spolia ampla : of old in St. Augustine's time, they were used to adorn their tombs with flow- ers, therefore we may offer tapers to them. Truly an excellent enthymeme, but I fear the concealed proposition, which should make it a syllogism, hides its head for shame, and dares not appear; yet we will for once make * Ad aquas Tibilotanas Episcopo offerente projecto, reliquias martyr is gloriosissimi Stephani, ad ejus memoriam veniebat rnagnae mullitudinis concursus et oceursus : ibi caeca mulier, ut ad episcopum porluntem pignora sacra duceretur, oravit : Flores, quos ferebat, dedit ; recepit, oculis admovet, protinus vidit. Avgust. de Civit. Dei, 1. 22, c. 8. — Abscedens aliquid de altari (S. Stephani) riorum, quod occurrit, tulit. Idem, ibid. &c. t Theodoretus de curandis affect. Grtec. 1. 8. Infallibility of the Roman Church. Ill bold to draw it forth into light, that you may look upon it and tell us how you like it. This therefore it is — Whose soever tombs we adorn, to them and to their honour we may offer wax tapers. Consider it, I pray you, and if you approve it, then approve also of offering tapers, not only to canonized saints, but to all christians that may have monuments in churches. For all their tombs may be adorned with more precious and lasting ornaments than flowers ; yet if you had proved but this only, that in St. Augustine's time, they adorned the saints' tombs with flowers, by these outward signs to procure their intercession ; this, though not much to the purpose, had been not absolutely to delude us. But your quoted places prove not so much as this ; and yet I believe you quoted the best you could find. Nay, they prove not that they did adorn their tombs with flowers at all, much less that they did it for your pre- tended purpose; such fools you think to deal with, that will take any thing for any thing. Your first place, I say, proves it not, unless out of mere courtesy we understand by ferebat she brought to adorn St. Stephen's tomb. The second proves it not, unless we give you leave after altari (without warrant from St. Augustine) to put in S. Stephani ; whereas I am yet to seek for any place in St. Augustine, where he calls any altar the altar of such or such a saint ; which yet I think they forbore, not for the unlawful- ness, but for fear of misconstruction. Then for Theodoret, he tells us indeed of vows made, of monuments of thankfulness dedicated for benefits obtained by the intercession of the mar- tyrs. But here also I fear your conscience tells you that you abuse us, and hide' yourself in ambiguities. For to whom does Theodoret say these vows were made? To whom were these monuments of thankfulness dedicated? What, to the author or procurers of the received favours ? To God, or to the martyrs? If to the martyrs, that had been something towards, though not home, to your purpose : for there is a wide difference between offering of a creature by way of consumption (as was never lawfully done but to God alone, as a profession that he is Lord of the creature) and erecting a permanent monument to a saint's honour ; which I doubt not but it may lawfully be done to a living saint, much more to the memory of a martyr. But Theodoret in the place hath not so much as this : nay, it is evident that these gifts he speaks of, were both vowed and paid to God himself. His words are — Pie precatos ea consequi, Sfc. that they who pray piously, obtain the things which they desire ; they paying of their vowed presents in the sign of their recovered health, doth abundantly testify. For their Lord accepts most graciously these presents, how mean soever. 6. Demand. Whether, according to the doctrine of the Roman church, this may not be done lawfully by women and children, and men that are not priests ? Ans. They may offer any thing by way of gifts and presents, by the doctrine of the Roman church ; but it is contrary to the Roman doctrine, for any other than priests, to offer any thing by way of sacrifice, as the Collyridians did. Reply. Aristotle says most truly, that true definitions (he means I think of the terms of the conclusion to be demonstrated) are the best principles of science ; and therefore want of them must needs be a cause of error and confusion in any discourse. Let me therefore here request you to set down what is a sacrifice, and how distinguished from an oblation by way of gift or present, and you will quickly see, that if the Collyridians offering a cake to the blessed Virgin were indeed a sacrifice, your offering a taner to her 718 A Conference concerning the must likewise be so : for a sacrifice is nothing else (for aught I know) but the oblation of any creature, by way of consumption, to the honour of that, whatsoever it is, to which it is offered. For if you include in the defini- tion, that this offering must be intended to the highest Lord of all ; so is, as you pretend, your offering of tapers to the blessed Virgin, intended to God finally, though not immediately : if you say it must be directed im- mediately to him, and is, not only no lawful sacrifice, but simply no sacri- fice unless it be so ; I say, you may as well require to the essence of a sacrifice, that it be offered by a priest, and from thence conclude, because the Collyridians were, you say, no priests, their offering was no sacrifice. For the object of the action is as extrinsical to the essence of it, as the efficient; and therefore, if the defect of a due and legitimate offerer cannot hinder but that an offering may be a true sacrifice, neither will the want of a due and lawful object be any hindrance, but still it may be so. Secondly, I say, this is to confound the essence of things with the lawful use of therrr: in effect, as if you should say, that a knife, if misemployed, were a knife no longer. Thirdly, it is to make it not unlawful to offer incense (which yet you seem somewhat scrupulous of) or burnt-offerings to the Virgin Mary, or the saints, or even to living men, provided you know and believe and profess them to be men and not gods. For this once supposed, these offerings will be no longer sacrifices ; and to offer to creatures offerings that are not sacrifices, you say, by the doctrine of the Roman church, is lawful. It is, lastly, to deny (which is most ridiculous) that the pagans did indeed sacrifice to any of their inferior gods. 7. Demand. If it be said, that this worship, which they give to the blessed Virgin, is not that of Latria, but that of Dulia or Hyperdulia, for that they do not esteem her God ; or if it be said, that their worship to her is not finally terminated neither, but given her for her relation to Christ ; I demand, whether, as it is in St. Paul's judgment a great crime for him that knows God, not to worship him as God, so it be not as great a crime for him that knows her not to be God, yet to worship her (as if she were God) with the worship which is proper, and hath been always appropriated to God alone? Such is the worship of oblations. Ans. The worship of oblations, as worship is taken largely, for honour, and oblations for a gift or present, was never appropriated to God alone : take worship and oblations in any higher sense, and so it is not allowed in the church of Rome. Reply. The oblation of things, by way of consumption, is the worship I spoke of: this is a higher matter than that of gifts and presents, and this is allowed in the church of Rome to be employed on and directed unto (though not terminated in) the Virgin Mary and other saints. 8. Demand. Whether any thing can be said for the justifying the doc- trine and practice of the Roman church in this matter which might not also have been as justly pretended for the justification of the Collyridians in their opinion and practice ; seeing it was never imputed to them, that they accounted the blessed Virgin, God, or that they believed in more gods than one ; and seeing their choosing her out, rather than any other woman, or any other creature, for the object of their devotion, shows plainly, that they gave it her for her relation to Christ. Ans. The Collyridians could not say this, as appears by what has been said before : and it is a most shameless slander upon God's church, and such as (without repentance) will lie heavy upon his soul that uttered it, that the Collyridians might as justly and truly have said all this for them- selves, as papists for themselves. Reply. To this I reply four things. I. That to my last and most con- Infallibility of the Roman Church. 719 vincing reason you have answered (as much as you could, I believe, but yet you have answered) nothing; and I am well content you should do so ; for where nothing is to be had, the king himself must lose his right. 2. That if I had thought or spoken better of the Collyridians than they deserved, yet I cannot see how this had been to slander the church of Rome. 3. That I did not positively affirm, that the Collyridians might do so, but desired only it might be inquired into and examined, whether, for the reasons alleged, they might not do so. 4. And, lastly, upon a thorough examination of the matter I do now affirm, what before I did not, that the Collyridians, for aught appears to the contrary, might justly and truly have said, for the justification of their practice, as much, nay, the very same things, that the papists do for theirs. For they might have said, We are christians, and believe the scripture, and believe there is but one God. We offer not to the blessed Virgin, as believing she is God, but the mother of God ; our worship of her is not absolute but relative, not terminated in her, but given to her for her Son's sake : and if 'our practice mav be allowed, we are content to call our oblation not a sacrifice, but a present ; neither is there any reason, why it should be called a sacrifice, more than the offering and burning a taper to the honour of the same Virgin. All this the Colly- ridians might have said for themselves ; and therefore, I believe you will have more cause to repent you for daubing over impiety with untempered mortar, than I shall have for slandering the Roman church with a matter of truth. 9. Demand. Whether therefore one of the two must not of necessity follow ; that either the ancient church erred, in condemning the opinion and practice of the Collyridians as heretical ; or else that the church of Rome errs, in approving the same opinion, and the same practice in effect, which in them was condemned 1 That is, whether the church of Rome must not be heretical with the Collyridians, or else the Collyridians catho- lics with the church of Rome? Ans. It appears by the former answers, that neither did the ancient church err in condemning the opinion and practice of the Collyridians, as heretical, nor doth the church of Rome approve the same opinion, or the same practice. Reply. The substance of the former answers is but this : That the papists offer to the Virgin Mary, and other saints, wax tapers by way of gift or present, not of sacrifice ; and to her, not as to a god, but as the mother of God ; but that the Collyridians offered to her by way of sacri- fice, as to a sovereign power and deity. To this I have replied, and proved, that it no way appears, that the Collyridians did believe the blessed Virgin to be a sovereign power and deity, or that she was not subordinate to God. Then, that their offering might be called a gift, as well as the papists', and the papists' a sacrifice, as well as theirs; both of them being a consump- tion of a creature in honour of the blessed Virgin, and neither of them more than so ; and, therefore, either the Collyridians must stand with the church of Rome or the church of Rome fall with the Collyridians. It had been perhaps sufficient for me, thus to have vindicated my assertion from contrary objections, without taking on myself the burden of proving a negative ; yet to free from all doubt the conformity of the Roman church with the Collyridians, in this point, I think it will be necessary to shew, and that by many very probable arguments, that Epiphanius did not im- pute to them the pretended heresy of believing the Virgin Mary, God ; for then that other evasion, that their oblation was a sacrifice, and the papists' is not, together with this pretence, will of itself fall to the ground. Now, an opinion may be imputed to a man two ways ; either because 720 A Conference concerning the he holds and maintains it expressly, and formally, and in terms ; or be- cause it may by a rational deduction be collected from some other opinion, which he does hold : in this latter sense, I deny not but Epiphanius might impute this opinion, we speak of, to the Collyridians, as a consequence upon their practice, which practice they esteemed lawful ; but that they held it and owned it formally, and in terms ; this, I say, Epiphanius does not impute to them, which I think for these seven reasons. My first reason is, because he could not justly do so, and therefore with- out evident proof we may not say he did so ; for this were to be unchari- table to him, in making him uncharitable to others. Now I say he could not justly charge them with this opinion, because he was not informed of any such opinion that they held, but only of their practice, and this prac- tice was no sufficient proof that they held this opinion. That his infor- mation reached no further than their practice, appears out of his own words: "I have heard (saith he, Hseres. 78,) another thing with great astonishment, that some being madly affected to the blessed Virgin, endea- vour to bring her in in God's place, being mad and beside themselves : for they report, that certain women in Arabia have devised this vanity, to have meetings, and offer a cake to the blessed Virgin." The same practice he sets down, Hceres. 79. But that he was informed of any such opinion that they held, he has not a word or syllable to any such purpose; and yet if he had been informed of any, here had been the place to set it down; which certainly, writing his book rather of heretical opinions than prac- tices, he would not have omitted to do, if there had been occasion : his silence therefore is a sufficient argument, that he was not informed of any such opinion that they held. Now that their practice was no assurance that they held this opinion, it is manifest ; because they might ground it, not upon this opinion, that she was God, but upon another as false, though not altogether so impious, that the worship of oblations was not proper to God alone. And therefore, though Epiphanius might think, or fear, that possibly they might ground their practice upon that other impious opinion, and therefore out of abund- ant caution confute that also, as he doth obliquely and in a word, and once only in all his long discourse, by telling them that our Saviour called her woman; yet he had no ground from their practice to assure himself, that certainly they did hold so. Nay, justice and reason and charity would, that he should incline himself to believe, that they grounded their practice upon that other opinion, which had less impiety in it ; that is, that this wor- ship of oblations was not proper to God, but communicable to creatures high in his favour. My second is, because, if Epiphanius had known, that these Collyridians held the blessed Virgin to be a supreme power and deity, this being a far greater matter than offering a cake to her, should in all probability rather have given them their denomination ; at least when he sets down what their heresy was, he would have made this part of it, that they did believe so : but to the contrary, in his Anacephalaeosis, p. 130, he thus describes them : " they that offer to the name of the blessed Virgin cakes, who are called Collyridians." And again, p. 105, "they that offer to the blessed Virgin cakes, who are called Collyridians :" so to the seventy-ninth heresy he gives this title, "against the Collyridians, who offer to Mary :" so Hceres. 78 and 79, he sets down what he heard of them ; but no where, that they held this opinion of her. I conclude, therefore, that he never conceived this opinion to be a part of their heresy, and they were no further charge- able with it, than as a probable consequent upon their practice. My third is, because, had the Collyridians held her God, they would Infallibility of the Roman Church. 721 have worshipped her all the year long, and not only once a year at a solemn time, as Epiphanius says they did. My fourth is, because, if Epiphanius had known, that they held her God, he would questionless have urged them with those attributes which are given to God in scripture, as eternity, immortality, impassibility, omnipo- tence, &c. and shewed them, that if they believed the scripture, they could not think of her any of those things ; if they did not, they had no reason to think of her any thing more than of an ordinary woman. My fifth is, because, had their opinion been, that the blessed Virgin was God, a great part of Epiphanius's discourse were plainly ridiculous; both where he says only without proof, she was not a god, but a mortal crea- ture, which to them that held the contrary should not have been said, but proved ; but especially where he speaks to this purpose, (as he does very frequently) that the honour of oblations was not to be given to angels or men, much less to women, but only to God : for what had that been to the Collyridians, if they thought her (as is pretended) a sovereign power and deity \ To what purpose was it for Epiphanius to ask, Quis propheta ? " What prophet ever permitted, that a man, much less a woman, should be adored, though he be yet alive? Nor John, nor Tecla, nor any other saint. For neither shall the old superstition have dominion over us, that, leaving the living God, we should adore his creatures :" to what end, I say, was all this, if they thought her not a saint, nor creature, but God himself, and the Lord of all 1 How did this argument touch them 1 Ne angelos quidem — " He suffers not the very angels to be adored, how much less the daugh- ter of Anna." If they thought her not the daughter of Anna, but God eternal, in vain had it been to say to them — not to a woman, no, nor to a man, but to God alone, is this mystery (of oblation) due. — So that the angels themselves are not fit subjects for such an honour. Or again : "Let the creature be turned to the Creator: let shame at length compel you to worship God alone." Or, lastly, that so often repeated : " Let Mary be honoured, but the Lord only adored." For they might have answered all this in a word, saying, all this discourse sits beside the cushion, and concerns us and our offerings nothing at all : for we believe the bless- ed Virgin, to whom we offer, neither man, nor woman, nor angel, nor creature, but a deity. A sixth reason let it be this : If Epiphanius did indeed say of the Colly- ridians, as is pretended, that they held the Virgin Mary God, and so dif- ference their practice from the papists ; then the author of this answer, and Petavius in his translation, needed not to have directed to him what he should say, nor make him say so, whether he will or not : but it is evident they do so, as of the author of this answer I have already shewn ; and, for Petavius's part, I will so present it to your view, that if you will not shut your eyes, you shall not choose but see it. First, then, Hseres. 78, prope fnem, he (Petavius) sets in his margin, quidam Devm Mariam esse crediderunt ; and, to countenance this with a loquuntur of his own putting in, makes them speak of her like mad men, i. e. they said she was God ; whereas in Epiphanius's Greek they say just nothing. Secondly, to fasten the pretended opinion on them, he translates xtvopuvrj^a, novum dogma ; presuming, it seems, xffojxoi/tyua would easily be mistaken for xawo^vrjua ; and therefore means nothing by it, but a vanity or folly. Thirdly, he translates -tovtoys, Mud ; and so makes it look backward to that pretended novum dogma of the Collyridians; whereas it signifies there (and), and looks forward to their practice. Fourthly, With the help of a colon, he stops the sense at commentas Z Z 61 722 A Conference concerning Infallibility of the Roman Church. fuissc ; whereas in Epiphanius there is but a comma, and the sense goes on without suspension. Fifthly, With an adeo ut, he brings in their action, as an effect of their former opinion ; whereas Epiphanius lays nothing to their charge but their action only : so that, whereas Epiphanius's words truly translated run thus, " Another thins I have received with ^reat astonishment, that others being mad concerning the blessed Virgin, have and do go about to bring her in the place of God; being mad, I say, and beside themselves: for they report, that certain women in Arabia, have brought this vanity of offering a cake to her name :" Petavius makes them thus : " Not without admiration we have heard another thing, that some in these things that concern the most holy Virgin, have proceeded to that degree of madness, that they would obtrude her upon us for a god, and speak of her as mad- men : for they report, that certain women in Arabia have invented that new opinion ; so that to the Virgin's name and honour they offer by way of sacrifice a cake or wreath of bread." Again, in the same hseres. wpouytw St,a ywatxwi/ he translates advantage- ously, per mvlieres sacrificia facere. Whereas ispovycw is more general than sacrificia facere, and signifies sacris operari, or sacros ritus pera- gere. Again, in the same place, whereas Epiphanius says, simply and abso- lutely, " let no man offer to her name ;" he makes it, " let no man offer sacrifice to her name ;" as if you might lawfully offer any thing, provided you do not call it a sacrifice. So again, hseres. 79, besides his putting cunningly — ipsa fuit — which before we took notice of; he makes no scruple to put in dogma and sacri- ficium, wheresoever it may be for his purpose. Epiphanius's title to this heresy is, Against the Collyridians, who offer to Mary — Petavius puts in — sacrifice. Again, in the same page, before D. he puts in his own illo dogmate ; and whereas Epiphanius says — in all this, (he makes it) in all this opinion. Page 1061. to Brpxtiqi; vrtovoias, he translates, this womanish opinion; whereas vriovoia, though perhaps it may signify a thought, or act of think- ing, yet I believe it never signifies an opinion, which we hold. Ibid, at B. towvto, this, he renders, this opinion. Page 1064, at C. " Nor that we should offer to her name," simply and absolutely : he makes it, " Nor that we should offer sacrifice to her name." So many times is he fain to corrupt, and translate him partially, lest in condemning the Collyridians, he might seem to have involved the practice of the Roman church in the same condemnation. My seventh and last reason is this : had Epiphanius known, that the Collyridians held the Virgin Mary to be a sovereign power and deity, then he 'could not have doubted, whether this their offering was to her, or to God for her; whereof yet he seems doubtful and not fully resolved, as his own words intimate, hreres. 79, ad fin. Quam multa, &c. " How many things may be objected against this heresy ! For idle women, either worshipping the blessed Virgin, offer unto her a cake, or else they take upon them to offer for her this foresaid ridiculous oblation. Now both are foolish, and from the devil." These arguments, I suppose, do abundantly demonstrate to any man not veiled with prejudice, that Epiphanius imputed not to the Collyridians the heresy of believing the Virgin Mary God ; and if they did not think her God, there is then no reason imaginable, why their oblation' of a cake should not be thought a present, as well as the papists offering a taper ; or that the papists' offering a taper, should not be thought a sacrifice, as well An Argument from communicating Infants. 723 as their offering a cake: and seeing this was the difference pretended between them, this being vanished, there remains none at all : so that my first conclusion stands yet firm ; that either the ancient church erred in condemning the Collyridians, or the present errs in approving and prac- tising the same worship. IV. — An Argument drawn from the admitting Infants to the Eucharist, as without which they could not be saved, against the Church's Infal- libility. The condition, without the performance whereof no man can be admit- ted to the communion of the church of Rome, is this: that he believe firmly, and without doubting, whatsoever the church requires him to believe. More distinctly and particularly thus: He must believe all that to be Divine revelation, which that church teaches to be such ; as the doctrine of the Trinity ; the hypostatical union of two natures in the person of Christ ; the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son ; the doctrine of Transubstantiation, and such like. Whatsoever that church teaches to be necessary, he must believe to be necessary : as baptism for infants ; faith in Christ, for those that are capable of faith ; penance for those that have committed mortal sin after baptism, &c. Whatsoever that church declares expedient and profitable, he must believe to be expedient and profitable : as monastical life ; prayer to saints ; prayer for the dead ; going on pilgrimages ; the use of pardons ; veneration of holy images and relics ; Latin service, where the people understand it not ; communicating the laity in one kind, and such like. Whatsoever that church holdeth lawful, he must believe lawful : as to marry ; to make distinction of meats, as if some were clean and others unclean ; to fly in time of persecution ; for them that serve at the altar, to live by the altar ; to testify a truth by oath, when a lawful magistrate shall require it; to possess riches, &c. Now it is impossible, that any man should certainly believe any thing, unless either it be evident of itself, or he have some certain reason (at least some supposed certain reason) and infallible ground for his belief. Now the doctrines, which the church of Rome teacheth, it is evident and unde- niable that they are not evident of themselves, neither evidently true, nor evidently credible. He therefore that will believe them, must of necessity have some certain and infallible ground, whereon to build his belief of them. There is no other ground for a man's belief of them, especially in many points, but only an assurance of the infallibility of the church of Rome. No man can be assured, that that church is infallible, and cannot err, whereof he may be assured that she hath erred, unless she had some new promise of Divine assistance, which might for the future secure her from danger of erring; but the church of Rome pretends to none such. Nothing is more certain than that that church hath erred, which hath believed and taught irreconcilable contradictions, one whereof must of necessity be an error. That the receiving the sacrament of the eucharist is necessary for infants, and that the receiving thereof is not necessary for them ; that it is the will of God, that the church should administer the sacrament to them, and that zz2 724 An Argument from communicating Infants, it is not the will of God, that the church should do so, are manifest and irreconcilable contradictions ; supposing only (that which is most evident) that the eucharist is the same thing, of the same virtue and efficacy now, as it was in the primitive church ; that infants are the same things they were, have as much need, are capable of as much benefit by the eucharist now, as then ; as subject to irreverent carriages then, as now; and, lastly, that the present church is as much bound to provide for the spiritual good of infants, as the ancient church was : I say, these things supposed, the propositions before set down are plain and irreconcilable contradictions ; whereof the present Roman church doth hold the negative, and the ancien church of Rome did hold the affirmative : and therefore it is evident, that either the present church doth err, in holding something not necessary, which is so ; or that the ancient church did err in holding something neces- sary, which was not so. For the negative proposition, viz. That the eucharist is not necessary for infants ; that it is the doctrine of the present church of Rome, it is most manifest, first, from the disuse, and abolition, and prohibition, of the con- trary ancient practice. For if the church did conceive it necessary for them, either simply for their salvation, or else for their increase or con- firmation in grace, and advancement to a higher degree of glory, (unless she could supply some other way their damage in this thing, which evi- dently she cannot) what an uncharitable sacrilege is it, to debar and defraud them of the necessary means of their so great spiritual benefit ! Especially seeing the administration of it might be so ordered, that irreverent casual- ties might easily be prevented ; which yet, should they fall out, against the church's and pastor's intention, certainly could not offend God, and in rea- son should not offend man ! Or if the church do believe, that upon such a vain fear of irreverence (which we see moved not the ancient church at all) she may lawfully forbid such a general, perpetual, and necessary charity, certainly herein she commits a far greater error than the former. Secondly, from the council of Trent's anathema, denounced on all that hold the contrary, in these words ; " if any man say, that the receiving of the eucharist is necessary for little children, before they come to years of discretion, let him be anathema.'' Concil.Trid. Sess. 21. De communione parvulorum, Cant. 4. * Now for the affirmative part of the contradiction, to make it evident that that was the doctrine of the ancient church, I will prove it, first, from the general practice of the ancient church, for several ages. Secondly, by the direct and formal testimonies of the fathers of those times. Thirdly, by the confession of the most learned antiquaries of the Roman church. My first argument I form thus : If to communicate infants was the general practice of the ancient church for many ages, then certainly the church then believed, that the eucharist was necessary for them, and very avail- able for their spiritual benefit ; but it is certain, that the communicating of infants was the general practice of the church for many ages ; therefore the church of those times thought it necessary for them. To deny the consequence of the proposition is to charge the church with extreme folly, wilful superstition, and perpetual profanation of the blessed sacrament. As for the assumption, it is fully confirmed by Clemens Rom. Constit. Apost. 1. 3, c. 20 ; Dionysius Areopagita De Eccles. Hierar. cap. ult. ; S. Cy- prian, and a council of African bishops with him, Ep. 59, ad Fidum; and in his treatise De lapsis. p. 137, edit. Pamel. ; Paulinus, bishop of Nola, in Italy, an. 353, in Ep. 12, ad Senem: out of Ordo Romanus, cited by Alcuinus, S. Bede's scholar, and master to Charlemain, in his book De Divinis Ojficiis, cap. De Sab. Sancto Pasc. Gennadius Massiliensis De against the Infallibility of the Roman Church. 725 Eccles. Dogmatibus, c. 52, Concil. Toletanwn, 2 Can. 11. It continued in the western church unto the days of Lewis the Debonnaire, witness Cardinal Perron Des Passages de St. Ai/gustine, p. 100. Some footsteps of it remained there in the time of Hugo de S. Victore, as you may see, lib. i. De Sacram. et Cerem. cap. 20. It was the practice of the church of the Armenians in Waldensis' time, as he relates out of Guido, the Car- melite, torn. ii. De. Sacr. c. 91, De erroribus Armenorum. It is still in force in the church of the Abyssines, witness Franc. Alvarez, Hist. JEthiop. c. 22, et Thomas a Jesu de procuranda salute omnium gentium. It has continued without any interruption in the Greek church unto this present age, as may be evidently gathered out of Lyranus, in ch. vi. John ; Arcu- dius, 1. i. c. 14, et 1. iii. c. 40, De Concord. Eccles. Orient, et Occident, in Sacram. Administratione ; Card. Perron Des Passages de S. Augus- tine, p. 100. Where he also assures us of the primitive church in general, that she gave infants the eucharist as soon as they were baptized ; and that the custom of giving this sacrament to little infants the church then observ- ed ; and before, p. 21, that in those ages it was always given to infants together with baptism. The same is likewise acknowledged byContzen in John vi. ver. 54, and by Thomas a Jesu de procuranda salute omnium gentium. So that this matter of the practice of the ancient church is suf- ficiently cleared. Seeing therefore the ancient church did use this custom, and could have no other ground for it, but their belief that this sacrament was necessary for infants ; it follows necessarily, that the church then did believe it necessary. But deductions, though never so evident, are superfluous, and may be set aside, where there is such abundance of direct and formal authentical testi- monies ; whereof some spoke in thesi, of the necessity of the eucharist for all men, others in hypothesi, of the necessity of it for infants. My second argument, from the testimonies of the fathers of those times, I form thus: That doctrine in the affirmative whereof the most eminent fathers of the ancient church agree, and which none of their contempora- ries have opposed or condemned, ought to be taken for the catholic doc- trine* of the church of those times ; but the most eminent fathers of the ancient church agree in the affirmation of this doctrine, that the eucharist is necessary for infants, and none of their contemporaries have opposed or condemned it ; ergo, it ought to be taken for the catholic doctrine of the church of their times. The major of this syllogism is delivered and fully proved by Cardinal Perron, in his letter to Casaubon, 5 obs. and is indeed so reasonable a postulate, that none but a contentious spirit can reject it. For confirmation of the minor, I will allege, first, their sentences, which in thesi affirm the eucharist to be generally necessary for all, and therefore for infants; and then their suffrages, who in hypothesi avouch the neces- sity of it for infants. The most pregnant testimonies of the first rank are these : of Irenseus, lib. iv. cont. hceres. c. 34, where he makes our union to Christ by the eucharist the foundation of the hope of our resurrection, in these words : " As the bread of earth, after the invocation of God, is now not common * The reader, when he meets with the phrase, catholic doctrine, in this and the fol- lowing discourse, must remember, that it does not signify articles of faith determined in any general councils, which might be looked upon as the faith of the whole church; but the current and common opinion of the age, which obtained in it without any known opposition and contradiction. Neither need this be wondered at, since they are about matters far removed from the common faith of christians, and have no necessary influence upon good life and manners, whatsoever necessity by mistake of some scrip- tures might be put upon them. 61* 726 An Argument from communicating Infants, bread, but the eucharist, consisting of two things, an earthly, and a hea- venly; so our bodies receiving the eucharist, are not now corruptible (for ever) but have hope of resurrection." The like he hath, lib. v. c. 2. And hence in probability it is, that the Nicene council styled this sacrament, Symbolum Resurrectionis, the pledge of our resurrection : and Ignatius, Ep. ad Eph. — P karma cum immortalitatis, the medicine of immortality. Cyril. Alex. lib. iv. in Joan. "They shall never partake, nor so much as taste the life of holiness and happiness, which receive not the Son in the mystical benediction." Cyril, lib. x. in Joan. c. xiii. et lib. xi. c. 27. " This corruptible nature of our body could not otherwise be brought to life and immortality, unless this body of natural life were conjoined to it." The very same things saith Gregory Nyssen. Orat. Catech. c. 37. And that they both speak of our conjunction with Christ by the eucharist, the ante- cedents and consequents do fully manifest, and it is a thing confessed by learned catholics. Cyprian, Dc coena Domini, and Tertullian, De resur. carnis, speak to the same purpose : but I have not their books by me, and therefore cannot set down their words. St. Chrysostom, Horn. 47, in Joh. on these words : Nisi manducaveritis, has many pregnant and plain speeches to our pur- pose. As, " The words here spoken are very terrible : verily, saith he, if a man eat not my flesh, and drink not my blood, he hath no life in him : for whereas they said before, this could not be done, he shews it not only not impossible, but also very necessary." And, a little after : " He often iterates his speech concerning the holy mysteries, shewing the necessity of the thing, and that by all means it must be done." And again: " What means that, which he says, My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed : either that this is the true meat, that saves the soul ; or to confirm them in the faith of what he had spoken, that they should not think he spoke enigmatically, or parabolically ; but know, that by all means they must eat his body." But most clear and unanswerable is that place, lib. iii. De sacerdotio, where he saith, "If a man cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven, unless he be born again of water and the Holy Spirit ; and if he which eats not the flesh of our Lord, and drinks- not his blood, is cast out of eternal life ; and all these things cannot be done by any other, but only by those holy hands, the hands, I say, of the priest ; how then, without their help, can any man either avoid the fire of hell, or obtain the crowns laid up for us?" Theophylact. in vi. Joan. " When therefore we hear, that unless we eat the flesh of the Son of man, we cannot have life, we must have faith without doubting in the receiving of the divine mysteries, and never inquire how : for the natural man, that is, he which followeth human, that is, natural reasons, receives not the things which are above nature, and spiritual ; as also he understands not the spiritual meat of the flesh of our Lord, which they that receive not, shall not be partakers of eternal life, as not receiving Jesus, who is the true life." S. Augustine De pec. mor. et remis. c. 24. " Very well do the puny christians call baptism nothing else but salvation, and the sacrament of Christ's body nothing else but life. From whence should this be, but as I believe, from the ancient and apostoli- cal tradition, by which this doctrine is implanted into the churches of Christ, that only by baptism and the participation of the Lord's table any man can attain either to the kingdom of God, or to salvation, or to eternal life." Now we are taught by the learned cardinal, that when the fathers speak not as doctors, but as witnesses of the customs of the church of their times ; and do not say I believe this should be so holden, or so understood, or so observed ; but that the church from one end of the earth to the other against the Infallibility of the Roman Church. 727 believes it so, or observes it so ; then we no longer hold what they say, for a thing said by them, but as a thing said by the whole church ; and princi- pally when it is in points, whereof they could not be ignorant, either because of the condition of the things, as in matters of fact ; or because of the suf- ficiency of the persons : and, in this case, we argue no more upon their words "probably, as we do when they speak in the quality of particular doctors, but we argue thereupon demonstratively. For example : St. Augustine, the sufhcientest person which the church of his time had, speaking of a point wherein he could not be ignorant, says : " Not that I believe the eucharist to be necessary to salvation ; but the churches of Christ believe so, and have received this doctrine from aposto- lical tradition :" therefore I argue upon his words not probably, but demon- stratively, that this was the catholic doctrine of the church of his time. And thus much for the thesis, that the eucharist was held generally neces- sary for all. Now for the hypothesis, that the eucharist was held neces- sary for infants in particular. Witnesses hereof are St. Cyprian, Pope Innocentius I. and Eusebius Emissenus, with St. Augustine, together with the author of the book, entitled Hypognostica. Cyprian indeed does not in terms affirm it, but we have a very clear intimation of it in his epistle to Fidus. For whereas he, and a council of bishops together with him, had ordered, that infants might be baptized and sacrificed, that is, communicated, before the eighth day, though that were the day appointed for circumcision by the old law ; there he sets down this as the reason of their decree — that the mercy and grace of God was to be denied to no man. Pope Innocent I. in Ep. ad Episc. Cone. Milev. quce est inter August. 93, concludes against the pelagians, that infants could not attain eternal life without baptism, because without baptism they were incapable of the eucharist, and without the eucharist could not have eternal life. His words are : " But that which your fraternity affirms them to preach, that infants without the grace of baptism may have the rewards of eternal life, is cer- tainly most foolish ; for unless they eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, they shall have no life in them." Now that this sense, which I have given his words, is indeed the true sense of them, and that his judgment upon the point was as 1 have said, it is acknowledged by Maldonate in Joan. vi. ver. 54 ; by Binnius upon the Councils, torn. i. p. 624; by Sanctesius, Repet. vi. c. 7; and it is affirmed by St. Augustine, who was his contemporary, held correspondence by letters with him, and therefore in all probability could not be ignorant of his meaning. I say he affirms it as a matter out of question, Ep. 106, and contr. Julian, 1. i. c. 4, where he tells us that Pelagius, in denying this, did dispute contra sedis apostolicte authoritatem, against the authority of the see apostolic. And after: "But if they yield to the see apostolic, or rather to the Master himself and Lord of the apostles, who says that they shall not have life in them, unless they eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, which none may do but those that are baptized ; then at length they will confess, that infants not baptized cannot have life." Now I suppose no man will doubt, but the belief of the apostolic see was then (as St. Augustine assures us, ). i. cont. Jul. c. 4,) the belief of the church of Rome, taking it for a particular church ; and then it will pre- sently follow, that either other churches do not think themselves bound to conformity of belief with the Roman church, notwithstanding Irenseus's necesse est ad hanc ecclesiam omnem convenire ecclesiam ; or that this was then the doctrine of the catholic church. For Eusebius Emissenus, I 728 An Argument from communicating Infants, cannot quote any particular proof out of him : but his belief in this point is acknowledged by Sanctes. Repet. vi. c. 7 ; likewise for St. Augustine, the same Sanctesius, and Binnius, and Maldonate, either not mindful or not regardful of the anathema of the council of Trent, acknowledge (in the places above quoted) that he was also of the same belief: and, indeed, he professeth it so plainly and so frequently, that he must be a mere stranger to him that knows it not, and very impudent that denies it. Eucharistiam infantibus putat necessariam Augustinus, say also the divines of Lou- vaine, in their index to their edition of St. Augustine ; and they refer us in their index only to torn. ii. p. 185 ; that is, to the 106th Epist. (the words whereof I have already quoted, to shew the meaning of Innocenfius) and to torn. vii. p. 282 ; that is, 1. i. De pec. mor. et remis. c. 20, where his words are : " Let then all doubt be taken away : let us hear our Lord, (I say) saying, not of the sacrament of holy baptism, but of the sacrament of his table (to which none may lawfully come, but he which has been baptized) unless you eat the flesh of the Son, and drink his blood, you shall have no life in you. What seek we any further'.' What can be answered hereunto ? What, will any man dare to say, that this appertains not to little children ; and that without the participation of his body and blood, they may have life?" &c. with much more to the same effect. Which places are indeed so plain and pregnant for that purpose, that I believe they thought it needless to add more ; .otherwise, had they pleased they might have furnished their index with many more references to this point ; as, De pec. mor. et rem. 1. i. c. 24 ; where of baptism and the eucharist he tells us, that Salus et vita ccterna sine his frusta promittitur parvulis. The same he has Cont. 2, Epist. Pelag. ad Bonifaciam, 1. i. c. 22, (which yet by Gracian, De confec. D. 3, c. Nulli, and by T. Aquinas, p. 3, q. 3, art. 9, ad tertiam, is strangely corrupted, and made to say the contrary) and I. iv. c. 4, the same Cont. Julian. 1. i. c. 4, and 1. iii. c. 11, 12, Cont. Pelag. et Celest. 1. ii. c. 8, de Preedest. Sanctorum ad Prosp. et Hilar. 1. i. c. 14. Neither doth he retract or contradict this opinion any where, or mitigate any one of his sentences touching this matter, in this book of Retractations. Sanctesius indeed tells us, that he seems to have departed from his opinion in his works against the donatists ; but I would he had shewed some probable reason to make it seem so to others; which seeing he docs not, we have reason to take time to believe him. For as touching the place mentioned by Beda in 1 ad Corinth, x. as taken out of a ser- mon of St. Augustine's ad infantes ad altare ; besides that it is very strange St. Augustine should make a sermon to infants, and that there is no such sermon extant in his works, nor any memory of any such in Possi- dius, St. Augustine's scholar's catalogue of his works, nor in his book of Retractations ; setting aside all this, I say, first, that it is no way certain that he speaks there of infants, seeing in propriety of speech (as St. Augus- tine himself teacheth us, Ep. xxiii.) infants were not fi deles, of whom St. Augustine in that supposed sermon speaks. Secondly, admit he does speak of infants, where he assures us, that in baptism every faithful man is made partaker of Christ's body and blood, and that he shall not be alienated from the benefit of the bread and cup, although he depart this life before he eat of that bread and drink of that cup: all this concludes no more, but that the actual participation of the eucharist is not a means simply necessary to attain salvation, so that no impossibility shall excuse the fail- ing of it; whereas all that I aim at is but this — that in the judgment of the ancient church it was believed necessary, in case of possibility ; necessary, not in actu, but in voto ecclesice ; not necessary to salvation simply, but necessary for the increase of grace and glory : and therefore, lastly, though against the Infallibility of the Roman Church. 729 not necessary by necessity of means, for infants to receive it ; yet neces- sary by necessity of precepts, for the church to give it. The last witness I promised, was the author of the work against the pelagians, called Hypognostica, who (1. v. c. 5,) asks the pelagians, " See- ing he himself hath said, Unless you eat the flesh, &c. how dare you pro- mise eternal life to little children, not regenerate of water and the Holy Ghost; not having eaten his flesh, nor drunk his blood?" And, a little after : " Behold then, he that is not baptized, and he that is destitute of the bread and cup of life, is separated from the kingdom of heaven." To the same purpose he speaks 1. vi. c. 6. But it is superfluous to recite his words ; for either this is enough, or nothing. The third kind of proof, whereby I undertook to shew the belief of the ancient church in this point, was the confession of the learnedest writers and best versed in the church of Rome ; who, what the council of Trent forbids under an anathema, that any man should say of any ancient father, are not yet afraid, nor make any scruple to say it in plain terms of the whole church for many ages together, viz. that she believed the eucharist necessary for infants. So doth Maldonate in Joan vi. Mitto Augvstini et Innocentii sententiam (qua etiam viguit in ecclesia per sexcentos annos) eucharistiam etiam infantibus necessarium. " I say nothing (says he) of St. Augustine's and Innocentius's opinion, that the eucharist was neces- sary even for infants ; which doctrine flourished in the church for six hun- dred years." The same almost in terms hath Binnius, in his Notes on the Councils, p. 624. Hinc constat Innocentii sententia (quce sexcentos circiter annos viguit in ecclesia, quain Augustinus sectatus est) eucharistiam etiam infantibus necessariam fuisse. Lastly, That treasury of antiquity, Cardinal Perron, though he speaks not so home as the rest do, yet he says enough for my purpose. Des Passages de St. Aug. c. 10, p. 101. " The custom of giving the eucha- rist to infants the church then observed as profitable." This, I say, is enough for my purpose: for what more contradictious, than that the eucha- rist, being the same without alteration, to infants should then be profitable, and now unprofitable? Then, all things considered, expedient to be used, if not necessary, and therefore commanded ; and now, though there be no variety in the case, all things considered, not necessary, nor expedient, and therefore forbidden? The issue of all this discourse, for aught I can see, must be this : That either both parts of a contradiction must be true, and consequently nothing can be false, seeing that which contradicts truth, is not so ; or else, that the ancient church did err in believing something expedient, which was not so (and, if so, why may not the present church err in thinking Latin service and communion in one kind expedient ?) or that the present church doth err, in thinking something not expedient, which is so. And, if so, why may she not err, in thinking communicating the laity in both kinds, and service in vulgar languages, not expedient ? V. — An Argument drawn from the doctrine of the Millenaries against Infallibility. The doctrine of the millenaries was, that before the world's end Christ should reign upon earth for a thousand years, and that the saints should live under him in all holiness and happiness. That this doctrine is by 730 An Argument from the Millenaries against the the present Roman church held false and heretical, I think no man will deny. That the same doctrine was by the church of the next age after the apostles held true and catholic, I prove by these two reasons : The first reason. Whatsoever doctrine is believed and taught by the most eminent fathers of any age of the church, and by none of their con- temporaries opposed or condemned, that is to be esteemed the catholic doc- trine of the church of those times ; but the doctrine of the millenaries was believed and taught by the most eminent fathers of the age next after the apostles, and by none of that age opposed or condemned ; therefore it was the catholic doctrine of the church of those times. The proposition of this syllogism is Cardinal Perron's rule (in his epistle to Casaubon, 5 obs.) and is indeed one of the main pillars, upon which the great fabric of his answer to King James doth stand, and with which it cannot but fall ; and therefore I will spend no time in the proof of it. But the assumption thus I prove. That doctrine, which was believed and taught by Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, the disciple of the apostles' disciples (according to Eusebius, who lived in the times of the apostles, saith he'; by Justin Martyr, doctor of the church, and martyr; by Melito, bishop of Sardis, who had the gift of pro- phecy, witness Tert. and whom Bellarmine acknowledges a saint ; by St. Irenseus, bishop of Lyons, and martyr ; and was not opposed or condemned by any one doctor of the church of those times; that doctrine was believed and taught by the most eminent fathers of that age next to the apostles, and opposed by none. But the former part of the proposition is true ; ergo, the latter is true also. The major of this syllogism and the latter part of the minor, I suppose will need no proof with them that consider, that these here mentioned were equal in number to all the other ecclesiastical writers of that age, of whom there is any memory remaining, and in weight and worth infinitely beyond them : they were Athenagoras, Theophilus Antiochenus, Egesippus, and Hippolitus ; of whose contradiction to this doctrine there is not extant, either in their works, or in story, any print or footstep ; which if they, or any of them had opposed, it had been impossible, considering the eccle- siastical story of their time is written by the professed enemies of the mil- lenaries' doctrine, who, could they have found any thing in the monuments of antiquity to have put in the balance against Justin Martyr and Irenseus, no doubt would not have buried it in silence; which yet they do, neither vouching for their opinion any one of more antiquity than Dionysius Alex- andrinus, who lived with Eusebius, nostra (state (in our age) but certainly in the latter part of the third century. For Tatianus, because a heretic, I reckon not in this number. And if any man say, that before his fall he wrote many books ; I say it is true ; but withal would have it remembered, that he was Justin Martyr's scholar, and therefore in all probability of his master's faith, rather than against it. All that is extant of him one way or other, is but this in St. Jerome De Script. Ecclcs. " Justini Martyris sectator fuit." Now for the other part of the minor, that the forementioned fathers did believe and teach this doctrine. And first for Papias, that he taught it, is confessed by Eusebius, the enemy of this doctrine (1. iii. Hist. Eccl. c. 33,) in these words : " Other things besides the same author (Papias) de- clares that they came to him as it were by unwritten tradition, wherein he affirms, that after the resurrection of all flesh from the dead, there shall be a kingdom of Christ continued and established for a thousand vears upon earth, after a human and corporeal manner." The same is confessed by Infallibility of the Roman Church. 731 St. Jerome, another enemy to this opinion [De Script. Eccles. s. 29) : — " Papias, the auditor of John, bishop of Hierapolis, is said to have taught the Judaical tradition of a thousand years, whom Irenseus and Appolina- rius followed." And in his preface upon the commentaries of Victorious upon the Apocalypse, thus he writes: " Before him Papias, bishop of Hier- apolis, and Nepos, bishop in the parts of Egypt, taught as Victorinus does, touching the kingdom of the thousand years." The same is testified by Irenceus (1. v. cont. hcer. c. 33,) where having at large set forth this doctrine, he confirms it by the authority of Papias, in these words : " Papias, also, the auditor of John, the familiar friend of Poly- carpus, an ancient man, hath testified by writing these things in the fourth of his books ; for he hath written five." And concerning Papias thus much. That Justin Martyr was of the same belief, is confessed by Sixtus Senen- sis Biblioth. Stce. 1. vi. An. 437,) by Faverdentius, in his premonition be- fore the last five chapters of the fifth book of Irenseus ; and by Pamelius in Antidoto ad Tertul. farad, paradox. 14. That S. Melito, bishop of Sardis, held the same doctrine, is confessed by Pamelius, in the same place: and thereupon it is, that Gennadius Mus- siliensis, in his book De Eccles. Dogmatibus, calls the followers of this opinion, Melitani ; as the same Pamelius testifies in his notes upon that fragment of Tertullian, De spe Fidelium. Irenseus's faith in this point is likewise confessed by Eusebius in the place before quoted, in these words : " He (Papias) was the author of the like error to most of the writers of the church, who alleged the antiquity of the man for a defence of their side, as to Irenseus, and whosoever else seemed to be of the same opinion with him. By S. Jerome, in the place above cited De Script. Eccles. s. 29. Again, in lib. Ezek. xi. in these words : " For neither do we expect from heaven a golden Jerusalem (ac- cording to the Jewish tales, which they call Deuterosis) which also many of our own have followed ;" especially Tertullian, in his book De spe Fidelium; and Lactantius in his seventh book of Institutions, and the fre- quent expositions of Victorinus Pictavionensis ; and of late Severius, in his dialogue, which he calls Gallus; and to name the Greeks and to join together the first and last, Irenasus and Apollinarius." Where we see he acknowledges Irenasus to be of this opinion ; but that he was the first that held it, I believe that that is more a christian untruth, than Irenasus's opin- ion a judaical fable. For he himself acknowledges in the place above cited, that Irenasus followed Papias ; and it is certain and confessed, that Justin Martyr believed it long before him : and Irenseus himself derives it from — Presbyteri, qui Johannem discipulum Domini viderunt ; from priests, which saw John, the disciple of the Lord. Lastly, by Pamelius, Sixtus Senensis, and Faverdentius, in the places above quoted. Seeing, therefore, it is certain, even to the confession of the adversaries, that Papias, Justin Martyr, Melito, and Irenasus, the most considerable and eminent men of their age, did believe and teach this doctrine; and, seeing it has been proved as evidently as a thing of this nature can be, that none of their contemporaries opposed or condemned it; it remains, according to Cardinal Perron's first rule, that this is to be esteemed the doctrine of the church of that age. My second reason I form thus : Whatsoever doctrine is taught by the fathers of any age, not as doctors, but as witnesses of the tradition of the church (that is, not as their own opinion, but as the doctrine of the church of their times) that is undoubtedly to be so esteemed, especially if none contradicted them in it ; but the fathers above cited teach this doctrine, not as their own private opinion, but as the christian tradition, and as the doc- 732 An Argument from the Millenaries against the trine of the church, neither did any contradict them in it ; ergo, it is undoubtedly to be so esteemed. The major of this syllogism is Cardinal Perron's second rule and way of finding out the doctrine of the ancient church in any age ; and if it be not a sure rule, farewell the use of all antiquity. And for the minor, there will be little doubt of it to him that considers, that Papias professes himself to have received this doctrine by unwritten tradition, though not from the apostles themselves immediately, yet from their scholars, as appears by Eusebius in the forecited third book, chapter 33. That Irenseus grounded it upon evident scripture, and professes that he /earned it (whether mediately or immediately, I cannot tell) from -presby- ters, qui Johannem discipulum Domini viderunt, priests or elders, who saw John the Lord's disciple, and heard of him what our Lord taught of those times (of the thousand years) ; and also, as he says after, from Papias, the auditor of John, the chamber-fellow of Polycarpus, an ancient man, who recorded it in writing. Faverdentius's note upon this place is very notable. Hinc apparet (saith he), &c. From hence it appears, that Irenseus neither first invented this opinion, nor held it as proper to himself, but got this blot and blemish from certain fathers. Papias, I suppose, and some other inglorious fellows, the familiar friends of Irenseus, are here intended. I hope then, if the fathers, which lived with the apostles, had their blots and blemishes, it is no such horrid crime for Calvin and the century writers to impute the same to their great-grand-children. JEtas parentum pejor avis progeniem fert vitiosiorem. But yet these inglorious disciples of the apostles, though perhaps not so learned as Faverdentius, were yet certainly so honest, as not to invent lies, and deliver them as apostolic tradition. Or, if they were not, what confidence can we place in any other unwritten tra- dition ? Lastly, that Justin Martyr grounds it upon plain prophecies of the Old Testament, and express words of the New. He professeth, that he, and all other christians, of a right belief in all things, believe it; joins them who believe it not, with them who deny the resurrection ; or else says, that none denied this, but the same who denied the resurrection ; and that indeed they were called christians, but in deed and in truth were none. Whosoever, I say, considers these things, will easily grant, that they held it not as their own opinion, but as the doctrine of the church, and the faith of christians. Hereupon T conclude, whatsoever they held, not as their private opinion, but as the faith of the church, that was the faith of the church of their time; but this doctrine they held, not as their private opinion, but as the faith of the church ; ergo, it was and is to be esteemed the faith of the church. Trypho. Do ye confess, that before ye expect the coming of Christ, this place Jerusalem shall be again restored, and that your people shall be congregated, and rejoice together with Christ, and the patriarchs, and the prophets? &c. Justin Martyr. I have confessed to you before, that both I and many others do believe, as you well know, that this shall be; but that many again, who are not of the pure and holy opinion of christians, do not acknowledge this, I have also signified unto you ; for I have declared unto you, that some called christians, but being indeed atheists and impious heretics, do generally teach blasphemous, and atheistical, and foolish things. But that you might know that I speak not this to you only, I will make a book, as near as I can, of these our disputations, where I will profess in Infallibility of the Roman Church. 733 writing that which I say before you ; for I resolve to follow not men, and the doctrines of men, but God, and the doctrine of God. For although you chance to meet with some that are called christians, which do not con- fess this, but dare to blaspheme the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; which also say there is no resurrection of the dead, but that as soon as they die, their souls are received into heaven ; do not you yet think them christians : as neither, if a man consider rightly, will he account the sadducees, and other sectaries and heretics, as the genista;, and the meristee, and galileans, and pharisees, and hellenians, and baptists, and other such, to be Jews; but only that they are called Jews, and the children of Abraham, and such as with their lips confess God (as God himself cries out) but have their hearts far from him. But I, and all chris- tians, that in all things believe aright, both know that there shall be a resur- rection of the flesh, and a thousand years in Jerusalem restored, and adorned, and enlarged ; according as the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah, and others do testify : for thus saith Isaiah of the time of this thousand years : " For there shall be a new heaven, and a new earth, and they shall not remember the former," &c. And after : " A certain man amongst us, whose name was John, one of the twelve apostles of Christ, in that reve- lation which was exhibited unto him, hath foretold — that they which believe our Christ, shall live in Jerusalem a thousand years, and that after, the universal and everlasting resurrection and judgment shall be." I have presumed in the beginning of Justin Martyr's answer to substi- tute (not) instead of (also) because I am confident, that either by chance, or the fraud of some ill-willers to the millenaries' opinion, the place has been corrupted, and ov turned into xm, not into also. For, if we retain the usual reading — but that many, who are also of the pure and holy opinion of christians, do not acknowledge this, I have also signified unto you — then we must conclude, that Justin Martyr himself did believe the opinion of them which denied the thousand years to be the pure and holy opinion of christians: and, if so, why did he not himself believe it? Nay, how could he but believe it to be true, professing it (as he does, if the place be right) to be the pure and holy opinion of christians? For how a false doc- trine can be the pure and holy opinion of christians, what christian can conceive? Or, if it may be so, how can the contrary avoid being untrue, unholy, and not the opinion of christians ? Again, if we read the place thus — that many, who are also of the pure and holy opinion of christians, do not acknowledge this, I have also signi- fied — certainly there will be neither sense nor reason, neither coherence nor consequence in the words following — for I have told you of many called christians, but being indeed atheists and heretics, that they altogether teach blasphemous, and impious, and foolish things. For how is this a confirmation or reason of, or any way pertinent unto, what went before, if there he speak of none but such as were puree piceque christianorum sen- tential, of the pure and holy opinion of christians? And therefore, to dis- guise this inconsequence, the translator has thought fit to make use of a false translation, and instead of — for I have told you, to make it — besides I have told you of many, &c. Again, if Justin Martyr had thought this the pure and holy opinion of christians, or them good and holy christians that held it; why does he rank them with them that denied the resurrec- tion? Why does he say afterward, although you chance to meet with some that are called christians, which do not confess this, do not ye think them christians ? Lastly, what sense is there in saying, as he does, I, and all christians, that are of a right belief in all things, believe the doctrine of the thousand years ; and that the scriptures both of the Old and New Testa- 62 734 An Argument from the Millenaries against the ment teach it ; and yet say — that many, of the pure and holy opinion of christians, do not believe it? Upon these reasons I suppose it is evident, that the place has been corrupted, and it is to be corrected, according as I have corrected it, by substituting ov in the place of xm, of not instead of also. Neither need any man think it strange, that this misfortune of the change of a syllable should befall this place, who considers, that in this place Justin Martyr tells us that he had said the same things before, whereas nothing to this purpose appears now in him. And that in Victorinus's com- ment on the Revelations, wherein (by St. Jerome's acknowledgment) this doctrine was strongly maintained, there now appears nothing at all for it, but rather against it. And now from the place thus restored, these obser- vations offer themselves unto us. 1. That Justin Martyr speaks not as a doctor, but as a witness of the doctrine of the church of his time. I (saith he) and all christians, that are of a right belief in all things, hold this. And therefore, from hence, accord- ing to Cardinal Perron's rule, we are to conclude, not probably, but demon- stratively, that this was the doctrine of the church of that time. 2. That they held it as a necessary matter, so far as to hold them no christians that held the contrary. Though you chance to meet with some called christians, that do not confess this, but dare to blaspheme the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, &c. yet do not ye think them christians. Now if Bellarmine's rule be true, that councils then determine any things as matters of faith, when they pronounce them heretics that hold the contrary : sure then Justin Martyr held this doctrine as a matter of faith, seeing he pronounceth them no christians that contradict it. 3. That the doctrine is grounded upon the scripture of the Old and New Testament, and the Revelation of St. John, and that by a doctor and martyr of the church, and such an one as was converted to Christianity within thirty years after the death of St. John, when in all probability there were many alive, that had heard him expound his own words, and teach this doctrine. Arid if probabilities will not be admitted, this is certain out of the most authentical records of the church, that Papias, the disciple of the apostle's disciples, taught it the church, professing that he had received it from them that learned it from the apostles : and if, after all this, the church of those times might err in a doctrine so clearly derived, and authentically delivered, how, without extreme impudence, can any church in after-times pretend to infallibility? The millenaries' doctrine was overborne, by imputing to them that which they held not ; by abrogating the authority of St. John's Revelation, as some did ; or by derogating from it, as others ; ascribing it not to St. John, the apostle, but to some other John, they knew not who : which — Dionysius, the first known adversary of this doctrine, and his followers ; against the tradition of Irenseus, Justin Martyr, and all the fathers their antecessors; by calling it a Judaical opinion, and yet allowing it as probable, by cor- rupting the authors for it ; as Justin, Victorinus Severus. VI. — A Letter relating to the same subject. Sir, — I pray remember, that if a consent of fathers either constitute or declare a truth to be necessary, or shew the opinion of the church of their time ; then that opinion of the Jesuits, concerning predestination upon pre- science (which had no opposer before St. Augustine) must be so, and the Infallibility of the Roman Church. 735 contrary of the dominicans heretical ; and the present church differs from the ancient, in not esteeming of it as they did. Secondly, I pray remember, that if the fathers be infallible (when they speak as witnesses of tradition) to shew the opinion of the church of their time ; then the opinion of the Chiliasts (which now is a heresy in the church of Rome) was once tradition in the opinion of the church. Thirdly, Since St. Augustine had an opinion, that of whatsoever no beginning was known, that came from the apostles, many fathers might say things to be tradition upon that ground only; but of this opinion of the Chiliasts, one of the ancientest fathers, Irenseus, says not only, that it was tradition, but sets down Christ's own words when he taught it, and the pedigree of the opinion from Christ to John his disciple; from him to several priests (whereof Papias was one, who put it in writing) and so downwards ; which can be shewn from no other father, for no other opin- ion, either controverted or uncontroverted. Fourthly, That if Papias, either by his own error, or a desire to deceive, could cozen the fathers of the purest age in this, why not also in other things? Why not in twenty as well as one? Why not twenty others as well as he? Fifthly, That if the fathers could be cozened, how could general councils escape, who, you say, made tradition one of their rules, which can only be known from the fathers? .Sixthly, If they object, how could errors come in, and no beginning of them known ? I pray remember to ask them the same question concern- ing the millenaries, which lasted uncontradicted until Dionysius Alexandri- nus, two hundred and fifty years after Christ ; and if they tell you, that Papias was the first beginner, look in Irenseus, and he will tell you the con- trary, loco citato, 1. 5. c. 33. Seventhly, Remember that, if I ought not to condemn the church' of Rome out of scripture, because my interpretation may deceive me ; then they ought not to build their infallibility upon it (and less upon her own word) because theirs may deceive them ; unless the same thing may be a wall, when you lean upon it, and a bulrush when we do. Eighthly, Remember that they cannot say, they trust not their interpre- tation in this, but a consent of fathers ; because the fathers are not said to be infallible, but as they tell the opinion of the church of their time, which is infallible: therefore they must first prove out of scripture that she is infallible, or else she (who is herself the subject of the question) cannot be allowed till then to give a verdict for herself. Ninthly, Remember the Roman church claims no notes of the church, but what agree with the Grecian too (as antiquity, succession, miracles, &c.) but only communion with the pope and splendour ; both which made for the Arians in Liberius's time ; and it were a hard case, that because the Greeks are poor upon earth, they should be shut out of heaven. Tenthly, Remember, that if we have an infallible way, we have no use (at least no necessity) of an infallible guide ; for if we may be saved by following the scripture as near as we can (though we err) it is as good as any interpreter to keep unity in charity (which is only needful) though not in opinion : and this cannot be ridiculous, because they say, if any man misinterpret the council of Trent, it shall not damn him ; and why (with- out more ado) may not the same be said of scripture? 788 Contradictions in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation, VII. — An Argument against the Infallibility of the present church of Rome, taken from the contradictions in your doctrine of Transubstan- tiation. Mr. Chillingworth. That church is not infallible which teacheth contra- dictions ; but the church of Rome teacheth contradictions : therefore the church of Rome is not infallible. Mr. Daniel. I deny the minor. Chill. That church teacheth contradictions, which teacheth such a doc- trine as contains contradictions ; but the church of Rome teacheth such a doctrine : therefore the church of Rome teacheth contradictions. Dan. I deny the minor. Chill. The doctrine of transubstantiation contains contradictions ; but the church of Rome teacheth the doctrine of transubstantiation : therefore the church of Rome teacheth such a doctrine as contains contradictions. Dan. I deny the major. Chill. That the same thing, at the same time, should have the true figure of a man's body, and should not have the true figure of a man's body, is a contradiction ; but in the doctrine of transubstantiation it is taught, that the same thing (viz. our Saviour present in the sacrament) has the true figure of a man's body, and has not the true figure of a man's body, at the same time : therefore the doctrine of transubstantiation con- tains contradictions. Dan. The major, though not having all rules required to a contradic- tion (as boys in logic know) yet let it pass. Chill. Boys in logic know no more conditions required to a contradic- tion, but that the same thing should be affirmed and denied of the same thing at the same time. For my meaning was, that that should not be accounted the same thing, which was considered after divers manners. Dan. I deny the minor of your syllogism. Chill. I prove it, according to the several parts of it : and, first, for the first part. He must have the figure of a man's body in the eucharist, who is there without any real alteration or difference from the natural body of a man ; but our Saviour, according to the Romish doctrine of transubstantia- tion, is in the sacrament without any real alteration or difference from the natural body of a man : therefore, according to this doctrine, he must there have the figure of a man's body. To the second part, that he must not have the figure of a man's body, in the sacrament, according to this doc- trine, thus I prove it. He must not have the figure of, a man's body in the eucharist, which must not have extension there ; but our Saviour's body, according to the doctrine of transubstantiation, must not have extension there : therefore, according to this doctrine, he must not have the figure of a man's body there. The major of this syllogism I proved, because the figure of a man's body could not be without extension. The minor I proved thus : that must not have extension in the eucharist, whose every part is together in one and the same point ; but, according to this doctrine, every part of our Saviour's body must be here in one and the same point : therefore here it must not have extension. Mr. Dan. answered, by distinguishing the major of the first syllogism, and said ; that he must not have the true figure of a man's body, accord- ing to the reason of a figure taken in its essential consideration, which is to have positionem partium sic et sic extra partes ; but not the accidental consideration, which is in ordine ad locum. And this answer he applied for the solution of the minor, saying thus : Our Saviour is there without an Argument against Infallibility of the Roman Church. 737 any real alteration intrinsical, but not extrinsical ; for he is not changed in order to himself, but in order to place : or otherwise, he is not altered in his continual existence, which is only modus essentia, and inseparable even by divine power, though altered in modo existendi, which is situation, and required to figure taken in order to place. Chill. Against this it was replied by Chillingworth, that the distinction of a man's body, as considered in itself, and as considered in reference to place, is vain, and no solution of the argument : and thus he proved it : If it be impossible, that any thing should have several parts one out of another in order and reference of each to other, without having these parts in several places ; then the distinction is vain ; but it is impossible, that any thing should have several parts one out of another, without having these parts in several places : therefore the distinction is vain. The major of this syllogism he took for granted. The minor he proved thus : Whatsoever body is in the proper place of another body, must of necessity be in that very body, by possessing the dimensions of it : therefore, whatsoever hath several parts one out of the other, must of necessity have them one out of the place of the other ; and consequently in several places. For illustration of this argument he said : If my head, and belly, and thighs, and legs, and feet, be all in the very same place, of necessity my head must be in my belly, and my belly in my thighs, and my thighs in my legs, and all of them in my feet, and my feet in all of them ; and therefore, if my head be out of my belly, it must be out of the place where my belly is ; and if it be not out of the place where my belly is, it is not out of my belly, but in it. Again, to shew that, according to the doctrine of transubstantiation, our Saviour's body in the eucharist hath not the several parts of it out of one another, he disputed thus : Wheresoever there is a body, having several parts one out of the other, there must be some middle parts severing the extreme parts ; but here, according to this doctrine, the extreme parts are not severed, but altogether in the same point ; therefore, here our Saviour's body cannot have parts one out of the other. Mr. Dan. To all this (for want of a better answer) gave only this : Let all scholars peruse these. Afler, upon better consideration, he wrote by the side of the last syllogism this: Quoad entitatem verum est, non quoad locum ; that is, according to entity it is true, but not according to place. And to (let all scholars peruse these) he caused this to be added — and weigh whether there is any new matter worth a new answer. Chillingworth replied, that to say the extreme parts of a body are severed by the middle parts according to their entity, but not according to place, is ridiculous. His reasons are, first, because severing of things is nothing else but putting or keeping them in several places, as every silly woman knows; and therefore to say, they are severed, but not according to place, is as if you should say, they are heated, but not according to heat; they are cooled, but not according to cold; indeed it is to say, they are severed, but not severed. VIII. — An Account of what moved the Author to turn Papist, with his own Confutation of the Arguments that persuaded him thereto. I reconciled myself to the church of Rome, because I thought myself to have sufficient reason to believe, that there was, and must be, alwavs in 3 a 62* 738 The Author's Confutation of the Arguments the world some church that could not err ; and, consequently, seeing all other churches disclaimed this privilege of not being subject to error, the church of Rome must be that church which cannot err. I was put into doubt of this way which I had chosen, by Dr. Stapleton and others, who limit the church's freedom from error to things necessary only, and such as without which the church can be a church no longer ; but granted it subject to error in things that were not necessary : hereupon considering, that most of the differences between protestants and Roman catholics were not touching things necessary, but only profitable or lawful ; I concluded that I had not sufficient ground to believe the Roman church either could not or did not err in any thing, and therefore no ground to be a Roman catholic. Against this again I was persuaded, that it was not sufficient to believe the church to be an infallible believer of all doctrines necessary, but it must also be granted an infallible teacher of what is necessary ; that is, that we must believe not only that the church teacheth all things necessary, but that all is necessary to be believed, which the church teacheth to be so ; in effect, that the church is our guide in the way to heaven. Now to believe that the church was an infallible guide, and to be believed in all things which she requires us to believe, I was induced, first, because there was nothing that could reasonably contest with the church about this office, but the scripture, and that the scripture was this guide, I was willing to believe ; but I saw not how it could be made good, without depending upon the church's authority. 1. That scripture is the word of God. 2. That the scripture is a perfect rule of our duty. 3. That the scripture is so plain in those things which concern our duty, that whosoever desires and endeavours to find the will of God there, he shall either find it, or at least not dangerously mistake it. Secondly, I was drawn to this belief, because I conceived that it was evi- dent, out of the Epistle to the Ephesians, that there must be unto the world's end a succession of pastors, by adhering to whom men might be kept from wavering in matters of faith, and from being carried up and down with every wind of false doctrine. That no succession of pastors could guard their adherents from danger and error, if themselves were subject unto error, either in teaching that to be necessary, which is not so, or denying that to be necessary, which is so: and therefore, that there was, and must be some succession of pastors, which was an infallible guide in the way of heaven, and which could not possibly teach any thing to be necessary, which was not so ; nor any thing not necessary, which was so. Upon this ground I concluded, that seeing there must be such a succession of pastors as was an infallible guide, and there was no other (but that of the church of Rome) even by the confes- sion of all other societies of pastors in the world ; that therefore that suc- cession of pastors is that infallible guide of faith, which all men must follow. Upon these grounds I thought it necessary for my salvation to believe the Roman church, in all that she thought to be, and proposed as neces- sary. Against these arguments it hath been demonstrated unto me ; and first against the first, that the reason why we are to believe the scripture to be the word of God, neither is nor can be the authority of the present church of Rome, which cannot make good her authority any other way, but by pretence of scripture ; and, therefore, stands not unto scripture (no, not in respect of us) in the relation of a foundation to a building, but of a build- that persuaded him to turn Papist. 739 ing to a foundation ; doth not support scripture, but is supported by it. But the general consent of christian? of all nations and ages, a far greater com- pany than that of the church of Rome, and delivering universally the scrip- ture for the word of God, is the ordinary external reason why we believe it ; whereunto the testimonies of the Jews, enemies of Christ, add no small moment for the authority of some part of it. That, whatsoever stood upon the same ground of universal tradition with scripture, might justly challenge belief as well as scripture ; but that no doctrine, not written in scripture, could justly pretend to as full tradition as the scripture, and therefore we had no reason to believe it with that degree of faith, wherewith we believe the scripture. That it is unreasonable to think, that he that reads the scripture, and uses all means appointed for this purpose, with an earnest desire, and with no other end, but to find the will of God, and to obey it, if he mistake the meaning of some doubtful places, and fall unwillingly into some errors, unto which no voice or passion betrays him, and is willing to hear reason from any man that will undertake to shew him his error ; I say, that it is unreasonable to think that a God of goodness will impute such an error to such a man. Against the second it was demonstrated unto me, that the place I built on so confidently, was no argument at all for the infallibility of the suc- cession of pastors in the Roman church, but a very strong argument against it. First, no argument for it, because it is not certain, nor can ever be proved, that St. Paul speaks there of any succession, Ephes. iv. 11 — 13. For let that be granted, which is desired, that in ver. 13, by (until we all meet) is meant, until all the children of God meet in the unity of faith, that is, unto the world's end ; yet it is not said there, that " he gave apostles and pro- phets," &c. which should continue, &c. " until we all meet," by connect- ing ver. 13 to ver. 11. But he gave (then upon his ascension, and mira- culously endowed) apostles and prophets, &c. for the work of the ministry, for the consummating of the saints, for the edification of the body of Christ, until we all meet, that is, if you will, unto the world's end. Nei- ther is there any incongruity, but that the apostles, and prophets, &c. which lived then, may in good sense be said now at this time, and ever hereafter, to do those things which they are said to do. For who can deny but St. Paul, the apostle and doctor of the gentiles, and St. John the evangelist and prophet, do at this very time (by their writings, though not by their per- sons) do the work of the ministry, consummate the saints, and edify the body of Christ? Secondly, it cannot be shewn or proved from hence, that there is, or was, to be any such succession ; because St. Paul here tells us, only, that he gave such in the time past, not that he promised such in the fime to come. Thirdly, it is evident, that God promised no such succession, because it is not certain that he hath made good any such promise : for who is so impudent as to pretend, that there are now, and have been in all ages since Christ, some apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers : especially such as he here speaks of, that is, endow- ed with such gifts as Christ gave upon his ascension ; of which he speaks in ver. 8, saying, " He led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men." And that those gifts were men — endowed with extraordinary power and supernatural gifts — it is apparent, because these words, " and he gave some apostles, some prophets," &c. are added by way of explication and illus- tration of what was said before — and he gave gifts unto men. And if any man except hereunto, that though the apostles, and prophets, and evange- 3a2 740 An Answer to some Passages lists were extraordinary, and for the plantation of the gospel, yet pastors were ordinary, and for continuance ; I answer, it is true, some pastors are ordinary, and for continuance, but not such as are here spoken of; not such as are endowed with the strange and heavenly gifts, which Christ gave not only to the apostles, and prophets, and evangelists, but to the inferior pastors and doctors of his church, at the first plantation of it. And therefore St. Paul, in 1 Cor. xii. 28, (to which place we are referred by the margin of the vulgar translation, for the explication of this) places this gift of teaching amongst, and prefers it before, many other miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost. "Pastors there are still in the church, but not such as Titus, and Timothy, and Apollos, and Barnabas : not such as can justly pretend to immediate inspiration and illumination of the Holy Ghost. And, therefore, seeing there neither are, nor have been, for many ages in the church, such apostles, and prophets, &c. as here are spoken of, it is certain he promised none ; or otherwise we must blasphemously charge him with breach of his promise. Secondly, I answer, that if by dedit, he gave, he meant, promisit, he promised, for ever; then all were promised, and all should have continued. If by dedit be not meant promisit, then he promised none such, nor may we expect any such by virtue of or warrant from this text that is here alleged. And thus much for the first assumpt, which was, that the place was no argument for an infallible succession in the church of Rome. Now for the second, that it is a strong argument against it, thus I make it good. The apostles, and prophets, and evangelists, and pastors, which our Saviour gave upon his ascension, were given by him, that they might con- summate the saints, do the work of the ministry, edify the body of Christ, until we all come into the unity of faith, that we be not "like children, wavering and carried up and down with every wind of doctrine." The apostles, and prophets, &c. that then were, do not now in their own per- sons, and by oral instruction, do the work of the ministry, to the intent we may be kept from wavering, and being carried up and down with every wind of doctrine : therefore they do this some other way. Now there is no olher way by which they can do it, but by their writings; and there- fore by their writings they do it : therefore by their writings, and believing of them, we are to be kept from wavering in matters of faith : therefore the scriptures of the apostles, and prophets, and evangelists, are our guides : therefore not the church of Rome. An Answer to some Passages in Rushworth , s Dialogues, beginning at the Third Dialogue, § XII. p. 181. Ed. Paris, 1654, about Tradi- tions. Uncle. Do you think there is such a city as Rome or Constantinople? Nephew. That I do : I would I knew what I ask as well. Chillingworth. First, 1 should have answered, that in propriety of speech I could not say that I knew it, but that I did as undoubtedly believe it, as those things which I did know. For though (as I conceive) we may be properly said lo believe that which we know, yet we cannot say truly, that we know that which we only believe upon report and hearsay, be it never so con- in Rushworth's Dialogues. 741 stant, never so general : for seeing the generality of men is made up of particulars, and every particular man may deceive and be deceived, it is not impossible, though exceedingly improbable, that all men should con- spire to do so. Yet I deny not that the popular phrase of speech will very well bear, that we may say we know that, which in truth we only believe, provided the grounds of our belief be morally certain. Neither do I take any exception to the nephew's answers made to his uncle's 2, 3, 4, and 5, interrogatories. But grant willingly as to the first, that it is not much material, whether I remember or not any particular author of such a general and constant report. Then, that the testimony of one or two witnesses, though never so credible, could add nothing to that belief which is already at the height ; nay, perhaps, that my own seeing these cities would make no accession, add no degree to the strength and firmness of my faith concerning this matter, only it would change the kind of my assent, and make me know that which formerly I did but believe. To the fourth, that seeming reasons are not much to be regarded against sense or experience, and moral certainties (but withal I should have told my uncle, that I fear his supposition is hardly possible, and that the nature of the thing will not admit, that there should be any great, nay, any pro- bable reasons invented, to persuade me that there was never such a city as London) ; and therefore, if any man should go about to persuade me that there was never such a city as London ; that there were no such men as called themselves, or were called by others, protestants, in England, in the days of Queen Elizabeth ; perhaps such a man's wit might delight me, but his reasons sui*e would never persuade me. Hitherto we should have gone hand in hand together : but whereas in the next place he says, In like manner then you do not doubt, but a catholic, living in a catholic country, may undoubtedly know what was the public religion of his country in his father's days, and that so assuredly, that it were mere madness for him to doubt thereof; I should have craved leave to tell my uncle, that he presumed too far upon his nephew's yielding dis- position. For that as it is a far more easy thing to know, and more authen- tically testified, that there were some men called protestants by themselves and others, than what opinions these protestants held, divers men hold divers things, which yet were all called by this name ; so is it far more easy for a Roman catholic to know, that in his father's days there were some men, for their outward communion with, and subordination to, the bishop of Rome, called Roman catholics, than to know what was the religion of those men who went under this name: for they might be as dif- ferent one from another in their belief, as some protestants are from others. As for example, had I lived before the Lateran council, which condemn- ed Berengarius, possibly I might have known, that the belief of the real presence of Christ in the sacrament was part of the public doctrine of my country ; but whether the real absence of the bread and wine after conse- cration, and their transubstantiation into Christ's body, were likewise catho- lic doctrines at that time, that I could not have known, seeing that all men were at liberty to hold it was so, or it was not so. Moreover, I should have told my uncle, that living now, I know it is catholic doctrine, that the souls of the blessed enjoy the vision of God : but if I had lived in the reign of Pope John XXII. I should not have known that then it was so, considering that many good catholics before that time had believed, and then even the pope himself did believe the contrary : and he is warranted by Bellarmine for doing so, because the church had not then defined it. I should have told him further, that either catholics of the present time 742 An Answer to some Passages do so differ in their belief, that what some hold lawful and pious, others condemn as unlawful and impious ; or else, that all now consent, and con- sequently make it catholic doctrine, that it is not unlawful to make the usual pictures of the trinity, and to set them in churches to be adored. But had I lived in St. Augustine's time, I should then have been taught another lesson ; to wit, that this doctrine and practice was impious, and the contrary doctrine catholic. I should have told him, that now I was taught that the doctrine of indul- gences was an apostolic tradition : but had I lived six hundred years since, and found that in all antiquity there was no use of them ; I should either have thought the primitive church no faithful steward in defrauding men's souls of this treasure intended by God to them, and so necessary for them, or rather that the doctrine of indulgences, now practised in the church of Rome, was not then catholic. I should have told him, that the general practice of Roman catholics now taught me, that it was a pious thing to offer incense and tapers to the saints and to their pictures : but had I lived in the primitive church, I should, with the church, have condemned it in the Collyridians as here- tical. I should have represented to him Erasmus's complaint against the pro- testants, whose departing from the Roman church occasioned the determin- ing and exacting the belief of many points as necessary, wherein, before Luther, men enjoyed the liberties of their judgments, and tongues, and pens. " Antea, (says he) licebat varias agitare qusestiones, de potestate pontificis, de condonationibus, de restituendo, de purgatorio ; nunc tutum non est hiscere, ne de his quidem, quae pie vereque dicuntur. Et credere cogimur, quod homo gignit ex se opera meritoria, quod benefactis meretur vitam seternam, etiam de condigno, quod B. Virgo potest imperare Filio cum Patre regnanti, ut exaudiat hujus aut illius preces, aliaque permulta, ad quae pise mentes inhorrescunt." And from hence I should have collect- ed, as I think very probably, that it was not then such a known and cer- tain thing, what was the catholic faith in many points, which now are determined ; but that divers men who held external communion with that church, which now holds these as matters of faith, conceived themselves no ways bound to do so, but at liberty to hold as they saw reason. I should have shewed him, by the confession of another learned catholic, that through the negligence of the bishops in former ages, and the indis- creet devotion of the people, many opinions and practices were brought into the church, which at first perhaps were but winked at, after tolerated, then approved, and at length, after they had spread themselves into a seem- ing generality, confirmed for good and catholic ; and that therefore there was no certainty that they came from the beginning, whose beginning was not known. I should have remembered him, that even by the acknowledgment of the council of Trent, many corruptions and superstitions had by insensible degrees insinuated themselves into the very mass and offices of the church, which they thought fit to cast out ; and, therefore, seeing that some abuses have come in, God knows how, and have been cast out again, who can ascertain me, that some errors have not got in, and while men slept (for it is apparent they did sleep) gathered such strength, got such deep root, and so incorporated themselves, like ivy in a wall, in the state and polity of the Roman church, that to pull them up had been to pull them down, by razing the foundation on which it stands, to wit, the church's infallibility 1 Besides, as much water passes under the mill, which the miller sees not; so who can warrant me, that some old corruptions might not escape from them, in RushwortK's Dialogues. 743 and pass for original and apostolical traditions? I say, might not, though they had been as studious to reduce all to the primitive state, as they were to preserve them in the present state ; as diligent to cast out all postnate and introduced opinions, as they were to persuade men that there were none such, but all as truly catholic and apostolic, as they were Roman. I should have declared unto him, that many things reckoned up in the roll of traditions, are now grown out of fashion, and out of use, in the church of Rome ; and therefore, that either they believe them not, what- ever they pretend, or were not so obedient to the apostle's command, as they themselves interpret it, " keep the traditions which ye have received, whether by word, or by our epistle." And seeing there have been so many vicissitudes and changes in the Roman church ; catholic doctrines growing exolete, and being degraded from their Catholicism, and perhaps depressed into the number of heresies ; points of indifference, or at least aliens from the faith, getting first to be inmates, after procuring to be made denizens, and in process of time neces- sary members of the body of the faith ; nay, old heresies, sometimes, like old snakes, casting their skin and their poison together, and becoming wholesome and catholic doctrines ; I must have desired pardon of my uncle, if I were not so undoubtedly certain, what was and what was not catholic doctrine in the days of my fathers. Nay, perhaps I should have gone farther, and told him, that I was not fully assured, what was the catholic doctrine in some points, no, not at this present time. For instance (to lay the axe to the root of the tree) the infallibility of the present church of Rome, in determining controversies of faith, is esteemed indeed by divers that I have met with, not only an article of faith, but a foundation of all other articles. But how do I know there are not, nay, why should I think there are not, in the world divers good catholics, of the same mind touching this matter, which Mirandula, Panormitan, Cusanus, Florentinus, Clemangis, Waldensis, Occham, and divers others were of; who were so far from holding this doctrine the foun- dation of faith, that they would not allow it any place in the fabric? Now Bellarmine hath taught us, that no doctrine is catholic, nor the con- trary heretical, that is denied to be so by some good catholics. From hence I collect, that in the time of the forenamed authors this was not catholic doctrine, nor the contrary heretical ; and, being then not so, how it could since become so, I cannot well understand. If it be said, that it has since been defined by a general council ; 1 say, first, this is false : no council has been so foolish as to define, that a council is infallible ; for unless it were presumed to be infallible before, who or what could assure us of the truth of this definition ? Secondly, if it were true, it were ridicu- lous : for he that would question the infallibility of all councils in all their decrees, would as well question the infallibility of this council in this decree. This therefore was not, is not, nor ever can be, an article of faith, unless God himself would be pleased (which is not very likely) to make some new revelation of it from heaven. The rtpatov 4-£u5oj, the fountain of the error in this matter is this, that the whole religion of the Roman church, and every point of it, is conceived or pretended to have issued originally out of the fountain of apostolic tradi- tion, either in themselves or in the principles, from which they are evident- ly derlucible; whereas it is evident, that many of their doctrines may be originally derived from the decrees of councils, many from papal defini- tions, many from the authority of^ some great man ; to which purpose it is very remarkable what Gregory Nazianzen says of Athanasius : 744 An Answer to some Passages c * " What pleased him was a law to men ; what did not please him, was a thing prohibited by law : his decrees were to them like Moses' tables, and he had a greater veneration paid him, than seems to be due from men to saints." And as memorable, that in the late great controversy about predetermi- nation and free-will, disputed before Pope Clement VII. by the Jesuits and dominicans, the pope's resolution was, if he had determined the matter, to define for that opinion, what was most agreeable, not to scripture, not to apostolic tradition, nor to a consent of fathers, but to the doctrine of St. Augustine: so that if the pope had made an article of faith of this contro- versy, it is evident St. Augustine had been the rule of it. Sometimes upon erroneous grounds customs have been brought in, God knows how, and after have spread themselves through the whole church. Thus Gordonius Huntleius confesses, that because baptism and the eucha- rist had been anciently given both together to men of ripe years, when they were converted to Christianity ; afterwards by error, when infants were baptized, they gave the eucharist also to infants. This custom in short time grew universal, and in St. Augustine's time passed currently for an apostolic tradition, and the eucharist was thought as necessary for them as baptism. This custom the church of Rome hath again cast out, and in so doing, professed either her disregard to the traditions of the apostles, or that this was none of that number. But yet she cannot possibly avoid, but that this example is a proof sufficient, that many things may get in by error into the church, and by degrees obtain the esteem and place of apos- tolic traditions, which yet are not so. The custom of denying the laity the sacramental cup, and the doctrine that it is lawful to do so, who can pretend to derive from apostolic tradition ? Especially when the council of Constance,! the patron of it, confesses, that Christ's institution was under both kinds, and that the faithful in the primi- tive church received it in both. Licet Christus, &c. "Although Christ after his supper instituted and administered this venerable sacrament under both kinds ; although in the primitive church this sacrament was received by the faithful under both kinds — Non obstante, &c. Yet all this notwith- standing, this custom, for the avoiding of scandals (to which the primitive church was as obnoxious as the present is) was upon just reason brought in, that laics should receive only under one kind." Brought in therefore it was, and so is one of those doctrines, which Lerinensis calls inducta non tradita, inventa non accepta, &c. therefore all the doctrine of the Roman church does not descend from apostolic tra- dition. But if this custom came not from the apostles, from what original may we think that it descended? Certainly from no other than from the belief of the substantial presence of the whole Christ under either kind. For this opinion being once settled in the people's minds, that they had as much by one kind as by both ; both priest and people quickly began to think it super- fluous, to do the same thing twice at the same time; and thereupon, being (as I suppose) the custom required, that the bread should be received first, having received that, they were contented that the priest should save the pains, and the parish the charges, of unnecessary reiteration. This is my conjecture, which I submit to better judgments ; but whether it be true or * Tov-to tjv vo/M{ avtoi$ o ti extiva bSoxii, xat, -tovto artcoitor'oi/ rta.%w, o f.iy tSoxfC xat, rttawes j Mwduswj aufotj to. txewov boy^uvta, xcu rCKi iov to oej3as rj rtapa ai'flpwrtwv * ot> a/ytoij otysCtetcu. Oratxxi. in laudem Alhan. t Sess. xiii. in RushwortK's Dialogues. 745 false, one thing from nence is certain, that immemorial customs may by degrees prevail upon the church, such as have no known beginning nor author ; of which yet this may be evidently known, that their beginning, whensoever it was, was many years, nay, many ages after the apostles. St. Paul commands,* that nothing be done in the church, but for edifica- tion. He says, and if that be not enough, he proves, in the same place, that it is not for edification, that either public prayers, thanksgiving, and hymns to God, or doctrine to the people, should be in any language, which the assistants generally understand not ; and thereupon forbids any such practice, though it were in a language miraculously infused into the speaker by the Holy Ghost, unless he himself, or some other present, could and would interpret it. He tells us, that to do otherwise is to speak into the air ; that it is, to play the barbarians to one another ; that to such blessings and thanksgivings the ignorant, for want of understanding, cannot say Amen. He clearly intimates, that to think otherwise is to be children in understanding. Lastly, in the end of the chapter he tells all that were prophets and spiritual among the Corinthians, that the things written by him are the commandments of God. Hereupon Lyranus upon the place acknowledgeth, that in the primitive church blessings and all other service were done in the vulgar tongue. Cardinal Cajetan likewise upon the place tells us, that out of this doctrine of St. Paul, it is consequent that it were better for the edification of the church, that the public prayers, which are said in the people's hearing, should be delivered in a language common both to the clergy and the people. And I am confident that the learnedest antiquary of the Roman church cannot, nay, that Baronius himself, were he alive again, could not, produce so much as one example of any one church, one city, one parish, in all the christian world, for five hundred years after Christ, where the sermons to the people were in one language, and the service in another. Now it is confessed on all hands to be against sense and reason, that sermons should be made to the people in any lan- guage not understood by them ; and therefore it follows of necessity, that their service likewise was in those tongues which the people of the place understood. But what talk we of five hundred years after Christ? when even the Lateran council held in the year 1215, makes this decree: Quoniam in plerisque, &c. " Because in many parts within the same city and diocese, people are mixed of divers languages, having under one faith divers rites and fashions, we strictly command that the bishops of the said cities or dioceses provide fit and able men, who according to the diversities of their rites and languages may celebrate divine services, and administer the sacra- ments of the church, instructing them both in word and example." Now after all this, if any man will still maintain, that the divine service in unknown tongues is a matter of apostolic tradition, I must needs think the world is grown very impudent. There are divers doctrines in the Roman church, which have not yet arrived to the honour to be donates civitate, to be received into the number of articles of faith ; which yet press very hard for it, and through the im- portunity and multitude of their attorneys that plead for them, in process of time may very probably be admitted. Of this rank are the blessed Virgin's immaculate conception, the pope's infallibility in determining con- troversies, his superiority to councils, his indirect power over princes in temporalities, &c. Now as these are not yet matters of faith and apostolic traditions, yet in after ages, in the days of our great grandchildren, may * 1 Cor. xiv. 26—28 ; ix. 11, 16, 20, 27. 63 746 An Answer to some Passages very probably become so : why should we not fear and suspect, that many things now pass currently, as points of faith, which Eccltsia ab apostolis, apostoli a Christo, Christus a Deo recepit, which perhaps in the days of our great grandfathers had no such reputation. Cardinal Perron teaches us two rules, whereby to know the doctrine of the church in any age. The first is, when the most eminent fathers of any age agree in the affirmation of any doctrine, and none of their contempo- raries oppose or condemn them, that is to be accounted the doctrine of the church. The second, when one or more of these eminent fathers speak of any doctrine, not as doctors, but as witnesses, and say, not, I think so, or hold so, but the church holds and believes this to be truth ; this is to be accounted the doctrine of the church. Now if neither of these rules be good and certain, then we are destitute of all means to know what was the public doctrine of the church in the days of our fathers ; but, on the other side, if either of them be true, we run into a worse inconvenience ; for then surely the doctrine of the millenaries must be acknowledged to have been the doctrine of the church in the very next age after the apostles. For both the most eminent fathers of that time, and even all whose monu- ments are extant, or mention made of them, viz. Justin Martyr, Irenseus, Tertullian, Melito Sardensis, agree in the affirmation of this point, and none of their contemporary writers oppose or condemn it. And, besides, they speak not as doctors, but as witnesses ; not as of their own private opinion, but as apostolic tradition, and the doctrine of the church. Horatius, and out of him Franciscus a Sancta Clara, teaches us, that under the gospel there is nowhere extant any precept of invocating saints; and tells us, that the apostles' reason of their giving no such precept was, lest the converted gentiles might think themselves drawn over from one kind of idolatry to another. If this reason be good, I hope then the posi- tion, whereof it is the reason, is true, viz. that the apostles did neither com- mand, nor teach, nor advise, nor persuade the converted gentiles to invo- cate saints (for the reason here rendered serves for all alike), and if they did not, and for this reason did not so ; how then, in God's name, comes invocation of saints to be an apostolic tradition 1 The doctrines of purgatory, indulgences, and prayer to deliver souls out of purgatory, are so closely conjoined, that they must either stand or fall together; at least, the first being the foundation of the other two, if that be not apostolic tradition, the rest cannot be so. And if that be so, what meant the author of the Book of Wisdom to tell us, that (after death) " the souls of the righteous are in the hand of God, and there shall no torment touch them?" What means St. John to teach us, that they are blessed which die in the Lord, for that they rest from their labours ? But above all, what meant Bishop Fisher, in his confutation of Luther's assertion, so to prevaricate, as to me he seems to do, in the 8th Art. in saying, Multosfor- tasse movet ? &c. " Peradventure many are moved not to place too great faith in indulgences, because the use of them may seem not of long stand- ing in the church, and a very late invention among christians. To whom I answer, that it is not certain by whom they began first to be tau^t.* Yet some use there was of them, (as they say) very ancient among the Romans, which we are given to understand by the stations, which were so frequented in that city. Moreover they say Gregory I. granted some in his time." And after : Cceteram, ut dicere capimus, &c. " But, as we were saying, there are many things of which in the primitive church no * Therefore it is not true, that all the Roman doctrines were taught by Christ and his apostles. in Rushworth's Dialogues. 747 mention was made, which yet, upon doubts arising, are become perspicu- ous through the diligence of after-times. Certainly (to return to our busi- ness) no orthodox man now doubts whether there be a purgatory, of which yet among the ancients there was made very rare or no mention. More- over the Greeks to this very day believe not purgatory. Whoso will, let him read the writings of the ancient Greeks, and I think he shall find no speech of purgatory, or else very rarely. The Latins also received not this verity all at once, but by little and little. Neither was the faith, whe- ther of purgatory or indulgences, so necessary in the primitive church, as now it is ; for then charity was so fervent, that every one was most ready to die for Christ. Crimes were very rare, and those which were, were punished by the canons with great severity. But now a great part of the people would rather put off Christianity, than suffer the rigour of the canons. That not without the great wisdom of the Holy Spirit, it hath come to pass, that after the course of so many years the faith of purgatory, and the use of indulgences, hath been by the orthodox generally received. As long as there was no care of purgatory, no man looked after indulgences, for all the credit of indulgences depends on that. Take away purgatory, and what need is there of indulgences? We therefore considering, that purga- tory was a long while unknown ; that after, partly upon revelations, partly upon scripture, it was believed by some, and that so at length the faith of it was most generally received by the orthodox church, shall easily find out some reason of indulgences. Seeing therefore it was so late ere purgatory was known and received by the universal church, who now can wonder, touching indulgences, that in the primitive church there was no use of them ? Indulgences therefore began after men had trembled awhile at the torments of purgatory. For then, it is credible, the holy fathers began to think more carefully, by what means they might provide for their flocks a remedy against those torments, for them especially, who had not time enough to fulfil the penance which the canons enjoined." Erasmus tells us of himself, that though he did certainly know, and could prove that auricular confession such as is in use in the Roman church was not of divine institution ; yet he would not say so, because he conceiv- ed confession a great restraint from sin, and very profitable for the times he lived in ; and therefore thought it expedient, that men should rather by error hold that necessary and commanded which was only profitable and advised, than by believing, though truly, the non-necessity of it, neglect the use of that, as by experience we see most men do, which was so beneficial. Jf he thought so of confession, and yet thought it not fit to speak his mind, why might he not think the like of other points, and yet out of discretion and charity hold his peace? and why might not others of his time do so as well as he? and, if so, how shall I be assured, that in the ages before him there was not other men alike minded, who, though they knew and saw errors and corruptions in the church, yet conceiving more danger in the remedy, than harm in the disease, were contented hoc Catone — to let things alone as they were, lest by attempting to pluck the ivy out of the wall, they might pull down the wall itself, with which the ivy was so incor- porated ? Sir Edwin Sandys relates, that in his travels he met with divers men, who, though they believed the pope to be antichrist, and his church anti- christian, yet thought themselves not bound to separate from the communion of it; nay, thought themselves bound not to do so, because the true church was to be the seat of antichrist, from the communion whereof no man might divide himself upon any pretence whatsoever. And much to this purpose is that which Charron tells us in his third 748 An Answer to some Passages Verite, cap. iv. §. 13, 15. That although all that, which the protectants say falsely of the church of Rome, were true, yet for all this they must not depart from it. And again : though the pope were antichrist, and the estate of the church were such (that is, as corrupt both in discipline and doctrine) as they (protestants) pretend, yet they must not go out of it. Both these assertions he proves at large in the above-cited paragraphs, with very many and very plausible reasons ; which I believe would prove his intent, had not the corruptions of the Roman church possessed and infected even the public service of God among them, in which their communion was required ; and did not the church of Rome require the belief of all her errors, as the condition of her communion. But howsoever, be his reasons conclusive or not conclusive, certainly this was the professed opinion of him and divers others; as, by name, Cassander and Baldwin; who, though they thought as ill of the doctrine of the most prevailing part of the church of Rome, as protestants do, yet thought it their duty not to separate from her communion. And if there were any considerable number of consider- able men thus minded (as I know not why any man should think there was not), then it is made not only a most difficult, but even an impossible thing, to know what was the catholic judgment of our fathers in the points of con- troversy ; seeing they might be joined in communion, and yet very far divided in opinion : they might all live in obedience to the pope, and yet some think him head of the church by divine right; others (as a great part of the French church at this day) by ecclesiastical constitution ; others by neither, but by practice and usurpation, wherein yet, because he had pre- scription of many ages for him, he might not justly be disturbed. All might go to confession, and yet some only think it necessary, others only profitable. All might go to mass and the other services of the church, and some both like and approve the language of it, others only tolerate it and wish it altered if it might be without greater inconvenience. All might receive the sacrament, and yet some believe it to be the body and blood of Christ, others only a sacrament of it. Some that the mass was a true and proper sacrifice, others only a commemorative sacrifice or the commemora- tion of a sacrifice. Some, that it was lawful for the clergy to deny the laity the sacramental cup ; others, that it was lawful for them to receive it in one kind only, seeing they could not in both. Some might adore Christ as present there according to his humanity, others as present according to his divine nature only. Some might pray for the dead, as believing them in purgatdry ; others, upon no certain ground, but only that they should rather have their prayers and charity, which wanted them not, than that they, which did want them, should not have them. Some might pray to saints, upon a belief that they heard their prayers and knew their hearts ; others might pray to them, meaning nothing but to pray by them, that God for their sakes would grant their prayers : others, thirdly, might not pray to them at all, as thinking it unnecessary ; others, as fearing it unlawful ; yet, because they were not fully resolved, only forbearing it themselves, and not condemning it in others. Uncle. I pray you then remember also what it is that protestants do commonly taunt and check catholics with ; is it not, that they believe tra- ditions? Nephew. It is a mere calumny, that protestants condemn all kinds of traditions, who subscribe very willingly to that of Vincentius Lerinensis, that christian religion is res tradita, non inventa ; a matter of tradition, not of man's invention ; is what the church received from the apostles (and by consequence what the apostles delivered to the church) and the apostles from Christ, and Christ from God. Chemnitius, in his Examen of the in RusJnoorth's Dialogues. 749 Council of Trent, hath liberally granted seven sorts of traditions, and pro- testants find no fault with him for it. Prove therefore any tradition to be apostolic, which is not written ; shew that there is some known word of God, which we are commanded to believe, that is not contained in the books of the Old and New Testament, and we shall quickly shew, that we believe God's word, because it is God's, and not because it is written. If there were any thing not written, which had come down to us with as full and universal a tradition, as the unquestioned books of canonical scripture, that thing should I believe as well as the scripture ; but I have long sought for some such thing, and yet I am to seek; nay, I am confident no one point in controversy between papists and protestants can go in upon half so fair cards, for to gain the esteem of an apostolic tradition, as those things, which are now decried on all hands ; I mean the opinion of the chiliasts, and the communicating infants. The latter, by the confession of Cardinal Perron, Maldonate, and Binius, was the custom of the church for 600 years at least : it is expressly and in terms vouched by St. Augustine for the doctrine of the church, and an apostolic tradition : it was never insti- tuted by a general council, but in the use of the church, as long before the first general council as St. Cyprian before that council ; there is no known author of the beginning of it : all which are the catholic marks of an apostolic tradition ; and yet this you say is not so, or, if it be, why have you abolished it? the former lineally derives its pedigree from our Saviour to St. John ; from St. John to Papias ; from Papias to Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Melito Sardensis, Tertullian, and others of the two first ages ; who, as they generally agree in the affirmation of this doctrine, and are not contradicted by any of their predecessors, so some of them at least speak to the point, not as doctors, but as witnesses, and deliver it for the doctrine of the church and apostolic tradition, and condemn the contrary as heresy ; and, therefore, if there be any unwritten traditions, these cer- tainly must be admitted first ; or, if these which have so fair pretence to it, must yet be rejected, I hope then we shall have the like liberty to put back purgatory and indulgences, and transubstantiation, and the Latin ser- vice, andthe communion in one kind, &c. none of which is of age enough to be page to either of the forenamed doctrines, especially the opinion of the millenaries. Uncle. What think you means this word tradition 1 No other thing certainly, but that we confute all our adversaries by the testimony of the former church ; saying unto them, this was the belief of our fathers ; thus were we taught by them, and they by others, without stop or stay till you come to Christ. Nephew. We confute our adversaries by saying thus — truly a very easy confutation. But saying and proving are two men's offices ; and therefore, though you be excellent in the former, I fear, when it comes to the trial, you will be found defective in the latter. Uncle. And this no other but the Roman church did or could ever pre- tend to, which being in truth undeniable, and they cannot choose but grant the thing, their last refuge is to laugh, and say, that both fathers and coun- cils did err, because they were men, as if protestants themselves were more. Is it not so as I tell you 1 Nephew. No indeed it is not, by your leave, good uncle. For, first, the Greek church, as every body knows, pretends to perpetual succession of doctrine, and undertakes to derive it from Christ and his apostles, as con- fidently as we do ours. Neither is there any word in all this discourse, but might have been urged as fairly and as probably for the Greek church, as for the Roman. And, therefore, seeing your arguments fight for both 63* 750 Jin Answer to some Passages alike, they must either conclude for both, which is a direct impossibility, for then contradictions should be both true ; or else, which is most certain, they conclude for neither, and are not demonstrations, as you pretend (for never any demonstration could prove both parts of a contradiction) but mere sophisms and captions, as the progress of our answer shall justify. Secondly, it is so far from protestants to grant the thing you speak of, to wit, that the controverted doctrines of the Roman church came from apostolic tradition, that they verily believe, should the apostles now live again, they would hardly be able to find amongst you the doctrine which they taught, by reason of abundance of trash and rubbish which you have laid upon it. And, lastly, they pretend not, that fathers and councils may err, and they cannot ; nor that they were men, and themselves are not ; but that you do most unjustly and vainly to father your inventions of yesterday upon the fathers and councils. Uncle. I know that we catholics do reverence traditions as much as scripture itself; neither do I see why we should be blamed for it ; for the words, which Christ and his apostles spake, must needs be as infallible as those which were written. Nephew. True. But still the question depends, whether Christ and his apostles did indeed speak those words you pretend they did. We say with Irenreus, Prceconiaverunt primum, scripserunt postea ; what they preach- ed first they wrote afterwards. We say with Tertullian (ecclesias) apos- toli condiderunt, ipsi eis prcedicando, tarn viva, quod aiunt, voce, quam per epistolas postea : the apostles founded the churches by their preaching to them, first by word of mouth, then after by their writings. If you can prove the contrary, do so, and we yield ; but hitherto you do nothing. Uncle. And as for the keeping of it, I see the scripture itself is beholden to tradition (God's providence presupposed) for the integrity both of the letter and the sense. Of the letter it is confessed ; of the sense manifest. For the sense being a distinct thing from the naked letter, and rather fetch- ed out by force of consequence, than in express and formal terms contain- ed (which is most true, whether we speak of protestant sense or the catho- lic) it belongeth rather to tradition than express texts of scripture Nephew. That which you desire to conclude, is, that we must be beholden to tradition for the sense of scripture ; and your reason to conclude this, is, because the sense is fetched out by force of consequence. This of some places of scripture is not true, especially those which belong to faith and good manners, which carry their meaning in their foreheads. Of others it is true, but nothing to the purpose in hand, but rather directly against it. For who will not say, if I collect the sense of scripture by reason, then I have it not from authority ? That is, unless I am mistaken, if I fetch it out by force of consequence, then I am not beholden to tradition for it. But the letter of scripture hath been preserved by tradition, and therefore why should we not receive other things upon tradition as well as scripture? I answer, the Jews' tradition preserved the books of the Old Testament, and why then doth our Saviour receive these upon their tradition, and yet con- demn other things, which they suggested as matters of tradition 1 If you say, it was because these traditions came not from Moses, as they were pre- tended ; I say, also, that yours are only pretended, and not proved to come from the apostles. Prove your tradition of these additions as well as you prove the tradition of scripture, and assure yourselves, we then, according to the injunction of the council of Trent, shall receive both with equal reverence. Uncle. As it may appear by the sense of these few words, Hoc est cor- in Rushworth's Dialogues. 751 pus meum, whether you take the protestant or the catholic sense : for the same text cannot have two contrary senses of itself, but as they are fetched out by force of argument ; and therefore, what sense hath best tradition to shew for itself, that 's the truth. Nephew. This is neither protestant nor catholic sense ; but if we may speak the truth, direct nonsense. For what if the same text cannot have contrary senses, is there therefore no means but tradition to determine which is the true sense ? What connexion, or what relation, is there between this antecedent and this consequent ? Certainly they are mere strangers to one another, and until they met by chance in this argument, never saw each other before. He that can find a third proposition to join them together in a good syllogism, I profess unto you, erit mihi magnus Apollo. But what if of these two contrary senses, the one, that is the literal, draw after it a long train of absurdities ; the other, that is, the figurative, do not so, have we not reason enough, without advising with tradition about the matter, to reject the literal sense, and embrace the spiritual ? St. Augustine certainly thought we had ; for he gives us this direction in his book, De Doctrina Christiana; and the first and fittest text that he could choose to exemplify his rule, what think you is it ? Even the cousin-german to that which you have made choice of: " Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man," &c. Here, saith he, the letter seems to command impiety : figura est ergo ; therefore it is a figure, commanding to feed devoutly upon the passion of our Lord, and to lay up in our memory, that Christ was cruci- fied for us. Uncle. These particulars, peradventure, would require a farther discus- sion ; and now I will take nothing but what is undeniable. As this is, to wit, that what points are in controversy betwixt us and protestants, we believe to have been delivered by Christ and his apostles to our forefathers, and by them delivered from hand to hand to our fathers, whom we know to have delivered them for such to us, and to have received and believed them for such themselves. Chillingivorth. Certainly, though ink and paper cannot blush, yet I dare say you were fain to rub your forehead over and over before you committed this to writing. Say what you list ; for my part, I am so far from believing you, that I verily believe you do not believe yourselves, when you pretend that you believe those points of your doctrine, which are in controversy, to have been delivered to your forefathers by Christ and his apostles. Is it possi- ble, that any sober man, who has read the New Testament, should believe, that Christ and his apostles taught christians, that it was fit and lawful to deny the laity the sacramental cup? that it was expedient, and for the edification of the church, that the scripture should be read, and the public worship of God perpetually celebrated in a language which they under- stand not, and to which, for want of understanding (unless St. Paul deceive us) they cannot say amen ? or is it reasonable you should desire us to believe you, when your own men, your own champions, your own coun- cils, confess the contrary 1 Does not the council of Constance acknowledge plainly, that the custom, which they ratified, was contrary to Christ's institution, and the custom of the primitive church ? And how then was it taught by Christ and his apostles ? Do not Cajetan and Lyranus confess ingenuously, that it follows evident- ly from St. Paul, that it is more for edification, that the liturgy of the church should be in such a language as the assistants understand 1 752 An Answer to some Passages The like confession we have from others concerning purgatory and indul- gences. Others acknowledge the apostles never taught invocation of saints. Rhenanus says as much touching auricular confession. It is evident from Peter Lombard, that the doctrine of transubstantiation was not a point of faith in his time. From Picus Mirandula, that the infallibility of the church was no article, much less a foundation of faith in his time. Bellarmine acknowledges, that the saints enjoying the vision of God before the day of judgment, was no article of iaith in the time of Pope John XXII. But as the proverb is — When thieves fall out, true men recover their goods; so how small and heartless the reverence of the church of Rome is to ancient tradition, cannot be more plainly discovered, than by the quarrels which her champions have amongst themselves, especially about the immaculate conception of the blessed Virgin. The patrons of the negative opinion, Cajetan, Bannes, Bandellus, and Canus, allege for it, first, a whole army of scriptures, councils and fathers, agreeing unanimously in this doctrine, that only Christ was free from sin. Then an innumerable multitude of fathers expressly affirming the very point in question, not contradicted by any of their contemporaries or pre- decessors, or indeed of their successors for many ages. All the holy fathers agree in this, that the Virgin Mary was conceived in original sin. So Bannes.* Cajetan brings for it fifteen fathers, in his judgment irrefragable; others produce two hundred; Bandellus almost three hundred. Thus Salmeron.f That all the holy fathers, who have fallen upon the mention of this mat- ter, with one mouth affirm, that the blessed Virgin was conceived in original sin. So Canus4 And after, that the contrary doctrine has neither scripture nor tradition for it. For (saith he) no traditions can be derived unto us, but by the bishops and holy fathers, the successors of the apostles ; and it is certain that those ancient writers received it not from their predecessors. Now, against this stream of ancient writers, when the contrary new doctrine came in, and how it prevailed, it will be worth the considering. The first that set it abroach was Richardus de Sancto Victore, as his countryman Johannes Major testifies of him : § "He was expressly the first that held the Virgin Mary free from original sin : or, he was the first that expressly held so." So after, upon this false ground, which had already taken deep root in the heart of christians, that it was impossible to give too much honour to her that was the mother of the Saviour of the world, like an ill weed, it grew and spread apace. So that in the council of Basil || (which Binius tells us was reprobated but in part, to wit, in the point of the authority of councils, and in the deposition of Eugenius, the pope) it was denned and declared to be holy doctrine, and consonant to the worship of the church, to the catholic faith, to right reason, and the holy scripture, and to be approved, held, and embraced by all catholics; and that it should be lawful for no man for the time to come to preach or teach the contrary. The custom also of keeping the feast of her holy conception, which before * In Part, prima, 1. Art. viii. Dub. 3. t Disp. 51, in Ep. ad Rom. X Lib. vii. Loc. cap. i. cap. iii. n. 9. § Omnium expressc primus Christiferam virginem originalis noxac expertem tenuit. De eslis Scntorum, iii. 12. || Sess. 36. in Rushwortli's Dialogues. 753 was but particular to the Roman and some other churches, and, it seems, somewhat neglected, was then renewed and made universal, and command- ed to be celebrated, sub nomine Conceptionis — under the name of the Conception. Binius in a marginal note tells us indeed, that they celebrate not this feast in the church of Rome, by virtue of this renovation, cum esset conciliabulum, being this was the act not of a council, but of a con- venticle; yet he himself in his index styles it the oecumenical council of Basil, and tells us, that it was reprobated only in two points, of which this is none. Now whom shall we believe? Binius in his margin, or Binius in his index 1 Yet in after times Pope Sixtus IV. and Pius V. thought not this decree so binding, but that they might and did again put life into the condemned opinion, giving liberty by their constitutions to all men to hold and main- tain either part ; either that the blessed Virgin was conceived with original sin, or was not. Which constitution of Sixtus IV. the council of Trent renewed and confirmed.* But the wheel again turning, and the negative opinion prevailing, the affirmative was banished, first by a decree of Paul V. from all public ser- mons, lectures, conclusions, and all public acts whatsoever ; and since, by another decree of Gregory XV. from all private writings, and private con- ferences. But yet all this contents not the university of Paris. They, as Salme- ron tells us, admit none to the degree of doctor of divinity, unless they first bind themselves by solemn oath to maintain the immaculate conception of the blessed Virgin. Now I beseech you Mr. R. consider your courses with some indifference. First, You take authority upon you, against the universal, constant, un- opposed tradition of the church for many ages, to set up, as a rival, a new, upstart, yesterday's invention, and to give all men liberty to hold what they please. So Pope Sixtus IV. the council of Trent, and Pius V. That is, you make it lawful to hold the ancient faith, or not to hold it, nay, to hold the contrary. This is high presumption : but you stay not here, for, Secondly, The ancient doctrine you cloister and book up within the nar- row, close, and dark rooms, of the thoughts and brains of the defenders of it, forbidding them, upon pain of damnation, so much as to whisper it in their private discourses and writings ; and in the mean time the new doc- trine you set at full liberty, and give leave, nay, countenance and encour- agement, to all men to employ their time, and wits, and tongues, and pens, in the maintenance and propagation of it. Thus Paul V. and Gregory XV. Yet this is not all : for, Thirdly, You bind men by oaths to defend the new opinion and to oppose the ancient. So the university of Paris. Yet still you proceed farther : 'or, Fourthly, By your general councils, confirmed by your popes, you have declared and defined, that this new invention is agreeable, and consequent- ly that the ancient doctrine is repugnant, to the catholic faith, to reason, to the Holy Scripture. So the council of Basil. These things I entreat you to weigh well in your consideration, and put not into the scale above a just allowance, not above three grains of par- tiality, and then tell me, whether you can with reason or with modesty sup- pose or desire, that we should believe, or think that you believe, that all the points of doctrine, which you contest against us, were delivered at first by * Sess. 5. 3b 754 An Answer to some Passages Christ and his apostles, and have ever since by the succession of bishops and pastors been preserved inviolate, and propagated unto you. The patrons, I confess, of this new invention set not much by the decree of the council of Basil for it, but plead very hard for a full and final defini- tion of it from the see apostolic: and finding the conspiring opposition of the ancient fathers to be the main impediment of their purpose, it is strange to see how confidently they ride over them. " First, (says Salmeron in the place forecited*) they press us with a mul- titude of doctors, of whom we must not say that they err in a matter of such moment. " We answer, (says he) out of St. Augustine, f and the doctrine of St. Thomas, that the argument drawn from authority is weak. Then to that multitude of doctors we oppose another multitude. " Thirdly, we object to the contrary the efficacy of reasons which are more excellent than any authority. " Some of them reckon two hundred fathers; others, as Bandellus, almost three hundred ; Cajetan fifteen, but those, as he says, irrefragable. But as a wise shepherd said, Pauperis est numerare pecus. Some of those, whom they produce, are of an exolete authority, and scarce worthy of memory. " Lastly, Against this objected multitude we answer with the word of God4 ' Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil ; neither shalt thou in judgment yield to the sentence of many to depart from the truth.' For when the donatists gloried in the multitude of their authors, St. Augustine answered, It was a sign of a cause destitute of truth, to rely only upon the authority of many men, who may err. " It falls out sometimes also, that from some one doctor, especially if he be famous, proceeds a multitude of followers of his opinion ; and some, taken with an humble and pious fear, choose rather to follow the opinion of another against their mind, than to bring out of their own wit any thing new, lest they should so bring any new thing into the church. Whose humility, as it is to be praised, so the confidence of others is not to be con- demned, who for the love of truth fear not to bring in better things. Thus St. Jerome, in his sermon of the assumption (if it be his) fears to affirm, that the Virgin Mary is assumed into heaven, and thinks it rather to be piously desired, than rashly defined. But St. Augustine^ more happily dared to affirm it, and settle it with many arguments, by which adventure the church hath gained this, that persuaded by his reasons she hath believed it, and celebrates it in her worship. " But they fetch their arguments from the antiquity of the doctors, to which always greater honour was given than to novelties. But I answer, old men are praisers of ancient times, but we affirm, the younger the doctors are, the more perspicuous. Moreover we say, that although they were ancient, yet they were men, and themselves held under the darkness of ori- ginal sin, and might err. But go to, who are these ancients? Are they apostles, are they Ambrose, or Jerome, or Augustine ? But none of them discussed this controversy on purpose. " Chrysostom is opposed in his commentary on St. Matthew, where he saith, ' though Christ were not a sinner, yet he has human nature from a sinner.' Understand (says Salmeron) from her, who, of herself, and ac- cording to the condition of nature, was a sinner. Thomas says that Chry- sostom speaks exorbitantly, for he constitutes the Virgin under actual sin ; * Disp. 51, in Epist. ad Rom. t De moribus Ecclesiee, 1. 1. cap. ii. t Exod. xxiii. 2. § In the margin here he says, "The doctrine of St. Augustine alone hath brought into the church the worship of the blessed Virgin's assumption." in Rushwortli's Dialogues. 755 or that the commentaries, which go up and down under his name, are not his j or, that these passages are adjectitious ; or, if they be indeed his, with the good leave and favour of so great a man, they are to be rejected. Neither ought any man to marvel, that he, and Bernard, and Thomas, and Bonaventure, and Alexander of Ales, and Albert, and Durand, and Egidius, and, lastly, the greater part followed that opinion ; both because they were men, and because in progress of time new mysteries are revealed, which before were unknown. For as holiness of life purgeth no man from sin, so it frees no man from danger of error. Every age finds out some verities proper to itself, which the former ages were ignorant of." And there in the margin, "every age hath its peculiar divine revelations." Thus far Salmeron : by whom we may see, that protestants are not the only men, who say, that the fathers may err ; but that Roman catholics too can and dare valiantly break through and tread under their feet, (though perhaps with cap in hand,, and some show of reverence) and even ride over whole bands of fathers, when they stand in their way. Another great Achilles for the same opinion is one Joannes Baptista Porta, a Jesuit, and professor of divinity at Cornplutum. He, in his fourth book of his Elucidarium Dtipara, pleads very earnestly to have it defined, and labours very lustily to remove all exceptions to the contrary, but above all, those many ones, that there is no tradition for it ; that the stream of ancient tradition is against it, and therefore well and worthily may it be condemned for a heresy ; but, to be canonized among the articles of faith, it can with no reason expect. To the second exception he brings two answers, which Salmeron, it seems, forgot, in the prosecution whereof he hath many excellent passages, which I have thought good to cull out of him, to evidence the wonderful reverence and constant regard of the present church of Rome to the tradi- tion of the ancients. The first, That it is possible, the writings of the fathers, out of which these testimonies against the immaculate conception are taken, may be cor- rupted. But to show it probable they are so in these places, he speaks not one word of sense, nor so much as any colourable reason, unless this may pass for one (as perhaps it may where reasons are scarce) — no proposition which contradicts the common judgment, of the fathers, can be probable : but it is defide, that our opinion is probable ;* for the council of Trent hath made it so, by giving liberty to all to hold it : therefore without doubt we must hold, that it is not (whatsoever it seems) against the common judg- ment of the fathers. This argument, saith he, doth most illustriously con- vince the followers of the contrary opinion, that they ought not to dare affirm hereafter, that their opinion flows from the common judgment and writings of the ancient doctors. His second answer is, That whereas Bandillus, and Cajetan,&c. produce general sayings of Irenasus, Origen, Athanasius, Theophilus Alexandrinus, Greg. Nyssen, Basil, Greg. Naz. Cyprian, Jerome, Fulgentius, and in a manner of all the ancient fathers, exempting Christ alone from, and con- sequently concluding the Virgin Mary under original sin, which argument must needs conclude, if the Virgin Mary be not Christ: his answer, I say, is, These testimonies have little or no strength ; for did they conclude, we must then (let us in God's name) say, that the Virgin Mary committed also many venial sins : for the scriptures, fathers, and councils set forth in pro- positions as universal, that there is no man, but Christ, who is not often i * I should rather subsume — but this does so ; therefore not probable. 3b2 756 An Answer to some Passages defiled, at least with smaller sins, and who may not justly say that petition of our Lord's Prayer, Demitte nobis dcbita nostra. An answer, I confess, as fit as a napkin, to stop the mouths of his domestic adversaries, though no way fit to satisfy their reason. But this man little thought there were piotestants in the world, as well as domini- cans, who will not much be troubled by thieves falling out, to recover more of their goods than they expected, and to see a prevaricating Jesuit, instead of stopping one breach in their ruinous cause, to make two. For whereas this man argues from the destruction of the consequent to the destruction of the antecedent thus : — If these testimonies were good and concluding, then the Virgin Mary should have been guilty, not only of original, but also of actual, sin : but the consequent is false and blasphemous ; therefore the antecedent is not true : they on the other side argue, and sure with much more reason, and much more conformity to the ancient tradition, from the assertion of the antecedent to the assertion of the consequent, thus: — If these testimonies be good and concluding, then the blessed Virgin was guilty both of original sin and actual : but the testimonies are good and concluding; therefore she was guilty even of actual sins, and therefore much more of original. His third answer is, That their church hath or may define many other things, against which (if their works be not depraved) there lies a greater consent of fathers, than against the immaculate conception ; and therefore, why not this 1 The instances he gives are four. 1. That the blessed Virgin committed no actual sin. 2. That the angels were not created before the visible world. 3. That the angels are incorporeal. 4. That the souls of saints departed are made happy by the vision of God before the day of judgment. Against the first opinion he alleges direct places out of Origen, which he says admit, no exposition, though Pamelius upon Tertullian, and Sixtus Sinensis labour in vain to put a good sense on them ; out of Euthymius, and Theophylact ; out of St. Chrysostom clivers pregnant testimonies, and St. Thomas's confession touching one of them ; out of the author of the ques- tions of the New and Old Testament, in St. Augustine, cap. Ixxv. ; out of St. Hilary upon Psa. cxviii. which words yet, says he, Tolet has drawn to a good construction, yet so much difficulty still remains in them; out of Tertullian, De came Christi, cap. vii. which he tells us will not be salved by Pamelius's gloss; out of Athanasius ; out of Irenseus, iii. 18, out of St. Augustine, lib. ii. De Symbolo ad Catech. cap. v. whose words yet, because they admit, says Poza, some exposition, I thought fit to suppress, though some think they are very hard to be avoided ; out of Greg. Nyssen ; out of St. Cyprian in his sermon on the passion, whose words, says he, though they may by some means be eluded, yet will always be very difficult, if we examine the antecedents and consequents ; out of Anselm, Rich, de St. Victor, St. Ambrose, St. Andrew of Jerusalem, and St. Bede ; and then tells us, there are many other testimonies much resembling these, and besides, many fathers and texts of scripture, which exempt Christ only from actual sin ; and, lastly, many suspicious sayings against her immunity in them, who use to say, that at the angel's annunciation she was cleansed, and purged, and expiated from all faults committed by her free-will ; which, saith he, though Canisius and others explicate in a pious sense, yet at least they show, that either those alleged against the immaculate conception are in Rushworth's Dialogues. 757 as favourably to be expounded, or, we must say, that a verity may be defined by the see apostolic against the judgment of some fathers. From these things, says he, is drawn an unanswerable reason, that, for the defining of the purity of the conception, nothing now is wanting. For seeing notwithstanding, more and more convincing testimonies of fathers, who either did, or did seem, to ascribe actual sin to the blessed Virgin ; not- withstanding the universal sayings of scriptures and councils, bringing all, except Christ, under sin ; lastly, notwithstanding the silence of the scrip- tures and councils, touching her immunity from actual sin ; seeing, not- withstanding all this, the council of Trent* hath either decreed, or hath confirmed, it being before decreed by the consent of the faithful, that the blessed Virgin never was guilty of any voluntary, no, not the least sin ; it follows certainly, that the apostolic see hath as good, nay, better ground, to enrol amongst her articles the Virgin's immaculate conception. The reason is clear : for neither are there so many, nor so evident sentences of fathers, which impute any fault or blemish to the conception of the mother of God, as there are in appearance to charge her with actual offences ; neither are there fewer universal propositions in scripture, by which it may be proved, that only Jesus was free from actual sin, and therefore, that the Virgin Mary fell into it ; neither can there at this time be desired a greater consent of the faithful, nor a more ardent desire than there now is, that this verity should be defined, and that the contrary opinion should be ana- thematized for erroneous and heretical. The words of the council of Trent, on which this reason is grounded, are these: "If any man say, that a man all his life long may avoid all, even venial sins, unless by special privileges from God, as the church holds of the blessed Virgin, let him be anathema." But if the consent of the church hath prevailed against more clear testi- monies of ancient fathers, even for that which is favoured with no express authority of scriptures or councils ; and if the council of Trent, upon this consent of the faithful, hath either defined this immunity of the Virgin from all actual sin, or declared it to be defined ; who then can deny, but that the church hath immediate power to define among the articles of faith, the pious opinion of the immaculate conception ? His second example, by which he declares the power of their church to define articles against a multitude of fathers, (and, consequently, not only without, but against tradition) is the opinion, that angels were not created before the corporeal world was created ; which, saith he, is or may be defined, though there were more testimonies of fathers against it, than against the immaculate conception. So he says in the argument of his fifth chapter. And in the end of the same chapter, the council of Lateran hath defined this against the express judgment of twenty fathers ; of which Nazianzen, Basil, Chrysostom, Cyril, Jerome, Ambrose, and Hilary, are part. His third example to the same purpose is the opinion, that angels are incorporeal ; against which, saith he, in the argument of his sixth chapter, there are more testimonies of the fathers, than against the immaculate con- ception ; and yet it is, or at least may be, defined by the church. And in *the end of the chapter, I have for this opinion cited twenty-three fathers, which, as most men think, is now condemned in the Lateran council ;f or at least, as Suarez^: proves, is to be rejected as manifestly temerarious. His fourth and last example to the same purpose is the opinion, that the souls of saints departed enjoy the vision of God before the resurrection ; *Sess. vi. c. 23. De justificat. tFirm. De summa Trinitate. t De Angelis, 1. vi. 64 758 An Answer to some Passages in Rushworth , s Dialogues. against which, he tells us, in the first place, was the judgment of Pope John XXI. though not as a pope, but as a private doctor. Then he musters up against it a great multitude of Greek and Latin fathers, touching which he says : All these testimonies when Vasques has related, * at length he answers, f that they might be so explained, as to say nothing against the true and catholic doctrine ; yet, if they could not be so explained, their authority ought not to hinder us from embracing that, which the church hath defined. The same argument I make, says Poza : the fathers and ancient doctors, who are objected against the pious opinion of the conception of the Virgin, may be commodiously explicated, or at least so handled that they shall not hurt ; notwithstanding, though some of them cannot be so explicated, their testimonies ought not to hinder, but that the see apostolic may define the blessed Virgin's preservation from original sin. In fine, for the close of this argument, he adds, Nolo per plura, I will not run through more examples ; these that I have reckoned are sufficient, and admonish learned men to bring together other like proofs, whereby they may promote the desired determination. * 1, 2. D. 29, cap. i. tCap. iil A TABLE OF THE PRINCIPAL MATTERS IN CHARITY MAINTAINED, &c. JVote.— The figures within the parentheses refer to the paragraph, and thoBe which follow to the page. Protestants agree in more things than they differ in, by believing the scripture, (49, 50) 289, 290. We have as many ra- tional means of agreement as the papists, (7, 8) 293. Papists pretend to means of agreement and do not agree, (3 — 6) 192, 193. Not necessary to find a church agree- ing with protestants in all points, (19) 58, (27) 354. Antiquity vainly pleaded for Romish doctrines and practices, since many errors are more ancient than some of their doctrines, (19) 350. Apostles erred after the sending of the Holy Ghost, (33) 208. The apostolic church an infallible guide, to which we may resort, being present to us by her writings, (69, 80) 235, 242. That the church has power to make new articles of faith, asserted by the Romish doctors, (18) 270. This one article — I believe the Ro- man catholic church to be infallible — if their doctrines were true, would secure against heresy more than the whole creed, (77 — 79) 303, 304, (83) 305. Assent, evidence the cause thereof, (51) 476. Christ's assistance promised to the church, to lead her into more than necessary truths, (61, 62) 368, 370. Assistance, Divine, who shall have it, (88) 382. Atheism and irreligion spring easily from some Romish doctrines and practices, (7, 8) 51, 52. Attrition, what, (4) 76. St. Augustine's saying, Evangelio non crederem, &c, how to be understood, (54) 127, (97—99) 142, 143. St. Augus- tine's testimony against the donatists not cogent against protestants, (163) 173. St. Augustine's words, no necessity to divide unity, explained, (10) 346. The author's vindication from suspicion of heresy, (28) 66. The author's motives to turn a papist, with answers to them, (42, 43) 37. B. Baptism, what, (7) 497. Baptizing of children not provable by scripture, (7) 497. Belief: things worthy to be believed not always necessary to be believed, (46) 217 ; things necessary to be believed, what, (17) 58, (101) 144, (5) 192, (13) 196. Belief in Christ, what, (13) 196. Bible only is the religion of protestants, (56) 480. The bible, which is the religion of protestants, to be preferred before the way of Romish religion, showed at large, (56—72) 480 — 485. The calvinists' rigid doctrine of prede- termination unjustly reproached by papists, who communicate with those that hold the same, (30) 513. To give a catalogue of our fundamentals not necessary nor possible, (27) 64, (13) 196, (53) 224. Want of such a catalogue leaves us not uncertain in our faith, (14) 198. Papists as much bound to give a catalogue of the church's proposals, which are their fundamentals, and yet do it not, (53) 224. Our general catalogue of fundamentals as theirs, (12) 266, (35) 516. Catholic church : — I believe in the catholic church — what it signifies, (41) 359. Cere- monies, (42) 214. Moral certainty a sufficient foundation of faith, (154) 167. Certainty, actual, may be without absolute infallibility, (26) 203. What cer'tainty re- quired, (154) 167. A protestant may have certainty, though disagreeing protestants all pretend to like certainty, (13) 504. What charity papists allow to us protestants, and we to them, (1, 3—5) 74, 75—78. A cha- ritable judgment should be made of such as err, but lead good lives, (33) 515. Pro- testant charity to ignorant papists no com- fort to them that will not see their errors, (76) 376. Christianity must be known be- fore the church, (53) 291. Church, by what constituted, ibid. True visible, what, (19) 58. Its visibility may cease, (13) 348. Visible church in some cases may be re- sisted, (164) 173. Where to be hearkened (759) 760 THE TABLE. to, (3) 49. What errors free from, (64) 370. It may err, (11) 195, (70) 236. How far to be obeyed, (58) 230. Its communion when to be separated from, (11) 195. What authority it hath to decide controversies of faith, (162) 172. No particular church se- cured fromerring in fundamentals,(55)217. The same church, what, (11) 195. Not judge of controversies, (20) 440. Its per- petuity not necessary, (13)436. The church how furnished with means to determine con- troversies, (7, 11) 79, 83. Church of Rome, how a true church, (20) 440. Not infallible, nor our guide, (29) 511. We may be a true church, though deriving ordination, and re- ceiving scripture from a false one, (54) 478. Circumstances of worship, how far to be taken from the church, (42) 214. Com- mands in scripture to hear the church, and obey it, suppose it not infallible, (41) 214. Common truths believed, may preserve them good, that otherwise err, (38) 515. Con- cord in damned errors worse than disagree- ment in controverted points, (72) 374. Conscience, how far it justifies disobedience to superiors, (108) 399. The consequence of men's opinions may be unjustly charged upon them, (12) 84, (30) 513. Contradic- tions a man may believe, (46) 285. Con- troversies in religion not necessary to be all determined, (7) 79, (88) 246. Means of ending them, (7, 8) 193. How controver- sies about scripture itself are to be decided, (27) 1 1 6. Controversies not necessary to be decided by a judicial sentence, without any appeal, (85) 138. Creed, how it contains the credenda necessary to be proposed, (12) 266, and believed, (1) 74, (21, &c.) 273, (65) 299, (73) 302. All the points in it not fundamental, (69) 300, and why, (75) 302. That the creed contains all necessary points, and how to be understood, (23) 274, (73, 74) 302. Not necessary, that our creed should be larger than that of the apostles, (67) 300, (70—72) 301. D. Damnable, (21) 59, (26) 60. Defining is no more than declaring what the word sig- nifies, (22) 351. St. Dennis of Alexandria's saying explained, about not dividing the church, (12) 348. To deny a truth wit- nessed by God, whether always damnable, (9) 53. The apostles' depositing truth with the church, no argument that she should always keep it sincere and entire, (148) 164. Of disagreeing protestants, though one side must err, yet both may hope for salvation, (22) 59, (10) 82, (13) 85, (17) 87. Two may disagree in a matter of faith, and yet neither be chargeable with denying a de- clared truth of God, (10) 54. Differences among protestants vainly objected against them, (2, 3, 5) 192. No reason to reproach them for their differences about necessary truths and damnable errors, (52) 222. Dis- belief, when a fault, (9) 53. What is re- quisite to convince a man that a doctrine comes from God, (8) 52. Believing the doctrine of scripture, a man may be saved, though he did not believe it to be the word of God, (159) 170. The donatists' error about the catholic church, what it was and was not, (64) 232. The donatists' case and ours not alike, (101) 393. The Roman church guilty of the donatists' error, in per- suading men, as good not to be christians, as not Roman catholics, (64) 232. Papists liker to the donatists than we, by their un- charitable denying of salvation out of their church, (21, 22) 508, (27) 510. E. English divines vindicated from inclin- ing to popery, and for want of skill in school divinity, (19) 58. Errors damnable, what and how, (6, 7) 51, (26) 60, (29) 66, (4) 76, (12) 84, (12) 111, (11) 195, (17) 199, (52) 222, (14) 269, (49) 289. Dangerous, ib. Fundamental, (21) 59, (9) 294. Sin- ful, (26) 60. Venial, (29) 511. Security from fundamental errors, how, (56) 227. In what case errors damnable may not damn those that hold them, (58) 230, (14) 269. In what case errors not damnable may be damnable to those that hold them, (66) 372. No man to be reproached for quitting his errors, (103) 394. Though we may pardon the Roman church for her errors, yet we may not sin with it, (70) 373. Errors of the Roman church that endanger salvation to be forsaken, though they are not destruc- tive of it, (6) 496. Erring persons, that lead good lives, should be judged of cha- ritably, (33) 515. A man may learn of the church to confute its errors, (40) 214. Wc did well to forsake the Roman church for her errors, though we afterwards may err out of it, (63—65) 370, 371, (67) 372, (87) 381, (92) 385. We must not adhere to a church in professing the least errors, lest we should not profess with her necessary doc- trine, (56) 227. Eucharist given to infants, accounted an apostolic tradition by St. Augustine, &c. (10) 54, (42) 214. The ex- amples of those, that, forsaking popish errors, have denied necessary truths, no ar- gument against protestants, (63) 231. Ex- ternal communion of a church may be left without leaving a church, (32) 356, (45) 360, (47) 360. Faith, what (8) 81 . It is not knowledge, (2) 428. Articles of faith necessary to be be- lieved, (17) 58, (144) 162, (159) 170,(2) 192. Faith certain, how required, (9) 82. Matter of faith (10) 82. Scripture the sole and adequate object of faith, (101) 144. Faith in Christ, what, (13) 196. Faith no new article, {28) 205. No article of faith can be THE TABLE. 761 made or declared by any one, which was not made and declared before, (18) 270. Whether faith be destroyed by denying a truth testified by God, (25) 60, (49) 472, (19) 506. The objects of faith, of two sorts ; essential and occasional, (3) 264. Certainty of faith, less than the highest degree, may please God, and save a man, (8) 81 , (3 — 5) 428 — 430. Faith, less than infallibly cer- tain, may resist temptations and difficulties, (5) 430. There may be faith, where the church and its infallibility begets it not, (49) 125. Faith does not go before scripture, but follows its efficacy, (48) 124. Protes- tants have sufficient means to know the cer- tainty of their faith, (152) 166. In the Ro- man church, the last resolution of faith is into motives of credibility, (154) 167. The fathers declared their judgment of articles, but did not require their declarations to be received under anathema, (18) 270. Pro- testants did not forsake the church, though they forsook its errors, (1 1) 295. Sufficient foundation for faith without infallible cer- tainty, (6) 431, (45) 470. Fundamentals, what, (20, 21) 200, (51) 222, (52) 291. Dif- ferences in fundamentals, (19) 200, (13) 196, (19) 271. Not necessary to have a list of them, (53) 224. Who secure from erring in them, (64) 370. No infallible guide in fundamentals (39) 213. Fundamental errors twofold (88) 382. To be unerring in fundamentals can be said of no church of one denomination, (55) 226. To say, that there shall always be a church not erring in fundamentals, is to say, that there shall be always a church, (35) 211. A church is not safe, though retaining funda- mentals, when it builds hay and stubble on the foundation, and neglects to reform her errors, (61) 368. Ignorance of what points in particular are fundamental, does not make it uncertain whether we do not err fundamentally, or differ in fundamentals among ourselves, (14) 504. In what sense the church of Rome errs not fundamental- ly, (20) 58. G. The four gospels contain all necessary doctrines, (40—43) 281, 283. An infallible guide not necessary for avoiding heresy, (127) 156. The apostolic church an infal- lible guide, to which we may resort, (69) 235. The church may not be an infallible guide in fundamentals, though it be infalli- ble in fundamentals, (39) 213. That the Roman church should be the only infallible guide of faith, and the scriptures say nothing concerning it, is incredible, (20) 440. H. Heresy, what, (8) 52, (127) 156, (18) 270, (51) 362, (11) 435, (38) 461. No mark of heresy to want succession of bishops hold- ing the same doctrine, (38) 461, (41) 467. 64 Heretics, who, (127) 156. We are not heretics for opposing things propounded by the church of Rome for divine truth, (11, 12) 435. Holy Ghost, its motions, (95) 141. Hooker's fundamentals, (49) 289. Whether protestants schismatically cut off the Roman church from hopes of salvation, (38) 357. Jewish church had in it no infallible di- rection, (124) 155, (141) 160. The im- posing a necessity of professing known errors, and practising known corruptions, is a just cause of separating from a church, (31) 356, (36) 357, (40) 358, (50) 362, (59, 60) 366, 367, (68, 69) 373. IndifFerency to all religions falsely charged upon pro- testants, (3) 49, (12) 196. The belief of the church's infallibility makes way for heresy, (10) 54. An infallible guide not needful for avoiding heresies, (127) 156. The church's infallibility has not the same evidence as there is for the scriptures, (30) 206, (31) 207. The church's infallibility can no way be better assured to us, than the scriptures' incorruption, (25) 116, (27) 204. The church's infallibility is not proved from the promise, that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, (70) 236. Nor from the promise of the Spirit's lead- ing into all truth, which was made only to the apostles, (71) 236, (72) 237. The church's infallibility not proved from Ephes. iv. 11 — 13, He gave some apostles, &c. till we all come in the unity of the faith, &c, (79, 80) 241, 242. That God has appointed an infallible judge of contro- versies, because such a one is desirable and useful, is a weak conclusion, (128 — 136) 157, 158. Infallibility in fundamentals no warrant to adhere to a church in all that she proposes, (57) 229. Infallible interpre- tations of scripture vainly boasted of by the Roman church, (93—95) 140, 141. Whe- ther the denial of the church's infallibility leaves men to their private spirit, reason, and discourse, and what is the harm of it, (12, 13) 56. Traditional interpretations of scripture how ill preserved, (10) 109. In- terpretations of scripture, which private men make for themselves (not pretending to prescribe their sense to others) though false, or seditious, endanger only them- selves, (122) 154. Allow the pope or Ro- man church to be a decisive interpreter of Christ's laws, and she can evacuate them, and make what laws she pleases, (10, 11) 54, 56, (1) 105. Interpretations of scrip- ture may not be imposed, (16) 269." Men may declare their sense, but cannot impose it, (18) 270. Interpreter of scripture, every man for himself, (110) 149. Not the Ro- man church, (80) 136. St. Irenseus's ac- count of tradition favours not popery, (144 — 146) 162 — 164. His saying, that no 762 THE TABLE. reformation can countervail the danger of a schism, explained, (11) 347. A living judge to end controversies about the sense of scripture, not necessary, (12, 13) 111, 112. If Christ had intended such a judge in religion, he would have named him, which he has not done, (23) 115, (69) 134, (20) 440. Though a living judge be neces- sary to determine civil causes, yet not ne- cessary for religious causes, (14^ — 22) 113, 114. If there be a judge of controversies, no necessity he should be of the Roman church, (69) 235. Roman catholics set up as many judges in religion, as protestunts, (116) 151,(118) 152, (153) 166. Judge of controversies none, (10) 109, (13, &c.) 112, (85) 138, (103) 146, (69) 235. In religion every one for himself, (11) 110, (116) 151, (153, &.c.) 166, (87) 246. Justification, verbal disputes about it, (30, &c.) 513. K. Our obligation to know any divine truth arises from God's manifest revealing of it, (19) 200. L. How we are assured, in what language the scripture is uncorrupted, (55 — 57) 127 — 129. To leave a church, and to leave the external communion of a church, is not the same thing, (32) 458, (35) 460, (47) 470. Love, what requires different degrees of it, (5) 496. Luther's separation not like that of the donatists, and why, (33) 356, (101) 393. Luther and his followers did not di- vide from the whole church, being a part of it, but only reformed themselves, for- saking the corrupt part, (56) 364. Luther's opposing himself to all in his reformation, no objection against him, (89, 90) 383. We are not bound to justify all that Luther said and did, no more than papists are bound to justify what several popes have said and done, (112) 404, M. They may be members of the catholic church, that are not united in external com- munion, (9) 346. Merit, how denied, (35) 279. Millennium, a matter of faith to Irenaeus and Justin Martyr, (10) 54. The mischiefs that followed the Reformation, not imputable to it, (92) 385. The author's motives to change his religion, with an- swers to them, (42, 43) 37. The faith of papists resolved at last into the motives of credibility, (154) 167. N. Necessary to salvation, what, (26) 60. Necessary simply to salvation, (52, 53) 222, 224. Necessary to be believed, what, ibid. (49) 289. Necessary, the evil of making that necessary, which God has not made necessary to salvation, (64) 232. Necessary truths, what, (1, &c.) 264, (41) 282. What makes any truth necessary to be believed, (4, &c.) 265. To be believed, and not to be disbelieved, the same, (11) 266. To be be- lieved absolutely, and necessary to be be- lieved upon a supposition, ibid. Necessary to be known that they are revealed, and why to be believed when they are revealed, and known to be so, (30, &c;) 277. Ne- cessary doctrines, all to be found in each evangelist, (40) 281. Necessary simply, how to be known, (144) 162. What makes points necessary to be believed, (11) 266. No more is necessary to be believed by us than by the apostles, (27, &c.) 277. Papists make many things necessary to salvation, which God never made so, (7) 497. All necessary points of faith are contained in the creed, (73, 74) 301, 302. Why some points not so necessary were put into the creed, (75, 76) 302, 303. Protestants may agree in necessary points, though they may overvalue some things they hold, (34) 516. To impose a necessity of professing known errors, and practising known corruptions, is a just cause of separation, (31) 356,(36) 357, (40) 358, (50) 362, (59) 366, (60) 367, (68, 69) 373 O. A blind obedience is not due to ecclesias- tical decisions, though our practice must be determined by the sentence of superiors, in doubtful cases, (110) 402. A probable opin- ion may be followed (according to the Ro- man doctors) though it be not the safest way for avoiding sin, (8) 499. Optatus's saying impertinently urged against protes- tants, (99, 1 00) 391, 392. Ordination, (39) 462, (15) 505. Though we receive ordi- nation and scripture from a false church, yet we may be a true church, (54) 478. P. Whether papists or protestants most ha- zard their souls on probabilities, (57) 295. What we believe concerning the perpetuity of the visible church, (18) 58. Peter had no authority over the other apostles, (100) 392. Whether 1 Tim. iii. 15, The pillar and ground of truth, belong to Timothy, or the church, (76) 240. If those words belong to the church, whether they may not signify her duty, and yet that she may err in ne- glecting it, (77) 241. A possibility of being deceived argues not an uncertainty in all we believe, (26) 203, (50) 221, (107) 399, (47) 470. By joining in the prayers of the Roman church, we must join in her unlaw- ful practices, (11) 195. Preaching the word and administering the sacraments, how they are inseparable notes of the church, and how the}' make it visible, (19) 350. Private judgment, how not to be opposed to the public, (109) 400. Private spirit, how we are to understand it, (110) 149. Private spirit is not appealed to, (i. e. to dictates pretending to come from God's Spirit) when controversies are referred to scripture, (110) 149. Whether one is left to his private THE TABLE. 763 spirit, reason, and discourse, by denying the church's infallibility, and the harm of it,(12, 13) 24, 25, (1 10) 149. The Jesuit.' doctrine of probability exposed, (8) 499. Proposed sufficiently, what, (9) 22. It is hard for papists to resolve what is a sufficient pro- posal of the church, (54) 225. Protestants are on the surer side for avoiding- sin, and papists on the more dangerous side to com- mit sin, showed in instances, (9) 502. R. Every man by reason must judge both of scripture and the church, (111 — 113) 149, 150, (118) 152, (120) 153, (122) 154. Rea- son and judgment of discretion is not to be reproached for the private spirit, (100) 144. If men must not follow their reason, what they are to follow, (114, 115) 150, 151. Some kind of reformation may be so neces- sary, as to justify separation from a corrupt church, though every pretence of reforma- tion will not, (53) 363. Nothing is more against religion, than using violence to intro- duce it,(96) 388. The religion of protestants (whicli is the belief of the Bible) a wiser and safer way than that of the Roman church, showed at large, (56—72) 480—485. All protestants require repentance to remission of sins, and remission of sins to justification (31) 514. Revelation unequal, (24) 201. No revelations, known to be so, may be re- jected as not fundamental, (11) 266. A di- vine revelation may be ignorantly disbeliev- ed by a church, and yet it may continue a church, (20) 200. Papists cannot have reve- rence for the scripture, whilst they advance so many things contrary to it, (1) 205. No argument of their reverence to it, that they have preserved it entire, (2) 106. The Ro- man church, when Luther separated, was not the visible church, though a visible church, and part of the catholic, (26, 27) 354. The present Roman church has lost all authority to recommend what we are to believe in religion, (101) 144. The proper- ties of a perfect rule, (5—7) 107, 108. Whether the popish rule of fundamentals, or ours, is the safest, (83) 305. S. Right administration of sacraments un- certain in the Roman church (63 — 68) 130 — 132. Salvation, the conditions of it (5) 51, (159) 170 ; the sure way to it, (53) 291, (63) 298 ; great uncertainty of it in the church of Rome, (63) 130. Schism, what, (3) 49, (22) 59, (22) 351, (28, &c.) 355, (51) 362, (56) 364, (102) 394 ; trial of schism, (22) 59 ; the only fountain thereof, (16) 269. He may be no schismatic, that forsakes a church for errors not damnable, (2) 48. They may not be schismatics, that continue the separation from Rome, though, Luther, that began it, had been a schismatic, (4) 345, (14) 436. Scripture, a perfect rule of faith, (5) 107 ; its meaning, (84) 138 ; proofs of its divine authority, (53) 291 ; it is suf- ficient to guard us from error, and keep us in unity of faith, (80) 242 ; the incorruption thereof known by consent of copies, (27) 204 ; received from universal tradition, (36) 212 ; the certainty of understanding it in some places, (50) 221 ; what canonical, de- terminable only by the testimony of the an- cient churches, (27) 116, (33, &c.) 120; translations, how to be examined or depend- ed on, (27) 116, (55) 137, (72) 134, (83) 137 ; internal arguments for the authority of the scriptures, (47) 123 ; not received upon the authority of the Roman church, (91) 140 ; but universal tradition, (27) 204 ; church of Rome not the infallible interpre- ter of scripture, (97) 142, received from uni- versal tradition, (101) 144, (62) 231 ; a suf- ficient rule to judge what is necessary to be believed, (104) 146 ; intelligible in all necessaries, (105) 147 ; scripture received only by the authority of universal tradition, (114) 150 ; obscure places, what matter of faith they contain, (127) 156; plain places may be certainly understood, (150) 165 ; the only rule to judge all controversies by, (155) 168; its incorruption more secured by providence than the Roman church's vigilancy, (24) 115; when made the rule of controversies, those that concern itself, are to be excepted, (8) 109, (27) 116, (156) 169 ; it contains all necessary material ob- jects of faith, of which the scripture itself is none, but the means of conveying them to us, (32) 120, (159) 170 ; it must deter- mine some controversies, else those about the church and its notes are undeterminable, (3) 107; is unjustly charged with increasing controversies and contentions, (4) 107. The scripture is a sufficient means for discover- ing heresies,(127) 166. When controversies are referred to scripture, it is not referring them to the private spirit, understanding it of a persuasion pretending to come from the Spirit of God, (10) 109. Protestants, that believe scripture, agree in more things than they differ in, and their differences are not material, (49) 289, (50) 290. Private men, if they interpret scriptures amiss, and to ill purposes, endanger only themselves, when they do not pretend to prescribe to others, (122) 154. The protestants' security of the way to happiness, (53) 127. Want of skill in school divinity foolishly objected against English divines, (19) 28. Separation from a church, (56) 364 ; grounds thereof, (56) 227, (57) 229 ; how far lawful, (71) 373, (66) 233 ; it is justifiable from the profes- sion of what seems false, (64) 370. Separa- tion from a church erring in fundamentals, or that requires the profession of any error, is not schism, (75) 375. The principles of the church of England's separating from Rome will not serve to justify schismatics, (71) 373, (74) 374, (80) 377, (81, 82) 378, (85) 380, (86) 381. Socinianism and other heresies countenanced by Romish writers, who have undermined the doctrine of the 764 THE TABLE. Trinity, (17, 18) 26. Spirit teaches suf- ficiently, not irresistibly, (71) 236. The promise of the Spirit's leading into all truth, proves not infallibility, ib. The promise of the Spirit's abiding with them for ever, may be personal, (74) 239 ; and it being a conditional promise, cuts off the Roman church's pretence to infallibility, (75) 239. Succession of men orthodox not necessary, (38) 460, (41) 467. In what sense succes- sion is by the fathers made a mark of the true church, (40) 465. Papists cannot prove a perpetual succession of professors of their doctrine, (41) 467. Sufficienter et efficaciter, (34) 209. Superstitions not to be tolerated, (40) 214. Toleration, (85) 138 ; the way to truth, (13) 267, (39) 281. The church may tole- rate many things, which she does not allow, (47) 218. Tradition, what, (147, 148) 164. Tradition mistaken, (44) 215, (45) 217; good as written, (46) 217 ; how urged by the fathers, (40) 465. Tradition proves the books of scripture to be canonical, not the authority of the present church, (25) 116, (53) 127, (90, 91, 92) 139, 140, (27) 204. Traditional interpretationsofscripture,how ill preserved by the Roman church, (10) 109, (46) 21 7. No traditional interpretations of scripture, though if there were any remain- ing, we are ready to receive them, (88, 89) 1 39, (46) 217. The traditions, distinct from scripture, which Irenaeus mentions, do not favour popery, (144) 162, (145, 146) 1G4. The asserting unwritten traditions, though not inconsistent with the truth of scripture, yet disparages it as a perfect rule, (10) 109. Though our translations of the Bible are subject to error, yet our salvation is not thereby made uncertain, (68) 132, (73) 135. Different translations of scripture may as well be objected to the ancient church, as to protestants, (58, 59) 129. The vulgar trans- lation is not pure and uncorrupted, (75, 76, &c.) 135. Transubstantiation, contradic- tions contained in it, (46) 285. The doctrine of the Trinity undermined by Roman doc- tors, (17, 18) 26. Truth necessary to be known, (20, 21 ) 200. Truths revealed, what necessary to be believed, (9) 22. Truths suf- ficiently propounded, (25) 31. Truths de- livered in scripture, because they wewe ne- cessary to be believed, what, (17) 26. Truth in scripture, not necessary, (13) 85. Truths revealed, how they may be innocently de- nied, (16) 198. God's truths not question- ed by protestants, though they deny points professed by the church, (12) 84. Protes- tants question not God's truth, though denying some truth revealed by him, if they know it not to be revealed, (16) 198. The truth of the present church. depends not up- on liio visibilitv or perpetuity of the church in all ages, (21)351,(20) 507. The apostles' depositing truth with the church, is no argu- ment that she should always keep it entire and sincere, (148) 164. The promise of being led into all truth, agrees not equally to the apostles, and to the church, (34) 209. A trial of religion by scripture may well be refused by papists, (3) 107. U. Violence and force to introduce religion, is against the nature of religion, and un- justly charged upon protestants, (96) 388. What visible church was before Luther, disagreeing from the Roman, (19) 58, (27) 354. That there should be always a visible unerring church, of one denomination, is not necessary, (27) 354. The visible church may not cease, though it may cease to be visible (13, 14) 348, 349, (41) 359. The church may not be visible in the popish sense, and